Is "Byzantium" Roman?

Alternative Title: Let's get Bizzy
"Byzantine Empire" is a term you might hear from time to time, and, if it's your first time hearing about it, they might seem to come out of nowhere. I mean, Greek Empire, you know who the Greeks are, Roman Empire you know who the Romans are, Arabian Empire, you know of modern day Arabs. But who are the Byzantines? Why do we call them that?
It has everything to do with medieval politics.
I thought I would try and up the production values for this one/alter the process a bit. Let me know what sticks and what didn't.
________________________
00:00 Intro
02:46 Them Roman Greeks
04:21 complain
04:53 complain over
06:40 The Other Romes
09:55 Conclusion
11:09 Outro
_____________
As of posting this video, I'm close to 200 subs and while I planned to do a semi-joke 100 sub Q&A, I might backburner that until there's more Q to A, as it were.
Also, if you're wondering about that HOI4 screenshot, it was a relatively lucky game using a fun loophole I found in the Greek missions to become byz but avoid the EEE reigning.
____________________
Sources I mentioned:
Louis use of Augustus
play.google.com/books/reader?...
Fred letter transcribed
www.dmgh.de/mgh_ss_rer_germ_n...
Fred letter original
gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv...
Map Source:
www.loc.gov/resource/g5672m.c...
He-goat source
www.jstor.org/stable/283503?o...
Byzantium before 1500 source
www.cambridge.org/core/journa...
_____________
Wikipedia junk:
Translatio Imperii
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transla...
Last of the Romans
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_of...
Problem of Two Emperors
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem...
___________________________
If any Bizzyboos make it this deep into the description, you might want to check out these two source libraries for some interesting reads:
www.carleton.edu/medieval-ren...
sourcebooks.fordham.edu/sbook...

[@croisaor2308]

I never thought about it from the Eastern Roman perspective, but having the former heartland of the Roman Empire controlled by Germans who not only destroyed the Western Empire but now also claim to be the true successor must have been horrifying lmao

[@yungyahweh]

I have heard people say the eastern Roman Empire destroyed the west. They say when they went to retake Italy and the city of Rome they destroyed the institutions of the western Roman Empire which continued after there wasn’t a emperor in the west. Is there any truth to that in your opinion?

[@captain-chair]

@@yungyahweh I heard that the actual Roman senate sided with the Germans and gave consent to them to use the title if Roman, it was the Goths and not the later Germans but it is interesting.

[@maude7420]

That's an historical convention I doubt 400 years after the supposed "fall" happened, people would go chimp mode at supposed "Barbarian invasions" People need to start blaming the Romans for fucking up instead of depicting "Barbarians" as ooga booga cavemen

[@croisaor2308]

@@maude7420 The argument over who was the true successor to the Roman Empire between the Holy Roman Empire and the Eastern Romans was actually a very important question and was one of the main reasons for the animosity between the two Empires for centuries. Both parties refused to recognise the other as Emperor despite both claiming the title. I was mainly joking pointing out the people who destroyed Rome were the ones who claimed it, but the Holy Roman Empire's claim to Rome was a massive issue for the Eastern Romans for most of the Medieval period.

[@yungyahweh]

@@maude7420 From what I have heard and read it really did seem the policy that the Romans had for the barbarians led to what eventually happened in the west. You’re right I never hear people talk about the Roman policy failures as much

[@jasserole]

It's funny to me how there could only be Empire, but everyone was fine with there being two Sicilies.

[@alanpennie8013]

The more Sicilies the better.

[@zxera9702]

This guy doesn't want Sicilies.Good,more for us then.

[@Arbelot]

The title "King of Sicily" didn't have that much prestige and dominion over Christendom as the title "Emperor of Rome" did. so, they don't have a problem with that lol

[@Baurles]

A point as well to how the "Byzantines" saw themselves comes from the historian Prof. Peter Charanis, who was born on the island of Lemnos in the early 20th century, then still part of the Ottoman Empire, and recalls a story from when the Greeks occupied the island in 1912, several children stood and looked at the soldiers. The soldiers asked what they were looking at and the children replied "At Hellenes", at which the soldiers asked if they were not Hellens as well, but the children said "No, we are Romans.". That the inhabitants of an island in the Aegean Sea would still consider themselves to be Romans, in opposition to being mere "Hellenes", several hundred years after the fall of Constantinople and more than a century since the birth of the Greek state says at least something about how ingrained "Romanity" was in the culture of the Byzantine Empire.

[@Rosencreutzzz]

I’ve heard that story before and I even considered bringing it up but I couldn’t find the source and forgot a few too many details, so I’m glad to see someone bring it up in a comment.

[@hedgehog3180]

In general it's just mind boggling how enormous the influence of Rome has been, Rome and Byzantium form the basis of western legal systems and are also the root of legitimacy that basically every western state appeals to. Like there's a reason why the US has a Senate or why London has so much neoclassical architecture.

[@prkp7248]

In Lebanon even in the middle of XX century some people said that. Especially those who were Christian.

[@vanmars5718]

Greeks didn't "occupied" the island. The Aegean islands were always inhabited by Greeks and all Greeks called themselves Romans (Romaioi) traditionally up until the creation of the Greece which they started favored the ethnic name Hellene (which is not "mere"...since for the Romaioi of the 19th century the name Hellene actually brought back to them pride and realization of their justice for independence while the name Romaioi has long been associated with ottoman servitude and obedience to the patriarchate not to rebel and be massacred). So to be Greek in the 19th century was actually almost mythical for them and not being Roman. This event in the island it captures the reality of the day that while Greeks in Greece called themselves Hellene (as today) the Greeks in the ottoman territories continue to call themselves Romaioi (as the Greek minority in Istanbul is still doing) and we see a child not be aware of such issues as ethnic names...more over the Romioi of the ottoman Empire called all Greeks as Romioi in every day use anyway...

