The collapse of the Roman Empire into Eastern and Western

1620 years ago, 17 January 395, the Roman Empire divided into Eastern and Western. The era of the Roman Empire came to an end. On this day, the last emperor of the united Roman Empire, Theodosius I the Great, died. Before his death, the emperor Theodosius carried out a peaceful division of the Roman Empire between his sons. The eldest son, Arkady, took control of the Eastern part of the empire with its capital in Constantinople, it is known in modern historiography as Byzantium. The youngest Honorius was removed by the Western part of the Roman Empire. The young emperor Honorius Theodosius placed under the care of a trusted commander Flavius ​​Stilicho, who was married to his niece Serena. Stilihon actually became the ruler of the Western Roman Empire.

On the way to the section

In the III-IV centuries. The Roman Empire was in deep decline. The military-political elite has degraded, mired in hedonism. The empire was shaken by internecine, civil wars, invasions of the “barbarians”. The period of foreign expansion, which gave Rome an influx of gold, other mining and slaves, came to an end. Parasitizing on other nations has failed. In Central and Eastern Europe, the ancestors of the modern Germans and Slavs repulsed the Romans. The invasions of the masters of the Black Sea steppes — the Scythians and Sarmatians (the direct ancestors of the Russians), horsemen dressed in armor and piercing opponents with long spears, placed Rome on the verge of a military defeat. Many cities were turned into ruins. In the Middle East, the Romans stopped Persia.

The population has also degraded. Military service has ceased to be the basis of Roman society. The Romans ceased to be a warrior people. The "indigenous" Romans did not even want to reproduce themselves. Life for pleasure does not leave room for children. The empire covered the demographic crisis. In this regard, the current European civilization is similar to the fallen Roman Empire. In order to preserve military power, the barbarians had to give up military business. Many of the passionary "barbarians" eventually became prominent dignitaries, military leaders, and even emperors. Entire tribes settled in the border provinces, and their leaders vowed to defend Rome. As a result, some Roman "barbarians" fought with other "barbarians". The moment was approaching when strong and resilient tribes would occupy the “ecological niche” of the degenerate Romans.

The military, socio-political crisis complemented the rift in culture and religion. The ancient pagan cults gradually gave way to young Christianity. Even then, Christianity itself was not united and was divided into a number of hostile movements. The imperial power needed the support of the people and the gods (gods), in which people believed. The emperors chose between Mithra (the Sun), which was popular in the East, Jupiter and Christ. In the end, chose Christ. According to legend, during the struggle for the throne, the successor to Diocletian Constantine (306 - 337) was a vision of a cross surrounded by a shining and the inscription: "Sim beat." The emperor ordered the cross erected on the banners of his legions and won. From that moment on, the imperial power began to provide protection to Christians.

At the beginning of the IV century, Constantine the Great recognized Christianity, he was no longer persecuted. Konstantin also convened the first church council in Nicaea in 325, which approved the “Symbol of Faith” - a statement of the foundations of Christianity, which unified religion. At the end of the same century, the emperor Theodosius recognized the Nicene branch of Christianity as the dominant, state religion. Now Christianity persecuted its opponents, including the “heretical” Christian branches. Christianity from the persecuted teachings transformed into a state ideology, Christian-Greek culture. The center of the new ideology was the new capital of the empire - Constantinople.

I must say that the victory of Christianity saved the eastern part of the Roman Empire. Christianity mobilized society, strengthened the moral foundations. The state used the church to control society. The church has become a symbol of unity, brotherhood and mercy. She not only gave consolation, but also fed the poor. The emperors made the church the richest landowner, gave her huge funds, a lot of houses and land. These funds were used to create hospitals, homes for the reception of wanderers, any beggar could get a plate of soup or a coin in the church for food. The church has taken on the role of the social security system.

Empire Section

Diocletian (reigned in 284 - 305) also introduced a tetrarchy system (from the Greek. "Reign of four, quad power"). The power in the empire was divided between the two augustas, who had younger co-rulers - the Caesars. Diocletian wanted August to retire after the 20-year reign, and they were replaced by the Caesars, who would be replaced by new Caesars. However, the system was unstable and led to an internecine war, between the claimants to the imperial throne. Constantine won the war. During the reign of Constantine, the power of the state was restored and the contradictions temporarily smoothed out. But already his sons unleashed a new internecine war. As a result, two brothers died, defeated Constantius, who ruled until the 361 year. Constantius was a supporter of Arianism. The Arians believed that Christ is not equal to God the Father. Nikonians were persecuted.

Constance was succeeded by Julian (Julian the Apostate). He was the son of Julius Constance, the brother of Constantine the Great, a cousin of the deceased emperor. Constantius solving the problem of succession, proclaimed Julian Caesar, married his sister Helen. Julian successfully opposed the Germans in Gaul and was loved by the troops. In 360, the city of Constantius conducted preparations for the Persian campaign and demanded that Julian send the best legions to the East. The troops refused and revolted. The emperor, engaged in the war with the Persians, could not suppress him. Julian took the aisles in the Alps, Illyria, Pannonia and Italy. A new great civil war was approaching. Unexpected death Constance saved the empire from war. Julian joined Constantinople as a direct and legitimate heir to Constantius.

It was the emperor-philosopher. Julian announced religious tolerance, and planned to carry out the restoration of paganism. At the same time, he wanted to update paganism on the basis of philosophy (neo-platonism) and the borrowing of certain features of Christianity (hierarchy, piety, charity, etc.). However, it did not last long, so the reforms were not completed. In 363, Mr. Julian died under strange circumstances during the Persian campaign.

The throne was occupied by the former commander of the court guard, Jovian. He was elected by August soldiers. But also the rules were short-lived and died in 364 under the circumstances that were not fully clarified. The emperor became Valentinian (364 - 376). At the request of the army, he approved his brother Valens August and co-regent (364 - 378). Vale rules in the East. Valentian left behind him the western part of the empire, he was succeeded by his son Gratian (375-383). At the same time, the troops proclaimed Augustus Valentinian II (375-392), a four-year-old stepbrother of Gratian. After the death of Valens, who fell in the Battle of Adrianople in 378, Gratian approved Theodosius at the post of August, to whom the eastern part of the empire was transferred to management.

