Maybe because none of them are actually Roman and this larping is cringe?
Or maybe it's just you constantly refusing to accept historical facts, which is even more cringe? "Byzantines" were Romans, it is as certain as modern Germans being Germans (including those who have medieval Slavic roots and that's a lot of modern Germans). What's even the point in denying that?
Having relation to the city of Rome.
Bro asked about the most basic definition like it was some kind of "gotcha" moment
The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!
www.dictionary.com
Great - then medieval Roman empire fits this criteria nicely, as it was the direct, uninterrupted continuation of the ancient Roman empire. They weren't some American or Japanese Roman empire fans who just started larping. They literally were the Roman empire, that part of it that was still standing. Everything checks out, no need to thank me.
the catholic church is often called "roman christianity" because it is based in Rome
Somebody tell that man that there are "Roman" catholics around the world. But, according to your logic, "Roman" catholics in Australia aren't "Roman catholics", because they clearly are "Australian catholics" only. It's just semantics, nothing more.
The same with the already debunked "only the city of Rome" argument.
Roman empire under Trajan stretched from Spain to Mesopotamia. There was a lot of Romans who spent their entire lives far away from Rome and never, literally never saw the city of Rome. And they were still Roman citizens.
Will you personally stop being "Roman" or "Italian" if you emigrate to Greece?
Yes there is. Roman empire = the empire of Rome (as in governed by it)
Why "governed by it"? ERE under Arcadius wasn't "governed by it" in any way, and yet it was undisputably the Roman empire. Even WRE wasn't "governed by it" in the end of its existence. Hell, even before Rome became an "empire" large chunks of it weren't governed "by Rome" but you wouldn't call Anthony's eastern domain "not Roman", right? Don't desperately cling to already debunked arguments.
Being the continuation (and I have to reiterate again, after the 4th crusade you can't really claim it) doesn't mean being the original.
How so? How can literally the same state become something completely else? When a state ceases to be the same state and becomes completely else? And who gives you the authority to tell when exactly it ceased to be itself? Do you really believe semantics and dictionary change anything in that matter?
Oh, and I can claim that after 4th crusade it was still the same state very easily, just look:
"After the 4th crusade the so called 'Nicene Empire' was still the direct continuation of the Roman Empire".
Because it was, lol. It's not as simple as you pretend it to be.
"Lose the capital and you become something completely different, all your legacy and history is erased and starts anew". Nope, it doesn't work that way. French lost direct control of Paris in 1940 but I'm pretty sure people there are French right now.
The funny thing is that calling it Byzantine empire follows the same logic of calling the roman one Roman empire, since it was the empire of Byzantium (as in governed by it), which is one of the reasons I like it as I found it a little poetic
There was no "Byzantion" anymore. By the EUV start date it was Constantinopolis for about 1000 years. Even if some citizens poetically called it that way - it was officially Constantinopolis, and you know it very well. It's literally the same as calling French "Lutetians".
So if I understand the Bizaboos right, all that matter is how people call themseslves.
No, you don't. It matters how people called themselves (or, more importantly, who they were) but that's not the major factor. I can call myself "Roman" but that would change nothing and won't make me "Roman". But if I lived in the direct continuation of the Roman empire, in a state that hasn't changed since the age of Constantine - then yeah, the chance of me being "Roman" would increase greatly.
Ya'll I think there is 10x more discussion here for the devs to understand that people like options, and which the community prefers. Are we accomplishing anything by continuing the game of one-up-man-ship?
I prefer empire of the Romans as I believe that to be the period endonym when translated to English, but I think there is nuance to consider and that my opinion isn't more valid than others.
It wouldn't hurt to apply pressure all the time, there's always a chance devs will give up and add those options just to "stop the whining". Until then it's even fun to read some of "arguments" here.
