Constans II visiting Rome in 663 AD: What would you have seen?

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

🔴 YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? 🔴 🤗 Join our Patreon community: www.patreon.com/Maiorianus 😉 Or become an official Maiorianus member on KZbin: kzbin.infojoin Please support the excellent Kickstarter campaign of Marco Cappelli: www.kickstarter.com/projects/originespictae/ammianus-vesper-mundi It is a beautiful comic, taking place in the fascinating era of the Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy.

[@Gerhard_Fleischer_5682]

Sebastian pls do more videos about this emperor or heraclian dynasty, or about byzantine dark age.

[@РимскийОрел]

It will be interesting if this channel makes a video about the Battle of the Nations. It is well known that Flavius ​​Aetius defeated Attila in the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields. Many historians such as Mary Beard and Ian Hughes (the latter even wrote a book, “Aetius: Attila's Retribution”) think so. According to most historians in the world, the Romans defeated the Huns and their success is indicated by such obvious facts as: 1) The city of Orleans withstood the siege of the Huns, which is why they were unable to capture it and attack another city, Toulouse. 2) During the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields, the Huns suffered heavy losses, which is why they retreated from Gaul. Thanks to which the spoils from the battlefield went to Flavius ​​Aetius and it became a symbol of his victory over Attila, Prosper of Aquitaine and Gregory of Tours wrote about this. 3) The attempt of the Huns to subjugate the inhabitants of Roman Gaul failed, since the Roman vassals Merovech and Chlodebaud became the kings of the Salian and Ripuarian Franks!

[@gordonsh24]

Amazing episode! I remember how shocked I was when I learned about the emperor's visit for the first time during my trip to Rome.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Hi Gordon, thanks a lot :) Yes, I am also super fascinated by this almost last visit of a Roman emperor to Rome. Rome in those times still retained a lot of the old grandeur of antiquity.

[@Bern_il_Cinq]

The name "Romeo" was originally an Italian version of a Greek word that described people who were pilgrims to Rome. I guess you could say Constans II was the original Romeo 😊

[@AmadeusHortfrick]

In Spain we still call a pilgrim "Romero"

[@nikolakuncevic2417]

​@@AmadeusHortfrickIn slovenian it's "romar".

[@Leptospirosi]

Considering the kind of plunder he made in Rome and the state he left the city in, I doubt Constantine could be considered as the "first Romeo": possibly the "Last Genseric"!

[@stephencampbell2735]

I didn't know that bit of trivia! Thanks ☺️

[@fluffytom82]

Not pilgrims, Rhomaios was just the Greek word for Roman.

[@rsfaeges5298]

Once again, you not only cover little known topics, you open up an even less known, and fascinating, perspective. Props

[@NemanorTheAlmighty]

This is my favorite channel on KZbin

[@progrockdocs]

Your videos are getting better and better. Perhaps you have done one already but could you make something about how Roman fashion and building design changed (or didn't change) over time?

[@WillMowass]

Very good. I too, believe Rome continued on for centuries after 476 CE. Love your videos.

[@dasparado]

Sure it did, the Greek Eastern part of the Empire lasted till 1453 when the Ottomans finally did them in. Byzantines never get as much credit as they should for lasting as long as they did.

[@matthewwright8995]

Fantastic video, thanks. It's mind-blowing that even after the centuries of war, earthquakes, plague etc., that so many impressive buildings were still intact so late in the 7th century I didn't know. Imagine walking exploring the ruins.

[@bulumacpaul8917]

Amazing episode! Rome being part of the Roman Empire in the 7th and 8th centuries is fascinating. It hits hard the "byzantinists" agenda.

[@michaeldunne338]

Not really. It was just a lodgement at a time when the East Roman Empire lost most of its empire. There seemed to be a map showing that - Syria lost, Egypt lost, much of the Balkans lost, maybe Cilicia lost, and of course what is now Tunisia lost by the early 8th century. Was not a great time for what was left of an Eastern Roman Empire that basically got beaten into a rump state, one that would later be presided over by Hellene despots (late 8th century or 9th century onwards).

[@jedisith85]

I always find interesting these videos about ancient cities. 💯👍

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Thanks a lot, I am very happy to hear that :) Yes, the transition of Rome from 320 AD to the middle ages, is I think, one of the most fascinating topics ever.

[@aidanbarrett9313]

@@Maiorianus_Sebastian This video very much illustrates the transition of Rome from the city of Emperors to the city of Popes, a very iconic change of vibe from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. At this time of course, the Pope was growing in power but still a subject of a "Roman Emperor" who could dismiss him. Constans II himself famously did that with Pope Martin.

[@someoneno-one7672]

@@Maiorianus_Sebastian Dear Sebastian, I wonder if you are going to touch on “Byzantine papacy”, the destiny of the Exarchate, and, especially, on the conflict between Emperor Leo III and Pope Gregory II. It was, in my opinion, the turning point when Constantinople lost its real power over the old City of Rome (although western Romans formally became subjects of the Pope, not the Emperor, only half a century later). Secondly, under Gregory II the Holy See gained its ecclesiastical authority over more or less all the lands of the old Western Roman Empire. Finally, in his dispute with Leo III, Gregory II first time in history formulated the distinction between the secular and ecclesiastical powers. This move had, in my opinion, sent west European states and peoples on the trajectory that resulted in the emergence of the western democracy and democratic nation-states (but that might be too much of speculation 😅)

[@prototropo]

Such an evocative discussion. I am, like all fans of Sebastian's channel, riveted by scenes from the late Roman Empire and early Medieval era. Rome is truly the eternal city if that means inextinguishable. My hero of the times is Boethius, one of many brilliant, tolerant and universal thinkers in a time of coercive mediocrity, shallow philosophies and antipathy for reason and inquiry. Constans is for me a new figure of vision in that time.

[@michaelfisher7170]

this is the stuff I like. shedding some light on those neglected times when we don't have a lot of sources, Rome in the centuries after the fall of the empire, who was there, what was happening, what still stood, what didn't? Imagine life in the ruins of a city that once held a million people but now its you and maybe 25 or 30,000 others.

[@patrickselden5747]

Fascinating, Sebastian - thank you very much... ☝️😎

[@flyingisaac2186]

Constans headed an empire with vastly increased security needs but severely reduced resources. Melting statues and plaques to mint those heavy bronze coins perhaps seemed reasons despite the great loss this entailed. However for the people of Rome, this must have rankled and led within a century to the Popes they still elected rejecting the authority of the exarch, Paul the Deacon perhaps captures the raw resentment at the losses of beloved elements of the Roman mental and physical landscape.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Well said Isaac, well said !

[@rexfleming9319]

In 663 AD the Eastern Roman empire was besieged by Muslim Arabs, who had already torn away Egypt and Syria, and were pillaging Asia Minor, so it is surprising that an Eastern Roman Emperor could have been bothered visiting Rome when he was confronted by so many problems closer to home.

[@blackferdinand2260]

Emperors are famous for being useless

[@dasparado]

Well give props to the Byzantines, they manage to stick around for another 800 years after this date. Think about how difficult it must of been to keep that empire together. You are literally always surrounded by enemies.

[@christianfreedom-seeker2025]

Well he was likely looking for help! It was hardly a social visit.

[@Joshua-fq9tm]

fret not, in around 300 years the romans will be on the offensive once again

[@tylerellis9097]

@@Joshua-fq9tm200 but indeed 💪🏼

[@TimeOfTroubles73]

One of my favorite channels. Excellent content.

[@Tigs2]

This is the first time I have seen your channel. WOW! I love your use of AI to give images of how life/people may have looked in the 6/7th Century. A really great video with excellent script writing and delivery. I subbed straight away. Thank you !

[@NubesComics]

Thanks so much, Sebastian!

[@danamcdonnell9064]

It's amazing to look at the photographs of the mills in the Tiber which probably weren't too different from the mills that existed in the 7th Century. It's like looking at a photo of ancient history!

[@VIC-jk2qd]

You’re one of my favorite KZbinrs. I know the topics are niche, but I enjoy watching your videos more than almost every “popular” KZbinr/streamer. Byzantium (*Rome) has become my favorite historical empire thanks to you.

[@paulcapaccio9905]

Your channel is priceless.

[@Uzair_Of_Babylon465]

Great video keep it up you're doing amazing things 😁👍😊

[@serge-partykingtech5923]

Love to see you do a series on the Ostrogothic kingdom and the argument they were essentially Roman Emperors on all but name

[@agenthunk5070]

This video makes you cry.

[@CHAS1422]

Its likely that Constans II saw Rome in a deteriorating state and saw that the Romans themselves were purloining the Bronze roof tiles of the Temples, like that of Roma-Amor. He concluded that if they were going to remove and smelt for the metal, it might as well be him.

[@michaeldunne338]

Constans II's empire lost Egypt, Syria, Palestine and Cyrenaica to the Arabs. Armenia and Cappodocia were being invaded by Arabs too. Meanwhile, the lower Danube frontier was competely breached and Italy had barbarians all over the place. All this before he visited Rome. I suspect he needed the metal.

[@CHAS1422]

@@michaeldunne338 Excellent assessment. Preserving the bronze roof tiles on the Pantheon were probably the last thing on Constans II mind. In the prior 27 years the Byzantines had lost half of their lands, resources and tax revenues. The Mediterranean was no longer safe. Even his trip to Rome must have been a risk. Compare to Hadrian's tour at Rome's height.

[@michaeldunne1253]

@@CHAS1422 Osprey publishing gives an assessment that by the early 8th century the Eastern Roman Empire lost 2/3rds of its "resources" (which I read to mean people and taxes). So the 7th century was a really rough time; and this came after the titanic war with Persia.

[@furrybear57]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Constans also removed all the metal (bronze?) brackets that reinforced the concrete and marble in all the great temples, bathhouses and colosseums, seriously weakening them when earthquakes and floods came along, accelerating the deterioration of the city.

[@rustler160]

This is so sad to watch. I could only imagine what he would have thought seeing what had become of Rome

[@kayharker712]

Thank you for helping us to imagine the reality of Rome through the centuries.

[@grantpenton1850]

Imagine the damage the Lombards would have inflicted on Rome had their southward invasion not been opposed... imagine the immense regret that Constans II would have experienced knowing that Rome could not be further repaired and protected. If only Basil had lived earlier and had the resources to do to the Lombards what he did to the Bulgars!

[@ronb7189]

Unfortunately for the Byzantines, they would not be able able to pour much resources if any into Italy as Anatolia would be the target of the much larger United Caliphate army while the Bulgar King Asparuh was about to create the Bulgarian state in the Balkans. The Byzantines would mostly be in the defensive for the next 2 centuries until the Arab Empire started fracturing.

[@ansibarius4633]

I doubt whether the Lombards would have deliberately tried to damage Rome. The idea of 'Rome' as the standard of civilization would probably have meant far less to the Lombards than it did to Theodoric or to Justinian, but I don't think the Lombards were actively vandalizing towns like Milan and Pavia, which they had already conquered. Maybe they would have neglected its monuments, or pillaged some of them for valuables, but then again, the city was already suffering from underpopulation and lack of resources, and many of the ancient buildings had already been stripped.

[@onemoreminute0543]

Tbf, things were actually going quite well in Byzantine Italy at the time of Basil II's reign. His deputy there, Basil Boioannes, was one of the most talent leaders of the time and pretty much secured Byzantine rule over the south by defeating the local Lombard duchies. He even crossed the sea and attacked Croatia briefly to prepare for Basil II's expedition against the Arabs of Sicily, but the emperor died before such plans could occur. The period from about 876 to 1048 was basically a great revival of Byzantine fortunes in southern Italy, save for the loss of Sicily.

[@stutzbearcat5624]

This is fantastic!!!

[@hmao4466]

Awesome content. Thank you.

[@РимскийОрел]

It will be interesting if this channel makes a video about the Battle of the Nations. It is well known that Flavius ​​Aetius defeated Attila in the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields. Many historians such as Mary Beard and Ian Hughes (the latter even wrote a book, “Aetius: Attila's Retribution”) think so. According to most historians in the world, the Romans defeated the Huns and their success is indicated by such obvious facts as: 1) The city of Orleans withstood the siege of the Huns, which is why they were unable to capture it and attack another city, Toulouse. 2) During the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields, the Huns suffered heavy losses, which is why they retreated from Gaul. Thanks to which the spoils from the battlefield went to Flavius ​​Aetius and it became a symbol of his victory over Attila, Prosper of Aquitaine and Gregory of Tours wrote about this. 3) The attempt of the Huns to subjugate the inhabitants of Roman Gaul failed, since the Roman vassals Merovech and Chlodebaud became the kings of the Salian and Ripuarian Franks!

[@ritchiekolvers997]

I feel this channel has shifted over the years to a more pro-eastern Roman stance where in the past it was mostly negative. I appreciate this shift a lot. ❤

[@bulumacpaul8917]

It's more than welcomed! We need this channel to be part of the Romanists camp regarding the Eastern Roman Empire.

[@onemoreminute0543]

Certainly. A while back I think Maiorianus was rather critical of Zeno for not doing enough to prevent Odoacer from liquidating the WRE, but the reality is that Zeno had his hands full dealing with coups and barbarians in the Balkans. I think his perspective has shifted on that now.

[@raduraducu2668]

It was 50000 people in total, 30000 people in the urban core and 20000 with the villages inside the wals.

[@ale_s45]

I was always so intrigued by this last emperor visiting Rome

[@AntonioBrandao]

A tragic sight to behold. They wouldn’t be thinking “wow the buildings still exist and are still standing” - they would be thinking “this city was abandoned by the gods”, everything fell to decay.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Hi Antonio, yes, very tragic indeed. The prophecy said: As long as the fire in the temple of Vesta burns, Rome shall never fall. The flame was extinguished by Theodosius in 395 AD, and only 15 years later, Rome was sacked. The gods had truly abandoned Rome, or let's say, the were forcefully ousted.

[@changhulu4922]

Ave Christus Rex

[@bobafett9348]

​@@changhulu4922 Ave Christus Rex

[@Casedork]

Such a fascinating and acutely dark period of European history-nice vid

[@РосенСаръмов]

Great video again!

[@FrancisFjordCupola]

Perhaps he was thinking about how much it would cost to restore in terms of money, resources and time and what kind of a tax base a restored city would provide and how wide the chasm between those two were. Would have been heart-braking.

[@andreamarino6010]

He was there to steal everything of value for war ecforts

[@josephang9927]

Even after the Barbiarian invasions, decadence and debris, Rome probably still looked very magestic. I don't blame the romans, though, since such city would require a huge population to be kept in good shape.

[@carlosfilho3402]

An amazing video.

[@kevinburke9940]

I discovered your channel today; it’s a fascinating historical trek. When the emperor was escorted through Rome you mentioned he would’ve been followed by high ranking officials. I didn’t know any were still there. I’m curious who they were or what title(s) did they use? Mayor? Administrator?

[@erikbjorke5851]

Yes, I appreciate the East Roman content.

[@gerardjacquemier5137]

Présentation très intellligente.

[@issaelynuma9001]

Great video.

[@gtd-sq2pj]

As an old man, I find something depressing about this video.

[@macgordonaberese-ako4587]

My exact sentiment. Augustus would weep he could be resurrected to see his eternal city.

[@Δ-Δ-Δ-Δ]

Why? Rome still stands. Rome is still remembered. Rome can't last forever, as neither can we.

[@haditawbe9617]

Best channel ever

[@baselius662]

Constans II visited Rome because he was desperate. The East was overrun by the Arabs and Constantinople was threatened. But it was for nought that Constans visited the west. Italy was a non-contiguous depopulated territory. The only hope for the Romans lay in the mountains of Anatolia were they would defend themsleves and survive for another 1000 years.

[@michaeldunne338]

Aside from Anatolia, the Eastern Roman Empire had lost "strategic depth." Even the Exarchate of Africa was vulnerable to invasion in Constans II's time, and would soon fall to the Arabs. The Balkans were getting overrun by a number of peoples, notably various Slavs, which maybe has been reflected in current day genetic studies, extending well into Greece.

[@Lira-j4g]

@michaeldunne338 Augustus removed all incentive for generals to conquer because they can’t get rich nor get enough prestige to rival an emperor

[@ΒασιλικηΚαζαντζη-θ8φ]

Bravo! Very nice and amusing

[@sindrigretars5094]

Great one, more views...

[@dasparado]

I consider Byzantine and Roman essentially being the same thing. Byzantium was obviously Greek in nature, but I think they still called themselves the Eastern Roman Empire. Considering Byzantium lasted all the way until 1453 while being constantly surrounded by enemies, I think they should get the respect they deserve.

[@mattgraham9515]

I loved this new video! Of course, very interested in Rome during this period... but where does the information about the Palace being maintained into the 700s come from? I'm just really curious. I loved this video. Constans II is really kind of a maligned hero.

[@mattgraham9515]

@muscledavis5434 i don't think it can be this book, because Ammianus was writing 300 years earlier.

[@muscledavis5434]

@@mattgraham9515 holy moly I confused it with the Rome-visit of Constantius II, my bad. But come on, these names will always be confusing😩

[@mattgraham9515]

@@muscledavis5434 you're totally right! I'm just really interested in Rome in the Dark Ages

[@mattgraham9515]

@@muscledavis5434 I think there was also a Constantinus somewhere...

[@liberatumtaiwanae3580]

Love from Taipei. Your imperial "cart" 10:20 that looks like a wheelchair made me laugh. Sure AI could do better than that!

[@Onezy05]

Oh hey, it's the long bearded emperor dude!

[@HerveMendell]

The visuals are amazing, and I assume they are A.I. generated. Which is both awesome inspiring and frightening at the same time.

[@djnickbennett]

Bravo.

[@FieldHoodGaming]

So the Roman emperor sacked the City of Rome too? Wow

[@TheManCaveYTChannel]

You can’t sack what’s yours.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@TheManCaveYTChannel yes, that can be done. See Cremona in the year of the 4 emperors, or Lugdunum under Severus.

[@FieldHoodGaming]

@@TheManCaveYTChannel well... Some people are stupid enough to make that a possibility. Thus, here we are

[@countalma9800]

I have a question - how do you create the illustrations for your videos? Do you collaborate with some artist? Do you find them online? Are they AI generated? I wonder what the technique is? They look hyper realistic.

[@blackopsguy1023]

They look very AI to me

[@countalma9800]

@@blackopsguy1023Not always though.

[@MrPeterheather]

fascinating!

[@takispapas9887]

In school in Greece we were taught that Rome was liberated and re annexed to the "Byzantine" empire. Not occupied of course. Rather re- incorporated in the empire even though the capital and the governing was done by Constantinople in the east. Which had by early 7th century become more "Greek", aknowledged by the fact that the official language of the empire was Greek by then

[@Miodrag.Vukomanovic]

Yes soon the double headed eagle shall reign supreme over the east AND west, once again!!!! All of Europe will be conquered soon, Rome shall be sacked, and Constantinople will be ours again!!! First Rome was Latin, the second was Greek, and the third will be SLAVIC !

[@shane1948]

You were taught well. I Iearnt that it ended in 476 AD

[@paulvmarks]

The first Emperor to loot temples is said to have been the Emperor Maximinus Thrax.

