Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I'm not a historian but can there still be an empire if there's no emperor or empress? The Eastern Roman empire is a misnomer for the Byzantine Empire, which started when the last Roman emperor, Romulus Augustulus, was deposed in the 400s by some Germanic warlord whose name I forget. How is that not the end of the Roman Empire? Seems like deciding to call Ukraine Western Russia.
The Byzantine Empire was the Eastern Roman empire - we really on refer to them differently for temporal convenience. The west were the Latin speakers and the east were the Greek speakers (as least for the first half-millennium). And many people still called themselves Emperor of Rome, in a continuous succession, after the fall of the west. For quite a while one of the Pope's titles was (legitimately) Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.
By the 20th century it was down to 3 rightful heirs, all trying to make Europe recognize them as THE Emperor. But in the mean time their empires still recognized them as such.
Which claimants are you thinking of? I know the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire both claimed to be continuations of the Roman Empire. I don't think Italy ever claimed to be the new Rome, somewhat ironically, and I think Germany and France had stopped claiming to be Rome as well.
The House of Hohenzollern in Germany. The Habsburgs formally gave up their claim in order to create the Austro-Hungarian alliance/Empire, but they had asserted it less than a generation prior and also claimed their Empire status on that back of it. And in the Ottoman Empire the lineage of Mehmed, including Mehmed V during WWI, claimed to be the continuation of the Byzantine / Eastern Roman Empire.