|
PittTheElder posted:The author of this map seems not to understand the difference between the greater than and less than signs. 50 is the minimum
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:46 |
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I think that actually would go the other way; since being identified as a true city involves extra politicking, that means that higher up governments will drag their heels on acknowledging that a settlement has gotten big enough that they'd have to reckon with. And sometimes you'll have the reverse where places do extra politicking to get their privileges before they have the right to them, or maintain their old privileges after they've fallen from grace and their population has shifted elsewhere. Historically though it used to be the reverse. In a premodern era before strong central governments, if you were a peasant on the land you were either somebody’s serf, owing feudal obligations, or you were a freeholder, without obligations but often without any political rights. Medieval and early modern cities actually had far more democratic and representative governments, so cities and city states often had far more developed concepts of citizenship or residency rights or permissions than the countryside, because political structures other than “that one guy runs poo poo” existed in cities and so levels of access to those structures - ranging from the ability to be one of the guys who runs poo poo through able to vote for them through not voting but can’t be asked to leave to allowed to stay, for now, if you pay, but that can change, all had to regulated in cities centuries earlier. Also, more prosaically, cities had walls, and so there had to be ways to control who was getting let inside them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 20:00
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:50 is the minimum But Lower Mesopotamia and the Hejaz were never part of the Roman Empire for anywhere approaching 50 years. Neither with Germania Antiqua
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 20:09
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:The author of this map seems not to understand the difference between the greater than and less than signs. I think "approximate" covers both greater than and less than? And people out there believe that the Roman empire ended with the Western Empire. Just the other day at lunch I had one coworker not know about Carthage and another insisting that the Roman Empire ended in the 400s even after I brought up the Eastern Empire. And I didn't even claim that the Ottoman Empire was Rome or anything. But yeah, I agree that it counts, it's just that a lot of people kinda forget that the fall of Rome the city was not the fall of the entire empire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 21:27
|
|
|
If you want people to think of you as the Roman empire you need to start with making sure you have a Rome
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 21:33
|
|
|
You don't have to be in Italy to make Italian food, you don't have to be in Rome to rule a Roman empire
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 21:36
|
|
|
Sparkling Roman empire
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 22:17
|
|
|
BonHair posted:I think "approximate" covers both greater than and less than? lots of people are wrong about things
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 22:31
|
|
|
The annoying part is that nobody on earth at the time or even long after disputed that the eastern empire was Rome. Even in the 1300s, Dante calls Justinian a Roman Emperor and includes the East in his quick overview...until 800 anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 22:48
|
|
|
hmm, struggling to see the pattern
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:13
|
|
|
If they add Austria and Italy, it’s a full blockbuster and they win this round.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:19
|
|
|
TinTower posted:If they add Austria and Italy, it’s a full blockbuster and they win this round. there's norway in the north too
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:26
|
|
|
BonHair posted:I think "approximate" covers both greater than and less than? Eh, I mean the eastern empire was pretty different. I see they stopped using Latin as an official language around 600 AD. Sure there wasn’t any conquest and it was a reasonably amicable split / transfer between the two sides (with wars here and there), but to me saying it’s the same continuously would be like saying the British are still top dogs in the world because America is the leading country of the world, and DC is the new London. I mean that’s a kinda lovely analogy that I know people in this thread can blow holes in, but you get the sentiment. Like no one says the Egyptian empire is continuous from 3200 BC to the present day, and they’re still in the same place, similar ethnically, and a few people still speak Egyptian (Coptic), and some actually spoke it normally up until like 1700 AD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:29
|
|
|
drk posted:hmm, struggling to see the pattern oh hell yeah 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:30
|
|
|
Saladman posted:the British are still top dogs in the world because America is the leading country of the world, and DC is the new London.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:30
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Eh, I mean the eastern empire was pretty different. I see they stopped using Latin as an official language around 600 AD. Sure there wasn’t any conquest and it was a reasonably amicable split / transfer between the two sides (with wars here and there), but to me saying it’s the same continuously would be like saying the British are still top dogs in the world because America is the leading country of the world, and DC is the new London. the roman empire was the same roman empire, but england isn't usa and the modern egyptian republic isn't the ancient kingdom
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:33
|
|
|
The Roman Empire fell in the 200s. Then it got back up again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:50
