Has there ever been a greater act of we wuzzery?

Has there ever been a greater act of we wuzzery? People make fun of africans for claiming egypt but this is arguably worse

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    I believe Voltaire's most famous quote is the one were he mocks the HRE for being neither holly, roman, nor an empire.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Quite like a better part of Voltaire's sayings, this one sounds very clever but reveals a shallowness of understanding upon closer inspection

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      I mean it's not Roman, but it is Holy and an Empire.

  2. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Has there ever been a greater act of we wuzzery?
    Title tsar and the Chinese client "Emperor at home, king abroad"s are considerably funny.
    >tfw Russia claimed to be Roman
    >tfw Japan once claimed to be a little china

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_China_(ideology)

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Emperor at home King abroad wasn’t we wuzzery, it’s like the opposite. It’s you wuzzn’try.
      Really though, if you’re the emperor of China, why do you give a shit that the guy in charge of Korea calls himself an emperor too?

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >if you’re the emperor of China, why do you give a shit that the guy in charge of Korea calls himself an emperor too
        it demonstrates that he sees himself as my equal, when that is simply not the case

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          If it’s really that important then invade him and eat his peasants moron. Don’t just sit in your gay palace and demand that they change their title whenever you’re gonna hear about them

  3. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >own seat of the vatican
    >"erm youre not actually holy sweetie"

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      A bunch of germans larping as romans is the more egregious part

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        So the country who owns rome, most of italty where most aspects of society and religion are controlled by rome cant call themselves roman, but a country thats filled with semites, africans and greeks are all legitimately roman? Makes sense

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >hold Rome for like 100 of the 1000 years your "empire" exists
          >Ja ich bin as romanischer as Augustus
          Lol
          Also
          >the Roman empire never had semites, africans or greeks ever
          Kek

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Papal States were seen as formally an autonomous region of the empire until the reformation. You're using a concept of nation states and sovereignty which, even in their vaguest possible terms, did not exist back then.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >hold Rome but actually don't cause it's de facto independent from the empire
            that doesn't sound roman at all either

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Rome is the seat of the highest episcopacy in the land. That makes it the source of all authority. Rome being the authority? Idk pretty roman

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            As opposed to not holding it at all.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >africans, native americans and indians must be British becuase they were in the british empire
            >"uh what about the germans in Hanover?"
            >NOO AAAAA I HATE THEM FILTHY GERMANS ARGHH

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Rome didn't have any Romans by then as they had lost to the superior peoples who had conquered them.

        They didn't LARP and didn't take any customs except for a minority of laws and an education system (although what Charlemagne developed was more inspired by Greeks than Romans leading the Trivium/Quadrivium systems and the first modern Universities). The Imperial title of Rome did not refer to Roman citizenry, but the geographic region.

        It would be like some that conquers all of Europe and calls itself the European Empire. Nothing wrong with that,

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          There was an effort on continuity since Charlemagne, being a roman emperor was like being king of the world to the germanic tribe. So there was an effort to restore the empire as a form of legitimization to the eyes of your subjects, which where former romans most of them and to your people. Most germanic tribes wanted to be romans, and some of them even aquire some of their customs and religion. The tradition of being crowned by the Pope was just another form of legitimization by Charlemagne and successors since the Church in Rome was a remnant of that roman authority in the western world

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        At least those Germans are genetically closer founding stock early Roman republic peoples. The slave-raped mutts that the late Empire had was far more egregious and insulting to the memory of Rome than anything that can after including the Tsar LARP.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Germans larping as Romans
        Frick off, I don't believe in that nonsense.
        >Greeks larping as Romans
        _0o0_/

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Greeks were at least culturally closer to romans than Germans, and the ERE did actually inherit Roman institutions. There was literally nothing Roman about the HRE, it was just a germanic larpfest

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Romans were always just LARPing as Greeks, so things came full circle.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Brainlet
      It doesn't mean "we are the descendants of romans" it means "look at me, I'm the emperor now". It is a claim to supreme political power, legitimized by the pope (the higher religious authority of western christendom).
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translatio_imperii

