A Source Book of Mediaeval History Part 49

71. Current Rumors Concerning the Life and Character of Frederick II.

Frederick II. (1194-1250), king of Naples and Sicily and emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, was a son of Emperor Henry VI. and a grandson of Frederick Barbarossa. When his father died (1197) it was intended that the young child's uncle, Philip of Hohenstaufen, should occupy the imperial throne temporarily as regent. Philip, however, proceeded to a.s.sume the position as if in his own right and became engaged in a deadly conflict with a rival claimant, Otto IV., during which the Pope, Innocent III., fanned the flames of civil war and made the situation contribute chiefly to the aggrandizement of papal authority in temporal affairs. In 1208 Philip was a.s.sa.s.sinated and in the following year Otto received the imperial crown at Rome. Almost immediately, however, disagreement broke out between the Pope and the new Emperor, chiefly because of the latter's ambition to become king of Sicily. Repenting that he had befriended Otto, Innocent promptly excommunicated him and set on foot a movement--in which he enlisted the services of Philip Augustus of France--to supplant the obnoxious Emperor by Frederick of Sicily (the later Frederick II.). Otto was a nephew of Richard I. and John of England and the latter was easily persuaded to enter into an alliance with him against the papal-French-Sicilian combination. The result was the battle of Bouvines [see p. 297], in 1214, in which John and Otto were hopelessly defeated. Meanwhile, in 1212, Frederick had received a secret emba.s.sy from Otto's discontented subjects in Germany, offering him the imperial crown if he would come and claim it. In response he had gathered an army and, with the approval of Innocent and of Philip Augustus, had crossed the Alps for the purpose of winning over the German people from Otto to himself. The battle of Bouvines (in which Frederick was not engaged, but from which he profited immensely) was the death-blow to Otto's cause and Frederick was soon recognized universally as head of the Empire.

The reign of Frederick II. (1212-1250) was a period of large importance in European history. The Emperor's efforts and achievements--his crusade, his great quarrel with Gregory IX. and Innocent IV., his legislation, his struggles with the Lombard League--were full of interest and significance, but, after all, not more so than the purely personal aspects of his career. Mr. Bryce has a pa.s.sage which states admirably the position of Frederick with reference to his age and its problems. A portion of it is as follows: "Out of the long array of the Germanic successors of Charles [Charlemagne], he is, with Otto III.,[550] the only one who comes before us with a genius and a frame of character that are not those of a Northern or a Teuton. There dwelt in him, it is true, all the energy and knightly valor of his father Henry and his grandfather Frederick I. But along with these, and changing their direction, were other gifts, inherited perhaps from his half Norman, half Italian mother and fostered by his education in Sicily, where Mussulman and Byzantine influences were still potent, a love of luxury and beauty, an intellect refined, subtle, philosophical. Through the mist of calumny and legend it is but dimly that the truth of the man can be discerned, and the outlines that appear serve to quicken rather than appease the curiosity with which we regard one of the most extraordinary personages in history. A sensualist, yet also a warrior and a politician; a profound law-giver and an impa.s.sioned poet; in his youth fired by crusading fervor, in later life persecuting heretics while himself accused of blasphemy and unbelief; of winning manners and ardently beloved by his followers, but with the stain of more than one cruel deed upon his name, he was the marvel of his own generation, and succeeding ages looked back with awe, not unmingled with pity, upon the inscrutable figure of the last emperor who had braved all the terrors of the Church and died beneath her ban, the last who had ruled from the sands of the ocean to the sh.o.r.es of the Ionian Sea. But while they pitied they condemned. The undying hatred of the papacy threw round his memory a lurid light; him and him alone of all the imperial line, Dante, the worshipper of the empire, must perforce deliver to the flames of h.e.l.l."[551]

The following selections from the _Greater Chronicle_ of Matthew Paris comprise some of the stories which were current in Frederick's day regarding his manners, ideas, and deeds. Frederick was far ahead of his age and it was inevitable that the qualities in him which men could not understand or appreciate should become the grounds for dark rumors and unsavory suspicions. Matthew Paris was an English monk of St. Albans. It is thought that he was called _Parisiensis_, "the Parisian," because of having been born or educated in the capital of France. He seems to have confined his attention wholly to the study of history, and mainly to the history of his own country. His _Chronicle_ takes up the story of English and continental affairs in detail with the year 1235 (where Roger of Wendover had stopped in his _Flowers of History_) and continues to the year 1259. His book has been described as "probably the most generally useful historical production of the thirteenth century."[552]

Source--Matthaeus Parisiensis, _Chronica Majora_ [Matthew Paris, "Greater Chronicle"]. Adapted from translation by J. A.

Giles (London, 1852), Vol. I., pp. 157-158, 166-167, 169-170; Vol. II., pp. 84-85, 103.

[Sidenote: Frederick suspected of heresy]

[Sidenote: Accusation of friendly relations with the Saracens]

In the course of the same year [1238] the fame of the Emperor Frederick was clouded and marred by his jealous enemies and rivals; for it was imputed to him that he was wavering in the Catholic faith, or wandering from the right way, and had given utterance to some speeches, from which it could be inferred and suspected that he was not only weak in the Catholic faith, but--what was a much greater and more serious crime--that there was in him an enormity of heresy, and the most dreadful blasphemy, to be detested and execrated by all Christians. For it was reported that the Emperor Frederick had said (although it may not be proper to mention it) that three imposters had so craftily deceived their contemporaries as to gain for themselves the mastery of the world: these were Moses, Jesus, and Mahomet [Mohammed]; and that he had impiously given expression to some wicked and incredible ravings and blasphemies respecting the most holy Eucharist. Far be it from any discreet man, much less a Christian, to employ his tongue in such raving blasphemy. It was also said by his rivals that the Emperor agreed with and believed in the law of Mahomet more than that of Jesus Christ. A rumor also crept amongst the people (which G.o.d forbid to be true of such a great prince) that he had been for a long time past in alliance with the Saracens, and was more friendly to them than to the Christians; and his rivals, who were endeavoring to blacken his fame, attempted to establish this by many proofs. Whether they sinned or not, He alone knows who is ignorant of nothing....

[Sidenote: Frederick's seizure of the lands belonging to a bishop]

[Sidenote: Refusing to restore them, he is excommunicated]

In Lent, of the same year [1239], seeing the rash proceedings of the Emperor, and that his words pleaded excuse for his sins,--namely, that by the a.s.sistance of some of the n.o.bles and judges of Sardinia he had taken into his own possession, and still held, the land and castles of the bishop of Sardinia, and constantly declared that they were a portion of the Empire, and that he by his first and chief oath would preserve the rights of the Empire to the utmost of his power, and would also collect the scattered portions of it,--the Pope[553] was excited to the most violent anger against him. He set forth some very serious complaints and claims against the Emperor and wrote often boldly and carefully to him, advising him repeatedly by many special messengers, whose authority ought to have obtained from him the greatest attention, to restore the possessions he had seized, and to desist from depriving the Church of her possessions, of which she was endowed by long prescription. And, like a skilful physician, who at one time makes use of medicines, at another of the knife, and at another of the cauterizing instrument, he mixed threats with entreaties, friendly messages with fearful denunciations. As the Emperor, however, scornfully rejected his requests, and excused his actions by arguments founded on reason, his holiness the Pope, on Palm Sunday, in the presence of a great many of the cardinals, in the spirit of glowing anger, solemnly excommunicated the said Emperor Frederick, as though he would at once have hurled him from his imperial dignity, consigning him with terrible denunciations to the possession of Satan at his death; and, as it were, thundering forth the fury of his anger, he excited terror in all his hearers....[554]

[Sidenote: Frederick accuses the Pope of ingrat.i.tude and jealousy]

