• 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.
You do realize the term Byzantine went from neutral pre-Enlightenment to a purely negative connotation enlightenment onwards right?

To most people you byzantine means a system of complicated procedures that have you speak to dozens of beaurucrats about a minor easily fixed issue and you are still at exactly the same place you started with no progress.
Nah. :)

To most people Byzantine means crafty, deceitful, underhanded, political manoeuvrings. A shadowy court filled with intrigue. Sophistication, grandeur, complexity, wealth, and corruption. Sleeping with one cousin whilst gouging the eyes out of another.
But never, ever, boring.

The Eastern Roman Empire on the other hand... yawn. Sounds like something from dusty old 1950's textbook.
 
  • 6
  • 1
Reactions:
The Eastern Roman Empire on the other hand... yawn. Sounds like something from dusty old 1950's textbook.
Then use the objectively more correct and better sounding Basileia Rhomaion. Simple!

That avoids the awkward "but why call it east when the west has already fallen 1000 years ago?" and "why call it Byzantium when its an objectively terrible name that should never have seen common use due to the absurdity of it" issues :)
 
  • 10
  • 2
  • 1Love
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Then use the objectively more correct and better sounding Basileia Rhomaion. Simple!

That avoids the awkward "but why call it east when the west has already fallen 1000 years ago?" and "why call it Byzantium when its an objectively terrible name that should never have seen common use due to the absurdity of it" issues :)
That is certainly better than Eastern Roman Empire. (What isn't). :D
But Basileia Rhomaion gives off vibes of a twelve year old who has just found Google translate and is trying to show off how edgy he is to his twelve year old mates. Its all very What the Sigma.
 
  • 13
  • 2
Reactions:
That is certainly better than Eastern Roman Empire. (What isn't). :D
But Basileia Rhomaion gives off vibes of a twelve year old who has just found Google translate and is trying to show off how edgy he is to his twelve year old mates. Its all very What the Sigma.
Your vibedar is way, way off imo.
 
  • 3
  • 3
Reactions:
I actually am kind of enjoying "Later Roman Empire" in general speech recently since my wife always thinks of the type of necklace when I say "Byzantine".

Its still in English (a perk) and accurately describes things in a way neither Byzantine nor Eastern Roman Empire do.

I recognize it has a near-zero chance of being implemented and I'm OK with it.

But, we have to get to 1453 posts, right? At least at 1292 we're past the Latin empire though.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
speaking of, why is it called "The Latin Empire" ans not Eastern Roman Empire"?

Because the Latin Empire could not as loudly lay claim to the Roman title, which would have been an affront to the Holy Romans and the Roman Church which supported the Imperial claim. It carried forward what the Franks perceived to be the proper title of the Eastern Romans - Imperium Constantinopolitanum. Both Henry and Baldwin do pepper the title Roman throughout their correspondence but it never stuck and the Empire was destroyed before it could ever legitimize such a notion.
 
They like the idea of "Rome" dying with the start of their dark ages despite everyone calling the Eastern Roman Empire Roman and the people who lived there Roman and the people themselves calling themselves Roman a thousand years after the 5th century.
This just isn't true. I don't understand why people lie about this. Contemporaries did not universally refer or think as Byzantium as Roman. Hell, this is so easy to prove wrong, that I don't understand the point of this claim, especially when you put it in such absolutist terms.

Liutprand of Cremona, envoy sent by Otto the Great to Constantinople, wrote in Relatio de Legatione Constantinopolitana this:

on the day of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary the holy mother of God (August 15), there came-an evil augury for me-envoys of the apostolic and universal pope John, through whom he asked Nicephorus ,the emperor of the Greeks " to close an alliance and firm friendship with his beloved and spiritual son Otto "august emperor of the Romans." ...

The papal messengers, therefore, being thrown into prison, that offending epistle was sent to Nicephorus in Mesopotamia; whence no one returned to bring an answer until the second day before the Ides of September (Sept. 12). ...

"Now listen," they continued, " we know you will say that the pope is the simplest of men; you will say it, and we acknowledge it." "But," I answered, "I do not say it."

"Hear then! The stupid silly pope does not know that the holy Constantine transferred hither the imperial scepter, the senate, and all the Roman knighthood, and left in Rome nothing but vile minions- fishers, namely, peddlers, bird catchers, bastards, plebeians, slaves. He would never have written this unless at the suggestion of your king; how dangerous this will be to both-the immediate future, unless they come to their senses, will show." "But the pope," I said, "whose simplicity is his title to renown, thought he was writing this to the honor of the emperor, not to his shame. We know, of course, that Constantine, the Roman emperor, came hither with the Roman knighthood, and founded this city in his name; but because you changed your language, your customs, and your dress, the most holy pope thought that the name of the Romans as well as their dress would displease you. He will show this, if he lives, in his future letters ; for they shall be addressed as follows: 'John, the Roman pope, to Nicephorus, Constantine, Basilius, the great and august emperors of the Romans!" ...

When the princes I have mentioned heard from me the aforesaid promise concerning the address, not suspecting any guile: "We thank you," the said, "oh bishop. It is worthy of your wisdom to act as mediator in so great a matter. You are the only one of the Franks whom we now love; but when at your behest they shall have corrected what is evil, they also shall be loved. And when you shall come to us again you shall not go away unrewarded."

This destroyed the marriage negotiations between Otto and Nicephorus, as it was rather bad decorum to refer to them as Greeks. The point being that Byzantium was considered the Empire of the Greeks, at least by some. The people there were Greeks to foreigners, not Romans. The idea that Byzantium was a differing political entity from the Rome of late antiquity isn't some modern idea. Doesn't really matter what the Greeks themselves thought, when it's all semantics at the end of the day. To them, the idea of a Roman had shifted. To Western Europeans, they had strayed away from what it meant to be a Roman.

There's also a funny thing in these writings by Liutprand regarding clothing.

The second hour," said Nicephorus, "is already past. The solemn procession to the church is about to take place. Let us now do what the hour demands. At a convenient time we will reply to what you have said."

May nothing keep me from describing this procession, and my masters from hearing about it! A-numerous multitude of tradesmen and low-born persons, collected at this festival to receive and to do honor to Nicephorus, occupied both sides of the road from the palace to St. Sophia like walls, being disfigured by quite thin little shields and wretched spears. And it served to increase this disfigurement that the greater part of this same crowd in his (Nicephorus') honor, had marched with bare feet. I believe that they thought in this way better to adorn that holy procession. But also his nobles who passed with him through the plebeian and barefoot multitude were clad in tunics which were too large, and which were tom through too great age. It would have been much more suitable had they marched in their everyday clothes. There was no one whose grandfather had owned one of these garments when it was new. No one there was adorned with gold, no one with gems, save Nicephorus alone, whom the imperial adornments, bought and prepared for the persons of his ancestors, rendered still more disgusting. By, your salvation, which is dearer to me than my own, one precious garment of your nobles is worth a hundred of these, and more too. I was led to this church procession and was placed on a raised place next to the singers. ...

"But tell us," they continued, " does your most holy master wish to close with the emperor a treaty of friendship through marriage?"

" When I came hither he wished it," I said, " but since, during my long delay, he has received no news; he thinks that you have committed a crime, and that I have been taken and bound; and his whole soul, like that of a lioness bereft of her whelps, is inflamed with a desire through just wrath to take vengeance, and to renounce the marriage and to pour out his anger upon you,"

"If he attempts it," they said, " we will not say Italy but not even the poor Saxony where he was born - where the inhabitants wear the skins of wild beasts-will protect him. With our money, which gives us our power, we will arouse all the nations against him; and we will break him in pieces like a potter's vessel, which, when broken can not be brought into shape again. And as we imagine that Al thou, in his honor, hast bought some costly garments, we order you to bring them before us. What are fit for you shall be marked with a leaden seal and left to you; but those which are prohibited to all nations except to us Romans, shall be taken away and the price returned."

When this had been done they took away from me five most costly purple stuffs; considering yourselves and all the Italians, Saxons, Franks, Bavarians, Swabians-nay, all nations-as unworthy to be adorned with such vestments. How unworthy, how shameful it is, that these soft, effeminate, long-sleeved, hooded, veiled, lying, neutral gendered, idle creatures should go clad in purple, while you heroes-strong men, namely, skilled in war, full of faith and love, reverencing God, full of virtues-may not! What is this, if it be not contumely? "But where," I said, "is the word of your emperor, where the imperial promise? For when I said farewell to him, I asked him up to what price he would permit me to buy vestments in honor of my church. And he said: "Buy whatever ones and as many as you do wish;' and in thus designating the quantity and the quality, he clearly did not make a distinction as if he had said 'excepting this and this.' Leo, the marshal of the court, his brother, is witness; Enodisius, the interpreter, John, Romanus, are witnesses. I myself am witness, since even without the interpreter, I understood what the emperor said."

"But," they said, -these things are prohibited; and when the emperor spoke as you say he did, he could not imagine that you would even dream of such things as these. For, as we surpass other nations in wealth and wisdom, so also we ought to surpass them in dress; so that those who are singularly endowed with virtue, should have garments unique in beauty."

"Such a garment can hardly be called unique," I answered, " when with us the street-walkers and conjurers wear them."

"Where do they get them? " they asked.

"From Venetian and Amalfian traders," I said, " who, by bringing them to us, support themselves from the food we give them."

"Well, they shall not do so any longer," they said. They shall be closely examined , and if any thing of this kind shall be found on them they shall be punished with blows and shorn of their hair."
 
Last edited:
  • 7
  • 1
Reactions:
This just isn't true. I don't understand why people lie about this. Contemporaries did not universally refer or think as Byzantium as Roman. Hell, this is so easy to prove wrong, that I don't understand the point of this claim, especially when you put it in such absolutist terms.

Liutprand of Cremona, envoy sent by Otto the Great to Constantinople, wrote in Relatio de Legatione Constantinopolitana this:



This destroyed the marriage negotiations between Otto and Nicephorus, as it was rather bad decorum to refer to them as Greeks. The point being that Byzantium was considered the Empire of the Greeks, at least by some. The people there were Greeks to foreigners, not Romans. The idea that Byzantium was a differing political entity from the Rome of late antiquity isn't some modern idea. Doesn't really matter what the Greeks themselves thought, when it's all semantics at the end of the day. To them, the idea of a Roman had shifted. To Western Europeans, they had strayed away from what it meant to be a Roman.

There's also a funny thing in these writings by Liutprand regarding clothing.
It's all semantics at the end of the day huh? Weird thing to say for someone so insistent that Byzantine should be used instead of...just the actual name. We all know they are Greeks, but to say "Doesn't really matter what the Greeks themselves thought" is some funny contemporary relativism which I hope everyone sees the irony in.

Going by your logic we shouldn't talk about the "Holy Roman Empire" because we have Voltaire with his famous technicality quote during the period about it not being Holy nor Roman nor an Empire etc. Plus if you wanna go by "Western Europeans" thinking "they had strayed away from what it meant to be a Roman", surely when people use the term HRE there isn't some weird cognitive dissonance at play where because it has the audacity to have "Roman" in the name they literally see it as the same as the Rome of Augustus right? When I talk about both I explicitly don't just say "Roman" Empire, I say Holy Roman Empire and Eastern Roman Empire. It's silly that Eastern Rome is on the receiving end of this "um actually they are not Rome yk, they are Greek! So just use the word (????)Byzantine!(????)" when a German polity is allowed to keep the name with no one on the forums asking the IO to be renamed. Funny how that works. We can go on and on about how culturally "Roman" the Germans are if you want to go down this path of argument.

Meanwhile I'm going off what they called themselves and what neighbouring polities, that didn't have some type of weird bone to pick about legitimacy, like the Turks called them. They called them Romans. It's the Eastern Roman Empire.
 
  • 6
  • 6
Reactions:
This just isn't true. I don't understand why people lie about this. Contemporaries did not universally refer or think as Byzantium as Roman. Hell, this is so easy to prove wrong, that I don't understand the point of this claim, especially when you put it in such absolutist terms.

Liutprand of Cremona, envoy sent by Otto the Great to Constantinople, wrote in Relatio de Legatione Constantinopolitana this:



This destroyed the marriage negotiations between Otto and Nicephorus, as it was rather bad decorum to refer to them as Greeks. The point being that Byzantium was considered the Empire of the Greeks, at least by some. The people there were Greeks to foreigners, not Romans. The idea that Byzantium was a differing political entity from the Rome of late antiquity isn't some modern idea. Doesn't really matter what the Greeks themselves thought, when it's all semantics at the end of the day. To them, the idea of a Roman had shifted. To Western Europeans, they had strayed away from what it meant to be a Roman.

There's also a funny thing in these writings by Liutprand regarding clothing.

According to Cicero Pro-Archias there is no contradiction between being a Roman and being a Greek. Unlike later texts and actions that was an actual Roman lawyer arguing a case before a Roman court. That he could argue that Archias was fully Roman ends any idea that someone being Greek would make them not Roman (it didn't while the Romans had their highest levels of power).

If you are willing to go onwards to the empire yes this is a dictatorship (The Republic wasn't so Cicero should be more than enough to prove my point) but

Nero had a converted Romanized Jew as prefect of Egypt (can you say no ethnic basis to being a Roman Citizen yet? Converted Jew? Remember the Spanish Inquisition? Those aren't generally accepted in ethnically based societies).

Rome itself simply didn't have an ethnic basis for being Roman.

To put it this way I don't know your national identity but if you are American are you English? That doesn't make you less American if the answer is no does it?
 
Nah. :)

To most people Byzantine means crafty, deceitful, underhanded, political manoeuvrings. A shadowy court filled with intrigue. Sophistication, grandeur, complexity, wealth, and corruption. Sleeping with one cousin whilst gouging the eyes out of another.
But never, ever, boring.

The Eastern Roman Empire on the other hand... yawn. Sounds like something from dusty old 1950's textbook.

That is unless they visit the DMV
 
You do realize the term Byzantine went from neutral pre-Enlightenment to a purely negative connotation enlightenment onwards right?

To most people you byzantine means a system of complicated procedures that have you speak to dozens of beaurucrats about a minor easily fixed issue and you are still at exactly the same place you started with no progress.
Didn't know most people had an accurate understanding of the late Eastern Roman Empire's politics, what a massive W for the education system.


In all seriousness though, just because something has negative connotations doesn't mean they're wrong. There *was* alot of intrigue, unnecessary complexity, corruption, and general inefficiency in the Byzantine system. I mean we're talking about a system which incentivized putting competent generals and family members into monasteries or mutilating them, had constant civil wars, and aside from a few brief reprieves was consistently loosing ground either slowly or quickly to their neighbors from Justinian onward.
 
Last edited:
  • 6
Reactions:
The fact that this thread is still ongoing is one of God's best jokes.


*When I say God I mean @Johan .
 
  • 6Haha
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
According to Cicero Pro-Archias there is no contradiction between being a Roman and being a Greek. Unlike later texts and actions that was an actual Roman lawyer arguing a case before a Roman court. That he could argue that Archias was fully Roman ends any idea that someone being Greek would make them not Roman (it didn't while the Romans had their highest levels of power).

If you are willing to go onwards to the empire yes this is a dictatorship (The Republic wasn't so Cicero should be more than enough to prove my point) but

Nero had a converted Romanized Jew as prefect of Egypt (can you say no ethnic basis to being a Roman Citizen yet? Converted Jew? Remember the Spanish Inquisition? Those aren't generally accepted in ethnically based societies).

Rome itself simply didn't have an ethnic basis for being Roman.

To put it this way I don't know your national identity but if you are American are you English? That doesn't make you less American if the answer is no does it?

I merely replied to the person claiming that the word Byzantium is some modern historian invention and that its status as Roman was uncontested. I'm sure there were contemporaries of Cicero, who did not think of Greeks as "true" Romans. Not like it matters for this.
 
byzantine.. where did i hear that before.. ah.. yes.. its the stellaris thing!

1725045702473.png


Also, this legit French documentary film showed that Caesar's Rome already was very bureaucratic.

1725045863110.png
 
  • 3Like
  • 2Haha
Reactions:
I’ll probably play with the game rule set to Eastern Roman Empire because I like it better and it would be weird to be named Empire of the Romans then turn into the formable Roman Empire lol. I’d only use term Basileia tōn Rhōmaiōn if I was playing a mod that turned a lot of the tags into Endoyms. I’m playing an EU4 mod right now that lets you form the Imperium Romanum Occidentale starting as Brittany/Amorica that’s been fun lol I don’t even have Italy in my campaign right now.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: