Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 41

Thread: Would Europe have been better off if Roman Empire had lived longer?

  1. #1
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    Would Europe have been better off if Roman Empire had lived longer?



    Studies of 6th century Bavarian Graveyards proved that the cause of death was plague. Historians think that 2/3 of Roman Empires population were dead because of plague that lasted 200 years. This was one of the main causes of Roman Empire demise. Since the plague was not spread to Slavic populated areas it brought the explosion of Slavic populations. So plague its one of the causes, that we have South Slavs in places where they do not belong, namely Balkans They brought destruction to long established local cultures and disappearance of nations like Thrace, Panonia and many more. Whole areas of Balkan were filled with barbaric Slavic tribes that never brought anything to the area, than the savagery. What is your hypothetical view, would Balkan been better of without Slavs, Worse off, or the same as it is. Without plague Slavs had no chance of entering Balkans Roman Empire woould have had the manpower to protect its possessions.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    ebAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-07-12
    Posts
    226
    Points
    6,051
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,051, Level: 23
    Level completed: 1%, Points required for next Level: 499
    Overall activity: 2.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b- P312
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2E2

    Ethnic group
    German and Swedish
    Country: USA - Colorado



    Albanopolis "They brought destruction to long established local cultures and disappearance of nations like Thrace, Panonia and many more."

    Not true, Albanopolis.

    Thracian specifically, but would apply to most Balkan ancient tribes. Excluding the Greeks, because of the rugged territory.

    "The ancient languages of these people had already become extinct and their cultural influence was highly reduced due to the repeated barbaric invasions of the Balkans by Celts, Huns, Goths, and Sarmatians, accompanied by hellenization, romanization and later slavicization." wiki

  3. #3
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Boss's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-03-12
    Posts
    119
    Points
    6,400
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,400, Level: 23
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2f

    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Why don't Slavs belong in the Balkans? which populations belong anywhere apart from, maybe, Africa?

    To be honest, I don't even understand what your complaint is. This "They brought destruction to long established local cultures and disappearance of nations like Thrace, Panonia and many more." as ebAmerican said, is false. Centuries of Hellenisation and Romanisation had altered these people to the extreme. Justinian, Constantine (before the Slavic migrations) and so on did not speak "Slavic" as a primary language nor did they speak Thracian or Illyrian or Pannonian. So another problem is your assumption that somehow the Roman Empire losing the western part in the 5th century, meant the end of the Roman Empire. But to quote John Burry, the Roman Empire did not come to an end until 1453.

    This "Whole areas of Balkan were filled with barbaric Slavic tribes that never brought anything to the area, than the savagery" is only true if we assume that the Illyrians, the Thracians and so on were the creme de la creme of civilisation. And they weren't.

  4. #4
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Boss View Post
    Why don't Slavs belong in the Balkans? which populations belong anywhere apart from, maybe, Africa?

    To be honest, I don't even understand what your complaint is. This "They brought destruction to long established local cultures and disappearance of nations like Thrace, Panonia and many more." as ebAmerican said, is false. Centuries of Hellenisation and Romanisation had altered these people to the extreme. Justinian, Constantine (before the Slavic migrations) and so on did not speak "Slavic" as a primary language nor did they speak Thracian or Illyrian or Pannonian. So another problem is your assumption that somehow the Roman Empire losing the western part in the 5th century, meant the end of the Roman Empire. But to quote John Burry, the Roman Empire did not come to an end until 1453.

    This "Whole areas of Balkan were filled with barbaric Slavic tribes that never brought anything to the area, than the savagery" is only true if we assume that the Illyrians, the Thracians and so on were the creme de la creme of civilisation. And they weren't.
    They were not the creme of civilization but they had absorbed the Roman culture which was very advanced for the time. Local cultures had a lot of local flavors aside Roman. Original home of Slavs are Russian steppes, no? Do you think Slavs belong to Czechoslovakia or Poland? They are German lands, no? Regardless the luck has been on Slavs side, is another matter. I appreciate your comment anyway, we can't change anything now. The question is hypothetical. Would Europe been better off if the empire lasted longer?

  5. #5
    Curious Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    11-08-12
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    2,262
    Points
    15,835
    Level
    38
    Points: 15,835, Level: 38
    Level completed: 24%, Points required for next Level: 615
    Overall activity: 11.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Not known - O3?
    MtDNA haplogroup
    Not known - M?

    Ethnic group
    Chinese
    Country: Canada-British Columbia



    Slavery helped Islam to bring down the Roman Empire as it was more tolerant towards slaves.

    Though slavery was maintained, the Islamic dispensation enormously improved the position of the Arabian slave, who was now no longer merely a chattel but was also a human being with a certain religious and hence a social status and with certain quasi-legal rights. The early caliphs who ruled the Islamic community after the death of the Prophet also introduced some further reforms of a humanitarian tendency. The enslavement of free Muslims was soon discouraged and eventually prohibited. It was made unlawful for a freeman to sell himself or his children into slavery, and it was no longer permitted for freemen to be enslaved for either debt or crime, as was usual in the Roman world and, despite attempts at reform, in parts of Christian Europe until at least the sixteenth century. It became a fundamental principle of Islamic jurisprudence that the natural condition, and therefore the presumed status, of mankind was freedom, just as the basic rule concerning actions is permittedness: what is not expressly forbidden is permitted; whoever is not known to be a slave is free. This rule was not always strictly observed. Rebels and heretics were sometimes denounced as infidels or, worse, apostates, and reduced to slavery, as were the victims of some Muslim rulers in Africa, who proclaimed jihad against their neighbors, without looking closely at their religious beliefs, so as to provide legal cover for their enslavement. But by and large, and certainly in the central lands of Islam, under regimes of high civilization, the rule was honored, and free subjects of the state, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, were protected from unlawful enslavement.
    The professional slave soldier, so characteristic of later Islamic empires, was not present in the earliest Islamic regimes. There were indeed slaves who fought in the army of the Prophet, but they were there as Muslims and as loyal followers, not as slaves or professionals. Most of them were freed for their services, and according to an early narrative, when the Prophet appeared before the walls of the Hijaz town of Ta'if, he sent a crier to announce that any slave who came out and joined him would be free. Abu Muslim, the first military leader of the Abbasid revolution which transformed the Islamic state and society in the mid-eighth century, appealed to slaves to come and join him and offered freedom to those who responded. So many, we are told, answered his call that he gave them a separate camp and formed them into a separate combat unit. During the great expansion of the Arab armies and the accompanying spread of the Islamic faith in the seventh and early eighth centuries, many of the peoples of the conquered countries were captured, enslaved, convcrted, and liberated, and great numbers of these joined the armies of Islam. Iranians in the East, Berbers in the West, reinforced the Arab armies and contributed significantly to the further advance of Islam, eastward into Central Asia and beyond, westward across North Africa and into Spain. These were, however, not slaves but freedmen. Though their status was at first inferior to that of freeborn Arabs, it was certainly not servile, and in time the differences in rank, pay, and status between free and freed soldiers disappeared. As so often, the historiographic tradition foreshortens this development and attributes it to a decree of the Caliph 'Umar, who is said to have ordered his governors to make the privileges and duties of manumitted and converted recruits "among the red people" the same as those of the Arabs. "What is due to these, is due to those; what is due from these, is due from those." The limitation of this concession to the "red people," a term commonly applied by the Arabs to the Iranians and later extended to their Central Asian neighbors, is surely significant. The recruitment of aliens, that is, non-Arabs and often non-Muslims, was by no means restricted to liberated captives, and the distinction between freed subjects, free mercenaries, and bought barbarian slaves is often tenuous.
    http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/lewis1.asp

    The plague also helped bring down the Byzantium Empire.

    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/plague-help...134835636.html

  6. #6
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by oriental View Post
    Slavery helped Islam to bring down the Roman Empire as it was more tolerant towards slaves.


    Today there was a GOOGLE news. Plague, that lasted from 4th to 6th century, decimated the population of empire. 65% of
    http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/med/lewis1.asp

    The plague also helped bring down the Byzantium Empire.

    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/plague-help...134835636.html
    people died of plague. Roman Empire was brought down by this sickness. That is the recorded time of Slavic invasions in Balkans. Do you think Europe would have been better off, worst off, or the same without presence of Slavs. Its an hypothetical question. .............

  7. #7
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Boss's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-03-12
    Posts
    119
    Points
    6,400
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,400, Level: 23
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2f

    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    They were not the creme of civilization but they had absorbed the Roman culture which was very advanced for the time. Local cultures had a lot of local flavors aside Roman. Original home of Slavs are Russian steppes, no? Do you think Slavs belong to Czechoslovakia or Poland? They are German lands, no? Regardless the luck has been on Slavs side, is another matter. I appreciate your comment anyway, we can't change anything now. The question is hypothetical. Would Europe been better off if the empire lasted longer?
    I think it's the other way around. As I said, these people were Hellenised and later Romanised. Again, look at the major figures from these areas before the Slavic migrations but after centuries of Romanisation and Hellenisation. They didn't speak the languages you associate with their ethnicities. So again I don't believe it was the Slavs that destroyed these people's customs and languages.

    No I don't think Slavs "belong" in the steppes. What's the original home really and why trace it back to Russia? the original home of every human is Africa. But so what?

    And longer than what? part of the Roman empire fell in 473. But the Balkan regions were in and out of the Roman Empire for hundreds of years after that. I have no idea what Europe would look like today if the Slavs had never arrived - and neither does anyone else.

  8. #8
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-02-13
    Posts
    553


    Country: Albania



    Quote Originally Posted by Boss View Post
    I think it's the other way around. As I said, these people were Hellenised and later Romanised. Again, look at the major figures from these areas before the Slavic migrations but after centuries of Romanisation and Hellenisation. They didn't speak the languages you associate with their ethnicities. So again I don't believe it was the Slavs that destroyed these people's customs and languages.

    No I don't think Slavs "belong" in the steppes. What's the original home really and why trace it back to Russia? the original home of every human is Africa. But so what?

    And longer than what? part of the Roman empire fell in 473. But the Balkan regions were in and out of the Roman Empire for hundreds of years after that. I have no idea what Europe would look like today if the Slavs had never arrived - and neither does anyone else.
    Look! If you go to Russia, the place Slavs belong there is not a trace a civility. So I think without Slavs Balkans would have been as prosperous as Italy.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran10000 Experience Points
    zanipolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    22-03-11
    Posts
    2,073
    Points
    22,792
    Level
    46
    Points: 22,792, Level: 46
    Level completed: 25%, Points required for next Level: 758
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - Z19945
    MtDNA haplogroup
    K1a4o

    Ethnic group
    Down Under
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    Look! If you go to Russia, the place Slavs belong there is not a trace a civility. So I think without Slavs Balkans would have been as prosperous as Italy.
    so you saying slavs have kept there nomadic gypsy like "genes"?
    Father's Mtdna H95a1
    Grandfather Mtdna T2b24
    Great Grandfather Mtdna T1a1e
    GMother paternal side YDna R1b-S8172
    Mother's YDna R1a-Z282

  10. #10
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,223
    Points
    41,719
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,719, Level: 63
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 1,231
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    Look! If you go to Russia, the place Slavs belong there is not a trace a civility. So I think without Slavs Balkans would have been as prosperous as Italy.
    I really don't share that Idea.

    historically Slavs gave another 'air' in Balkans and manage to create alternative cultures and civilisations,
    from what Balkans suffer is mercenairies, and corruption,

    even before Ottomans Balkans was a pool for mercenairies troops,
    since you are an Albanian you know about that,
    a Balkan man can kill his neighbor for money or religion,
    or shut his mouth in criminality just to save his 'fellow' that share same religion or has money,

    West Europe learn from religion wars, Balkans did not,
    don;t go back, before 100 years, Turkish army in Balkans had 60-70% Balkanic people troops,
    who and why? ask your shelf,
    Balkans were much prosper, find out what time,

    It is not coinsidence that before WW I & II some South Slavic areas were so heavily industrial and prosper that some West European would envy.

    tell me, before the 80's would you buy a Dacia or a Zastava car, or a fine Bulgarian parfume to support Balcanic prosper?
    Even today Dacia produces cars, tell me how many of us support that Balkanic effort to prosperity?
    ΟΘΕΝ ΑΙΔΩΣ OY EINAI
    ΑΤΗ ΛΑΜΒΑΝΕΙΝ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ
    ΥΒΡΙΣ ΓΕΝΝΑΤΑΙ
    ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣΗ ΑΚΟΛΟΥΘΟΥΣΙ ΔΕ

    When there is no shame
    Divine blindness conquers them
    Hybris (abuse, opprombium) is born
    Nemesis and punishment follows.

