The collapse of Western Rome was basically 80% Gaiseric, 20% everything else... Yet he's completely forgotten today, why?
>>18283453Vandals were originally Hunnish vessel
>>18283453>>18283488Gaiseric was the descendant of LOYAL Roman mercenaries which were denied pay or land for their service, which is why Vatican Grecophile scholars tend to avoid the topic. The descendants of Cimbri and their germanic kinsmen had a cultural memory of how the Numidians also fought against Rome during the Cimbri-Jugurthine wars, and that the rule of Mauretania had been prosperous and stable in newer times, plus being a home of Arianist christianity, so they decided to check out this south.An increasingly Byzantine Rome failed to pay their own defenders, and then acted "surprised and betrayed" when said Arianist mercenaries refused to protect western Rome from other germanics whom they had ALSO wronged.tldr;Gaiseric is basically Faramir.
>>18283772>tldr;>Gaiseric is basically Faramir.Fuck i meant Éomer,- coming to Faramirs assistance. Faramir being the romantic idea of having an ally in this Arianist south homeland, aka "Gondor" in this comparison.
>>18283453huh? the collapse of rome is expained easily as an economics issue. Barbarians, religioun, etc are just noise. The economic system could not generate enough surplus to pay for it, so it collapsed.
>>18283842Complete meme. Despite everything the West's finances were still running even up to the very end and its armies were still beating the barbarians. The bigger issue was food security, because they lost North Africa and control of the shipping lanes in the Mediterranean to the Vandals.If Gaiseric wasn't a shonen protagonist that somehow beat back like fucking five Roman invasion attempts from both East and West and the Romans kept control of Carthage there is literally NO world in which the empire collapses in the 5th century.
>>18283453Gaiseric only won one battle fair and square by the Roman general that brought him to North Africa forgot his name. The battle of cartenenga and cape bon were victories for the vandals because the Romans had traitors, probably Germanic burning the fleets. The vandals sacked Rome because it was defenceless and fighting other armies. 80% of Rome collapsing was bad politics stemming from theodosian.
>>18284614romejeets whining about 'fair and square' battles is a bit rich
>>18284616Nope it’s the truth when you examine these questions. There is no doubt Gaiseric was the greatest Germanic general to have ever lived until I guess Charlamagne but that’s mostly from his cunning and ability to deceive on the battlefield.
>>18284621romans had no qualms with using underhanded means to win battles lol, if anything they would have admired Gaiseric for exploiting their tendencies to win
>>18283772>Gaiseric was the descendant of LOYAL Roman mercenaries which were denied pay or land for their serviceThe Vandals were never in Roman service. Neither was Gaiseric. From the crossing of the Rhine to the conquest of Africa there was no point where they were serving the Romans in any way.>>18284614>Gaiseric only won one battle fair and square by the Roman general that brought him to North Africa forgot his nameAspar. He never actually defeated Aspar in the field, but neither did Aspar defeat him. It stalemated and he left back to the East which is when all resistance to Gaiseric ended.
>>18283453It was more the huns that badly weakened rome that allowed the germans to finish them off. Not the vandals, even though they did capture very important territories.
>>18283842No this is wrong, it was ByzantinismThe Byzantine Emperor Zeno had the means and the authority to go back and claim the West to unite both sides of the empire under a single Roman banner, but declined in favor of appointing Odoacer as the leader of Italy. There was no emperor controlling Rome, and therefore the Roman Empire ceased to be. Gustav Schnürer came up with this idea. He viewed the ancient Mediterranean as a single system at the height of Rome’s power, but defined his version of “Byzantinism” as a culturally isolationist movement. Hyper-focused on its own success as the capital and shutting out anything that it could not extract resources from, hence Zeno’s actions. I think this is a more interesting view.
>>18284631>Zeno is not going to go reconquer Italy because he is busy with other things and wants to get rid of his enemies>This means Zeno is not a Roman Emperor anymoreExtremely dumb reasoning>but defined his version of “Byzantinism” as a culturally isolationist movement. Hyper-focused on its own success as the capital and shutting out anything that it could not extract resources fromSo, exactly like the Romans for the past 700 years?
>>18283453Vandals stopped being dangerous after he died, and their whole people got BTFO from history very early. So there is nobody today wewuzzing as them
>>18284614>fair and squarelol LMAO even
>>18284630Not really, the Huns did more damage to the Germans than to the Romans. Especially the Western Romans.
>>18284631Zeno absolutely did not have the means to depose Odoacer, dude spent his entire reign fighting civil wars.
>>18284934>Germani>Western RomansSame citizenship.
>>18284982They actually were never granted citizenship, at least the bulk of them. Some individuals got it.
>>18283453>Gaiseric
>>18283453You mean 50% Christians and 50% no Romans family who took power
>>18284627>descendant of>no point where they were serving the Romans in any way.perhaps read a little closer next time.
>>18283772Noticing that King Gaiseric and Theodoric the Great had their diplomatic system similarities to Otto von Bismarck’s brilliant framework before the successors ruined realm chance of survival.
>>18284627>Aspar>an commander with Alanic-Gothic origin
>>18284631>“Byzantinism” as a culturally isolationist movementI would argue this is more a result of post Arab conquest. They lost a massive amount of territory in the 7th century and would have seen it as a punishment from God. There was definitely a period of isolationism, but by the start of the Macedonian dynasty they managed to take back a lot of new territory and projected a lot of power in both the Caucuses and Balkans.Zeno did not have a secure claim on the empire. He only retook the throne in 476 and was in no position to exert any influence in Italy, he needed to make sure he could hold on to Constantinople more than anything. I agree they had an isolationist period, but I don't think it was embedded into the culture. Just a result of the massive contraction of the empire after the Arab conquests, and by the 9th century they are certainly looking like an empire rising again.
Rome was still real Rome before Justinian invaded. The Goths were fully romanized.
>>18285531No they weren't. They did respect Roman institutions though, so as not to anger their Roman subjects and the enperor in Constantinople.
>>18285531>. The Goths were fully romanized.Where do people get this lie from?
>>18285531>The bantustanis yam farmers are frenchified, chud! They are just as french as you and i
>>18285581>>18285531>Via Amerigo Vespucci (the Italian version of "Amalaric," or "Amal ruler"), the Amali were the ultimate namesakes of the Americas.Vandalic cousin left lasted impact
>While the Gepids themselves spoke a Oder-Vistula Germanic tongue, Procopius records that among the populations under their rule, there existed groups that spoke other languages, reflecting the multiethnic composition of the post-Roman frontier regions. He does not always specify the exact language, but context implies the presence of Hunnic, Latin-speaking Romano-Balkan populations or other indigenous, non-Germanic linguistic communities that had survived Roman administration and integrated into the Gepid kingdom.>Specifically, in History of the Wars (Book VI, Gothic and Balkan campaigns), Procopius mentions the Gepid capital and its subjects, noting that their customs and languages included influences distinct from the Germanic core. Scholars infer from his descriptions that remnants of Romanized peoples, possibly speaking vernacular Latin or other regional Italic or Paleo-Balkan languages, were present alongside the Germanic Gepid rulers and warriors.
>>18286823Ok so what?
>>18286847Vandals = Vikings relative predecessorGepids = Germanic-like Magyars predecessor
>>18286860Wtf have they got to do with Magyars?
>>18283453There were jews in the Roman Empire already at this point. Why don't you talk about them?
>>18283453>>18283772>>18284627>>18285280Gaiseric was Roman, his full name was Flavius Gaisericus and he hated if someone called him with the germanic form of his name instead the Latin one.When he conquered Carthage, he wanted to create a new Roma in it and he proclaimed himself Rex, not könig. And the "sack of Roma" was to avenge the murder of his son-in-law Valentinianus III.Valentinianus III proclaimed him Consul per Africa, patricius and senator.
>>18286876Because Hungarian close neighbor, Poland, have claim their kinship with Vandals too
>>18285280>>18285030You're Gelimer, Tzazo, or Ammatus (depending on POV) in 533 AD. What do you do?
>>18286936Literal fanfic
>>18286936Literal fact that lost through time.
>>18286936@grok is this true?
>>18287433>Gaiseric was born around 389 AD and was the son of the Vandal king Godigisel. His name in Latin was Gaisericus, while the reconstructed Vandalic form was Gaisarīx. Historical accounts suggest that he valued the Latin form of his name, aligning himself with Roman tradition and authority, and reportedly disliked being addressed by the Germanic version. This preference reflects his broader strategy of integrating Roman political and cultural legitimacy into his rule, despite leading a Germanic tribe.
>>18287467>After rising to power among the Vandals in Baetica, Hispania (Spain). Gaiseric moved his people to North Africa around 428/429 AD, eventually seizing Carthage in 439. His vision was to transform Carthage into a new center reminiscent of Rome, establishing a prosperous capital for the Vandal kingdom and integrating Roman administrative practices. He presided over a mixed population of Vandals, Alans, Goths, Barbers and Punic-Romans, maintaining Latin cultural influence and even utilizing Latin officials within his administration.
>>18287487>Gaiseric concluded a peace with Emperor Valentinian III in 435 AD, which included recognition of his territorial control, the payment of tribute to Rome, and the sending of his son Huneric as a hostage to Rome. This treaty also granted him Roman political designations, including Rex, patricius, and later recognition as a senator in Roman contexts, demonstrating how he adopted Roman titles to augment his legitimacy.
>>18287488>The assassination of Valentinian III by Petronius Maximus, who usurped the imperial throne and married both Eudoxia and her daughter — who had been promised to Gaiseric’s son — served as a casus belli for Gaiseric. In retaliation, Gaiseric led a Vandal fleet to Rome and conducted a systematic "sack" in 455 AD, seizing wealth, hostages, and key political figures, but largely sparing the city's population from massacres at the request of Pope Leo I. The "sack" was partly motivated by vengeance for the broken imperial promises and the murder of his son-in-law’s betrothed, connecting personal and political motives.Gaiseric was a Latinized Roman-Germanic ambition rulers who employed Roman titles, culture, and strategy to consolidate his kingdom, while using both personal and political motives to justify his campaigns. Brilliant genius man of the post-antiquity.
>>18287467>Historical accounts suggest that he valued the Latin form of his nameSuch as?>aligning himself with Roman tradition and authorityHe did not do this at all>and integrating Roman administrative practicesHe didn't do this at all. When Justinian reconquered Africa there was a near total lack of old administration.>Gaiseric concluded a peace with Emperor Valentinian III in 435 ADWhich he broke in months.
>>18283488Vandal women were a vessel for Hunnic seed
>>18287467Or you know, the people minting the coins were Latin so they used the Latin version of his name?
