when you fall down the stairs, do you timestamp the moment you tripped, the moment you landed at the bottom, or every moment you hit each and every step on the way down?
this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2024
311 points (99.1% liked)
Rough Roman Memes
469 readers
55 users here now
A place to meme about the glorious ROMAN EMPIRE (and Roman Republic, and Roman Kingdom)! Byzantines tolerated! The HRE is not.
RULES:
-
No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, bigotry, etc. The past may be bigoted, but we are not.
-
Memes must be Rome-related, not just the title. It can be about Rome, or using Roman aesthetics, or both, but the meme itself needs to have Roman themes.
-
Follow Lemmy.world rules.
Not sure where to start on Roman history?
A quick memetic primer on Republican Rome
A quick memetic primer on Imperial Rome
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
A better metaphor doesn't exist lmao perfect
Beautiful.
In some ways, this is worse, because they hit metaphorical stairs the whole way up as well, and where the "top" is is a matter of what you want to measure.
It's very not-the-circlejerk, but maybe 13 should be "Rome never existed in the first place".
Your correction should be "The Roman Empire...". The city of Rome existed without a doubt. (So did the empire, but it fits what you're saying.)
"The city of Rome existed without a doubt... (So did the empire....)
Source?
https://www.popularmechanics.com/culture/a42913823/roman-empire-conspiracy-theory/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_chronology_(Fomenko)
(/S)
The other answers use "it", so probably that if we're actually doing a rewrite.
I'm not worried about being misunderstood here, and natural language is intrinsically imprecise. But yeah, Rome the city is still there, and actually bigger than ever.
The bottom, but no one knows how long the stairway was and the steps seem to peter out into smaller and smoother ramps the lower you go.
Explanation: Due to Rome's longevity and its wide reach, there are a number of dates that can be used as its fall - some quite, uh, interesting. For bonus points, my date of choice isn't here.
Oh, and for those curious, the most commonly accepted answers are:
476 AD (Fall of the city of Rome and the Western Empire)
1204 AD (Sack of Constantinople and the break of government continuity in the Byzantine Empire)
1453 AD (Siege of Constantinople and conquest of the Byzantine Empire by the Ottoman Turks)
27 BCE (Fall of the Republic)
395 AD (Split of the Empire into East and West)
476 AD (Fall of the city of Rome and the Western Empire)
717 AD and 867 AD (Byzie stuff? Not sure)
1204 AD (Sack of Constantinople and the break of government continuity in the Byzantine Empire)
1453 AD (Siege of Constantinople and conquest of the Byzantine Empire by the Ottoman Turks)
1806 AD (Dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, the Germanic state which claimed legitimacy by being crowned by the Pope)
1917 AD (Fall of the Romanov dynasty which claimed dynastic continuity with the Byzantine Empire and called Russia the 'Third Rome')
717 AD (-718 AD): Siege of Constantinople by the Umayyad Caliphate
867 AD: Basil I murders Michael III, becoming emperor and establishing the Macedonian dynasty, beginning a Byzantine revival
And if you go by the last one, you can say that they sold Coca-Cola in the Roman Empire.
Man, I love unexpected comparisons like this!
Abraham Lincoln could have sent a fax to a samurai
Woolly mammoths walked the Earth while the pyramids were being built (well, one small corner of it).
Oxford university was teaching before the Aztec Empire began.
I think I read through an entire AskReddit thread of these. A few I came across on my own and was surprised by: Fibbonacci of the numbers fame could have met Ghengis Khan, Benjamin Franklin could have talked to Isaac Newton, and Galileo was literally the same age as Shakespeare.
And TBF there is a pretty good argument that Russia picked up where Byzantium left off, on cultural and religious fronts.
Edit: And if you accept that, maybe 1917 was just a change of dynasty, and it either never fell or fell in 1990.
What's your preferred?
284 AD. The ascension of Diocletian and the shift away from the city of Rome as the center of the Empire. There's still an Empire after that point - but it's only dubiously Roman.
Dominate vs. Principate. Coinage also took a steep nosedive in terms of quality and silver content at this point. I'd argue that Diocletian's argenteii were among the last really "good" coins produced before it all devolved into tiny pieces of copper (nummi). Then again, they were arguably more comemmorative than meant for circulation which is why you'll be fairly hard pressed to come across visibly worn ones.
Things got pretty chaotic in the 300s already. The battle of Adrianople or generally the Gothic War would be a classic choice, and you could even cut it off with Constantine or Valerian if you want to emphasis the transition to Christianity and the accompanying cultural shift.
I don't know why I'm guessing, PugJesus is right here...
Romania and the Papal state still exist so we have one secular and one spiritual remain of Western Rome
1453 AD (Siege of Constantinople and conquest of the Byzantine Empire by the Ottoman Turks)
The petrified king will rise again!
Sound of Philip K Dick smashing option 10 repeatedly
This is my favorite comment. Perhaps ever. 🤣
I’m not familiar with the connection, can you explain it?
Phil believed that time itself ceased operating normally during the Roman empire, that what we perceive now is an illusion, and that the Roman Empire continues in a metaphysical realm trapping humanity in a control system he refers to as the 'Black Iron Prison' wherein no new disruptive ideas can be formed that would allow humans to develop spiritually, only increasingly more complex minutia of entertainment and busy-work. Occasionally, messianic figures arise who are carriers of divine wisdom to try help free humanity, but they die as martyrs, usually as a result of human greed and ignorance, this indicating that we are still too dangerous and don't deserve our freedom yet.
Valis, a book by Philip K Dick. Or Horselover Fat, depending on what you decide to believe.
10, because the Bible says the world will end when Rome falls and yet I still have work tomorrow.
I'm pretty sure that was Babylon, but it's been a while.
Hold my ziggurat, I’m going in.
I actually did too. This is the wiki, at least for what I'm thinking of. Apparently one interpretation of "Babylon" is Rome.
I wasn't taught a clear interpretation, except that suddenly we're not literalists anymore just for that part, haha.
Trick question. All the dates are not in AUC format.
1917 is REALLY stretching it
I know right.... the correct answer is 1997 with the transfer of Hong Kong to the PRC.
This one has my vote.
I'm just glad we can all agree it sure af wasn't 1943.
I request to add 480 to the list!
12, it's 1922.
I love how 11 implies 10 as well. You can't choose that it fell in one sense or another many times without also saying it is yet to fall
This would be a great test question if it was a "short answer" or "essay" question, graded on the quality of answer given.
The answer is 12. Then, in the margins, you go on a deranged tirade about how an insignificant party fact was actually Rome died.
Yes but is the Roman empire happy?
one must imagine the Roman empire to be happy
The answer is however the teacher thinks it happened, history is subjective like that
10 it lives with us and just requires a single apocalypse to come back life
Yesn't
- Depends
view more: next ›