Constantinople.. city which is so perfectly fortified that it doesn't matter how large your army is. Ottomans almost 800 years later took it just because of cannons and even with them they almost failed to take it and at least two times during that siege they wanted to withdraw. This city is legendary.
Ottomans tried to capture Constantinople many times, the last attempt was successful not only because of the greatest canons ever seen in the world but also the military genius Mehmet the second who made the ships walk on land. A legendary city needs a legendary conquerer. That man had plans to capture rome too, unfortunately he did not live long enough.
@@kasadam85 ottomans also has good opportunity to attack rome, but to busy fighting with vlad and balkan bois, they even take one of the roman city, but no future reincforcement drove them back
Lmfao it took the Turks 500 years to conquer Constantinople after constant failures. Internal strife and the 4th Crusade is what ultimately led to the Fall of Constantinople
birol muhlandiz - It’s called a Siege goof it’s strategic. Let’s not forget it took Turks 500 YRS to conquer Constantinople and they FAILED TWICE. Even during the battle the Ottomans lost many. The Byzantines died gloriously in Battle in one of the most famous Last Stands in History after existing for 2000 years, the longest lasting empire in history. Turkey will never have a legacy like Romans ever.
The strategy of Ottomans, on the other hand, should be greatly appreciated: Instead of conquering the city (which was extremely well protected by high wall and seawater) directly, Ottomans had purposely occupied most of the original territories of the Empire first and the Empire thus became much weaker before the final war in 1453. Since the Empire had lost control of most trade routes in Argean Sea either, the 'Romans' eventually lacked any financial and material supports outside the city during the time of siege. The victory of Ottomans was then just a matter of time.
As an Arab Muslim I’m pretty impressed with the will of the Byzantines from 717 to even Konstantinos XI iron balls in 1453. That dude refused to abandon Konstantinopili even when his citizens cried for him to. Byzantines were badasses since Anastasius.
Fun fact: The Conquest of Egypt, Palestine etc.by the Khalifs, began almost two years after Heraclius was done once and for all with the Persians. Pretty much what happened: Heraclius: Finally i can rest after decades of war with the Persians. Servant: My Emperor, the Arabic Peninsula has united and the Khalif is conquering what you just reconquered, after your war with Persia. Heraclius: CAN'T GET A BIG FAT BREAK.
@1 Sultan 1 Actually they've been pretty much fighting since forever, I've heard that the Arab Tribes were constantly fighting each other non-stop to the point where they had to create a tradition where for 1 month every year they have to stop temporarily which is crazy but the fighting intensified in the year 632 due to the Ridda Wars
Khan Tervel (change the stress, you are pronouncing it wrong) was given the title of caesar (second after the emperor), a lot of tribute and the Zagora district - the first Bulgarian lands south of the Balkan. You also fail to mention that his grandfather, khan Kubrat, was a Byzantine patrician and a secret Christian. Also - khan Tervel was the second ruler of nowadays Bulgaria and he was probably looking for legitimacy of the renewed Bulgarian state on the Balkans.
Ottomans & Crusaders:WHO THE HELL SAID IT COULDNT BE CONQUERED?
4 ปีที่แล้ว +95
Crusaders could not conquer it but they could plunder it. That Crusade was so dumb they just plundered Christians cities, they were traveling to the middle east for months then they said fuck it, close enough lets plunder these places and go home.
@ Welp,over the time the Crusade dumb and dumber,even many see that the only succesful Crusade (That reached the Objective) was the first Crusade,yet the Continuation Crusade Just Become More and more bad since the multiple army tradition and welp,the just want money instead of something not worth dying for
Bismarck 1941 after thousand years war in all fronts and rebellions we lost at least we fought with honor to the death till we got our revolution from the ottomans
@@dawid7224 they try but the second byzantine emperor from the civil war just call the turks to come and dont pay them. THATS HAPEN KIDS WHEN YOU DONT PAY TAXES
@@Bulgarian_corps like they took any notice that that was the direct reason of the downfall of many post iron age civilisations, of which they had knowledge through written records which, by the early middle ages was the common way of spreading any sort of wisdom or knowledge.
Historians says that the Persians and the Romans became so weak by fighting one another and due to civil wars so they became vulnerable to Arab invasion but historians seems to forget that the Arabs themselves emerged out of a devastating civil war
Iranians had a civil war and after that parthians which were warriors of the empire stopped supporting sasanians and became either autonomous or independent in their own lands.
Yes but is very important to note what came out of these internal conflicts and how they affected the empires. Byzantine And Persians took hits so big they never fully recovered. Arabs were able to overcome and unite as one.
Can you learn some inglish spelling? They never called themselves bizantines... Never They were Romans Only in the 1500 someone invented this terminology
@@enricomanno8434yes byzantine term is used to differaciate roman latin and Roman Hellenic. So that latin nationalist and kids knows the difference. Because today's generation kids only think Roman are latins
All things come to the end; including good things, e.g. the strongest empires, regardless of religion- The Caliphates & Ottomans also perished in time, in the same way..
Blaming the conquest of Sassanid Persia and Byzantine Holdings on their previous war alone really downplays their achievements and the military mind of Khalid ibn al Waleed, who, in my opinion, was up there with Hannibal, Alexander, Caesar and Napoleon. Although the war had exhausted both empires, Rome recovered quite well from it and was at full operational capacity. Both empires were able to muster unbelievable amounts of manpower and could also take advantage of a sustained military tradition. Compare that to the upstart caliphate which just came out of a devastating civil war and could only muster 50% of its manpower originating out of a patch of desert
@@LouisKing995 They were able to field the same number of troops as they did against the Persians and were beginning to expand their influence into Northern Hejaz. Never underestimate Roman mastery over military operations and logistics :D
Rex Galilae It is compete nonsense that the Romans returned to “full operational capacity”, they had totally lost control of the Balkans, with most of the tax revenue in the hands of Slavic settlers, the Anatolian territories had been ravaged by Persian raids and occupation and the empire was unable to raise enough coin to pay its veterans. The bulk of the troops used to fight the Arabs were shabbily trained new conscripts and the Romans lacked supply infrastructure to keep the army outfitted for any long period of time. Syria Armenia, Egypt and North Africa were all infra-structurally ravaged, the local garrisons were depleted, the tax revenues were basically none-existent and the empire didn’t have the time it needed to properly reinvest and stabilise those territories. We are talking about an almost 30 years war, the longest in all of a Roman/Persian history which at one point resulted in nearly all of Roman territory in the east lost before being retaken. It completely castrated the empires ability to fight a prolonged conflict abroad and to say the empire retuned to “full operational capacity” is utterly nonsensical and not backed by any historian of note. In the Persian side, the enjoyed home stability at all post-war, since Kadvah 2nd died mere months after assuming the throne, causing numerous civil wars and dynastic struggles. Complete nonsense.
An epic tale that took place during the siege of Constantinople: on the 15th of March 1453, five ships full of Cretan archers, under the leadership of Manousos Kallikratis (Μανούσος Καλλικράτης), left the port of Souda (Σούδα), province of Chania (Χανιά) in the island of Crete (Κρήτη), to assist their fellow Hellenes and their allies defending the legendary City of Constantinople. On their way to Constantinople, while sailing at the Sea of Marmara (Μαρμαρά), they got involved in a Naval Battle with numerous turkish ships, sinking many of them but also losing two out of total five ships. The remaining three arrived in Constantinople, where the archers were divided in two teams. The first team under Captain Pavlis (Καπετάν Παυλής) rushed to provide back up to the besieged gate of Saint Romanos (Πύλη του Αγίου Ρωμανού), where Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos was fighting. The second team defended at the three towers of Vasilios, Leon and Alexios (the names of the towers, πύργοι του Βασιλείου, Λέοντος και Αλεξίου). The Cretan archers in those towers (even though we are already in the era of cannons and the first gunpowder weapons, Cretan archers had been famous for their relative skill since antiquity), fought bravely and killed many Turks and their allies, that even after the Queen of Cities fell, they still kept fighting, killing their enemies by the thousands. Shortly after, the Ottoman Sultan himself, admiring the spirit of those men, granted the glorious Cretans the right to flee the City unharmed. The Cretans, knowing the City was already lost, accepted, and they were allowed to return to their ships in their full combat gear and in a victorious parade they marched to their ships, where they embarked for Crete. On their way back, one ship was damaged and was forced to harbour in Mount Athos - Hagio Oros (Άγιο Όρος), where one of the Monks recorded this legendary mission. Commander Manousos Kallikratis descended from the region of Sfakia (Σφακιά) in Crete, the only place along with Agrafa (Άγραφα), Souli (Σουλι) and Mani (Μάνη), that never fell under Ottoman rule.
One of the most thrilling historical novels, regarding the history and the legacy of Constantinople is “The Dark Angel” (original title Johannes Angelos), of prominent Finnish writer, Mika Waltari. Truly epic.
Because Bulgarians and Khan Tervel, that's why. Every one knows about Charles Martel and the battle of Poitiers in 732. No one knows about Tervel and the battle for Constantinople 717-718. Poitiers is pale in comparison both in size and significance and historical outcome compared to the siege of Constantinople, but... Bulgarians and Byzantines postponed Muslim conquer of the Balkans with full seven centuries! That's a fact.
considering how high the production values of these videos usually are, it is really jarring and just plain weird, that they repeatedly keep making such an amateurish mistake like mispronouncing names and places ...
