🎥 Join our KZread members and patrons to unlock exclusive content! Our community is currently enjoying deep dives into the First Punic War, Pacific War, history of Prussia, Italian Unification Wars, Russo-Japanese War, Albigensian Crusade, and Xenophon’s Anabasis. Become a part of this exclusive circle: kzread.info/dron/MmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fw.htmljoin or patron: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals and Paypal paypal.me/kingsangenerals as well!

@federicotrevisan5319

8 ай бұрын

I would have paid more attention to the comnenian family system and the palaiologoi civil wars (reasons ecc)

@sadman1005

8 ай бұрын

Through which software you make your beautiful map animations & thumbnails?!

@KingsandGenerals

8 ай бұрын

@@sadman1005 after effects and Photoshop

@killer5896u

8 ай бұрын

​@@KingsandGenerals bro write baquates instead of mauri

@killer5896u

8 ай бұрын

​@@KingsandGenerals Can you make a video about the moorish-byzantine wars in a neutral way?

If I had a dollar for every time the Byzantines fought in a civil war, I'd have enough to fund a mercenary army and usurp the throne of my country

@hardlegends8850

7 ай бұрын

Nice one

@justinchalmers3464

7 ай бұрын

This is an insanely underrated comment

@redterrorproductions1373

6 ай бұрын

The byzantine empire never existed.

@justinchalmers3464

6 ай бұрын

@@redterrorproductions1373 You right There’s really no difference between the Roman Empire and the Byzantine empire Ones just like way way more Greek than the other lmao

@martinusv7433

4 ай бұрын

Usurping seemed to be the favourite pastime over there 😑 Such an immensely petty and pathetic display of reckless megalomania, instead of fighting together to save the greatest empire in the world 🤦🤦

Kings & Generals casually being one of the few channels to explain Justinians provincial reforms in the middle of their video about Byzantine civil wars. What a flex.

@MyVanir

8 ай бұрын

There aren't many channels covering Byzantine civil wars in the first place.

@samsmith2635

8 ай бұрын

@@MyVanir Channels covering Byzantine anything don't exist... they were Romans.

@Youtuube304s

8 ай бұрын

​@@samsmith2635I like my empires when they don't get sacked.

@dersuddeutschesumpf5444

8 ай бұрын

​@@samsmith2635 The classification is byzantine. Bugger off greekoid

@PerryKobalt

7 ай бұрын

​@@samsmith2635unfortunately they speak Greeks No longer Latins

What’s truly amazing is how long the Empire lasted, despite being surrounded by unrelenting and powerful enemies bent on it’s destruction, and all the civil wars.

@iwannisbalaouras1687

8 ай бұрын

well it was more powerfull than those states and more cunning

@koubichahouatia8820

8 ай бұрын

Yeah but it ended pretty badly with the Eastern Romans getting ethnically cleansed from Anatolia by the Turks

@iwannisbalaouras1687

8 ай бұрын

@@koubichahouatia8820 The thing you are saying is not valid. Ethnically cleansed from Anatolia came 19th century. Turks needed christians to pay taxes

@liming7827

8 ай бұрын

​@@koubichahouatia8820It was more like the greeks in anatolia getting assimiliated into the turkish culture

@Antiochos-ur3qt

8 ай бұрын

​@@liming7827 In Anatolia the Greeks of ethnic-Greek ancestry (i.e. Greek speaking Christians of ethnic-Greek genetic ancestry) where in the western and northern coastline - and there Greeks did not assimilate into the Ottoman islamic culture. Ottomans assimilated the populations in the center, south and east where most Greek-speaking Christians were for the most of non-ethnic-Greek ancestry. Was that by accident? I leave it to you to ponder.

It is a bit terrifying how an empire so torn by civil war, and that regularly, still managed to keep other powerhouses at bay...for a millenia.

@Captain_Titus3867

8 ай бұрын

They truly had the means to retake at least most of the provinces back, and they lasted almost as long as the original Roman Empire. Imagine what they could’ve accomplished with that type of military might without being handicapped by civil wars.

@constantinexii8182

8 ай бұрын

They were the strongest power in Europe for 900 years from the 400s to 1200s, that says alot about their military

@themercifulguard3971

8 ай бұрын

The breakup of the Abbasid Caliphate evened out the internal strife + temporarily eased the eastern frontier for the Byzantines for sure.

@constantinexii8182

8 ай бұрын

@@themercifulguard3971 Not really, it sure was more peaceful but the Byzantines had a lot of success against the ummayads, 100.000 ummayads died only at the siege of Constantinople

@themercifulguard3971

8 ай бұрын

@@constantinexii8182 The civil wars got substantially worse later into the medieval period when the Umayyads were already usurped by the Abbasids, who were fragmented by this time. There's a reason why the Battle of Manzikert wasn't just a wartime disaster for the Romans, but also a political one. You had petty Islamic kingdoms squabbling amongst themselves while the Roman emperor was dealing with the Tornikios Rebellion. Then the Turks came and initiated major conquest of Roman territories while all that happened.

Great job with this video! I would love to see videos on both the Arian Controversy (which culminated in the Council of Nicea and resulted in the conversion of the Goths to Arianism, an offshoot from Christianity) and the Greek vs Oriental Orthodox split following the Council of Chalcedon in 451 since these religious disputes played a major prominent role in dividing the Eastern Empire. They frequently come up in discussions regarding religious history but are rarely discussed in the broader context of the history of the time.

"Might makes right" is a poor strategy in the long-term

@thorsday121

8 ай бұрын

The Eastern Roman Empire lasted like a thousand years though lmao

@jacobjones1457

8 ай бұрын

@@thorsday121because the rest of the governments systems were able to make up for it

@kevintierney5711

8 ай бұрын

@@thorsday121 *Laughs in Fourth Crusade*

@stevenfallinge7149

8 ай бұрын

It's not a strategy, it's more like it's just what happens. Whatever tends to last longer (meaning, has might) does last longer.

@liming7827

8 ай бұрын

​@@thorsday121As jacobjones said, for all of the corruption, civil wars, parasitic nobles and incompetent emperors,the eastern roman empire managed to crawl into the 1400s through its legacy, geographical and strategic postion, military knowhow, bureaucracy ( when it isnt a corrupt and useless moneypit) and competent emperors. Without the civil wars themselves, who knows how much more longer they could have survived

"What if they had done X, the empire could have survived" "What if they had done Y, the empire could have survived" My Romans in Christ... STOP INFIGHTING

@realdaggerman105

7 ай бұрын

Nothing says ‘Roman’ like political infighting!

Ahhh the Byzantine empire, a huge medieval empire that is also the longest lasting empire in history, while also fighting unstoppable wars with formidable enemies, despite that they had an 80% victory percentage and were probably stronger than all of western Europe👏👏

@athanasiusdicia117

8 ай бұрын

There was never an Empire named Byzantine. It was the Roman Empire till the end.

@user-McGiver

8 ай бұрын

@@athanasiusdicia117 correct!... the name was adopted after the fall... just like the symbol, the double headed eagle was never a symbol of the Eastern Roman Empire [that was anything but ''Greek'' as they say...] instead it was an ancient Mongolian symbol... [that little piece of history burns!...]

@constantinexii8182

8 ай бұрын

​@@athanasiusdicia117 Ok but it's good to use the term byzantine so we can part the ancient Rome from the medieval Rome

@athanasiusdicia117

8 ай бұрын

@@user-McGiver The double headed eagle was in fact two opposite facing eagles, those of Zeus, meeting at Delphi. It was literally the remnant of that myth.

@aligin

8 ай бұрын

I can't help but find similarities demonstrated in the Byzatine Empire and in ours. Instead of fighting with masts and javlines as did the ancient generals, today's politicians fight with money and filibusters and sweet talks pandering to voters. No wonder the ideal state to Plate is never direct democracy.

People often think it was the Turks finished the Eastern Rome but they clearly did to themselves way before the Turks arrived. And the 4th crusade was the final nail to the coffin. Turks just swept away the survivors

@tatarcavalry2342

8 ай бұрын

The things Oghuz Turks destroyed at it's prime was the Crusades and Serbians not the Byzantines, Crusade of 1101 crippled all the plans because how bad it went for the Crusaders. Similar goes for Serbians too maybe you can include Hungarians they were not at their prime but they were too pretty strong at that time.

@FLLCI

7 ай бұрын

The Turks actually waited for Byzantines to fight among themselves while they were fighting with Serbs, Bulgars, and other balkanic nations and cleaning their way into the Balkans... then, they circled Byzantine and captured it. which is a brilliant strategy.

