Why didn't Rome conquer Persia?
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 10. 2021
- Get WPO x Terminator now on Android, iOS and Windows for FREE here: gmlft.co/Knowledgia-WPO-Q42021
Win a T-800 Terminator Skull Box! Sponsored by Gameloft
The WPO event has also been extended to November 7th, 23:59 GMT - follow War Planet Online on Facebook for more info about the contest: / warplanetonline
Why didn't Rome conquer Persia?
Throughout history, Persia has proven itself to be a land of mighty empires and unconquerable strength. Despite attempts to do just that, even great imperial powers such as the Ottoman Empire have failed time after time to take from Persia what belonged to its people. Even one of the mightiest empires to ever walk the earth never got around to conquering Persia. So, with that being said, why did the Romans fall short of checking this challenge off their bucket list?...
♦Consider to Support the Channel of Patreon and gain cool stuff:
/ knowledgia
♦Please consider to SUBSCRIBE : goo.gl/YJNqek
♦Music by Epidemic Sound
♦Script & Research :
Skylar Gordon
♦Sources :
www.heritage-history.com/inde...
www.historynet.com/roman-pers...
Dio, Cassius. Roman History, Book LXXX.
Eutropius. Abridgment of Roman History, Book IX.
Herodian. History of the Roman Empire, Book VI.
www.flickr.com/photos/4152398... www.flickr.com/photos/alkalis...
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
#Rome #Persia #Documentary
Get WPO x Terminator now on Android, iOS and Windows for FREE here: gmlft.co/Knowledgia-WPO-Q42021
Win a T-800 Terminator Skull Box!
Thank you for watching, see you next time!
What you Favourite Empire from History and your Favorite Male and female figures from History?
I have a question. Why did persia not conquer the roman empire?
So if you mark Armenia on the Map why you don't mark ancient Georgian kingdoms such as Colchis and Iberia on the map? If you notice Roman empire ends right at the edge of Georgia on the east which is not conquered just like from your Persia vs Ottoman Empire Map where Georgia is not conquered between this 2 huge empires. Maybe worth as a fact to point it out.
@@lakshmipraveen8734 My favourite Queens from History are the Persian Queens :
1. Cassandane, the "dearly loved" wife of Cyrus the Great, and the influential and powerful Achaemenid Persian queen
2. Atossa, the influential and powerful Achaemenid Persian queen, and a wife of Darius I the Great
3. Mumtaz Mahal, the beloved wife of Shah Jahan, the Mughal Emperor
4. Stateira
5. Balendukht (the queen of one of the most popular and famous kings of Georgia, Vakhtang I of Iberia)
6. Laodice III of Pontus, she was a Persian princess from Pontus and the most powerful queen in the history of the Seleucid Empire, and Laodice III is the only Seleucid queen who ruled the Seleucid Empire. Laodice III ruled the Seleucid Empire for 6 years.
7. Hamida Banu Begum, the mother of the third Mughal Emperor Akbar the Great
8. The Martyred Queen "Khayr Nisa Begum". The most powerful queen of Iran after Islam is the Martyred Queen "Khayr al-Nisa Begum" (Mahd-i Ulya) who ruled Iran for 2 years. Khayr Nisa Begum was the most powerful queen of the Safavid Empire, and she is the only Safavid queen who ruled the Safavid Empire.
Queen Khayr al-Nisa Begum was martyred to defend Iran and Iranians. She is one of the greatest women in the history of Iran. This intelligent and beautiful woman was the savior of Iran both during her precious life and after her martyrdom.
9. Jeyran (the beloved wife of Naser al-Din Shah Qajar). She is the most influential queen of Iran during the Qajar Empire, because contrary to the tradition of the Qajars (as it was the tradition that the Qajar kings be of their tribe ancestry in both paternal and maternal.), Jeyran became the mother of the crown prince and the official wife of the Qajar king "Soltan-e Sahebgharan Naser al-Din Shah".
Also, I love Youtab.
@@lakshmipraveen8734 My favourite Empire is the Persian Achaemenid empire.
How could you not mention that a roman emperor, Valerian was captured by the Persians in about 260 A.D and died in captivity? The only Roman emperor to die in captivity. That is something you shouldn't have missed.
Interesting thanks
Western history doesn’t teach much about their failures, I should know I live in the US. Just like how Western history teaches that Greeks were good guys and Persians were bad in that ancient conflict, when at the time Greeks held slaves and forced their beliefs on people they conquered, while Persia had no slaves and allowed people they conquered to self govern and practice whatever religion as long as they paid a tax. I love learning about real history through neutral sources apposed to what governments try to teach us. At the same time some Eastern history doesn’t paint the whole picture as well so I encourage you to look to neutral sources to fully understand both sides of the story and come to a conclusion for yourself👍👍That is very interesting that they captured a Roman emperor, I didn’t know that!
Because it is a propaganda channel not history my brother.
Same as Herodotus the “storian”.
@silent hawk
Thank you bro for speaking of the truth.
This would be a good standard truthful answer to all these Roman fetishists channels all over the place:
Did you know that the Roman empire didn’t conquer Persia because it was not able to?!
Did you know it was Persia(Iranshahr) that had the upper hand and was superior vs Roman empire?
Did you know the map you are using as thumbnail is a wrong map from the border lines point of view and is exaggerated and Enlarged towards the North(higher latitude)?
Did you know that Iranshar had more trained, more determined troops and knights and was better equipped than the Roman legions and in most of the battles had the lower numbers but was victorious?! E.g in Carrhae the numbers were 5 to 1!!
Did you know that half of the “barberians” that terminated the Roman empire were Iranic Sarmatians supported by Iranshahr and the other half were the Germanic “barberians”?!
Did you know that the Roman economy was based on slavery and wars and brutal conquest against the Germanics, Celtics and Iranic Scythians, jews and semites; Belgs, Gaels, Britons … tribes?
Did you know that the Roman fetishist channels all over the place are just a tools for propaganda and not for speaking of the truth?
Did you know that long lives the names of Hermans(Arminius) the great as well as King Shapur the great, the conqueror and capturer of 3 Roman emperors?!
@@farshads3367 we know, we know, you have a inferiority complex and you are pressed, it's oke
Me : ok let's sleep now
The internet : "Why didn't Rome conquer persia?"
Also me : well well...
same 😂😂
The turn tables
Literally me right now haha
Ditto
It's 2:23 am right now and this literally my entire biography
Every emperor :"I'm gonna conqueror Persia"
The day after:💀
Execept for the...wait for it.....the Mongols :)
@@Disasterpiece03 and arabs
@@Disasterpiece03 Most of the soldiers of the Mongols who conquered Iran were Turk.
@@hamzahhazmy468 Arabs learned culture and civilization from Persians.
@@S.C.P.I no, they were Chinese Hans
Iran is very tricky to conquer both geographically and culturally. Even in the case of the Arabs, Macedonians and Monguls when they did conquer Iran, they pretty much dissolved into Iranian culture themselves and overtime became Iranian. You either don't get them, or you become them eventually lol
persian became in "iran" in 1950s it was always called persia
@@christophercolumbus8944 wrong we called it iran since old times , you've been calling it persia. there are old mythologies ,poems , stone engravings etc that refers to the country as IRAN . there are also governmental letters and documents .
there are also coins . for example there are coins from nader shah era calling him "Nader of Iran , the world conqueror emperor"
@@TheOne-ok7gn prove it
before the coup de ta and america's involvement it was "persia "
@@christophercolumbus8944 i literallly wrote some of evidences that exit for you and you're telling me prove it? open your f-ing eyes and you see the proof . or if you can read persian go and read some old scripts or books . persia is what westerners were calling the country not us . we were calling this country Iran/iranshahr since ancient times.
@@TheOne-ok7gn you are called what the west calls you
like your shah was the puppet of the USA and CIA
Emperor of Rome: wants to invade Persia
Also the Emperor: got always killed
@پیاده نظام خان If they were successful, they would preserve Armenia :)
@پیاده نظام خان Armenia was fine on its own?? From the Parthian Empire to the Sassanids and the Byzantines, Armenia was repeatedly exchanged between Persia and Rome! What are you talking about? Roman client state 🤡🤡 Armenia was more Iranian than Roman. Iran soil
@@nimajafari7336 you're muslim now because Persia couldn't stop the muslim invasion
@@nimajafari7336 Thats not Great Logic, Let's say that Some Romans are trying to lead a charge into Ctesiphon. They technically would be going the opposite Direction to Armenia. Plus Armenia was a Border Land, Not even The Sassanians, Parthians or could really preserve it.
@@bussytron No! Armenia was the territory of Iran, which Rome took from Iran several times. The Armenian people themselves wanted to join the Roman government because the Romans were Christians like them, but the Iranians were Zoroastrians.
persia was pretty impressive, even after getting conquered several times throughout history (alexander, arabs, etc) they still rebounded and became strong powers in the east
The Persian culture is born from its ashes every time like a phoenix
I believe the only nation who sometimes defeated by invaders and still kept their identity until today are Persians! didn't came cross with any others in the history.
@@juyacity3734 exactly! phoenix symbol suits Persians!
@@NimaKDavani china as well since they got invaded multiple times by steppe empires such as mongols, khitans, manchus, etc
@@juyacity3734 Too bad Persia is now ruled by theocrats who want to stamp out Persian traditions in favour of Arab culture.
It's interesting how the Persians managed to survive and build up empires, even today Iran has a wide sphere of influence in it's area, ranging from Iran, Iraq, Syria, and some parts of Lebanon/Yemen, and non of this has been easy having to fight proxy wars on multiple fronts against major powers. Good job surviving this long.
I have belabored similar points a number of times, but take this also into account; modern Iran has 7% of the world's natural resources, 4th largest oil reserves, 2nd largest gas reserves,and the 10th largest steel producer. It is also in the top 20 of car makers, the largest producer of turquoise and saffron. On the list of STEM countries, they are #5(right behind the.U.S.). I can go on and on. Right now, they are a powerful regional power. In spite of the sanctions, maybe even because of them, they have the potential to become a world power.
Thanks 🙌🙌
Thanks. The mountains helps.
@Larry Heritz
You need to read about the natural influence Persia (known as Iran since 1936 outside but still known as Iranshahr for Persians since Achéménides) had over Lebanon and Syria ( Phoenicia ) since Achéménides and forming the Persian navy of those times; or the today Irak which was actually and before Muslim/Arab invasion part of Iran and at the matter of fact being the place where were 3 of the Persian Capitals; or Eastern Anatolia in today's Turkey that were native lands of Iranic people like Kurds, and so
read the bible a little and you’ll see why
the defeat on the roman side has also been so terrible. for example, the roman emperor, Valerian the elder, who wanted to capture Persia, was taken captive. There are some stone works showing that the emperor of Persia at that time, named Shapur, used Valerian as a foot stool whenever he wanted to mount on his horse 🙃.
I remember seeing that when in some history classes haha
Iran's rulers were called "Shah" not emperor
@@reaperoftheyeari4481 they called shahanshah means king of kings or king of iran and Aniran
Alexander making it look so easy had an ungodly effect on many Romans.
@@mathiasbartl903 He never did make it look easy tho
rome and persia are two great and fascinating empire learning about them is allway good
What about Greatness of Ancient India Empires? What your think about that ,what your Favourite Empire from History and your Favourite Male and female figures from History?
@@lakshmipraveen8734 maybe because of this India didn't have a powerful rival or something like that the biggest threat could be Persian Empire but there were no skirmish in between these two big Empires
They have been trading with each other for thousands of years
That's my opinion...
@@saeeddookat2330 Then what about rival between Mauryan Empire and Seleucid empire , Alevander and Porus (later become friends)and Cyrus The Great (my Favourite all time) could not able to conquered the India (only Indus vallay)
You only know about Persia because they have tried to destroy western civilization for their entire history. And failed btw.
@@prestons9305 cringe
Why didn't Rome conquer Iran?
Simple: They Couldn't.
Mongols: Starts laughing
@@binbasesatoktayyldran5236 monghols comes from another side.
@@sogdian6348 ık
@@binbasesatoktayyldran5236 mongols took everywhere and disappeared like a wind.
@@TheOne-ok7gn After killing 2/3 of Iran's population yes
Fast and Furious: Rome... that's the movie i wanna see.
You dont need persia when you have family - van disel probably
I want the cross over with Jurrasic World. Centurions v Dinos. Actually nevermind Syfi probably already made something like it. ?;- )
Persia: i am a joke to you?
Mongolias, Afghan and Muslim Arabs: yes you are.
Rome: WTF... after arabs also clapped them too simmntinsaly.
The world at the time ,in 7th century: did i mise a page?
AileDiablo Iranian Empires like Parthian Empire had Sassanid Empire ruled Arabs for more than 500 years before Islam Arabs were nothing but vassal of Iran and Rome before Islam search about Shapur II the Great he who pierces shoulders of Arabs
@@yaqubleis6311 ok what that has to do with what i said. It doesn't change the fact they where f out of existence by the Muslim arabs in 7th century. Like i don't het what you saying.... like it has nothing with what i am talking about.
the last 20 years of the roman-persian wars are among the funniest in history! they were planning to establish peace after 700 years of war.
to stablish peace, the emperor of Persia (modern day Iran) got married to the daughter of the roman emperor. every body was happy at that time, assuming that with the royal wedding, the war is over for ever!
but a few years later after the royal wedding, there was an uprising in Iran, in which one of the army generals ceased power, and the persian emperor had to flee to Rome. now, the emperor of rome (who was his father in law) gave him an army to take back his throne.
the persian emperor, led the roman army and on the way, some Iranian generals joined him and he finally retook his throne. now, every body was saying: oh man, its tru that we thought war was over, but this uprising took place and caused another persian roman war. but that is for sure over now.
however, a few years later, there now was an uprising in rome by the aristocrats, in which they killed the emperor of rome. having heard of that, the emperor of Iran attacked rome to avenge the blood of his father in law. these lase set of wars lasted for 20 years unabated. which eventually caused the arab muslims to use the persian and roman empire's weakness for their favor.
