Yes and No.
Comparing Byzantine emperors with Charlemagne in the time of 800 to 814 is comparing them with the one person who was probably the most powerful monarch of the Middle Ages.
Later Byzantine emperors would have to be compared with western emperors of the Holy Roman Empire of their own times. Most of the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire were rather weak. This was partly because they were elected, and so there was no father to prepare the throne for them, but it was mostly because they had powerful feudal vassals, including kings, who limited their authority.
Of course the Byzantine Empire gradually declined through the entire Middle Ages, leaving a rather decrepit country in the end, and an emperor of this country had no more power than his country did, and the Holy Roman Emperor had much more power than the Byzantine Emperor.
It not that the Byzantine Emperors were more powerful. Byzantine Empire is a term historians have coined to refer the Eastern Roman Empire after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The east did not fall because it was far from the areas the Germanic peoples invaded in the west. These invasions precipitated the fall of the west.
It is not that the Byzantine emperors were more powerful. Byzantine Empire is a name which has been coined by historians to indicate the Eastern Roman Empire after the fall of the Western Roman empire. The difference was that the west fell under the weight of the Germanic invasion, while the east, which was not affected by the invasions, continued to exist for another 1,000 years.
suck a fat hard dick
There was only the Roman Empire. This is the only term the Romans had. Eastern Roman Empire and Western Roman Empire are terms invented by historians. What happened is that co-emperors were established, with one in the eastern part and the other in the western one. This was done to improve the defence of vast frontiers of the empire which were often under attack. One emperor concentrated on those in the west and the other on those in the east. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Eastern Roman Empire helped to unite an empire which was not divided.
The Roman Empire was ruled by a succession of emperors, beginning with Augustus who became the first emperor in 27 BC. The country known as Rome during this time was located in what is now modern-day Italy.
The majority of Asian and Middle Eastern immigrants settled on Southern CA coast, the Pacific rim, and Canada from Vancouver southward. From those settlements they grew and developed. Today they are known as powerful minorities.
What are the Eastern and Western fronts? Who fought against whom in those areas? What are the Eastern and Western fronts? Who fought against whom in those areas? What are the Eastern and Western fronts? Who fought against whom in those areas?
i have no clue
The Byzantines spread Orthodox Christianity to those areas.
The Byzantines spread Orthodox Christianity to those areas.
those who live in the Eastern time zone
There was only the Roman Empire. This is the only term the Romans had. Eastern Roman Empire and Western Roman Empire are terms invented by historians. What happened is that co-emperors were established, with one in the eastern part and the other in the western one. This was done to improve the defence of vast frontiers of the empire which were often under attack. One emperor concentrated on those in the west and the other on those in the east. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Eastern Roman Empire helped to unite an empire which was not divided.
Titus (son of Vespasian) was sole emperor during those years.
The death of an emperor could sometimes cause problem for the government usually because the deceased emperor never left a will or never designated an heir. Then the throne was up for grabs and the one with the most powerful backing and the most money for bribes to the praetorian guard and the senate was the one who was declared emperor.
Yes, it is the reason why those soldiers continued to serve the emperor lying in the tomb as his guards.
a utahraptor
There is no capital of eastern Africa. Africa is a continent. There are many different countries in the eastern part of Africa. Each of those has their own capitals.
The emperor in Gulliver's Travels symbolizes political corruption, incompetence, and arrogance. Swift uses the emperor character to critique the flaws and folly of those in positions of power.
The Roman Empire was ruled by a succession of emperors, beginning with Augustus who became the first emperor in 27 BC. The country known as Rome during this time was located in what is now modern-day Italy.
put it in google images and you'll find out