Dude studied the glory days of Rome so hard and forgot its most important lesson: Don't charge balls deep into Persia trying to emulate Alexander the Great.
@@artr95 Yeah, while they were in a civil war and he only took Mesopotamia There was nothing in his way other than local forces and there wasn't any formidable army Trajan failed to take Hatra, which avoided a total Parthian defeat Parthian forces attacked key Roman positions, and Roman garrisons at Seleucia, Nisibis and Edessa were evicted by the local populaces But anyway, Rome lost all of those conquered territories to peasant rebelles and Iranians were able to take Mesopotamia back without sending an army to fight the Romans
It's crazy to think that Julian was as far removed from Julius Caesar (in terms of time) as Queen Elizabeth II is from Queen Elizabeth I. That's one hell of an Empire.
Julian the Apostate was 1 of the 29 Roman Illyrian Emperors that ruled the Roman and Eastern Roman Empire from 250s and 270 AD up to 610 AD. Today of these great people only Albanians are left . IMO Julian was a very able emperor. I don't agree much with his religious views but he was very able in state affairs and in the military besides being virtuous and having great knowledge. In his Persian campaign he defeated Persians in most battles and if he wouldn't have been deadly wounded he would have returned and defeated Sasanids. Very underrated Emperor. I am forward waiting a video about the other 3 other Illyrian Roman Emperors such as Valentinian the Great, Anastasius and Justinian the Great. Aeitius and Majorian deserve a documentary each too.
@@marshalllaw4u Dude I know it has nothing to do with But Anatolian Turks and Turks in Central Asia are ethnically Turkish, but the only difference between them is that their cousins are different races, right?
@@سالمالدعدي-غ7س when you have an arrogant and young hotheaded emperor who doesn't focus on the strategy of the campaign(boring stuff like supply lines, logistics), that kind of ruler usually loses the war he engaged in. Because he sees the war as a decisive battle that he will win, in other words he focuses on the tactics. I assume that old men are usually more cautious and reserved therefore they are most likely to be more focused on the strategy. Julian was an excellent military commander in gaul. But he underestimated the very different style of warfare the sassanids waged.
@@سالمالدعدي-غ7س basically the Romans had attacked and sacked the Sassanids countless times. At the same time, the Romans had been destroyed plenty of times in Sassanid territory
@@lyonvensa Dude I know it has nothing to do with But Anatolian Turks and Turks in Central Asia are ethnically Turkish, but the only difference between them is that their cousins are different races, right?
@@channelname8360 Though Heraclitus came before that the greek notion of dialactics, for much of the western Phylosophy, there is no progress or Synthesis without previous discord, Thesis vs Antithesis.
When the Sassanids fight Romans: Use battle-tested tactics that work. When the Sassanids fight Arabs: HaHa lets 1v1 our generals and frontal charg dood!
Then again, they were probably underestimating the Arabs. In their minds, the Arabs were small fries compared to the potential existential threat of the Roman empire
The fall of the Sassanids was an internal collapse, with many Parthian dynasties teaching cataphracts not supporting the Sassanid dynasty and seeking their own kingdom. The empty Sassanid treasury, which was destroyed during the Mazdakian uprising during the reign of Khosrow II, had practically made it difficult to recruit soldiers for years. In addition, several kings had minted coins for themselves during the time of Yazdgerd, and a civil war had broken out inside Iran, and the Sassanid court was divided into two groups, the Persians and the Pahlavis, who no longer supported each other . In the wars that took place with the Arabs, the change in the Sassanid army was quite characteristic. There is no more news of catapults and riders, defensive wars that were formed with the help of ordinary people and forces loyal to the Sassanids. In the end, the fall of the Sassanids was an internal collapse, not three foreign wars with the Arabs.
@@erfancurufinwe8356 Arabs played a massive part dude. If it wasn't for their decisive victories, Persia would've had a different fate. It was a combination of many things.
If you ever read about the Sassanid armies during their wars with the Arabs them you will see that after internal struggle and wars with the Romans had left them with a poorly structured, ill equipped and undisciplined fighting force, that was a far cry from the armies of previous ages. The tactical prowess and ability was severely limited by that time
a bit of it was reconquered by Constantine. and he rebuilt a bridge to help with trade. as the daco-romans and even the goths were still showing signs of relatively prosperous industries. that territory was again lost by Constans.
The gold mines of Dacia were empty and it was the only province that sat on the far side of the Danube. So Aurelian (270-275AD) advised any Roman citizens in Dacia that they were abandoning the province slowly and orderly over a few years. They made agreements with pro Roman tribes to take over the abandoned province so essentially there would be a buffer zone of friendly tribes along the far side of the Danube where Dacia used to be. Then Aurelian re-named a province on the near side of the Danube Dacia. So Dacia was never abandoned it was just Um, relocated!!
@@1wor1d Dude I know it has nothing to do with But Anatolian Turks and Turks in Central Asia are ethnically Turkish, but the only difference between them is that their cousins are different races, right?
Ironic, for someone who was such a big fan of history and ancient heroes Julian managed to not learn from the past Roman defeats and victories and proceded to fall victim to scorched earth tactics, even getting attacked in the front and rear. Not the best way for someone who was reforming and alienating the religious structure of such a massive empire to leave it without a emperor.
He was too stuck in the mindset of his past heroes. The roman world had changed. Even if christianity was divisive, it was never going to go back. He kept deluding himself instead of accepting the situation. His arrogance and naiveté in thinking that he could defeat the Persians like he could with the alamani, just proves much he had to learn. Him abandoning his fleet and relying on living off the land was horrible logistical planning. He doomed his own army before the main battle already began. His successor jovian had to relinquish nisbis and several key roman forts vital to the persian front because of julian’s horrible blunder.
The only ancient source I completely trust about Julian would be Ammianus Marcellinus. The Christian writers were writing polemics about Julian and were determined to make him the villain, while the few other pagan sources besides A.M. were writing unreliable panegyrics or similar about the emperor. Ammianus Marcellinus strikes me as a real historian and fair in his assessments. He was supportive of Julian, but he was also well aware of the emperor's weaknesses and doesn't try to cover these up in his writings.
@@ronald556 Why? Because he encouraged the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem and gave the Jews some tax breaks? This was in the context of Julian's seeking Jewish support against the Persian Empire and finding yet another way to irritate Christian authorities. He really wasn't a Zionist in the 20th century sense. Now, just goosestep on out the door, Heinrich.
@@julianhermanubis6800 Yes, basically the first Zionist before it was even a thing lmao Its no wonder pagans, secularists and Jewish scholars love to defend him to the death and rewriting our history to make him seem like such a good guy
@@ronald556 For you to even write such complete stupidity, just indicates to me that you've never read a book about the Emperor Julian in your entire life. He was first and foremost concerned with restoring some version of state paganism and reviving temples and religious rites that had been suppressed or fallen into disuse. He was a bit skeptical of Judaism as the origin of Christianity, but he had a sense of realpolitik when it came to utilizing the Jews as possible allies. He didn't persecute the Jews and had no interest in seeing them converted to any other religion, and I think those aspects of his approach were appreciated by later Jewish scholars. I have no idea why a modern neopagan would have any interest in Zionism. Now go away, you're just too dumb to engage with.
The Roman system of succession, effectively civil war, was oddly both a weakness and a strength of the Roman system. A weakness in that it expended great amounts of energy and manpower in internal conflict, and a strength in that it, more frequently than dynastic rule, produced talented reformers who managed to adjust the system enough to keep it going even when under significant pressure.
Let’s be honest here guys this is one of the few channels that makes such HD content it makes you forget everything else you were doing then and there and head right into it in a heartbeat!!! 👌🏻👌🏻💯💯👍🏻👍🏻
@@resentfuldragonThe main differences between them was Julian not having the gigantic amounts of luck that Alexander did, a Shrewed, capable and underrated Daddy King who did all the important and needed stuff just to die before earning the glory himself, and an incapable wuss for an enemy, instead facing one of the most capable and badass Enemies of Rome(and indeed perhaps, most capable Monarchs EVER) in the persona of Shapur II.
Please do an episode about Emperor Majorian. He is an underrated Roman emperor. The last emperor to try to restore the west and almost succeeding with the few resources he had during the twilight of the western empire. I can't find a documentary about him at all...
I am a huge admirer of Majorian's life and efforts to save a crumbling world. In the words of Edward Gibbon, Majorian presented "the welcome discovery of a great and heroic character, such as sometimes arise, in a degenerate age, to vindicate the honour of the human species". He truly deserves one or even a series of videos. There is a beautiful historical novel about him, "Imperator" by G. Castelli, but I am afraid it has not been translated yet to English.
Everyone: The most talking "what-if" alternate scenario in the world is the Battle of Tours between the Umayyad Caliphate and the Franks. Kings and Generals Channel: Allow us to introduce to you all to the Roman Emperor named Julian and how he died in the war against the Sassanid Persians.
Really I'd say Alexander dying as he did. Then there's the story of a centorian saving Ceaser. History is absolutely full of what if moments that could have totally changed everything we know.
There's no shot. If he had won the war he probably would've tried to hold the east like Alexander, and like Alexander his empire would've fractured at his death. If he had escaped after capture, he'd be discredited as a viable ruler. If he had managed some kind of status quo victory, the increasingly Christian empire would've revolted. He wished for a world that no longer existed and wouldn't have survived the one that did
@GoodGirlKate oh there a million outcomes from Alexander surviving. I'm more certain that Rome would never have existed than Alexander would change to Buddhist as he appears to have thought himself a god. I think we'd have a Egyptian Greko mix faith now if he'd managed to live and do what he intended. He was planning to go west when he died so Italy and the Mediterranean would have fallen. Taken longer because there was no single entity to beat to take the lot but then they'd have had to join together to stop him so maybe a few battles would have taken most. It's definitely interesting to speculate about what the total joining of East West like that might have led to. It's like the story that a party of Chinese diplomats attempted to get to Rome, just after Octavian took control, they got to around 100 miles from the boarder but the Persians they asked lied to them in a way as they told them how long it'd take to get to Rome not in to Roman territory. If they'd pushed on a little further can you imagine a world where Rome and China were working together. I mean the reason Persia were so scared of it happening was due to them having a border against each of them and if they'd worked together the Persia was finished.... So so many what ifs.
@@DragonwolfoftheSands hmmm. Hard to say that. If he'd taken Persia then the power it would have given him would be unrivalled. Yes it was to late to stop Christianity but it might be a lot less powerful today. Especially as Constantinople would have become very much the centre of the world and the Roman Church would maybe not become the power it did. Remember that Persia wasn't Christian and he'd have had plenty of non Christians to place all around the empire. It'd depend on the person who followed him, how long he lived after and many things but we'd definitely have a different world today.
@@itarry4 agreed on Alexander. He surprisingly gets very little credit for a ton of empire-foundation-laying work he did in a short time between the end of his conquests and his death. Caesar however seems more like a symptom of institutional changes which began probably with the Marian reforms, evidenced by Sulla.
Thanks K&G. Julian has always been one of my favorite Romans. Good to see someone acknowledge his influence to the ancient world. IMVHO went East far too soon.
@@kennymccormick8906 I had gotten pretty far through, thanks to 2x speed (because I am weird like that), and I don't have to completely finish a video to day it is good, plus it remained good throughout when I finished the video.
“the time now has come to leave this life which I rejoice to return to nature at her demand like an honorable debtor not bowed down with sorrow having learned from the general conviction of philosophers how much happier the soul is than the body and bearing in mind whenever a better condition is servered from a worse one should rejoice rather than grieve” Julian’s last words
after this two parter this guy might be in the running for one of my favorite emperors of all time... he wasnt overly malicious and I feel like he enacted reforms he thought would and possibly could have righted the course of what was happening to the roman empire.
Some interesting facts about Shapur II: he is the longest reigning monarch in the history of Iran, ruling from before he was born until his death at 70. When he was just 16, he laid waste to numerous Arab tribes and for his expeditions in Arabia gained the nickname "the one who pierces shoulders" by the Arabs. His greatest wish was to gain back lost territories to Rome at the Peace of Nisinis, which he most certainly did. Much like Julian, he was a great enemy to Christians and prosecuted many of them during his reign.
@@chronikhiles I wouldn't want to speak for all Iranians, but I would say you could devide them into three groups on that. The hard-line Muslims would look at it with suspicion, some would be indifferent, but I would say a majority of them look at pre-Islam Iran with great reverence, inspiration and admiration. Most Iranians nowadays name their children after ancient kings, heros and gods, as a gesture of drift from Islamic culture.
Julian also attempted to rebuild the Jewish temple to invalidate Jesus’ prophecy about its destruction in 70 ad, but fires broke out and the Galilee earthquake of 363ad caused the end of the project.
@@apexnext I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
@@scourgeofgodattila579 They also destroyed an army from emperor valerian at least 50,000 strong and captured him in battle. They also destroyed belisarius’s army at calinicum soon after the battle of dara. The sassanids were strong enemies. They aren’t supposed to be underestimated.
@@darthvenator2487 Perhaps if you believe in hell. Scriptures state that sinners simply perish with no mention of a place of torment. Essentially, non believers enter non existince while believers fellowship with God eternally.... hence, the wage of sin is death and the reward of faith is immortality with God. However, most Christians today also believe in hell which is purely bad theology.
@@MilVetGaming and we did not create the heaven and the earth and that between them aimlessly. That is the assumption of those who disbelieve, so woe tô those who disbelieve from the fire.
@iMakz which is why they are all wrong. "Those who believe in the justness of an eternal hell either don't understand eternity or they don't understand hell". It's a deeply evil and wrong doctrine, stop simping for desert religions that push it.
Yhea can't see him being called an apostate bothering him in any way. He certainly seems to have understood his enemy in the Christians at an intellectual level but maybe forgot their other human traits that everyone has.
I think there’s some important things he missed. For instance, he wanted to make paganism more like Christianity in order to make it easier to defeat. *Julian's attempts to reinvigorate the people shifted the focus of paganism from a system of tradition to a religion with some of the same characteristics that he opposed in Christianity.[119] For example, Julian attempted to introduce a tighter organization for the priesthood, with greater qualifications of character and service. Classical paganism simply did not accept this idea of priests as model citizens. Priests were elites with social prestige and financial power who organized festivals and helped pay for them. Yet Julian's attempt to impose moral strictness on the civic position of priesthood only made paganism more in tune with Christian morality, drawing it further from paganism's system of tradition.* Julian also adopted a sort of monotheism. He believed in one transcendent God who created the world and saw the pagan Gods as his representatives or something. Kind of like angels in the bible I guess. He also forgot one of the most important aspects of Julian’s character that everyone in ancient times commented about: his love of animal sacrifice. Christians tended to obsess over animal sacrifice, which probably made Julian sacrifice even more because he knew how much they disliked it. *A key practice clearly out of step with current thinking, but to which Julian was devoted, was animal sacrifice. He believed it was an essential component of ritual observance. Among his first acts on becoming emperor was to repeal the prohibition imposed by Constantine and confirmed by Constantius II. Julian sacrificed at every opportunity, and at least twice a day, at dawn and dusk. His detractors ridiculed him as ‘sacrifice-mad’, ‘butcher’, ‘bull-burner’, ‘seller of meat’. Even his supporters joked that if he were to return victorious from Persia there would be an empire-wide shortage of livestock.* *Few, even after the lifting of the legal ban, shared Julian’s passion or his insistence on its importance. But sacrifice was not made compulsory. The emperor was not prepared to enforce his convictions, despite his clear frustration with his co-religionists. Whatever the ritual preferences of Julian’s fellow believers (perhaps they chose to pray or burn incense or pour libations), Christians promoted an image of pagan religiosity fixated on animal sacrifice. Blood-drenched devotees glistening with gore are the stuff of Christian fantasy. The imagined close connection between pagans and animal sacrifice is one of the great and lasting successes of Christian polemic. In Julian’s obsession that fiction seemed, if only briefly, to be realised.*
@@joellaz9836 one creator God and many lesser gods has absolutely nothing in common with Christianity...now please see some of the west African religions like the Yoruba which have the same thing
Superb production. Also very timely. I was reading about Christian Saints and the legend of St. Mercurius and the demise of Emperor Julian. Although most likely a legend indeed it is undeniable that alot of early christians reviled Julian despite his accomplishments as Roman Emperor.
What accomplishments ??? Almost leaving a mighty and prosperous empire left by Constantine in ruins?? Getting yourself killed with the main army of Roman empire trapped in foreign lands??
@@johnnybravo19871 check his success against Germans and administrative reforms. Bungled in Persia and let Christianity ravage his ancestral religion once again and this time it was not stopped by anyone.
The Sassanids should be credited more. Their cavalry were one of the best antiquity had to offer. They were the ancestors of what would be the medieval knight. Jousting and knight duels came specifically from the east. The sassanids also were more aggressive than the parthians and dealt numerous defeats against the romans that would make carrhae look like a drop in an ocean
@@Berfo1 Im guessing it was the muslims who downplayed later persian empires and their achievements. Im just assuming but we really don’t get much details about sassanian era compared to the parthian one. Zoroastrians were also a minority at this time despite their huge influence in history. I think it was much better to convert than deal with the jizya tax and get treated as a second-class citizen.
@@Berfo1 indeed anatolia was a heavily populated area and the byzantines held a bid part until the late 12th century thanks to the komnenos dynasty . the 4th crusade was catastrophic for the eastern romans but still they held some territories empire of trepizond held the pontus region until the 15th century and the empire of nicaea later the byzantine empire western anatolia until the rise of the ottomans ( at the start of the 14th century )
@@Berfo1 Nice revisionism buddy, you are 100% downplaying the muslims. The only real advantage the muslims had was far less turmoil since sassanid leaders kept killing eachother and sassanid army men kept defecting. The muslims had even worse manpower problems as they were a minority in their own empire and had the ridda wars, where they fought a civil war against many pagans. Furthermore not only were the arabs outnumbered, but they had objectively inferior equipment to the sassanids and romans. Another issue was they fought on multiple fronts, and one battle even had a combined roman-sassanid force that fought the muslims. Also its incorrect to say the sassanids had no trained soldiers, at the beggining they had trained soldiers but they lost them in the first few muslim victories since the death counts were so high. I doubt that the sassanids at full power could have beat the muslims since the muslims wouldn't have attacked rome until after making gains like they did in real life. The muslims frequently only needed a force of around 10-15 thousand to destroy armies many times its size, the sassanids never had a chance realistically.
@@Berfo1 Not true, the sassanids had a military that was larger and better equipped. Rather than lie about sassanid weakness, talk about their power at their height. The sassanids have many great feats to talk about, why not talk about how Khosrow trolled justinian and sacked his cities? Why lie about the muslims when you know they were at a disadvantage for most of the battles against the sassanids?
@@resentfuldragon i don't think arabs would get anywhere if the roman sassanan war during early 7th century never happened. This is only a what if scenario but the romans and sassanians are far more higher quality and has the numerical advantage in terms of military, remember when the muslims attacked the sassanids and romans AFTER the roman sassanid wars, they were still outnumbered by the sassanids and romans. Although they exploited an weakness, the muslims are really great even though they were still outnumbered especially the general khalid. But to be fair if the wars never happened I doubt even if they did defeat the romans or sassanids, the two superpowers would still recover due to sheer size, wealth and strength alone
I think Julian just had bad luck in that moment. Had he survived somehow even with a leg wound like Timur he could've easily become known as a Great like Shapur II considering his good performance in Gaul.
@@jordanplays-transitandgame1690 he was reckless during his Persian camping, razing his river boats , lack of supplies Sooner or later he would've defeated He besieged Persian capital two times and failed I personally think he had luck to die Otherwise he might've had a fate like Valerian
The hubris is pretty astounding. Rather than turning around and consolidating gains, he marched past Ctesiphon. It seems like after his victory in Gaul he thought he couldn't lose. He is on the same level as Crassus.
@@Zeerich-yx9po Mmmh yea, but they were short-lived incursions, and Ctesiphon was only one of two capitals of the Parthians (the other Ecbtana) I believe that the Parthians actually had more victories over the Romans, and as long as they kept control of the Silk Road they could quikly reabosrb all the gold and silver the Romans plundered. Cheers!
@@Zeerich-yx9po Don't ignore the Parthians victories The Parthians defeated the Romans at the battle of Carrhae and took 7 Roman eagle flags while Romans outnumbered them almost 5 to 1 (Fun fact : The Sassanids defeated a great Roman general at Carrhae too. But it's known as the battle of Callinicum) After Parthians raided asia minor and judea, they lost a battle to the Romans but defeated Mark Antony after that while they had 50000 soldiers and Antony had over 100000 The Parthians killed half of his men The Parthians even took back Mesopotamia back from Trajan's commanders without their main army They defeated the Romans at the battle of Rhandeia and even won in their last war against the Romans known as the war of Caracalla and defeated the Romans at the battle of Nisibis The Sassanids gained even greater victories
It should be noted that the mausoleum of Julian in Constantinople (Istanbul) still exists today, together with other Roman emperors. It is conspicuous as it is the only one without the symbol of the cross on it. EDIT: It is a sarcophagus not mausoleum
@@cromusician6153 Unfortunately no, possibly somewhere in Venice, but it’s also possible the bones of Constantine, Julian, Justinian, and Basil, were simply dumbed into the sea or found there way to some monastic catacombs.
thank you for the great content, i’m currently in hospital and your content is keeping me going. i have loved this mini series on the final pagan emperor. keep up the great content :)
Ctesiphon had been sacked four times prior rather than five: Trajan, Verus, Severus, Carus. Odaenathus never succeeded in capturing the city, and while Galerius is recorded in the vicinity (leading to scholarly misunderstanding), no source claims he captured it.
Version with Christian assasin is the least often mentioned in Roman sources(no matter that many later Christioans even liked that idea or that this is modernly most popularly propagated version becouse it seems so romantic that he would died by Christian hand).By far the most often repeted version says that he was killed by a Roman soldier but not because of religious motivation but by totally profane reasons-he was enraged on Julian for the situation Romans get under him in Persia.The 2nd most commonly refered version from original sources says that assasin was from the Persian army,either an actual Persian or as most claim-an arab auxiliary in Persian service.Many other versions are preserved.For example the one suposing that Julian was indeed killed by a Roman soldiers but in mere unintentional friendly fire(which is quite possible as basically all sources agree it was very confused situation with very limited visibility because of mighly dust clouds all around mixed with several fighting groups in close order) or even fantastic stories that he was killed by supernatural being which included Christian saints but also Pagan demons.
In short: Nobody knows, but everyone guessed. Though out of all the versions in which he was killed by a Roman, the "F*ck you for getting us into this mess" motive makes most sense to me considering the situation they were in.
The second-best Roman Emperor after Augustus. The Death of Julian was one of the biggest disasters in Western history. Rome started to decline after his death, and a few decades after his death was the start of the fall of the Roman Empire as Rome grew weak. Within 100 years of Julian's death, the western roman empire was gone.
2nd best after Augustus is so incredibly exaggerated that you could make epic trilogy from it.East continued for many more centuries and it was not anyhow less a Roman empire that western half of the same state.
@@Lucasukx I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
@@adolphbismark4331 I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
"The Roman Emperor Julian, writing in the fourth century, regretted the progress of Christianity because it pulled people away from the Roman gods. He said, 'Atheism [I.e. the Christian faith!] has been specially advanced through the loving service rendered to strangers, and through their care for the burial of the dead. It is a scandal that there is not a single Jew who is a beggar, and that the godless Galileans care not only for their own poor but for ours as well; while those who belong to us look in vain for the help that we should render them."
That campaign was long at works already since Constantine.Julian possibly had among his motives also to cement his position with it had he returned a victor.
How could Julian not have brought along siege engines with him? Why could he not have sent for materials to build them to be transported on his ships? It seems an incredible oversight. If Ctesiphon could not be stormed then why not starve it out? Julian had limitless supply with his ships, whilst the inhabitants of the city did not. Sooner or later the Persians would have had to attack or let their Capital fall. The former would have resulted in a pitch battle involving a fully supplied, entrenched Roman army, giving them an excellent chance of success. The latter would be a sufficiently large victory in itself to declare the campaign a success and sail back up the river. If a long siege was unfeasible, then the best remaining option was probably to sack any settlements within a couple days march then head back to Imperial lands.
Julian also prepared to build the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. He accumulated building materials in Jerusalem. He received great Jewish support but an explosion wrecked the building site and his death finished this endeavour.
Romans still had outposts there. Dacia was late overrun by germanics, slavs, avars, turkic tribes, mongols, hungarians , bulgars etc. Btw both Julian and Aurelian were Illyrian Roman Emperors.
The romans took heavy losses but managed to resist until nightfall forcing the persians to retreat, which allowed the army (under the newly elected emperor jovian) to retreat from the battlefield. A few days later they were trapped with their backs against a river by the returning persian army and forced to sign a peace treaty with shapur II, handing him many eastern forts and towns in excange for safe passage back to syria. The concessions made to the persians were very heavy and were considereted humiliating by both modern and contermporary authors alike, as they basically undone all of the hard-fought progress diocletian and galerius achived in the east. Sadly for some reason sassanid history is always skipped or underplayed on this channel, which is a shame because their videos are among the best on youtube
@@omba3905 *_The 2nd Shahenshah/Emperor of the Sassanid dynasty of Persia who defeated the Roman emperor "Valerian" In the Battle of Edessa 260 AD and made him his slave_*
Where are the Sassanid elephants? Shapur II had a war elephant. If you can make a video of the first Sassanid wars with the Arabs during the time of Shapur II.
I suggest Gore Vidal’s narrative historical fiction Julian, which tells the story from the perspective of Julian and his greatest supporters. It’s an amazing book.
When a competent emperor like Julian is condemned while Theodosius who was reliant on barbarian generals and made the empire lose its territorial integrity is given the magnus moniker, you know the end is imminent.
All 3 Illyrian Roman Emperors. It is crazy how much influence the Illyrian Roman Emperors had in the Roman Empire and Eastern Roman empire between 250 AD to 610 AD. Only Albanians are left of these great people.
@@8kuji I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
Julian the Apostate was 1 of the 29 Roman Illyrian Emperors that ruled the Roman and Eastern Roman Empire from 250s and 270 AD up to 610 AD. Today of these great people only Albanians are left . IMO Julian was a very able emperor. I don't agree much with his religious views but he was very able in state affairs and in the military besides being virtuous and having great knowledge. In his Persian campaign he defeated Persians in most battles and if he wouldn't have been deadly wounded he would have returned and defeated Sasanids. Very underrated Emperor. I am forward waiting a video about the other 3 other Illyrian Roman Emperors such as Valentinian the Great, Anastasius and Justinian the Great. Aeitius and Majorian deserve a documentary each too.
@@alessandrogini5283 Two of the worst emperors (Caracalla and Elagabalus) came from that dynasty Edit: 'last Severan'? You mean Severus Alexander? Then yes he is underrated
Crassus wasn't an emperor. Crassus lived during the Republic, though in it's waning days. He was a Senator & governor of Syria when he invaded Parthia.
He was undoubtedly one of the best Roman emperors, and the best since Aurelian. If they had lived and ruled for a decade or two, the World would have been extremely different from what it is today.
@@marcelohenrique6624 He got only 2 years. And in those 2 years he changed the empire drastically. Imagine if he ruled for 2 decades. Also he would have ruled longer than 2 decades if he would have ruled till his death, if he died in ripe old age.
He was not He was an arrogant fool stuck in the past and that was his downfall sure he defently was a unique individual but calling him "great" is very innacurate
@@dirckthedork-knight1201 ? He died fighting in Persia, his rule didn't got overthrown or something, so how can you say that his admiration for the principate caused his downfall? Rome was on it's knees in 4th century so admiring the Rome of Pax Romana makes too much sense. Also he was one of the most successful Roman emperor as a general of the late empire.
I wish somebody like Paradox would make a late antiquity strategy game. I know there's Total War: Attila, but I'm more thinking a game that has multiple start dates, like the year of the six emperor's, the reign of Valerian, and the reign of Diocletian. The game would end around 800 with the Arab conquests as a kind of "final boss" similar to the Mongols in Crusader Kings. It's oddly specific but I feel like late antiquity really doesn't get much appreciation as a historical era.
Too bad that Imperator Rome got abandoned by Paradox. I was hoping we would get a start date around this time period for future updates. As a separate game, it’s difficult as the late antiquity doesn’t have a large amount of appeal and appreciation compared to the classical antiquity or the medieval era. It’s the time where empires faced civil wars, declining economy and population, and the invasion of the Huns which pushed several barbarian tribes to migrate west causing the downfall of Rome. For gameplay perspective, it’s not beginner friendly as the factions that many people wants to play such as Rome and Sassanids are over-stretched and difficult to manage while smaller factions which are mostly barbarian tribes faced constant pressure from other barbarian tribes to move west and they have to deal with the might of Rome causing a 2 way war. Overall, its a game that focuses on survival rather than empire building. Total war Attila has demonstrated how difficult it is and the amount of players who bought and played the game is not as high as Rome 2. Its just a gloomy and dark time period for people to appreciate thus I don’t think it would work as a separate game.
I think its more because the change of religion and propaganda because the romans had a "country" a lot longer than the sassanids and what is the best way to convert a culture when it is conquered...propaganda
The supposedly invincible belisarius? Bet they didn’t say that he got defeated at the battle of calinicum soon after the battle of dara. He was dismissed from his post as magister millitem oriens because of the defeat.
So.. no Renaissance? Jokes aside, the Empire was already dying anyway. Pax Romana ended with Marcus Aurelius, after that it was politics, overly incompetent emperors, and barbarian invasions that ravaged the Roman world. Without Christianity, either Europe never progressed and become some backwater of civilizations or we would be worshipping Ahura Mazda as our lord and saviour.
@@soulofcinder2129 I think that's the beauty of it, anything could have happened. Still though, I wouldn't have minded a pantheon of gods in modern day like the roman one.
For as much as Julian was hyped here, he turned out to be an amateur in the end. Starting a campaign against a rival empire while his own was still unstable; Burning his supply line; Leaving a substantial army (& the enemy's capital) intact on his back while retreating; Choosing a route that will inevitably sandwich him between Ctesiphon & Shapur; Being indecisive in choosing which part of the army to rally towards; Having no designated successor, etc. aren't hallmarks of the "New Caesar" that he wished to become.
Head to keeps.com/kings to get 50% off your first order of hair loss treatment.
SECOND
Today's episode should be linked to Bogomils and later to Cathars, or maybe the latter should be left for another Al Andalus series
The sassanids was a kurdish not persian dynasty. Is this channel controlled or owned by the iranian or Turkish government?
Make a video about battle of Edessa
Excellent episode today guys
Dude studied the glory days of Rome so hard and forgot its most important lesson: Don't charge balls deep into Persia trying to emulate Alexander the Great.
It's romantics trap, like Hitler trying to do what Napoleon couldn't.
But it worked for Trajan
@Van Sen Yeah because hitler invaded Russia to emulate Napoleon. That’s what the ideology was about
@@artr95 they were in the middle of a civil war
@@artr95 Yeah, while they were in a civil war and he only took Mesopotamia
There was nothing in his way other than local forces and there wasn't any formidable army
Trajan failed to take Hatra, which avoided a total Parthian defeat
Parthian forces attacked key Roman positions, and Roman garrisons at Seleucia, Nisibis and Edessa were evicted by the local populaces
But anyway, Rome lost all of those conquered territories to peasant rebelles and Iranians were able to take Mesopotamia back without sending an army to fight the Romans
It's crazy to think that Julian was as far removed from Julius Caesar (in terms of time) as Queen Elizabeth II is from Queen Elizabeth I. That's one hell of an Empire.
Agreed! Never thought about it like that.
My love for history was kickstarted when my history teacher explained that the Great Pyramids were older to Augustus, than Augustus is to us.
You mean the British or the Romans?
@@freddovich7925 well, both to be honest lol. But i was referring to the long-term durability of the Roman empire.
Julian the Apostate was 1 of the 29 Roman Illyrian Emperors that ruled the Roman and Eastern Roman Empire from 250s and 270 AD up to 610 AD.
Today of these great people only Albanians are left .
IMO Julian was a very able emperor. I don't agree much with his religious views but he was very able in state affairs and in the military besides being virtuous and having great knowledge.
In his Persian campaign he defeated Persians in most battles and if he wouldn't have been deadly wounded he would have returned and defeated Sasanids. Very underrated Emperor.
I am forward waiting a video about the other 3 other Illyrian Roman Emperors such as Valentinian the Great, Anastasius and Justinian the Great. Aeitius and Majorian deserve a documentary each too.
If nothing else, Julian is certainly one of histories most unique characters.
Indeed, but don not forget others
Was he bald?
@@thegamingwolf5612 Bro I am seriously help me
@@mathieudizzy9313 they're the same people
Fascinating to speculate how the history of Europe as Christian might have changed if Julian had had 40 years instead of 4.
- Walks into empire
- Restores old temples
- Refuses to wear armor further
- Leaves
What a Chad
Extreme Gigachad
"As he thought they deserved to be ruled by someone made in their mold." THE SHADE. I'm gooped.
It felt like justice incarnate!
@@marshalllaw4u Dude I know it has nothing to do with But Anatolian Turks and Turks in Central Asia are ethnically Turkish, but the only difference between them is that their cousins are different races, right?
Gwyneth Paltrow gooped?
Romans: "How many times do we have to teach you this lesson, old man!?"
Sassanids: "How many times do we have to teach you this lesson, old man!?"
Arabs Be like : What a free estate 🤑🤑🤑
some one explain this
@@سالمالدعدي-غ7س when you have an arrogant and young hotheaded emperor who doesn't focus on the strategy of the campaign(boring stuff like supply lines, logistics), that kind of ruler usually loses the war he engaged in. Because he sees the war as a decisive battle that he will win, in other words he focuses on the tactics.
I assume that old men are usually more cautious and reserved therefore they are most likely to be more focused on the strategy.
Julian was an excellent military commander in gaul. But he underestimated the very different style of warfare the sassanids waged.
@@سالمالدعدي-غ7س basically the Romans had attacked and sacked the Sassanids countless times. At the same time, the Romans had been destroyed plenty of times in Sassanid territory
@@lyonvensa Dude I know it has nothing to do with But Anatolian Turks and Turks in Central Asia are ethnically Turkish, but the only difference between them is that their cousins are different races, right?
"Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony"
- Heraclitus
discord does not bring harmony
@@channelname8360 Though Heraclitus came before that the greek notion of dialactics, for much of the western Phylosophy, there is no progress or Synthesis without previous discord, Thesis vs Antithesis.
@@steakdriven Heraclitus would have loved it!
@@saidtoshimaru1832
thesis-antithesis-synthesis. Hegelian Dialectical
@@SetTrippin82 The method of Dialectics was originally atributted to Zeno of Elea, a pupil of Parmenides, famous for his paradoxes.
When the Sassanids fight Romans: Use battle-tested tactics that work.
When the Sassanids fight Arabs: HaHa lets 1v1 our generals and frontal charg dood!
Then again, they were probably underestimating the Arabs. In their minds, the Arabs were small fries compared to the potential existential threat of the Roman empire
@@game_boyd1644 Arrogance is a huge factor of defeats in wars since ancient times for sure
The fall of the Sassanids was an internal collapse, with many Parthian dynasties teaching cataphracts not supporting the Sassanid dynasty and seeking their own kingdom.
The empty Sassanid treasury, which was destroyed during the Mazdakian uprising during the reign of Khosrow II, had practically made it difficult to recruit soldiers for years. In addition, several kings had minted coins for themselves during the time of Yazdgerd, and a civil war had broken out inside Iran, and the Sassanid court was divided into two groups, the Persians and the Pahlavis, who no longer supported each other .
In the wars that took place with the Arabs, the change in the Sassanid army was quite characteristic.
There is no more news of catapults and riders, defensive wars that were formed with the help of ordinary people and forces loyal to the Sassanids.
In the end, the fall of the Sassanids was an internal collapse, not three foreign wars with the Arabs.
@@erfancurufinwe8356 Arabs played a massive part dude. If it wasn't for their decisive victories, Persia would've had a different fate. It was a combination of many things.
If you ever read about the Sassanid armies during their wars with the Arabs them you will see that after internal struggle and wars with the Romans had left them with a poorly structured, ill equipped and undisciplined fighting force, that was a far cry from the armies of previous ages. The tactical prowess and ability was severely limited by that time
Small error, Dacia was abandoned around a century before Julians reign
a bit of it was reconquered by Constantine. and he rebuilt a bridge to help with trade. as the daco-romans and even the goths were still showing signs of relatively prosperous industries.
that territory was again lost by Constans.
but yeah they showed the Dacia of Trajan while talking about the reign of Constantius the 2nd. that is indeed an error.
The gold mines of Dacia were empty and it was the only province that sat on the far side of the Danube. So Aurelian (270-275AD) advised any Roman citizens in Dacia that they were abandoning the province slowly and orderly over a few years. They made agreements with pro Roman tribes to take over the abandoned province so essentially there would be a buffer zone of friendly tribes along the far side of the Danube where Dacia used to be. Then Aurelian re-named a province on the near side of the Danube Dacia.
So Dacia was never abandoned it was just Um, relocated!!
Also, there was definitely still a lot of Roman influence.
@@1wor1d Dude I know it has nothing to do with But Anatolian Turks and Turks in Central Asia are ethnically Turkish, but the only difference between them is that their cousins are different races, right?
Ironic, for someone who was such a big fan of history and ancient heroes Julian managed to not learn from the past Roman defeats and victories and proceded to fall victim to scorched earth tactics, even getting attacked in the front and rear. Not the best way for someone who was reforming and alienating the religious structure of such a massive empire to leave it without a emperor.
He was too stuck in the mindset of his past heroes. The roman world had changed. Even if christianity was divisive, it was never going to go back. He kept deluding himself instead of accepting the situation.
His arrogance and naiveté in thinking that he could defeat the Persians like he could with the alamani, just proves much he had to learn. Him abandoning his fleet and relying on living off the land was horrible logistical planning. He doomed his own army before the main battle already began.
His successor jovian had to relinquish nisbis and several key roman forts vital to the persian front because of julian’s horrible blunder.
It's just show how that "nostalgia toxicity" is nothing news.
As it is said in many romance languages today, Julian commited a Crassus' error. Literally.
His blind ambition and heroic fantasies were his own downfall, as it was with many powerful young men before him
@@althesian9741 so Christianity was the fall of the Roman Empire just like they say? Religion made them weak?
Lol at Kings and Generals saying it's too late for his team member to grow his hair back and then saying but it isn't for us. That was funny to me
8:12 "No wild beasts are such dangerous enemies to man as christians are to one another"
Oh if Julian could have seen the 30 Years War...
* Gets a glimpse of 1200 years into the future. *
Julian: By Zeus, they’re still fighting each other!
@@Creativethinker12 Wouldn't it be "by Jupiter" since he was roman pagan.
@@Victor_aeternus002
Julian was pro-Hellenic and preferred using the name of Greek Gods. He considered himself Greek as well.
@@Creativethinker12 Ah, ok. Nevermind.
@@Victor_aeternus002 Kratos killed Zeus, and now he is coming for your gods
Was waiting so long to see another Julian video, nice work
@GoodGirlKate you are very free
The only ancient source I completely trust about Julian would be Ammianus Marcellinus. The Christian writers were writing polemics about Julian and were determined to make him the villain, while the few other pagan sources besides A.M. were writing unreliable panegyrics or similar about the emperor. Ammianus Marcellinus strikes me as a real historian and fair in his assessments. He was supportive of Julian, but he was also well aware of the emperor's weaknesses and doesn't try to cover these up in his writings.
Julian was a proto Zionist and deserved everything he had coming to him
@@ronald556 Why? Because he encouraged the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem and gave the Jews some tax breaks? This was in the context of Julian's seeking Jewish support against the Persian Empire and finding yet another way to irritate Christian authorities. He really wasn't a Zionist in the 20th century sense. Now, just goosestep on out the door, Heinrich.
@@julianhermanubis6800 Yes, basically the first Zionist before it was even a thing lmao Its no wonder pagans, secularists and Jewish scholars love to defend him to the death and rewriting our history to make him seem like such a good guy
@@ronald556 For you to even write such complete stupidity, just indicates to me that you've never read a book about the Emperor Julian in your entire life. He was first and foremost concerned with restoring some version of state paganism and reviving temples and religious rites that had been suppressed or fallen into disuse. He was a bit skeptical of Judaism as the origin of Christianity, but he had a sense of realpolitik when it came to utilizing the Jews as possible allies. He didn't persecute the Jews and had no interest in seeing them converted to any other religion, and I think those aspects of his approach were appreciated by later Jewish scholars. I have no idea why a modern neopagan would have any interest in Zionism. Now go away, you're just too dumb to engage with.
@@julianhermanubis6800 lmaoo okay keep defending your proto-Zionist emperor lol absolute cringe
The Roman system of succession, effectively civil war, was oddly both a weakness and a strength of the Roman system. A weakness in that it expended great amounts of energy and manpower in internal conflict, and a strength in that it, more frequently than dynastic rule, produced talented reformers who managed to adjust the system enough to keep it going even when under significant pressure.
Let’s be honest here guys this is one of the few channels that makes such HD content it makes you forget everything else you were doing then and there and head right into it in a heartbeat!!! 👌🏻👌🏻💯💯👍🏻👍🏻
He died at the same age as his hero Alexander the Great. 32 years.
A lot less successfully though, but honestly that's not saying much since few reached that level.
@@resentfuldragonThe main differences between them was Julian not having the gigantic amounts of luck that Alexander did, a Shrewed, capable and underrated Daddy King who did all the important and needed stuff just to die before earning the glory himself, and an incapable wuss for an enemy, instead facing one of the most capable and badass Enemies of Rome(and indeed perhaps, most capable Monarchs EVER) in the persona of Shapur II.
Please do an episode about Emperor Majorian. He is an underrated Roman emperor. The last emperor to try to restore the west and almost succeeding with the few resources he had during the twilight of the western empire. I can't find a documentary about him at all...
Second this. He came very close to tying it back together.
Correction-last emperor from the west trying really actively to restore west of the Empire but not the last Roman Emperor trying for that.
I am a huge admirer of Majorian's life and efforts to save a crumbling world. In the words of Edward Gibbon, Majorian presented "the welcome discovery of a great and heroic character, such as sometimes arise, in a degenerate age, to vindicate the honour of the human species". He truly deserves one or even a series of videos. There is a beautiful historical novel about him, "Imperator" by G. Castelli, but I am afraid it has not been translated yet to English.
Check out HistoryMarche if you haven't already. They have an excellent video on Majorian.
@@paprskomet Yeah, justinian also tried and got really close ,though it was more belisarius doing the legwork there.
Everyone: The most talking "what-if" alternate scenario in the world is the Battle of Tours between the Umayyad Caliphate and the Franks.
Kings and Generals Channel: Allow us to introduce to you all to the Roman Emperor named Julian and how he died in the war against the Sassanid Persians.
Really I'd say Alexander dying as he did. Then there's the story of a centorian saving Ceaser. History is absolutely full of what if moments that could have totally changed everything we know.
There's no shot. If he had won the war he probably would've tried to hold the east like Alexander, and like Alexander his empire would've fractured at his death. If he had escaped after capture, he'd be discredited as a viable ruler. If he had managed some kind of status quo victory, the increasingly Christian empire would've revolted.
He wished for a world that no longer existed and wouldn't have survived the one that did
@GoodGirlKate oh there a million outcomes from Alexander surviving. I'm more certain that Rome would never have existed than Alexander would change to Buddhist as he appears to have thought himself a god. I think we'd have a Egyptian Greko mix faith now if he'd managed to live and do what he intended. He was planning to go west when he died so Italy and the Mediterranean would have fallen. Taken longer because there was no single entity to beat to take the lot but then they'd have had to join together to stop him so maybe a few battles would have taken most. It's definitely interesting to speculate about what the total joining of East West like that might have led to.
It's like the story that a party of Chinese diplomats attempted to get to Rome, just after Octavian took control, they got to around 100 miles from the boarder but the Persians they asked lied to them in a way as they told them how long it'd take to get to Rome not in to Roman territory.
If they'd pushed on a little further can you imagine a world where Rome and China were working together. I mean the reason Persia were so scared of it happening was due to them having a border against each of them and if they'd worked together the Persia was finished....
So so many what ifs.
@@DragonwolfoftheSands hmmm. Hard to say that. If he'd taken Persia then the power it would have given him would be unrivalled. Yes it was to late to stop Christianity but it might be a lot less powerful today. Especially as
Constantinople would have become very much the centre of the world and the Roman Church would maybe not become the power it did.
Remember that Persia wasn't Christian and he'd have had plenty of non Christians to place all around the empire. It'd depend on the person who followed him, how long he lived after and many things but we'd definitely have a different world today.
@@itarry4 agreed on Alexander. He surprisingly gets very little credit for a ton of empire-foundation-laying work he did in a short time between the end of his conquests and his death. Caesar however seems more like a symptom of institutional changes which began probably with the Marian reforms, evidenced by Sulla.
Thanks K&G. Julian has always been one of my favorite Romans. Good to see someone acknowledge his influence to the ancient world. IMVHO went East far too soon.
@GoodGirlKate nah
@GoodGirlKate indeed.
RIGHT?!
Such a good video.
You haven't even watched it when you wrote that
@@kennymccormick8906 I had gotten pretty far through, thanks to 2x speed (because I am weird like that), and I don't have to completely finish a video to day it is good, plus it remained good throughout when I finished the video.
@@cirthador1453 bullshet at 2x speed the video is barely comprehensible
@@ap6480 I am aware that I am weird but that is just how I like to watch my videos, I don't find them unintelligible at all.
@@cirthador1453 why you be liking you're own comment tho...
“the time now has come to leave this life which I rejoice to return to nature at her demand like an honorable debtor not bowed down with sorrow having learned from the general conviction of philosophers how much happier the soul is than the body and bearing in mind whenever a better condition is servered from a worse one should rejoice rather than grieve” Julian’s last words
You guys should watch Dovaahaty animated series on the Roman Empire, it’s absolutely beautiful
@@billychops1280 I have! I really wish he went with his last true words, especially seeing how pro Julian he is
That's a mouthful for a guy speared through the ribs...
@@jamesgirardeau757 makes a wise point. Apparently it may also have clipped his liver and intestines.
For a guy who get speared through his ribs, he really speaks a lot, huh. Idk, man. I like the “You won, Galilean” version better.
after this two parter this guy might be in the running for one of my favorite emperors of all time... he wasnt overly malicious and I feel like he enacted reforms he thought would and possibly could have righted the course of what was happening to the roman empire.
Some interesting facts about Shapur II: he is the longest reigning monarch in the history of Iran, ruling from before he was born until his death at 70. When he was just 16, he laid waste to numerous Arab tribes and for his expeditions in Arabia gained the nickname "the one who pierces shoulders" by the Arabs. His greatest wish was to gain back lost territories to Rome at the Peace of Nisinis, which he most certainly did. Much like Julian, he was a great enemy to Christians and prosecuted many of them during his reign.
How do modern Iranians perceive their pre-Islamic kings? Any idea?
@@chronikhiles I wouldn't want to speak for all Iranians, but I would say you could devide them into three groups on that. The hard-line Muslims would look at it with suspicion, some would be indifferent, but I would say a majority of them look at pre-Islam Iran with great reverence, inspiration and admiration. Most Iranians nowadays name their children after ancient kings, heros and gods, as a gesture of drift from Islamic culture.
Ruling from before he was born? Well don't just stop there, explain!
@@ruthswann88 well he means when his mother was pregnant they put the crown on her belly and crowned him as the new shahanshah(King of Kings)
@@hermit1358 His father died shortly after conceiving him?
Julian also attempted to rebuild the Jewish temple to invalidate Jesus’ prophecy about its destruction in 70 ad, but fires broke out and the Galilee earthquake of 363ad caused the end of the project.
you cant fight and win against God
Are you going to talk about the prophecies that haven't materialized?
@@gregorkl1206 Flat Earther 🤡
@@gregorkl1206 yep but you can crucify and kill god lol
@@ShahanshahShahin ok, shit-thrower.
Julian: cousins with Constantius II, married to Helena
Helena: Constantius' sister
*Sweet home Alabama*
And Constantius is Christian supposedly 😁
I am glad along with my hourly dose of History I also know that every channel I like cares about my body hair more than I do myself.
Those ads make this free and plentiful.
@@apexnext I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
Roman commanders: Exist
Sassanids: Your free trial of living has ended
Great video as always. Listening to your videos have helped get me through many long work days
Those Sassanids were always being cheeky to others. They were giving out so much sass!
The Sassanids suffered a great defeat from the Gokturks, 2 Persian kings were defeated and killed by the Gokturks in 2 years.
@@scourgeofgodattila579 Arabs : Nice one Boyz
@@scourgeofgodattila579 i assume you're a turk and want some attention
@@scourgeofgodattila579 They also destroyed an army from emperor valerian at least 50,000 strong and captured him in battle.
They also destroyed belisarius’s army at calinicum soon after the battle of dara.
The sassanids were strong enemies. They aren’t supposed to be underestimated.
@@althesian9741 👍👍👍
8:14Why throw Christians to the lions when you can throw them to other Christians?
And the foolish failed. And now he is facing ultimate torment.
@@darthvenator2487 Perhaps if you believe in hell. Scriptures state that sinners simply perish with no mention of a place of torment. Essentially, non believers enter non existince while believers fellowship with God eternally.... hence, the wage of sin is death and the reward of faith is immortality with God. However, most Christians today also believe in hell which is purely bad theology.
@@MilVetGaming and we did not create the heaven and the earth and that between them aimlessly. That is the assumption of those who disbelieve, so woe tô those who disbelieve from the fire.
@iMakz which is why they are all wrong. "Those who believe in the justness of an eternal hell either don't understand eternity or they don't understand hell". It's a deeply evil and wrong doctrine, stop simping for desert religions that push it.
@@James-kh8mq wow, I have never been defended before... always criticized. Thanks for adding your take on it.
Yhea can't see him being called an apostate bothering him in any way. He certainly seems to have understood his enemy in the Christians at an intellectual level but maybe forgot their other human traits that everyone has.
Finally had the empire on a steady course and he decides he has to invade Persia! Why Julian Why??
it's the fate of every roman emperor lmao
@@sofiapellegrini7094 well everyone came from africa
@@drsm7947 Pls😪
@@sofiapellegrini7094 ?
Rome and Persia were still at war from 359.
You could make a small series on the reign of Julian and his attempts to return Rome to its Old Faith
I think there’s some important things he missed. For instance, he wanted to make paganism more like Christianity in order to make it easier to defeat.
*Julian's attempts to reinvigorate the people shifted the focus of paganism from a system of tradition to a religion with some of the same characteristics that he opposed in Christianity.[119] For example, Julian attempted to introduce a tighter organization for the priesthood, with greater qualifications of character and service. Classical paganism simply did not accept this idea of priests as model citizens. Priests were elites with social prestige and financial power who organized festivals and helped pay for them. Yet Julian's attempt to impose moral strictness on the civic position of priesthood only made paganism more in tune with Christian morality, drawing it further from paganism's system of tradition.*
Julian also adopted a sort of monotheism. He believed in one transcendent God who created the world and saw the pagan Gods as his representatives or something. Kind of like angels in the bible I guess.
He also forgot one of the most important aspects of Julian’s character that everyone in ancient times commented about: his love of animal sacrifice. Christians tended to obsess over animal sacrifice, which probably made Julian sacrifice even more because he knew how much they disliked it.
*A key practice clearly out of step with current thinking, but to which Julian was devoted, was animal sacrifice. He believed it was an essential component of ritual observance. Among his first acts on becoming emperor was to repeal the prohibition imposed by Constantine and confirmed by Constantius II. Julian sacrificed at every opportunity, and at least twice a day, at dawn and dusk. His detractors ridiculed him as ‘sacrifice-mad’, ‘butcher’, ‘bull-burner’, ‘seller of meat’. Even his supporters joked that if he were to return victorious from Persia there would be an empire-wide shortage of livestock.*
*Few, even after the lifting of the legal ban, shared Julian’s passion or his insistence on its importance. But sacrifice was not made compulsory. The emperor was not prepared to enforce his convictions, despite his clear frustration with his co-religionists. Whatever the ritual preferences of Julian’s fellow believers (perhaps they chose to pray or burn incense or pour libations), Christians promoted an image of pagan religiosity fixated on animal sacrifice. Blood-drenched devotees glistening with gore are the stuff of Christian fantasy. The imagined close connection between pagans and animal sacrifice is one of the great and lasting successes of Christian polemic. In Julian’s obsession that fiction seemed, if only briefly, to be realised.*
@@yibithehispanic No Turkey Turks Azerbaijan Turks and Turkmenistan Turks They are the same I did research These three are described as Oghuz Turks
@@joellaz9836 one creator God and many lesser gods has absolutely nothing in common with Christianity...now please see some of the west African religions like the Yoruba which have the same thing
@@Texasmade74 christianity has 3 gods plus angels, demons, prophets and saints
Ave Julianus!
"So long as you are a slave to the opinions of the many you have not yet approached freedom or tasted its nectar."
- Julian the Apostate
The pages were still the magority in his time
Superb production. Also very timely. I was reading about Christian Saints and the legend of St. Mercurius and the demise of Emperor Julian. Although most likely a legend indeed it is undeniable that alot of early christians reviled Julian despite his accomplishments as Roman Emperor.
What accomplishments ??? Almost leaving a mighty and prosperous empire left by Constantine in ruins?? Getting yourself killed with the main army of Roman empire trapped in foreign lands??
@@johnnybravo19871 check his success against Germans and administrative reforms. Bungled in Persia and let Christianity ravage his ancestral religion once again and this time it was not stopped by anyone.
that sponsor section, there was no need to call out ya boi like that.
The Sassanids should be credited more. Their cavalry were one of the best antiquity had to offer. They were the ancestors of what would be the medieval knight. Jousting and knight duels came specifically from the east.
The sassanids also were more aggressive than the parthians and dealt numerous defeats against the romans that would make carrhae look like a drop in an ocean
@@Berfo1 Im guessing it was the muslims who downplayed later persian empires and their achievements. Im just assuming but we really don’t get much details about sassanian era compared to the parthian one. Zoroastrians were also a minority at this time despite their huge influence in history. I think it was much better to convert than deal with the jizya tax and get treated as a second-class citizen.
@@Berfo1 indeed anatolia was a heavily populated area and the byzantines held a bid part until the late 12th century thanks to the komnenos dynasty . the 4th crusade was catastrophic for the eastern romans but still they held some territories empire of trepizond held the pontus region until the 15th century and the empire of nicaea later the byzantine empire western anatolia until the rise of the ottomans ( at the start of the 14th century )
@@Berfo1 Nice revisionism buddy, you are 100% downplaying the muslims.
The only real advantage the muslims had was far less turmoil since sassanid leaders kept killing eachother and sassanid army men kept defecting.
The muslims had even worse manpower problems as they were a minority in their own empire and had the ridda wars, where they fought a civil war against many pagans.
Furthermore not only were the arabs outnumbered, but they had objectively inferior equipment to the sassanids and romans.
Another issue was they fought on multiple fronts, and one battle even had a combined roman-sassanid force that fought the muslims.
Also its incorrect to say the sassanids had no trained soldiers, at the beggining they had trained soldiers but they lost them in the first few muslim victories since the death counts were so high.
I doubt that the sassanids at full power could have beat the muslims since the muslims wouldn't have attacked rome until after making gains like they did in real life.
The muslims frequently only needed a force of around 10-15 thousand to destroy armies many times its size, the sassanids never had a chance realistically.
@@Berfo1 Not true, the sassanids had a military that was larger and better equipped. Rather than lie about sassanid weakness, talk about their power at their height.
The sassanids have many great feats to talk about, why not talk about how Khosrow trolled justinian and sacked his cities?
Why lie about the muslims when you know they were at a disadvantage for most of the battles against the sassanids?
