Had it survived, Minyue (OTL Fujian) would be considered as succesor of Yue (OTL southern Jiangsu, Shanghai and Zhejiang).
What empires could relocate to a new area, like the Byzantines or Mughals?
That's the point, they didn't changed location : ERE was the direct continuation of roman administration, with a tradition of rule from eastern Romania at least since a century.
I can't be more clear than saying that considering Thrace as not a Roman core by the IVth is not grasping the nature of Roman empire, state or institutions.
Nicomedia and Constantinople were as much imperial centers than Rome, Ravenne or Milan and the eastern part of the empire was no less Roman than the west. It did not changed location or cores, it split over its various cores, namely West and East eventually (altough a quadriparte or tripate division appeared sometimes as likely, roughly over Treves/Milan-Ravenne/Constantinople-Nicomedia, for example).
As for al-Andalus, the Umayyad emirate is for most of things the continuation of the previous situation, without a clear connection with the Umayyad Caliphate save sharing the same dynasty.
You could say that Abd al Rahman built its authority in Spain upon dynastic legacy, but as an "empire in exile" (and even less a caliphate in exile)? I simply don't see much going in this sense : do you have any idea about it? Because, would it be politically, a lot of pre-emiral features remained in place.
Last edited:
We are talking about states, not cultural and legal institutions, it's not like England disappeared either.
The sultanates of Perak, Selangor and Pahang could be considered as succesor states of the Sultanate of Melaka, which itself considered as (indirect) succesor to Srivija through the Kingdom of Singapura.
I'm with @LSCatilina on this one.
It is hard to really describe the ERE as a move for the Romans. The Romans in reality had two Empires in one - arguably 3 if you look at the divisions of the Crisis of the Third Century.
The Eastern Roman Empire realistically was the Roman administration of the Koine-Dominated east, at least at first. If you look at the natural borders for any state built around that region (see the Ottomans, every Philip scenario, the Palmyrene Empire, etc) the area is pretty easy to classify as a natural Super-Region. Balkans, Anatolia, Egypt, Levant.
So it wasn't so much that the Roman Empire moved to new cores - it took over those cores, and considering that Greek was a language of learning both in Rome and these new regions, you basically had a Greek Empire with a Roman label on it, eventually becoming as much part of the Roman Empire as anything else. In no way did it willingly "Relocate".
A Greek-Speaking Empire that might better match the OP would be the Greco-Bactrian -> Indo-Greek Kingdom. You could (theoretically) have an Egypt->Nubia scenario with the Hyksos, potentially, but both of those scenarios are significantly like "Migration Period" Europe with the Visigoths, Vandals, etc. A Ruling Class that moves, rather than an entire people.
It is hard to really describe the ERE as a move for the Romans. The Romans in reality had two Empires in one - arguably 3 if you look at the divisions of the Crisis of the Third Century.
The Eastern Roman Empire realistically was the Roman administration of the Koine-Dominated east, at least at first. If you look at the natural borders for any state built around that region (see the Ottomans, every Philip scenario, the Palmyrene Empire, etc) the area is pretty easy to classify as a natural Super-Region. Balkans, Anatolia, Egypt, Levant.
So it wasn't so much that the Roman Empire moved to new cores - it took over those cores, and considering that Greek was a language of learning both in Rome and these new regions, you basically had a Greek Empire with a Roman label on it, eventually becoming as much part of the Roman Empire as anything else. In no way did it willingly "Relocate".
A Greek-Speaking Empire that might better match the OP would be the Greco-Bactrian -> Indo-Greek Kingdom. You could (theoretically) have an Egypt->Nubia scenario with the Hyksos, potentially, but both of those scenarios are significantly like "Migration Period" Europe with the Visigoths, Vandals, etc. A Ruling Class that moves, rather than an entire people.
These four are NOT really examples for the question you asked. You are mixing up the terms 'empire' and 'dynasty'
1. This was the flight and survival of one member of the dynasty to far away lands and resettling there. No empire or survival thereafter. (NOT)
2. The Sultanate of Rum was another branch of the Seljuk dynasty and there was no resettling either, they were both ruling different states by the time of the disintegration. (NOT)
3. The Golden Horde and the Yuan dynasty were different states by the time of the collapse and there was no resettling either.
PS: Funny thing, the mongols after the fall of the Yuan dynasty DID what you were asking for, relocated back to Mongolia and troubled the Chinese from there.
4. Babu was not exactly THE Timurid empire, but he reestablished the Timurid dynasty in India(Borderline case)
One exact example of the relocation of an empire would be the Byzantine empire, though I´m not sure if you had that period in mind when you posed your question
Constans II withdrew from Byzantium and resettled in Syracuse from 660-668, making it his new capital.
Alkmaion