Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Inheritance of romans

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Poll Question: Which one of these empires is the real heirs of the romans
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
19 [86.36%]
3 [13.64%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
RomiosArktos View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
  Quote RomiosArktos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Inheritance of romans
    Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 18:29
The Byzantines always perceived themselves as the only people who had the ancestral  right to be called Romans.
On the other hand the western Europeans who also considered their empire heir to the western Roman empire and themselves descendants of the Romans of the west often quarelled with the Byzantines over these matters.

This is the account of Liutprand of Cremona ambassador in Constantinople  of the Holy Roman Emperor of the west:

On this same day he ordered me to be his guest. Not; thinking me worthy, however, to be placed above any of his nobles, I sat in the fifteenth place from him, and without a tablecloth. Not only did no one of my suite sit at table, but not one of them saw even the house in which I was a guest. During which disgusting and foul meal, which was washed down with oil after the "manner of drunkards, and moistened also with a certain and other exceedingly bad fish liquor, he asked me many questions concerning your power, many concerning your dominions and your army. And when I had replied to him consequently and truly, "You lie," he said, "the soldiers of your master do -not know bow to ride, nor do they know how to fight on foot; the size of their shields, the weight of their breast-plates, the length of their swords, and the burden of their helms permits them to fight in neither one way nor the other." Then he added, smiling: "their gluttony also impedes them, for their God is their belly, their courage but wind, their bravery drunkenness. Their fasting means dissolution, their sobriety panic. Nor has your master a number of fleets on the sea. I alone have a force of navigators; I will attack him with my ships, I will overrun his maritime cities with war, and those which a-re near the rivers I will reduce to ashes. And how, I ask, can he even on landresist we with his scanty forces? His son was there, his wife was there, the Saxons, Swabians, Bavarians, were all with him: and if they did not know enough and were unable to take one little city that resisted them, how will they resist me when I come, I who am followed by as many troops as
'Gargara corn-ears have, or grape-shoots the island of Lesbos,
Stars in the sky are found, or waves in the billowy ocean

When I wished to reply to him and to give forth an answer worthy of his boasting, he did not permit me; but added as if to scoff at me: "You are -not Romans but Lombards." When he wished to speak further and was waving his hand to impose silence upon me, I said in anger: "History, teaches that the fratricide Romulus, from whom also the Romans are named, was born in adultery-; and that he made an asylum for himself in which he received insolvent debtors, fugitive slaves, homicides, and those who were worthy of death for their deeds. And he called to himself a certain number of such and called them Romans. From such nobility those are descended whom you call world-rulers, that is, emperors; whom we, namely the Lombards, Saxons, Franks, Lotharingians, Bavarians, Swabians, Burgundians, so despise, that when angry, we can call our enemies nothing more scornful than Roman-comprehending in this one thing, that is in the name of the Romans, whatever there is of contemptibility, of timidity, of avarice, of luxury, of lying: in a word, of viciousness. But because you do maintain that we are unwarlike and ignorant of horsemanship, if the sins of the Christians shall merit that you shall remain in this hard-heartedness: the next battle will show what you are, and how warlike we."

http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/source/liudprand1.html
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 18:41

How could such a good-general--Nicephorus Phocas--be such a bad diplomat .

-Akolouthos

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 22:47
Originally posted by Imperator Invictus

Maju, what you said is interesting because Romania (Ρωμανία) is the official name for the Byzantine Empire during the Middle Age. 


Romania in Wikipedia directs you to Romania (Rumania) the modern state at the Black Sea. But there's another entry:


Romania may refer to:




So it has the three meanings.

Of course, apart of the Rumanians, no linguistic Romanians call themselves Romans or Romanians but their languages are called Romances and their antique architectonical style Romanic. The don't call themselves Latins either most of the time but they do speak dialects of Latin. You can't also ignore that Italian national origins can only go back to the Roman republic, when Italy was first constituted as a national entity, with partial and later total Roman citizenship, while the rest of the world (including Cisalpine Gaul) were provinces (external domains) or barbarian lands.

