HN user

fkozlowski

93 karma
Posts8
Comments7
View on HN

As other commenters noted — Rome did almost fall apart and come back a few times. Peter Brown has a bit about how the crisis of the 3rd century was reversible because it was fundamentally about control of the empire, rather than disassembling it.

My headcanon is that while the elites of the empire found more value in controlling the reins of power rather than carving out their own fief — that's what prevented collapse.

Yeah, that's a good point. Even though Latin had diverged to the point that reading Cicero required explicit schooling — the post-476 Romans did consider themselves Roman and fully the descendants of the late Republican / early Imperial period.

I'm mostly arguing that people overindex on the political changes and don't see the ground level continuity. Map color changed != they're not Roman any more.

Regardless, I do enjoy asking "what made Rome Rome?" — I like the idea of the Byzantines being Roman in 1453 even though at that point it was tenuous.