In 1032 Rodolph of
Burgundy
died, after a long and
feeble rule.
feeble rule.
Cambridge Medieval History - v3 - Germany and the Western Empire
266 (#312) ############################################
266
The feudal edict of 1037
certainly as early as July 1036 decided to visit Italy for the second
time. The appeal of the opposing parties, therefore, came very oppor-
tunely. “If Italy hungers for law, I will satisfy her," he remarked on
receiving the news. He crossed the Brenner in December, spent Christmas
at Verona, and reached Milan early in the new year. On the day
following his arrival a popular rising occurred which was imputed, not
without some reason, to the instigation of Aribert. Lacking confidence
in his strength to deal with the situation in the stronghold of his
enernies, Conrad decided that all questions of difference should be deter-
mined at a diet to be held at Pavia in March. Here numerous com-
plaints were brought against the arrogant archbishop, foremost amongst
his accusers being Hugh, a member of the Otbertine family, who held
the countship of Milan. The Emperor demanded redress; the arch-
bishop defiantly refused to comply. Conrad, judging his conduct treason-
able, took the high-handed measure of thrusting him into prison under
the custody of Poppo, Patriarch of Aquileia, and Conrad, Duke of
Carinthia. Poppo, however, was not sufficiently watchful of his important
prisoner, and suffered for his negligence the displeasure of the Emperor.
A certain monk, Albizo by name, had been allowed to share with his
lord the hardships of prison; through his agency escape was effected.
One night, while the faithful Albizo feigned sleep in the bed of the
archbishop, the sheets drawn close over his head to prevent recognition,
Aribert in the harmless guise of a monk passed safely through his
gaolers, mounted a horse waiting in readiness, and rode in haste to Milan,
where he was welcomed with enthusiasm by the patriotic burghers.
With reinforcements brought by his son from Germany Conrad
besieged Milan, but without much success; it amounted only to some
indecisive fighting, the storming of a few strongholds, the devastation of
the surrounding country. But if the siege of Milan produced little
military result, it drew forth the most important constitutional act of
the reign, one of the most famous documents of feudal law, the edict
of 28 May 1037. This celebrated decree solved the question at issue
between the greater and the smaller vassals. As in Germany Conrad had
shewn himself in sympathy with the small tenants, so in Italy he now
secured to them and to their successors the possession of their lands
against unjust and arbitrary eviction by their lords. “No vassal of a
bishop, abbot, abbess, marquess, count, or of anyone holding an imperial
or ecclesiastical fief. . . . . shall be deprived of it without certain and proved
guilt, except according to the constitution of our ancestors and by the
judgment of his peers. " The next two clauses deal with the rights of
appeal against the verdict of the peers: in the case of the greater
vassals the hearing may be brought before the Emperor himself, in the
case of the smaller either before the overlords or before the Emperor's
missi for determination. Then, the succession of the fief is secured to the
son, to the grandson by a son, or, these failing, to the brother. Aliena-
## p. 267 (#313) ############################################
Proceedings against Archbishop Aribert
267
tion or exchange without the tenant's consent is prohibited; the Emperor's
right to the fodrum“as it was taken by our ancestors" is affirmed. Finally,
a penalty of a hundred pounds of gold, to be paid half to the imperial
treasury, half to the injured party, is enjoined for disobedience. By
these concessions the Emperor bound to his interests the strongest and
most numerous military class in North Italy, and at the same time struck
a blow at the dangerously powerful position of the Lombard episcopate.
The heat of the summer prevented any serious campaigning for some
months. The siege of Milan was raised, the army dispersed. The
Emperor, however, did not relinquish his efforts to overthrow the Arch-
bishop of Milan; in spite of the remonstrances of his son and many others,
he took the unprecedented step of deposing Aribert without reference to
an ecclesiastical synod. The Papacy was weak and submissive; John XIX
had allowed himself to be inscribed in a document among the fideles of
the Emperor'. He was now dead (1033), and his nephew, a bad man
certainly, but not so bad as he is painted in the scurrilous party literature
of the succeeding generation, young perhaps, but not the mere boy of
twelve he is usually accounted", was raised to the pontificate under the
name of Benedict IX. He, no doubt, cared little for the duties incumbent
on his office; at all events, when he visited the Emperor at Cremona, he
made no protest against the uncanonical action of Conrad. Aribert
retaliated by organising a conspiracy with Conrad's enemy and late rival
for the throne of Burgundy, Odo of Blois. But it soon collapsed; after
two incursions into Lorraine, Odo was defeated and killed at Bar on
15 November 1037 by Duke Gozelo. The three Lombard bishops of
Vercelli, Cremona, and Piacenza, who were implicated, were banished to
Germany.
Towards the end of the year Conrad again took the field, this time
with the object of ordering the affairs of the southern principalities. On
his march southward the burgbers of Parma revolted and were punished
by the destruction of their city (Christmas). At Spello the Emperor had
another interview with the Pope, who now imposed the sentence of ex-
communication on the Archbishop of Milan (Easter 1038). It was
probably also on this occasion that a constant source of confusion and
trouble in the Roman courts was removed; this was the indiscriminate
use of Lombard and Roman law, which gave rise to endless disputes
between Lombard and Roman judges. The Emperor's edict now esta-
blished that in Rome and Roman territory all cases should be determined
according to Roman law.
1
1 “Qualiter nos communi fidelium nostrorum decreto, pape scilicet Johannis et
Popponis patriarche venerabilis, Aribonis Moguntini archiepiscopi," etc. Cf. Bresslau
1, 148, n. 4.
2 See the suggestion of R. L. Poole (“Benedict IX and Gregory VI,” Proceedings
of the British Academy, Vol. viii. p. 217) that Rodulf Glaber misread a statement that
Benedict had been Pope per ann. xii. for puer ann. xii.
CH, XI.
## p. 268 (#314) ############################################
268
Affairs of South Italy
a
Conrad made the initial mistake in 1024 of liberating, at the request
of Guaimar, Prince of Salerno, Paldolf (Pandulf) IV of Capua, the wolf
of the Abruzzi, as Aimé of Monte Cassino calls him, who had been cap-
tured in Henry II's campaign of 1022 and since been held a close prisoner,
This act led to the recrudescence of Byzantine power in South Italy, for
Paldolf kept on friendly terms with the Greek government. The catapan
Bojannes at once set to work to put his valuable ally in possession of his
old principality; and in this he was assisted by Guaimar of Salerno, who
with lavish grants bought the support of some Norman adventurers under
Ranulf. This formidable combination made their first task the capture
of Capua. The town fell after a siege of eighteen months; Paldolf V of
Teano surrendered and Paldolf IV was restored. This was the situation
that Conrad was forced to recognise on his first Italian expedition in
April 1027. But Paldolf was not content with the mere recovery of his
former possessions. On the death of Guaimar, the only effective rival
to his power, he sought to extend his frontiers at the expense of his
neighbours. He captured Naples by treachery and drove out its duke,
Sergius IV. The latter was restored two years later by the aid of the
Norman bands of Ranulf; in reward for this service Ranulf was invested
with the territory of Aversa (1030), the nucleus of the Norman power in
South Italy, which was to be in the succeeding centuries one of the most
important factors in the history of Europe. Ranulf, a skilful but entirely
unscrupulous ruler, soon deserted his benefactor and allied himself with
Paldolf, who was now at the height of his power. The latter's rule, how-
ever, became daily more intolerable; and a body of malcontents, joined
soon by the renegade Ranulf, taking advantage of a quarrel between
Paldolf and Guaimar IV of Salerno, decided to appeal for the interven-
tion of the Emperors of the East and the West.
No response came from Constantinople. Conrad however, already in
Italy, accepted the invitation. Seemingly at Troia', the Emperor entered
into negotiations with Paldolf, ordered him to restore the property of the
Abbey of Monte Cassino which he had seized, and to release the prisoners
he had captured. Paldolf on his part sent his wife and son to ask for
peace, offering 300 pounds of gold in two payments, and his son and
daughter as hostages. The terms were accepted, the first half of the
indemnity paid; then the son escaped. Paldolf changed his attitude,
refused to carry out the rest of his bargain, and withdrew to the castle
of Sant' Agata. Conrad in the meantime entered Capua without resist-
ance and invested Guaimar with the principality. Capua and Salerno
were thus once more united in one hand as they had been under Paldolf
Ironhead in the days of Otto II. At the same time Conrad officially
recognised the new Norman colony at Aversa as a fief of the Prince of
Salerno.
1 So Bresslau, 11. p. 307, n. 1, following the notice in the Ann. Altah. 1038. But
cf. Chalandon, Hist. de la Domination Normande, 1. 83.
## p. 269 (#315) ############################################
Conrad's death
269
>
His work in the south completed, the Emperor returned northward.
On the march the troops suffered severely from the heat; pestilence
broke out in the camp, and many, among them Queen Gunnhild and
Herman, Duke of Swabia, perished; Conrad himself was overcome with
sickness. Under these circumstances it was impossible to renew the siege
of Milan. Leaving, therefore, injunctions with the Italian princes to
make an annual devastation of the Milanese territory, the Emperor
made his way back to Germany.
Conrad never recovered his strength. At Nimeguen in February 1039
he was overcome by a more severe attack of the gout; in May he was
well enough to be removed to Utrecht, where he celebrated the Whitsun
festival. But he grew rapidly worse, and died the following day (4 June).
His embalmed body was borne through Mayence and Worms to Spires,
the favourite city of the Salian emperors, and was buried in the crypt of
its cathedral church.
Conrad, once he had gained the mastery in his kingdom, was deter-
mined to secure the inheritance to his son; he was not only the first, but
by a definite policy the founder, of the Salian dynasty. So at Augsburg
in 1026 he designated his youthful son Henry, a boy of nine years old, as
his successor; his choice was approved by the princes, and the child was
duly crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle in 1028. The theory of hereditary suc-
cession seems to have been a guiding principle in the policy of Conrad II.
He had suffered himself from the absence of it; for his uncle, the
younger brother of his father, had acquired the Carinthian dukedom
of his grandfather, and on his death it had passed out of the family
altogether to the total disregard not only of his own claims, but also
of those of his cousin, the younger Conrad, the son of the late duke.
Adalbero of Eppenstein must in his eyes have been looked upon as an
interloper. Personal wrongs doubtless biassed his judgment when the
Duke of Carinthia was charged with treasonable designs at the Diet of
Bamberg in 1035. Adalbero was deposed and sentenced to the loss of
his fiefs. The court witnessed a strange scene before the verdict was
obtained; the assent of the young King Henry, as Duke of Bavaria, was
deemed necessary, and this the latter steadfastly refused to give; he was
bound, he afterwards explained, by an oath to Adalbero taken at the
instance of his tutor, Bishop Egilbert of Freising. Entreaties and
threats availed nothing; the son was obdurate, and the Emperor was
so incensed with passion that he fell senseless to the floor. When he
recovered consciousness he again approached his son, humbled himself
at his feet, and finally, by this somewhat undignified act, gained his
end'. But the successor to the fallen duke was well chosen; it was the
1 See the letter addressed to Bishop Azecho of Worms in Giesebrecht, 11. 712.
Cf. also Neues Archiv, m. 321.
CH, x.
