The romans didn't distinguish between the two, why would you?Which is completely unrelated to the citizenship of the Roman Empire (the empire which is the topic of the thread).
- 3
- 1
The romans didn't distinguish between the two, why would you?Which is completely unrelated to the citizenship of the Roman Empire (the empire which is the topic of the thread).
Are those the places where the roman empire started or are those places named after the place where the roman empire started? I would guess the second.View attachment 1203242
So the people living in these places are Romans too, right?
The city stopped being a part of the empire.The romans didn't distinguish between the two, why would you?
But we stayed, and we're still romanThe city stopped being a part of the empire.
Citizen [of the city of Rome] and citizen [of the Roman Empire] are two totally different things now.
I, as a random citizen of the European Union, by the virtue of the right of free movement of persons am free to move to the city any time. Furthermore, once I have established residence there I have the right to take part in the municipal elections, to vote or be voted for. That's pretty much what citizenship entails. I have no Italian ancestry whatsoever, so how please explain to me, how does moving to another city change my ethnic background?The first one is a real ethnic background
View attachment 1203242
So the people living in these places are Romans too, right?
It doesn't, that's the same reason why a greek born in Athens can't be a roman. I think you all are just trolling at this point, I'm having fun with your fallacyes but I have to go now, maybe I'll get back here tomorrow. Have fun!how does moving to another city change my ethnic background?
View attachment 1203242
So the people living in these places are Romans too, right?
I think almost every one with a wester european ancestry has a couple tbh
The first one is a real ethnic background (it's an undenayble fact), the second is based on the claim of a greek person (in the case of the late byzantine empire). Easy to understand
But we stayed, and we're still roman
Does that matter? The criteria, in your words is this:Are those the places where the roman empire started or are those places named after the place where the roman empire started? I would guess the second.
And they're called "Rome", not Roma. So they're not even homonym
Are you denying those places don't exist or that they aren't from Rome, just like you are?that's the the term for the people of Rome
Nope, I'm just trying to point out to you that ethnicity and citizenship are not the same thing. I can become just as much a citizen of Rome as you are without having the previous links to the place you have, genetic or otherwise. It doesn't matter whether the name refers to a city or a whole empire, the concept is the same.It doesn't, that's the same reason why a greek born in Athens can't be a roman. I think you all are just trolling at this point, I'm having fun with your fallacyes but I have to go now, maybe I'll get back here tomorrow. Have fun!
True. After the Roman Empire was conquered by the Ottomans in 1453 the Roman people weren't all genocided.continued to exist after
Almost, but not quite that simple. One can go and stay for 3 months, after that there's a need to register and provide proof of employment or other means of supporting oneself. So, it's not that anyone can get a municipal citizenship just by moving in.I, as a random citizen of the European Union, by the virtue of the right of free movement of persons am free to move to the city any time. Furthermore, once I have established residence there I have the right to take part in the municipal elections, to vote or be voted for. That's pretty much what citizenship entails. I have no Italian ancestry whatsoever, so how please explain to me, how does moving to another city change my ethnic background?
That's what establishing residence refers toAlmost, but not quite that simple. One can go and stay for 3 months, after that there's a need to register and provide proof of employment or other means of supporting oneself. So, it's not that anyone can get a municipal citizenship just by moving in.
True. After the Roman Empire was conquered by the Ottomans in 1453 the Roman people weren't all genocided.
I recall a story about an island in the Aegean that was quite isolated that ended up occupied during WW1 or 2 (icr the exact story, my bad) where the citizens still considered themselves Roman.
That is precisely the one"Charanis is known for his anecdotal narrations about Greek Orthodox populations, particularly those outside the newly independent modern Greek state, who continued to refer to themselves as Romioi (i.e. Romans, Byzantines) well into the 20th century. Since Charanis was born on the island of Lemnos, he recounts that when the island was taken from the Ottomans by Greece in 1912, Greek soldiers were sent to each village and stationed themselves in the public squares. Some of the island children ran to see what Greek soldiers looked like. "What are you looking at?" one of the soldiers asked. "At Hellenes," the children replied. "Are you not Hellenes yourselves?" the soldier retorted. "No, we are Romans," the children replied."
Peter Charanis - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
This reminds me of those Hellenic pagans who continued to practice in the Mani Peninsula until the 9th century or so. I'm pretty sure Paradox even used them as the basis for a Hellenic county in CK2's 769 start date.True. After the Roman Empire was conquered by the Ottomans in 1453 the Roman people weren't all genocided.
I recall a story about an island in the Aegean that was quite isolated that ended up occupied during WW1 or 2 (icr the exact story, my bad) where the citizens still considered themselves Roman.
Pagan Rome truly was the best Rome. Really went downhill from there.