It remains only to speak of the person who should have been to Rome
what the national king was to the cities of France, or England, or
Germany, that is to say, of the Emperor. As has been said already, his
power was a mere chimera, chiefly important as furnishing a pretext to
the Colonna and other Ghibeline chieftains for their opposition to the
papal party. Even his abstract rights were matter of controversy. The
Popes, whose predecessors had been content to govern as the
lieutenants of Charles and Otto, now maintained that Rome as a
spiritual city could not be subject to any temporal jurisdiction, and
that she was therefore no part of the Roman Empire, though at the same
time its capital. Not only, it was urged, had Constantine yielded up
Rome to Sylvester and his successors, Lothar the Saxon had at his
coronation formally renounced his sovereignty by doing homage to the
pontiff and receiving the crown as his vassal. The Popes felt then as
they feel now, that their dignity and influence would suffer if they
should even appear to admit in their place of residence the
jurisdiction of a civil potentate, and although they could not secure
their own authority, they were at least able to exclude any other.
Hence it was that they were so uneasy whenever an Emperor came to them
to be crowned, that they raised up difficulties in his path, and
endeavoured to be rid of him as soon as possible. And here something
must be said of the programme, as one may call it, of these imperial
visits to Rome, and of the marks of their presence which the Germans
left behind them, remembering always that after the time of Frederick
the Second it was rather the exception than the rule for an Emperor to
be crowned in his capital at all.
[Sidenote: Their approach.]
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