0
well im assuming you mean who founded it it orginated in 324 when constatine moved the roman capital to consinapole (the former byzantium now called istanbul) whenrome was sacked by the visgoths and the Roman Empire had ended it turned into the byzantine empire
The Roman Empire was never divided. Western Roman Empire and Eastern Roman Empire are terms which have been coined by historians. The Romans did not have them and used only one term: Roman Empire. Historian use the terms to indicate the western and eastern part of the Roman Empire not two separate empires.
Emperor Diocletian created the tetrarchy (rule by four) in 286. He appointed fellow general Maximian as co-emperor who took charge of the western part of the empire, while he took charge of the eastern part. These two men became senior emperors (Augusti) when Diocletian appointed two junior emperors (Caesars) who were subordinate to the senior emperors and took charge of areas of the frontiers which were under the greatest pressure from attacks from outside, the river Rhine in the west and the river Danube in the east.
This created four administrative units. Diocletian took charge of the territories in Asia and of Egypt. Maximilian took charge of Italy and northwestern Africa. One junior emperor took charge of Britain, Gaul and Spain in the west and the other took charge of the Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe.
The tetrarchy was an administrative arrangement designed to improve the defence of the frontiers of one single empire which was under constant attacks from outside. Diocletian stressed that the empire was indivisible. Co-emperorship was not new. Previously emperors had made their sons co-emperors with one of them in charge of the east and the other in charge of the east. The purpose was the same, improving the defence of the frontiers. After the tetrarchy, there was an alternation of periods of co-emperorship and periods with a sole emperor. This clearly shows that the empire was not divided.
There were co-emperors who were in charge of the eastern part of the Roman Empire on and off.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why was the fall of the Roman Empire not a complete fall?
The Roman Empire had been divided into the East Roman Empire, with its capital at Constantinople, and the West Roman Empire, with its capital either at Rome or Ravenna, in 395. The West Roman Empire was in a state of chaos, with various Germanic kingdoms forming, and though they nominally acknowledged the fact that they were in the Roman Empire, for the most part, they were not really under control. In 476, the last emperor of the West Roman Empire was deposed, and the emperor of the East Roman Empire was asked to assume control of the whole. This is the event referred to as the Fall of the Roman Empire. The Roman Senate, which had operated in Rome since before the Roman Republic continued to operate after the purported fall, and its last known act was after the year 600. The East Roman Empire continued to operate until Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453.
When were Romans first alive?
The Roman Empire existed from 27 BC - 476 AD in the West and285-1453 AD in the East. The Roman Republic predated the Roman Empire by about 500 years.
Why do lists of Roman Emperors have names and dates for emperors who ruled after the fall of Rome?
After Rome was sacked in 410 AD, the Roman Empire continued to exist. After Rome fell in 476, the Roman Empire continued to exist. It continued to exist, according to the Byzantines, until 1453, a date used by some historians as the end of the middle ages. During much of its history, the Roman Empire was divided into two parts, the Empire of the West, with a capital usually in Rome, and the Empire of the East, with a capital in Constantinople. What happened in 476, a date some historians use for the fall of the Roman Empire, was that the last emperor of the Empire of the West abdicated in favor of the emperor of the Empire of the East. This mean that in theory, at least, the empire was reunited. What really happened was that the Roman Empire of the West had been divided into kingdoms that mostly acknowledged the sovereignty of the Roman Empire, but were in fact not paying taxes or providing services. This had happened before 476, and the process continued. But people thought of themselves as being in the Roman Empire for a long time after that. When Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West, the idea was that the Roman Empire of the West was getting a new emperor after not having one for 334 years. Charlemagne's empire, the Carolingian Empire, divided after his death. One large part became France, and the other became the Holy Roman Empire, which was called a Roman Empire because it regarded itself as a continuation of the Roman Empire. The legality and facts of that can be argued. But the continuation of the East Roman Empire cannot be dismissed so easily. The East Roman Empire, which we call the Byzantine Empire, but which called itself the Empire of the Roman People long after its people stopped using Latin for any purpose and only used Greek, went on for nearly 1000 years. The emperors who are listed as having dates after the fall of Rome are those who were emperors of the Roman Empire, in its capitol of Constantinople, which had been set up as a capital by Constantine the Great himself.
How many miles did the Roman Empire stretch from east to west?
it is 400 miles east to west hope this helps
Who divided the roman empire into four parts?
The empire was not actually split. It came to be co-ruled. It is often said that the division was started by Diocletian who created the tetrarchy (rule by 4) in 293. He shared the empire with co-emperor Maximian. Diocletian ruled in the east and Maximian in the west. Two junior emperors (Caesars) were then appointed to help each of the senior emperors (Augusti) and took charge of areas where there were troubles along the frontiers. The reason for this was that it was difficult for one man to control the whole empire by himself and protect the thousands of miles of frontiers which were being attacked all the way from France to Syria. The patterns of co-rulership started before the tetrarchy with Philip the Arab who ruled 244-249. Emperors co-ruled with close relatives or with their sons. One emperor would deal with raids into Gaul or Italy in the west, the other with raids across the river Danube or attacks in the Middle East in the east. With the tetrarchy co-rule was between fellow generals, rather than relatives. Milan was made the site of the imperial court in the west and Nicodemia the site of the court in the east (later it was replaced by Constantinople). The tetrarchy collapsed by 331 due to infighting. New patterns of co-rulership emerged. There were also some emperors who ruled on their own. The last one was Theodosius. He then gave the west and the east to his two sons. It is at this point that it is said that the empire became split into the empire of the west and the empire of the east. This was because the west was disintegrating under the weight of Germanic invasions, loss on internal political cohesion and infighting. During this period the empire of the west was often a puppet of the emperor of the east.
What was the size of the roman empire from east to west?
The roman empire extended for about 4500 miles from west to east.
What empire did Justinian rule east or west?
Justinian ruled in the East, in the Byzantine Empire
What was the emperor's purpose in dividing the empire between east and west?
The Roman Empire was not actually divided. East and West were administrative subdivisions usually headed by two co-emperors (one in the east and one in the west) through sometimes the empire was ruled by a sole emperor. The purpose was to share the defence of the vast frontiers of the empire which were often attacked by outsiders at very distant locations. This had at times caused the Roman army to become overstretched.
When did Greece stop being part of the roman empire?
In 395 the Roman empire split into two pieces: the west and the east. Rome and Italy were part of the west and Greece was part of the east.
Who is considered the founder of the Eastern Roman Empire?
There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.There is no founder of the eastern Roman empire. The Roman empire was divided into east and west by historians, not Romans. This was done for ease in relating events that occurred in either the west or the east. For example, when the western part of the empire fell to the barbarians, the Romans considered it a loss of territory, not a loss of half of an empire as some historians did.
How old is Roman Empire?
The Roman Empire dates to 27 BC, when Octavian was given the title Augustus by the senate. It divided permanently in 395 AD into the East Roman Empire and the West Roman Empire. The date usually given for the fall of Rome is 476, when the last emperor of the West Roman Empire was deposed. The East Roman Empire, however, survived until 1453. There is a link below.
Who conqured the Phoenicians?
They were absorbed into the Persian Empire in the east, and Carthage was absorbed into the Roman Empire in the west.
How many emperors did Byzantium have?
There were 178 Roman emperors in total. There were 81 emperors of the west and 97 emperors of the east. This does not count the wannabes who ruled while another emperor legitimately ruled and were soon overthrown.
A successor of the Roman Empire was?
There was no successor in the west besides a thing called the Holy Roman Empire which had nothing to do with ancient Rome. In the east it was the Ottoman empire.
What two churches formed after the division of the Eastern Roman Empire and the Western Roman Empire?
The Catholic Church in the West and the Orthodox Church in the East
How far west did the Roman Empire extend its height?
At its peak, the Roman Empire stretched as far west as the tip of the Iberian Peninsula, as far south as Egypt, as far north as England, and as far east as the Middle East. A map of the Roman Empire at its height can be viewed under Related links.
What time period do you call the roman empire?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Roman Empire is said to have begun when the Senate granted the title Augustus to Octavian on January 4, 27 BC. The date of the fall of the Roman Empire is usually given as 476 AD, though the empire did not really fall on that date. The Roman Empire divided and was reunited several times, the last division being in 395. The event of 476 was the abdication of the last Emperor of the West, in favor of the Emperor of the East. But the West Roman Empire had already become a chaotic mess and never recovered. The emperors of the East Roman Empire tried to reconquer the West, but never got very far. The East Roman Empire finally fell in 1453. Our current historians refer to the East Roman Empire from about 500 AD to 1453 as the Byzantine Empire. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