@Shadow King who hurt you kid. Never said anything about them calling themselves the Byzantine, they saw themselves as the Eastern part Roman Empire. Plus I know what the correct pronunciation is and I can assure you Con-stand-ti-niople isnt the right one.
roman and persian empires: "nooooooo you Muslims from the desert can't defeat us both at the same time. we're super powers but you're just few dudes from the desert. noooooooooooooooo" Rashidun caliphate: I'm about the end both of your careers
@Ivan no I meant that, during the Byzantine reign small Turkish tribes which had migrated from Central Asia, came and started to cause friction between the population in Asia Minor, those small Turkish tribes them started demanding more autonomy, and this caused even more unrest. It went as far as to collapse the Byzantine Empire and create the Ottoman Sultanate.
@@Spartan-1821 can you learn history first mate? You need to check facts from opposing books and learn to make the logical choice. History is not one book it’s many books.
@@Knowledgia great video but I must correct the detail of the prophecy it wasn't said that the conqueror would have a prophet name but it was said by the prophet mohamed during a siege in his 3rd confrontation with quraish his former clan in witch he stated most of the land that would be conquered that by muslims and when talking about constantinople he said *blessed is the emir conquering constantinople and blessed his army* that's why it was prestigious to the ottomans witch capitalizes on that
lucie PR when you spend your life savings to fight the infidels but after a breach of an agreement you decide to burn down the one city that had prevented Islamic conquest of europe for 600 years because at the end of the day 💰 was more important to them than any holy duty
They had it coming after all, eastern Romans constantly messed with Europe and then later when they were in trouble they call for help they totally deserved it
the Achaean Constantinople itself is a beautiful city, the reason I don’t really support it is the way Constantinople did politics.They made all the people around them fight each other constantly starting wars. If you ever wonder look how many times Constantinople was besieged during Ottoman Empire and look how many times it was besieged and by who during eastern Rome. It wasn’t a stable place and a had new emperor every few years. One example when emperor someone called to pope for help and they got the crusade going, the emperor tells the crusaders after everything to give all the lands back to emperor and leave and that was pretty much for free just you know a holy deed for Gods grace and repentance of sins, and later you can visit holy land for free ! no joke those emperors were too arrogant.
TL;DW: The Theodosian Walls were too strong to breach at the time, Greek Fire gave the Roman Empire the advantage at sea, and the Bulgarians finished off the Muslims invading force.
Before starting my Byzantine era comic book i did some research on the history of the Eastern Romans. I saw the surviving land walls of the city and felt that this must have been a formidable sight for any potential attacker.
For those interested, some selected works of one (among many) prestigious and credible Historian, Warren Treadgold, regarding the Greek Byzantine Empire, include; “A Concise History of Byzantium”, “A History of the Byzantine State and Society”, “Byzantium and Its Army, 284-1081”, “The Byzantine Revival, 780-842”.
The whole age of exploration was brought about because of the fall of Constantinople. No trade route to the China or India meant they had to sail their, which , of course, prompted others to explore across the Atlantic.
Constantinople was conquered with gunpowder and turned into Istanbul...and everyone in Europe was too busy fighting themselves and did nothing...shameful.
@@KJ-is5ug well,the Abbasid was full of corruption at the time Mongols attacked the city. The Mongols even need to siege the city several times before it fall.
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok if you see the map of the Abbasid when the Mongols attack it was at its worse conditions. Heck,even I was surprised that they hold against the Mongols
The reason the Arabs weren't able to brake the Bulgar siege was probadly that they lacked the quantity of cavalry needed. Han Tervel had exceptionally sized cavalry for the Balkans. East Rome was very often outpaced and therefore beaten by the factor.
Lol the Bulgars did basically nothing, The Byzantine Empire dominated the sea and crushed the Arabs in the Naval encounters also repelled every attack on the walls and won a bunch of minor land battles, they also cut off the Arabs supply lines, the Arabs at the end were basically drained from casualties due to famine and disease, that's when Trevel who was nowhere to be seen came in order to gain some spoils lol
@Polemarch And that means that the Ottoman cannons are property of Hungary? The Ottomans provide the raw materials, the funds and the necessary manpower to man the cannons, but somehow the cannons are property of the hungarians. Its like saying that the AC induction motor is a Serbian invention, despite the fact it was invented and patented in the US. Weird.
... no. He didn't underestimate them at all because underestimating is to do with numbers. The term would be undervaluing and no he didn't. Infact he says that the Bulgars did help and harassed the Arabs both during and after the siege.
An interesting video and the role of the Bulgarians, as always, is belittled and a great victory for Byzantium. Bulgaria has more than once helped Byzantium against invasions from Asia. As it happens now, by the way. I wonder why the great Byzantines needed help. And why did they later betray the Bulgarians so that the Turks could come and enslave us for 500 years. Not to mention that they hired them as an auxiliary army and sent them to Bulgaria. Why couldn't Constantinople be conquered?
@@Closed0254 Bulgarian history is nearly 2000 years old. There are a number of factors that have helped preserve this genus. Mostly the knowledge that has been preserved in the family and the numerous educators who have acted all the time and have recorded and preserved Bulgarian history from ancient times. Preservation of ancestral consciousness and traditions. What you are saying is untenable, in view of the preservation of a number of other nations in similar circumstances. Jews, for example. Did you know that the first factory in the Ottoman Empire was built by a Bulgarian. And for the fact that Mustafa IV is half Bulgarian, because his mother was abducted, like millions of Bulgarians at that time as a concubine. That no one had the right to land or blood tax and that a Turk could have killed a Bulgarian on any occasion without any consequences, kidnapped his wife, children, etc. My great-grandfather was the only surviving child from a village devastated by the Turks during the Ilinden-Preobrazhensk Uprising of 1903. 20th century, and what about the dark times during which Asian ignorance and madrasa education prevailed, where only education was taught the Koran. There are still many Bulgarians in Bulgaria who are Muslims, called Pomaks, people who forcibly changed their faith several centuries ago under threat of death and total destruction, but kept the traditions. Please educate yourself more before starting a discussion. Where the Bulgarian foot set foot, it became a state and cities were built. Bulgarians do not say that, it is recorded more than foreign sources, check. For Vologda Bulgaria and for the earlier countries. By the way, the Wallachian Bulgarians saved Europe from the Mongols in the 13th century, until they were also destroyed. The only army from which they have an undisputed defeat is the battle of the rams, by the Bulgarians. And the battle is so called because the surviving Mongol wars were exchanged for rams. Etc.
And yes, the Bulgarians made precisely states in which other nations joined voluntarily, because they were just, and not by brute force fire and sword. A just people about which many people and nations have written, such as the Hungarians. Because they knew how to build cities and they knew the laws. And they did not destroy cities and countries to plunder them.
☠️ Belittled??? You should be grateful that he even mentioned them, they basically did nothing, their role was no better than Richard The Lionheart's role in the battle of Acre which he also did almost nothing in, "oH tHe aRaBs aRe aLrEaDy dEfeAtEd, LeT's aTtAcK tHeiR cAmP tO gAtHeR sOmE sPoiLs" the Byzantine source that greatly exaggerates the numbers of the Arabs claimed they killed 22,000 which in turn means the actual number wasn't any more than like a couple thousand maximum
-This dude: The sassanids and Buzantines lost because they were worn out by war. Sassanids and Buzantines: Both had a numerical advantage and were way a head technologically in every single battle.
@@viriato6525 War isn't the same as war. There are multiple important factors: - Long wars lead to a high war weariness and therefore low morale. Also infrastructural expenses often are reduced which for example leads to weaker defensive structures or worse roads which reduces the time you need to mobilize your forces - Even wars lead to a high death toll because progress of either side is very slow - Land losses often lead to plundering an raiding which damages the economy - War preparation is important. If you run out of money, man power or other things you have to take loans and repay them Of course the victory of the Arabs is also due to good leadership and very motivated forces because of their religion. It's safe to say though that the Byzantine Empire would have been better prepared if they just had fought a minor conflict before the invasion instead of a long ans brutal war.
The Bulgars made their attack that brutal so the muslims did not enter the Balkans for almost 600 years. Actually some ancient cristian historians called Khan Tervel the Savior of Europe, because the european tribes at that time were weak and they would be easily conquered by the muslims. They ruled Iberian peninsula for few centuries and that pagan ruler made sure that wont happened in the Balkans. After the arabs were gone the Emperor gave Tervel the title Ceaser which was never given before to a pagan ruler. Very interesting video, Knowledgia!
Everyone in Bulgaria will laugh at you if you say this. Bulgarians are indo europeans. The turkic tribe theory is long gone and absoletely fake. Get some update from the last 50 years. They dont even look the same. Idiot.
@@islamisthetruth3402 Lol who much wrong information in one comment. You probably talk about the 15% turkish minority. Other 85% are pure indo european nation with nothing in common the turks. Bulgarian have only come cultural similarities with the turkic, NOT turkish tribes. The title Ceaser(and a red cape) was given to Tervel from the Byzantine emperor after his victory against arabs. This is from their chronologists Go read some history science journal, that turkic theory was long ago debunked. Ps. There wasnt one slavic invassion in Bulgaria ever hahah
@@islamisthetruth3402 So you want to tell me Indo-european genes dont exist? Thats hilarious. IE is the genetic family. When the science developed more and more it was easy to see the genetic difference between the nations. Every genetic study shows proto Bulgars are indo europeans not turkic. As i said bulgars had similarities with turkic culture previously. Like the title of the ruler and the religion, even though since Khan Kubrat , Tervel grandfather the ruler was baptized. But they dont have anything else in common with other turkic tribes
Who knew that Fate had intended to gift the jewel of human civilization to a group of people, who at the time when this battle was fought, were probably humble shepherds in the great grasslands of Asia.
