History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login


Forum Lockedwhy did marcus and basil destory their empires

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
Post Options Post Options   Quote hiddenhistory Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: why did marcus and basil destory their empires
    Posted: 09-Jun-2009 at 18:27

that means that from the time of trajan the roman state was running on borrowed time, living only on the gold from his dacian war and that when this run out the crisis began there was nothing anyone could do about it. hummm not sure about that. possible instead after the civil wars in 69 and the vast building programmes like the colluseum the bank was empty. trajan just refilled it with his dacian war and set things right again. all was fine till marcus time when war and disease upset things. but by the end of his time marcus had almost set things right again. had he lived on or had he chosen a competent man to follow him things could have went back to the way they were before.

Back to Top
es_bih View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Beglerbeg

Joined: 20-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3426
Post Options Post Options   Quote es_bih Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2009 at 18:41
It is interesting how you admit relative ignorance to this time period, but keep your circular argument. It is hard to keep up with what false premise has been debunked or not by now.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 610
Post Options Post Options   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2009 at 22:31
Hey, Pinoy jokes may abound but it is rude to address someone in Tagalog. You may think it cute, but it is not.
Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
Post Options Post Options   Quote hiddenhistory Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2009 at 22:53

sorry i hit the wrong key, what i meant to say was interesting thank you for your insight

Back to Top
es_bih View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Beglerbeg

Joined: 20-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3426
Post Options Post Options   Quote es_bih Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2009 at 00:26
Originally posted by hiddenhistory

sorry i hit the wrong key, what i meant to say was interesting thank you for your insight



Regardless, you always have the edit function. I will hide your post.

Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
Post Options Post Options   Quote hiddenhistory Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2009 at 15:37

so back to the debate we agree then that had marcus chosen a competent successor the roman empire would have survived

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 610
Post Options Post Options   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2009 at 16:00
What a fascination for the circuitious!!!
 
The "Roman Empire" did survive Commodus and if you look into the existing sources you will find that this last of the Antonines was quite popular with the people, if not with the Senatorial class. The conflict with the latter accelerated after AD 190 and what you so willingly overlook is the career of Septimus Severus...as well as others. Your contention just does not wash and makes soap-bubbles of interpretative flow during the 4th century, given the fact that institutional history continued despite the incompetence of a host of would-be emperors and successors.
 
I wonder what you would make of contemporary Korean history?
Back to Top
es_bih View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Beglerbeg

Joined: 20-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3426
Post Options Post Options   Quote es_bih Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2009 at 21:18
drgonzaga I see you're still trying...don't you see, what has been written is wrong...the Roman Empire actually collapsed the moment Commodus took the title and magically re-appeared when Basil II became emperor. Filled a void and skiped time. Must be as we provided evidence for our claims - and he is still going on with the original premise. :).

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 610
Post Options Post Options   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2009 at 21:53
Well, es_bih, I am simply trying to preserve the intellectual integrity of the Forum in the event someone truly interested in the subject encounters the thread. Regretfully, one must make the time to defend Clio's honor from would-be "rapists".
BANG!-You-are-Dead


Edited by drgonzaga - 10-Jun-2009 at 21:54
Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
Post Options Post Options   Quote hiddenhistory Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jun-2009 at 12:10

guys relax im not trying to rape anything particularly clios honour, yes i agree the empire continued, yes i agree there were many competant emperors. im just suggested that perhaps if another man who was competant had followed marcus perhaps roman history would have been different. anyway im going to raise a white flag on this one before i give you both strokes. nice talking to you and i actually learnt a lot. take care huh

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 15-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 610
Post Options Post Options   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jun-2009 at 14:45
HH, no need to worry about my health, I've got insurance coverage up the wazoo! However, despite my colored language and Romantic allusions--shades of Europa and the randy bull--the point behind my caveats was a simple one: the Roman world as a cultural phenomenon still haunts us today, and your concern over decadence and decay is but a projection of a contemporary political bugaboo. The spectre of Rome shadows us as much as it did the political thinkers of the late Enlightenment--the book to read: J. G. A. Pocock. The Machiavellian Moment (1976).
Back to Top
hiddenhistory View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 27-May-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
Post Options Post Options   Quote hiddenhistory Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jun-2009 at 16:08
will have a look at it soon as i can. actually the reason i was going on about this was because when i looked at the history of the empire it seemed that two things were most important the army and the emperor. if there was a strong emperor who commanded the respect of the army then despite problems like attacks from outside and disease pretty much all was ok. look at the first emperors they commanded respect and all was fine then caligula and nero lost that and the result was civil war. then comes along vespasian sets things right and starts a line of emperors respected by the army and up till the death of marcus all is fine. the commudus ruins that and after that its pretty much more about individual warlords grabing power. yes there some very competent ones and some commanded respect but the damage had been done and was never repaired despite the best efforts of diocletion.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.