especially the Council of Lyons (can. 14-17), did their utmost to remedy the loss of the Holy Land and the defencelessness of Germany against the Mongols, whilst Frederick applied himself only by words to both these important matters. Not till he saw death approach did Frederick testify any repentance, and he then endeavoured to repair many a grievous wrong. His influence might have been as profitable as it was rendered fatal through his sensuality, cruelty, faithlessness, and tyranny. The only fruit of the splendid education he had received from his guardian, Innocent III., was that he fostered learning and education. In the early part of his career he cannot be said to have contributed to the prosperity of cities, for he framed laws prejudicial to their autonomy; only in the last five years of his reign did he show himself more favourable towards them. His life was a grand misuse of his gifts and powers. Hefele, v. 984. Per quam (sententiam) imperator Romanus in laesae majestatis. crimine dicitur condemnatus per quam ridiculose legi subjicitur, qui legibus omnibus imperialiter est solutus. 4 Bréholles, vi. 357 seq. 366, 374, 375, 581, 701, 702. Cf. Höfler, Friedrich II. p. 227. 5 Hefele, 1. c. p. 1007 seq. 1009. • A meeting between the King and the Pope took place at Clugny in Nov. 1245; further endeavours followed in the April and in the autumn of 1246 (Hefele, pp. 1005, 1008). Huber (p. 31 seq.) refers to Daunou, Essai Historique sur la Puissance Temporelle des Papes, i. 212. The report of the conversation, which Döllinger (Lehrb. ii. p. 219) thinks very questionable, comes from Matth. Paris. 7 'In omnibus se reddidit incredibilem' are words reported of the Pope by M. Paris. Later, Louis promised if it were necessary to defend the Pope and the Church by force of arms. Hefele, p. 1012. • Hefele, pp. 993-996. " Bréholles, iii. 445 seq.; iv. 286 seq.; vi. 366. Hefele, pp. 880, 882. PART III. THE EMPIRE FROM FREDERICK II. TILL ITS FALL. § 1. Rudolph of Hapsburg. § 2. Adolphus of Nassau and Albert. § 3. Henry VII. § 4. The emperor's oath and the rights of the Pope. § 5. Henry VII.'s quarrel with the Pope. § 6. Declaration of Clement V. § 7. The imperial vicariate in Italy. § 8. Louis of Bavaria and Frederick of Austria. § 9. Louis excommunicated. § 10. Louis de clared to have forfeited the empire. § 11. His campaign in Italy. § 12. Louis and Benedict XII. § 13. The controversy as to Louis. § 14. Election of Charles IV. § 15. From Charles IV. to Charles V. § 16. Disputes with Charles V. § 17. Abdication of Charles V. § 18. Fall of the ancient German Empire. § 1. From the deposition of Frederick II., A.D. 1245, till the coronation of Henry VII., A.D. 1312, there was no lawful emperor. Innocent IV. endeavoured to obtain recognition for William of Orange, who had been elected by the Church party in Germany, and who, after the death of Frederick (December 13th, 1250), and after having conquered Conrad IV., had a meeting with the Pope at Lyons, and made some progress in Germany. After William's death in 1256, the German princes again split into two parties, who respectively elected Prince Richard of Cornwall and Alphonso X. of Castile. Of these the former came to Germany but for a short time, the latter never. Almost all the princes of the empire showed themselves to be -corrupt, selfish, and fickle.3 The Pope positively forbad the proposed election of the boy Conradin, because the Hohenstaufen were enemies of the Church, and the Holy See could not choose as her protector one who had insulted her.1 Alexander IV., who was applied to by both candidates, gave no decision concerning the disputed election.5 Urban IV., elected in 1261, invited both parties to Rome, there to state their case. .6 But both accepted the invitation as implying their right to be undoubted, that their summons to Rome signified that their election would be confirmed by the Pope, and that they should be crowned by him. Urban