That they united a variety of different peoples, religions and languages under the rule of one nation. Although there was a dominiering culture and language people from all peoples could work for the state and many different languages were in use in daily life as well as in official institutions. Although German an Turkish were the lingua franka. And of course both had a god given emperor, that did not cared much about democraty (Austria had a parliament, but that had no power).
After WW I both empires were broken into smaller national states.
Other than the empire of lets say England, these countries had no colonies.
No, the Ottoman empire was long after the Roman empire. After the Roman empire, the byzantine empire followed. The Ottoman Turks did, however, take over the Byzantine captial of Constanope renaming it Istanbul.
The Roman Empire came first.
The only similarity was geographic. Both empires were centred abound the Mediterranean. In fact, the Ottoman possessions around the Mediterranean covered areas which has been previously part of the Roman Empire. The main geographical differences were that 1) the Roman Empire also covered northern Morocco, the Mediterranean shores in western Europe (Spain, France, Italy and Malta), Slovenia and Croatia, which the Ottomans did not conquer; 2) the Ottoman Empire included areas of the Middle East (Persia, Iraq, the Persian Gulf coast down to close to the peninsula of Qatar, the Arab and Yemeni coasts on the Red Sea) and eastern Sudan, Eritrea, and a small part of the coast north-eastern Somalia, which the Romans did not conquer.
The Byzantine Empire, also known as the Eastern Roman Empire
There was no successor in the west besides a thing called the Holy Roman Empire which had nothing to do with ancient Rome. In the east it was the Ottoman empire.
No, the Ottoman empire was long after the Roman empire. After the Roman empire, the byzantine empire followed. The Ottoman Turks did, however, take over the Byzantine captial of Constanope renaming it Istanbul.
The Roman empire died in 1453 when it was conquered by the Ottoman empire.
The Roman Empire came first.
The only similarity was geographic. Both empires were centred abound the Mediterranean. In fact, the Ottoman possessions around the Mediterranean covered areas which has been previously part of the Roman Empire. The main geographical differences were that 1) the Roman Empire also covered northern Morocco, the Mediterranean shores in western Europe (Spain, France, Italy and Malta), Slovenia and Croatia, which the Ottomans did not conquer; 2) the Ottoman Empire included areas of the Middle East (Persia, Iraq, the Persian Gulf coast down to close to the peninsula of Qatar, the Arab and Yemeni coasts on the Red Sea) and eastern Sudan, Eritrea, and a small part of the coast north-eastern Somalia, which the Romans did not conquer.
The Ottoman Turks.
The Byzantine Empire, also known as the Eastern Roman Empire
The Western Empire finally succumbed to Germanic tribes between 470-490 A.D., and the Eastern (Byzantine) Empire was destroyed when the Ottoman Turks captured Constantinople in 1453 A.D.
There was no successor in the west besides a thing called the Holy Roman Empire which had nothing to do with ancient Rome. In the east it was the Ottoman empire.
The Ottoman Empire
In 1453, the Ottoman Empire invaded and took over Constantinople, changing the name to Istanbul, among other things. Istanbul became the third capital city of the Ottoman Empire, and became an Islamic city, rather than a Roman one.
You do not specify which eastern empire you are referring to. If you mean the Byzantine Empire, which is a term used by historians to refer to the eastern part of the Roman Empire after the fall of its western part, it fell in 1453, when the Ottoman Turks captured its capital, Constantinople.
It was taken over by the Ottoman Turks.