Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SvenkaPipa t1_j4h94l9 wrote

Even during the unified Roman Empire, the eastern half (i.e., the future "Byzantium") differed in language and culture from the western half. When Emperor Constantine moved the capital of the Empire to Byzantium, and gave a speech about it, the audience (the Greeks) did not understand his speech.

And what about the term "Byzantium", I think it is appropriate to use it to refer to the Empire between 1261-1453, because at that time very little of Greece was really Roman, because what little was left of the Roman Empire was destroyed in 1204.

4

mangalore-x_x t1_j4kiti2 wrote

Constantine himself was not Roman by origin, but of Illyrian descent with a Greek mother.

Roman was not a nationality by that point. Plenty of people up to the highest echelons could come from anywhere in the empire.

This idea that Romans ruled over non Romans was precisely not how things worked. As Romans settled through the empire after a few centuries they assimilated into their regional provinces and regional provincials assimilated into Roman elites. To the point to a whole row of Roman emperors coming from all over the place.

3

SvenkaPipa t1_j4kk2c5 wrote

The ethnic groups may have been mixed. But linguistic and cultural differences persisted.

Illyria, for example, was Latin-speaking.

2

mangalore-x_x t1_j4kk5xv wrote

With no relevance to the structure of the Roman Empire as a political Entity.

The entire point is: Yes, Cultural differences persisted, including between Illyria and Africa, Africa and Italy, Gaul and Spain, Spain and Greece.

And emperors and other high officials came from all those places.

1

SvenkaPipa t1_j4kku12 wrote

It's funny, but there were no emperors exactly from Greece. where roman emperors were born

1

mangalore-x_x t1_j4kse47 wrote

I mean, borders are a bit complicated

Point remains that we have a general assimilation of more and more provincial elites until we have Roman citizenship apply to a wide breadth of people.

At the same time the title emperor to the Roman was never the same exclusive title it became in the Middle Ages and later so someone holding a title of imperium did not mean it needed to be someone from a specific bloodline. They always saw it in a more complex political organization, that is why we have emperors seemingly splitting the empire. To them this was obviously an office of high prestige, but it was an office with administrative and military power, not some blood right. And they never saw this as breaking the Roman Empire apart, but making administration or military organization easier.

2