When do you realized that the Holy Roman Empire and other western medieval "powers" were a meme and that the Basileia...

>Mt 16.18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
>The Pontifex Maximus carries less Roman authority than the Bishop of Constantinople

>denying history because religion
You are a revisionist, that interpretation of thr verse is objectively wrong by the historical consensus on the history of the roman church in the roman empire as a state religion.

>religion is not the main source of legitimacy
>The Pontifex Maximus carries less Roman authority than the Bishop of Constantinople

>denying history
The roman emperors were the effective heads of the church very soon after christianism became the official religion of the roman empire and the pope invented the notion of him being the head of the church many centuries after that.

Denying that woulf be like saying the earth is flat.

Hohenstaufen, yes.
My bad.

But then, after a while even when the Luxembourg Emperors were more powerful than the Byzantines.

What am I denying that is wrong?
That Mt verse is a source of papal legitimacy.
The pope claiming to be Pontifex Maximus makes sense.
Religion was the main source of legitimacy.
Also the please give examples of cases where the Western Emperor has put the bishop of Rome into power, this would make him "effective head of church".

They were greek romans. Just like puertoricans are americans

DO IT AGAIN, ENRICO DANDOLO

nobody considers puertoricans as americans though.

So strong that not able to handle some Italian city-states.

The Greek culture was more important than latin culture during the antiquity even in Rome.

-architecture
-religion
-naval warfare
-literature
-art
-city planning
-etc

everything was stolen by romans from greece

this

>they spoke Greek

You realize the Romans also spoke Greek, right? You weren't considered an educated person in ancient Rome unless you were fluent in both Greek and Latin. Orators would sometimes switch languages mid-speech just to prove that they could do it.

>treated non Greeks with disdain?

Romans always treated barbarians with disdain. Why would that change?

I obviously meant they spoke Greek as their native language

>call yourself the Romeme Empire
>call people living in and around Rome, who speak Latin/the languages descended from Latin, whose ancestors since the days of Caesar had lived near Rome, barbarians
Wew lad

>call yourself the Romeme Empire
>speak German mostly, but have documents in Latin and protect the Pope, the Pontifex Maximus, the spiritual father of all Romans, from the perfidious Greeks
It's clear to me who the winner is.

>collection of kingdoms and dynasties who invaded and destroyed Rome being blessed by the Pope because that was the new reality and he had nothing better to do, predominantly located somewhere Rome never was
vs
>Literally the Roman entity, capital was moved there, was richer than the west minus Italy

Would Cato the Elder consider the Germans of the HRE or the Greeks of the Byzantine Empire as Romans?

>invaded and destroyed Rome
How could they do this when they were almost all east of the Rhine? Review your history. And it was the Ostrogoths who invaded and destroyed Rome, but they and the Lombards were eventually absorbed into the native population.
>literally the Roman entity
Only up tilt he 7th century.
>capital was moved there
So you admit, it's the Constantinopolitan Empire
>richer than the west minus Italy
I don't see what this has to do with anything.

He would say neither. If forced to choose he'd probably say Germans of the HRE. Greater personal freedoms, a league of equal (at least on paper) princes who elect and can be elected emperor. Versus the Greek Empire, ruled by an iron-fisted tyrant who can be deposed by general and literal dickless eunuchs and the intrigues of women at court. Fucking disgraceful.
Actually Cato would probably prefer the Germans over the lack of eunuchs alone.

>So you admit, it's the Constantinopolitan Empire
Yeah I have no issues with that. We're measuring who is more Roman though.
>I don't see what this has to do with anything.
Because that made the empire, not the Celtic backwaters
>How could they do this when they were almost all east of the Rhine? Review your history. And it was the Ostrogoths who invaded and destroyed Rome, but they and the Lombards were eventually absorbed into the native population.
I'm not sure what your point is. It wasn't exactly Latin peoples who were super excited about the HRE, but Germanics. Their only argument is that the Pope lived in Rome and half-arsed use of the Latin language in official contexts.

you should probably review your history, your points are total shit

>anarchic barbarians
>more Roman than cream of the crop centralized and bureaucratic Byzantium

That's exactly why

He didn't go far enough.