Alexios is just cluelessly wandering around hoping that someone will recognize him as their lawful Emperor after 1204. This clueless wandering almost caused the downfall of Nicaea had they not won the Battle of Antioch on the Maeander despite heavy losses. Sometimes I think Michael planned for this to happen when he ransomed Alexios, the Nicaean-Epirote conflict may have started much earlier than we thought...
Fun fact because of the Lascaris dynasty the name Έλλην Èllin ( it means Greek in Greek) started to be reused to describe the Greek people and started to lose the medival meaning of "pagans". For me the most interesting and underated period of time in terms of political scheming and constant changes.
Agreed, it was a very interesting period. "Hellene" as a term was gradually reused and losing its negative connotations since the Komnenian period but yeah I guess the Laskarids really upped their game on using this word.
@@byzansimp if i am not mistaken Theodore Lascaris the second used the title "King of the Romans and the Hellenes" (Βασιλεύς Ρωμαίων και Ελλήνων) but yes the Lascaris dynasty was crucial for the preserving of the classical texts and the education of their people. Just to imagine how beloved they were, up until 1922 every year in Nympheon the memory of John Vatatzis was honoured by the Greek orthodox church in the church that he build as "John the merciful".
He should do a follow up on how Asan Dynasty and their Kingdom was Vlach and never Bulgarian. Kaloyan was literally nicknamed "John the Vlach" by medieval writers such as Geoffroi de Villehardouin, Henri de Valenciennes, Robert de Clari and Philippe Mouskes
7:12 this hat is weird Fashion of Eastern Roman empire is weird and cool. In next videos do you think you should make Byzantine fashions? Ideologies. Daily lives? By the way I like your accent Greek accent?
That's supposed to be a tall helmet. I won't be covering Byzantine fashion soon but some basics for you: the late centuries were when very tall hats and helmets became popular. You can see that a lot in surviving iconography and paintings by western artists as well (cf. Renaissance drawings of Emperor Ioannes VIII Palaiologos which immortalized his huge hat).
So glad you think so! Drawing is such a bummer for Trebizond and Epirus because so little pictorial representations are available... I can only hope I did the Megaloi Komnenoi and Komnenodoukai some justice with my humble sketches.
No, they never even claimed it themselves. They were a Sunni Persianate Turkish Sultanate in Anatolia, so their majority subject population are the Romans, but the Seljuks themselves were not successors of Rome.
We really don't know, I proposed a theory only. David's fate has been shrouded in mystery for so many years and only came to light very recently, so new evidence might be found soon which shows us the whole truth. I mean, I went with the most obvious choice, because David had a good thing going for him, Laskaris stopped him but couldn't drive him back either, maintaining a status quo and just ruling Paphlagonia is good enough. I doubt he one day willingly left this secular world behind and went to Mt Athos because he suddenly had an epiphany. And why do people usually go to monasteries? Because they get exiled for political reasons.
fun fact:there is a tower in tarnovo called balduin's tower it is belived this is where the first latin emperor baldwin was kept until he died after his defeat from tsar kaloyan.
0:04 Ahh yes, by "Bulgarian's". Nope, not them by but Vlach's. 2:30 By Bulgarian Tsar's??? This is completely a lie and big disrespect towards Vlach medieval history. Tsar Kaloyan was a Vlach not "bUlGaRiAn". Geoffroi de Villehardouin, Henri de Valenciennes, Robert de Clari and Philippe Mouskes refers to Kaloyan as "John the Vlach", showing the ethnicity of Kaloyan. The Byzantine chronicler Niketas Choniates also refers to him as Ioannitsa the Mysian (ho Mysos Iōannēs) and made very clear earlier that Vlach's were formerly called Mysians: "provoking the barbarians who lived in the vicinity of Mount Haimos, formerly called Mysians and now named Vlachs" ‐by Niketas Choniates. Thus Choniates referring to Kaloyan as the "Mysian" is the same as referring to him as "the Vlach". Want to point out that Choniates also makes it clear that Asan and Peter (the two older brothers of Kaloyan) were of the same race and origin as the Vlach's: "he (Isaakios Angelos II) made the barbarians of Mount Haimos, who were formerly called Mysians, and now Vlachs, enemies of the Sies and the Romans. These, entrusted by the inaccessibility of the land in which they lived and relying on their fortresses, which are also very numerous and erected on steep rocks, once again submitted against the Romans; but