[@markmh835]

If Rome's population was so small, why did it need so many churches?

[@bondniko]

His thoughts: bloody fools. Let's get back home now.

[@Leptospirosi]

@Majorianus, you should check the historical FACTS rather then watching everything with the pink glasses of your love for the Roman Empire! Having Constantin II visiting Rome in 663 must have been like having the black Plague and Attila the Hun knocking at the door at the same time. He plundered so many buildings, still in good shape up until then that the sack of Alaric would have seem a minor happening. The reason for Constantin visit was to plunder as much as possible before Grimuald caught up and dealt with with him for good. A few days later he fled to Sicily, where a slave cut his throat while he was bathing. Canonically 66AD was the year when Rome stopped being a Byzantine city (because the Byzantines starts with the death of Justinian) and the Pope started courting the Franks for protection. The Rome Costantine II left would not be able to stand again until the late middle age. The Romans were so repelled by the Byzantine's behaviour that they would not considered themselves subjects of "Roman Empire" ever again. After 663AD there were no more official contacts between Byzantimum and Rome, especially due to the Iconoclast doctrine that ruined the religious relations between the two cities.

[@MrBigpapi85]

Were you drunk when you wrote that?. You said soooo many inaccuracies it's crazy

[@raduraducu2668]

Video idea : What hapend to the old latin elite after fall? Were they hunted to the last men by germanic and fiino-ugric invaders like Irene's letter to byzantine ideology , french revolutioneries comunists and the video game ,, Al-andalu 711" a game that is about the fall of the Visigothic as the title sais is about the fall of the visigoths whos main caracter is a latin named Theudis (Theodosius) and it begins with the main caracter as a child telling a sad story about the opresed latines living under the yoke of foreinght warlords they considerd the scourge of god , and despite hight illiteracy they were reminded of their past glory and current humiliation. Or some managed to survive and stay in power.

[@TWOCOWS1]

The Middle Easterners never called anything "Byzantine" empire, but always Rhum/Rum/Rome all the way to 1453 when Ottomans occupied Stambulon/Istambul/Byzantium/Constantipole/kitchen sink. Then the Ottomans used the name Rhume/Rome for themselve into the 18th century, before finally doing what the other Europeans were doing: not calling the Muslim empire after Rome, but Ottoman Empire.... Remember the name given to the great mystic poet, Rumi: he immigrated to Iconinum/Konya, in "Rum" (Anatolia) and became known to all as the "Roman" (Rumi) to the present day. No one ever called him "Byzantini" but Rumi/Roman

[@constantius4654]

The Ottomans were Asiatic, not European.

[@michaeldunne338]

Byzantion was a name known then, for the city known in the west as Byzantium and its environs. And that persised through the Dark Ages, as the provinces of the East and Norh Africa were conquered by the Arabs (and later the turks).

[@tobytawaqal3678]

​@@constantius4654 they were, but over time they intermingled with europeans from anatolia and beyond, mothers of some sultans were romanian, albanian, circassians, & greeks

[@TWOCOWS1]

@@constantius4654 Yes, so what? The name remained. That was a point, which you missed

[@TWOCOWS1]

@@michaeldunne338 Yes, but what is the point you are trying to make? Not clear.

[@danielbenitez-kz3iz]

Great video and narration, I think that it is wonderful to think back about when the Romans held Rome in the sixth and seventh centuries. But unfortunately, their hold on Italy was short-lived and they could not find peace with the Langobards to create an alliance. I find that the best option for the Romans was to ally with the Goths in order to hold Italy, even though the Langobards could have caused some revolts and discontent, but this might have been solved with assimilating the Goths to Roman customs and language.

[@iDeathMaximuMII]

Question: Why is he called Constans II? He was given the name Constantine at birth And he ruled the Empire as a Constantine Constans was more like a nickname. Similar to Caligula, who didn't call himself that. He reigned as Gaius. So why do we accept Constans II? When he should be Constantine IV

[@geordiejones5618]

Because his son was Constantine IV lol

[@iDeathMaximuMII]

@@geordiejones5618 And? What's your excuse for Constantine I & Constantine II being father & son & ruling back to back? Lmao

[@tobytawaqal3678]

I get that Caligula is a diminutive form of Caliga which means 'little boots', probably the same case of Constantine & Constans, or Justin & Justinian. I think it's a romance naming thing when you want to refer something but smaller, eg: in french you'll add -ette, like cigarette is a smaller form of cigar

[@iDeathMaximuMII]

​@@tobytawaqal3678I see what you mean. Emperor Anthemius had a son named Anthemiolus, which means "Little Anthemius". Another one Augustus Augustulus (Little Augustus) Justinian's original name was Petrus Sabbatius. Justinian, if I'm correct is a mixture of two words. "Just" & "Fair" in Latin. If I'm not right, feel free to correct me. While Justin is just...well, Just lol. Not like Little Justin or anything. So I dunno if he applies in this context. But for Anthemiolus & Augustulus, they are the same name, just that they're the younger versions of their father/forebearer. In the case of Constans II Maybe it was because his father was referred to as Constantine himself? Historians list him as Constantine III, but did he go by Heraclius, Constantine or both? Then again, as I said in another comment. Constantine I & Constantine II are not referred to as different names. They are both called Constantine with no nickname for Constantine II. Sorry if I bored you. I get lost in explanations lmao.

[@onemoreminute0543]

Historiography

[@jasonpalacios1363]

That's because the Byzantine Empire was the other half of the Roman Empire in which it lasted for 1000 years.

[@Occident.]

Until May 1453 to be exact.

[@ohads1007]

Please do a what if constans ll lived longer🙏

[@infolover_68]

What things the Eastern Roman emperor saw, what went through his mind??... History of the past passing by...

[@mt_baldwin]

Ever thought about doing a vid on the Bagaudae? There's next to nothing anywhere on them and little that can be found is vague and conflicting. I get three different impressions as to what they were from a few conflicting sources. One: peasant/slave uprisings that took control of an area, one step up from anarchy or ran in some other ad hoc way. Two: criminal gangs or bandits that seized control of an area and ran it like tyranny. Three: Commoners taking control of an area, the commoners in control weren't appointed by nor answered to imperial authorities but otherwise ran it like a roman controlled area. Any of these would be interesting to hear about. They sound almost like a type of "barbarian tribe" but instead of coming from who knows where, these were home grown "barbarians" from the lowest classes of Roman civilization.

[@licmir3663]

Constans should have appointed a co-emperor to live in Rome. Would have been better than an exarch.

[@mikered1974]

Italy at that time under Eastern Roman rule is disconnected even Rome is slightly disconnected to Ravenna the capital of Exarch by strip of land only connected thru a single Castle inbetween practically Italy in the 7th Century is ( Poor , No Resources , Plague by Massive Diseases , Depleted in Manpower , Disconnected to each other and Far away from Eastern part of the Empire and most of all Surrounded by Enemies in all side ie: Lombards and Germanic Tribes in North and West in the East Slavs and other Nomadic Tribes in the South the Encroaching Arabs) its not ideal to divide administraly the Empire in that Grim Situation especially what ever remains in the West of the Roman Empire THATS THE WORST IDEA FOR ROMAN ITALIA AT THAT TIME.

[@9_9876]

Would love to watch this video, but I really need subtitles, I am not a native speaker, please enable automatic subtitles for your videos

[@hhjj621]

How about: Constans II visiting Rome in 2024AD? 😂😂😂

[@Luciferianful]

Gloria ad civitatem aeternam et ad Imperium Romanum in saecula saeculorum ...gloria a civta eterna ed a Emperia Romana in secle secloru as in 663 the romans would have spoken in romanesco volvare

[@flaviushonoriusemperorofro3903]

the last roman emperor to visit rome and the last emperor who wanted to move the capital back in to italy in syracouses for starters and rome if his wars against the logobards were proved to be successful that's why he was assassinated in 668 at his baths in sicily.

[@stevehammel2939]

Rome was the first superpower that degenerated into Italy.

[@72Worker]

Sounds like you're talking about Detroit Michigan.

[@johna.4334]

Detroit -America's Pompeii.

[@artv.9989]

AI needs to generate this somehow

[@Tom-Bomb]

Just to be fully clear for everyone, there was NO separate “Byzantine” distinction at all back then. Even tho the west had fallen, the Eastern half of the Roman Empire survived for another thousand years! And they still considered themselves to be fully Roman right up until the end when Constantinople finally fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. And rightfully so since they were for all intents and purposes the direct continuation of the original Roman Empire. So bc of that they didn’t view themselves any differently or their country as some separate entity. And even technically for a few decades after the fall of Constantinople did the Roman’s still living there consider themselves Roman. Hell even Mehmed the Conqueror considered HIMSELF and his new capital of Constantinople to be the continuation of the Roman Empire, basically just under new Muslim leadership. That’s why he and many of his heirs took the title “Kayser-i Rum”) Anyway, I love the Byzantine era and everything about it but the distinction historians try to make them out to be something completely different really irks me. It’s one thing to label them and that period as Byzantine to distinguish it from the way the Roman Empire was pre-fall of the west, but to try and make them out to be a completely separate state and tell everyone the Roman Empire fell in 476 is just wrong.

[@neutronalchemist3241]

As for that, the people living in the Ostrogothic Empire considered themself Romans. Theoderic the Great considered himself an Augustus and adopted Roman imperial symbols and habits, and he used to say that any wealthy Goth wanted to be a Roman, only the poor Romans wanted to be Goths. It can be said that the Eastern Romans became Byzatines exactly with the Gothic Wars. As, forthe local Italics, they were not their fellow Romans that came to regain the peninsula. They were invaders that spoke Greek.

[@TheManCaveYTChannel]

@@neutronalchemist3241the local Italians consistently sided with “Byzantines” and aided against the goths. wtf r u talking about? Why do you think the goths severely punished the inhabitants of cities that sided with the Romans when the goths would take back a city?

[@neutronalchemist3241]

@@TheManCaveYTChannel According to who? If he cared so much about the inhabitants, why Belisarius Sacked Naples and massacred the population? Totila, when he reconquered the city, didn't sack it, and fed the inhabitants, that starved under the siege. He destroyed the walls of of the cities he reconquered, because siege warfare favored the Greeks, but generally treated well the inhabitants. In the end, to beat the Goths, had been the depopulation caused by the same "Romans".

[@TheManCaveYTChannel]

@@neutronalchemist3241 Tell that to the inhabitants of Milan who were wiped out by Vitiges and his men. As far as Naples is concerned, Belasarius gave them favorable terms to not resist. But the gothic soldiers garrisoned at the city roused the inhabitants to resist. When Belasrius made his way to Rome, he entered unopposed. You calling the "byzantines" Greeks, shows how you have a skewed and bias view. Like it or not, they were Romans. Facts don't care about your feelings.

[@TheManCaveYTChannel]

@@neutronalchemist3241 I'll also add a side note. Have you ever read a roman history book? Since when is it a surprise when romans attack each other? And being that only a Roman can become an emperor, it makes you wonder why the goths would offer Belasrius their support should he make himself emperor of the west. Greeks aren't Roman according to you.

[@jmcitr382]

This is so sad

[@SquireWaldo]

Thank you for the video! I am in the process of unsubscribing from KZbin channels that have backup channels on Odysee or Rumble. I see that you have a Rumble channel but it is not entirely synced???? Also, there is no way to 'join' your channel. Eventually I will completely abandon KZbin as I can no longer support the horrible behavior of KZbin. I hope your Rumble channel is up, running, and ready to go by then.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Hello, and thanks for also following the channel on Rumble. I am also not a fan of KZbin, but out of necessity, it's unfortunately still the largest platform. My wife helps me with the Rumble uploads, but yes, it's not always in sync, that is true :( I am not sure what you mean with join, you mean on Rumble? I am really a newbie there, I have to admit.

[@SquireWaldo]

@@Maiorianus_Sebastian First of all you might want to check on the auto-sync function. That way when you post a video on KZbin it automatically uploads to Rumble or Odysee, etc. A nice feature I think. As for 'Join' it is like Membership on KZbin. so you can make a bit of money while backing up your videos.

[@tiberiusjacksonIII]

Maiorianus is great! But he does make a major mistake in this video. He says that the Eastern Emperor visited Rome in the 7th century when the main church was St. Peter's Bascilica. St. Peter's was built in the 16th century. When the emperor visited Rome in the 7th century, the main church was St. John Lateran.

[@ale_s45]

YEah exactly

[@KM-qx2qi]

Were there still any pagans in Italy in the 7th Century?

[@gav7428]

shame about the AI slop

[@chilloutcentral2097]

There’s no Byzantiness or Byzantine. It’s all Roman. Furthermore, constants II moved the capital from Constantinople to syracuse. So what? Should we have called it the syrancusan occupation of Rome?

[@hortagent5687]

Very interesting video, but I have to say that in 2024, this is another example to prove that revisionist history is alive and well. All of a sudden, the Roman Empire didn't really fall because the so called "Eastern Roman Empire" was still what we think of as the Roman Empire. I would like to suggest 2 things: When the Roman Empire was split in 2, the original Roman Empire ceased to exist and the glory that was Rome was over. Just because the people in the Byzantine Empire thought of themselves as Romans, did not mean that they were part of the one and only original Empire. If an Empire was not being run from Rome, what existed was not the Roman Empire. Secondly, didn't the so-called "Eastern Roman Empire" establish Greek as the official language of politics and business? No. The Romans were those who the original empire who lived in Rome Empire was the one that existed when it's borders were from Britain to the middle east.

[@psmorgan2542]

I know right. The population decreased to 20 times less, roads grew over and populations became isolated, language split, disease increased, no central governments, now eating kingdoms. But it’s still the same.

[@psmorgan2542]

Warring kingdoms*

[@ronb7189]

Except contemporary sources from the 5th century and beyond still considered the Eastern Rome as the continuation of the Roman Empire, even the Turks who conquered Anatolia from the Byzantines named their sultanate the "sultanate of rum," rum referring to the Romans these Turks are now ruling over, so even as far back as the 11th century, the rival Muslim powers still considered the Byzantines as true Romans. So if anything your point of view on this subject is actually more in line with historical revisionism as the Byzantines being seen as the continuation of the Roman Empire was unquestionable until the rise of the rise of the HRE and even then, the Eastern Romans was still seen by many as the true continuation of the Roman Empire. This point of view of the ERE being completely different to the Roman Empire did not come about until the enlightenment period when thinkers such as Gibbons desperately tried to differentiate Eastern Roman history from Roman history, but the Germanic Barbarian leaders who nominally subjugated themselves to the Eastern Roman Emperor Zeno during the late 5th century, definitely did not see Zeno as the King of the Greeks, rather they viewed him as the true Roman Emperor hence why they wanted his recognition in order to enhance their positions in the tumultuous landscape of post WRE Europe/North Africa.

