Were the Ottomans the successors to Rome?

no.

They inherited the Byzantine throne, so yes.

>>1737448
Why now? They controlled much of the same territory and inherited the Eastern Empire

File: true successor story.png (145KB, 500x528px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 500x528px

>this is actually a question
Of course they were

Only balkan kul's say otherwise since their people were the ones that ruined the Sultanate of Rum.

No finland is

>>1737513
No, Rome was the successor to Finland

>>1737438
Define what you mean by the terms "successor", "the Ottomans" and "Rome".

>>1737845
Define what you mean by "terms", "you", and "define".

>>1737468
you got old pretty fast

>>1737438
>>1737468

>Destroy Rome
>Become Rome

Not how it works.

No, germany was.

They destroyed Rome, it is like saying a usurper is the rightful heir when he killed to get his throne

>>1737918
tell that to the franks

>>1737953
>>1737918
That's how it's worked since Ceasar.

>>1737958
Franks didn't destroy Rome. They killed a successor state headed by Syagrius.

>>1737953
t. knows jack shit about rome

>>1737977
>They killed a successor state headed by Syagrius
yeah, so rome. it had the same amount of continuity as the byzantines

>>1737983
A glorified rump state lead by a commander in Gaul is not Rome. By that logic, the Franks were Roman since they too were headed by Roman commanders.

>>1737989
shitflingers dressed like romans arent romans

>>1737989
>By that logic, the Franks were Roman since they too were headed by Roman.

>
>
>

>>1738023

>Holy
>Roman
>Empire

>>1738023
The Frankish chieftans held Roman titles and their armies fought in the Roman fashion at the time, still they weren't true Romans.

File: 1474235003508.jpg (82KB, 700x717px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 700x717px

>>1738087

>NO TRUE ROMAN!

Obviously the true heir to Rome is the United States government.

Senatus Populus Que Americanum

The Republic lives on.