## p. 270 (#316) ############################################
270
Hereditary Fiefs
Emperor's cousin, Conrad, who thus at this late hour stepped into the
dukedom of his father (1036)'.
It was not his aim, however, as sometimes has been suggested, to crush
the ducal power.
In one instance indeed he greatly strengthened it.
A powerful lord was required in the vulnerable border-land of Lorraine;
it was a wise step to reunite the two provinces on the death of Frederick
(1033) in the hands of Gozelo. In the case of Swabia the hereditary
principle prevailed. The rebellious Ernest who fell in the fight in the
Black Forest had no direct heir; “snappish whelps seldom have puppies,"
Conrad remarked on receiving the news of his death; but he had a brother,
and that brother succeeded. When the hereditary line failed, Conrad
followed the policy of Otto the Great of drawing the dukedoms into his
own family; in this way his son Henry acquired Bavaria after the death
of Henry of Luxemburg (1026)” and Swabia on the death of Herman in
Italy (1038).
In Italy, as we have seen, he definitely established by a legislative act
the principle of hereditary fiefs for the smaller and greater vassals alike.
There is no such decree for Germany; none at least has come down to us.
Yet there are indications which suggest that the Emperor, perhaps by
legal decision in the courts, perhaps by the acceptance of what was
becoming a common usage, sanctioned, indeed encouraged, the growing
tendency. Instances multiply of son succeeding father without question
or dispute; families become so firmly established in their possessions that
they frequently adopt the name of one of their castles. Wipo remarks
that Conrad won the hearts of the vassals because he would not suffer
their heirs to be deprived of the ancient fiefs of their forbears. Too
much weight may not be placed on this statement, but it is certain that
Conrad could rely in a marked degree upon the loyalty of the local
nobless. In the revolt of Ernest the nobility of Swabia supported not
their duke but their king; Adalbero after his deposition found himself
unable to raise his late subjects to rebellion. Such loyalty was unusual
in the earlier Middle Ages, and it seems a natural conclusion that these
knights of Swabia and Carinthia had reason to stand by Conrad. From
this rank of society the Emperor reinforced that body of officials, the
ministeriales, who later came to play so important a part at the courts of
the Salian emperors. Conrad's gallant and faithful friend and adviser,
Werner, who lost his life in the riot at Rome which followed the imperial
coronation, and who earned the honour of a grave beside the Emperor
Otto II at St Peter's, is perhaps the first as he is a typical representative
of this influential class.
Conrad II is usually depicted as the illiterate layman", the complete
1 The Carinthian mark (later, in 1056, the mark of Styria) was severed from the
duchy, and bestowed upon Arnold of Lambach.
2 Elected at Ratisbon, July 1027.
3 See Bresslau, 11. 368-374.
4 “Quamquam litteras ignoraret,” Wipo, c. 6.
## p. 271 (#317) ############################################
Relations with the Church
271
antithesis to the saintly Henry who preceded him. Undoubtedly he
sought from the outset of his reign to emancipate himself from the over-
weening power of the Church. He decided questions relating to the
Church on his own authority, often without reference to a Church synod.
He kept a firm hold on episcopal elections; he appointed his bishops and
expected a handsome gratuity from the man of his choice. From Udalrich,
elected to the see of Basle in 1025, we are frankly told that “the king
and queen received an immense sum of money. " Wipo adds that the
king was afterwards smitten with repentance, and swore an oath never
again to take money for a bishopric or abbacy, “an oath which he almost
succeeded in keeping! ” In truth the oath weighed but lightly on his
conscience and affected his practice not at all. If, however, he did nothing
to promote, he did little to hinder, reform. More than one of his
charters bestows lands on Cluniac houses, and by including the kingdom
of Burgundy (a stronghold of the reforming movement) in the Empire,
he insensibly advanced a cause with which he was out of sympathy. The
leaders of the reforming party, Richard, Abbot of St Vannes at Verdun,
and Poppo, Abbot of Stablo (Stavelot), made steady if slow progress in
their work, which met with the sympathetic encouragement of the
Empress Gisela. The ruins of the picturesque Benedictine abbey of
Limburg and the magnificent cathedral of Spires remind us that the
thoughts of Conrad, who once at least is described as “most pious,"
sometimes rose above things merely temporal.
Conrad above all realised the importance of increasing the material
resources on which the Empire depended. By careful administration he
increased the revenue from the crown lands; he revoked gifts made to the
Church by his too generous predecessors, and allocated to himself demesne
lands which had fallen into the hands of the dukes. The reign of Conrad
was a time of prosperity for Germany; he encouraged the small begin-
nings of municipal activity by grants of mint and market rights; the
peace was better kept. To Conrad the cause of justice came first among
the functions of royalty. A story is told of how the coronation procession
was interrupted by the complaints of a peasant, a widow, and an orphan,
and how Conrad, without hesitation and in spite of the remonstrances of
his companions, delayed the ceremony in order to award justice to the
plaintiffs. Stern, inexorable justice is a strong trait in his character.
This strong, capable, efficient ruler did much for his country. The allure-
ments of Italy, the mysteries of Empire, had led his predecessors to
neglect the true interests of Germany. It is to his credit that he restored
the strength of the German monarchy and increased enormously the per-
sonal influence and authority of the Crown. He prepared the way
for his
son, under whom the Holy Roman Empire reached the apogee of its
greatness.
1 “In quo voto pene bene permansit. ” Wipo, c. 7.
CH. .
## p. 272 (#318) ############################################
272
CHAPTER XII.
THE EMPEROR HENRY III.
The reign of Henry III is the summit of the older German imperialism.
The path uphill had been made by the persevering energy of the Saxon
kings and Emperors; under Henry's successors the Empire rushed, though
with glory, into ruin. Henry himself, sane, just, and religious, has the
approval of reason, but could never have raised the white-hot zeal, and
the fiercer hatred, which burned round the Hohenstaufen.
His father and mother were among those rare men and women who
wrest from circumstances their utmost profit. Conrad, trained by adver-
sity, attempting nothing vaguely or rashly, almost invariably attained
his object, and left the “East-Frankish ” Empire stronger within and
without than ever before. His education of his son in state-craft was
thorough and strenuous : very early he made him a sharer in his power, ,
and then shewed neither mistrust nor jealousy, even when faced by
markedly independent action. Henry, for his part, though he judged
adversely some of his father's conduct, honoured him and kept his memory
in affection.
Henry's mother Gisela (of the blood of Charlemagne, of the royal
house of Burgundy, and heiress of Swabia) used fortune as Conrad used
adversity. To power and wealth she added great beauty, force of character,
and mind. Her influence is seen in the furtherance of learning and of
the writing of chronicles. It was to her that Henry owed his love of
books, and she made of her son “the most learned of kings. ” Gisela's
share in public affairs during her husband's reign was considerable, even
taking into account the important part habitually assigned to the
Emperor's consort. Under Henry III the part of the Empress, Mother
or Consort, in the Empire begins to dwindle, and there are indications of
misunderstandings later between her and Henry. The chronicler Herman
of Reichenau speaks of Gisela dying “disappointed by the sayings of sooth-
sayers, who had foretold that she should survive her son. ”
Conspicuous in Henry's early circle was his Burgundian tutor, Wipo,
the biographer of Conrad and the staunch admirer of Gisela. According
to Wipo, a king's first business is to keep the law. Among the influences
which were brought to bear upon Henry in his youth, that of Wipo
cannot be overlooked.
## p. 273 (#319) ############################################
Boyhood of Henry III
273
Henry was a boy of seven when at Kempen, in 1024, Conrad was
elected king. In 1026, Conrad, before setting out on his coronation ex-
pedition into Italy, named Henry as his successor and gave him in charge
to an acute and experienced statesman, Bishop Bruno of Augsburg,
brother of the late Emperor and cousin to the Empress Gisela. The
energy with which Bruno held views different from those of his brother
had, in the last reign, led him into conspiracy and exile. With the
same independence in church matters, he, alone in the Mayence pro-
vince, had taken no part in the collective action of the bishops against
Benedict VIII. From such a guardian Henry was bound to receive a
real political education. Under his care, Henry attended his father's
coronation in Rome. Three months later, Conrad, in accordance with
his policy of the absorption of the old national duchies, gave to Henry
the Duchy of Bavaria, vacated by the death of Henry of Luxemburg.
Then, on Easter Day, 1028, in the old royal Frankish city of Aix-la-
Chapelle, Henry, after unanimous election by the princes and acclamation
by clergy and people, was, at the age of eleven, crowned king by Pilgrim
of Cologne.
In the inscription “Spes imperii” on a leaden seal of Henry's in
1028 Steindorff sees an indication that this election at Aix implied the
election to the Empire. He draws attention also to the title “King”
used of Henry before his imperial coronation in the Acts emanating from
the imperial Chancery in Italy, as well as in those purely German ; and to
the fact that Henry was never re-crowned as King of Italy. He argues
therefore that contemporaries regarded the act of Aix-la-Chapelle as
binding the whole of Conrad's dominions, and as a matter of fact this
cannot be doubted.
On the death of Bishop Bruno in April 1029, Henry, whose place
as its duke was in Bavaria, was placed in charge of a Bavarian, Bishop
Egilbert of Freising. Egilbert had in the early years of Henry II's reign
taken active part in public affairs, but of late he had devoted himself
chiefly to provincial and ecclesiastical duties. Under him Henry played
his first part as independent ruler, basing his actions on motives of justice
rather than on those of policy. Conrad in 1030 had led an unsuccessful
expedition into Hungary; he was planning a new expedition when Henry,
“ still a child," taking counsel with the Bavarian princes but not with his
a
father, received the envoys of St Stephen and granted peace, “acting
with wisdom and justice," says Wipo, “ towards a king who, though un-
justly attacked, was the first to seek reconciliation. "
In 1031 Henry was present with his father in the decisive campaign
against the Poles.
In 1032 Rodolph of Burgundy died, after a long and
feeble rule. Conrad, though he snatched a coronation, had still to fight
for his new kingdom against the nationalist and Romance party supporting
Odo II (Eudes) of Champagne, and throughout 1032 the imperial
diplomas point to Henry's presence with his father, in company with
C. MED. H. VOL. III. CH. XII.
18
1
## p. 274 (#320) ############################################
274
Henry and his father
the Empress and Bishop Egilbert. In the following years, Henry was
deputed to act against the Slavs of the North-East and against Bratislav
of Bohemia. In these, his first independent campaigns, he succeeded in
restoring order. In August 1034, Conrad was fully recognised as king
by the Burgundian magnates, and in this recognition the younger king
was included. Henry had already in the previous year come fully of age,
the guardianship of Bishop Egilbert being brought to an end with grants
of land in recognition of his services.
The deposition in 1035 of Duke Adalbero of Carinthia led to a curious
scene between father and son. In the South the deposition was regarded
as an autocratic act (Herman of Reichenau curtly notes that Adalbero
“ having lost the imperial favour, was deprived likewise of his duchy ");
and Bishop Egilbert won a promise from his late ward that he would not
consent to any act of injustice against the duke. The princes accord-
ingly refused to agree to the deposition without Henry's consent, which
Henry withheld in spite of prayers and threats from Conrad. The
Emperor was overcome and finally borne unconscious from the hall; on
his recovery, he knelt before Henry and begged him to withdraw his
refusal. Henry of course yielded, and the brunt of the imperial anger
fell on Bishop Egilbert.
