that purpose depended, as the anarchy of the recent interregnum
shewed, upon the presence of the recognized feudal head.
[Sidenote: Decline of the regal power in Germany as compared with
France and England.]
That head, however, was no longer what he had been. The relative
position of Germany and France was now exactly the reverse of that
which they had occupied two centuries earlier. Rudolf was as
conspicuously a weaker sovereign than Philip III of France, as the
Franconian Emperor Henry III had been stronger than the Capetian
Philip I. In every other state of Europe the tendency of events had
been to centralize the administration and increase the power of the
monarch, even in England not to diminish it: in Germany alone had
political union become weaker, and the independence of the princes
more confirmed. The causes of this change are not far to seek. They
all resolve themselves into this one, that the German king attempted
too much at once. The rulers of France, where manners were less rude
than in the other Transalpine lands, and where the Third Estate rose
into power more quickly, had reduced one by one the great feudataries
by whom the first Capetians had been scarcely recognized. The English
kings had annexed Wales, Cumbria, and part of Ireland, had obtained a
prerogative great if not uncontrolled, and exercised no doubtful sway
through every corner of their country. Both had won their successes by
the concentration on that single object of their whole personal
activity, and by the skilful use of every device whereby their feudal
rights, personal, judicial, and legislative, could be applied to
fetter the vassal. Meantime the German monarch, whose utmost efforts
it would have needed to tame his fierce barons and maintain order
through wide territories occupied by races unlike in dialect and
customs, had been struggling with the Lombard cities and the Normans
of South Italy, and had been for full two centuries the object of the
unrelenting enmity of the Roman pontiff. And in this latter contest,
by which more than by any other the fate of the Empire was decided, he
fought under disadvantages far greater than his brethren in England
and France. William the Conqueror had defied Hildebrand, William Rufus
had resisted Anselm; but the Emperors Henry the Fourth and Barbarossa
had to cope with prelates who were Hildebrand and Anselm in one; the
spiritual heads of Christendom as well as the primates of their
special realm, the Empire. And thus, while the ecclesiastics of
Germany were a body more formidable from their possessions than those
of any other European country, and enjoying far larger privileges, the
Emperor could not, or could with far less effect, win them over by
invoking against the Pope that national feeling which made the cry of
Gallican liberties so welcome even to the clergy of France.
[Sidenote: Relations of the Papacy and the Empire.]
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