Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Who was the first emperor of the holy roman empire? Charlemagne or Otto of Saxony?
- 10 years agoFavorite Answer
Otto the Great of Saxony is.
Charlemagne was King of the Franks from 768 and "Emperor of the Romans" from 800 to his death in 814.
Even though the Holy Roman Emperor and the "Emperor of the Romans" are "technically" the SAME thing, the Holy Roman Empire [962–1806 AD] did NOT yet exist -----
So "technically" Charlemagne was crowned "Emperor of the Romans" by the Pope and NOT the "Holy Roman Emperor".
While Charlemagne had been crowned Emperor in 800, his empire had been divided amongst his grandsons, and following the assassination of Berengar of Friuli in 924, the Imperial title had lain vacant for nearly forty years.
On 2 February 962, Otto the Great (912-973) was crowned Emperor of what would later become the Holy Roman Empire.
Otto is considered the first Holy Roman Emperor.
- 10 years ago
Charlemagne inherited King of the Franks from his father Pepin, and then, when he'd established a larger empire beyond what is now France, taking in all of Germany, most of Italy, and even part of Spain, was crowned Emperor of the Romans by Pope Leo III, on Xmas Day, 800. This was to present him as a successor to the great Roman emperors of the past. The Carolingian family, which used the title Emperor of the Romans by way of inheritance, died out before the year 1000.
Otto I (the Great) united Germany under his rule as strongly as he could, then marched south through Italy and into Rome. He was crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the pope, his empire taking in all of what is now Germany, Northern Italy down to Rome, and other lands of Europe that are too numerous to mention, but France was an independent kingdom. This was another reference to the great Roman emperors/empire of the past, but "another reference" and being the same as Charlemagne's empire are not the same.
I consider it a historian's fallacy to say that Charlemagne was the first Holy Roman Emperor. This takes nothing away from him, whether he be "Charles le Magne" to the French, or "Karl der Grosse" to the Germans. What Charlemagne had started was over when Otto entered into the picture, Otto creating a new empire.Source(s): I have been a teacher of world history on the high school level for 36 years. The sources I have read as a teacher of history, in this case European, are clear regarding the roles of Charlemagne and Otto the Great. Any decent world history textbook will give names and dates.
- Anonymous4 years ago
Otto Of SaxonySource(s): https://shrinke.im/bamGG
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 10 years ago
I was under the impression that Charlemagne was before Otto but was not crowned. therefore Otto was the first holy roman emperor
- 10 years ago
"Otto I was crowned King of Germany in 962, but he is nevertheless considered to have been the first Holy Roman Emperor (German: Römisch-Deutscher Kaiser) in retrospect. Otto was the first emperor of the realm who was not a member of the earlier Carolingian dynasty. "
- Anonymous10 years ago
wasn't it Otto? i think Charlemagne was the one that made some really big changes.....grr....i suck at history