A special shout-out to all the people who recently donated to us via Super Thanks 🤗: 🧡 @Squire Waldo 🧡 @Ruufus De Leon 🧡 @David Keane 🧡 @Kevin Gomez 🧡 @scrot 🧡 @Xina Marie Uhl 🧡 @Aaron Flynn 🧡 @Robert 🧡 @Gary Worthington 🧡 @howtorideahorse 🧡 @Franz Nowak 🧡 @(Ἰάσων) Sobek Lord of the Four Corners 🧡 @michael porzio 🧡 @David Batlle Thank you so much for your generous support and for believing in us 🙏 Your host, Sebastian
I think the video exaggerates how much decline there was. He also fails to mention that smaller scale baths still existed, that at least the baths of Zeuxippus were turned into silk workshops (not totally disused) and that later writers from the west such as Liutprand of Cremona describe Constantinople as being in fine working order. Were there some ruins in the 800s AD? Yes, but not many. They were the exception, not the rule.
I also find it hard to believe that no new fountains were built after the aqueducts were restored. What was all that water being used for if not for public use from fountains?
Of course there's much more information and research done in this video then I am capable of. But there is one I would like to add...... there are accounts from the 4th Crusade by eyewitnesses of how completely mind-boggling the experience of entering Constantinople was for the westerners so, at least by medieval standards, Constantinople was still truly impressive..... it was still the largest city that anybody in Europe had experienced
Cough Propaganda. You only talk about pagan monuments and make no mention of how multiple were converted into other things. The Baths of Achilles for example were converted into a Imperial Silk Workshop. And imperial doesn’t just mean Pagan, we Know the Column of Justinian was routinely repaired with the use of actual acrobats to cover all of it. They even added 3 statues below it that showed Muslim leaders submitting to it. The Aqueduct of Valens was also maintained and periodically repaired all the way into the 1400s. And the heck you mean false image of a golden city? The Constantinople of 1180 at the Death of Manuel had 250-300 people. That’s on par with the Low estimates of Antiquity. Triumphs that went through the Entire city in the exact same style as the Republican version were also restored by Constantine in the 940s. Constantinople did get hit with a massive decline from which it was already recovering from by 800 but it had fully recovered from it by the time of Basil II. And I think it’s important to remember to use not only Byzantine but foreign sources. Many of the monuments are mentioned by foreigners more than the Byzantines who were used to them. This whole vid takes your usual tone of Western Pagan propaganda and it’s quite tiresome on otherwise good vids.
I agree, this video disappointed me a bit. It makes it seems like Constantinople was a ruins after the early 600s but all the records agree that the city was stunning and splendorous and clearly displayed much of even classical pagan Greco-Roman heritage right up until the Fourth Crusade. After the Fourth Crusade the city certainly fell into a more ruinous state until the Ottomans began rebuilding the city
Also, the video makes an argument from absence. "There's no record of certain type of new structures being built in the written records, so there MUST have been none!" The video maker should know that few records of anything survive from that long ago, least of all construction logs.
@@andyt7295 Constantinople was Rome. Wherever the Roman emperor and senate, and Roman government were headquartered, there was Rome. Roma Nova become Rome. Old Rome was Rome only in name, Nova Roma or Constantinopolis was Rome until 1453.
Large scale building projects and a population recovery are evident in the macedonian renaissance. Maybe do another look at constantinople in 1025ad and you’ll see that the city became just as grandiose as it was under justinian.
He has a clear anti-christian agenda. I don't buy, that they were superstitious. When they saw a pagan building in disrepair, they either repurposed it or converted it into a church.
I think the peak was in the turn of 13th century, with the diverse groups of people, Italian merchants, Europeans, Jews and Asians contributing to the riches and the cultural fabric of the city, disrupted by Manuel's and Andronicus's policies. There was a wave of Anatolians towards the capital, after the plateau became a no-man's land, so the population probably reached, if not surpassed the so-called Justinian peak. Angeloi have also notably spent lavish amounts for the beautification of public buildings.
I think this assumption is only partially correct. Especially in the best time of the middle ages, so 10th-11th century, Constantinopel might not have looked as good as in late antiquity, but for a western visitor who had never seen a city as big and with such monumental churches, it might still have been very impressive.
I agree, the permanence of both political and religious powers throughout the Early Middle Ages meant that before 1204 Constantinople was always the richest and most impressive city of Christendom...
It's an absolute shame there aren't important movies about Constantinople's amazing story. It seems like Hollywood is not interested at all in adaptating a story in which the characters are not occidental
@@MedjayofFaiyum "Byzantine empire" is a term Western scholarship invented after the fall of Constantinople. The term obfuscates the fact that this empire was the direct continuation of the Roman empire, and those who invented it wanted to claim the Roman legacy for themselves.
Most of the statues in Constantinople were erected in honor of Roman emperors and Christian saints. There was a large forum dedicated to Romulus and Remus.
Another great video, amice Maioriane. Outstanding work. As the capital of the Roman state, New Rome did a powerful, long-lasting job in every way for saving Roman culture and prestige. It is such a shame that in western European states of today, Constantinople's contribution to preserving the Roman legacy is heavily overlooked.
If Constantinople was weak at 800 then how the Russians were so impressed by it that they converted orthodox Christianity just because they thought this beauty must be built by god
Bc his theory relies on 1 source, that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition. I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Constantinople in the 11th Century must have been quite amazing. The presence or absence of ancient monuments is irrelevant to this--walking through it would have been astounding: bustling, smelly, alive. Its grandeur and importance is NOT solely linked to the preservation of ancient things.
Your videos have been beyond incredible, coming from someone who has taught history, I am learning quite a bit about the details of the time period of 476-1453. I never even knew about Rome still being in a relatively good state until the early-mid 500's! Absolutely fascinating, your hard work is greatly appreciated by all of us who value history, do not ever stop!
Hello amicus, thank you so much for your kind words, this is really a joy to read, I am really happy to see that so many people are really fascinated about urban history. This is an aspect of history of great fascination which is often looked over or over simplified, so it is really amazing to see that so many people share my fascination. Thanks a lot and best regards, Sebastian.
Apparently a lot of ancient public sculpture of major importance was lost in the fourth crusade of 1204, so I doubt the forums were as ruined as u suggest
800 Ad is still a hard period for Byzantium in which much of the budget is spent on the military. However we see some building activity such as in the time of Theophilos who built some new Palace quarters. Perhaps using material from other dilapidated buildings of the palace.
The levels of decay, he's describing are strongly contradicted by the splendor that the Slavs and the Arabs ascribe to the city. The Magnaura, the Nea Ekklesia, the Boukoleon Palace, the many new monasteries etc, none of these are mentioned. His only source is Cyril Mango and even he probably doesn't paint such a picture. What is he blaming for this (probable false) picture? Christianity, like in every video! The guy is a pagan larper, who twists historical facts to suit his narrative, just like he did in the video about Hypatia.
