Once the Germanics became Romanophiles and started LARPing as Romans why didn't they try to raise up the actual Romans in Italy and learn from th...

Once the Germanics became Romanophiles and started LARPing as Romans why didn't they try to raise up the actual Romans in Italy and learn from them and bring back the actual Roman Empire?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ummm sweatie, what is the Carolingian Empire or the HRE for you? Also the Byzantines were still alive and kickin' at that time and they considered themselves as the Romans

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why would you give up political power? They weren't trying to LARP as Romans either, only the Franks and Ostrogoths ever gave local Roman aristocrats state offices, completely excluding anything important for the Franks.

      They did. Literally what the Carolingian Empire and early HRE did.

      The Carolingians and Ottonians were not somehow placing an ethnic group on its last legs to power. Of the appointed men, only Franks and Alemanni ever got court positions like Count under Charlemagne, only the already extant Lombard Dukes kept their positions and Widukind after he surrendered for good was made Count.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Gallo-Romans get court positions to in Charlemagne time (even before).

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Gallo-Romans get court positions to in Charlemagne time
          I didn't say they didn't get any but they certainly didn't get any important ones. The highest military position a Roman aristocrat ever got under the Carolingians was commander of the Saxon Shore Navy. Which wasn't quite helpful since at the time the Kingdom did not have a Navy

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Even before the fall of Rome proper, it was more profitable to become a bishop and join the church anyway.
            So it's not surprising they weren't big into court politics.

            Why would you give up political power? They weren't trying to LARP as Romans either, only the Franks and Ostrogoths ever gave local Roman aristocrats state offices, completely excluding anything important for the Franks.

            [...]
            The Carolingians and Ottonians were not somehow placing an ethnic group on its last legs to power. Of the appointed men, only Franks and Alemanni ever got court positions like Count under Charlemagne, only the already extant Lombard Dukes kept their positions and Widukind after he surrendered for good was made Count.

            You forgot about the Visigoths.
            Who were also major Romeaboos.
            And I can pull up at least one example in the kingdom of the Burgundians.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >it was more profitable to become a bishop and join the church anyway.
            Absolutely not. Competition for civic posts was fierce because it was not only prestigious but extremely well paid. Aristocrats weren't running to the Church, they were trying to scrape their way into the administration. Out of all the major families that were in the Senate a member going to become a Bishop was almost unheard of, some like the Symmachi had none at all

            Hispano-Romans had a great influence in the Visigothic kingdom, see Leander and Isidore of Seville

            >Leander and Isidore of Seville
            Were not part of the political leadership, military or civic. They were not given court positions. That would be no different from saying the Vandals do so because the bishops in Africa happened to be Romans. There were no Roman military appointments or governers in Visigothic Spain. In fact the Visigoths outlawed Roman military participation even in conscription.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Were not part of the political leadership, military or civic. They were not given court positions
            You're playing with words. What's important is the effect, not the formality behind it.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >not the formality behind it.
            That's the entire point of legitimate power from the state. The answer to if any Roman ever gained political power inside the court was no. There were no Roman Counts being appointed over the ruling peoples. The Visigoths never appointed a Roman to military and civic power that had independent power to act.

            >a medieval bishop is not a part of the political leadership
            Gayreeks are so fricking stupid it hurts
            Go back to playing Paradox games

            No, Roman and Early Medieval bishops were not politically powerful. They did when they held power in tandem to their office as Bishop like Gregory of Tours did. Unless you somehow believe all of the Middle Ages was the exact same as 9th century Western Europe.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >the bishops weren't powerful
            >they only controlled the religious institutions, have on numerous occasions organized defense against invading armies, engaged in peace talks during sieges, and served as diplomats with barbarian kings
            This intellectual dishonesty is just embarrassing. Bishops becoming the de-facto Roman authority in Late Roman Europe isn't just a theory, it's the consensus in the academia.
            Your insistence on only temporal, secular offices having any power reeks of video games.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Bishops becoming the de-facto Roman authority in Late Roman Europe isn't just a theory, it's the consensus in the academia.
            Do you actually have any source for this
            >reality is.... le video games!
            Get your head out of the gutter

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Do you actually have any source for this
            Liebeschuetz and Hodgkin
            >Get your head out of the gutter
            Only when you stop deluding yourself with modernist interpretations of spirituality and secular power.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Liebeschuetz and Hodgkin
            Name dropping means nothing. I asked for a source as to your claims. Not a name.
            >modernist interpretations of spirituality and secular power.
            How exactly is saying that the court held all military and ultimately political power in the Early Medieval states a 'modernist interpretation'

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Name dropping means nothing. I asked for a source as to your claims. Not a name.
            Respectable scholars are sources. Barbarians and Bishops: Army, Church, and State in the Age of Arcadius and Chrysostom; Italy and her Invaders.
            Of course I could just go through a case-by-case scenario where I ask you how a certain bishop held significant political power, and why he's referred as bishop rather than his supposedly more important secular title.

