Serious question. Why didn't he crown himself Emperor of

>>2487192
>Serious question.

Really?

>>2487192
Im assuming the same reason why Geroge Washington didn't declare himself king

>>2487230
Yes, Anon. There is a lot shit posting, I need a serious answer to why Otto didn't take the crown of Germany for himself.

Was it mainly because of the confederation requiring the head of it state be tied to monarchy of Prussia?

Probably a lack of legitimacy.

>>2487192
it's gonna sound memey but some men just want to do more for their country than they want out of it

not sure if he was like that but it's just an assumption

>>2487238
Because the population of that time had a monarchistic view of the world. A simple Junker had no legitimate claim.

>>2487236
>>2487247
The seat of chancellor was made specially for him within government and he was able to assign and dismiss secretaries at will.

He did pretty much everything as the Emperor didn't really care until his grandson got in. Otto was the Emperor in everything, but name, yet he didn't take the official position for himself why? Why rule everything, but not have the official position permanently >>2487245 isn't much of a problem.

You can't just declare yourself a monarch, dummy.

>>2487253
>Junker had no legitimate claim.
Neither did Napoleon III and Napoleon I, yet they still ended up as Emperor's of the their respective countries doing the same thing as Otto in winning the people, leading the country, and being the guy pulling the strings.

>>2487263
>yet he didn't take the official position for himself
...How exactly could he do that?

He conducted politics with the blessing of the emperor. He was not indispensable, nor did the wield unconditional support from the military, the elites, or the people. You act like he could just say "i'm the emperor now" and everyone would have no choice to accept it as a fait accompli.

>>2487295
That because France had nationalism for centuries. Germany even to this day isn't that centralised. Also Austria soft power was still a thing.

The real question is why he didn't include Austria into Germany

>>2487238
>Yes, Anon. There is a lot shit posting, I need a serious answer to why Otto didn't take the crown of Germany for himself.
There already was a king?

Mayhem he was a loyal subject and a honorable man and soldier, not an usurper.

>>2487617
>Mayhem
Maybe