this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2025
131 points (100.0% liked)
RoughRomanMemes
674 readers
23 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 Piefed.social rules.
MORE COMMS ON THE HISTORYVERSE:
- !historymusic@quokk.au
- !historygallery@quokk.au
- !historymemes@piefed.social
- !historyruins@piefed.social
- !historyart@piefed.social
- !historyartifacts@piefed.social
- !historyphotos@piefed.social
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
This is me with Byzantium :(
No-one who's studied empire could mourn its passing.
Yes, I'm sure the decline and fall of the Empire led to a much better situation for ordinary people and a blossoming of civilized arts. After all, it was an empire! The magic word makes it void of redeeming features, unlike such holsum words as 'Kingdom' or 'League'.
I think Italians have better healthcare and quality of life now, so, yes?
So do the Japanese nowadays, but I don't think the fall of the Empire was really relevant to that.
The decline and fall of the Empire set back European civilization hundreds of years. The subsequent period was one of recovery from a significant loss, not an improvement over what preceded it. Only after hundreds of years of recovery, arguably over a thousand, did conditions for Italians improve from what they were during the height of the Empire.
thought it was obvious a non serious answer.
though The Roman empire was great for its upper class,. the average person quality of life wasn't that great.
thought it was obvious a non serious answer.
Unfortunately, I've seen far too many serious "The fall of the Roman Empire improved quality of life because it was an empire and therefore bad" arguments.
though The Roman empire was great for its upper class,. the average person quality of life wasn’t that great.
The average person's quality of life wasn't that great after either; and, for that matter, became considerably worse following the Empire's fall.
personally, I don't feel that bad for an empire that went around enslaving every territory it conquered until it ended up destroying it's own economy.
and please don't reply with "every empire did that". because they weren't really invading competing empires but populated regions in their way.
personally, I don’t feel that bad for an empire that went around enslaving every territory it conquered until it ended up destroying it’s own economy.
what.
and please don’t reply with “every empire did that”. because they weren’t really invading competing empires but populated regions in their way.
... what do you think the peoples whom the Roman conquered did to each other? Or to the Romans themselves, for that matter?
Do I have to launch into a lecture on Celtic and Germanic endemic warfare?
Wow, way to jump unto another topic.
Wow, way to jump unto another topic.
... your rebuttal had the clear implication that the 'populated regions' that the Romans conquered didn't engage in the same kind of warfare and enslavement that the Romans themselves did, which is patently untrue.
and please don’t reply with “every empire did that”. because they weren’t really invading competing empires but populated regions in their way.
That's 100% things you said I said, not things I said.
If I said I don't feel bad for the end of expansionists empires that enslaved and destroyed other cultures. It is safe to assume that I don't feel bad for the end of expansionists empires that enslaved and destroyed other cultures. not that I "only don't care about expansionists empires that enslaved and destroyed other cultures if said empire is this specific one"
That’s 100% things you said I said, not things I said.
and please don’t reply with “every empire did that”. because they weren’t really invading competing empires but populated regions in their way.
It is safe to assume that I don’t feel bad for the end of expansionists empires that enslaved amd destroyed other cultures.
Lord.
So we are at the same "Empire is my trigger word" that I explained my irritation with at the start.
Wait, do you think expansionists empires are a good thing?
Wait, do you think expansionists empires are a good thing?
I think that the notion that Rome did anything that the people it conquered weren't also doing (as you claimed in the excerpt) is absurd; and furthermore, that the idea that the Roman Empire was involved in the business of destroying other cultures (as you claim in the second quote) speaks as to a lack of understanding of how the Roman Empire worked. Presumably because the word 'Empire' has negative and modern connotations, considering the emphasis you keep going back to the word with.
didn't know the Iberians and Egyptians were trying to conquer Rome.
This really speaks to your worldview.
didn’t know the Iberians and Egyptians were trying to conquer Rome.
I thought you didn't feel bad for expansionist polities that enslaved and conquered their neighbors?
This really speaks to your worldview.
That is comes from an understanding of Classical antiquity instead of a Pavlovian reaction to the word 'Empire'?
Wait, were they? was Egypt an expansist empire thing to conquer the world? didn't they even set up nations for the defeated sea people? by today's standards Egypt sucked back then. but by the classical period, Rome sucked too.
You seem to relish in your love of rome. which is a bit of a red flag.
it's ok to acknowledge that it was impressive empire, while acknowledging that it also sucked and it was bound to collapse sooner or later from it's own bullshit.
Wait, were they? was Egypt an expansist empire thing to conquer the world?
... do you really not know? Are you really making this argument from a place of ignorance that serious?
... yes. Yes, Egypt was an expansionist empire. It was an intensely expansionist empire. Under native rulers, under Nubian rulers, and under Ptolemaic rulers alike.
didn’t they even set up nations for the defeated sea people?
... the... the Sea Peoples the Egyptians defeated whose warriors they conscripted into the Egyptian army and sent out onto the frontiers of the Egyptian empire to fight Egypt's enemies?
by today’s standards Egypt sucked back then. but by the classical period, Rome sucked too.
By today's standards both polities were awful, and unambiguously so. By the standards of the period, the Principate era of the Roman Empire was exceptional in most areas - and certainly not some aberrant polity doing conquest and slavery on poor foreign peoples who had never done any such thing in their lives.
The Celtic polities and Germanic tribes they warred against regularly, and with great vigor, conquered, enslaved, and even exterminated their neighbors. Same with the Iberian polities, same with Egypt and the other Successor States. Rome conquering them was no different than what the conquered peoples did to their neighbors (and fellow countrymen) - save that Rome's successes were more lasting.
You seem to relish in your love of rome. which is a bit of a red flag.
I do adore the aesthetic and history of Rome, but my irritation here is centered around unfortunately all-too-common pop history myths that you're insisting on.
it’s ok to acknowledge that it was impressive empire, while acknowledging that it also sucked and it was bound to collapse sooner or later from it’s own bullshit.
-
At no point have I denied that by modern standards, Rome was not good.
-
The point of contention that this conversation started on was about the living standards before and after the Empire for the common people.
-
The argument escalated into a broader issue of the relative morality of the Roman Empire when you insisted that the 'populated regions' it conquered were substantially different from the Empire in their behavior with regards to conquest and slavery. This became more grating with the revelation that you did not understand that Egypt was an expansionist empire, when it was one of the first in recorded history.
-
It became more contentious when you connected the destruction of cultures, a common feature of the empires of early modernity, with the Roman Empire, which was famously multicultural.
-
The determinist view that it was 'bound to collapse', especially pared with your previous implication of the Roman Empire as a plunder economy, a position that went out of style in academia in the late 19th century, is immensely irritating.
rule of thumb, if someone isn't taking a topic seriously, you shouldn't get too serious either, honestly, that wordcount is a wee too much. not going to read beyond a paragraph. have life to do, and reading that is too involved. plus, if you haven't noticed, I'm a wee anarchist. so any empire is bad, and Romans were exceptionally bad. maybe simply because their succeed or were inherently more deranged than the rest. but dude, chill. I've insulted a dead empire, don't get offended in its behalf.
rule of thumb, if someone isn’t taking a topic seriously, you shouldn’t get too serious either,
You mean like when you clarified that your first response wasn't serious, and then contrasted it by making a serious statement, and then a series of serious statements betraying an utter paucity of understanding of even the basic concepts being discussed?
honestly, that wordcount is a wee too much. not going to read beyond a paragraph. have life to do, and reading that is too involved.
Lord. But an unsurprising attitude.
and Romans were exceptionally bad.
"This thing I don't understand any detail of is bad because it has bad word in it >:("
But hey, it has your trigger word in it, so go off, I guess.
man, take your meds please. don't blame me for your high blood pressure.
Still, fuck the Roman empire, the best thing it ever did is collapse under its own bullshit.
Given the difference in word count between our responses, it is interesting that think I'm the triggered one.
man, take your meds please. don’t blame me for your high blood pressure.
I'm sorry that you feel that insistently repeating utterly idiotic misinformation on a historical subject is something that you should get asspats instead of pushback for.
Given the difference in word count between our responses, it is interesting that think I’m the triggered one.
Christ. Do I have to explain what a trigger word is too?
Or would that also be too many words for you to read? Should I get an illustrator and make a children's book? Maybe do it in rhyme to keep your attention.
wait, calling the Roman empire stupid triggering to you?
i swear every Roman empire stan is in dire need of therapy.
wait, calling the Roman empire stupid triggering to you?
No, but that interpretation is in line with your previously stated reluctance to read.
yhea, too busy to read your schitzo rants.
"Egypt wasn't an expansionist empire!"
"Yes, it very much was."
"That's a schizo rant, I refuse to read it"
👏
And I guess historical fact is a lizardman conspiracy to you, huh?
tbf, Egypt has an insanely long history. but they were never as expansionist as Rome. During the bronze age and beyond they traded with their neighbours rather than always trying to conquer them (to some degree). while rome was mostly trying to conquer everything it reached. that's the differences. same when most kingdoms. that's the difference between a kingdom and an empire.
you just seem to assume that all states in the past were empires, just some more successful than others. which is false.
BTW, would you mind telling me if you're an historian affictionado or one of those fash who fetishise the Roman empire?
tbf, Egypt has an insanely long history. but they were never as expansionist as Rome.
Oh, they only extended into Nubia, Libya, and Anatolia by 'peaceful penetration', huh?
During the bronze age and beyond they traded with their neighbours rather than always trying to conquer them
... you... you are aware that one of the core legitimizing actions of a Pharaoh was conquest, right?
while rome was mostly trying to conquer everything it reached.
Oh yes, quite unlike Egypt, which merely conquered all of its neighbors and was only stopped by the presence of other, larger empires.
Quite unlike every other ancient polity.
that’s the differences.
The differences would seem to be that you don't understand Ancient Egypt about as much as you don't under Ancient Rome.
same when most kingdoms. that’s the difference between a kingdom and an empire.
... fucking what.
you just seem to assume that all states in the past were empires, just some more successful than others. which is false.
All major polities in the antiquity were expansionist, which is why they survived and why we know about them. Even the smallest city-states on record extended their control by coercion over a wide swathe of the surrounding countryside. Hence the old joke about Sumerian god-kings ruling over two villages and a cow; the difference between vast polities and small ones is only scale.
A basic grounding in IR might help here - in a state of international anarchy (not in the philosophical sense; in the 'no enforcement mechanism' sense), polities are unable to trust one another, and for that reason, seek to advantage themselves and disadvantage others. Polities may conquer, they may vassalize, they may colonize, they may establish hegemonies, but those that do not are inevitably out-positioned and then subjugated by those that do. And military force is always a factor in this pre-modern state of international anarchy.
One of the key fucking problems here is that you keep going back to the word of 'empire' as though it has an important and definable meaning, when in reality it's just being used as a snarl word that triggers a certain set of assumptions from you, as seen with your assertion that the Roman Empire 'destroyed cultures'.
BTW, would you mind telling me if you’re an historian affictionado or one of those fash who fetishise the Roman empire?
I was an undergrad who majored in History. Fascists are scum of the earth.
glad you're not a fash.
from lived experience, most people who defend the Roman empire end up being fash themselves. which sucks, because having an interest in history should have nothing to do with politics.
see what I mean but schitzo rants???? get help
see what I mean but schitzo rants????
"Schizo rants is when someone disproves what I say by bringing up basic facts that anyone who passed middle school social studies should have retained"
Okay.
get help
I'm sorry about your illiteracy. I hope you get better - but I know you probably won't. Idiots tend to be proud of their stupidity, after all.
i mean. I write a couple sentences and you reply with a wall of text. that's not an appropriate response.
You're right, from now on, I'll only respond with soundbites free of any actual facts.
Fuck, you make an idiotic assertion about a broad swathe of history, and you complain that the refutation is too wordy because it's a few paragraphs long? What do you expect in response, a 'nuh-uh'?
Is this comment too long for your tastes as well?
dude chill. go drink some water. the conversation died a long time ago. you got way too offended about the whole empire falling and me not being sad about it. but yes. that length is more appropriate size. imagine if you asked someone what time it was and they gave you a 15 minute monologue? you were just wasting your energy
you got way too offended about the whole empire falling and me not being sad about it.
Again, proving your illiteracy.
I don't give a fuck whether you're sad about the Roman Empire falling. I give a fuck about the pop history myths you're uncritically repeating, and then doubling down on when confronted with any sort of historical fact.
imagine if you asked someone what time it was and they gave you a 15 minute monologue?
Oh, is that what you did? Asked what time it was? Not made an immensely stupid assertion about multiple ancient polities and then whinged when it was it was disproven because too many words made your head hurt?
you just seem to assume that all states in the past were empires, just some more successful than others. which is false.
"I was just asking what time it was 😭"
you were just wasting your energy
It would seem I was writing to someone incapable of reading, yes.
again with the wall of text.
maybe you're just an LLM and don't know better
too soon
Don't worry little guy .... enjoy the current empire as much as you can because its on the verge of falling right now.
verge? it's been going downhill for a while already.