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Eh, I mean the eastern empire was pretty different. I see they stopped using Latin as an official language around 600 AD. Sure there wasn’t any conquest and it was a reasonably amicable split / transfer between the two sides (with wars here and there), but to me saying it’s the same continuously would be like saying the British are still top dogs in the world because America is the leading country of the world, and DC is the new London. there was a major invasion in the 600s that broke the continuity of egypt and caused some shakeups within the roman empire
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:54
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Eh, I mean the eastern empire was pretty different. I see they stopped using Latin as an official language around 600 AD. Sure there wasn’t any conquest and it was a reasonably amicable split / transfer between the two sides (with wars here and there), but to me saying it’s the same continuously would be like saying the British are still top dogs in the world because America is the leading country of the world, and DC is the new London. The Republic was pretty different from the Empire too (though not as different as modern popular culture would have you believe), that doesn't mean they were different states. The Christian Empire was pretty different from the pagan Empire too, still the same state. The later Empire continues the same organizational principles, the same institutions, the same philosophy, and the same ethnic identities that had existed in the combined Empire for centuries, with no break in between, because they're the same state. The analogies aren't just kinda lovely, they're nonsense, because nobody in those places is even claiming to be the continuation of the same state. In the American case they are quite loudly stating "we are not the British, we are something else". You'll notice the population of the later empire never does this, for good reason. BonHair posted:I think "approximate" covers both greater than and less than? Those symbols don't mean that though! And yeah I know a lot of people think that but also that opinion is dumb and bad, and need not be taken seriously.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 23:55
|
|
|
Approximate is ~
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 00:08
|
|
|
Approximately greater than fifty, by which of course I mean “strictly less than fifty”.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 00:11
|
|
|
NYC is the fifth Rome.Jean-Paul Shartre posted:Historically though it used to be the reverse. In a premodern era before strong central governments, if you were a peasant on the land you were either somebody’s serf, owing feudal obligations, or you were a freeholder, without obligations but often without any political rights. Medieval and early modern cities actually had far more democratic and representative governments, so cities and city states often had far more developed concepts of citizenship or residency rights or permissions than the countryside, because political structures other than “that one guy runs poo poo” existed in cities and so levels of access to those structures - ranging from the ability to be one of the guys who runs poo poo through able to vote for them through not voting but can’t be asked to leave to allowed to stay, for now, if you pay, but that can change, all had to regulated in cities centuries earlier. Also, more prosaically, cities had walls, and so there had to be ways to control who was getting let inside them. Yeah so that means that there's an extra level of admin to go through when a medieval town or village organically grows pretty big. The area and people have to be extracted from whoever's dominion that they are under, which historically most medieval lords would not be happy about and may put up a fuss. It's not an automatic process. Nor is it automatic that every town can build its own fortifications, that's another thing that the lords will sometimes get angry about. There were times when kings would try to stop various subjects from building fortifications, which may have been difficult, but building big defensive walls could still be an inflammatory move for a polity, It's also a misnomer to think of medieval local governments as "democratic". I'm pretty sure that some towns could even have lord-appointed mayors, but even the self-governing ones would have a whole host of options other than democracy to turn to. Drawing lots was more popular than it should've been. With medieval republics especially, don't think "republic" means "democracy". Often their leaders were chosen through ridiculously complex methods that were mainly just opportunities for all the powerful families to give their input so that the government would mainly be a weird balance between all the families (especially since if one family got too much prominence they could just declare themseves hereditary rulers, like the Medici did in Florence). Sometimes even the official top head honcho position title would even be rendered hobbled and nearly powerless, making it a bit more confusing where the actual seat of power was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 00:32
|
|
|
Yeah if your bottom category is "greater than 50" then you got something wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 00:36
|
|
|
the last caesar died in the netherlands in 1941
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 00:45
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:NYC is the fifth Rome.  Rome Constantinople Wandering HRE Capital The Hague New Amsterdam
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 00:55
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
mods ban this denier of the true fourth rome: belgrade
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 01:04
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Yeah so that means that there's an extra level of admin to go through when a medieval town or village organically grows pretty big. The area and people have to be extracted from whoever's dominion that they are under, which historically most medieval lords would not be happy about and may put up a fuss. It's not an automatic process. Nor is it automatic that every town can build its own fortifications, that's another thing that the lords will sometimes get angry about. There were times when kings would try to stop various subjects from building fortifications, which may have been difficult, but building big defensive walls could still be an inflammatory move for a polity, We often vastly overestimate the size of historical populations, which then leads to an overestimation of the size and complexity of governmental apparatuses in all areas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 02:09