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok pff, those were nothing compared to the city of the world's desire. Trade from two continents went through it It was near two rich seas, it was heavily invested in by not only Rome, but the Venetians and the Genoese. And with walls that would put any other to shame
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok by the time the ming came about constantinople had witnessed a plague and a sacking. Yet it didn't stop being rich, that's a testament to it's grandeur. If you went before 1204 A.D and compared Beijing to Constantinople Beijing would seem like a backwater compared to it.
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok Compare an empire that changed the history of the world via it's military campaigns and culture, like Rome To an isolationist empire that just sat there collapsing every time the eunuchs didn't like the emperor, such as China. Beijing trade-wise wasn't in an important location (due to the americas now it is) Meanwhile Constantinople was at about the center of the old world till the americas were discovered and it shifted to London and perhaps Seville or Lisbon Point being While both being rich Constantinople was A) Richer B) More important And I'd reckon Istanbul today is still just as important as Beijing is Also how the hell do you calculate the GDP of something a milennia ago? I'd imagine you can provide me with a source? Or perhaps tell me how many teapots the Yuan produced in May 1257?
The Byzantine Empire had the following enemies: the Bulgarians, the Arabs, the Persians, the Turks, the Crusaders, the Franks, the Venetians, and even the Russians and the Vikings ... And it had civil strife. No one can even build so high walls even today to keep them all out
The Byzantines don't get anywhere near the amount of respect that they deserve. They survived for over a millenia while being surrounded on all sides by foreign powers that would enjoy nothing more than carving them up. Even at their weakest after the rise of the Ottomans, it still took the ottomans many sieges before they finally captured their capital. The sheer length of time they lasted whilst under pressure from the north, south, east, and west really attests to how great they were.
History is writen by the winners, and diminishing the importance of the real roman empire, now just its eastern part, was important for western Europe early on, for reasons of propaganda, since they renamed their empire the "holly roman empire", to a timepoint where the roman empire already existed in Konstantinople... It´s cheap, but western Europeans were so uneducated to this timepoint, that they´d believe everything. And a willing population backing you is key, look at the US-wars...
@igor lopes Nope, that happened hundreds of years after the western roman empire extincted. and he wasn´t given the title of the western roman emperor, but of the "holy" roman emperor, thereby creating a new trademark, that most of the population, of course, didn´t notice at all, so thinking that this were the continuation of the roman empire, since the population were very uneducated, and couldn´t know that the eastern part of the empire still existed. also charlemagne and his population never had culturally something in common with the romans, except kicking each others ass during wartimes, his people were concidered barbarians before the establishment of the holy roman empire, and afterwards too (by the people who used to be in the western roman empire some hundereds of years ago, when it still existed)...
@igor lopes 1st: the eastern roman emperor doesn´t have to "conquer" the western roman empire, cause he is the legitimate failsage emperor of the whole roman empire, in case the western emperor dies or the west gets conquered by barbarians. of cource the eastern emperor didn´t have the money and army to fullfill his task. 2nd: the greeks call themselves till today "Romans", since being roman is a cultural thing, and not a racial one. Grece was the 1 place that the romans conquered after italy, and stayed roman for 1100years after the western half has extincted. the question isn´t if the greeks were romans (being 1600 years long romans, till 1453), but much more if the italians were romans compared to the greeks, since the italians being only 550 years long Romans (200BC-350AC)...
@igor lopes cause they simply had 1 administration shared over 2 emperors, cause for 1 single emperor it would be too difficult to manage the whole empire!!! imagine it like a company with 2 partners owning it! are you simply a troll, or trully clueless?
That is deeply inaccurate depiction of the Byzantine map. At that point of time, NONE of the Balkans mainland was controlled by the Empire, apart from most of important coastal cities. The peninsula was wholly settled by slavic tribes.
@Plamen Stoev yeah dude, thats how history works... but trying to expalin it to fanbois of either side is just another level of optimism, so I admire you for that
7:57 the greek fire...hmmm , so , from here came George RR Martin inspiration...you know...Game of Thrones ...King's Landing (Constantinople inspiration)
Phrasal - It took the Turks over 500 years to conquer Constantinople after constant failure😂 Internal strife and the 4th Crusade is what ultimately led to the Fall of Constantinople
Khan Krum drinking from the emperor's skull most probably was a legend to satanize us, but we are proud of the khan because that was one of the major victories for us in the Middle Ages. It was a matter of life or death for the newly-formed Bulgarian kingdom.
The contemporary Bulgarian nation was made of 3 main ethnicities -Slavs, Thracians and proto-Bulgarians. The proto-Bulgarians were according to some historians Turks. Another say that they were Iranian tribes influenced by the Turks. The first Bulgarian state was founded with an agreement between the proto-Bulgarians, who became the ruling elite, and 7 Slavic tribes. Later on, the proto-Bulgarians were assimilated by the Slavs because they were the smallest from the 3 ethnicities. This process speeded up with the imposing of the Christianity and the Cyrillic Alphabet in the country.6
@@Lennon1923 Yep it's Istanbul since 1923, officially declared by Kemal and the Republic of Turkey. Up until then the official name was Konstantiniye. However the name Istanbul/Stambol was also used deriving from the Greek Es tin/tan polin, literally meaning to the city. A great city full of different histories and names :)
Just to tell you Arabs weren't a grait civilisation so when they conquered and craited a big empire they relied on the persien Just like how roman take a lot of culture from greek the same can be said between arabs and persian so yah stop your lies
Pangea Productions There would be no Baghdad hence no algebra , no Algorithm (no computers or phones) , No chemistry so many things were invented at Baghdad and Córdoba from the Islamic civilization.
@Battle of Empires Ah yes, you're absolutely right. I now realised that I read the original point wrong xD I read it as "Europe wasn't even European". Thank you for the comment
When you conquered it , it was a ghost city , almost abandonded with fewer inhabitants and only 10000 defenders , with 1000 year old walls badly maintained and you had gunpowder weapons and cannon. The Arabs were not so lucky. They tried 2 times in a golden era of byzantium a wealthy powerful empire with unlimited manpower, Arabs had 700 year older siege technology than the ottomans and the walls were the pick of wall technology of the era. Also Byzantines had technology superiority at sea , and crashed the arab fleet with flamethrowers. So no comparison. Conquering constantinople was not something impresive. Mohamed had more impresive and epic victories and much more difficult sieges like the one in Chalkida (named Negro Ponte then).
@@tengrieli1673 He is right. You Turks are always so proud of conquering Constantinopel, but Constantinopel was long time broke when you guys came. They had only 5000 Greek Defenders and 2000 Italians.... and the Ottomans were like 150.000+ so.... come down big boy !!!!
@@ΛεωνάνδροςΠεργαμενός I honestly dont know why this kind of conversation is still relevant. 500 years passed and the demographics changed by magnitudes. But I still hear of greeks that wish to have the city back which is ridiculous compared to the pride of conquering a city that lasted ceinturies.
Well prepared army but still unable to siege Constantinople because the prophecy was told for someone other than arabs. the Turks captured the city in 1453.
Both Leo III that was a formidable general and the Bulgarians are greatly underrated in saving Europe from Muslims at this crucial moment. Whereas Habsburgs took credit for defeating the Ottomans.
The walls of Constantinople are represented incorrectly. There were 4 walls, not 2. The outer Theodosian wall was a triple wall with a water filled moat. The inner wall shown on the map is the old Constantinian wall that was partly in ruin by this time. It is the remains of the original Constantinople wall when Constantine the Great had it built. The Theodosian Walls were added after the First Sack of Rome in 410, most likely during the reign of Theodosius II.
For real do some sound check before doing the videos man. I mean who the hell told you that that the eastern Roman empire is pronounced Byezantane and one of the most famous cities in the world being pronounced Constaninople? Did you even read the name of the city?
@the Achaean thanks for explaining, sounds logical. So basically the Arabs were open from the European side, it would've been better for them if they (like the Ottomans) would first secure a big bunch of Europe before starting to attack the city.
The Zenata Chronicles - Lmfao yea after a thousands years of constant failure. It was internal strife and the 4th Crusade that ultimately led to the fall
Thanks for vividly proving how the Byzantines saved Western civilization by breaking the power of the Umayyad caliphate, leading to its fall. This siege made the much-celebrated Battle of Tours in France around the same time look like a food fight. Leo was a far greater fighter than Charles Martel!
@Alex Mercer Vulgarity always accompanies ignorance. The crushing defeat in 717 kept the Muslims OUT of Eastern Europe for more than 6 centuries. They expanded "westward", yes, in North Africa and then in Spain, before being stopped in the West. Look it up. And behave.
Who the fuck of the Muslim caliphs cared about France? My love only, the governor of Andalusia has been attacked? If the caliph came to you from Damascus, he would end at least you history. Remember that the caliph’s ruling at that time was from China to France. And the ruler of Byzantine empire was paying the jazyah.
@@islamisthetruth3402en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_civilization look at the section "genetic studies". Also, about the etimology of "europe", you're referring to the daughter of king Agenore...a greek mitology...