upon this rejected both candidates, and justly, for how could his decision carry weight if he were denied the right to decide? Alphonso was the first to take this step, and Richard's ambassador followed. The Pope endeavoured to negotiate an understanding between the parties. His successor, Clement IV., at once took up the affair; both sides prevaricated, and the German princes, contrary to the Pope's advice, meditated a fresh election. When Alphonso, after the death of Richard in 1272, demanded the imperial crown of Pope Gregory X., the latter declared that he must first hear the German princes who had elected Richard, for that their rights should not be encroached upon. Alphonso was offended at this, and conceived the project of sending an army into Italy. But as his supporters in Germany were dead, and he now enjoyed little consideration there, the time seemed come to end the strife, and Gregory advised the princes to make a new and unanimous election, otherwise with the help of the cardinals it would be his care to provide an emperor.7 Rudolph of Hapsburg was elected in 1273, and on the 26th September 1274, was recognised at Lyons by the Pope as King of the Romans. Later, when Alphonso had shown himself inclined to give way, Rudolph was invited to receive the imperial crown. He met the Pope, Gregory X., at Lausanne, in October 1275, and took the customary oaths; but he never came to Rome to be crowned. Rudolph died in 1291. In 1279, under King Rudolph and Pope Nicholas III., many princes of the empire expressly acknowledged it to be a special favour from the Holy See that the king they elected was also chosen to be future emperor. The codes of law known as the Sachsenspiegel and the Schwabenspiegel are identical with the Pope's view of public law. The latter maintained that the emperor should exercise his authority to procure due obedience for the Pope in case of necessity by the imperial ban. The Germans elect the King of the Romans 10 and enthrone him at Aix-la-Chapelle, but the Pope by his consecration confers the full power of the empire and the imperial title. 1 Phillips, K.R. iii. § 123, p. 123. Such bitterness had the Pope created in men's minds,' exclaims Huber (p. 32), that even German prelates had sworn to murder their king.' But the prelates in question (the Bishop of Ratisbon and the Abbot of St. Emmeran) had suffered very much from the Hohenstaufen, and were thus exercising a private revenge upon Conrad, whom besides they did not recognise as their lawful king. It is nowhere shown that Innocent IV. had any share in the sudden attack made on Conrad at Christmas 1250; he had only expressed himself against Conrad, who appeared to be following his father's example only too closely. 3 Hefele, vi. p. 10 seq. Alex. IV. Const. 7, Firma, to the Archbishop of Mainz, July 1256, §1: Quanta vigilantia debet adhiberi, ubi de advocato Ecclesiae agitur, de ipsius defensore tractatur, ne pro advocato impugnator et pro defensore assumatur offensor.' Cf. Card. Vinc. Petra, Com. in Const. ap. t. iii. p. 116 seq.; Urban IV. ap. Rayn. a. 1262, n. 5 (not Urban VI., as we find it in Huber, p. 23). By the election of Conradin, who was at that time only four years old, the existing condition of rebellion against law and order would not have been ended but increased. The same reasons held good now as at the death of Henry VI. Raynald. a. 1257, n. 8; 1263, n. 40, 41, 43. Cf. Ricord. Malasp. Hist. Flor. c. excviii.; Villani, Chron. 1. vii. c. xliii.; Naucler. Gen. c. xliii. 8 Raynald. a. 1274, n. 7, 12, 51, 54; a. 1275, n. 37 seq. Pertz, M. G. Hist. iv. 421 : Complectens ab olim sibi Romana mater Ecclesia quadam quasi germana charitate Germaniam illam eo terrenae dignitatis nomine decoravit, quod est super omne nomen temporaliter tantum praesidentium super terram, plantans in ea principes tamquam arbores praeelectas et rigans illas gratia singulari, illud eis dedit incrementum mirandi potentia, ut ipsius Ecclesiae auctoritate suffulti, velut germen electum per ipsorum electionem illum, qui frena Romani teneret imperii, germinaret.' 