and most solemn act, conferring the supreme civil power and the authority of chief protector of Christendom. Jaffe, Reg. p. 444. 1 Henry V.'s father had only been crowned by the Antipope Guibert, Clement III., in 1084. 2 Jaffé, n. 5079, p. 540: Nihil Henrice, de jure tuo vindicare sibi quaerit Ecclesia; nec regni nec imperii gloriam affectamus; obtineat Ecclesia quod Christi est, habeat imperator, quod suum est; si nos audire volueris, cum temporalis regni et imperii fastigio etiam aeterni regni gloriam consequeris.' 3 Hefele, Conc. v. p. 334. The regnum Teutonicum is quite different from the imperium, as is recognised by Gregory VII. in 1080 (1. viii. Ep. 9, Mansi, xx. 321; Jaffé, n. 3905, p. 436), by Paschal II. in 1105 and 1106 (Mansi, 1.c. p. 1209; Jaffé, pp. 490, 492, n. 4515, 4540), by Innocent II. in 1130 (Jaffé, n. 5318, 5321, p. 561), by Eugenius III. in 1148, 1149 (J. n. 6403, 6469, pp. 632, 636), by Alexander III. (Ep. 30, p. 103; Ep. 192, p. 257, ed. Migne), and frequently elsewhere. Otto Fris. Chron. vii. 18; Suger, in Vita Ludov. vi.; Chron. Maur. a. 1133; Baron. h.a. n. 1-4; Jaffé, p. 571. 5 Innocent II. on the 20th June 1130 writes to the German bishops (Jaffe, 1.c. n. 5321): Praedecessor siquidem noster f. m. P. Honorius pro unitate Ecclesiae conservanda et statu imperii in melius reformando, quod a vobis de eo (Loth.) factum fuerit, auctoritate apostolica confirmavit ipsumque pro suscipienda imperialis dignitatis plenitudine. . . . ad Sedem Apostolicam evocavit.' Cf. Ep. ap. Mansi, xxi. 428; J. n. 5320. Rex Romanorum' he is styled by Eugenius III. in the letter of December 11, 1146, as well as in several later ones (J. n. 6273, 6305, 6333, 6343, pp. 624, 626, 628). Imperator' is found once, it may be through an error of the copyist or dictating clerk, or possibly because the coronation was shortly expected to take place (Jaffé, n. 6402, p. 632). Pag. a. 1138, n. 3; a. 1149, n. 1. Bianchi, 1.c. § 7, n. 8. In the confirmation in 1138 of the privileges granted by Lothair to the monastery of Stablo, the words of the former privilege were repeated according to custom; but instead of 'imperialis sollicitudo' is put 'regia;' instead of imperium,' 'regnum.' Cf. the diploma in Migne, clxxxix. pp. 1467, 1471. Canute, King of Denmark, when seeking help from him, called him emperor, and looked upon it as his duty as 'pater justitiae filiusque pacis' to interfere on his behalf. In the same way the other pretender, Swen, placed himself under Conrad's protection. Otto Frising. de Gest. Frid. I. 1. i. c. xxviii. Wibald, Ep. 211, 212. 11 Card. de Arag. in Vita Hadr. Anon. Vat. ap. Baron. a. 1155. Thomassin, P. ii. 1. iii. c. lxv. n. 4 seq. 12 Ep. Conc. Papiens. (Pertz, Leg. ii. 126). Chron. Vinc. Prag. ap. Dobner, Mon. Hist. Boh. i. 68. Jaffe, p. 828. $ 6. In spite of Frederick's refusal to receive a democratic sovereignty from the favour of the Roman people, he was by no means disposed to submit to the views of the Pope and the Church concerning the imperial crown, as they had been understood since the time of Charles the Great. His was an imperious spirit, imbued with the notion of Roman law as expounded to him by the jurists of Bologna, especially at the diet held on the fields of Roncaglia (1158). His journey to the East, whither he had accompanied his uncle, Conrad III., had acquainted him with the absolute authority of the Greek emperor and the Saracen sultan. He desired, like a second Justinian, to be an absolute and independent ruler, and to reduce everything to submission to his sway-Pope, princes, and towns, especially the flourishing towns of Italy. He delighted in the phrases, I am lord of the world,' 'The will of the ruler is law.' He intended to make the Pope serve his ambitious purpose of universal dominion, and attack with the spiritual sword what Frederick desired to seize with the material sword. It was the same thing as Napoleon's demand on Pius VII.: My enemies must be also yours."3 Frederick disregarded the whole historical development of the Christian German Empire, and sought to restore the conditions and circumstances of the Roman Empire of old. But the universal feeling of the time was against this. Bishop Arnulf of Lisieux, in his speech at the opening of the Council at Tours* in 1163, only confirmed the words spoken by Cardinal Roland at Besançon in 1159, which were ill received at the time: 'From whom has the emperor received his empire (imperium) if not from the Pope 5 The biographer of St. Adalbert writes: 'Rome alone can make kings into emperors.' 