Theodosius was able to stop the offensive and ready to push them to the Danube. The agreement with the Goths on the protection of borders has been restored. The "Barbarians" settled as federations of the Roman Empire in the Lower Moesia and Thrace (modern Bulgaria). Theodosius proved himself to be a good commander and defeated the Arabs. A number of Arab tribes settled in Syria as federates. They began to protect the borders of the state. With the Persians managed to maintain a good relationship. In the Persian state during this period there was a struggle for power, and Theodosius managed to maintain good relations with the rapidly changing Persian rulers. In Armenia, which was an “apple of discord” between the two great powers, an agreement was reached on the division of spheres of influence.

At this time, another unrest began in the western part of the Roman Empire. Commander Magnim Maxim in Britain was proclaimed soldiers by the emperor. Part of the German army also went over to his side. Soon Gratian betrayed and the rest of the army, he was killed. The power was shared by Maxim and the half brother of the Gratian emperor Valentinian. In 387, Maxim decided to become the only emperor and sent troops to Italy. Valentinian asked for the patronage of Theodosius. Their union was sealed by the marriage of Theodosius on Halle, the sister of Valentinian. A new war began between the western and eastern parts of the empire. In 388, the combined army of Theodosius and Valentinian defeated Maxim’s army. Maxim died.

Soon in the west there was a new coup d'état. Emperor Valentinian and his commander-in-chief, Arbogast, fell out. Valentinian killed. Arbogast raised his protégé Eugene to the throne. Theodosius refused to recognize the legitimacy of the coup, a new war began. 6 September 394 of the year in the battle on the Frigid River in the foothills of the eastern Alps Arbogast army was defeated. Eugene was killed, Arbogast committed suicide.

Thus, Theodosius for several months became the de facto ruler of the united Roman Empire. However, a single empire remained not for long. 17 January 395, Theodosius the Great passed away. Before his death, he divided the Roman Empire. Son of Honorius, he planted in Rome, and Arkady ruled during his absence in Constantinople.

After that, the two parts of the empire were never united under a single leadership. Rome was heading towards its sunset. Already in 401, the Goths rose again. They elected the military leader of Alaric and moved to Rome. The Roman commander and guardian of Honorius Stilicho, who was also a “barbarian” who had served in the Roman army, and his army for the most part consisted of the same “barbarians”, summoned the legions of the German army to defend Rome. The first onslaught is ready to repel. But in the north, the Germans took advantage of the departure of the Roman troops and broke into Gaul. All Gaul was ablaze. In 405, the city of Stilicho repelled the invasion of the “barbarous” army of Radagays (Radagast). However, Stilicho was accused of friendship with Alaric, an attempt at a palace coup and killed. In 410, the Goths of Alaric took Rome. The “eternal city” was taken by enemies for the first time in 800 years (since the time of the Gauls attack in the 4th century BC.).

The invasion of the Huns signed the death sentence of the Roman Empire. Then the tribes that left the Huns went all the way through Gaul. The tribe of Vandals-Wends brought even to North Africa, where they founded their state. The Last Roman, Flavius ​​Aetius, in the battle of the Catalan fields in 451, was able to stop the hordes of Atilla. However, the best diplomat and commander, the savior of Rome, was already killed in 454 by order of Emperor Valentinian. In 455, vandals broke into Rome. The city was subjected to a terrible defeat. After their departure in Italy, the leaders were leaders of mercenaries, who enthroned and overthrew the emperors. In the rest of the provinces they created their own state formations “barbarians”. In the Eastern part of the empire ruled their emperors, whom the fate of Rome did not particularly care. The Eternal City lost its glory for a long time.

Rome finally fell in the 476 year, when the commander Odoacer removed Romulus Augustus from power and proclaimed himself king of Italy. The eastern part of the Roman Empire (the Roman Empire) existed for almost another thousand years and fell in 1453 under the onslaught of the new "barbarians" - the Ottomans.

Comments

[inkass_98]

Thanks to the author for his efforts, but I would like to note the following:
- in the title should be made competent name of the card;
- do not engage in demagogy: Invasions of the owners of the Black Sea steppes - Scythians and Sarmatians (direct ancestors of Russian) - why the Etruscans are not the ancestors of the Russians, there is also such a "scientific" version. At the same time, just above the author mentions the Slavs. So the Russians are Finno-Ugro-Mongols, as our neighbors Svidomo claim? If the author does not know, I can enlighten that the Scythians, Sarmatians (both peoples were mainly nomadic), Meots (sedentary farmers) and some other peoples who inhabited the Northern Black Sea region and the present south of Russia were Iranian peoples, and they are related to the Slavs only in that that we belong to the same language group and borrowed some words from the Scythian language (dog, road, horse, ax, etc.);
- and the last. The Ottoman Turks were by no means such "barbarians", and the fall of Constantinople and the whole of Byzantium was the result of betrayal, including by Western countries, which promised help to co-religionists (not long before that, the Union of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches was adopted, from where the current Uniates originate from Ruin, Belarus, etc.), but betrayed Byzantium. And further. In Byzantium, a banal situation developed, then repeated in the USSR - the authorities saw that everything was going to pieces, but they had neither the strength nor the desire to fix anything. Byzantium itself fell into the hands of the Ottomans, it was a sin not to use it.
I apologize for such a long comment, it’s just that in my early youth I was a little concerned with this issue.

[Guard]

The phrase that the Scythians and Sarmatians are direct ancestors of the Russians cut my eyes too. Maybe he knows this part of the story from Blok’s poem?
Scythians and Sarmatians are Iranian-speaking nomads (and a small part of Iranian-speaking settled families) who lived in yurt-like dwellings, ate horse meat, drank koumiss, and, judging by historical descriptions, are more similar in everyday life to the modern Turkic-speaking peoples of Central Asia than to any other peoples.
The Scythians were swallowed up by Turkic-speaking nomads, who 2500 years ago began to move from the territory of present-day Mongolia, Siberia, and Altai to the modern Kazakhstan steppes. The proximity of their nomadic cultures made it possible to quickly merge the Iranian-speaking nomads with the Turkic-speaking ones. The result was a commonality with the Turkic language, but with a huge interspersing of East Iranian words, and a huge array of Scythian culture, which is still visible with the naked eye among modern Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and Uzbeks.
Having absorbed the Central Asian Scythians (Saki), later the Western Scythians (who lived on the Black Sea) disappeared into the Turkic conglomerate - in the 5th century the borders of the Turkic Kaganate reached this sea, knocking out the Byzantines from there.
In short, roughly simplifying, we get such a picture.
And the genetic connection of Scythians and Russians is just poetry of the Silver Age. Afghan Pashtuns and those have more historical rights to the Scythian inheritance than the Russians. No offense.