These videos would be exponentially better if you put the year on the screen when a specific event happens, or mention the year when you talk about the event. It's so hard to tell when any of this stuff happened. You sometimes mention the century but you rarely (or never) say the year stuff happens.

Great work!

Very informative. Your historic maps are amazing. Any way you could cover the Eastern Roman rump states in Trebizond, the Peloponnese, and Crimea?

Kings and generals another brilliant video. I love roman and middle age history. It is so fasinating. We know it takes a lot of time and hard work to make these videos. So we always appreciate your hard work and dedication to make these videos. Love and huge fan of you from Sri Lanka 🇱🇰🤝🇺🇸

The reason why Rome is my favourite Empire is , it had 1000+ civil wars , surrounded by enemies, bounced back at dire times, plagued to death and lasted 2206 years.

@alphagamer9505

8 ай бұрын

The empire lasted around 1420 years (counting the 60 year interruption because of the fourth crusade)

@brandonbonas2761

8 ай бұрын

​@@alphagamer9505i believe he's talking about Rome as a whole from its founding in 753 bc to 1453

@williamrobert9898

8 ай бұрын

@@brandonbonas2761 He said Empire though so the gentleman above is correct, as an empire it lasted 1218 years (since it fell to the crusaders in 1204) using this guys logic Persia lasted for 2657 years

@brandonbonas2761

8 ай бұрын

@@williamrobert9898 that's likely because he mostly sees Rome as the Empire i mean u don't get ppl mentioning the Kingdom at all when they mention Rome in general, could also be an error on the them. Not to mention 2206 years is the exact time from its founding to the fall of Constantinople which means he meant the whole thing.

@williamrobert9898

8 ай бұрын

@@brandonbonas2761 But it was not an imperial constitution until 14 BC so he messed up, that is the point

I swear, Greeks could never stop fighting each other.

@user-ll9hb3sd8h

8 ай бұрын

They are their worst enemy

Thanks for the video! One note: I find it hard to follow the chronology sometimes with just the emporers names as landmark. Maybe the current discussed year or the time of the Reign could be displayed in a corner in future videos of similar kind with a huge time frame?

the Byzantine Empire is basically Rome 2.0, so naturally it had all of Rome Strengths, like adaptability and economic power house. But it also had all of Rome's weaknesses, ie internal strife that leads to civil wars that slowly but surely weakened the empire in the long run, just like the old days of Rome.

@darkorodic638

8 ай бұрын

Byzantine Empire IS Roman Empire, continuity was not broken

@user-McGiver

8 ай бұрын

@@darkorodic638 correct!... the name was adopted after the fall... just like the symbol, the double headed eagle was never a symbol of the Eastern Roman Empire [that was anything but ''Greek'' as they say...] instead it was an ancient Mongolian symbol... [that little piece of history burns!...]

@freddekl1102

8 ай бұрын

wtf is this argument "it's basically X state 2.0 so it had strenghts and weaknesses of it", how does it work in your mind? Real life works like a game with a specific name of country gets buffs and debuffs? And it can't reform/change? France is basically Frankish empire 2.0, with its strenghts in generating strong leaders and weakness in dividing after leader dies

@balabanasireti

8 ай бұрын

​@@darkorodic638Nah

@Brandonhayhew

8 ай бұрын

The Eastern Roman empire a shadow its former power when the caliphate risen and taken the middle east and north africa.

Excellent video, absolutely jam packed with information.

I think this video focuses more on the militaristic and factional disputes, while ignoring other factors, religious disputes being the most notable I can think of. Many civil wars were, either in name or in fact, started by differences in religious creeds and doctrines. See: Eikonomachia, Nestorianism, Arianism, Monophysitism, Schism...

@KingsandGenerals

8 ай бұрын

Good point. And, indeed, "Religious strife in the Byzantine empire" script is in the works.

Amazing work! Thank you ❤

"The Empire, Long Divided, Must Unite; Long United, Must Divide" The Roman Empire, including the Eastern Roman Empire always valued its republican tradition where by merit a leader had the right to govern but in practice this can be an invitation to anarchy and because of that they experienced numerous civil wars throughout its history due to factors such as succession disputes, power struggles, political instability and military ambitions. But the Romans also had economic disparities, and regional aspirations. These conflicts could have been avoided through clear succession plans, political reforms, military reforms, economic and social reforms, granting regional autonomy, and prioritizing diplomacy and negotiation. Implementing these measures could have reduced the occurrence and severity of civil wars, leading to a more stable and cohesive empire.

@AL_AFGHANI1

8 ай бұрын

Brazzerlian

@pandoraeeris7860

8 ай бұрын

Mebbe they needed democracy.

@oole0111

8 ай бұрын

Bros saying this like they could follow your advice (you're +1000 years late)

As a reader of byzantine history I think this video does as much justice as one can on the topic of byzantine internal instability as one can in 18 minutes. It's hard to cover over a 1000 years of history but you guys definitely did a decent job here explaing the topic for a audience that might not be super familiar with byzantine history. Nobody does infighting better than the bzyatium babyyyyy😎

Great video! Your team did a great job!

A guy takes the throne. "yay" 3 dudes pop up in rebellion. A random 4th guy takes the throne instead. What am I watching? lol But I love it. Great episode.

Thanks for the video!

These kind of videos are the best on the channel

Excellent video!

Keep it rolling sir! Keep the Byzantine content running! We would love a new series about Theophilus, John Korkouas, John Tsimiskes, or John and Manuel Komnenos.

Great job!

Fantastic video! ⚔🔥🙌

Kings and Generals Great Video!

Thank you for uploading! I'm learning more and more about my favorite empire

Great channel! A nice feature would be for the years to scroll by on the screen as you're narrating.

@KingsandGenerals

Ай бұрын

It does when we depict a certain year

Nice video

A great video...... a very good concentration of details that clear the way to understand the roman civil wars .... as always you guys are doing an insane job ... everything is perfect including the narration as always ... got my full support !!!!!

This video was a very interesting and well done summary of bizantine civil wars, I just felt the lack of more dates on the screen to better follow the narration between the differnt eras of bizantine history

Its a local tradition that goes back to the generals of alexander the great and can be seen even in last century's modern Greece

@user-ll9hb3sd8h

7 ай бұрын

Greatest enemy of a Greek is another Greek

You could never convince me that the Eastern Romans had more civil wars then the Western Romans.

In Crusader Kings, if "Byzantine Revolt" isn't on the map, wait 5 minutes.

"Eastern Roman Empire, how many civil wars do you want?" "Yes!"

Can you please put the scroll that shows the year that something happens up much much more? It really helps to put things into perspective, when its easy to see exactly when something happened.

Its interesting how their enemies steadily kept encroaching on their borders, whitling the empire away, but still they kept rebelling and starting civil wars

My boy is back at it! Thank you everyone who makes this happen

Very eye opening; would of thought that the presence of a mortal threat would have concentrated the minds of the leadership class

11:10 , The Foka-these clan... sounds rather unfortunate 😂

Eastern Roman Emperor: coughs His generals: So I decided it was coup time.

Dynatoi is the plural in Greek for Powerful, Capable and/or Able 9:54. Of course I’m sure understanding “exactly” what it meant within the historical context is more complicated than a simple translation I suppose.

@Manouil_III

8 ай бұрын

He is talking about the definition, rather than the etymology of the term tho.

Even the Enemies of Byzantium thought having so many Civil Wars was nuts.

Great video keep it up you're doing amazing things... 😁🙏

It is characteristic of the Greeks throughout all our history. We are not aggressive or hostile to other nations but civilized, but because we are very anarchist and free spirits with a strong sense of "Being", of our ideas or opinions etc. ("selfish" as one would say more populist in everyday language) we fight between ourselves. Even in every day modern Greek culture when a Greek is agree he/she usually says "Eh! Do you know who I AM ? " (it is something like a motto, or "meme" of everyday culture) On one hand this is not something good but on the other that characteristic is exactly what gave birth to our nation's greatness, our strong sense of "human subject", of identity (our very early national consiousnes) , of "Being"... of freedom, of chaos...of "Wow, ok that is very nice that we created, now let's burn the whole thing down" 😄 We are Nietzscheic.. nation Ps. But for that exactly reason also no one outsider and nothing can destroy us even if we live in the most "centered" and geostrategical place in the world, crossroad of civilizations for thousands years etc.etc. The strong sense of Being... But, between this times of civil war there are times of deep harmony and cultural explosion / creation and then the same pattern again. Creation and destruction, creation and destruction, exactly like in the ancient Greek mythology...(Khronos takes the throne of Uranus and turns the world and it's laws "upside down", then Zeus takes the throne of Khronos the same happens, then Prometheus threatens the throne of Zeus, then the last Greek god Christ also threatens the throne of a Roman emperor - he gives the command that all little child's lately borned to be killed - and turns Rome "upside down" etc.etc)

They were just keeping true to the cherished Roman tradition of Civil War Tuesday.

The Byzantine Republic is a good book that explains how the civil wars functioned as elections

@huey7437

8 ай бұрын

😂

@CameronAB122

8 ай бұрын

Good book

The fragmentation of Byzantine imperial power because of the thematic system sounds like what happened to feudal Japan wherein the shogun's held more power than the emperor.

Another great video!

Intresting reading ancient Chinese sources about East Rome's elective monarchy

There's a common pattern between Alparslan and Attila both inflicted heavy defeats against the Romans in Manzikert and Ravenna respectively and died just the year after at the height of their power

@iwannisbalaouras1687

8 ай бұрын

Battle of Manzikert was not so important because the empire took the lost lands back and won against the turks. The big problem that destroyed the empire was the fourth crusade. Romans lost to many battles but always where coming back stronger

@eongerbe

8 ай бұрын

actually, as far as disastrous battles go, manzikert was not that bad, as Alp Arslan would let Romanos IV just leave captivity without any repercussions. the real change the battle brought around wast the lack of troops that the emperor could use to defend against his userper, who would decide to continue the war with the seljuks, something that brought disstrous consequences@@iwannisbalaouras1687

@CIABACKWARDYAKUZA

8 ай бұрын

@@iwannisbalaouras1687 chill shut up TURKS TAKE ANATOLİA AND İSTANBUL MASSACRED ALL GREEKS BECAUSE BATTLE OFMANZKİKERTç

@Takmatikbaspapaz

8 ай бұрын

@@iwannisbalaouras1687 The Battle of Manzikert paved way for Crusades and the Turkification of Anatolia which laid the seeds of the Ottoman empire which conquered Constantinople ending Rome and triggering the Age of Discovery which shaped much of the modern world,... A battle can only be this impactful

@iwannisbalaouras1687

8 ай бұрын

@@Takmatikbaspapaz read again my answer , i don't like to repeat myself

Could you make for Granada too?

I think you could draw so many parallels between the slow decline of the Byzantine empire due to the “screw everyone and everything as long as I am the king of the ashes” attitude of the elites and the current state of so many western countries. At least I see it here in the U.K.

@SolracCAP

7 ай бұрын

Sometimes it feels like the whole world is run by people like this.

@realdaggerman105

7 ай бұрын

It’s very easy to draw parallels, but we have to remember Byzantine history lasted 1,000 years. Assuming we don’t get nuked off the planet, I doubt we will see much radical change in our lifetimes.

@Kanriel

2 ай бұрын

For me it was the part about the elites preferring a weak emperor that can be controlled over a strong emperor that made me "ah yes, American politics of the last few decades..."

Thank you for the video

is it possible that the meritocacy that led to the civil wars also led to the consistent competent emperor's rising to power who were competent enough to fight off Byzantium's myriad enemies for a millennia?

"These Denatoi were families who had acquired vast tracts of land in Anatolia during the 7th & 8th centuries." All I could think of is Monty Python's Holy Grail: Lord of Swamp Castle: "What's wrong with Princess Lucky? She's beautiful! She's got great, huge. . . . tracts of land!" Son: "But I don't want land!" "Listen son! We live in a bloody swamp! We need all the land we can get!" 😆

One of the best videos on Byzantine history. Great work as always

can you also make videos about the western roman empire?

Ha love that term 'thoroughly Stalin-ed' should be in the OED

You mentioned it in passing, but could you do a video on the Samaritan Revolt? I don't think there are nearly enough videos on KZread exploring their history and you guys would no doubt do it justice!

@d.m.collins1501

8 ай бұрын

I second this! Samaritans need love too! One parable in the New Testament isn't enough.

Good job

what would be an alternate history everyone would like to see on wizards and warriors.

Roman Empire's greatest weakness is that they had to pretend they were a republic till the end. They couldn't tolerate the idea of a ruler passing office to his son. But let's face it, kingdoms, as bad as they were, were much more stable, because there was a clear line of succession instead of "hey, the throne is now for the grabbing, let the games begin".

