Thinks the eastern roman empire is not a rightful heir to the roman empire

>Is the actual literal Roman Empire
>Capital isn't Rome
what did he mean by this?

To what extent can the Romans just be viewed as an offshoot of Greek culture anyways? Their entire weltanschauung was rooted in Greek culture and ideas. Roman culture itself is probably more or less just the result of Greek culture merging with Etruscan and local Latin culture in Italy.
So Greek overtaking Latin as the language is hardly a split from Roman culture

fucking this, i never understood why such a big deal was made of roman culture leaning more towards greek when they were major greekboos in the first place

It was like that for most of the roman empire's fucking history actualy, starting from Domitian's hatred for the senate and bigger interest in the frontiers, to Hadrian's empire tour, to Diocletian's complete disdain of the city, to the end of the last roman emperor, which was in Ravenna

Can't we just agree that Byzantium was a successor state rather than the continuation of the actual Roman empire? They had no senate and Latin died out and was replaced with Greek, though culture, institutions and identy were Roman

Because Rome is an inherently western polity. Anything eastern can't be Roman, "eastern Roman" is an oxymoron. The HRE is the rightful successor to the empire simply by process of elimination.

They had a senate right to the end what are you talking about. Just because it was irrelevant doesn't mean it wasn't there.

>State of New York
>capital isn't New York
Greece is the literal birthplace of western civilization you nonce, Latins were the ones that started the Great LARP by claiming to be Trojans so as to link themselves with the glory of Archaic Greece.

>Rome is an inherently western polity
No, Rome is an inherently mediterranean polity, the concept of "the West" didn't exist back then. Naming the two parts "East" and "West" was based purely on geography.
Also the HRE had literally nothing in common with the Roman Empire except for holding Rome for like 3 minutes

Well, beside the (((((senate)))) you do agree, don't you?

>Can't we just agree that Byzantium was a successor state rather than the continuation of the actual Roman empire?

No.

>They had no senate

So? The senate in Rome was essentially powerless after the events of the 1st Century BC.

>Latin died out and was replaced with Greek

That didn't happen overnight. That was a long, gradual process.

>thinks the ottoman empire is not a rightful heir to the roman empire

During those times, Rome was shit compared to Constatinople.

Rome wasn't even the capital of WRE when it died. It had a population of some 30,000.

It the Turks actually bothered to seriously claim that, it would have been, but they gave up on the attempt.

>A bunch of Gayreeks
>The rightful emperor as proclaimed by Rome and confirmed by her bishop, the avatar of God himself

How is this even a question? How fucking braindead do you have to believe that the actual empire recognized by Rome is in any way less Roman than a constantly revolting conferedation of pedophiles and Slavic barbarians?
Do you think Finland is the heir to the Russian Empire as well?

Revisionism with a touch of the Westerner's inferiority syndrome.

>No
Why, byzaboo, why?

Same guy, it was as much a continuation of the Roman empire, as was the Turd Reich of the German Empire

The Roman Empire lasted from 27 BC to 1453 AD. You can't dispute this.

The title, yes. De jure=/=de facto

the notion of westernhood doesnt even apply in ancient times

I'll use this thread merely to say that I don't understand how can anyone be interested or like the gross oriental clusterfuck that is Bizantium. There is something inherently disgusting about it, a kind of putrid stench emanates from the whole thing. Gaudy, meaningless, orthodox, like a carcass swarming with worms and flies.

>Bizantium
Too obvious bait

There is no true heir to the roman empire, and you wannabe larpers ought to deal with it. The best you've got is nations with similar levels of influence/control.

In my language it's Bizant.

there is no successor, The Roman Empire died when Rome was sacked

heir to rum? you mean osmans?

>Can't we just agree that Byzantium was a successor state
No, because it *was* the Roman Empire. It is the same state and there is complete legal continuity from Augustus to Constantine XI. The Empire still had a senate and Greek was always the lingua franca of the east so it makes sense that when the Roman Empire exists in the east, Greek is more important and efficient.

that limit evaluates to 0 it should be written as lim(x-->0) -1/x^2