Is the Pope the successor of the Roman Emperors? Vatican city = Roman Empire?

[Barnabas]

The byzantines spoke greek, and ruled over greeks in greece and asia minor, not romans.

the holy roman empire was well... german, not roman.

From the collapse of the Empire, the only one who ruled over Rome, and kept the language of the romans alive (to this day) was the Bishop of Rome, aka Pope, so, the Papal states (were) until that hellbound mason Garibaldi appeared the successor of the Roman Empire, and now the Vatican City (is) the successor of the Roman Empire, and the Popes have been and are to this day successors of the Emperors!

Rule Rome, they have it
Speak Latin, they have it
Elective Monarchy a la Adoptive Emperors, they have it..
Title Pontifex Maximus, they also have it.

Discuss.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

[Barnabas]

stop giving me the dancing little dudes, people

[Gangerolf]

empire > city

[chequita guevara]

Re: Is the Pope the successor of the Roman Emperors? Vatican city = Roman Empire?

No, the President of Turkey is.

edit: seriously

[Gangerolf]

Actually, the Russian Czar was, or claimed to be. So I guess that may mean that Vladimir Putin is now the Roman emperor.

[chequita guevara]

No one recognized the Russian claim.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
Actually, the Russian Czar was, or claimed to be. So I guess that may mean that Vladimir Putin is now the Roman emperor.

No, it means Vladimir Putin is now the Pope. Duh.

[chequita guevara]

Western Rome fell, but Eastern Rome did not. What we now called the Byzantine Empire was not the successor to the Roman Empire. It was the Roman Empire. That is how everyone refered to it. When the Ottomans took Constantinople, they were recognized as the successors to Rome by their contempories, not just in the East, but in the West as well. They were the Ottoman Sultanate of Rum. The Sultan's title was Kaiser i-Rum, Caesar of Rome. Hell, the Venetians recognized the Ottomans claims to Southern Italy based on the Ottomans being the Romans. Turkey was the successor state to the Ottomans, thus, the President of Turkey is the successor of the Caesars.

Muscovy's claim to being the 3rd Rome was based soley on marrying a Byzantine princess, but the Ottomans didn't just marry them, they were decended from them as well.

[KrazyHorse]

The Roman Empire died in 1453

When the Eastern Empire fell there were no more successors.

The line ended there.

[DRoseDARs]

Stop NOT giving him little dancing dudes!

[KrazyHorse]

The Ottomans did not succeed to the throne of the Empire. They took the Byzantines apart a piece at a time. They did not install themselves as the new leaders of Rome. Their rule was a clear break with the rule of Rome.

[chequita guevara]

You're wrong, KH. They called themselves the caesar of the romans and their contemporaries recognized them as such. Mehmet II definately considered himself the Roman Emporer. Suleyman did as well, and one of the reasons for the strong animosity betwen him and Carlos of Spain was that the latter called himself Emperor of the Romans (since he was Holy Roman Emperor). The 2nd seige of Vienna was specifically done in order to bring Carlos to battle and decide the issue once and for all. Carlos never showed.

[KrazyHorse]

They called themselves Caesars as a convenience. Some of their contemporaries recognised them as such because it was convenient. Some did not because it was inconvenient.

The Byzantines were taken apart a piece at a time. The Ottomans were not their successors, but their conquerors.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
The Byzantines were taken apart a piece at a time.

A distinction without meaning.

The Ottomans were not their successors, but their conquerors.

When you conquer someone, you inherit any claims they once had.