Anybody that is a fan of alternate history in English will get exposed to Byzantium/Eastern Rome. Many of the modern authors such as Harry Turtledove, David Drake, Eric Flint, SM Stirling, etc have either a background or a fondness for the era, if not outright man-crushes on Belisarius.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of abusufyans son converting to Christianity in Ethiopia it is a lie, a fabrication, do your research

5:43 that did not happen my brother

Voltaire is full of shit, but 1000 years of decline is unfortunately accurate as much as Byzantiboos don't want to admit it.

Duhet te dini se simboli i shqiponjes me dy koka perfaqeson gjuhen primordiale te cilen e flasin shqiptaret, prandaj gjuha quhet shqip Dhe vendi shqiperi sepse ndodhet ne mesin ose qendren e globit. Eshte gjendra pineale e globit. Eshte kodi sekret i ndertimit te materies Dhe jetes ne toke prandaj eshte kaq i perhapur. Thank you

Its really not surprising, byzantium was largely just a rump state in constant decline until its inevitable end

In Spanish, that office is called "pregonero." The etymology is evident.

When you translate the word Islam to what it actually means it's a bit funny to talk about the "birth of Islam" in the 7th century, as if people were rebellious towards God then said "Ok you got me now i will be in peace with God" Altough i get what you mean. Peace

Bull shit you know very little mi friend fake sorryyyyy

The people who took political power after prophet Mohamed stole this right from his rightful successor Ali bin Abi Taleb... all those who led the nation were usurpers, many of whom had great lust for power, money, and women... blondes typically so they went after personal glory because lay Muslims were just impressed with stories of wars and conquests (the leading figures instilled a strong sense of elitism in people) although they were ruled harshly by the state. We also have the beginning of police and intelligencia state with Mu'awiya's ascent on the throne. Any story you read, take it with a shovel of salt. Unfortunately, however, most lay Muslims still believe all the nonsense their history books tell them. Shi'a Islam looks all these events way differently, they even object to these conquests both religiously and morally as they turned the religion into piracy and tyranny. The prophet also prophesised this and even the Quran prophesised after the prophet's death people will turn upon their heels.

Interestingly enough, most of the Orthodox and Muslim world only ever referred to the Byzantine Empire as "The Roman Empire", and many actually continued to identify Greeks as "Roman" till quite recently, well after Constantinople fell to the Ottomans. I think the name change to "Byzantine" in some areas in the Middle East now is more due to recent Western influence.

@@

In fact in Middle East we rarely hear of Julius Caesar or Italy, for us Rome was Anatolia & Balkans

The reason that Byzantium/Eastern Roman Empire is not so popular is relatively simple. 1. After Justinian/Belisarius the Eastern Empire while claiming sovereignty over the whole “ Empire” did nothing to actually (despite having the wealth to do so) restore the Empire in the West. The term “Byzantine” in the West came to mean, duplicity, backstabbing, obsession with wealth and power etc. So from a Western Perspective the view was “ you claim to be “ Roman” but you do nothing for the people in actual Rome or its citizens in the West. - A modern day analogy would for the U.S. to move its Capital to Hawaii and claim to have control over the continental USA yet it does nothing as gangs pillage and everything descends to chaos. The second reason is that after the rise of Islam Byzantium lost control of most of the rest of the Eastern Empire, and was reduced to to a rump state. The Byzantines “looked” down on everyone .. as long as they lived in luxury… they stabbed everyone they ever dealt with in the back from the Latins to the Arabs to the Turks and even themselves … so no one had respect for them …

i live in Anatolia. I found a chipped stone when i was teen near Antalya beach, it had an amblem of double headed eagle just like the hittites example. I lost it in 25 years of time and i regret that very much.

Because it was Christian, and Christianity ruins everything.

15:15 The Turks be played by black actors 💯 and half the Greeks be🌈🏳️‍🌈🌈🏳️‍🌈🌈🏳️‍🌈.