The Roman Empire: exists. Civil wars: I'm going to end this man's whole career. Theodosian walls: not so fast.

Byzantine 1: "Hey, did you hear that our entire civilisation is under an existential threat?" Byzantine 2: "oh yeah, and the emperor is doing his best to combat it right?" Byzantine 1: "Yup, you know what that means" Byzantine 1 and 2 proceed to draw their daggers and blind the most capable emperor in a century

Thank you!!

Greek translations: Dynatoi, the strong. Penetes, the starving. As fitting as it gets.

I think we should focus on why they don't have the law for successor. Personally,it is clear that the Repulic was successed by the medival Rome,even the Repulic transformed to be a military dictatorship system,the name and the system of the Repulic still exited in the Rome. When Auguest estabulished the kind of military dictatorship regime,he depended on different tilte and military to control the power,therefore we can see the situation about someone who can take the support of military,he can be the emperor. This is not only in the medieval Rome,this is comomon in any dictatorship regime.

aah division and unification. the entirety of greek history in two words. from troy to the aftermath of WW2 . but as with any state, once it adopts the mantle of ""empire" its doomed to fall. such is life when speaking about states i think. Nevertheless a splendid empire, one which the word meritocracy endured during the dark ages, as well as a place of culture science and trade. Only if we could learn from their mistake and imittate their successes(speaking as a modern greek here....). Excellent video keep it up :).

"Let us remember of what men we are descendants of, and if one wishes to refer to our oldest ancestors, refer to the old Hellenes....and refer to the ancient Romans, from whom we are named after....However our origins lie in both of these genes...we are the heirs of Alexander the Great and his successors." Manuel Chrysochloras, "Peri tou Basileus ton Romaion" Epistule XLIX

*Strategoi* & *Dynatoi* (13:56) are being butchered *at the last syllable* since the KG establishment... *Palaiologoi* (16:56) spared miraculously 😋.

@KingsandGenerals

8 ай бұрын

Establishment

@Manouil_III

8 ай бұрын

@@KingsandGenerals 😇

This was a great, fresh take on history that also made me think "why has no one ever done Byzantine history through this lens?" I might have liked to see more about how these civil wars were directly linked to territorial losses to enemies--especially during the 4th Crusade--but I suspect that this aspect of Byzantium's decline will be covered in some way in future videos. Other people here have mentioned the religious aspect of many of medieval Rome's civil wars, and I'm glad to hear you guys are planning a video on that, too! I hope you might also touch more upon regionalism in the late Roman Empire and its effect on civil wars and usurpations--which you did touch on briefly in this video, but I want to hear more! E.g. did people from Antioch or Sicily or Cilicia resent centralized rule and put forward their own candidates for the purple in order to get a better deal on taxes or protection?

9:48 Vast tracts of land you say? ;)

the eastern empire had less civil wars than the original part of the roman empire. i mean rome itself had civil wars from the early relublic right up until the western empire collapsed. the estern empire somehow was both untable and oddly unifed at the same time. one should also point out how unstable constatinople itself was for instance justinian was nearly otherthrown by the mobs in the nicca riots it was only the timely intervention of the army that crushed the revolt.

The Byzantine was just doing the balkan stuff.

Medieval Roman Empire: “hey, you could probably restore me back to my full glory if you all chilled for five minutes. You already have enough going on with invasions, plagues, natural disasters” Byzantine Romans: “true, truuuu. Buttttt~”

The Battle of Manzikert paved way for Crusades and the Turkification of Anatolia which laid the seeds of the Ottoman empire which conquered Constantinople ending Rome and triggering the Age of Discovery which shaped much of the modern world,... A battle can only be this impactful

@iwannisbalaouras1687

8 ай бұрын

The battle of Manzikert washn't so important, fourth crusade destroyed the empire after that the empire was a shell of its former self. >> Komnhnian restoration

Looking at the wild ride that is it's history, it is quite amazing that the Eastern Roman Empire lasted as long as it did.

I like civil wars in the Eastern Roman Empire. Thanks to one of them, Bulgaria made its first territorial expansion south of the Balkan Mountains. Good, civil wars.