      By voltaires time the emperors weren't usually crowned by the pope. The idea of a primacy of the holy roman emperor over other monarchs was long since gone too. The german kings kept the title as a tradition, not because it still meant what it once used to.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >It doesn't mean "we are the descendants of romans" it means "look at me, I'm the emperor now".
        They were doing it even while the ERE still existed

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >ERE still existed
          LARPing Greeks had even less to do with Rome, but you are missing the point of the title which was that Charlemagne only took it because he thought the authority of the Church also had power in the East.

          it was therefore a claim on the territories of the East. One he wisely never bothered to pursue as peaceful unification of Christendom was more desirable.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >LARPing Greeks had even less to do with Rome
            They were literally part of the empire, unlike germans

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >unlike germans
            Blatantly false.

            Picrel magister militum per Illyricum.

            Btw there are records of Romans immigrating into Germany to escape the decadency of what the Roman Empire had become and to join what they saw as the purer Germanic tribes who were closer to what their own ancestors idealised.

            So there's probably some Roman blood that helped sack Rome too, even when you ignore the fact that Germanics had been part of the empire for centuries serving the most important roles in the military, the Emperor's bodyguard etc.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Germanics will only relevant in the empire in late antiquity. Prior, they were seen as enemies and barbarians

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Prior, they were seen as enemies and barbarians
            So? Romans lost to them, get over it Chud.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            You have absolutely no idea about Charlemagne at all

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, and that's by design.
          >Some Western authorities considered the Byzantine throne, now occupied by a woman, to be vacant and instead recognized that Charlemagne, who controlled Italy and much part of the former Western Roman Empire, had a valid claim to the imperial title. Pope Leo III, crowned Charlemagne as Roman Emperor in 800, an act not recognized by the Byzantine Empire.
          Basically, the pope and the frankish/german kings declared the byzantines had become unworthy of the title and they were taking over.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >By voltaires time
        I hate when lowwit people quote him because they saw it in their video games without knowing the context that he was critiquing the weak crown authority of the late twilight of the Empire and in particular its stalemate with Protestants as well as recent loss of authority in Italian city states. The crown authority was actually quite strong for most of its thousand year history compared to other European powers.

  4. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Unlike Africans claiming to be Egyptian the German nobility in the HRE never claimed to literally be Romans though did they? I always thought they were larping as a spiritual successor.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >the German nobility in the HRE never claimed to literally be Romans though did they?
      They didn't. They spoke German and didn't care much for Roman tradition beyond useful ideas they had regarding Roman laws, but mostly the empire stuck to Germanic law until the reforms by Leibniz nearly a thousand years later.

      No one in the HRE cared much for Rome, the HRE built far greater things. Rome never built anything taller than the pyramids.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's not at all true. Medieval germans (any medieval christian really) revered and admired ancient rome, less for its culture or technology that they knew little about, but for being so powerful and peacefully ruling all the christians. They aspired to be exactly like them, with the holy roman emperor basically getting the papal mandate to try and restore it. After charlemagne, none got very far, but that's another matter.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >That's not at all true.
          Yes it is.
          >Medieval germans (any medieval christian really) revered and admired ancient rome,
          They did not, you are confusing later Scholastic Germans for the sentiments of nobles who had always considered them weak. The Germanic warrior nobility retained more of their own traditions than that of the Roman military.
          > less for its culture or technology that they knew little about,
          Nonsense, there was never a loss in any technology. You are confusing the story of Britain with that of the continent. Germanic tech was superior to Rome. It had steel swords and both segmented and plate armour before Rome (Rome had to buy their steel from the Celts) as well as steel heavy plows with which they were able to till fields in Northern France that Rome had failed to. Its ships were also superior and able to survive the rough waters of the North Sea and the Atlantic while Rome frequently lost entire fricking fleets on relatively tame storms in the Mediterranean sea.

          Additionally they raised a massive industrialisation of windmills which automated grain milling, steel production and other ore processing. Not to mention steel-stone composite Gothic Cathedrals which four times taller than the Parthenon (the tallest building the Romans ever built; which was pathetically small).

          Yes they lacked writing, hence only propaganda against them survived. That is what Charlemagne took from the Romans. Scholastics in the Empire admired both Romans and the Greeks for obvious reasons.