[@vulpo]

Did Constans II speak Latin?

[@michaeldunne338]

Probably some. Seems Latin was still the official language of the empire under Heraclius until around AD 620. Constans II was born about a decade later, around AD 630, in Constantinople - so not long after. But he did travel to Italy, and seemed comfortable enough in Sicily for rumors to crop up about an intention to move the seat of power to there. My guess is he knew enough for some level of conversational speaking, and was taught to read it. Whether he received a thorough education in rhetoric in Latin (vs Greek), I can't say.

[@rlgmedia5364]

This exact process of depopulation is occurring in some cities such as Detroit. 15:40

[@captainpancake8177]

For the love of god please stop using ai

[@darrellhagopian9406]

“A million people, now housing 20 times less than that number.” So, a million times 20 is… hold on, stay with me. A million times 20 is 20 million, so it sounds like you are arguing that Rome at the time had a population of negative 19 million people. Now, im just a regular dumb guy, but thats how it reads. You could have claimed “a twentieth of the population” but thats a completely different thing and you cant have both so please pick the phrase that says what you are trying to say

[@aa2339]

And how did his campaign against the moslems do?

[@andreamarino6010]

Are Syria, Egypt and Palestine christian countries? That's your answer

[@DeanStephen]

Where did all those hundreds of thousands of people go? I’d be curious to see an analysis of why modern scholars are so fixated on the Roman Empire to the exclusion of the Roman Republic. I find little to admire in empires. They are all the same, based on expansion through war, taxes, inflation, outright theft, murder of those who object, and slaughter of those whose lands are being seized. Yes, Rome had some innovation that made it slightly more humane, but it was still based on theft to support them. When the money and land ran out, so did the humanity. The Republican on the other hand tried to at least aspire to a more moral and ethical system.

[@septimiusseverus343]

Oh gee, I dunno. Probably because it's interesting...ya think? And the Roman Republic gets massive attention, especially from idiots who believe it was some sort of proto-liberal democracy where the average Gaius and Lucilla got a vote. It was nothing but a kleptocratic oligarchy that failed due to being torn apart by generals and politicians who had profited from the Republic's wars of conquest.

[@johna.4334]

Note: I look forward to the day when the material stolen from Roman monuments to construct the many churches is returned to reconstruct the monuments.

[@carlosaugustodinizgarcia3526]

But first we should look forward to the day when the material romans stole from egyptian monuments return to their original place.

[@Jarvis_923]

Never going to happen. These materials have been in churches longer than they’ve been in Roman monuments. And the people who built these churches were Romans themselves. Also, how would you be able to distinguish between the original Roman “stolen” materials vs the other materials used in the construction?

[@marcpaola1371]

That would be fantastic, and an official apology to from the church for the desecration of pagan temples, monuments, statues, the huge persecution of pagans that lasted near on 1000 years and also for leading to the downfall and greatness off Rome, the styfulling of science, innovation, public construction, philosophy, arts, maths etc....

[@marcpaola1371]

​@@Jarvis_923so destroying, dismantling, desecrating pagan temples is ok with you. I guess your response would be very different if say the church of Scientology took control of the Vatican and desecrated the churches and out of it,build their new religious temples.

[@russellsharpe288]

"Since 410 the city had been sacked or besieged countless times: three times in the fifth century, and another three times in the sixth century." So not exactly 'countless' times, unless the use of Roman numerals made it difficult to count up to six (VI). Hyperbole is fine, but exploding it in the very next sentence is somewhat jarring.

[@AriarcusJunyent]

Eres guapo y me gustaría no bendiga en unión el Papa

[@richardfirsten2364]

Please stop referring to the two basic time periods as BC (Before Christ) and AD (Anno Domini, in the Year of Our Lord). The whole world doesn't recognize Christ, so now woke historians and others use BCE (Before the Current Era) and CE (in the Current Era).

[@thenapalmbrothershq5585]

Good video but instead of using AI generated images please use an AI generated voice over.

[@johns2226]

🤡

[@kishirisu1268]

200 years ago it is not ancient, it just shabby and old. Even now we have buildings from 1800 and they are OK, except outdated materials. In Rome they used stones and concrete which definitely not degrade after such short period of time. You should work more on text logic and lees on yours silly AI generated images which are just fakes.

[@MTGnEWbie420]

wtf u expect then ? u want him to travel back in time and record for you? rofl

[@andreamarino6010]

They do not degrade as much because the workload is not as much as today. A street today need to stand for 20 years with vehicles weighting from 0.5t to 60t passing on it everyday. Roman streets max load was 2 horses and some box