Was Ottoman Empire more Roman than Byzantines

...

hah yeah if you mean archaic

Trojans weren't greeks though they fought against the greeks.

WE

Well, they controlled more former Roman territories and subjects than Byzantines.

Greeks fought against other greeks all the time

That eagle ıs called Öksökö in pre-islamic Turkic mythology. İt is a symbol of the Tengrist god 'Ülgen', and was used by the Seljuqs before they had arrived in Anatolia.

It was literally the trojans against a united greece.

Turks called them Roman.

So were the Ottomans

the symbol is of the twin eagles konrul and togrul from ancient turkic mythology
who the fuck writes these neo-historical blog-tier bullshit theories around is beyond me

>ottomans were greek
top-kek

>If the USA loses the eastern states, and the language transitions to spanish, they are not USA anymore.

So?

trojans were native anatolians. they didn't speak greeks, weren't genetically greek and weren't culturally greek thus they weren't greeks

The majority of the population was the same as it was under eastern roman rule.

>ancient greece must have had the same borders as modern greece

ancient greeks didn't see trojans as greeks nor did trojans see themselves as greeks

ruling class didn't see themselves as greeks though. also neither the administrator nor the army was greek. there were some greeks in the government but they always were a minority. ruling over greeks does not make the ottoman turks greek

yes, the ruling class and the commoners saw themselves as romans.

The Trojans spoke luwian, but perhaps had similar gods.

>ancient greeks didn't see trojans as greeks nor did trojans see themselves as greeks
>The Trojans spoke luwian, but perhaps had similar gods.

That is fanfiction.

>the ruling class and the commoners saw themselves as romans.

>Although we are of the same root as Italians and although i have the right to take the vengeance of Hector from the Romans(Greeks) i am amazed by the fact that the Italians show enmenity towards me and provoke the Romans(Greeks) against me. -Mehmed the Conqueror

ottomans believed that they were native anatolians. they subscribed to the idea that the seljuk turks derived from the native anatolians who were driven out by the greek invasion and saw themselves as rightfully returning to their lands and taking revenge from the romans.

There is more proof that Trojans knew luwian over Greek.

How many levels of propaganda were they on?!

They speak greek in the Iliad, and that is the only proof of Trojans there is.
Hisarlik's might have spoken luwian.

The Iliad is your proof, and not literally the only artifact that showed language to ever be found at Troy during the Trojan war (luwian)?

>not literally the only artifact that showed language to ever be found at Troy during the Trojan war
But it hasn't been proven that Hisarlik is actually Troy.

>ottomans believed that they were native anatolians
Nothign was known about native anatolians before 1800s
stop shitposting

>The majority of the population was the same as it was under eastern roman rule.

hmm

-Arabs (new people)
-Kurds (recently migrated to Anatolia after Battle of Manzikert
-Turks/Turkmens (after 1071)
-Hungarians
-Romanians
-Croatians
-Crimean Tatars
-Azerbaijanis
-Some Georgians

totally same dude.
Fuckign retard

I guess the majority of Germany is Syrian and African nowadays...

It’s agreed upon by historians that it is Troy. Who doesn’t agree, just you?

As mentioned there is no proof that it is Troy.
Maybe you have it, if so show it.

They spoke Luwian and were a native Anatolian people you idiot. It wasn't an Ionian colonist city. The Brad Pitt movie shouldn't be your primary source, buckaroo.

Historians don't even agree if Troy was a real city.

edict of caracalla says that they were still roman

Correct

They would be a successor or rump state,

>Implying "Greek" and "Roman" were mutually exclusive ideas in the late Roman era
is correct. As the empire went on, Roman was used less and less as a ethnic identity, and more a mark of citizenship. The people of Greece and Anatolia never stopped speaking Greek when the Romans took over. "Latinization" was a process that mostly occurred in the western half of the empire, but not so much the eastern half. Greek, Aramaic, and Coptic remained the common tongue of Greeks, Levantines, and Egyptians before, during, and after the Roman Period.
This is a poor example and pretty much explained why. A better (though not perfect) analogy would be:
>Year is 2100. Spanish has replaced English as the most widely spoken language on the West coast, and Spanish/Spanglish is the lingua franca in pretty much the entire western half of the US. Even millions of non-Latino people are fluent. Congress passes legislation that creates a second, equally legitimate, federal government to govern the western half of the United States, with its own capital based in Los Angeles. This is a mostly bureaucratic move, so citizens of neither half stop considering themselves Americans as they always have. Eventually Mexico and Canada overrun the eastern half of the US and it is now a defunct political hell hole and Mexico owns Washington D.C. Does this series of events mean that the citizens of the still standing western half immediately cease to be Americans?

And just for clarification's sake, I'm well aware that the Coptic language did not exist prior to the 2nd century, and that they spoke Demotic before Rome's conquest.

No you dumbass

When you're a constant threat to the germans and slavs then you are a roman.

And the ottomans were?

So under that logic was the British empire Indian?

watt?