The Emperor, on hearing of this, was inflamed with violent anger, and with oft-repeated reproaches accused the Church and its rulers of ingrat.i.tude to him, and of returning evil for good. He recalled to their recollection how he had exposed himself and his property to the billows and to a thousand kinds of danger for the advancement of the Church's welfare and the increase of the Catholic faith, and affirmed that whatever honors the Church possessed in the Holy Land had been acquired by his toil and industry. "But," said he, "the Pope, jealous at such a happy increase being acquired for the Church by a layman, and who desires gold and silver rather than an increase of the faith (as witness his proceedings), and who extorts money from all Christendom in the name of t.i.thes, has, by all the means in his power, done his best to supplant me, and has endeavored to disinherit me while fighting for G.o.d, exposing my body to the weapons of war, to sickness, and to the snares of his enemies, after encountering the dangers of the unsparing billows. See what sort of protection is this of our father's! What kind of a.s.sistance in difficulties is this afforded by the vicar of Jesus Christ"!...[555]

[Sidenote: Further accusation of an alliance with the Saracens]

[Sidenote: His neglect of pious and charitable works]

"Besides, he is united by a detestable alliance with the Saracens,--has ofttimes sent messages and presents to them, and in turn received the same from them with respect and alacrity...; and what is a more execrable offense, he, when formerly in the country beyond sea, made a kind of arrangement, or rather collusion, with the sultan, and allowed the name of Mahomet to be publicly proclaimed in the temple of the Lord day and night; and lately, in the case of the sultan of Babylon [Cairo], who, by his own hands, and through his agents, had done irreparable mischief and injury to the Holy Land and its Christian inhabitants, he caused that sultan's amba.s.sadors, in compliment to their master, as is reported, to be honorably received and n.o.bly entertained in his kingdom of Sicily. He also, in opposition to the Christians, abuses the pernicious and horrid rites of other infidels, and, entering into an alliance of friendship with those who wickedly pay little respect to and despise the Apostolic See, and have seceded from the unity of the Church, he, laying aside all respect for the Christian religion, caused, as is positively a.s.serted, the duke of Bavaria, of ill.u.s.trious memory, a special and devoted ally of the Roman Church, to be murdered by the a.s.sa.s.sins. He has also given his daughter in marriage to Battacius, an enemy of G.o.d and the Church, who, together with his aiders, counsellors, and abettors, was solemnly expelled from the communion of the Christians by sentence of excommunication. Rejecting the proceedings and customs of Catholic princes, neglecting his own salvation and the purity of his fame, he does not employ himself in works of piety; and what is more (to be silent on his wicked and dissolute practices), although he has learned to practice oppression to such a degree, he does not trouble himself to relieve those oppressed by injuries, by extending his hand, as a Christian prince ought, to bestow alms, although he has been eagerly aiming at the destruction of the churches, and has crushed religious men and other ecclesiastical persons with the burden and persecution of his yoke. And it is not known that he ever built or founded either churches, monasteries, hospitals, or other pious places. Now these are not light, but convincing, grounds for suspicions of heresy being entertained against him."...

[Sidenote: Frederick's wrath at his excommunication]

When the Emperor Frederick was made fully aware of all these proceedings [i.e., his excommunication at Lyons] he could not contain himself, but burst into a violent rage and, darting a scowling look on those who sat around him, he thundered forth: "The Pope in his synod has disgraced me by depriving me of my crown.

Whence arises such great audacity? Whence proceeds such rash presumption? Where are my chests which contain my treasures?" And on their being brought and unlocked before him, by his order, he said, "See if my crowns are lost now;" then finding one, he placed it on his head and, being thus crowned, he stood up, and, with threatening eyes and a dreadful voice, unrestrainable from pa.s.sion, he said aloud, "I have not yet lost my crown, nor will I be deprived of it by any attacks of the Pope or the council, without a b.l.o.o.d.y struggle. Does his vulgar pride raise him to such heights as to enable him to hurl from the imperial dignity me, the chief prince of the world, than whom none is greater--yea, who am without an equal? In this matter my condition is made better: in some things I _was_ bound to obey, at least to respect, him; but now I am released from all ties of affection and veneration, and also from the obligation of any kind of peace with him." From that time forth, therefore, he, in order to injure the Pope more effectually and perseveringly, did all kinds of harm to his Holiness, in his money, as well as in his friends and relatives.

