The streak would transcend 2000 years. Let that sink in.

Actually depending on which date you take for the start of the Byzantine Empire it would either still be 94 years younger than the Republic of San Marino or if you take 286 when the Roman Empire first divided then it would only be 15 years older.

@@AndreiBucin I am fairly sure he's taking either 27 or 49 BC, and treating the Byzantines as one and the same with the original Empire.

Arguably it would be around 2,500 years if you go from the founding of the republic. Rome already holds that record if you go from the republic, but now, even if you went from the founding of the empire, it would be the oldedt

@@tanwenwalters7689 Technically it is one and the same.

Also avoiding the major damage due to diseases. At one point they had a Black Death die out

Greeks fleeing to the West from Constantinople with books and manuscripts is the reason we had the Renaissance...

@@arc1t3ct-9 was Alcuin greek? Carolingian renaissance is a thing, look it up. BTW can you guys name at least 5 byzantine philosophers? I'll even help you. Michael Psellos, John Italus, name just three more.

@@hrsmp Alcuin was a Saxon. What makes you think that the Italian Renaissance was in any way influenced by the Saxons? Britain didn't come to prevalence until well after the Norman conquest of 1066... 5 Byzantine Philosophers you say? Here is a list of the 18 most famous: Gemistus Pletho Michael Psellos Theodore Metochites Photios I of Constantinople Gregory Palamas Gennadius Scholarius Nikephoros Blemmydes Michael of Ephesus John Philoponus George Pachymeres Arethas of Caesarea Nicephorus Gregoras Nikephoros Choumnos Maximus the Confessor Simplicius of Cilicia Bessarion Leo the Mathematician George of Trebizond

yup sounds right to me

Kinda the Poland of cities.

@@aliveyetundead what's so cool about poland?

And because it was such a huge and prosperous city ( at least before 1204) not only it was a really diverse city in terms of people from all places living there but it was the literal Asgard for the Norsemen going down there. Some Norse even recognized bizantine emperors as their political superiors back there and people like Harold Hardrada made themselves famous and rich by serving in the Varangian guard,atracted by the possibilities the city had to offer

I mean, it had so much trade going through it that shouldn't be a surprise.

@@Practitioner_of_Diogenes Absolutely not. Richer and arguably more prestigious than Rome itself.

Hey Jimmy, come look at this! What is it? I think its a new continent! Dear God.....

New alternate history video on this?

christopher snedeker Country that sent the first sattlelite is Russia not USA.

christopher snedeker first rocket was made by Germany (V1 and V2) not USA

christopher snedeker USA always came late at everything.

More like a Federation after America I think, or even a democratic monarchy.

It may be just as simple as referring to themselves as the Roman Republic again.

@Shafiqul Alam They would have blocked access to Russia's only warm water port to the outside world. They could have made a bundle taxing Russian imports.

@@petermills3814 The term is constitutional monarchy.

or maybe People's Republic of Rome

that's how our leaders should look up to be

This is quite the historical tidbit you have there, Jeremy Hillary Boob PHD.

I can confirm this

True Roman

Atleast he died a true Roman

And it all hinges on something that never actually happened.

HappyBeezerStudios - by Lord_Mogul what never happened?

@@TheMudKip-ff2tb Martin Luther never nailed his teses on a chuch's door. It was fabricated by german nationalism.

@David McConville Precisely, the reformation was a joke, they are no better, thet should have converted to orthodoxysm.

@@felipegome1 I read that as “Martin Luther never nailed his testes on a churches door”

And most the CK2 games I've played.

@@jhroomy wait what so in ck2 the byzantines dont burn down their whole nation

@@playaboutpatforms2709 Despite their frequent revolts they usually live. In many of my games they actually expand into ahistorical areas.

@@danshakuimo k

@@playaboutpatforms2709 Every playthrough of byzantium of ck2 is personalized. You might get few revolts. You might get Aurelian Simulator.

I am the funniest KZfaqr of all time I watched my latest video and laughed for 69 minutes straight I am extremely funny I am dangerously funny and I have two girlfriends who think I am extremely dangerously funny and they watch all of my videos thanks for listening dear 2i

@@AxxLAfriku you are funny

You would have at least a full dollar from me.