then, finding the so-called pretext of Patroclus in abducting their flocks and oppressing themselves, they broke into a violent insurrection. And they were bringers of misfortune and agitators of the whole nation, one Peter and with Asan, of the same race and origin" Geoffroi de Villehardouin and Robert de Clari gives same reference to Kaloyan, calling him "the Vlach" and refers to his Kingdom as "Vlachia". Here are the texts of both writers: *PROGRESS OF THE YOUNG ALEXIUS THROUGH THE EMPIRE* (WRITINGS OF GEOFFROI DE VILLEHARDOUIN) (p.51) Alexius, to do his will and commandment, and did him fealty and homage as to their lord-all except John, who was King of Vlachia and Bulgaria. This John was a Vlach, who had rebelled against his father and uncle, and had warred against them for twenty years, and had won from them so much land that he had become a very wealthy king. -And be it known to you, that of the land lying on the west side of the Straits of St. George, he had conquered very nearly the half. This John did not come to do the will of the emperor, nor to submit himself to him. - Geoffroi de Villehardouin (p.72) "Sire," said he, "tidings have come to me from Salonika that the people of the land would have me know that they are ready to receive me willingly as their lord. And I am your liegeman, and hold the land from you. Therefore, I pray you, let me go thither; and when I am in possession of my land and of my city, I will bring you out such supplies as you may need, and come ready prepared to do your behests. But do not go and ruin my land. Let us rather, if it so pleases you, march against Johannitsa, the King of Vlachia and Bulgaria, who holds a great part of the land wrongfully." (p.82) And they stood in great need of succour, for Johannitsa, the King of Vlachia, had mightily oppressed them with war. So Renier helped them right well, and held a great part of the land, and most of those who had sided with Johannitsa, now turned to him. In those parts the war with Johannitsa raged fiercely. *Chapter 64: OF JOHN THE VLACH* (WRITINGS OF ROBERT DE CLARI) It came to pass thereafter, in those days when Mourzuphles the traitor was emperor, and the host of the Franks was so poor, as I have recounted to you before, and whilst they were diligently making ready their ships and their engines for the assault, that John the Vlach sent word to the high barons of the host that if they would crown him king, to be lord over his land of Vlachia, he would hold his kingdom from them, and would come to their aid to help take Constantinople, with an hundred thousand men at arms. Now Vlachia is a land that belonged to the emperor’s domains, and this John was a groom of the emperor, who kept one of the emperor’s studs; so that whensoever the emperor sent for three score horses, or an hundred, this John sent them to him. And he himself came every year to court, before he fell out of favour at the court. But at last it chanced one day that he came thither and that a certain eunuch, one of the emperor’s doorkeepers, did an unseemly thing to him, for he smote him with a scourge full in the face; whereof he suffered great pain. And because of this unseemly thing that was done to him, John the Vlach departed in high dudgeon from the court and went back to Vlachia. And Vlachia is a mighty land that is all compassed about by mountains, so that one can neither enter it nor come out thence save one single pass. American Historian Robert Lee Wolff wrote about the origins of the Asan Dynasty, saying: "Moreover, the testimony of the sources is overwhelming that the brothers Peter (Kalopeter) and Asen (Assen, Asan), who led the revolt of 1186, were Vlachs"
I explicitly mentioned that Peter and Asen were two Vlachs, not Bulgarians in my previous video which discussed the founding of the Second Bulgarian Empire. When I employ the term "Bulgarian", I do it because Peter and Asen's state was done in the name of "reviving the First Bulgarian Empire", even if the rulers and I'm sure much of the population were Vlachs. The political identity of the Second Bulgarian Empire is linked to the Bulgars of old, much like how the Eastern Romans' political identity is Roman despite having a very diverse ethnic population within the Empire consisted of Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, Vlachs, Latins, Turks and so much more. Medieval Vlach history is very awesome, but you don't have to force people to specify that the Tsars were Vlachs when I'm narrating the actions of the state which thinks itself to be a continuation of the First Bulgarian Empire, that's how Peter and Asen were able to raise such a successful rebellion against the Romans in the first place, by claiming to revive an ancient enemy of the Romans, even if they were Vlachs.