10 Cf. Senkenberg, in the preface to the Schwabenspiegel, § 20; Eichhorn, Deutsche R. und Rechts-Geschichte, vol. ii.; Gosselin, ii. p. 323 seq. Vide the passages in Friedberg, p. 29, No. 5; p. 87, No. 1. "The land law of the Sachsenspiegel, b. iii. a. 57, § 2, and the feudal law of the same code, art. 4, § 2, mention expressly the seven electors. The English ambassadors in Rome under Urban IV. mentioned them in their judicial statement in favour of Richard of Cornwall, according to Urban's letter to Richard (Raynald. a. 1263, n. 53). Cf. Hefele, vi. p. 18, No. 1. Nicholas of Cusa thought they had been appointed by the Emperor Henry II. with the consent of the nobles and people. Cf. Düx, Nicholas of Cusa, vol. ii. p. 303. Thomassin (P. iii. 1. i. c. xxx. n. 18) places their origin in the second half of the thirteenth century. Adolphus of Nassau a man of small account. § 2. could not aspire to the empire; he was Albert of Austria, who conquered and slew him in 1298, was acknowledged King of the Romans for the first time in 1303.1 He despatched a letter to Rome, promising fidelity and obedience, and fully recognised that the Roman See had conferred upon the German princes the power of electing the King of the Romans and future emperor.2 He promised also not to send any imperial vicar to Tuscany or Lombardy for five years without the consent of the Pope, and to fight against the enemies of the Church. On the 1st May 1308, Albert was murdered by his nephew John. Rayn. a. 1302, n. 2 seq. Böhmer, p. 231 seq. 243. 2 Rayn. a. 1303, n. 8-13. Pertz, ii. 483, 484. Böhmer, p. 235. Albert acknowledged: Quod jus elegendi Romanorum regem in imperatorem postmodum promovendum certis principibus ecclesiasticis et saecularibus est ab eadem Sede (sc. Ap.) concessum, a qua reges et imperatores, qui fuerunt et erunt pro tempore, recipiunt temporalis gladii potestatem ad vindictam malefactorum laudem vero bonorum.' He avows: Quod Romanorum reges in imperatores postmodum promovendi per Sedem eamdem ad hoc potissime ac specialiter assumuntur, ut sint S. Romanae Ecclesiae advocati, Catholicae fidei ac ejusdem Ecclesiae praecipui defensores.' Albert also fully acknowledges what appears to Huber (p. 37) as Papal usurpation. § 3. Philip the Fair of France endeavoured to obtain the vacant imperial throne for his brother Charles of Valois; but the Pope, through Cardinal Prato, brought his influence to bear upon the spiritual electors, and in 1308, Henry of Lutzelburg was unanimously elected. Henry's ambassadors took the customary oaths relative to the protection of the Pope and of the Church,2 and he renewed them in person at Lausanne in October 1310. On the 6th January 1311 he was crowned King of the Lombards at Milan, and received the imperial crown from the hands of the cardinal delegates at the Lateran on the 29th June 1312.3 Henry thought that as emperor he was monarch of all the world, and that all kings were subject to him; but as he was not powerful enough to maintain his position over the various parties in the empire, he shortly found himself merely leader of the Ghibellines. He quarrelled with King Robert of Naples, whom he treated as a simple vassal, whereas he was so only as far as his earldom of Provence was concerned. When (before Henry's coronation as emperor) Clement V. bade both him and Robert conclude a peace and recall their troops from Rome, appealing to the oaths each had taken to the Holy See, Henry, surrounded as Frederick Barbarossa used to be with a crowd of lawyers, protested that in their opinion it was quite unlawful to put him and his vassals on a par, and to ascribe to him an oath of fidelity which he had never sworn, and thus to slight the imperial dignity. At the same time he declared himself willing, from affection for the Pope, not to make war upon 1 |