Exactly, he commissioned buildings in the example and style of Baghdad at the time and this was just the beginning of a 4 century reconstruction period
@@Michael_the_Drunkard so, of course, the city looked good to the Slavs. Medieval Kyiv was no match for medieval Constantinople, even in terms of population numbers. But, neither was medieval Constantinople any match for antique Rome or Constantinople. It is a hard fact that most of the grand civic, sanitation (baths) and pagan architecture from the antiquity period was abandoned. And, yes, Christianity literally had a lot to do with attitudes towards restoration of pagan-linked buildings and large public baths (attitude towards nudity literally changed drastically). In other cities, like Alexandria, it is well documented that Christian riots were responsible for direct destruction of pagan monuments, most notably the Serapium and the Library. Of course, lack of money, in Byzantine period, also played a role. By the fall of Constantinople, not even the Great Palace was in a condition fit for inhabitation...
@@MikayeYakovlev then why was Byzantine Thessaloniki known for having more baths than people? Cut the crap the Eastern Romans didn’t ban baths but in the 8th century they were more preoccupied with defending themselves than building fancy buildings. And in 1453 the city was falling into ruin because of Crusaders sacking it in 1204 not because the eastern Romans didn’t maintain the city. In fact in 1200 the city was home to 400,000 or more people and sources describe the grand buildings and sculptures that were still visible in the city. In the vicinity of the Hagia Sophia alone there were at least 300 individual classical Greek and Roman sculptures. As for nudity being banned, look at the art from the Macedonian Renaissance and say it again.
a biased view of Constantinople and of the Eastern Roman Empire. Shame. Constantinople in its long history had many ups and downs and one cannot argue that it was a ruined place because a public bath was abandoned. The Macedonian and Comnenian dynasties and restored much of what was ruined and expanded much such as the Blachernae palace. The real reason Constantinople was ruined is the Fourth Crusade and the Ottoman conquest which destroyed everything that stood.
@@ibrahimsulaiman9047 Seems so lately nothing of eastern Rome is good for him. He blame Justinian for fall of west, he diminish Constantinople and yet one only need to go and visit Venice - all the things they stole from Constantinople and than visit Istanbul and marvel in all the wonderous sight still there.
@@belisarius1453 Truly sad how the Eastern Roman Empire is treated these days even among some from academia. Even though they preserved the Roman culture, it seems as though everyone treats the west as the true authentic Roman legacy when the ERE preserved all the writings and political legacy of the Romans. People only take what they need as western bits of culture in the ERE such as philosophy and reject the culture, religion and architecture of the ERE. Constantinople was magnificent and the "Queen of Cities" but yet people treat Rome as though it was the only Roman city and not Constantinople.
The real date of decline of Costantinople is the year 1204 AD., before the IV crusade the city was the biggest of the Europe and the richest of the world.
Hello Hal :) Thanks for always watching my videos as one of the first! I really appreciate that. And I also had lots of fun when editing this video, because some of the artwork and renders were new to me as well ;)
This guy needs study more about history. Sure Constantinople had declined periods in her history but quickly recovered thus it wasn't just "filled with ruins" till 4th crusade. And the last straw was the totalitarian state Ottomans. Ottomans but especially Turkey literally destroyed this once beautiful city.
Nothing lasts forever. As time goes by, the buildings decay and become ruins. Some may remain intact. Most of the churches were certainly converted to mosques whether you like it or not but other than that I do not recall any monument or buildings from the Byzantine era that were demolished on purpose during the Ottoman period.
We also need to see what the condition of Rome itself was in the years prior to the Humanist recognition from around 1300 to 1450 of the true loss of the Roman civilization and culture. What was left in the Roman Forum? Not from the prints of the 16th century, but in terms of reconstructions of what was the Campo Vaccino or the cow pasture, with mud up to the arches of some of the buildings left there.
Excellent, yes, that is also still on my list :) In fact, a lot of monuments were still standing in Rome as late as 1300 or 1450, and were then torn down :( This is a sad tale, but luckily we have now learned to love our past and our heritage. But it was a long journey and much was lost.
I am sensing some resentment and and effort to equate the miserable state of Rome to the one of Constantinople around 700's, but this disparaging picture is far from reality since recycling material for buildings was a common practice. Nothing stayed a ruin. Public baths were as common as starbacks and by 1204 crusaders witnessed churches with golden domes. I'm pretty sure Constantinople of 1204 put ancient Rome in shame from that perspective.
@@phillipholland6795 We're talking about urban developments before the advent of electricity, cars and modern building techniques and materials. I think the cut-off is the Napoleonic - Victorian period. By then Constantiniye was probably the most impressive capital in the world, for 19th century standards.
C'mon, you can't say that nonsense: imperial cities need imperium, in other words they need large revenue to maintain public buildings. Both Rome and Constantinople weren't that after the glory of Roman empire had passed.
So it would have been cool to see Rome just before the Goths had their war with Justinian. and I guess Istanbul would have been nice to see after the 4th crusade sacked it.
Constantinople Was Far From The Great City it Was in Late Antiquity in The Late Middle Ages But it Was Still Able To impress Both Westerners And Easterns As Well As The Crusaders And Ottomans Turks Whose Sultan Dedicadet Himselve To Dominating The Magnificente City.
2 takeaways I've found for myself from the video: 1) One of the huge reasons of the decline was the fact that Africa has been lost and African grain was therefore no longer available. 2) People there were mostly Christians by then, and they had a superstitious belief that old temples and stuff are related to the pagan times and therefore it was not a good idea to restore these old buildings and monuments.
I understand it's beyond the scope of this channel, but this video has sparked my interest in researching more about the city after 1453, and to what extent the population increased and public structures were built in the Ottoman's early / ascendant period.
Very thought-provoking video. I was aware of a level of decline before the sack of 1204, but not quite to this extent. There is something that comes to mind, however: would the abandonment of the pagan structures in the city have strongly affected the city as a whole? Much though it may have retained a pagan heritage, wasn't the Christian heritage, which was preserved, far greater? In other words, if there were still 100,000 people in a largely intact city, wouldn't that have made Constantinople a fairly impressive place by the standards of the time?
I mean Constantinople was seen as the capital of the world up until its fall? I think some of the points may be exaggerated or made by crusading/latin sources.
@@belisarius1453 Yeah, during the reign of Basil II, I think the city was as splenderous as it was during the reign of Justinian (of course with less people as plague and war had taken away a considerable amount of citizens). Only after 1204 can you really say that it was in active decay.
