Started By
Message

re: Non athletic points to ponder thread

Posted on 5/8/19 at 11:48 am to
Posted by Cheese Grits
Wherever I lay my hat is my home
Member since Apr 2012
55184 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 11:48 am to
I was speaking of the Western, as by your response you are correct.

As to the Eastern, I think as an empire they were more of a glorified city / state blessed with the trade advantage of a geographic moat (when moat is used in the business sense and not the castle sense). While climate would alter the end goods of trade the place and war deaths of a holy war would be difficult for most empires to withstand scarcity and resulting death is pretty established throughout world history.

I might think of the trade (with merchants and mixed races of trade) the Eastern Roman Empire reminds me a bit of is the power of Spain (and Portugal) as the gatekeeper empire of the New World trade.

Would you agree or disagree with this assessment?
Posted by Athanatos
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
8143 posts
Posted on 5/9/19 at 6:04 pm to
quote:

While climate would alter the end goods of trade the place and war deaths of a holy war would be difficult for most empires to withstand scarcity and resulting death is pretty established throughout world history.


Could you expound on this?

quote:

As to the Eastern, I think as an empire they were more of a glorified city / state blessed with the trade advantage of a geographic moat (when moat is used in the business sense and not the castle sense)


I think the Eastern Roman Empire existed as an entity in phases. First, as a subdivision of the Roman Empire as a whole under Diocletian. Second, as the seat of the entire empire under Constantine. Third, as a "coequal" but superior entity relative to the Western Roman Empire. In this phase, the Eastern Roman Empire was rich in trade, military prowess, art, etc. It had its flaws and its dips, but it was by no means a glorified city/state. It stretched from Bulgaria south to Sudan, from Libya east to Palmyra. It was huge, it was populous, and it was rich.I would say that this phase ran from the death of Constantine to the defeat of Valens at Adrianople. From that point on, the East and West were separate entities more and more until the fall of Rome to the Goths in 476 C.E.

During this phase, the Roman Empire in the West dwindled significantly, and the Eastern Roman Empire dwindled and lost various holdings. Then, Emperor Justinian expanded the Eastern Roman Empire again back into Italy, the western Balkans, Sicily, North Africa, etc. At this point, the Eastern Roman Empire was by no means the Roman Empire of the 2nd or even 4th centuries, but it was very large and a massive player in the Eastern Med./Middle East.

The climate change, demographic change, and plaques drastically diminished the strength of this empire as well as their Sassanid neighbors. Then, the Muslim expansion could not have come at a worse time for these empires. This was all still 350 years before the Crusades. The fact that the east survived the Umayyad Expansion was a testament to its strength. It was not until the loss at Manzikert to the Seljuk Turks that I would classify the East as a glorified city-state.
This post was edited on 5/9/19 at 7:39 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter