Ah yes, the eastern """Roman"""

The saddest part about byzzabooism is that them clinging to the roman continuity completely overshadows everything else about this pretty neat nation and its testament in history. Byzantium deserve better tha those EU4 babbies.

kys

>>3045914
>t. Roach

>>3045914
Yeah, because they really were a crucial part of "Roman" Empire, it even became the capital and heartland of Roman Empire, Roman emperor literally call it "Nova Roma". I don't see the problem here. Do you think your moronic words are more credible than "Roman" emperor?

>>3045914
Is hating the byzantines a new trend on /his/? Is this the new >H>R>E meme?

>>3045914
Greece was part of the Roman Empire longer then it had been an independent entity.

>>3045914
latin italians stopped being the end-all-be-all of what it meant to be roman when they started colonizing most of europe, north africa, and half the middle east, and when we saw emperors from each of these places and great roman heroes with ethnic origins all over the place, from the illyrian dynasties to the iberian dynasties and even african dynasties, rome was a multicultural setup long before the west and east came apart.

People's argument is that as soon as you stop having Rome, you stop having the roman empire, and semantically thats true. But in all actual meaningful metrics they were as "roman" as they ever were going to be, there is no "next step" that makes them suddenly "true romans." Rome stopped being the capital and lost most strategic purpose in the late empire, it literally wasnt even important anyway and was only a symbolic city. Some emperors literally never stepped foot there.

As far as the religious arguments, christians have been divided in the roman empire since the inception of christianity, everyone everywhere has always had their own special snowflake sect, this traces back far before the split. Were they not romans before the split even though they had different religions the entire time anyway? Early churches never agreed on anything.

These arguments are always shallow and semantics-based. It fails to grasp the true spirit and history of the roman empire, as a truly multinational union of provinces where everyone contributed to the central hub in their own way, and his central hub was constantinople long before the split. Remember that Constantine was a western caesar in charge of gaul, and his capital was the city with his namesake in the east.

The fact that a city which was irrelevant to the empire long before any official split suddenly matters when its gone is like a child wanting his untouched toy back after some other kid wants to play with it. It had lost meaning until it was gone, but it only ever was symbolic

File: 1494556780235.jpg (198KB, 1024x1752px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1024x1752px

>state called the Roman Empire whose people call themselves Romans
>it is somehow not the Roman Empire and the people are not Romans
Explain

>>3046423
It's because Greek keep in LARPing around saying that they were Romans and shit and that actual Roman Catholic Italians are sub-human. It's a push back against all the Byzantine wank and butthurt with the 4th crusade.

>>3046507
well thats because the byzantines had true blood relations to the last emperors and are the official, legal inheritors. Rome was nothing if not a legal state that loved its laws and regulations, romans sued each other just as much as we do today. Any true roman would respect the legal heirs, you'll find your womanish attachment to italy is actually counter to the true spirit of romans, who saw the whole world as the dominion of terminus, that everywhere would eventually be roman.

>>3046490
hear hear

>no turk shit poster in thread
I knew the guy was fake

File: 1497195754664.png (611KB, 699x699px) Image search: [Google]

611KB, 699x699px

>>3046423
>Is hating the byzantines a new trend on /his/?
oh my sweet summer child!

>>3046490
wasn't the real meaning behind the nomenclature of the Roman Empire closer to "the Empire of the Romans" rather than a direct link of the name of the empire to the city of Rome itself?

wouldn't that make holding Rome irrelevant as long as you are linked to the "Roman Empire" by other means?

>>3046507
>>3047420
>>3046423
>>3045955
>>3045914


>Empire
>Full of Roman citizens
>Not the Roman Empire
?

1)'REEE ROMANS ARE ONLY FROM THE CITY ITSELF' stopped being a thing following the Social wars
2)All members of the empire (e.g. all the freeman) became Roman citizens from 212 onwards (Edict of Caracalla)
3)Following the Pope is hardly what makes one 'Roman'. If it was, then you'd be dismissing the classical Rome as not roman

>>3045914
that is correct
what is it that you wanted to say?