[Nicholas C.]

Quote: Guard

Scythians and Sarmatians are Iranian-speaking nomads (and a small part of Iranian-speaking settled families) who lived in yurt-like dwellings, ate horse meat, drank koumiss, and, judging by historical descriptions, are more similar in everyday life to the modern Turkic-speaking peoples of Central Asia than to any other peoples.

It is amusing when authors write as eyewitnesses.
It is impossible to correct inaccuracies with nonsense.

You are partly right. Before the Mongolian (with the Turkic language) conquest of Central and Central Asia, the indigenous autochthonous population there was Eastern Sarmatians and, possibly, quite mythological dinlins. 2500 years of the Turkic language sounds quite anecdotal. Akin to 140 year old ukram. The Ashin clan that formed the Turkuts and the Turkic language is the second half-end of the 000th century AD. The Türks conquered Central Asia itself right up to the 6th century. Therefore, the Turkic Kaganate in the 10th century and even on the Black Sea, when even Bumyn - the founder of the Turkic Kaganate - was not born - it can only be in the inflamed brain of an absolutely uneducated Svidomo student. What the Mongols said to Ashin, what their proto-language was, especially 5 thousand years ago - an interesting question. But in any way - this is an Altai family of languages. And not Indo-European, as among the Slavs, Sarmatians and Scythians. The Scythians lived west of the Sarmatians. And they could not disappear into nowhere. Those. or the Scythian language gradually became Slavic, Russian. Or Scythians Slavicized kindred Slavs, Russians.
Saki are also Iranian-speaking tribes. Only they relate to the times for 1000 years BEFORE discussed. Therefore, who the Saki became after 1000 years, the question is of the same order as what the Scythians are now.

The Türkic language not only in the southern Russian steppes, but also in the Volga region, was established only under the Polovtsy. The Pechenegs in our area spoke it only themselves.

[Guard]

1) "Mongolian" invasion - by and large only conditionally "Mongolian". In fact, the Horde consisted of the Turks. Even the Mongols do not really argue with this. Turks and Mongols argue primarily about the nationality of Genghis Khan himself. As for the army and the state apparatus, even the Mongols say that 90% consisted of Turks.
2)

Quote: Nikolai S.

2500 years of the Turkic language sounds quite anecdotal.

He wrote in a simplified way. You can write a proto-Turkic language. The meaning does not change much, given that the Turkic languages ​​are much more conservative in comparison with the Indo-European languages ​​in terms of distorting the vocabulary - they change very slowly. Any Azerbaijani, Kazakh, Tatar, Uzbek can effortlessly read the ancient Turkic epitaphs transcribed into modern writing almost XNUMX years ago. But the Europeans find it difficult to understand their texts from a similar period, since European languages ​​"mutate" quickly.
3)

Quote: Nikolai S.

Therefore, the Turkic Haganate in the 5th century and even on the Black Sea, when even Bumyn - the founder of the Turkic Haganate - was not born

Here I was mistaken - I wanted to first write about the five hundredth years, but in the end I decided to just indicate the century. As a result, I wrote "5th century", although it was necessary to write "6th century". It was then that the Turks came to the Crimea.
4)

Quote: Nikolai S.

Saki are also Iranian-speaking tribes. Only they relate to the times for 1000 years BEFORE discussed.

Hello. Eastern Scythians - Saki - were in the political arena until the beginning of the 1st millennium AD. And they were absorbed and assimilated by the Turkic-speaking nomads, who for 2500 years began to populate the modern lands of Kazakhstan. From Saks in modern Kazakh culture above the roof of "remnants" - starting with the words of the main lexicon and ending with the main holidays and items of clothing.
And in the middle of the first millennium AD, it was the turn of the Western Scythians to assimilate, when one by one "Turkic" waves of migrations from the east went to them.

Quote: Nikolai S.

The Türkic language not only in the southern Russian steppes, but also in the Volga region, was established only under the Polovtsy. The Pechenegs in our area spoke it only themselves.

And the fact that up to the Polovtsy in the so-called. After the Hunnic wave the Bulgars, Avars, Khazars and other Turkic nomads turned out to be the "southern Russian" steppes, forgot?

[Nicholas C.]

You have no knowledge and never will be systematic. Because You do not understand the meaning of what is written. Murad Aji should be read less. In comparison, even Valyanskiy and Kalyuzhny are examples of scientific conscientiousness.

Ethnic Türks, which, for difference from later Turkized Mongoloids and Caucasians! called turkuts - westMongolian tribe. Accordingly, TO Turkic people, strictly speaking, were not Turkic languages, but the ancient languages ​​of the Altai family. But the first Khagans of the Turkuts, Bumyn, aka Ilkhan, etc. - personalities even more legendary than Kiy, Schek, Boyan, etc.

Quote: Guard

Ancient Türkic epitaphs of almost XNUMX years ago

For whom is this a lie? Runes with inscriptions (not only grave) - the Orkhon-Yenisei script - appeared many centuries later even Bumyna. dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/bse/116996/Orkhono

The Uyghur-Mongolian writing is already the time after Chigiskhan. Only if you look at the sources, for example, "The Secret Legend of the Mongols" - attributed to the time of Ogedei - but there is no original, but there is a Chinese edition in Chinese transcription around the 15th century. "Study of literary sources in the Uyghur-Mongolian writing (research, archaeographic, textological study and publication of sources of the history of Buryat literature)" Abstract of the doctoral dissertation of Dugar-Nimaev Tseren-Anchik
http://cheloveknauka.com/issledovanie-literaturnyh-istochnikov-na-uyguro-mongols
koy-pismennosti-razyskaniya-arheograficheskoe-tekstologicheskoe-iz # ixzz3PB7XnoNv

Before the formation of literary Chagatai, everything is very doubtful. But next to the Persians (they are Iranians) such a wonderful culture. One Omar Khayyam is worth.

Quote: Guard

Here I was mistaken ... I wrote "5th century", although it was necessary to write "6th century". It was then that the Turks reached the Crimea

Funny nonsense. You would at least know the official Kazakh history with the protrusion of the protokazakhs, otherwise it is somehow inconvenient for the kaganate "in the 6th century". You don't know what happened to him. Read here: "History of Kazakhstan. Turkic Kaganate" kazakhstan.awd.kz/theme/t3_1.html

I don’t even want to discuss about Saks - this is a separate topic. For example, in Crimea there is the ancient city of Saki. Are these the Scythians who migrated from Iran here? With the same success, you can reason at the same time about the massagets, Geths, Hittites, ready - you still do not know anything.

Quote: Guard

Bulgars, Avars, Khazars and other Turkic nomads

About the fact that they are "Turkic" authors such as you write in wikis and other pedias. Because there are no sources that would unequivocally point to their language. Huns also concern. And there are more than enough versions of the origin of these all.

[Rarog]

The Scythians, the self-name Skolots (linguists cannot attribute this name to any other language group, except for the Slavic), as indicated in the writings of Herodotus, are our ancestors with a very high degree of probability. Even if their language belonged to the Iranian language group, which contradicts the self-designation of these people, this does not speak of their ethnicity, a Negro who speaks Russian is not Russian, and vice versa, Russian by origin speaking the language of the African tribe continues to be Russian. From the nearest history ... in RI before the Napoleonic Wars and partly during them, all of our elite preferred French to Russian, as well as the elite of England in an earlier period of time, which does not indicate their ethnicity. To attribute the Scythian-Skolotov to the Türks, one must try very hard, because the excavation of their burials and the analysis of the remains indicate their "Europeanness" + on jewelry known to us as "Scythian gold" there is very often an image of people, look at the photo of these jewelry and make sure that they depict Europeans (modestly), and if not modestly, then those bearded peasants with gold jewelry are difficult to confuse with anyone else.

[inkass_98]

Quote: Rarog

look at the photos of these jewelry and make sure that they depict Europeans (modestly)

You made me laugh. To begin with, the Iranian tribes were also Caucasian, and not the Mongolians, who came to the East much later. And secondly, anyone can be your ancestors, so our fate decreed, but the Scythians, who almost did not disappear and assimilate with the same southern Slavs, didn’t. Indirectly - yes, it is possible, but they are not direct relatives to you.

[Rarog]

I didn’t write anything funny. I know very well that the Indo-Arians (Iranian Persians also belong to them), close relatives of the Rus, there is evidence in the recently emerging field of DNA research - DNA genealogy. About 48% (the largest number, by the way) of ethnic Russians (Belarusians, Great Russians and Little Russians) have a haplogroup R1A Z280 - related to the haplogroup of Indians belonging to the caste of Brahmins and Iranians. In my post I wrote about the Turks, only in order to prevent the attempts of other forum users who could attribute the Scythians to the Mongoloids, no more. If you claim that the Slavs assimilated the Skifs, then several questions arise:
- How does assimilation contradict the fact that the Scythians are the ancestors of the Russians?
- What are we going to do with the data of Herodotus about the self-designation of the Scythians - Skoloty, as I wrote above, modern linguists attribute the word “Skoloty” to the Slavic group of languages?
- Where did the Slavs come from? Where did they suddenly appear at the turn of 5-6. centuries of our faith, if my memory serves me, on the lands of the Scythians-Skolots, with a similar way of life and beliefs of the Scythians-Skolots, according to the same Greek sources? Isn’t it easier to assume that for some reason this is the same people who changed their name? He doesn’t have to go far for examples ... Ukraine and Ukrainians are quite suitable.

[Guard]

Quote: Rarog

with a similar lifestyle and beliefs of the Scythians-Skolotov, according to all the same Greek sources?

Have you definitely read Herodotus? What evidence of the similarity of the Slavic and Scythian cultures found there?

Scythians are classic steppe nomads. The Slavs are sedentary.
Scythian and Slavic clothes are different. The kitchens vary. Beliefs vary. Languages ​​(according to famous words) differ. Attitude to war - varies, etc.
There was a small part of the sedentary Scythians, but even Herodotus writes about some of these "plowmen" that they themselves do not eat wheat, but grow it purely for trade with sedentary non-Cythian neighbors, preferring to eat just like the nomads - a lot of meat (horse meat in the first place) , game, koumiss.

[Ingvar 72]

Quote: Guard

Scythians are classic steppe nomads. The Slavs are sedentary.

1) And you do not assume that the Scythians could settle? Well, or part of the Scythians, when settled, became known as Slavs?
2) Judging by your posts, the Slavs appeared later. Then where did the Slavs come from? And in such quantities that now a quarter (approximately) of the world's population has Slavic roots?
There is no feeling that it was the Slavic history that was rigged at some point?

[Rarog]

Why are the Slavs necessarily farmers? Why "historians" do not even give the Slavs a chance to be nomads? Scythians disappeared into nowhere, and in their place the Slavs arose from the void and immediately became farmers?

To be honest, the argument is about nothing. The official history knows what people were doing and who they were 5000 years ago in the territory of modern China, 4000 years ago in the North of Africa, they even know what happened on the British Isles, but the territory of Russia and the history of the Russian People (our ancestors) are a solid white spot, despite Ivankovo ​​culture on the Volga, Arkaim in the Urals, Gold of the same Western Scythians, etc. etc., which somehow confirms our relationship with the ancient peoples living in this territory ... everything is denied. Slavs. Like in the 6th century A.D. descended from the trees, on which no one had noticed them before, and immediately became farmers, and then the Scandinavians came to them and they conceived the state, although they themselves will not have any more statehood for a century. It smacks of political order, but it doesn’t even smell, but stinks.

By the way, study the work of Klesov and Rozhansky, and at least Western experts in the field of DNA genealogy, it is clearly said that DNA studies of the remains from the Scythian and Slavic burials + DNA research of modern representatives of the Slavs speak about their direct relationship. The haplogroup R1A prevails in all. The story can be interpreted, the results of DNA analysis - no, they are digits in Africa!

[Rarog]

Quote: Rarog

Ivankovo ​​culture

Imenkovskaya * culture, of course. Mistaken in the name.

[Rarog]

Quote: Guard

Quote: Rarog

with a similar lifestyle and beliefs of the Scythians-Skolotov, according to all the same Greek sources?

Have you definitely read Herodotus?

I have not read the original, I do not know Greek, and the "Greek Sources" is not only Herodotus. I read the historical works of various authors (and supporters of the relationship of the Slavs with the Scythians and their opponents), which often give references to the works of the ancients. Recently, I am less and less like the approach of historians in the study of the days of the past, too free interpretations sometimes even contrary to common sense. With the advent of DNA genealogy, which I have already mentioned in this thread more than once, manipulations in the field of studying the kinship and continuity of peoples will come to naught, even though in this part of the study of our past we will get rid of shameless liars from history working to please political orders.

[ShturmKGB]

There are, of course, questions, but this is secondary, the main thing is that people will read, ask themselves a question, seek, enlighten!

