Watch my latest history documentary here:- th-cam.com/video/c3Hq6UaFQqk/w-d-xo.html Finally dedicating an entire episode to a Byzantine Emperor. First of many to come! Who is your favourite Emperor of Byzantium? Let me know in the comments.. Maybe I will make a video of them! Please like and subscribe if you enjoyed the video, and let us know in the comments what you'd like too see covered in the future.
Byzantine Emperors all have such interesting histories, you gotta give us more It'd be awesome if you gave us vids on the Bulgar Tsars as well. Especialy Krom, and Kolyan; who destroyed the crusaders who occupied Byzantium when they were supposed to go to the Middle East
A very much appreciated production good sir. For your question, im partial too a couple of the Pailaigos, Basil (slightly iffy, he was an interesting fellow. Id not want to have too fight him in war, would for sure attempt too have him murdered) Alexios makes a good stab at staving off destruction, and Maurice had potential. There are one or two more (Justin? Justinian was impressive, a great if cowardly man, but a good emperor? Good for his people? Good for the state? I personally think he was anathema too good governance in later years. ) but that's probably enough for the crown.
Can I just say that The History of Byzantium is by FAR the best pre-modern history podcast to date? It set out to be a continuation of The History Of Rome podcast, but in my opinion it soon surpassed it both in the amount of detail and the flow of the narrative. If you are into history podcasts, you reeeeaaally shouldn´t skip this one. Oh, and Piersons voice is very soothing and just makes the whole thing a great lisitening experience.
@@aimanmarzuqi4804 Yes... kind of, Victor. You see, Victor means *victorious* and Nikephoros means the one who *brings* victory. Slight difference there. Nikephoros is a compound word: Nike (victory) and the verb phero (I bring, or I bear something) Similar compound names of Greek origin: Christopher: The one who bears Christ inside Lucifer: light bearer (Luc, from the Latin LUX for light)
Is there any Christian who's obsessed with Byzantium and the history of Christendom/Christianity in general, who would like to help me create an animation project about the history of Christendom/Christianity (Battle of Tours, Battle of Covadonga, Battle of Nineveh)? Movies/animes about Heraclius, Charlemagne, and many other heroes of Christendom... My discord is: Proletariado#4420 ADD ME
Reason for the pretty much forgotten and ignored glorious 1000 year old byzantine history in the west has its roots in the mutual hate the two cultures had. Byzantines hated and dispized westerners and vice versa. This hatred was mutual and it also went to the medieval and also modern greeks to a point who were always not very favorable to the westerners. Byzantine empire was the shield of western civization for 1000 years. Fighting off huns , goths , vikings, avars , bulgarians , rus , persians , arabs , turks. 1000 years of epic war epic victories and epic defeats all almost unknown the the vast majority of westerners. Everyone knows for example Charles Martel ,hunderds of books , shows etc , taught in every school as a great victory over the muslim when in reality it was a small insignificant battle against a small raiding party. At the same time Byzantines were fighting an epic 400 years war the Arabs with epic battles naval battles sieges , hugr armies and cost, while everybody knows Poitiers few know about the epic second siege of Constantinople and the destruction of the Arabs a military defeat and catastrophe that was never matched in muslim history until the era of the mongols invasions. 120000 men dead , 2560 ships sunk, the victory that truly saved europe and stoped arab expansion. Who knows about the epic byzantine-arab wars except history fanatics? 400 years , and who knows about the 1000 year of the eastern roman/bynantine against the persians? few people... but all know about wars in europeb, 100 years was for example , or Charlomagne etc. Its about time western historiography introduces to the masses byzantine history. It truly epic and an important part of the western culture. Even in Greece which is a huge part of our history and culture , byzantine history is not taught much. Its all about ancient and hellenistic stuff and then straight to late middle ages and then modern greece.
Byzantine history is generally more confusing with more frequent civil wars and rebellions within the empire, as well as extreme corruption which was the bane of its existence.
@@chuckles5689 Not really. That's a misconception that was proposed by the western powers in order to minimize the importance of the Eastern Roman empire. The Empire was the single, most powerful nation in the world up until 1204 when Constantinople fell to the Crusaders. After that it was a losing battle until it finally fell in 1453 to the Turks. Now you'll ask why they hated the Eastern Roman Empire so much. It was because the legitimacy of their rule, particularly of the Holy Roman Emperors, was dependent, no matter if they wanted to or not, on the fact that the Eastern Roman EMPEROR recognized them or not. And that was something that they had to acquire by marrying Roman Princesses. So, in reality all the royal houses of Europe, for more than a 1000 years did their very best to marry Romans princesses and unofficially paid homage to the Roman Emperor in order to legitimize their rule. Byzantium is considered one the most, if not the most, successful empire in the world because it managed to do what other empires could not. It's citizens felt they were Romans. The civil wars you mentioned were nothing more than wars of succession, a mad grab for power by powerful nobles. But not even once there was in more than 1100 years a civil war that led to any part of the empire to secede. And that is what's incredible.
@@kpetalis It isn't a "misconception", it is a fact. Most powerful nation in the world is subjective, and there are obvious contenders to that claim from the Islamic caliphates and China. The Fourth Crusade was done by westerners on the behest of a pretender(Alexios IV), who the Greeks deposed and killed. The prior emperor was Alexios III, who took the throne by deposing and blinding Isaac II, his younger brother. The Latins saw the death of Alexios IV (at the hands of Alexios V) as the Greeks murdering their rightful liege. An aristocrat (Alexios V) became Emperor after deposing Alexios IV, and the crusaders were still unpaid, leading to the Sack of Constantinople among a string of other more complicated events which I do not wish to delve into. The decline you are referencing did not start during the Fourth Crusade, but with the fall of the Komnenian Dynasty and their replacement by the Angelos. The Holy Roman Emperor was clearly not dependent on the Byzantines in any way, and were more or less recognized by the Latin West and by the Papacy, without regard for the Byzantines. I don't know what nations you are referring to paid homage to the Byzantine Empire, the Latin vassals around Antioch? The Byzantine Empire was not a tremendously successful empire and was beset by corruption and constant infighting and strife, it's longevity is owed to coincidence, the existing Roman system, and yes, the revival periods of some good emperors, such as John II and Manuel.
@@kpetalis "The Empire was the single, most powerful nation in the world up until 1204 " is wrong as fuck. Byzantines never became that strong. They lost most of their empire to Arabs. They defeated by the nomads and paid tribute to them. Yet they still managed to recover until they got smashed by the Seljuks in 1071. They were not even strongest state in Southeastern Europe.
@@RandomGuy-df1oy Byzantophiles conveniently seem to forget just how often the Byzantines had to pay tribute, from the Hunnic invasions all the way to the Ottomans.
Guys, be gratious, I think Fawad referred to "we" as the latter pairing of adversaries. We may have our individual sides but I think we're also all intelligent history lovers on this channel.
Both Richard and Saladin were virtuous and beloved by their people, during their life on earth and even to this day. Nicephoros and Sayf Al-Dawla used hype and propoganda to bolster their image and reputations. This came back to bite them near the end of their lives as their true characters were exposed and their people began to hate them. And their existence fell into obscurity after their deaths.
Wellllllllllll. You did one showing the Byzantines winning! about time. Great job! Have always liked Phocas. Makes you wonder how things would have gone if he'd not been killed off, or if Tzimskis there had lived longer. Dynamic leaders both of them.
Theres not really he can do much at that time since he was too unpopular, one thing though is i wish his reforms of the church was implemented. In a way he was a crusader before it was cool, but the Orthodox clergy as a whole doesnt want the concept,
@@mysteryjunkie9808 my guy wouldn't have to deal with usurpers and rebels early on, a more stable roman empire by the beginning of basil ii's reign would have allowed him to conquer as far as delhi, alexios komnenos would have conquered all the way to japan
Ah, an entire video about Nikiphoros and a shoutout to History of Byzantium, too! Great, I really appreciate all your videos. One thing has to be said, though, although there are many historical channels and I love them all, they don't ever reach your attention to detail and focus. I particulary like your heavy usage of the primary sources, which isn't that common in the historical corner of TH-cam.
Then you probably haven't checked out this series yet th-cam.com/play/PLEQru6POYgetKOdzDYaLyjBkymSN9XeyY.html the most in depth approach on byzantine history there is on YT imo. Can only recommend
@@papageitaucher618 that is most hardcore bisantine and diadocchi historycal channel imagineble. Unfortunately way to indepth to ever become popular on TH-cam . But delivery is briliant there too.
Oh done beautifully ,,, greetings from Greece specially from Crete and Cyprus, the crown jewels of Greek Byzantium at eastern Mediterranean sea to this day !
@@Panos_Stayis I mean everyone knows they had a Greek consciousness. But legally it was still the legit Roman empire. They were all too aware of their Greek heritage, but their political tradition and culture was Roman.
@@cormacmcquillan828 Their culture has always been Greek not roman (even before the fall of the western part) . The state and institutions were indeed Roman since the greeks preserved them. But saying that there was no Greek Byzantium considering that the people in charge were the Greeks (not the old Romans), that the ethnic group that had the central role was the Greeks , the prevelant culture was the Greek culture, the lingua franca was Greek , and the education was Greek as well, is kind of a stretch. Essentially the Roman empire transformed into a Greek empire but if we want to be accurate we could call Byzantium a Greco-Roman empire (even if the old Romans didn't have anything to do with it anymore) .
@@gilpaubelid3780 There was no such thing as old Romans. Roman civilisation was Greeco Roman, they mixed Latin with Greek. When the Greek speaking provinces were conquered the Romans changed almost nothing. They let the same systems of government exist and never made an attempt to Latinise these areas because well, they were already Roman. Calling it "Greek Byzantium" is both historically and culturally incorrect because it came from a different tradition than being simply "Greek". Same way modern Britain comes form a tradition different from the Medieval English kingdom. Modern Italy also comes from a different tradition than classical Rome, a much different one.
Another legend. Nikephoros had a first spouse he loved profoundly but she died too soon.Since this loss NP was not interested anymore in women.He married the widowed Basilissa of Romanos II to protect their two sons who had already been inthronised ( Basileios II and Konstantinos VIII).The basilissa was a beautyfull woman but ΝΦ did not approach her. Tzimiskes ,the assassin of NΦ miraculously did not massacrate the two heirs. Basileios II, one of the greatest emperors of the AMORID ( not macedonian) dynasty succeded him togheter with his brother Konstantinos VIII who administrated the empire, whereas Basileios II fought the B' lgurs and the türks to reestablish the frontiers of the EREmpire.
Yup your right the Byzantines called themselves Romans as they should. Sadly most westerns have no clue there one of the same so for simplicity reasons the name Byzantine exists.
Yeah and in 1204 the ‘Europeans’ stabbed the Byzantines in the back when they sacked Constantinople. History does not work the way you think it works. Ironically one of the biggest threats to the byzantines were the catholics.
