WRE is a myth

There was never such a thing as "western roman empire". There was an empire with two emperors, and eventually one of them got fired by germanic foederati and only one emperor remained. On the other hamd, the term "eastern roman empire" may be a synonym for the "byzantine empire", as the seat of power was transferred by Constantine to the east (so western parts can be considered as part of ERE since 330, some of the were later reconquered by Justinian, but ERE didn't magically appear in 395. "Western empire" was never an entity and I am getting tired of the moronic narrative.

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    OP discovers the concept of historiography

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >There was an empire with two emperors

    >"Western empire" was never an entity

    OP are you moronic?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There used to be 4 emperors at one point too frickwit

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Ignoring that two were expressly subordinate, they were reabsorbed into the empire.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Correct.

      You are the one who is moronic.
      >did you know that there is a VICE president!
      >durrrr there are two americas!!’

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The American Vice President is subordinate to the President. On the other hand, the Western Roman Emperor and the Eastern Roman Emperor were completely independent of each other. They were two completely independent realms each with their own Emperor.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This is complete bullshit and it is a lie. Lurkers, dont believe him. The Western Emperor was the junior partner to the Eastern Emperor. Law in one side included law in the other. You are a normie who will make up as much as you can on the apot to shore up the history channel/youtibe narrative.

          The roman emprie was ruled by the pffice of roman emperor. There was two office-holders at the same time. One office, two employees.
          >but me normalgay and me no like! That no what history streamer say!!

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You are a normie who will make up as much as you can on the apot to shore up the history channel/youtibe narrative
            projector.jpg

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >reeeeeee normies get out!
            You are correct about rome thoughbeit

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >They were two completely independent realms each with their own Emperor.
          but that's not true

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Well obviously. It's a historiographic term. We use it for modern convenience

          They did not rule independent realms. Laws were made jointly and political processes were done between each other, only with the virtual demise of the state in the West did some degree of detachment begin outside of the retinue of the Emperors. Eastern Generals would go West with armies, Western administrators and generals would go East. They were both equally legitimate, interconnected and cooperative.

          This is complete bullshit and it is a lie. Lurkers, dont believe him. The Western Emperor was the junior partner to the Eastern Emperor. Law in one side included law in the other. You are a normie who will make up as much as you can on the apot to shore up the history channel/youtibe narrative.

          The roman emprie was ruled by the pffice of roman emperor. There was two office-holders at the same time. One office, two employees.
          >but me normalgay and me no like! That no what history streamer say!!

          >The Western Emperor was the junior partner to the Eastern Emperor.
          Not necessarily. Honorius was senior Emperor after the death of his brother Arcadius, Valentinian III after Theodosius II died. Being the senior Emperor meant being the longest reigning one, not the one who was in charge of a certain place.

          >There was never such a thing as "western roman empire".
          Julius Nepos would disagree with you here. So would Valentinian.

          Julius Nepos and Valentinian were both Roman Emperors. Not a different form. They shared the same office as their colleagues.

          This is obviously true , its merely labeled that way to distinguish the different management and military campaigns of the two parts of the empire.

          Most historians recognize that it was the battle of Battle of Adrianople in 378 that doomed the Western part of the empire even though it was fought in todays eastern Thrace. The western limes had completely collapsed well before that.

          >Most historians recognize that it was the battle of Battle of Adrianople in 378 that doomed the Western part of the empire even though it was fought in todays eastern Thrace.
          I have never seen anybody say that. The aftermath of Adrianople didn't even affect Gratian, in fact he managed to stop the spilling of hostile people into Illyria. This was a problem for Gratian's newly appointed colleague, Theodosius.
          >The western limes had completely collapsed well before that.
          Neither have I seen anybody say that before. Hugh Elton suggests that the army worked as per usual until 425.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Schizoidberg

      Wait until he finds out there was never a "Byzantine" empire.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        lol, it's literally stated everywhere, unlike the "wre"

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This is tepid stuff OP. If you want to really impress me you need to start claiming that the HRE and Byzantium were actually the same Empire.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Much of what you said is true, but what's most important to my mind is that the original Romans were actually Ligurians who came from Massalia who themselves were descended from Danish Ambrones tribes so therefore the Holy Roman Empire was indeed holy, Roman, and an empire and the rightful heirs to the Western Roman crown as this confirms their Nordic-Germanic origins.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We still have books naming carolingian art "romanesque", french style cathedrals "gothic" and actual gothic buildings are "preromanesque".
    It's obvious the historians have created a religion out of being wrong and won't stop parroting lies from the illustration.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >There was an empire with two emperors
    Why do you think there were two emperors anon?
    What do you think both those emperors were in charge of?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The same singular office of Roman Emperor, which they both shared.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why did they create two of them though

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      "western part of the roman empire" is not the same as "western roman empire", the latter implies total political independence, which it never had

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So there were two emperors
        One in charge of the west
        The other East

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the ideal was one empire two emperors but in practice there were multiple incidents where they tried to get rid of one another

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >the 4 tetrarchs try to get rid of eachother
          >that means.. there are le 4 empires!!
          Your brain on normalhomosexualry and israelitetube.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Radiochan

    >There was never such a thing as "western roman empire".
    Julius Nepos would disagree with you here. So would Valentinian.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wrong, fed. Both subordinate to the emperor in Constantinople. Try again.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Roman Empire = both combined
    Eastern Roman Empire = Byzantine parts alone
    Western Roman Empire = HRE parts alone

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is obviously true , its merely labeled that way to distinguish the different management and military campaigns of the two parts of the empire.

    Most historians recognize that it was the battle of Battle of Adrianople in 378 that doomed the Western part of the empire even though it was fought in todays eastern Thrace. The western limes had completely collapsed well before that.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It just refers to the western part of the empire with its own administration hence the "empire" part

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