[@mehm8fatih]

In Turkish, "Rum" still refers to Greeks living in Turkey and mostly used synonymously with Yunan(greek).

[@celdur4635]

Cesar and all the "classic" romans also spoke Greek, the whole upper class learn Greek as kids and probably spoke it amongst themselves so the populorum won't understand them either.

[@maude7420]

This ! Mfs acting like Greek was invented when that dumbass Romulus was deposed by Odoacer, I never hear anyone saying Caesar or Marcus Aurelius were the first Byzantines, so maybe that just means language was kind of irrelevant to the Romans

[@hedgehog3180]

Also it's really not uncommon for the population of a state to change what language they speak over time, for example within the history of Denmark as a kingdom it would go from mainly speaking Old Norse to speaking Danish as Old Norse diversified into Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Faeroese and Icelandic. In that time period the ruling class would also go from Old Norse to German to French and German to Danish. By the time people stopped speaking Latin in the Eastern Roman Empire people had also stopped speaking Latin in the west and arguably at that point Greek is the only Roman language left in common usage. The Eastern Roman Empire would continue to use Latin for legal documents and texts for many centuries beyond that and they never stopped using it for battle orders, Eastern Roman Armies marched to the same cries as did the armies of Constantine.

[@celdur4635]

@@hedgehog3180 Good points!

[@dimitriosvlissides5781]

​@@hedgehog3180 greek WAS THE language ot the Eastern Empire predating the arrival of the Romans as conquerors as all this part of the world knew the greek language even before the Alexander the Grat era

[@jeffersonmarques2899]

About the conclusion, in portuguese we call it "Sacro Império Romano-Germânico" (translates to Holy Roman-Germanic Empire). Just thought it was funny lol

[@Rosencreutzzz]

Now that I’ve never heard before. Funny to know that Portuguese decided to be pedantically correct with that label.

[@Ladyangel116]

It's the same in Spanish, Sacro Imperio Romano-Germánico

[@jeffersonmarques2899]

@@Ladyangel116 So I went to wikipedia to check it out and it's the same in french. I guess the romance languages didn't accept the Germanic claim to Rome lmao.

[@vortukassingh999]

We call it the same here in Brazil.

[@jeffersonmarques2899]

@@vortukassingh999 Opa, eu sou br hauahah

[@Lightwolf234]

The Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire and the Ottoman Empire are kind of the coolest eastern Mediterranean civilizations that exist in that time frame. It’s always cool to learn about these sort of black sheep of Medieval and Early Modern European History. They were nothing like the rest of Europe in the times they exist and kind of have cool histories and cultures. It’s also pretty cool to learn about nations and cultures that all claimed to be the true successors of Rome proper. Be it the Eastern Roman Empire, the Carolingian/the Holy Roman Empire, the Latin Empire, the Ottomans, or even Imperial Russia.

[@maude7420]

On the topic of nothing like them existing at the time I can relate so much tbh Rebellions, centralized systems of governance, views of legitimacy that went further than just "I have cool bloodline lol" It really is its own world and a clear reminder that the Roman Empire was still there

[@MyUsersDark]

I heard someone point out how every major power in 1914 in some part believed they held the claim to Rome: The German Empire's monarch, the "Kaiser", uses the correct pronunciation of "Caesar" The Austro-Hungarian Empire were ruled by the Habsburgs, who were rulers of the Holy Roman Empire for most of its life The Ottomans claimed to be Romans after taking Constantinople The Russians claimed to be the heir to Byzantium (Rhomania) since they became the center of Orthodoxy after the fall of Constantinople, and took the title "Third Rome" The Italians, with their capital in Rome, lived on the soil that Rome was built, in its core province, Italia The French claimed to be Roman, apparently (I didn't hear much about this one but I heard something about French propaganda stating they were Roman?) The British claimed to be the successor to classical Greek and Roman democracy I don't know how true those last two are, or if the German Empire cared for the title of Roman at all, but that's cool I guess

[@slyseal2091]

@@MyUsersDark This is probably true, but moreso reliant on the fact that claiming every conceivable honor was part of the game of political optimisation that every european(-adjacent) monarchy took part in. A lesser form of adjusting borders to lay claim to towns that didn't bring in taxes, didn't have resources and weren't gonna be defended by the next war, because the only effort the other side was gonna make to recapture it would be in the post-war border adjustments that lost them the town in the first place.

[@mydogsbutler]

The Greek eastern roman empire was hardly a black sheep. it was one of the richest most advanced civilizations of the middle ages. And it lasted longer than the original Latin Roman empire.

[@joaquinrodriguez227]

​@@MyUsersDarkthe spanish monarchy has the literal title of Roman Emperor since the Catholic Monarchs, idk why people ignore that (i guest Black Legend, but even then is ridiculous)

[@RitterDagobert]