@@AxxLAfriku Can you please stop advertising your channel on EVERY VIDEO YOU FIND! Like half the videos I see you're there.

You probably have like 50 bucks from me not going to lie lmao

That'd be the best timeline

Best timeline would be if the Roman empire never fell in that context

Disgusting a barbarian ruling Rome personal I’d like if Majorian had retaken the west or Syagrius had defeated the franks

Barbarians in Rome?! ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING!! All of Italia must be united behind the Emperor and his chad legions

what if Charlemagne and the byzantine empress married and united the empires?

@ELITE EXTREME GAMER people called themselves Romans, some people actually do to this day. Everybody who does is Greek though. The laungage was Greek, most of the emperors were Greek, the main land of the empire was Grecia and finally, the main part of the population were Greeks.

@ELITE EXTREME GAMER Not quite, the empire had succeed at assimilating much the people that came to live it's boarders. Gaul and Hispaniola were considered integral parts of the Empire, the Franks and the Goths were what shifted the demographics and put to the sword vast amounts of Romans. The Franks in fact can be credited with the French language being a mix of the old Gallo Romantic dialect mix with the Germanic of the Franks. The problem in the rich east came with the first black death wiping out 2/3s of the Empire's population and after the Hums and the Slavic nomad invasions. The Empire's vast Roman population it once had in the Balkans was wiped out. The Slavic nomads filled the void they created and shifted the demographics. This is what shifted the Roman Empire's demographics to a mostly multi national empire as the people the Romans had spent millennia assimilating were replaced while the Empire was the weakest it had ever been and could not assimilate them anymore. The st1 black death decided the fate of Eastern Roma, not the people that invaded during what was going to be the reconquest of the west. I will give you Anatolian's ethnic diversity, but the mountainous region meant the eastern sections were boarder lands with the Persian dynasties. Last the consent of nationalities is not a good once since most people never left the villages they lived in or had dialectics utterly incomprehensible without state intervention. The concept of a shared cultural or ethnic identity was prevalent during these time. The biggest reason the Turks had such an easy time taking the last of the Roman Empire was because of the collapse of tolerance that was necessary to run & sustain such an Empire's social structure. The fanaticism and great intolerance of the Christianity faith killed the Empire more so then the invasions of nomads. Remember when bathing and personal hygiene was declared a satanic ritual, think about those late Roman plagues. Or when the Armenians were declared heretics of the christian faith, the Seljuks rolled into the eastern lands easily defeating the two crusades called to defeat them.

@ELITE EXTREME GAMER youbare mixing things up in general . I will clear them to you when i get the free time .

@ELITE EXTREME GAMER Rome was literally what people call now Greece lmao, i am Roman myself which means greek

@ELITE EXTREME GAMER The byzantine empire started as roman but later became greek.The original roman empire was indeed multicultural,but in the eastern meditterenean where constantinople was located,the greeks were dominant.After the fall of the western part of the empire,the term roman was more a political term than a national term.As I said,the dominant ethnicity in eastern meditterenean were Greeks,so after the fall of the western part,they kept calling themselves as Romans because they thought themselves as the inheritors of the Roman empire and the ones that will continue it,but ethnically were greek.After 610 AD,the greek languege became the main languege of the empire but greek was spoken widely even before that,they even adopted greek customs.Finally,the last emperor of the Byzantines,Konstantinos Palaiologos said in his last speech before the fall of the constantinople by the ottomans,that byzantines are descendants of both Romans and Greeks(look it up if you dont believe me)

“Don’t knock it till you try it” -Singapore

Ahem -san Marino

Sus -Monaco

I'm a superpower despite only controlling a city block and a single Church. -Vatican City

Wow -Luxembourg

They wouldnt be, that is just his opinion, Rome unlike the turks survived for over 2000 years and knew how to adapt to changing times so they would figure it out.

Its possible that if they were more aggressive during the whole protestant reformation battle royale and conquered more land in the Mediterranean they could've became a naval superpower, If they were even more aggressive they could've crippled the latin powers and delayed their exploration and jumpstarted their own.

This isn't eu4 man.