|
|
|
Archduke Frantz Fanon posted:mods ban this denier of the true fourth rome: belgrade 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 03:01
|
|
|
i wanted to make the argument that biden is the true roman emperor and wilmington the 5th rome via the dupont family but they left france 4 years too early 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 03:22
|
|
|
Turks still refer to the ones in Turkey as Romans, since the modern identity of Greek was a creation of nationalists in the late 18th century and only became a thing in the 19th after independence. Rhomaioi was still a living identity into the 20th century, it didn't really go away until after 1923. The people who had been calling themselves Romans for a solid 1500 years, most of that living in the state of Romania (Land of the Romans) were, indeed, Roman.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 05:34
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The analogies aren't just kinda lovely, they're nonsense, because nobody in those places is even claiming to be the continuation of the same state. In the American case they are quite loudly stating "we are not the British, we are something else". You'll notice the population of the later empire never does this, for good reason. Archduke Frantz Fanon posted:mods ban this denier of the true fourth rome: belgrade
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 06:16
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:nobody in those places is even claiming to be the continuation of the same state. In the American case they are quite loudly stating "we are not the British, we are something else". You'll notice the population of the later empire never does this, for good reason. Sure, but personally I’m not convinced that "Ottoman Empire is Rome" line of thinking, and I don’t think many other people do either. Of course the East-West break was more gradual, but Constantinople in 800 AD was ethnically, linguistically, geographically, and culturally descended from a different civilization than that of Ancient/Imperial Rome, even if culturally they were essentially cousins.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 09:32
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:A core aspect of being British/American is insisting that you're a special and unique freedom-loving boy, and not at all associated with those other guys, so Americans loudly insisting they're not British is them carrying on an important British tradition. Perhaps it could be aided by doing a rename for the export version, Belgrade can be the fourth Rome and NYC can be seiken densetsu 5
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 10:10
|
|
|
Rome died when everyone started wearing pants.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 11:30
|
|
|
Byzantium was Rome in the same way that Taiwan is China.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 11:33
|
|
|
The city of Rome has always been the only Rome and the dark ages are an entirely inaccurate description. On an unrelated note the city of Rome went from having more than a million people to less than twenty thousand living among the ruins while still being one of the major settlements remaining in western europe. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 11:59 on Mar 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 11:53
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:The city of Rome has always been the only Rome  
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 12:19
|
|
|
If you think about it the Gaza strip has bit less than twice as many people as the city of Rome did during it's ancient height. Makes you think. The mythical 6th Rome?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 12:32
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Of course the East-West break was more gradual, but Constantinople in 800 AD was ethnically, linguistically, geographically, and culturally descended from a different civilization than that of Ancient/Imperial Rome, even if culturally they were essentially cousins. That's only if you're comparing them to the pagan Rome of Caesar and Augustus, but of course centuries had passed since those two, and even by the 5th century AD the empire was very different. Greek had been the second language of the elite since the late Republic, and it had been the lingua franca of the Roman East. Roman identity wasn't based on ethnicity, and as more people learned latin and greek, adopted roman clothing and customs and received citizenship all barrier between the original Romans from Latium and romanized peoples eroded. Obviously this goes both ways, as Italian romans received cultural influenced from the peoples they conquered. After Commodus, who died in AD 192, most emperors were of non italian origin:  Christianity was another great equalizer, since provincial identities had been closely tied with what gods people worshiped, and christianity wiped that away. By the 5th century Romans were noticeably different from the times of the Republic, they wore different clothes, had different and more varied customs, christianity was the official religion, the army was different in the way it was organized and fought, etc. By 800 AD people from the eastern empire called themselves Romans, called their land Land of the Romans and considered Constantine the second founder of their civilization. Roman identity had become closely tied with Christianity in the East AND in the West. Frionnel fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Mar 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 13:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:46 |
|
|
You can see that the second most common origin for Emperors is present day Serbia because Illyria was the main recruiting grounds for the legions throughout the period.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2024 13:59
|
|