In 1036, at Nimeguen, Henry wedded Kunigunda, or Gunnhild,
daughter of Knut, a wedding which secured to Denmark, for over eight
hundred years, the Kiel district of Schleswig. The bride was delicate
and still a child, grateful for sweets as for kindness. In England songs
were long sung of her and of the gifts showered on her by the English
people. Her bridal festivities were held in June in Charlemagne's palace
at Nimeguen, and on the feast of SS. Peter and Paul (June 29) she was
crowned queen. Conrad was soon after called to Italy by the rising of
the vavassors against the great lords. Henry was summoned to help,
and with him went Kunigunda and Gisela. In August 1038, on the
march of the Germans homeward, camp and court were pitched near
the shores of the Adriatic. Here a great sickness attacked the host;
among the victims was Queen Kunigunda, whose death" on the
threshold of life” roused pity throughout the Empire. Her only
daughter Beatrice was later made by her father abbess of the royal
abbey of Quedlinburg near Goslar.
Another victim of the pestilence was Henry's half-brother Herman,
Gisela's second son. His duchy of Swabia devolved on Henry, already
Duke of Bavaria. To these two duchies and his German kingship was
added, in 1038, the kingship of Burgundy. Then in the spring of 1039
Conrad died at Utrecht.
The position of public affairs at Henry's accession to sole rule was
roughly this. There had been added to the Empire a kingdom, Burgundy,
for the most part non-German, geographically distinct, yet most useful
if the German king was to retain his hold upon Italy. The imperial
## p. 275 (#321) ############################################
Accession of Henry
275
power in Italy had been made a reality, and an important first step had
been taken here towards incorporating the hitherto elusive South, and
towards absorbing the new-comers, the Normans. On the north-eastern
frontiers of the Empire both March and Mission were suffering from
long neglect. Poland had been divided and weakened, and turned from
aggression to an equally dangerous anarchy: Bohemia had recently
slipped into hostility: Hungary was tranquil
, but scarcely friendly.
In the North the Danish alliance tended to stability. In the duchies
of Germany itself, Lorraine was indeed growing over-powerful, but
Bavaria, Swabia and (a few months later) Carinthia were held by the
Crown; Saxony was quiescent, though scarcely loyal; in Germany as a
whole the people and the mass of fighting landowners looked to the
Crown for protection and security. The Church, as under Henry II, was
a State-department, and the main support of the throne.
Over this realm, Henry, in the summer of 1039, assumed full sway,
,
as German, Italian, and Burgundian king, Duke of Swabia and of
Bavaria, and “Imperator in Spe. ” The Salian policy of concentrating
the tribal duchies in the hands of the sovereign was at its height.
In his father's funeral train, bearing the coffin in city after city, from
church-porch to altar, and finally at Spires, from the altar to the tomb,
Henry the Pious inaugurated his reign. A young man in his twenty-
second or twenty-third year, head and shoulders taller than his subjects,
the temper of his mind is seen in his sending away cold and empty the
jugglers and jesters who swarmed to Ingelheim for the wedding festivi-
ties of his second bride, Agnes of Poitou, and in his words to Abbot Hugh
of Cluny, that only in solitude and far from the business of the world
could men really commune with God.
The re-establishment of the German kingship, after the disintegration
caused by the attacks of Northmen and Magyars, had been a gradual and
ficult process.
for the moulding of a real unity, not even yet attained,
there was need of the king's repeated presence and direct action in all
parts of the realm. What Norman and Plantagenet rulers were to do later
in England by means of their royal commissioners, judges and justices,
the German king had to do in person.
Following in this the policy of his predecessors, Henry opened his reign
with a systematic progress throughout his realm, a visitation accompanied
by unceasing administrative activity. He had already, before leaving the
Netherlands, received the homage of Gozelo, Duke of both Lorraines; of
Gerard, the royalist-minded and most energetic bishop of Cambray; and
of a deputation of Burgundian magnates who had been waiting on Conrad
in Utrecht when death overcame him. He had passed with the funeral
procession through Cologne, Mayence, Worms, and Spires. Immediately
after the conclusion of the obsequies he returned to Lower Lorraine, to
Aix-la-Chapelle and Maestricht, where he remained some eight or nine
days, dealing justice to the many who demanded it. Thence he went to
1
CH. XII.
18-2
## p. 276 (#322) ############################################
276
The royal progress
Cologne, the city which competed with Mayence for preċedence in
Germany; it was already governed by Henry's life-long and most trusted
adviser, Archbishop Herman, whose noble birth and strenuous activity
contrast strongly with the comparative obscurity and the mildness of
Bardo of Mayence.
In the first days of September, accompanied by the Empress Gisela
and Archbishop Herman, Henry made his first visit as sole ruler to
Saxony, of all the German lands the least readily bound to his throne
and destined to play so fatal a part in the downfall of his heir. This
weakness in the national bond Henry seems to have tried to remedy by
personal ties. The obscure township of Goslar was to be transformed
by his favour into a courtly city. Here in the wild district of the Harz
was Botfeld, where, now and throughout his life, Henry gave himself
up at times to hunting, his only pleasure and relaxation from the toils
of state. Near at hand was the Abbey of Quedlinburg, whose then
Abbess, the royal Adelaide, he distinguished as his “spiritual mother”;
while her successors in turn were Henry's own two daughters, his eldest,
Beatrice, niece of the Confessor, and his youngest, Adelaide.
Disquieting news reached Henry in Saxony of events in Bohemia,
whose Duke Bratislav had, late in August, returned triumphantly to
Prague after a whirlwind campaign throughout the length and breadth
of Poland, a land recently made vassal to the Empire, the prince of
which, Casimir, an exile in Germany, was the nephew of Herman of
Cologne. From Saxony Henry passed through Thuringia towards
Bohemia, and there consulted with Eckhard of Meissen, guardian of the
Marches against Bohemia, a veteran of staunchest loyalty, in whose wise
counsels Henry placed unfailing confidence in spite of his unsuccess in
war. There can be no doubt that Henry in Thuringia was at the head
of an armed force, and that he meant war with Bohemia; but an embassy
with hostages from Bratislav, together, doubtless, with the need for com-
pleting the visitation of the German duchies, determined him for the
time to peace. So he dismissed his forces, and turned south to Bavaria.
From Bavaria, at the beginning of the new year, 1040, he moved to
his mother's native duchy of Swabia ; while after his departure Peter
of Hungary, ally of Břatislav, sent his Magyars raiding over the Bavarian
borders. In Swabia, Henry visited, among other places, the famous
monastery of Reichenau, the chief and most brilliant centre of learning in
Germany, the home of Herman, the noble cripple, whose genius was
extolled throughout Germany, and to whose pen we owe a very large, if
not the chief part, of our knowledge both of his times and of Henry
himself, a knowledge but little tinged with enthusiasm or sympathy for
the king. As he passed through Constance, Henry shews for a moment
a touch of human sympathy, as he visited, in the Church of Saint Mary,
the tomb of his unfortunate eldest brother, Ernest of Swabia.
At Ulm he summoned his first “Fürstentag,” the assembly of princes,
.
## p. 277 (#323) ############################################
Defeat in Bohemia
277
a
bishops, and abbots from all parts of the realm. Here came among others
Gunther, the German hermit of the Böhmer Wald, no less notable than
any of the great princes, and soon to render a signal service to his king
and countrymen in distress. To Ulm there came also the first formal
embassy from Italy to the new ruler.
From Ulm Henry passed to the Rhine. He spent April at his palace
at Ingelheim, where he received both a formal embassy from his Bur-
gundian kingdom, and more important still, Archbishop Aribert of
Milan, his father's stubborn opponent in Italy. Henry had never
approved of Conrad's proceedings against him; and the siege of Milan,
carried on by Italian princes at Conrad's command, had ceased auto-
matically with Henry's accession. By receiving the explanations and
the homage of the archbishop, Henry healed an open wound in the
Empire. Thus auspiciously, with an act of justice and reconciliation,
he opened the period of his lordship in Italy; thus too closed his in-
augural progress through the realm.
During its course had died Henry's cousins, Conrad, Duke, and
Adalbero, ex-Duke of Carinthia, after whom, as next heir, he succeeded
automatically to the duchy. He was now therefore Duke of Swabia,
Bavaria, and Carinthia; of the five great duchies, only Lorraine and
Saxony remained apart from the Crown.
The progress through the German lands completed, Henry was free
to turn to the Bohemian campaign, the necessity of which had been
clearly shewn by the raids of Břatislav's Hungarian ally. Two months
more Henry spent, apparently peacefully and piously, after his own
heart, in both the Lorraines and in Alsace, at the ancient royal
palaces of Nimeguen and Utrecht, at Liège, Metz, Nancy and Moyen-
Vic; giving grants to churches ; shewing marked favour to the re-
forming ascetic monasteries; attending, especially, the consecration of
the new Minster at Stablo, under Poppo, the pioneer and leader of
monastic reform in Germany. Probably it was from Stablo, a scene
of peaceful and pious magnificence, that Henry issued the summons for
the army to assemble against Bohemia. In July, 1040, at Goslar he
again met Eckhard of Meissen, to formulate the plan of campaign. At
Ratisbon he joined his forces and proceeded to Cham at the entrance to
the Bohemian pass, by which he meant to attack; and on 13 August he
broke camp for Bohemia.
The expedition failed speedily and disastrously; his troops were
ambushed, their leaders slain. The mediation of the hermit Gunther,
and the promise to restore the Bohemian hostages, including Břatislav's
son, alone rescued hundreds of German captives. Břatislav was left
exultant master of the situation.
Henry, silent and as it were dismissing Bohemia from his mind,
retraced his steps through Bavaria. On 8 September he filled up the
newly-vacant see of Bamberg by appointing Suidger, a Saxon, who was
CH, XII.
## p. 278 (#324) ############################################
278
Submission of Bohemia
99
a few years later, as Clement II, the first of the reforming German
popes. Going north, he held an open court, dealing justice, at Aldstedt;
and received there envoys from Yarosláv, Prince of Kiev. Then at
Münster he met the princes, laid before them the Bohemian situation,
and dismissed the Bohemian hostage-prince to his own country. This
year nature conspired with fortune against Germany The rain fell, the
rivers rose, destructive floods swept the country-side, many lost their
lives. To crown all, "grapes were scarce and the wine sour.
But Henry's calm attention to other matters by no means meant
submission to defeat. At Seligenstadt, in the April of 1041, the princes
again met to discuss active measures, and overtures from Bohemia were
rejected. Fortune was veering, for Břatislav was now deprived of his
Hungarian ally Peter, who lost his throne by a sudden insurrection and
only saved his liberty by flight to Germany, where Henry received him
kindly, "forgetting for the sake of God the wrong towards himself. ”
Bohemia, however, he did not forget, but pressed forward his preparations.
At Aix, in June 1041, he met the princes and bishops of the West,
Gozelo and Godfrey of Lorraine, Herman of Cologne, Poppo of Trèves,
Nithard of Liège. At Goslar and at Tilleda, the royal seat in Thuringia,
he concerted final measures with Eckhard of Meissen; and on 15 August,
the anniversary of his previous expedition, he crossed the Bohemian
frontier.
By Michaelmas he was back in Germany a victor. A fortnight later
Břatislav followed him to Ratisbon, and there did public homage and
underwent public humiliation. Probably Peter also appeared there as
à suppliant before Henry. Henceforth Peter was Henry's client and
Břatislav Henry's friend. Great was the joy in Germany at this Bohe-
mian victory. With it we can undoubtedly connect the "Tetralogus" ”
of Henry's tutor Wipo, a chant of praise and exhortation to the “fame-
crowned King," who “after Christ rules the world,” the lover of justice,
the giver of
peace.
ce. It is in the midst of the turmoils and rejoicings of
1041 that the Augsburg Annals record “by his (Henry's) aid and
diligence very many excelled in the arts, in building, in all manner of
learning. ”
But in this same year misfortune after misfortune fell upon the land.
There were storms and floods. Everywhere the harvest failed and famine
reigned. Nor could Henry rest on his oars. The fall and fight of
Peter of Hungary had increased, rather than removed, the Hungarian
menace, even if it opened new vistas of extended power; while Burgundy,
newly in peace, clamoured for attention lest this young peace should die.
And although to the great Christmas gathering of princes round Henry
at Strasbourg (1041) there came envoys from Obo of Hungary to know
“whether might he expect certain enmity or stable peace,” it was to
Burgundy that Henry first gave his attention. Since his appearance
as Burgundian king in 1031 he had not again visited the country.
## p. 279 (#325) ############################################
Burgundy
279
He kept Christmas (1041) at Strasbourg amid a brilliant gathering
of princes; and when immediately afterwards he entered Burgundy, it
was at the head of armed vassals. We are told by Herman of Reichenau
that the Burgundian nobles made submission, that many were brought
to justice, that Henry entered Burgundy, ruled with vigour and justice,
and safeguarded the public peace; finally Wipo tells us that “he ruled
Burgundy with magnificence. "
Some notion of the state of the land before Henry's arrival may be
gathered by the history of the archdiocese of Lyons. Here Archbishop
Burchard, characterised by Herman of Reichenau as “tyrannus et sacri-
legus, aecclesiarum depraedator, adulterque incestuosus,” and moreover
strongly anti-German, had been cast into prison and chains by Conrad
in 1036. The city was then seized upon by a Count Gerard, who,
desirous it would appear of playing at Lyons the part played by the
“Patrician" at Rome, thrust into the see of Lyons his son, a mere boy.
This boy later secretly fled, and since then Lyons had contentedly lacked
a bishop.
The filling of the see thus left vacant was one of Henry's first cares
in Burgundy: at the recommendation of the Cluniac Halinard of Dijon,
who refused the sacred office for himself, it was given to a pious and
learned French secular priest, Odulric (Ulric), Archdeacon of Langres.
That the
peace
and order enforced under Henry were after all but com-
parative may be judged from the murder of Odulric himself only a few
years later. There was much to attract Henry in Burgundy; for side
by side with its lawlessness and violence were the strivings for peace and
holiness embodied in the “Treuga Dei” and in the austerity of Cluny
and its monasteries. Henry's approbation of Cluniac ideals is evident,
and throughout his whole life he shews real ardour, almost a passion
in his striving to realise throughout the Empire that peace founded
on religion, upon which the Treuga Dei, if in somewhat other fashion,
strove to insist locally.
After some six weeks in Burgundy, he must have heard at Basle on
his way back of the havoc played among the Bavarians on the frontier, a
week earlier, by the new King Obo of Hungary and his raiders. Henry,
himself the absentee duke of the unfortunate duchy, at once handed
it over (without waiting, as it would seem, for the formality of an
election, as right was, by the Bavarians) to Count Henry of Luxemburg,
who was akin to the last Duke Henry of Bavaria, and nephew to the
Empress Kunigunda, wife of Henry II. Trusting to the vigour of the
new duke to protect Bavaria for the time being, Henry next, a few
weeks later, summoned all the princes, including of course Eckhard of
Meissen, to Cologne, there to decide upon further steps to be taken
with regard to Hungary. They unanimously declared for war.
Some four or five months elapsed before the expedition was launched.
From Würzburg, at Whitsuntide, Henry strengthened his hold on
CH. XII.
## p. 280 (#326) ############################################
280.
Hungary
his Burgundian realm by dispatching Bishop Bruno to woo for him
Agnes of Poitou.
A few months he spent in comparative quiet, pro-
bably with his mother, in Thuringia and Saxony; then later, in August
1042, he entered Bavaria and started, early in September, on the Hun-
garian expedition.
It was a success. Henry overcame, not Obo himself, who retired to
inaccessible fastnesses, but at least the Western Magyars. He set up a
new king, not Peter, but an unnamed cousin of his, and then returned fairly
well satisfied to Germany. Directly his back was turned, Obo emerged
from his fastness, and the reign of Henry's candidate came to an abrupt
end. Yet a lesson against raiding had undoubtedly been given to “the
over-daring Kinglet. ”
The king spent the Christmas of 1042 at Goslar; whither in January
came envoys from the princes of the northern peoples. Břatislav of
Bohemia came in person, bearing and receiving gifts. The Russians,
though they bore back to their distant lord far more magnificent presents
than they could have offered, departed in chagrin, for Henry had rejected
their offer of a Russian bride. Casimir of Poland also sent his envoys;
they were not received, since he himself did not come in person. Lastly
Obo too, who had just ejected his second rival king, sent to propose
peace. His messengers received an answer ominously evasive.
Early in the following month, at Goslar, the Empress-Mother died.
That there had been some measure of alienation between Henry and
Gisela is suggested by Wipo's exhortation to Henry to "remember the
sweetness of a mother's name,” and by his recording in his Tetralogus
the
many benefits conferred by Gisela on her son; as well as by Herman
of Reichenau's acid comment. Yet there is no evidence that the aliena-
tion was serious. Henry's grants and charters on his mother's petition
are numerous. In all probability he spent with her the only long interval
of comparative leisure (1042) that he had enjoyed since his accession ;
she died whilst with him at Goslar.
Soon after the funeral ceremonies were over, Henry had his first
meeting with the King of France, Henry I. Its place and object are
obscure; but probably it was on the frontier at Ivois, and it may very
well have been in connexion with Henry's approaching marriage with
Agnes of Poitou.
The king's mind was now bent on the preparations for yet another
Hungarian expedition. Twice Obo sought to evade the conflict. Obo
did not, it is true, shew much tact, if indeed he really desired peace ;
for in his second embassy he demanded that Henry should himself swear
to any terms agreed upon, instead of merely giving the oath in kingly
fashion by proxy; this request was deemed an insult.
The blow when it came was effective. Henry in the space of four
weeks brought Obo to a promise of humble satisfaction, a satisfaction
never made effectual, because the promises of Obo were not fulfilled.
## p. 281 (#327) ############################################
The Day of Indulgence
281
Far more important and of solid and lasting advantage to Germany,
was the restitution by Hungary of that territory on the Danube ceded
to St Stephen “pro causa amicitiae” in 1031.
Since the frontier won by Henry remained until 1919 the frontier
between German Austria and Hungary, it is worth while considering it
in detail.
The land ceded, or rather restored, was “ex una parte Danubii inter
Fiscaha et Litacha, ex altera autem inter Strachtin et ostia Fiscaha usque
in Maraha. " South of the Danube, that is to say, the Leitha replaced the
Fischa as boundary as far south as the Carinthian March. North of the
river, the old frontier line seems to have run from opposite the confluence
of the Fischa with the Danube to a fortress on the Moravian border,
Strachtin or Trachtin. This artificial frontier was now replaced by the
river March. Thus among other things was secured permanently for
Germany the famous “ Wiener Wald. "
The realm was now at peace: Burgundy in order, Italy contented (in
contrast to the early days of Conrad) with German overlordship, not one
of the great princes or duchies of Germany a danger to the realm. The
fame or the arms of the king had induced the princes on its borders to
seek his friendship and acknowledge his superiority. Nothing remained
to mar the public peace save private enmities. To private enemies the
king might, without danger to the commonwealth, offer reconciliation.
On the “Day of Indulgence" at Constance, in late October 1043, Henry
from the pulpit announced to the assembled princes and bishops and to
the whole of Germany, that he renounced all idea of vengeance on any
who had injured him, and exhorted all his princes, nobles and people in
their turn to forget all private offences. The appeal of the king was
ordered to be made known throughout the whole land, and this
day at Constance became known as the “Day of Indulgence” or “Day
of Pardon. "
The object was to abolish violence and private war, and so far the
attempt bears a strong resemblance to the contemporary Franco-Bur-
gundian institution, the “Truce of God," with which, however, it cannot
be confounded, since although the ends were the same, the means were
only superficially alike. Since however the “Indulgence” has sometimes
been confused with, sometimes considered as deliberately rivalling, this
“Treuga Dei,” it is worth while to consider some relations and dis-
similarities between the two movements.
The “Truce of God” endeavoured to mitigate and limit violence by
an appeal to Christian sentiment rather than to Christian principle. The
Christian, under heavy church penalties, was to reverence certain days
and times regarded as sacred by abstaining on them from all violence not
only in aggression but even under provocation. This “Truce” was created
in France, the country where private feuds were most general and
fiercest, and where therefore there was greatest need of it. Its birth-
CH. XII.
## p. 282 (#328) ############################################
282
Peace and Truce of God
9
place was Aquitaine, in the year of Henry's accession; and nowhere was
it more eagerly adopted than in Burgundy, where religious zeal burnt
whitest and private feuds were most universal and devastating.
Now this “Truce of God” was an addition made to the original pro-
clamation of a Peace of God (c. 980), which forbade private violence
against non-combatants, by oath and for a fixed time, as contrary to
Christian precept. Like most medieval legislation, both “Peace" and
“Truce” were largely failures? Henry's “Indulgence” struck at the root
of the evil as they had not. The Indulgence, it is true, was not so
sweeping as would have been the “Peace of God," because no provision
was made for the protection of non-combatants, in case private war did
arrive. The “Indulgence,” being a pardon of actual enemies, could by
its nature refer only to the present and the actual without a word as
to the future, although Henry no doubt hoped that the one must entail
the other.
Another distinction between the "Treuga Dei" and the “Indulgence"
consists in the ecclesiastical character of the former. The “Truce" was
conceived by the Church, proclaimed by the Church, its breach punished
by heavy ecclesiastical penalties. The “Indulgence” was an example and
exhortation from a Christian king to his subjects, compliance being in
appearance voluntary, though royal displeasure might threaten him who
refused it. But the distinction does not, as some have thought, imply
any sort of opposition. Henry approved of the “Truce as churchmen
approved of the “Indulgence. ” One adversary of the Truce opposed it,
indeed, on the ground that by it the Church usurped a royal function.
But this was the ultra-royalist Gerard of Cambray, one of the few
bishops who did not enjoy Henry's favour. On the other hand, the
chief supporters of the Truce in Burgundy were the bishops, firm im-
perialists. Only a year before Henry's visit to Burgundy the Bishops
and Archbishops of Arles, Avignon, Nice, Vienne and Besançon, had
met Pope Benedict IX at Marseilles and had in all probability obtained
his approval for the measure promulgated by the Burgundian synod at
Montriond in 1041, extending the time of the Truce to the whole of
Lent and Advent.