@@byzansimp By that logic the East Francian state was never German, neither the Emperor's but truly Roman. Because Otto the Third, just how the three Vlach brother's did, implied "translatio imperii" to gain legitimacy over their imperial rule. But East Francia was never really Roman but German, and it was not a direct descendant of the Western Roman Empire. Historically speaking, the old Bulgarian Empire was destroyed by Basil the Bulgarslayer, 167 years later a Vlach revolt begins in Paristrion also nicknamed Βλάχία by Romeian's. Before the Vlach revolt, 3 Bulgarian revolts existed 1 century earlier before the Comnenoi era, all of whom started in Theme of Bulgaria and all unsuccessful, the last being religious rather than national (source, Robert Lee Wolff). Those Vlach's who formed the first ever documented imperial vlach state, is literally shadowed by people as being Bulgarian tho, those Bulgarian's never ruled it nor are they mentioned as partaking in any military action until Battle of Adrianople in 1205, which Vlach's and Cumans part took in. I have to also mention that while the Tsar's did indeed refer to their state as "Bulgaria" but as an translatio Imperii, the state was numerous times referred as "Vlachia" or "Kingdom/Empire of Vlachia" as Robert de Clari and Geoffroi de Villehardouin texts shows. Snorri Sturluson a Nordic writer calls it Blokumannaland (Land of the Vlach's/"Blökumenn"), and even Arabic writers calls the state "Al-Awalak" literally Vlachia and its people "Ulaqut/Ulagh" basically "Vlach's". Henry of Flanders, the Latin Emperor also calls the state "Blakie la Grant" aka "Greater Vlachia" which ruler was Boril the Usurper. The conclusion is, just how one of Germany's medieval state called itself "Holy Roman Empire", but is recognised as a German state. So should the Vlach medieval Empire be recognised as Vlach.
Vlach's made Greco-Roman's to fight each other, not Bulgarian's. The revolt of 1185 was Vlach as mentioned by the Byzantine Chronicler Niketas Choniates (lived 1155-1217). Plus the Asan Dynasty was also Vlach
I love how Alexios III looks like he just stumbles into things and I like that I learned about Micheal I since I don't know that much about Epirus
Alexios is just cluelessly wandering around hoping that someone will recognize him as their lawful Emperor after 1204. This clueless wandering almost caused the downfall of Nicaea had they not won the Battle of Antioch on the Maeander despite heavy losses. Sometimes I think Michael planned for this to happen when he ransomed Alexios, the Nicaean-Epirote conflict may have started much earlier than we thought...
@@byzansimp he's like Xavier The Renegade Angel
this video is quite the masterpiece. great job!
I want to be like Theodore When i Grow up
Wow super complicated part of history you just causally made entertaining and enjoyable
Thank you, glad you find it so!
This is Great
Fun fact because of the Lascaris dynasty the name Έλλην Èllin ( it means Greek in Greek) started to be reused to describe the Greek people and started to lose the medival meaning of "pagans". For me the most interesting and underated period of time in terms of political scheming and constant changes.
Agreed, it was a very interesting period. "Hellene" as a term was gradually reused and losing its negative connotations since the Komnenian period but yeah I guess the Laskarids really upped their game on using this word.
@@byzansimp if i am not mistaken Theodore Lascaris the second used the title "King of the Romans and the Hellenes" (Βασιλεύς Ρωμαίων και Ελλήνων) but yes the Lascaris dynasty was crucial for the preserving of the classical texts and the education of their people. Just to imagine how beloved they were, up until 1922 every year in Nympheon the memory of John Vatatzis was honoured by the Greek orthodox church in the church that he build as "John the merciful".
He should do a follow up on how Asan Dynasty and their Kingdom was Vlach and never Bulgarian. Kaloyan was literally nicknamed "John the Vlach" by medieval writers such as Geoffroi de Villehardouin, Henri de Valenciennes, Robert de Clari and Philippe Mouskes
i love John Vatatzes
I CANNOT WAIT!
7:12 this hat is weird Fashion of Eastern Roman empire is weird and cool. In next videos do you think you should make Byzantine fashions? Ideologies. Daily lives? By the way I like your accent Greek accent?
That's supposed to be a tall helmet. I won't be covering Byzantine fashion soon but some basics for you: the late centuries were when very tall hats and helmets became popular. You can see that a lot in surviving iconography and paintings by western artists as well (cf. Renaissance drawings of Emperor Ioannes VIII Palaiologos which immortalized his huge hat).
Finally😍.
🔥🔥🔥
UNDERRATED MF AND GREAT DRAWING😊
So glad you think so! Drawing is such a bummer for Trebizond and Epirus because so little pictorial representations are available... I can only hope I did the Megaloi Komnenoi and Komnenodoukai some justice with my humble sketches.
@@byzansimp btw I’m the justinian II fan in ur server
Isn’t Rum also a Roman successor state ?
No, they are illegitimate, they’re Turks who claimed to be Roman, yet never held Constantinople
No, they never even claimed it themselves. They were a Sunni Persianate Turkish Sultanate in Anatolia, so their majority subject population are the Romans, but the Seljuks themselves were not successors of Rome.
