|
Sulla-Marius 88 posted:Is there an ask/tell thread about ancient Rome where people know what they are talking about and actually answer questions, TIA NO the internet makes you stupid
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 01:40 |
|
|
I know about Roman things, let me tell you about the Emperor who was killed by lightning.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:I know about Roman things, let me tell you about the Emperor who was killed by lightning. Man, the Final Fantasy series is getting really weird.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
How did the rest of the Italian peninsula get out from under Rome's (western flavor) control during the dying days of the empire?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:How did the rest of the Italian peninsula get out from under Rome's (western flavor) control during the dying days of the empire? Pretty much by being conquered by whichever flavor of the week Germanic tribe was in charge of the peninsula that decade. If that sounds flippant, remember that the Italian peninsula had been the core region of the empire for so long there was little effective cultural difference between it and the city of Rome by the time the Western Empire fell. What cultural differences there are today are mostly because of what happened in the 1500 years after the Western Empire collapsed. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 05:38 on May 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:How did the rest of the Italian peninsula get out from under Rome's (western flavor) control during the dying days of the empire? It...didn't, really. Italy stayed as more or less one entity through Odoacer's day and then in Theodoric's. It was the Byzantine-Ostrogoth Wars starting in the 530s that turned Italy into the charred hellscape no man's land we all think of...the aqueducts were cut in the 530s, for example, and Theodoric's court in the 520s still had a classically-educated Roman Senate that he appeased.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Yeah a lot of it was the empire's fault. They reconquered Italy, then lost parts of it again. Then the local imperial overseers were given a lot of autonomy, which brings us excellently named entities like the Exarchate of Ravenna. Continual warfare slowly divides Italy into city states as the smallest stable units of society.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Yeah a lot of it was the empire's fault. They reconquered Italy, then lost parts of it again. Then the local imperial overseers were given a lot of autonomy, which brings us excellently named entities like the Exarchate of Ravenna. Continual warfare slowly divides Italy into city states as the smallest stable units of society. Yeah, essentially Italy was the Byzantine version of Iraq, they went in hosed poo poo up and tore down the local power structure. After they pulled out alot of soldiers to deal with other poo poo the Ostrogoths rose back up, they surged in more troops and managed to defeat them after more fighting. Finally after they beat the Ostrogoth's down the Lombard's decided to come out of Italy and proceeded to conquer most of Italy besides a few places, and the Lombards were far less "romanized" than the previous goths. I was reading an interesting Byzantine history book which seemed to imply the Ostrogoths, Visgoths, Vandals and even the Franks paid homage to the Emperor in Byzantium, pretending to be the local representatives of the Roman Empire, while in actuality they were 100% independent while maintaining elements of Roman civilization. Justinian kinda soured that when he invaded them all and the wars followed by a plague almost as bad as the black death crippled western Europe.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Would sub-Roman Britain continue on the same trajectory to Welshness without the Anglo-Saxon conquests? I'm running a small LP right now, playing a game focusing on 5th century Europe, with the intent to convert the game over to Crusader Kings 2 once it's done. Right now in the game, Britain has emerged from the WRE and has successfully repulsed the Angles, Saxons and Jutes. There's been some talk already about what their fate might be, and I'm not sure if an organized sub-Roman Britain is likely to be more Celtic or Romantic by the Middle Ages. Was Britain Romanized to a decent degree anywhere by the late 4th/early 5th century? Without the conquest, would the Britons still end up speaking Welsh or something very close to it, or would there have been a larger Romanizing influence and the emergence of Brithenig or some such sort of British Romance language with a strong Celtic influence, rather than straight-up Celtic?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
Without the Anglo-Saxons, the Vikings would probably have still attacked most of the same places they did in reality, up to and including their long term rule of parts of the islands. Also, it's likely that the Normans would also have invaded eventually, due to sheer proximity in both cases. The results would probably be that modern English ends up having much more Norse influenced basic language with the addition of significantly more celtic influence, and we still get about the same French influence after the Normans invade. And depending on how the dice land, there might have been more mixing of Latin influence prior to the booster shot of Norman French.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
CK2 starts in 769, before the Vikings' attack on Lindisfarne or the Normans or any of those later movements, and it's that time, pre-Viking, I'm most interested in making into a half-decent start for a scenario. I can try to anticipate further Germanic movements later on, but I still got to have something good for a mid-8th century Britain sans the Saxons.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Therein lies the rub. Absent a Saxon invasion, does the Romano-British elite hold together their little kingdom in the face of Celtic revival? Probably, although a lot of it depends on how they fare in their confrontation with the expansionist Goths in Gaul. A long draining war means their power relative to the Celtic remnants is weaker. Having a unified Britain prior to the Viking invasions makes the Viking's job a lot harder, that's for sure.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:Money got Crassus pretty far (why he kept getting so many chances as he did), but Crassus had little personal charisma (as the world's biggest slumlord inevitably wouldn't) and less military experience (especially since Pompey "the Great" kill-thieved Spartacus). Also, didn't Crassus save Sulla's rear end during the Battle of the Colline Gate but never really receive his due for it? He was pretty much responsible for ending the Civil War and assuring Sulla's victory, but I don't think he ever got that Triumph he spent the rest of his career pursuing (along with lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of money).
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Unfortunate news. ISIS has captured about 1/3rd of Palmyra.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 13:24
|
|
|
Jokes on them, someday the whole Earth will be ruins, and they won't be around to smash them. 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
Palmyra just fell. They got the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Palmyra just fell. They got the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:I know that ISIS has done worse with murdering countless people and other human rights violations too numerous to count, but it still hurts to see priceless and irreplaceable historical buildings and artwork destroyed by barbarians who want to erase the past. Don't worry, I'm sure some of it will show up on the black market, then when things calm down we can buy it all and rebuild it.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Don't worry, I'm sure some of it will show up on the black market, then when things calm down we can buy it all and rebuild it. Carpet bomb it now so we can at least kill them for their near future crimes.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Should've let the Syrians keep their chemical weapons. This would be a perfect use for them.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Breaking News: all members of Daesh suddenly fall victim to fatal illness called "Zenobia's Curse". IS sympathizers appear paralyzed, unable to accomplish even the most basic tasks, in what seems to be a parallel ailment known only as "Gallienus Syndrome".
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
ISIS: the Fourth Rome?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 10:16
|
|
|
Kellsterik posted:ISIS: the Fourth Rome? Dibs on Fifth Rome!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
I just read Justinian's Flea, and near the end it talks about Totila's taking of Rome, and how he started destroying monuments. Belisarius sent him a letter asking him to stop, saying that they were of value to all mankind and to future generations, who would curse him for destroying their heritage. He listened and stopped it. '"Did Totila," the letter asked, "wish to go down to posterity as the man who destroyed the most glorious city of the world?"'
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
Considering that ISIS are basically the Islamic equivalent of Rapture Ready, I doubt they believe in future generations of mankind.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I just read Justinian's Flea, and near the end it talks about Totila's taking of Rome, and how he started destroying monuments. Belisarius sent him a letter asking him to stop, saying that they were of value to all mankind and to future generations, who would curse him for destroying their heritage. He listened and stopped it. gently caress yeah I wanna go down to posterity as the man who destroyed the most glorious city of the world! 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 15:30
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:'"Did Totila," the letter asked, "wish to go down to posterity as the man who destroyed the most glorious city of the world?"' Yeah but then a few hundred years later the Romans were totally smashing all the statues they could get to try and win victory against Islam. That said they then got pretty well edited out of history so I guess we can see if destroying idols and icons works out better for daesh or not.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
Belisarius was way better than those Iconoclast dicks though.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 16:29
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Belisarius was way better than those Iconoclast dicks though.
|
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Yeah, essentially Italy was the Byzantine version of Iraq, they went in hosed poo poo up and tore down the local power structure. After they pulled out alot of soldiers to deal with other poo poo the Ostrogoths rose back up, they surged in more troops and managed to defeat them after more fighting. Finally after they beat the Ostrogoth's down the Lombard's decided to come out of Italy and proceeded to conquer most of Italy besides a few places, and the Lombards were far less "romanized" than the previous goths. I was reading an interesting Byzantine history book which seemed to imply the Ostrogoths, Visgoths, Vandals and even the Franks paid homage to the Emperor in Byzantium, pretending to be the local representatives of the Roman Empire, while in actuality they were 100% independent while maintaining elements of Roman civilization. Justinian kinda soured that when he invaded them all and the wars followed by a plague almost as bad as the black death crippled western Europe. Basically everyone paid homage to the Byzantium Emperor till Charlemagne and some places paid it even nominally till the Battle of Mazikert basically crushed Byzantium power (Veince, Hungary, Serbia, various other Italian city states, steepe tribes would all pay homage form time to time)
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
The crusaders on the first crusade paid homage to the Emperor only for them to flip out and accuse him of breach of contract when his army ran away upon hearing the false news that the crusader army had been defeated.