The population of Constantinople in 1204 was around 250-300,000 and the majority of the city's monuments were very well preserved. In fact, many other monuments (mostly churches) were built between the 8th and the 13th century, that can still be seen today. This video is wrong on so many levels. If you are interested, you can read the book ''Constantinople'' by Jonathan Harris or ''Between the Pagan Past and Christian Present in Byzantine Visual Culture: Statues in Constantinople, 4th-13th Centuries CE'' by Paroma Chatterjee.
@@balkanmountains2103 Thanks for that perspective - I'll look into those titles. I'll admit that my imagination is happier with a very impressive Constantinople up until 1204. The thought, for example, of a full hippodrome with Roman chariot races continuing right through to the late "middle ages" is something I find amazing.
i pray i live the day when someone will make this city in 530AD, 800 AD and 1453 AD, in VR. i would very much like to see it that way, to walk through its streets, possibly among its "citizens". oh man...
When suddenly, at midnight, you hear an invisible procession going by with exquisite music, voices, don’t mourn your luck that’s failing now, work gone wrong, your plans all proving deceptive-don’t mourn them uselessly. Like one long prepared, and graced with courage, say goodbye to her, the Alexandria that is leaving. Above all, don’t fool yourself, don’t say it was a dream, your ears deceived you: don’t degrade yourself with empty hopes like these. As one long prepared, and graced with courage, as is right for you who were given this kind of city, go firmly to the window and listen with deep emotion, but not with whining, the pleas of a coward; listen-your final delectation-to the voices, to the exquisite music of that strange procession, and say goodbye to her, to the Alexandria you are losing.
The mental images of these cities--Roma & Byzantium--are irresistible to all of us who love Antiquity, especially as seen through the strangely modern eyes of a Roman citizen. Their surrendering grandeur, however, is and infinitely mournful, probably to all of us. When I allow myself to imagine how much art and literature was lost, even destroyed, purposely and wantonly, oh my gosh, I just hold my aching head and heart. They both were grander at their apices than Memphis or Babylon, certainly more exuberant than Athens or Persepolis ever were, with more gravity than Tenochtitlan of the 13th century, and more imperial ambition than Adis Ababa in the 11th century, or Kyoto of the 16th century. For reasons that derive ironically from some limits set on the sheer gratuity of state brutality after the 18th-century, Rome, then Constantinople, then Istanbul, were probably more fabulous and legendary in their prime eras than Venice, Vienna, Paris, London, New York, Buenos Aires, Beijing or Delhi have ever been, at least cosmetically. I'm intrigued by cities whose archeology is still unfurling, like Chichen Itza's sprawling immensity and the Khmer Empire's somewhat parallel, exuberant flowering, but almost antipodal to each-other. In an inversion of possibilities, it seems that, tragically, "Muslim- majority" religious states and "Communism-obligate" ideologic states have tied their futures to anachronistic programs with concrete buoys, and I used quotes above to suggest that Islam and Socialism, when humanely interpreted and reasonably applied, could absolutely be viable guides to tolerant societies and productive governments, in my opinion. Both are utterly amenable to democracy. But that will never happen when one man is allowed to play autocrat, for even one decision, one election, as proven by the bruised civil structure and broken citizens' societies now flailing under Bashar al Assad, Kim Jung Un, Vladimir Putin, Recip Tayyip Erdogan and Alexander Lukashenko. As Geoffrey Firmin says in "Under the Volcano," by Malcolm Lowry, "It's too late in the world for flags." And I agree with that idea as proposed two centuries earlier by Immanuel Kant and still urgently worth deliberation as national borders, hatred for differences and an ugly taste for violence has come knocking on the door of a dyspeptic, derelict world. If, however, from the fresh springs of young minds and open hearts more intriguing measures of urban vigor or even an hegemony possessed of integrity, with a humanist ethos, (c'mon, pretend with me for a second) are applied, like cultural and creative liberties, intellectual ferment, depth of support for innovation, for ethical missions and boundaries, younger and older leadership collaboration, the generous embrace of immigrants, early but more thoughtful adoption of novel ideas and technologies, and the cultivation of long-term projects with extremely delayed rewards--reaped only over generations, even, then we could be anticipating successful civilizations not seen on Earth anywhere, anytime, before. We would maybe require ourselves to shift our notions of geographic scale, our emphasis on patriotic, religious nationalism vs ecumenical, secular internationalism, and socio-political power vs economic-military power. But if successful, then the most compelling, popular cities of the next 100 years could be Montreal, Dublin, Berlin, Cape Town, San Francisco, Cuernavaca, Tunis, Montevideo, Aukland, Sydney, Barcelona, Prague, Nairobi, Tel Aviv, Seoul, and the storied Cradle of Enlightenment, just north of the Wall that Hadrian Built: Edinburgh! And that's a grand idea to me.
Love the story. Must be hard to dig up the sources of around that age; people probably had better things to do. I kind of doubt the citizens had the time, knowledge and resources in enough abundance to perform the repairs and maintenance... after all the big city had way, way more human resources (populace). Perhaps a dive into documents and other written sources about the time period would be interesting.
fascinating how you look at it during the times of "paganism" looking for virtue and strength from the gods like Jupiter and Zeus, on the other hand, looking for salvation with the cross in Christ, it's just fascinating to see the two angles and the differences in and the people.
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link to Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition. I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Arguably the Roman empire in the west continued under various magister militvms until the Ivstitinianvs reunification again. 476 to 535 did not have that much nominal or de facto difference as earlier in the 5th century I always felt
Around the 9th century, a revival began, but he as the neopagan larper, that he is, won't admit this. Worse, he will even say, that 6th century Rome was more prosperous than 11th century Constantinople.
Thank you so much, amicus, for your kind words. I am extremely happy to read that other people are as fascinated as me about urban history of late antique cities :)
This has become one of my favorite TH-cam channels! Fascinating history and GREAT work in depicting what otherwise has been a glossed over and simplistic depiction of what Ancient and Medieval Roman civilization was like. Hopefully, in the near future, there will be movies made with this type of sourced materials to give future generations a more realistic impression of the Late Roman (both West and East) Empires.....I salute you on this great work!!! 😉👍🙏
Thanks a lot Amicus, I am really happy to read that there are other people as fascinated as I am about the urban history of Constantinople or Rome. Yes, this is unfortunately an aspect of history that is very often oversimplified, and indeed it is difficult to find good source material. I put two very good books into the description, that delve into this topic. Best regards, Sebastian.
Wow i always thought that Constantinople was in pristine condition until 1204.. yeat it was already partially in ruins, and had been in constant decline from late antiquity. Everything is impermanent
Bc his theory relies on 1 source, that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition. I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link of Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition. I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Constantinople was the centre an extremely resilient empire, even a "stubborn" one if you will - unfortunately, the many setbacks of the 7th century never let her reach the magnificence Rome achieved. That doesn't mean it didn't have its greatness even as a Christian city - the permanence of the imperial power and the heritage of classical antiquity saved it from a total collapse - and I dare say that even in 1453, the sheer size of its abandoned fora and decrepit columns still amazed allies and enemies alike...
My man, I love your channel. Late Roman, and generally anything eastern Roman, is not something I studied. I have to ask you though. I’m guessing you have a degree, how did you make it through studying this? I am equal parts fascinated and depressed the more I learn. I don’t know that I could have gotten my degree in this. At least with your videos, I can take time away. To get the degree you immerse yourself in it. It just makes me sad.
It wasn't the Arabs or the Persians. It was the climate, the "Vandal Solar Minimum." You should read "Climate Change during and after the Roman Empire" by Michael McCormick.
The city was degrading, yes, but actually the ottomans, who were fascinated by the roman monuments, took great care of the byzantine herritge after taking the city, restoring some and building a new, thus bringing a new splendor back to the city
@@ericponce8740 but certainly not 600 years before. The guy has a clear anti-Christian agenda. He tries to make 500 AD Rome more prosperous than 1000 AD Constantinople.
by the 8th century the empire was still pretty much in the shitter, althought the greatest constantinople was, was probably during the times of Basil II, or the Peak of Komnenian Rule
This is the only site that I have ever made comments on. And all of it is positive. I had figured that after the Arab conquests in the 7th and 8th centuries what we would have recognized is holdovers Rome chariot races, public baths Etc were too expensive. But I didn't know it was so desolate I'm looking forward to seeing what it was like under Basil Ii.... I have read contemporary commentaries from the 10th and 11th centuries and they're all enthusiastic(except of course Liudiprand of Cremona)... including the Fourth Crusaders. The tons of spoils have made their way through Europe after 1204 a proof that there was quite a lot of richness and prosperity.. but that's an interesting point that this result concentrated on the churches and perhaps the palace. I'm a 70-year-old plumber in New York City and not getting a lot of work lately when I do I will definitely contribute the cash you need to keep going on. This is a long text I know but I want to say I learned how to read Because of Byzantium I couldn't read until the 5th grade in public school which is about 10 years old.. when I found out about the existence of Byzantium, in one year I learned enough to read the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.. and a red ever since about it but the information gets stale and you revive it and make it alive and interesting again and I actually hear things that I didn't know
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link to Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition. I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Νo matter how they slice it and mince it and dice it ..they would not be able to convince us ..we would had seen Ottomans in Konstantinople......during that era ofcourse. Zeus akhbar everybody.
Thank you again for all this great videos you make. I think that the lost of Egypt is the major reason for the city population decline, because many people use to live there just because the government free bread supply. And when this was over only the people who produced something was able to afford to live there
Your precise elocution and the most unusual voice are not merely pleasant but seductive to the ear, in a manly way and tone however. I also detect a humility that is innate and not at all feigned. That rare, refreshing character asset in media contrasts greatly with the bombastic tirades of many other video "influencers" who usually affect a repugnant, arrogant BBC or faux Cambridge or Oxford accent when addressing the ignorant hoi polloi--we mindless, uncultivated, unwashed, common thralls wallowing with the swine in the gutters of civilization, in other words. I do hope you are not AI. What a pity that would be!
All we got as a source of medieval "decline" is an amazon link to the book, no direct citations! But like in every video of him, there are baseless assumption how Christianity is at fault for this.
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link of Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition. I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Sebastian, I really LOVE the passion that you put in these videos (i.e. you make the viewer enjoy all the beauty that you enjoy and shed a tear for all that you also shed a tear on when watching the slow decay of that beautiful world) and in teaching on that enthalling period of Western History. Regards from Argentina, a country that also derives its name from the Latin "Argentum"🙂
A special shout-out to all the people who recently donated to us via Super Thanks 🤗:
🧡 @Squire Waldo
🧡 @Ruufus De Leon
🧡 @David Keane
🧡 @Kevin Gomez
🧡 @scrot
🧡 @Xina Marie Uhl
🧡 @Aaron Flynn
🧡 @Robert
🧡 @Gary Worthington
🧡 @howtorideahorse
🧡 @Franz Nowak
🧡 @(Ἰάσων) Sobek Lord of the Four Corners
🧡 @michael porzio
🧡 @David Batlle
Thank you so much for your generous support and for believing in us 🙏
Your host, Sebastian
I think the video exaggerates how much decline there was. He also fails to mention that smaller scale baths still existed, that at least the baths of Zeuxippus were turned into silk workshops (not totally disused) and that later writers from the west such as Liutprand of Cremona describe Constantinople as being in fine working order. Were there some ruins in the 800s AD? Yes, but not many. They were the exception, not the rule.
I also find it hard to believe that no new fountains were built after the aqueducts were restored. What was all that water being used for if not for public use from fountains?
I swear you give me emotional whiplash with how you talk about the (eastern) medieval Roman Empire sometimes 😂
Of course there's much more information and research done in this video then I am capable of. But there is one I would like to add...... there are accounts from the 4th Crusade by eyewitnesses of how completely mind-boggling the experience of entering Constantinople was for the westerners so, at least by medieval standards, Constantinople was still truly impressive..... it was still the largest city that anybody in Europe had experienced
Cough Propaganda. You only talk about pagan monuments and make no mention of how multiple were converted into other things. The Baths of Achilles for example were converted into a Imperial Silk Workshop.
And imperial doesn’t just mean Pagan, we Know the Column of Justinian was routinely repaired with the use of actual acrobats to cover all of it. They even added 3 statues below it that showed Muslim leaders submitting to it. The Aqueduct of Valens was also maintained and periodically repaired all the way into the 1400s.
And the heck you mean false image of a golden city? The Constantinople of 1180 at the Death of Manuel had 250-300 people. That’s on par with the Low estimates of Antiquity.
Triumphs that went through the Entire city in the exact same style as the Republican version were also restored by Constantine in the 940s.
Constantinople did get hit with a massive decline from which it was already recovering from by 800 but it had fully recovered from it by the time of Basil II.
And I think it’s important to remember to use not only Byzantine but foreign sources. Many of the monuments are mentioned by foreigners more than the Byzantines who were used to them.
This whole vid takes your usual tone of Western Pagan propaganda and it’s quite tiresome on otherwise good vids.
I agree, this video disappointed me a bit. It makes it seems like Constantinople was a ruins after the early 600s but all the records agree that the city was stunning and splendorous and clearly displayed much of even classical pagan Greco-Roman heritage right up until the Fourth Crusade. After the Fourth Crusade the city certainly fell into a more ruinous state until the Ottomans began rebuilding the city
Hey nice to see you again! Fully agree! Christianity lives rent-free in his head, so he makes us believe Christianity destroyed civilization.
