Hi.

Where are the sources? "History" channel act like this, meh

Please continue the series on Hannibal, the last episode was some 8 months ago. Love the channel!

​@@Hauggyfulyou are under the impression that this is a history channel , this is in fact a history brothel, who ever pays the most on Patreon gets to have their way with it !

Thank you so much for the algorithm 🙏🙏🙏

Nikephoros and John weren't of Macedonian blood though as they acted as regents for Basil II and his brother Constantine VIII

I mean it didn’t produce Nikephoros Phokas or Ioannes Tzimiskes. Besides you forgot the man who started the reconquest era with Romanos Lekapenos.

@@tylerellis9097 you mean John Kourkouas? 😊

The last members of the Macedonian Dynasty were FAR from competent. Even the great Basil II can be blamed for not securing a competent heir to safeguard all of his gains. He apparently only worried about the welfare of the empire during HIS lifetime. The rapid collapse of Eastern Roman power after his death should also be a part of his legacy.

@@nickholsinger5481 John was actually a loyal commander and didn’t become Emperor, but yes he is also very underrated and his campaigns are the start of Byzantine dominance with the reconquest of Melitene and his raids into Armenia and Mesopotamia. He is very much the start of what Nikephoros and Leo Phokas plus John Tzimiskes continued

Maybe now, but who knows how it was back then?

Normally we cannot know how it was a milenia ago. But I remember summers when I was literally able to walk across, not even knee high, and I can't imagine that back then it was many times deeper

@@sipanica Generally, due to a number of reasons, rivers today tend to be shallower than they were during the pre-industrial era. For example, right in front of my house there used to be a large Roman bridge over the Great Iskar river. Nowadays, that Great Iskar has turned into a measly canal - about a metre wide and 20-30cm deep. I guess it's because rivers today are dammed, diverted for agricultural and industrial needs (this is especially true for the smaller tributaries), etc.

Definitely not 😂 Did we not watch the same video. Samuel was not a worthy opponent

@@paulyotzuar2788He definitely was being able to form a new Bulgarian state in its underdeveloped western territories away from the traditional Bulgarian centers of power after the Rus invasion by Sivatoslav and subsequent conquest by John Tzimiskes. Samuel was able to subjugate the Serbs and unite the Bulgarians under him despite being from a minor Dynasty while resisting the power of Basil II for decades. The fact he could be defeated by the Byzantines repeatedly and still pull of wins afterwards without the state collapsing is impressive. Byzantium couldn’t do the same when the Seljuks arrived.

@@tylerellis9097The Seljuks lasted only 100 years after Manzikert’s victory against the Byzantines. They were crushed by the Khwarazmians who were annihilated by the Mongols after another 100 years. The Byzantine Empire outlived all of them.

@@kingkwon8002 There were 8 civil wars in the decade after Manzikert. Even though the Byzantines lasted longer, they were by no means immune to collapse.

@@daspotato895 Their collapse was definitely inevitable but it would’ve happened centuries earlier for any other civilization (Seljuks, etc). That was the point I was trying to make for the guy I responded to

All my respects to the Persian empires and civilizations, such as the Aechemenids, Parthians, and Sassanids! Greetings from Puebla, Mexico!!

Basil lost twice in Pernik to a local warrior named Krakra

​@@aleksk41511018; next

Hmm, while this was the dominant ethnic and linguistic component in the both empires, by definition they were multi-ethnic.

Thank you so much for supporting my channel! Very kind of you.

@@HistoryMarche Thank YOU for your wonderful content and professionalism!

Coming in part 5, next week.

@@HistoryMarche Great news

Basil lost twice in Pernik . Greatest warrior Krakra 💪💪

Needless to say, there are a number of modern historical novels from the Bulgarian side as well, like Dimitar Talev's "Shields of Stone" trilogy or, more recently, Anton Donchev's Krakra tetralogy.

@@NikeBG Interesting are these books translated in English?

I would hardly call Delta a nationalist. She committed suicide once the Nazis entered Athens. I grew up reading her books and she has documented very well the greek popular base, her book written from the POV of a dog is just legendary.

