Going off of "Imperial Brothers", by Ian Hughes and "Failure of Empire", by Noel Linski it's actually not a sure thing that part of the deal was that the Goths would surrender their arms. Valens' strategic ambition was to use the Goths as soldiers in the upcoming Persian war, an unavoidable war that was made obvious from the Armenian satellite war. Had he disarmed the Goths, he would have had to rearm them with his own stocks. With the Gothic families settling the Danube area, he could trust that the Gothic men would not raise a revolt with their own arms, for fear of their families being killed in retaliation. This was exactly the kind of deal Theodosius arrived at in 382. He had bottled up the Goths in Greece after 4 years of maneuvering and could have destroyed them, though not without risk; instead, he went with the only strategically viable solution: Use the Goths as soldiers and farmers. Valens appears to have wanted this as well, especially since his brother had regularly pulled troops from the east for his campaigns in the west and had taken direct control of Macedonia, one of the main recruiting grounds in the east. Valens is the only eastern emperor to ever not have direct control over Macedonia, and it repeatedly stung. Valens could also trust Gothic leadership. Fritigern had actively aided Valens in his attempt to avenge himself upon the Goths who had honored the Constantine treaty when Procopius (Nephew of Julian) launched his mutiny. Valens knew this man, had worked with him in the Gothic war, and clearly trusted him to ensure the Goths would behave once inside Roman territory. It should also be noted that Valens did not personally want to wage "one great, final battle". He was aware of his PR problem, having never been accepted by the Roman people (especially in Constantinople) as a legitimate emperor; he would only ever be a random, nobody farmer and undistinguished soldier turned emperor by the fortunes of his older brother. I have read that Valens was pushed to direct military action by his generals, who were interested in the glory of battle VS the strategic health of the army long-term. In Armenia, Valens did not seek glorious battles even when his reign could have used them. Valens appears to have hoped to strike fear in the Goths on August 9 with a drawn up army and negotiate from a position of strength. He left Adrianople without his baggage train, knowing where the Goths were located. If this was supposed to be an all-out slugging match, he would have brought everything with him for the big fight. He did not do this, a very telling move. Valens let Fritigern, a trusted factional leader, bring his people into Roman territory to alleviate a terrible manpower problem. Destroying the Goths in a battle would not have served Valens' strategic interests and would have jeopardized his own position for the impending war against the Sassanids. This would explain why he "wasted" so much time negotiating with the Goths as his army deployed; yes, he could have rushed the Gothic camp but even losing a few thousand men would have badly stung for an impending, all out war against Persia. It's not just my one opinion that he doesn't appear to have been interested in a fight, and in fact Valens loses control of his army with the skirmishing forces drawing everyone into the fateful battle. I'm curious as to what source you have that says he terminated negotiations and ordered the advance of the main line; I do not recall reading that. I read that negotiations were still in progress when battle erupted without his input. Additionally, the story of Valens being burned alive is a reoccurring literary device for Roman emperors who persecuted Christians (or later on, the wrong kinds of Christians) as with Decius' body being stripped naked and eaten by animals. It's a literary fable (like how Roman step mothers are always evil, murderous harpies), and in reality Valens was probably swallowed up in the dusts of battle; we know that his body was never found. Valens simply made an enemy of lots of Christians, because he persecuted those who didn't subscribe to his personal faith: Homoean Christianity, a compromise sect that was one of four major sects of Christianity at the time. Arian Christianity was the dominant sect in the east, making Valens a minority. Finally, just some small details: the west did not govern from Rome, like your map implies. Ever since Gallienus, the west ruled from Milan (with the exception of Maximian and Maxentius seizing Italy briefly), so your map could reflect that in the future. I promise I don't hate your video, lol. I just think it's important to distinguish small but important details that can shift the narrative. I actually recently unsubscribed from Weird History, because they claimed that it was the Huns in 376 who took part in the battle of Adrianople.