To be fair their goal was still Constantinople and Rum,Rome there was obviously some sort of wanting to be Roman part of it all
Nope 😂
@@pbobmapping4178w rise of nations greek pfp
Every time I read about a roman crisis, I reform Byzantium in EU4 to cope with the sorrow.
Then how many times have you reformed Byzantium now? About a million?
Idk what to make of Alexios exiling David since he was his best man
We really don't know, I proposed a theory only. David's fate has been shrouded in mystery for so many years and only came to light very recently, so new evidence might be found soon which shows us the whole truth. I mean, I went with the most obvious choice, because David had a good thing going for him, Laskaris stopped him but couldn't drive him back either, maintaining a status quo and just ruling Paphlagonia is good enough. I doubt he one day willingly left this secular world behind and went to Mt Athos because he suddenly had an epiphany. And why do people usually go to monasteries? Because they get exiled for political reasons.
fun fact:there is a tower in tarnovo called balduin's tower it is belived this is where the first latin emperor baldwin was kept until he died after his defeat from tsar kaloyan.
This sounds like a fun place to visit.
Game of thrones Byzantine version!! i love it
Greeks fighting Greeks is one of the greatest traditions lmfao 😂😂😂😅😅 🇬🇷☦️👑
uhh...
Not just a Greek tradition, but a ROMAN tradition! 😎
0:04 Ahh yes, by "Bulgarian's". Nope, not them by but Vlach's.
2:30 By Bulgarian Tsar's??? This is completely a lie and big disrespect towards Vlach medieval history. Tsar Kaloyan was a Vlach not "bUlGaRiAn". Geoffroi de Villehardouin, Henri de Valenciennes, Robert de Clari and Philippe Mouskes refers to Kaloyan as "John the Vlach", showing the ethnicity of Kaloyan. The Byzantine chronicler Niketas Choniates also refers to him as Ioannitsa the Mysian (ho Mysos Iōannēs) and made very clear earlier that Vlach's were formerly called Mysians: "provoking the barbarians who lived in the vicinity of Mount Haimos, formerly called Mysians and now named Vlachs" ‐by Niketas Choniates. Thus Choniates referring to Kaloyan as the "Mysian" is the same as referring to him as "the Vlach". Want to point out that Choniates also makes it clear that Asan and Peter (the two older brothers of Kaloyan) were of the same race and origin as the Vlach's: "he (Isaakios Angelos II) made the barbarians of Mount Haimos, who were formerly called Mysians, and now Vlachs, enemies of the Sies and the Romans. These, entrusted by the inaccessibility of the land in which they lived and relying on their fortresses, which are also very numerous and erected on steep rocks, once again submitted against the Romans; but then, finding the so-called pretext of Patroclus in abducting their flocks and oppressing themselves, they broke into a violent insurrection. And they were bringers of misfortune and agitators of the whole nation, one Peter and with Asan, of the same race and origin"
Geoffroi de Villehardouin and Robert de Clari gives same reference to Kaloyan, calling him "the Vlach" and refers to his Kingdom as "Vlachia". Here are the texts of both writers:
*PROGRESS OF THE YOUNG ALEXIUS THROUGH THE EMPIRE* (WRITINGS OF GEOFFROI DE VILLEHARDOUIN)
(p.51) Alexius, to do his will and commandment, and did him fealty and homage as to their lord-all except John, who was King of Vlachia and Bulgaria. This John was a Vlach, who had rebelled against his father and uncle, and had warred against them for twenty years, and had won from them so much land that he had become a very wealthy king. -And be it known to you, that of the land lying on the west side of the Straits of St. George, he had conquered very nearly the half. This John did not come to do the will of the emperor, nor to submit himself to him. - Geoffroi de Villehardouin
(p.72)
"Sire," said he, "tidings have come to me from Salonika that the people of the land would have me know that they are ready to receive me willingly as their lord. And I am your liegeman, and hold the land from you. Therefore, I pray you, let me go thither; and when I am in possession of my land and of my city, I will bring you out such supplies as you may need, and come ready prepared to do your behests. But do not go and ruin my land. Let us rather, if it so pleases you, march against Johannitsa, the King of Vlachia and Bulgaria, who holds a great part of the land wrongfully."
(p.82)
And they stood in great need of succour, for Johannitsa, the King of Vlachia, had mightily oppressed them with war. So Renier helped them right well, and held a great part of the land, and most of those who had sided with Johannitsa, now turned to him. In those parts the war with Johannitsa raged fiercely.
