>Eastern
Cardinal direction is subjective.
>Roman
Latin was not spoken. Rome had no influence.
>Empire
Only for the first few hundred years. Afterwards it was just a shitshow.
Despite all of this, /his/ will say the Byzantine Empire was a legitimate successor to the Roman Empire. Meanwhile, /his/ says the Mongol Empire died only a generation or two after Genghis Khan and left no successor states. /his/ must be hypocritical, in that the Mongol Empire left numerous successor states (Ilkhanate, Yuan Dynasty, Mughal Empire, the Hordes, etc.) which were much more comparable to the Mongol Empire than Byzantium was to the Roman Empire.
So /his/, why do you continue to hold an anti-Mongol bias? Isn't history supposed to be neutral?
History is anti-Mongol leaning :^)
>>930859
>Cardinal direction is subjective.
it's relative tho
Fuck off, Voltaire
>>930859
Inb4 new version of that Voltaire cuck is created.
Neither Eastern. Nor Roman. Nor Empire.
>Byzantium
>sucessor state
No, it was literally the Roman Empire, which lost it's Western provinces. No different than, say, Taiwan being China.
>b-but it was so different!
Yeah, no one is saying that it wasn't. The Empire went on for a thousand years after Constantinople was founded, do you really not expect/went the culture of the nation to change during that time? Compare 1700s USA to the America of today, irrecgonizable, but still the same state, with the same laws, government and constitution.
>>930859
>muh Hardcore History
>muh historical arsonists
I feel you, anon. The ERE part is a bit beside the point, though.
>>931095
>Taiwan is China.
t. Gerald Ford
Seriously, who even holds this opinion?
But you're right-ish about the ERE otherwise.
>>930859
>Cardinal direction is subjective.
It's east of Rome you cuck. That's the important part considering the entire argument is about whether or not they are the successors of Rome...
