Grand Admiral Pellaeon

You are correct. The Byzantine Empire considered itself Roman and called itself the Roman Empire.
As with the Remnant, there has been no de jure change.

However, the situation in reality in both situations is quite different.

The Byzantine Empire was a Greek speaking Empire with a largely Greek and Thracian nobility ruled from a city in Asia Minor by a dynasty with few if any Latin connections (Emperor Justinian began as a Thracian officer and his wife Theodora was an Egyptian whore) with an army that was in the main made up of Thracian and Illyrian cataphracts whose military organisation owed little to the Roman legions but much to the Persian dehgans whose armed might was didicated to defending the most important province in the Empire which was Egypt.

They were Roman only in name. And there isn't (contrary to all popular suspicion) all that much in a name.

I said nothing about the Holy Roman Empire which was neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire.

To reiterate my point...what the Remnant considers itself to be is, from an external point of view, irrelevant. In the end, what it all boils down to is that if Pellaeon wants to be Grand Admiral, Head of State or Supreme High Mugwump, who's going to say no?

 

As has already been stated, it matters little whether the empire considers itself the same empire of Palpatines era. In practice, it is a completely new form of government. All it proves is that members of the Rementant are in a state of denial (might i add that Pellaeon isn't, he has accepted that the Empire is changed). They may live by the Ideals of the New Order, but the government structure is decidedly different. And the Byzantine Empire WAS decidedly different from the the earlier Roman Empire.

It all depends on whether you believe a government is based on it's ideals or practices. Personally, i believe you can only label a government by it's practices.

"Any quibbling over the protocols and rank system of a regime that no longer exists is irrelevant."


My point exactly, just phrased in the best way possible.

 

"Any quibbling over the protocols and rank system of a regime that no longer exists is irrelevant."

Everybody likes this phrase
:~)
I...I feel so...warm and fuzzy inside.

Th...thanks guys.

 

Agreed - if the Empire no longer has an Emperor, has lost the majority of its territory, armed forces, and population, plus has a different government and ruling class (new moffs, higher-ranking soldiers), why should they be bound by the old practices of the Empire?

I'm not saying that there are no similarities between the two entities, but since there is no more Emperor, since they have less territory, etc, their past practices are null and void.

Also, who's to say that the Moffs aren't more powerful than they used to be? I haven't read their constitution ( :: grins :: ), so I have no idea on that point...I also don't have to books with me...

~ SE

 

The fact that you so conveniently overlook is that Admiral Pellaeon is not the chief of state or head of government. He is the Imperial equivalent to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He has no authority to grant himself titles or promotions.

Unless you'd care to suggest that he has taken the course of one Manuel Antonio Noriega?

You know, despite the internal differences, the state ruled by Elizabeth II. to-day, in AD 2001, is the same state created by William I. the Conqueror after AD 1066. William I. shouldn't have recognised it, but it is the same.

The Roman Empire that fell in AD 1453 is the same state was founded in AC 27 by Imperator Caesar Divi filius Augustus.

 

According to you III_Vir_RPC, Pellaeon dosn't have the right to grant promotions, the Military hierarchy dosn't have the right to grant promotions, and the Moffs don't have the right to grant promotions. Apparently the only person with the athority to elevate anybody through the chain of command is that Ex-Prune of an Emperor who is nothing more than atoms floating in space. Imagine how well society would function if we all answered only to some long dead dictator (in case your actually wondering: not too well at all).
Someone elevated Pellaeon to whatever rank he is now. Also, seeing that in VotF the Empire was still in a state of war, Pellaeon could very well have been the major Authority of the Empire. In fact i think it is mentioned somewhere (maybe not in VotF; perhaps Ruin) that in a state of war all Imperial matters are EXCLUSIVELY the responsibility of the Supreme Commander. That would include Promotions, Alliances, etc.
On a final note, much of the debate in this thread has centred around the assumption that the IR follows a political system that exists in our society, or in our societies history. Truth be told, it's fiction. The rules can practically be whatever they like. The only thing for sure is that the Empire is no longer a Imperial Dictatorship. The rest of the rules are right out the window..... oops, there they go...... can you see em..... over there..... they just got up flew right out the window. Say bye bye now.

 

I'm glad that you're happy Brandl

 

Umm...you see the difference between the case of Britain and the case of the Remnant is that Britain has always had a monarch; constitutional or otherwise (unless you count the period under Cromwell) The nation as a whole has remained one single entity.

The Empire on the other hand fragmented many times...the Remnant is in truth merely a rump state which was conquered by the most successful ex-Imperial warlord, Pellaeon.

"The Roman Empire that fell in AD 1453 is the same state was founded in AC 27 by Imperator Caesar Divi filius Augustus"

Uh...huh...
May I reiterate the point that everyone on this thread has been repeating over and over and over and over again?

Appearances matter not.
Sure the Byzantines called themselves Romans. Yeah...Greek speaking Christian Romans with a capital in Asia Minor and an aristocracy that was...surprise, surprise...mostly Greek. De facto vs De jure. De facto wins in the end.

All that matters is that Pellaeon can pretty much do what he wants to do. He can you know and theres no running away from that.

I believe that most people on this thread agree with me. If you can find no better response than to spit the same point at everyone when it has been clearly refuted then I have nothing else to say.

Ooops...I lied...

No worries

Refer to me signature ;-)

 

Constantinople is NOT in Asia-Minor. It is on the European side.

Yours

 

No no no....it's Istanbul, not Constantinople. Hehe

 

Ooops...me bad

<Retreats with egg all over his face blushing furiously>

Details...details...I always screw up the details.

OTHER than that, however, my point still stands even though it does make me sound like an arrogant, smarmy sonuvabitch who talks too much about things he knows too little of.

Which is pretty true.

But the point still holds

Check the sig.