So I seen a shit ton of posts and threads shitting on the greeks, and my question is why? What has made them such a spit can on Veeky Forums.. Any reason at all?
Second question! Why is the Holy Roman Empire memeified on this damn part of this acursed webpage. I mean they were pretty stronk were they not? Charlemagne, Barbarossa etc etc.
Give me answers Veeky Forums! These questions cant go unanswered!
>
>
>
Because it's a mess.
>listening to some fag that couldn't stand up towards the Church
> So I seen a shit ton of posts and threads shitting on the greeks, and my question is why?
1. Because most of our sources for ancient history is written by Greeks and they are mostly about how Greeks are awesome and cool and how everybody else isn't. That's pretty annoying.
2. Western historiography tends to overemphasize supposed similarities between ancient Athens and modern western world for political reasons. I mean, they ostensibly too had liberties, democracy, freedom of speech, technical advancements, naval superpower, etc. It doesn't help that Athenians basically invented freedom-loving West vs despotic East dichotomy and "Democracy" meme for PR reasons, while running a slave-driven economy.
I have nothing against the ancient Greeks. Definitely some of the most based societies in history.
But I do shit on Byzantium because byzaboo and orthodox posters are fucking intolerable most of the time.
Fuck Byzantium, horrible people, didn't defend the holy land.
well i believe that early byzantium (justinian,maurice,heraclius)and some of the middle medieval stuff like Leon III,Tzimiskes,basil II were based as fuck.Some momentes were on par with some of the best early roman emperors.Late medieval times and after the seljuks and first crusade the things were retarded in the empire and the end inevitable.
Early Byzantium didn't do anything to help defend against the Holy Land.
>Second question! Why is the Holy Roman Empire memeified on this damn part of this acursed webpage. I mean they were pretty stronk were they not? Charlemagne, Barbarossa etc etc.
Many people here learn history via Europa Universalis and think that the HRE was always more decentralized than France.
well indeed they didnt do anything.in fact they lost in the middle 7th century to the first caliphates.
but the holy land is the base of all abrahamic religions and there were always forces to fight about it since the dawn of history.
heraclius took it back from the persians just to lose it to arabs.just think how many conquerors passed through jerusalem through time.
Greeks were shit fuckers who were always at war with one another and alliances were based on threatening you neighbors. Athens was a bunch of old fucks playing mafia masturbating to how "enlightened" they were. Sparta was a bunch of dudebros going on about how art was degenerate.
>well indeed they didnt do anything.in fact they lost in the middle 7th century to the first caliphates.
So why the fuck do Orthoboos worship Byzantium if they do jack shit to reclaim the holy land?
HRE was as powerful as its emperor and his own personal kingdom,duchie or whatever.there were many instances when it had the semblance of a confedarated empire but it was never an empire in the classical term because of the feudal system.maybe charlemagne had it best when he united most of western europe.especially after the 1500 it was more of a political theatre of impressions than a state with centralized power.the inheritance of spains throne and other stuff made other europeans fear it and so it lost power.and the reformation made a schism so deep (like the orthodox/catholic schism in 1054)that hre was a battleground more or less between the petty lords for many years
Not always but the HRE was often a clusterfuck, trapped in endless feud with the Pope in Italy and despite some occasional strong leaders, it's obvious the HRE left a lesser impact on History than France or England because of its lack of political balance
I always preferred the Romans to the Greeks. Cooler language, cooler aesthetic, more earthy, hard-working and unpretentious
they saved the orthodox religion,they converted balkan,slavs,bulgars and kievan rus to christianity(just like some germanic rulers did with their people to take on roman standars of state and religion in the middle ages in the west).
moreoverthey held against arabs and delayed the introduction of islam to eastern europe untill the 14th century(ottomans)
ans they stayed pure to early christian tradition and the ecumenical conferences.
>ans they stayed pure to early christian tradition and the ecumenical conferences.
So they spit on Peter?
the roman law,the most important thing in the western world,their political views,the power and organization of roman army even of the late empire and byzantines were the backbone of our world along with the philosophy and early scientific thought of the greeks.
Romans were more steady politically than greeks who usually after some years of prosperity always lost their gains.
rome was institutionalized and that remained through all of middle ages.
so yeah you are right
well papacy after the carolingian times was heretical in an extreme level.the donation of constantine was a fraud.and some popes were degenarate secular lords and heads of state rather than spiritual leaders of christendom.
of course the whole east-west schism is a political affair rather than an ideological/ theological one.
the apostolic tradition held that everyone was equal.all the apostolic seats of late antiquity.
popes and patriarchs in high medieval times played the game of thrones more that they should be.
But in the east the caesaropapism(emperor higher than church leader)was in contrary with the situation in italy and generally in the west because of the frequency of powerless kings,dukes or whatever and the decentralized feudal system.
there is no dispute in a theological sense,only political powerplays.
This is quite on spot.Thanks for the insight.
The papacy is an office, it's the first among equal, and the Patriarchs were idiots for getting upset by this.
Brutal, artless, thoughtless.
As Dr. Johnson said, "A people, who while they were poor robbed mankind; and as soon as they became rich, robbed one another."
The Greeks were all these things, people see the Greeks as a nation of philosophers, artists and pretentious sophists when barely a minority were like that.
1. Byzaboos from /int/ are annoying
2. Germaboos from /pol/ are annoying
With the Greeks it started with general christcuck shitflinging between orthodox and catholics. The autistic byzaboos and balkaniggers got salty and chimped out, thus the Veneziaboo was born.
>
>
>
is just a spicy meme and the butthurt from prussiaboos just encouraged it. The moral of the story is handle the banter unless you want to be on the receiving end.