I for one try to refer to the "Byzantine Empire" as the "Roman Empire", especially after reading "Warum es kein islamisches Mittelalter gab" (Why there were no "islamic middle ages") by Thomas Bauer, a short book that anyone capable of reading german with an interest in history should honestly read. It mainly deals with continuities in the islamicate world contrasted with greater discontinuities in western europe compared to antiquity. In regards to the "Byzantine Empire" it mentions the shift of recent deceades in cultural and historical studies of referring to cultures/societies/states/etc. by their own, self-identifying names. Contrast that with us still referring to the "Byzantine Empire" as such. Even regarding cultural/linguistic shifts, the "Byzantine Empire" still continued the "Roman legacy" truer than the Catholic world ever could. The ownership of Rome proper is at that a bit of a mute point since for most of the middle ages it was a decently sized city (by medieval standards, not ancient ones) of only regional importance aside from the papacy. Constantinople on the other hand remained a metropolis for long after Rome "fell" until the fourth crusade from which the city and the empire never managed to truly recover. To come back to the text by Bauer, he argues that the pervasiveness of referring to the "Byzantine Empire" as such comes down to making Western Europe out to be the only true heir to Ancient Rome & Greece. First and foremost, the islamicate world has to be denied this legacy, but also the genuine continuation of the Roman Empire cannot be allowed to stand besides "Western civilization". This may be more pragmatically phrased than by Bauer (if only very slightly), but genuinely reflects what 19th/early 20th (Western) historian were doing. tl;dr the Roman Empire ended in 1453 CE, don't let anyone tell you otherwise

[@hedgehog3180]

After listening to The History of the Byzantine Empire I have started to refer to them as the Eastern Roman Empire or even occasionally Romania since it's become rather obvious that they have a perfectly legitimate claim to the title of Roman Empire since Roman doesn't just refer to the inhabitants of the city and the Romans never thought that, they thought a Roman was anyone who followed Roman culture and the people of the Eastern Roman Empire certainly did.

[@alanpennie8013]

The Papal decision to revive The Western Empire in 800 has confused so many people.

[@kinmersha]

Dan Olson is awesome, so I wholeheartedly support this. Been really enjoying the recent videos, they feel a bit more focused than your first couple. Already learning and growing!

[@Rosencreutzzz]

Thanks! I try and learn something new with every video so far, this one I took on a few too many new things at once, but I think it came together decently with the background music tracks and stuff. I don't know what I need to work on for the next one, but something always comes up.

[@alanpennie8013]

Are you aware of the short - lived Bulgarian "Roman Empire" (925 - 68) founded by Tzar Simeon I? Pope John X was happy to recognise Simeon as Roman Emperor because there was no Western Emperor at that moment, following the death of Berengar of Friuli in 924.

[@ericew576]

Each video essay you make is enjoyable. Thanks for making these explainers

[@OrdinaryX11]

Your videos are awesome, keep it up and you'll hopefully grow very fast :)

[@arkfille]

You deserve more views! This is on par or better than so many similar channels

[@Ivan2294]

I've been really enjoying your videos my dude, keep it up

[@georg2039]

Hello, interesting video. People living in the Roman Empire's territories always self-identified as Romans, up to our times, centuries after the empire's fall in 1453, like my grandmother using the name "Roman" instead of Greek, when referring to us, me, family, and Greek people, to our traditions and customs. And we are Greeks.

[@GlidusFlowers]

Been waiting for this! Here we go

[@gen1exe]

In Europe, I think the Roman imperium was also tied with being the rightful secular leader of Christendom. Many scholars today refer to the Byzantines as the Eastern Roman Empire. The continuity between the Roman Empire and the ERE is even more pronounced when you take into account that the center of power had moved east even before the fall of Rome in the West. Going along with the political argument, sometimes enemies of the Holy Roman Emperor would call him stuff like king of the Germans as a slight while the emperors were adamant that they were "imperator romanorum."

[@hedgehog3180]

10:50 Actually on the point of the HRE in Danish it's called “The German-Roman Empire” so this is the case sometimes. Though I get that your video is primarily about English language discussion but I figure extending it more broadly to the west makes sense. English probably didn't put German in the name because it had more direct influence from the Frankish realm and therefore followed it's propaganda more and it also didn't really have much of a concept of Germany until the modern state. Meanwhile in countries that directly bordered it there was more competition with it so an imperative to deemphasize it's Romanness and the concept of German developed a lot earlier, in Danish the word is Tysk and it dates far back into middle ages.

[@MyUsersDark]

In fact, the word "Dutch" comes from the German word for German, "Deutsch", and is used as an adjective for the Netherlands because the English couldn't tell the Dutch from the Germans. Yeah, not much of an idea of what Germans were. And yeah I can confirm, it's the same in Norwegian as well.

[@CyNiiCaL_nR7Gaming]

voltaires quote is also weird because at that point it was called HRE of the German Nation as they lost Italy they added the German nation part

[@yungyahweh]

I’m happy I found your channel :)

[@solinvictus6562]

Cool video,i really hope you get big one day

[@masterman1001]

How do countries get their names? I mean, many countries' names are merely based off the local, ancient word for "the people" (DEUTSCHland for example, which stems from "thiutisk" in old high german and meant something along the lines of "part of the people") or merely referencing a clan/state that may have resided in the area (Switzerland -> Schweiz which most likely comes from one of our cantons, Schwyz, but we also call ourselves the Confoederatio Helvetica, named after the tribe of the Helvetii, one of the few celtic tribes present in the area of northern and central Switzerland). Some may also refer to themselves as "the people", intending more than just the people of their own country, like the Slavic peoples did (as apparently "slawa" meant "people", but I may be wrong here. Interestingly this word to the people further west, the germanic peoples, that word was reappropriated to think of them as slaves, because of course other peoples would find ways to use someone's word to identify themself as a derogatory term. Again, this may not be based on facts as I must research it once more after work). It's funny either way, and makes perfect sense that you'd merely use whatever word you have to describe your people.

[@hedgehog3180]

It's an ongoing debate as to whether Slav comes from the word Slave or Slave comes from Slav.

[@DrAnarchy69]

I’m a part of the Byzantium Discussion and Study Meetings Club. Or BDSM Club for short

[@MrJMB122]

Damn good video!!!

[@Linux_MissingNo]

Thank you for considering my topic idea. I do have one suggestion to maybe talk just a little bit faster

[@yoghurtmaster1688]

Huh pretty underrated channel

[@corylarsen5788]

Interesting look at the Christian Greek Empire

[@chrisfrap]

its the eastern roman empire not greek empire

[@Nico_M.]

In my opinion, the thing about the Byzatine/Roman Empire boils down to three situations, each having happened several times, but barely not the three at the same time. 1) A "country" (I'll use a modern term just for simplicity) being named after their capital. 2) A country moving its capital to another city. 3) A country losing territory. So, to understand the Byzantine/Roman issue, I like to imagine a similar situation about another country. So, let's say that Mexico moves its capital to Guadalajara, and then they lose a war against a country that invades from Yucatán to Mexico City. It's possible that, in the future, historians started to informally call the new country "Guadalajaran Republic", but officially they would probably keep the name of United Mexican States, even if the place they're named after is not longer controlled by them. Because the concept of "United Mexican States" is way bigger than Mexico City, similarly to the concept of the USA being bigger than "a government from Washington DC".

[@hlibushok]

"Vindonian Empire" sound cool as hell.

[@sleepinthemorningcalm]

4:12 I hear this point a lot. That the East ceased to be Roman when they stopped speaking Latin. I don’t see why a polity can’t have its language change and still be continuous. It feels like an anachronistic view informed by modern nationalism’s extreme emphasis on linking of a people group with language rather than thinking of how people back then perceived themselves If the United States became a majority Spanish or German or whatever speaking country that wouldn’t necessarily mean it would be a new entity completely divorced from the past.

[@sto_karfi842]

The Byzantines had many Latin Romans as well.The switch in language was formal after the laws were published in Greek.The empire had no official language,and so having language as an excuse to deromanise the Roman state is laughable.

[@prazzlerazzle5565]

they also called the language they spoke roman like maybe the most well educated byzantines would know about their hellenic past but your average farmer, city dweller, soldier? it was romans all the way down

[@ChronosHellas]

@@prazzlerazzle5565You don’t study from peasants but the elites, they are GREEKS, the Hellenic Republic is alive today not some idiotic called “romaion” state.

[@mydogsbutler]

@@prazzlerazzle5565 The former Yugoslavians today claim to be "macedonians". Most of them don't know their ancestors were Bulgarians not "Macedonians". Sometimes names are deceptive.

[@nathanwaterser8218]

Also Rome always had a very close conection to Greece A lot of emperors spoke Greek even before the western part collapsed, a lot of what we associate with Rome was Rome copying and adapting Greek stuff to their culture To say the Byzantine empire is not Roman just because they officially stopped using Latin is just wrong from my perspective Would be like saying Belarus isn't a nation because most people speak Russian rather than Belarussian

[@mydogsbutler]

@@nathanwaterser8218 To say the Holy Roman empire is not Roman is just wrong from my perspective. The Holy Roman empire called the other Roman empire Greek for centuries.

[@carlaandreea8180]

Love the content! But please, call it how it is, Anno Domini

[@Casavo]

I sometimes say something like "The byzantine Eastern Romans". I only use the term byzantine empire to help delineate a time frame, tho i always preface it with the fact they themselves never used this term. I draw a line personally at the islamic conquest of Egypt and the Levant as this was a truly game changing event for the state in question. This whole thing tho makes me think of some of the rump dynasties in china where they would just add a modifier like the Southern Song.

[@AdobadoFantastico]

5:03 no matter which way I turn it, the text always looks upside down. I think this script gives me dyslexia.

[@SarudeDanstorm]

I thought Emperor Maurice, died in 602 CE was the last to speak Latin and use it in court?

[@alanpennie8013]

Could be. Though The Heraclians originated from Africa and so may have been Latin speakers, at least at first. This is untrue. It is unknown where their home province was. The fact that they lived in Africa when we first hear of them doesn't mean they originated from there.

[@sodinc]

That name of Rome in alternative history is a bit funny because it exactly how it sounds in my slavic-speaking head in real history

[@barbadolid5170]

Rema, now that one made me laugh

[@justinjeffries1554]

The music makes me want to play Civ again

[@hazenoki628]

In Swedish, the Holy Roman Empire is normally referred to as "Tysk-romerska riket", or the German-Roman Empire*. If you ever refer to it as the Holy Roman Empire you mostly do so to mock it, and use the ridiculously long full name to signify that. *Rike doesn't map perfectly onto English, being used for countries of any size above city-state, but it's what we use for the actual Roman Empire of Antiquity. It just doesn't sound as grand as empire. Yes, rike is cognate with Reich.

[@elephantofdoom]

In this essay, I will explain why Rome fell in 1542 when the Principality of Wales was formally absorbed into the Kingdom of England...

[@abarette_]

based...