|
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
In fairness it was less 'false news the army had been defeated' as 'the Emperor's legate was informed the Crusaders were going to kill him and kind of skipped town on the seige of Antioch, then the guy that informed him managed to make himself king of Antioch as the Emperor didn't have representatives at the conclusion of the seige.' Possibly, turns out history is still very messy when it's relatively close. Unless you were thinking of the second Crusade?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2015 18:18
|
|
MrNemo posted:In fairness it was less 'false news the army had been defeated' as 'the Emperor's legate was informed the Crusaders were going to kill him and kind of skipped town on the seige of Antioch, then the guy that informed him managed to make himself king of Antioch as the Emperor didn't have representatives at the conclusion of the seige.' Yeah my retelling is simplistic, I don't think anyone can be sure of exactly what happened there except that relations between Taticius and the princes were extraordinarily bad already and so it was easy for him to believe people were going to kill him, and they definitely propagandised his departure as a way of giving themselves an excuse not to give back the land. I was more just trying to point out that homage to the emperor was something that lasted after the translatio imperii in 800 in certain odd historical scenarios by transcribing the wiki page on it without trying to remember it better.
|
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
I think there was definitely an understanding that the East was still really the province of the 'Greeks', at that stage the cities of the Levant had been controlled by the Empire until fairly recently and I think that, while they might reject his authority over themselves, there was still a recognition that he had a strong claim to the land and that the Emperor was an authority figure. But then it's very much getting into medieval politics and that's in some ways more confusing than the Roman Republic, weirdly.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
I believe there were people in the west giving nominal homage to the emperor right up to 1453. Most western rulers were doing so up until Charlemagne at the very least, then many switched to the HRE. You can roughly track how well the empire is doing by how many people are bothering to give homage to Constantinople. Back in 700 they're still the big kid on the block who can gently caress you up if they really want to. By 1300... eh.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
ofc even in 1100 in a some places the homage people were giving to even a local ruler was laughably notional at best hello france
|
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
I think it's really hard to understand premodern politics for us westerners because it's just so alien to think of these governments with no authority. The government may not be a daily concern for most of us most of the time but the idea of it simply being irrelevant, and having no means to assert itself in any way, is so weird. Obviously there are people still living in those types of places. I'm just assuming everyone here is from some sort of functional country since we're sitting around on the internet talking about poo poo from thousands of years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 02:52
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I think it's really hard to understand premodern politics for us westerners because it's just so alien to think of these governments with no authority. The best drinking game for pre-modern history is that every time a book mentions that a law was passed to deal with something but it had no effect, take a shot.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:The best drinking game for pre-modern history is that every time a book mentions that a law was passed to deal with something but it had no effect, take a shot. You could play that with the modern era as well, as long as you don't mind a little alcohol poisoning.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 01:40 |
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I think it's really hard to understand premodern politics for us westerners because it's just so alien to think of these governments with no authority. The government may not be a daily concern for most of us most of the time but the idea of it simply being irrelevant, and having no means to assert itself in any way, is so weird. Honestly I find it weirder once you realise how government authority worked in the purely personal feudal sense. Really came home to me listening to the History of the Crusades podcast when Richard I comes along and supports Guy for the throne of Jerusalem because, while he wasn't of particularly high ranking nobility, was an indecisive, untalented and uncharismatic miliary leader and had just managed to screw up badly enough that he had lost nearly every city in Jerusalem aside from the one controlled by someone who was opposed to his rule; he was from the same area of France as Richard and so nominally owed fealty to him (and thus Richard had responsibility to him) and both claimed descent from a water fairy in French mythstory establishing familial ties. Like, Patron-client relationship I can pretty much grasp. It's a relatively straightforward money/support relationship with some more complex sociological baggage. But I cannot really grasp how 'You're family is from an area I control and we both claim descent from a water fairy so I guess I have to overlook your incompetence, flimsy claim to the throne and the utter disaster you've helped bring about' works.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2015 13:20
|
|