>Question 1: What year did the Roman Empire ended?
>A.1806 AD
>B.1453 AD
>C.1917 AD
>D.453 AD
>E.1922 AD
>F.480 AD
>G. 1461 AD
>H. The Roman Empire never fallen, it's current form is the U.S.
Well /his/?
>>1157752
H is a silly answer.
Empire = Emperor = Defined by the rule of a particular emperor
G
Trebizond, blood of Pontus and right of Romans
>>1157752
H, except not USA
>>1157764
How exactly was the Western Roman Empire illegitimate when it was part of the Theodosius' decree was to have Honorius rule the west and Arcadius the east???
>>1157764
Fuck off you nigger
The WRE was perfectly legitimate
>>1157752
B.
Also,
>no 476 date
284
>>1157785
Because whenever you hear Roman Empire you obviously think of greeks and not romans, duh.
>1453 (Eastern)
also fuck of amerifat
>>1157752
>B.
I will fight anyone who says different
>>1157752
G is the correct answer. I never see it anywhere, well done OP.
>>1157764
I die a little inside when someone tells the "Moscow is the third Rome" shit.
>>1157785
Not him, but de jure WRE was subservient to ERE. Doesn't make it illegitimate but it's successor state obviously had a smaller claim to "Rome" than ERE.
1204
>>1157801
The Western Roman Empire was legally the senior empire
Try again
Daily reminder that the mantle of "Roman Empire" was legally sold to the Spanish Crown and the empire never fell
>>1157817
I don't believe it was subservient though, how I understand the Theodosius split is just two emperors on each pivotal throne ruling like 2 governors rule a state and both function interests for the interest and expansion of Rome
>people think the Holy See isn't the direct successor to the Roman Empire
>>1157856
It actually ended on 1946.
>>1157836
It wasn't subservient see>>1157825
Legally the Western emperor was the senior emperor of the two because he controlled the ancient capital of Rome (regardless of whether or not he used it as his capital)
Functionally speaking they were both equals who dealt with their own halves of the empire and left the other the fuck alone. This did piss the western emperors off later when the barbarian invasions got worse and they requested Eastern help that they didn't get.
>>1157825
>who was constantine
>>1157865
>Legally the Western emperor was the senior emperor
No. Legally the Western emperor had to bee approved by the Eastern Emperor. This of course didn't happen that often, but still. Legally the West was of lower status than the East.
Rome had been not so important for a century at this point with Ravenna and even Trier taking its place.
>>1157858
Even when pointing out that both Emperor and pope were entitled "Pontifex Maximus".
>>1157752
I'm not seeing an option for 27BC
>>1157764
It's Spain
>The last holder of the crown of the Byzantine Empire, Andreas Palaiologos, sold his imperial title to Ferdinand II of Aragon and V of Castile and Isabella I of Castile before his death in 1502. The King of Spain is the legitimate emperor of Rome, as the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire and Russia, which also claimed this title, disappeared in 1806 and after the Russian Revolution.
>>1157752
>I. It took on a different form as the Roman Catholic Church from the fall of the Western Empire.
>>1157752
1945
>>1157752
The Republic of Turkey is the only heir of the Roman Empire
Sorry m8s
>>1158306
>dispose of your so-called "Roman" Ottomans
>WE STILL ROMANS N SHEEEET
>>1158421
Turkey is the legitimate heir to the Ottoman Empire and honored all treaties signed by the Ottoman Empire and took upon all of the positive and negative aspects of being the successors to the Ottomans. Including the mantle of the Roman Empire
Deal with it silly infidel
>>1157752
B, anything else is a meme
>>1157824
This is the correct date. Fourth crusade happened and Byzantine got fucked over good and proper. A capital city being sacked and defiled like that (filthy franks!!) always seemed a more definitive end. Ottos just finished the deed properly.
>>1157752
My Roman history is fairly lacking, can someone explain these dates to me and why they would be considered the fall of the Roman Empire?
I understand 1453 as the fall of the Byzantines, 1461 as the fall of Trebizond, and 476 was the fall of the wre but it isn't included on the list
And H is just silly
>>1158934
Sorry, I also know 1806 as the fall of the hre by Napoleon
>>1157764
Alaska was free of Soviet taint since it was sold to America during the imperial period.
America is therefore the rightful inheritor of Rome.
>>1158934
1917 because the Russian Empire claimed to be the inheritors of Rome.
1806 for the HRE.
>>1158077
(You)
>>1159843
>1806 for the HRE.
Oh god, Anon, they're going to start posting THAT now
>>1159993
One of these days, we're going to have to make memes an automatic ban.
>>1157752
The Roman Empire never fell, it's current form is Finland.
>>1160131
Not sure how that second reply got there
>HRE
>Emperor is consecrated by the Pope of the Roman Catholic church
>Not Roman
>>1160147
That church is a heretical offshoot of the true Orthodox Church.
The Byzantine/ERE is the only legitimate successor to the Roman Empire, to say otherwise (i.e. WRE, >H>R>E, etc.) is wrong. The Russian Empire is the only legitimate successor to the Byzantine/ERE, to say otherwise is wrong. Upon the Russian revolution, the only legitimate nation to stand out of the revolution is Finland, thus Finland is the true modern surviving successor to the Roman Empire
I. 1460 AD.
Trebizond was a breakaway state founded by a Roman dynastic house, but one which stopped contesting the Roman crown and acknowledged Constantinople's supremacy. If we count it we might as well count Montferrat.
Morea was a Roman province ruled by two squabbling Byzantine dynasts - one of whom was the rightful heir given the death (or disappearance) of Constantine XI after the fall of Constantinople.
>>1159847
What I posted is the truth.
>>1157752
>ended
>>1158934
480 is the death of Julius Nepal, a retired Roman Emperor who still had under its control Illyria. At his death Odoacer waged war and conquered those territories
>>1160618
>Nepal
Nepos
>>1157752
>did ended
>>1157858
>muh Donation of Constantine
>>1157752
1453 is the only correct answer. The 'holy Roman empire' is in no way a successor, popes don't have the authority to declare a successor to the Roman empire. Ottoman claim is also bullshit, just become you conquered it doesn't mean you become it. By that logic Rome is Carthage. WRE is of course only half the Roman empire. The ERE was the only legitimate Roman empire because it was simply a continuation.
I get the point of all the dates except 1922, what happened then?
>>1160654
The Ottoman Empire was dissolved in 22 or 23 depending on the perspective.
>>1158082
This
>>1158438
>and took upon all of the positive and negative aspects of being the successors to the Ottomans
good one
>>1157752
641 it's no more an empire
Except the US is clearly the reiteration of the Republic