[@dusankazandzic401]

Our history teacher only mentions the HRE but when talking about Barbarosa he called him the King Of Germany, as for Byzantium he used Byzantium and Romejsko Carstvo (Play on the word Rome which we actually use to signify the difference that Byzantium is used for i the west)

[@dusankazandzic401]

Hre a few times*

[@teardeem]

honestly I will continue to call it byzantine for eternity because it is hands down the cooler name

[@ZS-rw4qq]

0:30 You would be shocked to find out that in Serbo-Croatian we call the city of Rome - Rim/Рим Which sounds exactly the way you pronounced it

[@rexrules8895]

YES

[@jaspervanheycop9722]

Funnily enough in Germany and it's neighbours (like the Netherlands where I'm from) the HRE IS just called "The German Empire" (i.e. Deutsches Reich, Duitse Rijk). I'd never heard the proper Holy Roman Empire terminology until university (and Medieval Total War 2 hah). Even then in Dutch we distinguish between "Romaans" and "Romeins" (lit. "Rome-ish" and properly Roman resp.), to indicate whether we're talking Medieval (Romaans) or "real" Romans (Romeinen)

[@AggelosKyriou]

Incredibly based Dutch

[@mydogsbutler]

When Charlegmane was crowned Roman emperor by the Pope it was just Roman empire not "German empire" that came much later. Back then Germans claimed to be the real Roman empire and claimed the other Roman empire was really Greek. The reason why "Byzantine" arose is precisely because the Germans refused to call the Greek-one Roman even after it fell to the Turks. The Germans still considered themselves the "real" Roman empire.

[@iangear9943]

Yes

[@aleccrull4114]

@6:00 In the year 380 A.D. emperor, Theodosius made Catholicism, the official religion of the empire, so Rome was Catholic

[@mydogsbutler]

Theodosius saw himself as a Christian. Although there were different Christian sects at the time, the distinction between Catholic and Orthodox didn't exist yet.

[@darkraven5106]

Historians: Wait, it's all Roman Empire? Ottomans: Always has been.

[@spaghettiking7312]

If you asked Constantine, he would give you a definitive, 'Yes.'

[@Arbelot]

Even if you ask Heraclius down to Basil II down to Constantine XI, they will answer the same: "Yes".

[@cyrussilver8230]

Fun fact: in Slavic languages Rome IS actually called Reme.

[@TheRezro]

Actually 🧐 Classical Roma as what most people think about Roman Empire, ended in the 3'th century, with Edict of Caracalla. When every person in Rome become a citizen. This break importance of the capital and people from outside the Rome become Emperors. And shortly after Constantine The Great, who was from Dacia and was Cezar (Elect) of Galia. Reconquered the Rome and move capital to Constantinople. Idea of Western and Eastern empire is actually a modern invention. Until 5'th century, Constantinople hold control directly over half of the country. With various self proclaimed Cezar's and Roman Generals (who at the time commonly were German) fight over control of the region. With various provinces going semi-independent. Formal destruction of city of Rome was only nail to the coffin, what give Byzantine excuse to negate citizenship of the provinces. Even if most recognize Byzantine rule until 8'th century and Roman senate operated under Ostrogoth, who were Roman province (what ended after Longobard conquest). Worth to mention that Frankish King Clovis 1 was Roman Consul. So what fall we actually talking about? Anyway. When Byzantium (what was calling itself Rome to be clear) changed official language on the Greek, it deepened division with rest of the Empire. As Franks, Italians, Hyspanians or Dacians (Romanians) speaking vulgar-latin, become pushed even more. It is also the reason why many not see them as true Rome anymore. Anyway, after inheritance crisis in Byzantium, with help of Papal State, what was Byzantine Patriarchy. Charlemagne usurp title of the Emperor gaining support of the Papal State. So that is when actual split of the Rome did happen. Anyway. Charlemagne empire split on predecessors of modern France, Germany and Italy (while Spain was conquered by Muslims), but Emperor of Holly Roman Empire was at least formally recognized as ruler of entire Christaindom. At least until it was dissolved nu Napoleon, who declared himself a Emperor. What was fallowed by similar declarations by King of Austria and Germany. Calling themselves by term Kaiser. Despite fiasco of World Wars, Europe reunited diplomatically again. After that Byzantium was gradually diminishing in power, while actin like they are still ruling the world. Only to be conquered by Ottoman Turks. Who in fact did consider themselves as Sultans of Rum, but title was not recognized by anyone. Russians have nothing to do with them. Ivan the terrible was literal madman! While Peter the Great was German, what was most legitimate part in they claims to being Roman. So not much.

[@chrisfrap]

correct

[@mydogsbutler]

The mostly Greek speaking eastern Roman empire was about as "Roman" as the mostly German-speaking western Roman empire was "Roman". Both empires inherited aspects of Roman law but ethnically neither was Roman. Greek and German were the largest demographics albeit they both claimed to be Roman empire.

[@TheRezro]

​@@mydogsbutler Exactly! The issue is that while everyone claim that Byzantium was "True Rome" (despite changing language, culture and everything else) at the same time people pretend that East Rome fall to "Barbarians" and not mostly Latin speaking citizens of Empire, who just have German ancestors (city of Rome was actually destroyed by Justinian, as Ostrogoth's preserved it). Either classic Rome end in 3'th century and everything after that is various derivatives. Or everyone is equally Roman, beside Russia. Because they even steal from wrong Romans.

[@nubnubdubdeh]

Roman empire SPQR the OG Byzantium (which was not called that) Eastern roman empire

[@dziosdzynes7663]

imagine having to question whether literally rome is roman by people who sacked rome and then pretended to be rome themselves

[@prazzlerazzle5565]

great video going through your whole backlog just now only thing I wanted to mention is around 5:51 you said that the byzantines knew they were a hellenic people, they knew what language they were speaking. but the problem with that is that they called that language roman your average roman citizen had very little knowledge of their own history should we judge their romanness based on what their most educated scholars knew about their past descent or judge the average roman, who was the child of a roman, who spoke roman, and lived in romania, which as an aside was what the romans called the empire since around the 3rd century. the latins didn't come up with it they just used the name of the country they conquered

[@ScholeionHistory]

This is categorically false and a modern fringe revisionist view that emerged during the 1950s. It's word/concept fallacy. There are an unbelievable about of primary sources that show they knew themselves to be Greek in every century of the empire. Anthony Kaldellis, who people read and*think they know Byzantine history, loves to cherry pick. Here's just a very few sources against that debunk this view. • 5th century lexicon of Hesychius of Alexandria: Γραικιστί - Ἑλληνιστί Graikos language - Hellenic language • 7th century Miracles of St. Demetrios calls the empire *Ἑλλήνων χώραν* Land of the Hellenes. • Even the 6th Ecumenical Council in 680 uses Hellene in a non-pagan way in one of the signatures of the Letter of Pope Agatho to the Emperor, read at the Fourth Session) Στέφανος ἐλέῳ Θεοῦ ἐπίσκοπος τῆς Κορινθίων μητροπόλεως τῆς *Ἑλλήνων χώρας* Stephanos, by the mercy of God, bishop of Corinth, metropolitan of the land of the Hellenes, for me and the synod before me. I signed. • In a 9th century white limestone engraving from Corinth, a Christian barber and prisoner asks in his prayer for God to protect his family and the Hellenes. ☩ ὁ θ(εὸ)ς τῆς̣ δίκης τῆς̣ δικα- ζούσης, ὀρθ̣ῶς φλα̣[γέλ]ωσον τὰ ’σ̣χρά̣ {²⁶ἐσχρά = αἰσχρά}²⁶. τοὺς Ἕληνας π̣[ροαι(?)]ρ̣οῦ ποτε κ(αὶ) ἀπώ- λ̣εσον τοὺς ἐχθ[ροὺς - -]η̣ρου κ(αὶ) Μαρ̣ίνου [- -] υ̣ἱῶν [τοῦ δεῖνος κ]ουρέος. ☩ ☩ God of justice that giveth judgement, rightly scourge evil. Ever [prefer?] the Greeks, and destroy the enemies of [- -]eros and Marinos, the [- -] sons of [- -] the barber. ☩ • 10th century Metropolitan Theodoros of Cyzicus writing in Emperor Constantine Porphyrogennetos: Θεοδώρου μητροπολίτου Κυζίκου Κωνσταντίνῳ βασιλεῖ Τείχη περιῃρημένα, ἐρείπια πολλὰ καὶ κολωνοὶ μεγάλοι, στηλῶν καὶ τάφων ἀνατετραμμένα ἐγκαταλείμματα καὶ παρατεθραυσμένων ἐπιγραμμάτων τεμάχια, παλαιᾶς εὐδαιμονίας ἐν μὲν γράμμασιν ἀμυδρὰ λείψανα, ἐν δὲ λίθων μεγέθεσι καὶ λίαν ἐπίσημα . καὶ τὸ δὴ σχετλιώτερον, ἄνθρωποι μόνην ἔχειν μαρτυρούμενοι σὺν ἀπαιδευσία τὴν μαρτυρίαν τῶν ἀποικισάντων αὐτοὺς χωρὶς τῆς ἄλλης ἀρετῆς. Ἑλλὰδος γὰρ καὶ οὗτοι φημίζονται ἄποικοι. “walls broken down, ruins many and columns great, debris of columns and tombs, all neglected and fallen, pieces of broken epigrams, faint remains of the old bliss in the letters, but in the size of the stones quite remarkable, and worst of all, people who next to their illiteracy, the only thing they have to testify in their favor is the origin of their first settlers, but they do not have the rest of their virtues. In other words, it is said that they too are settlers from Greece.” The peasants even knew that they are Greeks. This isn’t just the idea of intellectuals. With all the statues, temples, and ruins all around them, it would be impossible not to know. • 12th century Ioannes Tzetzes Epistle 5, Page 10 ἐκ τῶν εὐγενεστάτων Ἰβήρων τῷ γε μητρῴῳ γένει καϑέλκοντα τὴν σειράν, ἐκ δέ γε πατρὸς καϑαρῶς τυγχάνοντα Ἕλληνα. I descend from the most noble of Iberians in my mother's family, but from my father I am a pure Hellene. • 7th-8th century Pseudo-Methodios Chapter 8, Section 1, page 23 Ἄκουε τοίνυν αὖθις σὺν ἀκριβείᾳ, πῶς αἱ τέσσαρες βασιλεῖαι ἀλλήλαις συνήφθησαν, οἱ Αἰθίοπες Μακεδόσι, Ῥωμαίοις καὶ Ἕλληνες· Now hear again precisely how the four kingdoms were united with one another, the Ethiopians with the Macedonians, and the Romans with the Hellenes. Section 7 Κατεκράτησεν οὖν τὸ σπέρμα τῆς Χουσὴθ θυγατρὸς Φὸλ βασιλέως Αἰθιοπίας τήν τε τῶν Μακεδόνων καὶ τῶν Ῥωμαίων καὶ Ἑλλήνων ἕως αἰῶνος· τοίνυν ἡ *βασιλεία τῶν Ἑλλήνων, ἥτις ἐστὶ τῶν Ῥωμαίων* , ἐκ σπέρματος τῶν Αἰθιόπων κατάγεται· αὕτη ̼»προφθάσει χεῖρα αὐτῆς τῷ θεῷ« ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ τὴν προφητικὴν ἐκφαντορίαν. Therefore the seed of Chouseth, the daughter of King Phol of Ethiopia, gained mastery over the Macedonians and the Romans and Greeks forever. Accordingly the kingdom of the Hellenes, that is of the Romans, is derived from the seed of the Ethiopians, which “shall stretch out her hands unto God” according to the prophetic disclosure. • Late 9th century St. Photios the Great, Patrologiae Graeca, Jacques Paul Migne, Tomus CI (Volume 101), column 948, page 489: Περὶ διαμορφώσεως καὶ χαρακτῆρος τῶν ἁγίων εἰκόνων. On the design and character of the holy icons. o Προτείνουσιν, ἔφης, τῶν Εἰκονομάχων οἱ θρασύτεροι καί κακόσχολοι, καί σοφόν ἡγοῦνται τό περίεργον, ποία τῶν εἰκόνων τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀληθής, πότερον ἡ παρά Ρωμαίοις, ἤ ἥνπερ Ἰνδοί γράφουσιν, ἤ ἡ παρ’ Ἕλλησιν, ἥ ἡ παρ’ Αἰγυπτίοις… o Those who are bolder and more malicious among the Iconoclasts, and who think that curiosity is wisdom, are asked which is the genuine image of Christ, whether by the Romans, or that which the Indians write, or by the Hellenes, or by the Egyptians… Patriarch Photios is referring to the holy icons of the Hellenes. • 13th century The Annals of Niketas Choniates, Alexios Doukas, page 319, 1206AD o πῶς ἂν ἔγωγε εἴην τὸ βέλτιστον χρῆμα, τὴν ἱστορίαν, καὶ κάλλιστον εὕρημα τῶν Ἑλλήνων βαρβαρικαῖς καθ᾿ Ἑλλήνων πράξεσι χαριζόμενος. o “how then can I devote the very best thing and the most beautiful invention of the Hellenes-history-to the recounting of barbarian deeds against Hellenes?” Literally read the letter of Emperor John Doukas Vatatzes reply to Pope Gregory IX who says that Constantine passed the Roman septre to the Greeks and that it is the Hellenes who are the only Romans. Read Emperor Theodoros II Doukas Laskaris who literally says the Greeks are their descendants and ancestors. Read Theodoros Metochites who says the same thing. Read the Apologia of Demetrios Kydones who complains how sick and tired he is that his countrymen (not scholars, but regular people) view the world as Greeks vs barbarians. They didn't view it in a dichotomy, but as both the Roman empire and a Greek empire. The Greeks were the Romans and that's how they viewed it. "your average roman citizen had very little knowledge of their own history should we judge their romanness based on what their most educated scholars knew about their past descent or judge the average roman, who was the child of a roman, who spoke roman, and lived in romania, " Your average Roman didn't know much about the Romaness you talk about either. That doesn't matter. Digenes Akrites, the folk tale, calls everything that is Greek rhomaios, but says that his hall was filled with Greek characters, not ancient Roman ones. The point you make works against you. If the Greek language was called Roman and the Roman culture was Greek culture and Romania was Greece, what does that make Roman? I'm making a video on this topic so this ridiculous fringe view will hopefully be squashed. Funny enough it is the exact argument the West made against them in the first place: the idea that the Greeks cannot be Roman.

[@jjgreek1]

So they spoke Greek, wrote Greek, the church was called Greek Orthodox, all the writing on all the buildings was Greek...Greeks lived in that region for thousands of years, so how is it "Roman"?

[@ldmx4039]

I want to go back to Constantinople

[@scarletharlot69]

didn't all roman emporers speak greek?

[@chrisfrap]

all roman emperors knew greek because they were educated yes but not all the people of the empire

[@achilleuspetreas3828]

Nope, not all. And for most of them it was a second language until after Justinian, then it became not only their native tongue, but the ONLY language they knew...that's a gargantuan difference

[@ethandelgado7458]

Hold on, what do you mean "The Romans were never Catholic"?

[@Rosencreutzzz]

Neither the Roman nor Byzantine state practiced a form of Christianity we would associate with Roman Catholicism. Now, there’s some semantic arguments that both the Catholic and Orthodox church lay claim to both the terms Catholic and Orthodox in describing themselves, but the Roman Empire’s Christianity was wholly different from papal Catholicism and anything that followed the Chalcedonian schism.

[@hedgehog3180]

@@Rosencreutzzz Well no Catholic had a meaning before it came to refer to a specific church. It used to be somewhat synonymous with Orthodox in refering to the proper interpretation of scripture but was generally somewhat more restricted in it's meaning in referring to those who closely followed the teachings of the Pope while Orthodox just referred to everyone who wasn't considered a heretic. After the schism and to this day the Eastern Orthodox Church continues to refer to itself as Catholic and vice versa the official name of the Catholic church is the Orthodox Catholic Church. You kinda have to specify that the Romans never followed what we today call the Roman Catholic Church because the term Catholic appears even before the fall of the Western Empire.

[@unhomesenzill4366]

@hedgehog3180 worth pointing out that roman catholic means greek orthodox in near east

[@alanpennie8013]

​@@Rosencreutzzz It was not "wholly different". That's a ludicrous exaggeration.

[@habibcicero3833]

@@alanpennie8013 true though, there was no schism by the time the western roman empire fell and both west and east practiced the same religion (chalcedonian christianity) ironically the roman empire never practiced “roman catholicism” and the “roman” part of the catholic name probably just comes from the fact the pope is based in rome therefore “roman catholic” infact the fact the orthodox christianity is often dubbed “greek orthodox” was probably just another way to jab at the byzantine’s roman legitmacy by the latin west

[@mydogsbutler]

Speaking as a Greek, many Greeks are fine with the term "Byzantinum" but I despise it. The term has a long history of being used as a form of ethnic harassment towards Greeks. No one has a problem called the western Roman empire Roman so why should anyone have a problem also calling the eastern one Roman it's actual name? (qualifying with eastern would be fine to distinguish it from the western one) Then throw in how the term "Byzantine" is literally an insult in English. These are my ancestors. Imagine the term "Jew" or "Celt" being used as insult to better understand why it's offensive to me. Then of course there is how middle age Greek Roman history is being manipulated to justify ethnic engineering our Slavic neighbours into "macedonians" . The rationale many used to ridiculously recognize them as "Macedonians" was that Greeks were too "Byzantines" back then... a non-existent ethnic group... to be "real" Greeks. Yet back then we were told we were too Greek to be real Romans! This sort of revisionist history to harass Greeks is currently going on as well. The former Yugoslavians have turned into ancient Macedonians right before everyone's eyes yet nearly everyone pretends not to notice or unethically downplays it. Many that claim to speak for the past, effectively lie in the present through evasion.