*Chapter 64: OF JOHN THE VLACH* (WRITINGS OF ROBERT DE CLARI)
It came to pass thereafter, in those days when Mourzuphles the traitor was emperor, and the host of the Franks was so poor, as I have recounted to you before, and whilst they were diligently making ready their ships and their engines for the assault, that John the Vlach sent word to the high barons of the host that if they would crown him king, to be lord over his land of Vlachia, he would hold his kingdom from them, and would come to their aid to help take Constantinople, with an hundred thousand men at arms.
Now Vlachia is a land that belonged to the emperor’s domains, and this John was a groom of the emperor, who kept one of the emperor’s studs; so that whensoever the emperor sent for three score horses, or an hundred, this John sent them to him. And he himself came every year to court, before he fell out of favour at the court. But at last it chanced one day that he came thither and that a certain eunuch, one of the emperor’s doorkeepers, did an unseemly thing to him, for he smote him with a scourge full in the face; whereof he suffered great pain.
And because of this unseemly thing that was done to him, John the Vlach departed in high dudgeon from the court and went back to Vlachia. And Vlachia is a mighty land that is all compassed about by mountains, so that one can neither enter it nor come out thence save one single pass.
American Historian Robert Lee Wolff wrote about the origins of the Asan Dynasty, saying: "Moreover, the testimony of the sources is overwhelming that the brothers Peter (Kalopeter) and Asen (Assen, Asan), who led the revolt of 1186, were Vlachs"
I explicitly mentioned that Peter and Asen were two Vlachs, not Bulgarians in my previous video which discussed the founding of the Second Bulgarian Empire. When I employ the term "Bulgarian", I do it because Peter and Asen's state was done in the name of "reviving the First Bulgarian Empire", even if the rulers and I'm sure much of the population were Vlachs. The political identity of the Second Bulgarian Empire is linked to the Bulgars of old, much like how the Eastern Romans' political identity is Roman despite having a very diverse ethnic population within the Empire consisted of Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, Vlachs, Latins, Turks and so much more. Medieval Vlach history is very awesome, but you don't have to force people to specify that the Tsars were Vlachs when I'm narrating the actions of the state which thinks itself to be a continuation of the First Bulgarian Empire, that's how Peter and Asen were able to raise such a successful rebellion against the Romans in the first place, by claiming to revive an ancient enemy of the Romans, even if they were Vlachs.
@@byzansimp By that logic the East Francian state was never German, neither the Emperor's but truly Roman. Because Otto the Third, just how the three Vlach brother's did, implied "translatio imperii" to gain legitimacy over their imperial rule. But East Francia was never really Roman but German, and it was not a direct descendant of the Western Roman Empire.
Historically speaking, the old Bulgarian Empire was destroyed by Basil the Bulgarslayer, 167 years later a Vlach revolt begins in Paristrion also nicknamed Βλάχία by Romeian's. Before the Vlach revolt, 3 Bulgarian revolts existed 1 century earlier before the Comnenoi era, all of whom started in Theme of Bulgaria and all unsuccessful, the last being religious rather than national (source, Robert Lee Wolff). Those Vlach's who formed the first ever documented imperial vlach state, is literally shadowed by people as being Bulgarian tho, those Bulgarian's never ruled it nor are they mentioned as partaking in any military action until Battle of Adrianople in 1205, which Vlach's and Cumans part took in.
I have to also mention that while the Tsar's did indeed refer to their state as "Bulgaria" but as an translatio Imperii, the state was numerous times referred as "Vlachia" or "Kingdom/Empire of Vlachia" as Robert de Clari and Geoffroi de Villehardouin texts shows. Snorri Sturluson a Nordic writer calls it Blokumannaland (Land of the Vlach's/"Blökumenn"), and even Arabic writers calls the state "Al-Awalak" literally Vlachia and its people "Ulaqut/Ulagh" basically "Vlach's". Henry of Flanders, the Latin Emperor also calls the state "Blakie la Grant" aka "Greater Vlachia" which ruler was Boril the Usurper.
The conclusion is, just how one of Germany's medieval state called itself "Holy Roman Empire", but is recognised as a German state. So should the Vlach medieval Empire be recognised as Vlach.
What caused Romans to fight each other? I mean even look at their founding myth.Romulus killed Remus.
ego
Vlach's made Greco-Roman's to fight each other, not Bulgarian's. The revolt of 1185 was Vlach as mentioned by the Byzantine Chronicler Niketas Choniates (lived 1155-1217). Plus the Asan Dynasty was also Vlach
HYPE