Also, the video makes an argument from absence. "There's no record of certain type of new structures being built in the written records, so there MUST have been none!" The video maker should know that few records of anything survive from that long ago, least of all construction logs.
It was a miracle that the ERE lasted until 1453 despite of the disasters that happened to them especially the 1204 sack.
Yeah, if Rome was a glorious empire, Constantinople was surely a resilient one.
@@andyt7295 Constantinople was Rome. Wherever the Roman emperor and senate, and Roman government were headquartered, there was Rome. Roma Nova become Rome. Old Rome was Rome only in name, Nova Roma or Constantinopolis was Rome until 1453.
Large scale building projects and a population recovery are evident in the macedonian renaissance. Maybe do another look at constantinople in 1025ad and you’ll see that the city became just as grandiose as it was under justinian.
He has a clear anti-christian agenda. I don't buy, that they were superstitious. When they saw a pagan building in disrepair, they either repurposed it or converted it into a church.
@@Michael_the_Drunkard yeah he clearly does have that bias. probably a gibbon fan.
I think the peak was in the turn of 13th century, with the diverse groups of people, Italian merchants, Europeans, Jews and Asians contributing to the riches and the cultural fabric of the city, disrupted by Manuel's and Andronicus's policies. There was a wave of Anatolians towards the capital, after the plateau became a no-man's land, so the population probably reached, if not surpassed the so-called Justinian peak. Angeloi have also notably spent lavish amounts for the beautification of public buildings.
@@laughsatchungus1461 You make the same comment under every video. Didn't grow tired yet?
@@gaiusflaminius4861 ???
I think this assumption is only partially correct. Especially in the best time of the middle ages, so 10th-11th century, Constantinopel might not have looked as good as in late antiquity, but for a western visitor who had never seen a city as big and with such monumental churches, it might still have been very impressive.
I agree, the permanence of both political and religious powers throughout the Early Middle Ages meant that before 1204 Constantinople was always the richest and most impressive city of Christendom...
wrong....wrong... WRONG
@@foreverraining1522 How so?
@@foreverraining1522 really and second request for how???
It's an absolute shame there aren't important movies about Constantinople's amazing story. It seems like Hollywood is not interested at all in adaptating a story in which the characters are not occidental
It goes deeper than that. The very term "Byzantine empire" is designed to strip it of its true legacy.
@@ibrahimsulaiman9047 how so
@@MedjayofFaiyum "Byzantine empire" is a term Western scholarship invented after the fall of Constantinople. The term obfuscates the fact that this empire was the direct continuation of the Roman empire, and those who invented it wanted to claim the Roman legacy for themselves.
@@MedjayofFaiyum Because the Empire was Orthodox Christian.
As Constantinople is the same with other incredible cities as Tenochtitlan for example, their rise and fall was so epic and totally forgoten.
Most of the statues in Constantinople were erected in honor of Roman emperors and Christian saints. There was a large forum dedicated to Romulus and Remus.
Another great video, amice Maioriane. Outstanding work. As the capital of the Roman state, New Rome did a powerful, long-lasting job in every way for saving Roman culture and prestige. It is such a shame that in western European states of today, Constantinople's contribution to preserving the Roman legacy is heavily overlooked.
If Constantinople was weak at 800 then how the Russians were so impressed by it that they converted orthodox Christianity just because they thought this beauty must be built by god
Bc his theory relies on 1 source, that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition.
I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Constantinople in the 11th Century must have been quite amazing. The presence or absence of ancient monuments is irrelevant to this--walking through it would have been astounding: bustling, smelly, alive. Its grandeur and importance is NOT solely linked to the preservation of ancient things.
Your videos have been beyond incredible, coming from someone who has taught history, I am learning quite a bit about the details of the time period of 476-1453. I never even knew about Rome still being in a relatively good state until the early-mid 500's! Absolutely fascinating, your hard work is greatly appreciated by all of us who value history, do not ever stop!
Put your money where your keyboard is 😜
Hello amicus, thank you so much for your kind words, this is really a joy to read, I am really happy to see that so many people are really fascinated about urban history. This is an aspect of history of great fascination which is often looked over or over simplified, so it is really amazing to see that so many people share my fascination. Thanks a lot and best regards, Sebastian.
Apparently a lot of ancient public sculpture of major importance was lost in the fourth crusade of 1204, so I doubt the forums were as ruined as u suggest
Your videos are simply amazing and bring to life a forgotten era
Thank you for all the great videos. This is definitely an overlooked part of history!
800 Ad is still a hard period for Byzantium in which much of the budget is spent on the military. However we see some building activity such as in the time of Theophilos who built some new Palace quarters. Perhaps using material from other dilapidated buildings of the palace.
The levels of decay, he's describing are strongly contradicted by the splendor that the Slavs and the Arabs ascribe to the city. The Magnaura, the Nea Ekklesia, the Boukoleon Palace, the many new monasteries etc, none of these are mentioned. His only source is Cyril Mango and even he probably doesn't paint such a picture. What is he blaming for this (probable false) picture? Christianity, like in every video! The guy is a pagan larper, who twists historical facts to suit his narrative, just like he did in the video about Hypatia.
Exactly, he commissioned buildings in the example and style of Baghdad at the time and this was just the beginning of a 4 century reconstruction period
@@Michael_the_Drunkard so, of course, the city looked good to the Slavs. Medieval Kyiv was no match for medieval Constantinople, even in terms of population numbers. But, neither was medieval Constantinople any match for antique Rome or Constantinople. It is a hard fact that most of the grand civic, sanitation (baths) and pagan architecture from the antiquity period was abandoned. And, yes, Christianity literally had a lot to do with attitudes towards restoration of pagan-linked buildings and large public baths (attitude towards nudity literally changed drastically). In other cities, like Alexandria, it is well documented that Christian riots were responsible for direct destruction of pagan monuments, most notably the Serapium and the Library. Of course, lack of money, in Byzantine period, also played a role. By the fall of Constantinople, not even the Great Palace was in a condition fit for inhabitation...
@@MikayeYakovlev then why was Byzantine Thessaloniki known for having more baths than people? Cut the crap the Eastern Romans didn’t ban baths but in the 8th century they were more preoccupied with defending themselves than building fancy buildings. And in 1453 the city was falling into ruin because of Crusaders sacking it in 1204 not because the eastern Romans didn’t maintain the city. In fact in 1200 the city was home to 400,000 or more people and sources describe the grand buildings and sculptures that were still visible in the city. In the vicinity of the Hagia Sophia alone there were at least 300 individual classical Greek and Roman sculptures. As for nudity being banned, look at the art from the Macedonian Renaissance and say it again.