One minor addon to the final sentence: The reason the eastern romans shifted to a predominantly cavalery force had little to do with the goths. It was a response to the constant wars with the Persians/Sassanids who made that change a matter of survival for the romans And when the arabs would later show up this process would speed up even faster because the romans got crushed basically every time they meet the arabs in open battle. They basically switched to gurellia warfare at that point trying to use ambush tactics while most standart roman soldiers were poorly equipped and all the money went into the cavalary. Also the eastern romans were,after losing 2/3 of their territory, basically constantly to broke to field a proper infantery army anyway and only Constantinople could fund the cavalry forces. The gothic influence on the eastern roman army isnt that great and compared to the cold war/hot war superpower situation the eastern romans had going on at their eastern border for their entire existance with persians, sassanids, arabs and later turks it is of minor influence. At least thats how I remember it from the really good "history of byzantium" podcast :)
How about the Huns' use of archer cavalry to devastate everyone they faced, until units of Hums were embedded in the Eastern Roman army in Belisarius' day
Thank you for all tour hardwork and dedication in bringing these videos together. Huge fan of roman history and it always make my day to see a video of it!🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
@@metarus208its the worst defeat which means the enemy casualties also count. At arbittus Cniva's goths took heavy casualties just like the cimbri. Hannibal however took light casualties proportionally to the casualties he inflicted and the goths took light casualties here too 👍
@@razorsharpview9090 Adrianople was just one of the nails in said coffin that started setting during the Nerva-Antoine dynasty got toppled and compounded during the 3rd Century crisis
@@metarus208 Arausio was 8-10 legions lost. Cannae was 16 legions lost. To say Arausio is worse than Cannae is similar to other tards claiming Teutoburg forest was Rome's worst defeat. Again, if Teutoburg is Rome's biggest defeat it is like saying the Battle of Isandlwana is the greatest defeat of the british empire. Germanoids trying to boost their their own non-existent ancient past by hijacking roman history. Typical.
Thank you for your time and hard work and dedication towards these videos. We always appreciate your hard work and dedication. I love your videos. Love from Sri Lanka ❤️🔥. Battle of Adrianople one of the decisive battles in roman history. It made the pathway to goths to enter the stroy. Brillaint video. ❤️🔥
Allot thanks for sharing this wonderful and remarkable introduction of historical coverage of Visigoth penetrating and ravaging the danob regions . Thank you for the (house of history) channel
Well done! This was a more comprehensive video on this battle than others ive seen. Valens blew it! Constantine would have never put his army in a strategic disadvantage. Caesar would have known more about his opponent with proper scouting. Valens knew better and should have waited for Gratian. But wanted to score a quick knock out victory after hearing of his Emperor Nephews successes. Valens also lost control of his forces by letting them engage without proper instructions from officers. It reminds one of Crassus debacle in the east against the Parthians. Just like Crassus Valens let his taste for glory cloud sound military judgement.
@@3ntra I am always baffled with why people think of Roman Empire as some benevolent paragon in history that deserved to keep winning and live forever.
The battle was so epic, the emperor died, and the battle was a catastrophy for the roman army... To say it in gothic: Ik wilja haban gafridon in aiwins-I will have peace for ever... What did goths look like? The musicgroup Ainbusk or Eric Gadd from Gotland /Gutland give a good image....
As a dutch person this sounds really similar although its from a different branch of the germanic language tree. Ik wilja haben sounds reaaly similar to ik wil hebben gafridon spoken in an dutch accent sounds just like vreden with the suffix ge- which we use in modern dutch for the term justice: gerechtigheid. In aiwins sounds like in eeuwens, although the s shouldnt be added to the dutch word eeuwen which means centuries. Its really cool how similar it still is
Thankyou for your commitment making these videos. It was to be the shape of things to come for the Western Roman Empire... many more boy emperors to come.