It's crazy how when I attended italian high school we focused on jabroni-tier barbarian states and never talked about the Eastern Roman Empire

Who is Ahmed bin hamdal ?? You lost me it's hanbal

What is the source you got the prophet's pbuh son in law left Islam ... ?? Don't make things up

I love my history but when it is displayed to me in the context of EU4 i absorb it like a sponge

🎵From the river to the sea, 🎵Constantinople will be free 🎵🎵

When the biggest representation of "Oxthodox Renaissance" today are rednecks, Russian Barbarians eho never really stopped being communists inbreds, and countries like Greece who havent been able to balance their budget in their entire history, you wonder if its all because of 1 writer of duento the representation of a civilization thatbis simply backwards

They are romans any one who says different are on purpose white washing history and being disingenuous to dismiss a entire national pride and its clearly shows France and the Germans and pope got what they wanted legitimacy from a lie.

Maybe because orthodox are unbearable. Also, their history was one of decay. Rome signified the ascendenance of European culture, where as Bizantium was a slow and gradual decay where virutally everything was erased. Eventhough the western part of the Roman empire collapsed the nations that where form constantly sought to revived the roman past, and although they did not achieved that, far stringer nations would be created. Also, the catholic church preseved Roman Law, Science, and language far better than the Orthodox one. Specialky since the Oxthodox were mostly erased and became muslims. Where as in Iberia, France and Italy the Muslims were driven back and eventually conquered.

This argument is the same as France. French love claiming their medieval and dark ages heritages as the same nation but refuse to say the romans are still romans. Nations culture can change doesn't change its identity

It’s obvious, European historians couldn’t accept that Muslims conquered the Eastern Roman Empire so they had to wipe it out from culture

Still not

If the eastern half of the United States collapsed and the western, Hispanicized west continued as a rump state, it wouldn’t matter if they continued using the same institutions, historians would draw a major distinction between the two eras regardless of pedantry.

Gibbon and and Voltare are awful. I will forever have disdain for specifically the gay little old Frankish rivalry of the French and Germans ruining everything it touched

why hre is holy roman and empire: text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text text Why hre is not holy roman or empire: it it not holy because i said so, it is not roman because they are not the real roman empire, it is not an empire because it is many nations

Because "the West" is Catholic/Protestant while Byzantium is Orthodox, "The East".

There is no such thing as Byzantium, no such thing as Eastern Roman Empire, it's ROMAN EMPIRE. Constantinople was one of the two capitals of Rome, when the Western capital fell only the Eastern remained.

Maybe its me, but its hard to see the ERE as a continuation (i know it was) when Rome was always about being agressive, full of energy and drive to conquer, and the ERE more than times than not we see it in the backfoot, defensive position. Also the fact they are greek and not latin anymore

the enlightenment, never was society more prone to superstition than when enlightenment broke trough. seriously, the term "homosexual" was coined to denote an abnormality, a neural deficiancy that needed to be treated, medieval people did find same sex relations shamefull but they saw it a sodomy like any other form and it was very rarely cause for more than whispers. women often were the ones to accuse their husbands of it which remained the case after enlightenment and is still the case in the islamic world. female on female was simply not taken seriously at all. enlightenment brought insane asylums, it used to be that they would say they simply heard God but couldn't understand as no mere mortal could hope to understand his divine will. therefore they were given food, shelter, and most importantly people spoke to them and listened to them, I am sure it was not that most believed they were speaking for God but they were brought up with an obligation to see them as such regardless. Enlightenment thinkers were obsessed with "normality" how they could (trough "science") fix the abnormal behaviours. Therefore Gay people and the mentally challenged were strapped to tables and had experiments performed on them. In fact the whole Gender identities debacle can be tied in here. The initital literature on the subject makes one point very clear, gender in her view was not even tied to sex, it was an expression of identity itsself, the conclusion the author had was that gender was fluid because the wide range of factors made it impossible to classify a person as part of a collective. But gender was used synonymous with sex in general society and it didn't take long for the exact opposite conclusions to be formed, more classifications rather than none could suffice. later people invented them for themselves. People like John Money decided to experiment on children believing he could change their "gender" based on raising them as either a girl or a boy, his experiment failed, he did in fact also force the children in question to engage in sexual acts with eachother as well, one of the boys in question had lost his member trough a medical mishap i believe which lead to the parents agreeing to his "expert oppinion" to just raise him as a her cause it would be easier for him, the kid comitted self delete not long after, the other kid followed a number of years later, they had been traumatised by the experimental and allround abuse, in the end John Money is widely refuted but his findings are still quoted and supported by "enlightened" people out there.

