>LOL DUDE the byzantines were, like, TOTALLY roman! they even called themselves romans so it must make it so!
>what? the holy roman empire? HAHA no fuck that they weren't le holy weren't le roman and weren't le empire! like, comon dude, they didn't even speak latin!
>>6961
He's right you know
one is a direct successor to that state, that for long periods of time held most of the former empire.
The other was set up over 400 years after the fall of the empire.
>>7018
>one is a direct successor to that state
Only by a fluke of imperial succession laws. The Byzantine state had just as much resemblance to the old Roman one as any of the successor states in the west
>>7078
>Only by a fluke of imperial succession laws
you mean existing continuously with the previous state. There was no fluke. After Constantine Byzantium was the senior capital of rome
>>7129
>existing continuously with the previous state
Same can be said about the Vandal and Lombard kingdoms.
Why were the Ethiopians the ONLY black civilization to ever accomplish literally anything of note?
>>7186
How exactly? They didn't even consider themselves Romans.
>>6961
Russia was more of a third Rome than the HRE ever was
>>7078
Constantine moved the seat of the empire in 330 AD, and that seat remained the seat of the empire until 1453 AD, when the empire finally fell.
>>7310
>They didn't even consider themselves Romans
The Vandals, for example, in only about 2 generations did.
>>7315
This.
>>7348
Oh ffs if that counts, then so do the Franks and the Visigoths.
>>7315
and of course the ottoman empire even more so.
>>7351
>tsar
>caesar
it's all the same. look into his eyes and tell me he is not caesar of all rome
>>7401
>pavel
>>7394
not at all
>>7377
...and if the Franks and Visigoths count, so do the Byzantines. And if they don't, neither do the Byzantines. All these states have as much connection to the old empire, it just so happens that the king of the Byzantines holds a bunch of old Roman titles happens to occupy an old Roman capital.
>>7254
Wot about Rhodesia?
I am not a history buff.
>>6961
He has a point
>>7254
Eastern coast stretching from Somalia to Mozambique had one of the largest trading networks in the world that colonizers simply took advantage of. Not to mention these city states made Swahili a lingua franca for much of the eastern/central African continent
>>7487
>being this fanny flustered
the ERE considered itself roman, their enemies and allies considered them roman.
>>7487
>All these states have as much connection to the old empire, it just so happens that the king of the Byzantines holds a bunch of old Roman titles happens to occupy an old Roman capital.
Yeah that's stupid. Eastern Roman Empire was a thing. Western was divided into lots of smaller things and we usually call those things by their barbarian occupiers.
But the Byzantines were never really "barbarians" or "outsiders", so you can't seriously say something like that.
>>7487
... because of descendency from an emporer (Constantine) who moved the Roman capital.
>>6961
They were the rightful continuation of the Empire you frankish fucking faggot.
>>7512
>literally the good parts of the old Roman empire
>"oh it wasn't really the roman empire at all"
>>7512
>>7542
>>7556
ERE =/= Byzantium
No one denies Rome continued to exist in the east for a couple of centuries after the west has been overrun.
The difference is that the feudal abomination that occupied Anatolia and tiny parts of the Balkans after the 7th century was a new state, with very little systemic or even cultural connection to the ERE. It was its own thing.
>>7254
Didn't ethiopians consider themselves "red" and not black?
>>7586
nubby StuG so kawaii though
>>7654
>a new state, with very little systemic or even cultural connection to the ERE. It was its own thing.
Why do you claim this? It wasn't conquered, given, handed, etc to anyone else. It was a direct continuation of it.
>>7666
Maybe, japs thought they were white and Spaniards were brown.
>>7654
>new state
>direct continuation was the new state
>>7254
Ethiopians are not black
>>7693
>It wasn't conquered
It lost 70% of its territory to the arabs.
Its economy, military and society functioned entirely differently from the old Roman empire. With the theme system, the rapid de-urbanization and militarized aristocracy it resembled more the western succession kingdoms than Rome.
>>7499
Rhodesia wasn't a black civilization though,it was in africa but it wasn't run by blacks.
>>7654
Read 'The Alexiad' by Anne Komnene. It will show you how the imperial politics remained unchanged from the ERE, just the scale of the empire got smaller, which compressed the power of imperial offices, etc. thus pushing the empire towards forms of (although still very autocratic in nature) feudalism. Very good book.
>on phone. sorry for grammar
>>7779
>old roman empire
nigga, roman society changed over time too, or are you gonna argue that the republic died during the jugurthine war?
>>7779
>It lost 70% of its territory to the arabs.
Why the fuck does this even matter lol
The parts that were managed by the Byzantines were a direct continuation or ERE
>functioned entirely differently
Not -entirely- differently, like you claim, to be honest. And things evolve. HRE had even less in common with WRE.
And it didn't resemble western kingdoms at all, are you crazy? Byzantinism was literally a word thrown around back then.
>empires can never ever change in its policy and institutions over the course of centuries and if it does, we shouldn't call it by the same name anymore
Right, so we should also call the current USA by a completely different name now since it no longer resembles the USA of the early 19th century?
>>7779
Nations and empires are constantly in flux. Stagnant empires die for a reason. Saying that change invalidates the Byzantines from being a continuation of the Roman Empire is absurd. The Byzantine Empire was just the Roman Empire adapting to the changes of society and technology.
It's like saying the United States now and the United States from 1776 are two different countries.
>>6961
Well, yes.
And btw, Greeks still call themselves Romans, but most don't realize what it is supposed to mean when the say it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_Greeks
>byzantines
>literally born out of the Roman empire with no time separation between them
>HRE
>a bunch of irrelevant germans the Pope gave the title to despite not having any of the authority
Learn the difference
>>7654
what
is the French Anciens Regime more french than the French Empire and the French Republics?
>>6961
John Greene is a moron, but he's not wrong. The Byzantines were the last vestige of Rome that was even partway legitimate; the HRE was not an imperial power, it was a disparate organization of petty lords under a feudal system. Byzantium retained the apostolic faith, much of the Roman law, and much of the culture. The HRE was a petty imitation.
The HRE was a goddamn joke
They weren't an empire in the slightest, nor were they Roman in any way
They're so Roman, that people much older and smarter than all of us invented a new name to call them: Byzantines
Now shut the fuck up
>>6961
Well, they didn't just all themselves Romans, but pretty much everyone called them Romans including their most common enemies.
>>8279
>t. gibbons.
>>7426
He didn't get to bring friends
>>8267
It's called Empire because it encompassed France, Germany, Czech Republic, Yugoslavia, Itay, parts of Poland, Spain, and pretty much every modern Western European nation
It's was called Holy because the Pope crowned the emperor
It was called Roman because 1. the Pope in Rome, like I said. 2. The high clergy and some of the nobility (France) who spoke Latin 3. Geographically similar to the western Roman Empire 4. Same religion as the Roman Empire 5. Still contained some roman culture
It wasn't even called the HRE until a few centuries after its creation anyways
>>8450
>Spain
wut
HRE was never even near Spain
>>8290
Yeah, and Arabian explorers and Mongolian embassies would call Scandinvians, "Franks"
They may have even called the Greeks Franks at one point, I'll have to double check
>the capital isn't rome
>claim to be a continuation of the roman empire and thus call yourself roman
ayy lmao
>>7254
Egyptians
>>8450
This is not true at all. The Holy Roman Empire basically consisted of small states ruled by princes and kings in what is not Germany. The emperor was chosen by two bishops and four monarchs (Pfalz, Brandenburg and i forgot the others), so the emperor was not crowned by the pope.
>>8531
>I know nothing about the Holy Roman Empire
ayy lmao, just keep your mouth shut if you don't know mate
>>8609
>what is not Germany
what is now Germany
>>8564
>egyptians
>black
>>8609
>monarchs
anon pls
>>8625
Who cares about the HRE, I'm talking about byzantines
>>8632
Memes aside, there were black Egyptian dynasties too iirc
>>7903
Yes.
It's the American Empire now, the United States died some time ago.
>>8609
Why lie?
>The emperor was chosen by two bishops and four monarchs (Pfalz, Brandenburg and i forgot the others), so the emperor was not crowned by the pope.
Yes, true. But only starting in 1356 AD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Bull_of_1356
>After the Habsburgs got nothing from the decree of the Golden Bull in 1356, he gave order to draw up the "Privilegium Maius", a fake document to empower the Austrian rulers.
Which some consider to be the final turning point in the whole "We're German, but actually not" that Austria is known for.
>>7426
Dr. Pavel , I'm ERE
>>9286
Uhh, you don't get to bring crusaders
>>6961
Voltairefags are the absolute WORST
by dictionary definition, the Holy Roman Empire absolutely was what it claimed to be
In truth the Roman Empire died in the 4th Crusade. By the time Constantinople was taken over again by Michael VIII there were several direct successors to the Byzantine throne each as legitimate as the next.
The ERE was the direct continuation of the Roman Empire. They still had Roman traditions but with more Greek influence. Even their Enemies called them Roman.
Why wouldn't they be called Roman?
>>9538
The problem is not Voltaire or his infamous sentence. By the time of Voltaire, HRE was pretty much what he said.
HRE before his time (Especially between 10th-12th century) was a more legit.
>>7348
Gonna need a source for this one. Do you happen to mean: vandals living under roman controlled areas? Or are you insinuating that the vandalic kingdoms started calling themselves roman in places such as lawcodes and the like? I am very doubtful if you mean the latter.
>>7654
The differences between the Roman Empire during the Dominate and the Roman Empire during the early Principate were just as vast as the differences between the ERE before the Islamic conquests and the ERE after. You can't point at an event and say this is when the ERE stopped being the ERE, because it was a slow and natural evolution to the changing world that the Romans lived in. They'd already adopted the Theme System in the 7th century, when they still ruled large parts of Romance speaking Italy and North Africa so you can't say that it's adoption was the end of the ERE.
>>7254
Ethiopia was accomplished because it was linked with the civilizations of Eurasia for a very long time. They grew out of Yemeni civilization and adopted Roman Christianity, thus becoming a part of the wider Eurasian civilization growing out of the Fertile Crescent, just like Europeans did. The Sudanese and Swahili were the same.
The rest of Africa developed in comparative isolation. Mali had contacts with the Islamic world, but unlike Ethiopia it was never fully integrated into Eurasian civilization, though they did have a literary culture derived from them. For the most part, Africans developed in isolation. Since agriculture started in Africa thousands of years later than in Eurasia, Africans never had close to enough time to develop civilizations on par with Eurasia. In Nigeria they did achieve a high level of urbanization and artistic production after 1000 AD, but that was far too late to complete with the rest of the world.
>>8564
Bait
>>7730
Ethiopians and north africans in generap do look very different from sub saharan africans.
>>7254
Ghana
Mali
The Zulus
>>11670
That's because East and West Africa are heavily separated via their land.
You have a few options to get from the East to the West side.
You had options. You either had the Great Rift Valley, Nile Cataracts, the Sahara, or the Congo Jungle to get through Africa. You were probably going to die on each one.
>>12665
lel
>>6961
Okay, can we all agree here once and for all that John Greene is a massive wanker? Putting all politics and biases aside, his skills as a historian are dismal. He provides the most watered-down, simplified summaries of periods of history and constantly leaves out critical details.
>mfw he has the usual "LIKE FAVORITE SUBSCRIME XD" shit at the end of his videos instead of citations or sources listed at the end of his videos
They show this hack in high school history classes for fucks sake.