Actually the defence of Europe starts in Marathon. When Persians were an Athenian general sugest to follow them and kill them. Athenians then agree to not disturb them and let them pass to Asia from Thrace, because their big number might change direction and destroy the people of Europe.
Byzantines were also fighting for Europe. Holy land is the strategical key point to Europe thats why Europe is Christian and beleive is the grave of Christ and Muslims beleive is the passage to heaven
I really appreciate the audio mixing of this video, really works with rather than against the content. Both loud and quiet in just the right spots. Too many documentaries with good content are spoiled by distracting audio.
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language." Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
@@-Blast "Romans were neither Greek nor Italian, specifically. "Roman" had always been a rather general term, applying not to a specific race or ethnic group and instead to those with Roman CITIZENSHIP, born in a Roman province, or those who reflected the characteristics of Roman people." - Greg Woolf "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 In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios [Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)] In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene. [Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)] In other words according to the lexica of that period : Rhomaios (Roman) =Raikos (Greek) =Graikos (Greek) =Hellene (Greek) But then I guess you don't even have a clue what the Souda or Zonaras Lexica even are... "As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001) Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482
@@-Blast "With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212 "It may be said, however, that despite its multi-national character, three forces tended to give it unity. One was Orthodoxy, the other a common language, and the third the imperial tradition. The first and the second were Greek and to the extent that they were Greek the Empire was Greek also. The third was Roman, and to that extent the Empire was also Roman." The Transfer of Population as a Policy in the Byzantine Empire Author(s): Peter Charanis Source: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 3, No. 2, (Jan., 1961), pp. 140-154 Published by: Cambridge University Press
@@-Blast "…That in the race of us the Hellenes, wisdom reigns" ‘ὅτι τε ἐν τῷ γένει τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἡμῶν ἡ σοφία βασιλεύει’ Emperor John III Doukas Vatatzes (1193-1254) to Pope Gregorio IX "the HELLENIC RACE looms over all other languages" and that "every kind of philosophy and form of knowledge is a discovery of Hellenes […]. What do you, O Italian, have to display?" " 'Ἁπασῶν γλωσσῶν τὸ ἑλληνικὸν ὑπέρκειται γένος… Πᾶσα τοίνυν φιλοσοφία καὶ γνῶσις Ἑλλήνων εὕρεμα… Σὺ δὲ ὦ Ἰταλέ, τίνος ἕνεκεν ἐγκαχαῦσαι;’ Theodore II Laskaris (1254-1258), Christian Theology, 7 f "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 "Present your shield, swords, arrows, and spears to them, imagining that you are a hunting party after wild boars, so that the impious may learn that they are dealing not with d*mb animals but with their lords and masters, THE DESCENDANTS OF THE HELLENES (GREEKS) AND THE ROMANS." Constantine Palaologos XI speaks in front of his officers and allies before the final siege of Constantinople by the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed Bey George Sprantzes - The Fall of the Byzantine Empire 1453 - primary source from the war. "Καὶ οὕτως λογίσθητε ὡς ἐπὶ ἀγρίων χοίρων καὶ πληθὺν κυνήγιον, ἵνα γνώσωσιν οἱ ἀσεβεῖς ὅτι οὐ μετὰ ἀλόγων ζῴων ὡς αὐτοί, παράταξιν ἔχουσιν, ἀλλὰ μετὰ κυρίων καὶ αὐθεντῶν αὐτῶν καὶ ἀπογόνων ΕΛΛΗΝΩΝ καὶ Ῥωμαίων." Ὁμιλία τοῦ Αὐτοκράτορα Κωνσταντίνου ΙΑ’ Παλαιολόγου πρὶν τὴν ἅλωση τῆς ΚωνσταντινουπόλεωςἈπὸ τὸ Χρονικὸν τοῦ Μεγάλου Λογοθέτη Γεωργίου Σφραντζῆ ἢ Φραντζῆ Ἐκδοθὲν ἐν Κερκύρᾳ ἔτει 1477
Hallo from Denmark . Once again you deliver another great video . And this time I learned something byzantine history and Nikephoros II Phokas . Thank you very much sir . I just expanded my knowlege . But the Capital of byzantine Empire(modern dat Istanbul ) has a very origins . It ess settled around as colony from the Greek citystate of megara around 685 bce . And it properbly as transit port of the Greek Trade with the Black sea. The Black sea region was a very importent trading area for the ancient greeks . As main Greece has only a few fertile areas . Where crops like grain Can grow ... Since its 80-90 procent mountains . But its perfect for grapes and Olives. So Wine snd olive Oil was ancient greece’s main exports. In Black sea region on Russian plain (and on the crimea) lived the scytians. The scytians were also ahead of their time in matters equal rigths . As scytian women coud fight in armies as soldiers abd became clan cheiftains . They were s nomadic people . They lived in different tribes . Now the scytians were fond Greek Wine and weapons . And the greeks were very interested in in wheat and grain ... So symbiotic relationship happended between greeks and the nomadic scytians .... Scytian cheiftains allowed the greeks found colonies on their land .... And since the scytians lived a tribal/clan society . The some had war with each other or raids . That resulted in a lot prisoners. And many of prisoners were offen sold as slaves to the greeks . In the City state of Athens scytians slaves were used as a police force .... So many Greek Trade ships sailed back and forth between Greece and the Black region ... Also Many Greek merchants had personal relations with scytian cheiftains . And many Greek colonists were married into scytian families. So the local scytian cheiftains were not just the local tradepartner. For many of the Greek traders. He or she was also father/mother in law ... The Black sea region (and also egypt) was on of ancient greece imported grain / wheat and slaves from. And this is why the Greek colonies of byzantion and chalcedon (the two towns today make make up modern day City of Istanbul ) was a founded They were transit ports for Black sea trade. And later when the roman Constatine the great make his Capital . The City grew in importence . And when the eastern roman Empire became byzantine Empire . The City continued to the Capital of that Empire ....
Constantinople (New Rome), aside from sharing just some of the previous geographic location of prior Byzantium, was a totally different city from Byzantium. So much as Istanbul today is different from Constantinople.
dude's you're not getting it.. It's "#fuckers" meet the fuckers. God protect you children . piece from upsidedowndy australia. Ps the moon landings was just another one of their faked news events
Δόξα στην Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία ήθελες να πεις; Δεν υπήρχε ποτέ Βυζαντινή Αυτοκρατορία. Και για του λόγου το αληθές, οι κάτοικοι της αρχαίας πόλεως-κράτους του Βυζαντίου αυτοπροσδιορίζονταν ως Βυζάντιοι και το επίθετο για το Βυζάντιον ήταν . Ο όρος Βυζαντινός ήταν καταφάνεστατα ανθελληνικό εφεύρημα των Γερμανών που ήθελαν να ιδιοποιηθούν το εθνωνύμιο Ρωμαίος αλλά εντέλει απέτυχαν τραγικώς.
You know Byzantine were the first army did landings from the ships on their horses ready for attack, from a door open down like todays ships. They were also the first army trained on similar theatres before battle in order to be fast and accurate
Arabs never took the whole control of the island of Crete. Free areas had make their own state that govern by an elderly council (Senate). They help and fought with Phokas in the siege of Candia. After they won Phokas allow them to keep their authority and gave them many advantages. The same noble families stayed on power and make revolutions during the Venetian and Ottoman occupation to liberation.
The majority of Cretans had already become muslims after the Andalusian conquest and Phocas along with Nikon "the Metanoeite" committed genocide to about the half of the native Cretan population in order to bring them back to Christianity. So Crete was almost uninhabited after the byzantine conquest. The noble families that Phokas brought to Crete cared only about their self interests and after the Venetian conquest of Crete they only reacted for keeping their benefits, so after the Venetians gave them some benefits they served the Venetian rule and they even made mixed marriages with them. I am Cretan but i like the truth even if it's harsh to tell.
@@Funk5Punk You are deluded. The inner areas of Crete have been always near impossible to control because of the geography of the island, whether by Arabs, Romans, Venetians, Ottomans or Germans. Aside from the slaughter of the slavers and pirates of Chandax there was no other mass massacre that I know of. Even the story about the 12 noble Byzantine families sent to Crete is probably more of a myth than reality. Most Byzantine noble families that I know of came to Venetian-controlled Crete when the Byzantines were losing most of their lands in the 14th-15th centuries. Additionally Venetians also made mixed marriages with locals and they gave privileges to local strongmen after several revolts by the local Greeks.
@@Funk5Punk It's wrong to say that 100 % of the Roman Greek population of Crete was islamized. This did not happen in the 250 years of ottoman occupation later which was much harsher. Why should it happen in the 140 years of saracen occupation. Some Cretan Greeks in the north plains were indeed islamized. And this because of physical or social coercion and violence. Christians were usually second and third class subjects do for many people there was a strong motive to convert. It was impossible for an island to beat back the forces and the resourcesof a whole empire ( Saracens , Ottomans ) especially when it's about the control of the main cities in the north coast. But, simultaneously , an foreign occupation army had usually enormous problems to campaign in interior mountainous Crete , because if the very harsh environment and because of the guerilla tactics of the Cretan Greeks. Even the German war machine had huge logistical and operationalproblems in the Cretan mountains . Imagine how it would be for the Saracens. Also , we know for sure that christian people from the interior mountainous areas ( as Sfakia ) contributed a lot to the byzantine (roman) greek liberation of the island under Nicophoros Phokas.
@@megasayajinsongoku99 No i didn't say that the 100% of the population were Islamized, but the majority especially in northern parts of the island and in the big cities. In the mountainous parts and some isolated southern parts like Sfakia and Lentas the population remained christian. But i don't care so much about religions, because both Christianity and Islam were forced to the local population and they weren't the native religions of Crete in the first place. My objection against Fokas is because instead of converting the population peacefully back to Christianity, he instead made mass massacres to the local Islamic population and he wiped from the face of the earth entire cities like the city of Chandax/Candia. Only after the Venetians came to Crete the city of Candia returned to its full glory. Fokas and later emperors also kept the island isolated from the rest of the Mediterranean sea routes, which was not during the Andalusian conquest, and put very high taxes to the local population to feed their bureaucratic regime in Constantinople. At least the Venetians knew how to capitalize the sources of the island and opened it to the commerce routes of the Mediterranean sea and the whole population prospered at that time.