Awesome. Thank you for this.
Lol sources? Never heard of this?
If the Romans hadn't lost at Yarmouk, probably the Arabs wouldn't have been able to conquer Persia. In this case, I think we would've had another 700 years of wars between the Romans and the Persians xD
Last part of this article is so sad. Two great civilizations fighting each other continuously and giving opportunity to backward savages from south to come and destroy everything in their path.
@@ch3rl0b11n the arabs and islam brought civilisation to these two idiots empires existed that day
Important to note: Armenia was switching hands from the Roman to Parthian sphere of influence but was rarely directly ruled by either. The Arshakuni Dynasty which had mixed Parthian-Armenian origins ruled from 53-428 AD. Rome only ruled over Armenia from 114-118. And while the Parthians never fully annexed Armenia the Persian Sassanians did in 428 and made it an autonomous province of the empire where the Governor was usually a Christian Armenian expect during times of revolt when the Sassanians would replace him with a Persian Zoroastrian governor.
Eastern Rome ruled Armenia directly for quite some time.
@@mojewjewjew4420 Not really. The Byzantines temporarily occupied parts of Armenia in 1045-1071 when they invited the King to Constantinople for peace talks, arrested him, and through treachery took his leaderless capital of Ani. And even then other outposts such as the Kingdoms of Vanand, Lori, Syunik, and Artsakh last up until the 13th century without ever being annexed by the Byzantines.
Romans assimilated the Easter Armenians entirely. And destroyed their culture. That's why today the people we know as Armenians are all from "Pars Haykakan" that means Persian Armenia.
@@Mithradatesi No… that’s factually incorrect. First of all Romans/Byzantines at times controlled western Armenia while the Parthians/Persians at times controlled eastern Armenia. So your geography is off as is your claimed “translation” of “Persian Armenia.”
@@kristaporkhach yeah I mixed east and west, sorry for that. Eastern Armenia is "Parskahayastan". Current Armenia is just a small portion of that. Pars Haykakan I think means Persian Armenian or Parskahayer. Nevertheless "Roman Dominated Armenia" was assimilated. They were even forced into Byzantine christanity. While all Iranian rulers were pro "Armenian Autonomie" and cultural integrity, although maybe for strategic reasons. But the relationship was cordial.
Very great video 👍👍
Love all of you guys from Iran🇮🇷
A Roman emperor:I will conquer Persia
God:I like your funny words dead man🙂
Rome: Imma invade Persia
Persia meanwhile: ambushing the generals army
I think even if they did conquer Persia, they would have a hard time holding on to it. Not just because of the geography but also because it is so far from the Mediterranean.
The capital would have moved to Byzantium like it did, but the problem would be holding it from the Mongolians
@@ADogNamedStay Mongol Empire was a good while after rome fell
@@ADogNamedStay There wasn't any Mongol that time
@@parodyisparody3158 Mongol Empire died after 11 years
@@parodyisparody3158 uh… the Eastern Roman Empire held out until 1453, the mongol empire started their conquests 1206….
The video talks about Parthians as occupiers of Persia. As if they were not Iranian people. They were. The Parthians were among indo-european tribes who along Persians and Medes came to Iran. And they saw their fight against the Greeks who were ruling over Iran as a liberation war for establishing a native dynasty. The Parthian kings even used the same hat as the kings of the first Persian empire to claim that they have inherited their place.
Byzantine and sassanid era is one of the most intresting , influential and fundamental points of history .
And Achaemenid too...
Persia: i am a joke to you?
Mongolias, Afghan and Muslim Arabs: yes you are.
Rome: WTF... after arabs also clapped them too simmntinsaly.
The world at the time ,in 7th century: did i mise a page?
@@ailediablo79 what a child . The muslim caliphate or mongols could not have manage ruling a nation without help of persians . Its their own confession . The caliphates are gone but iran is still alive
@@shaneslr9123 ok it still doesn't change anything. It was a smart move.
@@ailediablo79 what ? So ?
Probably should have mentioned that the Persian Heavy Cataphracti and horse archers (ever hear of the Parthian shot?) were a substantial opponent to the Legion. For a good board game on the back-and-forth between Rome and Persia, see "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Two Generals Games, which covers the period from Julius Caesar to 476 AD.
The Persians used mostly infantry.
The Battle of Carrhae was an unusual circumstrance.
1. Crassus attack with a private army he bought out of his own pocket (mostly recruited from Syria). Some Gauls (cavalry) were there too.
The main Persian army, led by the King, was besieging cities in Armenia. So the Persian king sent one of his generals with 10 000 cavalry from the main army to stall the Romans, while he would finish up in Armenia with the infantry.
The Persians shot arrows at the Romans all day. Out of the 40 000 Romans, 4000 were injured and the Roman cavalry mostly defeated. Those injured were left to fend for themselves while the Roman army left to fortify a nearby town.
The Persian general sued for peace.
Crassus, didn't accept to meet with the Persian general. But his men threatened to mutinee, if he did not.
Arriving at the meeting, Crassus' horse panicked, then everyone panicked and Crassus and many Roman officers died at the meeting.
The freshly recruited Green army of Crassus, now leaderless, recieved new of this back in the town, panicked and individuals ran for Syria.
The Persians hunted them down. Killing as many as they could find.
20 000 Romans made it back to Syria. Cassius was one of these who survived...and he took control of what remained of the army.
The Persian General then immediately followed up with an attack on Syria. The Persians were defeated by Cassius, and while retreating, was caught and slaughtered.
Knowledgia - *Why didn't the Ottomans conquer Persia?*
Also Knowledgia - *Why didn't the Romans conquer Persia?*
Persia - Am I a joke to you
Mongols 👀
Why didn't iraq (Saddam Hussein) conquer khouzestan (province in iran )
@@tylerchapin1566 And their melting in Iranian culture 🇮🇷
@@tylerchapin1566
Mogols disapeared in history but persia raised againe
There should be a long series
Except Macedonians, Arabs and Mongols who all melted in our culture less than 2 centuries
IDK man why you differentiated Parthians with Persians, as an Iranian, they're both the same thing to me. ( Iranians )
but they're different
There were three aryan groups who came to iran. The medes, the persians and the parthians. Parthians were the horse masters
@@elonthegreat4712 they're ethnically Iranic so they're not that different at all actually
No, they were two separate but closely related ethnic groups.