266
The feudal edict of 1037
certainly as early as July 1036 decided to visit Italy for the second
time. The appeal of the opposing parties, therefore, came very oppor-
tunely. “If Italy hungers for law, I will satisfy her," he remarked on
receiving the news. He crossed the Brenner in December, spent Christmas
at Verona, and reached Milan early in the new year. On the day
following his arrival a popular rising occurred which was imputed, not
without some reason, to the instigation of Aribert. Lacking confidence
in his strength to deal with the situation in the stronghold of his
enernies, Conrad decided that all questions of difference should be deter-
mined at a diet to be held at Pavia in March. Here numerous com-
plaints were brought against the arrogant archbishop, foremost amongst
his accusers being Hugh, a member of the Otbertine family, who held
the countship of Milan. The Emperor demanded redress; the arch-
bishop defiantly refused to comply. Conrad, judging his conduct treason-
able, took the high-handed measure of thrusting him into prison under
the custody of Poppo, Patriarch of Aquileia, and Conrad, Duke of
Carinthia. Poppo, however, was not sufficiently watchful of his important
prisoner, and suffered for his negligence the displeasure of the Emperor.
A certain monk, Albizo by name, had been allowed to share with his
lord the hardships of prison; through his agency escape was effected.
One night, while the faithful Albizo feigned sleep in the bed of the
archbishop, the sheets drawn close over his head to prevent recognition,
Aribert in the harmless guise of a monk passed safely through his
gaolers, mounted a horse waiting in readiness, and rode in haste to Milan,
where he was welcomed with enthusiasm by the patriotic burghers.
With reinforcements brought by his son from Germany Conrad
besieged Milan, but without much success; it amounted only to some
indecisive fighting, the storming of a few strongholds, the devastation of
the surrounding country. But if the siege of Milan produced little
military result, it drew forth the most important constitutional act of
the reign, one of the most famous documents of feudal law, the edict
of 28 May 1037. This celebrated decree solved the question at issue
between the greater and the smaller vassals. As in Germany Conrad had
shewn himself in sympathy with the small tenants, so in Italy he now
secured to them and to their successors the possession of their lands
against unjust and arbitrary eviction by their lords. “No vassal of a
bishop, abbot, abbess, marquess, count, or of anyone holding an imperial
or ecclesiastical fief. . . . . shall be deprived of it without certain and proved
guilt, except according to the constitution of our ancestors and by the
judgment of his peers. " The next two clauses deal with the rights of
appeal against the verdict of the peers: in the case of the greater
vassals the hearing may be brought before the Emperor himself, in the
case of the smaller either before the overlords or before the Emperor's
missi for determination. Then, the succession of the fief is secured to the
son, to the grandson by a son, or, these failing, to the brother. Aliena-
## p. 267 (#313) ############################################
Proceedings against Archbishop Aribert
267
tion or exchange without the tenant's consent is prohibited; the Emperor's
right to the fodrum“as it was taken by our ancestors" is affirmed. Finally,
a penalty of a hundred pounds of gold, to be paid half to the imperial
treasury, half to the injured party, is enjoined for disobedience. By
these concessions the Emperor bound to his interests the strongest and
most numerous military class in North Italy, and at the same time struck
a blow at the dangerously powerful position of the Lombard episcopate.
The heat of the summer prevented any serious campaigning for some
months. The siege of Milan was raised, the army dispersed. The
Emperor, however, did not relinquish his efforts to overthrow the Arch-
bishop of Milan; in spite of the remonstrances of his son and many others,
he took the unprecedented step of deposing Aribert without reference to
an ecclesiastical synod. The Papacy was weak and submissive; John XIX
had allowed himself to be inscribed in a document among the fideles of
the Emperor'. He was now dead (1033), and his nephew, a bad man
certainly, but not so bad as he is painted in the scurrilous party literature
of the succeeding generation, young perhaps, but not the mere boy of
twelve he is usually accounted", was raised to the pontificate under the
name of Benedict IX. He, no doubt, cared little for the duties incumbent
on his office; at all events, when he visited the Emperor at Cremona, he
made no protest against the uncanonical action of Conrad. Aribert
retaliated by organising a conspiracy with Conrad's enemy and late rival
for the throne of Burgundy, Odo of Blois. But it soon collapsed; after
two incursions into Lorraine, Odo was defeated and killed at Bar on
15 November 1037 by Duke Gozelo. The three Lombard bishops of
Vercelli, Cremona, and Piacenza, who were implicated, were banished to
Germany.
Towards the end of the year Conrad again took the field, this time
with the object of ordering the affairs of the southern principalities. On
his march southward the burgbers of Parma revolted and were punished
by the destruction of their city (Christmas). At Spello the Emperor had
another interview with the Pope, who now imposed the sentence of ex-
communication on the Archbishop of Milan (Easter 1038). It was
probably also on this occasion that a constant source of confusion and
trouble in the Roman courts was removed; this was the indiscriminate
use of Lombard and Roman law, which gave rise to endless disputes
between Lombard and Roman judges. The Emperor's edict now esta-
blished that in Rome and Roman territory all cases should be determined
according to Roman law.
1
1 “Qualiter nos communi fidelium nostrorum decreto, pape scilicet Johannis et
Popponis patriarche venerabilis, Aribonis Moguntini archiepiscopi," etc. Cf. Bresslau
1, 148, n. 4.
2 See the suggestion of R. L. Poole (“Benedict IX and Gregory VI,” Proceedings
of the British Academy, Vol. viii. p. 217) that Rodulf Glaber misread a statement that
Benedict had been Pope per ann. xii. for puer ann. xii.
CH, XI.
## p. 268 (#314) ############################################
268
Affairs of South Italy
a
Conrad made the initial mistake in 1024 of liberating, at the request
of Guaimar, Prince of Salerno, Paldolf (Pandulf) IV of Capua, the wolf
of the Abruzzi, as Aimé of Monte Cassino calls him, who had been cap-
tured in Henry II's campaign of 1022 and since been held a close prisoner,
This act led to the recrudescence of Byzantine power in South Italy, for
Paldolf kept on friendly terms with the Greek government. The catapan
Bojannes at once set to work to put his valuable ally in possession of his
old principality; and in this he was assisted by Guaimar of Salerno, who
with lavish grants bought the support of some Norman adventurers under
Ranulf. This formidable combination made their first task the capture
of Capua. The town fell after a siege of eighteen months; Paldolf V of
Teano surrendered and Paldolf IV was restored. This was the situation
that Conrad was forced to recognise on his first Italian expedition in
April 1027. But Paldolf was not content with the mere recovery of his
former possessions. On the death of Guaimar, the only effective rival
to his power, he sought to extend his frontiers at the expense of his
neighbours. He captured Naples by treachery and drove out its duke,
Sergius IV. The latter was restored two years later by the aid of the
Norman bands of Ranulf; in reward for this service Ranulf was invested
with the territory of Aversa (1030), the nucleus of the Norman power in
South Italy, which was to be in the succeeding centuries one of the most
important factors in the history of Europe. Ranulf, a skilful but entirely
unscrupulous ruler, soon deserted his benefactor and allied himself with
Paldolf, who was now at the height of his power. The latter's rule, how-
ever, became daily more intolerable; and a body of malcontents, joined
soon by the renegade Ranulf, taking advantage of a quarrel between
Paldolf and Guaimar IV of Salerno, decided to appeal for the interven-
tion of the Emperors of the East and the West.
No response came from Constantinople. Conrad however, already in
Italy, accepted the invitation. Seemingly at Troia', the Emperor entered
into negotiations with Paldolf, ordered him to restore the property of the
Abbey of Monte Cassino which he had seized, and to release the prisoners
he had captured. Paldolf on his part sent his wife and son to ask for
peace, offering 300 pounds of gold in two payments, and his son and
daughter as hostages. The terms were accepted, the first half of the
indemnity paid; then the son escaped. Paldolf changed his attitude,
refused to carry out the rest of his bargain, and withdrew to the castle
of Sant' Agata. Conrad in the meantime entered Capua without resist-
ance and invested Guaimar with the principality. Capua and Salerno
were thus once more united in one hand as they had been under Paldolf
Ironhead in the days of Otto II. At the same time Conrad officially
recognised the new Norman colony at Aversa as a fief of the Prince of
Salerno.
1 So Bresslau, 11. p. 307, n. 1, following the notice in the Ann. Altah. 1038. But
cf. Chalandon, Hist. de la Domination Normande, 1. 83.
## p. 269 (#315) ############################################
Conrad's death
269
>
His work in the south completed, the Emperor returned northward.
On the march the troops suffered severely from the heat; pestilence
broke out in the camp, and many, among them Queen Gunnhild and
Herman, Duke of Swabia, perished; Conrad himself was overcome with
sickness. Under these circumstances it was impossible to renew the siege
of Milan. Leaving, therefore, injunctions with the Italian princes to
make an annual devastation of the Milanese territory, the Emperor
made his way back to Germany.
Conrad never recovered his strength. At Nimeguen in February 1039
he was overcome by a more severe attack of the gout; in May he was
well enough to be removed to Utrecht, where he celebrated the Whitsun
festival. But he grew rapidly worse, and died the following day (4 June).
His embalmed body was borne through Mayence and Worms to Spires,
the favourite city of the Salian emperors, and was buried in the crypt of
its cathedral church.
Conrad, once he had gained the mastery in his kingdom, was deter-
mined to secure the inheritance to his son; he was not only the first, but
by a definite policy the founder, of the Salian dynasty. So at Augsburg
in 1026 he designated his youthful son Henry, a boy of nine years old, as
his successor; his choice was approved by the princes, and the child was
duly crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle in 1028. The theory of hereditary suc-
cession seems to have been a guiding principle in the policy of Conrad II.
He had suffered himself from the absence of it; for his uncle, the
younger brother of his father, had acquired the Carinthian dukedom
of his grandfather, and on his death it had passed out of the family
altogether to the total disregard not only of his own claims, but also
of those of his cousin, the younger Conrad, the son of the late duke.
Adalbero of Eppenstein must in his eyes have been looked upon as an
interloper. Personal wrongs doubtless biassed his judgment when the
Duke of Carinthia was charged with treasonable designs at the Diet of
Bamberg in 1035. Adalbero was deposed and sentenced to the loss of
his fiefs. The court witnessed a strange scene before the verdict was
obtained; the assent of the young King Henry, as Duke of Bavaria, was
deemed necessary, and this the latter steadfastly refused to give; he was
bound, he afterwards explained, by an oath to Adalbero taken at the
instance of his tutor, Bishop Egilbert of Freising. Entreaties and
threats availed nothing; the son was obdurate, and the Emperor was
so incensed with passion that he fell senseless to the floor. When he
recovered consciousness he again approached his son, humbled himself
at his feet, and finally, by this somewhat undignified act, gained his
end'. But the successor to the fallen duke was well chosen; it was the
1 See the letter addressed to Bishop Azecho of Worms in Giesebrecht, 11. 712.
Cf. also Neues Archiv, m. 321.
CH, x.
## p. 270 (#316) ############################################
270
Hereditary Fiefs
Emperor's cousin, Conrad, who thus at this late hour stepped into the
dukedom of his father (1036)'.