@@islamisthetruth3402to be fair, "farmers that lived in Western Anatolia and the Aegean Sea"...anyway...what define the culture of a nation isn't its Y chromosome origin, but what that population achieved in terms of art, science and so on...Greek and europe culture does exist, from the moment european and greeks started to develope their own language, social organization and so on...So one of the precedent comments was correct: middle-east and egypt in 500/600 d.C. was under strong ellenistic influence. Also, sorry but saying that "Europe doesn't exist" just because of the etimology of the word is just stupid.
3:54 boy he was wrong. Conqueror of constantinople would not have the name of 'a' prophet he would have the name of 'the' prophet or prophet Muhammad(saw). Mehmed the conqueror conquered constantinople or turkish of Mohammad the conqueror.
The numbers are wrong, Arabs couldn't gain more than 25 thousand in battle of yarmuk how could they gain more than 180 thousand to siege Constantinople while there army units were spread from China and central Asia to Spain and France, also riddah war between the Arabs also exhausted them, even the war between Sassanid and byzantine was to exhausted for both of them their armies were much higher in number and quality when Muslims invade Iraq and Syria
Asmoh Most Muslim sources documenting the spread of the caliphate also come decades and centuries later. It’s not a “EuropeAn” thing, ancient sources always exaggerated. Be you white or brown. The Chinese are perhaps the worst for it, talking about multiple armies hundreds of thousands strong, millions of horses etc. All ancient sources hugely exaggerate.!
@Alex Mercer Ottomans didn't force its citizens to convert or speak Turkish, everyone had their own culture religion language after hundreds of years of Ottoman rule. When Roman became Christian they forced everyone to be Christians. Few years under the British empire French empire Spanish empire everyone lost everything.
Constantinople.. city which is so perfectly fortified that it doesn't matter how large your army is. Ottomans almost 800 years later took it just because of cannons and even with them they almost failed to take it and at least two times during that siege they wanted to withdraw. This city is legendary.
yeah any city with that wall is unbreakable until canon arrives
Ottoman's few times nearly got it. They were just consistently unlucky
Ottomans tried to capture Constantinople many times, the last attempt was successful not only because of the greatest canons ever seen in the world but also the military genius Mehmet the second who made the ships walk on land. A legendary city needs a legendary conquerer. That man had plans to capture rome too, unfortunately he did not live long enough.
@@kasadam85 ottomans also has good opportunity to attack rome, but to busy fighting with vlad and balkan bois, they even take one of the roman city, but no future reincforcement drove them back
@@anwardaud Otranto
Ah, yes. The great city of Consininople. Capital of the Bi-zan-tain empire.
Bay Zan Tain
Constani-nople (no "t") of By-zen-tain Empire.
@mu al no
It most likely because he’s trying to put on a fake British accent lol
@mu al More like Miklagård ;P
Ottomans at the wall: So anyway I started blasting
the first crusade: so anyway I started plundering
Lmfao it took the Turks 500 years to conquer Constantinople after constant failures. Internal strife and the 4th Crusade is what ultimately led to the Fall of Constantinople
Augustus C. I think it was the Canons yeah yeah I’m pretty sure it was the canons
Yes we attack walls and dont hide behind it like your grand parents
birol muhlandiz - It’s called a Siege goof it’s strategic. Let’s not forget it took Turks 500 YRS to conquer Constantinople and they FAILED TWICE. Even during the battle the Ottomans lost many.
The Byzantines died gloriously in Battle in one of the most famous Last Stands in History after existing for 2000 years, the longest lasting empire in history. Turkey will never have a legacy like Romans ever.
Don't bother arguing about how to pronounce "Byzantine". The right answer is "Roman"
Yes, exactly !
The strategy of Ottomans, on the other hand, should be greatly appreciated:
Instead of conquering the city (which was extremely well protected by high wall and seawater) directly, Ottomans had purposely occupied most of the original territories of the Empire first and the Empire thus became much weaker before the final war in 1453. Since the Empire had lost control of most trade routes in Argean Sea either, the 'Romans' eventually lacked any financial and material supports outside the city during the time of siege. The victory of Ottomans was then just a matter of time.
Based
Lol 😆
@@alexsiu8006 well I mean, they also used cannons something which the Umayyad’s didn’t.
As an Arab Muslim I’m pretty impressed with the will of the Byzantines from 717 to even Konstantinos XI iron balls in 1453. That dude refused to abandon Konstantinopili even when his citizens cried for him to. Byzantines were badasses since Anastasius.
Battle of Achelous 917
@@aleksk4151 Battle of Kleidion 1014
@@wolf5329 Battle of Pliska 811
@@aleksk4151battle of Marcellae
@@TheIronChancellor battle of Versinikia
Fun fact: The Conquest of Egypt, Palestine etc.by the Khalifs, began almost two years after Heraclius was done once and for all with the Persians. Pretty much what happened:
Heraclius: Finally i can rest after decades of war with the Persians.
Servant: My Emperor, the Arabic Peninsula has united and the Khalif is conquering what you just reconquered, after your war with Persia.
Heraclius: CAN'T GET A BIG FAT BREAK.
thats probably what he thought of them
arabic peninsula
Fun fact. The Muslims fought for 30 years and directly afterwards conquered the Persians and Byzantines. Not taking any breaks unlike heraclius.
The ect.by send me in a Russian sight maybe traveling
@1 Sultan 1 Actually they've been pretty much fighting since forever, I've heard that the Arab Tribes were constantly fighting each other non-stop to the point where they had to create a tradition where for 1 month every year they have to stop temporarily which is crazy but the fighting intensified in the year 632 due to the Ridda Wars
Nobody:
Knowledgia: ByzanTAIN
🤮
The same thing with city and other words with T.
The new narrators have some really strange problems with pronunciation
~Banjo noises intensify~
ConstaNINople, SulEyman, PerGAmon, AbasSIDS, bruh...
nobody:
Absolutely nobody:
Knowledgia: BYE-zan-TANE EMPIRE
Constaninople
0:50
Bulgarian K'nate
But let's go easy on them. The video was FANTASTIC.
Nobody
Nobody
Nobody
Wow look I’m hilarious
WHY DID YOU HAVE TO TELL ME THIS?!?!?!
Constninple??
Khan Tervel (change the stress, you are pronouncing it wrong) was given the title of caesar (second after the emperor), a lot of tribute and the Zagora district - the first Bulgarian lands south of the Balkan. You also fail to mention that his grandfather, khan Kubrat, was a Byzantine patrician and a secret Christian. Also - khan Tervel was the second ruler of nowadays Bulgaria and he was probably looking for legitimacy of the renewed Bulgarian state on the Balkans.
Ottomans & Crusaders:WHO THE HELL SAID IT COULDNT BE CONQUERED?
Crusaders could not conquer it but they could plunder it. That Crusade was so dumb they just plundered Christians cities, they were traveling to the middle east for months then they said fuck it, close enough lets plunder these places and go home.
@ Welp,over the time the Crusade dumb and dumber,even many see that the only succesful Crusade (That reached the Objective) was the first Crusade,yet the Continuation Crusade Just Become More and more bad since the multiple army tradition and welp,the just want money instead of something not worth dying for
@Ulysses strange Dude its Just a MEME,dont be to quick to judge
@Ulysses strange No problem i forgive you
Bismarck 1941 after thousand years war in all fronts and rebellions we lost at least we fought with honor to the death till we got our revolution from the ottomans
Imagine sieging christian capital just to get dabed by cavalery
-this meme is made by polo-bulgar gang
yeah, looking at your history, you were never as great as us.
@@geoffjeff6016 which nation do you represent?
@@ivokantarski6220 sex country
And the winged bulgars arrived
probably not winged
😂 this guy Man, if only the same happened when the Turks came
@@dawid7224 they try but the second byzantine emperor from the civil war just call the turks to come and dont pay them. THATS HAPEN KIDS WHEN YOU DONT PAY TAXES
@@Bulgarian_corps like they took any notice that that was the direct reason of the downfall of many post iron age civilisations, of which they had knowledge through written records which, by the early middle ages was the common way of spreading any sort of wisdom or knowledge.
Coming by the counterside
Historians says that the Persians and the Romans became so weak by fighting one another and due to civil wars so they became vulnerable to Arab invasion but historians seems to forget that the Arabs themselves emerged out of a devastating civil war
Suleman Ahmad This is normal, they should find excuses for their ancestors, the important thing is not to say that they were defeated
More of a disunity, just like the mongols united and conquer the world
@@obamacare9139 No it was a civil war for 30 years for the Muslims. Many battles were fought.
Iranians had a civil war and after that parthians which were warriors of the empire stopped supporting sasanians and became either autonomous or independent in their own lands.
Yes but is very important to note what came out of these internal conflicts and how they affected the empires. Byzantine And Persians took hits so big they never fully recovered. Arabs were able to overcome and unite as one.
Ah yes, Constanidopple, glorious capital of the Byezentane Empire. Those were the days.
HAHAHHAHAHAH LOOOOOL
Hahhahahahaha
Can you learn some inglish spelling?
They never called themselves bizantines... Never
They were Romans
Only in the 1500 someone invented this terminology
@@enricomanno8434yes byzantine term is used to differaciate roman latin and Roman Hellenic. So that latin nationalist and kids knows the difference. Because today's generation kids only think Roman are latins
You can't just conquer the Roman Empire like that.