[@John-el.]

nice video tho everyone in the east of the empire called them Romans only the west didn't

[@MarcusBrutus-nu9yj]

Rome rose and fell yet endured Roman culture endured the only constant in an ever changing world often imitated never duplicated similar to the cultural han bureaucracy yet unique not like the han bureaucracy yet related by Judean christian and even older ur of the caledean and therefore possible indus cultural influence which would have send Abraham west and budda east and have Roman adopt Judean Christianity China buddists Confucius yet all linked possibly by the indus cradle of civilization

[@user-kk5fy5yd1c]

᾽Ρωμανία 🇬🇷☦

[@ChronosHellas]

Με ελληνική σημαία, σιωπή βάρβαρε😂

[@chrisfrap]

ALL I HAVE TO SAY IS THAT THE OG ROMANS WERE NEVER CATHOLIC . THEY BELIEVED IN GRECO-ROMAN POLYTHESIM AND AFTER CONSTANTINE DEATH THEY BELIEVED IN ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY . THATS THE REAL HISTORY OF ROMAN EMPIRE

[@lelyanra]

Love the vid, but I'm going to suggest you to speak a little faster. KZbin is an attention economy and being able to convey what you want quickly is a virtue. In short: content is great, cadence of speech is kinda slow (I just changed to 1.25 and it was almost perfect, though it looses speech slowdown enphasis.)

[@giokun100]

The root for Byzantion is entirely forgotten? A quick wiki search would show otherwise: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzas. The name Byzas probably derives from the Proto Indo-European (not Ilyrian) bʰuǵ which indeed means goat. If you don't even put effort to relay accurate information, then better leave it to professionals who take pride in their craft.

[@Rosencreutzzz]

I'm aware of the "he-goat" possibility, but there is general disagreement on the root of Byzas' name and indeed the founding myth itself. That's hardly a conclusive argument. There's also speculation on what the name Byzas itself means, which is apparent on both the page you linked in its talk page, and in the one for Byzantium more broadly. He-goat is a guess of the root of the name of a mythical founder who may not have existed. The page you link to has no citations in the body of the text, and in the background section offers differing myths.

[@giokun100]

@@Rosencreutzzz I grew up next to Megara and king Vyzas is well known here as the establisher of the Greek colony in Byzantium. In ancient Greece they believed as such, and the same in medieval and modern times. You presented it as it's something unknown which is simply not truth.

[@ChronosHellas]

@@RosencreutzzzGreeks used both myth and history together, so you are totally wrong for about passing it on as a not factually correct.

[@originalmetalman9430]

Wrong

[@giannisgiannopoulos791]

Nice video. Just one thing, there is no need for so much talk to reconcile opinions. First and foremost, Byzantion was never an Empire. It was a Greek colony. New Rome/Constantinople was built in the ruins of Byzantion and eventually became the sole capital city of the Roman Empire. Period. The Bishop of Rome Leo III had neither the authority nor the jurisdiction to crown the King of Franks as Roman Emperor. The Empire had already an Emperor. The crowning of the Roman Emperor had been happening by the Bishop of Constantinople since the coronation of Leo I by Bishop Anatolius. Besides, this is where the Emperor was ruling from, full-stop Last but not least, the Empire did not fall in 476. This is a convenient myth. It was recovered by Justinian I and any claims on an actual fall can be attributed only in 1071 when the last Roman soldier had to abandon Bari after the pressure of the Normans, although Manuel I sought to invade Italy again and restore Imperial control.

[@mohirender]

Important to note, the Ottomans also claimed to be the Roman successors, which has more legitimacy than what some may think.

[@WorthlessWinner]

The Ottomans were as Roman as the Byzantines. The rejection of this is for the same reason people reject Byzantium being rome I can't see any coherent argument for saying "the Christian empire ruled from Constantinople IS Rome" that wouldn't also apply to the Ottoman empire

[@azainkadri9556]

Continuity is the reason. There is no byzantine empire. It was created and always called as EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE . Constantinople was the capital of the Roman empire before the partition. Rome was Partitioned into 2, not conquered like the ottomons did.

[@martinnolhaf3151]

For the Last Time. "Byzantium" is the Eastern Roman Empire. The Germanic Barbarians aka Larpers were Not Roman. And the Latin traitors of course Not either. And Turks or Russians are also not Roman. Rome died 29.5.1453.

[@saxogrammatikus4195]

So are the greeks. The Roman Empire died with Constantine the Greek-Lover. Abondend the city and senate of the city build by Romolus and make the capital Byzantion in the savage lands of Thrace. We should not talk about the christ-cuckery thing either.

[@Bamboo-fk5dm]

IF you believe you are yourself, then Byzantine is Rome itself. No debate.

[@katamattyon]

No.

[@Eliza-yd7fi]

After the Arab conquests, there's no Roman Empire as people commonly think of Rome

[@yungyahweh]

Why?

[@alanpennie8013]

​@@yungyahweh I suppose he means because The Caliphate was now the great power in The Mediterranean World with the old "Oecumene" reduced to scattered fragments.