The west has fallen

Tbh even though most people prefer the late republic/early Empire periods, the late Empire and the early Bizantine Empire really are my favorite time periods of Roman history. It's so interesting to see how Roman society is forced to change to adapt to adversity, and the drama really feels like a tv show.

> sees headline > insert transform_into_crying_chud.gif > “it’s over”

Rome has fallen Millions must undergo peasantization

Tbh if Stilico became the regent/magister militum of both Emperors i think there's a chance things wouldn't have gotten this fucking bad. Dude was power hungry yes but he was damn talented and cared about protecting the Empire

- Barbarians overrun the Romans - Talented Roman general appears and defeats them, stabilization of the empire begins - Talented general is murdered - Barbarians overrun the Romans - Repeat But sadly, you can only have a limited anount of luck in having talented and loyal generals

It's not that the city of Rome wasn't politically significant, in fact many Western Emperors resided there and preferred it over Ravenna. But, it was farther away from the frontiers and generally the city was losing population as declining grain imports couldn't feed the city anymore. However, it was still by far the largest city in Western Europe until the Gothic Wars which created a diminished Roman state led by the Pope and left it surrounded by often hostile Lombard kingdoms. The old Roman aristocracy was still present in Rome until the 7th century.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard someone call the Gibraltar Strait the "Pillars of Hercules" , I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice

I CANT BREEEEED

Do a Habsburg Emperor tier list! Starting with Frederick III and finishing with Charles I.

Majorian is most based Western Roman Emperor

We’re so back

it’s over bros

Fallen but never forgotten

The west has fallen? Its over. . .

In many ways the seeds for the empire's fall were laid by the extreme measures taken to prevent collapse in the third century. The increasing power of local landowners caused by the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine starved the empire of resources and troops when it desperately needed them.

Your videos are always so through and well narrated! Kudos to you man!😊😊😊

I just realized... It's been awhile since I've watched a video of yours... You have grown so big since I first found you . Please keep it up

Welcome back! I love any and all videos on the Roman Empire. Keep up the GREAT work you do!

billions must listen to youtube essays.

You can ask "Did X cause the fall of the Roman Empire?", subsituting X for just about anything, and the answer will be "Yes, in part."

Something interesting about Attila's invasion of Italy is that after sacking Aquilea and on his way to Rome, Pope Leo confronted him and wanted to talk to him, they went into a room, talked, and then Attila decided to leave. No one knows what the two talked about.

Rip Majorian

I think it’s very dramatic to say that the Roman Empire after the crisis of the Third century and Diocletians reforms was in a state of marked decline. If anything, Evidence points to the period between the Tetrarchy and Valens’ loss at Adrianople had the empire at its strongest, with the highly centralized Roman state being able to acquire more taxes and material goods than ever from its provinces, was at its military peak, able to field an unprecedented amount of soldiers with levels of production and logistical support that Dwarfs anything from the Republican or Principate period. Scholars are now appreciating the 4th century as one of Romes golden ages, if not it’s absolute peak, which of course makes its sudden and precipitous decline by the 5th century all the more fascinating. However. I have heard a very interesting argument that the centralizing reforms of Aurelian, while restoring the Roman state and making it far more centralized in reaction to the circumstances of the Crisis of the third century also weakened it in a very fundamental aspect through fundamentally changing the relationship between the Roman state and its urban provincial aristocracies. In the principate period, Urban provincials had a much higher stake in the Roman state through not only public works and constructions, but also in having local rule in the interest of the Roman state. While this did not go away after the crisis, It was most definitely weakened. Local military orders were dismantled while mints were “nationalized” by the emperor themselves under Aurelian, Not to mention. Diocletian would then establish a robust civil service that was divorced from aristocratic control, and now all of a sudden, Aristocrats were able to benefit from the control of the Roman state without contributing to it, making them more susceptible to jumping ship and swearing allegiance to an actual authority representing by the barbarians once central authority in the emperor completely vanished. The reforms of Aurelian and Diocletian left rome far more all encompassing, centralized, and efficient. No longer was Rome an empire based in Italy, Rome was now everything from Brittania to Upper Egypt, an bureaucratic construct and governmental apparatus that transcended it’s original understanding. But the state, While stronger, also became far more brittle and less flexible. When the crisis of the third century broke out, There were local Greek cults fighting to maintain imperial order against the goths, Palmyra was holding the east down against the Sassanids, And the Gallic Empire maintained roman order in a way the central government could not at the time. These were not just seceding empires like many people claim, But these were “emergency empires” that managed to maintain a roman presence in regions that would have otherwise been utterly lost by the central state. After the state was remolded after the crisis, And the central authority became ruled by weak emperors and literal children, The provincial aristocracies were no longer a support system for the empire to fall back on, But now indifferent opportunists with no interest in maintaining the state This is not the only reason why the western empire fell of course, but this is certainly a reason.

the west has fallen....

If I had a nickel for every video ive seen on the fall of the west. I'd have a shit load of nickels.

I can tell this is gonna be a banger

What do you mean fallen? Albania still exists!!!

Fantastic video keep it up you're doing amazing things 😁👏👏

Westphalen

gazillions must live

I suppose its a law of the universe that the more closely related a history channel/nerd is into Rome, the More inevitable they make a video or rant about what caused Rome to Fall.

MILLIONS MUST WATCH

Very interesting video

It’s so over

around 14:35 marker you say that they broke through in 1406-1407 by mistake, rip. spectrum so traumatized just talking about events in honorius' reign that he can't speak right. I know the feeling.

Please make a video ranking every Safavid Shah from worst to best

Please make HRE emperors tier list, Sassanids would also be epic.