@@Funk5Punk Are you sure you are a Greek from Crete ? ; Από ποιο μέρος της Κρήτης είσαι ; Οι πιο πολλοί Έλληνες και ειδικά τώρα Κρητικοί δύσκολα θα έλεγαν αυτά που λες εσύ. Ι do not care much about religions either . I am not a Christian. I am atheist/irreligious. But its one part if christianized Roman Greeks convert other Roman Greeks ( which was done peacefully in the first 3 centuries AD and with political violence only in the 4. and 5. century and certainly it was a mistake and I condemn it) and its different if foreign Moslems invade , destroy everything and then put a lot of pressure to the people to convert . The Moslem Saracens came in Crete not as tourists and not peacefully. They came as invaders and thiefs and they massacred the Byzantine Cretan populations there. Why do you mention only the doings of Nicephoros Phokas and why you do not mention and not condemn the initial saracen invasion ? Is this not double standarts. The Saracen invaders destroyed Gortyn , the center of byzantine Crete and after this Gortyn was never again rebuilt. Crete was ravaged many times even from the 7.century with arab moslem raids and now this time the Saracens tried a full scale attack. Under Saracen occupation, Crete was a piracy emirate and it bleeded the whole Aegian sea with piracy raids and slavery. Crete was inherently part of the Byzantine Roman State and part of byzantine greek culture. The Saracens invaded a part of the Roman State (Byzanz). It was common sense that Rhomania would try to liberate Crete from saracen occupation. And they tried many times to liberate Crete and the Cretans, not only under Nicephoros Fokas, but also before. The Saracen occupation of byzantine Crete not only did it destroy / islamiced the byzantine cities of Crete, it also was a center of piracy and aggression toward the whole Aegian . As you also say many people in north Crete were eirher murdered (those who resisted) , they became Moslems or they were forced to go to the mountains. The liberation of Crete not only helped and liberated the Cretan Greeks who were in a critical situation. The liberation of Crete also ended the countless piracy attacks in many other parts of the greek world ( Peloponnese, Cyclades, Macedonia, Thrace, Minor Asia etc.) . I am not justifying any killing of unarmed people. I would prefer that the Saracens would have transported peacefully. But we cannot have double standarts. The liberation of Crete was ethically correct. The Cretans never stopped fighting in the mountains against the Saracens and finally they fought together with the imperial armies of Rhomania for the liberation of their homeland. The Saracens were invaders in a foreign land. The Saracens invaded , they killed, they massacred etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As for the other thing about the supposed isolation of Crete after the byzantine greek liberation, it does not make sense. First, economies aside, the natural place for Roman Greeks was to be in one state (eastern Roman State), even in the medieval times. Peloponesse, Crete, Cyclades, Thessaly, Epirus, Macedonia, Thrace, Minor Asia, Dodecanese, Cyprus , Pontos etc. everything was part of a whole. Medieval Greeks had developed a proto-nationalism in the surviving remains of the Roman State. Saracens , Venetians, Ottomans were foreign conquerors/ invaders and they were also seen as foreign conquerors. So , most of the Greeks ( of the Cretan Greeks in this particular case) felt the Byzantine Roman State as their homeland and they felt the foreign occupations as miserable and barbaric foreign occupations. As for the economy, the liberated Crete (after the Saracen rule) prospered . It prospered as much it could prosper in acritical (border) conditions. I do not know about the trade isolation (source?) you are saying , but its understandable that a Saracen occupied Crete would have a lot of commerce with the whole islamic world (from Spain, to Maghreb, Libya, Egypt and Syria ) . After the byzantine liberation, Crete could mostly do commerce with the other areas of Byzantine Greece and possibly also with other christian lands . The piracy attacks of Moslem pirates were also a large problem for the economy of the Byzantines (aka Roman Greeks) . Anyway, the Cretan greek folklore identifies itself with Rhomania (Byzantine State). Also there were special relations between Crete and Konstantinopel . The last defenders of Konstantinopel in 1453 were Cretan volunteers. On the other hand, countless revolts/revolutions were made against venetian occupation , which was very brutal and harsh in he beginning. The same(countless revolts/revolutions were made ) against ottoman turk occupation.
Excellent video!!! I am currently reading Gibbon, but I am about six hundred years prior to your video. I love the in-depth preview you provide. Respectfully...
in the times when Western Europe was still gathering itself from, first, the fall of the Western half of the Roman Empire, then, The fall of the Carolingian Empire... the Eastern Romans/byzantines were getting beaten up left right and center. but also... they were learning. after a major restructuring of their society, following the loss of important Syria and crucial Egypt, the byzantines finaly had enough manpower an resources to go on the offensive. with the Caliphate in pieces, and talented generals leading their armies, the eastern romans were kicking serious ass. make no mistake: to be called "the Pale Death of the Saracens" is seriously BADASS, medieval style.
But were they able to destroy Islam or the arabs? No, in fact going on the offensive without a clear goal. If they stopped and built themselves up better and stronger and interacted more with europe on a positive way, together they could have easily defeated the seljuks. Mamaluks, saracens , mongols, timur tamerlanes and all those eastern goofies who destroyed them. They were arrogant and thought they were romans. And indeed they fell like rome fell, to the hand of barbarians.......
I always loved your channel because it shed light on the most (wrongfully) forgotten historical periods! I must congratulate you on this wonderful video and your research :)
A couple of remarks: "infidels" is the term not used in Christian theology; "infidels" is a ☪ invention. ☪ imposed "jeezrah", the tax, on Christians and Jews. The latter had to put the famous 6 point star, "David's star" on their clothes to appear as a distinct category to ☪. The siege of Crete was violent just as much as the ☪ aggression of the previous 4 centuries was, so on Crete, the ☪ got what they deserved. The ☪ aggression pre-dated the Crusades which were a direct consequence. It was the ☪ who attacked Christian pilgrim caravans, not the knights attacking ☪ caravans.
@@momoffour5885 Could you cite a Christian book, any other document, or declaration by Christian kings where the word "infidel" was used? On the contrary, could you cite Quran or any other Islam documents either by mullahs or Muslim rulers where, as you say, there weren't any mentions of ? الجهاد,كافر
@@gaiusflaminius4861sure we use infidel on pagans and we call everyone who isn’t Christian a pagan no matter the religion we call Muslims and Jews pagan we call them infidel as well just look into our akathists and other prayers you will see the use of infidel
I just so happen to come from the city of Chandax (Now called Heraclion) and I can tell you with absolute certainty that some of the buildings shown in the video (for example the shipyard in min. 4:57 - 5:00) can indeed be found in the city, but belong to a later period, the one that Crete was in the sphere of infuence of Venice (13th-17th century). These buildings along with the walls of the city (that survive through this day) were amongst the finest of their time, since they also withstood the longest siege in history, the "Siege of Candia" (another name of the city) that lasted from 1645 to 1669. Of course this is an honest mistake and I don't mean to criticise. I just mention this becouse the buildings shown create an image of technologican advancement on behalf of the arabs that was completely absent at that time at all.
The Cretans are very badass. Cretan hold the only tower in Constantinople the ottomans couldn't siege long after the city fell. Finally Sultan ask them to leave keeping their belongings horses and ships. The left armed with ottomans open their way upnto their ships.
I believe Crete only returned to Greece from the Ottoman Empire in the very early twentieth century as result of the Balkan Wars.Actually the siege of Candia was the second longest in history -the longest was that of Ceuta in Morocco.(Wikipedia)The great painter El Greco was born in Crete during the Venetian period -moved to Venice and eventually to Spain.
@@kaloarepo288 I'm afraid you are wrong on the siege part ( en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Candia ) according to wikipedia.. On your other two points you are right.. Although Greece gained independence from the ottomans in 1830 Crete had to wait untill the end of the 1st Balkan war on 1912. And yes El Greco was from Candia
Excellent. You read and the words appear as if im watching it in my mind. Thank god im listening and seeing today, instead of observing and living then. Brutal....
Dude this was absolutely beautiful. You are so underrated I wished you had millions of subscribers; so many more people would be interested in history if it were presented the way you do. Thank you for all your hard work.
Been on vacation so I'm late to the party. Wow! This was your best narrative yet. Gripping, fascinating and tragic. Thanks for the podcast recommendation, I was really hoping we'd get this. I'm still working my way through the History of Rome podcast, but look forward to this one next.
I wonder how the wheel of history would have turned if my country of Bulgaria and the Byzantines managed to set their differences aside and unite in a holy alliance :) Would we have survived longer by standing together against the Turks? Would we have been able to withstand against Wester influence? How would our nations look like today? I love history.
They would be very hard to stop if they were united. Probably the Roman empire would survive, the Greek culture and know how along with the Bulgarian manpower would be more than enough to stop the loss of Anatolia. Especially the Bulgarian military which had a much more similar and suited fighting against the Arabs or Turks would really help. That set aside, I believe the Bulgarians would be assimilated more and the character of the empire would not be an equal fusion, rather a 70% Greek and 30% Bulgarian in terms of culture, language and attitude. Of course these are anachronisms and today we would call ourselves Romans rather our Greek or Bulgarian nationalities. History is really interesting, always wondered what would happen if the Doukas family didn't withdraw the troops they commanded, betraying and leaving emperor Romanos Diogenis alone with his guard against Turks in Mantzikert. Or the other Byzantine general who was supposed to attack from the rear but got lost and never made the battlefield. We would probably never had turkey as we know it. Turks got into Balkans due to the civil war in Byzantium, as the Komnenos dynasty proved later with much much fewer resources, they were not hard to beat if there was a smart and strong leadership. Though they had amazing scouts and spies and knew exactly when to attack and retreat, when to be friendly and hostile. That's how they conquered all Balkans while the Balkan countries were fighting each other or with themselves. Or what if Vladimir of Kiev converted to islam, as he was torn between Christianity and Islam, we would have muslim russian people.
I'm remarkably impressed by your accuracy and style; I'm fairly pedantic about the life of Nikephoros so the only-few remarks I'm leaving below are evidence that you've done a really excellent job here. You do use the phrase that Nikephoros was "undefeated" and then mention a defeat under his father in 954. Furthermore, you've highlighted Marash A.D. 953 as the reason for Bardas' dismissal, whilst downplaying Adata A.D. 954. John Tzimiskes first recorded actions were in A.D. 956, not A.D. 955, and led to a stinging Roman defeat against Sayf al-Dawla. Sayf al-Dawla wasn't watching from the Aleppine citadel, as Aleppo was sacked. al-Shimishati and Yahya of Antioch record that Sayf fled to Balis, having suffered defeats under the vangaurd force, led by Tzimiskes, who pursued him. Your record of the 965 taking of Tarsos doesn't quite follow my understanding from Leo the Deacon. The Tarsiot citizens were forced to convert, die or *allowed leave with their possessions*. Aleppo only became a Byzantine protectorate in early 970, rather than in 967, after Sayf al-Dawla's death, although a similar outcome was inevitable by then.