@Muhammad Haider Ibn Akhlaq
Exposed
@@blondequeen1779 Jesus died virgin. Plus Jesus is an important prophet in Islam.
@@blondequeen1779 When?
@@blondequeen1779 Calm down. You just united the Muslims and the Christians who can understand English against you.
RoMaN EmPiRe ? more like ReTarD empire , can't even decide who's the emperor while a phedo and his bois takes up their women , children and land
All things come to the end; including good things, e.g. the strongest empires, regardless of religion- The Caliphates & Ottomans also perished in time, in the same way..
Every empire has a start and an end
@@Knowledgia True, hard part is finding that start and end sometimes
@@Knowledgia when will usa empire die...
@selahattin kaşıkçı so never... too bad
@@lazarjovanovic4388 these albanians in balkans... the last country that set free without ever fight the turks... a shame of the peninsula...
Blaming the conquest of Sassanid Persia and Byzantine Holdings on their previous war alone really downplays their achievements and the military mind of Khalid ibn al Waleed, who, in my opinion, was up there with Hannibal, Alexander, Caesar and Napoleon.
Although the war had exhausted both empires, Rome recovered quite well from it and was at full operational capacity. Both empires were able to muster unbelievable amounts of manpower and could also take advantage of a sustained military tradition.
Compare that to the upstart caliphate which just came out of a devastating civil war and could only muster 50% of its manpower originating out of a patch of desert
Agreed. The arabs might have well been easily beaten back if not for khalid
@@hazzmati
Definitely.
Rex Galilae “Recovered to full operational capacity” that isn’t true lol.
@@LouisKing995
They were able to field the same number of troops as they did against the Persians and were beginning to expand their influence into Northern Hejaz. Never underestimate Roman mastery over military operations and logistics :D
Rex Galilae It is compete nonsense that the Romans returned to “full operational capacity”, they had totally lost control of the Balkans, with most of the tax revenue in the hands of Slavic settlers, the Anatolian territories had been ravaged by Persian raids and occupation and the empire was unable to raise enough coin to pay its veterans. The bulk of the troops used to fight the Arabs were shabbily trained new conscripts and the Romans lacked supply infrastructure to keep the army outfitted for any long period of time. Syria Armenia, Egypt and North Africa were all infra-structurally ravaged, the local garrisons were depleted, the tax revenues were basically none-existent and the empire didn’t have the time it needed to properly reinvest and stabilise those territories.
We are talking about an almost 30 years war, the longest in all of a Roman/Persian history which at one point resulted in nearly all of Roman territory in the east lost before being retaken. It completely castrated the empires ability to fight a prolonged conflict abroad and to say the empire retuned to “full operational capacity” is utterly nonsensical and not backed by any historian of note.
In the Persian side, the enjoyed home stability at all post-war, since Kadvah 2nd died mere months after assuming the throne, causing numerous civil wars and dynastic struggles.
Complete nonsense.
An epic tale that took place during the siege of Constantinople: on the 15th of March 1453, five ships full of Cretan archers, under the leadership of Manousos Kallikratis (Μανούσος Καλλικράτης), left the port of Souda (Σούδα), province of Chania (Χανιά) in the island of Crete (Κρήτη), to assist their fellow Hellenes and their allies defending the legendary City of Constantinople.
On their way to Constantinople, while sailing at the Sea of Marmara (Μαρμαρά), they got involved in a Naval Battle with numerous turkish ships, sinking many of them but also losing two out of total five ships. The remaining three arrived in Constantinople, where the archers were divided in two teams. The first team under Captain Pavlis (Καπετάν Παυλής) rushed to provide back up to the besieged gate of Saint Romanos (Πύλη του Αγίου Ρωμανού), where Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos was fighting. The second team defended at the three towers of Vasilios, Leon and Alexios (the names of the towers, πύργοι του Βασιλείου, Λέοντος και Αλεξίου).
The Cretan archers in those towers (even though we are already in the era of cannons and the first gunpowder weapons, Cretan archers had been famous for their relative skill since antiquity), fought bravely and killed many Turks and their allies, that even after the Queen of Cities fell, they still kept fighting, killing their enemies by the thousands.
Shortly after, the Ottoman Sultan himself, admiring the spirit of those men, granted the glorious Cretans the right to flee the City unharmed. The Cretans, knowing the City was already lost, accepted, and they were allowed to return to their ships in their full combat gear and in a victorious parade they marched to their ships, where they embarked for Crete. On their way back, one ship was damaged and was forced to harbour in Mount Athos - Hagio Oros (Άγιο Όρος), where one of the Monks recorded this legendary mission. Commander Manousos Kallikratis descended from the region of Sfakia (Σφακιά) in Crete, the only place along with Agrafa (Άγραφα), Souli (Σουλι) and Mani (Μάνη), that never fell under Ottoman rule.
If he says "bi-zan-tain" one more time, I am "goo--ing" to "de-clure" "ware" on him!
One of the most thrilling historical novels, regarding the history and the legacy of Constantinople is “The Dark Angel” (original title Johannes Angelos), of prominent Finnish writer, Mika Waltari.
Truly epic.
0:31 the empire was in a "constantine" fighting lol
ok sorry ima neck myself now
Wow. You just made me hate myself just for reading this comment.
constant infighting. lol
Because Bulgarians and Khan Tervel, that's why. Every one knows about Charles Martel and the battle of Poitiers in 732. No one knows about Tervel and the battle for Constantinople 717-718. Poitiers is pale in comparison both in size and significance and historical outcome compared to the siege of Constantinople, but... Bulgarians and Byzantines postponed Muslim conquer of the Balkans with full seven centuries! That's a fact.
considering how high the production values of these videos usually are, it is really jarring and just plain weird, that they repeatedly keep making such an amateurish mistake like mispronouncing names and places ...
Shut up
@@jarnickvanessen2625 Bye-zan-tine or Con-stand-ti-niople
@Shadow King who hurt you kid. Never said anything about them calling themselves the Byzantine, they saw themselves as the Eastern part Roman Empire. Plus I know what the correct pronunciation is and I can assure you Con-stand-ti-niople isnt the right one.
Lol I bet you would look silly pronouncing the names of people from different countries so pipe down the narcissism
roman and persian empires: "nooooooo you Muslims from the desert can't defeat us both at the same time. we're super powers but you're just few dudes from the desert. noooooooooooooooo"
Rashidun caliphate: I'm about the end both of your careers
The Romans survived for another 800 years
@@baha3alshamari152 yes..bcuz they were romans
But almost area was gone
"Constantinople can't be conquered"
Ottoman Turks - "Hold my coffee"
**Coffee*
Hold my Coffee,ayran,tea,kımız
Greece: at least it was good run. With 1000 years.
The Icon of Sin we lived for 1000 years. From 395 until 1453
the Achaean, didn’t know my teacher was here
: These muslims are no match for us they will never take Constantinopel !
The ottomans : say what ?
uber Mk2 well not really, small Turkish tribes destroyed the Byzantine then those Turkic Tribes united only to take Constantinople (Istanbul)
Ironic how they declared themselves Romans though
@@Shuja_Khyber can you learn some history and then come back
@Ivan no I meant that, during the Byzantine reign small Turkish tribes which had migrated from Central Asia, came and started to cause friction between the population in Asia Minor, those small Turkish tribes them started demanding more autonomy, and this caused even more unrest. It went as far as to collapse the Byzantine Empire and create the Ottoman Sultanate.
@@Spartan-1821 can you learn history first mate? You need to check facts from opposing books and learn to make the logical choice. History is not one book it’s many books.
Seriously this narrator needs a crash course in pronunciation. Byzantine, bows, and Pergamon all mangled
a little lecture for you if it's pronounced that way in his country it's also right
@Ivan Romaine lettuce
Anast-OS-ius
Const-Inople
I was going to sleep but I saw knowledgia upload! Sleep can wait
You can sleep after 10 minutes + a share 😅
@@Knowledgia great video but I must correct the detail of the prophecy it wasn't said that the conqueror would have a prophet name but it was said by the prophet mohamed during a siege in his 3rd confrontation with quraish his former clan in witch he stated most of the land that would be conquered that by muslims and when talking about constantinople he said *blessed is the emir conquering constantinople and blessed his army* that's why it was prestigious to the ottomans witch capitalizes on that
"Constantinople can't be conquered"
The 4th Crusade: **Deus Vult**
I mean more like the employers let the crusaders in, and they just sacked it after a disagreement.
Rather "holy water" or "wine/the blood of Christ"
lucie PR when you spend your life savings to fight the infidels but after a breach of an agreement you decide to burn down the one city that had prevented Islamic conquest of europe for 600 years because at the end of the day 💰 was more important to them than any holy duty
They had it coming after all, eastern Romans constantly messed with Europe and then later when they were in trouble they call for help they totally deserved it
the Achaean Constantinople itself is a beautiful city, the reason I don’t really support it is the way Constantinople did politics.They made all the people around them fight each other constantly starting wars. If you ever wonder look how many times Constantinople was besieged during Ottoman Empire and look how many times it was besieged and by who during eastern Rome. It wasn’t a stable place and a had new emperor every few years. One example when emperor someone called to pope for help and they got the crusade going, the emperor tells the crusaders after everything to give all the lands back to emperor and leave and that was pretty much for free just you know a holy deed for Gods grace and repentance of sins, and later you can visit holy land for free ! no joke those emperors were too arrogant.
TL;DW: The Theodosian Walls were too strong to breach at the time, Greek Fire gave the Roman Empire the advantage at sea, and the Bulgarians finished off the Muslims invading force.
*Byzantine Empire*
@@pantelisdalezios1086 That's a term invented by historians, not what the empire was really called.
@@pantelisdalezios1086 amatuer.
and later we finished Bulgarians... ;)
@@ΛεωνάνδροςΠεργαμενός you suffered the worst defeats against those Bulgarians
watch Pliska and Versinikia video
Before starting my Byzantine era comic book i did some research on the history of the Eastern Romans. I saw the surviving land walls of the city and felt that this must have been a formidable sight for any potential attacker.
Byzantine Era comic book?
Λεωνανδρος Περγαμενος Yes check it out . It’s called Theophano: A Byzantine tale
@@byzantinetales thank you very mutch.... this comic looks awesome... i whould defenerly purchase it...👍
@@byzantinetales there is just one book. Did the artist plan also more books to follow?
For those interested, some selected works of one (among many) prestigious and credible Historian, Warren Treadgold, regarding the Greek Byzantine Empire, include;
“A Concise History of Byzantium”,
“A History of the Byzantine State and Society”,
“Byzantium and Its Army, 284-1081”,
“The Byzantine Revival, 780-842”.
I don’t like the pronunciation in this video
Ante Barisic same it really bothers me
they are romanian, so that might explain some of it
Bai-zen-tain. Constani-nople (no "t")
you can`t expect them to get everything right.....grow up people. instead of nit picking, maybe appreciate the video
Rolilasx it’s been like this for like a year. They could have improved the pronounciation after all this time, it’s inexcusable
Romans: Walls of Constantinople can never be broken.
Ottomans: Are you challenging us?
Those walls were long gone badly damaged after the 3rd crusade, after that Constantinople was not formidable as it was before.
@@jamesgavin6171 and the ottoman has the biggest cannon in the world during that time
@@jamesgavin6171 Legendary city still
Mehmed: WE DID IT GUYS! WE CONQUERED CONSTANTINOPLE! WORLD COMMERCE IS OURS
Otoomans: Hooray!
40 years later
Columbus: FOUND GOLD WEST!
More like the Portuguese and Dutch found India and East Asia
And silk road become a shit road:(
The whole age of exploration was brought about because of the fall of Constantinople. No trade route to the China or India meant they had to sail their, which , of course, prompted others to explore across the Atlantic.
Spain: Hold This (Hands an L to all existing powers in Europe, Eurasia, and Africa)
Ottomans in 1918: You know, you guys suck.
Us: 👁️👄👁️
Constantinople was conquered with gunpowder and turned into Istanbul...and everyone in Europe was too busy fighting themselves and did nothing...shameful.
Why couldn't the Constantinople be conquered?
*Mehmed II has enter the chat*
Still, Constantinople stood still for 1123 years. Unlike baghdad city.
No, see, they are talking about ConSANINOPLE, which as it never existed, was never conquered.
Check mate, Ottomans.
@@KJ-is5ug well,the Abbasid was full of corruption at the time Mongols attacked the city. The Mongols even need to siege the city several times before it fall.
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok there are traitors at the city
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok if you see the map of the Abbasid when the Mongols attack it was at its worse conditions. Heck,even I was surprised that they hold against the Mongols
The reason the Arabs weren't able to brake the Bulgar siege was probadly that they lacked the quantity of cavalry needed. Han Tervel had exceptionally sized cavalry for the Balkans. East Rome was very often outpaced and therefore beaten by the factor.
Lol the Bulgars did basically nothing, The Byzantine Empire dominated the sea and crushed the Arabs in the Naval encounters also repelled every attack on the walls and won a bunch of minor land battles, they also cut off the Arabs supply lines, the Arabs at the end were basically drained from casualties due to famine and disease, that's when Trevel who was nowhere to be seen came in order to gain some spoils lol
''Why couldn't Constantinople be conquered?
''
*1453 intesifies*
*sees title*
Ottoman empire: allow me to introduce myself.
Ottomans??, laugh in Christians 4 Crusade, they already take down Constantinople by 1204
@@sirra6965 yeah you right you got a point.
W8 ottoman cannons kabooom
@Polemarch
No, Ottoman cannons, Hungarians at the time were not really using such big cannons to fight their wars.
@Polemarch
And that means that the Ottoman cannons are property of Hungary?
The Ottomans provide the raw materials, the funds and the necessary manpower to man the cannons, but somehow the cannons are property of the hungarians.
Its like saying that the AC induction motor is a Serbian invention, despite the fact it was invented and patented in the US.
Weird.
You're underestimating the role of the Bulgarians, without their help the outcome would be uncertain
... no. He didn't underestimate them at all because underestimating is to do with numbers. The term would be undervaluing and no he didn't. Infact he says that the Bulgars did help and harassed the Arabs both during and after the siege.
An interesting video and the role of the Bulgarians, as always, is belittled and a great victory for Byzantium. Bulgaria has more than once helped Byzantium against invasions from Asia. As it happens now, by the way. I wonder why the great Byzantines needed help. And why did they later betray the Bulgarians so that the Turks could come and enslave us for 500 years. Not to mention that they hired them as an auxiliary army and sent them to Bulgaria. Why couldn't Constantinople be conquered?
@@Closed0254 Bulgarian history is nearly 2000 years old. There are a number of factors that have helped preserve this genus. Mostly the knowledge that has been preserved in the family and the numerous educators who have acted all the time and have recorded and preserved Bulgarian history from ancient times. Preservation of ancestral consciousness and traditions. What you are saying is untenable, in view of the preservation of a number of other nations in similar circumstances. Jews, for example. Did you know that the first factory in the Ottoman Empire was built by a Bulgarian. And for the fact that Mustafa IV is half Bulgarian, because his mother was abducted, like millions of Bulgarians at that time as a concubine. That no one had the right to land or blood tax and that a Turk could have killed a Bulgarian on any occasion without any consequences, kidnapped his wife, children, etc. My great-grandfather was the only surviving child from a village devastated by the Turks during the Ilinden-Preobrazhensk Uprising of 1903. 20th century, and what about the dark times during which Asian ignorance and madrasa education prevailed, where only education was taught the Koran. There are still many Bulgarians in Bulgaria who are Muslims, called Pomaks, people who forcibly changed their faith several centuries ago under threat of death and total destruction, but kept the traditions. Please educate yourself more before starting a discussion. Where the Bulgarian foot set foot, it became a state and cities were built. Bulgarians do not say that, it is recorded more than foreign sources, check. For Vologda Bulgaria and for the earlier countries. By the way, the Wallachian Bulgarians saved Europe from the Mongols in the 13th century, until they were also destroyed. The only army from which they have an undisputed defeat is the battle of the rams, by the Bulgarians. And the battle is so called because the surviving Mongol wars were exchanged for rams. Etc.
And yes, the Bulgarians made precisely states in which other nations joined voluntarily, because they were just, and not by brute force fire and sword. A just people about which many people and nations have written, such as the Hungarians. Because they knew how to build cities and they knew the laws. And they did not destroy cities and countries to plunder them.
☠️ Belittled??? You should be grateful that he even mentioned them, they basically did nothing, their role was no better than Richard The Lionheart's role in the battle of Acre which he also did almost nothing in, "oH tHe aRaBs aRe aLrEaDy dEfeAtEd, LeT's aTtAcK tHeiR cAmP tO gAtHeR sOmE sPoiLs" the Byzantine source that greatly exaggerates the numbers of the Arabs claimed they killed 22,000 which in turn means the actual number wasn't any more than like a couple thousand maximum
-This dude: The sassanids and Buzantines lost because they were worn out by war.
Sassanids and Buzantines: Both had a numerical advantage and were way a head technologically in every single battle.
i've never understood. There was no time without war in the Medieval. Why being worn out is just an excuse for these two powers.
@@viriato6525 War isn't the same as war. There are multiple important factors:
- Long wars lead to a high war weariness and therefore low morale. Also infrastructural expenses often are reduced which for example leads to weaker defensive structures or worse roads which reduces the time you need to mobilize your forces
- Even wars lead to a high death toll because progress of either side is very slow
- Land losses often lead to plundering an raiding which damages the economy
- War preparation is important. If you run out of money, man power or other things you have to take loans and repay them
Of course the victory of the Arabs is also due to good leadership and very motivated forces because of their religion. It's safe to say though that the Byzantine Empire would have been better prepared if they just had fought a minor conflict before the invasion instead of a long ans brutal war.
u r very simple minded
This channel deserves more subs and views.
Great battle for Europe.East Roman Empirie Bizantine and Bulgaria .Glory from Heroes 🇧🇬 and 🇬🇷.Save Europe 🇪🇺
The Bulgars made their attack that brutal so the muslims did not enter the Balkans for almost 600 years. Actually some ancient cristian historians called Khan Tervel the Savior of Europe, because the european tribes at that time were weak and they would be easily conquered by the muslims. They ruled Iberian peninsula for few centuries and that pagan ruler made sure that wont happened in the Balkans.
After the arabs were gone the Emperor gave Tervel the title Ceaser which was never given before to a pagan ruler.
Very interesting video, Knowledgia!
@Battle of Empires who was turkic?
It was conquered almost 730 years after this events so the muslims remembered well this devastating loss.