@JamesYork-jy2tl See this is why you need historical context. Because you're wrong. Cannae in terms of lives was devastating, but when one looks at the aftermath it didn't shake Roman resolve to any large degree. They told the Carthaginians see ya next year, I'm paraphrasing but their was never a doubt that the war was still on. Teutoberg damaged the Roman psyche to such an extent that Germania was abandoned. Adrianople destroyed the core of the eastern Roman army, killed many valuable administrators and left all of the armories across the danubian frontier raised. It worsened what was already a crisis regarding the recruitment of soldiers. All of this considered it can easily be considered worse than Teutoberg and Cannae because the Empire was not even close to being able to sustain the losses it used to. It was similar to Edessa during the crisis of the third century. It marked a low point that would become the benchmark to struggles in the future. A point of no return that Roman's would not be able to revert to for better or worse. All of this can be considered and even still you could say the other battles were more devastating, if not for one definitive outcome. Adrianople was the foundation of the Germanic Barbarians as a regional power and factor of the geopolitics therein. Even after Theodossius would succeed Valens and "tame" the Goths they remained as the other. They were accepted as allies, but were never expelled, exterminated or assimilated. They remained a distinct entity within Roman borders, allies for a bit, after that independent and eventually sacked Rome while also serving as an almost mandatory source of recruitment. Do you see? After Adrianople the Goths were not able to be ignored they were not a factor but THE factor.
When Julian is killed and the empire put in it knees by the Persians that is the worst defeat and force them to sign a humuliating treaty; the Persians who are Rome true enemies; not a bunch of random tribes.
At this late stage the Roman army was only a shadow of its former self . The embracing of Christianity and allowing non Romans to join the army was the death knell of the Roman Empire .
yes i agree with you! I hate the fake names! Byzantin empire is a fake name just like Seleucid empire. The Roman empire was Roman and NOT Byzantin at 375 A.D. Just like the Greek empire! Greek empire was Greek and not Seleucid!
different creators different flavor. I see people requesting Punic War from KingsGenerals even when HistoryMarche already has an epic series on Hannibal.
I like how u show arrow of goth coming from east germany but on tje map its a heart of poland lol. There was no germans 2000 years ago. All tribes were slavic including goths
Gallerius,Grațian and other emporius was dacians ,they ruled from the Rome.They make forum,status and gives imperiali edicts.Gallerius admite în Edictus from MILAN eguality of Cristyans religios.And Constantinus I to Niceea change the religios of entire romans Empire.Now roman catolic and ortodox was together till 1054,when papa Leon decide to solve problems with greek influences în Eastman roman imperium.The churce was devided till today.😅😅😅
''Worst Defeat Since Cannae'' Forget about the Persians who are constantly defeating the Romans ? Julian failed expedition into Persia put the empire in its knees and forced them to sign a humiliaty treaty; the random tribes are nothing compared to Persia; Rome true enemy.
Considering every fresco mosaic depictions of what Roman’s actually looked like we continue to see barbarian version of roman society. Accuracy matters greatly
This channel Have no idee about history or îs promoting false information! The goths nord of danube wore only guest , that area for 3000 years got ocupied by the Dacians that split in 3 kindoms (Walahia, Moldavia and Transilvania) that createf the modern sau Romania! We Have more then 1000 historical proff that this was the mojority population from 1000 BC at least, but this channel îs desinforming every day!
Going off of "Imperial Brothers", by Ian Hughes and "Failure of Empire", by Noel Linski it's actually not a sure thing that part of the deal was that the Goths would surrender their arms.
Valens' strategic ambition was to use the Goths as soldiers in the upcoming Persian war, an unavoidable war that was made obvious from the Armenian satellite war. Had he disarmed the Goths, he would have had to rearm them with his own stocks. With the Gothic families settling the Danube area, he could trust that the Gothic men would not raise a revolt with their own arms, for fear of their families being killed in retaliation. This was exactly the kind of deal Theodosius arrived at in 382. He had bottled up the Goths in Greece after 4 years of maneuvering and could have destroyed them, though not without risk; instead, he went with the only strategically viable solution: Use the Goths as soldiers and farmers. Valens appears to have wanted this as well, especially since his brother had regularly pulled troops from the east for his campaigns in the west and had taken direct control of Macedonia, one of the main recruiting grounds in the east. Valens is the only eastern emperor to ever not have direct control over Macedonia, and it repeatedly stung.
Valens could also trust Gothic leadership. Fritigern had actively aided Valens in his attempt to avenge himself upon the Goths who had honored the Constantine treaty when Procopius (Nephew of Julian) launched his mutiny. Valens knew this man, had worked with him in the Gothic war, and clearly trusted him to ensure the Goths would behave once inside Roman territory.
It should also be noted that Valens did not personally want to wage "one great, final battle". He was aware of his PR problem, having never been accepted by the Roman people (especially in Constantinople) as a legitimate emperor; he would only ever be a random, nobody farmer and undistinguished soldier turned emperor by the fortunes of his older brother. I have read that Valens was pushed to direct military action by his generals, who were interested in the glory of battle VS the strategic health of the army long-term. In Armenia, Valens did not seek glorious battles even when his reign could have used them.
Valens appears to have hoped to strike fear in the Goths on August 9 with a drawn up army and negotiate from a position of strength. He left Adrianople without his baggage train, knowing where the Goths were located. If this was supposed to be an all-out slugging match, he would have brought everything with him for the big fight. He did not do this, a very telling move.
Valens let Fritigern, a trusted factional leader, bring his people into Roman territory to alleviate a terrible manpower problem. Destroying the Goths in a battle would not have served Valens' strategic interests and would have jeopardized his own position for the impending war against the Sassanids. This would explain why he "wasted" so much time negotiating with the Goths as his army deployed; yes, he could have rushed the Gothic camp but even losing a few thousand men would have badly stung for an impending, all out war against Persia. It's not just my one opinion that he doesn't appear to have been interested in a fight, and in fact Valens loses control of his army with the skirmishing forces drawing everyone into the fateful battle.
I'm curious as to what source you have that says he terminated negotiations and ordered the advance of the main line; I do not recall reading that. I read that negotiations were still in progress when battle erupted without his input.
Additionally, the story of Valens being burned alive is a reoccurring literary device for Roman emperors who persecuted Christians (or later on, the wrong kinds of Christians) as with Decius' body being stripped naked and eaten by animals. It's a literary fable (like how Roman step mothers are always evil, murderous harpies), and in reality Valens was probably swallowed up in the dusts of battle; we know that his body was never found. Valens simply made an enemy of lots of Christians, because he persecuted those who didn't subscribe to his personal faith: Homoean Christianity, a compromise sect that was one of four major sects of Christianity at the time. Arian Christianity was the dominant sect in the east, making Valens a minority.
Finally, just some small details: the west did not govern from Rome, like your map implies. Ever since Gallienus, the west ruled from Milan (with the exception of Maximian and Maxentius seizing Italy briefly), so your map could reflect that in the future.
I promise I don't hate your video, lol. I just think it's important to distinguish small but important details that can shift the narrative. I actually recently unsubscribed from Weird History, because they claimed that it was the Huns in 376 who took part in the battle of Adrianople.
Damn
Amazing contribution of yours. It is obvious that you know very well the subject and you back up your opinions with data and facts.
gym class hero aint a hero
well explained
with using sources
the
first lesson U learn on history studies at university
good comment m8
Really nice summation of this battle, well done.
Didn't realize Rome fought in the
Austrian-Prussia war 🤔
Episode 6 of this series through me for a bit of a loop 😁
One minor addon to the final sentence:
The reason the eastern romans shifted to a predominantly cavalery force had little to do with the goths. It was a response to the constant wars with the Persians/Sassanids who made that change a matter of survival for the romans
And when the arabs would later show up this process would speed up even faster because the romans got crushed basically every time they meet the arabs in open battle. They basically switched to gurellia warfare at that point trying to use ambush tactics while most standart roman soldiers were poorly equipped and all the money went into the cavalary. Also the eastern romans were,after losing 2/3 of their territory, basically constantly to broke to field a proper infantery army anyway and only Constantinople could fund the cavalry forces.
The gothic influence on the eastern roman army isnt that great and compared to the cold war/hot war superpower situation the eastern romans had going on at their eastern border for their entire existance with persians, sassanids, arabs and later turks it is of minor influence.
At least thats how I remember it from the really good "history of byzantium" podcast :)
How about the Huns' use of archer cavalry to devastate everyone they faced, until units of Hums were embedded in the Eastern Roman army in Belisarius' day
And funny enough the East are still predominatly a infantry force; this is a myth that they become a cavalry force.
Absolutely FANTASTIC!! More videos about ancient Greece and Rome please!!
Thank you for all tour hardwork and dedication in bringing these videos together. Huge fan of roman history and it always make my day to see a video of it!🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
This is a great channel, your presentations are absolutely amazing... I cant believe I get to watch these for free... THANK YOU!!!!
Valens really should've taken that suggestion to use hit-n-run tactics against the Goths. Nice video.
It wasn't Rome's worst defeat since Cannae. The Romans had a similarly devastating defeat against the same Goths at the Battle of Abrittus in 251.
Actually Rome's worst defeat was at Arausio
@@metarus208its the worst defeat which means the enemy casualties also count. At arbittus Cniva's goths took heavy casualties just like the cimbri. Hannibal however took light casualties proportionally to the casualties he inflicted and the goths took light casualties here too 👍
The Battle of Adrianople is the worst defeat for Rome because it is the catalyst of it's downfall especially in the west.
@@razorsharpview9090 Adrianople was just one of the nails in said coffin that started setting during the Nerva-Antoine dynasty got toppled and compounded during the 3rd Century crisis
@@metarus208 Arausio was 8-10 legions lost. Cannae was 16 legions lost. To say Arausio is worse than Cannae is similar to other tards claiming Teutoburg forest was Rome's worst defeat. Again, if Teutoburg is Rome's biggest defeat it is like saying the Battle of Isandlwana is the greatest defeat of the british empire.
Germanoids trying to boost their their own non-existent ancient past by hijacking roman history. Typical.
Did anyone see the resemblance with the current situation in Europe?
Thank you for your time and hard work and dedication towards these videos. We always appreciate your hard work and dedication. I love your videos. Love from Sri Lanka ❤️🔥. Battle of Adrianople one of the decisive battles in roman history. It made the pathway to goths to enter the stroy. Brillaint video. ❤️🔥
Allot thanks for sharing this wonderful and remarkable introduction of historical coverage of Visigoth penetrating and ravaging the danob regions . Thank you for the (house of history) channel
Excellent work here Sir and your Team
Well done! This was a more comprehensive video on this battle than others ive seen. Valens blew it! Constantine would have never put his army in a strategic disadvantage. Caesar would have known more about his opponent with proper scouting. Valens knew better and should have waited for Gratian. But wanted to score a quick knock out victory after hearing of his Emperor Nephews successes. Valens also lost control of his forces by letting them engage without proper instructions from officers. It reminds one of Crassus debacle in the east against the Parthians. Just like Crassus Valens let his taste for glory cloud sound military judgement.
Do one on Cotez and the conquest of the Myans
Fantastic video and battle.
Great video as always!
Yes! I love your ancient history videos
Fantastic work! Thanks.
What I hate about this battle is that the loss was 100% avoidable. It should have been an easy win.
It was a win
@@3ntra I am always baffled with why people think of Roman Empire as some benevolent paragon in history that deserved to keep winning and live forever.
@@darkorodic638 Rome was THE Western Civilization.
True. Had the emperor valens didn't underestimate the goths, this would be an easy victory
@@nomooon WAS is the key word, but then it's time has come and it gave way for new things to happen as it should have happened.