Great videos all of them. There are very few videos on my ancestors thr abbasids and yours is by far the most honest and detailed. Can you make one on Ruknuddin baybars who fought the french mongols and the crusaders
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'." Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"The Phocas family was always associated with the province of Cappadocia in eastern Anatolia; its actual lineage seems to have been a mixture of Armenian and Greek." Blaum, Paul A. (1994). The Days of the Warlords: A History of the Byzantine Empire, A.D. 969-991. University Press of America. p. 6
Awsome video, (this is coming from a saracen) really awsome keep up the good work 👍 Please cover the islamic conquests too as there were many great generals also! Much respect for your work
Who wants a tv show based on Nikephoros or Justinian or anything related to Eastern Rome ( Which I view as the underrated brother of the Western Roman Empire) other than 1453 siege. I just don’t get why Hollywood hates Eastern Rome so much
Plus the history of eastern Roman empire is notorious of containing so much intrigue, betrayals, tragedies and politics that would make game of thrones look like a cartoon. If you put in the mix the heorism and the epicness of some of the emperors and generals, it's buffing they didn't make a series yet. You can follow families, like the Lekapenos, Komnenos, Doukas, Phokas, Melissenos, Diogenoi and many more that had highs and lows, that fought to gain power or fought to protect the empire. You can also follow dynasties, or individual characters. And none of them is completely black or white, rather shades of gray. Such a big potential, the dream of every screen writer
Same reason you dont have movies about the aztecs, nobody wants to see wiped out destroyed loosers on screen. Aztecs dont excist anymore, most mexicans literally are 50% spanish, all paternal, so the fraternal male DNA have been wiped out by the spaniards and aztecs identify as mexicans now. Same with Byzanthenes, they are wiped out, most people in western turkey have 50% greek DNA and 50% turkish dna.....you have been invaded and erased and you did nothing to preserve your identity. Even kurdish people still are kurds and have their own language.....rome got taken down and latin also disappeared but atleast a lot of italians still have roman dna in them, mixed with german/lombard/vandal/ frankish, celt
Btw Sayf Al Dawla was his title meaning "Sword of the (Abbasid) State" Those kind of titles were very common during the Abbasid era were you can notice that all the Abbasid caliphs used a title like Saffah or Al-Mansor unlike the Umayyads and Rashidun who simply used their names There were other titles given by the Caliphs to famous generals or rulers who considered him as their religious head Like the title Saladin (the good of the Religion) to the famous conqueror of Jerusalem and the title Rokndinn (the corner of religion) to the Mameluke sultan Baibers
Well explained and easy to follow, because you often repeat yourself which sort of acts like a reminder of what you said earlier. Others don't repeat themselves and so the listener gets confused.
I've always been fascinated with the byzantium empire,it still amazes me tho how such a strong empire for so long can be just stamped out of existence completely.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 er..i know 'byzantium' or 'byzantine' empire is the modern name given to the Eastern roman empire,everyone who follows this channel or has the slightest interest in the roman empire would know that.
@@christospanagopoulos5821 Greek how? Just curious what you mean. If you could define that. He was a Greek-speaking Roman. He was of indigenous Anatolian Cappadocian descent. Probably a product of intermingling between Armenians, Latins, Anatolians and who know, but a little Greek. But definitely not a Greek.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 Armenians were speaking Armenian, Latins Latin, cappadocians and anatolians were Greek even before Alexander. He was Greek speaking, but he was Latin Armenian,... Ok...
@@christospanagopoulos5821 You do know that this is false, right? Latin was the lingua franca in the West. Many millions of foreigners learned it. That is why so many Romance nations exist today, as well as Latino nations in the Americas. Greek was also a lingua franca in the East. Before the Arabs and Turks invaded the Eastern Empire, many tens of millions of foreigners learned Greek. That in no way goes to show that they are Greek. There were many Armenians, Cappadocian Anatolians and other groups who had willingly learned to speak Greek in Eastern Roman Empire. So I will ask you again in a friendly way, what is your definition of Greek? Because Nicephorus I Phocas was of Arabic descent from southern Cappadocian province. Nicephorus II was likely a mixed person. Neither of them had a Greek identity. They saw themselves as legitimate Romans. Just saying.... Post Scriptum: the Roman province of Cappadocia did not become fully Greek-speaking until the 4th century AD. 600 years after Alexander. So no, Cappadocia was never a fully Greek place. There were indigenous Cappadocians there, Persians, Latins, Greeks and later Arabs and Slavs and Armenians moved in. Greek was the common language of them all. But they were Roman citizens.... Rhomaioi.
I was looking up who St Margret of Antioch and well there's not much on Wikipedia but it's all Grade A Awesome. I know saints aren't your usual thing but I reckon she'd be a great subject for a video and even if you're too busy the wiki page alone is worth a read. I love your videos by the way.
Byzantine history is totally underrated. Im surprised this video is one of the least views when Nikephoros Phokas is one of the best military commanders of his age.
The best video !!!! And the best channel !!!! You are from few channels who writes so good subjects for one of the most interesting periods the war between Muslim and byzantine christianity !!! Of my bottom of my heart thank you !!!! Thank you sir!!!
@@mohamedred5746 Why? They fought against the Byzantines, who would've taken most of Syria had they not defeated them in numerous naval and land engagements.
Some historians say that Nicephorus's family came from Georgia into the Anatolia. In the Southern parts of Georgia, there is still a town with famous churches and early medieval buildings called Phocas.
There is another version which says that the family in the first centuries moved from the ancient ionian greek city of Phokaia (modern day Foça in Turkey) to Capadocia.
Great video, as always, Pete. But don’t forget that in Greek (ancient and modern) and Latin, C is always pronounced as the K sound, always, no exceptions. Using C for the S sound came much later. Also, the Romans changed the -os of Greek words to the more-Latin sounding -us.
I think dar al-harb means all non muslims not just foreign lands not at peace with the caliphate, this is how they justified some of their first religious wars
Watch my latest history documentary here:-
th-cam.com/video/c3Hq6UaFQqk/w-d-xo.html
Finally dedicating an entire episode to a Byzantine Emperor. First of many to come! Who is your favourite Emperor of Byzantium? Let me know in the comments.. Maybe I will make a video of them! Please like and subscribe if you enjoyed the video, and let us know in the comments what you'd like too see covered in the future.
History Time mh John Tzimiskes or Basil 2nd are my favourite
Byzantine Emperors all have such interesting histories, you gotta give us more
It'd be awesome if you gave us vids on the Bulgar Tsars as well. Especialy Krom, and Kolyan; who destroyed the crusaders who occupied Byzantium when they were supposed to go to the Middle East
A very much appreciated production good sir.
For your question, im partial too a couple of the Pailaigos, Basil (slightly iffy, he was an interesting fellow. Id not want to have too fight him in war, would for sure attempt too have him murdered) Alexios makes a good stab at staving off destruction, and Maurice had potential.
There are one or two more (Justin? Justinian was impressive, a great if cowardly man, but a good emperor? Good for his people? Good for the state? I personally think he was anathema too good governance in later years. ) but that's probably enough for the crown.
Basil the bulgar Slayer!
My favorite emperors are Alexios I and his son John II.
Can I just say that The History of Byzantium is by FAR the best pre-modern history podcast to date? It set out to be a continuation of The History Of Rome podcast, but in my opinion it soon surpassed it both in the amount of detail and the flow of the narrative. If you are into history podcasts, you reeeeaaally shouldn´t skip this one. Oh, and Piersons voice is very soothing and just makes the whole thing a great lisitening experience.
Exactly my opinion too!
Well you can’t make the Byzantine empire boring it’s impossible
His name, in Greek, literally means ''He who brings victory''.
Does Nike literally mean victory or does it originally only refer to the goddess Nike?
Dexter Both
@@aimanmarzuqi4804
Nike, literally means victory.
Goddess Nike (as a name), is the equivalent of the name Victoria.
@@Z1BABOUINOS Aah I get it now. I guess in English Nikephoros's name would be the equivalent of the name Victor. I like the name.
@@aimanmarzuqi4804 Yes... kind of, Victor.
You see, Victor means *victorious* and Nikephoros means the one who *brings* victory. Slight difference there.
Nikephoros is a compound word: Nike (victory) and the verb phero (I bring, or I bear something)
Similar compound names of Greek origin:
Christopher: The one who bears Christ inside
Lucifer: light bearer (Luc, from the Latin LUX for light)
Eastern Orthodox history is just so damn cool
Emiliano Zapata is way more cooler !!!
Is there any Christian who's obsessed with Byzantium and the history of Christendom/Christianity in general, who would like to help me create an animation project about the history of Christendom/Christianity (Battle of Tours, Battle of Covadonga, Battle of Nineveh)? Movies/animes about Heraclius, Charlemagne, and many other heroes of Christendom... My discord is: Proletariado#4420 ADD ME
@@minoutarromantic5805 I am, it's seems very interesting, I've only gotten into it recently tho
Plus I've got no experience
It is Roman history.
Reason for the pretty much forgotten and ignored glorious 1000 year old byzantine history in the west has its roots in the mutual hate the two cultures had. Byzantines hated and dispized westerners and vice versa. This hatred was mutual and it also went to the medieval and also modern greeks to a point who were always not very favorable to the westerners. Byzantine empire was the shield of western civization for 1000 years. Fighting off huns , goths , vikings, avars , bulgarians , rus , persians , arabs , turks. 1000 years of epic war epic victories and epic defeats all almost unknown the the vast majority of westerners. Everyone knows for example Charles Martel ,hunderds of books , shows etc , taught in every school as a great victory over the muslim when in reality it was a small insignificant battle against a small raiding party. At the same time Byzantines were fighting an epic 400 years war the Arabs with epic battles naval battles sieges , hugr armies and cost, while everybody knows Poitiers few know about the epic second siege of Constantinople and the destruction of the Arabs a military defeat and catastrophe that was never matched in muslim history until the era of the mongols invasions. 120000 men dead , 2560 ships sunk, the victory that truly saved europe and stoped arab expansion. Who knows about the epic byzantine-arab wars except history fanatics? 400 years , and who knows about the 1000 year of the eastern roman/bynantine against the persians? few people... but all know about wars in europeb, 100 years was for example , or Charlomagne etc. Its about time western historiography introduces to the masses byzantine history. It truly epic and an important part of the western culture. Even in Greece which is a huge part of our history and culture , byzantine history is not taught much. Its all about ancient and hellenistic stuff and then straight to late middle ages and then modern greece.
Byzantine history is generally more confusing with more frequent civil wars and rebellions within the empire, as well as extreme corruption which was the bane of its existence.
@@chuckles5689 Not really. That's a misconception that was proposed by the western powers in order to minimize the importance of the Eastern Roman empire. The Empire was the single, most powerful nation in the world up until 1204 when Constantinople fell to the Crusaders. After that it was a losing battle until it finally fell in 1453 to the Turks.
Now you'll ask why they hated the Eastern Roman Empire so much. It was because the legitimacy of their rule, particularly of the Holy Roman Emperors, was dependent, no matter if they wanted to or not, on the fact that the Eastern Roman EMPEROR recognized them or not. And that was something that they had to acquire by marrying Roman Princesses. So, in reality all the royal houses of Europe, for more than a 1000 years did their very best to marry Romans princesses and unofficially paid homage to the Roman Emperor in order to legitimize their rule.
