No More Learning

They meet frequently, and
apparently on cordial terms of friendship. There were nevertheless grounds
for friction. Old Welf Vi, since the loss of his son by the pestilence in
Italy (1167), thinking that in his advanced age he could make better use
of money than of land, resolved to sell his inheritance. He offered it first
to Henry who, though accepting the proposal readily enough, was tardy
in the matter of payment; Welf therefore approached his other nephew,
Frederick, who concluded the bargain forth with. Henry was thus deprived
of a rich portion of the estates of his family, lands on both sides of the
Alps, on which he had surely counted. This was a grievance but not the
only one that rankled in the heart of Henry. Frederick had attempted,
it was said, to get into his hands the disposal of Henry's inheritance in the
event of the latter's death in the Holy Land. Nor was the bitterness all on
one side; the Emperor too had cause to complain of his cousin. Henry had
been drawn into relations with foreign powers who were not in sympathy
with Frederick’s Italian policy-with the Eastern Emperor Manuel who
was aiding the Lombards, with Henry II of England, his father-in-law,
who had recognised Alexander III.
So the breach widens. The collapse of the great Welf power was at
hand. A campaign to Italy was arranged for the autumn of the year 1174,
and in this campaign Henry took no part. Frederick, whose Lombard
adversaries had grown in strength, had become more united, more stub-
bornly resolved to resist to the last, could ill afford to dispense with the
troops which Henry could bring into the field. It is unlikely that
he willingly left the duke in Germany even for so important a task
as the maintenance of peace; nor in the circumstances was Henry,
surrounded as he was by personal enemies, very likely to succeed in this.
The two met for the last time on terms of friendship at Ratisbon in May
1174. Their next meeting, if indeed it is historical, is the famous inter-
view at Chiavenna. This is altogether a very mysterious episode. The
chroniclers who refer to it are so confused in their knowledge that many
scholars are led to the conclusion that the whole thing is a myth, a legend
spread by ballad singers after Henry's death in 1195; and their contention
is so far supported in that we possess no account of it written near the time
it was supposed to have taken place. With the exception of Gilbert of
Mons, who probably wrote in 1196, and the Marbach Annals, which are
attributed to the year 1184, all our authorities belong to the first quarter
of the thirteenth century. Yet it is difficult to understand how such a
widely, though inaccurately, known story could have arisen entirely with-


## p. 403 (#449) ############################################

The meeting at Chiavenna
403
out foundation. It was after his army had suffered severe losses at the
siege of Alessandria that Frederick in the spring of 1176 sought a personal
interview with his cousin. They met at Chiavenna, and the Emperor
begged for the other's assistance; he even humbled himself before his proud
subject, for, it seems, he realised that he must make amends for something,
presumably his conduct while Henry was in Palestine. Henry, on the other
hand, felt himself in a position to dictate terms, and he demanded the
restoration of Goslar, which he had ceded to the Emperor as the price of
peace in 1168, as a fief; the terms were too heavy, and the two parted in
enmity. So runs the story and, in spite of the difficulties, we may accept
the substance of it. Moreover it has an important bearing on what
followed. Though the refusal of help and the subsequent trial cannot be
regarded as cause and effect, it is impossible to deny the influence of the
one on the other. The breach between the former friends was now almost,
if not quite, irreparable; the Emperor would no longer arbitrate in the
duke's quarrels as a friend, not even as an impartial judge, but as a man
determined on the duke's ruin; and it was a quarrel between the duke and
the Saxon princes which gave rise to the famous trial.
The quarrel centred round the bishopric of Halberstadt. Its Bishop,
Ulrich, as long ago as 1160 had been deprived of his see for the attitude
he had adopted in the papal schism; for he had recognised Alexander III.
His place had been filled by one Gero, a close friend of the duke. By the
terms of the agreement reached at Anagni and confirmed at Venice, Ulrich
was restored to his old see, and he immediately set about undoing all the
acts of the usurper; he claimed back the fiefs of his church which had been
granted to Henry; he dismissed from their benefices the clergy appointed
by Gero under the duke's patronage. Henry was engaged in a campaign
in Pomerania, and was besieging the fortress of Demmin, when the news
of these events reached him. Having hurriedly concluded a truce with the
Slavs, he hastened back to Saxony. The last move of the bishop was still
more threatening; on a hill in the near neighbourhood of Halberstadt
he built a fortress, obviously as a basis of operations against the duke.
Twice was the stronghold destroyed and twice rebuilt. A command from
the Emperor in Italy, bidding the princes to refrain from repairing the
obnoxious fortress, for the moment restored peace. But Henry's position
was becoming daily more hazardous; a portion of his army had suffered
a severe defeat and the loss of more than four hundred prisoners at the
hands of Bernard of Anhalt; then early in the year 1178 an offensive and
defensive alliance was concluded against him at Cassel between Ulrich and
the formidable Philip of Cologne. The duke's castles and lands in West-
phalia were attacked and plundered, and it was only with difficulty that
Archbishop Wichmann of Magdeburg succeeded in preventing further
hostilities till the Emperor's return. He returned towards the end of
October, and both parties laid their complaints before him at a diet held
at Spires on 11 November 1178.
CH. XII.
26-2


