The Ottoman Imperial Project of Roman Succession Efe Göktürk Bozkır Introduction The assertion that the Ottoman Empire considered itself the legal successor to the Roman Empire is a compelling claim, rooted deeply in the pivotal conquest of Constantinople in 1453. This was not merely a territorial acquisition but, in the eyes of its conqueror, Mehmed II, and subsequent Ottoman ideologues, a profound act of imperial translation. While the Western Roman Empire had long since fragmented, the Eastern Roman Empire saw itself as the uninterrupted continuation of Roman imperium. By conquering this "Second Rome," the Ottomans, particularly Mehmed II, consciously positioned themselves as inheritors of this ancient and prestigious lineage. The historical context is crucial: the inhabitants of the Eastern Roman Empire identified themselves as "Romans" (Ῥωμαῖοι). 1 The term "Byzantium" itself originally referred to the ancient Greek city 2 before Constantine transformed it into Constantinople, the new imperial capital. This Eastern Roman entity, though increasingly Hellenized over centuries, maintained Roman legal and administrative traditions. 3 When Mehmed II conquered Constantinople, he was, in his view, conquering the existing Roman Empire. His immediate adoption of the title Kayser-i Rum (Caesar of Rome) was the most explicit articulation of this claim. This wasn't a hollow boast but a deliberate political and ideological statement, signifying his intent to rule over all former Roman lands and peoples, including the substantial Greek Orthodox "Rum" population he now governed. The term "Rum" was complex; Ottomans themselves sometimes used it to describe their own lands and even their identity, especially in the early centuries, before it became more specifically associated with the Greek Orthodox millet under their rule. This initial self-identification with "Rum" territory further bolsters the idea of an inherited Roman-ness. 1 Anthony Kaldellis , ‘From “Empire of the Greeks” to “Byzantium”: The Politics of a Modern Paradigm Shift,’ in N. Aschenbrenner and J. Ransohoff, eds., The Invention of Byzantium in Early Modern Europe (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 2021) p. 351. 2 Anthony Kaldellis. p. 351. 3 Anthony Kaldellis. p. 351.