Missing Emperor?

[Princeps]

I can't find "Justinian" on the Emperors list. I dunno if he ever wnt by another name, maybe that is what has me confused (or maybe the list doesn't stretch to his reign). How far does the list go? Have I overlooked his entry or something?

[Moonlapse]

I believe Justinian is considered a Byzantine emperor. If he does show up on this site it will be a while from now.

[Primus Pilus]

Yes, we had to choose a 'cut-off' point, and the fall of the west was as good as any. Yes I agree that the Byzantines/Romanions are an extension of the west in many ways (despite some cultural differences) but it still marks a very distinctive turn of events in western history.

[Princeps]

Oh well, it is a shame. Apparently a lot of Roman historians consider him to be the last great Emperor (though I never really saw what marked him as above average). I assume a lot of you guys have seen the "I, Caesar" programmes by Seventh arts? They are repeating them on the history channel this week. I think Justinian is on Friday if anyone has time to catch it.

 

Oh yeah, I think you are being a bit pedantic by not including Julius Caesar on the list

[Zeke]

Julius Caeser wasn't an emperor though.

 

:/

 

Zeke

[Princeps]

Julius Caeser wasn't an emperor though.

 

:/

 

Zeke

Yeah I know, but still...

[Onasander]

Hmmm, the present may be pressing, but nothing but time in the future. Keep bugging him, and he'll crack adventually and do it.

[Primus Pilus]

Eventually we hope to continue on with a 'Byzantine' site, but considering the pace of my current writing, we are talking about years and years from now.

[Skarr]

To me, the real Rome died when Caesar was assassinated. In terms of research, I have generally confined my readings to a cut off date of around 25 BC or so (counting backwards).

 

While I have read some accounts of Claudius,Nero,Caligula,Vespasian,Aurelius,Julian and a few others like Hadrian / Trajan, I would say that my reading here has been more confined to popular texts or versions.

 

I liked the TV series - I, Claudius and I think the DVD set is pretty good. I own the Caligula LD and it is a curiosity, more than anything else. I also have the odd novel set in Rome around Nero's time or during one of the later emperors.

 

I don't think there are many novels set in the Republic and I was pleasantly surprised to read one titled Woman of Stone by Debra Tash, covering a brief chapter in the life of Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus. Check out my post under Roman media, where I've reviewed the novel (available both in print and as an ebook)

[Ursus]

I'd say my interest in Rome lies from mid republic to early empire.

 

The very early histories of Rome are as much myth and legend as fact, and while those stories are entertaining and vivid, who knows how much can be trusted. The history of the later empire is depressing, and everything after Constantine gets a bit dim for me. So my expertise spans mostly from the Punic wars to roughly Hadrian.

 

 

Byzantine? I don't know. They called themselves Romans. They adopted Roman law and government. I'm not entirely sure what "Roman" meant by then, though. They were certainly more cultured than the Romano-Germanic lands of the fuedal west, but they also seemed to lack a certain straightforward vitality that I associate with the older empire. And the energy they spent on debating minute aspects of Christianity was simply insane. Like Skarr said, they aren't exactly the Romans of Caesar's day. I'm honestly glad we're still on the early empire. :-)