It was not his aim, however, as sometimes has been suggested, to crush
the ducal power.
In one instance indeed he greatly strengthened it.
A powerful lord was required in the vulnerable border-land of Lorraine;
it was a wise step to reunite the two provinces on the death of Frederick
(1033) in the hands of Gozelo. In the case of Swabia the hereditary
principle prevailed. The rebellious Ernest who fell in the fight in the
Black Forest had no direct heir; “snappish whelps seldom have puppies,"
Conrad remarked on receiving the news of his death; but he had a brother,
and that brother succeeded. When the hereditary line failed, Conrad
followed the policy of Otto the Great of drawing the dukedoms into his
own family; in this way his son Henry acquired Bavaria after the death
of Henry of Luxemburg (1026)” and Swabia on the death of Herman in
Italy (1038).
In Italy, as we have seen, he definitely established by a legislative act
the principle of hereditary fiefs for the smaller and greater vassals alike.
There is no such decree for Germany; none at least has come down to us.
Yet there are indications which suggest that the Emperor, perhaps by
legal decision in the courts, perhaps by the acceptance of what was
becoming a common usage, sanctioned, indeed encouraged, the growing
tendency. Instances multiply of son succeeding father without question
or dispute; families become so firmly established in their possessions that
they frequently adopt the name of one of their castles. Wipo remarks
that Conrad won the hearts of the vassals because he would not suffer
their heirs to be deprived of the ancient fiefs of their forbears. Too
much weight may not be placed on this statement, but it is certain that
Conrad could rely in a marked degree upon the loyalty of the local
nobless. In the revolt of Ernest the nobility of Swabia supported not
their duke but their king; Adalbero after his deposition found himself
unable to raise his late subjects to rebellion. Such loyalty was unusual
in the earlier Middle Ages, and it seems a natural conclusion that these
knights of Swabia and Carinthia had reason to stand by Conrad. From
this rank of society the Emperor reinforced that body of officials, the
ministeriales, who later came to play so important a part at the courts of
the Salian emperors. Conrad's gallant and faithful friend and adviser,
Werner, who lost his life in the riot at Rome which followed the imperial
coronation, and who earned the honour of a grave beside the Emperor
Otto II at St Peter's, is perhaps the first as he is a typical representative
of this influential class.
Conrad II is usually depicted as the illiterate layman", the complete
1 The Carinthian mark (later, in 1056, the mark of Styria) was severed from the
duchy, and bestowed upon Arnold of Lambach.
2 Elected at Ratisbon, July 1027.
3 See Bresslau, 11. 368-374.
4 “Quamquam litteras ignoraret,” Wipo, c. 6.
## p. 271 (#317) ############################################
Relations with the Church
271
antithesis to the saintly Henry who preceded him. Undoubtedly he
sought from the outset of his reign to emancipate himself from the over-
weening power of the Church. He decided questions relating to the
Church on his own authority, often without reference to a Church synod.
He kept a firm hold on episcopal elections; he appointed his bishops and
expected a handsome gratuity from the man of his choice. From Udalrich,
elected to the see of Basle in 1025, we are frankly told that “the king
and queen received an immense sum of money. " Wipo adds that the
king was afterwards smitten with repentance, and swore an oath never
again to take money for a bishopric or abbacy, “an oath which he almost
succeeded in keeping! ” In truth the oath weighed but lightly on his
conscience and affected his practice not at all. If, however, he did nothing
to promote, he did little to hinder, reform. More than one of his
charters bestows lands on Cluniac houses, and by including the kingdom
of Burgundy (a stronghold of the reforming movement) in the Empire,
he insensibly advanced a cause with which he was out of sympathy. The
leaders of the reforming party, Richard, Abbot of St Vannes at Verdun,
and Poppo, Abbot of Stablo (Stavelot), made steady if slow progress in
their work, which met with the sympathetic encouragement of the
Empress Gisela. The ruins of the picturesque Benedictine abbey of
Limburg and the magnificent cathedral of Spires remind us that the
thoughts of Conrad, who once at least is described as “most pious,"
sometimes rose above things merely temporal.
Conrad above all realised the importance of increasing the material
resources on which the Empire depended. By careful administration he
increased the revenue from the crown lands; he revoked gifts made to the
Church by his too generous predecessors, and allocated to himself demesne
lands which had fallen into the hands of the dukes. The reign of Conrad
was a time of prosperity for Germany; he encouraged the small begin-
nings of municipal activity by grants of mint and market rights; the
peace was better kept. To Conrad the cause of justice came first among
the functions of royalty. A story is told of how the coronation procession
was interrupted by the complaints of a peasant, a widow, and an orphan,
and how Conrad, without hesitation and in spite of the remonstrances of
his companions, delayed the ceremony in order to award justice to the
plaintiffs. Stern, inexorable justice is a strong trait in his character.
This strong, capable, efficient ruler did much for his country. The allure-
ments of Italy, the mysteries of Empire, had led his predecessors to
neglect the true interests of Germany. It is to his credit that he restored
the strength of the German monarchy and increased enormously the per-
sonal influence and authority of the Crown. He prepared the way
for his
son, under whom the Holy Roman Empire reached the apogee of its
greatness.
1 “In quo voto pene bene permansit. ” Wipo, c. 7.
CH. .
## p. 272 (#318) ############################################
272
CHAPTER XII.
THE EMPEROR HENRY III.
The reign of Henry III is the summit of the older German imperialism.
The path uphill had been made by the persevering energy of the Saxon
kings and Emperors; under Henry's successors the Empire rushed, though
with glory, into ruin. Henry himself, sane, just, and religious, has the
approval of reason, but could never have raised the white-hot zeal, and
the fiercer hatred, which burned round the Hohenstaufen.
His father and mother were among those rare men and women who
wrest from circumstances their utmost profit. Conrad, trained by adver-
sity, attempting nothing vaguely or rashly, almost invariably attained
his object, and left the “East-Frankish ” Empire stronger within and
without than ever before. His education of his son in state-craft was
thorough and strenuous : very early he made him a sharer in his power, ,
and then shewed neither mistrust nor jealousy, even when faced by
markedly independent action. Henry, for his part, though he judged
adversely some of his father's conduct, honoured him and kept his memory
in affection.
Henry's mother Gisela (of the blood of Charlemagne, of the royal
house of Burgundy, and heiress of Swabia) used fortune as Conrad used
adversity. To power and wealth she added great beauty, force of character,
and mind. Her influence is seen in the furtherance of learning and of
the writing of chronicles. It was to her that Henry owed his love of
books, and she made of her son “the most learned of kings. ” Gisela's
share in public affairs during her husband's reign was considerable, even
taking into account the important part habitually assigned to the
Emperor's consort. Under Henry III the part of the Empress, Mother
or Consort, in the Empire begins to dwindle, and there are indications of
misunderstandings later between her and Henry. The chronicler Herman
of Reichenau speaks of Gisela dying “disappointed by the sayings of sooth-
sayers, who had foretold that she should survive her son. ”
Conspicuous in Henry's early circle was his Burgundian tutor, Wipo,
the biographer of Conrad and the staunch admirer of Gisela. According
to Wipo, a king's first business is to keep the law. Among the influences
which were brought to bear upon Henry in his youth, that of Wipo
cannot be overlooked.
## p. 273 (#319) ############################################
Boyhood of Henry III
273
Henry was a boy of seven when at Kempen, in 1024, Conrad was
elected king. In 1026, Conrad, before setting out on his coronation ex-
pedition into Italy, named Henry as his successor and gave him in charge
to an acute and experienced statesman, Bishop Bruno of Augsburg,
brother of the late Emperor and cousin to the Empress Gisela. The
energy with which Bruno held views different from those of his brother
had, in the last reign, led him into conspiracy and exile. With the
same independence in church matters, he, alone in the Mayence pro-
vince, had taken no part in the collective action of the bishops against
Benedict VIII. From such a guardian Henry was bound to receive a
real political education. Under his care, Henry attended his father's
coronation in Rome. Three months later, Conrad, in accordance with
his policy of the absorption of the old national duchies, gave to Henry
the Duchy of Bavaria, vacated by the death of Henry of Luxemburg.
Then, on Easter Day, 1028, in the old royal Frankish city of Aix-la-
Chapelle, Henry, after unanimous election by the princes and acclamation
by clergy and people, was, at the age of eleven, crowned king by Pilgrim
of Cologne.
In the inscription “Spes imperii” on a leaden seal of Henry's in
1028 Steindorff sees an indication that this election at Aix implied the
election to the Empire. He draws attention also to the title “King”
used of Henry before his imperial coronation in the Acts emanating from
the imperial Chancery in Italy, as well as in those purely German ; and to
the fact that Henry was never re-crowned as King of Italy. He argues
therefore that contemporaries regarded the act of Aix-la-Chapelle as
binding the whole of Conrad's dominions, and as a matter of fact this
cannot be doubted.
On the death of Bishop Bruno in April 1029, Henry, whose place
as its duke was in Bavaria, was placed in charge of a Bavarian, Bishop
Egilbert of Freising. Egilbert had in the early years of Henry II's reign
taken active part in public affairs, but of late he had devoted himself
chiefly to provincial and ecclesiastical duties. Under him Henry played
his first part as independent ruler, basing his actions on motives of justice
rather than on those of policy. Conrad in 1030 had led an unsuccessful
expedition into Hungary; he was planning a new expedition when Henry,
“ still a child," taking counsel with the Bavarian princes but not with his
a
father, received the envoys of St Stephen and granted peace, “acting
with wisdom and justice," says Wipo, “ towards a king who, though un-
justly attacked, was the first to seek reconciliation. "
In 1031 Henry was present with his father in the decisive campaign
against the Poles.
In 1032 Rodolph of Burgundy died, after a long and
feeble rule. Conrad, though he snatched a coronation, had still to fight
for his new kingdom against the nationalist and Romance party supporting
Odo II (Eudes) of Champagne, and throughout 1032 the imperial
diplomas point to Henry's presence with his father, in company with
C. MED. H. VOL. III. CH. XII.
18
1
## p. 274 (#320) ############################################
274
Henry and his father
the Empress and Bishop Egilbert. In the following years, Henry was
deputed to act against the Slavs of the North-East and against Bratislav
of Bohemia. In these, his first independent campaigns, he succeeded in
restoring order. In August 1034, Conrad was fully recognised as king
by the Burgundian magnates, and in this recognition the younger king
was included. Henry had already in the previous year come fully of age,
the guardianship of Bishop Egilbert being brought to an end with grants
of land in recognition of his services.
The deposition in 1035 of Duke Adalbero of Carinthia led to a curious
scene between father and son. In the South the deposition was regarded
as an autocratic act (Herman of Reichenau curtly notes that Adalbero
“ having lost the imperial favour, was deprived likewise of his duchy ");
and Bishop Egilbert won a promise from his late ward that he would not
consent to any act of injustice against the duke. The princes accord-
ingly refused to agree to the deposition without Henry's consent, which
Henry withheld in spite of prayers and threats from Conrad. The
Emperor was overcome and finally borne unconscious from the hall; on
his recovery, he knelt before Henry and begged him to withdraw his
refusal. Henry of course yielded, and the brunt of the imperial anger
fell on Bishop Egilbert.
In 1036, at Nimeguen, Henry wedded Kunigunda, or Gunnhild,
daughter of Knut, a wedding which secured to Denmark, for over eight
hundred years, the Kiel district of Schleswig. The bride was delicate
and still a child, grateful for sweets as for kindness. In England songs
were long sung of her and of the gifts showered on her by the English
people. Her bridal festivities were held in June in Charlemagne's palace
at Nimeguen, and on the feast of SS. Peter and Paul (June 29) she was
crowned queen. Conrad was soon after called to Italy by the rising of
the vavassors against the great lords. Henry was summoned to help,
and with him went Kunigunda and Gisela. In August 1038, on the
march of the Germans homeward, camp and court were pitched near
the shores of the Adriatic. Here a great sickness attacked the host;
among the victims was Queen Kunigunda, whose death" on the
threshold of life” roused pity throughout the Empire. Her only
daughter Beatrice was later made by her father abbess of the royal
abbey of Quedlinburg near Goslar.
Another victim of the pestilence was Henry's half-brother Herman,
Gisela's second son. His duchy of Swabia devolved on Henry, already
Duke of Bavaria. To these two duchies and his German kingship was
added, in 1038, the kingship of Burgundy. Then in the spring of 1039
Conrad died at Utrecht.
The position of public affairs at Henry's accession to sole rule was
roughly this. There had been added to the Empire a kingdom, Burgundy,
for the most part non-German, geographically distinct, yet most useful
if the German king was to retain his hold upon Italy. The imperial
## p. 275 (#321) ############################################
Accession of Henry
275
power in Italy had been made a reality, and an important first step had
been taken here towards incorporating the hitherto elusive South, and
towards absorbing the new-comers, the Normans. On the north-eastern
frontiers of the Empire both March and Mission were suffering from
long neglect. Poland had been divided and weakened, and turned from
aggression to an equally dangerous anarchy: Bohemia had recently
slipped into hostility: Hungary was tranquil
, but scarcely friendly.
In the North the Danish alliance tended to stability. In the duchies
of Germany itself, Lorraine was indeed growing over-powerful, but
Bavaria, Swabia and (a few months later) Carinthia were held by the
Crown; Saxony was quiescent, though scarcely loyal; in Germany as a
whole the people and the mass of fighting landowners looked to the
Crown for protection and security. The Church, as under Henry II, was
a State-department, and the main support of the throne.
Over this realm, Henry, in the summer of 1039, assumed full sway,
,
as German, Italian, and Burgundian king, Duke of Swabia and of
Bavaria, and “Imperator in Spe. ” The Salian policy of concentrating
the tribal duchies in the hands of the sovereign was at its height.
In his father's funeral train, bearing the coffin in city after city, from
church-porch to altar, and finally at Spires, from the altar to the tomb,
Henry the Pious inaugurated his reign. A young man in his twenty-
second or twenty-third year, head and shoulders taller than his subjects,
the temper of his mind is seen in his sending away cold and empty the
jugglers and jesters who swarmed to Ingelheim for the wedding festivi-
ties of his second bride, Agnes of Poitou, and in his words to Abbot Hugh
of Cluny, that only in solitude and far from the business of the world
could men really commune with God.
The re-establishment of the German kingship, after the disintegration
caused by the attacks of Northmen and Magyars, had been a gradual and
ficult process.
for the moulding of a real unity, not even yet attained,
there was need of the king's repeated presence and direct action in all
parts of the realm. What Norman and Plantagenet rulers were to do later
in England by means of their royal commissioners, judges and justices,
the German king had to do in person.
Following in this the policy of his predecessors, Henry opened his reign
with a systematic progress throughout his realm, a visitation accompanied
by unceasing administrative activity. He had already, before leaving the
Netherlands, received the homage of Gozelo, Duke of both Lorraines; of
Gerard, the royalist-minded and most energetic bishop of Cambray; and
of a deputation of Burgundian magnates who had been waiting on Conrad
in Utrecht when death overcame him. He had passed with the funeral
procession through Cologne, Mayence, Worms, and Spires. Immediately
after the conclusion of the obsequies he returned to Lower Lorraine, to
Aix-la-Chapelle and Maestricht, where he remained some eight or nine
days, dealing justice to the many who demanded it. Thence he went to
1
CH. XII.
18-2
## p. 276 (#322) ############################################
276
The royal progress
Cologne, the city which competed with Mayence for preċedence in
Germany; it was already governed by Henry's life-long and most trusted
adviser, Archbishop Herman, whose noble birth and strenuous activity
contrast strongly with the comparative obscurity and the mildness of
Bardo of Mayence.
In the first days of September, accompanied by the Empress Gisela
and Archbishop Herman, Henry made his first visit as sole ruler to
Saxony, of all the German lands the least readily bound to his throne
and destined to play so fatal a part in the downfall of his heir. This
weakness in the national bond Henry seems to have tried to remedy by
personal ties. The obscure township of Goslar was to be transformed
by his favour into a courtly city. Here in the wild district of the Harz
was Botfeld, where, now and throughout his life, Henry gave himself
up at times to hunting, his only pleasure and relaxation from the toils
of state. Near at hand was the Abbey of Quedlinburg, whose then
Abbess, the royal Adelaide, he distinguished as his “spiritual mother”;
while her successors in turn were Henry's own two daughters, his eldest,
Beatrice, niece of the Confessor, and his youngest, Adelaide.
Disquieting news reached Henry in Saxony of events in Bohemia,
whose Duke Bratislav had, late in August, returned triumphantly to
Prague after a whirlwind campaign throughout the length and breadth
of Poland, a land recently made vassal to the Empire, the prince of
which, Casimir, an exile in Germany, was the nephew of Herman of
Cologne. From Saxony Henry passed through Thuringia towards
Bohemia, and there consulted with Eckhard of Meissen, guardian of the
Marches against Bohemia, a veteran of staunchest loyalty, in whose wise
counsels Henry placed unfailing confidence in spite of his unsuccess in
war. There can be no doubt that Henry in Thuringia was at the head
of an armed force, and that he meant war with Bohemia; but an embassy
with hostages from Bratislav, together, doubtless, with the need for com-
pleting the visitation of the German duchies, determined him for the
time to peace. So he dismissed his forces, and turned south to Bavaria.
From Bavaria, at the beginning of the new year, 1040, he moved to
his mother's native duchy of Swabia ; while after his departure Peter
of Hungary, ally of Břatislav, sent his Magyars raiding over the Bavarian
borders. In Swabia, Henry visited, among other places, the famous
monastery of Reichenau, the chief and most brilliant centre of learning in
Germany, the home of Herman, the noble cripple, whose genius was
extolled throughout Germany, and to whose pen we owe a very large, if
not the chief part, of our knowledge both of his times and of Henry
himself, a knowledge but little tinged with enthusiasm or sympathy for
the king. As he passed through Constance, Henry shews for a moment
a touch of human sympathy, as he visited, in the Church of Saint Mary,
the tomb of his unfortunate eldest brother, Ernest of Swabia.
At Ulm he summoned his first “Fürstentag,” the assembly of princes,
.
## p. 277 (#323) ############################################
Defeat in Bohemia
277
a
bishops, and abbots from all parts of the realm. Here came among others
Gunther, the German hermit of the Böhmer Wald, no less notable than
any of the great princes, and soon to render a signal service to his king
and countrymen in distress. To Ulm there came also the first formal
embassy from Italy to the new ruler.
From Ulm Henry passed to the Rhine. He spent April at his palace
at Ingelheim, where he received both a formal embassy from his Bur-
gundian kingdom, and more important still, Archbishop Aribert of
Milan, his father's stubborn opponent in Italy. Henry had never
approved of Conrad's proceedings against him; and the siege of Milan,
carried on by Italian princes at Conrad's command, had ceased auto-
matically with Henry's accession. By receiving the explanations and
the homage of the archbishop, Henry healed an open wound in the
Empire. Thus auspiciously, with an act of justice and reconciliation,
he opened the period of his lordship in Italy; thus too closed his in-
augural progress through the realm.
During its course had died Henry's cousins, Conrad, Duke, and
Adalbero, ex-Duke of Carinthia, after whom, as next heir, he succeeded
automatically to the duchy. He was now therefore Duke of Swabia,
Bavaria, and Carinthia; of the five great duchies, only Lorraine and
Saxony remained apart from the Crown.
The progress through the German lands completed, Henry was free
to turn to the Bohemian campaign, the necessity of which had been
clearly shewn by the raids of Břatislav's Hungarian ally. Two months
more Henry spent, apparently peacefully and piously, after his own
heart, in both the Lorraines and in Alsace, at the ancient royal
palaces of Nimeguen and Utrecht, at Liège, Metz, Nancy and Moyen-
Vic; giving grants to churches ; shewing marked favour to the re-
forming ascetic monasteries; attending, especially, the consecration of
the new Minster at Stablo, under Poppo, the pioneer and leader of
monastic reform in Germany. Probably it was from Stablo, a scene
of peaceful and pious magnificence, that Henry issued the summons for
the army to assemble against Bohemia. In July, 1040, at Goslar he
again met Eckhard of Meissen, to formulate the plan of campaign. At
Ratisbon he joined his forces and proceeded to Cham at the entrance to
the Bohemian pass, by which he meant to attack; and on 13 August he
broke camp for Bohemia.
The expedition failed speedily and disastrously; his troops were
ambushed, their leaders slain. The mediation of the hermit Gunther,
and the promise to restore the Bohemian hostages, including Břatislav's
son, alone rescued hundreds of German captives. Břatislav was left
exultant master of the situation.
Henry, silent and as it were dismissing Bohemia from his mind,
retraced his steps through Bavaria. On 8 September he filled up the
newly-vacant see of Bamberg by appointing Suidger, a Saxon, who was
CH, XII.
## p. 278 (#324) ############################################
278
Submission of Bohemia
99
a few years later, as Clement II, the first of the reforming German
popes. Going north, he held an open court, dealing justice, at Aldstedt;
and received there envoys from Yarosláv, Prince of Kiev. Then at
Münster he met the princes, laid before them the Bohemian situation,
and dismissed the Bohemian hostage-prince to his own country. This
year nature conspired with fortune against Germany The rain fell, the
rivers rose, destructive floods swept the country-side, many lost their
lives. To crown all, "grapes were scarce and the wine sour.
But Henry's calm attention to other matters by no means meant
submission to defeat. At Seligenstadt, in the April of 1041, the princes
again met to discuss active measures, and overtures from Bohemia were
rejected. Fortune was veering, for Břatislav was now deprived of his
Hungarian ally Peter, who lost his throne by a sudden insurrection and
only saved his liberty by flight to Germany, where Henry received him
kindly, "forgetting for the sake of God the wrong towards himself. ”
Bohemia, however, he did not forget, but pressed forward his preparations.
At Aix, in June 1041, he met the princes and bishops of the West,
Gozelo and Godfrey of Lorraine, Herman of Cologne, Poppo of Trèves,
Nithard of Liège. At Goslar and at Tilleda, the royal seat in Thuringia,
he concerted final measures with Eckhard of Meissen; and on 15 August,
the anniversary of his previous expedition, he crossed the Bohemian
frontier.
