Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SvenkaPipa t1_j4kk2c5 wrote

Reply to comment by mangalore-x_x in I think that the term Byzantines is rightly used for adressing the Eastern Roman Empire. by VipsaniusAgrippa25

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