>>3046490

>latin italians stopped being the end-all-be-all of what it meant to be roman when they started colonizing most of europe

Actually, it was even before that. All of Rome's found myths seem to emphasize the idea that no matter how far you go back, there is always going to be another group of people who got there before you, and even the Italians were not exempt from this.

ah yes, i guess when the african american calls themselves ancient egyptian they actually were ancient egyptian yes

File: Justinian555AD.png (195KB, 2111x1144px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 2111x1144px

>>3045914
Aside from intentionally trying to delegitimize the Eastern Roman Empire in order for the Pope to claim influence over his Holy Roman Empire, how does the same government ruling over the same territory as the Empire not make it so?

For the final 150 years of the Western/Eastern Empires, Constantinople was seen as the better capital, with even the Western Empire abandoning Rome in favor of Ravenna.

My question is just that, how does having the exact same state, government, and law system not make it the country that it was founded to be just because an influential bishop of the Church says it's not?

>>3047678
>influential bishop
You mean the head of christianity, right?

>>3047699

You realize that the Roman empire predated Christianity by a substantial margin, right?

>>3047706
>>3047699
friendly reminder that the roman empire died with constantine

>>3047712

Only if you have an extremely limited view of the Roman empire. One which the Romans themselves wouldn't have shared.

>>3047735
sure and the ottoman empire is a legitimate sucessor to the roman empire btw

>>3047699
but that's the thing, The Roman Empire, even after accepting Christianity as the state religion, still exercised the policy of Caesaropapism, where the Emperor was the authority of the church, even moreso than the Bishop of Rome, This policy continued all through the history of the Eastern Roman Empire as the Emperor still held authority over the Ecumenical Patriarch and was the de facto leader of the Orthodox Church. The Pope simply rejected that and declared the Pope to be the supreme authority of their own Holy Roman Empire by making the Holy Roman Emperors subservient to the Pope.

The Pope's actions to exercise authority over Emperors was an exact reversal of the Christian Roman practice, and it was that direct challenge to the Emperor in Constantinople that led to the Schism, among other catalysts.

>>3045968
Turk posters support the idea of a contiguous Eastern Roman Empire because it lets them claim to be the successor to Rome.

People against the idea are butthurt Italians, Germans, Catholics and "German"-Americans

>>3047712
*theodosius

Constantine didn't convert till his death bed

>>3045914

Hot Take: Historians will look at the United States before and after the 1960's the same way we view the Roman: Byzantine dichotomy.

Multicultural California is our Constantinople and Obama is our Heraclius.

>>3048065
no one cares amerifat, stop posting dumb shit

>>3048065

In other words they share geographic and (to some degree) political continuity but the underlying cultural shifts make them rather separate entities.

File: 1492045346799.jpg (26KB, 239x268px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 239x268px

>>3048065

>>3048065
nonce, all but one of our federal entities are east of the mississippi. plus california is pretty much a vassal since you're so incompetent at managing your resources and borders

>>3048149

> all but one of our federal entities are east of the mississippi

I meant it more in the sense that Constantinople was deliberately founded as a "new" Christian, Greek-speaking city away from the more Latin, and still at that time more traditionally Pagan Rome. Theodore Roosevelt ( let alone a George Washington), wouldn't recognize modern California as being American anymore than Cato the Elder would recognize the City of Constantine as Roman.

> plus california is pretty much a vassal since you're so incompetent at managing your resources and borders

I'm a Texan.

a

>>3048090

If Americans decided to start speaking French would they still be Americans?

>>3048190

Except Latin was still the official state language, language of the military, and language of the aristocracy for centuries after its founding.

>>3048315

In Roman society, you weren't considered to be an educated person unless you were fluent in Latin AND Greek.

>>3048308
bad comparison. The east had always predominantly spoken greek. Were they not romans before the fall of the west just because they spoke greek?

The Roman Empire died when it converted to Christianity since that was the point the state chose to become something that wasn't Roman

>>3048418
wow that was really original Gibbons you should write a book about it

>>3048424
he's right though

>>3047677
t retard

>>3046423
Newfag
>E
>R
>E

>>3045914
What it meant to be a Roman changed through history. By the time of thr split the Byzantines fit firmly within the definition of Roman

>>3045914
DELETE THIS

>>3046499
WE

>>3048940
WU

>>3046423
yes, /his/ is now on /v/ contrarian levels because the Byzantine Empire is more popular than before.

>>3048065
>libtards are STILL salty

>>3046423
>new

byzzieboos are always shunned on /his/ for a good reason

>>3049135
>for good reason
Which is?

>>3049139
/his/ posters like to start to the historical orthodoxy of the 1950s/60s and get angry if you bring about revisionist views or point out the new academic consensus

>>3049135
>byzzieboos are always shunned on /his/ for a good reason
They're not though. Please go to >>3041019 and notice how people are talking about "Byzantine" history without REEEEEE'ing. The general /his/ consensus has always been that Byzantium = Rome, and the newfags who periodically start REEEEEEing at it always get BTFO.

Like this thread.

>>3048065
>Multicultural California is our Constantinople and Obama is our Heraclius.
Nope, they're not at all. ERE banned faggotory and they didn't have tranny toilets and fluid genders degeneracy.

>>3049390
They did however have a third gender.

Eunuchs. That weird place between man and women

>>3051221
Eunuchs are just castrated "men", that's not "third gender", they didn't call themselves third gender, and they're castrated not because of "identity crisis" lunacy.

>>3051335
I'm not saying they did it because 'I'm not a man!'.

It's just that culturally and socially, they were treated as not male, nor female.

>>3048065
>>3058149

Libtard salty much?

>>3045955
>EU4 babbies
CK2 babbies ?

>>3045914
>Eternal
>Roman
>Empire

isnt it just bunch greeks larping as romans anyway, why does christards really want to claim rome's name that much

File: 8a4.jpg (30KB, 316x202px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 316x202px

>>3045914
>Germans LARPing as Romans
>Greeks LARPing as Romans

>>3053511
this, i dont get why christians, both the orthodox and catholic flavour wants to be associated with empire that killed their jew god

>>3053520
because christianity is roman to the core. 99.9% of what modern christians do is rooted not in some unknown jewish backwater, but in roman society. Rome spread it everywhere, rome codified it, rome set up the rituals that people still follow today. Its impossible to separate rome from christianity

>>3047699
No, we mean the bishop of Rome. There was no "head of Christianity" at that time other than Jesus Christ. Papal authority came way later as an invention. Making him the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

>>3053542
why even bother being christian then if youre not even going to follow the original

>>3053551
>the original

christianity has always been highly decentralized. It was unique everywhere it sprung up because it changed depending on where it was. There was never "one true faith," it has always been a clusterfuck. Those bishops never agreed on fucking anything. Wars were started over semantics, I kid you not.

>>3053542
>christianity is a roman invention

wouldnt that makes the whole thing fake then

>>3053562
well it is all fake but thats irrelevant. Everything you think is christian is actually a roman tradition that predates christianity and was later changed to fit with christianity. Its so ridiculously bastardized that I cant help but laugh every time some calvinist acts like he has it all figured out. I mean, Jesus was basically an anarchist, using him to prop up family values and the state is fucking hilarious, but romans morphed it into something that worked for them and us in the same way. What jesus taught is not compatible with your social structure or life choices. You cannot be a capitalist and a christian, but you can if its the bastardized roman christianity.

>>3053511
>greeks larping as romans.

Define 'greeks'.

Genetically? No, it was a mix of hellens, slavs, anatonials and such.

Culturally? No, it wasn't modern greek culture (which looked back to ancient greece), nor was it reverting to pre-roman culture.

The culture remained Imperial and Christian (like the Late Western Empire), albeit written in medieval Greek instead of Latin.

Instead of Greeks, it was just what was left of the Roman Empire.

>>3053572
It really isn't.
The 'everything is just copied from pagans!'.

It's a nice meme, but research has shown that a lot of it isn't.

And if anything, Jesus was just a revolutionary jew, aimed at destroying the power the priest class had over jews. If it was the 'original' stuff, it'd just be Liberal Judaism

>>3053572
>>3053542
>>3053511
>baby's first history book

>>3053637
>expecting any better from 4 chins

>>3049135
Absolutely false, Byz hate was always from butthurt HREfags

>>3049135
Hi otto

>>3053637
get back to plebit

>>3053637
papadopulos pls

>>3045914
I am a Turk but I cant stand this bullshit:

1) intelligentsia of Romans were always Greeks
2) Greek was the scientific tongue
3) Greeks formed the theory of military, bureaucracy and nobility that Roman society employed

In short, Roman Empire was a bastardization of 1000 years of Greek social tradition.

If anyone deserved the mantle Byzantines did, by far. Romans themselves were sheepfucking alcoholics.

Shitalians can't into originality.

File: download.jpg (4KB, 125x95px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 125x95px

>>3054458
Costantinople was a fusion between Roman identity and centralism and Greek culture al language. Ancient Greeks never had any idea of a unified state for themself (cities states), the Roman teach them how to not kill each others in petty wars.

So, as long as i am a Byzantine fanboys, nobody can deny that they were Greek speaking Romans. Language and land aside they had virtually nothing in common with the classical Greeks

>>3054515
> Ancient Greeks never had any idea of a unified state for themself (cities states),

This isn't true, Athens made a bid for it, and the Peloponnesian war was fought to prevent Athens from creating a pan Hellenic empire. The Spartans had a somewhat reactionary desire to stay in the era of city states forever and ended up causing the stagnation that led to the later conquests by both Macedon and Rome.

>>3054553
Athen league was not a centralized empire, rather a league of vassals cities, who were forced to give tributes to Athenians and help them in they wars.

The Macedonians dominance was similar, the cities were vassals under a Macedonian-leading league, not part of the Macedonian state. Only Rome endend the indipendence of the Greek cities by forcefully annex Greece into the Republic

>>3054515
This, pretty much

>>3054458
>>3054515
I agree with both of you. You two all have fair points.

>>3046499
I can call myself Roman too, but it doesn't make me Roman.

>>3045968
>everyone who doesn't share my idea is a t*rk

>>3057018
Yeah, but you aren't a roman citizen. Which most of the ERE was.

>>3047699
The bishop of Rome was just one of five patriarchs. The seat just got entitled due to being the only patriarch inside the territory of the former WRE which netted it immense influence in Western Europe.

>>3057018
Your argument is retarded and the position that ERE wasn't Roman is as silly as claiming that people from Texas or California aren't americans.

Roman empire died with christianity

>>3045914

Greeks larped as Romans, absolutely

File: 00aac35e-e7e2-408f-82f1-03dc810ac993.jpg (94KB, 745x496px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 745x496px

>>3045914

>Imagine a place full of Mexican Americans, speaking Spanish and call their country Estados Unidos de America.

I wouldn't want to see that abomination.

>>3058763
It's the eurangutan fate. America belongs to the Amerindians. You are being replaced. Deal with it.

>>3058763
this

>>3058763
It's more
>USA invades Canada
>Intergrates it
>Divides in two because of corruption issues
>Parts of old USA get eaten by mexicans
>Canadian + north american states are all that remains of USA
>Still call themselves USA, as it's still the US government with US citizenship
>Some Mexican warlord declares he's the USA now

>>3045955
It's a Roman rump state

>>3045914

When you think about it, Turkey is the most valid modern day successor to the Roman Empire, by following the line of

Roman Empire
| |
| |
West Rome East Rome
|
|
Byzantines
|
|
Ottomans
|
|
Turkey

Why did Rome become so irrelevant? What caused it to decline to not even being worthy of being capital

any doesn't really give a toss about the byzantines one way or another man in?

>>3054575
>Athen league was not a centralized empire, rather a league of vassals cities, who were forced to give tributes to Athenians and help them in they wars.
so exactly like persia
that's how most it not all empires of the era worked

>>3046499
>state called the Holy Roman Empire whose people call themselves Holy Romans
>it is somehow neither Holy, nor Roman, nor truly an Empire
Explain this

>>3061016
>Holy
Numerous wars with the Papacy, their supposed holy protector
>Roman
Roman meant 'citizen of the Roman empire', which the barbarian people's lacked. Just having Rome doesn't make you Roman.
>Empire
More a lose confederation that kept fighting each other

>>3060513
t. Mehmet

>>3060513
You messed that chart up, it's:

Roman Kingdom
|
|
Roman Republic
|
|
Roman Empire (which fell in 1204)

>>3058763
Tough luck gringo :^)

WE

>>3060931
It's geographically defensible position also made it difficult for information and trade to travel to. For a gigantic empire, the extra weeks or months it would take for a rider to reach rome rather than mediolanum or Constantinople can be the difference between a catastrophic defeat and an organized, contained response.

>>3064341
Are Romans

byzzieboos needs to be gassed

Roman Empire
| |
| |
West Rome East Rome
|
|
Seljuks
|
Ottomans
|
|
Turkey

>>3045914
>>3045955
Does anyone actually legitamately not see this as cheap b8?

File: 1497908850860.jpg (63KB, 592x492px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 592x492px

>>3047877
>A non-European people Speaking a non-European language with their non-European culture and non-European religion thinks its the successor to not 1 but 2 European founded Empires

>>3066520
sounds like byzantium to be honest, if the eastern """roman""" empire is roman then so is the Ottoman empire

>Eastern

>>3066525
Where in Europe are the Turks originally from, lad?

Seljuks were more Roman than Byzantines hence Turkmenistan, Turkey and Azerbaijan have more claims on Rome than Gayreece
t. Turk

>>3066530
Finland

File: Mehmed II the Roman.jpg (26KB, 460x640px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 460x640px

This guy is more ROMAN than any Byzantine """""""""""emperor""""""""" (actually Byzantine Empire was too small to be called an Empire so let's call it duchy from now on) will ever be

>>3045914
But most of Western Rome used to speak greek. I mean greek in rome was language of elite

>>3066813
lmao no, they spoke latin

>>3067292
>>3066813
They spoke Germanic and were blond haired.

>>3060513
Roman Empire
Byzantine Empire (Used-up and dilapidated West given to retard northerners like a bone is given to a dog)
Russia (Last successor of Byzantine court ran away to Russia after the fall of Constantinople - the bare ecclesiastical structure of the Byzantine church remains under siege in Istanbul but the substance fled to Russia)
Finland (The White Russian Army, the monarchists, were the successors of Rome at this point, and they fled to Finland after losing Russia)

The true successor to the Roman Empire is Finland.

>>3067397
t.varg

>>3045914
T.Nordcuck

>>3066531
Seljuks were Persian. Anna Comnena didn't use the word Turk to refer to the Seljuks once, but only ever 'Persians'.

>>3066539
>duchy

Latins out in force

>>3070578
>latins

you mean true romans

Charlemagnes legitimacy as the "Roman Emperor" was based on the "Byzantines". His and Popes argument was that Irene couldn't be the Emperor so the title was given to Charlemagne. So if "Byzantium" isn't Rome, neither is the HRE.

What /his/ pseudohistorians fail to realize is that there was no Greek hellenic identity in "Byzantium" like there was before and after "Byzantium". They were an unbroken continuation of the Roman Empire in every possible way, they considered themselves Romans and all were Roman citizens. This is in stark contrast to the HRE and Ottomans. They both had their own tribal identities that were in every way primary, while their secondary "Roman" identity was limited to sometimes using Roman titles. Roman titles that were legitimized by the real Romans, the Byzantines.

>>3071673

Wow...so....HRE......was NOT Roman.
Damn. This is controversial.

>>3046499
> a state called Macedonia whose people call themselves Macedonians
>it is somehow not Macedonia and the people are not Macedonian
Explain

>>3071683

It's a race thing.
FYROMians aren't Mediterranean and so can't be Macedonians aka Greeks aka Romans.

>>3071683
Well, you see:

'Byzantium' had the same government and administration as late Rome.

FYROM is slavs who are claiming hellenic fame and history as their own

>>3061016
That's just the thing, they didn't call themselves Romans or anything like it

>>3053627
All that shit about Christianity is literally true, though.

>>3072499
this board is overrun with christians and I just choose to ignore them.

>>3053624
yeah, and those early sects had little to no influence on the bishops centuries later, who proceeded to bastardize christianity so that it could work within the social structure of an empire with pagan foundations. Winter holidays? The idea of a designated "church," as opposed to just meeting in homes like real christianity suggests? Romans. Spring holidays? Romans. Sermon structure? Romans. Church leadership? Romans. Literally "how to be a fake christian starter pack" type of christian was born in Rome, and thats the kind of christian most people are.

I went to church for 18 years, was very close with my pastor's family, and he told me straight the the romans butchered christianity and he actually tried his best to distance his teachings from it, for instance we didnt meet in a real church. They were what you would call Calvinists, so Ive been taught early what the catholics did to christianity.

