Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who was “Third Rome” ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Machlud View Post

    Oh! Dear!............................................. ..........
    Have you ever give a look to any ancient jug? There is no special or magical technology there.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
      First, what is the "second Rome"?... If you refer to Byzantine Empire, it's Rome, period.

      As for a supposed "third Rome" (which would be the second) it would be the HRE because of its name,its influence all over Europe and more important : the restauration of the "Western Roman Empire" (which I would personally consider as a joke, but anyway).


      So what? Papal states had Rome itself, was it Roman Empire? No. Plus once Ottomans took Byzantium, many of the brains from there ran away to Europe and started the Renaissance.
      The second Rome refers to holy roman empire.

      You are right that Byzantines are same as Rome, both are first Rome, Byzantines as word appeared later in 15th.

      Mehmed II declared himself Kaiser-i Rum after conquering Constantinople and taking it as capital city. Mehmed also had a blood lineage to the Byzantine Imperial family; his predecessor, Sultan Orhan I had married a Byzantine princess, and Mehmed may have claimed descent from John Tzelepes Komnenos

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Mikeesmith View Post

        The second Rome refers to holy roman empire.

        You are right that Byzantines are same as Rome, both are first Rome, Byzantines as word appeared later in 15th.

        Mehmed II declared himself Kaiser-i Rum after conquering Constantinople and taking it as capital city. Mehmed also had a blood lineage to the Byzantine Imperial family; his predecessor, Sultan Orhan I had married a Byzantine princess, and Mehmed may have claimed descent from John Tzelepes Komnenos
        Why the second Rome would not refer to Byzantine empire? And the HRE was existing until the Napoleonian war, so... disappearing to leta "third Rome" is... not convincing at all.

        His ancestor having one Byzantine princess as consort doesn't make her his ancestor as well unless she is her grandmother, mother or such. Claiming to descent from a Byzantine prince without anything beside either. Actually, it looks a lot like those people claiming they have "brightful" ancestors because they have absolutely no legitimacy by themselves on the place they invaded.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Elishar View Post
          Oh , obviously the califate,,they have so much in common with rome,,Haahaahahaahh...
          Sure they do... mass genocidal slaughters, pedistry at the palace, trying to conquer the whole world, mass enslavement.. the Caliphate is the true successor to the Rome that was left behind over 1500 years ago...

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

            Sure they do... mass genocidal slaughters, pedistry at the palace, trying to conquer the whole world, mass enslavement.. the Caliphate is the true successor to the Rome that was left behind over 1500 years ago...
            Not the same purpose either, and still many diferences. I would rather be a slave in Rome than in any muslim empire for the eventuality of bein wel treated according to the Roman laws. Then the level of Rome, concerning technology and their ability to develop is much more important.Rome has probably the greatest influence, with Greeks, on Europe and the world while Ottomans... They do have, sure, but not as Rome still has.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Machlud View Post
              I am not being cynical at all. I am just saying that we learn very little or nothing from history, or if we do we ignore it.
              Erm no you're not, you are contradicting yourself like you usually do

              Originally posted by Machlud View Post
              Nothing, absolutely nothing is learned from History never has been and never will be, if it had this World would be a much different place!!!
              Originally posted by Machlud View Post
              For example:-- the early Egyptians had jugs that spilt not a drop of water when pouring, water was precious, yet I cannot buy a jug type kettle that does not dribble all over the place whilst I am pouring from it. Which part of that is learning from History?
              All that proves is you don't learn from your own history of previous mistakes or you would have spent more money on a better jug type kettle, mine doesn't spill a drop



              Comment


              • #22
                Absolutely the Ottoman Empire

                Comment


                • #23
                  city is not a who, lel

                  but yeah usually it refers to Moscow, no one considers post byzantine Constantinopole to be it. It was mostly a failed attempt by ottoman pashas to claim the title of protector of orthodox christianity- as retarded as that sounds.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Moscow is the Third Rome, as Philotheus said "First Rome fell because of heresy (catholic faith), second Rome fell because of the betrayal of true faith. Moscow is the third Rome and it won't fall"

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by grgur View Post
                      city is not a who, lel
                      but yeah usually it refers to Moscow, no one considers post byzantine Constantinopole to be it. It was mostly a failed attempt by ottoman pashas to claim the title of protector of orthodox christianity- as retarded as that sounds.
                      This is not clear to me,how long following the capture of the haggia sofia did the moslems wait before making it a mosque REPLACING Christianity before projecting themselves as GUARDIANS of said Christianity...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        We all agree where was the first Rome. But what means expression "third Rome". It is a continuation of evolved civilization from a nucleus born on the banks of Tiber river. With "Rome" being not only a capitol but a central point for their civilization.