16 This condition was at the root of the petition preferred by the Saxons to Gregory VII., as Bossuet has acknowledged. It asserted itself in spite of the many efforts of the Hohenstaufens against it. It was confirmed in the fourteenth century by Ludolf of Bebenberg, one of the most esteemed of jurists; also by many other writers.9 1 L. ix. ff. xiv. 2; 1. i. ff. i. 4. Radev. 1.c. ii. 4. 2 Joh. Sar. Ep. 59 (Migne, PP. Lat. cxcix. p. 39): Promittebat se totius orbis reformsturum imperium et urbi subjiciendum orbem eventnque facili omnia subacturum, si ei ad hoc solius Romani Pontificis favor adesset. Id enim agebat, ut in quemcumque denunciatis inimicitiis materialem gladium imperator in eumdem Rom. Pontifex spiritualem gladium exerceret.' 3 Letter of the 13th Feb. 1806. Artaud, Hist. de Pie VII. t. ii. c. xi. Pp. 131-134. Mansi, xxi. 1167 seq. Hefele, v. 542. Radev. 1. i. c. x. • Vita S. Adalb. Prag. ap. Mabillon, saec. 5, O.S.B. Pertz, M. vi. 590. 7 Bruno de Bello Saxon. et Vit. Henr. IV. ap. Urst. p. 382. Bossuet, 1.c. 1. i. sect. 1, c. xii. p. 109. Bossuet remarks on this passage, 1. iv. c. ix. p. 352: Quae profecto ostendunt, his jam temporibus in Rom. Pontifice fuisse notatum peculiare aliquod jus ad constituendum eum regem, qui postea imperator futurus esset, atque ad eum postea deponendum.' De zelo principum Germ. c. 7 seq. ed. Argent. 1609. Anon. de potest. Papae ap. Richer, Vindic. doct. maj. schol. Paris. Colon. 1683, iv. p. 188; Joh. de Parisiis, de pot. reg. et pap. c. xv. xvi. p. 107, Bossuet, 1.c. p. 351. $ 7. Frederick Barbarossa was already displeased with Hadrian IV. for the peace he had concluded with King William III., whereby Frederick was deprived of a pretext for making war on this prince, and thus of conquering Italy. His displeasure was fostered by a small party of ambitious cardinals, who were in close alliance with him. He also violated in many ways the Concordat of Worms, and did nothing for the release of the Archbishop of Lund, who had been taken prisoner in his dominions, although the Pope urged him to this duty. He wilfully misinterpreted Hadrian's complaints on this subject,1 poured out volleys of invective against Rome, and asserted that he had received the kingdom and the empire direct from God through his election by the princes. He endeavoured to gain the bishops of Germany to his side, and many of them wrote to the Pope from Frederick's point of view. His sovereign dignity appeared to him disparaged by an inscription on a painting in the church of the Lateran ; but later he owned himself satisfied with the Pope's explanation of the matter. Their reconciliation was, however, not complete, and the Pope soon had further cause to complain of the emperor, for his arbitrary appointments to bishoprics, and also concerning the decrees of Roncaglia with regard to the imperial rights of supremacy and the regalia, which were extended so widely. Frederick was ever on the watch for pretexts of complaint against the Pope; he neither listened to the Pope's demands nor gave admittance to his legates. Contrary to custom and respectful observance, he placed his own name in his letters before the name of the Pope. Hadrian IV. a few months before his death, on the 24th June 1159, sent him a solemn admonition, and death alone prevented him from excommunicating the emperor. 1 Radevic. de Gest. Frid. i. 9. Mansi, xxi. 789. Jaffé, n. 6991, p. 669.. 2 Radev. i. 10. Pertz, Leg. ii. 105. 3 Radev. i. 15, 16. Würdtwein, Nova subsid. Diplom. xiii. 33. Bossuet,. 1.c. c. ix. p. 352. Radev. i. 22. Mansi, 1.c. p. 793. J. n. 7036, p. 672. Hoc nomen,' the Pope wrote, ‘ex bono et facto est editum et dicitur beneficium apud nos non feudum, sed bonum factum.' The words contulimus tibi insigne imperialis coronae' are equal to imposuimus coronam.' Even Frederick says of the Pope (Ep. ad Otton. Fris.), 'benedictionem coronae Romani Imperii super caput nostrum effudit,' and quite separates the 'prima unctio regni Teutonici' from the coronation as emperor. Otto of Freising, i. 22, says: Imperii coronam accepit anno regni sui quarto.' 3 Cf. Döllinger, Lehrbuch der K.G. ii. p. 173 seq. against Bossuet, t. i. 1. iii. c. xviii. p. 312 seq. Vide Bianchi, t. ii. 1. v. § 13, n. 6 seq. p. 344 seq. As early as 865 Nicholas I. blamed a King of Britain for doing this. Mansi, xv. 471. J. n. 2118, p. 248. 7 Resipisce igitur, resipisce, tibi consulimus quia cum a nobis consecrationem et coronam merueris, dum inconcessa captas, ne concessa perdas tuae nobilitati timemus.' Mansi, xxi. 796. J. n. 7121, p. 677. § 8. Pope Alexander II., elected by a majority of the cardinals, was opposed by Octavian as antipope under the name of Victor IV. Victor was supported by the powerful protection of the emperor, who found in him a willing instrument. In vain did Alexander's electors, whose right had thus been violated, admonish the emperor to return to his duty of protecting the Church. In October 1159, Frederick convoked an 'Ecumenical Council' at Pavia, which was to settle the dispute; but he showed beforehand the bias of his decision by calling the antipope Bishop of Rome, and the lawfully elected Alexander only Cardinal Roland. It was impossible for Alexander III. to sub mit his just cause to an assembly held under the influence of the emperor. The Council, as Frederick intended, decided in favour of the antipope,2 invested him with the ring, and clothed him in the Papal robes3 (Feb. 1160). Alexander complained of Frederick's tyrannical proceedings in the States of the Church, of the illegal imprisonment of prelates returning to Rome, of the favour shown to the schismatic Octavian and his usurpation, and of the unjust decision of the Council of Pavia. At the same time he spared no pains to effect the conversion of the emperor, although after the Council at Pavia he excommunicated him, and, as the real cause of schism and devastator of the Church, released his subjects from their oath of allegiance.7 5 8 Frederick continued to uphold the schism, persecuted the Pope in Italy so much that he was obliged to seek refuge in France, intrigued against him even there, ill-treated his followers in his dominions, and after the death of the first antipope elected successively two others. Strict Catholics no longer regarded Frederick Barbarossa as emperor, and looked upon Alexander III. as the refuge of the liberties of the Church. The Pope's courageous firmness conquered at length. In November 1165 he returned to Italy, and continued to reside there. Frederick's reverses in the peninsula overthrew his military fame; and, humbled by misfortune, he renounced his schism at the peace of Venice in 1777, and was released from his excommunication. Alexander acted towards him at this time with so much moderation and magnanimity, that until his death, 30th August 1181, Frederick preserved for him esteem and friendship." New discords, however, arose between Frederick and the successors of Alexander, owing to the outrages of Frederick and his son Henry against the liberty of the Church and the Papal States. 10 1 'Qualiter ex imperialis officio dignitatis (S. R. Ecclesiam) protegere debeatis modis omnibus ac tueri.' Radev. ii. 23. Migne, PP. Lat. t. cc. p. 62. 2 Hefele, Conc. v. p. 509 seq. 3 Alex. III. Ep. 19 (Migne, l.c. p. 90; Jaffé, n. 7146, p. 681): Ceterum, ut praedictus imperator Ecclesiam Dei suae videretur subjugare et supponere ditioni et eam in supremam redigere servitutem, memorato Apostatico, sicut dictum est, pontificalia insignia reddidit et eum de papatu, quod est a saeculis inauditum, per annulum, prout dicitur, investivit. Sic enim reges et principes diversarum partium sibi intendit tum spirituali |