Excellent videos, beautifully written and well delivere
d
Great work, Maiorianus!
a biased view of Constantinople and of the Eastern Roman Empire. Shame. Constantinople in its long history had many ups and downs and one cannot argue that it was a ruined place because a public bath was abandoned. The Macedonian and Comnenian dynasties and restored much of what was ruined and expanded much such as the Blachernae palace. The real reason Constantinople was ruined is the Fourth Crusade and the Ottoman conquest which destroyed everything that stood.
Here we go again, more Germanic propaganda....
How do you mean?
🍿
@@ibrahimsulaiman9047 Seems so lately nothing of eastern Rome is good for him. He blame Justinian for fall of west, he diminish Constantinople and yet one only need to go and visit Venice - all the things they stole from Constantinople and than visit Istanbul and marvel in all the wonderous sight still there.
@@belisarius1453 Truly sad how the Eastern Roman Empire is treated these days even among some from academia.
Even though they preserved the Roman culture, it seems as though everyone treats the west as the true authentic Roman legacy when the ERE preserved all the writings and political legacy of the Romans.
People only take what they need as western bits of culture in the ERE such as philosophy and reject the culture, religion and architecture of the ERE.
Constantinople was magnificent and the "Queen of Cities" but yet people treat Rome as though it was the only Roman city and not Constantinople.
@@belisarius1453 I'm getting fed up to the back teeth as well with his anti ERE bias. If he doesn't cut it out sooner I'll stick to Romaboo Ramblings.
Love this episode! Thank you!
The real date of decline of Costantinople is the year 1204 AD., before the IV crusade the city was the biggest of the Europe and the richest of the world.
Love the artwork and renders! Much better idea of how things looked. Must have taken a lot of work!
Hello Hal :) Thanks for always watching my videos as one of the first! I really appreciate that. And I also had lots of fun when editing this video, because some of the artwork and renders were new to me as well ;)
Where is this footage of Constantinople from? show? movie?
You have hit the nail, right on the head, when you talk of cultural estrangement
Can you do a video about greek syracuse? Cicero said that it was the largest and most prosperous greek city
This guy needs study more about history. Sure Constantinople had declined periods in her history but quickly recovered thus it wasn't just "filled with ruins" till 4th crusade.
And the last straw was the totalitarian state Ottomans. Ottomans but especially Turkey literally destroyed this once beautiful city.
Nothing lasts forever. As time goes by, the buildings decay and become ruins. Some may remain intact. Most of the churches were certainly converted to mosques whether you like it or not but other than that I do not recall any monument or buildings from the Byzantine era that were demolished on purpose during the Ottoman period.
The pictures are wonderful.
We also need to see what the condition of Rome itself was in the years prior to the Humanist recognition from around 1300 to 1450 of the true loss of the Roman civilization and culture.
What was left in the Roman Forum? Not from the prints of the 16th century, but in terms of reconstructions of what was the Campo Vaccino or the cow pasture, with mud up to the arches of some of the buildings left there.
Excellent, yes, that is also still on my list :) In fact, a lot of monuments were still standing in Rome as late as 1300 or 1450, and were then torn down :(
This is a sad tale, but luckily we have now learned to love our past and our heritage. But it was a long journey and much was lost.
Imperial Constantinople was founded as a Christian city, Im not sure if it even had any significant pagan past
Amazing Video.
I am sensing some resentment and and effort to equate the miserable state of Rome to the one of Constantinople around 700's, but this disparaging picture is far from reality since recycling material for buildings was a common practice. Nothing stayed a ruin. Public baths were as common as starbacks and by 1204 crusaders witnessed churches with golden domes. I'm pretty sure Constantinople of 1204 put ancient Rome in shame from that perspective.
If you're comparing them then modern day Istanbul is more impressive than them both
@@phillipholland6795 We're talking about urban developments before the advent of electricity, cars and modern building techniques and materials. I think the cut-off is the Napoleonic - Victorian period. By then Constantiniye was probably the most impressive capital in the world, for 19th century standards.
C'mon, you can't say that nonsense: imperial cities need imperium, in other words they need large revenue to maintain public buildings. Both Rome and Constantinople weren't that after the glory of Roman empire had passed.
So it would have been cool to see Rome just before the Goths had their war with Justinian. and I guess Istanbul would have been nice to see after the 4th crusade sacked it.
I gotta say that map of Byzantine Spain is very generous
We will never forget the glory of Rome.
Constantinople Was Far From The Great City it Was in Late Antiquity in The Late Middle Ages But it Was Still Able To impress Both Westerners And Easterns As Well As The Crusaders And Ottomans Turks Whose Sultan Dedicadet Himselve To Dominating The Magnificente City.
Actually, Constantinople reached its peak by late 12th century.
Was Heraclius not responsible for extending the walls to include the Blachernae district? I have heard different stories
2 takeaways I've found for myself from the video:
1) One of the huge reasons of the decline was the fact that Africa has been lost and African grain was therefore no longer available.
2) People there were mostly Christians by then, and they had a superstitious belief that old temples and stuff are related to the pagan times and therefore it was not a good idea to restore these old buildings and monuments.
I understand it's beyond the scope of this channel, but this video has sparked my interest in researching more about the city after 1453, and to what extent the population increased and public structures were built in the Ottoman's early / ascendant period.
Ottomans only built few mosques. And all of them were small copies of Hagia Sophia.
thanks to PHOKAS...I would love a what if Phokas never over threw Maurice.
I didn't hear you name η Κωνσταντινούπολη "Byzantium" once watching this video. Σας ευχαριστώ 🙏
- from someone whose family name is Papaconstantinou.
Very thought-provoking video. I was aware of a level of decline before the sack of 1204, but not quite to this extent.
There is something that comes to mind, however: would the abandonment of the pagan structures in the city have strongly affected the city as a whole? Much though it may have retained a pagan heritage, wasn't the Christian heritage, which was preserved, far greater?
In other words, if there were still 100,000 people in a largely intact city, wouldn't that have made Constantinople a fairly impressive place by the standards of the time?
I mean Constantinople was seen as the capital of the world up until its fall? I think some of the points may be exaggerated or made by crusading/latin sources.
@@Jg-jg6jb You are correct, it smells like Germanic/Latin propaganda
@@belisarius1453 Yeah, during the reign of Basil II, I think the city was as splenderous as it was during the reign of Justinian (of course with less people as plague and war had taken away a considerable amount of citizens). Only after 1204 can you really say that it was in active decay.
The population of Constantinople in 1204 was around 250-300,000 and the majority of the city's monuments were very well preserved. In fact, many other monuments (mostly churches) were built between the 8th and the 13th century, that can still be seen today. This video is wrong on so many levels. If you are interested, you can read the book ''Constantinople'' by Jonathan Harris or ''Between the Pagan Past and Christian Present in Byzantine Visual Culture: Statues in Constantinople, 4th-13th Centuries CE'' by Paroma Chatterjee.