It is true though. The region of Macedonia was expanded by Philip, Alexander and especially the Antigonid dynasty who conquered the Paeonians. When the Romans conquered Greece, "Macedonia prima" corresponded to modern Greek Macedonia and "Macedonia Secunda" to modern Vardaska.

Yep, I as a bulgarian hate it when "civilized" people do not adhere to the political correctness principles. How are they thinking that they are wining an argument if they haven't proven us wrong, but have repeatedly used "facts" that we have proven are incorrectly used? Cancel culture is one heck of a pain in the ***, no wonder the Pope says it goes out of control.

The Bulgarians in denial.

@@odalv316 you do reallize you are proving my point?

@user-qg9fz5xm4b That modern-day N. Macedonian are Bulgarians in denial?

How could that be when the Roman’s ruled those lands as far back as 170 bc?

@@sanele2948 Many people seem unable to grasp that Roman identity was solely a political/civic identity until the "Byzantine" empire was geographically reduced to mostly Greek speaking areas at around the 7th century A.D. But after the loss of Syria and North Africa by the Muslims, the term "ROMAIOS" gradually took an ethno-linguistic sense referring ONLY to the GREEK SPEAKING Chalcedonian Christians who now were the majority population of the empire, utterly becoming a SYNONYM of the terms "GREEK" which was always being used as the Latin semantic equivalent of "Hellene" and "HELLENE" itself which from the 10th century onwards gradually also revived with it's original ethno-linguistic connotation (since paganism was no longer a threat) and came to refer to the exact same people..

@@sanele2948 "After the Empire lost non-Greek speaking territories IN THE 7th AND 8th CENTURIES, "Greek" (Ἕλλην), when not used to signify "pagan", became synonymous with "Roman" (Ῥωμαῖος) and "Christian" (Χριστιανός) to mean a Christian Greek citizen of the [Eastern] Roman Empire." "Roman, GREEK (if not used in its sense of 'pagan') and Christian became SYNONYMOUS terms, counter-posed to 'foreigner', 'barbarian', 'infidel'. The citizens of the Empire, now predominantly of GREEK ethnicity and language, were often called simply ό χριστώνυμος λαός 'the people who bear Christ's name'." Harrison, Thomas (2002). Greeks and Barbarians. New York: Routledge., p. 268

Weren't the Bulgarians the invaders?

@@vangelisskia214 thanks for the info. Are Bulgarians stepp nomadic ppl or are they a branch of Germanic tribe?

Isn't the Eugene of Savoy series finished

@@Iamnotracistlmao I think they haven’t finish the Prince Eugene of Savoy episode and they are still 3 parts that he hasn’t uploaded it and I saw it on the first part such as: Battle of Blenheim August 13, 1704 Battle of Petrovaradin August 5, 1716 Siege of Belgrade July 18, 1717

It's Eastern Roman History/ Greek history, Kiddo🗿🍸🍸

Eastern Roman, Macedonian, Greek, Bulgarian History

One of Great Ruler in World in 10-11 century

Yes !Ones of Great East Roman emperators for my in top 3

Eii Make..

They never really conquered all of Bulgaria. The bulgarians were threated with respect. The bulgarian church - the Ohrid Archbishop was lowered in rank but its church lands were stilled called bulgarian and bulgarian priests rules the church regions.

"Comitopul" is not a family dynasty, a state post. Governor of a province in Byzantium and Bulgaria.

@@milenpetev811 There is no proper evidence for the name of Samuil's dynasty. It's called "Comitopuli" in the bulgarian historiography because he and his historically important brothers were sons of a powerful bulgarian "comit" aka governor called Nikola. There is no evidence that Nikola was an heir to the Krum dynasty. The only thing known about Nikola besides being a powerful governor in the western part of the Bulgarian Empire was that he married an armenian woman, which explains the names of Nikola's sons, which are unusually biblical.

Bulgaroktónos

I said I may be wrong Bugaroctonos is without the accent Bugaroktónos

Great warrior. Unfortunately 1014.