            >How exactly is saying that the court held all military and ultimately political power in the Early Medieval states a 'modernist interpretation'
            Video game statism, yikes.
            Don't want to break immersion for you, but Late Roman kingdoms weren't anywhere as advanced as to have the court decide everything on their own.
            The entire fall of Rome is a case of formal subjects of the emperor(s) being de-facto independent.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >a medieval bishop is not a part of the political leadership
            Gayreeks are so fricking stupid it hurts
            Go back to playing Paradox games

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Hispano-Romans had a great influence in the Visigothic kingdom, see Leander and Isidore of Seville

  2. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    They did. Literally what the Carolingian Empire and early HRE did.

  3. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >raise up the actual Romans in Italy and learn from them
    Do you think people growing up in rome with roman ancestry magically behave like ancient romans? That's not how it works.
    Also
    >Germanics became Romanophiles and started LARPing as Romans
    That's not what happened and not what HRE means.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Do you think people growing up in rome with roman ancestry magically behave like ancient romans

      yes? why not

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Because there’s centuries of cultural, economic, social, and political developments that caused them to change

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          really? is there proof of that. Italy has always been dysfunctional.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Please kill your self baiting moron

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Italians today are the same as italians 10, 100 and 1000 years ago.

  4. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Theodoric, the Ostrogoth king, kinda had that in mind. To join romans and germans, with the romans as scholars and the germans as soldiers

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Choosing Romans as your scholars
      Topkek. Greece was the intellectual power. Italians we're just farmers.

  5. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >actual Romans in Italy
    Most Romans were never from Italy

  6. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    there's a solid case to be made that the Ostrogothic kingdom actually restored the Roman Senate to it's former glory.

  7. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Otto III made Rome the administrative capital of his Empire and revived elaborate Roman customs and Byzantine court ceremonies.
    >Otto III arranged for his imperial palace to be built on the Palatine Hill and planned to restore the ancient Roman Senate to its position of prominence. He revived the city's ancient governmental system, including appointing a City Patrician, a City Prefect, and a body of judges whom he commanded to recognize only Roman law. In order to strengthen his title to the Roman Empire and to announce his position as the protector of Christendom, Otto III took for himself the titles "the Servant of Jesus Christ," "the Servant of the Apostles", "Consul of the Senate and People of Rome," and "Emperor of the World".

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >In 1001, the people of the Italian city of Tibur revolted against Imperial authority. Otto III besieged the city and put down the revolt with ease, sparing its inhabitants. This action angered the people of Rome, who viewed Tibur as a rival and wanted the city destroyed.
      >In the weeks after Otto's actions at Tibur, the Roman people rebelled against their Emperor, led by Count Gregory I of Tusculum. The rebellious citizens besieged the Emperor in his palace on the Palatine Hill and drove him from the city.
      >The Emperor's advisors urged him to wait outside the city until military reinforcements could arrive to ensure his safety.
      >After summoning his army in late 1001, Otto headed south to Rome to ensure his rule over the city. During the travel south, however, he suffered a sudden and severe fever. He died in a castle near Civita Castellana on 24 January 1002. He was 21 years old and had reigned as an independent ruler for just under six years, having nominally reigned for nearly nineteen. The Byzantine princess Zoe, second daughter of the Emperor Constantine VIII, had just disembarked in Apulia on her way to marry him.

  8. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because it was widely believed by the larpers that the TRUE Romans were gone and only the corrupt remained. Why make some nobodies in Italy important when nobody recognized their claim to a Roman identity

  9. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    There is already a Roman empire and some Germanic tribes are basically vassals of Rome or have treaties with them like the Lombards; the only exception are the Franks and Visigoths in continental Europe; the most close thing we get to a ''western roman empire'' are the HRE.

  10. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because just like the Ottomans they weren't really Romaboos. The claim to be the successor of XY and larping as such is supposed to give an invader some form of legitimacy over conquered and unconquered regions of a former empire. It's 90% realpolitics and 10% sincere admiration. Somehwat comparable to how Latinx and 'Native American' turbomutts whose genetic makeup is 70 invader and 30% native try to larp as the original inhabitants of the continent to garner more priveleges and legticimacy when it comes to claims of landownership etc.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Very American post, and as expected is full of shit

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Weird, because I am not even American but an obvious ESL instead.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          I never said you were north americans tho

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not a LAtinx larper either. For very obvious reasons.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I give up, where do you hail from, brave soul?
            I will then proceed to explain to you why your post is moronic

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'm from Nauru

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ok, well your post is moronic because the Turks kept their language, religion and other customs while the Germanics eventually discarded all of these.

  11. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Roman in the context her emeans that the emperor had political power over rome, and that the empire was deeply catholic, roman catholic for the matter.
    Is more related to religious and political legitimacy based on the posession of the vatican and control over italy than to anything related to rome per se. Franks only trusted their own close relatives within their own tribe. thats why sallic law was never outlawed, and it remained as an active legal element as far as the 18th century. Visigoths sort of outlawed leges barbaricum and did a common law for hispano-romans and goths, but it was short lived and more related to the fact they married generations of hispanic women than anything

    Heads in is also a fact that italians are descendants of anatolian and syrian economic migrants and slaves, corrupt and prone to mafia like any other armeno-arabian of their same extraction. Latin roman patricians went extinct within the end of the republic and late antiquity.

  12. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >bring back a failed empire
    Why would they do that?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *