We often ask why Rome fell, but we rarely ask why it lasted so damn long given all of these disasters that shook it. There have been dozens if not hundreds of events that shook Rome to its core and threatened to tear it apart, but Rome existed for a thousand years and a thousand more in the East. From the transition to the Republic to the Punic Wars to Sulla's purge to Caesar and Octavian, to even the Crisis of the 3rd century, Rome persevered.
@MrRemicas3 жыл бұрын
They had an incredible capacity to adapt.
@keerf2553 жыл бұрын
Among the catholics at our church we have this theory where the Roman Empire was basically protected by God as it would be the instrument through which the Holy faith would be spread. As soon as Christianity wad entrenched enough, the empire was left to it's own corruptions and devices and (the west) fell within a century.
@swagatochatterjee71043 жыл бұрын
@@keerf255 this a great piece of rubbish this theory!
@saintburnsy24683 жыл бұрын
@@keerf255 But then the Orthodox east continued on for another thousand years? I guess they were more chosen by God wait does that mean God is orthodox? Or Muslim cos of the Ottomans? Or secular cos both Europe and Turkey are secular now (lol God not believing in himself sounds kinda funny. "Cheer up God, you can do it!")
@finonevado88912 жыл бұрын
@@keerf255 sorry that these people are so rude, but this is history and not religion
@justinian-the-great3 жыл бұрын
It should tough be noted that most of these problems could relate ONLY to the Western Roman Empire. The East survived in a large part because it had a rich and relatively stable country. It witnessed few large scale revolts, it had no huge problems with economy and it's army was genuinely strong. In fact, when we compare late Western Empire to the Eastern one, you can just see how much actually effort was put into the East. It's army was much bigger that the army of the Western Empire (some 200.000 soldiers in the East in comparison to only 125.000 in the West) and far, FAR better equipped. Western army basically didn't even know what cataphracts are, not to mention that East had much more defendable capital. Another thing is that East was much more richer, especially in the cities. The people of the East actually prospered during the 5 century and continued to do so until about 540, when the Justinian's plague hit the Empire and basically screwed their entire history.
@creamycereal3 жыл бұрын
Facts people always ignore the East
@stateofconstatinopole83163 жыл бұрын
@@creamycereal i dont understand everyone was a roman citizen is that they speak greek ?
@alexandrostheodorou83873 жыл бұрын
What? Roman Cataphracts would be used in the West. Julian used Cataphracts against the Germans during his battle against the Alemani.
@justinian-the-great3 жыл бұрын
@@alexandrostheodorou8387 I meant after the Empires split on the Western and Eastern one in 364 AD. Julian did use cataphracts during battle of Strasbourg sure, but they were few in numbers (probably just couple of hundred men) and probably among his personal entourage and most importantly - many of them were actually part of the Eastern army, provided to Julian by Constantius. Except for that, it is noted that western cataphracts fared very poorly in the battle and eventually fled the field, crashed into their own infantry (which actually won the battle) and then hide behind their lines. Julian personally had to come to them and talk some sense into them and one of the regiments still refused to return to battle, which after the battle prompted Julian to force to wear female clothes as a punishment. That just shows the "quality" of the western cataphracts.
@septimiusseverus3433 жыл бұрын
"Justinian's plague hit the Empire and basically screwed their entire history." Until the late 8th century, when things gradually began to improve again. But you're dead right.
@KitteridgeStudios3 жыл бұрын
Came for your Roman Emperor Ranking, binged the rest of your channel afterwards. Genuinely great content.
@anonfaceless60883 жыл бұрын
Same.
@mtfnoelle2 жыл бұрын
same bro
@iamkanye4432 жыл бұрын
Same! I love this channel now
@alejandroalmendarez23882 жыл бұрын
Same, interesting takes and covers different times, even though its focused on roman history
@Grant5003 жыл бұрын
Do you hear that? It's the sound of this channel taking off like a rocketship, headed straight for the sun!
@al-muwaffaq3413 жыл бұрын
I subbed at 149 and now he has 3k!
@gallendugall89133 жыл бұрын
The main reason is that slavery is death for an economy. Great at concentrating wealth in the hands of a few, but an economy is built on a large number of small interactions and not a small number of large interactions. Because of slavery Rome needed a constant influx of tribute and spoils to keep from collapsing. What's astounding is how long it lasted.
@bogdan33863 жыл бұрын
To add on the economy part for centuries under the Romans the Mediterranean basin was bleeding silver and gold for goods from India and China which were desired by the Romans but on the other hand the Romans didn't really had anything to offer besides glass and corral because other goods from Rome weren't necessary in those regions so the Romans just paid so much silver and gold for those goods throughout the centuries.
@cageybee72213 жыл бұрын
also, the quality of labour done by slaves is dogshit, because not only do they have nothing to work for, their work literally reinforces their own oppression. slavery creates workers who are incentivized to NOT WORK. not only that, no paid worker could ever hope to compete with slave labour, as it's literally free labour. so paid labourers who want to work and are incentivized to do it well are displaced by slave labourers who don't want to work and are incentivized to do the worst job they can get away with.
