Childhood is when you idolize the Holy Roman Empire

The Ottoman Empire was quite cool, definitely respectable

Modern Turkey is a shithole though

I mean, obviously the HRE was none of those things, but what did the Byzantines ever do besides slowly decay for a thousand years?

Is the byzantine character in the image a feminine man or an androgynous woman?

I don't idealize HRE

But the early medieval crude half-barbarian kings and dukes fighting each other just has some beauty to it

Modern Turkey was doing quite well only a couple decades ago, too bad Islam pollution caused them to backslide, and ironically the EU telling them to change the system so they would stop couping all the time helped that.

...

yeah, Ataturk knew of the corruptive influence of Islam and what it does to a country. A shame what became of Turkey

>Romans
>BTFOd by the Suljuks

The exact same thing the Western Empire did for several centuries; decay.

But the first couple hundred years were pretty cool. Reclaiming Rome and kicking the shit out of the Vandals and what not.

t. turkposter

>what did the Byzantines ever do besides slowly decay for a thousand years?

take back Rome and hold it for 200 more years

Reform Roman law into a 3 volume text that's now that basis for Civil Law worldwide

Boast the strongest navy in the world for 1000 years with Flamethrowing ships.

Ended the centuries long Persian wars for good with a Byzantine victory.

Conquer the Ostrogoths, Vandals, and Bulgarians.

Built the greatest engineering feats of their time, from walls that were invincible until the age of cannons to a grand church the size of which would not be matched until the high Renaissance 1000 years later.

>HRE
>330

Why is the bizantine guy so gay?

The last Roman Empire fell in 1917.

*476

>I mean, obviously the HRE was none of those things, but what did the Byzantines ever do besides slowly decay for a thousand years?
Byzantium kept many hostile forces from overrunning poorly-developed and fragmented western Europe until the time came when these petty kingdoms grew to become mighty factions in their own right. The Byzantines paid a huge price for what they (unintentionally) did, but their efforts ended up preserving Western society in the end.

Constantinople itself endured no less than 40 major sieges during its history, and only twice fell in a thousand years. When properly manned by trained defenders, the Theodosian walls were impregnable to even the largest of siege forces. The Avars, Persians, and Arabs threw their most powerful armies at those walls and never were able to breach them. It was only the Latin Crusaders catching the Byzantines in an era of decline that caused the first fall. The second, was at the end of all things - the fall of the Empire. But even in its last days, Constantinople still proved to be the major problem for the Ottoman Turks - they had to completely capture all other Byzantine holdings around the city before even attempting to siege it.

The Byzantines' incredible ability to not only halt their enemies, but also beat them back after sustaining major losses is highly commendable and impressive.

Byzantium was also, by far, the richest state in Europe from roughly AD 395 - AD 1204. Constantinople was perhaps the largest trading center in the WORLD during the same period - you could find spices and silk from China, incense and myrrh from the Horn of Africa, anything. The Byzantines preserved and built upon the Roman economic system and so were able to continue to turn over vast amounts of gold every single year to pay off hostile factions, build and upkeep roads and aquaducts, pay for mercenaries and their own armies, build lavish churches, pay for social services such as education and hospitals etc

>Italians being this mad

Just accept that the Russians accomplished more as the Roman Empire than you ever did

And then realizing the Romans were just not that great to begin with.

Maturity is when you realize the "Roman" Empire never existed.

>tfw no alternate history where the Turks convert to a sect of Christianity like Nestorianism (which was popular in the steppes) and become legitimate heirs to the Romans

That's the danger of Islam, when your society goes Muslim it's impossible to stamp out the infection because the rules are written to be so punitive against "apostasy".

