$Unique_ID{bob00882}
$Pretitle{}
$Title{History Of Europe During The Middle Ages
Part I}
$Subtitle{}
$Author{Hallam, Henry}
$Affiliation{}
$Subject{henry
footnote
germany
frederic
upon
otho
struvius
son
princes
conrad}
$Date{}
$Log{}
Title:       History Of Europe During The Middle Ages
Book:        Book V: History Of Germany To The Diet Of Worms In 1495
Author:      Hallam, Henry

Part I

     Sketch of German History under the Emperors of the House of Saxony -
House of Franconia - Henry IV. - House of Suabia - Frederic Barbarossa - Fall
of Henry the Lion - Frederic II. - Extinction of House of Suabia - Changes in
the Germanic Constitution - Electors - Territorial Sovereignty of the Princes
- Rodolph of Hapsburg - State of the Empire after his Time - Causes of Decline
of Imperial Power - House of Luxemburg - Charles IV. - Golden Bull - House of
Austria Frederic III. - Imperial Cities - Provincial States - Maximilian -
Diet of Worms - Abolition of Private Wars - Imperial Chamber - Aulic Council -
Bohemia - Hungary - Switzerland.

     After the deposition of Charles the Fat in 888, which finally severed the
connection between France and Germany, ^a Arnulf, an illegitimate descendant
of Charlemagne, obtained the throne of the latter country, in which he was
succeeded by his son Louis. ^b But upon the death of this prince in 911, the
German branch of that dynasty became extinct.  There remained indeed Charles
the Simple, acknowledged as king in some parts of France, but rejected in
others, and possessing no personal claims to respect.  The Germans therefore
wisely determined to choose a sovereign from among themselves.  They were at
this time divided into five nations, each under its own duke, and
distinguished by difference of laws, as well as of origin: the Franks, whose
territory, comprising Franconia and the modern Palatinate, was considered as
the cradle of the empire, and who seem to have arrogated some superiority over
the rest, the Suabians, the Bavarians, the Saxons, under which name the
inhabitants of Lower Saxony alone and Westphalia were included, and the
Lorrainers, who occupied the left bank of the Rhine as far as its termination.
The choice of these nations in their general assembly fell upon Conrad Duke of
Franconia, according to some writers, or at least a man of high rank, and
descended through females from Charlemagne. ^c [A.D. 911.]

[Footnote a: There can be no question about this in a general sense.  But
several German writers of the time assert that both Eudes and Charles the
Simple, rival kings of France, acknowledged the feudal superiority of Arnulf.
Charles, says Regino, regnum quod usurpaverit ex manu ejus percepit.
Struvius, Corpus Hist. German, pp. 202, 203.  This acknowledgment of
sovereignty in Arnulf King of Germany, who did not even pretend to be emperor,
by both the claimants of the throne of France, for such it virtually was,
though they do not appear to have rendered homage, cannot affect the
independence of the crown in that age, which had been established by the
treaty of Verdun in 843, but proves the weakness of the competitors, and their
want of patriotism.  In Eudes it is more remarkable than in Charles the
Simple, a man of feeble character, and a Carlovingian by birth.]

[Footnote b: The German princes had some hesitation about the choice of Louis,
but their partiality to the Carlovingian line prevailed.  Struvius, p. 208:
quia reges Francorum semper ex uno genere procedebant, says an Archbishop
Hatto, in writing to the pope.]

[Footnote c: Schmidt, Hist. des Allemands, t. ii. p. 288.  Struvius, Corpus
Historiae Germanicae, p. 210.  The former of these writers does not consider
Conrad as Duke of Franconia.]

     Conrad dying without male issue, the crown of Germany was bestowed upon
Henry the Fowler, Duke of Saxony, ancestor of the three Othos, who followed
him in direct succession.  [A.D. 919.] To Henry, and to the first Otho (Otho
I., A. D. 936; Otho II., 973; Otho III., 983), Germany was more indebted than
to any sovereign since Charlemagne.  The conquest of Italy, and recovery of
the imperial title, are indeed the most brilliant trophies of Otho the Great;
but he conferred far more unequivocal benefits upon his own country by
completing what his father had begun, her liberation from the inroads of the
Hungarians.  Two marches, that of Misnia, erected by Henry the Fowler, and
that of Austria, by Otho, were added to the Germanic territories by their
victories. ^d

[Footnote d: Many towns in Germany, especially on the Saxon frontier, were
built by Henry I., who is said to have compelled every ninth man to take up
his residence in them.  This had a remarkable tendency to promote the
improvement of that territory, and, combined with the discovery of the gold
and silver mines of Goslar under Otho I., rendered it the richest and most
important part of the empire.  Struvius, pp. 225 and 251.  Schmidt, t. ii. p.
322.  Putter, Historical Development of the German Constitution, vol. i. p.
115.]

     A lineal succession of four descents without the least opposition seems
to show that the Germans were disposed to consider their monarchy as fixed in
the Saxon family.  Otho II. and III. had been chosen each in his father's
lifetime, and during legal infancy.  The formality of election subsisted at
that time in every European kingdom; and the imperfect rights of birth
required a ratification by public assent.  If at least France and England were
hereditary monarchies in the tenth century, the same may surely be said of
Germany; since we find the lineal succession fully as well observed in the
last as in the former.  But upon the early and unexpected decease of Otho
III., a momentary opposition was offered to Henry Duke of Bavaria, a
collateral branch of the reigning family.  [A.D. 1002.] He obtained the crown,
however, by what contemporary historians call an hereditary title, ^e and it
was not until his death in 1024 that the house of Saxony was deemed to be
extinguished.

[Footnote e: A maxima multitudine vox una respondit; Henricum, Christi
adjutoria, et jure haereditario, regnaturum.  Ditmar apud Struvium, p. 273.
See other passages quoted in the same place.  Schmidt, t. ii. p. 410.]

     No person had now any pretensions that could interfere with the unbiassed
suffrages of the nation; and accordingly a general assembly was determined by
merit to elect Conrad, surnamed the Salic, a nobleman of Franconia. ^f [A.D.
1024.] From this prince sprang three successive emperors, Henry III., IV., and
V. (Henry III., A.D. 1039; Henry IV., 1056; Henry V., 1106).  Perhaps the
imperial prerogatives over that insubordinate confederacy never reached so
high a point as in the reign of Henry III., the second emperor of the house of
Franconia.  It had been, as was natural, the object of all his predecessors,
not only to render their throne hereditary, which, in effect, the nation was
willing to concede, but to surround it with authority sufficient to control
the leading vassals.  These were the dukes of the four nations of Germany,
Saxony, Bavaria, Suabia, and Franconia, and the three archbishops of the
Rhenish cities, Mentz, Treves, and Cologne.  Originally, as has been more
fully shown in another place, duchies, like counties, were temporary
governments, bestowed at the pleasure of the crown.  From this first stage
they advanced to hereditary offices, and finally to patrimonial fiefs. But
their progress was much slower in Germany than in France.  Under the Saxon
line of emperors, it appears probable that, although it was usual, and
consonant to the prevailing notions of equity, to confer a duchy upon the
nearest heir, yet no positive rule enforced this upon the emperor, and some
instances of a contrary proceeding occurred. ^g But, if the royal prerogative
in this respect stood higher than in France, there was a countervailing
principle that prohibited the emperor from uniting a fief to his domain, or
even retaining one which he had possessed before his accession.  Thus Otho the
Great granted away his duchy of Saxony, and Henry II. that of Bavaria.  Otho
the Great endeavored to counteract the effects of this custom by conferring
the duchies that fell into his hands upon members of his own family.  This
policy, though apparently well conceived, proved of no advantage to Otho, his
son and brother having mixed in several rebellions against him.  It was
revived, however, by Conrad II. and Henry III.  The latter was invested by his
father with the two duchies of Suabia and Bavaria.  Upon his own accession he
retained the former for six years, and even the latter for a short time.  The
duchy of Franconia, which became vacant, he did not regrant, but endeavored to
set a precedent of uniting fiefs to the domain.  At another time, after
sentence of forfeiture against the Duke of Bavaria, he bestowed that great
province on his wife, the Empress Agnes. ^h He put an end altogether to the
form of popular concurrence, which had been usual when the investiture of a
duchy was conferred; and even deposed dukes by the sentence of a few princes,
without the consent of the diet. ^i If we combine with these proofs of
authority in the domestic administration of Henry III. his almost unlimited
control over papal elections, or rather the right of nomination that he
acquired, we must consider him as the most absolute monarch in the annals of
Germany.

