Conversation

Notices

1. augustus pugin 🌖 (augustus@shitposter.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:37:50 JST augustus pugin 🌖
   just like how Byzantines never thought of themselves as Byzantine, but as citizens of Rome, the current period we live in will be thought of very differently by future gens. phrases like international community etc. will be replaced by more accurate terms like US imperial satrapies, or something similar
   • LS (lain@lain.com)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:37:49 JST LS

     in reply to
     @augustus do you think calling the byzantines not romans is more accurate?
   • augustus pugin 🌖 (augustus@shitposter.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:43:38 JST augustus pugin 🌖

     in reply to

     • LS
     @lain AA did a 3 hour panel on this question with Sargon + Apostolic Majesty (pro-roman) vs AA + someone else (anti-roman). I lean towards them not being Roman but they made a pretty good case to the contrary so I won't claim that lightly.
     LS likes this.
   • LS (lain@lain.com)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:44:45 JST LS

     in reply to
     @augustus at least we can all agree that he holy roman empire was none of the above
   • augustus pugin 🌖 (augustus@shitposter.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:48:42 JST augustus pugin 🌖

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Komnene
     @Komnene @lain they were greek m8, but also lets not open this can of worms it will never end
     LS likes this.
   • Komnene (komnene@cawfee.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:48:43 JST Komnene

     in reply to

     • LS
     @augustus @lain Is there anything supporting that they weren't roman except for not holding rome and donatio constantini which is a forgery?
     LS likes this.
   • augustus pugin 🌖 (augustus@shitposter.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:59:13 JST augustus pugin 🌖

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Komnene
     @Komnene @lain here's the stream I was talking about if you want to waste 3 hours of your life on the minutia of whether they were Roman or not https://youtu.be/jGppv--Bv-8
     LS likes this.
   • Komnene (komnene@cawfee.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 18:59:14 JST Komnene

     in reply to

     • LS
     @augustus @lain I was asking because I've never heard anyone say that so I was wondering what you could base this on
   • augustus pugin 🌖 (augustus@shitposter.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 19:02:11 JST augustus pugin 🌖

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Komnene
     @Komnene @lain nah they're all arrogant youtubers with no credentials on the topic. although Apostolic Majesty is an actual gigabrain worth listening to
     LS likes this.
   • Komnene (komnene@cawfee.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 19:02:12 JST Komnene

     in reply to

     • LS
     @augustus @lain These seem like politics commentators, I thought you were talking about a panel with academics
   • Komnene (komnene@cawfee.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 21:38:09 JST Komnene

     in reply to

     • LS
     @lain @augustus Not to open the can of worms, but in case you're still interested
     
     The byzantine time period is made to differentiate the organisation of religion and the common language. Greek was always popular with the upper classes, with Hellenization only the language spoken by the commoners changed and hence the laws and some titles were written in Greek
     
     One of important differences between the orthodox and catholic churches is the power structure. The catholic church had the concept of Papoceasarism which placed the pope above the king and other patriarchs and equal to the emperor, while the orthodox were under the kings and emperors
     
     The first doubts of them being Romans comes from the forged letters and decrees such as the Donatio Constantini, first started by Pippin and continued by Charlemagne that gave land and legitimacy to the papacy, the goal was to make the pope return the favor by granting the title emperor to Charlemagne, making him an equal in the western power structure
     
     Another thing is education - the eastern court was educated in classical philosophy and kept the largest library of it while in letters to the pope, the Frankish kings would ask "what's the point of learning to read"
     
     The nomadic Bulgars were also influenced, started using Greek in court and later used byzantine architects to build their capital in a roman style and claimed they were also successors to the roman empire. Later on, Russia also claimed that
     
     The byzantine social organisation was also different from the rest of Europe, feudalism never really spread there as the legal and philosophical tradition wasn't broken. The commoners weren't tied to their land and had the freedom of movement, trade and could work different professions independent of guilds or lords
     
     The distribution of power wasn't based on vassalage but on themes, which were either military or civic or both and there was regulation between them
     
     They also had public chariot games like in antiquity which were influential in politics
     
     On the question of identity, you were roman if you spoke Greek and accepted the laws and power of the monarch, ethnicity didn't matter, you could be Latin, Greek, Syrian, Armenian, Alan, Bulgar or from Scandinavia
     
     So, I think it would be inaccurate to call them non-Romans, as they followed the lifestyle, way of thinking and had the social structure of Latin speaking Romans, that is also the opinion of my relevant professors on the subject. Maybe the most accurate term would be Rhomaion/Rhomaioi
     LS likes this.
   • augustus pugin 🌖 (augustus@shitposter.club)'s status on Friday, 24-Feb-2023 21:38:09 JST augustus pugin 🌖

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Komnene
     @Komnene @lain
     Blood? Not Roman ❌
     Place? Not near Rome ❌
     Language? Not Latin ❌
     Conclusion: Not Rome. Simple as.
     LS likes this.