Holy Roman Empire

>>2208421
I have no idea what you are talking about, unless you are referring to the idiotic meme that wants the HRE not being Holy, Roman, or an Empire, which is only true for the later stages of it, the period during which the man which came up with the idea of the Empire not actually having the characteristics it proclaimed to have, used to live

File: voltman.jpg (15KB, 220x396px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 220x396px

>>2208443
>meme

>>2208443
>literally never roman
>literally never holy
>only sometimes an empire

Meme you say?

>>2208482
>>2208484
In its inception Otto I the great held Rome, making it a roman empire, was recognised by the pope, making it holy, was large, multi-ethnic and highly centralised, making it an Empire, at least from the 10th century to the 12th century, if not 13th or even 14th

>>2208484
Or you can read up why Charlemagne called it that. Interesting piece of /his/.

>>2208489
Otto saw himself in the line of Charlemagne which claimed to be Roman emperor. He did that for religious reasons and to claim succession of the Frankish empire from the Roman Empire.

>>2208502
unrelated to the simple fact Otto was crowned king of Rome, but true

File: Holy_Roman_Empire_1000_map-de.svg.png (1MB, 2000x2454px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x2454px

>>2208506
He was King of Rome and good deal of what is today Northern Italy, but then the claiming the succession of the Roman empire had a religious component, as it makes you legal end boss of all Christendom. Thats why Charlemagne did it and thats why Otto did it.

>>2208516
yes but there you are discussing motives, which is not really related to the topic, however appreciated

>>2208525
Understanding motives and context of the time is important, especially in regard to the OP question.

File: prussian germany.png (471KB, 1936x810px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1936x810px

>>2208421
It was a great tool to keep Germans fighting each other instead of trying to bring down everyone else.

>>2208489
>held Rome, making it a roman empire,

No. Rome was a possession. For it to be "Roman" it would have to be the other way around. Is the United States "the Puerto Rican Empire?" No. Don't be stupid.

>was recognised by the pope, making it holy,

All territories in Christian cultures had the pope's stamp of approval. That doesn't make them theocracies. Nobody called it "Holy England," etc.

>was large, multi-ethnic and highly centralised, making it an Empire

It was never "highly centralized."

>Byzaboos sperg out about the HRE being >>>
And yet, the >>> isn't true of their precious Byzantium.

checkmate

>>2208572
Otto I was King of Rome, crowned by the Pope, and his "state"'s composition qualifies as Empire

Is criticizing the historical name really the only thing you idiots can argue about?

>>2208597

Go to Puerto Rico and ask who the president is.

>>2208715
Puerto Rico is a dominion of the USA, not a property of the US president
Rome was direct property of Rome as he was the King of Rome

>>2208742
1) That's not what a king is.
2) Even if it was, what is the point of that distinction?
3) How does it make it make it a "Roman Empire" any more than a "Saxon Empire," for example?

>>2208489
>Otto I the great held Rome
You do realize that strictly speaking Otto I was the emperor who explicitely confirmed the Papacy's independence, right? He made the emperors GUARANTORS OF INDEPENDENCE. Kinda hard to argue he held something he considered independent.

>>2208742
>he was the King of the Romans
FTFY, subjects vs territory is a big fucking difference.

>debating semantics
>not understanding the poltics oir historical context
stay classy /his/

>>2208810
>>2208786

Vatican city and Rome are not equivalent, the Pope recognised and crowned Otto as Emperor of the Romans in exchange for protection

>>2208421
>Rome is that city from Gladiator, right?

This fucking board.