Persians were lived in today South Iran while Parthians in today Turkmenistan, but they were later assimilated with Persians, who started to be called 'Iranians' since 20th century.
BTW in this context 'Parthians' refferes rather to ruling dynasty, not to ethnic group.
Achemenids and Sassanids were orgined from Persia, Parthian dynasty form Parthia and Seleukids from Greece, but all of them ruled over todays Iran.
5:49 "Especially since the Sassanians came in with guns blazing." Now that would have been something! But I think you mean "with bows blazing".
Actually, they used special "crossbows" which could shoot five bolts repeatedly before being reloaded. They were called "Panjagan."
Persia: i am a joke to you?
Mongolias and Muslim Arabs: yes you are.
Rome: WTF... after arabs also clapped them too simmntinsaly.
The world at the time ,in 7th century: did i mise a page?
@@ailediablo79 Calm down kiddo. Not the afghans. they got destroyed in few years by Nader Shah. and clap is a strong word. it took 46 years for arabs to took over completely.
@@NJ-eo2oc after the Mesopotamia campaign is done with and the few years of peace and the 1 yr of Persian skirmishs it took them less than 10 yrs to reach the Indis river. From where you got the 40 ys thingy. That is not accurate even if you add the everything together. Also there was an Afghan Empire in 19th and 18th century.
I love and appreciate every cultural and its extensive past present and existence in history, anything new to learn is an opportunity and that encompasses all details large and small, well known to odd and obscure and so on and so forth.
With respect and understanding an open mind, opens limitless comprehension. Respect 🤙🏻
Many foreign powers have tried to conquer Iran, but none succeeded in the long run. Even after severe military defeats and occupations the Iranian state always resurrected and many of the conquerrors were "persianized". Iran is the only country in the region which exists now for millennias in more or less the same borders. The true strenght of Iran is among the easily defendable terrain it's strong culture and willingness to resist foreign powers. It's no different in 2021...
So true :)
Have you heard of Iraq or Egypt?
@@mhmd_2000_ egypt and iraq both have conquered by iran multiple times
Iran got conquered by Muslim armies and still followed Islam today. That means Iran can be conquered and be devoted Christians like they always do, to follow the religion of the conquerors.
@@keywinhomes8969 iran didnt fully conquered also conquering or attacking iran is impossible espicially in in modern day Iranians ruled arabs most of the time in history iranina empires in BC like median empire qchaemenid empire parthian empire artaxiad dynasty mithridatic dynasty of Ponic empire and others rule arab after sassanid rule them shapour 1 the great shapour 2 the great khosrow 1 the immortal khosrow 2 and other sassanid kings conquered and destroyed theme to many times after arabs conquered iran they never conquered dabuyid dynasty after iranian lion abu muslim destroyed the biggest islam empire in history in ease of battle of zab and put abbasid in power and abbasid caliphate in middle east got destroyed by iranians there capital baghdad was conquered by buyid dynasty they put the caliphate on their controll saladin was iranian kurdish origin destroyed destroyed one of biggest arab empire called fatimid and after islam empires like sassanid empire rustamid dystany qarmatian stats and saladin empire iranian warriors destroy mecca. And saffavid dystany ruled them iran always beat and destroy arabs even now iran controll yemen syria iraq qaza lebanon
The word "Partisan", comes from the word "Parthian" due to gorilla warfare of Parthians against Seleucid. Parthians, like Persians, Sasanians, Sakas and Zagarthians were native Aryan tribe of Iran (aka Land Of Aryans) and were not invaders of Iran.
The ruling family of Parthian tribe were Ashkanian dynasty of Iran.
No the real ethymology of Partisan is from French Partisan it self from Italian Partigiano from parte from Latin partem which is an infection of Pars which means A part. But no link to Persia
@@inkusquidusquid1673 and those countries you mentioned including creece loaned a lot of words from Persia
@@ms.m6060 it’s not the subject
@@inkusquidusquid1673 i meant it could have been loaned from persia
The word Arya has nothing to do with a community or a race
6:21 The greatest atrocity by the Praetorian Guard.
I see you are a man of culture as well
you watched Dovahhatty didnt you and also carthago delenda est
Maybe they could've avoided it by keeping plebs off guard but noooooo...... EqUAliTy
But our boy Constantine came in with Praetoriae Delenda Est
It's literally the worst single event to ever happen in Roman history outside maybe Manzikert.
Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!
Persian Empires also had threats from their borders in the east and north, It's not like only Romans had to deal with neighbors
The middle east at the time was the richest, most populated, and most developed part of the entire world. Most of Rome’s revenue came from Egypt, Asia (Turkey), and the Levant. The reason why Persia and its incarnations were unconquerable was because their lands were heavily populated and rich. Western expansion was easier through Gaul and Britannia but eastward was a whole other matter.
it was not that populated, persia in 1650 only had 8-10 million people
@@mint8648 The mongol invasion of 1220 - 1250 destroyed 70% of Iran's population.
Gaul was easy? Really?
@@mint8648 Ctesiphon was most populated city before arab invasion, also khurasan cities like merv before mongol invasion , also Baghdad maybe was a half Iranian city and one of biggest cities in history
Persia (Iran) is one of the oldest civilizations, cultures and countries in the world. Persians have given many great scientists, poets, scholars and philosophers to the world.
Persians/Iranians are responsible for many inventions, innovations, and customs. Persian is one of the oldest living languages in the world, and Persian literature is one of the most beautiful, oldest, and richest literature in the world that has influenced the literature of European and Asian countries.
Innovations of ancient Persia/Iran and ancient Persian culture contributed to many of the aspects of the modern world. Persians introduced a number of novel concepts in innovations and inventions.
Wow I like your content. Editing and narrating make your channel my favorite. Your work should be admired . You are deserve more subscriber I hope you must gain 1 Million subscriber by the end of this year. Please keep continue this type of amazing work. Your admirable hard work and deep research make you the best channel on CZcams.
Very well done documentary indeed i really enjoyed every second of the video .Thanks so much for sharing .
Heraklius: “Finally, I’m the first Roman Emperor to crush the Persians!”
The Caliphate: *Not so fast.*
And Alexander the great
He wasnt the first roman to, Trajan means anything to you?
Arabs learned culture and civilization from Persians.
@@gregson8531 Alexander considered himself the successor of the Persian emperors.
@@S.C.P.I yes, until the 16th century all sunnis were ruled by Persian and arab scholars, but after the safavid forced conversion to shiism, egypt became the home for sunni studies and center of the Islamic world
Lets not forget Valerian and 60000 Romans captured by Shapur 1st at Edessa
Iran couldn’t conquered Rome and Rome couldn’t conquered Iran but Shapur I the Great one of the best Military commanders in history destroyed Rome Shapur I the Great was reason Roman Empire become 2 Empire he destroyed the real Roman Empire most historians say Roman Empire was destroyed by Shapur I the Great after Battle of Edessa the battle is generally viewed as one of the worst disasters in military history because most battles are only one of many that help to decide the fate of kingdoms and empires. On occasion, however, there is a battle so epic that its outcome can lead to the complete destruction of civilizations, a decline from which they never recover, or their handing over to a greater force. Here are ten ancient battles that ended empires, destroyed armies, and changed history Roman and Persian forces clashed in a devastating defeat for the Romans at the Battle of Edessa in AD 260. Under the command of Emperor Valerian, the Roman Army of 70,000 men attacked the Sassanid forces under the command of Shapur I, king of the kings. The entirety of the Roman army was defeated and captured, including Emperor Valerian-the first time such an event had occurred in Roman history.Rome never fully recovered from their defeat at Edessa, which had long-lasting impacts on the political climate of the empire. The defeat was one in a long series of crises that afflicted Rome during the third century, which ultimately led to the creation of the Western Roman Empire in . Eventually, the Western Roman Empire fell, and Rome continued weakly into the fifth century after the Eastern Roman Empire (aka theByzantine Empire) rose to power in 330 Shapur I the Great destroyed Roman Empire made the Empire 2 Empire
Actually it was Valerian and 10000-20000 Romans
50000-60000 Romans were killed in battle
Shapur I had 40000 soldiers
Valerian had 70000
With Valerian steel
Shahpur the first killed gurdianus , captured and prisioned valerian and defete the philipe the arab , and conqure edesa and armenia .
Is that enough for you rome ?
Also say what khosro parviz did to rome that was too close to reform Achaemenid empire
Iran couldn’t conquered Rome and Rome couldn’t conquered Iran but Shapur I the Great one of the best Military commanders in history destroyed Rome Shapur I the Great was reason Roman Empire become 2 Empire he destroyed the real Roman Empire most historians say Roman Empire was destroyed by Shapur I the Great after Battle of Edessa the battle is generally viewed as one of the worst disasters in military history because most battles are only one of many that help to decide the fate of kingdoms and empires. On occasion, however, there is a battle so epic that its outcome can lead to the complete destruction of civilizations, a decline from which they never recover, or their handing over to a greater force. Here are ten ancient battles that ended empires, destroyed armies, and changed history Roman and Persian forces clashed in a devastating defeat for the Romans at the Battle of Edessa in AD 260. Under the command of Emperor Valerian, the Roman Army of 70,000 men attacked the Sassanid forces under the command of Shapur I, king of the kings. The entirety of the Roman army was defeated and captured, including Emperor Valerian-the first time such an event had occurred in Roman history.Rome never fully recovered from their defeat at Edessa, which had long-lasting impacts on the political climate of the empire. The defeat was one in a long series of crises that afflicted Rome during the third century, which ultimately led to the creation of the Western Roman Empire in . Eventually, the Western Roman Empire fell, and Rome continued weakly into the fifth century after the Eastern Roman Empire (aka theByzantine Empire) rose to power in 330 Shapur I the Great destroyed Roman Empire made the Empire 2 Empire
ایران میتونست بگیره روم رو ولی خب چه سودی داشت
@@ardeshirbabakan9034 What use ?
A lot of use, vast wealth was one of many
What kind question is that ?
Iran could conquer Byzantine empire (if it wasn't for some wrong decisions of Khosrow Parvis) but not the previous Roman empire
@@ramtin5152 great SHAHPOUR could do it but he didn't
Wow what a great documentary. I am Persian myself and I didn't know most of the facts in this. Thank you so much it has made me proud of what I am.
Yea time to read a bit history of your country
Roman Emperor : I gonna take per.... *dead*
Persia: Aryan meme son
The sassanids were a more of a hard difficulty kind of game as compared to parthians. Parthians mostly defended and did not take cities but Sassanids went all out from using chemical warfare to imaginable seige tactics. If rome could not take out parthia, they definitely could not take out sassanids.
Sassanids even conquered almost all of their empire (including constantinople) in their final conflict and managed to held onto it for a few decades under Khosrow II rule. of course great generals such as Shahin Bahmanzadegan and Shahrbaraz made this achievement possible
chemical warfare😐? uh u mean the bombs? or else...?
@@amirmahdiasghari3960 some sort of sulphur something while digging for a roman city. Romans met them below the ground and the persians somehow knew that and placed chemicals there and blew it up and the Romans died there.
@@lordhosseinlh wow i didn't know that tnx for info.. by the way where r u from
@@amirmahdiasghari3960 Iran
Armenia: can I just be Armenia?
Roman Empire and Republic: No.
Sassanid Empires: No
Umayyad: you mad bro? NO!
Abbasid: habibi i dont mind but Allah says no
Seljuk: ever heard of silk road? We making kebab road, No!
Mongol Empire: only if you can Tuvan throat singing.
Ottomans: but..who will be Ottowomans??
USSR: "WE ARE ONE AHTEIST/ORTHODOX HAPPY FAMILY"
@@Suleei Turks became Persianized, so Persians win.
@@Suleei And then the Persians conquered the Bedouin Arabs with their Persian culture and civilization. The Arabs learned culture and civilization from the Persians.
@@Suleei Alexander's empire was a copy of the Persian Empire.
@@Biblical.Magi_Persia_Iran It's theory that Alexander is the fake person
The same reason Persia didn’t conquer Rome.
Both were of comparable strength, AND distances were too great.
(Carthage and Rome may have been comparable, but they were relatively close to each other. And it could have gone either way.)
actually the last war with Rome was their biggest mistake while they did capture a lot of territories they UNLEASHED the arab nomads that went on and built an army to go againist them something nobody discusses
arabs were nothing back in those days the persians were by and large responsible for their own demise
@@christophercolumbus8944 My brother, the war lasted for 700 years. This is not a single war. These are stupid wars
Great video bro 💫
Parthians(Arsacid-247BC to 244 AD) and Sassanids(244 AD to 651 AD) were two ruling dynasties of Iran during the Roman empire's existence. Parthians were from the province of Khorasan of Iran, and Sassanids were from province of Pars ( origin of the word "Persian" in English, "pars-ian" - today's Fars province) were all Iranian people. Most video's give the impression that these were different people that set up these empires in Iran. They omit the use of the name Iran. During these empires, the whole region was called Iran-Shahr.
To an Iranian, Persia(English name) has always been Iran(google the meaning!).
Like "Sweden" in English which called "Sverige" by its own people.
Iranic people have always lived in that region, city of Susa in Iran, is one of the oldest cites in the world that predates Mesopotamia. Susa in Iran, is the location of the prophet Daniel's tomb from the old testament(suggested reading : Book of Daniel).
You should have made a video on why didn't Persia conquer the Roman Empire. ;)
@Sanjeev Das they actually captured and killed 5 roman emperors that he didnt mentioned
@@notatroll78 because half of them were bad and ambushed but that doesn't mean it not pretty impressive how long and how much last the Roman Empire to the Persian, ahahahahaha
@@mariano98ify your problem is that you say persian
We had iran empire and called our pand iranshahr from 3000 years ago till now
Parthian and sasanian empires were both iranic they jist had regime change
They lasted from 200 bc till 700 ad
And the arguement of weak is valid for the times romans conquered parts of mesopotamia
Iran's number 1 enemy were turkish turans basically like turkish huns were romes worst nightmare
They were very similar and equal to each other and never conquered each other at any mean
Iran conquered anatolia and egypt for 10 years and seiged Constantinople in 600 ad its the same that rome captured Mesopotamia for a decade for most part or so
Both were civilized and sattled aryan empires that fought each other to the near break and let their land conquered by arabs turks and germans that had no real civilization and were nomadic and warrior people
@@mariano98ify the regime change is similar from roman republic to roman empire
And you cant really say rome had empire after arab 700 ad invasion
They lost all Mesopotamia and lavand and egypt and most part of the anatolia they were just something like a shadow of a past not an actal mighty roman empire
@@notatroll78 ahahahahha, the Romans still holding Balkans, Anatolia, Greek Islands, South Italy, Africa, etc. How that it is not a mighty empire? By far their empire was longer that any Arab state after the Abbasid Caliphate until the Ottomans come to their own peak.
Extra info
In Battle of Edessa rome attack to persia but Roman army was defeated and captured in its entirety by the Iranian forces. for the first time in history, a Roman emperor was taken prisoner
Name of King of persian in sasanian denesty was Shahanshah (King of the Kings) Shapur I in 260
Marcus Licinius Crassus (Everyone most probably know about him and his role to defeat Spartacus) had attack to persia and was defeated by Surena (commander of partian empire) in Battle of Carrhae
Roman and Persian Empire had their great interesting relationship too.
For example persian used to send their prince and princes to the palace of Roman to be safe and trained and Roman used to do the same.
The time of assassination in the palace of Persian , many royals moved to Rome and then back to Iran after. Same with Roman.
Many iranian Royal and Roman got married too. Similarity in face, blood and family name is totally clear.
Brilliant video as always 👍
Have a great weekend 🤙
Alexander had help from Those Iranian Satraps who belonged to the deflated faction in The Persian civil war. Potelemy explains this thoroughly in his book.
I’m proud to be a persian, and have such a badass enemy like romans.
What have you done to be proud of it??
Only the dumbest people are proud of what they havent have any enfluence in it and only shallow people are proud of what they have done.
I’m Armenian and I’m proud the be sandwiched between you two knuckleheads.
Get rid of the Ayatollah and make Persia great again
Imagine being the first super power, having kings like Cyrus and Alexander, having enemies like ancient Greece Rome and ottomans. Iran is a chad 🗿
@@lavosico and right now america :)
Cool! Thanks for the video!
Nicely explained.
Love to my Persian and Italian brothers from your Arab brother!
شکرا/ممنون
love the greeks too, they held the title of "Roman" for almost a thousand years after the romans in italy perished.
@@shohan5772 Greeks too for sure! Also forgot to add, Kurds Assyrians Indians Egyptians and more but I just mentioned those specifically because that's what the video is about.
@@yousifbk8165 man of culture
@@monarchistheadcrab8819 appreciate it
Dude, I love your voice and how you explain history with passion. I'm happy that you come to be big as you are now. I follow you since 50k and watched your growth with joy. You deserve it! My respects!
I’ve watched you grow aswell
@@Fallout3131 😂
It's never one reason but a multitude or reasons. That's what leads to a collapse or a defeat. And something most people wouldn't get.
This channel teach me more about history than school
In short, we call it logistical impracticability of harsh terrain in military.
Asking why Rome just didn't conquer Persia is like asking why didn't the US just didn't conquer the USSR or China. Those countries are too powerful and it would essentially have lead to WW3. The same kind of stalemate existed between Rome and Persia. Neither side was powerful enough to conquer the other. Persia and Rome fought minor wars with each other for centuries. Then all hell broke loose in 602ad when Eastern Roman Empire fought an all out war with Persia. Both empires destroyed each other.
This was basically the WW3 of the ancient world. When it was over there was nothing left but ruins on both sides and it became the dividing line between late antiquity and the Medieval ages in the Levant.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Sasanian_War_of_602%E2%80%93628
@@Novusod There are major differences in both technology and mindset between the 2 periods.
Prior to the fall of West Rome they could have annex Persia, the question is why they would do that. They were already overextended. Look at Trajan's exploits against Persia.
@@Novusod Not the same case. There are miles of distance between those countries and this is actually the main reason why those countries got so stronger and possible threats to eachothers on the far sides of the world since they couldn't interfere with each other in the past, no possibility of contact and impact unlike today's modern warfare doctrines. So Rome vs Persia, Ottoman Empire vs Persia or Ottoman Empire vs Eastern Rome (Byzantine Empire) military superiority is completely different issue because they had line of contact. And when there is a line of contact there are many things to evaluate to determine to superiority. Terrain and logistics are one them. Persia had it's luck on terrain and logistics superiority against Rome, Eastern Rome did'nt have the same luck and superiority against Ottoman Empire and faced the extinction. Thus the Middle Age has ended and Early Modern Period began when the Constantine fell in 1453.
Same as Why doesn't the USA invade Iran
@@mojewjewjew4420 The only reason Only Trojan did achieve some success is because the Parthian empire was in a big civil war and was weakened at the time. but even then that campaign failed and they were kicked out of the region eventually
Ask Valerian (Roman emperor) who died in captivity in the hands of Persians.
-Why didn't Rome conquer Persia?
+uhhhh.... because they couldn't.
I love this Channel, Thanks for the education
Marcus Crassus tried at the same time when Caesar went after Gaul. He was captured and got molten gold dumped down his throat.
Roman emperors: imma invade Persia
Death: imma do a pro gamer move
Great vídeo 👏👏
If there’s one civilization that can be called true conquerors, it’s the Iranian/Persian civilization, for even though they are conquered militarily they end up conquering their conquerors culturally
İran safevi already Türk empire,persian is slave to turk 1000 years
Parthians (actually name of their House as Emperors was Arsacid, in Persian it is Ashkanian ) were also Iranians! they call themselves Shahanshah. Mehrdad the Scond even call himself Persian in his inscriptions!
