this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
109 points (100.0% liked)
A Comm for Historymemes
3076 readers
761 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism, atrocity denial, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Lemmy.world rules.
Banner courtesy of @[email protected]
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I had to look up why there were two empires. I took a guess and thought it had something to do with a split of the Catholic Church. I was about a thousand years off.
Source: Students of History
As for the split of the Catholic Church, it happened in 1378:
Source: Christian History for Everyman
Please note: I just search for these events and have no idea how accurate these websites are. "Christian History for Everyman" sounds a little sketchy...
First is mostly accurate! Diocletian actually split the Empire into four sections, but there were two senior Emperors and two junior. The capital in the Western Empire was actually Ravenna, though Rome remained important.
Second is true, but referring to a different schism than the one you're probably thinking of. The schism between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, which predominated in Western Europe and the Byzantine Empire, respectively, was a slow process, but is generally considered to be complete by the Great Schism of 1054
How did you read my mind about the Great Schism of 1054?! Yes, that is the one I was thinking about and I should've looked for the most popular one initially but I am working/procrastinating right now.
Also I just want to say I appreciate this community you built and these interesting post.
Always happy to offer a little entertainment and trivia to the good folk of the Fediverse! 🙏
Splitting up and then one of the division conquering all the others is what Rome did.
Other way around - divide et impera means that Rome attempted to divide their enemies so they could conquer them one at a time (or rule them peaceably while they were focused on hating each other, since 'impera' means 'rule').
Hum... People do have a really strong bias toward looking at only the republic era and the first few decades of the empire.
... what?
The Roman Kingdom certainly didn't divide itself to conquer its enemies. The Crisis of the Third Century included some of the Empire dividing itself, but certainly not conquering anyone - Rome lost territory during the Crisis. The Dominate likewise was a period in which land was largely lost, not gained.
Where you got that it was to conquer its enemies? (Edit: Oh, reading my post again I see where you got that idea.)
It was always dividing itself and conquering itself again. Unless you count parts of it as enemies (what would be reasonable).