Toggle sidebar

GDT: Four Nations Face-Off

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
My guess is Canada wins tonight.

USA seems beat up and sick. Canada has the chip on their shoulder now, and honestly outplayed the US last game. Might come down to if Hellebuyck can steal the game again.
 
koteka said:
That is why we need team Holy Roman Empire. That adds the Czechs, the Swiss, the Austrians, and Texier to Draisatl.
Click to expand...
img_9311.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: majormajor
Iron Balls McGinty said:
img_9311.jpg
Click to expand...
The HRE was the direct result of the Church's position that G-d forbid the Romans be ruled by a woman. No, really; Empress Irene of Athens had just taken over the ERE/Byzantine throne in her own right after she got tired of her son pushing back against the Mother-knows-best dual-rule they'd had for years. So the Church decided, hey, this Charlemagne guy seems cool, he's kicked the Lombards around when we've asked, let's crown him Emperor. The West Roman Empire is back, baby!

I sometimes wonder what it would've been like if Irene's attempts to marry Charlemagne had ever actually worked out.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: ThirdPeriodTurtle and Iron Balls McGinty
Viqsi said:
The HRE was the direct result of the Church's position that G-d forbid the Romans be ruled by a woman. No, really; Empress Irene of Athens had just taken over the ERE/Byzantine throne in her own right after she got tired of her son pushing back against the Mother-knows-best dual-rule they'd had for years. So the Church decided, hey, this Charlemagne guy seems cool, he's kicked the Lombards around when we've asked, let's crown him Emperor. The West Roman Empire is back, baby!

I sometimes wonder what it would've been like if Irene's attempts to marry Charlemagne had ever actually worked out.
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viqsi
CBJWerenski8 said:
I bet there’s no fights tonight, fwiw.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't rule it out if 1 team gets in a rut and needs some momentum but its probably a lot less likely to happen than actually take place. Especially with both Tkachuk's likely not 100%. Players also probably getting some nudges from their NHL teams to not kill themselves in the middle of the season
 
  • Like
Reactions: CBJWerenski8
Viqsi said:
The HRE was the direct result of the Church's position that G-d forbid the Romans be ruled by a woman. No, really; Empress Irene of Athens had just taken over the ERE/Byzantine throne in her own right after she got tired of her son pushing back against the Mother-knows-best dual-rule they'd had for years. So the Church decided, hey, this Charlemagne guy seems cool, he's kicked the Lombards around when we've asked, let's crown him Emperor. The West Roman Empire is back, baby!

I sometimes wonder what it would've been like if Irene's attempts to marry Charlemagne had ever actually worked out.
Click to expand...

The issue of Irene being a woman was likely just a pretext. Charlemagne was the first western ruler who had enough territory to have imperial pretensions (most of Western Europe), and had taken on more Roman stylings as his realm grew. Meanwhile the Pope had just been rescued by Charlemagne, from some folks trying to put his eyes out, and was now under Charlemagne's protection.

I don't agree with it - there was only one real Emperor (Irene) and this was a great crime. But I think they would have done it regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThirdPeriodTurtle, Aaaarrgghh and Viqsi
majormajor said:
The issue of Irene being a woman was likely just a pretext. Charlemagne was the first western ruler who had enough territory to have imperial pretensions (most of Western Europe), and had taken on more Roman stylings as his realm grew. Meanwhile the Pope had just been rescued by Charlemagne, from some folks trying to put his eyes out, and was now under Charlemagne's protection.

I don't agree with it - there was only one real Emperor (Irene) and this was a great crime. But I think they would have done it regardless.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but the way I told it I get to act all aggrieved and such on behalf of women everywhere. :p: ;)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ThirdPeriodTurtle and Derby
majormajor said:
The issue of Irene being a woman was likely just a pretext. Charlemagne was the first western ruler who had enough territory to have imperial pretensions (most of Western Europe), and had taken on more Roman stylings as his realm grew. Meanwhile the Pope had just been rescued by Charlemagne, from some folks trying to put his eyes out, and was now under Charlemagne's protection.

I don't agree with it - there was only one real Emperor (Irene) and this was a great crime. But I think they would have done it regardless.
Click to expand...
Agreed that it in large part was pretext. Securing a dependable ally for the Papacy and the pope personally was no doubt a huge part of it. Not to mention that the relations between the Byzantines and the Papacy had been strained for a while, that Byzantine presence in Italy had been steadily declining for a while as well as the formal enhancement of the status of the Papacy that the pope crowning an Emperor of the Romans provided.

While I am always eager to sympathise with the real Romans, you can certainly make a point that the Emperor of the Romans should maybe be able to, you know, defend Rome*.

*EDIT: And yes, "Rome" was more the polity than the city itself. But this particular argument is a matter of appearances. And I'm trying to be the Devil's advocate, because no one ever defends the Holy Roman Empire.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ThirdPeriodTurtle
Aaaarrgghh said:
Agreed that it in large part was pretext. Securing a dependable ally for the Papacy and the pope personally was no doubt a huge part of it. Not to mention that the relations between the Byzantines and the Papacy had been strained for a while, that Byzantine presence in Italy had been steadily declining for a while as well as the formal enhancement of the status of the Papacy that the pope crowning an Emperor of the Romans provided.

While I am always eager to sympathise with the real Romans, you can certainly make a point that the Emperor of the Romans should maybe be able to, you know, defend Rome*.

*EDIT: And yes, "Rome" was more the polity than the city itself. But this particular argument is a matter of appearances. And I'm trying to be the Devil's advocate, because no one ever defends the Holy Roman Empire.
Click to expand...

I actually didn't know until looking it up today that a lot of historians think Charlemagne genuinely didn't see the Imperial coronation coming, that the Pope sprung it on him. The Pope had people trying to blind him and the coronation meant that anyone who touched him was now going after the Pope who crowned Charlemagne.

From 330 onward Rome was in Constantinople, so I'm less interested in who defends the fetid swamp and ruins of the old city, which by now had perhaps a tenth of the population of Constantinople.

My favorite anecdote about Roman identity is from a little over a century ago, around 1912. A group of Greek soldiers had just captured the Aegean island of Lemnos from the Ottoman Empire. As they came ashore, a local boy asked "who are you?" The men said "We are Greeks, just like you". The boy replied "No, we are Romans". The point is that Roman identity moved with the capital, and it stayed there, and to some degree is still there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThirdPeriodTurtle
Z really showing his skills. Is there another dman who can get as engaged deep into the ozone and still get back on defense. Especially against the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom