Sparked by an article that I read through the mentioning by Dirk Marinus, I started to think about the question how the idea of the Roman Empire was continued in the later European history.

First the article:
https://www.historischnieuwsblad.nl/nl/nieuws/23548/het-romeinse-rijk-eindigde-pas-honderd-jaar-geleden.html
IMO a oneliner as title of the article: The Roman Empire ended only 100 years ago
"Feitelijk eindigde het Romeinse Rijk niet met de val van Constantinopel in 1453, maar met het uiteenvallen van de laatste Europese keizerrijken aan het einde van de Eerste Wereldoorlog. Dat zei Anton van Hooff tijdens de collegedag Casa Romana,"
In fact ended the Roman Empire not with the fall of Constantinople in 1453, but with the collapse of the last European empires at the end of  WWI. That said Anton van Hooff during the college day Casa Romana...
http://www.sharedstories.nl/auteur/anton-van-hooff/

My critique if you only look to the term Caesar is it a feeble argument, but of course there is perhaps more...

In the West Clovis (from the Merovingians) saw himself and was recognized by the Roman empire in Constatinople as consul in the West, later Charlemagne was added legitimation by the pope as successor of the Western Roman Empire.
The Holy Roman Empire was born
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Holy_Roman_Empire
It changed name in 1512 to Holy Roman Empire of German nation: The first Reich, the Second Reich was from the Prussian King crowned in 1870 to Kaiser and the Third Reich I think I haven't to comment.
Even a Napoleon had some ideas in that direction...he too was named and crowned: l'Empereur...and he abolished the first Reich in 18O6 if I recall it well.

In the East, Russia christianized from the Greek-Orthodox side can perhaps seen as a continuation of the Eastern Roman Empire from Constatinople? I think that even the title Csar had something to do with it...
As an aside: I read in the paper that in nowadays Russia there is more and more cooperation between Church and State and a beautiful girl (under the umbrella of the Putin Government) seems to be the coordinatrice.

Later on this day   more comments on the subject...

Kind regards, Paul.

The first French Republic, established after the revolution, was of course politically the inheritor of the Kingdom of France and so ultimately of Clovis' and Charlemagne's Gallic 'Roman Empire', but it also deliberately set itself up to evoke the ancient Roman Republic. The trappings of central government: consuls, prefects, the senate etc.; the symbols of the state such as, the goddess Liberty, aka 'Marianne', the fasces, eagles on military standards etc.; and culturally things such as the so-called Directoire and Empire styles of architecture and furniture, and classical subjects in painting and sculpture; were all deliberately made to recall the style, trappings, and of course imperial might, of ancient Rome.

PS from wiki: The historian Hugh Honour in 'Neo-classicism. Style and Civilisation' (1968) wrote of the Directory period,

"The stoic virtues of Republican Rome were upheld as standards not merely for the arts but also for political behaviour and private morality. Conventionels saw themselves as antique heroes. Children were named after Brutus, Solon and Lycurgus. The festivals of the Revolution were staged by Jacques-Louis David as antique rituals. Even the chairs in which the committee of Salut Publique sat were made on antique models devised by David.... In fact Neo-classicism became fashionable".

But how much did they actually believe themselves to be the true descendents and inheritors of the Roman Empire?

Meles meles,

thank you for this French connection. I paid no attention to this obvious link to France.
And of course you are right. It seems even the "Roman salute":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_salute

Although the Roman Salute would even started by a painting of your Jacques-Louis David, as in the Roman pictures there is no such salute completely in the same manner...
From the wiki
However, no Roman text gives this description, and the Roman works of art that display salutational gestures bear little resemblance to the modern Roman salute.^[1]
Jacques-Louis David's painting The Oath of the Horatii (1784) provided the starting point for the gesture that became later known as the Roman salute. The gesture and its identification with Roman culture were further developed in other neoclassic artworks. This was further elaborated upon in popular culture during the late 19th and early 20th centuries in plays and films that portrayed the salute as an ancient Roman custom. These included a 1914 Italian film called Cabiria based upon a screenplay by the nationalist poet Gabriele d'Annunzio. In 1919, d'Annunzio adopted the cinematographically depicted salute as a neo-imperial ritual when he led the occupation of Fiume.

Yes and over the Italian Gabriele d'Annunzio it became a Nazi salute...
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-Nazis-use-Roman-symbols-Where-is-the-connection-between-these-not-very-apparently-similar-philosophies

Meles meles I mentioned in my former message:
"As an aside: I read in the paper that in nowadays Russia there is more and more cooperation between Church and State and a beautiful girl (under the umbrella of the Putin Government) seems to be the coordinatrice."

Will comment that in an addendum.

Kind regards from Paul.

Addendum to the previous message

Meles meles I mentioned in my former message:
"As an aside: I read in the paper that in nowadays Russia there is more and more cooperation between Church and State and a beautiful girl (under the umbrella of the Putin Government) seems to be the coordinatrice."

Did some research to find on the internet what I mentioned and didn't immediately find the girl...

But the article I remember was about the new "moral and ethic" attitudes in Russia and the link between Putin and the ROC (the Russian Orthodox Church)
And it all seems frightening...
In the time on the old Beeb I have already warned for the weird combination of nationalism, religion and language...and here seems to be added the exeptionalism (the uniqueness) of the Russian "culture"...frightening...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulcoyer/2015/05/21/unholy-alliance-vladimir-putin-and-the-russian-orthodox-church/#3311715c27d5


About Russia's Iron Ladies:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/22/vladimir-allies-russias-iron-ladies-useful-anti-feminists


And with the "twenty Russian Women who matter" I found my lady:
https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/twenty-russian-women-who-matter-57360


Natalia Poklonskaya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalia_Poklonskaya


Kind regards, Paul.

Addendum to the previous message.

Thinking about my message of yesterday

Putin a more effective Tsar than the former ones? In fact I have the impression that the impregnation of the population is more subtle than with the Tsars?

Natalia Poklonskaya, because of her celebrity used in the semi-official RT (the equivalent of the Chinese CCTV)?




And yes the combination with a long ago established Church seems more productive than for instance the Nazis with their obscure new ideology, in which many people didn't recognize themselves? In my humble opinion...
Clever Putin I would say...

Kind regards, Paul.