Nor does it appear that authority was ever exercised by any Emperor in
Spain. Nevertheless the choice of Alfonso X by a section of the German
electors, in A.D. 1258, may be construed to imply that the Spanish
kings were members of the Empire. And when, A.D. 1053, Ferdinand the
Great of Castile had, in the pride of his victories over the Moors,
assumed the title of 'Hispaniæ Imperator,' the remonstrance of Henry
III declared the rights of Rome over the Western provinces indelible,
and the Spaniard, though protesting his independence, was forced to
resign the usurped dignity[207].
[Sidenote: England.]
No act of sovereignty is recorded to have been done by any of the
Emperors in England, though as heirs of Rome they might be thought to
have better rights over it than over Poland or Denmark[208]. There
was, however, a vague notion that the English, like other kingdoms,
must depend on the Empire: a notion which appears in Conrad III's
letter to John of Constantinople[209]; and which was countenanced by
the submissive tone in which Frederick I was addressed by the
Plantagenet Henry II[210]. English independence was still more
compromised in the next reign, when Richard I, according to Hoveden,
'Consilio matris suæ deposuit se de regno Angliæ et tradidit illud
imperatori (Henrico VIto) sicut universorum domino.' But as Richard
was at the same time invested with the kingdom of Arles by Henry VI,
his homage may have been for that fief only; and it was probably in
that capacity that he voted, as a prince of the Empire, at the
election of Frederick II. The case finds a parallel in the claims of
England over the Scottish king, doubtful, to say the least, as regards
the domestic realm of the latter, certain as regards Cumbria, which he
had long held from the Southern crown[211]. But Germany had no Edward
I. Henry VI is said at his death to have released Richard from his
submission (this too may be compared with Richard's release to the
Scottish William the Lion), and Edward II declared, 'regnum Angliæ ab
omni subiectione imperiali esse liberrimum[212].' Yet the idea
survived: the Emperor Lewis the Bavarian, when he named Edward III his
vicar in the great French war, demanded, though in vain, that the
English monarch should kiss his feet[213]. Sigismund[214], visiting
Henry V at London, before the meeting of the council of Constance, was
met by the Duke of Gloucester, who, riding into the water to the ship
where the Emperor sat, required him, at the sword's point, to declare
that he did not come purposing to infringe on the king's authority in
the realm of England[215]. One curious pretension of the imperial
crown called forth many protests. It was declared by civilians and
canonists that no public notary could have any standing, or attach any
legality to the documents he drew, unless he had received his diploma
from the Emperor or the Pope. A strenuous denial of a doctrine so
injurious was issued by the parliament of Scotland under James
III[216].
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account