"Grok" is only a typo or two away from "Greek". Sure it's impartial?
- 8
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
My knowledge on Byzantine history is quite rusty but if I'm not wrong the 1337 ER was a ER rump state that just took and rebased itself in Constantinople, why not call Trebizond and Epirus who are also ER rump states, then why not call them Rome? Note that none of these states control Rome at that time
- 7
- 2
- 1
This is an interesting question. Apparently, according to wikipedia, the rulers of the other rump states did not really claim to be THE Basileus of the Romans after the reconquest of Constantinople in 1261, although before one ruler of Epirus did. The ruler of the empire of Trebizond did call himself Basileus, but reportedly his title was "the faithful Basileus and Autokrator of All the East, the Iberians and Perateia", so he left the title of the Roman emperor to Constantinople. Therefore, it seems to make sense to call the Byzantine empire around Constantinople the Roman (Byzantine) empire. I don't know what did ruler of Trebizond do between 1453-1461, when his state still existed. But saying that the Byzantine/Roman empire fell with Constantinople in 1453 has the advantage of giving as an epic and for the Roman/Byzantine empire, which discourages to question it. If we said it ended with Trebizond in 1461 we would not be much better off than with the boring 476.
Last edited:
- 2
Actually, according to wikipedia:
"Despite the Nicaean reconquest, the Emperors of Trebizond continued to style themselves as Roman emperor for two decades and to press their claim on the imperial throne. Emperor John II of Trebizond officially gave up the Trapezuntine claim to the Roman imperial title and Constantinople itself 21 years after the Nicaeans recaptured the city, altering his imperial title from "Emperor and Autocrat of the Romans" to "Emperor and Autocrat of all the East, Iberia and Perateia"."
en.wikipedia.org
So we have former Nicaeans, Trebizond, Morea, Epirus, Theodoro and HRE.
"Despite the Nicaean reconquest, the Emperors of Trebizond continued to style themselves as Roman emperor for two decades and to press their claim on the imperial throne. Emperor John II of Trebizond officially gave up the Trapezuntine claim to the Roman imperial title and Constantinople itself 21 years after the Nicaeans recaptured the city, altering his imperial title from "Emperor and Autocrat of the Romans" to "Emperor and Autocrat of all the East, Iberia and Perateia"."
Empire of Trebizond - Wikipedia
So we have former Nicaeans, Trebizond, Morea, Epirus, Theodoro and HRE.
- 5
Honestly, the legitimacy dispute among the Roman rump states post 1204 is one of the most interesting parts of the history of the region to me, and I hope we'll get some flavor about other claimants so we can lean into the idea of unseating the Most Legitimate TM Roman state in Constantinople, whether as another Greek Orthodox state or as a revival of the Latin Empire.
- 7
The Last Centuries of Byzantium by Donald Nicol is the best I own, and I would recommend The History by Georgios Akropolites as a good source from a guy who was actually there for it. George Finlay's History of Greece and the Empire of Trebizond 1204-1261 is also good in that it devotes broader attention to other Roman claimants, but it's super biased and outdated, take that one with a grain of salt.
- 1
- 1
- 1
Thanks. Time to add these to my ever growing collection of books/ebooks I don't really have time to read.
- 2
- 1
From the top of my head, Rome claimants suggested in this thread:
Whoever forms Rome by controlling Rome and whatever else is required
Byzantium
Trezibond
Morea
Epirus
Theodoro
HRE
Papal States
Romania
Russia
does Moscow have a claim, or only Russia?
Finland
Serbia
Bulgaria
Ottomans
France
Kyiv
UK
South Vietnam? I can find the reference but not the reasoning for this
USA
"Literally every country in Europe"
"Perhaps every country on Earth"
I'm sure someone will fill in some more?
Seriously @Johan there's a need for an option, like the one for Byzantium's name, to let the player select which country gets to have tyrian purple for its color. It'll be easier for you to do the option than to select one and suffer the complaints of all those who think you chose wrong
EDIT: Added some missing ones. Some of which I should have remembered...
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
Well, that is at least a pile of shame to be proud of. Our nerd Steam library of shame, on the other hand...
You forgot Serbia and Bulgaria, also the Ottomans by right of conquest, France since Frankia was also a Roman rump state, hmm maybe also Kyiv as it was the heart of the old Rus'From the top of my head, Rome claimants suggested in this thread:
Whoever forms Rome by controlling Rome and whatever else is required
Byzantium
Trezibond
Morea
Epirus
Theodoro
HRE
Papal States
Romania
Russia
does Moscow have a claim, or only Russia?
Finland
I'm sure someone will fill in some more?
Seriously @Johan there's a need for an option, like the one for Byzantium's name, to let the player select which country gets to have tyrian purple for its color. It'll be easier for you to do the option than to select one and suffer the complaints of all those who think you chose wrong
- 1
- 1
- 1
Honestly maybe that idea of a Rome map-mode was not even a jokeFrom the top of my head, Rome claimants suggested in this thread:
Whoever forms Rome by controlling Rome and whatever else is required
Byzantium
Trezibond
Morea
Epirus
Theodoro
HRE
Papal States
Romania
Russia
does Moscow have a claim, or only Russia?
Finland
Serbia
Bulgaria
Ottomans
France
Kyiv
I'm sure someone will fill in some more?
Seriously @Johan there's a need for an option, like the one for Byzantium's name, to let the player select which country gets to have tyrian purple for its color. It'll be easier for you to do the option than to select one and suffer the complaints of all those who think you chose wrong
EDIT: Added some missing ones. Some of which I should have remembered...
How hard will it be to mod in mapmodes I wonder?
- 1
Miklagarðr** or we could go Gothic and call it Mikilagards
- 1
It wasn't yet a rump state yet. Andronikos III reunited Epirus with the empire and made a lot of progress towards reuniting Greece. The progress would be undone because he died and his best friend John would declare himself John VI and launch a civil war that shattered the empire. When the game starts there is nothing inevitable about Byzantine decline.
At the person who thinks the Eastern Roman Empire was a rump state when the game start here is the map of the area
It doesn't look like a rump state to me, it was not a rump state, and there was nothing inevitable about John VI considering John VI had no claim to the throne, and according to Kaldellis had no support whatsoever from anyone in the empire for his usurpation.
Last edited:
- 2
- 2
Maybe rump state isn't the right word, but the ERE in 1337 is a post 4th crusade state. There is a soild argument to be made that 1204 was the fall of the Roman Empire and the state that held Constantinople from 1261-1453 was just a successor state, the most successful of many.
- 7
- 2
- 2
I fully agree with that there isn't anything to make the Nicaean claim superior to Epirus besides "we took Constantinople" (unless you are willing to add in "and we are stronger than you" which would of course undermine their claim).
However the death of Andronikos III before being able to consolidate his gains wasn't inevitable. If he had lived long enough to avoid a regency for his son we may today be discussing why two Balkan nations call themselves Romania when the WRE fell 476 and ERE fell 1204.
I also still think Eastern Roman Empire is the best name despite the issue of Epirus having the same claim mainly because Epirus was brought into the empire during the game start and unless they have the death of Andronikos III fixed the civil war that reversed his gains might not trigger.
- 1
- 1
You might want to add the UK to that since its technically in part descended from various roman successor states formed by the Romano-British in the wake of the roman withdrawal from Britain, and the Saxon kingdom of Wessex(that went on to form England) was actually founded by a Briton ironically enough.From the top of my head, Rome claimants suggested in this thread:
Whoever forms Rome by controlling Rome and whatever else is required
Byzantium
Trezibond
Morea
Epirus
Theodoro
HRE
Papal States
Romania
Russia
does Moscow have a claim, or only Russia?
Finland
Serbia
Bulgaria
Ottomans
France
Kyiv
I'm sure someone will fill in some more?
Seriously @Johan there's a need for an option, like the one for Byzantium's name, to let the player select which country gets to have tyrian purple for its color. It'll be easier for you to do the option than to select one and suffer the complaints of all those who think you chose wrong
EDIT: Added some missing ones. Some of which I should have remembered...
- 1
At the time that kinda meet the same thing in southern Britain. it was the most hevily romanized part of the country and at the time its lightly most people either spoke Vulgar Latin or were bilingual in both common Brittonic and Vulgar Latin. The welsh title "prince" was derived from princeps and not the conventional understanding of an heir and that was created in the 1200's so even eight centuries down the line the Britons still had some knowledge of the fact they were successor states to Rome. and if Frankish get that claim for conquing a rump state I think a romanized briton founding the earliest direct political antessesor to the modern British state should be in the running too.