          >but for being so powerful and peacefully ruling all the christians. They aspired to be exactly like them, with the holy roman emperor basically getting the papal mandate to try and restore it. After charlemagne, none got very far, but that's another matter.
          The Germanic nobility where barely Christian before the Investiture Controversy. You are mixing up your timelines.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I didn't even imply roman technology was better - in some respects it was, in some it was improved upon during the middle ages. Rome was also massively more affluent, creating cities and infrastructure most of medieval europe could only dream of. Either way, they really didn't know, and that's part of the reason they didn't care.
            >The Germanic nobility where barely Christian before the Investiture Controversy.
            Is this some sort of alternate history theory now? Of course they were christian, christianized between the 6th (franks) and 9th (saxons) century. Nobles were probably among the first ones to follow their king in becoming christian.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            This. Romans were so good at engineering that their roads are still being used today

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >in some respects it was
            Which, specifically? Can you name a single technology though? Because I was educated in an English curriculum, so I also used to believe this, but it turned out to be a complete falsehood. It is true that Saxons in Britain fell behind in development and possibly regressed, but the same was never true of the continent.
            >Rome was also massively more affluent,
            This is very true.
            > creating cities
            Cities plural? Rome was absolutely bigger than any city would be north of the Danube for the next 800 years, but other Roman cities were not much bigger than Oppida.
            >and infrastructure most of medieval europe could only dream of.
            Utter nonsense. Medieval Europe saw the construction of terraforming dykes that drove back the sea. The highest concentration of automated industry anywhere on Earth using tens and thousands of mills. A highly sophisticated water management system that prevented flooding and ensured irrigation was possible through the entire drainage basin in the empire north of the Alps.

            Not to mention the establishment of a sophisticated postage system by Maximilian I which allowed ideas to be spread faster than ever before in human history. Romans only allowed government or the military to use their postage system.
            >Either way, they really didn't know, and that's part of the reason they didn't care.
            I don't know what you mean by this. The average university graduate back then knew more about Ancient Rome than the average graduate does today. They never lost any books, they copied them, but didn't care. Much like how modern Europeans barely know anything about the Baroque period. We are not ignorant of the period, it is just not relevant to the average pleb and sadly not to the average politician either.

            >they were christian, christianized between the 6th (franks) and 9th (saxons) century.
            I think you misunderstood my point. They were Christians, but they were not very zealous in their religion.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_technology
            Educate yourself. Yes, medieval europe had technologies that ancient rome didn't - and vice versa. In terms of infrastructure, the romans were considerably more developed - not so much because medieval people didn't have the knowledge to built the same things, but because they didn't have the ressources or the political unity to do so.
            >sophisticated postage system by Maximilian I
            Funny how that's at the very end of the middle ages.

            Either way - read up on translatio imperii and medieval historiography or political theory. Rome was relevant to it as the model of universal power, and that's why the frankish king charlemagne and various german kings wanted to be called emperors of rome - by their subjects and by the pope. Roman culture or material wealth weren't the reason they did it - no matter how much or little they knew of it, or how their present level of development compared to it.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_power

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_technology
            Of course I am aware of every single thing on this page. Why would you assume otherwise? Did you even read my post?

            Name one thing on that page that was superior to medieval tech for its purpose.

            >In terms of infrastructure,
            Vague. Name something specific. I gave you many specific examples.

            >Rome was relevant to it as the model of universal power, and that's why the frankish king charlemagne and various german kings wanted to be called emperors of rome
            I would agree that this was the main legacy of Rome in Europe, but this is certainly not how Charlemagne himself thought of his Kingdom/Empire. He built his power models based on tribal unification. Hence why the HRE continued to have Kurfürsten a full thousand years later. Mostly the Roman claim was court intrigue to attempt dominion over lands that were ruled by others as well as to keep the Pope happy.

            Notice that there is an important difference between the titles of Kingdom of Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. Despite being held in the same family, they were never the same thing.

  5. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    They were Romans though, Pope said so

  6. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    It was a continuation, an IS, not a WUZ.

    The title and history of Rome was of little importance compared to the fact that the Pope and all Christians respected it. Hence why the Franks adopted it.

  7. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Rome ended with the end of the Principate

  8. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    They were not We Wuzzing dumbass. The HRE claimed to be Roman to draw upon the legitimacy of the Pax Romana and the Roman Emperors, primarily Julius Caesar and Augustus Caesar. It is well known that the German word for King, Kaiser, comes from Caesar.

  9. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    I am Spanish so I am more a HRE enjoyer than a ERE redditor fan.

  10. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Romaboos (usually descendants of people the romans conquered, enslaved and assimilated, but I digress) are really mad that some germans just went to rome, told everyone "nice job but we're taking over" and the handful of actual romans left were too buckbroken to even complain.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      The irony is all Germanics (and all modern Europeans in general) can trace their genealogy to Charlemagne. In turn Charlemagne is related to nearly every Roman emperor, general and statesman...through the maternal line.

      The modern meds are either direct paternal descendants of these Germanics, or they are the direct descendants of slaves who didn't do any fighting and have zero relation to early Romans.

  11. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Its not even close to being worse, west africans are completely unrelated to egyptians, they share single digit percentiles of DNA if any.
    Germans and Romans not only had a history of extensive contact, but they share at least 50% of their genome through just the barcin alone, not even mentioning the 20% steppe Latins had which means Germans and Latins shared more around 70% of their DNA.
    not to mention both spoke related languages as both are subsets of IE.

    you just hate Germans because they are better than you.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      And middle easterners are closer to the romans than germans are, checkmate

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        No they aren't. You are thinking of those Imperial Roman samples which are slaves. Early Roman Republican samples are not related to MENA browns at all.

        Romans were Indo-Europeans good at killing Semites like Phoenicians and israelites. MENA mutts are only related to Europeans due to being rape babies of Greeks, Romans and Crusaders.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          MENAs were literally citizens, had multiple emperors, and had their religion adopted by the Romans. What did the Germanics do by comparison?
          >muh genetics
          Irrelevant since that would open the floodgates for more we wuzzing and there are genetic similarities with certain Southern European groups anyways.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >MENAs were literally citizens,
            No, they were slaves. Some of the salves were bred by Europeans and the progeny of those became citizens but this was extremely rare.

            In general you are confused by the Roman colonial model which had planted settlements of pure Roman citizens for administration. Many of these pure Romans born in the colonies of course returned to Italy for their careers.

            >What did the Germanics do by comparison?
            Essentially all the fighting and more importantly conquered the rotten Empire and put it out of its misery after it had become a weak dysgenic nightmare.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        No they arent, MENA share less DNA and plot further away from Republican Latins than literal Scandinavians.
        just because you both have brown eyes doesnt make you the same race

        MENAs were literally citizens, had multiple emperors, and had their religion adopted by the Romans. What did the Germanics do by comparison?
        >muh genetics
        Irrelevant since that would open the floodgates for more we wuzzing and there are genetic similarities with certain Southern European groups anyways.

        "MENA" in the era of Republican Rome were not related to modern basal admixed arab derived groups.
        >muh genetics
        that is literally what denotes relatedness kek
        >what did Germanics do
        Have more achievements in Rome and were seen as better?

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >MENA" in the era of Republican Rome were not related to modern basal admixed arab derived groups.
          Utterely delusional lmao
          >that is literally what denotes relatedness kek
          Its meaningless. White or black Americans for example aren't related to the empires and kingdoms of Europe and Africa.
          >Have more achievements in Rome and were seen as better?
          Such as?

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            post a single Republican sample that is closer to MENA than to Germans.
            Romans, overwhelmingly, were EEF, they were more like Sardinians than modern italians, Sardinians are MORE divergent from MENA than Italians are.
            >White Americans arent related to Euros
            lol
            >such as
            Their entire army lmao

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >post a single Republican sample
            Who cares lmao. Plenty of imperial samples say otherwise
            >lol
            Cletus, you can't larp as the Kaiser or king of England
            >Their entire army lmao
            They only scored one (1) decent victory against the Romans at Teutoberg. By all accounts MENAs were fiercer fighters during the Punic Wars and especially with the Parthians/Sassanids)

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      And middle easterners are closer to the romans than germans are, checkmate

      All of this is nonsense anyway. Medieval germans didn't claim to be descended from romans, simple as that. The concept of the holy roman empire means something entirely different.

  12. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    It’s one of the all time worst for sure, the entire endeavor was cringe as all frick and nothing more than a nakedly desperate attempt to larp as the universally revered civilization they’d previously destroyed. It’s the ultimate case of the dog catching the car: once they actually caught it, they had no fricking clue what to do next, and since they lacked any genuine respect within and outside of Europe, as well as any kind of creativity, they just decided to try and call themselves what they evidently weren’t in the hopes of scrounging up some clout.
    Other good examples of we wuzzery could give the HRE a run for its money tho, including:
    >Aztec “We Wuzz” Teotihuacan
    >Russia “We Wuzz Rome
    >Mussolini “We Wuzz” Rome
    >Bantu “We Wuzz” absolutely anything north of the Sahara/Sahel
    >German “We Wuzz” Aryans
    >Mormon “We Wuzz” Chosen People of Jackson, Mississippi
    >African American “We Wuzz” everything and everyone that ever existed
    No doubt theirs more, not immediately coming to mind though.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      “We Wuzz” Aryans
      45% genetic relation is "wewuzzing" now?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Russian WE WUZ THIRD ROME AND SHIEET is worse than the HRE by miles. If you squint really hard, the HRE could kind of be viewed as some bizarre successor state. But Russia being ROMAN AND SHIET is just fricking moronic, and they really believed it too.

  13. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >we wuzzery
    Everything north of the Sahara and west of the Urals was/is ours and should be purged then united into one kingdom.

  14. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why do IQfypics really not understand the concept of Rome as a claim to universal governance, not WE ARE LITERALLY ETHNIC ROMANS?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      They didn't even have that claim as they had none of the Roman institutions either.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Who cares?

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Because then there's literally nothing roman about the holy roman empire

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah, and who is going to whine about it, the romans? LMao

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Well considering the HRE was pushed specifically due to seething about the ERE, yeah

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >LE SEETHING
            time to grow up bud

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >t. man seething about the ERE

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >t. man seething about the ERE

            Go back

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nobody on reddit cares about history

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Neither do you, evidently

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's not wrong though, the concept of the HRE was literally just catholics seething about the ERE and not wanting to admit they had a more valid claim to being Rome than the pile of rubble that was what was left of the former WRE

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I just checked reddit and I report you that /r/history has 18kk users.
            And yes, redditors are obsessed with term "Easstern Roman Empire".

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >And yes, redditors are obsessed with term "Easstern Roman Empire"
            How do you even know? Do you use reddit? Or did you see a thread about it once and went "yeah they must love it since they talked about it once"

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Calm down

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            sperging out then telling people to calm down doesnt really work 2bh

  15. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Their lands did incorporate rome.
    Where is the WeWuzzery?
    > People make fun of africans for claiming egypt but this is arguably worse
    There is no more absurd of an act of WeWuzzery than you Yid mystery meats claiming to be related to jessus

  16. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >reddit thread №14881331

    Why do you think it was called "holy roman" empire and not just a "roman" empire?

  17. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Rome's entire schtick was to get people to speak Latin, adopt Roman custom and Laws, and then they'd become Romans
    >Germans start doing that
    >nooooo not like that nooooo you're not roman

  18. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    yeah, i can think of one

  19. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    You have to consider that the Pope was the only person that could give divine blessing to a Emperor and this Pope was located in Rome (most of the time). Rome was also part of the HRE.

  20. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Has there ever been a greater act of we wuzzery?
    Yes. Greekoids larping as Romans.

  21. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yet it's better than 95% of Africa today

  22. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why didn't they expand to the North and take Denmark?

  23. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    not a single
    >
    >
    >
    ITT. fricking dead board full of tourists. i hate you all.

  24. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes
    The greater act of we wuzzery was also done by the HRE, but in the form of keeping the name after losing control over the Papal States and most of Italy

  25. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    They're claiming a State, not a race.
    The Pope recognized Charlemagne as the Roman Emperor. That's a shit claim but it's something.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *