Emperor Goblinus
-
Posts
216 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Emperor Goblinus
-
-
Maybe it was Theodosius (who razed the temples), however the reasons were probably the same as the ones mention in my previous post.
Anyway, I recall reading it was Constantine who razed pagan temples, acording to my history book at least.
Theodosius actively had temples smashed, while I think Constantine just turned a blind eye to the vandalizing of certain temples. Constantine didn't move too terribly strongly against paganism, simply because it was still dominant, and a backlash could have cost him his throne. Also, the army was mostly pagan, and an emperor that lost favor with the army in the late imperial period was doomed.
-
From what I've heard about it, it's quite a humanizing story. Both the Christians and Muslims are depicted as just regular people, with neither side being demonized.
-
In the infamous "Year of the Four Emperors," the empire was torn asunder with usurpers and Gallic attempts at seccession. Could the empire have indeed been split apart due to the fighting?
-
Did any remnant pagans continue to practice through the Byzantine medieval period up to 1453?
-
There is alot of truth to that. Diolcetian may have been born a slave, and many of the founders of the great imperial houses were military men of modest background. Diocletian did not want his system to be based on blood but on merit, and that is probably why Constantine originally did not succeed his father as the western Caesar. However, the Dominate saw some of the first dynasties that looked like royal dynasties. Up until that time, with the exception of Claudius II, you never saw seconds, thirds or fourths in a dynasty. The idea of setting up a fixed dynasty, though accepted long before, now seemed to be the rule, with houses like the Constantines and the Theodosians setting up ruling families that could only be matched in previous generations with the Julio-Claudians. Thus in a way, though the old senatorial class was definitely pushed aside, it just seemed to be replacing one elite with another. Was it for the better? I think so. Though it did destroy whatever was left of the republican system (though the Valentinians repeatedly used the propaganda of "restoring the republic"), in the harsh military times, it was better for a hard Pannonian soldier to be in charge than a spoiled senator.
The major pitfall of the Dominate was the fact that children could now become emperor, which led to things like the disaster that was Honorius. In the times of the Principate, the Senate would never have stood for giving the imperial powers to a five-year old.
-
Good points. The dominate was much more honest about the monarchy, rather than the principate which was hampered by republican illusions. I for one do think that the dominate or something like it was necessary in the wake of the third century. In the happy sunshine days of the Pax Romana, the Romans could have the luxury of leaving their emperor's powers vague and pretend that it was still a republic. But this vagueness probably prolonged the third century crisis. Everyone knew that the emperor was the real authority, yet there was not set method of choosing him. Thus, this led to troops proclaiming their officers left and right, numerous civil wars, and an inability to keep the borders. Diocletian and the emperors that came after him solidified the position and power of the emperor (though the issue of succession was never definitively solved). It is sad to see the last vestiges of republicanism go out the window, but the changed empire could not indulge in them any longer.
-
I've heard that before. Although I don't think that the Byzantines shared that idea. At times, they seemed to have been almost racist, and banned marriages with any other groups, other than the Franks.
-
Interesting. I always thought that it was used to allow the Byzantines to be able to recruit barbarians into the army.
-
It did indeed give them added protection against assassination. As for their influence, it all depended on the emperor. Soldier emperors like Diocletian, Constantine, Constantius II, Julian, the Valentinian brothers, and Theodosius I all fought on the front lines and earned the respect of their troops and were very active in shaping the policy of the state. It was only when emperors, especially in the West, did little more than sit on their throne, did their power slip into the hands of others.
-
Happy Birthday!
-
Starting in the late thrid century, the emperors furthered distanced themselves from the notion of the "first citizen," and developed all of the trappings of the Persian royal court. Do you think that such a change helped the beleagured later empire, or hastened its decline?
-
I believe it was Zeno, but I'm not too sure. Also, Majorian failed to take back North Africa, but he was pretty effective for a western emperor of that time.
-
Almost any book about the reign of Justinian will most likely give substantial information about Belisarius. Justinian: The Last Roman Emperor goes into great detail about both his personal life and military career.
-
Yes, this can include the Byzantines. Another bad one might be Romaus Diogenes for building up the biggest army that money could buy, then having it wiped out at Manzikert.
-
At the apogee of Byzantine power, the empire controlled a small part of southern Spain, which was finally lost in the 620's. Did this far west piece of territory offer anything to the empire, or was it just dead weight?
-
We have a thread on the best Roman, now who do you think was the worst? For me, it would be a toss between Honorius and Nero. Honorius because of his disastrous policies that ultimately doomed the western empire, and Nero is pretty obvious.
-
I`d like to know what this belief is based on.
The Emperor Maurice and His Historian by Michael Whitby
The History of Byzantium by Timothy E. Gregory
-
It is believe that Maurice planned to divide up the empire, with his son taking the eastern half and ruling in Constantinople, with Maurice ruling the West, not from Ravenna, but from Rome. Unfortunately, his overthrow by Phocas ruined whatever plans he had. But if Maurice had been able to establish a strong imperial thrown in the West, that worked with Constantinople, that the West could have eventually been reconquered?
-
Although I'm glad that he did not resume outright paganism (in fact, I do believe that he invited a number of prominent Christians to his court, but they all refused), but his decision to not allow Christians to teach the classics was quite harmful, and helped to drive a further wedge between classical and Christian culture.
-
Theodosius is often called "the Great," like Constantine the Great. While I think that Constantine earned his title, what other than being the last emperor to rule both the East and the West, made Theodosius "Great?" Though he won some victories over the Goths, his compromises with them allowed them to have virtual kingdoms within the empire.
-
Who knows what would have happened if Julian had been emperor for many years? Though I disagree with his religious policy, I do think that he was an excellent emperor.
-
An interesting article:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5280420
-
Hey all... I was just wondering how was the Military and Religion throughout each stage of the Roman Empire? Im pretty sure the 3 stages were the Republic, the Polytheistic empire, and the Empire when it was under Christianity. I wonder how the Byzantine empire fits into this. yea this is a question to for a college essay I have to write. Hope you guys can help me thanks
Well technically, the Republic is separate from the Empire, so the Republic would not be a stage. For me, the four periods of the imperial period would be the Pax Romana from Augustus to Marcus Aurelius, the period from Commodus to Alexander Severus, the Third Century Crisis from 235 to the ascendancy of Diocletian in 285, the Late Empire from 285 to the death of Heraclius in 641. The Byzantine period is from there until the fall of Constantinople in 1453.
-
Challenge - Find An Old Photo Of Your Home Town
in Historia in Universum
Posted · Edited by Emperor Goblinus
Here's a bird's eye view of Alexandria, Virginia in 1863.
Here's a painting of Civil War artillery at Alexandria.
Here's my former high school, T.C. Williams High. Yes, the same T.C. Williams from Remember the Titans.