Turks indeed had a decisive role in triggering historical major events like the Migration Period, Crusades, shaping the history of Balkans, Islamization of Northern India, Age of Discovery as well as ending the Middle Ages with the conquest of Constantinople, fall of the Roman Empire.

is Dacia supose to be there? 4:15

I hope this is replicated in Medieval Total War 3. Where as the Byzantines you have great wealth and technology, but that is balanced by constant civil unrest.

@Kanriel

2 ай бұрын

It's literally the entire premise of Mount and Blade: Bannerlord. It's made by a Turkish gaming studio and the whole premise is the mercenary factions surrounding the empire ended up murdering the emperor, then the successor is mysteriously killed, so it's just all out war as "The Empire" splits into 3 factions (1 general, 1 senate and 1 monarchistic) vying for control and the merc factions on the outside all going at it. There's no more storyline, it's just constant wars and cease fires.

Hi, didn’t understand sth. Can I use all channels on discord as a member?

@KingsandGenerals

8 ай бұрын

Yes, contact me if you have any questions. Sometimes discord and/or youtube bugs out and certain people do not get automatic access.

@Roman_History_fan

8 ай бұрын

@@KingsandGenerals you mean ilkin right? If yes, I can only write if you accept my friend request

Not so many, but because empire was so monumental, it held for hundreds of years, even with those civil wars. Take Arab sultanats, caliphates, and Emirates for example, civil war caused many empires turn into ashes. So we know about many civil wars not because there were so many, but because of empire holding after civil wars.

@constantinexii8182

8 ай бұрын

The rashidun caliphate, the ummayad caliphate and the Abbasid caliphate together lasted for 300 to 400 years, the Byzantine empire was at its territorial height for 300 years

@sircatangry5864

8 ай бұрын

@@constantinexii8182 You comparing dynasties to an empire, and not just how long empire last, but last with its territorial height. ERE was empire from 395, to 1204, 800+ years of empire, that's more than impressive.

@constantinexii8182

8 ай бұрын

@@sircatangry5864 It's not just dynasties because a caliphate isn't an empire it works a bit different and it is difficult to explain, but I think that the abbasid caliphate is a different state to the rashidun caliphate

@sircatangry5864

8 ай бұрын

@@constantinexii8182 Well, Abbasids claim to descendant from Radhidun caliphate. But yeah, its complicated.

@constantinexii8182

8 ай бұрын

@@sircatangry5864 It's VERY complicated but the rashiduns are the heirs of Muhammad, the ummayads from caliph Muawiyah and the Abbasids from al Abbas I may be wrong but it sounds right

Great empires often fall more because of internal problems than external threats…

Thank you. I was always so curious why usurpations and rebellions were endemic.

I keep thinking….. when? When? When?

Chinese history: hold my beer🍺

My American private high school only mentioned Byzantium. We aren’t taught anything about it. Other than it was the 2nd Rome and was Greek lol

Why So Many Civil Wars? We're Greeks, we can't agree amongst ourselves most of the time, but when necessary we become united so that we can build a state to squabble in peace. Queue 3500 years of Hellenism with this ad nauseam.

Reading about the Palaiologos civil wars of the 14th century had me like: (to the Palaiologans) "We had a good thing you stupid son of a bitch! We had Thessaly! We had Macedonia! We had everything we ever needed! And it all ran like clockwork! You could have slowly expanded and taken back the pre-1204 land. It was perfect! But no! You just had to blow it up! You, and your civil wars and alliances! You just had to be the Roman! If you'd kept your navy, paid the Catalan Company, we'd all be eating souvlaki right now!"

Thus, questions. How did the average Eastern Roman view the imperial purple? Were there or did anyone even try to formalise a succession system/law?

The history of the Roman empire, eastern or not, was a series of civil wars, that is, wars of succession. - Significantly, the European peoples that kept more or less the Roman model of succession (namely eastern orthodox states) inherited that kind of instability: Bulgaria, Serbia, Rus states, Wallachia, Moldavia. (Muscovy-Russia became an empire only after the dynastic principle was imposed by the Romanov, through blatant tyranny and even terror, not unlike what some Roman emperors came up with).

The period between the death of Basil II in 1025 and the coronation of Alexios I in 1081 proved to be the most crucial point to the long-term existence of the empire. I could only imagine, what if Basil II had 2 more competent successors before the rise of Alexios. The Turks would have been stop in 1071. Thus, there will be no Crusades. No sacking of 1204