Bonus Fact(s): - Julian died 32 years of age (just like Alexander the Great). - The following emperor, Jovian, also died with 32 while retreating from persia (he suffocated while heating his tent with a charcoal fire).
Trace Fleeman Garcia Socrates Scholasticas was a notoriously unreliable source. He was writing nearly eighty years after Julian’s death, had never known Julian personally, and was a church historian. His main aim was not to document Roman history, but the history of the church during the Constantinian era. He was also biased against the Emperor, as most ecclesial historians were, and was likely to repeat unfounded rumors. If you want a good source on Julian’s life, I suggest reading Ammianus Marcellinus, an officer under Julian who wrote a history that covered his rule extensively, or Licenius, a philosopher who was part of Julian’s retinue. Many of the Emperor’s letters and writings have survived, making his reign remarkably well documented.
Keep in mind that when Julian invaded Persia he had no real specific goal in mind. He had no specific vision of what victory looked like other than "defeat the Persians".
I think the goal was to punish them for destroying Amida. The story is often told like Julian started a war with Persia out of the blue, when in reality he was simply continuing the war that had begun in 359 between his cousin and Shapur.
@@dantecaputo2629 Sure, but that's not what I meant. I meant he had no specific war aim that would signify that the war was won. Like sacking the Sassanid capital. He was kind of waging war by the seat of his pants. Much like the Americans in Afghanistan.
@@pieceofschmidtgamer it literally said his goal was to take a city at first, and he had a method of attack planned out for it involving sending a decoy over the armenian mountains
Julian did not "simply retreat", he won the battle in Ctesiphon (defeated the army in front of the city and surrounding it) and Shapur 2(emperor of Persia) offered a pretty good deal (giving Rome a lot of territories, gold and etc) just so the romans would leave. The mistake Julian did was not taking that offer and dwelling further into the country, while he did not receive the backup and resources that was expected, also the persians sat on fire vast amount of lands in order to starve the roman army, thus they began a difficult march home in which he was stabbed with a spear by one of his close servants, as there was a plot long before that event, organized by his christian generals and others. He was a very intelligent and admirable emperor, also a highly skilled in battles (I believe he does not have a loss at all). The reforms he planned were enormous, alas they were never fully realized. Read Gore Vidal's book on the matter.
Julian was indeed a good tactician. But I think the supposed plot and theory of Julian being killed by one of his own christian servants has never been confirmed though. However, Vidal uses this interesting rumour in his outstanding novel.
It was just that Julian had to die, and Europe to become fully christianized. Had he not been killed in such a way, we would have been living in a different world.
@@abdullahamir119 Yes, a much better world. The Inquisition (caused by the Roman Catholic church) and the Holocaust (inspired by the later teachings of Martin Luther and Germany's long history of anti-Semitism under both Catholic and Lutheran rule), as well as the Crusades, never would have happened in such a world. Literally millions of lives would have been saved.
@Sarsath During the Crisis of the 3rd Century Berbers began raiding the area, and since the Romans were busy with more pressing matters they de facto lost control of the area to various Berber tribes.
The Roman Empire did retake a very small part but something happend after the Sassanid war in early 600, are you talking about that? Its probably because they had to focus on the middle east.
The colonies where abandoned and legal authority transferred to the Mauri. Reports between the Mauri rulers and the Romans were good until the Arabic conquest. The Mauri / Moors asked for help from Constantinople but Rome was in no position to help.
You forgot to mention Julian is considered to be one of Rome's greatest authors, writing comedy (about his own family); drama's and history books. That is his claim to fame, not that he was Rome's last pagan Emperor.
@@minch333 It's quite easy to view him as a comical figure and this is partly down to his telling stories against himself (like the story of the goose of Daphne). It's very sad that such an attractive person died so young but perhaps a long and successful reign would have soured his character.
@@alanpennie8013 Well, he wasnt exactly well-liked by anyone during his reign Traditional polytheistic pagans didnt like his emphasis on charity with the pagan church he tried to establish (and pagan priests actively hated him since he tried to crack down on and correct the hedonistic and debaucherous behavior that had always been the norm for them). Monotheistic/henotheistic pagans (like the Neoplatonists) saw him as an eccentric larper at best, and at worst were actively repulsed by his bizarre fondness for blood sacrifice (which had long since fallen out of favor with them), not to mention we have writings from a few of them who werent too happy with his attempt to ban Christians from teaching and engaging with the Classics. Christians...that goes without saying. Politically, he was trying to decentralize the government and revert to a more Principate-styled government, including a restoration of Senatorial power-which would have gone over like a lead balloon with the (often quite powerful) bureaucrats, *many* of whom were Christian, along with any general or relative of his with a feasible shot at the throne. Rome had changed far too much for any sort of return to the Principate to be remotely feasible and be anything other than (pretty much literal) suicide. Even his allies and supporters who knew him personally admitted he had a pretty hair-trigger temper and was prone to hotheaded and bullheaded decisions from time to time because of it. He was pretty much doomed to die early (by assassination if not war) because of a combination of these factors. His war in Persia was pretty ill-advised but it was basically his best way to try and gain a much-needed popularity boost.
Even though it seems like a footnote, Julian's act to ban Christian philosophers from teaching the "classics" changed Christian doctorand and dogma for centuries. Christians adapted quickly and created their own doctorands and dogmas completely separate from the classics with only a few Greek and early Roman philosophers really getting much traction in the early Catholic teachings even after Julian died. Also due to Julian living such a short reign, he made these very damaging and dividing acts against Christianity without really forming the Pagan traditions he wanted to emphasize, so it went right back to Christianity but in a slightly different direction, with a possibly even more conservative direction then before Julian. If Julian never became emperor, it's very possible, the Catholic Church would have been much more open minded about a lot of their doctorands and dogmas based a lot more on the Greek Classics then they ended up having and it's possible the way Christianity developed over the centuries quite possibly would be very different.
I assume he was waiting to earn it. If he'd inflicted a defeat and settlement upon the House of Sasan, his panegyrists would have sung him a new song of Amun.
No mention of Julian's defense of Gaul, his chastisement of the Germans across the Rhine, nor his strategem of passing through Germany itself, to bypass Constantius' eastern defences. All heroic exploits worthy of mention, and a prequel episode?
yeah the German war was a particular high point which deserves mention. there are people here arguing for Julian as a "great emperor" which he was not, but he did great work for Rome before he was emperor.
Constantius kept sending Julian on impossible missions and had generals simply ignoring his requests for reinforcements. They had trust issues. Didnt help that when Julian was a boy Constantius murdered Julian`s entire family
To be objective-nobody knows exactly how it happened.Julian had no doubts that family purge was ordered by Constantius(we know that from his writtings) but was it really so?Quite likely but not necessarilly.Official version was that it was spontaneous act of an army.
He started an unwanted war against Persia and got himself killed. It was one of my big what ifs as to what would have happened had he survived.Only other thing I think could change entire religion would be Maurice surviving and not going to another stupid war against Persia due to his overthrow
He didnt started it.That war was already raging when he bacame sole Emperor.However Persian King was ready to make peace which Julian refused several times.
Oversimplified: hold my beer Historia civils: hold my beer Extra credits: hold my beer Me: umm, I’ll introduce the rest later, I can’t hold this many beers
You make it seem like Christians and Pagans were on equal footing before this, or at least for novices in Roman history, when Christians in fact got preferential treatment from emperors like Constantine the Great, who practically made it impossible to advance in the government bureaucracy and likewise unless one subscribed to the said religion
This isn't really true though. Themistius of Constantinople was employed by all the Eastern Emperors from Constantius II to Theodosius I as their public relations man despite being a pagan.
Karl 17 Ah yes, Christians had it so good in the Roman Empire... It’s not like they were literally crucified and thrown to the lions for their beliefs.
@@maple2524 Lol, I am talking about the privileged status Christians enjoyed during the reign of Constantine the Great and the period afterwards, check your chronology. But I agree with you, before Constantine Christians were used as scapegoats and had been generally, and at times harshly, persecuted up to the time of Constantine, most notably by the emperors Nero, Decius and Diocletian
I like these short video's but do hope that you make good on your promises of making some longer video's as well, though i get that these of course take more time to make.
@Iddo Margalit-Friedman He didn't actually. Julian issued an edict in which he stated he was going to rebuild the Jewish Temple AFTER his victory in Persia. Seeing as he died during that campaign, the construction never started.
@@iddomargalit-friedman3897 Nope, the tale of the earthquake (or in some sources, intentional sabotage, or a lightning strike) is from a considerably later source.
@Nate A Nope, they still wore togas until at the latest the 8th Century, albeit they were much simpler than the classical toga. These togas were also only worn by the nobility, just like in classical times and most people would wear a tunic.
Constantine didn't have much to do with it - it went out of fashion in the 3rd century and had lost its meaning as distinguishing Roman citizens from non-citizens (as all inhabitants of the Empire were citizens by then); also, civilian officials tended to wear military-style garb from Diocletion onwards. A toga was only used by senators in the Senate, the prefects (mayors) of Rome and Constantinople, and often consuls.
So Julian wanted to show he was a big man by breaking from his predecessors’ policies and invading Persia . . . even though he’d gotten the top spot by refusing to send troops to invade Persia when Constantius had called for them? 😒
His troops refused to go to Persia and neither of his predecessors followed their own ones (Constantine obviously because he favored Christianity and Constantius II was an Arian, which was declared heretical during the Council of Nicea by Constantine).
Vienna The Grill He invented The Franks. So there's that. He put them in Belgium but they didn't like it there and moved to France which is called that because of them.
Has Rome ever fought a war with the Persians in which they won? This is a genuine question, since most of my Rome knowledge is lodged in Caesar, Octavian/Augustus, and Justinian.
The Persian capital of Ctesiphon was sacked for more times than i can remember, counting the bizantine empire, i think the seventh time was Heraclius in the 600s. When reading Roman-persian wars im always looking if the poor Ctesiphon is going to be sacked again Lol. Julian tried but the capital was sacked so many times that for the time when Julian decided to attack the city, the inhabitants were ready this time,i mean the city by that time was sacked five times already and the people were like, fockin romans this time we will be ready
In the 2nd and early 3rd century, Rome had the upper hand against the Parthian Empire, and sacking Ctesiphon became something of a regular occurrence. That changed when the Sassanids took over in the 220s and turned the balance of power in the East around. And then at the very end, Herakleios defeated them again in the early 7th century.
@@acebalistic1358 not really, at least when they sacked it, there were the spoils of war from the city and the surroundings, and that without mentioning the villages and cities that they sacked in the way to ctesiphon
Now tell about his time as caesar, his campaign in gaul was one of the greatest on late roman empire. Anyone interested, i believe kings and generals cover it, or maybe history march
@@koffieslikkersenior Ktesiphon is the Hellenic version. Tespon or Tispun or however is the original Iranian term (being an Iranian city founded to control Nahrain). It later evolved into Tisfon for similar reasons that Greek /p^h/ evolved into /f/. Considering that Tisfon, or Mahoze in Aramaic (also Qtesiphon in Aramaic, from Greek), is certainly not Greek in anyway, it's better to use the term that the elites used, or at least Mahoze for the natives. (Tho Mahoze refers to the dual cities of Tisfon and Seleukia, the natives probably didn't care either way, still foreign rulers).
Its like saying, Roman Empire: I'm the only legitimate Empire. Roman Empire: Hold my beer (in greek) Its like saying I'm a different person because I'm older and I speak greek now
@@august8696 Julian was not irrelevant. It’s true that his time as Augustus was cut short, but as Caesar he prevented an early collapse of the Western Empire to a major Germanic invasion of Gaul.
He definitely was not the only good emperor of the 4th century. Most historians regard him as a mediocre emperor even Edward Gibbons (who was an anti-Christian) regarded him as a mediocre/average emperor. *Valentinian and Valens faced a different, less visible type of crisis as well. They had taken over an empire that could not pay the bills previous emperors had accumulated and could not cover the future promises that Julian and Jovian had made. Much of the blame lay with Julian. Julian had cut tribute payments in many different parts of the empire, and he had also forgiven a large number of debts owed the treasury. He led an army of perhaps sixty-five thousand people into Persia, spent a great deal of money supplying it, and promised significant bonuses to his troops during the campaign. In addition to increasing expenses and cutting revenues, Julian reduced the total amount of property that the imperial government owned-an important resource that emperors could use to address food or revenue shortfalls. He returned to temples the properties that Constantine had taken from them, he returned to the cities civic estates that Constantius had taken over, and he gave properties to friends as gifts.* *Even pagan supporters of Julian understood the severity of the situation. Ammianus compared the debts that Valentinian inherited from Julian to those left to the third-century emperor Aurelian (an allusion whose significance would be clearer if the books of Ammianus’s history covering the reign of Aurelian had not been lost) and Eutropius characterized Julian as “having a mediocre concern for the treasury.”* *As sole emperor, Julian also succumbed, as many Roman leaders before him (e.g. Crassus, Trajan, Septimius Severus) to "Alexander the Great syndrome": the desire to emulate the Macedonian general and conquer the Persian empire. He invaded Mesopotamia at the head of an enormous army of 65,000. But the campaign was a disaster: Julian lost his own life and his army was forced to retreat with huge losses. Although most of these would have been from the eastern comitatus and from the emperor's own escort army, the comitatus of Illyricum and Gaul would undoubtedly have been stripped of troops to fill the gaps. The result was that in 366 Gaul was again overrun by Alamanni hordes and Julian's painstaking work of restoration undone. This forced Julian's successor, Valentinian I, to spend years carrying out a virtual replay of Julian's Gallic campaign.*
These 3 minute videos are kinda underwhelming tbh. Julian was a very interesting figure. In the 10 minute video you could have effectively explained his beliefs and his childhood and his rise as caesar. With the 3 minute videos you leave out too much details and information.
@@captainunderpants2816 I'm not saying it's perfect but I definitely prefer more of his videos to longer ones we get less often. But sometimes I do feel that a few more minutes could have benefited the video like this one and the one on Kaiser William II in the netherlands
Whatever is against Jesus is loved by the cesspool of liberal extremism that is the European Union using a Tower of Babel imitation look for the parliament building, showing they are of the satanic New World Order builders.
The ancient Etruscan oracles warned Julian: DON'T INVADE PERSIA. But he insisted on listening to his court-wizard yes-men instead! Moral: ALWAYS HEED THE ORACLES
@@alanpennie8013 He read the entire Bible, and like any intelligent man was aware that it was a pack of lies and forgeries written by schizophrenic sadists
@@thomasbeninger4753 Logic shits on atheism in my series "The Politically-Incorrect History of atheism + Refutations of atheist Myths" showing who are the liars and who are the deceivers and who are the crazies and who are the ones asking for suffering. Atheists like you hate the Bible because it says you're not the boss. Atheism says you can crown yourself the king of the cosmos and pull rights out of your ass, and impose your bigoted opinions onto others. Atheism also says you can get away with evil when you die.
Julian had the potential to be one of Rome's best emperors. As Caesar, he distinguished himself as a skilled military commander, leading a successful campaign into Germany. As an administrator, he granted local provinces and cities autonomy and decreased the size of the top-heavy Roman bureaucracy. He was also a considerable scholar, writing many books on philosophy and theology. His reign was tragically cut short, but had he survived, we would probably remember him as one of the best emperors of late antiquity.
Oh my. His short reign was disastrous enough. Definitely overrated once you read more about him. *Valentinian and Valens faced a different, less visible type of crisis as well. They had taken over an empire that could not pay the bills previous emperors had accumulated and could not cover the future promises that Julian and Jovian had made. Much of the blame lay with Julian. Julian had cut tribute payments in many different parts of the empire, and he had also forgiven a large number of debts owed the treasury. He led an army of perhaps sixty-five thousand people into Persia, spent a great deal of money supplying it, and promised significant bonuses to his troops during the campaign. In addition to increasing expenses and cutting revenues, Julian reduced the total amount of property that the imperial government owned-an important resource that emperors could use to address food or revenue shortfalls. He returned to temples the properties that Constantine had taken from them, he returned to the cities civic estates that Constantius had taken over, and he gave properties to friends as gifts.* *Even pagan supporters of Julian understood the severity of the situation. Ammianus compared the debts that Valentinian inherited from Julian to those left to the third-century emperor Aurelian (an allusion whose significance would be clearer if the books of Ammianus’s history covering the reign of Aurelian had not been lost) and Eutropius characterized Julian as “having a mediocre concern for the treasury.”* *As sole emperor, Julian also succumbed, as many Roman leaders before him (e.g. Crassus, Trajan, Septimius Severus) to "Alexander the Great syndrome": the desire to emulate the Macedonian general and conquer the Persian empire. He invaded Mesopotamia at the head of an enormous army of 65,000. But the campaign was a disaster: Julian lost his own life and his army was forced to retreat with huge losses. Although most of these would have been from the eastern comitatus and from the emperor's own escort army, the comitatus of Illyricum and Gaul would undoubtedly have been stripped of troops to fill the gaps. The result was that in 366 Gaul was again overrun by Alamanni hordes and Julian's painstaking work of restoration undone. This forced Julian's successor, Valentinian I, to spend years carrying out a virtual replay of Julian's Gallic campaign.*
There is way too much polarization here. Julian was a decent emperor with naive ideals (Rome had been Christian for decades). Almost defeated Persia once and for all, but didn't take the peace offer.
@@aaronTGP_3756it had been Christian for decades but Pagan for centuries, alot of Julian's ideals were lofty but a long reign and strong will could absolutely reduce the position of Christianity under the empire, much like his uncle Constantine had done in the reverse.
Sara Samaletdin He did other stuff. Don't sell my boy Julian short. He was fortunate to live in an unusually well - documented period of Roman history. Many of his own writings survive, unlike those of Claudius another literary emperor.
You might enjoy Flashman on the March, the last of MacDonald Fraser's historical novels about Victorian adventurer Harry Flashman which concerns Napier's Abbysinian (Ethiopian) campaign. The author was careful to make his novels as historically accurate as possible.
In versian given by Ammianus Marcellinus.Given to the fact Romans already had huge problems Ammianus either exaggerates or Julian did not show much foresight if he really wanted to continue despite Romans failed to even capture Ctesiphont or defeat main royal Persian army.
You missed a BIG ONE: He allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem to resettle the city and rebuild the Temple. According to a witness the foundation stone of the "new Temple" was sucked under during an earthquake and the Sanhadrien disbanded not long after!
I really miss longer videos :c I thought the name change was so he could vary between shorter videos and longer ones, but so far, 3 min to 4 min seems to be new standard. I watch the old 10 min vids with deep nostalgia and for the monstrous power they possess in making me just abstract from everything else and enjoy everything, which can still be done in these smaller videos but to a smaller extent.
@@BroadwayRonMexico Sounds like you are not familiar with E.A.Thompson, the historian of the early barbarian kingdoms (not to be confused with his contemporary and near namesake E.P. Thompson) who argued that the barbarians became converted after they settled within the frontiers as a badge of romanitas. The Franks (who remained pagan for over 100 years after Julian settled them in Toxandria) seem to have been an exception to this rule.
@@alanpennie8013 The Goths and Vandals *definitely* didn't adopt Arian Christianity as a badge of Romanitas and converted to it prior to entering Roman territory
@@BroadwayRonMexico Disagreed. The Tervingi (Visigoths) were predominantly pagan prior to their crossing the Danube into Roman territory in 376. In the years prior to that they seem to have been dividing into an anti - Roman party (led by Athanaric) and a pro - Roman party (led by Fritigern). The latter accepted baptism, probably in the hope of gaining the assistance of Emperor Valens.
@@alanpennie8013 You're factually wrong. Ulifilas was the missionary who converted the Goths and Vandals to Arianism, and it was precisely the fact that he *wasnt* very Roman (he was born to parents from Capadoccia, but they were captured and enslaved by Goths and he grew up more or less as a Goth himself) that he was able to find success among the Goths and Vandals. And at the time, the Goths and Vandals were still in Eastern and Central Europe, well outside of Roman territory
Ah, Julian! Such an interesting figure. While I wouldn't call myself a proper Christian (or a religious man in general) I'm definitely *not* one of those people who think that Christianity ruins everything and in particular that it ruined the Roman Empire, which seems to be an increasingly popular opinion (although it has been around at least since Edward Gibbon). Yet I still always felt a strange sympathy for Julian and couldn't stop wondering how history would change if he had a long and successful reign.
The belief that Christianity killed Rome is an increasingly popular opinion just because of atheists and others with a chip on their shoulder for Christianity who regurgitate history "memes" uncritically. It's pretty much a thoroughly discredited idea among historians and academics with any knowledge of European late antiquity, however.
The idea that christianity caused the downfall of rome is just nosense, the crisis of the third century (from which the west never recovered) started when christianity was still illegal and reached it's peak under decius and valerian, both of whom were famous for brutally purging christians. The peak of roman stability after the crisis was ironically under constantine, the guy who legalized christianity and stopped the persecutions... Then again the eastern roman empire lasted more than a thousand years as a christian empire, even having 2 golden ages...
Next week's episodes are all 19th century wars. Because I want to.
Wednesday is the Franco-Prussian War and Sunday is the Crimean War.
History Matters 1870 and France is a tiny bit pissed off
All right!!
History Matters I can’t wait for the Franco Prussian war
@@maxf8805 yeah and the Crimean war sound interesting🙂 love this chanal!
Great
"He began to invade Persia"
*notices the video is almost over*
Welp, I can see where this is going
@ Noah Johnson , ??? Persia is weak
@@thekhans2823 Persia is either easily conquered or not at all. The Romans were particularly bad at attacking it.
@ Noah Johnson , 🇲🇳 conquered it in a year
@@thekhans2823 "easily or not at all"
@ Noah Johnson , OK OK
Moral of the Story: Wear armor, you dolt.
Or you can do as Fredrich Barbarisa to wear dull armour when are in a rive, su you can drown.
@@Rikard_A
You can't win.
preach
"Wear armor, you dolt."
Richard the Lionheart: "Don't tell me what to do! Raaaaaah!" *shot*
Don't image Russia in the winter, don't invade Persia at any time
I love the irony of the restorer of Rome’s Christianity being named Jovian.
What's the irony behind that?
@@MessiKingofKings “Jove” is another term for Jupiter… the traditional king of the Roman pagan gods.
@@edwardglass9602 Ah okay, thank you.
And that the last Roman “Emperor” was a child named Romulus.
@@ChristianF15cher And the last Byzantine emperor was called Constantine
All roads lead to Rome.... *country roads, take me Rome*
Constantinople* Rome is old now.
Country roads,
Take me Rome,
To the place,
I invade.
Colosseum,
Western romans,
Take me Rome
Country roads
Like to hear the rest of the song
Cuba gey
All the provinces
To it belongs
from Hispania
to Crimea
Take me to Rome Country roads
Oh for goodness sake now ill have it stuck in my head AGAIN!!
“Death Scene No.2”
The little signs are the best
Bonus Fact(s):
- Julian died 32 years of age (just like Alexander the Great).
- The following emperor, Jovian, also died with 32 while retreating from persia (he suffocated while heating his tent with a charcoal fire).
Julian also claimed to be Alexander the great.
Genie Wiley
He didn’t.
Trace Fleeman Garcia
Socrates Scholasticas was a notoriously unreliable source. He was writing nearly eighty years after Julian’s death, had never known Julian personally, and was a church historian. His main aim was not to document Roman history, but the history of the church during the Constantinian era. He was also biased against the Emperor, as most ecclesial historians were, and was likely to repeat unfounded rumors. If you want a good source on Julian’s life, I suggest reading Ammianus Marcellinus, an officer under Julian who wrote a history that covered his rule extensively, or Licenius, a philosopher who was part of Julian’s retinue. Many of the Emperor’s letters and writings have survived, making his reign remarkably well documented.
Imagine trusting a Christian source on a Pagan Emperor.
The last Pagan Emperor at that, after several Christian ones.
Imagine emerging victorious from a battle against your greatest arch enemy and suddently dying from charcoal
Keep in mind that when Julian invaded Persia he had no real specific goal in mind. He had no specific vision of what victory looked like other than "defeat the Persians".
I think the goal was to punish them for destroying Amida. The story is often told like Julian started a war with Persia out of the blue, when in reality he was simply continuing the war that had begun in 359 between his cousin and Shapur.
@@dantecaputo2629
True.
He can be blamed for not accepting a Sassanian peace offer though.
Did he tell you that?
@@dantecaputo2629 Sure, but that's not what I meant.
I meant he had no specific war aim that would signify that the war was won. Like sacking the Sassanid capital. He was kind of waging war by the seat of his pants.
Much like the Americans in Afghanistan.
@@pieceofschmidtgamer it literally said his goal was to take a city at first, and he had a method of attack planned out for it involving sending a decoy over the armenian mountains
Once again I learned things I didn't know before. Which is why we few, we happy few. we band of Brothers watch. History does matter.
*Ten Minute History
Never forget...
and gentlemen in England now a bed, shall think themselves acursed they were not here!!!
You are selling yourself short by just watching this channel. Watch full flegde documentaried made by TH-camrs. They are of much higher quality.
@@johnpijano4786 shut up nerrrrd
@@cheguevara8769 then why did you watch the video then?
You should do mongol invasion of vietnam
The one where the Mongols lose in Egypt is pretty dope.
mankytoes They never reached Egypt, they tried conquering Palestine but Mamluks stopped them.
mankytoes Ain jalout was in Palestine
Not Egypt
Lol the "me so horny" girl has Mongol ancestry 😛🙎
@@youtubeuser1820 didn't Eyyubis ruled the Egypt at the time?
Imagine how different the world would be today if Julian never fought the Persians and had a long reign.
He'll probably be killed.
Maybe he'll have a succesor and The Roman empire will split later on.
Paganism will lose on a later date.
Without the cult of Sol Invictus -Christianity established by Constantine
, no Islam would ever have apppeared…
Христо Луков, because Islam is a mixture of Judaism, pagan Arab beliefs and Christian gnostic Gospels
the world would be a better place... so would be greece and italy (aka the succesors of rome and bysandium)
@@rafaelsegura8962 But how does that mean that a lack of Sol Invictus-Christianity have caused Islam to never rise?
Julian did not "simply retreat", he won the battle in Ctesiphon (defeated the army in front of the city and surrounding it) and Shapur 2(emperor of Persia) offered a pretty good deal (giving Rome a lot of territories, gold and etc) just so the romans would leave. The mistake Julian did was not taking that offer and dwelling further into the country, while he did not receive the backup and resources that was expected, also the persians sat on fire vast amount of lands in order to starve the roman army, thus they began a difficult march home in which he was stabbed with a spear by one of his close servants, as there was a plot long before that event, organized by his christian generals and others. He was a very intelligent and admirable emperor, also a highly skilled in battles (I believe he does not have a loss at all). The reforms he planned were enormous, alas they were never fully realized. Read Gore Vidal's book on the matter.
Damn generals can’t stop themselves from killing amazing emperors
Julian was indeed a good tactician. But I think the supposed plot and theory of Julian being killed by one of his own christian servants has never been confirmed though. However, Vidal uses this interesting rumour in his outstanding novel.
It was just that Julian had to die, and Europe to become fully christianized. Had he not been killed in such a way, we would have been living in a different world.
@@abdullahamir119 Yes, a much better world. The Inquisition (caused by the Roman Catholic church) and the Holocaust (inspired by the later teachings of Martin Luther and Germany's long history of anti-Semitism under both Catholic and Lutheran rule), as well as the Crusades, never would have happened in such a world. Literally millions of lives would have been saved.
@@woodrobin Better or bitter, we cannot say because we can never know what bad could have happened instead of those things.
2:49 I love how there are holes in his hands from the nails
*@DarkMatter2525* did this too
I wonder how the video will star...
"... is dead!"
Yeah, thought so 😂😂
.
--
`
++
How did Rome lose that territory in Morocco.
@Sarsath
During the Crisis of the 3rd Century Berbers began raiding the area, and since the Romans were busy with more pressing matters they de facto lost control of the area to various Berber tribes.
The Vandals were later, in the 5th century.
The Roman Empire did retake a very small part but something happend after the Sassanid war in early 600, are you talking about that?
Its probably because they had to focus on the middle east.
Barbarians
The colonies where abandoned and legal authority transferred to the Mauri. Reports between the Mauri rulers and the Romans were good until the Arabic conquest. The Mauri / Moors asked for help from Constantinople but Rome was in no position to help.
You forgot to mention Julian is considered to be one of Rome's greatest authors, writing comedy (about his own family); drama's and history books. That is his claim to fame, not that he was Rome's last pagan Emperor.
Mediolanon
The Haters of the Beard is a really cool title.
Also his time as Caesar was a great triumph against many adversities. He's honestly my favourite emperor and I'll feel this video sells him short
@@minch333
It's quite easy to view him as a comical figure and this is partly down to his telling stories against himself (like the story of the goose of Daphne).
It's very sad that such an attractive person died so young but perhaps a long and successful reign would have soured his character.
@@alanpennie8013 Well, he wasnt exactly well-liked by anyone during his reign
Traditional polytheistic pagans didnt like his emphasis on charity with the pagan church he tried to establish (and pagan priests actively hated him since he tried to crack down on and correct the hedonistic and debaucherous behavior that had always been the norm for them). Monotheistic/henotheistic pagans (like the Neoplatonists) saw him as an eccentric larper at best, and at worst were actively repulsed by his bizarre fondness for blood sacrifice (which had long since fallen out of favor with them), not to mention we have writings from a few of them who werent too happy with his attempt to ban Christians from teaching and engaging with the Classics. Christians...that goes without saying.
Politically, he was trying to decentralize the government and revert to a more Principate-styled government, including a restoration of Senatorial power-which would have gone over like a lead balloon with the (often quite powerful) bureaucrats, *many* of whom were Christian, along with any general or relative of his with a feasible shot at the throne. Rome had changed far too much for any sort of return to the Principate to be remotely feasible and be anything other than (pretty much literal) suicide.
Even his allies and supporters who knew him personally admitted he had a pretty hair-trigger temper and was prone to hotheaded and bullheaded decisions from time to time because of it. He was pretty much doomed to die early (by assassination if not war) because of a combination of these factors. His war in Persia was pretty ill-advised but it was basically his best way to try and gain a much-needed popularity boost.
he seemed like a really great guy
Julian tries to reinstate roman paganism Jupiter: *Nice*
God *Am I a myth to you?!*
please stop
Julian was a neo platonist.
@@Biggvs_dickvs yeah i know but he pushed for roman paganism rather than try and spread neo platanism
@@al-uc7cb im surprised this bothers you that much
@@AncientAccounts that's true.
The truest cause of why Rome fell was Romans killing Romans.
We have Honorius, Valentinian III, and Ricimer to blame.
@@aaronTGP_3756 Especially Ricimer..smh
How to start a history matters video/ten minute history.
its {inset year here} and {insert ruler here} is dead.
Even though it seems like a footnote, Julian's act to ban Christian philosophers from teaching the "classics" changed Christian doctorand and dogma for centuries. Christians adapted quickly and created their own doctorands and dogmas completely separate from the classics with only a few Greek and early Roman philosophers really getting much traction in the early Catholic teachings even after Julian died. Also due to Julian living such a short reign, he made these very damaging and dividing acts against Christianity without really forming the Pagan traditions he wanted to emphasize, so it went right back to Christianity but in a slightly different direction, with a possibly even more conservative direction then before Julian. If Julian never became emperor, it's very possible, the Catholic Church would have been much more open minded about a lot of their doctorands and dogmas based a lot more on the Greek Classics then they ended up having and it's possible the way Christianity developed over the centuries quite possibly would be very different.
I'm not that early, but i'm going to think of a joke anyway
The Perpetual Peace between the Byzantine Empire and Sassanid Persia
* Slaps Knee * *W h e e z e*
So painful, yet so true
Actually painful tens of hundreds of thousands died in those wars
Maurice achieved it ..no thanks to phokas
Normie
i love it when your videos start with *insert date* and *insert person* is dead, just amazing
He was also the last man proclaimed Pharoh by the priests of Amun, though he never formally accepted the title.
I assume he was waiting to earn it. If he'd inflicted a defeat and settlement upon the House of Sasan, his panegyrists would have sung him a new song of Amun.
No mention of Julian's defense of Gaul, his chastisement of the Germans across the Rhine, nor his strategem of passing through Germany itself, to bypass Constantius' eastern defences. All heroic exploits worthy of mention, and a prequel episode?
skeletorrobo
We need more Julian.
@@alanpennie8013 Hi
He got wrecked by persia by being a idiot
yeah the German war was a particular high point which deserves mention.
there are people here arguing for Julian as a "great emperor" which he was not, but he did great work for Rome before he was emperor.
Constantius kept sending Julian on impossible missions and had generals simply ignoring his requests for reinforcements. They had trust issues. Didnt help that when Julian was a boy Constantius murdered Julian`s entire family
To be objective-nobody knows exactly how it happened.Julian had no doubts that family purge was ordered by Constantius(we know that from his writtings) but was it really so?Quite likely but not necessarilly.Official version was that it was spontaneous act of an army.
I've seen a fair number of your videos, and the thump when someone dies always gets me
the ( thud) sound when ever someone dies, really cracks me the fuck up lol
He started an unwanted war against Persia and got himself killed. It was one of my big what ifs as to what would have happened had he survived.Only other thing I think could change entire religion would be Maurice surviving and not going to another stupid war against Persia due to his overthrow
He didnt started it.That war was already raging when he bacame sole Emperor.However Persian King was ready to make peace which Julian refused several times.
Best history channel on TH-cam
Oversimplified: hold my beer
Historia civils: hold my beer
Extra credits: hold my beer
Me: umm, I’ll introduce the rest later, I can’t hold this many beers
@@acebalistic1358 also Dovahatty for true unbiased history.
This is the funniest. The best is HOC EST BELLVM from what I recall.
You make it seem like Christians and Pagans were on equal footing before this, or at least for novices in Roman history, when Christians in fact got preferential treatment from emperors like Constantine the Great, who practically made it impossible to advance in the government bureaucracy and likewise unless one subscribed to the said religion
This isn't really true though. Themistius of Constantinople was employed by all the Eastern Emperors from Constantius II to Theodosius I as their public relations man despite being a pagan.
The fate of Hypatia in later times is a prime example of what non Xstians could expect
Karl 17 Ah yes, Christians had it so good in the Roman Empire... It’s not like they were literally crucified and thrown to the lions for their beliefs.
@@maple2524 Lol, I am talking about the privileged status Christians enjoyed during the reign of Constantine the Great and the period afterwards, check your chronology. But I agree with you, before Constantine Christians were used as scapegoats and had been generally, and at times harshly, persecuted up to the time of Constantine, most notably by the emperors Nero, Decius and Diocletian
@@alanpennie8013 Thanks for your insight, I wasn't aware of that :-) In the world of real politics competence comes first, I guess
Oh, if only the old ways remained… Julian’s story will forever remain unfinished, too brave for his own good.
One of my favorite emperors! Thank you for covering this!
I like these short video's but do hope that you make good on your promises of making some longer video's as well, though i get that these of course take more time to make.
Ditch the apostrophes.
I always wait for the "thank you to our supporters..." to see if the day will ever come when James Bisonnette is not mentioned first.
He also started building a third jewish temple in Jerusalem.
Quite an important deal
He did it more out of his anti-christian ideology, not really out of his pro-jewish ideals.
@@allenkeettikkal3149 yea sure
That makes it even more relevant to the story
@Iddo Margalit-Friedman
He didn't actually. Julian issued an edict in which he stated he was going to rebuild the Jewish Temple AFTER his victory in Persia. Seeing as he died during that campaign, the construction never started.
@@marvelfannumber1 are you sure?
I read that he started, then there was an earthquake, then he said he would start again and *then* he died.
@@iddomargalit-friedman3897
Nope, the tale of the earthquake (or in some sources, intentional sabotage, or a lightning strike) is from a considerably later source.
I honestly love this story, could've turned into such a historical fluke.
Did romans wear togas by the 360s? I think they went out of style with Constantine
@Nate A
Nope, they still wore togas until at the latest the 8th Century, albeit they were much simpler than the classical toga. These togas were also only worn by the nobility, just like in classical times and most people would wear a tunic.
Constantine didn't have much to do with it - it went out of fashion in the 3rd century and had lost its meaning as distinguishing Roman citizens from non-citizens (as all inhabitants of the Empire were citizens by then); also, civilian officials tended to wear military-style garb from Diocletion onwards. A toga was only used by senators in the Senate, the prefects (mayors) of Rome and Constantinople, and often consuls.
Nate A what did the fashion become then?
For the elites, the palium (a sort of simple toga). For the rest, tunics I think.
And for the emperors, ornate purple robes with gold trimmings.
LOL "Oh wait, turned out he'd been lying to everyone" that's right up there with " because of course, war"
So Julian wanted to show he was a big man by breaking from his predecessors’ policies and invading Persia . . . even though he’d gotten the top spot by refusing to send troops to invade Persia when Constantius had called for them? 😒
WeLCum tO pOLiTiCS
His troops refused to go to Persia and neither of his predecessors followed their own ones (Constantine obviously because he favored Christianity and Constantius II was an Arian, which was declared heretical during the Council of Nicea by Constantine).
Whilst I'm happy to see more uploads I'm sad the 10 minute history series for the UK is dead
2:018 Actually the capital of Persia was called Tesiphon. the C was not pronounced.
I love how your jokes just flow so smoothly in your videos.
So Julian wanted to Make Roman Great Again and failed?
Vienna The Grill ironicly it is because of their neighbour wall this time.
He needed a hat and an ignorant base.
Vienna The Grill
He invented The Franks. So there's that. He put them in Belgium but they didn't like it there and moved to France which is called that because of them.
@@wholeNwon like Obama?
@@MrJoebrooklyn1969 Was there an Obama hat? Missed that.
Has Rome ever fought a war with the Persians in which they won? This is a genuine question, since most of my Rome knowledge is lodged in Caesar, Octavian/Augustus, and Justinian.
Christian Buffum-Robbins Ctesiphon, the Parthian capital, has been captured by the Romans 5 times in history.
The Persian capital of Ctesiphon was sacked for more times than i can remember, counting the bizantine empire, i think the seventh time was Heraclius in the 600s. When reading Roman-persian wars im always looking if the poor Ctesiphon is going to be sacked again Lol. Julian tried but the capital was sacked so many times that for the time when Julian decided to attack the city, the inhabitants were ready this time,i mean the city by that time was sacked five times already and the people were like, fockin romans this time we will be ready
In the 2nd and early 3rd century, Rome had the upper hand against the Parthian Empire, and sacking Ctesiphon became something of a regular occurrence.
That changed when the Sassanids took over in the 220s and turned the balance of power in the East around. And then at the very end, Herakleios defeated them again in the early 7th century.
Many ended in technical Roman wins, but the destruction they caused felt like a loss
@@acebalistic1358 not really, at least when they sacked it, there were the spoils of war from the city and the surroundings, and that without mentioning the villages and cities that they sacked in the way to ctesiphon
I’m a Christian, but you have to admire a man that stands for his beliefs. It sounds like he actually cared about Rome, unlike most Emperors.
espacilly in the later empire when meny emprors didnt care about the fall of the west
Joe Smith
He had lots of good ideas. Probably too many really.
I will now forever refer to someone dying without armour as a Julian. “What an idiot. He Julian’d himself”
RIP Julian
rip bozo lol
"Julian was a Caesar"
Julian, Caesar
Now tell about his time as caesar, his campaign in gaul was one of the greatest on late roman empire. Anyone interested, i believe kings and generals cover it, or maybe history march
He also headed one of the last successful major Roman invasions of Germania, and was one of the last Rhine crossing Emperors.
You made a video on Julian the Apostate. I fucking love you.
Ctesiphon is pronounced TESS-i-fon
No, it's also Κτησιφῶν in Koine, the K is there for a reason
@@koffieslikkersenior
The original term is Teesphoon apparently, there's no K.
@@koffieslikkersenior Ktesiphon is the Hellenic version. Tespon or Tispun or however is the original Iranian term (being an Iranian city founded to control Nahrain). It later evolved into Tisfon for similar reasons that Greek /p^h/ evolved into /f/. Considering that Tisfon, or Mahoze in Aramaic (also Qtesiphon in Aramaic, from Greek), is certainly not Greek in anyway, it's better to use the term that the elites used, or at least Mahoze for the natives. (Tho Mahoze refers to the dual cities of Tisfon and Seleukia, the natives probably didn't care either way, still foreign rulers).
@@LionKing-ew9rm No its teaspoon
(jk)
I love your channel keep up the great stuff
Roman Empire: I'm the only legitimate Roman Empire
Byzantine empire: hold my beer
Both are literally the same thing.
What is a byzantine?
Christian leontsinis
It was another name for the Eastern Roman Empire
@@allenkeettikkal3149 /woosh
Its like saying,
Roman Empire: I'm the only legitimate Empire.
Roman Empire: Hold my beer (in greek)
Its like saying I'm a different person because I'm older and I speak greek now
Can't wait to Bismarck it up on Wednesday.
This paints him as an irrelevant emporer when in actuality he was one of the only good emporers of the 4th century
he was irrelevant. and what about constantine? he was extremely successful
@@august8696
Julian was not irrelevant. It’s true that his time as Augustus was cut short, but as Caesar he prevented an early collapse of the Western Empire to a major Germanic invasion of Gaul.
He definitely was not the only good emperor of the 4th century. Most historians regard him as a mediocre emperor even Edward Gibbons (who was an anti-Christian) regarded him as a mediocre/average emperor.
*Valentinian and Valens faced a different, less visible type of crisis as well. They had taken over an empire that could not pay the bills previous emperors had accumulated and could not cover the future promises that Julian and Jovian had made. Much of the blame lay with Julian. Julian had cut tribute payments in many different parts of the empire, and he had also forgiven a large number of debts owed the treasury. He led an army of perhaps sixty-five thousand people into Persia, spent a great deal of money supplying it, and promised significant bonuses to his troops during the campaign. In addition to increasing expenses and cutting revenues, Julian reduced the total amount of property that the imperial government owned-an important resource that emperors could use to address food or revenue shortfalls. He returned to temples the properties that Constantine had taken from them, he returned to the cities civic estates that Constantius had taken over, and he gave properties to friends as gifts.*
*Even pagan supporters of Julian understood the severity of the situation. Ammianus compared the debts that Valentinian inherited from Julian to those left to the third-century emperor Aurelian (an allusion whose significance would be clearer if the books of Ammianus’s history covering the reign of Aurelian had not been lost) and Eutropius characterized Julian as “having a mediocre concern for the treasury.”*
*As sole emperor, Julian also succumbed, as many Roman leaders before him (e.g. Crassus, Trajan, Septimius Severus) to "Alexander the Great syndrome": the desire to emulate the Macedonian general and conquer the Persian empire. He invaded Mesopotamia at the head of an enormous army of 65,000. But the campaign was a disaster: Julian lost his own life and his army was forced to retreat with huge losses. Although most of these would have been from the eastern comitatus and from the emperor's own escort army, the comitatus of Illyricum and Gaul would undoubtedly have been stripped of troops to fill the gaps. The result was that in 366 Gaul was again overrun by Alamanni hordes and Julian's painstaking work of restoration undone. This forced Julian's successor, Valentinian I, to spend years carrying out a virtual replay of Julian's Gallic campaign.*
"Make Rome Great Again" - Julian, 351 AD
Barbarossa be like "Okay, so don't take your armour off when going to war in the Middle East, got it"
The Persian army penetrated his camp and besieged it
I swear that land secession at 2:43 looks like the Gulf of Riga
These 3 minute videos are kinda underwhelming tbh. Julian was a very interesting figure. In the 10 minute video you could have effectively explained his beliefs and his childhood and his rise as caesar.
With the 3 minute videos you leave out too much details and information.
But he is able to put more of them out and focus on the important bits of their lives/events
This. Julian is a fascinating figure.
@@nikoclesceri2267 I mean he said nothing about what he did in Gaul.
@@captainunderpants2816 I'm not saying it's perfect but I definitely prefer more of his videos to longer ones we get less often. But sometimes I do feel that a few more minutes could have benefited the video like this one and the one on Kaiser William II in the netherlands
And every drill sergeant ever screamed “don’t be a cowboy” when they heard that
Interestingly there has been made a statue of him in Belgium 😀
Whatever is against Jesus is loved by the cesspool of liberal extremism that is the European Union using a Tower of Babel imitation look for the parliament building, showing they are of the satanic New World Order builders.
@@scintillam_dei You are funny I'll give you that.
Julian forgot to wear his trusty plot armor smh.
The ancient Etruscan oracles warned Julian: DON'T INVADE PERSIA. But he insisted on listening to his court-wizard yes-men instead!
Moral: ALWAYS HEED THE ORACLES
If only he'd read that story in The Bible about King Ahab and the lying prophets.
@@alanpennie8013 He read the entire Bible, and like any intelligent man was aware that it was a pack of lies and forgeries written by schizophrenic sadists
@@thomasbeninger4753
I Kings, chapter 22, if anyone's interested.
It's a great chapter no matter who wrote it.
@@thomasbeninger4753 butthurt pagacucks seething to this day
@@thomasbeninger4753 Logic shits on atheism in my series "The Politically-Incorrect History of atheism + Refutations of atheist Myths" showing who are the liars and who are the deceivers and who are the crazies and who are the ones asking for suffering. Atheists like you hate the Bible because it says you're not the boss. Atheism says you can crown yourself the king of the cosmos and pull rights out of your ass, and impose your bigoted opinions onto others. Atheism also says you can get away with evil when you die.
I really struggled to understand this video but the semi-Korean auto-generated subtitles helped.
Julian had the potential to be one of Rome's best emperors. As Caesar, he distinguished himself as a skilled military commander, leading a successful campaign into Germany. As an administrator, he granted local provinces and cities autonomy and decreased the size of the top-heavy Roman bureaucracy. He was also a considerable scholar, writing many books on philosophy and theology. His reign was tragically cut short, but had he survived, we would probably remember him as one of the best emperors of late antiquity.
Oh my. His short reign was disastrous enough. Definitely overrated once you read more about him.
*Valentinian and Valens faced a different, less visible type of crisis as well. They had taken over an empire that could not pay the bills previous emperors had accumulated and could not cover the future promises that Julian and Jovian had made. Much of the blame lay with Julian. Julian had cut tribute payments in many different parts of the empire, and he had also forgiven a large number of debts owed the treasury. He led an army of perhaps sixty-five thousand people into Persia, spent a great deal of money supplying it, and promised significant bonuses to his troops during the campaign. In addition to increasing expenses and cutting revenues, Julian reduced the total amount of property that the imperial government owned-an important resource that emperors could use to address food or revenue shortfalls. He returned to temples the properties that Constantine had taken from them, he returned to the cities civic estates that Constantius had taken over, and he gave properties to friends as gifts.*
*Even pagan supporters of Julian understood the severity of the situation. Ammianus compared the debts that Valentinian inherited from Julian to those left to the third-century emperor Aurelian (an allusion whose significance would be clearer if the books of Ammianus’s history covering the reign of Aurelian had not been lost) and Eutropius characterized Julian as “having a mediocre concern for the treasury.”*
*As sole emperor, Julian also succumbed, as many Roman leaders before him (e.g. Crassus, Trajan, Septimius Severus) to "Alexander the Great syndrome": the desire to emulate the Macedonian general and conquer the Persian empire. He invaded Mesopotamia at the head of an enormous army of 65,000. But the campaign was a disaster: Julian lost his own life and his army was forced to retreat with huge losses. Although most of these would have been from the eastern comitatus and from the emperor's own escort army, the comitatus of Illyricum and Gaul would undoubtedly have been stripped of troops to fill the gaps. The result was that in 366 Gaul was again overrun by Alamanni hordes and Julian's painstaking work of restoration undone. This forced Julian's successor, Valentinian I, to spend years carrying out a virtual replay of Julian's Gallic campaign.*
There is way too much polarization here. Julian was a decent emperor with naive ideals (Rome had been Christian for decades). Almost defeated Persia once and for all, but didn't take the peace offer.
@@aaronTGP_3756it had been Christian for decades but Pagan for centuries, alot of Julian's ideals were lofty but a long reign and strong will could absolutely reduce the position of Christianity under the empire, much like his uncle Constantine had done in the reverse.
Unfortunately for him, Pandora had already opened the box and there was no stopping what had come out of it.
Being Pagan is the only reason why he is so well known, he was Emperor for so little time and his campaing to East was a disaster.
Sara Samaletdin
He did other stuff. Don't sell my boy Julian short.
He was fortunate to live in an unusually well - documented period of Roman history. Many of his own writings survive, unlike those of Claudius another literary emperor.
The dialogue is so fast here, it is unsurprising that it is shorter than Julian's reign!
Rome's best Emperor** also read 'Julian' by Gore Vidal.
That's why you should buy armor before rushing B
You should put those adorable little cartoon figures on t-shirts and sell them!
I second that.
*Migos wants to know your location*
My uncle Bill had a problem with his apostate. He had to take these big pills and drink lots of water
one of the best late roman emperors you cant change my mind
He tried to rebuild the temple destroyed by Titus, but failed spectacularly.
May he rest in Peace...
With Hades ?! 😆 🤣 😂
Brutal assessment
Poor Julian
British expedition into Abssynia? I read the Wiki page but there's hardly anything there
You might enjoy Flashman on the March, the last of MacDonald Fraser's historical novels about Victorian adventurer Harry Flashman which concerns Napier's Abbysinian (Ethiopian) campaign. The author was careful to make his novels as historically accurate as possible.
2:22 Julian supposedly wanted to keep pushing into Persia, but his officers refused to do so
In versian given by Ammianus Marcellinus.Given to the fact Romans already had huge problems Ammianus either exaggerates or Julian did not show much foresight if he really wanted to continue despite Romans failed to even capture Ctesiphont or defeat main royal Persian army.
1:01 “Julian also promised that he would reform the empire and bring back the good times.” Like, MRGA (Make Rome Great Again)?
An episode on Aurelian or the 3rd century crisis could be nice.....
You missed a BIG ONE: He allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem to resettle the city and rebuild the Temple. According to a witness the foundation stone of the "new Temple" was sucked under during an earthquake and the Sanhadrien disbanded not long after!
Julian came so close...then forgot his armor. Roman facepalm ensues.
"Julian's plan was to crush the Persians in battle"
Persians: "How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man?"
Read Gore Vidal's novel "Julian" to learn more in an entertaining way. Fantastic book.
1:10 So Julian was a good Christian emperor...OH WAIT turns out he had been lying
Can you do the Imjin war?
Are you still going to make 10 minute videos
I really miss longer videos :c I thought the name change was so he could vary between shorter videos and longer ones, but so far, 3 min to 4 min seems to be new standard. I watch the old 10 min vids with deep nostalgia and for the monstrous power they possess in making me just abstract from everything else and enjoy everything, which can still be done in these smaller videos but to a smaller extent.
you really need to do the punic wars and the fall of the republic as videos
I can’t wait till I watch the Unbiased History of Rome episode on this guy
I still view that as one of the best episodes of Unbiased History. It was what got me into the series in the first place.
That art style looks gay in the non-happy way.
Rome's last OPENLY pagan emperor.
Seems like he wanted to make "Make Rome Great Again" XD
Except Julian was capable and educated men, like his sucesses at Strasbourg and Western Roman Empire.
Yey, more Roman history
I prefer to call this guy the last hope for rome
FedoraShrek.jpg
Imagine going home to your wife and kids and saying you stabbed the Roman emperor to death because he suicide charged you
If julian hadn't been so reckless maybe some of us would be worshipping Apollo and Jupiter now
The Casterereian Raynes
He tried to organise a Pagan Church. Mind you organising pagans is a bit like herding cats.
@@BroadwayRonMexico
Sounds like you are not familiar with E.A.Thompson, the historian of the early barbarian kingdoms (not to be confused with his contemporary and near namesake E.P. Thompson) who argued that the barbarians became converted after they settled within the frontiers as a badge of romanitas.
The Franks (who remained pagan for over 100 years after Julian settled them in Toxandria) seem to have been an exception to this rule.
@@alanpennie8013 The Goths and Vandals *definitely* didn't adopt Arian Christianity as a badge of Romanitas and converted to it prior to entering Roman territory
@@BroadwayRonMexico
Disagreed.
The Tervingi (Visigoths) were predominantly pagan prior to their crossing the Danube into Roman territory in 376.
In the years prior to that they seem to have been dividing into an anti - Roman
party (led by Athanaric) and a pro - Roman party (led by Fritigern). The latter accepted baptism, probably in the hope of gaining the assistance of Emperor Valens.
@@alanpennie8013 You're factually wrong. Ulifilas was the missionary who converted the Goths and Vandals to Arianism, and it was precisely the fact that he *wasnt* very Roman (he was born to parents from Capadoccia, but they were captured and enslaved by Goths and he grew up more or less as a Goth himself) that he was able to find success among the Goths and Vandals. And at the time, the Goths and Vandals were still in Eastern and Central Europe, well outside of Roman territory
I feel like Julian is just me if I got ahold of a Time Machine
You have won, galilean
Don't flatter yourself, you were not even a player.
@@gregoriotauro4469 no shit sherlock
Jovian: (looks at Julian who is near death) How'd it go?
Ah, Julian! Such an interesting figure. While I wouldn't call myself a proper Christian (or a religious man in general) I'm definitely *not* one of those people who think that Christianity ruins everything and in particular that it ruined the Roman Empire, which seems to be an increasingly popular opinion (although it has been around at least since Edward Gibbon). Yet I still always felt a strange sympathy for Julian and couldn't stop wondering how history would change if he had a long and successful reign.
The belief that Christianity killed Rome is an increasingly popular opinion just because of atheists and others with a chip on their shoulder for Christianity who regurgitate history "memes" uncritically. It's pretty much a thoroughly discredited idea among historians and academics with any knowledge of European late antiquity, however.
He was a virtuous man fighting for the losing side. He's attractive no matter how misguided his thinking was.
The idea that christianity caused the downfall of rome is just nosense, the crisis of the third century (from which the west never recovered) started when christianity was still illegal and reached it's peak under decius and valerian, both of whom were famous for brutally purging christians.
The peak of roman stability after the crisis was ironically under constantine, the guy who legalized christianity and stopped the persecutions...
Then again the eastern roman empire lasted more than a thousand years as a christian empire, even having 2 golden ages...
Miss the longer videos.
Bisonette is broke!