[Simon]

Very interesting article, friends! Yes, your argument is interesting. And in a dispute, TRUTH is born.

[BMP-2]

The position becomes clearer in the dispute, which in itself is useful. But on the account of the birth of truth - I would not be so optimistic: it may very well be, but it is unlikely!

[Pervusha Isaev]

The military-political elite degraded, mired in hedonism.

Philosophical Encyclopedia HEDONISM
(Greek hedone - pleasure) - a type of ethical teachings and moral views in which all moral definitions are derived from pleasure and suffering

how can one wallow in ethical teachings? well well.

years since a couple of times more serious war on historical subjects thundered, one topic reached 10000 posts and admins took a look and demolished it, and it’s a pity there were a lot of interesting comets. Now it's time to start talking about it again, GOOD TALK.
Rome in Italy NEVER Could achieve fame, power and prosperity due to the fact that it is not in the most convenient place. And those city states that have convenient trading locations in Rome reach power, the Tiber River is not navigable for most of the year, and secondly, there are no mineral deposits in Rome or in the okrug to build a civilization, such as copper and tin, what to do hundreds of thousands of BRONZE SWORDS AND KIRAS.
So, proceeding only from such simple considerations, to speak about the Roman Empire, prosperity and decay, has no basis.
Rome was created in the 14th century, as a religious center-created by Etruscans -Russian, images with texts of Etruscan writings -decrypted on the basis of Slavic writing.
In general, it is surprising how a powerful state could, according to historians, fall so low? And how could the powerful religion of the Romans defeat the insignificant, without numerous supporters, Christian religion? After all, it is known that they allegedly fought and destroyed Christians physically, so they had to deal with them? America destroyed millions of Indians in a hundred years, and the mighty Roman Empire could not deal with a miserable bunch of Christians? which are also Jewish foreigners and also persecuted by their own people and Judaism ??? I do not believe, continuous inconsistencies.
In short, conversations on the collapse of the Roman Empire are akin to discussing a turnip tale ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

Philosophical Encyclopedia HEDONISM
(Greek hedone - pleasure) - a type of ethical teachings and moral views in which all moral definitions are derived from pleasure and suffering
how can one wallow in ethical teachings? well well.

Yes, it was not in vain that it was noted in due time that “a specialist is like a gumboil, for his completeness is one-sided” (see the 101st aphorism from the collection of thoughts and aphorisms “The Fruits of Thought” (1854) by Kozma Prutkov). Read below, focusing on the highlighted text:
Hedonism, a, pl. no, m. (from the Greek. hedone - “pleasure”) philos. - The ethical doctrine, the most pronounced in ancient Greece, proceeding from the position that a person always seeks pleasure and avoids suffering.
(source: Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian language of Ushakov)
Hedonism is a moral and ethical doctrine according to which pleasure is the highest good and the criterion of human behaviordefining the whole system of moral requirements.
Greek hedone - "pleasure."
(source: Dictionary of Social Sciences. Glossary.ru)
Hedonism (from the Greek. Hédone - "pleasure") - the desire of the individual to increase his well-being in the name of maximizing the pleasure received from life.
(source: Modern Economic Dictionary)
Hedonism, Greek, the doctrine of enjoyment as the highest goal of life. Representatives of hedonism in antiquity were Cyrenaics and Epicureans.
(source: Brockhaus and Efron Small Encyclopedic Dictionary)
Цитируется по http://www.genon.ru/GetAnswer.aspx?qid=0045cf12-09ee-4217-b296-d47cda2e5b2e
Behind carelessness, paying attention to the theoretical justification, you have tritely missed the practical embodiment of the idea.

[Pervusha Isaev]

what language do you need to write to, what do you understand? hedonism is the doctrine of enjoyment, the main word is doctrine ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: 11111mail.ru

how could the powerful religion of the Romans defeat the insignificant, without numerous supporters, Christian religion?

... "the powerful religion of the Romans" ... the Pantheon roman of gods is a tracing-paper from the Greek pantheon. As well as official cults in Rome itself were in use the cults of Isis (Egypt), Cybele (Asia Minor). The followers of the aforementioned cults of perjury, incest, and bacchanalia were more attractive than the normal human life in our understanding, therefore they degenerated. Christianity, as opposed to paganism, provided a better moral support for a person, therefore, as opposed to pagan, Christian communities grew and multiplied. Read about the tragic fate of the "Theban" legion, subjected to 100% decimation. Therefore, Emperor Constantine had to rely on Christians, since this was the most reliable part of the troops.

[Pervusha Isaev]

Quote: 11111mail.ru

"Theban" legion, subjected to 100% decimation.

this is again absurdity, at least, "decimation" is every tenth, and if everything is in a row, it’s not decimation, you are being bullied, and you believe.

Quote: 11111mail.ru

The followers of the mentioned cults of oath-crime, incest, bacchanalia were more attractive than normal human life in our understanding, therefore they degenerated. Christianity, in contrast to paganism, provided the best moral support for man, therefore, in contrast to pagan, Christian communities grew and multiplied

your words sound especially strong now about "moral support", when pedophiles are elected to Christian bishops, and Western churches are crowned not for procreation, but same-sex for fornication and debauchery ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

this is absurdity again, at least "decimation" is every tenth, and if everything is in a row, then not decimation

The fact of the matter is that in relation to this legion, decimation was applied MANY TIMES. "Since the act of intimidation had no effect, it was repeated many times until the entire legion was exterminated." http://adamovka.ru/saint/?id=2083

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

your words sound especially strong now about "moral support", when pedophiles are elected to Christian bishops, and Western churches are crowned not for procreation, but same-sex for fornication and debauchery ...

Well, dear, no need to juggle, for this you can taste the candelabra! 1729 years have passed since this event. Probably, you will not find such martyrs for the faith and in such a number now, besides, about "distorting" your facts: I'm talking about your faith, and you about the church. Try to understand for yourself that they are not the same! You have the same case as with "hedonism".
Look at the Jews - how many centuries ago did Moses forbid them to worship the golden calf? And now what: point a finger at any banker ...

