Recent comments in /f/history

Ferengi_Earwax t1_ixmn78i wrote

The term emperor usually means you rule over various different lands and semi autonomous regions as an overlord. Even if you look at the tetrarchy, each of the emperors ruled over multiple provinces, with their Caesar being their number 2, and sometimes ruling over the lesser parts of that regions. Pretty much after the fall of rome, the term emperor returned to meaning "leader of the world".

2

Ferengi_Earwax t1_ixmm4oe wrote

That isn't where that system originated. It goes back to the Persians, mycaneans, Egyptians, and nearly the whole civilized history of the near east. Probably the most recorded widespread Era of this was the middle to late bronze age. It was an ever changing patch work of large empires with their "kings of the world" imposing their authority over smaller kings of territories. The tradition goes back as far as the sumerians. Another example is when the hittite emperor writes to the mycanean king and calls him a "great king" and differentiates between that kings Control over his petty kings. The same can be seen between Egypt and the hittites in the treaty of kadesh.

4

Regulai t1_ixmlasz wrote

"General of the Army" (the 5 star rank equivalent to marshal) would actually be the closer parable. In the US the title is mostly only given out as a great honour particularly after victory/war.

Imperator similarly is an honor title granted for success. Many emperors would in fact be proclaimed imperator multiple times for major achievements they attained, as opposed to a simple title equivalent to head of the army.

9

harkat82 t1_ixm6pqw wrote

For the state theres an obvious advantage, coins are a lot easier to use than raw gold so there's a benefit to the economy (assuming you can stop them being debased). So that's why emperor's did it. But for your average oligarch it's mostly just propaganda (or maybe theres a coin shortage in their region).

27

TonyWilliams03 t1_ixm6nnl wrote

My understanding was if you wanted a document to be taken seriously and stand the test of time, you wrote/translated it to Greek, not the native tongue of the author.

The idea being that Greek was a language known to around the world and was likely to stay around, unlike Aramaic

1