I do not know if they would seek to follow the old AOE2 spammed message. BUILD A NAVY If they had a deep water navy: they had enough resources to try an exploitation of Africa and the Middle East or the Americas. Perhaps they would discover and Colonize Australia. Who knows. What i Do recognize it the Romans and Bysantines were a Republic. They had an Emperor. The Emperor held massive power and ruled the nation, but they had representatives LOTS of them. I suspect they would end up a bit like Britain. A Parliament of Representatives ruling the nation: with a Ruler 'in charge' of the nation, who had little to actually do with the running of it. I expect France to have a Revolution. And I expect Nepolion deciding to rebuild the Empire of Rome, and have to crush the Byzantines to do it. Only to discover: That corner of Europe has been using horses in novel ways for CENTURIES. Introduce the first Rifle Cavalry of Europe. War of Maneuver, with a strong Centralized command structure.(although how many professional soldiers they would field given the collapse of the Silk Road profits? Who knows.) Pure speculation but: they COULD have retaken Egypt and built a Suez Canal, and with control and power over the Shortcut into Asia, they could make a Fortune of the new Silk Road, made their own Colonial claims, and paid for a navy to RULE the Mediterranean and challenge even the British in the Indian. I would then probably set up commities to manage the Middle East and settle the conflicts as best as I could. Not to end Centuries of hostility. But to create and environment of peace and quiet to keep them from trying to unite, forment rebellion or constantly kill each other. Sit down: shut up, enjoy living WITHOUT killing each other for a while. After all Alexander forged an empire. Oh and the Colossus of Rhodes would still be there. The Turks melted it down and sold it for scrap with their conquest of the area..

We're waiting for Spacx to build our rockets!

Europa Universalis game would be more fitting.

@@martinmortyry7444 Yes, but the timing is in line with the launch of CK3 being tomorrow. And that Paradox Interactive have been sponsoring several KZfaq videos lately because of said launch.

@@martinmortyry7444 Well, afaik, CK3 ends exactly at 1453.

Toasty boi it is on Xbox game pass for pc

@@rohatb That can't be right? Surely all CK3 games must end on November 11th, 1444 ?

If you actually want to experience the timeline, Just start in CK3 (or CK2) and end in VIC2, EU4 don't have the mechanicas for 1300 and earlier or 1750 and later

This makes sense, if the Byzantines got hold of the Suez, they suddenly become a bit more relevant. Yes the Ottoman also held Egypt but they were an Anti-Colonial Power (although not by choice). The Eastern shores of Africa, nearly the entire coast of India to even Indonesia were held by Sunni Islamic States who were allied with the Ottomans and were even helped by the Ottomans in their efforts to repel Portugese and Dutch Colonialism. The only Islamic Kingdom that the Ottomans attacked outside of their De Jure Mediterranean Cores was Persia, but only managed to conquer Iraq. In this alternate timeline, the Romans would have no such Obligation toward the Eastern Islamic Sultanates, their only obligatory ally would be Ethiopia and they would thus be competing against the other Rival Colonial Powers instead of resisting them. If Rome can't conquer to the west, it would go East.

​@@TheWebsOfCorruptionNeverFail Byzantium will do what Rome couldn't and conquer those damn Parthians/Sassians.

Not gonna say it is so ...but it is so.

Yeap

who watching who? all almost greeks are Romans now. since 2300 years

Also Italians. We personally se the Byzantine empire as the last true remnent of Rome.

@@VenusIsleNews Greeks where never Roman, the Latin Romans were able to assimilate the cultures they conquered, all but the Greek people, as they kinda of influenced the Roman culture themselves. Yeah, they called themselves Roman for a long while and yeah they had Roman emperors until Justinian, but Greek people are far from "Roman"

last i check the few has "latin empire,venice,turk,ottoturk,almost every musilim state untill the decline and every europe kingdom predecessor babarian"

being a threat to the Byzantines isn't unique and doesn't make you special.

I'm pretty sure bulgaria would be a lot weaker in this timeline, remember Russia and Byzantium are great allies and if byzantium kept strong for a while they could support russian expansion to the black sea cutting off then cornering the bulgarians

@@nbewarwe yeah, but what is unique is making the empire give you a title and bending it to the knee and making it a de facto vassal for a few years paying continuous tribute and homage to your tsar...