[Footnote f: Conrad was descended from a daughter of Otho the Great, and also
from Conrad I.  His first cousin was Duke of Franconia.  Struvius; Schmidt;
Pfeffel.]

[Footnote g: Schmidt, t. ii. pp. 293, 403.  Struvius, p. 214, supposes the
hereditary rights of dukes to have commenced under Conrad I.; but Schmidt is
perhaps a better authority; and Struvius afterwards mentions the refusal of
Otho I. to grant the duchy of Bavaria to the sons of the last duke, which,
however, excited a rebellion.  p. 235.]

[Footnote h: Schmidt, t. iii. pp. 25, 37.]

[Footnote i: Id., p. 207.]

     These ambitious measures of Henry III. prepared fifty years of calamity
for his son.  It is easy to perceive that the misfortunes of Henry IV. were
primarily occasioned by the jealousy with which repeated violations of their
constitutional usages had inspired the nobility. ^j The mere circumstance of
Henry IV.'s minority, under the guardianship of a woman, was enough to
dissipate whatever power his father had acquired. Hanno, archbishop of Mentz,
carried the young king away by force from his mother, and governed Germany in
his name; till another archbishop, Adalbert of Bremen, obtained greater
influence over him.  Through the neglect of his education, Henry grew up with
a character not well fitted to retrieve the mischief of so unprotected a
minority; brave indeed, well-natured, and affable, but dissolute beyond
measure, and addicted to low and debauched company.  He was soon involved in a
desperate war with the Saxons, a nation valuing itself on its populousness and
riches, jealous of the house of Franconia, who wore a crown that had belonged
to their own dukes, and indignant at Henry's conduct in erecting fortresses
throughout their country.  [A.D. 1073.]

[Footnote j: In the very first year of Henry's reign, while he was but six
years old, the princes of Saxony are said by Lambert of Aschaffenburg to have
formed a conspiracy to depose him, out of resentment for the injuries they had
sustained from his father.  Struvius, p. 306.  St. Marc, t. iii. p. 248.]

     In the progress of this war many of the chief princes evinced an
unwillingness to support the emperor. ^k Notwithstanding this, it would
probably have terminated, as other rebellions had done, with no permanent loss
to either party.  But in the middle of this contest another far more memorable
broke out with the Roman see, concerning ecclesiastical investitures.  The
motives of this famous quarrel will be explained in a different book of the
present work.  Its effect in Germany was ruinous to Henry.  A sentence, not
only of excommunication, but of deposition, which Gregory VII. pronounced
against him, gave a pretence to all his enemies, secret as well as avowed, to
withdraw their allegiance. ^l [A.D. 1077.] At the head of these was Rodolph
Duke of Suabia, whom an assembly of revolted princes raised to the throne.  We
may perceive, in the conditions of Rodolph's election, a symptom of the real
principle that animated the German aristocracy against Henry IV.  It was
agreed that the kingdom should no longer be hereditary, not conferred on the
son of a reigning monarch, unless his merit should challenge the popular
approbation. ^m The pope strongly encouraged this plan of rendering the empire
elective, by which he hoped either eventually to secure the nomination of its
chief for the Holy See, or at least, by owing the seed of civil dissensions in
Germany, to render Italy more independent.  Henry IV., however, displayed
greater abilities in his adversity than his early conduct had promised. In the
last of several decisive battles, Rodolph, though victorious, was mortally
wounded; and no one cared to take up a gauntlet which was to be won with so
much trouble and uncertainty.  [A.D. 1080.] The Germans were sufficiently
disposed to submit; but Rome persevered in her unrelenting hatred.  At the
close of Henry's long reign she excited against him his eldest son, and, after
more than thirty years of hostility, had the satisfaction of wearing him down
with misfortune, and casting out his body, as excommunicated, from its
sepulchre.

[Footnote k: Struvius.  Schmidt.]

[Footnote l: A party had been already formed, who were meditating to depose
Henry.  His excommunication came just in time to confirm their resolutions.
It appears clearly, upon a little consideration of Henry IV.'s reign, that the
eccleciastical quarrel was only secondary in the eyes of Germany.  The contest
against him was a struggle of the aristocracy, jealous of the imperial
prerogatives which Conrad II. and Henry III. had strained to the utmost.
Those who were in rebellion against Henry were not pleased with Gregory VII.
Bruno, author of a history of the Saxon war, a furious invective, manifests
great dissatisfaction with the court of Rome, which he reproaches with the
court of Rome, which he reproaches with dissimulation and venality.]

[Footnote m: Hoc etiam ibi consensu communi comprobatum, Romani pontificis
auctoritate est corroboratum, ut regia potestas nulli per haereditatem, sicut
antea fuit consuetudo, cederet, sed filius regis, etiamsi valde dignus esset,
per electionem spontaneam, non per successionis lineam, rex proveniret: si
vero non esset dignus regis filius, vel si nollet eum populus, quem regem
facere vellet, haberet in potestate populus.  Bruno de Bello Saxonico, apud
Struvium, p. 327.]

     In the reign of his son Henry V. there is no event worthy of much
attention, except the termination of the great contest about investitures. At
his death in 1125 the male line of the Franconian emperors was at an end.
Frederic Duke of Suabia, grandson by his mother of Henry IV., had inherited
their patrimonial estates, and seemed to represent their dynasty.  [A.D.
1125.] But both the last emperors had so many enemies, and a disposition to
render the crown elective prevailed so strongly among the leading princes,
that Lothaire Duke of Saxony was elevated to the throne, though rather in a
tumultuous and irregular manner. ^n Lothaire, who had been engaged in a revolt
against Henry V., and the chief of a nation that bore an inveterate hatred to
the house of Franconia, was the natural enemy of the new family that derived
its importance and pretensions from that stock.  It was the object of his
reign accordingly, to oppress the two brothers, Frederic and Conrad, of the
Hohenstauffen or Suabian family.  By this means he expected to secure the
succession of the empire for his son-in-law.  Henry, surnamed the Proud, who
married Lothaire's only child, was fourth in descent from Welf, son of Azon
Marquis of Este, by Cunegonda, heiress of a distinguished family, the Welfs of
Altorf in Suabia.  Her son was invested with the duchy of Bavaria in 1071.
His descendant, Henry the Proud, represented also, through his mother, the
ancient dukes of Saxony, surnamed Billung, from whom he derived the duchy of
Luneburg.  The wife of Lothaire transmitted to her daughter the patrimony of
Henry the Fowler, consisting of Hanover and Brunswick.  Besides this great
dowry, Lothaire bestowed upon his son-in-law the Duchy of Saxony in addition
to that of Bavaria. ^o

[Footnote n: See an account of Lothaire's election by a contemporary writer in
Struvius, p. 357.  See also proofs of the dissatisfaction of the aristocracy
at the Franconian government.  Schmidt, t. iii. p. 328.  It was evidently
their determination to render the empire truly elective (Id. p. 335); and
perhaps we may date that fundamental principle of the Germanic constitution
from the accession of Lothaire.  Previously to that era, birth seems to have
been given not only a fair title to preference, but a sort of inchoate right,
as in France, Spain, and England.  Lothaire signed a capitulation at his
accession.]

[Footnote o: Pfeffel, Abrege Chronologique de l'Histoire d'Allemagne, t. i. p.
269.  (Paris, 1777.) Gibbon's Antiquities of the House of Brunswick.]

     This amazing preponderance, however, tended to alienate the princes of
Germany from Lothaire's views in favor of Henry; and the latter does not seem
to have possessed abilities adequate to his eminent station.  On the death of
Lothaire in 1138 the partisans of the house of Suabia made a hasty and
irregular election of Conrad, in which the Saxon faction found itself obliged
to acquiesce. ^p The new emperor availed himself of the jealousy which Henry
the Proud's aggrandizement had excited.  Under pretence that two duchies could
not legally be held by the same person, Henry was summoned to resign one of
them; and on his refusal, the diet pronounced that he had incurred a
forfeiture of both.  [A.D. 1138.] Henry made but little resistance, and before
his death, which happened soon afterwards, saw himself stripped of all his
hereditary as well as acquired possessions.  Upon this occasion the famous
names of Guelf and Ghibelin were first heard, which were destined to keep
alive the flame of civil dissension in far distant countries, and after their
meaning had been forgotten.  The Guelfs, or Welfs, were, as I have said, the
ancestors of Henry, and the name has become a sort of patronymic in his
family.  The word Ghibelin is derived from Wibelung, a town in Franconia,
whence the emperors of that line are said to have sprung.  The house of Suabia
were considered in Germany as representing that of Franconia; as the Guelfs
may, without much impropriety, be deemed to represent the Saxon line. ^q

[Footnote p: Schmidt.]

[Footnote q: Struvius, p. 370 and 378.]

     Though Conrad III. left a son, the choice of the electors fell, at his
own request, upon his nephew Frederic Barbarossa. ^r The most conspicuous
events of this great emperor's life belong to the history of Italy.  At home
he was feared and respected; the imperial prerogatives stood as high during
his reign as, after their previous decline, it was possible for a single man
to carry them. ^s But the only circumstance which appears memorable enough for
the present sketch is the second fall of the Guelfs.  Henry the Lion, son of
Henry the Proud, had been restored by Conrad III. to his father's duchy of
Saxony, resigning his claim to that of Bavaria, which had been conferred on
the margrave of Austria. [A.D. 1178.] This renunciation, which indeed was only
made in his name during childhood, did not prevent him from urging the Emperor
Frederic to restore the whole of his birthright; and Frederic, his
first-cousin, whose life he had saved in a sedition at Rome, was induced to
comply with this request in 1156.  Far from evincing that political jealousy
which some writers impute to him, the emperor seems to have carried his
generosity beyond the limits of prudence.  For many years their union was
apparently cordial.  But, whether it was that Henry took umbrage at part of
Frederic's conduct, ^t or that mere ambition rendered him ungrateful, he
certainly abandoned his sovereign in a moment of distress, refusing to give
any assistance in that expedition into Lombardy which ended in the
unsuccessful battle of Legnano.  Frederic could not forgive this injury, and,
taking advantage of complaints, which Henry's power and haughtiness had
produced, summoned him to answer charges in a general diet.  The duke refused
to appear, and, being adjudged contumacious, a sentence of confiscation,
similar to that which ruined his father, fell upon his head; and the vast
imperial fiefs that he possessed were shared among some potent enemies. ^u He
made an ineffectual resistance; like his father, he appears to have owed more
to fortune than to nature; and, after three years' exile, was obliged to
remain content with the restoration of his allodial estates in Saxony.  These,
fifty years afterwards, were converted into imperial fiefs, and became the two
duchies of the house of Brunswick, the lineal representatives of Henry the
Lion, and inheritors of the name of Guelf. ^v

[Footnote r: Ibid.]

[Footnote s: Pfeffel, p. 341.]

[Footnote t: Frederic had obtained the succession of Wolf Marquis of Tuscany,
uncle of Henry the Lion, who probably considered himself as entitled to expect
it.  Schmidt, p. 427.]

[Footnote u: Putter, in his Historical Development of the Constitution of the
German Empire, is inclined to consider Henry the Lion as sacrificed to the
emperor's jealousy of the Guelfs, and as illegally proscribed by the diet.
But the provocations he had given Frederic are undeniable; and, without
pretending to decide on a question of German history, I do not see that there
was any precipitancy or manifest breach of justice in the course of
proceedings against him.  Schmidt, Pfeffel, and Struvius do not represent the
condemnation of Henry as unjust.]

[Footnote v: Putter, p. 220.]

     Notwithstanding the prevailing spirit of the German oligarchy, Frederick
Barbarossa had found no difficulty in procuring the election of his son Henry,
even during infancy, as his successor. ^w The fall of Henry the Lion had
greatly weakened the ducal authority in Saxony and Bavaria; the princes who
acquired that title, especially in the former country, finding that the
secular and spiritual nobility of the first class had taken the opportunity to
raise themselves into an immediate dependence upon the empire.  Henry VI.
came, therefore, to the crown with considerable advantages in respect of
prerogative; and these inspired him with the bold scheme of declaring the
empire hereditary.  [A.D. 1190.] One is more surprised to find that he had no
contemptible prospect of success in this attempt: fifty-two princes, and even
what appears hardly credible, the See of Rome, under Clement III., having been
induced to concur in it. But the Saxons made so vigorous an opposition, that
Henry did not think it advisable to persevere. ^x He procured, however, the
election of his son Frederic, an infant only two years old.  But, the emperor
dying almost immediately, a powerful body of princes, supported by Pope
Innocent III., were desirous to withdraw their consent.  Philip Duke of
Suabia, the late king's brother, unable to secure his nephew's succession,
brought about his own election by one party, while another chose Otho of
Brunswick, younger son of Henry the Lion.  [A.D. 1197].  This double election
renewed the rivalry between the Guelfs and Ghibelins, and threw Germany into
confusion for several years.  Philip, whose pretensions appear to be the more
legitimate of the two, gained ground upon his adversary, notwithstanding the
opposition of the pope, till he was assassinated in consequence of a private
resentment.  Otho IV. reaped the benefit of a crime in which he did not
participate, and became for some years undisputed sovereign.  But, having
offended the pope by not entirely abandoning his imperial rights over Italy,
he had, in the latter part of his reign, to contend against Frederic, son of
Henry VI., who, having grown up to manhood, came into Germany as heir of the
house of Suabia, and, what was not very usual in his own history, or [A.D.
1208] that of his family, the favored candidate of the Holy See.  Otho IV. had
been almost entirely deserted except by his natural subjects, when his death,
in 1218, removed every difficulty, and left Frederic II. in the peaceable
possession of Germany.

[Footnote w: Struvius, p. 418.]

[Footnote x: Struvius, p. 424.  Impetravit a subditis, ut cessante pristina
Palatinorum electione, imperium in ipsius posteritatem, distincta proximorum
successione, transiret, et sic in ipso terminus esset electionis,
principiumque successivae dignitatis.  Gervas.  Tilburiens. ibidem.]

     The eventful life of Frederic II. was chiefly passed in Italy.  To
preserve his hereditary dominions, and chastise the Lombard cities, were the
leading objects of his political and military career.  He paid therefore but
little attention to Germany, from which it was in vain for any emperor to
expect effectual assistance towards objects of his own. Careless of
prerogatives which it seemed hardly worth an effort to preserve, he sanctioned
the independence of the princes, which may be properly dated from his reign.
In return, they readily elected his son Henry King of the Romans; and on his
being implicated in a rebellion, deposed him with equal readiness, and
substituted his brother Conrad at the emperor's request. ^y But in the latter
part of Frederic's reign the deadly hatred of Rome penetrated beyond the Alps.
After his solemn deposition in the council of Lyons, he was incapable, in
ecclesiastical eyes, of holding the imperial sceptre.  Innocent IV. found,
however, some difficulty in setting up a rival emperor.  Henry Landgrave of
Thuringia made an indifferent figure in this character.  [A.D. 1245.] Upon his
death, William Count of Holland was chosen by the party adverse to Frederic
and his son Conrad [A.D. 1248]; and after the emperor's death he had some
success against the latter.  It is hard indeed to say that any one was
actually sovereign for twenty-two years that followed the death of Frederic
II. [A.D. 1250 to 1272] - a period of contested title and universal anarchy,
which is usually denominated the grand interregnum.  On the decease of William
of Holland, in 1256, a schism among the electors produced the double choice of
Richard Earl of Cornwall, and Alfonso X. King of Castile.  It seems not easy
to determine which of these candidates had a legal majority of votes; ^z but
the subsequent recognition of almost all Germany, and a sort of possession
evidenced by public acts, which have been held valid, as well as the general
consent of contemporaries, may justify us in adding Richard to the imperial
list.  The choice indeed was ridiculous, as he possessed no talents which
could compensate for his want of power; but the electors attained their
objects: to perpetuate a state of confusion by which their own independence
was consolidated, and to plunder without scruple a man, like Didius at Rome,
rich and foolish enough to purchase the first place upon earth.

[Footnote y: Struvius, p. 457.]

[Footnote z: The election ought legally to have been made at Frankfort. But
the elector of Treves, having got possession of the town, shut out the
archbishops of Mentz and Cologne and the count palatine, on pretence of
apprehending violence.  They met under the walls, and there elected Richard.
Afterwards Alfonso was chosen by the votes of Treves, Saxony, and Brandenburg.
Historians differ about the vote of Ottocar King of Bohemia, which would turn
the scale.  Some time after the election it is certain that he was on the side
of Richard.  Perhaps we may collect from the opposite statements in Struvius,
p. 504, that the proxies of Ottocar had voted for Alfonso, and that he did not
think fit to recognize their act.

     There can be no doubt that Richard was de facto sovereign of Germany; and
it is singular that Struvius should assert the contrary, on the authority of
an instrument of Rodolph, which expressly designates him king, per quondam
Richardum regem illustrem.  Struv. p. 502.]

     That place indeed was now become a mockery of greatness.  For more than
two centuries, notwithstanding the temporary influence of Frederic Barbarossa
and his son, the imperial authority had been in a state of gradual decay.
From the time of Frederic II. it had bordered upon absolute insignificance;
and the more prudent German princes were slow to canvass for a dignity so
little accompanied by respect.  The changes wrought in the Germanic
constitution during the period of the Suabian emperors chiefly consist in the
establishment of an oligarchy of electors, and of the territorial sovereignty
of the princes.

     1. At the extinction of the Franconian line by the death of Henry V. it
was determined by the German nobility to make their empire practically
elective, admitting no right, or even natural pretension, in the eldest son of
a reigning sovereign.  Their choice upon former occasions had been made by
free and general suffrage.  But it may be presumed that each nation voted
unanimously, and according to the disposition of its duke. It is probable,
too, that the leaders, after discussing in previous deliberations the merits
of the several candidates, submitted their own resolutions to the assembly,
which would generally concur in them without hesitation.  At the election of
Lothaire, in 1124, we find an evident instance of this previous choice, or, as
it was called, praetaxation, from which the electoral college of Germany has
been derived.  The princes, it is said, trusted the choice of an emperor to
ten persons, in whose judgment they promised to acquiesce. ^a This precedent
was, in all likelihood, followed at all subsequent elections.  The proofs
indeed are not perfectly clear.  But in the famous privilege of Austria,
granted by Frederic I. in 1156, he bestows a rank upon the newly created duke
of that country, immediately after the electing princes (post principes
electores); ^b a strong presumption that the right of pretaxation was not only
established, but limited to a few definite persons.  In a letter of Innocent
III., concerning the double election of Philip and Otho in 1198, he asserts
the latter to have had a majority in his favor of those to whom the right of
election chiefly belongs (ad quos principaliter spectat electio). ^c And a law
of Otho in 1208, if it be genuine, appears to fix the exclusive privilege of
the seven electors. ^d Nevertheless, so obscure is this important part of the
Germanic system, that we find four ecclesiastical and two secular princes
concurring with the regular electors in the act, as reported by a contemporary
writer, that creates Conrad, son of Frederic II., King of the Romans. ^e This,
however, may have been an irregular deviation from the principle already
established. But it is admitted that all the princes retained, at least during
the twelfth century, their consenting suffrage; like the laity in an episcopal
election, whose approbation continued to be necessary long after the real
power of choice had been withdrawn from them. ^f

[Footnote a: Struvius, p. 357.  Schmidt, t. iii. p. 331.]

[Footnote b: Schmidt, t. iii. p. 390.]

[Footnote c: Pfeffel, p. 360.]

[Footnote d: Schmidt, t. iv. p. 80.]

[Footnote e: This is not mentioned in Struvius, or the other German writers.
But Denina (Rivoluzioni d'Italia, l. ix. c. 9) quotes the style of the act of
election from the Chronicle of Francis Pippin.]

[Footnote f: This is manifest by the various passages relating to the
elections of Philip and Otho, quoted by Struvius, pp. 428, 430.  See, too,
Pfeffel, ubi supra. Schmidt, t. iv. p. 79.]