Blue's every thought is accompanied by, "How does this relate to the Roman Empire?"

@@BradyPostmaand does it have a dome?

@@marsultor6131 - Blue things those thoughts from within his own brain dome! It's domes all the way down!

Shoot, made the same joke before scrolling through the comments

@@BradyPostma and at the end of the day the world is just two domes clapped together.

Crusaders: No, I don't think I will

@@ISLAMMEHMEDOVcrusaders did it first though

Eastern Romans: "You want it so bad? Have a taste!" _Greek Fire_ Everything else, including the water: _screaming_

@@ISLAMMEHMEDOV I’m not sure the Byzantine Empire of 1453 was a difficult prospect to conquer.

@@ISLAMMEHMEDOV Well, if we look at the Byzantines just a few decades before the Ottoman’s established themselves, we would find that they weren’t in power at all. From 1204 to 1261 the old empire had been split into 3 successor states, Constantinople sacked and thrown into disrepair, and there was a massive territorial loss. Even 30 years after reunification, the wake of this event crippled the ERE. History isn’t about ‘winners’ and ‘losers’, because nothing stands eternal. No country, state, religion or person will exist forever. It’s about the mark you left behind on history. And the mark left by Rome was the largest across the entire Mediterranean hemisphere.

Nice

Noice.

Blue must be so happy to hear this news 😊

Same

Brilliant!

It isnt “kind of funny” Atrocious that you think it is.

@@LeoTheIit was 100s of years ago calm down

​@@LeoTheI always good to see someone having a mental breakdown over something minor in the youtube comment section.

​@@LeoTheIyou're right. It's freaking hilarious 😂 Imagine going shopping during a riot.

@@brianaschmidt910 Well,seems quite the deal coming from an American,you guys have experience to that and many,many more...

"The New and Better Antioch, Brought to You By Khosrau"

Great Sage Equal to Heaven vibes

There's anechdote that is likely apocrypha but still funny where Khosrau talks to a kidnapped citizen and asks him how he likes his new digs. The citizen says it's great except there was mulberry(?) tree that he really like in his yard in the old Antioch. The next morning a fully grown tree is in his yard

@@nicolasdiaz1542 It are stories like these that really don't matter whether they are fake or not, because they capture the spirit of the situation so well that there is no reason they could not be true at all. And yes, the story is hilarious. This is the reason why I sometimes lament that we don't really have true monarchies anymore. Who else but a king fully in control of his country could pull stunts like this?

​@@the_tactician9858well, billionaires. It is somewhat of a let down that our unelected global superpowers don't have the flare for theatrics the older generations had. Say what you want about Bezos just buying your favorite IP that got cancelled and bankrolling the entire creative endeavor so the artists could finish their work as they wanted, but it doesn't have the exact Umph as building your own better version of one of the world's largest cities and then actually committing to the bit, or drinking pearls in the first case in history of improvised champagne, or solving decades old dispute and the world's most difficult puzzle by just slicing it in half.

Everyone except Procopius! MAN, did he hate her and Antonina!

Some historical people just be like that!

Just don't bring up geese in front of her.

I, too, love totalitarian leaders who choose to massacre their subjects.

⁠@@paulwagner688or what she had Justinian do to the people at the hippodrome

Maurice, fetch me my city

Crazy old Maurice...

Tiffany dates back to the 11th century

Phocas is just the 7th-century version of Mort

MAURICE, I CANT MOVE IT MOVE IT ANYMORE

Blue for Roman Emperor First policy is moving the capital to Venice

Bluesileus

​@@theanimeunderworld8338 I'll get the scuba gear and floaties. They're for the domes. Y'all are gonna have to learn to swim or something.

@@GloGlo315You have won the Internet today

You mean vembis?

I’ve always found it interesting too how in the beginning Romans considered themselves Greek and in the end Greeks considered themselves Roman. Pretty wholesome.

We should not forget that Heraclius was a master propagandist - that account is almost certainly an exaggerated version of events to aggrandize and legitimate the new usurper's authority. Notably, the meticulous Paschal Chronicle has a slightly different version of events. Heraclius supervises from his ship and is not present in the city when Phokas is killed and his body burned. Heraclius actually burns a statue of Phokas the next day in the Hippodrome so he could participate in person

The chance of this episode being nothing but propaganda is 99%

The battle (forgot it's name but it was after 1204) between Theodore Laskaris of the Nicean Empire and the Seljuk Turks was actually not Propaganda, and is ironically almost exactly like a price of fantasy in its outcome. With Laskaris on the verge of defeat but not before routing the Turks by killing the Seljuk Sultan in single combat.

OSP is terrible at history and basically repeating Heraclian propaganda. Phocas was not a great emperor but in all fairness he was given a horrible hand. When he overthrew Maurice he may not have intended to become emperor and he had neither the necessary knowledge nor the legitimacy, making ruling the empire extremely difficult. He was most likely portrayed as much more cruel and incompetent than he really was by later pro-Heraclian sources. When Phocas was killed by Heraclius in 610, the Byzantines were losing the war against the Persians but they were still fighting on the border in Mesopotamia. The supposed miraculous arrival of Heraclius caused a civil war at the time when the empire needed soldiers on the frontiers the most. Not only that, but it was under Heraclius that the Levant and Egypt were lost, not under Phocas like OSP shows on the map. We will never know what would have happened had Heraclius not rebelled, but he may have made the situation even worse.

⁠​⁠@@Tansub96 If Phocas wasn’t cruel and incompetent, I strongly doubt Constantinople would have just completely rebelled the moment a navy showed up. When the Persians allied with the Avars(?) a few years later to put Constantinople under siege by both land and sea the city didn’t merely hold out but repulsed the double attack.

As a Greek Its sad to go To Constatinople it is our biggest faulire in the history of our people

​@@christosferizis-synodinos8851 it's hard to explain to normal people why I hate Venice so much.

@@Jacob-df5hr Yep

Don't use the B word!

It's beautiful. I lived in Istanbul as an international student for a year and I miss it greatly. I'm from Canada, so there's a lot of space but not much visible history here. It was amazing for me to be in one of the defining cities of the world, surrounded by history spanning nearly 2500 years. I took every opportunity to explore the city and the rest of the Eastern Mediterranean and I wish I could go back. I have a lot of fond memories of taking rubbings of Varangian graffiti in the Hagia Sophia while playing with the cats, watching the dolphins under the bridge, sketching the Topkapi gardens, and meeting friends at the Chai shops.

OMG! That's a great factoid to learn! As well as hysterical.

​@@John_Weissthe people who say that council of Niceae were there to "fix" the Bible or hide some sort of secret or whatever don't understand how very important their task was to them. When a dude whose whole legacy is giving up of his own wealth to help others loses his cool over it, you know it was serious. They only canonized New Testament accounts that could be traced back to people who were actually alive with Jesus and written by them in their life time. even then, a lot of epistles were left out, OT books were left out because, while being mentioned by other parts of the Bible, they were incomplete or had obvious changes made to them. It was, for them, "If we do this wrong, we spend eternity in hell and condemn our followers to the same" So, Santa has to throw hands with a gnostic trying to co-opt the whole thing.

Go watch his good couples of history Valentine’s Day special

Extra History has like, 10 videos on them and Bellisarius' campaigns.

Extra History has one. Maiorianus has an excellent channel on late Classical Roman History.

If one can trust Procopius, anyway.

Secret history and geese? Im hooked.

Romans* ffs

They didn't bring back anything, the roman Empire just survived

@@francisdupont1656 No it didn't

@@francisdupont1656 If we want to be specific, West Rome also technically didn't fall. After Hun invasion in 4'th century, where Legions perform poorly against horse archers. Rome start increasingly relying on the Cataract cavalry. And because those were usually part of auxiliaries (tribes who fought on side of the Rome). Those "barbaric" commanders start play increasingly important role in Roman politics. When Vandals burn the Rome in 5'th century, they actually intervened against usurpers in name of the Emperor. After that West Roman Empire basically go through Balkanization. With Longobards sizing control over Apennine Peninsula. BUT! Most of regions of the Rome, despite tribal population did consider itself as Roman. Only few decades after formal fall of Carolingian's (Franks) attempt to unite empire. In 8'th century recapturing the Rome. In fact they did attempt to rejoin Byzantium as Cesar (elector). But Roman Augustus (actual Byzantine Emperor) refuse negotiations seeing them as barbarians (fact that religions drifted from each other play also the role). Shortly after that control over Rome is taken by woman, in rather shady way. What is exploited by Franks, who call Byzantine interregnum and as they as Romans control city of Rome, they declare themselves as proper Roman Empire. From that point both sides basically were ignoring each other, considering other side as illegitimate. In 9'th century Frank empire go through split ironically identical to late Rome. Separating on three countries. But shortly after that Fance and Germany, invade Italy and Germans take Emperor crown. Founding Holly Roman Empire. But due to elector method Germany is divided, until Prussia finally unite country in 19'th century. While Italy struggle with reconquest of peninsula and isn't strong to claim title. While France despite united nature doesn't have strong enough claim to do so. At least until Napoleon temporarily claim the title. And there was also Austria-Hungary. Though it is weird case. Anyway, after WW1 Emperor is overthrown and formally for now, there is no one there. Though ironically Europe finally reunited though different means. So we may call it as Roman Union? I'm joking. East was no better. Country was in constant decline, after failed attempt of recapturing Apennine Penisula. They are finally defeated by Turks. Who also declare themselves as Roman Empire. But are universally ignored and later drop the idea. And there is also a madman known as Ivan the Terrible. Who declare himself as Cezar (Tzar) of Third Rome and some vogue concept of All-Rus (Russia). Though despite it being completely illegitimate, Russia is later overtaken by actual Germans, related to Kaiser. So it sort of become true. But not really? Definitely not now. If anything Bulgarian Tzar did have most legitimate claim to Byzantium heritage. Because he actually was subject and elector of Rome. So they technically could elect themselves. Anyway. Bulgaria is now in EU, so it doesn't matter.

​​@@pyropulseIXXI??? But it is the roman empire, just the eastern part of it.

Byzantines are my favorite AoE2 civs (If you haven't, you really should check out the AoE2 definitive edition. It's a great upgrade from the original)

@@DanielC01000100goths are so broken lol

What makes you think we'll ever stop?

He is also of Greek heritage. He has family back in Greece

@@alin-mihai Yep. I wish I could make something this cool as a homage to my heritage!

I will not research this as I don't believe in women, but I believe you, godspeed

Alas, eurocentric history strikes again...

china

Yup, there’s also Pamphile of Epidarus, who was a female Egyptian historian who lived in Greece during Rome’s occupation of it. She was born during Emperor Nero’s reign, so depending on the date which Ban Zhou and herself were born, either Ban Zhou or Pamphile of Epidarus could be the first.

@@tonic9914 It happens. Marco Polo: "I travelled to China and back." Ibn Battuta: "Amateur."

It was a long term migration and not done under a single political entity. Not much resemblance to the Mongols. It would still be an interesting topic, though, for a video!

The issue is there's no concrete archeology of what it looked like at the time. As someone else said it was a pointed political movement like the Mongols. It was just people(whom we know next to nothing of their language, trade goods, religions or anything of note) moving around, trading and settling in new places. All information is so dependent upon guess work that can't really be backed up. There isn't really a video there of substance.

@@TheGamingBDGR I'd say there's definitely enough knowledge for someone who specializes in archaeology, linguistics, or prehistory to do a video on the Indo-Europeans (maybe someone should ask miniminuteman) but there simply isn't any *history* for a history video on them.

