> which makes the claim even less legitimate To be fair there was nothing unusual from the Roman perspective about there being 2 emperors. Even during the Byza

> which makes the claim even less legitimate To be fair there was nothing unusual from the Roman perspective about there being 2 emperors. Even during the Byzantine period it was not particularly uncommon for heirs to be crowned as “co-emperors”. Despite effectively becoming a monarchy the empire retained some “republican” traits with the emperor reigning with the consent of God and the people of Rome.