    Εχε υπομονη Ηρωα
    Η τιμωρια δεν αργει.

  11. #11
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    That is the recorded time of Slavic invasions in Balkans. Do you think Europe would have been better off, worst off, or the same without presence of Slavs. Its an hypothetical question. .............
    Germanic and Gothic tribes invaded West Roman Empire, Empire collapsed, followed by centuries of dark ages. Do you think Europe would have been better without all the Germanic peoples?
    As Boss mentioned East Roman Empire, known as Byzantium, survived another 1000 years, and in vicinity of Slavs.

    Do you think Balkans would be better if instead of Albania there was Little Italia in its place?
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Boss's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-03-12
    Posts
    119
    Points
    6,400
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,400, Level: 23
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2f

    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    Germanic and Gothic tribes invaded West Roman Empire, Empire collapsed, followed by centuries of dark ages. Do you think Europe would have been better without all the Germanic peoples?
    As Boss mentioned East Roman Empire, known as Byzantium, survived another 1000 years, and in vicinity of Slavs.

    Do you think Balkans would be better if instead of Albania there was Little Italia in its place?
    How many years did the Slavs hold the Balkans for anyways? was it really that long? I mean, the Ottomans ruled the Balkans for more than 400 years (and I did mention the Romans who reconquered many areas and repopulated them with Roman citizens from the 5th century with Justinian until the fall of Empire). Even if what he says is true (Slavs "destroying" the apparently not-so-magnificent-but-still-better-than-the-Slavs Thraco-Illyrian civilisations), Slavic influence is hardly the only post-Roman influence in the Balkans.

    In almost no other region in the world do the people dump their problems on foreign conquest as much as people in the Balkans do.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    05-03-12
    Posts
    230
    Points
    4,753
    Level
    20
    Points: 4,753, Level: 20
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 297
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5a1b4

    Ethnic group
    English/British Isles
    Country: UK - England



    Probably not. Would have just been delaying the inevitable. Plus we can't change history, however fascinating it is to speculate.
    'Wise men speak only of what they know' - J.R.R. Tolkien

  14. #14
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points
    Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-03-13
    Posts
    1,040
    Points
    5,756
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,756, Level: 22
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 294
    Overall activity: 34.0%


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    The Bulgarians and Slavs all had very stable and impressive Empires and Kingdoms on the Balkan.
    The Osmanic invasion and rule was truly what plunged the Balkans into turmoil.

    I personally only view the Byzantine Empire as the titular successor to the Roman Empire. In many ways the Carolingian Empire was the true successor of the old Roman Empire [territory, infrastructure (roads/towns), Latin Alphabet, etc.] and in that sense the Roman Empire lived on.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    28-02-10
    Posts
    263
    Points
    7,254
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,254, Level: 25
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 296
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by albanopolis View Post
    Studies of 6th century Bavarian Graveyards proved that the cause of death was plague. Historians think that 2/3 of Roman Empires population were dead because of plague that lasted 200 years. This was one of the main causes of Roman Empire demise. Since the plague was not spread to Slavic populated areas it brought the explosion of Slavic populations. So plague its one of the causes, that we have South Slavs in places where they do not belong, namely Balkans They brought destruction to long established local cultures and disappearance of nations like Thrace, Panonia and many more. Whole areas of Balkan were filled with barbaric Slavic tribes that never brought anything to the area, than the savagery. What is your hypothetical view, would Balkan been better of without Slavs, Worse off, or the same as it is. Without plague Slavs had no chance of entering Balkans Roman Empire woould have had the manpower to protect its possessions.

    This?

    .. and coming from an Albanian?