Also Sassanids defeated Byzantine empire and capture most of Syria and Egypt after collapsing of Romans 👍 your video was perfect 💚
Before getting destroyed from the south
They took Egypt and Syria and where at walls of constantinople where they failed and got pushed all the way back into their own territory.
Until the first Arab invasions destroyed the sassanid Empire but Byzantium survived
@@mikewiltshire9121 Not really. The Arabs nearly destroyed the Eastern Roman Empire taking much of their territory.
My point was the Byzantines and Sassanids fought each other to the point of exhaustion. Their final struggle ended with Heraclius recovering all the territory that the Sassanids had captured. The Arab invasions captured Syria and Egypt but the Eastern Roman Empire existed for hundreds of years after. But the Sassanid Empire was completely destroyed and wiped out of existence.
How do you use those very high quality maps? Do you have a team who creates them? Great graphics too!
Much love for the vids (fervent watcher of the channel), but pls work on those pronunciations 😅
It's important to note that Persia (Iran) hasn't been militarily defeated on its home soil too many times from what I can recall. You have Alexander who created his empire at the expense of the Persian one, but he had defeated them before reaching Persia (again, Iran) and disposed of their king, hence his taking over of the empire was off of Iranian soil. The Romans tried, and failed hundreds of years later. So idk if an army could realistically defeat the Persians on their home soil without massive casualties that made the campaign essentially not worth it.
Ahem… Rashidun khalifates
@you hev squirrel not sure which side you're talking about. But most of Iranian cities were and are built on mountains.
It's a natural fortress.
Battle of Nahawand, was a glorious day
Agree. Persia is just difficult to hold due to its terrain. It is like Russia in that they can invite enemies in and let the land defeat them. The Romans did not have the logistics (without local support) to take Iran.
interesting that we are discussing why Romans didn't conquer Persia, and not the other way around, that pretty much sums it up imo.
No one had the balls to risk everything. Alexander risked everything; he got lucky it worked.
There was a legendary Hunchback he did snitch the 300 for future projects he got so strong they did not dare to do such aggain in those areas.
A very common misconception is that Ctesiphon, the city which the Romans sacked 5 times during 700 years, was the capital of the Persians. While the city was one of the most important in the Sassanian era, it wasn't really a capital in the conventional sense of the word, as Rome or Constantinople were for the Romans.
During the early Parthian era, Ctesiphon was no more than a small city, and it was important only in that it was the usual winter residence of the kings. By the end of the Parthian era the city was already sacked 3 times; it had grown considerably by then, becoming a major trading hub, but it still was no more important than Seleucia or Ecbatana, the summer residence of the kings. That's why Romans couldn't conquer the whole empire by just capturing Ctesiphon.
The Sassanids were much more centralised and so they began to govern from only one city, but that city was Estakhr, not Ctesiphon. It was only in the late Sassanian era that Ctesiphon became an actual capital, and by some accounts the biggest city in the world.
Also some of those 5 times don't sound logical to me
Especially carus . There is even a rock relief about bahram II defeating carus in battle and there are even some academic references about that event in iranica or academia .
Also during the time of narseh the roman army was not that strong to capture or raid the well defended city of ctesiphon . As the own Roman sources say , they were lesser than the Persian army which invaded Anatolia .
And let's not forget that ctesiphon was near the roman Borders , it was in the same distance Antioch was form the Persian borders . Which Persians sacked and captured even more than 6 times
Weren't the Tigris & Euphrates rivers fairly navigable and flowing in the right direction for the Romans to make good use of them ? As this region is also known as the fertile crescent and birthplace of civilization I don't see how you can say the Romans would be lacking in natural resources for their invasion up to this point.
Also they act as if the Roman Legions actually had to come from Rome, Anatolia/Near East was heavily populated and Legions were raised in provinces + auxiliaries.
Indeed they were.the rivers were used multiple of times too,for example in Trajan's expedition and Emperor Julianuses invasion respectively.
The only real desert part is roughly modern Iraq Syria border,after that literal Breadbasket of Middle east starts to be in your way.
Regarding military forces too,around 1/3 of Rome's legions were permanently tied down in the Eastern border.In General,this was not a good analysis and did not shed real light over the situation.
@@thenoobprincev2529 they thought it would be cute to copy paste the recent video on ottoman Safavid wars and get some extra credit, but they weren’t up to the task of an epic classical world war analysis like this warranted
@@thenoobprincev2529 Exactly this region modern day parts of Iraq/Syria/Jordan/Kuwait had been heavily populated and urbanized for centuries/millenium.
Surely large netwowork of roads/canals/rivers/trade routes.
Now admittedly invading modern day parts of Persian/Sassanid Empire (Iran) might have been a bit harder due to mountain barriers but then again mountain barriers hadn't stopped the Romans before.
"All roads lead to Rome" Legions were skilled enough to build roads/bridges/dams/ferries/ships/barges as they campaigned.
very good topic
The turning point in wars between Sasanians and Romans was a specific war we call it مشیک or Mshick in persion which occoured in the year 244 A.D.
Persian king was "Shapour The first" who had achieved the crucial war named بربلیسوس in 252
Iranic parthians
Are we gonna not talk about valerian who got captured and killed? No ok i thought that was important as he was the only roman emperor to gef captured.
@7:11, "to ensure [he, at least, stays alive]. haha!
"They either were equally strong or equally weak.." - Joey Tribbiani.
1 - Let's not forget that Rome was over 3000km away from Ctesiphon. A distance which largely nullified Roman superiority.
Thinking that Rome could have easily held a territory so far away from its core is quite a stretch, even during its expansive phase.
2 - Mesopotamia was an important land, but not crucial. In fact, the Romans' main target was to establish a trade route with India, which they eventually managed to do by going AROUND Mesopotamia and Persia, by sea. The incentive to invest in Parthian was largely lost.
Same reason they didn't conquer Scotland. Just too far away.
@@shaydowsith348 plus Scotland was just too damp and cold for the Romans. 😉
@@mikewiltshire9121 besides tin, and slaves what was there in Scotland to exploit?
Not to mention to handle the Germanic tribes of the North and the Carthage tribes to the south and the uprising all over the place. They make it seem like Rome couldnt handle the Persians, but its like if they didnt have the trouble on all sides they could slaughter any army at any time if they were never losing men on each front.
@@Barthaneous34 The Parthians and Sassanids are not like the Gauls, Celts, Iberians, without a regular army and system. They also lost most of their wars with Iran.
I have to make two points about the subject of this clip.
The first:
Armenia has always had a vassal king of the Parthian dynasty from the time of Mehrdad II, and it was never a Roman province, nor were its kings appointed by Rome (except in short years from 4 BC to 17 AD and then to 34 AD when Rome tried to interfere in Armenia affairs due to the weakness of the Parthian government, and after that, Armenia was occupied by Georgia for a while, until the defeat of Georgia and then Rome (Nero) in a war by Parthian, the Parthian Kings dynasty was re-established again in Armenia). After the defeat of Trajan and his death and the return of the occupied lands to the Parthians, the rule of a prince from the Parthian family was re-established also in Armenia. The complete official historical maps of Parthia, show Armenia like other semi-independent states east of the Euphrates River, in the Parthian borders.
The second:
Rome repeatedly and at the height of its power and in its purely offensive state, at the same time attacked the Parthians and Sassanids, suffered heavy and humiliating defeats that were unprecedented in all of antiquity.
In Crassus' attack on Parthia, twenty thousand Romans were killed and ten thousand Romans were taken prisoner, and Crassus and his son were beheaded.
Antonius then attacked Parthia with one hundred and thirteen thousand Roman soldiers, but retreated with twenty-four thousand casualties, and with humiliation and misery. He also lost in the second attack. Nero's army was also defeated, and despite the ridiculous show of awarding the crown of Armenia to its Parthian ruler, in practice Armenia was re-entered to the borders of Parthia.
But what you refer to as the defeat of Parthia and the conquest of the Parthian capital actually took place at a time when the Parthians were engaged in civil wars and did not equip enough manpower to confront Rome. In these wars, the Roman armies entered the Parthian cities and provinces without any real battle and without facing any serious resistance, and of course, each time these advances ultimately resulted in strategic defeat, casualties and retreat. Another point that proves this, is the final battle between Rome and Parthia. At that time, due to Caracalla's disrespect for the tombs and corpses of the Parthian family, they abandoned the civil war, united, and once again broked the noses of the dishonest Romans, forcing them to pay compensation and build all of the broke downs.
I will not say anything about the great defeats of the Romans during the Sassanid period and the killing of several Emperors and the captivity of Valerian along with his entire army of 70,000 Europeans.
But one who pays close attention to the historical documents written by the Greek and Roman writers themselves will see that Rome and Byzantium suffered the heaviest defeats from Iran at the height of their power. While their success has often been when Iran has been attacked by savage tribes from the eastern and northern borders or by a civil war for power between Princes.
Except him: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publius_Ventidius
great video
Steve Jobs had Persian ancestry. Ferrari is Roman. Somehow they have the world in their hands.
Eastern Military tactics also played a factor, it hurt the Seleucid Empire's ability to maintain its empire as well. The east relied on mobile horse archers which were difficult for the legion (and hoplites of Seleucid Empire) to stand up to. It played perfectly into guerilla warfare. Invading Iran was like invading Russia with Hitler and Napoleon, the enemy could just let you in and allow the land plus guerilla warfare consume your army.
Why romans simply deploy huge army of light cavalry to attack in the Deep of iranian plateau throught persis gate and diabal pass?
The Huns will try to defeat the Sassanids, but why are the Sassanian horsemen so heavy and fast when they have horse archers?
@@user-cg2tw8pw7j they have both heavy and light cavalry..i think that the huns where light cavalry,like the Arabs in 633
İran safevi already Türk empire,persian is slave to turk 1000 years
Me: i have to sleep
Brain: no lets find out why they didn’t invade persia
Insane how you didnt mention Valerians capture. Only roman emperor to ever die in captivity
Great facts!
Thank you for making clips about my country love you from iran🇮🇷🦁☀️🇮🇷
I sometimes wonder what would have happend if those two empires would have found a way to be friends.
Unfortunately the mindset of all empires is expansion, so there can never be a lasting peace between any two empires.
Good informations
Alexander with just a few tens of thousands of soldier could conquer Achaemenids but Rome with their hundreds of thousands of soldier couldn't conquer Parthian.
Because they couldn't.
3 Roman emperors were assassinated before invading Iran?! Well, well...now that's interesting...
Fun fact assasins creed actually was strted in Iran maybe thats the reason
I have an idea for Biden, Harris and Pelosi.
Please make more videos about Persian empires
and yet we stand strong in our ancient home. our ancestors are proud of us safeguarding the old persia and becoming a missile super power. our mighty army is ready to crush any Invader at any time.
☕️
Roman kings/commanders: i am going to invade Persia
After 2 secs
*Dies*
Persia defeat Rome, 10years later Rome defeat Persia.. at the end 450k Roman soldiers lost to 24k Madinah warriors...
This video doesn’t tell the whole story, one example is when 3 Roman emperors loosed the battle against shahpur I, one (emperor Gordian III (r. 238-244) of them get killed in battle, Philip the Arab loosed and did not dare to attack Sasanian again and Valerian captured by Sasanian Army.
The other example is when Sasanian took almost near capital of byzantine empire (eastern Roman) in time of Khusro II
Homa Katouzian, "Iranian history and politics", Published by Routledge, 2003. p. 128: "Indeed, since the formation of the Ghaznavids state in the tenth century until the fall of Qajars at the beginning of the twentieth century, most parts of the Iranian cultural regions were ruled by Turkic-speaking dynasties most of the time.
Alexander did it, The Arabs did it, The Seldjuks, the Mongols they all were successful in conquering Iran. Who ever came out of nowhere with lightning speed, strong army and determination was able to do it. Those with huge empires on their backs, bested with many problems were just like Persia, and lack the advantage of singlemindnenesss in their effort. On the other hands Persia did have natural defensive adventages. Even the modern great powers like Russia or British Empire stopped even before reaching Iran itself. Afghanistan was enough tough nut for them to crack, and Afghanistan, those were Persian Eastern provinces, most of the time. But whoever took Iran, Iran always quickly bounces back, becouse it cannot be ruled from the outside for long time. One has to rule Persia from Persia, It's local powerhouse, and nothing can change it. Much in the same way like China, you can conquer, but you must become one of them if you hope to stay.
It's easy to kill a sick and paralysed lion. Just one simple example: the great army of khorasan, biggest part of iran's army, did not engage in war with arabs since their leader became mazdaki. Arabs have mazdaki and roman leaders and had several times more troops than iranians. Read unbiased history. Without betrayal no iran conquest is possible.
Very good and logical comment.
Iranians simulate this situation to a legendary bird called Ghoghnus. They say at the difficult time they live under the fire like this bird waiting for the right time to come so that they can conqure it back again!
@@chek887 true, "simorgh" is also the name for this bird. And they have done this alot in the past, for greeks, zahhak,mongols,arabs; it doesn't even have to be for foreign tribes, the transition from ghajar traditions to pahlavi was also a major multidimensional change which happened in just about a century ago.
"Alexander did it, The Arabs did it, The Seldjuks, the Mongols " they conquered almost the whole world in their time
I'm so glad they didn't. The Greeks and the Romans were always distinct people with distinct language and culture but there was a lot shared. Persia being separate allowed it to shine and benefit the world over the millenia.
Could you please make a video about How did Rashidun Caliphate conquer Persia?