@@balkanmountains2103 Thanks for that perspective - I'll look into those titles.
I'll admit that my imagination is happier with a very impressive Constantinople up until 1204. The thought, for example, of a full hippodrome with Roman chariot races continuing right through to the late "middle ages" is something I find amazing.
i pray i live the day when someone will make this city in 530AD, 800 AD and 1453 AD, in VR. i would very much like to see it that way, to walk through its streets, possibly among its "citizens". oh man...
When suddenly, at midnight, you hear
an invisible procession going by
with exquisite music, voices,
don’t mourn your luck that’s failing now,
work gone wrong, your plans
all proving deceptive-don’t mourn them uselessly.
Like one long prepared, and graced with courage,
say goodbye to her, the Alexandria that is leaving.
Above all, don’t fool yourself, don’t say
it was a dream, your ears deceived you:
don’t degrade yourself with empty hopes like these.
As one long prepared, and graced with courage,
as is right for you who were given this kind of city,
go firmly to the window
and listen with deep emotion, but not
with whining, the pleas of a coward;
listen-your final delectation-to the voices,
to the exquisite music of that strange procession,
and say goodbye to her, to the Alexandria you are losing.
Constantinople also no longer had access to pozzolana.
how about the lombard invasion of italy in 568?
The mental images of these cities--Roma & Byzantium--are irresistible to all of us who love Antiquity, especially as seen through the strangely modern eyes of a Roman citizen. Their surrendering grandeur, however, is and infinitely mournful, probably to all of us. When I allow myself to imagine how much art and literature was lost, even destroyed, purposely and wantonly, oh my gosh, I just hold my aching head and heart.
They both were grander at their apices than Memphis or Babylon, certainly more exuberant than Athens or Persepolis ever were, with more gravity than Tenochtitlan of the 13th century, and more imperial ambition than Adis Ababa in the 11th century, or Kyoto of the 16th century. For reasons that derive ironically from some limits set on the sheer gratuity of state brutality after the 18th-century, Rome, then Constantinople, then Istanbul, were probably more fabulous and legendary in their prime eras than Venice, Vienna, Paris, London, New York, Buenos Aires, Beijing or Delhi have ever been, at least cosmetically.
I'm intrigued by cities whose archeology is still unfurling, like Chichen Itza's sprawling immensity and the Khmer Empire's somewhat parallel, exuberant flowering, but almost antipodal to each-other.
In an inversion of possibilities, it seems that, tragically, "Muslim- majority" religious states and "Communism-obligate" ideologic states have tied their futures to anachronistic programs with concrete buoys, and I used quotes above to suggest that Islam and Socialism, when humanely interpreted and reasonably applied, could absolutely be viable guides to tolerant societies and productive governments, in my opinion. Both are utterly amenable to democracy. But that will never happen when one man is allowed to play autocrat, for even one decision, one election, as proven by the bruised civil structure and broken citizens' societies now flailing under Bashar al Assad, Kim Jung Un, Vladimir Putin, Recip Tayyip Erdogan and Alexander Lukashenko.
As Geoffrey Firmin says in "Under the Volcano," by Malcolm Lowry, "It's too late in the world for flags." And I agree with that idea as proposed two centuries earlier by Immanuel Kant and still urgently worth deliberation as national borders, hatred for differences and an ugly taste for violence has come knocking on the door of a dyspeptic, derelict world.
If, however, from the fresh springs of young minds and open hearts more intriguing measures of urban vigor or even an hegemony possessed of integrity, with a humanist ethos, (c'mon, pretend with me for a second) are applied, like cultural and creative liberties, intellectual ferment, depth of support for innovation, for ethical missions and boundaries, younger and older leadership collaboration, the generous embrace of immigrants, early but more thoughtful adoption of novel ideas and technologies, and the cultivation of long-term projects with extremely delayed rewards--reaped only over generations, even, then we could be anticipating successful civilizations not seen on Earth anywhere, anytime, before.
We would maybe require ourselves to shift our notions of geographic scale, our emphasis on patriotic, religious nationalism vs ecumenical, secular internationalism, and socio-political power vs economic-military power. But if successful, then the most compelling, popular cities of the next 100 years could be Montreal, Dublin, Berlin, Cape Town, San Francisco, Cuernavaca, Tunis, Montevideo, Aukland, Sydney, Barcelona, Prague, Nairobi, Tel Aviv, Seoul, and the storied Cradle of Enlightenment, just north of the Wall that Hadrian Built: Edinburgh!
And that's a grand idea to me.
Love the story. Must be hard to dig up the sources of around that age; people probably had better things to do. I kind of doubt the citizens had the time, knowledge and resources in enough abundance to perform the repairs and maintenance... after all the big city had way, way more human resources (populace). Perhaps a dive into documents and other written sources about the time period would be interesting.
fascinating how you look at it during the times of "paganism" looking for virtue and strength from the gods like Jupiter and Zeus, on the other hand, looking for salvation with the cross in Christ, it's just fascinating to see the two angles and the differences in and the people.
I always wondered why ancient buildings (except for churches) were never restored under more favourable conditions. Thanks for the answer!
Ah Constantinopolis, the proverbial Second Rome. If only you had survived as Old Rome had....
Gracias Amici y Bien Imvali
This is Roman history.
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link to Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition.
I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Arguably the Roman empire in the west continued under various magister militvms until the Ivstitinianvs reunification again.
476 to 535 did not have that much nominal or de facto difference as earlier in the 5th century I always felt
This is during the byzantine dark ages.
Around the 9th century, a revival began, but he as the neopagan larper, that he is, won't admit this. Worse, he will even say, that 6th century Rome was more prosperous than 11th century Constantinople.
Just as Americans are becoming estranged even hostile to their own past.
Your videos are wonderful and very informative, please keep it up! Late antiquity is a really fascinating period of history
Thank you so much, amicus, for your kind words. I am extremely happy to read that other people are as fascinated as me about urban history of late antique cities :)
This has become one of my favorite TH-cam channels! Fascinating history and GREAT work in depicting what otherwise has been a glossed over and simplistic depiction of what Ancient and Medieval Roman civilization was like. Hopefully, in the near future, there will be movies made with this type of sourced materials to give future generations a more realistic impression of the Late Roman (both West and East) Empires.....I salute you on this great work!!! 😉👍🙏
Thanks a lot Amicus, I am really happy to read that there are other people as fascinated as I am about the urban history of Constantinople or Rome. Yes, this is unfortunately an aspect of history that is very often oversimplified, and indeed it is difficult to find good source material. I put two very good books into the description, that delve into this topic. Best regards, Sebastian.