>>3072684
>heretics make up lies about opposing beliefs
who would have guessed

File: maxresdefault.jpg (159KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1920x1080px

>>3045914
Who never heard of the "Holy" "Roman" "Empire" ?

It was called "Holy" because its only goal was to enrich the Church, and it was named "Roman" because of its master aka the Pope, finally it was an "Empire" because it was (((multicultural))) like the USA.


The
>Holy
>Roman
>Empire

was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire

>>3072748
good argument, really made me think

>>3045914
It WAS the roman empire, just run by greeks (thus why it was shit).
Roman =/= Latin

File: 1490971866867.jpg (34KB, 396x385px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 396x385px

>Japan moves capital from Kyoto to Tokyo
>still Japan
>Brazil moves capital from Rio de Janeiro ro Brasilia
>still Brasil
>Russia moves capital from Moscow to Saint Petersburg
>still Russia
>Roman Empire moves capital from Rome to Constantinople
>it's suddenly an entirely different country

Really makes you think

>>3072875
>moves capital from Rome to Constantinople
that's not even remotely close to what happened

>>3072784
>implying heretics deserve an arguement

>>3072908
youre right, rome wasnt even the capital by the time it switched to Byzantium/constantinople, which by the standards of certain peopld ITT means that as soon as Ravenna became the capital it stopped being the roman empire

>>3072845
Imagine the USA founded by Anglo Britishs but be overrun by Mexican larpers

>The Eastern Roman Empire continued on as the Byzantine Empire until 1453 CE, and though known early on as simply `the Roman Empire’, it did not much resemble that entity at all.

http://www.ancient.eu/Roman_Empire/

Roman Empire [27 BC-476 AD]


https://www.britannica.com/place/Roman-Empire

they called themselves Romaioi, or Romans. Modern historians agree with them only in part. The term East Rome accurately described the political unit embracing the Eastern provinces of the old Roman Empire until 476, while there were yet two emperors. The same term may even be used until the last half of the 6th century, as long as men continued to act and think according to patterns not unlike those prevailing in an earlier Roman Empire. During those same centuries, nonetheless, there were changes so profound in their cumulative effect that after the 7th century state and society in the East differed markedly from their earlier forms. In an effort to recognize that distinction, historians traditionally have described the medieval empire as Byzantine.

>https://www.britannica.com/place/Byzantine-Empire

>>3074059
Greeks BTFO

>>3072952
lol

>>3072908
Yes it is.
>the empire was divided in two, with the western half having its capital in Ravenna
>the western half collapsed, leaving the eastern half the successor/continuation of Rome
>brainlets still struggle with this concept
Lmao

>>3074059
>it did not much resemble that entity at all
Kind of irrelevent, the Roman Empire barely resembled the Roman Republic, which barely resembled the Roman Kingdom.
If anything, the Byzantine state is closer to the Roman Empire than that of the Roman Republic.

>>3074000
IRL
>Rome is founded by Latins
>expands to include the entire Mediterranean basin, rules over Celts, Germans, Greeks, Illyrians, etc
>conquer eastern Mediterranean, which then becomes the richest and most important area of Rome
>move its capital to Constantinople to be closer to the action
>western part falls to Germanic barbarians leaving what's now Turkey and the Balkans under the Emperor
>some German warlord then declares himself the new Roman Empire
>/his/ brainlets will then argue Rome (only based in Anatolia with stronger Greek influence) is not a continuation of Rome
Now imagine if
>USA is founded by Anglos
>expanded to include all of north America, rules over Germans, Hispanics, Injins, Irish, Scottish, Italians, etc
>conquers Mexico, which then becomes the richest area of the USA
>move its capital to Veracruz to be closer to the action
>northern part falls to Canadian barbarians leaving what's now Mexico under the President
>some Australian PM then declares himself the new American Empire
>/his/ brainlets will then argue the USA (only based in Mexico with stronger Hispanic influence) is not a continuation of the USA

>>3066525
>conquer the previous state
>we are now that state
vs
>BE the previous state
>we are still that state
woah, really made me think

>>3058917
>Mexicans
>Amerindians
Wew, forget Greeks larping as Romans. Spanish settlers literally went native and started larping as Aztecs.

>>3070974
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutio_Antoniniana

>>3045914
Nice borders.

>>3074059
>unlike those prevailing in an earlier Roman Empire
>During those same centuries, nonetheless, there were changes so profound in their cumulative effect that after the 7th century state and society in the East differed markedly from their earlier forms. In an effort to recognize that distinction, historians traditionally have described the medieval empire as Byzantine.

And what were these? Holy shit I used to have respect for Britannica but this is some grade A mental gymnastics. The Roman Empire changed several times throughout it's existence, but those changes did not make it "not roman". And please don't try to make any arguments for the word "Byzantine". The reason it is used is that early modern historians were still influenced by papal and "holy roman" propaganda.

>>3066525
Nope. >>3066525 and >>3071673. The Turks conquered Rome, and much like the Germans they still primarily saw themselves as Turkish and the only thing Roman about them was that they used Roman titles sometimes

>>3045914
I am going to point that after War of the Allies (91-88 BC) to be Roman increasingly moved to a model of citizenship rather then a geographic or ethnic matter. After the Liberators' civil war the rate that citizenship was given to non-Latins greatly increased and during the first few years of Augustus rule almost all Greeks became Roman citizens.

Attacking the roman continuity on a ethnic or geographic grounds is also attacking the Roman empire being based around citizenship. It is attacking its statues of being the first great power to be be defined by citizenship rather then subjectship. It is attacking the most interesting part of its nature.

>>3075560
I agree with his man.

These fuckers have been blown out all thread so they think posting some wiki article is going to save them. No substance at all to that encyclopedia entry.

Good threas

>>3074059
t.pleb

>>3074059
Byzzieboos blown the fuck out

The Greeks of the Byzantine Empire were aware of their Greekness. By the end of the Byzantine Empire many Greeks had even started to turn towards classical Greece - like some kind of proto-renaissance. Roman was never more than a political title.

Byzantium was not some kind of liberal society where citizenship was the only thing that mattered. People divided and judged each other by tongue and religion as they've always done. byzantine empire was an unique entity i dont know why all the people here are so stuck up about them being the same as the roman times.

"Well, now that the US has lost Washington to foreign invaders, I guess it'll have to call itself something completely different."

>>3081129
Its funny because Washington DC is actually more relevant to the United States than Rome was to the late Roman Empire. At least the federal government is actually in Washington DC, literally nothing of importance or anyone of note was in Rome. Rome is to Ravenna as DC is to New York City if New York City also had the federal government there.

>>3046168
You should

>>3074059
BTFO
T
F
O

>>3048065
If you're trying to imply Obama was bad with the Heraclius comparison
you might want to try use a different emperor

>>3075467
God tier

>>3046490
this

This thread (like all fucking threads here) is basically just a
>MY OPINION
>POP HISTORY
>An actual researched answer that gets ignored
>PEOPLE SCREAMING KEK

File: Roman_Reigns_bio--5c14cb3de4bd5254d51975d58576d828.jpg (55KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 900x506px

>>3046499
>Is called Roman Reigns
>Isn't Roman
>Doesn't Reign
>Romans don't even Reign anymore
Explain

Stop bumping this shit thread

>>3087238
>only fucking thread that has good answers

Would you prefer it dies and people make 8 more 'lol dey aren't roman!' threads and get blown the fuck out in each?

>>3053572
if you want to be orignal/root of it, Jesus was just a reformist jew who wanted to remove the priest caste from power.

All the extra shit is from his followers

>>3087409
you have to admit there is a lot of antiestablishment teachings straight from the mouth of Jesus. He says you should leave your family and all your possessions, that a rich man has a very hard time getting into heaven, that the state will always be evil and therefore there is no hope for it and people should rule themselves, that human kings will always be corrupt. Whether they instigate violence or defend themselves from it, violence is a part of human civilization, and jesus teaches pacifism. Pacifism and loyalty to a state cannot coexist when the state forces you to become a part of warfare. You are a potential target because you are owned by a ruler with enemies, even being a part of society risks breaking the teachings of Jesus, and he knew this from the start, thats why he told people to break away from society. Satan rules all human organizations, this is why he was able to tempt jesus with ruling them, because you cant tempt someone with something you dont have. All earthly power is corrupt and no true christian should pursue power or support a human ruler. Christianity began basically as a rejection of jewish society, the first christians view themselves as autonomous and would not swear loyalty to the romans because it was against their religion to worship something from this Earth. Jesus never intended for his teachings to become institutionalized and rigidly structured, it was always meant to be a personal relationship that you explore with those close to you. Jesus didnt just want to tear down the priest, he didnt intend to tear anything down at all really. His attitude was clear: theres no point in trying to fix something that is inherently broken. Ignore earthly powers and follow only the word of God, that is a true christian

t. ex-calvinist

>>3047712
*aurelius not having the balls to disinherit his son

>>3057057

>everyone who doesn't share my ideas is a Byzaboo

bump :)

>>3087482
And if the faith had stayed that way, Europe would have been fucked up in the arse (Catholicism was great for maintaining some of the Roman administrational structure in the West)

t. someone who cares for religion as its role as a social support, and not due to believing in fairy tales

>>3081129
>implying yankies are american

File: 1450306518310.gif (918KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

918KB, 400x300px

>>3089563
>>implying yankies are american
Um

>>3047670
Basically all of history emphasizes that.

>>3055398
Something you'd never hear on /pol/, good work guys.

>>3060001
Sounds right to me.

>>3075388
This is getting confusing.

>>3089582
>anglo, european, culturally dead
>killers of the one true american culture

>>3090432
We're not all faggots

>>3089582
the fuck is that

>>3052501
>stellaris babu

>>3075400
>Implying anyone here knows history

>>3069054
Seljuks are Persian as much as England was French when French was lingua franca of British court.

>>3048308
Yes.

>>3053572
You have to be over 18 to post here.

>>3046507
>Roman Catholic Italians are sub-human

This is true though.

>>3049135
/his/ is a new board.

>>3069054
Why did the Seljuk sultans use Turkish names though?

>>3095455
you dont have an argument and neither do the other 3 people who responded to me.

fuck off

>>3053572
>everything is just pagan shit!!!

Or, I know, hard concept for you, a lot of it developed over time, by the numerous christian cults while they were underground.

And before 'BUT DEY AIN'T WHAT JESUS WANTED!!!', the guy was a reformist jew. All your shit about him from the bible is already fucking corrupted by going through the eyes of his supporters and followers.

>>3097682
>a lot of it developed over time

no specifics though since youre just talking out of your ass.

>the guy was a reformist jew

yeah you keep saying that and responding to me multiple times pretending to be multiple people, but you still dont have any arguments. I like how instead of responding to the post youre actually responding to (the one I just made) you respond to my original post again and pretend to be a different person.

>All your shit about him from the bible is already fucking corrupted by going through the eyes of his supporters and followers.

and what is your alternative? There are no other sources. You speak as if you have some hidden source about jesus that obly you know about, when in reality your speculation is merely the "safe" summary for people who want to feel like theyve got the "insider info," well fuck off with that because I happen to know there are no such sources that would confirm your statement at all.

You post with charisma, hoping it will make up for the shallowness of your knowledge and arguments, but you have still yet to make one good point.

>>3097764
Actually, I've only just been this poster >>3097682+>>3053624 but feel free to assume everyone who disagrees is the same person.

>no specifics
Well, considering my statement was that a lot of the church's modern practises came about during its underground period and later organisation? And for examples, when christmas/easter are celebrated (which aren't just stolen from pagans, unlike what people assume).

>hurr hurr you act like you have some other source!

Never said that. The point is that people using biblical texts as a 'jesus acted this way and it's the word of god and you have to use the original versions to get the LORDS word' ignore the fact that the events that happened are already filtered. We don't know if they're actually accurate, we just have to assume.

>>3046423
They're hated for a good reason, they didn't pay debts.

>>3074059
How will greeks ever recover?

>>3097857
>>3097846
>>3094106
samefags
justs top you don't have any arguements stop bullying romans :(

>>3047678
It's saddening that the Justinian borders don't get that bit of North Africa + southern france and eastern spain.

>no mare nostrum :c

>>3057018
>being this dumb

>>3097846

For the vast majority of their run they were net creditors, not debtors.

>italians and pals burn the capital and destroy billions of GDP potential
>surprised debts cannot be paid
>they already took everything of value

According to Latin legend, the Romans originally came from the area of Troy. Constantinople is in that neighborhood, so it was in a sense, the true homeland of the Roman people. People who claim the Roman state ended when Italy fell to barbarism don't care much for the classics.

>>3048507
not really