[Pervusha Isaev]

in general, I doubted the fact of the recruitment of Christians in the army of Rome, because if the Romans fought with the new religion, they should have destroyed it, and not include their enemies in the army, because everyone says that the Romans were not idiots or TI already recognized that were there? They say that Ivan the Terrible was id_iot.
Your "multiple decimation" at the root is exactly the story for the idiots, because the soldiers did not understand from the first, not the second time, that they were being executed, but continued to engage in obscenities, and even when everyone was doing this around, again you have a deuce ...
As for the candelabra, when you swing the candelabra in front of the screen, don’t drop it on your foot or break something, because you are one of those who have ceased to understand the difference between real and extramural communication.
Well, as for gendenism, then you probably did not study well in the Soviet school, because stupid things didn’t go there ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

in general, I doubted the fact of the recruitment of Christians in the army of Rome, because if the Romans fought with the new religion, then they should haveиbeat, but not include your enemies in the army

Indeed? And where did St. Maurice come from then, for which he was canonized?
Constantine owed much of his victory over Maxentius to the Christians, who constitute a significant part of his army. http://oficeri.my1.ru/publ/i_vi_veka/vizantijskaja_imperija/konstantin/15-1-0-18

Here's another, catch: Kolobov A.V.Roman legions outside the battlefield
"Christians appear in the army at the end of the second century, as recorded by Tertullian (Tertul. De corona militis)." "The religious tolerance inherent in Roman society in the 05st-XNUMXnd centuries allowed a compromise between the requirements of loyalty to the emperor and non-violation of Christian norms." http://ancientrome.ru/publik/kolobov/kolobXNUMX.htm#VI

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

Well, as for gendenism, then you probably did not study well in the Soviet school, because stupid things didn’t go there ...

Yes, such nonsense as a headЕI didn’t go through ...

[Pervusha Isaev]

Quote: 11111mail.ru

Indeed? And where did St. Maurice come from then, for which he was canonized?

yes do not really care about your St. Mauritius fictional army correspond to fictional heroes, the main objection to the existence of your Roman empire is not a refutation of stories about Mauritius and moral Christians in the Roman army, but in what? so I already said that ...

Quote: 11111mail.ru

Yes, I didn’t go through such stupidity as gedinism ...

what's the difference how to name something that wasn’t?

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

fictional army correspond to fictional heroes, the main objection on the existence of your Roman empire is not a refutation of stories

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

what's the difference how to name something that wasn’t?

Everything is clear with you. Your knowledge of history is gleaned from the smart books of Fomenko-Nosovsky.

[Andrey_K]

And did it not occur to you that it was not the army that was invented, but the persecution of Christians?
The church needed martyrs, and she came up with them, or took them as examples of some who fell under the distribution and declared them martyrs.
Making an elephant out of a fly is a common practice of all propagandists.
Someone will be imprisoned, and "they will say that there were 100 of them."

[Pervusha Isaev]

Quote: 11111mail.ru

Therefore, Emperor Constantine had to rely on Christians, because it was the most reliable part of the troops.

sounds cool, can you imagine now in the Western armies they will destroy the pido_rasov, which are becoming more and more, for whose sake? maybe a new religion is coming too? but it’s in your rather traditional view of history. By the way, the question is: How could media have reached our days if neither paper, nor papyrus, nor parchment have lived for a thousand years? it's about your legion ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

By the way, the question for you is: How could media have reached our days if neither paper, nor papyrus, nor parchment have lived for a thousand years?

You amaze me! About the usual rewriting in your head thought could not come? This is now scribes (copyists) no one needs, and once were very much in demand.
In 1947, Arab shepherds discovered in a cave near the Dead Sea the so-called. "Qumran Manuscripts". Their dating dates back to AD 67. until the middle of the second century A.D. At the minimum, this is already 1800 years, which exceeds the figure you declared by 800 years. I advise you to think about the contents of what you are going to "give out on the mountain" before clicking the "Add" icon.

[Pervusha Isaev]

Quote: 11111mail.ru

About the usual rewriting in your head the thought could not come

they’ve talked about it many times already, literate people, say the century, it’s been about 10 times two times and it’s miscalculated, mainly by monks, why should the monks rewrite all sorts of nonsense about the Gentiles and their time? Numerous homers, ovidia, etc. ancient writers? Let me remind you the BASIC LAW OF HISTORY- WINNERS write HISTORY, so your story about decimation to zero, as it does not fit with common sense.
As for the dating, this is already serious, because the carbon analysis dates are very inaccurate and give a spread of THOUSAND YEARS, so everything that has been gained by this method can be questioned ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

As for dating, this is serious

So be serious, type in the search box the text "dating the Qumran manuscripts" and follow the links. Check if there is a radiocarbon dating of the Qumran finds. Read about other detection methods and only then make a conclusion. In the Qumran annals, by the way, the acts of not pagans are recorded, but just sectarians - "proto-Christians". For you personally, I will reiterate a piece of T.S. Shaov's text "Developing Fomenko", just about you and those like you:
"But we are cunning descendants:
We know more, we drill deeper.
In historical science
We'll put everything differently. "

Quote: Pervusha Isaev

literate people say a century since 10 times there were two and miscalculated, mostly monks

Lovely, lovely! You, say people, have not been informed about the Novgorod birch bark letters? Moreover, birch bark letters were found not only in Novgorod, but in Pskov and Tver. Even in the light of your "new chronology" they are at least 600 years old, and what else would they have done in the same time? The preservative environment is the same! And if the so-called. "chronoshift" to remove in 391?, then it will be just under a thousand years. http://new.chronologia.org/volume12/turin2012_gramoty.php There is also a drawing.

[ver_]

.. bullshit - the author does not know the topic at all .. Constantinople was founded by Dmitry Donskoy = Constantine the Great ... Jesus Christ = Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky 1152-1185 ..., Alexander Nevsky = Alexander the Great, Gaius Julius Caesar = Yuri George Dolgoruky = Caesar Khan .. and so on .. The history of Rome is written off from Russia ...

[11111mail.ru]

Quote: ver_

Guy Julius Caesar = Yuri George Dolgoruky = Caesar Khan .. etc .. History

Better listen to Timur Sultanovich Shaov's song "Developing Fomenko", maybe you will feel better. I give pieces of text ...
"But we are cunning descendants:
We know more, we drill deeper.
In historical science
Anything else is shameless.
........................
........................
History is not a hell for twenty ruble,
Stories need a revaluation.
Thucydides and Tacitus thought so,
They are the historians Nosovsky and Fomenko. "

[Sergey-8848]

It seems that this hastily picked up the article (well, that it was). Hence the errors you noticed. Only these are not the mistakes of the author, but the tweaks of other pseudo-scientists compiled by him. The author’s mistake is that he imagines himself a historian.
The price of this article is 0, if not less. A quick amateur raid on a historic date is what it is.