1921

>the hre last 330-1806

Yup! HRE definitely started in 330ad

The Romans were absolute shit, Soviet Tier civilization. They defeated all their meaningful enemies through weight of numbers, and inflicted crushing poverty everywhere they went, so they could build massive concrete structures that were of limited utility (that people on the internet and academia jerk off to). The dark ages wasn't the end, but the beginning of a thriving, vital civilization. The fact that there was a successor state to the Roman Empire, which had a successor state in turn, is probably a big part of why the Balkans, Anatolia and North Africa is a massive shithole compared to western Europe.

>The average Turk is literally descended from the average Byzantine subject of Anatolia.
So did Greeks, dumbass. And they at least preserved their culture unlike the ones who abandoned it to be come Turks.

...

>H
>R
>E
>330 A.D

Constantinople was a thriving trade city though

Being the most developed country in Europe (economically, culturally, technologically, militarily and having arguably the worlds most impactful legal system) for 600 years is quite an achievement. So is surviving onslaughts of the migrations period.

Yes. And so did Serbs, Bulgarians, Albanians etc. None of these countries saw major population changes. They exist as a continuation. What's your point?

If you have Turks, you have every reason to hate the Byzantine Empire, which was full of the same people.

> yeah, Ataturk knew of the corruptive influence of religon and what it does to a country.

Fixed that for you famalam

You dumbass moron, The Byzantine Empire was mostly compromised with Greeks who back then were known as ROMANS (and even called themselves that until their independence). This can't be said for all other ethnicities who were once subjects to the Byzantine Empire because they carried on on their own.

>None of these countries saw major population changes.
Greek didn't see major population changes? How about them Greeks in Anatolia and Constantinople then?

>This can't be said for all other ethnicities
Actually, the Ottomans called pretty much all Orthodox Christians "Roman".

>You dumbass moron, The Byzantine Empire was mostly compromised with Greeks who back then were known as ROMANS (and even called themselves that until their independence). This can't be said for all other ethnicities who were once subjects to the Byzantine Empire because they carried on on their own.
Except the Ottomans literally were the Sultanate of Rome, and called themselves that until Turkey declared it's independence.

>Greek didn't see major population changes? How about them Greeks in Anatolia and Constantinople then?
They're the Turks you hate so much.

Because they associated Orthodoxy with the Byzantine (Roman) Empire. There was still a clear difference between the Christian subjects though as while Serbs and Bulgarians stayed true to their identities, Greeks would anknowledge themselves as Romans because of their Byzantine heritage.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_Greeks#Romans_.28.E1.BF.AC.CF.89.CE.BC.CE.B1.E1.BF.96.CE.BF.CE.B9.29

>Sultanate of Rome
>WE OWN A BUNCH OF LAND THAT ROMANS USED TO OWN THEREFORE WE WUZ ROMANS N SHIT.
That's all it really was.

>They're the Turks you hate so much.
You're still ignoring that there were still many Greeks living in Constantinople and Anatolia before the population exchange of 1923.

>
>
>

>Except the Ottomans literally were the Sultanate of Rome, and called themselves that until Turkey declared it's independence.
But unlike the Byzantines their culture and laws and and systems of governance were not descended from Rome.

>true Romans
>empire doesn't include Rome

okay

...

>That's all it really was.
And if you're the Byzantines, that's really all it is.

>You're still ignoring that there were still many Greeks living in Constantinople and Anatolia before the population exchange of 1923.
And they were divided up according to Language and Religion, which the Byzantines did not share with the Romans. It is very essential to the Byzantine claim that Roman Identity have nothing to do with either of those things.

>But unlike the Byzantines their culture
So did the Greeks disappear or not? Either everyone was Roman by the 4th century, and there was no continuity with the Roman Population by the 4th century, and modern Greeks are WE WUZING, or they had cultural continuity with the greeks. Which would make sense, because they spoke Greek, not Latin.

>and laws and and systems of governance were not descended from Rome.
Except they didn't use the laws and system of Governance of Rome. And if you say other people are allowed to change them, and reforms are continuous, then they ARE continuous with the Roman Empire. Sultan Mehmed had a claim to the Byzantine Throne, and asserted it by force, then reformed the government.If you're going to claim Rome falls when someone with a bad claim takes over the empire, then Maximus Thrax surely crashed the empire with no survivors before the Byzantines even existed.

>a bunch of steppe nomads who conquered some lands from the Byzantines makes them hold the same legitimacy as the Byzantines themselves who were the eastern part of the Roman empire that survived for many centuries while the western part fell
that's not how it fucking works.

>And they were divided up according to Language and Religion, which the Byzantines did not share with the Romans.
Your whole sentence is a mess. Explain briefly.

>So did the Greeks disappear or not? Either everyone was Roman by the 4th century, and there was no continuity with the Roman Population by the 4th century, and modern Greeks are WE WUZING, or they had cultural continuity with the greeks. Which would make sense, because they spoke Greek, not Latin.
The difference between a Greek and a barbarian who were conquered by the Romans is that the Greek gets to retain his culture and his language because the Roman considered him as an equal civilised individual, while the barbarian on the other hand would have to adopt the Roman culture and language as he was considered inferior. But the thing that the Greek and barbarian share is that both can be Roman citizens to the state. After WRE fell and the ERE lost Egypt and Syria, the only areas that inhabited Roman citizens were the ones with a Greek majority. This explains why Greeks began identifying more with being Roman despite their Hellenic past. They were the last "Romans".

As for the last part, the Ottomans were a completely different entity from the Byzantines. Mehmed II may have boasted that he was 1/14 Komnenos or whatever but thats only for WEWUZING. And as for your Maximinus example, the difference is that he was still a Roman citizen, albeit a lowly one, unlike the Ottomans who were complete outsiders.

>Reform Roman law into a 3 volume text that's now that basis for Civil Law worldwide
Don't you mean the napoleonic code

Childhood is idolizing Rome past the Western Roman Empire's collapse
Adulthood is realizing that the Anglo-Saxon is now God's chosen

>their culture
Greek language and gods didn't come from Rome (even if they were hilariously similar). That's a rather big part of culture. I think you mean society.

>unlike the Ottomans who were complete outsiders
Were they really by then? It's not like they had just arrived from parts unknown. The Ottomans and the Turks in general had by then lived in and among Roman lands and citizens for several centuries.

I pushed my cock into Kasim Muhammad's asshole, and the big Black man squealed. I smacked his hairy Black ass and told him to shut the fuck up. Looking at us while fingering her pussy, Kasim's sexy wife, a chocolate-skinned Somali beauty named Khadija, winked at us. Clearly the Black woman was turned on by the sight of a well-endowed white male fucking her husband in the ass. I gripped Kasim's hips tightly and rammed my cock up his shit hole. I always wanted to try this, reverse the whole cuckold fantasy thing, you know? In most cuckold stories, a big Black guy dominates a white woman while her limp-dick white husband watches. I like to flip the script and dominate Blacks instead, you know?

I flipped Kasim on his back and raised his hairy legs in the air while pumping my cock into his asshole. He just lay there and took it like the bitch he was. I always knew that underneath all their religious craziness and macho swagger, Muslim guys were punks and Kasim Muhammad was definitely living proof. Khadija joined us after donning a shiny alabaster strap-on dildo. Kasim had been screaming non-stop as I pounded his well-lubricated but nevertheless tight ass with powerful thrusts of my thick Irish cock. Khadija silenced him by stuffing his mouth with her strap-on dildo. Obediently he began sucking her dildo with the same passion he sucked my cock earlier. Khadija and I high-fived each other as we filled Kasim's holes with our respective pricks. Khadija seemed to really enjoy helping me dominate her husband, and I was most thankful for her help. Not that I needed it, of course, but having it did help make things extra special.

What race were the majority of Byzantines?

>that's not how it fucking works.
You're right. Constantinople has nothing to do with Rome.

>Your whole sentence is a mess. Explain briefly.
"Greeks" were deported to Greece based on their language, and religion. The Byzantines spoke Latin and did not share the religion of Rome. If language and religion are the markers of Romaness, then Greeks are not Romans. If they are not the markers, then the Turks have just as much of a claim.

You have to pick one or the other, it can't be both ways.

>The difference between a Greek and a barbarian who were conquered by the Romans is that the Greek gets to retain his culture and his language
This completely gets rid of the claim made earlier, that Byzantine culture was a continuation of Latin Culture. If Latin came first in the region, why does Greek show no signs of being a Romance language, like say, French, the language of Charlemagne does?

>After WRE fell and the ERE lost Egypt and Syria, the only areas that inhabited Roman citizens were the ones with a Greek majority.
If we go by the marker of citizenship, then every state that emerged in Western Europe was the Roman Empire, because they were all citizens. Hurr a durr, Wales is the Roman Empire because it's kings were once Roman CItizens, therefor establishing continuity.

>
As for the last part, the Ottomans were a completely different entity from the Byzantines. Mehmed II may have boasted that he was 1/14 Komnenos or whatever but thats only for WEWUZING
But your entire argument is that WEWUZing is legitimate. If descent from the Byzantines isn't the same thing as descent from Rome, then the Byzantines weren't roman. At any rate, they were doomed anyway, because in 3 or 4 generations, all the Greeks would be WEWUZING.

>And as for your Maximinus example, the difference is that he was still a Roman citizen, albeit a lowly one
If Maximus's assention was legitimate, why did the Senate oppose it, and plot to kill him?

I continued to relentlessly pound Kasim's ass until I felt just about ready to cum. I pulled out of him and removed the condom. I was about to tell Kasim to get ready but his darling wife, the Somali beauty known as Khadija beat me to the punch. She ordered him to get on his knees and he complied, kneeling before me. Before I could say anything Kasim grabbed my cock and greedily sucked it, draining me of every last drop of cum. He licked my cock and balls like his life depended on it. A Black Muslim male slut sucking the thick white cock of a dominant white male in front of his bossy Black Muslim wife. Now THAT is definitely not something you see every bloody day. And now, the piece de resistance, if you will.

Little Asian

Southern Europeans, mainly Greeks.

It varied depending on which time period of "Byzantines" you were talking about. The "Byzantine" period lasted about 1000 years, and the territory changed drastically, at one point controlling a lot of the former Roman Empire, but by the end controlling nothing more than Constantinople. In the days of Constantine and Justinian? Latins, with a lot of Greeks too. In the days of Heraclius, then mostly Greeks, with some Levant people (not Arabs, but you know that majority of lighter-skinned Lebanese/Syrian people? Them.).

I ordered Khadija to kneel before me and the tall and chubby, big-bottomed Somali woman obeyed my command. I made her polish my thick cock with her succulent mouth while Kasim watched. Afterwards, I put on a condom then bent Khadija over, face down and ass up. I thrust two fingers into her wet, hairy pussy. I tasted them, and smiled. She tasted so damn good. Muslim pussy from Somalia is delicious. Small wonder Muslim men are so possessive of them. They don't want Christian men like myself to get a taste. That's why they call us kafirs or infidels. They're afraid of us. I began fucking Khadija right in front of Kasim. I slammed my cock deep into her pussy, making her squeal just like I made her husband squeal as I fucked him in the ass earlier. Kasim watched with wide eyes as I ravaged his wife by pounding her really hard with my thick white cock.

Does anyone else get annoyed about how little respect the Eastern Romans/Byzantines get in history? I've seen nothing about them in pop culture, except for one British movie and one Turkish propaganda movie*, despite the fact that they were around for twice as long as the USA and played a vital role in starting the Renaissance. It's weird.

*where the Byzantines are all blonde-haired, blue eyed, decadent people and the Ottomans are good muslims who dindu nuffin

>and played a vital role in starting the Renaissance
No.

In any case, it's because all the major powers today have their own history that barely intersects with the ERE except for some small Medieval misadventures abroad. Most people don't care about history unless it can be used to tell a story to reflect their own values and beliefs, which is why most respect for the Byzantines these days come from nationalist groups trying to uphold it as a propaganda example of the dangers of Islam/Immigration - the same way Persians get the short end of the stick as dark-skinned tyrants and terrorists attempting to crush freedom loving whites who 'dindu nuffin.'

Childhood is idolizing Rome, the >HRE, and Prussia.

Adulthood is realizing that France was the good guy all along and the USA is the true, spiritual successor to Rome.

shut the fuck up Darius

>You're right. Constantinople has nothing to do with Rome.
Except from the fact that Constantinople was made the capital of Rome by Constantine the Great. The city of Rome didn't even matter by then, even Ravenna was a more important city in Italy.

>"Greeks" were deported to Greece based on their language, and religion. The Byzantines spoke Latin and did not share the religion of Rome. If language and religion are the markers of Romaness, then Greeks are not Romans. If they are not the markers, then the Turks have just as much of a claim.
I don't understand your first sentence, are you implying that Greeks aren't from Greece? As for the language, you're forgetting that Greek was also the other major language of the Roman Empire where it was widely spoken in the eastern Mediterranean. Also, the Roman pantheon was extremely similar to the Greek pantheon so it didn't matter at all, even when Christianity became the state religion.

>This completely gets rid of the claim made earlier, that Byzantine culture was a continuation of Latin Culture. If Latin came first in the region, why does Greek show no signs of being a Romance language, like say, French, the language of Charlemagne does?
Byzantine culture is still Roman culture and the change from Latin to Greek was bound to happen because as I mentioned before, the ERE was mostly composed of the eastern Mediterranean which was mostly Greek influenced. As for the second part of your post, it confuses me greatly considering that you say that Latin was somehow what came first in the region before Greek. Assuming you're ignorant about the subject and not shitposting, Latin was only imposed in Western Europe where there were uncivilized tribes living in Iberia, Gaul and Britain but no in the already civilized areas that were conquered like Greece and Egypt.

Continuing to next post...

>You're right. Constantinople has nothing to do with Rome.

But the Roman Empire made Constantinople the capital, and Rome remained part of the new, Constantinople-based Empire for another 200 years....saying Constantinople has nothing to do with Rome is like saying Kaliningrad (Konigsberg) has nothing to do with Prussia.

>No.

Well, I'm going to need a better counteragument then "no"....I'm very open to changing my opinion on this, but from what I've read and learned they did play a vital role in starting it.

>In any case, it's because all the major powers today have their own history that barely intersects with the ERE except for some small Medieval misadventures abroad. Most people don't care about history unless it can be used to tell a story to reflect their own values and beliefs

Very true, and it's a bit sad. The Turks think of the Romans as their decadent Christian enemy, the Arabs do the same (after all, one of their most famous military victories was smashing an exhausted Roman Army at the battle of something that starts with "Y" in the 7th century), the Westerners look down on it because if we admit that Constantinople was the greatest Christian city on earth at its peak, we also have to confront the fact that our ancestors sacked it, slaughtered its people, raped its nuns, burned its chapels....

So strange how politicized historical discussion becomes. We emphasize what makes us look good, or, if we're one of those people who have some beef with the establishment, then we emphasize what makes us look bad.

>If we go by the marker of citizenship, then every state that emerged in Western Europe was the Roman Empire, because they were all citizens. Hurr a durr, Wales is the Roman Empire because it's kings were once Roman CItizens, therefor establishing continuity.
To be a Roman citizen you had to be part of a recurring Roman state. When the WRE fell, its people were no longer Roman citizens because they were not governed by the Roman government anymore since it was already destroyed by the Germanic tribes. This wasn't the case for the people of the ERE since it has still survived for many more centuries, even though it lost crucial land in the process. Since then it was left with areas dominated by Greek populations, but they were still considered to be Romans by law.

>If descent from the Byzantines isn't the same thing as descent from Rome, then the Byzantines weren't roman. At any rate, they were doomed anyway, because in 3 or 4 generations, all the Greeks would be WEWUZING.
Intermarriage between royalties in Europe and the Middle east was not something uncommon, m8. Also, the Byzantines were constantly changing dynasties with bloodshed, so it didn't really mean much if you had ancestry from one single dynasty.

>If Maximus's assention was legitimate, why did the Senate oppose it, and plot to kill him?
Because they considered him a barbarian, even though he was still legally a Roman citizen.

>As for the last part, the Ottomans were a completely different entity from the Byzantines. Mehmed II may have boasted that he was 1/14 Komnenos or whatever but thats only for WEWUZING. And as for your Maximinus example, the difference is that he was still a Roman citizen, albeit a lowly one, unlike the Ottomans who were complete outsiders.

They weren't complete outsiders. The Turks had moved into Anatolia by the mid-11th century, and since then they'd been trading, marrying, and generally living with Byzantine citizens to the point where towns would change loyalties between the emperor and sultan pretty easily, and where most Turkish beys had at some point in their lives served at or had sons raised in Byzantine courts. They were more like the Goths and Vandals than the Huns by that point.

Islam literally is a nestorian heresy repackaged in a different format to avoid its adherents converting back to the real Christianity

The Renaissance was already under way a full century before the Ottomans took Constantinople, and most of the books that formed the basis for the science and philosophy of the Renaissance were translated well before it or came from French and Italian monasteries.

>The Renaissance was already under way a full century before the Ottomans took Constantinopl

I know...I'm talking about Eastern Romans before the city fell to the Turks. I'm not talking about the Ottomans at all, they had fuck all to do with the Renaissance. Maybe you just misread my post, or I wasn't clear about what I mean?

>and most of the books that formed the basis for the science and philosophy of the Renaissance were translated well before

Absolutely. Roughly 200 years before, if I'm remembering my Eastern Roman history class correctly.

*wasn't clear about what I meant

The usual claim that the Byzantines sparked the Renaissance says that Byzantine refugees from the Ottoman conquest sparked it. However, almost all the important philosophical and scientific works in the West came from Moorish Spain and Sicily, British and French monasteries, and the translation efforts of those like Petrarch in Italy, who gave up on trying to rely on Southern Italian Greeks and Greek works and focused entirely on Latin texts.

>The usual claim that the Byzantines sparked the Renaissance says that Byzantine refugees from the Ottoman conquest sparked it.

That's not what I'm claiming at all. I'm talking about Byzantine scholars bringing their ideas to Italy well before that. IIRC it goes all the way back to the so-called "Byzantine Dark Age" of the 7th-9th centuries, following the Arab destruction of the Christian Middle East and the death of Heraclius. I wish I could give proper examples, but I am incredibly drunk.

>>"The Roman pope-if indeed he is to be called pope who has held communion and worked together with the son of Alberic the apostate, with an adulterer and unhallowed person-has sent letters to our most holy emperor, worthy of himself, unworthy of Nicephorus, calling him the emperor "of the Greeks," and not "of the Romans." Which thing beyond a doubt has been done by the advice of your master."

>>"What do I hear?" I said to myself. I am lost; there is no doubt but what I shall go by the shortest way to the judgment-seat."

>>"Now listen," they continued, "we know you will say that the pope is the simplest of men; you will say it, and we acknowledge it." "But," I answered, "I do not say it."

>>"Hear then! The stupid silly pope does not know that the holy Constantine transferred hither the imperial scepter, the senate, and all the Roman knighthood, and left in Rome nothing but vile minions- fishers, namely, peddlers, bird catchers, bastards, plebeians, slaves. He would never have written this unless at the suggestion of your king; how dangerous this will be to both-the immediate future, unless they come to their senses, will show."

>>"But the pope," I said, "whose simplicity is his title to renown, thought he was writing this to the honor of the emperor, not to his shame. We know, of course, that Constantine, the Roman emperor, came hither with the Roman knighthood, and founded this city in his name; but because you changed your language, your customs, and your dress, the most holy pope thought that the name of the Romans as well as their dress would displease you."

Who got BTFO the hardest here?

...

Voltaire was a punk.

>heretical
>german
>confederation

Well the Pope is still around and the Empire isn't, so I'd say Rome won the long game.

It's the opposite.

Childhood is believing Byzantine financially ruinous wars, fraticidal court intrigues, oversized bureaucracy and past-looking culture are awesome. Adulthood is realizing that the Holy Roman Empire with its descentralized political culture, traditional rights and liberties, burgeoning and dynamic imperial free cities, rich cultural and societal institutions was the greatest state of Europe during most of its existence, and it only disappeared because it was simply too good for an age of absolutism and tyrannical governments, but it should be always a model for how the European Union ought to work (instead of trying to emulate the Soviet Union).

If the Byzantine, the Ottoman and Russian Empires were the heirs to late Imperial Rome, its struggles and decadence, the Holy Roman Empire was heir to the glory days of the Republican Roman Senate, the heir to the liberty of freeborn men, the heir to its respect for the rule of law above the rule of petty tyrants and their armies.

It was the heir to what is actually good the Romans left to the world.

"Ever since our rough crusading forefathers first saw Constantinople and met, to their contemptuous disgust, a society where everyone read and wrote, ate food with forks and preferred diplomacy to war, it has been fashionable to pass the Byzantines by with scorn and to use their name as synonymous with decadence". - English Historian Steven Runciman

>Graeco-Roman and christian culture
>Constantinople literal new capital of the empire
>Roman law
>Imperial line continued
>implying political powerplay by the pope means something
>implying Charlemagne wasn't LARPing
Coronation
Imperial Coronation of Charlemagne, by Friedrich Kaulbach, 1861

In 799, Pope Leo III had been mistreated by the Romans, who tried to put out his eyes and tear out his tongue.[55] Leo escaped and fled to Charlemagne at Paderborn.[56]
At Mass, on Christmas Day (25 December), when Charlemagne knelt at the altar to pray, the Pope crowned him Imperator Romanorum ("Emperor of the Romans") in Saint Peter's Basilica. In so doing, the Pope effectively nullified the legitimacy of Empress Irene of Constantinople.

HREboos confirmed biased wehraboos in disguise.
The Byzantines where the true medieval Roman Empire.

Why is Byzantine empire so sexy?

Selectively breeded, prime βωιπουσσι.

>the Holy Roman Empire was heir to the glory days of the Republican Roman Senate
Sorry, that would be Venice.

why is this so gay?

Pretty sure the Sultanate of Rum was the legitimate Rome.

No way that's a man ass

...

Actresses used instead of actors, opposite of what Da Vinci did with females in art.

Adulthood is realizing that it doesn't fucking matter and that being the "true" Romans wasn't something to be desired anyway.

>there are people right now who doesn't think that Byzantium is Rome

>ヘタリア
stop

>And they at least preserved their culture

Except the fact that greek nationalism is based on hellenism, rather than the byzantine empire.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megali_Idea
>The Megali Idea implied the goal of reviving the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, by establishing a Greek state, which would be, as ancient geographer Strabo wrote, a Greek world encompassing mostly the former Byzantine lands from the Ionian Sea to the west, to Asia Minor and the Black Sea to the east and from Thrace, Macedonia and Epirus to the north, to Crete and Cyprus to the south. This new state would have Constantinople as its capital: it would be the "Greece of Two Continents and Five Seas" (Europe and Asia, the Ionian, Aegean, Marmara, Black and Libyan seas, respectively).

how did they keep track of all the different borders back then? even today it would be a nightmare