Byzantium is considered one the most, if not the most, successful empire in the world because it managed to do what other empires could not. It's citizens felt they were Romans. The civil wars you mentioned were nothing more than wars of succession, a mad grab for power by powerful nobles. But not even once there was in more than 1100 years a civil war that led to any part of the empire to secede. And that is what's incredible.
@@kpetalis It isn't a "misconception", it is a fact. Most powerful nation in the world is subjective, and there are obvious contenders to that claim from the Islamic caliphates and China. The Fourth Crusade was done by westerners on the behest of a pretender(Alexios IV), who the Greeks deposed and killed. The prior emperor was Alexios III, who took the throne by deposing and blinding Isaac II, his younger brother. The Latins saw the death of Alexios IV (at the hands of Alexios V) as the Greeks murdering their rightful liege. An aristocrat (Alexios V) became Emperor after deposing Alexios IV, and the crusaders were still unpaid, leading to the Sack of Constantinople among a string of other more complicated events which I do not wish to delve into. The decline you are referencing did not start during the Fourth Crusade, but with the fall of the Komnenian Dynasty and their replacement by the Angelos. The Holy Roman Emperor was clearly not dependent on the Byzantines in any way, and were more or less recognized by the Latin West and by the Papacy, without regard for the Byzantines. I don't know what nations you are referring to paid homage to the Byzantine Empire, the Latin vassals around Antioch?
The Byzantine Empire was not a tremendously successful empire and was beset by corruption and constant infighting and strife, it's longevity is owed to coincidence, the existing Roman system, and yes, the revival periods of some good emperors, such as John II and Manuel.
@@kpetalis "The Empire was the single, most powerful nation in the world up until 1204 " is wrong as fuck. Byzantines never became that strong. They lost most of their empire to Arabs. They defeated by the nomads and paid tribute to them. Yet they still managed to recover until they got smashed by the Seljuks in 1071. They were not even strongest state in Southeastern Europe.
@@RandomGuy-df1oy Byzantophiles conveniently seem to forget just how often the Byzantines had to pay tribute, from the Hunnic invasions all the way to the Ottomans.
Saladin and Richard the Lionheart: who are you?
Phokas and Sayf Al Dawla: we Are you but not so overrated by historians
We r ur daddy
Guys, be gratious, I think Fawad referred to "we" as the latter pairing of adversaries. We may have our individual sides but I think we're also all intelligent history lovers on this channel.
Phokas is more interesting than either of the other three because he established a famous line of several generations of Byzantine generals
who the heck was Sayf never heard about him? and neither has my spell checker.
Both Richard and Saladin were virtuous and beloved by their people, during their life on earth and even to this day. Nicephoros and Sayf Al-Dawla used hype and propoganda to bolster their image and reputations. This came back to bite them near the end of their lives as their true characters were exposed and their people began to hate them. And their existence fell into obscurity after their deaths.
Wellllllllllll. You did one showing the Byzantines winning! about time. Great job! Have always liked Phocas. Makes you wonder how things would have gone if he'd not been killed off, or if Tzimskis there had lived longer. Dynamic leaders both of them.
Theres not really he can do much at that time since he was too unpopular, one thing though is i wish his reforms of the church was implemented. In a way he was a crusader before it was cool, but the Orthodox clergy as a whole doesnt want the concept,
If Tzimiskes had lived a couple years more I think Basil II would’ve started his reign in a less rocky more secure place
@@mysteryjunkie9808 my guy wouldn't have to deal with usurpers and rebels early on, a more stable roman empire by the beginning of basil ii's reign would have allowed him to conquer as far as delhi, alexios komnenos would have conquered all the way to japan
to reclaim the holy lands you must Phokas
Beautiful. :D
lol
statue of liberty is ISIS
@@MrNecryptic you Amd wattman?
Noice
Ah, an entire video about Nikiphoros and a shoutout to History of Byzantium, too! Great, I really appreciate all your videos. One thing has to be said, though, although there are many historical channels and I love them all, they don't ever reach your attention to detail and focus. I particulary like your heavy usage of the primary sources, which isn't that common in the historical corner of TH-cam.
Yes, and few can make it all into a coherent and easy to follow story like him.
Then you probably haven't checked out this series yet th-cam.com/play/PLEQru6POYgetKOdzDYaLyjBkymSN9XeyY.html the most in depth approach on byzantine history there is on YT imo. Can only recommend
@@papageitaucher618 that is most hardcore bisantine and diadocchi historycal channel imagineble. Unfortunately way to indepth to ever become popular on TH-cam . But delivery is briliant there too.
I manage a small warehouse on my own and I just wanted to say thank you for keeping me company. Your videos are very much appreciated!
This is my dream job.
The era of Helleno-Roman resurgence. Glorious.
A solid 'epilogue' to the other side of the Abbasid Revolution vid you just made. Great work.
Thanks!
Oh done beautifully ,,, greetings from Greece specially from Crete and Cyprus, the crown jewels of Greek Byzantium at eastern Mediterranean sea to this day !
There was no Greek byzantium. It was the Roman Empire.
@@cormacmcquillan828 go tell this to Gibbon 😂
@@Panos_Stayis I mean everyone knows they had a Greek consciousness. But legally it was still the legit Roman empire. They were all too aware of their Greek heritage, but their political tradition and culture was Roman.
@@cormacmcquillan828 Their culture has always been Greek not roman (even before the fall of the western part) . The state and institutions were indeed Roman since the greeks preserved them. But saying that there was no Greek Byzantium considering that the people in charge were the Greeks (not the old Romans), that the ethnic group that had the central role was the Greeks , the prevelant culture was the Greek culture, the lingua franca was Greek , and the education was Greek as well, is kind of a stretch. Essentially the Roman empire transformed into a Greek empire but if we want to be accurate we could call Byzantium a Greco-Roman empire (even if the old Romans didn't have anything to do with it anymore) .
@@gilpaubelid3780 There was no such thing as old Romans. Roman civilisation was Greeco Roman, they mixed Latin with Greek. When the Greek speaking provinces were conquered the Romans changed almost nothing. They let the same systems of government exist and never made an attempt to Latinise these areas because well, they were already Roman. Calling it "Greek Byzantium" is both historically and culturally incorrect because it came from a different tradition than being simply "Greek". Same way modern Britain comes form a tradition different from the Medieval English kingdom. Modern Italy also comes from a different tradition than classical Rome, a much different one.
On Phokas grave it was written "He won everybody, appart a woman"
Another legend.
Nikephoros had a first spouse he loved profoundly but she died too soon.Since this loss NP was not interested anymore in women.He married the widowed Basilissa of Romanos II to protect their two sons who had already been inthronised ( Basileios II and Konstantinos VIII).The basilissa was a beautyfull woman but ΝΦ did not approach her. Tzimiskes ,the assassin of NΦ miraculously did not massacrate the two heirs. Basileios II, one of the greatest emperors of the AMORID ( not macedonian) dynasty succeded him togheter with his brother Konstantinos VIII who administrated the empire, whereas Basileios II fought the B' lgurs and the türks to reestablish the frontiers of the EREmpire.
@@ezzovonachalm7534 Didn't You watch this video??? He's just gave You this info, give Your fingers a rest blatant plagiarism.
Thanks for covering this. One of my favourite periods of history. Love your channel and I hope you keep growing.
I love the byzantines. Alexios Komnenos is deff worth talking about.
Alexios Komninòs
i am byzantine from Anatolia
So does John Komnenos his son and Basil I the Macedonian
There were no Byzantines. They were Romans.
Yup your right the Byzantines called themselves Romans as they should. Sadly most westerns have no clue there one of the same so for simplicity reasons the name Byzantine exists.
History of Byzantium is great. You do fantastic work too Pete. Starting to dig into your personal channels videos too.
The Byzantine empire in its 1000 years of existence acted as a shield to Europe. They fought against so many invaders. Their legacy lives on!
Europe is a modern geopolitical concept, much of byzentine history was spent fighting off what you would now call europeans
Yeah and in 1204 the ‘Europeans’ stabbed the Byzantines in the back when they sacked Constantinople. History does not work the way you think it works. Ironically one of the biggest threats to the byzantines were the catholics.
1100 years
Actually the defence of Europe starts in Marathon. When Persians were an Athenian general sugest to follow them and kill them. Athenians then agree to not disturb them and let them pass to Asia from Thrace, because their big number might change direction and destroy the people of Europe.
Byzantines were also fighting for Europe. Holy land is the strategical key point to Europe thats why Europe is Christian and beleive is the grave of Christ and Muslims beleive is the passage to heaven
I really appreciate the audio mixing of this video, really works with rather than against the content. Both loud and quiet in just the right spots. Too many documentaries with good content are spoiled by distracting audio.
History of byzantium is one of the first history podcasts I listened to!
Such a great show! Love seeing it getting more publicity :)
Nicephoros come from the greek νίκη=win and φέρω=bring which put together means he who brings the win (he who leads to win)
yes he who brings victory
"The Byzantine empire was clearly, despite its multinational dimension, a GREEK empire while its neighbours considered it so, and whose unity was based on the power of authority, in the dominance of Orthodoxy and the use of Greek as the official language."
Sylvain Gouguenheim, "La gloire des Grecs", 2017, pp. 73
The Byzantine empire is the Roman empire. It’s not Greek. They saw themselves as Romans plain and simple.
@@-Blast "Romans were neither Greek nor Italian, specifically. "Roman" had always been a rather general term, applying not to a specific race or ethnic group and instead to those with Roman CITIZENSHIP, born in a Roman province, or those who reflected the characteristics of Roman people." - Greg Woolf
"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
In the "Souda" Lexicon written (10th century) Graikos=Hellene and also Graikos=Romaios
[Graikoi (plural) =Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί : Οι Έλληνες. Εκ του Γραίξ, Γραικός.) and Raikos=Rhomaios (Ῥαικός : Ρωμαίος)]
In the "Zonaras" Lexicon (12th century) Romaios=Graikos=Hellene.
[Graikoi (plural) = Hellenes (plural) (Γραικοί. οἱ Ελληνες. ἀπὸ κώμης τινός. παρὰ τὸ ῥαῖσαι ῥαικὸς καὶ γραικός. καὶ γὰρ διὰ τὴν πολλὴν ἀνδρείαν οἱ Ελληνες ουτως ἐκαλοῦντο.) and Raikos=Rhomaios=Graikos (Ραικός. ὁ ̔Ρωμαῖος. ̓Επίχαρμος· φιλεῖ ειναι γραικὸς, ἀποβολῇ τοῦ ˉγ ῥαικός.)]
In other words according to the lexica of that period : Rhomaios (Roman) =Raikos (Greek) =Graikos (Greek) =Hellene (Greek)
But then I guess you don't even have a clue what the Souda or Zonaras Lexica even are...