[Alekst]

It seems that the format of the article is rather narrow for the description of this process, and it would be interesting to read the list of literature used by the author, suddenly someone will be interested in this question more deeply.

[s1н7т]

"... Sarmatians (direct ancestors of Russians)"

Gee! But I, naive, believed that the ancestors of the Russians are still Slavs

[predator.3]

The population has also degraded. Military service ceased to be the basis of Roman society. The Romans ceased to be a warrior nation. The “native” Romans did not even want to reproduce themselves. Life for pleasure leaves no room for children. The empire was covered by a demographic crisis. In this regard, the current European civilization is similar to the fallen Roman Empire. In order to maintain military power, the “barbarians” had to give up military affairs. Many of the passionate "barbarians" eventually became prominent dignitaries, generals, and even emperors. Entire tribes settled in the border provinces, and their leaders vowed to defend Rome.

And today what is happening in Europe, a repetition of the past, only "barbarians" are different!

[Rastas]

Roman power is not only warriors. You will not keep the state alone. Rome is Roman law - the progenitor of the present, these are Roman scientists and philosophers, this is Roman culture, science. Rome began to perish when it turned from an republic into an empire. From this began its gradual degradation.

[Pervusha Isaev]

Quote: Rastas

Rome - this is Roman law - the ancestor of the present, these are Roman scientists and philosophers, this is Roman culture, science

about Roman science it’s especially funny to try to multiply or divide by Roman numbers, and I laugh ...

[Rastas]

It was necessary to study at school. In the 5th grade, we passed Roman numerals, although you probably didn’t find the Soviet school, but in the modern one, they probably don’t pass, I don’t know. But the Romans did not yet have multiplication or division. By the way, not only numbers, but also the creation of the Julian calendar. You generally learn the achievements of Roman science - you will learn a lot of interesting things. And about architectural innovations, and the basics of botany, and about medical discoveries, such as pharmacology, pediatrics, the study of brain functions and much more.

[Pervusha Isaev]

Quote: Rastas

It was necessary to study at school. In the 5th grade, we passed Roman numerals, although you probably didn’t find the Soviet school, but in the modern one, they probably don’t pass, I don’t know

why didn't I "find it"? exactly when I found it. Just do not cheat at school took place HOW TO WRITE Roman numerals, and not how to count.
Here is the simplest example from the Internet on how to multiply two numbers to get a FOUR-VALUE DECIMAL NUMBER. But this is only a primitive multiplication, but how did you keep records in the chancellery of the government, how did the finances of the empire keep, and how did the expenses of numerous legions count? Historians have come up with accounts for tobacco, but it’s also IMPOSSIBLE, in short, take it, say, calculate your family’s budget, say for a year and realize that the Roman Empire never existed ...

http://www.lib.ru/NTL/ARTICLES/arifmetica.txt_with-big-pictures.html

[xan]

Quote: Rastas

Rome began to perish when it turned from an republic into an empire.

At that time, this is an objective process. Then the economies of the countries had little effect on weapons systems. And the empire in this situation is always stronger than the republic.
Only empires have shown in history examples of successful wars.
It is clear that the economy must always be managed somehow, and it is advisable to do it well. And Rome reached the point that already conquest did not increase state revenues compared with the costs of already conquered. Rome was doomed to destruction due to the evolution of that time. It was impossible to create such a civil society with a government controlled by the people, so that there was a thriving economy in the legal field, there were dashing commanders, and these heroes were unable to usurp power in conditions of ongoing wars along the borders of the borders.

[Pavel Gusterin]

A good card, but with an annoying typo name.

[den3080]

Asia and the Pacific have given rise to the many peoples who now live in Europe and America.
The presence of a huge number of Slavic tribes in those places where completely different tribes lived before them eloquently, in my opinion, indicates that they came from somewhere. 99% from Asia because there is nowhere else to go.
Wave after wave went the tribes - Germans, Huns, Scythians, Sarmatians. What or who squeezed them out from there is not clear, maybe the future Chinese and Mongols, and some Persians, Saks, Massagets, Sumerians shoved the first refugees out.
This is interesting, but I deliberately sketched everything without following the chronology, because the accepted chronology may not be very true.
In general, every historian pulls in his direction, in the direction of his modern national or even political predilections. So to find the truth in the ancient wilds based on the works of historians alas is unrealistic.
It remains to be content with beautiful legends about the past, and marvel at artifacts in museums.

[Semurg]

the author draws analogies between the fall of the Roman Empire and today's Europe, this is a rather tight comparison and a rather slippery occupation, because there was such an expression "Moscow is the third Rome and there will be no fourth" (It is true that Beijing will not try on the European mantle of eternal Rome; he himself has eternal history for others to see). And of course it is interesting to read historical dramas and tragedies.

[Hronyaka]

The decline of the era of the Roman Empire is a direct hint to Western Europe about the future that awaits it. There are not just too many matches! One gets the impression that someone, using the "experience" of the decline of the empire, launched the same process in Europe. Throughout the 20th century, Europe was united, first by wars, then economically, now politically. When Europe has become united, it is actively populated by foreigners (migrants, the policy of multiculturalism - the New Great Migration of Nations) and infected with a virus (the same hedonism should be noted). Now the process of super-disintegration of Europe is being launched, preferably with a bunch of wars and upheavals. As a result, all of Europe is dotted with new "barbarian kingdoms" in deep depression and cultural decline. Something like this.

[Victorio]

/// Invasions of the owners of the Black Sea steppes - Scythians and Sarmatians (direct ancestors of Russians), armored horsemen ///

====
Scythians and Sarmatians were not Russian ancestors

[Rarog]

Do not find it strange, there is a territory - the Russian Plain - on it the Scythians / Sarmatians appear from the air, then disappear in the same strange way - then immediately after their disappearance in the same place, the Slavs appear from the air, who eventually become Russians, Poles, but archaeological data confirming the total genocide of the first by the second NO ?! Or, according to the same logic, the Russians and the Poles are not Slavs, but also appear in their place from the air, and the Slavs disappear into nowhere ... no, you won’t say that, but even try to ridicule, because there are written sources confirming that modern Poles and Russians left the Slavs. And the fact that there were practically no written sources at the time of the Scythians, in principle, does not bother anyone, or the absence of such a source is confirmation of the "difference between the Slavs and Scythians / Sarmatians" ?! Or maybe it's still the same people at different times? After all, some 100 years ago (roughly) 99% of the ancestors of today's jumpers from Ukraine were all Russians, but their descendants suddenly became "ukrami" - just a political order, their DNA remained the same.

