Printable View
Yeah, it's quite an interesting subject really, Roman identity politics that is, not even most people of the Italian peninsula could really consider themselves to be Roman latins, and even the Turks having conquered the Eastern Roman Empire considered themselves to be Eastern Romans.Quote:
Originally Posted by keravnos
They were conquered by the Romans, after all. I'm sure even the people in Gaul, Spain, North Africa, etc all considered themselves Roman or at least Roman-esqueQuote:
Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking
The Byzantine Empire was just the surviving eastern half of the old Roman Empire. It was the 16th century German historian Hieronymus Wolf whom coined the phrase "Byzantine." They never declared independence, they just split the empire between two emperors. Its like if Britain was conquered by Nazi Germany, and the British Government and Royal Family relocated to Canada or Australia, and remained the case for more than sixty years.
No, because the split occured before the foreign invasions. There is no one fleeing, or relocating for that matterQuote:
Originally Posted by Magister Militum Titus Pullo
All I'm saying is that if the original homeland of an empire was overrun by the forces a foreign nation, then a new seat of government would be chosen if enough of its territories remained under its authority. I know that the Imperium Romanorum was continually divided and reunited before the reigns of Honorius and Arcadius. And even King Theodoric of the Ostrogoths rule of Italy on behalf of Emperor Zeno was a pretense of legality.
To me Byzantium as we now call it had the most legitimate claim of being roman so I consider them to be a second roman empire. The Venetians in my book come second place since they were decended from roman refugees.
My personal opinion is the death of the real Roman empire is when they got rid of the old gods in favor of Christianity but thats really a very generalized reaction.
I think they saw themselves as Roman before the collapse and split making the western and eastern empire because their was that dream that was Rome - the most glorious city in the known world
and everyone wanted to claim they were part of that
but i really don't have the qualifications or knowledge to justify this
:laugh4:
i can ask but one question, what would have happened if Imperium Romanum did not collapse?
If you had to leave your country to save your life, would it still be you in the other country you found refuge?
Then, imagine some generations later the descendants of your pursuers, coming from the country you left, and claiming to be your REAL descendants, killing your very own offspring.
That's Eastern Roman Empire-Byzantium in a nutshell, in my own personal opinion.
Obviously you completely ignored the spirit of my post. I suggest you go back and read it. Also, quoting arbitrary numbers doesn't help your argument and doesn't do anything to point out the differences in Roman culture compared to Greeks - ie. concern for the here & now compared to a concern for the metaphysical.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiniMe
Abou has a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by abou
But we both can agree that the Hellens (their true name) and Romans has possibly the most glorious history. Hands down in my opinion.
Yup, the Romans is the best in the western world/world while the Hellens isQuote:
Originally Posted by K COSSACK
2nd best in the "western world" only.
Its strange how the Hellenes took the illeterate farmers of Latio and taught them practically everything that would even remotely be called civilised...Quote:
Originally Posted by Intranetusa
So strange how the Romans dissapeared as a culture/language/tradition under the heel of the germanic tribes whilst Hellenes continued...
Greeks didn't civilize the Italians. They were already civilized via the Etruscans. I don't think Greeks had any influence over Roman society until they started 'allying' with other cities, some of which being Greek colonies.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellenes
Also Roman civilization didn't disappear with the Germanic invasion. Remember that the 'barbarian invaders' didn't want to destroy Rome, they wanted to be part of Rome. All of western civilization could be said to be Roman. Systems of government, law, religion, and much of the morality of the west is mixture of Roman and Christian systems. France has always been a very Roman nation. And Latin didn't disappear, it just changed. Spanish, French, Romanian, and Italian are all bastardized versions of Latin. I would say that Spanish is about as close to Latin as modern Greek is to ancient Greek.
The Romans had more obscene graffiti. That has to count for something. :)
To add to what Marcus wrote, the Hellenic culture didn't continue any more than any other culture. In fact, a governor of Athens wrote to the emperor in Constantinople complaining that no one in his city could read. Also, when Greece converted to Christianity they converted hard and either abandoned or altered their religious and cultural traditions to match. Therefore no more Elysian Mysteries, no more festivals to Dionysus.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellenes
And where do you think ancient Greece went? Lime-kilns of course, because when you burn marble it turns into lime for farming.
But were did the Greeks get their knowledge? As history shows people with great ideas are usually influenced by the works of another. At one time the Greeks had have been what they considered 'barbaric'. Every nation on the face of the earth at one or another was or is primitive. So again. Who were the greeks influenced by?
The Phoenicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfman25
Phoenician traders brought them technology, eastern civilization, the "Greek" written language, and even aspects of what would become Greek religion.
Yep. Ancient greeks used to call the 24 letter alphabet we greek still use "Phoenician" one. If they influenced the way we write, I would imagine a very big cultural influence.
Could it be guessed because Greece was once strong, but never united when strong (500BC+) still valuing the Greek city state polis
Later when Rome becomes a major player due to the Punic wars
they are able to suppress the Greeks and use all the knowledge to twist the roman way into something utterly greater than before the Punic wars, transforming the Roman way of life forever
Keravnos do you believe that the Byzantines are descended by Hellenes even though they consider themselves as Romans??As for the alphabet it was taken by the Eteocretes who were Greek and not from the Semitic Phoenicians who came after them. We must all agree that the Graeco-Romani culture was Destroyed by the coming of Christianity because it was consider pagan and evil :wall:
Well, I think I made my opinion on the Eastern Greek speaking Romani perfectly clear. Yes they were hellenes, mostly all but the ruling elite but considered themseleves Romani. The big majority of the intelligensia that would be needed to run an empire, had come from Roma to Konstantinoupolis too (originally called Nova Roma), so to my mind there is NO DOUBT whatsoever about the "Romanicity" of Byzantium. Besides, being called "Hellenas" back then was a mortal insult, as it implied Paganism and could get you killed if a priest was nearby listening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agiselaos
So far as the alphabet is concerned you are wrong. It was phoenician letters, in which we added the vowels (Phoenicians just didn't write theirs, much like Israelis today, but pronounced them all the same). Eteocretes were the descendants of Minoans, lived in Eastern Crete (Think Seteia and Ag. Nikolaos and environs), wrote in their own alphabet, (Grammiki A') which hasn't been read yet. Reason? They spoke a non greek language, Minoan which we know very little about. Grammiki B' the written language of the Mycenaeans was rough and unyieldy as every syllable had its own letter (approx 88 of them) and was very difficult to both read and write.
Phoenician alphabet...ΧΡΥΣΟΣ (spelled Chrysos=gold)
Linear B' alphabet... KU-RU-SO and it would look like this
http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%95%...1:Linear_B.jpg
Reading that (in the 40's using some unscrambling techniques of the British) was the first clear cut evidence that Mycenaeans were actually Greek.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ventris
If you guys can do watch this documentary,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documen...linear-b.shtml
It is not Here,
http://best.online.docus.googlepages.com/
among many of the best online documentaries (520 of them) I have seen, but it would be a fine addition.
and for more on the following (it is in greek)
http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%93%...A%CE%AE_%CE%92
Yes, the ruling elite were Romans but after the 7th or 8th century we can say they were Hellenes and many Emperors were Hellenes such Vasileios 2nd Nikephoros Phokas while others such were not(Tsimisces,Leon) but my point is even though they did not call themselves Hellenes they separate themselves from Italians who they called Latins.what is more they considered themselves free and after 4th crusade they hated more the Latins than Turks. :2thumbsup: As for the Eteocretes you were right but the first people who settled were Minoans as for the alphabet i think we have taken by these Phoenicians not from semitic Phoenicians:book:
The whole thing is debatable. While today we consider it a Greek Empire, they considered themselves as Rhomaioi (Basileus ton Rhomaion - Emperor of the Romans). Even in 1453 they considered themselves like that, but in fact, they were completely Hellenic.