The battle was so epic, the emperor died, and the battle was a catastrophy for the roman army... To say it in gothic: Ik wilja haban gafridon in aiwins-I will have peace for ever... What did goths look like? The musicgroup Ainbusk or Eric Gadd from Gotland /Gutland give a good image....
Sounds Dutch/Frisian almost.
As a dutch person this sounds really similar although its from a different branch of the germanic language tree. Ik wilja haben sounds reaaly similar to ik wil hebben gafridon spoken in an dutch accent sounds just like vreden with the suffix ge- which we use in modern dutch for the term justice: gerechtigheid. In aiwins sounds like in eeuwens, although the s shouldnt be added to the dutch word eeuwen which means centuries. Its really cool how similar it still is
Valentinian, I think you mean - but excellent piece on this key battle - I agree with others, totally winnable for the Romans
just like always another high quality history video
Thankyou for your commitment making these videos. It was to be the shape of things to come for the Western Roman Empire... many more boy emperors to come.
I remember reading accounts of this battle in my 3rd year Latin class back in the 1970s
This is kind of funny that the river of Dnieper is shown on the map having all reservoirs created by modern hydroelectric stations :)
Great Video!
When is the next episode of the German/Austrian War coming out?
Either this- or next week!
Any videos on Persia please
What about the battle of Edessa? This was also a crushing defeat of the Romans
It was made in these day by the Channel history marche
The massacre at Teutoburg Forest was an equally ignomonious defeat of the Romans in 9 AD
Yes! My favorite era
Great video
Thank you
Very Nice video
comment for the algorithm. I liked when you'd cut to yourself talking in your earlier videos, it felt more human. any reason why you stopped that?
Worst since Cannae? What about Teutoburgerwald or Carrhae?
They were bad but nothing compared to cannae
it's about after Cannae! What was the worst roman defeat: Adrianopel, Arausio, Carrhae, Teutoburgerwald, Abrittus, Edessa,...?@@JamesYork-jy2tl
@JamesYork-jy2tl See this is why you need historical context. Because you're wrong. Cannae in terms of lives was devastating, but when one looks at the aftermath it didn't shake Roman resolve to any large degree. They told the Carthaginians see ya next year, I'm paraphrasing but their was never a doubt that the war was still on. Teutoberg damaged the Roman psyche to such an extent that Germania was abandoned. Adrianople destroyed the core of the eastern Roman army, killed many valuable administrators and left all of the armories across the danubian frontier raised. It worsened what was already a crisis regarding the recruitment of soldiers. All of this considered it can easily be considered worse than Teutoberg and Cannae because the Empire was not even close to being able to sustain the losses it used to. It was similar to Edessa during the crisis of the third century. It marked a low point that would become the benchmark to struggles in the future. A point of no return that Roman's would not be able to revert to for better or worse.
All of this can be considered and even still you could say the other battles were more devastating, if not for one definitive outcome. Adrianople was the foundation of the Germanic Barbarians as a regional power and factor of the geopolitics therein. Even after Theodossius would succeed Valens and "tame" the Goths they remained as the other. They were accepted as allies, but were never expelled, exterminated or assimilated. They remained a distinct entity within Roman borders, allies for a bit, after that independent and eventually sacked Rome while also serving as an almost mandatory source of recruitment. Do you see? After Adrianople the Goths were not able to be ignored they were not a factor but THE factor.
@@tylerwerner291 I agree impact over lives
The visigoths would rule over all the Iberian peninsula a few centuries later until 711.
Fritigern in norwegian translates to free the tiger
not to be that one guy, but the name of Vlaens older brother was Valentinian (Valentinianus) not Valentian
why you say byzantine when you speak for the eastern part;
If I may comment on the title, Arausio was even worse than Cannae, but Hadrianople probably more consequential than both
These people whom annihilated the Romans were afraid of the Huns..
..imagine the battles of the Goths and the Huns :xx
Really good stuff, but I think you said relentless too many times. I like ancient battles the most
"Prince Pricurios of Iberia" Which Iberia? Kingdom of Iberia in Caucasus of Iberian Peninsula?
what a weird battle, charging uphill was so stupid
"Worst defeat since Cannae"!?
Are you not supposed to be historians?
Look up Arausio, which was Rome's worst defeat period- including Cannae.
When Julian is killed and the empire put in it knees by the Persians that is the worst defeat and force them to sign a humuliating treaty; the Persians who are Rome true enemies; not a bunch of random tribes.
@@MarceloHenriqueSoaresdaSilva so who was it that toppled the Roman Empire then? The Persians?
7:27 arrival of the orcs
I am Albanian but my Y haplogroup is a rare one here of Gothic origin 😬
My ancestors :)
No more pax Romana for this united Rome for long.
Battle of Carrhae: Excuse me?!!!
The teutoburg forest was pretty bad.
yes, romans got what they deserved
@@zurgesmiecalwent on to kick the Germanic tribes around Germany for the next 12 years. Germanic tribes won one ambush . . .lost everything after
they won the war against roman slave traders duh@@Prometuis101
Rome 😢
At this late stage the Roman army was only a shadow of its former self .
The embracing of Christianity and allowing non Romans to join the army was the death knell of the Roman Empire .
>At this late stage the Roman army was only a shadow of its former self
>source
>myself
justice was done against the roman slave traders
Much like what's happening to the UK today
Gothic Pride!
valens just innocently demanded they surrender any means of defense AND their young sons? like what lol, not much of a choice
For a super power Rome sure did lose a lot of big battles.
Why do these channels keep using the term Byzantine come on it's 2023 you should know better by now. Great video regardless.
yes i agree with you! I hate the fake names! Byzantin empire is a fake name just like Seleucid empire. The Roman empire was Roman and NOT Byzantin at 375 A.D. Just like the Greek empire! Greek empire was Greek and not Seleucid!
Can you make videos on Muslim generals
Pivotal moment for the Romans
crassus was worse
Invicta made a better video on this…
different creators different flavor. I see people requesting Punic War from KingsGenerals even when HistoryMarche already has an epic series on Hannibal.
I dont really get it
Why u like telling history about roman defeat
How about roman victory,
Victory over parthian for example
This is not the best source for this battle.
I like how u show arrow of goth coming from east germany but on tje map its a heart of poland lol.
There was no germans 2000 years ago.
All tribes were slavic including goths
Are you kidding. Rome was almost constantly at war. You got to loose a few battles. No one wins all the time.
Gallerius,Grațian and other emporius was dacians ,they ruled from the Rome.They make forum,status and gives imperiali edicts.Gallerius admite în Edictus from MILAN eguality of Cristyans religios.And Constantinus I to Niceea change the religios of entire romans Empire.Now roman catolic and ortodox was together till 1054,when papa Leon decide to solve problems with greek influences în Eastman roman imperium.The churce was devided till today.😅😅😅
''Worst Defeat Since Cannae''
Forget about the Persians who are constantly defeating the Romans ? Julian failed expedition into Persia put the empire in its knees and forced them to sign a humiliaty treaty; the random tribes are nothing compared to Persia; Rome true enemy.
This series of events shows the strain that mass immigration causes. History repeats
Huns from China? Ffs
These "Goths" were actually Getae, essentially a Slavic people.
No, they left the region of Sweden and migrated to the region of Ukraine and Russia, according to the Gothic historian
Ι was always perplexed by this battle . Was roman infantry the same lvl as prior ages? The battle the assault on the german wall by Augustus
battle of Ctesiphon please
Considering every fresco mosaic depictions of what Roman’s actually looked like we continue to see barbarian version of roman society. Accuracy matters greatly
This channel Have no idee about history or îs promoting false information! The goths nord of danube wore only guest , that area for 3000 years got ocupied by the Dacians that split in 3 kindoms (Walahia, Moldavia and Transilvania) that createf the modern sau Romania! We Have more then 1000 historical proff that this was the mojority population from 1000 BC at least, but this channel îs desinforming every day!
Fantastic video