7 ms·
I have always found the history around the Holy Roman Emperor interesting, with prince electors : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Emperor https://en.wi
by prox 4y ago
I have always found the history around the Holy Roman Emperor interesting, with prince electors : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Emperor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Emperor as a basis of continuing the Roman Empire in the west.
As it is I think we know little what happened to aristocratic families at the end of the Empire as well.
- tomatocracy 4y agoI rather like Gibbon's argument that the Ottoman empire was effectively the continuation of the Byzantine/Eastern Roman empire - by that line of thinking the ultimate surviving descendant of the Roman Empire fought in the First World War.
- simiones 4y agoIt's also fun to note that one of the first leaders of the Russian empire married one of the last Byzantine princesses - thus taking the title of Caesar (Tsar).
- neaden 4y agoYeah Moscow sometimes referred to as Third Rome by people who view it as the continuation. The Holy Roman Empire would have of course differed as the Kaiser (also Caesar derived) similarly counted himself as the continuation of the Roman Empire.
- vt85 4y agoAnd since when Tsar is Byzantine title? :)))
- int_19h 4y agoTsar is a contraction of Caesar as pronounced in Slavic languages. The corresponding Byzantine title was Basileus, and while the word itself is unrelated, the title correspondence was very well established at the time (much like the use of "emperor" for Chinese and Japanese rulers, even though the titles in those languages are not etymologically related, either).
- vt85 4y ago
- JadeNB 4y ago> I rather like Gibbon's argument that the Ottoman empire was effectively the continuation of the Byzantine/Eastern Roman empire - by that line of thinking the ultimate surviving descendant of the Roman Empire fought in the First World War. The Ottomans themselves thought of and described themselves this way.
- bhaak 4y agoWe know so little that there is no verified unbroken lineage between anybody from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_antiquity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descent_from_antiquity
- ginko 4y agoMeanwhile there's people alive today who claim main line descent from Confucius who lived in the 5th century BC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung_Tsui-chang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung_Tsui-chang
- thaumasiotes 4y agoChina also has a continuous literary tradition between that time and now, so the claims are plausible. I'm actually more impressed that the old Chinese imperial families are still around: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Zhao https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Zhao https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Zhu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Zhu In what I would think of as the "standard model" of history, one of the highest priorities for a new king is eliminating everyone who might theoretically be related to the old king.
- vkazanov 4y agoYeah.. even the last Chinese emperor wasn't executed, despite the endless civil war and his cooperation with Japanese.
- thaumasiotes 4y agoOn the other hand, membership in that family is unlikely to be something you want widely advertised. I believe most of them changed their name.
- SZJX 4y agoIt does seem to be a Chinese tradition (and I believe in quite a few other places) to pacify the old king and grant them a comfortable enough retirement, as they’ve already lost power. It’s probably less confrontational and somewhat satisfies all sides in the long run. Examples would be some kings during the Three Kingdom period, who all got some sort of honorary title in the conqueror’s kingdom.