Present-day Rome...

[Stavroforos]

Don't kill me for making this thread.

But, if there were to be a legitimate successor or inheritor of Rome, who do you believe it would be? Obviously I don't expect there to be anyone who claims any direct continuity, but for the sake of argument which nation could make the best case for being Rome's successor?

As a side note, I don't want anyone to get too involved with this thread or take questions of Romanness too seriously. It's just for fun.

Oh, and the Vatican doesn't count.

[Barry Goldwater]

Italy or Greece, I guess.

[crazyorc]

USA, because of Capitol Hill.

[SepulchreUK]

Geographically it has to be Italy, politically the US. Except the power disparity between the US and the rest of the world is much greater than the power disparity between Rome and the world she inhabited.

[Watchman]

Geographically it has to be Italy, politically the US. Except the power disparity between the US and the rest of the world is much greater than the power disparity between Rome and the world she inhabited.

OTOH, the US has a lot harder time actually using its theoretical power for much anything than Rome did...

Comes, in no small part, from having to deal with the whole world rather than just the region around the Mediterranean I guess.

After the fall of the Roman Empire the Byzantine Empire was the legitimatic continuation of the Roman State. That ended with the fall of Constantinople. There is no legitimat continuation of the Roman State after that. We can argue about a cultural continuation yes, but a continuation of the Roman State, no.

Didn't the Muscovite empire claim succession, though ? IIRC they could for a while at least make a reasonably legit claim to dynastic relation at least (Ivan the Terrible married a Byzantine princess or something, if memory serves...). 'Course, that one went belly-up too...

[Stavroforos]

I said legitimate for a reason. You can't be a legitimate successor of the Roman Empire without having ever belonged to the Roman Empire...

[SepulchreUK]

I said legitimate for a reason. You can't be a legitimate successor of the Roman Empire without having ever belonged to the Roman Empire...

Then it's impossible. No nation speaks Latin anymore, no nation holds on to roman style, no one builds with roman architecture. The world has developed too much for there to be a true direct successor to Rome.

[Xerrop]

Then it's impossible. No nation speaks Latin anymore, no nation holds on to roman style, no one builds with roman architecture. The world has developed too much for there to be a true direct successor to Rome.

Since when is building style or the change of architecture an indicator wheater an empire exists or not. Was the french kingdom an different state after they switched from Renaissance to Barock style.

And Latin was not the only Language in the Roman Empire. Greek was the second (but first only unofficial) one. And Latin died not completely out - it developed to the modern languages of Italy, France, Spain, Portugal and Romania. And Latin was later still the language of the catholic church, the science and the nobles.

But you´re right - there is no direct successor. The only one would be the Ottoman Sultan. After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 Mehmed II declared himself as Roman Caesar. But only by his title. Don´t know if his successors later used this title anymore.

Again I say the US.
It has the most similarities.
It follows the same principal of overseas military garrisoning to illicit political sway.
It uses it's wealth, political power and military force to exert control.
The only thing the US doesn't do is claim sovereignty of the many nations with large US military populus, and does not have direct control over those states affairs.
When the US sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold, and that is very true to the Roman Empire.

That can be said about any large and strong empire existing in history like the Persian Achaemenids, the Macedonian Empire, the Ottomans, Ming-China, British Empire ...

[SepulchreUK]

Since when is building style or the change of architecture an indicator wheater an empire exists or not. Was the french kingdom an different state after they switched from Renaissance to Barock style.

And Latin was not the only Language in the Roman Empire. Greek was the second (but first only unofficial) one. And Latin died not completely out - it developed to the modern languages of Italy, France, Spain, Portugal and Romania. And Latin was later still the language of the catholic church, the science and the nobles.

But you´re right - there is no direct successor. The only one would be the Ottoman Sultan. After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 Mehmed II declared himself as Roman Caesar. But only by his title. Don´t know if his successors later used this title anymore.



That can be said about any large and strong empire existing in history like the Persian Achaemenids, the Macedonian Empire, the Ottomans, Ming-China, British Empire ...

Yes it can, as I said, the British Empire was truly a successor to Rome but the OP wants a present day successor, not anything like HRE. They want to know who today can be seen as the successor of Rome.

Thus why largely it's a pretty silly subject.

[Tiberius Tosi]

Romania? It's got their name in it at least...

Definitely modern day Italy, but last time they tried to recreate the Roman Empire...well that didn't turn out too well.

Hell even the Catholic Church would technically be the best "connection" with the Roman Empire so perhaps even they could make claim to it lol.

[DAVIDE]

Romania? It's got their name in it at least...

""A Romanis apvd Zamam Hannibal victvs est, qvod saepe in Italia svperaverat""

Definitely modern day Italy, but last time they tried to recreate the Roman Empire...well that didn't turn out too well.

[BritPatriot1815]

I would say Western Europe culturaly & America politically

[il padrino]

id say every country that had even 1 roman emperor born in it.

[motiv-8]

id say every country that had even 1 roman emperor born in it.

So Syria has a claim to be Roman? and Libya? Algeria?

[il padrino]

So Syria has a claim to be Roman? and Libya? Algeria?

if they want to,then why not ?

[Gromovnik]

So Syria has a claim to be Roman? and Libya? Algeria?

They have better claim then USA... It's stupid to even put USA and Roman Empire in the same sentence. IMHO.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

They have better claim then USA... It's stupid to even put USA and Roman Empire in the same sentence. IMHO.

You just did.

NOW WHO'S STUPID!?!!?

[bushbush]

modern day Italy no doubt. It was where Roman civilization was born.

[War&Politics]

After the fall of the Roman Empire the Byzantine Empire was the legitimatic continuation of the Roman State. That ended with the fall of Constantinople. There is no legitimat continuation of the Roman State after that. We can argue about a cultural continuation yes, but a continuation of the Roman State, no.

[Fibur]

Don't forget the Holy Roman Empire either...