                        The "second Rome" is Constantinople. Created as a capitol for a Christian nation, as Rome was tainted by paganity. For first 100 years it was a pure latin transplantation surrounded by greek speaking people. With time not only language was replaced but also culture, fashion, military and administration started to evolve in something different. With each loss of Latin speaking city, this process was increasing. I recommend a book "lost to the west" by Lars Brownworth where history of Rome is focused on so called "byzantium". What remained same, unchanged? Common myths, binding people together and really often their heritage. People remembered from where they are and were still calling themselves Romans, even in Greek - Rhomanoi. Greeks started using other name just in XIX century, this "myth" was so strong. From mentioned reasons even if both periods were different, somehow it was "same" capitol and a ruler. Regsrdimg myths in a nation creation you should read Yuval Noah Harari - homo deus.

                        Things becames complicated with a term the third Rome. We have real two places aspiring - Moscow and an Islam Constantinople, renamed a few centuries later an Istanbul.

                        The Russians weren't sharing myths, the Rome was never there, they do not had a heritage and they weren't considering themselves Romans.

                        Ottomans from other hand... People had heritage. Bulgarian, Serbian, Armenian and Greek speaking - the 6 from 8 main dynasties were converted from Christianity. Former citizens of byzantine empire. The nephew of last Constantinople ruler was raised as an Muslim in same palace but by turks and became a famous admiral fighting against Christians. Till XVIII century population in modern Turkey was more Christians than Muslims. The territory of Ottoman Empire was covering in 100% a Byzantine periods and sometimes also part of stricte Latin speaking more "roman" part. "Turks" in many cases were converts to both religion and nationhood from previous. And do not understand me wrong. It is really impressive from my point of view how small population of maybe 10-20% convinced rest to join them. They had another religion and language than "first" Rome, but same follows to "second". First paganity - Christianity ajd later catholicism and orthodoxs.

                        Russia had only mixed royalty with former byzantine which had everyone. Royal courts all over the Europe were related to each other. An average Russians never considered themselves as Romans. Do not had same "myths". Hover and average Anatoliam in xvi century, could.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gelassenheit View Post
                          The Russians weren't sharing myths, the Rome was never there, they do not had a heritage and they weren't considering themselves Romans.
                          Such a scientific article with a detailed analysis...

                          Moscow stands on seven hills, like Rome. Rome Empire was the largest country, as Russia is now, with capital in Moscow.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by VaselineBasket View Post
                            Such a scientific article with a detailed analysis...

                            Moscow stands on seven hills, like Rome. Rome Empire was the largest country, as Russia is now, with capital in Moscow.
                            Yes mate but China is also a big country. Are you are really saying that Russia should be considered a third Rome because is big? What about China, is it a big enough country? In one city they have even a monument of Roman soldier because they insist their ancestors were captives from Crassus army. They realky went to China some of them as mercenaries. What about Bangkok, can it be called second venice because has canals? Russia has nothing to do with Roman Empire. So called cultural influence was much stronger from the steppes from the nomads, especially Khazzars, Mongols and especially a country called a golden horde. Not from small part of Crimea which had small but eradicated already in medieval population of Romans, through centuries. And because some people can be offended by facts my ancestors were Russian. So called byzantine diaspora after fall of Constantinople was biggest in genua and Venice not in Russia. Including members of royal dynasty. However, "italians" never insisted on being "third" Rome. In case of Russia it was all about a casus beli against Turkey a reason of war. The possible result of so called greek plan was to create a "greek" vassal state in Anatolya, resurrected byzantine empire under a direct rule of Russian crown. That is why wars in Bulgaria and Serbia supported by Russia, it wasn't about panslavism but about byzantine. That is why in Southern Ukraine you have greek names, which were given in xix century it was all about public relations. As well as greek uprising in peleponeese penisula supported by Russian navy.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Elishar View Post
                              Oh , obviously the califate,,they have so much in common with rome,,Haahaahahaahh...
                              It is interesting, your comment. What side of their common do you think?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Gelassenheit View Post
                                Yes mate but China is also a big country.
                                Total in km^2
                                1 Russia 17,098,246
                                2 Canada 9,984,670
                                3 China 9,596,961

                                17,098,246-9,596,961=7,501,285 (Total in km^2 of Australia = 7,692,024)
                                Russia=China+Australia
                                I think you should know the total square of Australia, because you live in Australia.

                                Originally posted by Gelassenheit View Post
                                Are you are really saying that Russia should be considered a third Rome because is big?
                                Have you heard of the literary figures of speech, for example "simile"?

                                Originally posted by Gelassenheit View Post
                                Russia has nothing to do with Roman Empire.
                                This is true. But Russia has a common religion with the former Byzantine (Eastern) Roman Empire.

                                Originally posted by Gelassenheit View Post
                                So called cultural influence was much stronger from the steppes from the nomads, especially Khazzars, Mongols and especially a country called a golden horde.
                                This is all relative. If you're talking about the Kievan Rus, then you say true. If we are talking about Moscovia, as the founder of Russia, the basis of culture laid Baltic and Eastern Slavs, Finnish tribes and some Polish immigrants.

                                Last edited by VaselineBasket; Yesterday, 10:35 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X