this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
108 points (99.1% liked)

A Comm for Historymemes

3061 readers
310 users here now

A place to share history memes!

Rules:

  1. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.

  2. No fascism, atrocity denial, etc.

  3. Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.

  4. Follow all Lemmy.world rules.

Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Splitting up and then one of the division conquering all the others is what Rome did.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Other way around - divide et impera means that Rome attempted to divide their enemies so they could conquer them one at a time (or rule them peaceably while they were focused on hating each other, since 'impera' means 'rule').

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Hum... People do have a really strong bias toward looking at only the republic era and the first few decades of the empire.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

... what?

The Roman Kingdom certainly didn't divide itself to conquer its enemies. The Crisis of the Third Century included some of the Empire dividing itself, but certainly not conquering anyone - Rome lost territory during the Crisis. The Dominate likewise was a period in which land was largely lost, not gained.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Where you got that it was to conquer its enemies? (Edit: Oh, reading my post again I see where you got that idea.)

It was always dividing itself and conquering itself again. Unless you count parts of it as enemies (what would be reasonable).