@@nbewarwe um yes it does considering that the byzantine empire was a mojor world player for most of its history

I definitely agree with you on that one, tis' a nice touch 👌

When their capital used to be called Byzantium but isnt anymore, it is an obvious smear from western jealous scholars on the empire since it ended a city state.

@@majormarketing6552 Rome still exists through its sons (latins and greeks and maybe Russia) it was far more than just a empire.

Yes, finally Byzantine finally gets what it deserves

@@mojewjewjew4420 how is Russia considered a child of rome

Ok Helenophile Byzantium was just as Armenian as it was greek.

@@Newbmann i dont see how this is related.

@@andrewgreenwood9068 I was pointing out how somone could like byzantium and not be a Byzantophile Byzantophiles like to go on and on about how it was ROMAN and Helenophiles like to go on and on about how it was GREEK.

yeees

@@Newbmann I mean, it was basically greek with roman characteristics lmao

He'd have surveyed all of Africa. He wasn't much interested in the west, but for some very strange reason he actually wanted to sail all around Africa. Edit: his empire would either still fall and not much would change, or would replace Persia as the Roman threat to the east.... but due to Roman innovations, and how poor the Phalanx was, they'd still lose Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia (though far less of it), and Egypt.

Bill Wurtz: He never got to India.

He would die at a old age then

His empire fractured due to his premature death. Had he lived long enough to raise his son, the empire would have survived.

His empire probably still collapses. It was simply too vast

Russia doesnt have political continouity with the roman empire in anyway whatsoever.

They are orthodox That's about it

Philip Weber and a family tie with one of the last Roman princesses, but other than that there’s literally nothing

@@pipebomber04 The two main claims to Russia being the continuation of the Roman Empire are: 1. A Byzantine princess married Ivan the Great while he was Grand Prince of Moscow. He would go on to unite Russia into the Tsardom. His royal family, the Romanovs, were through Ivan's wife direct descendants of the Byzantine emperors. 2. After the fall of Constantinople, the Empire's church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, moved it's center to Moscow, making it the new home of Eastern Roman Christianity. To me, Russia has a much stronger claim to being the heirs to the Roman Empire than the Holy Roman Empire.

But could the muscovite princes conquered the land not occupied by the Teutonic order turning the Baltic states into Orthodox princes

Coincidentally, the same scenario could have existed in the event of a certain earlier Frankish emperor and a Roman empress.

​@@wildfire9280Otto and Zoe could have produced an heir. Karl and Irene were too old at that point and the situation was far more unstable

Very true. The Eastern Roman Empire was the closest thing medieval Europe had to a modern state. A realm that was ruled not by landholding aristocrats but by a centralized administration whose authority was based on legalism and precedent as opposed to simply owning all the land. The landed gentry was influential in the Empire, but their influence could always be curtailed by the machinery of the state in Constantinople. It's part of the reason why in the west the term "Byzantine" is associated with needless complexity and despotism.

Forever,

I'm not drunk but can I help restore the glory of Rome. I might be able to get the knights templar on board if we stop by the Vatican on the way to Constantinople.

Byzantium delenda est!

Bring back the Empire!

No >:(

Restoring the Roman Empire is already on its way. It's called the EU. XD

There was much political and internal reasons for the ottomans decline tho, we can't say what the byzantines would have done

Dude Ottomans had Hellenes in economy trade science and politics.They were "the sick man" because they never change their farmers livestyle.The byzantines on the other hand managed to survive more than 1000 years because they were competitive themselves.

I see almost now way the Byzantines would have become the sick man of Europe. Consider they retain the scholars who, in our timeline, became the genesis of the Renaissance. I also see them incorporating the Kievian Rus, thus becoming a conglomeration of Russia and the Ottomans. Unlike the Ottomans, who never learned to administer an empire effectively, the Byzantines could draw on 2000 years of continuity and experience. They weren't perfect, but they were at least on par with the other great powers. I imagine them being like Germany after 1871.

@@caseycooper5615 would a union with the Kievan Rus have happened though? I know the Russians love to emphasise their links with Byzantium, but that was only based on a royal marriage and shared religion. Even if it had happened, the Byzantines would then have had to deal with the various hostile nomadic peoples (Scythians, Magyars), and eventually the Mongols. They probably would have been stretched even thinner than they already were. Don't forget, it was their overexpansion under Justinian that cost a lot of Byzantium's resources, and weakened them in the long term.

