Thread replies: 9
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 1494974632881.png (166KB, 858x675px) Image search:
[Google]
166KB, 858x675px
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-third-century-china-saw-rome-a-land-ruled-by-minor-kings-3386550/
>…The ruler of [the Roman Empire] is not permanent. When disasters result from unusual phenomena, they unceremoniously replace him, installing a virtuous man as king, and release the old king, who does not dare show resentment.
>they unceremoniously replace him, installing a virtuous man as king, and release the old king, who does not dare show resentment.
What exactly were the Chinese referring to? We're talking about the 3rd century AD so this is clearly the Roman Empire, not the Republic. So what process of disposing of "minor kings" do they even refer to, when the Roman Empire was a despotic regime where power passed through hereditary lines?
>>
>>3011634
Literally fake news
>>
>>3011634
Perhaps they're referring to the soldier emperors, albeit in a garbled way.
>>
The writer was clearly projecting a system he wanted in China.
>>
It's a reference to the crisis of the third century.
>>
>>3011634
Who cares, they were retards with wooden shitty structures and culture, the Greco-Roman world was superior in everything: infrastructure, production, culture, military: everything
>>
>>3011634
They're just misunderstanding the barracks emperors.
>they unceremoniously replace him
Is actually a bunch of low level officers getting pissed at their commander, murdering him when he's pissing by the road somewhere and installing one of their own as imperator by throwing a purple cloak onto him and lifting him up on their shields.
>>
>>3011634
China had very little contact with Rome so it is inevitable that there would be serious gaps in their understanding of Roman culture.
>>
>>3011823
Or more likely. The crisis of the third century
Thread posts: 9
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1