They were not. The processes were far more diverse, slow and there was no central rulership as with the Mongols - or even the Huns. What you are describing is a fantasy that belongs to a very dark part of modern European politics.

oh my, my bad I didn't realize I ended up implying the indo-europeans where a centralized empire that conquered roughly half of Eurasia In a life time. I knew the indo-european migrations took centuries and where very decentralized, and I only made the mongol comparison because both involved a nomadic horse rising people that over time conquered roughly half of Eurasia, I should defiantly be more clear with my language next time @@MariaVosa

KATAFRAKTOI ✊🏻

I remember that podcast! It's what caused me to stop saying, "Byzantine Empire", and start calling it the, "Eastern Roman Empire."

Did you know the calling of The East Roman Empire the Byzantines was a slur that the Venicians started. Not surprising though, their way of thinking was bent and cultivated a mindset in the West that is without honor.

@@corneliusmaze-eye2459well maybe if the Byzantines hadn’t wrecked the Ostrogoth kingdom that kept Italy stable and unfragmented Venice wouldn’t have had any opportunity to rise and start the slur :^)

From what has been taught to me, Byzantium was the name of the Ancient Greek city whose foundations Constantinople (or Nova Roma) was built over. One could guess, then, that they initially used it to discredit the legitimacy of the new city under the name of the guy that moved the capital from their area; or, just as likely, they just continued to call it that for a few generations during a transitional period of waiting to see if it would fail & revert, until it was colloquially more accepted. The latter aligns more with the fact the name was used poetically, but the former is just as valid considering how we adjust to new concepts ideas even today.

…and even its conqueror went, "No, wait wait wait wait wait! I'm not an invader! I'm just the new Caesar!"

bruh, its really cool

"You cannot hide, from this reality."

What could you possibly have beef with in the Nicene Creed? It is pretty apolitical for all modern contentious issues.

@@nonnayerbusiness7704 Sorry mixed it up with Council of Constantinople. I was taught that it led to removal of Mary Magdalene’s status as an Apostle and paved way for the much later Council of Trent in the Middle Ages that restricted women’s role in church. Sorry for the confusion.

Nahh dark age was absolutely meant as a slur on a thousand years of history because early moderns wanted to cast themselves as something new and enlightened. Saying “it’s about a lack of records” is just a disingenuous saving of face rather then properly fighting pop culture.

@@blacksage2375 Nope, historians use the term on any time with less written sources. That is all it means. It is understood wrongly by people like you. Wjat you confuse it with is the term "middle ages" Wich was used by humanists during the late middle ages (yeah they thought them self out of the middle ages in the 14th century) in Italy. Seeing it as a middle time between antiquity and the Renaissance (wich is an art form, not a time, it started in the middle ages)

@@allmachtsdaggl5109 The historians in question are a few centuries dead fucknuts, the term has been around a long ass time now. Where it came into existence to portray early moderns as 'enlightened' and thus support why Europe deserved its imperialism. (And any alignment with why Protestants are better then Catholic is purely coincidence.) It was never about books. While of course historians today generally use "medieval period" most commonly in my reading, sometimes middle ages, and with so often its rather cliche include an extended note about how there was nothing dark about the time.

@@blacksage2375 You are not quite right.The term is still used by historians today as a time of lacking written sources (not necessarily books, letters or chartes for example are much better sources). It is also used for the time between the bronze age collapse and the advent of the archaic greek culture, because we have less written sources for example. And back to the term "middle ages" this was dubed by Petrarca in the 14th century. And yes, he told a story about dark times that came between antiquity and his age. Yes he was convinced he would enlighten the world. The times were dark for him, because no one spoke propper Latin anymore wich he wanted to reform. Also he did not like the gothic architecture, he wanted classical roman architecture back. And here is my point: I have a problem with the term dark ages beeing used by scholars today, because of the confusion with what Petrarca said. And I am specifically about that modern use of the term, wich comes up most often in media.

same thoughts actually, I ain't no geographer but why won't he just march from Illyria from the north (like what Narses did in the later years after Belisarius)