Should the Byzantine Empire epoch be renamed to "Roman Basileate"? What would be the consequences of this?
This way:
- Roman Kingdom (753BC-509BC)
- Roman Republic (509BC-27BC)
- Roman Empire (27BC-629AD)
- Roman Basileate (629AD-1453AD)
[Succesor States]
-- Eastern Despotate (1453AD-1461AD)
-- (Others: Castille, France, Muscovy, etc)
No, Byzantine Empire is used for convenience sake in the field and is interchangeable with Roman Empire nobody feels shame in calling it the Roman Empire along with Byzantine Empire since it was a vital part of their identity and state.
That would imply the medieval-period Greek empire had anything in common with the Rome of Augustus or even of Diocletian
>anything in common with the Rome of Augustus
Comparing everything to Augustus' Rome would make even the Republic fall short of being Roman. It's utterly stupid to assume that nothing would change over multiple centuries. The Early and Middle Republic were completely different from the Empire Augustus left on his deathbed and so was that of Diocletians. It doesn't make it less Roman.
>It doesn't make it less Roman.
it does
rome was ok until 212, then it lost its priviledged status, following 3rd cent crisis and dominate was already not the good old rome anymore with the political and economic reforms
then each dude like Constantine, Theodosius and Justinian cased more amd more difference towars oriental despocy
>Blaming three Emperors who literally had to use Diocletians administration and military for everything and operating under the new political rules he created
1) Constantine didn't have to enforce the dominate ceremonies and other by, not to mention his support for christcuckery
2) Theodosius didn't have to sperg out agains pagans, not to mention his declaration of single state religion
3) J*stinian destroyed Italy and the budget of the East with Gothic wars that were absolutely redundant, that autist didn't even stop during the weather events of 535 and 542 and the plague, many aquaducts destroyed and population drastically reduced
also the whole roman magistrate system was dismatled, leading to despocy
>Theodosius didn't have to sperg out agains pagans
Why not? Paganism was dead and the only pagans left were actually LARPagans like Julians who were threatening the social order of the empire
>Paganism was dead and the only pagans left were actually LARPagans like Julians who were threatening the social order of the empire
source: my ass
your rant about "social order" only proves me right, those in charge were not the old romans anymore and just eastern larpers
if new rome is that cooler, why did they keep calling it Constantinople instead or didn't named themselves Constantinopole empire?
>why did they keep calling it Constantinople
To flatter the ego of the emperor, who didn't tell them to stop because he liked being flattered, like most emperors.
that would make sense only until Constantine's death
No, because by that point it was what everybody was calling it so they just kept calling it that. The name stuck.
Alexander's influence
Eastern LARPers were better at managing an empire it seems
>12046544
pagan rome conquered 0
christian rome conquered 2
Pagan Rome got conquered by Christian Rome and without a fight on top of that
dying is not being conquered
Technically you can't conquer your own empire but Roman pagans did get BTFO easily without any resistance from their side
>didn't named themselves Constantinopole empire
The same reason why America doesn't call itself the United States of Washington
this is complete bullshit
usa is using neutral name, unlike "roman empire" wannabe that doesn't have rome
no amount of cope will help with that
It's almost like there is no rule that says an empire has to be named after its capital.
Dilate and seethe more.
naming after a city you don't even own is very pathetic
cope harder greekoid
Time is linear, genius. The Empire wasn't named after a city it didn't own because it still owned it when it was named. Once again you lack basic understanding of reality. That dilate meds must be very good.
>you lack basic understanding of reality
LARPagans tend to be that way
>seething so much
whatever that "empire" was, it lost any legitimacy to be named after rome when they lost it
>hurr durr you do not need to own the city to have right to be named after it
yes you do. literaly no other empire did this embarassment, only byzantine larpers. that's why pope was absolutely correct that the roman throne is empty, even it wasn't the good old rome anymore. byzantines can be somewhat cultural descendants of rome, but they were never romans. no amount of their own delusion will help.
>it does
stopped reading right there, frick off
Christian Roman Empire works fine
>roman basileate
>does not control rome
kek, no
More like they abandoned it for the vastly superior New Rome
Why control Rome when they already have the Cooler Rome?
By this logic the western empire ceased to be Rome after they moved the capital to Ravenna and abandoned the eternal city, which happened nigh on a century before the last western emperor was deposed. Also, Constantine originally christened the eastern capital as "New Rome", but everybody just called it "Constantine's City".
I said rome died in 212 when it lost its priviledged status. it was still important cultural center, even though the emperor resided elsewhere. (but dominate was also not the same rome anymore)
that's why eastern larpers called themselves romans even they didn't hold it anymore
Nah, Rome died in 27 BC, the empire is a bunch of LARP with imperial toadies pretending to be senators.
They did until the 8th century though. Also Rome was irrelevant by then
I dont agree with this map. Justinian/Belisarius never successfully reclaimed the Italian peninsula.
They took over Silicy, the south up to Naples, the dilapidated husk of Rome, and eventually Ravenna.
Milan was never won back.
regarding your question, just leave it as byzantine empire. byzantine also has the meaning to be confusing/complex
Christian Roman Empire. But if you're going to do Basileate, then it should end at 1204. I don't think they were calling themselves Basileus after 1204 (well really, they mostly stopped by the Komnenoi dynasty)
Let’s just stick with Byzantine Empire. It’s established. Yeah, no one ever called it that until long after it was gone, but the Germans don’t call themselves Germans either.
Maybe take Empire out and split it into Principate and Dominate and then I suppose it fits.
Christian Rome makes as much sense as the caliphates being Islamic Sumeria.
It was the Roman empire up until Heraclius' death, after that it's a Greek empire.
Christian* empire
Many byzantine emperors weren't greek
Literally none of them was ethnic greek
Constantinople (Nova Roma) was superior to the original Rome in every single way. Western cucks will seethe.