    You have got to be kidding me.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Luan's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-05-13
    Location
    New york
    Posts
    83
    Points
    5,581
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,581, Level: 22
    Level completed: 7%, Points required for next Level: 469
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1a2a1 L23/ R-L150
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Ethnic group
    SHQIPTAR
    Country: Kosovo



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    The Bulgarians and Slavs all had very stable and impressive Empires and Kingdoms on the Balkan.
    The Osmanic invasion and rule was truly what plunged the Balkans into turmoil.

    I personally only view the Byzantine Empire as the titular successor to the Roman Empire. In many ways the Carolingian Empire was the true successor of the old Roman Empire [territory, infrastructure (roads/towns), Latin Alphabet, etc.] and in that sense the Roman Empire lived on.
    Thats true that the Osmanic invasion was what plunged the balkans, but when it comes to the Albanians the slavs were no diffrent then the ottoman. They both oppresed the Albanians, and Albanian and slav have always been fighting before the Ottoman invasion. The Romans also were no diffrent, they also opressed and had slavs.

  17. #17
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Luan View Post
    Thats true that the Osmanic invasion was what plunged the balkans, but when it comes to the Albanians the slavs were no diffrent then the ottoman. They both oppresed the Albanians, and Albanian and slav have always been fighting before the Ottoman invasion. The Romans also were no diffrent, they also opressed and had slavs.
    Please use words Slavs and slaves correctly.

    Don't you think it is about time to stop hating each other and instead work together for better Balkans?

  18. #18
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Boss's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-03-12
    Posts
    119
    Points
    6,400
    Level
    23
    Points: 6,400, Level: 23
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 150
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2f

    Ethnic group
    Greek
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    The Bulgarians and Slavs all had very stable and impressive Empires and Kingdoms on the Balkan.
    The Osmanic invasion and rule was truly what plunged the Balkans into turmoil.

    I personally only view the Byzantine Empire as the titular successor to the Roman Empire. In many ways the Carolingian Empire was the true successor of the old Roman Empire [territory, infrastructure (roads/towns), Latin Alphabet, etc.] and in that sense the Roman Empire lived on.
    What does "the true" successor mean?

  19. #19
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,223
    Points
    41,719
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,719, Level: 63
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 1,231
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody1 View Post
    The Bulgarians and Slavs all had very stable and impressive Empires and Kingdoms on the Balkan.
    The Osmanic invasion and rule was truly what plunged the Balkans into turmoil.

    I personally only view the Byzantine Empire as the titular successor to the Roman Empire. In many ways the Carolingian Empire was the true successor of the old Roman Empire [territory, infrastructure (roads/towns), Latin Alphabet, etc.] and in that sense the Roman Empire lived on.
    I don't like byzantine for other reasons,. but words like Romania Romylia, Aromani,
    and the Vlach existance and the Imperial CODEXes show clear that byzantine was bilingual and after crusaders the Greek part took the 'head'

  20. #20
    Regular Member Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Yetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-11
    Location
    Makedonia
    Posts
    5,223
    Points
    41,719
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,719, Level: 63
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 1,231
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    G2a3a
    MtDNA haplogroup
    X2b

    Ethnic group
    Makedonian original
    Country: Greece



    Quote Originally Posted by Luan View Post
    Thats true that the Osmanic invasion was what plunged the balkans, but when it comes to the Albanians the slavs were no diffrent then the ottoman. They both oppresed the Albanians, and Albanian and slav have always been fighting before the Ottoman invasion. The Romans also were no diffrent, they also opressed and had slavs.
    Albanians allied with Slavs,
    remember Epirus despotate against Serbo-Albanians and Normands,
    Albanians were allies with Slavs,
    remember Kastrioti enthrone time names and consultats,

  21. #21
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points
    Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-03-13
    Posts
    1,040
    Points
    5,756
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,756, Level: 22
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 294
    Overall activity: 34.0%


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    Quote Originally Posted by Boss View Post
    What does "the true" successor mean?
    In comparison to the Byzantine Empire, the Carolingian Empire resembled more the Old Roman Empire.
    Needless to say that the Roman Church (Pope) had a far greater influence on the Franks (Baptism of Clovis, Coronation of Charlemagne) than on the Byzantines.
    With Charlemagne's coronation on Christmas day 800AD in Rome; he held the official title Karolus serenissimus Augustus a Deo coronatus magnus pacificus imperator Romanum gubernans imperium

    the territory that was united during the Carolingian dynasty also revamped the old Roman infrastructure (roads, trade routes, towns, etc.)

    There were two great Empires in early medieval Europe the Byzantine and the Carolingian, to me the Carolingian is far more rooted in character and structure to the old Roman Empire than the Byzantine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yetos View Post
    I don't like byzantine for other reasons,. but words like Romania Romylia, Aromani, and the Vlach existance and the Imperial CODEXes show clear that byzantine was bilingual and after crusaders the Greek part took the 'head'
    Of course, the Byzantine Empire was called the East Roman Empire and had abundance of old Roman citizens (Romanics); Thats why i said only titular the Byzantine Empire was the successor.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points
    Nobody1's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-03-13
    Posts
    1,040
    Points
    5,756
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,756, Level: 22
    Level completed: 42%, Points required for next Level: 294
    Overall activity: 34.0%


    Country: Germany - Baden-Wurttemberg



    Quote Originally Posted by Luan View Post
    Thats true that the Osmanic invasion was what plunged the balkans, but when it comes to the Albanians the slavs were no diffrent then the ottoman. They both oppresed the Albanians, and Albanian and slav have always been fighting before the Ottoman invasion. The Romans also were no diffrent, they also opressed and had slavs.
    The Romans fought the famous Illyrian pirates (Queen Teuta), and than opressed Illyria like they opresed other conquered territory (nothing special).

    The Slavs were only in the Byzantine army, never in the old Roman army.
    Jordanes and Prokopius [Byzantine Historians] mention the Slavs living between Vistula, Dniester and Dnieper (6th cen AD) and record Slavic mercenaries in the Byzantine army during the Gothic war in Italy.

    Slavs on the Balkans are recorded (def.) by Paul the Deacon during the reign of Agilulf (590-616). If the Slavs migrated along with the Avars is not known, but it is recorded that they were peoples among the Avar Khaganate.

    Albania was a very important part of the Byzantine Empire, but the Battle of Dyrrhachium (Durrës) in 1081 was a massive defeat for the Byzantines against the Normannic Duchy of Apulia.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    28-02-10
    Posts
    263
    Points
    7,254
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,254, Level: 25
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 296
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    original poster has issues

    Albania is worst country in Europe, least developed, and with probably most primitive people.
    He just wants excuse, but the truth is they are in shit situation purely because of their own incompetence

  24. #24
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    28-02-10
    Posts
    263
    Points
    7,254
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,254, Level: 25
    Level completed: 41%, Points required for next Level: 296
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Croatian
    Country: Croatia



    Quote Originally Posted by Luan View Post
    Thats true that the Osmanic invasion was what plunged the balkans, but when it comes to the Albanians the slavs were no diffrent then the ottoman. They both oppresed the Albanians, and Albanian and slav have always been fighting before the Ottoman invasion. The Romans also were no diffrent, they also opressed and had slavs.

    Šiptars are mentioned first in 12 century, officially you didnt exist in Balkans before that.
    No Roman, Greek, or anybody mentioned anything about Šiptars before that, or even anything similar even those who were writing about people of Balkans.

    Šiptars only fought us in a service of Ottomans

  25. #25
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran5000 Experience Points
    nordicwarbler's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-03-13
    Posts
    201
    Points
    5,095
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,095, Level: 21
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 455
    Overall activity: 10.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1 (M253)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H

    Ethnic group
    European mix
    Country: United States



    Hmm, as an American I can say that I think I'm missing something concerning the deep divides in the Balkans. Nothing I've read fully explains the animosity in this area.

    On a side note... regarding Nobody1's comments on the Carolingian Empire, has anyone read the article about how the Norse brutally attacked the monks in Ireland to send a message to the Carolingians? They saw that the Carolingians were using the Church as a tool in the eventual invasion of the Northern territories.

    Unfortunately I'm not a great linker... anyone else read this article? Very interesting.

    P.S. I saw that Albanopolis got banned-- what happened?!
    Last edited by nordicwarbler; 12-05-13 at 13:22.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •