Did the inhabitants of the Holy Roman Empire view themselves as Romans?

Did the inhabitants of the Holy Roman Empire view themselves as Romans?

Nope. It was just a title.

I doubt they even viewed themselves as german.

The Lorrains saw themselves as French the Burgundians saw themselves as Burgundians but closely related to French

And saxony didn't go above the Elbe, to the East of the Elbe there was the Polabians and Sorbians who were Slatic

they view themselves as german or their regional subset

Sort of?
They enjoyed the prestige of the title, but they had no idea what it mean to be a Roman.
To them, they were Roman because they have no reference otherwise.

This. People throughout most of history identified with their town or village. They probably spoke a unique dialect too.

Some of the Italians probably viewed themselves as Roman

It doesn't matter though desu because the only legitimate romans left at this point were the Greeks and their crumbling successor state

The Italians literally living in Rome and the surrounding area had and have every right to called Romans

>Did the inhabitants of the Holy Roman Empire view themselves as Romans?
Most likely not. National identities like we see them today didn't really exist in the Middle Ages, and anything approaching nationalism left over from Roman times was long gone by the time the HRE was a thing. By the time national identities started to arise, people associated more with their home region more than some Roman identity.

Really the "Roman" part of the name was nothing but a means to give the Empire legitimacy. In the Middle Ages, the idea was that there could only be one Empire in the world at a time, so by declaring the German empire to be the Holy Roman Empire, it was supposed to give it the legitimacy of being the only rightful empire in the world. That also led to some fun interactions between the Byzantines and HRE - both subscribed to the ideas that they were the true legitimate successors to the Roman Empire as the only Empire in the world, so their correspondences tended to involve roundabout ways of avoiding acknowledging the other as an Empire while still retaining relatively cordial relations.

>Imperium Romanum Sacrum Nationis Germanicæ
>Holy Roman Empire OF THE GERMAN NATION
Here's your answer.

sneaky

Not in the slightest. After all "empire" strictly implies multiethnicity, and the empire was divided into various kingdoms and duchies with their own ethnic identity (tho with time that disappeared in Germany, once most non-german parts of the empire broke off). The emperor was simply the overlord. The "roman" part came from being the heir to Rome's perceived universality of power, and their religious role of ultimate temporal authority over christendom. Basically it was about prestige.

Tbf that name was a 15th century thing, it still leaves half a fucking millennium when the question makes sense.

Right, that's why I said some Italians probably did. But the only legitimate successor to presplit Rome was Byzantium

>your country was once part of the >H>R>E

I feel dirty

>But the only legitimate successor to presplit Rome was Byzantium
Legally maybe, but when you consider what the cultural value of Rome was to Europe, well Byzantium was just completely ineligible.

>Byzantium was just completely ineligible
Gibbon, pls. It was the Byzantine Greeks (together with Arabs) who saved the majority of the ancient texts and it was Byzantine Greeks scholars fleeing from T*rks with manuscripts in their backpacks who kickstarted the Renaissance.

>country borders HRE whole existence
>endless attempts to conquer it are rejected
>actually conquer lands from it instead
>treacherous frogs end the dream
Fucking boney.

And what has that to do with it? Rome to Europe was about continental unity and the divine mandate of the emperor to be its temporal representative. How could a foreign heretic state with barely a foothold on the continent be eligible for the role?

I wonder how people like you rationalise a state literally called "the Roman Empire" whose inhabitants referred to themselves as Romans and who kept Roman traditions and infrastructural systems intact until the 13th century as somehow not being Roman

>I wonder how people like you rationalise a state literally called "the Roman Empire" whose inhabitants referred to themselves as Romans as somehow not being Roman
Pic related.

Also not my point. If you actually read my post you'll see.

>but when you consider what the cultural value of Rome was to Europe, well Byzantium was just completely ineligible.

Most of Europe still acknowledged the authority of the eastern emperor long after the fall of the western empire, it wasn't just Greeks larping over in Anatolia.

The Macedonia comparison would only be valid if the modern Macedonian state had a direct continuity with the ancient Macedonian Kingdom and had the same law and system of governance and spoke the same language.

This. The map is shit. Everything past the Elbe should be a march: Ruled by Germanic margraves, but populated by Slavs.

They did (hence the word "Welsch" as a generic word for non-Germanic). They certainly didn't view themselves as German -citizens- though.

French =/= Franc (itself distinct from the earlier "Frank"). There was a significant nuance. You could be a Franc and not live in a territory ruled by the king of France.

that fucking image AAAAY LAMOA

Italian city-states had some kind of very modern-like nationalism.

Franc is a French term

And since you want to use French then it's not "French" but "Français " which is just "Franc" + "ensis" of nationality
Anyway, Lorrain are French

>itself distinct from the earlier "Frank").
modern construct

All comes from the Latin Francus which just mean, French

>
>
>

mooooooooooooom i posted it again lyl

ur daily d0se d00d

No, Welsch was for romance speaking foreingers, Wendisch for slavic ones

fpbp

You had a gazillion german tribes living there ready to tear the shit out of each other by the slightest movement so the Pope had to control somehow. People identified more with their own tribe be it swabians, franks, bavarians or whatever than anything else, much less their neighbors (which they frequently went to war against)

Medieval identity is an interesting field, I haven't really looked into identities in Central Europe at that time.

I do know something of modern Prussian identity and it was interesting in its negotiation between being "German" and "specifically Prussian", especially after becoming a great power in its own right.