Euro Area

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Yes, the claimants would need to be crowned by the Pope to be Emperor in name; but even when they didn't bother they still legally ruled the HRE as "King of the Romans". I did not know about that particular document though.

When we're speaking of the HRE, as in the collection of German states that had appropriated the title of "Emperor", in order to be King of the Romans (a prerequisite for coronation) one would need to be approved by the electors. And as said, the HRE was dissolved by Franz - even though he wasn't empowered to so from a legal perspective.

I'm pretty sure that Juan Carlos is not a male-line descendant of the Habsburgs, and even if he were, that alone would not sufficient in the days the HRE actually existed.

You are mistaken as to the nature of the Holy Roman Empire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire

As I said, the Emperor's authority derives from the Pope - the later arrangement with the "Electors" was Papally endorsed, tacitely at least, because all temporal monarchs derive their authority ultamately from God.

[Kralizec]

You are mistaken as to the nature of the Holy Roman Empire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire

As I said, the Emperor's authority derives from the Pope - the later arrangement with the "Electors" was Papally endorsed, tacitely at least, because all temporal monarchs derive their authority ultamately from God.

To be clear, I'm making a distinction between being the ruler of those German states and having the title of Emperor. Only the electors could name a King of Rome; wether the Pope actually went through and named him emperor didn't impact his power in any factual sense- in many cases the rulers of the HRE didnd't bother or just didn't get around to travel to Rome for actual coronation. They were still the rulers of the Empire, in fact if not on paper.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

To be clear, I'm making a distinction between being the ruler of those German states and having the title of Emperor. Only the electors could name a King of Rome; wether the Pope actually went through and named him emperor didn't impact his power in any factual sense- in many cases the rulers of the HRE didnd't bother or just didn't get around to travel to Rome for actual coronation. They were still the rulers of the Empire, in fact if not on paper.

That's fine - but to clarify the point, being "Holy Roman Emperor" doesn't have to apply to a German Emperor, which explains Napoleon's use of the Aqulia etc.

[Kralizec]

That's fine - but to clarify the point, being "Holy Roman Emperor" doesn't have to apply to a German Emperor, which explains Napoleon's use of the Aqulia etc.

I'm still not sure what your point is. The Germans assumed the imperial mantle after they absorbed the middle kingdom and the city of Aachen; which was Charlemagne's favoured residence, and the Pope induldged them in their pretentions.

The actual title is meaningless beyond its empty symbology. It's supposed to stress preemincence over the other monarchs of Europe, but even their power over the petty German princes waxed with the ages. The Papal recognition of their "imperial" crown was essentially a useless gesture but it gave the impression that the Pope actually did have authority over worldy rulers. Napoleon dispensed with this obvious nonsense and essentially crowned himself; the fact that the Pope was present was insult to injury.

Why Juan Carlos would have any claim to the title, a useless one anywa, is unclear to me. He did not descend from the Emperors and even if he did that would not be enough.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Why Juan Carlos would have any claim to the title, a useless one anywa, is unclear to me. He did not descend from the Emperors and even if he did that would not be enough.

He would not need to "descend" from anyone, although it became a de facto Hapsburg title it was never a de jure one.

He would get it by defeault - he's the only Roman Catholic King left!

[Kralizec]

He would not need to "descend" from anyone, although it became a de facto Hapsburg title it was never a de jure one.

He would get it by defeault - he's the only Roman Catholic King left!

Is my usage of the word "descend" incorrect?

Belgium.

Also, Luxembourg. That's just a grand duchy, though. And if the Pope can name any king an emperor, no matter how much power he actually has, surely he could name a beggar as well.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Is my use of the word "descend" incorrect?

Belgium.

Also, Luxembourg. That's just a grand duchy, though. And if the Pope can name any king an emperor, no matter how much power he actually has, surely he could name a beggar as well.

The first crowned Western Emperor was, irrc Clovis - nobody is "descended" from him. The point, it's not blood which is the key issue.

Is Luxemborg Roman Catholic, I did not know that.

[lars573]

You are mistaken as to the nature of the Holy Roman Empire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire

As I said, the Emperor's authority derives from the Pope - the later arrangement with the "Electors" was Papally endorsed, tacitely at least, because all temporal monarchs derive their authority ultamately from God.

The Holy Roman Emperor also had 2 ancillary titles. King of Germany and King of the Romans. After Charlemagne the title of HRE and king of the Romans was passed around by his grand-sons descendants. It end up with the elected king of the Germans also being HRE. With a stipulation that it was only official if you crowned by the Pope in Rome. Electors were the original dukes of the German tribal duchies. After the 15th century no HRE really bothered going to Rome for a coronation. But the late dark age idea that the Pope had the authority to make Emperors is why Napoleon had the Pope crown him Emperor.

[Kralizec]

The Holy Roman Emperor also had 2 ancillary titles. King of Germany and King of the Romans. After Charlemagne the title of HRE and king of the Romans was passed around by his grand-sons descendants. It end up with the elected king of the Germans also being HRE. With a stipulation that it was only official if you crowned by the Pope in Rome. Electors were the original dukes of the German tribal duchies. After the 15th century no HRE really bothered going to Rome for a coronation. But the late dark age idea that the Pope had the authority to make Emperors is why Napoleon had the Pope crown him Emperor.

That's mostly correct, except that the term "Holy Roman Empire/Emperor" was only used from Otto I and onwards. IIRC, being king of Germany (that is, the eastern portion of the divided Carolingian realm) was originally hereditary, but that male-line branch of Charlemagne's descendants died out at some point. Strictly speaking all the lands should then have passed to the Carolingian heir in west-Francia (i.e. France), but the German dukes decided to elect a new monarch instead. Since then, the king/emperor of Germany was elected.

[HopAlongBunny]

Apparently I was wrong about the LIBOR scandal winding down to oblivion.

Canadian banks are under investigation as well as ones in USA. The article (http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/stor...nk-probed.html) mentions Canadian branches of involved banks, as well as an investigation by the US. If any findings see the light of day, it could get very ugly indeed.

[drone]

Excellent, this need to get the full light-of-day treatment. It's high time the heads of bank execs started rolling, and the uproar might prevent the regulatory rollbacks the industry is currently bribing our congresscritters for.

[Strike For The South]

In 100 years, this will be the new gilded age, only with bankers taking the role that heavy industry played.

Any takers?

sigh. I would be a revolutionary, if there were any money in it.

[HopAlongBunny]

In 100 years, this will be the new gilded age, only with bankers taking the role that heavy industry played.

Any takers?

sigh. I would be a revolutionary, if there were any money in it.

I'll bite.

Unlike Twains' Gilded Age where cheap money saw enormous expansion of industry, agriculture and infrastructure (raising all boats), this gilded age is all about cheap money chasing paper returns essentially resulting in asset inflation. The beauty of Twains' take on things is it is just as relevant today as when published. The actors change but the mechanism of gov't/industry and "wealth creation" is much the same.