72. The Golden Bull of Charles IV. (1356)

The century following the death of Frederick II. (1250) was a period of unrest and turbulence in German history, the net result of which politically was the almost complete triumph of the princes, lay and clerical, over the imperial power. By 1350 the local magnates had come to be virtually sovereign throughout their own territories. They enjoyed the right of legislation and the privileges of coining money and levying taxes, and in many cases they had scarcely so much as a feudal bond to remind them of their theoretical allegiance to the Empire. The one principle of action upon which they could agree was that the central monarchy should be kept permanently in the state of helplessness to which it had been reduced. The power of choosing a successor when a vacancy arose in the imperial office had fallen gradually into the hands of seven men, who were known as the "electors" and who were recognized in the fourteenth century as possessing collective importance far greater than that of the emperor.

Three of these seven--the archbishops of Mainz, Trier, and Cologne--were great ecclesiastics; the other four--the king of Bohemia, the margrave of Brandenburg, the duke of Saxony, and the count palatine of the Rhine--were equally influential laymen. This electoral college first came into prominence at the election of Rudolph I. (of the House of Hapsburg) at the end of the Interregnum in 1273. From that time until the termination of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806 these seven men (eight after 1648 and nine after 1692) played a part in German history not inferior to that of the emperors. They imposed upon their candidates such conditions as they chose, and when the bearer of the imperial t.i.tle grew restive and difficult to control they did not hesitate to make war upon him, or even in extreme cases to depose him. It has been well said that never in all history have worse scandals been connected with any sort of elections than were a.s.sociated repeatedly with the actions of these German electors.

The central doc.u.ment in German const.i.tutional history in the Middle Ages is the Golden Bull of Emperor Charles IV. (1347-1378), promulgated in 1356. For a century prior to the reign of Charles the question of the imperial succession had been one of extreme perplexity. The electoral college had grown up to a.s.sume the responsibility, but this body rested on no solid legal basis and its acts were usually regarded as null by all whom they displeased, with the result that a civil war succeeded pretty nearly every election.

Charles was shrewd enough to see that the existing system could not be set aside; the electors were entirely too powerful to permit of that.

But he also saw that it might at least be improved by giving it the quality of legality which it had hitherto lacked. The result of his efforts in this direction was the Golden Bull, issued and confirmed at the diets of Nurnberg (Nuremberg) and Metz in 1356. The doc.u.ment, thenceforth regarded as the fundamental law of the Empire, dealt with a wide variety of subjects. It confirmed the electorship in the person of the king of Bohemia which had long been disputed by a rival branch of the family;[556] it made elaborate provision for the election of the emperor by the seven magnates; it defined the social and political prerogatives of these men and prescribed the relations which they should bear to their subjects, to other princes, and to the emperor; and it made numerous regulations regarding conspiracies, coinage, immunities, the forfeiture of fiefs, the succession of electoral princes, etc. In a word, as Mr. Bryce has put it, the doc.u.ment "confessed and legalized the independence of the Electors and the powerlessness of the crown."[557] Only a few selections from it can be given here, particularly those bearing on the methods of electing the emperor.

Source--Text in Wilhelm Altmann und Ernst Bernheim, _Ausgewahlte Urkunden zur Erlauterung der Verfa.s.sungsgeschichte Deutschlands im Mittelalter_ ["Select Doc.u.ments Ill.u.s.trative of the Const.i.tutional History of Germany in the Middle Ages"], 3rd ed., Berlin, 1904, pp.