Was this the same era when Jews refused jesus to be a Messiah and plotted his murder?

Answer? Racism

I thought you were going to interview Arabs.

Arabic speaker here, I've watched "faris bani marwan" on it's original run, back when I was a kid. It was one of my favorite, I'm surprised that you you don't understand Arabic but you also recognize the opening theme as a true banger. I always day dream about this show remake, what I like about it, it's that it was telling a complex story with a lot of gray moral, especially from Arabic side, when we were accustomed usually to romanticised one dimensional heroes vs villains depiction of early Islamic period from Arabic media.

Si era africano, sería lógico que tengas rasgos africanos y pelo mota no? Quizás por eso se lo retrata pelado, a lo mejor se afeitaba 😌 y quizás si bien no era costumbre de la época. Por algo fue el Gral más renombrado de la Roma antigua, habrá tenido sus características propias, sin media costumbres de época. 🌹🛡️🗡️

I have a monotheist bias. The Eastern Romans survived because they were Christian. And the western Romans were heretics pretending to be Christian but were godless pagans. Until the last century of the empire when repentance was true. But by then. It was to late. And this isn't a solely Christian bias. I prefer simply Jews, Christians, Samaritans, Enochites,, Muslims, Manicheans, Mandaens, Zoroastrians and Yazidis. And I dislike polytheist and pagan civilizations. Who I regard as cruel, cannibalistic, human sacrificing, women mistreating, and all sins, evilness and cruelty. So naturally I'm inclined towards eastern Romans over western Romans. Had the fourth crusade never happened or simply destroyed the Seljiuks instead than the Eastern Romans would of lasted another Century

It is a very tragic tale that of the fall of Byzantium to the turks.

Always work out with your whole body, make sure its all even, other wise you will end up like Quagmire after he found out about internet porn, don't get me wrong that would a nightmare for the Huns and Mongols if we would arm him with enough pilums,

Your evidence seems to contridict your thesis that there is some sort of misunderstanding of context of the claim Michael called Latin a Barbarian language. Anastasius keeps referencing the eastern Romans as Greeks which implies they were ethnically Greeks. And he wasn't some outlier.. From 800 century onwards the western Holy Roman empire calls the eastern one Greeks. Even when the Pope crown Charlemagne Roman emperor in Saint Peter's Basicala in 800 he supposedly said. "Decretalium, Romanourm imperium in persona magnifici Caroli a Grecis transtuli in Germanos"… Latin for "transferred Roman imperial authority from the Greeks to the Germans, in the name of His Greatness, Charles". Irene the Athenian, eastern Roman empress at the time, was a Greek. In other words, the context of "Roman" during the middle ages was in a sort of assimilating civic nationality context not an ethnic designation like say early Latin era Rome in antiquity. Anyone could be Roman but in terms of who were demographically the most numerous of Romans it was Germans in the west and Greeks in the east.

Anyway, I will say "Eastern Roman Empire".

A movie like the message deletes the role of the four companions from the biography, such as Uthman, Omar, Ali, and Abu Bakr, and distorts the story of the killing of Hamza. The story of the apostasy of Ubayd Allah ibn Jahsh is weak and not proven by Muslim scholars.

The greek revolution in 1821 was organized by "FILIKI ETERIA" established in Odessa (in today Ukraine) and the leader was Alexander Hypsilantis, general of the Russian army.

And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19 If you are in North America, please go check out any of the churches available to you: OPC, PCA, Rpcna, Urcna, or a Canrc church (These are conservative and actual Presbyterian/Reformed churches) If you can’t find one of the conservative presby churches then, maybe an Lcms Lutheran church. If you’re Scottish, I recommend the Free Church of Scotland and the APC. (Different from the Church of Scotland) If you’re English I recommend the Evangelical Presbyterian Church in England & Wales and the Free Church of England (Different from the Church of England) Also online you can look up church finders for each of the groups, it will show you locations. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. -Hebrews 10:24-25

You failed to mention that these Muhammad "messengs" are Ottoman forgeries debunked but carbon dating

Its a marvel and just ridiculous how people see history recreating itself.