While Greeks (Byzantines) can claim political inheritance, Latins can claim all the other aspects: cultural and ethnical specially but also legal and religious. Under the Visigoths for instance, who kept sort of an aprtheid, Romans (natives) were ruled by Roman law, while Goths were by the Gothic corps. Non-Germans were all the time called Romans, the only exception being Basques, who had stabilished a totally independent territory with a totally different legal tradition and a totally different language, being surely still Pagan for the most part and remaining for long out of the feudalist economic system.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Mar-2006 at 23:03
Originally posted by Akolouthos

How could such a good-general--Nicephorus Phocas--be such a bad diplomat .

-Akolouthos



And a greedy ruler. This sort of greed is what causes the fall of empires. Don't blame Venice, the Arabs or the Turks... blame the greed of the rulers, blame the lack of humilty.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
RomiosArktos View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
  Quote RomiosArktos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 05:04
Originally posted by Akolouthos

How could such a good-general--Nicephorus Phocas--be such a bad diplomat .

-Akolouthos



Nicephoros was a great emperor and indeed he brought many victories to his people(that is the meaning of his name) but he was too quick tempered and it seems that he didn't get on with the people of the west.
He was prejudiced against the western Europeans
Liutprand was also very prejudiced against the Byzantines.Especially when he describes their nasty diet habits






Back to Top
The Chargemaster View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Kishokan

Joined: 02-Feb-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
  Quote The Chargemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 05:43

Only the Byzantine empire. The "Holy Roman Empire" was one German Empire and this empire is founded many years after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The western state fall, but the eastern state survive. And the Eastern Roman empire was found of the romans themselves! And moreover - in the first centuries of the existing of the Byzantine empire the official language of the imperator court and of the empire was the latin language. The early byzantine law was the law of the Ancient Roman empire, but with a christian influence.

And this is interesting to me: When the Byzantine empire(the imperator court) becomes more greek than latin - after the arab-muslim invasion or before this invasion? When the greek language become an official language in the Byzantine empire?



Edited by The Chargemaster
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 06:28
Hi,
However, before being Emperor of the HRE, the Emporors were always
crowned king of the Romans. And until Charles V, they were
crowned in Italy. Moreover, their ties with the Pope were very close.
Finally, even if germanic and medieval culture were very important in
Emperor's mind, one can't denie the Roman tradition was extremely
present; if only by their attachment to the very title of Emperor.
So Constantinople of course... but HRE's still in the race.
Bye.
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
Bashibozuk View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 01-Feb-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 316
  Quote Bashibozuk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 10:44

While Greeks (Byzantines) can claim political inheritance

What makes them able to claim political inheritance? Greeks can only claim cultural and religious inheritance from Byzanthines, but political is definately for Turks, not others...

Garibim, namima Kerem diyorlar,
Asli'mi el almis, harem diyorlar.
Hastayim, derdime verem diyorlar,
Marasli Seyhoglu Satilmis'im ben.
Back to Top
Herschel View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 30-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
  Quote Herschel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 10:56
What makes them able to claim political inheritance? Turks can only claim cultural and religious inheritance from Byzanthines, but political is definately for Ottomans, not others...
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Mar-2006 at 13:17

Originally posted by Bashibozuk

What makes them able to claim political inheritance? Greeks can only claim cultural and religious inheritance from Byzanthines, but political is definately for Turks, not others...

Come on. Though it is debatable who "inherited" the traditions of the Romans, one group who demonstrably did not is the Turks.

-Akolouthos

Back to Top
The Chargemaster View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Kishokan

Joined: 02-Feb-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
  Quote The Chargemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 06:04
Look here about the information and MAPS of these empires: http://4umi.com/image/map/rome/19maps.htm
Back to Top
Herschel View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 30-Oct-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 172
  Quote Herschel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 09:08
The link didn't work for me. I think you're referring to this site, though: http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~s285238/Roman/19Maps.html
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 10:09
Originally posted by The Chargemaster

Look here about the information and MAPS of these empires: http://4umi.com/image/map/rome/19maps.htm


Well, the site could have well drawn the Holy Roman Empire of Charles V as well (from Peru to Slovakia, from Philippines to the Netherlands)... Don't know why the fall of Constantinople should be any final line.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
The Chargemaster View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Kishokan

Joined: 02-Feb-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
  Quote The Chargemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 11:18

Originally posted by Herschel

The link didn't work for me. I think you're referring to this site, though: http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~s285238/Roman/19Maps.html

Yes, that`s right.

Back to Top
RomiosArktos View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 13-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 309
  Quote RomiosArktos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 17:47
Originally posted by Maju



Well, the site could have well drawn the Holy Roman Empire of Charles V as well (from Peru to Slovakia, from Philippines to the Netherlands)... Don't know why the fall of Constantinople should be any final line.


Charles' Empire was indeed a vast empire, the Holy Roman Empire at its peak.
But Charles didn't do something that he should have done as a holy Roman Emperor,his troops sacked Rome in 1527 and he didn't prevent it from happening.


Edited by RomiosArktos
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 18:08

Originally posted by RomiosArktos

Originally posted by Maju



Well, the site could have well drawn the Holy Roman Empire of Charles V as well (from Peru to Slovakia, from Philippines to the Netherlands)... Don't know why the fall of Constantinople should be any final line.


Charles' Empire was indeed a vast empire, the Holy Roman Empire at its peak.
But Charles didn't do something that he should have done as a holy Roman Emperor,his troops sacked Rome in 1527 and he didn't prevent it from happening.

Charles couldn't prevent it from happening.  The troops were unpaid, and that was starting to be the biggest early modern problem.  Wars became lengthy and destructive; ways to pay for them became the largest problem of the sixteenth century, other than the Reformation.

For several reasons, I think the Sack of Rome was one of the most important events since 1500.  It was not a "decisive" battle, and there were no great documents or historic noble intentions, but it was a big determining event in how the sixteenth century developed.

The Reformation was the largest social/intellectual factor of the century, but close behind was the way in which war changed...and how that shaped Europe.

 

Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Mar-2006 at 18:54
Hi,

When in Spain Charles learned, just after his son's birth, Rome had been
sack, he cancelled all feasts and prayed for three days.
Charles de Bourbon, the French general of Charles mercenaries himself
didn't want Rome to be taken but his unpaid troops forced him. Finally
what kind of town is it the one that cannot even resist three days of
siege?

Bye.
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 00:45
Originally posted by RomiosArktos

Originally posted by Maju



Well, the site could have well drawn the Holy Roman Empire of Charles V as well (from Peru to Slovakia, from Philippines to the Netherlands)... Don't know why the fall of Constantinople should be any final line.


Charles' Empire was indeed a vast empire, the Holy Roman Empire at its peak.
But Charles didn't do something that he should have done as a holy Roman Emperor,his troops sacked Rome in 1527 and he didn't prevent it from happening.


So what?

I wasn't talking morality but the dimension and importance of his empire. Probably the all-times maximum of Rome.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
The Chargemaster View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Kishokan

Joined: 02-Feb-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
  Quote The Chargemaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 04:09

Originally posted by Maju

Don't know why the fall of Constantinople should be any final line.

The Easterh Roman Empire have been founded by the romans themselves. And not just "founded" - it was the eastern half of the ancient Roman Empire. The Western half fall in 4th september 476 year. The Eastern half fall in 1453 year. In 29 may 1453 year Constantinople was captured and the last byzantine emperor was killed.  That`s all.

The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation(Latin -  Sacrum Romanum Imperium Nationis Germanicae) have been founded in 962 year. This was one political state with very different SOCIETY than the ancient Roman Empire. I think that it will be similar, if someone found today some empire with a title like: "Great Roman Empire of some Nation" or other title of that sort...

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Mar-2006 at 04:11
No doubt, the Byzantine Empire is the real heir of the Roman Empire and not the Holy Roman Empire as its neither Holy nor Roman nor Empire...thats why the Roman Empire didn't end in 476 as some textbooks claim but it ends in 1453...the sad fall of Constantinople....
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.110 seconds.