54-83. Adapted from translation in Oliver J. Thatcher and Edgar H. McNeal, _Source Book for Mediaeval History_ (New York, 1905), pp. 284-295 _pa.s.sim_.

[Sidenote: Guarantee of safety of travel for the electors]

I. =1.= We decree and determine by this imperial edict that, whenever the electoral princes are summoned according to the ancient and praiseworthy custom to meet and elect a king of the Romans and future emperor, each one of them shall be bound to furnish on demand an escort and safe-conduct to his fellow electors or their representatives, within his own lands and as much farther as he can, for the journey to and from the city where the election is to be held. Any electoral prince who refuses to furnish escort and safe-conduct shall be liable to the penalties for perjury and to the loss of his electoral vote for that occasion.

[Sidenote: Penalties for violation of the safe-conduct of the electors]

=2.= We decree and command also that all other princes who hold fiefs from the Empire, by whatever t.i.tle, and all counts, barons, knights, clients, n.o.bles, commoners, citizens, and all corporations of towns, cities, and territories of the Empire, shall furnish escort and safe-conduct for this occasion to every electoral prince or his representatives, on demand, within their own lands and as much farther as they can. Violators of this decree shall be punished as follows: princes, counts, barons, knights, clients, and all others of n.o.ble rank, shall suffer the penalties of perjury, and shall lose the fiefs which they hold of the emperor or any other lord, and all their possessions; citizens and corporations shall also suffer the penalty for perjury, shall be deprived of all the rights, liberties, privileges, and graces which they have received from the Empire, and shall incur the ban of the Empire against their persons and property. Those whom we deprive of their rights for this offense may be attacked by any man without appealing to a magistrate, and without danger of reprisal; for they are rebels against the state and the Empire, and have attacked the honor and security of the prince, and are convicted of faithlessness and perfidy.

[Sidenote: Supplies for the use of the electors]

=3.= We also command that the citizens and corporations of cities shall furnish supplies to the electoral princes and their representatives on demand at the regular price and without fraud, whenever they arrive at, or depart from, the city on their way to or from the election. Those who violate this decree shall suffer the penalties described in the preceding paragraph for citizens and corporations. If any prince, count, baron, knight, client, n.o.ble, commoner, citizen, or city shall attack or molest in person or goods any of the electoral princes or their representatives, on their way to or from an election, whether they have safe-conduct or not, he and his accomplices shall incur the penalties above described, according to his position and rank.

[Sidenote: The electors to be summoned by the archbishop of Mainz]

=16.= When the news of the death of the king of the Romans has been received at Mainz, within one month from the date of receiving it the archbishop of Mainz shall send notices of the death and the approaching election to all the electoral princes. But if the archbishop neglects or refuses to send such notices, the electoral princes are commanded on their fidelity to a.s.semble on their own motion and without summons at the city of Frankfort,[558] within three months from the death of the emperor, for the purpose of electing a king of the Romans and future emperor.

=17.= Each electoral prince or his representatives may bring with him to Frankfort at the time of the election a retinue of 200 hors.e.m.e.n, of whom not more than 50 shall be armed.

[Sidenote: How a vote might be forfeited]

=18.= If any electoral prince, duly summoned to the election, fails to come, or to send representatives with credentials containing full authority, or if he (or his representatives) withdraws from the place of the election before the election has been completed, without leaving behind subst.i.tutes fully accredited and empowered, he shall lose his vote in that election.

[Sidenote: The oath taken by the electors]

II. =2.=[559] "I, archbishop of Mainz, archchancellor of the Empire for Germany,[560] electoral prince, swear on the holy gospels here before me, and by the faith which I owe to G.o.d and to the Holy Roman Empire, that with the aid of G.o.d, and according to my best judgment and knowledge, I will cast my vote, in this election of the king of the Romans and future emperor, for a person fitted to rule the Christian people. I will give my voice and vote freely, uninfluenced by any agreement, price, bribe, promise, or anything of the sort, by whatever name it may be called. So help me G.o.d and all the saints."

[Sidenote: Provision to ensure an election]

=3.= After the electors have taken this oath, they shall proceed to the election, and shall not depart from Frankfort until the majority have elected a king of the Romans and future emperor, to be ruler of the world and of the Christian people. If they have not come to a decision within thirty days from the day on which they took the above oath, after that they shall live upon bread and water and shall not leave the city until the election has been decided.

[Sidenote: Order of precedence of the three archbishops]

III. =1.= To prevent any dispute arising between the archbishops of Trier, Mainz, and Cologne, electoral princes of the Empire, as to their priority and rank in the diet,[561] it has been decided and is hereby decreed, with the advice and consent of all the electoral princes, ecclesiastical and secular, that the archbishop of Trier shall have the seat directly opposite and facing the emperor; that the archbishop of Mainz shall have the seat at the right of the emperor when the diet is held in the diocese or province of Mainz, or anywhere in Germany except in the diocese of Cologne; that the archbishop of Cologne shall have the seat at the right of the emperor when the diet is held in the diocese or province of Cologne, or anywhere in Gaul or Italy. This applies to all public ceremonies--court sessions, conferring of fiefs, banquets, councils, and all occasions on which the princes meet with the emperor for the transaction of imperial business. This order of seating shall be observed by the successors of the present archbishops of Cologne, Trier, and Mainz, and shall never be questioned.

[Sidenote: Seating arrangement at table]

IV. =1.= In the imperial diet, at the council-board, table, and all other places where the emperor or king of the Romans meets with the electoral princes, the seats shall be arranged as follows: On the right of the emperor, first, the archbishop of Mainz, or of Cologne, according to the province in which the meeting is held, as arranged above; second, the king of Bohemia, because he is a crowned and anointed prince; third, the count palatine of the Rhine; on the left of the emperor, first, the archbishop of Cologne, or of Mainz; second, the duke of Saxony; third, the margrave of Brandenburg.

[Sidenote: The order of voting]

=2.= When the imperial throne becomes vacant, the archbishop of Mainz shall have the authority, which he has had from of old, to call the other electors together for the election. It shall be his peculiar right also, when the electors have convened for the election, to collect the votes, asking each of the electors separately in the following order: first, the archbishop of Trier, who shall have the right to the first vote, as he has had from of old; then the archbishop of Cologne, who has the office of first placing the crown upon the head of the king of the Romans; then the king of Bohemia, who has the priority among the secular princes because of his royal t.i.tle; fourth, the count palatine of the Rhine; fifth, the duke of Saxony; sixth, the margrave of Brandenburg. Then the princes shall ask the archbishop of Mainz in turn to declare his choice and vote. At the diet, the margrave of Brandenburg shall offer water to the emperor or king, to wash his hands; the king of Bohemia shall have the right to offer him the cup first, although, by reason of his royal dignity, he shall not be bound to do this unless he desires; the count palatine of the Rhine shall offer him food; and the duke of Saxony shall act as his marshal in the accustomed manner.

[Sidenote: Judicial privileges of the electors confirmed and enlarged]

XI. =1.= We decree also that no count, baron, n.o.ble, va.s.sal, burggrave,[562] knight, client, citizen, burgher, or other subject of the churches of Cologne, Mainz, or Trier, of whatever status, condition, or rank, shall be cited, haled, or summoned to any authority before any tribunal outside of the territories, boundaries, and limits of these churches and their dependencies, or before any judge, except the archbishop and their judges.... We refuse to hear appeals based upon the authority of others over the subjects of these princes; if these princes are accused by their subjects of injustice, appeal shall lie to the imperial diet, and shall be heard there and nowhere else.

=2.= We extend this right by the present law to the secular electoral princes, the count palatine of the Rhine; the duke of Saxony, and the margrave of Brandenburg, and to their heirs, successors, and subjects forever.