Daily reminder that Roman Empire collapsed in 480 AD...

That's kinda like saying if California was the last remaining US state, and converted to a Islamic caliphate speaking Chinese, it's still the United States.

>The Byzantines spoke Greek
>Suetonius quotes Claudius as referring to "our two languages," and the employment of two imperial secretaries, one for Greek and one Latin, dates to his reign.
Daily reminder that Roman and Latin are not synonyms.

Well maybe if you broke of an tenth of the stick, marinated it in sacramental wine for a few years, and then fossilised it, the comparison might be valid.

>The Byzantines spoke Greek, thought like Greeks and worshiped like Greeks.

You mean what the elite of the Roman empire did for centuries?

Stop believing the Roman Empire existed.

A huge amount of imperial secretaries under the Claudians were Greek slaves who rose to that position through hard work and loyalty to the Imperial family.
All cultured Romans spoke Greek and a lot of them were crazy for Greek culture.
However "True" Romans spoke Latin. Rome's Emperors would've addressed their Roman subjects in Latin, thought in Latin, spoke to their families in Latin.
The Byzantines were Greeks that spoke Greek. For all intentents and purposes they should be recognised as their own civilisation distinct from Rome.

ANATOLY FOMENKO HAS NEVER CLAIMED THAT THE ROMAN EMPIRE DID NOT EXIST.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU HAVE NOT READ ANY OF HIS BOOKS.

The Roman Empire split into West and East, the West fell but the East did not in till much later.

It actually never stopped existing.

He claimed the original empire of the classical age never existed and was invented by Renaissance scholars, and Rome was founded in the Middle ages.
He did claim the Byzantine and later the Russian Empire were the "real" Roman empires.

Turn off your caps lock, dumbass.

Not the Roman Empire. Might as well say Australia today is the British Empire

It's what he does - just report him. If enough of us do it he'll at least have to crawl to another IP a few times.

Think I've exhausted my reports on him for the day - wish I could remember how to filter out individual namefags.

YOU COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTAND THE BASIC THESIS OF HIS THEORY.

READ HIS "WORKS" AGAIN —IF YOU HAVE ACTUALLY READ THEM.

>Might as well say Australia today is the British Empire
If the British monarchs and political elite relocated to Australia and the state would literally call itself the "British Empire", while Britain would become something else entirely, then yes.

May be a compromise to compare it to Quebec surviving a collapse of Canada, as the US took it over, and Quebec in turn making Buddhism their national religion.

Granted, I suspect some Canadians might not entirely disdain that scenario.

In their 1992 single "Weather with you", Crowded House sing the lyrics

Julius Caesar
And the Roman Empire
Couldn't conquer the blue skies

How true is this claim? Initial research seems to suggest the Roman Empire did not exist during the lifetime of Julius, and was in fact founded by Augustus following his adopted father's assassination.

However, there is more than one interpretation of the term "Empire". It can of course refer to a system of government ruled by an Emperor, but can also refer to a state/nationality/cultural-ethnic group which rules over a geographic expanse containing different states/nationalities/cutural-ethnic groups. For example, France in 1900 was a Republic, but there was still a French Empire in Africa and Indochina at the time.

In this sense, Crowded House may have been referring to Julius' conquests in Gaul and Egypt, bringing them into the "Empire" which was the Roman "Republic".

Hi /mus/, enjoy your visit!

Roman Empire ceased to exist when it was divided, from that point on there were two empires, Eastern Roman Empire and Western Roman Empire. Western Roman empire collapsed in 480, eastern continued until afterwards. Both were valid successors to the roman empire.

Its like you guys don't even understand the concept of a rump state.

No,mainly because you would need multiple states

...and occupying nearly the same space for a good deal of that time.

I think part of the problem comes in at the point where people hear "Byzantine Empire" and think of it as it was during it's last ~300 years, when it only occupied the area around Macedonia with Constantinople as its capital and a few other bits nearby. ...rather than under Justinian in the 500's, when it was occupying roughly the same territory as the Roman Empire.

Certainly there was an extreme cultural change under Justinian that just cascaded out from there, which later you could use to claim the state was no longer Roman. It's also certainly a stretch to call it Rome in those last 300 years. But, really, the fall of Rome was a slow and bumpy decay. There's a few sharp cliffs in there, but it's hard to draw a good solid line, even if the fall of Constantinople is clearly well beyond the patient's time of death, and was more desecration of the corpse than anything else.

Still, it's easier, if somewhat misleading, to say that the fall of Rome came come the time of the fall of the city of the same time.

>to say that the fall of Rome came come the time of the fall of the city of the same time
of the same name* dammit...

>the fall of Constantinople is clearly well beyond the patient's time of death, and was more desecration of the corpse than anything else.
In that case, maybe brain death occurred at 480AD, followed by a steady decay of bodily functions lasting 973 years.

I mean, to stretch metaphor out to infinity, a whole lot of internal biochemical changes happen at the time of death - and the society transformation under Justinian's rule, and perhaps more so, could be compared to such a process.

Although, if we're going by that measure, I'd almost want to roll the fall of Rome all the way back to Constantine I.

>and occupying nearly the same space for a good deal of that time
I don't see why two american states wouldn't be enough

>senile tripfaggot is a byzaboo

Quelle surprise

?

>Rome
Fucking plebs
Get on my level

The Byzantine Empire is the direct continuation of the Roman empire and this is a fact recognized by any credible historian.

Conquering something isn't the same as being directly tied to it. The Ottoman and the HRE aren't Roman in any conceivable way. The Byzantine Empire was just the Eastern Roman Empire after the Western half collapsed.

>direct continuation
>neither direct nor a continuation

WE WUZ greek pederasts LARPing as romans whilst fighting Latins does not a Roman Empire make

>Eastern

>Roman

>Empire

Maybe, but it's still not the Roman Empire, or we'd call it that. It's the result of what was left over, which is why we don't call it the Roman Empire. And culturally, even Rome stopped being Rome well before its fall, and Byzantium was more radically different still.

Russia is not the USSR, and it still has the same capital, as well as people alive who remember it.

I prefer porterhouse state personally

ITT semantics

ITP mental gymnastics

>holy Roman empire
>Roman and a empire

Please see Latin is not synonymous with Roman.

As you pointed out, Rome circa 400 AD was much different than Rome circa 80 AD. Yet still it is called the Roman Empire regardless of shift in culture.

The Byzantine Empire can be referred to as such, the name is just a tool just to refer to the Eastern Roman Empire in a time period where the Western Roman Empire ceased to exist. But it was still the continuation of the same empire. The names given to the Roman Empire, the Eastern Empire, the Late Empire, the Western Empire, etc. are just devices for referring to the Empire during different periods of time.

Comparing the Byzantine empire to the Ottomans or to the HRE, in relation to its connection to the Roman empire, is a false equivalence.

Obligatory
>Imperium
>''Romanum''
>Orientale

>''''Sacrum''''
>''''Imperium''''
>''''''''Romanum''''''''

>480 AD
Julius Nepos was a meme.

Just here to remind you that the word Roman by that time doesn't refer to people from Rome or even from Italy. It refers to everyone who is part of the empire,including Greeks so your argument is completely invalid.

Rome was already Christian before the western part fell and the Greek language was the one preferred by the scholars. A part of the Roman Empire that didn't fall to barbarians continued to call itself Roman because it was.

Patricians were speaking Greek instead of Latin as far back as like the Republican Era you mongoloid
The "but they spoke Greek!!!!" argument is not even an argument

Was the capital of the British empire moved to Sydney?Did Britain fall after the transfer of capitals?Then it's not the same thing.

WE

>Have stick
>attach all sorts of shit to the stick
>burn stick but some of the attached things survive
>"it's still a stick guys"

asshurt barbarians spotted

ROMAN

Posting the real thing.

SHIETTTT

What did he mean by this?

More like if Los Angeles became capital of USA, then a few centuries later the eastern half of USA is destroyed and a few more centuries later the remaining western half adopts Spanish as official Language, but continues having LA as capital, continues using the constitution, and continues calling itself Unidos Estades di America

it's literally all three(unlike HRE) so your meme fails

>A fucking city
>""""""""""""""""""""""""empire"""""""""""""""""""""""""

what on earth are you talking about fuckface

it controlled hundreads of cities

Dude, who cares.
The Romans were all tall, blue -eyed, Nordic body-builders that only wore lorica segmentata and togas, spoke the same scientific Latin of today and were a distinct ethnicity. In 500 AD they all suddenly became the Western peoples that are Catholic and Protestant today.

Preach it brother.

Though you forgot to remind everyone that all the modern peoples who inhabit what was once the roman empire are all mixed with brown people and not true romans, the true romans are in the areas that had zero connection to the ancient roman empire, namely scandinavia and northern germany