How long did the Roman Empire survive?

Originally posted by Aelfgifu I do not buy these artificial links between the Roman empire and later ones. The only link between the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire is a lot of wishful thinking, same for any that came after. The only direct continuum of the Empire was the Byzantine empire, and that ended well and good with the Ottomans. Any other claims are just desperate attempts to create continuity where there is none.

Perhaps you are right, but still, that "wishful thinking" was a crucial political agenda of the following era.

 Technically, in true political terms- the last remnant of the Roman Empire fell with the fall of German and A-H Empires after the wwi (or in 1922 if we calculate the Ottoman empire as one of the pretenders- and in many ways we rightfully should).
Other remnents of the Roman empire were- West Roman empire, East Roman (Byzantine) empire, Bulgarian empire, Sultanate of Rum, Latin Empire in Constantinople, Empire of Trebizond, Serbian Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Russian Empire and French Empire (I think- that's about it).
So it lasted from 27 BC to 1918 (1922).


Edited by Larus - 02-May-2007 at 11:10

Originally posted by Constantine XI The truth of the matter is we cannot answer this question without first defining one term: Roman Empire. Roman Empire may be defined as the autocratic state, highly militatarised, using the prefecturate administrative structure inherited from the republic, ruled largely by an Italian elite at its core, multiethnic and multilingual in the people it ruled. Because of this definition, I would put the end of the Empire at the reign of Heraclius. It was not the coming to power of Heraclius which ended the Roman Empire, but rather the events which occurred during his reign which so transformed its character that we cannot truly call it Roman any longer. During this period (610-640 AD), the Empire finally dispensed with Latin and Greek became the true language of the law and administration. It was during this period also that the Empire began to lose much of its multi-ethnic character and transformed into a Greek state. The prefecture structure of administration and organisation was finally gotten rid of - instead the distinctly Byzantine thema system replaced it. The rulers were now truly Hellenic rather than Roman in their tastes, language and world outlook - with a strong fusion of Christian ideas also. While the Empire may have had a chance to rest and then go on to recover her former Western territories, this ideal was shattered forever by the eruption of Islam onto the world stage. No longer was the Empire the Roman hegemon, losing and reconquering territory as had been the fashion for the previous four centuries. Instead she was the Byzantine Empire, continuously engaged in a struggle with Islam for her very survival. The notion of Roman centrality and universalism died during the reign of Heraclius.

The truth of the matter is we cannot answer this question without first defining one term: Roman Empire.

Roman Empire may be defined as the autocratic state, highly militatarised, using the prefecturate administrative structure inherited from the republic, ruled largely by an Italian elite at its core, multiethnic and multilingual in the people it ruled.

Because of this definition, I would put the end of the Empire at the reign of Heraclius. It was not the coming to power of Heraclius which ended the Roman Empire, but rather the events which occurred during his reign which so transformed its character that we cannot truly call it Roman any longer.

During this period (610-640 AD), the Empire finally dispensed with Latin and Greek became the true language of the law and administration. It was during this period also that the Empire began to lose much of its multi-ethnic character and transformed into a Greek state. The prefecture structure of administration and organisation was finally gotten rid of - instead the distinctly Byzantine thema system replaced it. The rulers were now truly Hellenic rather than Roman in their tastes, language and world outlook - with a strong fusion of Christian ideas also.

While the Empire may have had a chance to rest and then go on to recover her former Western territories, this ideal was shattered forever by the eruption of Islam onto the world stage. No longer was the Empire the Roman hegemon, losing and reconquering territory as had been the fashion for the previous four centuries. Instead she was the Byzantine Empire, continuously engaged in a struggle with Islam for her very survival. The notion of Roman centrality and universalism died during the reign of Heraclius.

Yeah i just hate kaiser for some reason and he popped up in my head when the caesar wannabe personialities came up.

And kaiser the german . A great deal of europe  continued to  have the  holy roman empire theme  if even  partly.

Originally posted by Aelfgifu   As for the Eastern Empire. I am not too well into it, but in my opinion it would be the same. The moment the last Greek/Roman Empreror was replaced by a nongreek/roman. (would that be Sulyman?)

I would also say 146BC - 1453AD. Just wanted to see what the majority believes.

I am taking Henri Pirenne's views and say that not just Rome, but the classical world ended when Islam conquered North Africa and the Near East which has ruptured the Roman mare nostrum

hmmm......it depends what you mean by the empire, if you mean a Roman state ruled by an emperor then it starts with the reign of Augustus in 27BC and goes too the fall of Constantinople in  1453AD or a little bit further to the collapse of the "empire" of trebizond in 1461 AD, if you go by the collapse of the empire of trebizond then that is 1488 years! if you mean the state of Rome starting with the foundation of the city, which according to legend took place in 753 BC (historians are unsure exactly when Rome was founded but date it to the same century as the myth) and ending again with either 1453AD or 1461AD with the slightly larger of the two potential time frames bieng 2214 years!!!! If you mean Roman culture then the number is far larger as others have pointed out that its still going but a culture is not an empire so the answer has been provided (in some cases approximately) by this information.

Regards, Praetor.