By Michaelmas he was back in Germany a victor. A fortnight later
Břatislav followed him to Ratisbon, and there did public homage and
underwent public humiliation. Probably Peter also appeared there as
à suppliant before Henry. Henceforth Peter was Henry's client and
Břatislav Henry's friend. Great was the joy in Germany at this Bohe-
mian victory. With it we can undoubtedly connect the "Tetralogus" ”
of Henry's tutor Wipo, a chant of praise and exhortation to the “fame-
crowned King," who “after Christ rules the world,” the lover of justice,
the giver of
peace.
ce. It is in the midst of the turmoils and rejoicings of
1041 that the Augsburg Annals record “by his (Henry's) aid and
diligence very many excelled in the arts, in building, in all manner of
learning. ”
But in this same year misfortune after misfortune fell upon the land.
There were storms and floods. Everywhere the harvest failed and famine
reigned. Nor could Henry rest on his oars. The fall and fight of
Peter of Hungary had increased, rather than removed, the Hungarian
menace, even if it opened new vistas of extended power; while Burgundy,
newly in peace, clamoured for attention lest this young peace should die.
And although to the great Christmas gathering of princes round Henry
at Strasbourg (1041) there came envoys from Obo of Hungary to know
“whether might he expect certain enmity or stable peace,” it was to
Burgundy that Henry first gave his attention. Since his appearance
as Burgundian king in 1031 he had not again visited the country.
## p. 279 (#325) ############################################
Burgundy
279
He kept Christmas (1041) at Strasbourg amid a brilliant gathering
of princes; and when immediately afterwards he entered Burgundy, it
was at the head of armed vassals. We are told by Herman of Reichenau
that the Burgundian nobles made submission, that many were brought
to justice, that Henry entered Burgundy, ruled with vigour and justice,
and safeguarded the public peace; finally Wipo tells us that “he ruled
Burgundy with magnificence. "
Some notion of the state of the land before Henry's arrival may be
gathered by the history of the archdiocese of Lyons. Here Archbishop
Burchard, characterised by Herman of Reichenau as “tyrannus et sacri-
legus, aecclesiarum depraedator, adulterque incestuosus,” and moreover
strongly anti-German, had been cast into prison and chains by Conrad
in 1036. The city was then seized upon by a Count Gerard, who,
desirous it would appear of playing at Lyons the part played by the
“Patrician" at Rome, thrust into the see of Lyons his son, a mere boy.
This boy later secretly fled, and since then Lyons had contentedly lacked
a bishop.
The filling of the see thus left vacant was one of Henry's first cares
in Burgundy: at the recommendation of the Cluniac Halinard of Dijon,
who refused the sacred office for himself, it was given to a pious and
learned French secular priest, Odulric (Ulric), Archdeacon of Langres.
That the
peace
and order enforced under Henry were after all but com-
parative may be judged from the murder of Odulric himself only a few
years later. There was much to attract Henry in Burgundy; for side
by side with its lawlessness and violence were the strivings for peace and
holiness embodied in the “Treuga Dei” and in the austerity of Cluny
and its monasteries. Henry's approbation of Cluniac ideals is evident,
and throughout his whole life he shews real ardour, almost a passion
in his striving to realise throughout the Empire that peace founded
on religion, upon which the Treuga Dei, if in somewhat other fashion,
strove to insist locally.
After some six weeks in Burgundy, he must have heard at Basle on
his way back of the havoc played among the Bavarians on the frontier, a
week earlier, by the new King Obo of Hungary and his raiders. Henry,
himself the absentee duke of the unfortunate duchy, at once handed
it over (without waiting, as it would seem, for the formality of an
election, as right was, by the Bavarians) to Count Henry of Luxemburg,
who was akin to the last Duke Henry of Bavaria, and nephew to the
Empress Kunigunda, wife of Henry II. Trusting to the vigour of the
new duke to protect Bavaria for the time being, Henry next, a few
weeks later, summoned all the princes, including of course Eckhard of
Meissen, to Cologne, there to decide upon further steps to be taken
with regard to Hungary. They unanimously declared for war.
Some four or five months elapsed before the expedition was launched.
From Würzburg, at Whitsuntide, Henry strengthened his hold on
CH. XII.
## p. 280 (#326) ############################################
280.
Hungary
his Burgundian realm by dispatching Bishop Bruno to woo for him
Agnes of Poitou.
A few months he spent in comparative quiet, pro-
bably with his mother, in Thuringia and Saxony; then later, in August
1042, he entered Bavaria and started, early in September, on the Hun-
garian expedition.
It was a success. Henry overcame, not Obo himself, who retired to
inaccessible fastnesses, but at least the Western Magyars. He set up a
new king, not Peter, but an unnamed cousin of his, and then returned fairly
well satisfied to Germany. Directly his back was turned, Obo emerged
from his fastness, and the reign of Henry's candidate came to an abrupt
end. Yet a lesson against raiding had undoubtedly been given to “the
over-daring Kinglet. ”
The king spent the Christmas of 1042 at Goslar; whither in January
came envoys from the princes of the northern peoples. Břatislav of
Bohemia came in person, bearing and receiving gifts. The Russians,
though they bore back to their distant lord far more magnificent presents
than they could have offered, departed in chagrin, for Henry had rejected
their offer of a Russian bride. Casimir of Poland also sent his envoys;
they were not received, since he himself did not come in person. Lastly
Obo too, who had just ejected his second rival king, sent to propose
peace. His messengers received an answer ominously evasive.
Early in the following month, at Goslar, the Empress-Mother died.
That there had been some measure of alienation between Henry and
Gisela is suggested by Wipo's exhortation to Henry to "remember the
sweetness of a mother's name,” and by his recording in his Tetralogus
the
many benefits conferred by Gisela on her son; as well as by Herman
of Reichenau's acid comment. Yet there is no evidence that the aliena-
tion was serious. Henry's grants and charters on his mother's petition
are numerous. In all probability he spent with her the only long interval
of comparative leisure (1042) that he had enjoyed since his accession ;
she died whilst with him at Goslar.
Soon after the funeral ceremonies were over, Henry had his first
meeting with the King of France, Henry I. Its place and object are
obscure; but probably it was on the frontier at Ivois, and it may very
well have been in connexion with Henry's approaching marriage with
Agnes of Poitou.
The king's mind was now bent on the preparations for yet another
Hungarian expedition. Twice Obo sought to evade the conflict. Obo
did not, it is true, shew much tact, if indeed he really desired peace ;
for in his second embassy he demanded that Henry should himself swear
to any terms agreed upon, instead of merely giving the oath in kingly
fashion by proxy; this request was deemed an insult.
The blow when it came was effective. Henry in the space of four
weeks brought Obo to a promise of humble satisfaction, a satisfaction
never made effectual, because the promises of Obo were not fulfilled.
## p. 281 (#327) ############################################
The Day of Indulgence
281
Far more important and of solid and lasting advantage to Germany,
was the restitution by Hungary of that territory on the Danube ceded
to St Stephen “pro causa amicitiae” in 1031.
Since the frontier won by Henry remained until 1919 the frontier
between German Austria and Hungary, it is worth while considering it
in detail.
The land ceded, or rather restored, was “ex una parte Danubii inter
Fiscaha et Litacha, ex altera autem inter Strachtin et ostia Fiscaha usque
in Maraha. " South of the Danube, that is to say, the Leitha replaced the
Fischa as boundary as far south as the Carinthian March. North of the
river, the old frontier line seems to have run from opposite the confluence
of the Fischa with the Danube to a fortress on the Moravian border,
Strachtin or Trachtin. This artificial frontier was now replaced by the
river March. Thus among other things was secured permanently for
Germany the famous “ Wiener Wald. "
The realm was now at peace: Burgundy in order, Italy contented (in
contrast to the early days of Conrad) with German overlordship, not one
of the great princes or duchies of Germany a danger to the realm. The
fame or the arms of the king had induced the princes on its borders to
seek his friendship and acknowledge his superiority. Nothing remained
to mar the public peace save private enmities. To private enemies the
king might, without danger to the commonwealth, offer reconciliation.
On the “Day of Indulgence" at Constance, in late October 1043, Henry
from the pulpit announced to the assembled princes and bishops and to
the whole of Germany, that he renounced all idea of vengeance on any
who had injured him, and exhorted all his princes, nobles and people in
their turn to forget all private offences. The appeal of the king was
ordered to be made known throughout the whole land, and this
day at Constance became known as the “Day of Indulgence” or “Day
of Pardon. "
The object was to abolish violence and private war, and so far the
attempt bears a strong resemblance to the contemporary Franco-Bur-
gundian institution, the “Truce of God," with which, however, it cannot
be confounded, since although the ends were the same, the means were
only superficially alike. Since however the “Indulgence” has sometimes
been confused with, sometimes considered as deliberately rivalling, this
“Treuga Dei,” it is worth while to consider some relations and dis-
similarities between the two movements.
The “Truce of God” endeavoured to mitigate and limit violence by
an appeal to Christian sentiment rather than to Christian principle. The
Christian, under heavy church penalties, was to reverence certain days
and times regarded as sacred by abstaining on them from all violence not
only in aggression but even under provocation. This “Truce” was created
in France, the country where private feuds were most general and
fiercest, and where therefore there was greatest need of it. Its birth-
CH. XII.
## p. 282 (#328) ############################################
282
Peace and Truce of God
9
place was Aquitaine, in the year of Henry's accession; and nowhere was
it more eagerly adopted than in Burgundy, where religious zeal burnt
whitest and private feuds were most universal and devastating.
Now this “Truce of God” was an addition made to the original pro-
clamation of a Peace of God (c. 980), which forbade private violence
against non-combatants, by oath and for a fixed time, as contrary to
Christian precept. Like most medieval legislation, both “Peace" and
“Truce” were largely failures? Henry's “Indulgence” struck at the root
of the evil as they had not. The Indulgence, it is true, was not so
sweeping as would have been the “Peace of God," because no provision
was made for the protection of non-combatants, in case private war did
arrive. The “Indulgence,” being a pardon of actual enemies, could by
its nature refer only to the present and the actual without a word as
to the future, although Henry no doubt hoped that the one must entail
the other.
Another distinction between the "Treuga Dei" and the “Indulgence"
consists in the ecclesiastical character of the former. The “Truce" was
conceived by the Church, proclaimed by the Church, its breach punished
by heavy ecclesiastical penalties. The “Indulgence” was an example and
exhortation from a Christian king to his subjects, compliance being in
appearance voluntary, though royal displeasure might threaten him who
refused it. But the distinction does not, as some have thought, imply
any sort of opposition. Henry approved of the “Truce as churchmen
approved of the “Indulgence. ” One adversary of the Truce opposed it,
indeed, on the ground that by it the Church usurped a royal function.
But this was the ultra-royalist Gerard of Cambray, one of the few
bishops who did not enjoy Henry's favour. On the other hand, the
chief supporters of the Truce in Burgundy were the bishops, firm im-
perialists. Only a year before Henry's visit to Burgundy the Bishops
and Archbishops of Arles, Avignon, Nice, Vienne and Besançon, had
met Pope Benedict IX at Marseilles and had in all probability obtained
his approval for the measure promulgated by the Burgundian synod at
Montriond in 1041, extending the time of the Truce to the whole of
Lent and Advent.
