To be HRE was....

[Txini]

..needed to be German???
Understanding German for being of German(HRE) Dinasty of being son/husband of German Royal, I ask this because I found that Alfonso X 'the Wise' King of Castilla y León, was candidate to the election thanks to the fact that his mother was a Hohenstauffen, so I wonder if it was needed to be German Catholic Nobleman to be elected Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of German People

 

[kurtbrian]

I don't think he needed to be german.

in 1516(?) Both Karl V and Francios(sp?) were contenders for the imperial throne as far as I know

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by kurtbrian
I don't think he needed to be german.

in 1516(?) Both Karl V and Francios(sp?) were contenders for the imperial throne as far as I know

But that is after the CK period (not too far past but still...).

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by Txini
..needed to be German???
Understanding German for being of German(HRE) Dinasty of being son/husband of German Royal, I ask this because I found that Alfonso X 'the Wise' King of Castilla y León, was candidate to the election thanks to the fact that his mother was a Hohenstauffen, so I wonder if it was needed to be German Catholic Nobleman to be elected Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of German People

Nope. Not necessary to be German.

Richard, Earl of Cornwall, was elected King of the Romans 1257-1272. He was never crowned Emperor though...

Edit: There were two candidated to the Empire in 1256: Richard of Cornwall and Alfonso X of Castille. Of the seven electors, four chose Richard in January 1257. In April a new election was held, in which Alfonso won with four to three! The King-Elector of Bohemia had changed his mind... Richard secured the title by arranging a coronation in Aachen in May, before Alfonso could reach Germany. The battle was lost for Alfonso...

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Tradition in the "original" HRE (911/62-1250) was that the Emperor be of royal or princely rank (ie, a member of the royal family or one of the "Tribal" Dukes). The 1st German king was Duke of Franconia. The 2nd & 3rd were Dukes of Saxony, the 4th & 5th royal Saxon princes, the 6th Duke of Bavaria. The 7th was Duke of Franconia, 8th Duke of Swabia, Bavaria, & Carinthia, 9th & 10th royal Franconian princes. 11th was Duke of Saxony, 12th Duke of Franconia, 13th Duke of Swabia, 14th royal Swabian prince, 15th & 16th Dukes of Swabia.

The only elected kings that werent royal sons or "Tribal" Dukes first were actually Anti-kings: Herman of Salm (Luxemburgian Count), William Count of Holland, and the Landgrave of Thuringia, who were all Germans. Otto IV was technically (until 1209 at least) an Anti-king, but by heredity, he shouldve been Duke of Saxony and was also related to 2 royal families.

So before the interregnum, yes, the Emperor had to be a German, and had to be elected and crowned King of Germany before he could be crowned Emperor. Only during the interregum was it possible to elect a non-German, and then only because he was closely related to the last royal family (Staufen); Alfonso and Richard, who based their claims entirely on that fact, were never taken seriously by the majority of German princes (and neither was Francis I by the way), and neither was ever crowned Emperor.

Even after the interregnum, many denied the right of the King of Bohemia to vote specifically because he was not a German. The three main houses that held the throne after the interregnum were all German (Hapsburg, Luxemburg, Wittelsbach). Thereafter the Hapsburgs held it alone. So from 962-1806, the Emperor was always a German; so effectively, the answer to the question is Yes.

 

[Secret Master]

Barbarossa,

I concur with your assesment that the Emperors were always German; however, it seems to me that this did not have to be the case. Some have noted a number of times non-Germans were in contention. So, would it be prudent to incclude in the game the possibility of non-Germans being named Emperor, but only under certain conditions (or, in EU terms, there is a heavy German bonus for dynasties who are German getting elected). This might also fuel the kinds of wars that would be "fun". i.e. conflicting claims on the Emperorship.

Does this make sense?

 

[kurtbrian]

yes it does (both times )

so instead of a Habsburg football it will be a german football...


Nah I think you have made a good suggestion

EDIT: I don't the title of holy roman emperor should be restricted to only german princes or nobles.

But I agree with SM that there could also be a bonus to german contenders for the throne so that they would the majority of the elections

 

[Txini]

can be a bonus for germans and a mid bonus for sons of german royal mother, as if it was father it will be German dinasty

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Well I guess it all depends how you look at it. From the Pope's point of view, the Empire was his to give or take away. So before Otto the Great was crowned HRE (962), he crowned Franks from France, Germany, & Italy, and it could be anybody he chose so long as that person was a Christian I suppose. So if youre looking for an "out", there it is-convince the Pope to transfer it to your house, although that will mean all-out war with Germany and much of Italy & Burgundy.

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Realistically and historically, after Otto the Great united Germany & Italy and became Emperor, the Empire from 962-1806 was a German institution, the "First Reich". There was a set pattern that lasted until 1507/8 and was replaced by another formalized pattern that prevailed until 1806:

1. A German prince had to first be elected by the other German princes on Frankish soil (meaning within the Duchy of Franconia, not in France). His election gave him the right to be crowned King of Germany at Aachen (Charlemagne's old capital). Until then, he was only "King-elect".

2. Upon being crowned at Aachen, he was now officially King of Germany, which gave him the right to be crowned Emperor by the Pope. For this reason, the title "King of Germany" was also called "King of the Romans" to stress his right to the imperial crown.

3. The German king can now go to Rome to be crowned Emperor. If he doesnt, he is not Emperor. So Richard of Cornwall and Alfonso were not emperors; Richard at least was crowned King of Germany and so had the right to be crowned emperor; Alfonso didnt even get that far.

4. When Maximilian I was unable to reach Rome (1507), he and the Pope agreed that election & coronation of German King & Emperor should be one and the same. From that point forward until the HREs death in 1806, election & coronation as King of Germany also made one Emperor. Now, if not in 962, the imperial and German crowns became irrevocably bound.

So despite all the intricacies of the situation, and the dubious candidatures of Richard, Alfonso, and Francis, not once in the entire period from 962-1806 was a non-German crowned Emperor, which sort of speaks for itself.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by BarbarossaHRE
So despite all the intricacies of the situation, and the dubious candidatures of Richard, Alfonso, and Francis, the Empire from 962-1806 was a German institution, the "First Reich". Not once in that entire period was a non-German crowned Emperor, which sort of speaks for itself.

But... Richard of Cornwall was elected and coronated King oof the Romans. As you say: As King of the Romans he had the right to be crowned Emperor - and he had not a drop of German blood in his veins...

Edit: For clarity

 

[Demetrios]

Originally posted by Havard
But... Richard of Cornwall was elected and coronated. As you say: As King of the Romans he had the right to be crowned Emperor - and he had not a drop of German blood in his veins...

He was never crowned Emperor, merely King of the Romans. However, had he made his way to Rome, it isn't unlikely that he would have been crowned Emperor - despite the fact he was totally Norman by descent...

 

[unmerged(6160)]

I hope any christain prince can become emperor. But Germans should be given a bonus. I hope we can accutaly elect.

BTW. What if Byzantium retook Rome/Italy, and forced the pope to unite the HRE and ERE into one?

 

[Secret Master]

so instead of a Habsburg football it will be a german football...

I know, right?

Perhaps this time there will be some better defined and less mysterious method of election. I dont know how many hours a few of us spent trying to figure it out, until we got a partial answer from Patric. German bonus or no, I think that the system of election should have logic to it AND that if a player controls a dynasty that has a vote, we should get the power to exercise it.

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Originally posted by Havard
But... Richard of Cornwall was elected and coronated. As you say: As King of the Romans he had the right to be crowned Emperor - and he had not a drop of German blood in his veins...

Yes, he was elected and crowned King of Germany/the Romans, but was never crowned Holy Roman Emperor, although the German crown gave him the right to be; so yes, he came within a hair's breadth of proving me wrong. But, even if he had been, 1 lone Englishman in 1000 years of German emperors wouldnt really change the fact that the Holy Roman Empire was a German institution, would it?

Alfonso was never a serious candidate, nor was Francis. Richard, on the other hand, came the closest; he was Frederick II's brother-in-law, and had served with him in Italy. He also actually went to Germany (1256-1259) to prosecute his claim, where he bought 4 of 7 electors (but they were notoriously fickle and greedy), and took a German bride to make him more palatable. However, his only real support came from the Rhineland, which depended on English trade, and even this took alot of bribery to secure. The rest of Germany never took him seriously, which he discovered on his 2nd visit (1260).

Ultimately, the Interregnum was the only reason Richard was even considered. And finally, remember that it was Richard who was elected, not England. So had he been successful, he wouldve just started his own German dynasty and continued things from there (wasnt his son even called "of Almaine"?) Thats not the same as Henry III or Edward I getting the imperial crown. And not a single non-German was ever crowned HRE between 962-1806, even when the Pope wanted to displace the current dynasty! Not even Charles of Anjou or a Hauteville from Sicily. None. That has to prove something.

 

[unmerged(5664)]

Originally posted by historycaesar
BTW. What if Byzantium retook Rome/Italy, and forced the pope to unite the HRE and ERE into one?

Extremely doubtful, since for centuries there had been Two Roman Emperors - one located in Rome, one located in Constantinople. What might be more likely would be for the HRE to recognize that he was a lesser Emperor to the one in Constantinople, and swear some kind of fealty.

Edit: Plus the Pope didn't have a whole lot to do with it, other than to Crown the Emperor. Once there was a HRE, a newly resurgent Byanztium would have to deal with the sitting HRE, not the Pope.

 

[Havard]

Originally posted by BarbarossaHRE
Yes, he was elected and crowned King of Germany/the Romans, but was never crowned Holy Roman Emperor, although the German crown gave him the right to be; so yes, he came within a hair's breadth of proving me wrong. But, even if he had been, 1 lone Englishman in 1000 years of German emperors wouldnt really change the fact that the Holy Roman Empire was a German institution, would it?

I have never claimed the HRE to be anything but a German institution either... What I was reacting to was you claim that the HRE had to be German. The fact that an English Prince was lawfully elected (I'm sure this wasn't the only election where accusations of bribery exists ) and later crowned King of the Romans with a lawful right to be crowned Emperor. The fact that he never became Emperor [1] can't hide that fact.

And finally, remember that it was Richard who was elected, not England. So had he been successful, he wouldve just started his own German dynasty and continued things from there (wasnt his son even called "of Almaine"?) Thats not the same as Henry III or Edward I getting the imperial crown.

Oh, yes. I am fully aware of that


[1] On the "missing" coronation of Dickie - do you have any clues to what prevented this? Papal disapproval? Trouble with Italy (i.e. Manfred)?

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Originally posted by Havard
I have never claimed the HRE to be anything but a German institution either... What I was reacting to was you claim that the HRE had to be German. The fact that an English Prince was lawfully elected (I'm sure this wasn't the only election where accusations of bribery exists ) and later crowned King of the Romans with a lawful right to be crowned Emperor. The fact that he never became Emperor [1] can't hide that fact.

Oh, yes. I am fully aware of that

[1] On the "missing" coronation of Dickie - do you have any clues to what prevented this? Papal disapproval? Trouble with Italy (i.e. Manfred)?

No, youre right about Richard being lawfully-elected and such, I was just being a smart-ass. And no, it wasnt by far the only bribing of electors; they were famous for it, and just as infamous for taking your money and then withdrawing support-which is why I said they werent serious about Richard.

But your implication stands; Richard proves it was possible in extreme circumstances (the interregnum); but since it never happened once in 1000 years, and only 1 guy even got close, it should be highly unlikely. Certainly the EU2 method was nearly impossible; the Electors choosing a foreign noble to be King of Germany based on connections with the previous dynasty is one thing, but to elect the king of a foreign country was inconceivable.

I dont know the particulars on your question, but didnt he refuse Sicily largely because he didnt want to fight the Staufen over it? Im sure it was complicated by the situation in Italy like you hinted.

 

[unmerged(11206)]

Originally posted by historycaesar
I hope any christain prince can become emperor. But Germans should be given a bonus. I hope we can accutaly elect.

BTW. What if Byzantium retook Rome/Italy, and forced the pope to unite the HRE and ERE into one?

Manuel I planned to do exactly that: Pope Alexander was at war with Barbarossa, who was about to cross the Alps and attack Rome. Manuel, already subsidizing the League of Verona against Frederick, offered to invade Italy and enter Rome to be crowned HRE and unite the Empires and Churches. The Pope never planned to acquiesce, but led Manuel on and took his money (like the Electors & Richard). The Byzantines took Ancona in preparation for Manuel's crossing, but Barbarossa beseiged it, sending his vanguard south to smash the Roman army at the Battle of Tusculum (1167). Frederick then stormed Ancona, and as the Pisan fleet sealed off the Tiber, rushed south and took Rome by assault.

So the plan came to nothing; but it illustrates a good point: it was possible because it proposed to separate the Empire (Italy) from Germany. So if, in the game, you can convince or force the Pope to transfer the Empire & Italy from Germany to your own dynasty, it might work. You dont need the sanction of the Electors unless you plan to be King of Germany, you just need to be crowned by the Pope! That solves all the "legal" problems, and leaves only a war with Germany to be won.

Oh man, Im forming plans for the Hautevilles of Sicily even now...all Italy united by the Normans...Mwahahaha!

 

[unmerged(5184)]

The French Charles de Valois (12xx-1325), the brother of Philippe IV Le Bel and owner of many titles himself, submitted his name every time it was possible. Although he has never been elected, the fact that he tried at least shows that there was a realist possibility that a non-German could be elected to the throne.