Everyone in Bulgaria will laugh at you if you say this. Bulgarians are indo europeans. The turkic tribe theory is long gone and absoletely fake. Get some update from the last 50 years. They dont even look the same. Idiot.
@@islamisthetruth3402 Lol who much wrong information in one comment. You probably talk about the 15% turkish minority. Other 85% are pure indo european nation with nothing in common the turks. Bulgarian have only come cultural similarities with the turkic, NOT turkish tribes. The title Ceaser(and a red cape) was given to Tervel from the Byzantine emperor after his victory against arabs. This is from their chronologists Go read some history science journal, that turkic theory was long ago debunked.
Ps. There wasnt one slavic invassion in Bulgaria ever hahah
The Muslim religion held back education and Europe advanced and destroyed the Ottoman empire in WW1.
@@islamisthetruth3402 So you want to tell me Indo-european genes dont exist? Thats hilarious. IE is the genetic family. When the science developed more and more it was easy to see the genetic difference between the nations. Every genetic study shows proto Bulgars are indo europeans not turkic.
As i said bulgars had similarities with turkic culture previously. Like the title of the ruler and the religion, even though since Khan Kubrat , Tervel grandfather the ruler was baptized. But they dont have anything else in common with other turkic tribes
To those who are saying "It was conquered" or similar: restart the video and read the very first thing that you see
I enjoyed this story. Thanks for the upload.
Who knew that Fate had intended to gift the jewel of human civilization to a group of people, who at the time when this battle was fought, were probably humble shepherds in the great grasslands of Asia.
Byzantine christians: thripple ente walls cannot be destroyed.
Ottomans: HOLD MY ZAMZAM
@ibrahim bozkurt
Erdogan: hold my milk
in fact the crusaders were the first
@ibrahim bozkurt your welcome my brother, assalamualaikum
@ibrahim bozkurt i'm christian but i'm from Indonesia, i like Turkey but not Endorgan
Zamzam ? That’s an Arabic thing. And Ottomans declares themselves Romans unlike the Umayyad Arabs who got beat badly in 717
Constantinople, the greatest city of medieval times.
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok pff, those were nothing compared to the city of the world's desire. Trade from two continents went through it
It was near two rich seas, it was heavily invested in by not only Rome, but the Venetians and the Genoese. And with walls that would put any other to shame
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok by the time the ming came about constantinople had witnessed a plague and a sacking. Yet it didn't stop being rich, that's a testament to it's grandeur. If you went before 1204 A.D and compared Beijing to Constantinople Beijing would seem like a backwater compared to it.
its Baghdad
@Mr Duloq Baka Bok Compare an empire that changed the history of the world via it's military campaigns and culture, like Rome
To an isolationist empire that just sat there collapsing every time the eunuchs didn't like the emperor, such as China.
Beijing trade-wise wasn't in an important location (due to the americas now it is)
Meanwhile Constantinople was at about the center of the old world till the americas were discovered and it shifted to London and perhaps Seville or Lisbon
Point being
While both being rich
Constantinople was
A) Richer
B) More important
And I'd reckon Istanbul today is still just as important as Beijing is
Also how the hell do you calculate the GDP of something a milennia ago? I'd imagine you can provide me with a source? Or perhaps tell me how many teapots the Yuan produced in May 1257?
Baghdad or Cordoba were far more developed
The Byzantine Empire had the following enemies: the Bulgarians, the Arabs, the Persians, the Turks, the Crusaders, the Franks, the Venetians, and even the Russians and the Vikings ... And it had civil strife. No one can even build so high walls even today to keep them all out
The plague also devastated it after they conquered Italy and they never recovered from it
Also add Khazars, Avars, Pechenegs, Norman Sicilians, and Slavs.
Why does it sound like Google translate is reading your script?
The Byzantines don't get anywhere near the amount of respect that they deserve. They survived for over a millenia while being surrounded on all sides by foreign powers that would enjoy nothing more than carving them up. Even at their weakest after the rise of the Ottomans, it still took the ottomans many sieges before they finally captured their capital. The sheer length of time they lasted whilst under pressure from the north, south, east, and west really attests to how great they were.
History is writen by the winners, and diminishing the importance of the real roman empire, now just its eastern part, was important for western Europe early on, for reasons of propaganda, since they renamed their empire the "holly roman empire", to a timepoint where the roman empire already existed in Konstantinople... It´s cheap, but western Europeans were so uneducated to this timepoint, that they´d believe everything. And a willing population backing you is key, look at the US-wars...
@igor lopes sure, but the western half extincted...
@igor lopes Nope, that happened hundreds of years after the western roman empire extincted. and he wasn´t given the title of the western roman emperor, but of the "holy" roman emperor, thereby creating a new trademark, that most of the population, of course, didn´t notice at all, so thinking that this were the continuation of the roman empire, since the population were very uneducated, and couldn´t know that the eastern part of the empire still existed. also charlemagne and his population never had culturally something in common with the romans, except kicking each others ass during wartimes, his people were concidered barbarians before the establishment of the holy roman empire, and afterwards too (by the people who used to be in the western roman empire some hundereds of years ago, when it still existed)...
@igor lopes 1st: the eastern roman emperor doesn´t have to "conquer" the western roman empire, cause he is the legitimate failsage emperor of the whole roman empire, in case the western emperor dies or the west gets conquered by barbarians. of cource the eastern emperor didn´t have the money and army to fullfill his task. 2nd: the greeks call themselves till today "Romans", since being roman is a cultural thing, and not a racial one. Grece was the 1 place that the romans conquered after italy, and stayed roman for 1100years after the western half has extincted. the question isn´t if the greeks were romans (being 1600 years long romans, till 1453), but much more if the italians were romans compared to the greeks, since the italians being only 550 years long Romans (200BC-350AC)...
@igor lopes cause they simply had 1 administration shared over 2 emperors, cause for 1 single emperor it would be too difficult to manage the whole empire!!! imagine it like a company with 2 partners owning it! are you simply a troll, or trully clueless?
That is deeply inaccurate depiction of the Byzantine map. At that point of time, NONE of the Balkans mainland was controlled by the Empire, apart from most of important coastal cities. The peninsula was wholly settled by slavic tribes.
Good work Khan Tervel! 🙂
Shrek: Good question
Because the byzantines were absolute madlads
Yeh, not really. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Yarmouk
@Plo Koon Nah, I can list many defeats numerically superior Byanztines were inflicted with by poor desert warriors.
.
Plo Koon I only wish they lasted longer :(
@Plamen Stoev yeah dude, thats how history works... but trying to expalin it to fanbois of either side is just another level of optimism, so I admire you for that
7:57 the greek fire...hmmm , so , from here came George RR Martin inspiration...you know...Game of Thrones ...King's Landing (Constantinople inspiration)
wildfire
@@anonimbilinmez3051 yes, wildfire = greek fire ... logic :)
@Plo Koon man, i said "inspiration" for his book
@Plo Koon generally in the year 1204 the worst suburb of constantinople was like paris...
România!!
Great video!
Turks: What u mean?
Yeah. I couldn't get what title says. (Writing this from Konstantiniyye)
Ottomen kaibabian hold my beard 😂😂😂😂😂
@emosh73 i agree
@Trevor Johnston honestly yeah. Before gunpowder they were pussies but when they get large weapons theyre strong 🤣
Phrasal - It took the Turks over 500 years to conquer Constantinople after constant failure😂 Internal strife and the 4th Crusade is what ultimately led to the Fall of Constantinople
Perfect video, well done!
Bulgaria was strong back then!💪💪💪
Drinking from emperor skull
Khan Krum drinking from the emperor's skull most probably was a legend to satanize us, but we are proud of the khan because that was one of the major victories for us in the Middle Ages. It was a matter of life or death for the newly-formed Bulgarian kingdom.
The contemporary Bulgarian nation was made of 3 main ethnicities -Slavs, Thracians and proto-Bulgarians. The proto-Bulgarians were according to some historians Turks. Another say that they were Iranian tribes influenced by the Turks. The first Bulgarian state was founded with an agreement between the proto-Bulgarians, who became the ruling elite, and 7 Slavic tribes. Later on, the proto-Bulgarians were assimilated by the Slavs because they were the smallest from the 3 ethnicities. This process speeded up with the imposing of the Christianity and the Cyrillic Alphabet in the country.6
This information provider is full of knowledge! Great job dude!
Ottomans: We conquered Constantinople. We will be the richest empire on earth.
Dutch: *Laugh in Dutch East India Company*
no cry little greek girl its İstanbul now.
@@Lennon1923 Yep it's Istanbul since 1923, officially declared by Kemal and the Republic of Turkey. Up until then the official name was Konstantiniye. However the name Istanbul/Stambol was also used deriving from the Greek Es tin/tan polin, literally meaning to the city.
A great city full of different histories and names :)
@@goshlike76 thanks for the info.
@@Lennon1923 Adam kötü bisey demedi, illa ülkemizi rezil edeceksiniz böyle.. Salak herif
Dutch came after 3 hundreds later
great vid, would love for years/dates to be shown on screen so I can follow the timeline better
Why Constantinople couldnt be taken?
-Because Bulgaria helped ERE and that city got 2times conquered
that’s true
how different the middle east would be today if the scourge of islam didn't destroy the culturally rich persian empire
Just to tell you Arabs weren't a grait civilisation so when they conquered and craited a big empire they relied on the persien
Just like how roman take a lot of culture from greek the same can be said between arabs and persian so yah stop your lies
They would be idol worshipping bacwards
Pangea Productions There would be no Baghdad hence no algebra , no Algorithm (no computers or phones) , No chemistry so many things were invented at Baghdad and Córdoba from the Islamic civilization.
yhe Also without the Ottomans the Europeans wouldn’t have found America
Guys be kind to him this guy is probably an person who never read about estern history and only see madia
this is so sad that this happened :(
it always hurts to see the ottoman empire rising
You ever hear about World War 1
well of course i know it
its me
Dude ottoman empire falled 98 years ago why this historical stuff hurts you dont be racist againts turks
@@iskambillordu just 98? lmao
Lol cope
>Yelkenler Biçilecek playing in the background
>People of Constantinople: "Why do i hear boss music."
It's rather amazing how you managed to mispronounce so many basic historical words. 🤔
Great video
Khan Tervel, one of the saviours of Europe!
@@islamisthetruth3402 Thank you for the comment! Can you explain what you mean please?
@Battle of Empires Ah yes, you're absolutely right. I now realised that I read the original point wrong xD I read it as "Europe wasn't even European". Thank you for the comment
This video was delightfully informative. I loved the animation. And the narration was great. Awesome job.
Shame the narrator cannot pronounce Constantinople, a 6-year-old child can do better, makes the whole vid laughable !!!
Me: A Turk reading the title
"I dont get it."
When you conquered it , it was a ghost city , almost abandonded with fewer inhabitants and only 10000 defenders , with 1000 year old walls badly maintained and you had gunpowder weapons and cannon. The Arabs were not so lucky. They tried 2 times in a golden era of byzantium a wealthy powerful empire with unlimited manpower, Arabs had 700 year older siege technology than the ottomans and the walls were the pick of wall technology of the era. Also Byzantines had technology superiority at sea , and crashed the arab fleet with flamethrowers. So no comparison. Conquering constantinople was not something impresive. Mohamed had more impresive and epic victories and much more difficult sieges like the one in Chalkida (named Negro Ponte then).
@@vonzuchter
Talk of not getting an ironic joke
@@tengrieli1673 He is right. You Turks are always so proud of conquering Constantinopel, but Constantinopel was long time broke when you guys came. They had only 5000 Greek Defenders and 2000 Italians.... and the Ottomans were like 150.000+ so.... come down big boy !!!!
@@ΛεωνάνδροςΠεργαμενός lol cope islambol is still ours
@@ΛεωνάνδροςΠεργαμενός
I honestly dont know why this kind of conversation is still relevant. 500 years passed and the demographics changed by magnitudes.
But I still hear of greeks that wish to have the city back which is ridiculous compared to the pride of conquering a city that lasted ceinturies.
wow this is class. Thank you for your great work.
You should not put Bulgars on the map but Bulgaria , it was a country not a group of people , thank you great videos
great video
Well prepared army but still unable to siege Constantinople because the prophecy was told for someone other than arabs. the Turks captured the city in 1453.
Both Leo III that was a formidable general and the Bulgarians are greatly underrated in saving Europe from Muslims at this crucial moment. Whereas Habsburgs took credit for defeating the Ottomans.
A glorious victory for the Christian defenders of Europe - Bulgaria and Greece.
Don't forget Charles Martel 711
Yes, but Ottomans came and fucked it up! God bless Istanbul!
@@islamisthetruth3402 There is a huge difference between Turkic and Turkish, you should know that.
Bulgars were pagan Tengriists, not Christian.
@@islamisthetruth3402 Orc get the fook out of here
The walls of Constantinople are represented incorrectly. There were 4 walls, not 2. The outer Theodosian wall was a triple wall with a water filled moat. The inner wall shown on the map is the old Constantinian wall that was partly in ruin by this time. It is the remains of the original Constantinople wall when Constantine the Great had it built. The Theodosian Walls were added after the First Sack of Rome in 410, most likely during the reign of Theodosius II.
For real do some sound check before doing the videos man. I mean who the hell told you that that the eastern Roman empire is pronounced Byezantane and one of the most famous cities in the world being pronounced Constaninople? Did you even read the name of the city?
Accents, dude. To-mAe-to, to-mAht-to
Fun fact Tervel was caesar and hw was christian and he is claimed as a saint Tervel of Bulgaria tsar of Bulgaria. The saviour of Europe
@@islamisthetruth3402 It's not a joke.You must read some books, don't be envy.
It got eventually conquered by the Ottoman empire, some speculate that Greek fire was the reason why Arabs couldn't take the city.
@the Achaean thanks for explaining, sounds logical. So basically the Arabs were open from the European side, it would've been better for them if they (like the Ottomans) would first secure a big bunch of Europe before starting to attack the city.
The Zenata Chronicles - Lmfao yea after a thousands years of constant failure. It was internal strife and the 4th Crusade that ultimately led to the fall
@the Achaean i give the most respect to the byzantines and greeks but they would fall due to starvation
Thanks for vividly proving how the Byzantines saved Western civilization by breaking the power of the Umayyad caliphate, leading to its fall. This siege made the much-celebrated Battle of Tours in France around the same time look like a food fight. Leo was a far greater fighter than Charles Martel!
The myth of Umayyad invincibility was broken, economy shaken, causing revolts, leading to Abbasid overthrow in 750. History clear if you look at it.
@@princeofarabia7715Both their failure at the siege, as well as the preexisting internal problems led to the fall of the Umayyads
@Alex Mercer Vulgarity always accompanies ignorance. The crushing defeat in 717 kept the Muslims OUT of Eastern Europe for more than 6 centuries. They expanded "westward", yes, in North Africa and then in Spain, before being stopped in the West. Look it up. And behave.
actually Khan Tervel is called Saviour of Europe and given the title of " CAESAR " .
but yeah both Tervel and Leo did heroic defense
Who the fuck of the Muslim caliphs cared about France? My love only, the governor of Andalusia has been attacked? If the caliph came to you from Damascus, he would end at least you history. Remember that the caliph’s ruling at that time was from China to France. And the ruler of Byzantine empire was paying the jazyah.
**Greek Fire joined the Chat**
Asmoh - The Middle East was extremely Greco European especially the Levant & Egypt for millenia before Islam & Pedophile Muhammad
@@islamisthetruth3402en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_civilization
look at the section "genetic studies". Also, about the etimology of "europe", you're referring to the daughter of king Agenore...a greek mitology...
@@islamisthetruth3402to be fair, "farmers that lived in Western Anatolia and the Aegean Sea"...anyway...what define the culture of a nation isn't its Y chromosome origin, but what that population achieved in terms of art, science and so on...Greek and europe culture does exist, from the moment european and greeks started to develope their own language, social organization and so on...So one of the precedent comments was correct: middle-east and egypt in 500/600 d.C. was under strong ellenistic influence. Also, sorry but saying that "Europe doesn't exist" just because of the etimology of the word is just stupid.
BULGARIANS NEVER HAD the TITLE KHAN they had KNYAZ
Constantinople is the definition of Plotarmour.
Until Mehmed came the armour has broken
@@banuraspati5864 It needed to so that season 4 could start. They were really milking the franchise at that point though.
3:54 boy he was wrong. Conqueror of constantinople would not have the name of 'a' prophet he would have the name of 'the' prophet or prophet Muhammad(saw). Mehmed the conqueror conquered constantinople or turkish of Mohammad the conqueror.
*God bless Constantinople.*
Bro that city is gone. Now it is Istanbul.
@@tycuygfyfyfh5498 it is not gone. It is just renamed by the Turkish government.
@@tycuygfyfyfh5498 it's not gone. It was renamed
Evidently he had
Don't worry the Russians going to renamed it soon enough
Mapping Error: Sardes and Pergamom are not in the inner Anatolia. They are in the west coast of Anatolia.
tbh flamethrowers would be pretty op at this time lmao.
Why do we always called them Byzantines? They were romans with greek language.
When Bulgars steal the show 😍😍😍
Because of the traffic jams. People were constant in Opel.
Thanks to the Bulgars!
Pretty sure it was the catholics.
@@alexandrub8786 you are wrong
no
The numbers are wrong, Arabs couldn't gain more than 25 thousand in battle of yarmuk how could they gain more than 180 thousand to siege Constantinople while there army units were spread from China and central Asia to Spain and France, also riddah war between the Arabs also exhausted them, even the war between Sassanid and byzantine was to exhausted for both of them their armies were much higher in number and quality when Muslims invade Iraq and Syria
Asmoh Most Muslim sources documenting the spread of the caliphate also come decades and centuries later. It’s not a “EuropeAn” thing, ancient sources always exaggerated. Be you white or brown. The Chinese are perhaps the worst for it, talking about multiple armies hundreds of thousands strong, millions of horses etc. All ancient sources hugely exaggerate.!
Czar Teodor ,,the savior of Europe"
Only Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror at the age of 21 could conquer Constantinople and become the new Ceasar.
No new roman empire or new Ceaser. They simply destroyed the real roman empire, an empire of over 2200 years of existence
@@pedroroque829 The Roman empire was an evil empire, the new Roman empire the Ottomans ruled with peace and justice.
@Alex Mercer Ottomans didn't force its citizens to convert or speak Turkish, everyone had their own culture religion language after hundreds of years of Ottoman rule.
When Roman became Christian they forced everyone to be Christians.
Few years under the British empire French empire Spanish empire everyone lost everything.