"As heirs to the Greeks and Romans of old, the Byzantines thought of themselves as Rhomaioi, or Romans, though THEY KNEW FULL WELL that they were ETHNICALLY GREEKS." (see also: Savvides & Hendricks 2001)
Niehoff 2012, Margalit Finkelberg, "Canonising and Decanonising Homer: Reception of the Homeric Poems in Antiquity and Modernity", p. 20 or Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum 2003, p. 482
@@-Blast "With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
"It may be said, however, that despite its multi-national character, three forces tended to give it unity. One was Orthodoxy, the other a common language, and the third the imperial tradition. The first and the second were Greek and to the extent that they were Greek the Empire was Greek also. The third was Roman, and to that extent the Empire was also Roman."
The Transfer of Population as a Policy in the Byzantine Empire Author(s): Peter Charanis Source: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 3, No. 2, (Jan., 1961), pp. 140-154 Published by: Cambridge University Press
@@-Blast "…That in the race of us the Hellenes, wisdom reigns"
‘ὅτι τε ἐν τῷ γένει τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἡμῶν ἡ σοφία βασιλεύει’
Emperor John III Doukas Vatatzes (1193-1254) to Pope Gregorio IX
"the HELLENIC RACE looms over all other languages" and that "every kind of philosophy and form of knowledge is a discovery of Hellenes […]. What do you, O Italian, have to display?" "
'Ἁπασῶν γλωσσῶν τὸ ἑλληνικὸν ὑπέρκειται γένος… Πᾶσα τοίνυν φιλοσοφία καὶ γνῶσις Ἑλλήνων εὕρεμα… Σὺ δὲ ὦ Ἰταλέ, τίνος ἕνεκεν ἐγκαχαῦσαι;’
Theodore II Laskaris (1254-1258), Christian Theology, 7 f
"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
"Present your shield, swords, arrows, and spears to them, imagining that you are a hunting party after wild boars, so that the impious may learn that they are dealing not with d*mb animals but with their lords and masters, THE DESCENDANTS OF THE HELLENES (GREEKS) AND THE ROMANS."
Constantine Palaologos XI speaks in front of his officers and allies before the final siege of Constantinople by the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed Bey
George Sprantzes - The Fall of the Byzantine Empire 1453 - primary source from the war.
"Καὶ οὕτως λογίσθητε ὡς ἐπὶ ἀγρίων χοίρων καὶ πληθὺν κυνήγιον, ἵνα γνώσωσιν οἱ ἀσεβεῖς ὅτι οὐ μετὰ ἀλόγων ζῴων ὡς αὐτοί, παράταξιν ἔχουσιν, ἀλλὰ μετὰ κυρίων καὶ αὐθεντῶν αὐτῶν καὶ ἀπογόνων ΕΛΛΗΝΩΝ καὶ Ῥωμαίων."
Ὁμιλία τοῦ Αὐτοκράτορα Κωνσταντίνου ΙΑ’ Παλαιολόγου πρὶν τὴν ἅλωση τῆς ΚωνσταντινουπόλεωςἈπὸ τὸ Χρονικὸν τοῦ Μεγάλου Λογοθέτη Γεωργίου Σφραντζῆ ἢ Φραντζῆ Ἐκδοθὲν ἐν Κερκύρᾳ ἔτει 1477
TRUTH, NOTHING ITALIAN/ROMAN ABOUT THOSE GREEK / ANATOLIAN FRAUDS
Hallo from Denmark . Once again you deliver another great video . And this time I learned something byzantine history and Nikephoros II Phokas . Thank you very much sir . I just expanded my knowlege . But the Capital of byzantine Empire(modern dat Istanbul ) has a very origins . It ess settled around as colony from the Greek citystate of megara around 685 bce . And it properbly as transit port of the Greek Trade with the Black sea. The Black sea region was a very importent trading area for the ancient greeks . As main Greece has only a few fertile areas . Where crops like grain Can grow ... Since its 80-90 procent mountains . But its perfect for grapes and Olives. So Wine snd olive Oil was ancient greece’s main exports. In Black sea region on Russian plain (and on the crimea) lived the scytians. The scytians were also ahead of their time in matters equal rigths . As scytian women coud fight in armies as soldiers abd became clan cheiftains . They were s nomadic people . They lived in different tribes . Now the scytians were fond Greek Wine and weapons . And the greeks were very interested in in wheat and grain ... So symbiotic relationship happended between greeks and the nomadic scytians .... Scytian cheiftains allowed the greeks found colonies on their land .... And since the scytians lived a tribal/clan society . The some had war with each other or raids . That resulted in a lot prisoners. And many of prisoners were offen sold as slaves to the greeks . In the City state of Athens scytians slaves were used as a police force .... So many Greek Trade ships sailed back and forth between Greece and the Black region ... Also Many Greek merchants had personal relations with scytian cheiftains . And many Greek colonists were married into scytian families. So the local scytian cheiftains were not just the local tradepartner. For many of the Greek traders. He or she was also father/mother in law ... The Black sea region (and also egypt) was on of ancient greece imported grain / wheat and slaves from. And this is why the Greek colonies of byzantion and chalcedon (the two towns today make make up modern day City of Istanbul ) was a founded They were transit ports for Black sea trade. And later when the roman Constatine the great make his Capital . The City grew in importence . And when the eastern roman Empire became byzantine Empire . The City continued to the Capital of that Empire ....
Constantinople (New Rome), aside from sharing just some of the previous geographic location of prior Byzantium, was a totally different city from Byzantium. So much as Istanbul today is different from Constantinople.
Love these Roman stories (histories), they’re definitely in a playlist rotation throughout the day for me 🙌🏼
Love the background music you use for your videos, it really sets the mood for the times. Great video overall.
Great vid! Glory to Byzantium!
P.S his name is pronunciated Nikeph'oros Phokas
More like ''Nee kee pho ros''
dude's you're not getting it.. It's "#fuckers" meet the fuckers. God protect you children . piece from upsidedowndy australia.
Ps the moon landings was just another one of their faked news events
Never was a Byzantium besides the ancient Greek city-state of Byzantium. It was the Roman Empire.
Δόξα στην Ρωμαϊκή Αυτοκρατορία ήθελες να πεις; Δεν υπήρχε ποτέ Βυζαντινή Αυτοκρατορία. Και για του λόγου το αληθές, οι κάτοικοι της αρχαίας πόλεως-κράτους του Βυζαντίου αυτοπροσδιορίζονταν ως Βυζάντιοι και το επίθετο για το Βυζάντιον ήταν . Ο όρος Βυζαντινός ήταν καταφάνεστατα ανθελληνικό εφεύρημα των Γερμανών που ήθελαν να ιδιοποιηθούν το εθνωνύμιο Ρωμαίος αλλά εντέλει απέτυχαν τραγικώς.
Every time I play Attila total war I play as the great purple NATION!! GLORY TO THE EMPIRE!!
Haha. My username on many services etc is a Byzantine general lol.
@koksal ceylan oof
@koksal ceylan yeah ottomans great empire remembered for.......... ??????? stealing maybe i guess
@@mikek.s1707 When Romans do it its conquest. When Ottomans do it its "stealing" No hypocracy for sure :P
@@RandomGuy-df1oy culture survives,and ppl after romans , but after turks nothing survives
Tenth Century D-Day invasion with landing craft and works. Amazing!
You know Byzantine were the first army did landings from the ships on their horses ready for attack, from a door open down like todays ships. They were also the first army trained on similar theatres before battle in order to be fast and accurate
Wait you didnt think americans invented beach landing did you haha
@@aokiaoki4238 In short: They were the best guys around.
Great video, amazing work! Bravo sir! Keep the good juices of Romeosyne flowing!
I’m happy that I’ve found this channel. Very interesting and well done. I am too lazy to do the hard work and read the history books. Thank you
Arabs never took the whole control of the island of Crete. Free areas had make their own state that govern by an elderly council (Senate). They help and fought with Phokas in the siege of Candia. After they won Phokas allow them to keep their authority and gave them many advantages. The same noble families stayed on power and make revolutions during the Venetian and Ottoman occupation to liberation.
The majority of Cretans had already become muslims after the Andalusian conquest and Phocas along with Nikon "the Metanoeite" committed genocide to about the half of the native Cretan population in order to bring them back to Christianity. So Crete was almost uninhabited after the byzantine conquest. The noble families that Phokas brought to Crete cared only about their self interests and after the Venetian conquest of Crete they only reacted for keeping their benefits, so after the Venetians gave them some benefits they served the Venetian rule and they even made mixed marriages with them. I am Cretan but i like the truth even if it's harsh to tell.
@@Funk5Punk You are deluded. The inner areas of Crete have been always near impossible to control because of the geography of the island, whether by Arabs, Romans, Venetians, Ottomans or Germans. Aside from the slaughter of the slavers and pirates of Chandax there was no other mass massacre that I know of. Even the story about the 12 noble Byzantine families sent to Crete is probably more of a myth than reality. Most Byzantine noble families that I know of came to Venetian-controlled Crete when the Byzantines were losing most of their lands in the 14th-15th centuries. Additionally Venetians also made mixed marriages with locals and they gave privileges to local strongmen after several revolts by the local Greeks.
@@Funk5Punk It's wrong to say that 100 % of the Roman Greek population of Crete was islamized.
This did not happen in the 250 years of ottoman occupation later which was much harsher. Why should it happen in the 140 years of saracen occupation.
Some Cretan Greeks in the north plains were indeed islamized. And this because of physical or social coercion and violence. Christians were usually second and third class subjects do for many people there was a strong motive to convert.
It was impossible for an island to beat back the forces and the resourcesof a whole empire ( Saracens , Ottomans ) especially when it's about the control of the main cities in the north coast.
But, simultaneously , an foreign occupation army had usually enormous problems to campaign in interior mountainous Crete , because if the very harsh environment and because of the guerilla tactics of the Cretan Greeks. Even the German war machine had huge logistical and operationalproblems in the Cretan mountains . Imagine how it would be for the Saracens.
Also , we know for sure that christian people from the interior mountainous areas ( as Sfakia ) contributed a lot to the byzantine (roman) greek liberation of the island under Nicophoros Phokas.
@@megasayajinsongoku99 No i didn't say that the 100% of the population were Islamized, but the majority especially in northern parts of the island and in the big cities. In the mountainous parts and some isolated southern parts like Sfakia and Lentas the population remained christian.
But i don't care so much about religions, because both Christianity and Islam were forced to the local population and they weren't the native religions of Crete in the first place.
My objection against Fokas is because instead of converting the population peacefully back to Christianity, he instead made mass massacres to the local Islamic population and he wiped from the face of the earth entire cities like the city of Chandax/Candia. Only after the Venetians came to Crete the city of Candia returned to its full glory.
Fokas and later emperors also kept the island isolated from the rest of the Mediterranean sea routes, which was not during the Andalusian conquest, and put very high taxes to the local population to feed their bureaucratic regime in Constantinople. At least the Venetians knew how to capitalize the sources of the island and opened it to the commerce routes of the Mediterranean sea and the whole population prospered at that time.
@@Funk5Punk Are you sure you are a Greek from Crete ? ; Από ποιο μέρος της Κρήτης είσαι ; Οι πιο πολλοί Έλληνες και ειδικά τώρα Κρητικοί δύσκολα θα έλεγαν αυτά που λες εσύ.
Ι do not care much about religions either . I am not a Christian. I am atheist/irreligious. But its one part if christianized Roman Greeks convert other Roman Greeks ( which was done peacefully in the first 3 centuries AD and with political violence only in the 4. and 5. century and certainly it was a mistake and I condemn it) and its different if foreign Moslems invade , destroy everything and then put a lot of pressure to the people to convert .
The Moslem Saracens came in Crete not as tourists and not peacefully. They came as invaders and thiefs and they massacred the Byzantine Cretan populations there. Why do you mention only the doings of Nicephoros Phokas and why you do not mention and not condemn the initial saracen invasion ? Is this not double standarts. The Saracen invaders destroyed Gortyn , the center of byzantine Crete and after this Gortyn was never again rebuilt. Crete was ravaged many times even from the 7.century with arab moslem raids and now this time the Saracens tried a full scale attack. Under Saracen occupation, Crete was a piracy emirate and it bleeded the whole Aegian sea with piracy raids and slavery.
Crete was inherently part of the Byzantine Roman State and part of byzantine greek culture. The Saracens invaded a part of the Roman State (Byzanz). It was common sense that Rhomania would try to liberate Crete from saracen occupation. And they tried many times to liberate Crete and the Cretans, not only under Nicephoros Fokas, but also before.
The Saracen occupation of byzantine Crete not only did it destroy / islamiced the byzantine cities of Crete, it also was a center of piracy and aggression toward the whole Aegian . As you also say many people in north Crete were eirher murdered (those who resisted) , they became Moslems or they were forced to go to the mountains. The liberation of Crete not only helped and liberated the Cretan Greeks who were in a critical situation. The liberation of Crete also ended the countless piracy attacks in many other parts of the greek world ( Peloponnese, Cyclades, Macedonia, Thrace, Minor Asia etc.) .
I am not justifying any killing of unarmed people. I would prefer that the Saracens would have transported peacefully. But we cannot have double standarts. The liberation of Crete was ethically correct. The Cretans never stopped fighting in the mountains against the Saracens and finally they fought together with the imperial armies of Rhomania for the liberation of their homeland.
The Saracens were invaders in a foreign land. The Saracens invaded , they killed, they massacred etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the other thing about the supposed isolation of Crete after the byzantine greek liberation, it does not make sense. First, economies aside, the natural place for Roman Greeks was to be in one state (eastern Roman State), even in the medieval times. Peloponesse, Crete, Cyclades, Thessaly, Epirus, Macedonia, Thrace, Minor Asia, Dodecanese, Cyprus , Pontos etc. everything was part of a whole. Medieval Greeks had developed a proto-nationalism in the surviving remains of the Roman State.
Saracens , Venetians, Ottomans were foreign conquerors/ invaders and they were also seen as foreign conquerors. So , most of the Greeks ( of the Cretan Greeks in this particular case) felt the Byzantine Roman State as their homeland and they felt the foreign occupations as miserable and barbaric foreign occupations.
As for the economy, the liberated Crete (after the Saracen rule) prospered . It prospered as much it could prosper in acritical (border) conditions. I do not know about the trade isolation (source?) you are saying , but its understandable that a Saracen occupied Crete would have a lot of commerce with the whole islamic world (from Spain, to Maghreb, Libya, Egypt and Syria ) . After the byzantine liberation, Crete could mostly do commerce with the other areas of Byzantine Greece and possibly also with other christian lands . The piracy attacks of Moslem pirates were also a large problem for the economy of the Byzantines (aka Roman Greeks) .
Anyway, the Cretan greek folklore identifies itself with Rhomania (Byzantine State). Also there were special relations between Crete and Konstantinopel . The last defenders of Konstantinopel in 1453 were Cretan volunteers.
On the other hand, countless revolts/revolutions were made against venetian occupation , which was very brutal and harsh in he beginning. The same(countless revolts/revolutions were made ) against ottoman turk occupation.
I got my cousins children hooked on history. On behalf of you.. I do thank you a lot.
Excellent video!!! I am currently reading Gibbon, but I am about six hundred years prior to your video. I love the in-depth preview you provide. Respectfully...
Great video as always! Keep the astonishing work !
Well narrated documentary! And great use of Skylitzes miniatures!!
i can feel that Basil the bulgar slayer is getting closer now :P
Waiting for THAT mess to begin!
nicephoros the drinking cup is more interesting
Unless Nicephorus was killed there would be no Basil II
in the times when Western Europe was still gathering itself from, first, the fall of the Western half of the Roman Empire, then, The fall of the Carolingian Empire... the Eastern Romans/byzantines were getting beaten up left right and center. but also... they were learning. after a major restructuring of their society, following the loss of important Syria and crucial Egypt, the byzantines finaly had enough manpower an resources to go on the offensive. with the Caliphate in pieces, and talented generals leading their armies, the eastern romans were kicking serious ass. make no mistake: to be called "the Pale Death of the Saracens" is seriously BADASS, medieval style.
But were they able to destroy Islam or the arabs? No, in fact going on the offensive without a clear goal. If they stopped and built themselves up better and stronger and interacted more with europe on a positive way, together they could have easily defeated the seljuks. Mamaluks, saracens , mongols, timur tamerlanes and all those eastern goofies who destroyed them. They were arrogant and thought they were romans. And indeed they fell like rome fell, to the hand of barbarians.......
I always loved your channel because it shed light on the most (wrongfully) forgotten historical periods! I must congratulate you on this wonderful video and your research :)
A couple of remarks: "infidels" is the term not used in Christian theology; "infidels" is a ☪ invention. ☪ imposed "jeezrah", the tax, on Christians and Jews. The latter had to put the famous 6 point star, "David's star" on their clothes to appear as a distinct category to ☪.
The siege of Crete was violent just as much as the ☪ aggression of the previous 4 centuries was, so on Crete, the ☪ got what they deserved. The ☪ aggression pre-dated the Crusades which were a direct consequence. It was the ☪ who attacked Christian pilgrim caravans, not the knights attacking ☪ caravans.
Wrong infidels is a term used by the Christian world. Infidels is not a term found in Quran.
Infidels was used to describe the Muslims.
@@momoffour5885 Could you cite a Christian book, any other document, or declaration by Christian kings where the word "infidel" was used? On the contrary, could you cite Quran or any other Islam documents either by mullahs or Muslim rulers where, as you say, there weren't any mentions of ? الجهاد,كافر
@@gaiusflaminius4861sure we use infidel on pagans and we call everyone who isn’t Christian a pagan no matter the religion we call Muslims and Jews pagan we call them infidel as well just look into our akathists and other prayers you will see the use of infidel
@@thegreatpoop1150 Really? Cite the references. I'd be curious to read.
@historytime thanks again for your amazing videos 👍👍
You do just beautiful work.Well narrated and written.With outstanding visual accompaniments and maps.Thank you !
I just so happen to come from the city of Chandax (Now called Heraclion) and I can tell you with absolute certainty that some of the buildings shown in the video (for example the shipyard in min. 4:57 - 5:00) can indeed be found in the city, but belong to a later period, the one that Crete was in the sphere of infuence of Venice (13th-17th century). These buildings along with the walls of the city (that survive through this day) were amongst the finest of their time, since they also withstood the longest siege in history, the "Siege of Candia" (another name of the city) that lasted from 1645 to 1669. Of course this is an honest mistake and I don't mean to criticise. I just mention this becouse the buildings shown create an image of technologican advancement on behalf of the arabs that was completely absent at that time at all.
The Cretans are very badass. Cretan hold the only tower in Constantinople the ottomans couldn't siege long after the city fell. Finally Sultan ask them to leave keeping their belongings horses and ships. The left armed with ottomans open their way upnto their ships.
@@aokiaoki4238 you should see what they did in ww1..
@@aggelosmaravas7211 I know...
I believe Crete only returned to Greece from the Ottoman Empire in the very early twentieth century as result of the Balkan Wars.Actually the siege of Candia was the second longest in history -the longest was that of Ceuta in Morocco.(Wikipedia)The great painter El Greco was born in Crete during the Venetian period -moved to Venice and eventually to Spain.
@@kaloarepo288 I'm afraid you are wrong on the siege part ( en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Candia ) according to wikipedia.. On your other two points you are right.. Although Greece gained independence from the ottomans in 1830 Crete had to wait untill the end of the 1st Balkan war on 1912. And yes El Greco was from Candia
Nikephoros Phokas had a keen ability to focus on his strategy.
Beautifully done yet again!
Excellent. You read and the words appear as if im watching it in my mind. Thank god im listening and seeing today, instead of observing and living then. Brutal....
Dude this was absolutely beautiful. You are so underrated I wished you had millions of subscribers; so many more people would be interested in history if it were presented the way you do. Thank you for all your hard work.
Legend has it that Nicephoros Phokas will respond if you post early within the hour!
Only if you send to 10 other people.
Been on vacation so I'm late to the party. Wow! This was your best narrative yet. Gripping, fascinating and tragic. Thanks for the podcast recommendation, I was really hoping we'd get this. I'm still working my way through the History of Rome podcast, but look forward to this one next.
Just found your channel. This is going to be good. I agree with everyones comments. A lot of detail and sources. Nice job
GOOD MUSIC TO
I checked out that podcast. It's a gold mine!
The history of Byzantium podcast is fantastic. He’s taking a break now and I’m waiting for him to come back.
I wonder how the wheel of history would have turned if my country of Bulgaria and the Byzantines managed to set their differences aside and unite in a holy alliance :) Would we have survived longer by standing together against the Turks? Would we have been able to withstand against Wester influence? How would our nations look like today? I love history.
They would be very hard to stop if they were united. Probably the Roman empire would survive, the Greek culture and know how along with the Bulgarian manpower would be more than enough to stop the loss of Anatolia. Especially the Bulgarian military which had a much more similar and suited fighting against the Arabs or Turks would really help. That set aside, I believe the Bulgarians would be assimilated more and the character of the empire would not be an equal fusion, rather a 70% Greek and 30% Bulgarian in terms of culture, language and attitude. Of course these are anachronisms and today we would call ourselves Romans rather our Greek or Bulgarian nationalities.
History is really interesting, always wondered what would happen if the Doukas family didn't withdraw the troops they commanded, betraying and leaving emperor Romanos Diogenis alone with his guard against Turks in Mantzikert. Or the other Byzantine general who was supposed to attack from the rear but got lost and never made the battlefield. We would probably never had turkey as we know it.
Turks got into Balkans due to the civil war in Byzantium, as the Komnenos dynasty proved later with much much fewer resources, they were not hard to beat if there was a smart and strong leadership. Though they had amazing scouts and spies and knew exactly when to attack and retreat, when to be friendly and hostile. That's how they conquered all Balkans while the Balkan countries were fighting each other or with themselves.
Or what if Vladimir of Kiev converted to islam, as he was torn between Christianity and Islam, we would have muslim russian people.
Then the balkans would only consist of bulgaria and eastern rome to this day😆
I'm remarkably impressed by your accuracy and style; I'm fairly pedantic about the life of Nikephoros so the only-few remarks I'm leaving below are evidence that you've done a really excellent job here.
You do use the phrase that Nikephoros was "undefeated" and then mention a defeat under his father in 954. Furthermore, you've highlighted Marash A.D. 953 as the reason for Bardas' dismissal, whilst downplaying Adata A.D. 954.
John Tzimiskes first recorded actions were in A.D. 956, not A.D. 955, and led to a stinging Roman defeat against Sayf al-Dawla.
Sayf al-Dawla wasn't watching from the Aleppine citadel, as Aleppo was sacked. al-Shimishati and Yahya of Antioch record that Sayf fled to Balis, having suffered defeats under the vangaurd force, led by Tzimiskes, who pursued him.
Your record of the 965 taking of Tarsos doesn't quite follow my understanding from Leo the Deacon. The Tarsiot citizens were forced to convert, die or *allowed leave with their possessions*.
Aleppo only became a Byzantine protectorate in early 970, rather than in 967, after Sayf al-Dawla's death, although a similar outcome was inevitable by then.
Great videos all of them.
There are very few videos on my ancestors thr abbasids and yours is by far the most honest and detailed.
Can you make one on Ruknuddin baybars who fought the french mongols and the crusaders
@@allan7380 the french, mongols and crusaders
Arabs be like: "Oh sh....! Here come Nikephoros. He gonna "phoc" us again!"
@East Lol Nikephoros II Phokas ruled 150+ years after Nikephoros I
20:04
Wait wait wait wait Bardas was 90 years old?? Jeezz
"With the collapse of the empire in the west, its eastern counterpart became, in reality, an entirely new and independent state, at once Greek by language and Roman in name: 'A Greek Roman empire'."
Roderick Beaton, "The Greeks: a global history", New York: Basic books 2021, pp. 212
Robin Pierson and Mike Duncan are two of my favorite podcasters.
Great details,well done.I would like to see an episode dedicated to the last,tragic,Emperor of Byzantine.
Why are there 2 naked dudes lying on top of each other while levitating on the front of this boat? 27:30
I've tried the great courses plus and I couldn't relax and enjoy it. I could enjoy it but I felt the need to take notes.
The history of Byzantium is absolutely fantastic, everyone really should check it out.
"The Phocas family was always associated with the province of Cappadocia in eastern Anatolia; its actual lineage seems to have been a mixture of Armenian and Greek."
Blaum, Paul A. (1994). The Days of the Warlords: A History of the Byzantine Empire, A.D. 969-991. University Press of America. p. 6
There is no real evidence that the Phokades were Armenian
Awsome video, (this is coming from a saracen) really awsome keep up the good work 👍
Please cover the islamic conquests too as there were many great generals also! Much respect for your work
Haha, don't call yourself a Saracen friend we are not the same as those who lived 1,000 years ago.
@@zippyparakeet1074saracen is just a precurser word for a specific group of arabs , so he is not wrong
Who wants a tv show based on Nikephoros or Justinian or anything related to Eastern Rome ( Which I view as the underrated brother of the Western Roman Empire) other than 1453 siege. I just don’t get why Hollywood hates Eastern Rome so much
Plus the history of eastern Roman empire is notorious of containing so much intrigue, betrayals, tragedies and politics that would make game of thrones look like a cartoon. If you put in the mix the heorism and the epicness of some of the emperors and generals, it's buffing they didn't make a series yet.
You can follow families, like the Lekapenos, Komnenos, Doukas, Phokas, Melissenos, Diogenoi and many more that had highs and lows, that fought to gain power or fought to protect the empire. You can also follow dynasties, or individual characters. And none of them is completely black or white, rather shades of gray.
Such a big potential, the dream of every screen writer
Same reason you dont have movies about the aztecs, nobody wants to see wiped out destroyed loosers on screen. Aztecs dont excist anymore, most mexicans literally are 50% spanish, all paternal, so the fraternal male DNA have been wiped out by the spaniards and aztecs identify as mexicans now. Same with Byzanthenes, they are wiped out, most people in western turkey have 50% greek DNA and 50% turkish dna.....you have been invaded and erased and you did nothing to preserve your identity. Even kurdish people still are kurds and have their own language.....rome got taken down and latin also disappeared but atleast a lot of italians still have roman dna in them, mixed with german/lombard/vandal/ frankish, celt
Btw Sayf Al Dawla was his title meaning "Sword of the (Abbasid) State"
Those kind of titles were very common during the Abbasid era were you can notice that all the Abbasid caliphs used a title like Saffah or Al-Mansor unlike the Umayyads and Rashidun who simply used their names
There were other titles given by the Caliphs to famous generals or rulers who considered him as their religious head
Like the title Saladin (the good of the Religion) to the famous conqueror of Jerusalem and the title Rokndinn (the corner of religion) to the Mameluke sultan Baibers
Din is better translated as faith not as religion, even tho it does mean religion in other context
Well explained and easy to follow, because you often repeat yourself which sort of acts like a reminder of what you said earlier. Others don't repeat themselves and so the listener gets confused.
I've always been fascinated with the byzantium empire,it still amazes me tho how such a strong empire for so long can be just stamped out of existence completely.
It was the Roman Empire. From 27 BC until 1453 AD. Never existed such a thing as the Byzantine Empire! Only Romans and Rome.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 er..i know 'byzantium' or 'byzantine' empire is the modern name given to the Eastern roman empire,everyone who follows this channel or has the slightest interest in the roman empire would know that.
If the 4th crusade never happened (or if it just wasn't such a damn mess), it would have continued to last for centuries. Such a shame, really.
Guess they werent as strong as they tought
On his grave there was the inscription ''He defeated everyone except for a woman''.
Astonishing work !huge respect ✊
Byzantine emperor eh? That's new
P/S love your works. Few channels touch this kind of topic
He made a video on Alexios Komnenos a year or so ago
Always love more stories about the Byzantine Empire
Just in time for my birthday, amazing! Thanks dude!
So good!! Greets from Greece!!!
He was Roman. Not Greek.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 of course he was Roman citizen, but was Greek, so what. Most byzantines were Greek. That doesn't mean they were not Roman.
@@christospanagopoulos5821 Greek how? Just curious what you mean. If you could define that. He was a Greek-speaking Roman. He was of indigenous Anatolian Cappadocian descent. Probably a product of intermingling between Armenians, Latins, Anatolians and who know, but a little Greek. But definitely not a Greek.
@@legioromanaxvii7644 Armenians were speaking Armenian, Latins Latin, cappadocians and anatolians were Greek even before Alexander. He was Greek speaking, but he was Latin Armenian,... Ok...
@@christospanagopoulos5821 You do know that this is false, right? Latin was the lingua franca in the West. Many millions of foreigners learned it. That is why so many Romance nations exist today, as well as Latino nations in the Americas. Greek was also a lingua franca in the East. Before the Arabs and Turks invaded the Eastern Empire, many tens of millions of foreigners learned Greek. That in no way goes to show that they are Greek. There were many Armenians, Cappadocian Anatolians and other groups who had willingly learned to speak Greek in Eastern Roman Empire. So I will ask you again in a friendly way, what is your definition of Greek? Because Nicephorus I Phocas was of Arabic descent from southern Cappadocian province. Nicephorus II was likely a mixed person. Neither of them had a Greek identity. They saw themselves as legitimate Romans. Just saying....
Post Scriptum: the Roman province of Cappadocia did not become fully Greek-speaking until the 4th century AD. 600 years after Alexander. So no, Cappadocia was never a fully Greek place. There were indigenous Cappadocians there, Persians, Latins, Greeks and later Arabs and Slavs and Armenians moved in. Greek was the common language of them all. But they were Roman citizens.... Rhomaioi.
"Pale Death of Saracens" - very metal nickname
Dude you're videos are unreal. They are so good! And long.....wow
I was looking up who St Margret of Antioch and well there's not much on Wikipedia but it's all Grade A Awesome.
I know saints aren't your usual thing but I reckon she'd be a great subject for a video and even if you're too busy the wiki page alone is worth a read.
I love your videos by the way.
Byzantine history is totally underrated. Im surprised this video is one of the least views when Nikephoros Phokas is one of the best military commanders of his age.
The best video !!!! And the best channel !!!! You are from few channels who writes so good subjects for one of the most interesting periods the war between Muslim and byzantine christianity !!! Of my bottom of my heart thank you !!!! Thank you sir!!!
Great content, thank you!
Love it !
33:00 What is the soundtrack of this part called?
Absolutely phenomenal video.
Wonderful video. Everyday we learn a little more. Thanks for sharing 😍👍
Europe: The Saracen is no longer at your gate he’s in your home.
Excellent video and narration
Kindly keep with this work
Your channel is a blessing for history enthusiasts like us
🙏🙏👌👌👌
Excellent as usual
Fatimids were Probable the Worst "Caliphate" Of all Times
@@mohamedred5746 Why? They fought against the Byzantines, who would've taken most of Syria had they not defeated them in numerous naval and land engagements.
Some historians say that Nicephorus's family came from Georgia into the Anatolia. In the Southern parts of Georgia, there is still a town with famous churches and early medieval buildings called Phocas.
There is another version which says that the family in the first centuries moved from the ancient ionian greek city of Phokaia (modern day Foça in Turkey) to Capadocia.
5:16 where is this art from? Is it Icon Painting? From what church?
Great video, as always, Pete. But don’t forget that in Greek (ancient and modern) and Latin, C is always pronounced as the K sound, always, no exceptions. Using C for the S sound came much later. Also, the Romans changed the -os of Greek words to the more-Latin sounding -us.
In medieval Eastern Rome, C is S. C doesn't exist in Greek alphabet.
His name is pronounced “Nicky-foros”.
Kudos!
Age of empires castle seige introduced me to Nikepheros
4:40 What do you mean? Greeks been there for 1000s of years
I think dar al-harb means all non muslims not just foreign lands not at peace with the caliphate, this is how they justified some of their first religious wars
Phokas knew how to deal with them.
Faithful and heroic Byzantines, reclaim the Lands usurped by the infidel that rightly belong to Our Blessed Lord and remember, DEUS VULT!!!
Byzantines empire is destroyed now.. Christianity is now breathing its last breath
I love your videos.
Very good video. but could you name the title of the music you use especially the first one of the documentary ? Thx.
yo..you are a great orator. i got work, so holla at your boy