Read a specialist in DNA genealogy Klyosov or Rozhansky, for example on "reformat", type there in the search - "Who are the Scythians".

To spread the data of DNA research from the excavations of Scythian burials and DNA of modern ethnic Russians in a limited amount of post in the topic of discussion, especially for every doubter it is a thankless task. And its categorical statements - "the Scythians and Sarmatians were not the ancestors of the Russians" is better to confirm with objective scientific data, Wikipedia does not count.

I believe a new direction in the study of DNA - DNA genealogy will break many historical stereotypes, and even historical forgeries, for example, such as the Norman theory of the origin of statehood in Russia, etc. Because history can be rewritten for the sake of a political order, as now, when the West is increasingly trying to forget about the enormous contribution of the Russian people to the defeat of Nazi Germany, what is there ... not only to belittle this contribution, but to equate the USSR to the 3rd Reich. And the DNA research data is an objective thing - they poured special. solvent for DNA samples, drove through a centrifuge, received numbers, compared numbers from previous studies and concluded - relatives or not. (of course, the one described above is greatly simplified by me).

[Guard]

Quote: Rarog

there is a territory - the Russian Plain - on it Scythians / Sarmatians appear from the air, then disappear in the same strange way - then immediately after their disappearance the Slavs appear in the same place from the air

Error at the very beginning. It was precisely where the Scythians lived, then Turkic-speaking tribes appeared. And only then the Slavs appeared on these lands, who during the Scythians lived on the territory of Central Europe until the Germans pushed them to the east.

[Rarog]

I answered you above. Read the work of researchers in the field of DNA genealogy.

[Aljavad]

Read the work of researchers in the field of DNA genealogy.

DNA, language, political identity - lie in DIFFERENT planes!
For example, in Asia Minor, the Greeks conquered by the Turks accepted Islam, spoke Turkish and became Turks, preserving the old DNA. And the Arabic language from the Tiger to the Atlantic spread without touching DNA. They speak the same language, but the peoples are different.

[Penzyac]

Quote: Victorio

/// Invasions of the owners of the Black Sea steppes - Scythians and Sarmatians (direct ancestors of Russians), armored horsemen ///

====
Scythians and Sarmatians were not Russian ancestors

What a peremptory statement! Have you been a witness? How do you know this so accurately?
There were many who were the ancestors of modern Russians, including Scythians and Sarmatians. You can't crush genes with your finger!

[Aljavad]

There were many who were the ancestors of modern Russians, including Scythians and Sarmatians. You can't crush genes with your finger!

In addition to genes, there are Scythian words in the Russian language
YES - all Slavs have "SO"
AX - for all Slavs "SEKIRA"
DOG - all Slavs have "PES"

[AARP]

As it is all far-fetched. This article persists in assuring Us of the "Wild Way" of development. Let's figure out where we came from

[ivanovbg]

the victory of Christianity saved the eastern part of the Roman Empire. Christianity mobilized society, strengthened moral standards ... The Church took on the role of a social security system.

Golden words!

Perhaps it was worth mentioning in the article that despite the political division of the empire in 395 (I didn’t know the date of January 17 or forgot, I remember this time), Christianity remained the only one for six and a half centuries, before the Great Schism in 1054. But this is just a personal opinion. The bustle of man - to find every spot on the Sun to find a speck. The article is excellent, thanks!

[Misha]

say there was no eastern roman empire

[Rarog]

Quote: Misha

say there was no eastern roman empire

Who is talking? When was this said? Where are the documentary refutations of the existence of Byzantium - the Eastern Roman Empire?

[Aljavad]

say there was no eastern roman empire

"All this was invented by Churchill in the 18th year! ....!

[Misha]

Quote: Rarog

Quote: Misha

say there was no eastern roman empire

Who is talking? When was this said? Where are the documentary refutations of the existence of Byzantium - the Eastern Roman Empire?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr8R-VgyQB0#t=294

[Rarog]

Quote: Misha

Quote: Rarog

Quote: Misha

say there was no eastern roman empire

Who is talking? When was this said? Where are the documentary refutations of the existence of Byzantium - the Eastern Roman Empire?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr8R-VgyQB0#t=294

If you watch the video from the timing to which you gave the link, then the material tells about the belonging of the Roman Empire (common and western) to the Slavic world. Such statements comfort their pride, even in some way are sometimes confirmed, but how do they relate to the statement - "they say there was no EASTERN Roman Empire"?

[Aljavad]

Such claims amuse pride,

Similarly: Ukrainians dug up the sea ...

[Misha]

Quote: Rarog

Quote: Misha

Quote: Rarog

Quote: Misha

say there was no eastern roman empire

Who is talking? When was this said? Where are the documentary refutations of the existence of Byzantium - the Eastern Roman Empire?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr8R-VgyQB0#t=294

If you watch the video from the timing to which you gave the link, then the material tells about the belonging of the Roman Empire (common and western) to the Slavic world. Such statements comfort their pride, even in some way are sometimes confirmed, but how do they relate to the statement - "they say there was no EASTERN Roman Empire"?

there at the beginning of the video it says that there were neither Eastern nor Western Roman empires) and the empire itself was not. I just didn’t put it that way

[AID.S]

Wrong article, the topic of proto-secrets is not disclosed.

[Penzyac]

Quote: AID.S

Wrong article, the topic of proto-secrets is not disclosed.

Thanks for the joke.

[andru_007]

Quote: Guard

Scythians and Sarmatians - Iranian-speaking nomads

as far as I know, not a single written source has been preserved to claim that these are Iranian-speaking tribes. Scythians and Sarmatians are not the self-names of tribes, but only their Greek name. Were the Scythians only nomads? This is generally a separate conversation: there were royal Scythians, Scythians-farmers (the largest grain suppliers to Constantinople).

Quote: Guard

Scythians swallowed by Turkic-speaking nomads

The Scythians were a very large people (maybe the largest European part of the continent) for more than one thousand years, so that they could be swallowed up without a trace!

A strange paradox: the Scythians - the largest people (ethnic group) of the European part of the continent instantly disappear and the Slavs immediately appear - the largest people (ethnic group) of the European part of the continent, which the Romes call Scythians, well, almost until the fall of Constantinople ....

[Ingvar]

The Nikonians were persecuted.

Who are the Nikonians, and why did they begin to be persecuted under Constance?