Was Frederick II Hohenstaufen the best Holy Roman Emperor?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 07:58:34 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Was Frederick II Hohenstaufen the best Holy Roman Emperor?		 « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: See above
#1
Yes		  
#2
Yessssssss		  
#3
I'm not familiar with Frederick II		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 10

Author Topic: Was Frederick II Hohenstaufen the best Holy Roman Emperor?  (Read 682 times)
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,772


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 10, 2013, 11:25:22 AM »
Go for it.  Option 2 for me.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2013, 12:04:33 PM »
There was a time in my life when I was absolutely fascinated with Frederick II Hohenstaufen.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2013, 02:01:44 PM »
He was, sadly, a failure at the office. Of history-changing proportions.

Anyways, I vote Justinian.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,416


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2013, 02:02:41 PM »
Justinian wasn't Holy Roman Emperor.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2013, 02:30:16 PM »
Quote from: Nathan on April 10, 2013, 02:02:41 PM
Justinian wasn't Holy Roman Emperor.
Of course he was; or else Friedrich wasn't either - the title "Holy Roman Emperor" never existed and the title "Holy Roman Empire" was invented (shortly) after Friedrich's time. Don't believe the 18th/19th century retcon about the Roman Empire "ending" in 476. It was reunited, and divided again in 800/812.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,416


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2013, 02:37:20 PM »
Quote from: wish I heard voices, wish I was a telephone on April 10, 2013, 02:30:16 PM
Quote from: Nathan on April 10, 2013, 02:02:41 PM
Justinian wasn't Holy Roman Emperor.
Of course he was; or else Friedrich wasn't either - the title "Holy Roman Emperor" never existed and the title "Holy Roman Empire" was invented (shortly) after Friedrich's time. Don't believe the 18th/19th century retcon about the Roman Empire "ending" in 476. It was reunited, and divided again in 800/812.

The term conventionally refers to the post-Charlemagne Western Emperors--but yes, I am aware of the problems with this, and point taken.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,772


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2013, 03:17:48 PM »
Quote from: Nathan on April 10, 2013, 02:37:20 PM
Quote from: wish I heard voices, wish I was a telephone on April 10, 2013, 02:30:16 PM
Quote from: Nathan on April 10, 2013, 02:02:41 PM
Justinian wasn't Holy Roman Emperor.
Of course he was; or else Friedrich wasn't either - the title "Holy Roman Emperor" never existed and the title "Holy Roman Empire" was invented (shortly) after Friedrich's time. Don't believe the 18th/19th century retcon about the Roman Empire "ending" in 476. It was reunited, and divided again in 800/812.

The term conventionally refers to the post-Charlemagne Western Emperors--but yes, I am aware of the problems with this, and point taken.

Yes, I was referring to the Western leaders of the Holy Roman Empire, though I think starting to consider it the Holy Roman Empire with Otto I's ascension rather than Charlemagne saves a lot of messy "what is the empire" stuff in the messy and chaotic late Carolingian era.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,940


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2013, 11:02:29 PM »
Nah. There are plenty of better emperors: Charlemagne, Charles IV, Rudolph II, and of course Joseph II.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.221 seconds with 14 queries.