OK, so if you rule some place you can proclaim someone emperor of it without giving them control of it and this should be taken seriously? Why don’t you say Catholic Church is the Roman Empire it would probably make more sense with this argumentation. But this can also be turned around: When Byzantines conquered Rome in the 6th century they made an integral part of their empire, when HRE took it in the 16th century they sacked and left. Which one feels more like Romans retaking their homeland? I could be wrong, but I am afraid that the Romans of the city would Rome of that time would side with the Byzaboos and say that these invaders were in fact not Romans, but Germanic barbarians.I'm not speaking about claims. The Pope did de facto rule Rome, that is a fact. The Palailogos claim to power can also be disputed, but they did rule the empire.
Last edited:
- 1