@J Wh You bring up some good points. One thing I would push back on with Justinian's conquests is I feel it was the more the events of 538 and not overexpansion that led to the ultimate reversal of his conquests. Of course, either way, it led to a weakened ERE and a path for Muslim conquests a century later. I think there would have been a natural alliance between the Rus and the Byzantines, especially given the influence of the Vikings who traveled throughout and a common enemy in the remnants of the Golden Horde. If the Ottomans, with their inefficient government, could hold on for centuries, the same could hold true for the Byzantines. In fact, I'm convinced they would have thrived had they been able to hold on to at least Anatolia and the Balkans.

Yup and the victors of the worlds wars that started also created the Cold War and the world we currently live in

which means all of our modern problems could be the cause of 1 turkish boi from the 11th century, going into anatolia because why not

Butterfly effects in a nutshell.

@@D00000T that's depressing but awesome at the exact same time.

And thus, you're the true successor to Rome.

You're like 600 years old? That's rad.

AUGUSTUS! AUGUSTUS! AUGUSTUS!

Dude, you’re old, like really old.

Andrew S. yes

I'm not even sure they'd become the sick man just because they wouldn't be a non-Christian nation that would tax the trade as heavily as the Ottomans did, which would still make them a viable route for trade with the east. Without the shrinking empire, they might actually expand a bit when the Arabs start to faulty. Perhaps in trying to reclaim the Empire of old, they capture Egypt and eventually make their own Suez canal before falling too far behind.

Thats exactly what i think, and before knowing that, it was still my favourite colour since a little kid. Hmmm things do happen for a reason

@Mousa Otbah It isn't

@Mousa Otbah those are your royal references...? Wow. It still isn't.

That's purple was once worth more than gold

@Mousa Otbah lol imagine still believing that purple is still worth more than gold when they have purple in crayon boxes

Bayern Munchen unites Germany, so this is some kind of bavarian germany already

i mean considering how austria was the 2 strongest german nation it would just have been them? the main reason why they didnt join was because the prussians didnt want to have non german states in unified germany and the austrians didnt wanna lose those

Saxony. They had Poland behind them.

@@meistermagierinvoker I could imagine Germans would get bit ore autonomy then other parts of empire. And maybe Sudets as part of unified Germany or as semi-autonomus teritory like other Ger. kingdoms.

Prussia was the main factor that stopped the Habsburgs from simply inheriting Bavaria in 1778, and in this timeline it doesn't exist. While the resulting fusion would likely end up calling itself Bavaria anyway, it'd simply be Austria changing tags after usurping its de jure kingdom title.

@erick meyer By the time urban came around, the 'empire' was also reduced to Constantinople and moria. They economically stagnated because they were forced to give Venice and Genoa ruinous trading rights in return for their naval assistance. Plus the fourth crusade wrecked Constantinople and the imperial bureaucracy, destroyed the imperial silk monopoly, and led to decades of civil war that ravaged their economic heartland. Until then, the ERE was by far the wealthiest state in all of europe.

@@tgk2343 China was super wealthy and urbanized, they were also technologically, culturally, economically superior to almost all Europeans for most of their existence. And look how they turned out to be during the 19-20th century.

@@user-sf2if2df4n That was due more to isolationism than anything else, and the geographical distance between them and europe also played a role in their stagnation. The ERE was never isolationist, and would be in constant contact, both militarily and economically, with the rest of Europe. Them falling behind like china did is highly unlikely.

Well yes but no, eventually the Russians and the Austrians also began preying on the Ottomans for control over the Balkans, and so the Byzantines would fall to geographical targeting in the Balkans.

Honestly, I believe that for Byzantium to prosper they would need to stabilize their internal politics first, to create a system that does not give the opportunity to so many would be emperors. From burning the navy and relying on Italian states, to calling the 4th crusade for internal conflicts, the mistakes that were made while struggling for the throne were endless and destructive. Breaching the gap between Constantinopole and the eastern military aristocracy, or taking away power from it were tactics that were used to relative success, but they did not carry over. If they figured that out, the ability of the empire to constantly adapt and attract foreign powers together with excellent diplomacy and vast cultural influence that they exterted over neighbouring territories would be enough for them to earn a place in the new world. Maybe not as the next Great Britain or Spain, but certainly as a considerable power.