@windunursetyadi3 жыл бұрын
@@cageybee7221 fyi, because some Roman slaves were highly educated, they would perform task such as accounting and teaching (while there's still guys who work in the farmlands and mines). While slaves were definitely abused, later imperial laws would expand the legal protections of slaves. Also, really late Romans might have begun the transition from slavery to serfdom in Europe beginning from the reign of Constantine.
@cageybee72213 жыл бұрын
@@windunursetyadi keyword some, also it was roman citizens who used to be free who were forced into serfdom, while slavery continued well into the 19th century in europe.
@windunursetyadi3 жыл бұрын
@@cageybee7221 I think it's hilarious how everyone now defines slavery as the Atlantic slave trade definition while every civilization in history at least has their own definition of slavery although the broadest one being people as property
@dallasjonpaulgrove5473 жыл бұрын
Corruption, The Praetorian Gaurd, Plagues, The Praetorian Gaurd, Bad Emporers, the Praetorian Gaurd, The Huns, The Praetorian Gaurd, Did I mention the Praetorian Guards?
@bleflar91833 жыл бұрын
You forgot about the Preatorian Guards.
@liubei30583 жыл бұрын
So, you're saying if I want to be Emperor (again), I need to avoid having a Praetorian Guard?
@dallasjonpaulgrove5473 жыл бұрын
@@bleflar9183 You're right, thanks dude.
@dallasjonpaulgrove5473 жыл бұрын
@@liubei3058 Well considering they killed the only Emperor during the crisis of the third century who could actually save the empire from complete collapse, that being Aurelian aka the Restitutor Orbis Literally "The Restorer of the World" it would be advantageous to purge the Praetorian Gaurd out entirely.
@alessandrogini52833 жыл бұрын
Murder of alexander severus, murder of aurelian, murder of stilicho flavius ezius and majoran
@benhbr3 жыл бұрын
Even today‘s societies are heavily dependent on agriculture. Crop failures do not just mean that the 2% agricultural sector is out of money, but also that EVERYBODY STARVES
@rainman37683 жыл бұрын
Lol, when's the last time a 1st world economy had a famine? I think France had one in the early 1800's.
@benhbr3 жыл бұрын
@@rainman3768 Germany 1916 and Ukraine 1938
@jeambeam31733 жыл бұрын
@@benhbr blame the Kulaks
@saradadhakal47483 жыл бұрын
@@jeambeam3173 Blame the communists
@bubastis63063 жыл бұрын
@@rainman3768 Netherlands had a war-induced famine during WW2
@hanspetrich65203 жыл бұрын
Normally, KZbin does not recommend me Roman history KZbinrs all that often, despite me watching a lot of that sort of content. And then, every 1-2 years, I get a recommendation for a new Roman history KZbinr who I've not heard of before. And I have not been disappointed with the quality content KZbin recommended me with this! Love your videos, subscribed
@jreiland073 жыл бұрын
It was just too damn big. Administering a unitary state of THAT size would be difficult enough in the 21st century, never mind the 3rd.
@marcelllakatos35863 жыл бұрын
The smallest, most obscure channels weirdly have some of the best content on KZbin.
@chuckles56893 жыл бұрын
You should perhaps mention in a future video how the Romans were in technological stagnation for several centuries, meanwhile the Germanics were progressively expanding. The Germans who Augustus fought had countless weak tribes and swords/chainmail were a rare luxury, while the Germans of 400 had formed into powerful proto-kingdoms and there were no shortage of swords and chainmail (thanks to the Romans).
@classiclife72043 жыл бұрын
Your channel will probably explode in popularity momentarily, so while we have your attention, great job. (Might want to turn your mic up, though.) Finally, a Rome KZbinr who just admits that the Empire was going to fall, no matter what. Christianity couldn't save it, breaking it in two couldn't save it (the West, at least), not even meme-lord Aurelian could save it. The Empire never recovered after the death of Marcus Aurelius but even if he assigned a better heir than Commodus it would have been some other reason, something else, and you do a great job explaining some of those reasons. The times were changing and Rome was not a medieval kingdom. The East, however, was, which explains it's survival.
@mojmirbezak14223 жыл бұрын
I really love the hard truth many Romaboos don't want to hear style of this video specifically
@Neomalthusiano3 жыл бұрын
I really don't see how Christianity could made the empire better overall. While I agree getting rid of unproductive superstitions could make a generic state more productive, Roman religion had no problem with that, to begin with. It was six of one for half a dozen of the other for them.
@natalkumar61322 жыл бұрын
Christianity destroyed it.
@bogdan33863 жыл бұрын
To add on the economy part for centuries under the Romans the Mediterranean basin was bleeding silver and gold for goods from India and China which were desired by the Romans but on the other hand the Romans didn't really had anything to offer besides glass and corral because other goods from Rome weren't necessary in those regions so the Romans just paid so much silver and gold for those goods throughout the centuries.
@eugenmalatov54702 жыл бұрын
This reminds me of the Opium Wars. Do you have a book that looks at history in terms of precious metal flows?
@fhffvgju62993 жыл бұрын
Reason number 1: nothing lasts forever and the fact that the roman state continued its existence for over 2000 years is smt unheard of in the history of human civilization(except for china I'm not sure about them)
@cruisingwithoutsail65853 жыл бұрын
Reason 1: it was too damn big with mostly incompetent monarchs to govern it.
@aaronTGP_37562 жыл бұрын
China does not count. There were many different kingdoms that ruled the region. Qin, Han, Jin, Tang, Song, Ming, Yuan, and Qing are just a few examples.
@vassilyvodka2638 Жыл бұрын
@@cruisingwithoutsail6585 according to Machiavelli he argued in the favor of the republic than the monarchy in Rome, because when you conquer a region you can give them tribune right and they will be involved in the roman politics as the representative of their people, so it was much easier to expand.
@ImnotCarlSagan3 жыл бұрын
This is a nice little channel. I hope to see more
@nowhereman60193 жыл бұрын
Man, I am very pleased to see that this isn't just another Romanaboo channel and instead uses actual reason and facts.
@jacob46653 жыл бұрын
Really digging this channel man
@timhare98673 жыл бұрын
Very good video, though I personally think the ‘Barbarization’ of the Late Roman Army has become something off a distorted myth. The idea that the government could not find enough willing citizens to join the army so had to contract barbarians isn’t really accurate, as the Roman Army after the 4th century was maintained by conscription. As it was the wealthy landholders who provided a quota of recruits they used the army to siphon off their most least productive workers from the fields, while keeping the strongest fittest men who would otherwise join the army on their own accord. Accept they couldn’t, because they couldn’t leave their occupation as farmers or labourers without permission from their landholders. Overall 3/4’s of the Roman Army probably remained comprised of conscripted ‘Romans’ throughout the collapse of the West. Don’t forget as the Visigoths, Franks and other Germanic groups took over lands inside the Empire they likely would have recruited soldiers from the local Romanised former citizens of the empire. I’m also not that convinced that the Late Roman army’s equipment or training was inferior to its predecessors. Motivation would most certainly have been an issue as these were conscripts and not volunteers, but otherwise the late Roman Army was tailored to fit the enemy of the day. The late Republican and early imperial legions were tailored to fight primarily Celtic and Greek enemies. The Late Roman Army was fighting primarily Germans and Persians, who made much greater use of light and heavy cavalry and missile troops. So this is what the Late Roman Army was tailored to fight. The Roman Army of Caesar and Trajan’s day tried to fight the Germans, Parthian’s and insurgencies using large but inflexible legions with minimal support troops in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. They got their arses kicked more then once. By comparison the Late Roman Army still won most battle it fought when pitted against the Germans, who were now very ‘Romanised’ themselves. They just couldn’t be everywhere at once, and particularly in the west as the 5th century rolled on their leadership was riven by civil wars that allowed the Germanic Barbarians to exploit weakened borders.
@BroadwayRonMexico2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, the issue was that the manpower pool was smaller and less motivated, not that it was "barbarized" or worse equipped/trained. Landowners werent sending the best men to fight, and there werent nearly as many people in cities to draw from as there used to be. And without the gain of citizenship to be earned (which used to keep recruitment high even when pay wasnt great), forget about motivated volunteers
@imperiumbrasiliae3 жыл бұрын
The subscribe thing seems to have worked
@thedemonhater77483 жыл бұрын
Fr, two weeks ago this guy had like, 200 subs lol
@imperiumbrasiliae3 жыл бұрын
@@thedemonhater7748 yes that os what im talking about the day before yesterday he had like 800
@thedemonhater77483 жыл бұрын
@@imperiumbrasiliae bless the algorithm
@menaseven90933 жыл бұрын
Awesome video Spectrum, I think the greatest problem of the Roman Empire was the political inheritance system and a bad financial system.
@jonathanmcelveen17493 жыл бұрын
*Looks at current events, and the goals of our current oligarchs and technocrats.* Buckle up, folks.
@luiscastaneda52502 жыл бұрын
So that's why 3/4 of the GDP is allocated to (war)Defense
@ilFrancotti3 жыл бұрын
The ground reason was that, gradually, more and more prominent figures rose to power but were ignorant of any moral bond to Rome, and I mean the "the idea of Rome" and its core values. (Even among those living within the city itself) This happened because way too many peoples, who knew nothing but the name of Rome, were annexed in such a short amount of time. (Roman values began to fade away) Rome's relentless success eventually mined her own loyalty. This is also why, despite having powerful lands (Gaul in the West and Anatolia in the East), late Roman Empires lived their lives voluntarily paralysed. Without any loyalty your greatest strength is also your greatest threat.
@floflo16453 жыл бұрын
Nah this is a very weak argument, Rome was the best empire of human history at integrating and accepting foreign cultures. The spread of the Latin languages in Europe outside of Italy prove it. And even if the east war more multingual with Greek and different smeitic languages that is where the Roman Empire lasted longuer.
@vorynrosethorn903 Жыл бұрын
This is an argument from wig historians (the other is that it was because they stopped being democratic) rather than what actually happened. All the foreign elites were fairly romanised and indeed they probably resembled the early Romans more than the late Romans themselves did.
@ilFrancotti Жыл бұрын
@@vorynrosethorn903 This is just one of the many ignorant comments around. Ancient Romans had never been "democratic" nor called their state a "democracy". "All foreign elites were fairly romanised"? What about Arminius and the Teutoburg battle? What about the Jewish revolts in Israel? What about half of the Mediterranean speaking an Hellenic language rather than Latin. What about the omnipresent lack of loyalty that Roman Emperors or usurpers displayed through the centuries.. some of which attempting secessionist movements once in Gaul, once in Britain, once in Syria and so on.. My original comment is not about racism towards foreign people.
@vorynrosethorn903 Жыл бұрын
@@ilFrancotti I was specifically criticising wig historiography, that is their viewpoint not mine. I put it in the context of late Rome. We wouldn't have titles like duke if they weren't romanised to a significant extent, also they were culturally aggressive, something the Romans lost over time (even if they retained their sense of pride).
@Khazrak1343 жыл бұрын
I needed a good cry. thanks
@kingarthur12173 жыл бұрын
“America is going to end up just like Rome” Yeah, the hell we are.
@rafaelglopezroman11103 жыл бұрын
Ironically those same guys also support a gold standard cause they think metal currencies can't be inflated even though the fact that they're prome to inflating is part of the reason we got rid of them, they support dumping fuckloads of money in a stagnant military industry instead of education and infrastructure, they support cheaper labor and no minimum wage further desitizing people from working in blue collar jobs while simultaneously preventing immigrants from working in those industrues. So we are left with a declining industry, a dumber population, and idiots in charge whose knowledge of monetary policy comes from the 1960, still not fucking Rome though.
@miguelpereira98592 жыл бұрын
@@rafaelglopezroman1110 FIAT currency and debt for as maliagned as they have been can be an incredibly powerful tool. The United States is in an unbelievably privileged position having the world's reserve currency, but the american elites have done fuck all with this position apart from enriching certain interest groups (like military contractors). Seriously the US can basically have gigantic budgets put into scientific and technological R&D with basically no consequence to the economy, leaving every single nation on the planet in the dust, but they haven't done that, instead the US has a mountain of debt and not much to show for it. I mean China has a tremendous amount of debt aswell but at least they have lifted an insane amount of people from poverty in their country
@vorynrosethorn903 Жыл бұрын
Maybe, but the fact is that after getting off the gold standard inflation got a lot worse, largely as it went from being possible to inflate to there being no impediment at all. Minimum wage is largely about having wages low enough to allow people on at the bottom rug of jobs, it has largely become very difficult for citizens and a shadow economy for immigrants. Immigration is frankly just terrible though better in America because they can at least be integrated. The problems with industry is globalisation, or offshore everything and try to not have the new industrial powerhouses not overtake you through wrangling the finance sector. The people you are talking about (the Austrians) have lost at every hurdle, they have no power and their policies have had very little influence, the people running the show are the Keynesians and an assortment of geniuses who've transformed the economy into a horrific mix of socialism and corporate capitalism (probably it has the most similarities with the fascist economy), this is even worse outside of the US. Now we are looking at a situation were the socialist part is failing and the corporations are looking to take the rest of the pie, really we are in a similar situation to eastern europe at the time of serfdom being introduced.
@irishpatriotv25753 жыл бұрын
climate change not only ended the western roman empire but the eastern as well Climate change made the Turks migrate from the steppes into the middle east
@iSyriux2 жыл бұрын
Huns weren't Turkic
@irishpatriotv25752 жыл бұрын
@@iSyriux the Turks are Turkic
@taco300pope3 жыл бұрын
damn another historical channel that adds a little special something, I guess ill sub!
@chiefmasterofdeepwarrens32083 жыл бұрын
The overstretching was thankfully ended by Theodosius "the great" (One of the few things he did right), Then the empire had a very large stepback by the death of Aurelian, then had an even larger stepback by the deaths of Stilicho and Aetius (not saying that those two are better just saying it was in a worse time) and then put a nail in the coffin by the death of Majorian because fucking Ricimer. Also Valens fucked up by letting the barbarians in, Same for Theodosius "the great", I wouldn't say that Christianity changed much of the empire except the religion, the pagan religion changed a few times (first time by Caligula who worshipped himself, then by Elagabalus who worshipped Deus Sol Invictus, And also Aurelian who also worshipped Sol Invictus, of course Christianity by Constantine the above average and finally by Julian the Apostate, who failed in converting the empire to Christianity). And to the heroes that saved or almost saved the empire go also terrible people who did that/who followed. Honorius, Valentinian, that guy who forced some people who killed Aurelian and Ricimer
@septimiusseverus3433 жыл бұрын
"Then the empire had a very large stepback by the death of Aurelian." How so? He had no shortage of competent successors who managed to set the empire on an even keel for some time afterward.
@mrscechy86252 жыл бұрын
Your chronology at the start there is a bit confused Aurelian was Emperor BEFORE Theodosius
@chiefmasterofdeepwarrens32082 жыл бұрын
@@mrscechy8625 I am aware, though i should get better at phrasing/constructing sentences
@jorder853 жыл бұрын
You should do a video where you pretend to be in charge of Rome in like the 400s ad and attempt to save it, like say what reforms etc you would implement
@nohbuddy13 жыл бұрын
Why bother
@cruisingwithoutsail65853 жыл бұрын
I can think of some solutions to prolong the longevity of the empire but not completely alter the course of its inevitable demise.
@saintburnsy24683 жыл бұрын
I would arm the military with AKMs and see where that got me
@Frendlu3 жыл бұрын
It's a waste of time. At the 400 Rome was going to a precipice without parachutes. Everything that you trying to do, was doomed because everyone can be emperor, so your main goal as a emperor, and if you want to change history, you need to be as powerfull as possible, it's "taking care" of the competence, and that means, wasting the less quantity of money as posible to repair infraestructure that your rivals can use to go faster to your city and kill you, bribes, a lot of them, to have the "loyalty" of your "trusfull" army, and not leave any penny to other things, because money that you can't waste to bribe the army means, that the army have more changes to go and kill you, crushing your reforms if they not decide to go earlier because your "reforms" are "dangerous" for them (not the first time that the army deposed and emperor for stupid reasons, like beeing too gay, wasting many time in a siege). And if this it's not enough, because everyone can be a real threat, choose between the harmless (to no say completly stupids) to administrate the empire (agravating much more the situation). With that, they're not avaible reforms that Rome can manage to survive. And if you manage to put this reforms, still, the next emperor/strong guy can just ignore them.
@DiviAugusti3 жыл бұрын
Everyone loves top ten lists and Roman history.
@shamasmacshamas71353 жыл бұрын
Great channel! Growth is guaranteed, I assure you
@Aaedion3 жыл бұрын
Your channel is growing...good
@thebandofbastards49342 жыл бұрын
You can understand the main cause of the fall by looking at it's eastern counterpart where despite having fewer problems than the western side, it still got destroyed due to internal problems. As it was not the invaders who destroyed Rome, but the very title of the Emperor as the excessive concentration of power brought every reason for a civil war even in times of crisies.
@7hayzuh2 жыл бұрын
How do you only have 1.9 million views on total your videos are great!
@wagwoon17123 жыл бұрын
I think an interesting video idea could be what reforms you think would of stabilized the late empire.
@bannedcommander2932 Жыл бұрын
A hereditary succession may not have helped much, because it often results in weaker candidates for leadership and Rome desperately needed good leaders in the late period to survive. Consider who got to be emperor because they were sons (or relatives) of the previous emperor. Names like Commodus, Caracalla, Elagabalus and Honorius come to mind. Hereditary succession may prevent some civil wars, but arguably having those four as emperors might have been worse than having another civil war or two. The good emperors were mostly either adopted and/or rose through the ranks of the army or Senate. Imagine what might have been if Stilicho or Aetius had been emperors instead of Honorius and Valentinian III... In terms of the economy, it should be noted that the problems largely started when Septimius Severus and then Caracalla each raised the salary of the legionaries to astronomical levels to ensure their support (since the Severans were generally hated by the Senate, they had to solely rely on the army to keep their power. They also started stationing legions near Rome where it would have previously been unthinkable). I think this is important to mention because the problem wasn't that the money had too little precious metal in it, it was that too much money was competing for too little produce. With the nonexistent economic knowledge of the time, it was impossible for them to know that putting that much extra money in circulation without significant growth in available goods would lead to an inflation loop which would ruin the Roman currency. Same goes for Diocletian-it is easy for us to see today that his Edict of Maximum Prices would not work and lead to even higher inflation and black market activity, but all of this wasn't known back then.
@saradadhakal47483 жыл бұрын
What I don't understand is why the east survived. They went through very similar situations as the west. The goths, Huns, Alans all ravaged the east before moving west. And just as the west had to deal with Germanic tribes, the east had to deal with tribes beyond the Danube. And in terms of prosperity, both were similar in 395 ad. The east had Egypt and Libya while the west had the rest. Both sides were comparable to each other. Iberia and Anatolia are comparable and so are gaul+ brittania with the Balkans. Not to mention that the east also had to deal with great, organized empire like the Sassanids which the west did not deal with. So I think both halves were pretty equal. Why then did only the west fall?
@megaponful3 жыл бұрын
The east was generally richer than the west. Trade flowed from there, they had Egypt which was the breadbasket of the empire. Though they also had to deal with barbarians the pressure was more focused on the West. In the end it was pure luck and perseverance which lead to them to continue to persist until 1453.
@saradadhakal47483 жыл бұрын
@@megaponful the west also had Carthage which was it's bread basket though it wasn't as good as Egypt. But I think these small disadvantages are outweighed by the fact that the Sassanid empire regularly went to war against the east. So I mostly hold it to chance that the east survived.
@alekisighl75993 жыл бұрын
@@saradadhakal4748 The west's bread basket was Sicily which was lost to the Vandals.
@saradadhakal47483 жыл бұрын
@@alekisighl7599 I thought north Africa was the bread basket for the west. How did such a small island provide food for the empire please explain.
@ronanshanley78293 жыл бұрын
@@saradadhakal4748 North Africa was the bread basket, Scicily was important too but didn't produce as much as north Africa. Both were lost either way
@yaminerenri3 жыл бұрын
Your channel pfp is honestly the best on youtube lol.
@juanferandrade21173 жыл бұрын
Love your videos dude, keep up the amazing work
@wrightroenigk3 жыл бұрын
This video made me cry
@sravasaksitam3 жыл бұрын
Why are you crying about a 2000 year old empire
@090giver0903 жыл бұрын
Ok, let's get facts straight about Bonifacius. We know that he "invited vandals to Africa" from works of Procopius and Jordanes whou lived and wrote 50-100 years after the event. Prosper of Aquitaine and Hydatius, who were contemporaries and of the events don't support this. Also Cassiodorus wrote that Vandals were pushed to Africa by Visigoths, who started conquering Iberia at that time. So my money on that poor Boni was falsely accused and these accusation are capt by Aetius' fanbase (that on average are as levelheaded and unbiased as typical K-pop fangirls) ever since Renaissance.
@alejandroalmendarez23882 жыл бұрын
Subscribed, nice videos with a good perspective
@wheresmyeyebrow16083 жыл бұрын
Damn those last scenes of tumbled architecture : ( Beautiful
@emperoroberon3 жыл бұрын
Why is the sound so low? I have to turn it way up and then when a commercial comes on, the sound is BOOMING! Fix your sound recording Bro.
@elliot65843 жыл бұрын
man how old is your channel, like 2 weeks? and you're already this big? congrats man
@SuperDaxos3 жыл бұрын
Your next big step is getting a new, good microphone. That will greatly enhance your growth
@MyViolador3 жыл бұрын
Their biggest mistake was to make all roads leading towards Rome, giving away the position of the capital to the barbarians.
@miguelpereira98592 жыл бұрын
Lel
@chiefmasterofdeepwarrens32083 жыл бұрын
Holy damn my man you have skyrocketed, didn't you have like 360 subs two weeks ago
@1_rma3 жыл бұрын
did this man jump to 100 subcribers go 3.26K? Great work.
@CKyIe3 жыл бұрын
They seem to have always been low on manpower at this time. Does anyone have any info on the birthrates? Any info on this for either the Romans or barbarians, as well as either before or after AD 300 would be very interesting to look at.
@CKyIe3 жыл бұрын
Also, great video!
@090giver0903 жыл бұрын
There are a bunch of studies of Roman demography (See Bruce Frier and Walter Scheidel). But for barbarians we can only make more or less educated guesses as they didn't do census.
@CKyIe3 жыл бұрын
@@090giver090 Thanks, I'll look into that
@anthonybird5463 жыл бұрын
You have quite a few waves of plagues that hit and places that subsequently went fallow and had to be reclaimed by different waves of people like in the Eastern Empire
@nohbuddy13 жыл бұрын
Always interesting to me why people think it's astounding the empire fell. All empires fall.
@martiawesome3 жыл бұрын
Man do a video about the punic wars or events during the roman republic before caesar
@Rufusdadoofus3 жыл бұрын
Thanks mannnnn ive always loved roman empire history but am lazy so thankkkkkkkkk you for this channel
@RodolfoGaming3 жыл бұрын
Congrats on 3k subs!
@nervatraianus3 жыл бұрын
THIS MAKES ME SAD, CITIZEN
@Steve_Hickman3 жыл бұрын
Gallic tribes sacked Rome in 387 BC, not AD
@johnmomberg58213 жыл бұрын
Subbed at 3.6k on August 22, 2021. (Just leaving a record here so I can brag when you blow up!)
@dontparticipate2402 жыл бұрын
Next time I play Rome Total War the Parthians will be conquered first.
@majorianus80552 жыл бұрын
the notion that the barbarian rule is better than the Roman one is not true at all. That's true only in Italy when Ostrogothic rule is better than Easter Roman, but for the most part especially in Spain, France, and Britain, the international economy collapsed. Half of the elites were replaced by their new barbarian overlords, most of the people were Orthodox Catholic Christians and were therefore not happy under the rule of Arian Christians. Most middle classes suffer as their products can no longer be exported to other markets, and the lower class no longer has the support of the central state which maintained the basic infrastructures like roads, baths, entertainment, hospitals, monasteries, churches, and schools.
@wilsontheconqueror81013 жыл бұрын
I thought Emperor Aurelian stopped corruption at the Roman mints? Well done!
@joshuapatrick6822 жыл бұрын
Because it was an empire? They all fail eventually. Pretty sure it’s the longest lasting one in recorded history if you count the western and eastern empires too. Also agriculture is paramount to all Societies now and it’s a self sustaining need. Farming allowed more people to be around and now there are so many that they couldn’t be supported without farming.
@joshuapatrick6822 жыл бұрын
To say that a society is not dependent on agriculture because it is “modern” is absurd. The primary reason Empires existed throughout history is to address the agricultural Needs of a particular group who was having a population expansion for their small space.
@DeansLists3 жыл бұрын
Great video, but turn up your volume
@automaticmattywhack14702 жыл бұрын
Maybe I missed something, but the Gauls didn't sack Rome in 387. It was almost 800 years prior in 387 BC. That sacking wasn't influenced by the weather in the late Roman Empire. But fun video regardless.
@mynamesjeff92803 жыл бұрын
remember me when you become famous
@spectrum11403 жыл бұрын
I'll try. If I do, that is.
@rbvfeehfbudenrj3 жыл бұрын
Let’s see
@capybarafan12383 жыл бұрын
@@spectrum1140 ok
@notani35333 жыл бұрын
I think when it comes to military tech, the real problem is that all of their adversaries have finally catched up with the Roman.
@jaredvh70342 жыл бұрын
The main reason the roman empire fell, it was an empire.
@massmaritimeexperience77793 жыл бұрын
Love the videos keep it up
@alangivre24743 жыл бұрын
Good content. You have much much future.
@rubberroast15982 жыл бұрын
which video game are those graphics from?
@MBP19183 жыл бұрын
Pain
@jec1ny3 жыл бұрын
Good video. Subbed.
@starhawck3 жыл бұрын
Historian's craft would have a word with you
@jodaz19493 жыл бұрын
I dont know what it is but i always recognize the portuguese accent haha, but good video.
@charlie75312 жыл бұрын
Do a video on fixing the Roman economy
@stateofconstatinopole83163 жыл бұрын
The empire lived for 1000 years more what Do you mean
@theonlybilge Жыл бұрын
5:35 The Boss was right, there is no such thing as an absolute enemy.
@petersclafani43703 жыл бұрын
If you want to know then there are causes in their books. 1. Will Durant 2. Gibbons.
@090giver0903 жыл бұрын
Gobbon is as old as mammoth droppings. It's still good as a review of factual material but his judgements and conclusions (ESPECIALLY about the fall of the Western Part) are were questioned by XIX and XX centuries studies.
@petersclafani43703 жыл бұрын
@@090giver090 his problem was to keep subjects short and for you to gather more research.
@MrNTF-vi2qc2 жыл бұрын
If you think about it, Rome's greatest enemy, the Germans, could of fallen instead of the Romans, if the Visogoths were integrated properly and moved to the Persian border so the Visogoths dealt with Persia in exchange for sacking their lands, someone who wasn't Honorius took over, for example, the usurper didn't kill Gratian and Gratian had a son who took over the west that listened to good generals and actually tried to fix problems, 406 could of been repelled since Stilicho wasn't dealing with the Visogoths as well as the usurper Constantine. (No not that one) And generals like that Hispanian general and Aetius succeeding the emperor, the Germans themselves could of been destroyed, you see, the Hunnic Empire wasn't actually as barbaric as you think, Aetius for the most part until Attila cooperated with the Huns and the Huns helped them defeat many Germans, Aetius could of been able to get Attila to destroy the Germans and steal their wealth so Attila could build a vast empire with no enemies. Since the Huns' fighting skills and destruction when they attacked someone was so enormous, with alongside the Romans, Aetius could get Attila to attack the Germanic tribes, and force them to become foederati to Rome in their homeland. (Not in the empire) By either their own will or crushing the tribe into submission with the help of the Huns and maybe other foederati. This would stop a Germanic Union from forming, and after all non foederati Germanic tribes were completely destroyed by the Huns, Rome and the Huns would turn on the foederati Germans and crush them when they least expect it, and Aetius lowering the time spent in the army and offering these new lands taken from the Germans to soldiers so they could recreate the middle class and increase the population of the upper class which would stop them from usurping so they don't sack Roman cities to become rich, creating a new coin that's printed along with the empire's population so inflation doesn't happen, and also the British Isles began getting civilized kingdoms during the 400s and 500s which would stop raids from the Picts and Irish, the Hunnic Empire would eventually disintegrate from succession crisis' as historically and slavic invaders, which would result in Rome taking land up to the Elbe River to give to the Roman soldiers and to create infrastructure to make jobs, leaving no real threat to the empire except maybe the Sassanids, but historically the Huns had destroyed a bunch of their lands for some time, meaning Rome would have no enemies until the 600s and thus military spending would decrease creating stability and much less usurpers, also removing proto peasant laws and having poor people work on infrastructure in newly conquered Germania would also help recreate the middle class, also populating the border's lands with experienced soldiers that could call up arms on a local level when a barbarian tribe invaded, would of saved the empire.
@Onezy05 Жыл бұрын
Number 1: The Praetorian Guard
@causantinthescot3 жыл бұрын
Honorius wanted your location
@mundoloving2 жыл бұрын
Stop asking me to subscribe, i dont wanna subscribe to every random channel i watch a video on.
@drill01522 жыл бұрын
Then y did u watch this
@jakebranch259912 күн бұрын
*Sad Eastern Roman Noises*
@user-ew5wg8ty8b3 жыл бұрын
11. We failed Rome
@loganspangler45203 жыл бұрын
You need some kind of an outro bro
@twanbrinkman7423 жыл бұрын
*Happy Old Dutch Germanic noises*
@lordgalius41853 жыл бұрын
Ranking every Holy Roman Emperor, when?
@alessandrogini52833 жыл бұрын
The problem of silver could be avoided if Germany would be annex
@praisethesun.praisedeussol60513 жыл бұрын
They tried and failed
@saintburnsy24683 жыл бұрын
Solution to #7: conquer the entire planet! Boom no more borders Probably just have ALL THE REVOLTS to deal with now, but I mean... is that really any different from how it was before? lol
@ingold14703 жыл бұрын
Is this just the Tominus Maximus video without wojaks?
@MrUrlanjedozvoljeno2 жыл бұрын
We can add one more reason why Rome fell. Once they gave up the true religion of the roman empire and accepted the christianity, the empire was chosen to fall apart. Constantine allowed all religions in the empire and Theodosius only allowed christianity and ironically his sons were the beginning of the end for Rome. But what comes to my mind as well is this. After Commodus did what he did and the civil war 193/194 destroyes the base of the empire. I would say Severus did a lot to save the empire until his death in 211. His son, similar to Commodus destoryed the empire again. If Severus would have continued with the adopted emperors like Trajan, Hadrian, M.Pius etc... then the Crisis in the 3. century wouldnt probably happen.
@kingofstars1023 жыл бұрын
Rome walked so the west could run
@alessandrogini52833 жыл бұрын
You already had read Peter heather fall of the Roman Empire?
@JamesJJSMilton3 жыл бұрын
they didnt know my buddy alan (hes pretty cool I think he could have saved rome)
@informer30002 жыл бұрын
Sounds like the UK
@DancaniaX3 жыл бұрын
reason 11 : "emperor" honorius
@svon13 жыл бұрын
even though i liked and subscribed i have to say you are kinda wrong , Rome wasnt doomed guards murdering emperors was nothing new Honorius and Valentinian III alone were 60 years of record mismanagement you even stated yourself they both killed a guy trying to fix everything heck Stilicho didnt even resist when they wanted to execute him and just like Flavius Aetius both were beloved by their troops with Stilicho and Aetius in charge instead i think eventually they would end up with gaul roman germania and britain becomming the gallic empire as a vassal kingdome to rome and rome itself would have the very easily defensible mountain borders of Spain and italy with the west becoming the Caeser empire to the east Augustus empire that would have probably even stabilized the Byzantines as in now not everything is lost was the Muslims invade Egypt
@victorvestroia923 жыл бұрын
Thank you for not mentioning Christianity as most ignorant people will say, infact before Christianity became the state religion, the empire problems were already to0 huge, the west was doomed already, the problems you mentioned took place and now gotten worse. If anything, Christianity made the empire last another 1000 years (Byzantine).
@budibausto3 жыл бұрын
BS. Christianity soften their brain. Yes, Changing the mentality of a civilization IS one of the many reasons for collapse. Can u reason with dogmatic people? Constantinople was busier defining jesus then sorting problems critically. When Barbarians became Christians, Romans look at them in a different way. St Augustin's city of God says it. And there was no unity among among Christian's which created even more instability. Christians couldn't stand outsiders who could have saved the west, like Teodoric or Stilico and others because they were Arians! The land owners, part of the senate and the people were happy with the Ostrogoth. The bigots in Constantinople squandered the delicate situation in Italy, precisly for religious matters.
@Frendlu2 жыл бұрын
They are people how hate Christianism and think that Hellenism was a friendly-happy-eco religión and don't see that Rome had too many gods, not only from hellenism himself, and you know the saying, "too many captains will sink the ship". And with hellenism had this problem. They had so many goods, that they didnt believe in any. When a truly religión arrived, with a strong god, strong "rules", well, Hellenism didnt had any chance. Other thing that we know, its that the greek/roman gods were horrible. One eated his own children, other did parricide, married with his own sister and not happy with that, he "spread the seed" around, and that god was Zeus/Jupiter.🤨 The gods acted more like a cheap versión of "game of thrones" than something truly superior. How can you respect that? And to finish all, we know the horrible things that Christianism did, but we don't know what terrible things did the hellenism, so, how we can judge Christianism, but "forget" about the sins from the greek/roman religion?
@analyzing_evil3 жыл бұрын
wanna do a collaboration ?
@eugenmalatov54702 жыл бұрын
What about Christianity?
@akradr3 жыл бұрын
Now you will have to do a video on why Rome was destined for greatness.