@@resentfuldragon i don't think arabs would get anywhere if the roman sassanan war during early 7th century never happened. This is only a what if scenario but the romans and sassanians are far more higher quality and has the numerical advantage in terms of military, remember when the muslims attacked the sassanids and romans AFTER the roman sassanid wars, they were still outnumbered by the sassanids and romans. Although they exploited an weakness, the muslims are really great even though they were still outnumbered especially the general khalid. But to be fair if the wars never happened I doubt even if they did defeat the romans or sassanids, the two superpowers would still recover due to sheer size, wealth and strength alone
It's really amazing how Julian and Shapur II were so similar
I think Julian just had bad luck in that moment. Had he survived somehow even with a leg wound like Timur he could've easily become known as a Great like Shapur II considering his good performance in Gaul.
@@jordanplays-transitandgame1690 he was reckless during his Persian camping, razing his river boats , lack of supplies
Sooner or later he would've defeated
He besieged Persian capital two times and failed
I personally think he had luck to die
Otherwise he might've had a fate like Valerian
Wow this is a amusing video this so much fantastic according to my account your channel is the best channel of TH-cam
@Kings and Generals Please do a similar documentary of the Life of Shapour II., It is nothing short of Julian.
The hubris is pretty astounding. Rather than turning around and consolidating gains, he marched past Ctesiphon. It seems like after his victory in Gaul he thought he couldn't lose. He is on the same level as Crassus.
681 years... That´s what the Roman-Persian wars lasted, with no substantial or long lasting gain on either side..
The last war was so unbelievably destructive it allowed the arabs the take more than half of the roman empire. And destroy the persians
Yeah, it would make a nice series focusing on this conflict from the beginning till the end.
@@Zeerich-yx9po Mmmh yea, but they were short-lived incursions, and Ctesiphon was only one of two capitals of the Parthians (the other Ecbtana) I believe that the Parthians actually had more victories over the Romans, and as long as they kept control of the Silk Road they could quikly reabosrb all the gold and silver the Romans plundered. Cheers!
@@Zeerich-yx9po Don't ignore the Parthians victories
The Parthians defeated the Romans at the battle of Carrhae and took 7 Roman eagle flags while Romans outnumbered them almost 5 to 1
(Fun fact : The Sassanids defeated a great Roman general at Carrhae too. But it's known as the battle of Callinicum)
After Parthians raided asia minor and judea, they lost a battle to the Romans but defeated Mark Antony after that while they had 50000 soldiers and Antony had over 100000
The Parthians killed half of his men
The Parthians even took back Mesopotamia back from Trajan's commanders without their main army
They defeated the Romans at the battle of Rhandeia and even won in their last war against the Romans known as the war of Caracalla and defeated the Romans at the battle of Nisibis
The Sassanids gained even greater victories
11:00 - I'm wondering whether Julian discovered the holy hand grenade during his time at Antioch?
It should be noted that the mausoleum of Julian in Constantinople (Istanbul) still exists today, together with other Roman emperors. It is conspicuous as it is the only one without the symbol of the cross on it.
EDIT: It is a sarcophagus not mausoleum
His body unfortunately isn’t there. It along with the bones of his relatives were taken during the 4th crusade.
@@dantecaputo2629 do we know where they ended up?
@@cromusician6153
Unfortunately no, possibly somewhere in Venice, but it’s also possible the bones of Constantine, Julian, Justinian, and Basil, were simply dumbed into the sea or found there way to some monastic catacombs.
@@dantecaputo2629 That is quite the shame
Awesome video. Thankyou K&G for another fascinating journey into the past
It would’ve been nice to hear about the failed attempt for building a temple in Jerusalem
YES! I was wondering why that part wasn’t mentioned.
@Xiuh Julian couldnt restore what is dead in the first place
@Xiuh same could be said about the Third Temple since the Dome of the Rock is over it
@Xiuh we won Jej
@Xiuh Pagan Ruins were totally more useful to the West then Christianity,totally useful
Please, sometimes make a full documentary about battle of Samarra!!!
Appreciate the highly informative content K&G. I'm looking to sturdy military history at university soon. So these vids are absolute gems🙏🙏👍
thank you for the great content, i’m currently in hospital and your content is keeping me going. i have loved this mini series on the final pagan emperor. keep up the great content :)
@@noneinparticular2338 thanks man, best of luck to you in the coming months
Ctesiphon had been sacked four times prior rather than five: Trajan, Verus, Severus, Carus. Odaenathus never succeeded in capturing the city, and while Galerius is recorded in the vicinity (leading to scholarly misunderstanding), no source claims he captured it.
Version with Christian assasin is the least often mentioned in Roman sources(no matter that many later Christioans even liked that idea or that this is modernly most popularly propagated version becouse it seems so romantic that he would died by Christian hand).By far the most often repeted version says that he was killed by a Roman soldier but not because of religious motivation but by totally profane reasons-he was enraged on Julian for the situation Romans get under him in Persia.The 2nd most commonly refered version from original sources says that assasin was from the Persian army,either an actual Persian or as most claim-an arab auxiliary in Persian service.Many other versions are preserved.For example the one suposing that Julian was indeed killed by a Roman soldiers but in mere unintentional friendly fire(which is quite possible as basically all sources agree it was very confused situation with very limited visibility because of mighly dust clouds all around mixed with several fighting groups in close order) or even fantastic stories that he was killed by supernatural being which included Christian saints but also Pagan demons.
In short: Nobody knows, but everyone guessed.
Though out of all the versions in which he was killed by a Roman, the "F*ck you for getting us into this mess" motive makes most sense to me considering the situation they were in.
@@rockyblacksmith also very much like a roman to do that
Dacia should be not be seen as under Roman control in your maps since it had been abandoned by Aurelian almost 90 years before this.
The second-best Roman Emperor after Augustus. The Death of Julian was one of the biggest disasters in Western history. Rome started to decline after his death, and a few decades after his death was the start of the fall of the Roman Empire as Rome grew weak. Within 100 years of Julian's death, the western roman empire was gone.
2nd best after Augustus is so incredibly exaggerated that you could make epic trilogy from it.East continued for many more centuries and it was not anyhow less a Roman empire that western half of the same state.
Legend says: if you meet a persian's king named Shapur as an enemy then you have already lost the battle.
Yet Julian won several battles against him - just blundered with the campaign & lost big time.
Julian actually won all ba
Actually Julian won all the battles against Shapur.
If he wouldn't had get wounded he would have come again and conquer Sasanids
@@Lucasukx I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
@@adolphbismark4331 I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
"The Roman Emperor Julian, writing in the fourth century, regretted the progress of Christianity because it pulled people away from the Roman gods. He said, 'Atheism [I.e. the Christian faith!] has been specially advanced
through the loving service rendered to strangers, and through their care for the burial of the dead. It is a scandal that there is not a single Jew who is a beggar, and that the godless Galileans care not only for their own poor but for ours as well; while those who belong to us look in vain for the help that we should render them."
@@luxinvictus9018 christianity changed so much for the worst.
@@luxinvictus9018 You mean nihilism
That is fake.AVE JULIAN.
@@luxinvictus9018 Didn't christianity became the same
@@heyyo6050 Power always corrupt.
Can you please make more Videos about the Achaemenids and Sassanids
Wooooo 😄 I've been waiting for this video!!! Keep up the good work!
The Persian campaign was a mistake. He should've stayed home and continued to reform and strengthen Roman institutions.
That campaign was long at works already since Constantine.Julian possibly had among his motives also to cement his position with it had he returned a victor.
How could Julian not have brought along siege engines with him? Why could he not have sent for materials to build them to be transported on his ships? It seems an incredible oversight.
If Ctesiphon could not be stormed then why not starve it out? Julian had limitless supply with his ships, whilst the inhabitants of the city did not. Sooner or later the Persians would have had to attack or let their Capital fall. The former would have resulted in a pitch battle involving a fully supplied, entrenched Roman army, giving them an excellent chance of success. The latter would be a sufficiently large victory in itself to declare the campaign a success and sail back up the river.
If a long siege was unfeasible, then the best remaining option was probably to sack any settlements within a couple days march then head back to Imperial lands.
Barbatio was the ultimate troll to Julian. Burning requested boats! Hilarious, but a jerk move. That and all the other stuff courtesy of Constantius.
What a great video! Julian died too early, he could have achieved so much more!
Watching this series is so much better when Julian is my name, and I too (along with everyone else here) is a History Nerd.
Julian also prepared to build the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. He accumulated building materials in Jerusalem. He received great Jewish support but an explosion wrecked the building site and his death finished this endeavour.
Wait a moment...
2:09 wasn't Dacia abandoned during the times of Emperor Aurelian?
Romans still had outposts there.
Dacia was late overrun by germanics, slavs, avars, turkic tribes, mongols, hungarians , bulgars etc.
Btw both Julian and Aurelian were Illyrian Roman Emperors.
so what happen to the army ? how they managed to get out of persia (i assume) ? this seems like a important information
Jovian
They negotiated a safe passage and gave away the important fortress of Nisibis
They signed treaty giving up Roman provinces that Diocletian gained from Narses in 299
@@zakariamattu8613 narseh
The romans took heavy losses but managed to resist until nightfall forcing the persians to retreat, which allowed the army (under the newly elected emperor jovian) to retreat from the battlefield.
A few days later they were trapped with their backs against a river by the returning persian army and forced to sign a peace treaty with shapur II, handing him many eastern forts and towns in excange for safe passage back to syria.
The concessions made to the persians were very heavy and were considereted humiliating by both modern and contermporary authors alike, as they basically undone all of the hard-fought progress diocletian and galerius achived in the east.
Sadly for some reason sassanid history is always skipped or underplayed on this channel, which is a shame because their videos are among the best on youtube
The productions this channel puts out are incredible. Thanks again for another great video.
Late Roman post-Constantine Empire: its so underrated
@Horse in suit It is forget by majority, you know who is majorian ?
The best Roman Emperor of the entire 4th century!
Could you guys make a series on sassanids empire or islamic persia? that would be great. i suggest you to read shahnameh (book of the kings)
Make a video about Shapur I
The great
Got no idea who that is and I already want to watch it!
@@omba3905 before that kings and Generals make a video about Battle of Edssa
@@omba3905 *_The 2nd Shahenshah/Emperor of the Sassanid dynasty of Persia who defeated the Roman emperor "Valerian" In the Battle of Edessa 260 AD and made him his slave_*
yea needs a vid about Shapur I `s life and battles, would be epic.
Hadn't the Romans already withdrawn from Dacia at this point?
Yes
Where are the Sassanid elephants? Shapur II had a war elephant.
If you can make a video of the first Sassanid wars with the Arabs during the time of Shapur II.
why tf would he attack the heartland of persian empire during the reign of the most powerful monarch in sassanid history
Because he was a glory hunger fool. And God vanquished him.
If he won he would have been greater than alexander which why he did
@@lyonelk3108 But he failed and now he is nothing
@@darthvenator2487 i mean sure but his legacy has outdone many emperors even thousands of years he is remembered and loved
@@lyonelk3108 Only by you. Unless you have multiple personaties.he is a footnote compared to Constantine, Basil II and Charlemagne.
Roman empire:I am victorious
5th century:you are nothing
Respect for a fellow warrior against Abrahamic aggression 🙏
We Hindus are still fighting against it.
I suggest Gore Vidal’s narrative historical fiction Julian, which tells the story from the perspective of Julian and his greatest supporters. It’s an amazing book.
Yess it's a great book, i was so sad by the end
Hi I would like to know if you can make a video about Thracians and Dacians that would be really cool.
When a competent emperor like Julian is condemned while Theodosius who was reliant on barbarian generals and made the empire lose its territorial integrity is given the magnus moniker, you know the end is imminent.
Wow! My new favourite Emperor, thanks so much for giving me another rabbit hole to go down. Hope there is some good reading on him.
I guess it would have been too much to tell how the campaign concluded after Julian's death....sad.
Right. Such an abrupt ending
@@dariusghodsi2570 how is it getting lazy?
Greatest what if in history.
What would be next? Jovian and Valentinian?
Valentinian most likely, after all he's the one they make the most content of
All 3 Illyrian Roman Emperors.
It is crazy how much influence the Illyrian Roman Emperors had in the Roman Empire and Eastern Roman empire between 250 AD to 610 AD.
Only Albanians are left of these great people.
@@8kuji I researched people in Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. Turks of Turkey, Turks of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan Turks and Uzbek Turks have the same blood (R and j Hablogrup) However, Kazakh Turks have the same blood as Mongolians and Chinese (R and O hablogrup). One is cousin with the Greeks, the others are cousins with the Persians, Afghans and Mongols. But whatever happens, Turks are not ethnically similar to the Chinese. The first homeland of the Turks is the state of Turkmenistan in Central Asia. I know it's not related to the topic my friend, but is this information correct? I will be glad if you reply today.
4:20 wasn't Dacia long abandoned by this time?
Another subject of late romane empire that deserves much attention is arborgaste
Julian the Apostate was 1 of the 29 Roman Illyrian Emperors that ruled the Roman and Eastern Roman Empire from 250s and 270 AD up to 610 AD.
Today of these great people only Albanians are left .
IMO Julian was a very able emperor. I don't agree much with his religious views but he was very able in state affairs and in the military besides being virtuous and having great knowledge.
In his Persian campaign he defeated Persians in most battles and if he wouldn't have been deadly wounded he would have returned and defeated Sasanids. Very underrated Emperor.
I am forward waiting a video about the other 3 other Illyrian Roman Emperors such as Valentinian the Great, Anastasius and Justinian the Great. Aeitius and Majorian deserve a documentary each too.
@@adolphbismark4331 what about severan dinasty? I think last severan deserves much more reputation
@@alessandrogini5283 Two of the worst emperors (Caracalla and Elagabalus) came from that dynasty
Edit: 'last Severan'? You mean Severus Alexander? Then yes he is underrated
@@dominicguye8058 alexander severus with more luck could be important as costantine or Diocletian
As a Persian got that 3 Roman Emperor and Emperor died in clashes with Parthian and Sassanids. Crassus, Valerian and Julian's.
Crassus wasn't an emperor. Crassus lived during the Republic, though in it's waning days. He was a Senator & governor of Syria when he invaded Parthia.
Philip the Arab?
@@ShahanshahShahin died against decius ,decius didn't want to kill him because he was his friend
He was undoubtedly one of the best Roman emperors, and the best since Aurelian. If they had lived and ruled for a decade or two, the World would have been extremely different from what it is today.
He is not even close in ALL to majorian, even valentian...
@@marcelohenrique6624 He got only 2 years. And in those 2 years he changed the empire drastically. Imagine if he ruled for 2 decades. Also he would have ruled longer than 2 decades if he would have ruled till his death, if he died in ripe old age.
The Empire desperately needed economic and social reform. Another showdown with Persia, it could have done without.
He was not
He was an arrogant fool stuck in the past and that was his downfall sure he defently was a unique individual but calling him "great" is very innacurate
@@dirckthedork-knight1201 ? He died fighting in Persia, his rule didn't got overthrown or something, so how can you say that his admiration for the principate caused his downfall? Rome was on it's knees in 4th century so admiring the Rome of Pax Romana makes too much sense. Also he was one of the most successful Roman emperor as a general of the late empire.
Hi Kings and Generals,
Is there a plan to try - the two skirmishes {1999 Kargil}, {1962 Indo-Sino} ?
I love the colour of Persia, Persian blue should be colour of Persians in future videos as well.
@@Berfo1 that too, but Persians used the colour blue in nearly all their architectures, but derafsh kaviani is good point
I wish somebody like Paradox would make a late antiquity strategy game. I know there's Total War: Attila, but I'm more thinking a game that has multiple start dates, like the year of the six emperor's, the reign of Valerian, and the reign of Diocletian. The game would end around 800 with the Arab conquests as a kind of "final boss" similar to the Mongols in Crusader Kings. It's oddly specific but I feel like late antiquity really doesn't get much appreciation as a historical era.
I understand, late antiquity is one of my favourite time periods!
Too bad that Imperator Rome got abandoned by Paradox. I was hoping we would get a start date around this time period for future updates. As a separate game, it’s difficult as the late antiquity doesn’t have a large amount of appeal and appreciation compared to the classical antiquity or the medieval era. It’s the time where empires faced civil wars, declining economy and population, and the invasion of the Huns which pushed several barbarian tribes to migrate west causing the downfall of Rome.
For gameplay perspective, it’s not beginner friendly as the factions that many people wants to play such as Rome and Sassanids are over-stretched and difficult to manage while smaller factions which are mostly barbarian tribes faced constant pressure from other barbarian tribes to move west and they have to deal with the might of Rome causing a 2 way war. Overall, its a game that focuses on survival rather than empire building. Total war Attila has demonstrated how difficult it is and the amount of players who bought and played the game is not as high as Rome 2. Its just a gloomy and dark time period for people to appreciate thus I don’t think it would work as a separate game.
Damn... The sassanids got a video in which they won
We never see it from thier point of view
@@hishamseddiqee9528 it's not that its roman propagonda hiding thier defeats or belittling them.
I think its more because the change of religion and propaganda because the romans had a "country" a lot longer than the sassanids and what is the best way to convert a culture when it is conquered...propaganda
@@orao4022 yeah
The supposedly invincible belisarius? Bet they didn’t say that he got defeated at the battle of calinicum soon after the battle of dara. He was dismissed from his post as magister millitem oriens because of the defeat.
Thank you sir....👍🇳🇿 New Zealand
the last Pagan Emperor.
_Of Roman Empire_
@@ShahanshahShahin Yeah, Japan still has a Pagan emperor. :D
A great episode/work 👌👏
Imagine how different the world would have been if christianity never rose
Shut up
@@selom6139 found the christian lmfao
@@selom6139 why? Can't I say that christianity had a massive influence in the world?
So.. no Renaissance? Jokes aside, the Empire was already dying anyway. Pax Romana ended with Marcus Aurelius, after that it was politics, overly incompetent emperors, and barbarian invasions that ravaged the Roman world. Without Christianity, either Europe never progressed and become some backwater of civilizations or we would be worshipping Ahura Mazda as our lord and saviour.
@@soulofcinder2129 I think that's the beauty of it, anything could have happened. Still though, I wouldn't have minded a pantheon of gods in modern day like the roman one.
Julian with 6 fingers (6:36) kinda gives the game away.
For as much as Julian was hyped here, he turned out to be an amateur in the end.
Starting a campaign against a rival empire while his own was still unstable; Burning his supply line; Leaving a substantial army (& the enemy's capital) intact on his back while retreating; Choosing a route that will inevitably sandwich him between Ctesiphon & Shapur; Being indecisive in choosing which part of the army to rally towards; Having no designated successor, etc. aren't hallmarks of the "New Caesar" that he wished to become.
Another awesome video.
I like Julian, a great emperor, probably one of my top 3 favorite Roman emperors. After Diocletian and Marco Aurelius.