I prefer rome. Sorry Prusia.

@@natanrosales9064 Agreed

Im sure something like the teutonic order wouldve happened anyway

Cringe pfp

I hate teutonics

Yeah but the Roman Empire was Italian while the Byzantine empire was Greek. They are kind of connected to each other, still we have two different nations

@@nestororiginal2344 You should learn the concept of naitons back then, because the romans werent italian they werent italians back then actually and most "romans" emperors werent from what you call italy You must think it as an empire

@@AdriatheBwitch Yeah it was an empire but with two different nation

@@nestororiginal2344 It wasnt a nations, you think like someone from the 21th century here, their culture was helenistic, which was the greek culture and they did reject their own culture themselves

@@AdriatheBwitch Their culture mixed up with the Greek culture. But they had their own alphabet which was copied by the Greek alphabet and their own mythology which was also copied from the Greek Mythology...

They never did to begin with.

Ahh, it's good to see fellow Historia Civilis fans

no batter aesthetics then Byzantine aesthetics

P U R P L E

@@SirFaceFone and G O L D

A E S T H E T I C

@@unatco1148 N I C E

It's been 500 years bro, just get over it. (The new name is Istanbul btw)

@@pilavboy4417 it will remain constantinople

@@elijahmikaelson5319 in your head canon ofc

Constantinople > Byzantium

​@@pilavboy4417Stay wrong 6legger

Yes I suppose, Bulgaria is a joke for every non-bulgarian who talks and makes videos about Byzantine. But in reality they've been in wars since 684 to 1396 and many times Bulgaria has been a huge threat to the Byzantine Empire.

literally 1/3 of the Byzantium empire he showed in the video was acually Bulgaria AND IT WASNT EVEN MENTIONED ONCE + it was a pretty big world power in 12-13th century, it fell because of Ottomans. So if in this scenario Ottomans never attacked, no reason for Bulgaria to be a part of the Byzantium empire /yeah ik ll through history Bulgaria and Byzantium empire tried to conquire each other or marry for each other's children so they have the connections and stuff but when someone attacks they unite their forces and all, their relationship was kinda like you and your sibling you dont really like, you fight and all but when someone is against you, you go together against the/

His videos are retarted i rather have him not mention it because my countury does not deserve to be offended Infront of millions of people by some limited pig.

i mean, Bulgaria was greatly weakened by the Byzantines but by weakening Bulgaria, they also weakened themselves, starting the decline but this actually happened, so there is no need to change this part

@@tatarkhan33 you seem offended for no reason

The borders aren’t even correct

@@gumbyshrimp2606 you too

4:54

Underrated comment

The reconnaissance era already started in Western Europe and they already had mechanical clocks and the compass way before the fall of Constantinople plus other inventions after 400 years of the dark ages. Go and take your fake history somewhere else.

nice one,nice one

@Visionoflife 41 I suppose it doesn't necessarily have to be, but it would fit with the trend of the world (Though I'm sure things would've changed somewhat, with the whole Byzantines still being around and such)

@LegoGuy87 But why, why would they do that. Memes aside, Roman Republican ideas and structures were reserve to history books even before the fall of western Rome. Culture, politics and religion change and not necessarily come back even if people still feel connected to it the history of Ancient Rome is a big proof of that.

@Visionoflife 41 For better and for worse, the ideas of liberalism and republicanism will still happen regardless of Byzantium's existence. The Russian and Ottoman empires initially existed without democratic institutions like a Congress but by the late 1800's they are compelled by internal politics to have one. Even the militaristic Japan of 1942 still has a democratically elected Diet since 1884...

@@caiocaguiar9310 I think inevitably, around 1848, there would've been a movement to go back to the roots and restore the senate and democracy

It would actually he interesting how The Balkans and Middle east turned out

Basically everyone.

It's like those murder mysteries who dunnit, like Knives Out, where it turns out that everybody pitched in.

At least the Georgians didnt play a role About the only country boardering them that didnt try to take a peice of them.

That was my favorite video too. "The crusade that ruined everything."

Easier to ask about who didn't helped

I love that series

What’s your favorite episode?

@@saratmodugu4000 Composite monarchies. It did a great job explaining how all those fancy titles of nobility work. They fought, bought, and negotiated their way into controlling towns and cities with separate rules for how they are managed. And if a ruler doesn't follow the terms of the contract, they could find themselves kicked out and the title for that land put up for grabs!

@@justcallmeSheriff Please tell me they got to the Angevin Empire

Interesting. The makes me think of aomething else. What if the ERE colonizes Egypt and the Red Sea coast, and builds the Suez Canal some 50-100 (I dont 100 years is too much but it is a stretch), how would that work out? Now they control the fastest route to Asia and might get some of their ancient bread baskets back. That could revitalize their economy and also cause the Scramble for Africa to happen way earlier.

Or worse: Bavaria takes over

Since there would be no strong Prussia in this alternative world, there would be no diplomatic revolution - a major change of alliances on the European continent. Instead of Prussia in the XVIII century, the main threat to Western Europe would be considered France. As for the Balkans, a possible Alliance between Russia and Byzantium could serve for a long time as a guarantee of the security of the Eastern Roman Empire. This would be a rather strange "big game", since Russia would already control Constantinople and the black sea Straits-through its ally. There would not have been the Crimean war or the war of 1877-1878, but perhaps the war of Russia and Byzantium against great Britain, Austria and the Arab States of the Levant. It would be interesting to see this - the first world war for the legacy of decrepit Byzantium. In the East, the interests of Britain and Germany-Austria would not contradict, but coincide with each other. We get the war of the Alliance of England, Germany, possibly Poland, the States of the middle East and Japan against the Alliance of France, Russia and Byzantium. Who would win it? I don't know.

i mean my first thought went to Luxembourg. Clearly I look at to many memes

Maybe Brandenburg could unite Germany (considering they had Berlin and I think they were more urbanized) and Prussia would just be Polish or Baltic. I think the main difference in this scenario is that Germany doesn’t expand as much East

Without prussias intervention bavaria would have been part of austria. A greater habsburg reich with germany, austria and italy would certainly be interesting. Though the revolution would likely still have changed politics, maybe also splitting italy from germany again. Thats actually a really interesting idea.

And Ottoman Empire saying nope!

Say hi to Byzantine Australia?

@@StergiosMekras Say hi to Byzantine America

And than u give up this dream plays something in asia and after 100 years u look onto Europe and the ottomans are dead and the byzantines rule in Greece

in one of my games Eastern Rome survived but scattered and Constantinople owned by Wallachia wtf

Voryn Rosethorn I feel like he doesn’t know as much as history as people think he does

He means that no one in the Middle East cared that much about the crusades in the region until recently.

He’s talking more demographically, the Middle East was always going to be ruled by some steppe warlord regardless

Yeah, without the crusades the Levant would have been way better off without the christians and mamluks taking turns genocideing it

Mameluks were kipchak turkic warriors

How could we live in a world without the picklehaube, one of the coolest headpieces.

Doodguy The blank Germaboo #738399272799

No or delayed Renaissance without the fall of The City in 1453

What that sounds like is “RIP Poland”

Yeah. I just watch youtube during my zoom calls lol

same

Its stupid how they make us use zoom

mute a 'Roman' enperor you brick.. I mean that brick sitting and ordering.. fron his golden toilet

Europeans also had access to the classics held at the Arabic library in Toledo. Translation from the original language is obviously superior, but Gerald of Cremona produced numerous satisfactory translations from Arabic. By the Renaissance, European science had progressed 300 years past the level of classical science, thanks to Gerald's translations.

The Byzantines would be the body builder (muscular) man of Europe

Remember that the Greek Throne (or Roman) was very impressive, with Automatons, dang it i forgot to mention it in my comment! Imagine developing the Automatons as City Guards with Greek Siphons (Fire)! OMG LETS DO A MOVIE!

@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 Still, like Cody said, Byzantines couldn't conquer North or South America due to geographical locations. Their trade routes would dry out over time as the Portuguese, Spanish, British empire create massive fleets and Atlantic trade routes. Plus, they would be much less powerful than Ottomans(because they wouldn't conquer Mamluk Egypt, internal conflicts and Sunni religion and culture and all that). The Ottoman empire was very powerful in the 1500s, and they just dwindled out in 1800s(Certainly not because they lacked Greek technology.) Italy was the hub of the Renaissance, and they didn't became the body builder of Europe. Face it. The Byzantine empire would be the old sick grandpa of Europe.

@@user-sf2if2df4n They may not be able to conquer The Americas. But if you take Egypt and the Levant you can easily go from there and colonize the East Indies and Indian subcontinent.

don't you think it's a shame that byzantium is not that mainstream? there are 50 movies of henry viii and how many of..... heraclius for example? you can also add me on discord to talk about byzantium :Proletariado#4420 I would be glad

Yeah and the Austrian Empire rules Northern Germany

A soul for a soul, Rome lives yet the Germans remain divided. On the bright side with the silk trade still continuing into Europe, colonialism would've been minimized and Asia would be less isolationist.

Yea, I’m still alive

How can we sit and do nothing when there is no more Constantinople

There would've been a full scale battle between Persia and Eastern Rome. We don't know for sure because Persia was also weakened by the plague.

@@user-sf2if2df4n Very true. While the Justinian Plague halted the Eastern Roman advance into western Europe, it also halted the Persian advance into the Empire's eastern frontier. Had the plague never happened, the Byzantines likely are stuck in a long, drawn out war with the Persians.

It’s pronounced Byzantine silly, not Byzantine

@@BasedBebs REEEEEEEEEEEEE

@@BasedBebs REEEEEEEEEEE

@@BasedBebs ree

True, but ROME

Man of culture here

@@capitanjulietti3436 Saxony, Bavaria, the Low Countries, the Rhenish states, or Austria. Choose

Nerds dont forget ULM

Saxons? How about the anglos oh wait I accidentally created England in germany

The templars would be sent in their stead, forming the Templar state.

@@danshakuimo I doubt it. The Teutons were Germans. The Templars had to run Cyprus and their holdings in France.

European wild forest would have lasted longer

Surprised this comment sections hasn't been taken over by Greek and Turkish keyboard warriors.

Turkish opposition: No Erdogan tho :)

@@SirGeorge8600 Me too actually

@@SirGeorge8600 Turks deny their own history. They're actually the descendants of Byzantinians, not the Turks.

@@grubbybum3614 you are right. genetics show western turks are greek, easterns armenian, north caucasian, south kurdish and arabic descendants with 10-15% central asian genes. and for the abdou, i really feel sorry for the people of these lands. maybe it would have been better if turkic invasion didn't happen. from armenia to the borders of vienna where turks ruled, there are deep problems with the people and administrations.

Last time I was this early, Vikings landed in North America.

@@DarDarBinks1986 I'm in Canada right now so good comment

last time i was early rome was still a city state

Last time i was this early england was still celtic

@@maleexile9053 Last time I was this early England was still english

If they were still around = us and them would still be calling them Romans or Eastern Greek Romans, and the word Byzantine would've never had been used for calling them that or would be used for a name of something else instead.

so you are not very early

@@yoghurtmaster1688 ????

When the Eastern Romans see the First Crusade: Let them pass between us.

Me too, the day it got collapsed i almost got a heart attack.

"At the Rivers of Babylon we sat, yea we wept when we remembered Zion."

Together with Prussia

@@rubenvanbelzen1217 neckbeard moment

why? It got easily destroyed

They could make some wars against China with the aid of Russia therefore no covid, also the czarism could never end since they would have the support of the byzantine empire to stop the revolution

Sergio Winter wot

@@banditmc12 The good ending

The comments like these makes me symphatetic to the Erdoğan and Neo Ottoman cause. Thanks for spewing your hatred. And I am glad my ancestors killed and conquered bunch of you back then.

Turks reconquer and Turkifies the Balkan and Greece. Good ending. :)

It would have most likely been taken over by Britain or Japan later on.

Would the join the US on their own terms or not though. Imagine a single American state that was a monarchy and had a king/queen instead of a governor.

@@lth9282 At least with Britain they would not have to change their flag.