answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Holy Roman Emperor and ruled alot of other places.

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago

Main body

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What were some accomplishments of Charles V Holy Roman Emperor?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Ancient History

Who anointed Charlemagne holy roman emperor?

It happened in Rome, on Christmas night of the year 800, when pope Leo 3rd , at the end of the mass in the basilic of Saint Peter, crowned Charles of the Franks as ''Ceasar and Emperor of the Romans''. Charles was dressed as a roman senator, the frank army officers in the church claimed him saying ''To Charles the Great, pious emperor krowned by God, life and victory'', while the roman people in the square in front of the basilical church claimed him as ''Charles Augustus, Great and pious Emperor of the Romans''. To note: Charlemagne was entitled Ceasar and Emperor of the Romans, not Holy Roman Emperor. The first who took this tile was only Otto 1st of Saxony in 963 a.D.


Why was Charlemagne crowned emperor of the Romans?

Charlemagne was not crowned emperor of the Romans. He was crowned as the Holy Roman Emperor, which had nothing to do with ancient Rome. The so-called Holy Roman Empire was a Germanic kingdom of the Middle Ages.


Who crowned Charlemagne the emperor of the Romans?

no one did but the pope crowned him emperor of the franks.AnswerPope Leo III crowned Charlemagne Holy Roman Emperor on Christmas Day in the year 800 in St. Peter's Basilicia.


Why did Charlemagne not want to be crowned Emperor by the Pope in 800 AD on Christmas day?

How do you get this idea? He was actually crowned on Christmas day of 800! His coronation created the Holy Roman Empire which existed until 1806! Historians dont actaully know weather or not he was pleased or displeased, but the contemporary account is that he was happy about his cornation becasue it would be useful to him having the imperoal title obviously, and was thankful to the church and the Papacy but also felt regretful for being viewed as a subject of the Papacy Charlemagne heartily disliked the Church and suspected trickery by the Pope. Incidentally, he wasn't crowned 'Holy Roman Emperor', just 'emperor'. The idea that he was the first Holy Roman Emperor is a much later fiction. The earliest mention of the Holy Roman Empire dates from about 1250.


Why was Charlemagne not truly the Emperor of the Romans?

Historically, we call people emperors of the Roman Empire if the Roman Senate endorsed them as such, or if an emperor approved by the Senate did so, making them co-emperors, and they subsequently ruled on their own. Anyone else who claimed independently to be the emperor is considered a claimant or usurper. The last known act of the Senate of the West Roman Empire took place in the year 603 AD, 197 years before Charlemagne was crowned emperor. He might be considered a legitimate Roman Emperor, if he had been accepted by Empress Irene of the Byzantine Empire, which was what remained of the Roman Empire at the time. From a certain point of view, all this is nonsense. If the Holy Roman Empire were still operating, our position on whether Charlemagne was legally Emperor of the Romans would almost certainly be different. There are links below.