6:29 Did you get that image from the Wikipedia article on the battle of the Catalaunian Plains? I assume so. If that's true I think that's cool because I'm the person who added that image to the article.

Its over, so over Litteraly cant be more over then this

This maybe challenging for you but, could you maybe do a ranking of all Roman Related Emperors (Augustus to Constantine XI)? It would be heckin awesome if you could!

TND

millions must die😔

Just here to confirm that the West has indeed fallen

One of the largest factors unspoken of is slavery. The creation of massive latifunda farms where wealthy landowners held huge swaths of land and wealth rotted the Western Roman Empire just as much as it did the Roman Republic in the 2nd and 1st Century BC in every way from law to quality of life to loyalty to the military to societal resiliency; Dicoletian instating feudal ties to peasants was the nail in the coffin no matter who was going to win what war or beat what invader.

A friend and I have had a recent discussion on whether or not the Byzantines/eastern Roman Empire is a successor or a continuation of the empire. He claims it’s a successor that claimed the title and that it’s not the original empire. I claim that it’s the continuation of the Roman Empire. What do you think Spectrum

what game is this shown in the video?

please reupload this video, there are a few too many errors. quality > upload speed, don't worry about sticking to a schedule :)

Do a swedish King tier list man!🎉🎉🎉

Gibbon be like: "IT WAS THOSE WEAK WILLED CHRISTIANS!"

Obligatory “The West has Fallen” joke

wake up babe new Spectrum video

thank you !

Do a Sassanid emperor Tier list

I personally believed that it was internal factor that did most of damage or rather allowed the damage to happen. If the internal factors weren't there then the Germans wouldn't have successfully invaded them. W. Rome has gotten more weaker than the barbarians has gotten stronger. East Rome manage to survive due to better fundamentals and by looking at their history they had to fight Persians, Caliphates, Bulgars, Slavs, West and Turkics and still surivived longer than Roman Republic and Empire combined.

Oh, I thought this video was going to be about modern day.

It's over the horizon 2019

I think the Roman Empire should be split up into two time periods, the Pagan Roman Empire and the Christian Roman Empire. I'd say when Christianity became the state religion, that symbolically marked the end of "classical" ancient Rome. It was a distinctly different empire after that ideologically. Same laws, same institutions, still Romans, but the previous spirit it had that built it up in the first place was gone and replaced with a new Christian one. The pagan Empire symbolized by constant expansion and being controlled from Rome, and the Christian Empire symbolized by terminal decline and being controlled from Constantinople.

where did the billions must die phase occur?

“Imperator, a second barbarian tribe has sacked the city of rome”

Millions must fry…

How often do you think about the Roman Empire? Spectrum: *yes*

Odoacer still nominally paid homage to the Eastern Emperor, which kind of makes the Western Roman Empire to not yet have fallen at that point. So, when did no one even make a pretense at recognizing any type of Roman legitimacy or political lineage?

billions must die west fall.

Internal factors made the external factors possible.

6:08 missed opportunity to say "Even the lower number sounds nice"

0:22 I mean it did last last another thousand+ years as the East so GG

It’s joever

The Late Empire was a time to be alive

Could you rank US Presidents? Or is it too modern history for you

Billion must oogaa boogaaa

The real question is:did it hit its head??

Székely András!!!! Hungarian!!!

14:35 1406, 1407???

Constantine saved the empire. If you sub him for just a regular emperor the 5th century would have been brought forward a century. He restructured and unified the most vital instruments of state, similar to Charlemagne recentralizing Europe with education and religion

Nederlands king ranking please

Spectrum, maybe if you do another ranking video... I have a few ideas.... you could try Georgia.... while that may seem difficult given its history, to keep it simple, if you did go ahead with that idea, I suggest the time period strictly where Georgia was mostly united, between 1008 and 1490. Or, since you've been doing a small series on the Habsburgs, you could rank them as well, for that, I would rank them from when Albert I of Germany, who if I remember right, was the first Habsburg to rule Austria... all the way to Karl I of Austria, which would be a timespan of 1282 to 1918. And then there's Hungary... from Saint Stephen to Louis II which would be 1000 - 1526... ( or 1570 if you would consider John I and John II to be legitimate rulers )

Bro think he chud 💀 😭

Literally one line on the plagues? Common, the decline of the Pax Romana was Commodus? Plagues played a substantially higher role

...but enough about current events XD

It happened because I feel asleep and the cat knocked the west from the table. Sorry guys.

Attila is incredibly overrated as a commander tbh. He was very talented at burning peasant villages and instilling fear, but mediocre when it came to armies that could actually fight back.

TW Attila is a good game

15:46 here, dont you mean that he overestimated the importance of Rome?

I'm mostly just blame ricimer lol

When hre emperor ranking..

now yuo see

Next vid - 'The Fall of the East - how it happened'.

The romana should have settle the goth's on the most easter provinces, make it them figth the sassanids

The later Roman army was actually pretty good.

Call me a revisionist, but I am more in the camp of calling Julius Nepos the last Western Roman Emperor.

Give it another few years and you'll see, first hand, how the"west" falls.

in occidente cecidit

It’s so over 🤦‍♂️

The Romans chose Turkey Syria and Egypt over France England and Germany when they moved east. Never go full Tropic Thunder.

Great video

In most of the video you talked about events before the death of majorian,this is wrong. You should have started the video right after the death of majorian.I like most of your videos but this one surely isnt that good.Most people here already know the outlining events,we need the focus on interesting details such as reign of anthemius and political and economic structure of some of rome's enemies such as vandals.

It's gone.

Spectrum the Roman Empire fell in 1453, so it did last another millennium...

When you have a emperor like Honorius could you blame the empire for falling😅🤣🤣