I see similarities with Rome and Constantinople to what's happening in America today.
Wow i always thought that Constantinople was in pristine condition until 1204.. yeat it was already partially in ruins, and had been in constant decline from late antiquity. Everything is impermanent
Hiç türkçe bir yorum görmemek ne kadar üzücü. Video için çok teşekkürler emeğine sağlık
Again another excellent Video keep it up!!!
Why did the Hercules of Lyssippos survived during the iconoclasm against pagan heritage of this period?
Thanks, surprised about the decline, also in saxon Britain People wouldnt enter the towns as they though they were inhabited by ghosts.
Bc his theory relies on 1 source, that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition.
I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Great video!
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link of Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition.
I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Somewhere between 471 and 533, Rome fell, at least in the West. What's the big deal? Why can't pod-casters accept that?
Constantinople was the centre an extremely resilient empire, even a "stubborn" one if you will - unfortunately, the many setbacks of the 7th century never let her reach the magnificence Rome achieved.
That doesn't mean it didn't have its greatness even as a Christian city - the permanence of the imperial power and the heritage of classical antiquity saved it from a total collapse - and I dare say that even in 1453, the sheer size of its abandoned fora and decrepit columns still amazed allies and enemies alike...
It's actually more magnificent now if you travel there
My man, I love your channel. Late Roman, and generally anything eastern Roman, is not something I studied. I have to ask you though. I’m guessing you have a degree, how did you make it through studying this? I am equal parts fascinated and depressed the more I learn. I don’t know that I could have gotten my degree in this. At least with your videos, I can take time away. To get the degree you immerse yourself in it. It just makes me sad.
Great video
It wasn't the Arabs or the Persians. It was the climate, the "Vandal Solar Minimum." You should read "Climate Change during and after the Roman Empire" by Michael McCormick.
You’re channel is very underrated
This topic is really interesting. Thanks for the video.
Price Vladimir good movie
The city was degrading, yes, but actually the ottomans, who were fascinated by the roman monuments, took great care of the byzantine herritge after taking the city, restoring some and building a new, thus bringing a new splendor back to the city
Wild, primitive nomads conquered Christian Byzantium, this was and is a tragedy.
look whos talking a slav still primitive to this very day
If you watch the 1453 documentary "The Rise of Empires: Ottoman", Constantinople looks pretty much ruined like how it was supposed to look like.
By 1400, Constantinople, sadly, was a shell of its former self. Large parts of the city were abandoned.
@@ericponce8740 but certainly not 600 years before. The guy has a clear anti-Christian agenda. He tries to make 500 AD Rome more prosperous than 1000 AD Constantinople.
Greeks left before 1453. The Genovese gave the city. You forget this. It wasn't Grecoturkish war exactly...
by the 8th century the empire was still pretty much in the shitter, althought the greatest constantinople was, was probably during the times of Basil II, or the Peak of Komnenian Rule
This is the only site that I have ever made comments on. And all of it is positive. I had figured that after the Arab conquests in the 7th and 8th centuries what we would have recognized is holdovers Rome chariot races, public baths Etc were too expensive. But I didn't know it was so desolate I'm looking forward to seeing what it was like under Basil Ii.... I have read contemporary commentaries from the 10th and 11th centuries and they're all enthusiastic(except of course Liudiprand of Cremona)... including the Fourth Crusaders. The tons of spoils have made their way through Europe after 1204 a proof that there was quite a lot of richness and prosperity.. but that's an interesting point that this result concentrated on the churches and perhaps the palace. I'm a 70-year-old plumber in New York City and not getting a lot of work lately when I do I will definitely contribute the cash you need to keep going on. This is a long text I know but I want to say I learned how to read Because of Byzantium I couldn't read until the 5th grade in public school which is about 10 years old.. when I found out about the existence of Byzantium, in one year I learned enough to read the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.. and a red ever since about it but the information gets stale and you revive it and make it alive and interesting again and I actually hear things that I didn't know
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link to Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition.
I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
Chariot races were held even as late as the 12th century.
@@Michael_the_Drunkard Show your source and point specifically to where he fell.
Curious why medieval writers still lauded Constantinople as a wondrous and beautiful city
@Wanda Olegovna Maksimova thanks for the credit
The end of the video is a great description of the fate of the Czech ,,communist industry''.
Νo matter how they slice it and mince it and dice it ..they would not be able to convince us ..we would had seen Ottomans in Konstantinople......during that era ofcourse.
Zeus akhbar everybody.
Thank you again for all this great videos you make. I think that the lost of Egypt is the major reason for the city population decline, because many people use to live there just because the government free bread supply. And when this was over only the people who produced something was able to afford to live there
A cultural tragedy, unavoidable...
Fantastic!!!
Können wir uns denn mittlerweolie schon wieder selbst verteidigen? Nein? Na dann. .
Your precise elocution and the most unusual voice are not merely pleasant but seductive to the ear, in a manly way and tone however. I also detect a humility that is innate and not at all feigned. That rare, refreshing character asset in media contrasts greatly with the bombastic tirades of many other video "influencers" who usually affect a repugnant, arrogant BBC or faux Cambridge or Oxford accent when addressing the ignorant hoi polloi--we mindless, uncultivated, unwashed, common thralls wallowing with the swine in the gutters of civilization, in other words. I do hope you are not AI. What a pity that would be!
This is so eye opening to me!!! I guess the conquest by the turkish in 1453 may not have been so difficult as portrait in other sources.
Actually, thanks to the Turks the city was much revamped and embellished.
@@vHumboldt77 no, it wasn't. Much of the city was destroyed to make it look more like Baghdad. Ewww
Fascinating!
I was waiting for this video. Well done and very informative for a perspective of history you can't find anywhere else! 👍
All we got as a source of medieval "decline" is an amazon link to the book, no direct citations! But like in every video of him, there are baseless assumption how Christianity is at fault for this.
“superstitions”. Nice one
Thanks for your nice words Antonio :) And I am so glad that you liked the video!
@@Maiorianus_Sebastian sounds alot more like sarcasm, if I am not mistaken.
tesekkurlerrrrrr!!!!
Thanks so much for watching the video again Serdar :)
Comment for the algorithm
Bro you're making me depressed 😭
His theory relies on 1 source (an amazon link of Cyril Mango's book), that he doesn't even directly cite and anti-Christian assumptions of superstition.
I am no longer taking him seriously after he blatantly lied about the circumstances of Hypatia's death.
You have confused me .
Sebastian, I really LOVE the passion that you put in these videos (i.e. you make the viewer enjoy all the beauty that you enjoy and shed a tear for all that you also shed a tear on when watching the slow decay of that beautiful world) and in teaching on that enthalling period of Western History. Regards from Argentina, a country that also derives its name from the Latin "Argentum"🙂