EAST ROMAN EMPIRE IN W/Justinian

[Gaius Octavius]

The only reason my name is Gaius Octavius is because Octavian Augustus, Caesar Augustus and their variants were taken.

 

[mjs0]

UB: Theodosian walls. Reaplces castle and cost +50%. City is immune to catapults and trebs.

Imagine building one of those on a city in a hill and garrisoning it with CG3 longbows. 6 * +50% (hill) +25%(city) +100%(walls) + 75%(promotions) = strength 21 How many macemen would it take?

Nice!
Now imagine Justinian with the Protective trait as well (adding Drill I to the longbows), so you can get those defenses in place that much quicker!

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Justinian would probably be aggressive/organized, philosophical/imperialist, or maybe even protective/imperialist.

 

[scy12]

Why not Spiritual - Something ? He is a leader of Byzantium.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Spiritual/imperialist is still open.

 

[cybrxkhan]

aww... too bad Theodora isn't in. hehe.

 

[scy12]

Spiritual/imperialist is still open.

I think it is irrelevant , if it is "open". He may get the traits of other leaders.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

I agree. I don't understand all the hubub that every leader *has* to have unique trait combos. There are still differences of UB's, UU's, and leader characteristics that would differentiate them. But the designers prefer to give each leader different traits, so I was just listing the ones they might choose that are as yet unused.

 

[GoodGame]

Instead of a UB, the walls of Byzantine should be a wonder.

UB: Theodosian walls. Reaplces castle and cost +50%. City is immune to catapults and trebs.

Imagine building one of those on a city in a hill and garrisoning it with CG3 longbows. 6 * +50% (hill) +25%(city) +100%(walls) + 75%(promotions) = strength 21 How many macemen would it take?

 

[Titus001]

From Flavius Valarious at unrv.com

Forget all the jumble mess, just know that the people of classical and medieval greece to the time of mid 20th century never used the word byzantine. Now as to the correct term, it depends on the time period. The ancient greeks around the time of roman dominance would call theselves people of hellenes. The christion greeks meanwhile would term themselves Romaioi,and if used the term hellenes,the Romaioi would hate even if he acknowledge his pagan past. Since the romaioi was extremely assertive of the that his empire was the true ROMAN EMPIRE/Basileria Romaion, so yes, a romaioi, considered himself ROMAN.

Now why do we have the creation of the different terms like byzantine? Blame the WESTERN EUROPEAN POLITICS and probably the POPE who crowned Charlemange. Since Charlemege was supposed the new roman emperor of the (Holy ) 'Roman Empire'
however, what do you do when there was already existing empire in the east? Simple you discredit them and call them the greek empire. Soon western europe was calling the greeks a bunch of things, and one of them was byzantine b/c it became popularized by the west.

Flavius Valens from unrv.com

Titus001- man do i love propaganda by the popes and germans to discredit the real roman in the east and guess what? the propaganda is still around and alive on this forum i guess.

 

[ohcrapitsnico]

I forgot who said this but it was that the HRE was neither holy nor roman nor empire, after studying it I've come to agree with him.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Yeah, the "real Romans"... who spoke Greek, not Latin, whose Empire was based in Constantinople, not Rome, and whose Emperor (Justinian) closed down Plato's Academy, effectively ending classical education and civilization. Yeah, good one, Titus.



Personally, I couldn't care less what they're called. I'm just glad they're in. I doubt very much that the ancient Babylonians would think of themselves in such broad terms, instead of on the mere city-state level, and the same might be said for the Greeks. (Though there's leeway due to their recognition of their collective of achievements.) Many terms used today and in the game are ahistorical (coughcoughNativeAmericanscoughcough) and I don't always like it either, but the nice thing about it is you have the ability to mod the game to suit your own tastes.

 

[Virulent]

If the Byzantines and the Ottomans are in the same game you are going to end up with a Istanbul AND a Constantinople (as opposed to Istanbul NOT Constantinople).

 

[scy12]

Well the Eastern Roman Empire was of course a part of the government of the roman empire but because it is called Eastern Roman some people think the Eastern Romans in the same light as Romans. It was Eastern Roman in name only. The culture of the Roman Empire and that of an Empire situated in the Greek penicula was extremely different. However the state did follow Roman Law originaly that was ofcourse translated in Greek.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Virulent, believe me, you're not the first person to say this. There are already a dozen cities that are duplicated but people never notice it because they are completely different names.

Eburacum = York
Lutetia = Paris
Byzantium = Constantinople = Istanbul
Baghdad ~ Babylon (well, almost)
Burdigala = Bordeaux
Massilia = Marseilles

 

[Titus001]

You are making yourself look foolish gaius.... People on unrv forum i think would have the same opinion as me regarding the made up name so called byzantines. Hey man if you want to believe the pope and german propaganda that the germans or 'Holy Roman Empire' were the roman empire fine by me,when infact the romans in constantinople were the real roman in medieval times.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5724&st=15

 

[Gaius Octavius]

You are making yourself look foolish gaius.... People on unrv forum i think would have the same opinion as me regarding the made up name so called byzantines. Hey man if you want to believe the pope and german propaganda that the germans or 'Holy Roman Empire' were the roman empire fine by me,when infact the romans in constantinople were the real roman in medieval times.

This is getting funnier by the minute!

You might want to visit these threads:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=202545
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=222282

I don't believe the Holy Roman Empire was "Roman" either. I believe the Roman Empire effectively died in the 5th century AD, and the shell that was left was a mere copy, at best. What's interesting is to get the Romans' perspective (i.e., the people who lived in the city of Rome) around that time. When Italy came under siege by the armies of Justinian and Belisarius, a lot of the Italians didn't particularly care to be "liberated" from Gothic rule. They thought of the "Greeks" (yes, that's how they viewed them!) as outsiders coming in and disrupting their lives.

Having said that, as one of my history professors once said (in half jest perhaps), "The Roman Empire is more recent than you think. It's entirely possible that some 'Romans' left after the capture of Constantinople in 1453 and sailed with Columbus to the new world." It's a bit cheezy, but it demonstrates what you're trying to say, I think.

 

[Titus001]

Yeah, the "real Romans"... who spoke Greek, not Latin, whose Empire was based in Constantinople, not Rome, and whose Emperor (Justinian) closed down Plato's Academy, effectively ending classical education and civilization. Yeah, good one, Titus.



Personally, I couldn't care less what they're called. I'm just glad they're in. I doubt very much that the ancient Babylonians would think of themselves in such broad terms, instead of on the mere city-state level, and the same might be said for the Greeks. (Though there's leeway due to their recognition of their collective of achievements.) Many terms used today and in the game are ahistorical (coughcoughNativeAmericanscoughcough) and I don't always like it either, but the nice thing about it is you have the ability to mod the game to suit your own tastes.

Constantinople was the capital of the roman civilization since the time of Constantine the great.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Another good point... for sometime I've been questioning whether Rome really ceased to be "Roman" once the capital was moved out of Rome proper. There are also other factors, such as the adoption of Christianity, that people have mentioned, but I think you could make a better case with the movement of imperial administration.

Having said that, Rome still was the symbolic center and a Western capital until it was moved to Ravenna (I think in 406 IIRC). But whatever the capital was, there's a huge gap between the Rome/Constantinople of 330 AD and the one of 476, 537, or even 1000 AD. By then they were as different as America and England are today, despite having a common ancestry.

 

[scy12]

Greco-Crhistiano-and maybe Roman Civilization. Konstantinoupolis was instead theCapital of the Roman Empire. And yes as a state it deserved to be called Roman.