## p. 404 (#450) ############################################

404
Proceedings against Henry the Lion
We are now launched into a sea of uncertainty and doubt. Innumer-
able questions arise: What was the Emperor's attitude? What were the
grounds of complaint against the duke? What course did the proceedings
follow? According to what law was he judged? Where and when was the
case heard? All and each of these questions are capable of more than one
answer. The only incontrovertible authority is the document drawn up
at the Diet of Gelnhausen on 13 April 1180, which, while having as its
main object the partition of the Saxon duchy, gives an official account of
the course of the trial. This too is not free from criticism. The original
manuscript is in parts wholly illegible; we have to rely on a transcript
made in 1306; it is open to a variety of interpretations according to the
way in which it is punctuated. But still it tells us much that we wish
to know; it makes it clear that there were two distinct legal processes,
one according to customary law, landrecht, one according to feudal law,
lehnrecht. In the former there is a single summons', the Swabian princes
-Henry's tribal peers—are the judges? , the sentence is the ban; in the
latter there are three citations, the princes without differentiation of
tribe are the judges, the punishment is the loss of fiefs. The document
tells us further that it was the complaints of the princes which initiated
the proceedings; for Henry “had sorely oppressed the liberty of the
Church and of the princes of the Empire by seizing their possessions and
by threatening their rights.
He was summoned to Worms on 13 January 1179 to answer to the
charges but failed to appear, and a new hearing was arranged for 24 June
at Magdeburg. Here, as Henry was again absent, the ban was pronounced
against him according to customary law. Now new charges are brought
into court: Henry in spite of warnings has continued his aggressions
against the princes; a Saxon noble, Dietrich of Landsberg, declared that
at Henry's instigation the Lusatians had made an incursion into his
territory, and was prepared to prove his assertion by battle—a challenge
which Henry refused; Henry had shewn contempt of the imperial com-
mands. It is now “evident high treason,” and the suit according to
1 The rule in customary law was that three summonses should be issued to the
defendant with terms of fourteen days intervening. But could these three intervals
be made consecutive in one long term of six weeks? Suits by customary law were
commonly of a local character and were heard in local courts. The short terms were
therefore quite practicable. When however the suit was cognisable in the imperial
court, which was always moving about, frequent short summonses were difficult. One
peremptory citation after a six weeks' interval would be an obvious and natural eva-
sion of this inconvenience. Güterbock, Der Prozess Heinrichs des Löwen (1909), pp.
131 sq. , cites eight instances of this practice: Otto of Nordheim, Lothar of Supplin-
burg, Frederick of Swabia, Conrad of Salzburg, Otto of Wittelsbach, Frederick of
Isenburg, Ottokar of Bohemia, and Guy of Flanders. Haller, Der Sturz Heinrichs
des Löwen (1911), contests this view and believes there were three citations in both
suits, pp. 367 sq.
2 The tribe was determined by the situation of the family castle (in the case of
the Welfs, Altdorf in Swabia), i. e. by descent.


## p. 405 (#451) ############################################

Dismemberment of the duchies of Saxony and Bavaria 405
feudal law goes forward. A second hearing was fixed for 17 August at
Kaina, and a third for 13 January 1180 at Würzburg, where on the
ground of contumacy, the repeated neglect of the imperial summons
the sentence, the loss of his fiefs, fell. We are told that Henry made an
attempt to secure a reconciliation, perhaps the removal of the ban, after
the Diet of Magdeburg. A meeting between Henry and the Emperor
apparently took place at Haldensleben, where the price of peace was set
at 5000 marks;
Henry refused to pay so large a sum, and the negotiations
broke down. The law therefore took its course. At the Diet of Geln-
hausen, 13 April 1180, the duchy of Saxony was partitioned. Westphalia,
severed from the duchy, was granted with ducal powers to the Archbishop
Philip of Cologne; the remainder, the portion east of the Weser, with
the title of Duke of Saxony, was conferred upon the Ascanian prince,
Bernard of Anhalt, the younger son of Albert the Bear. But Henry in
the course of his career had accumulated a number of Church fiefs in his
hands; these now reverted to the bishops, leaving to the new duke but a
comparatively small portion of Henry's extensive territorial possessions
in east and middle Saxony. In the Bavarian capital, Ratisbon, a diet
was held on 24 June 1180. Its object was twofold: first, as a year and a
day had elapsed since the publication of the ban at Magdeburg, Henry's
complete outlawry, the oberacht, was pronounced, and a campaign to give
effect to the sentence was arranged to open on 25 July. Secondly,
Henry's Bavarian duchy and fiefs were declared forfeit. Three months
later (16 September), at Altenburg, Bavaria was subjected to a treatment
similar to that of Saxony. The March of Styria was completely detached
and raised to the position of an independent duchy under Ottokar, its
former margrave; the dukedom thus diminished in extent was conferred
upon Otto of Wittelsbach.
No single event in the Middle Ages so profoundly altered the map of
Germany as the fall of Henry the Lion. In place of the four or five large
compact duchies, the conspicuous feature of the Germany of the Saxon
and Salian Emperors, we have now some few duchies, relatively small, and
innumerable independent principalities, little and great, scattered broad-
cast over the country. The duke moreover no longer stands in a place
apart, unrivalled in his wealth, power, and magnificence; there are others
as powerful as or more powerful than he: the Margrave of Brandenburg,
the Landgrave of Thuringia, the Count-Palatine of the Rhine. The day
of the tribal duchy has passed away.
Henry was condemned but not subdued; all this time, while the long
and dreary trial was going forward, warfare between the ducal and the
anti-ducal party had continued unceasingly, and fortune had on the
whole favoured Henry. Halberstadt had been captured and burnt by the
duke's men, and its Bishop Ulrich made prisoner; the Archbishops of
Magdeburg and Cologne had laid siege to the duke's town of Haldens-
1 Arnold of Lübeck, 11, 10.
CH. XII.


## p. 406 (#452) ############################################

406
Submission and banishment of Henry
leben, but in spite of every effort they were forced after some months to
abandon the attempt to take it. A truce gave both parties a much-
needed rest during the early months of the next year, 1180; but in April
fighting began again, and still Henry was successful. Though he failed
to capture Goslar, to which he laid siege, he gained an important victory
over an army led by Louis of Thuringia and Bernard of Anhalt at
Weissensee on the Unstrut, pursued the enemy as far as Mühlhausen, and
returned triumphantly, with more than four hundred prisoners, among
them the Landgrave Louis himself, to Brunswick. At the duke's bidding,
the obedient Wends swept ravaging through the Lausitz. On 30 July
Bishop Ulrich of Halberstadt, the source of much of Henry's trouble, died,
and two days later came the news of a considerable victory in Westphalia.
There a number of discontented vassals rose against their feudal lord; a
strong army under Henry's old associates in the Slav campaigns, the
younger Adolf of Schauenburg, Bernard of Ratzeburg, and Guncelin of
Schwerin, joined battle with them at Halrefeld, and after hard fighting
utterly routed them.
But this was the last of Henry's triumphs. The Emperor himself had
taken the field in July; after capturing Lichtenburg, an important
stronghold of the duke, he held a diet at Werla whence he issued a decree
commanding Henry's vassals to join his standard. A large number of
desertions was the result. Henry moreover had failed in his attempts to
secure foreign aid; he had approached Denmark and England. But his
old ally Waldemar was now strong enough to rest on his own resources;
his dependence on Henry was irksome, and he was only too glad to stand
by and watch the discomfiture of his former master. Henry II of England,
though full of good intentions towards his son-in-law, was not prepared
single-handed to entangle himself in so large an enterprise as war with
the Emperor would entail. One after another Henry's supporters fell
away and surrendered their castles; one after another his strongholds
opened their gates to the Emperor. The burghers of Lübeck put up a
gallant fight, for they owed much of their prosperity to the duke's
paternal care. But Waldemar of Denmark had now openly declared
himself on Frederick's side; between the Danish fleet and the German
troops the town was so closely invested that further resistance was useless;
the citizens, not however before they had obtained the express permission
of their patron, surrendered their city. The fall of Lübeck crippled
Henry's resources. He attempted to negotiate, he attempted to make a
last stand at Stade; but the time had passed for negotiations, and the
town of Stade fell into the hands of Philip of Cologne; it remained only
for him to submit. He appeared at a diet held at Erfurt, bowed himself
before the Emperor, who characteristically raised him from the ground
and kissed him amid tears. He was granted the two cities of his patri-
mony, Brunswick and Lüneburg, but it was considered, and, as events
proved, with justice, unsafe to allow him to remain in Germany. He was


## p. 407 (#453) ############################################

The Diet of Mayence
407
a
therefore banished under oath not to return without Frederick's leave.
The terms were hard, and foreign powers viewed with alarm the total
collapse of the great Welf power. Henry II of England, Pope Alexander III,
Philip Augustus, and Philip, Count of Flanders, used their endeavours to
persuade the Emperor to a more lenient course; and their efforts were not
without success: the term of banishment was limited to three years
and
portion of his revenues was allotted to the exiled duke. So in the summer
of 1182 Henry with his family left Brunswick to spend the years of
banishment at the court of his father-in-law in Normandy and England.
For the general peace of the country it was no doubt better that
Henry should be out of Germany, but it is none the less true that his
overthrow and banishment caused a serious set-back to his work on the
eastern frontier. Duke Bernard had neither the ability nor the resources
necessary to carry it on effectively; he had little influence among the East
Saxon nobility, who quarrelled among themselves and threw the country
into anarchy. “In those days there was no king in Israel,” laments Arnold
of Lübeck, “and each man ruled in the manner of a tyrant. " Denmark
took the opportunity to re-assert its independence; Canute VI, who had
succeeded his father Waldemar in May 1182, soon gained ascendency in
Holstein and Mecklenburg; he defeated Bogislav of Pomerania and made
him his vassal; finally he refused his homage to Frederick.
But these disasters were confined to the north-east corner of Germany;
elsewhere the Emperor's power and prestige were greater than they had
ever been. Here the chronicler tells a different tale; "all the tumult of
war has been stilled," and the brilliant festival of Mayence at Whitsuntide
1184 bears testimony to the success of the Emperor's rule. In the broad
meadows on the banks of the Rhine a vast city of wooden palaces and
bright-coloured tents was erected to house the multitude of princes and
foreign envoys that came thither to witness the knighting of the two
elder sons of Frederick, King Henry and Duke Frederick of Swabia. For
three days the large company were entertained as the Emperor's guests
with festivities and tournaments. To Henry, thus ceremoniously knighted,
was entrusted the regency during the Emperor's absence (1184-5). Born
in 1165, he was crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle when but four years old;
now at the age of nineteen he was called to a position of the highest
responsibility and difficulty; and if his youthful efforts at administration
were not entirely successful, it was because unaided he had to deal with
problems which might well have baffled more experienced rulers. There
was no Rainald of Cologne, no Christian of Mayence, no statesman-
bishop on whom he could rely for assistance. Philip of Cologne, the
most powerful man at the moment, was already adopting a hostile
attitude towards the crown, which was soon to be aggravated into open
hostility when the young king early in 1185 imposed a fine upon him for
breaking the peace in a feud with the burghers of Duisburg.
A dispute over the archbishopric at Trèves made matters worse.
CH. XII.


## p. 408 (#454) ############################################

408
Quarrel with Pope Urban III
Two candidates claimed to have been elected to the see in May 1183 —
Rudolf of Wied, provost of the Cathedral, and the Archdeacon Folmar.
Frederick summoned the electors to a diet at Constance, on the advice of
the princes ordered a fresh election, and subsequently invested the suc-
cessful candidate Rudolf with the regalia. Folmar, who had originally
received a majority of the votes, vigorously protested against the whole
proceeding, against Frederick’s interference, and most of all against the
election of his rival. He appealed to the Pope, and even used armed force
to keep Rudolf from entering upon his duties; in Germany his cause was
championed by Philip of Cologne, Rudolf's by King Henry who impetu-
ously took up arms against the supporters of Folmar. Pope Lucius III
hesitated to give a decision on the appeal; but his successor, Frederick's
old enemy Archbishop Humbert of Milan, as Pope Urban III, im-
mediately confirmed the appointment of the anti-imperialist candidate
and consecrated Folmar. Henry, by way of retaliation, was sent on a
plundering expedition into the papal patrimony. The Trèves election
dispute in this way brought the Emperor once more into hostility with
the Curia. Moreover other issues were involved: the still undecided
claim to the inheritance of the Countess Matilda, and the coronation of
his son.
To this last demand both Lucius and Urban were deaf. It
was not possible, they said, that two Emperors should rule the Empire
at one and the same time. Frederick therefore took the matter into his
own hands; at the feast which celebrated at Milan the nuptials of
Henry and Constance of Sicily he had his son crowned King of Italy at
the hands of Ulrich, the Patriarch of Aquileia, and associated him
with himself in the government of the Empire.
Philip, Archbishop of Cologne, formerly the zealous champion of the
imperial cause against Alexander III, had now, as we have seen, set him-
self at the head of the opposition to Frederick and his son in Germany.
Having, on the fall of Henry the Lion, acquired the duchy of Westphalia,
he had become a territorial prince with interests of his own to follow,
interests which clashed with those of the Empire. He had behind him,
moreover, a considerable party; many of the bishops, especially those of
his metropolitan diocese, sympathised with the attitude he had adopted
in the papal-imperial controversy, and more especially was this the case
when Urban III retaliated against the Emperor by an attack on the
latter's rights to the regalia and spolia, vexatious rights which they would
gladly see abolished. Many of the lay nobles, on the other hand, saw in
his policy the advancement of particularist as opposed to national or im-
perial interests; so we find enrolled among Philip's partisans Louis, the
Landgrave of Thuringia, and Adolf, Count of Holstein. For foreign
allies he could reckon of course on the Curia, perhaps on Denmark and
England. To the latter court he had paid a visit apparently with the
object of arranging a marriage between Prince Richard and a daughter
of the Emperor; it is not impossible that he used the occasion to come


## p. 409 (#455) ############################################

Rebellion of Archbishop Philip of Cologne
409
to an understanding with the banished Henry the Lion at the same time;
however, when the duke returned from exile about Michaelmas 1185, he
seems to have lived peaceably at Brunswick without taking any active
steps to support the great coalition which was gathering against the
Emperor.
The situation was serious; but Frederick was equal to the occasion.
He hurried back from Italy in the summer of 1186. Having tried with-
out success to settle matters at a personal interview with Philip, he
summoned a diet to Gelnhausen in December, himself addressed the
bishops in a long speech in which he expatiated on his grievances, especi-
ally regarding the Trèves election, and finally won them over to his way
of thinking. Conrad of Mayence, on behalf of the German clergy, made
known to the Pope the result of this assembly. Urban retorted with threats
of every kind, but he died suddenly while journeying from Verona to
Venice in the following autumn, 20 October 1187, stubborn but unsuc-
cessful. Philip, but now the head of a dangerous coalition, was gradually
being isolated from his previous allies till he stood almost alone. He was
already deprived of the support of the Pope and of the German bishops;
the value of his allies on the lower Rhine, the Count of Flanders and the
Duke of Brabant, was counteracted when at Toul Frederick won the
services of Count Baldwin of Hainault by the recognition of his claims
to the inheritance of Namur; finally the Emperor entered into a close
alliance with Philip Augustus against Henry II of England which disposed
of any hopes Philip of Cologne may have entertained of help from that
quarter. His refusal to present himself to answer to the charges brought
against him at the imperial court at Worms in August and at Strasbourg
in December 1187 alienated his German supporters; further resistance
would have been useless. Cardinal Henry of Albano, the zealous preacher
of the Third Crusade, exerted his influence in the interests of peace, and
finally Philip appeared before the Emperor at Mayence (March 1188),
cleared himself on oath of the charges raised against him, and was restored
to the good graces of Frederick.
With the death of Urban III all hindrances in the path of Frederick's
Church policy were withdrawn. Urban's successors were compliant to the
imperial will. Their energies were devoted to arousing Christendom to
action for the recovery of Jerusalem, which on 3 October 1187 had fallen
into the hands of Saladin. Gregory VIII in a busy pontificate of less
than two months restored peace and friendly relations with the Emperor;
Clement III deposed Folmar from the archbishopric of Trèves, and Henry
in his turn restored the papal lands which he had occupied in the course
of the struggle with Urban.
For Frederick, as for many great men in history, the East had a
singular fascination. After the battle of Legnano he is said to have
exclaimed: “Happier Alexander, who saw not Italy, happier I, had I been
drawn to Asia. ” It was appropriately on the fourth Sunday in Lent,
CH. XII.


## p. 410 (#456) ############################################

410
Preparations for the Third Crusade
named from the introit Laetare Hierusalem, that Frederick pledged himself
to recover the Holy City by taking the cross from the Cardinal-bishop of
Albano (Mayence, 27 March). His example was followed by his second
son Frederick, Duke of Swabia, by Leopold of Austria, and by large
numbers of other princes both lay and ecclesiastical. Frederick had
accompanied his uncle the Emperor Conrad III on the Second Crusade,
and had experienced the mismanagement of that ill-starred expedition.
He therefore took every precaution; he admitted into his army only
those who could maintain themselves at their own cost for a two years'
campaign. He wrote to the King of Hungary, to the Emperor of Con-
stantinople, to the Sultan of Iconium, demanding an unmolested passage
through their respective dominions. He wrote even to Saladin requiring
the restitution of the lands he had seized, and warning him in the event
of his refusal to prepare for war within a twelvemonth of the first
of November following. Saladin in a respectful but boastful letter
accepted the Emperor's challenge, and the latter hurried forward his pre-
parations for the expedition.
His son Henry, already crowned king and Emperor-elect, was to take
charge of affairs in the West during his absence; but Frederick was
anxious to remove as many difficulties as he could from the path of the
young and inexperienced ruler. Henry the Lion, who since his return
from banishment had remained tolerably peaceable at Brunswick, was
now shewing signs of restiveness; he was still, though in advanced years, ,
active and ambitious, too ambitious to rest quietly content with the
humble position which remained to him; there was not a little discord,
we are told, between him and his supplanter, Duke Bernard. At a diet
at Goslar in August 1188 he was given the choice between three alter-
native proposals: either he must content himself with a partial restitution
of his lands, or he must accompany the Emperor on the Crusade at the
latter's expense on the understanding that on his return he should be
completely restored to his own, or finally he must leave Germany with his
eldest son for a further period of three years. At first sight it seems
strange that Henry should choose the third alternative; but it was the only
one of the three which left him with a free hand. If he had accepted the
first offer he must renounce for ever the remainder of his former posses-
sions, if the second he saw little likelihood of Frederick's having either
the power or the inclination to make him the promised full restitution of
lands which had already been granted away to others. So at Easter 1189
he once more withdrew to the court of his father-in-law, there to scheme
and plot with his English kinsfolk for the recovery of his lost posses-
sions by force of arms.
There was another important matter which the Emperor wished to
see settled. His friendly relations with the French court drew him inevit.
ably into the political turmoil of the western border-countries—Flanders,
Champagne, Brabant, Namur, Hainault. The centre of interest is Baldwin,


## p. 411 (#457) ############################################

The Third Crusade
411
Count of Hainault, of whose doings we have a full account from his
Chancellor, Gilbert of Mons. He was heir to his childless brother-in-law,
Philip of Flanders; he was heir also to his blind, elderly, and also child-
less uncle Henry II, Count of Namur and Luxembourg. Such rich
expectations brought upon him the jealousy and hostility of his neighbours.
However he could look for support in the highest places; his sister had
married Philip Augustus, and Philip was on terms of friendship with
the Emperor. It was to the imperial court therefore that he looked for, and
from which he gained, a guarantee of his rights of succession to the count-
ship of Namur. Thus matters stood when to the surprise of everyone,
and not the least of himself, the aged Count of Namur became the father
of a daughter, Ermesinde, who before she was a year old was betrothed
to the Count of Champagne with the inheritance of Namur as her
promised dowry. Baldwin once more sought the help of Frederick, but
the final decision was postponed till the return of King Henry from Italy.
Then at Seligenstadt in May 1188 the Emperor not only confirmed him
in the succession, but raised the county into a margravate, thereby
exalting Baldwin to the rank of a prince of the Empire. Frederick's
policy was to create a strong outpost on the north-west frontier of his
dominions. Baldwin did not live to occupy this powerful position; but
it passed to his second son Philip, while his elder son united the counties
of Hainault and Flanders and was destined to become the first Latin
Emperor of Constantinople.
At the head of an army of some twenty thousand knights Frederick
left Ratisbon early in May 1189. The journey eastward was likely to prove
difficult, for Isaac Angelus, who was on anything but friendly terms with
Frederick since the conclusion of the German-Sicilian alliance, had
opened negotiations with Saladin. All kinds of obstructions were thrown
in the path of the imperial army. The crusaders had scarcely left Hun-
garian soil before they encountered hostility from the Bulgarians,
instigated by the perfidious Emperor of Constantinople; the ambassadors,
the Bishop of Münster and others, sent forward to the Greek capital as
an earnest of Frederick's good faith, were thrust into prison. Neverthe-
less fear of the German arms was stronger than hatred; the inhabitants
of Philippopolis and Hadrianople fled at their approach and left the cities
deserted; Isaac Angelus, dreading an attack on Constantinople, had to
submit. He agreed to provision Frederick's army, to transport it to Asia
Minor, and to provide hostages for his good conduct. Isaac had given
way none too soon; for Frederick, disgusted with his behaviour, had written
to his son in Germany with instructions to collect a fleet from the maritime
towns of Italy and to get the Pope's sanction to a crusade against the
Greeks. Timely submission alone prevented Barbarossa from anticipating
the work of the Fourth Crusade.
Without entering the Greek capital the German army moved south-
ward from Hadrianople and crossed from Gallipoli into Asia Minor. Here
CH, XII.


## p. 412 (#458) ############################################

412
Death of Frederick Barbarossa, 10 June 1190
too unexpected difficulties were encountered: the promises of the Sultan
of Iconium on which Frederick had reckoned were as valueless as those of
the Emperor of Constantinople; the line of march of the crusading army
was continually harassed by Turkish bands; supplies were cut off and
famine was added to the other difficulties which beset their path. Iconium
had to be captured before Sultan Qilij Arslān would fulfil his compact,
grant them a safe passage through his dominions, and provide them with
the necessary supplies. With Armenian guides they proceeded on their
way across the Taurus till they reached the banks of the Cilician river
Salef. There the great Kaiser met his end. How precisely, we cannot tell;
there are many versions of the story. Frederick, perhaps, chafing at the slow
progress of his army over the narrow bridge, rode impetuously into the
stream and was borne under by the swift waters, or, wearied by the tedious
march across the mountains, he may have wished to refresh himself in
the cool stream and found the current too strong for his aged limbs.
Certain it is that his body was drawn lifeless from the river.
The memory of Frederick Barbarossa was not extinguished when his
bones were laid to rest in the church of St Peter at Antioch. He has
lived on in the minds of his fellow-countrymen as the truest expression of
German patriotism. It is but a little more than a century ago that his
name was first linked with the well-known Kyffhäuser Saga; the hero of
that famous legend is his gifted, brilliant, yet far less patriotic grandson.
Rückert and Grimm', with a keener perception of the fitness of things,
make not Frederick II but Frederick Barbarossa sleep in the solitary cave
on the mountain side with his great red beard growing round the table
at which he sits; twice his beard has encircled the table; when it has done
so a third time he will awaken and fight a mighty battle, and the Day of
Judgment will dawn.
1 Rückert, Patriotische Gedichte, 1813; J. and W. Grimm, Deutsche Sagen, 1816,
p. 29. Cf. also Grimm, Deutsche Mythologie, 1854, pp. 906 sq.


## p. 413 (#459) ############################################

413
CHAPTER XIII.
FREDERICK BARBAROSSA AND THE LOMBARD LEAGUE.
When the votes of the Electors called the young Duke of Swabia,
Frederick of Hohenstaufen, to the throne, men's minds turned to him in
anxiety yet in the fulness of hope. Germany had need of settled
government in order to reunite her inherent forces and to raise the fallen
dignity of the Empire to the high level once attained by Charles and
Otto the Great. The character of the young monarch who now undertook
to direct the destinies of the Empire was not unequal to the task, and the
manly ambition which glowed within him found in the example of those
great predecessors a spur and inspiration fraught with promise. His
person seemed a symbol of domestic peace to the Germans who had raised
him to his throne. His father had transmitted to him the Ghibelline
blood of the Hohenstaufen with all the other imperial traditions of the
Franconian house. On his mother's side he was related to the Welfs,
and thus seemed to form a reuniting link of friendship between the two
great parties so long at variance. He was a voice calling upon the
scattered forces of Germany to combine and work in harmony for
common interests.
Gifted with a good memory and a keen intelligence, Frederick
spoke his native language eloquently but was not at home in the
Latin tongue, although he read Latin authors with pleasure and took
a delight in those narratives of Roman history which brought before his
mind, yearning for greatness and fame, memories of that bygone Roman
Empire on the restoration of which his heart was set. Like all men of
a higher cast of character, he opened his ears to the spirit of his age and
yielded to the influences of the revived classical learning. His mind was
full of the revived conceptions of the Roman imperial law, of which the
Italian jurists saw in him the embodiment. They did not, however,
understand that the Empire transplanted into German soil was not the
Empire of old, and that in Frederick of Hohenstaufen they had before
them the most authentic representation of the good and evil of Germanic
power against which, as by an inevitable antithesis, the free Lombard
communes were to rise. Frederick was the successor of Charles the Great
rather than of Augustus, and his counterpart was the new Italy which
had taken the place of the ancient Rome.
The crown was hardly on his brow when he sent to Italy ambas-
sadors, who presented themselves to the Pope and were well received.
Eugenius III, in May 1152, had at once written to Frederick from
CH. XIII.


## p. 414 (#460) ############################################

414
Barbarossa's early relations with the Papacy
Segni congratulating him on his election and announcing the dispatch
of a legate who would acquaint him with his intentions. The Pope, in
expressing his confidence that the king would maintain the promises
made by Conrad III to himself and the Roman Church, hinted at an
early visit to Rome. With a bearing on this subject which lay so near
his heart, Eugenius wrote on 20 September 1152 to Wibald, Abbot of
Corvey (Stablo), informing him of the machinations set on foot in Rome
by the popular faction at the instigation of the heretic, Arnold of Brescia,
unknown to the nobles and leading personages of the city. About two
thousand of the common citizens had met secretly to arrange for the elec-
tion of one hundred senators for life and two consuls, and to vest the
supreme authority over them and over Rome in one man holding the
rank of Emperor. The Pope enjoined Wibald to inform Frederick of this
secretly in order that he might take steps to meet the occasion. Frederick
stood in need of no incitement from the Pope to turn his thoughts to
Italy, and in the very first days of his reign he had discussed the matter
in council with the princes. His ecclesiastical advisers would have liked
him to have given effect without further negotiations to the engagements
made between Conrad III and the Holy See, and then to have proceeded
to Rome to receive the crown and re-establish the impaired authority of
the Pope. But the lay princes were opposed to this immediate absence
from Germany, either because the position of the kingdom was still too
unstable or because they thought it expedient to wait for a fresh in-
vitation from the Pope. Frederick, although anxious to receive the
crown and feeling that it was important to do so quickly, saw the
necessity of first dealing with the affairs of Germany. In the case of
the election of Wichmann? to the archbishopric of Magdeburg the inter-
pretation of the Concordat of Worms was involved, and this introduced
a serious cause of disagreement with the Pope.
In spite of this incident, friendly relations were maintained between
the Pope and the king. It was a matter of pressing importance for
both that the coronation at Rome should not be long deferred. While
settling the affairs of Germany, Frederick kept his attention steadily
fixed on Italy, and in giving his decision in favour of the Saxon Henry
the Lion, whom he liked and wished to reconcile to the Empire, in the
dispute between that prince and the Duke of Bavaria, he aimed at
securing powerful co-operation in his expedition into Italy. Invitations
to enter upon this expedition were many and fervent. The rebel barons
of Apulia pictured to him the easiness of an enterprise against the
King of Sicily; many Italian cities asked his aid against other and more
powerful cities, especially against the powerful and haughty Milanese
whom they had not sufficient strength to oppose. Anastasius IV, who
had succeeded Eugenius III in July 1153, confirmed the proposals of his
predecessor, and went so far as to grant the pallium to Wichmann for
See supra, Chapter XII, pp. 392–3.


## p. 415 (#461) ############################################

Pope Hadrian IV
415
a
new era
the see of Magdeburg, while urging Frederick to come to Rome. The
moment had come, and the young restorer of the Empire set out in
October 1154 from the Tyrol for Italy. In November he encamped near
Piacenza, on the plains of Roncaglia, in order to hold, according to
custom, his first Italian diet. A few days afterwards, on 3 December
1154, Anastasius died at Rome, and with his successor
opened, in which the story of the House of Swabia up to its end was
inextricably bound up with that of the Papacy.
'The new Pontiff was known as Hadrian IV. He was born in England,
at Langley near St Albans, in poor circumstances, and his name was
Nicholas Breakspear. He had left his native country in youth and
wandered through various districts of France in search of instruction.
After a stay of some duration at Arles, his studies being now complete,
he was received into the monastery of Saint-Ruf in Provence, where
his good looks, well-weighed speeches, and prompt obedience made him
a favourite. There he was able to turn to account his intellectual gifts,
and made such advance in his studies and in the esteem of his fellow-
religious that he was raised to the rank of abbot. In this office, however,
he did not obtain the same sympathies as before, either because the
monks found the rule of a foreigner irksome, or that he had heaped up
resentments against himself by his unflinching severity. Thus disputes
arose between him and his monks which brought him to Rome to
Eugenius III. In this way the Pontiff learned to estimate his true worth
and, removing him from the abbacy, appointed him Cardinal-bishop of
Albano and then placed him at the head of the Norwegian missions.
By carrying the Gospel into these distant regions and there organising
the Church, he secured such a reputation at Rome and among the car-
dinals that they, on the day after the death of Anastasius (4 December
1154), soon after his return from his mission, elected him to the
Papacy.
A strong man, called upon to face difficult times, he entered on his
sacred office with a very lofty conception of the supreme mission for
which this office had been instituted on earth by God. The zeal and
piety which inspired him were combined with a capacity for public
affairs bordering on astuteness, while the suavity of his manner was
accompanied by a strength and tenacity of character which looked
straight forward, without swerving, to the end in view. He had scarcely
become Pope when an occasion arose for displaying his firmness. The
Romans, in the last days of the pontificate of Eugenius, had consented
to a sort of truce which had enabled the Pope to re-enter Rome and
establish himself in the Vatican within the precincts of the Leonine
city. But it was a truce which both parties viewed with suspicion.
Arnold of Brescia with his followers was still in Rome, and his presence
encouraged the popular faction to contend for communal liberty against
pontifical supremacy. This new Pope, a foreigner, confident of his
CH. XIII.


## p. 416 (#462) ############################################

416
Rome and Sicily
authority and hostile to the teaching of Arnold, could not be acceptable
to the Romans, whose discontent reached at last the pitch of violence.
One day when Cardinal Guido of Santa Pudenziana was returning
from the Vatican, he was attacked and seriously wounded by Arnold's
followers. Hadrian in return for this grave outrage unhesitatingly
launched an interdict against the city, declaring that it should not be
removed until Arnold and his party were banished from Rome.
Never before had this heavy sentence fallen upon the city, and the
unforeseen event spread terror in men's minds. Easter was close at
hand, Holy Week had begun, and the churches were prayerless and shut
against the faithful. Hadrian remained unmoved amidst the amazement
of the panic-stricken people. Urged by the clergy and the populace,
the senators sought the Pope's presence and swore to banish Arnold and
his followers. While wandering in the Campagna he was taken prisoner
by members of the papal party, but being rescued by some friendly
barons who revered him as an apostle he found refuge in one of their
strongholds. His rebellious adversary having thus been got rid of,
Hadrian was able at last to issue forth from the Leonine city and proceed
with great pomp to the Lateran, where he presided at the Easter
solemnities.
While things were thus happening in Rome, fresh causes of anxiety
had arisen in the south, where the quarrel between the Curia and the
King of Sicily, William I, was once more active. The new king, who
had but recently succeeded Roger, began his reign under difficult cir-
cumstances. Harassed by rebellion within and by hostility on the part
of the Eastern and Western Emperors without his dominions, he thought
of reverting to the subtle traditional Norman policy by trying to renew
friendly relations with the Pope and thus separating him from Frederick.
On the election of Hadrian he had sent ambassadors to discuss terms of
peace but without success. Later, towards March 1155, the Pope,
alarmed perhaps by the arrival from Sicily of William at Salerno, sent to
him, in return, Henry, Cardinal of SS. Nereus and Achilleus, with letters
apostolic. In these letters, however, William was addressed ambiguously
as Lord instead of King of Sicily. He therefore sent back the cardinal
to Rome without even receiving him, a treatment which was greatly
resented by the Curia and the Pope. All probability of agreement
being thus upset, the king, notwithstanding his domestic troubles and
the movements among the hostile barons who were hoping great things
from Frederick's approach and were inclining towards him, sent out an
expedition against the papal territory under his Chancellor, who set
siege to Benevento, laying waste many districts, and burning anong
other places Ceprano, Bauco, and Frosinone. On his return he pulled
down the walls of Aquino and Pontecorvo, and expelled almost all the
monks from Monte Cassino on the suspicion that they were partisans
of the papal cause. Hadrian could do nothing in his own defence


## p. 417 (#463) ############################################

Frederick and the Lombards
417
except put William under excommunication and place all his hope on
Frederick.
The Pope had pursued steadily the negotiations relative to the visit
of the future Emperor to Rome. The agreements arrived at under
Eugenius III were confirmed, and the two potentates entered into a
close alliance, the terms of which included the submission of the Roman
Republic to the Pope, hostility towards the King of Sicily, and an
embargo on the acquisition of any Italian territory by the Emperor of
the East. Frederick, however, had scarcely set foot in Italy before he
perceived that he was walking on a volcano. The lofty notions of
domination of the Roman-Germanic Emperor were met by a burning
sentiment of liberty, which was the breath of life to those prosperous
cities wherein had originated a new phase of civic existence and com-
merce. It was clear that Frederick could never hope to have supremacy
in Italy and to hold aloft the imperial authority, if he did not first
subdue the strength of those self-reliant republics which in spite of their
intestine feuds shewed little willingness to submit. At Roncaglia the
representatives of the republics had appeared and had shewn a certain
degree of respect for the imperial authority, but it was not difficult to
see what fire was smouldering under the ashes. Pavia, Lodi, and some
other towns favoured Frederick out of hatred for Milan, to which they
were subordinate, but Milan was the soul of Lombardy and could not
endure the imperial yoke. During the diet Frederick had adjudicated
and settled terms of peace in the disputes between the different cities,
especially between Pavia and Milan, but the latter gave clear signs of
disinclination to bend to his will. It was necessary for Frederick to
use force and bring his heavy hand to bear. He very soon found an
opportunity of shewing his hostility to Milan. His temper had been
aroused by the conduct of the Milanese in guiding his army through
their territory along bad and inconvenient roads. He entered Rosate, a
strong castello of the Milanese, and, driving out the inhabitants, gave
it over to fire and pillage. In the same way the castelli of Trecate
and Galliate were entirely destroyed. The cause of the Empire in Italy
was bound up with that of feudalism, which was waning every day
before the growth and emancipation of the communes. The city of Asti
and the castello of Chieri had rejected the authority of the Marquess
of Montferrat, and Frederick, on an appeal from the marquess, put them
to fire and sword. But these acts of destruction were not sufficient to
prove his power and determination. The opportunity had not come for
carrying his power against Milan. That city was too powerful and too
well stocked with provisions and means of defence. A siege would have
exposed the army of Frederick to too serious a test and would have de-
layed too long his coronation. It was better to attack some other places
faithful to Milan and, by thus weakening the strength of her allies, to
spread through Lombardy the terror of his arms and unbending purpose.
27
C. MED, H. VOL. V. A. XIII.


## p. 418 (#464) ############################################

418
Execution of Arnold of Brescia
Pavia, always a relentless enemy, pointed out to him Tortona which,
when asked to separate from Milan, firmly refused. Frederick, supposing
that her subjection, like that of other strongholds, would be easy, laid
siege, supported by the forces of Pavia and of the Marquess of Montferrat,
but met with a stubborn resistance which gave earnest of obstinate
struggles to come. The fury of the assaults, the gallows on which
Frederick had the prisoners hanged in order to strike terror into the
besieged, the pangs of hunger, availed nothing during two months to
shake their determination. It was only at the beginning of April that
they were compelled to surrender through thirst. The inhabitants' lives
were spared but they were scattered abroad, and Tortona was razed to
the ground and utterly destroyed. All Lombardy rang with the news
of this event.
Frederick had spent so much time on this siege and had used up so
much of his strength upon it that he had to renounce all thoughts of the
entire subjugation of Lombardy. In the meantime he had taken steps to
secure the friendly assistance of the great maritime cities, Venice, Genoa,
and Pisa, in view of an expedition against the King of Sicily and, after
keeping Easter with great magnificence at Pavia, he moved towards Rome.
His route lay through Tuscany, where he intended to meet the Pope, who
was then at Sutri. His journey was so rapid that the Curia felt some
suspicions. Recollections of the violence used scarcely half a century
before by Henry V to Paschal II in St Peter's, in order to wring from
him concessions in the matter of the investitures, may perhaps have
occurred to Hadrian and the cardinals at this moment. After consultation
with the latter, with Peter, prefect of the city, and Otto Frangipane,
the Pope sent two cardinals to Frederick with special instructions to
settle the conditions of their interview. The cardinals found Frederick
at San Quirico near Siena and were received with marks of honour. They
explained the object of their mission, and among other requests asked
that Arnold of Brescia should be handed over to the Pope, who felt
anxiety at his being a fugitive at large. The request was a small one and
was at once granted. Frederick caused one of the barons friendly to
Arnold to be made prisoner and compelled him to surrender the unfor-
tunate refugee. The hour of martyrdom had now come for the apostle of
Brescia. He was condemned to death by the prefect of Rome and fell a
victim to his consuming zeal for the purity of the Church. His death
perhaps occurred at Civita Castellana, but the exact day and place are
unknown. He encountered the stake without fear; he made no recan-
tation; he murmured a silent prayer to God; and committed himself to
the rope and the flames with such calmness and serenity that even his
executioners gave way to tears. His ashes were cast into the Tiber lest
the Romans should preserve them as relics for veneration and as incentives
to revenge, but his words long re-echoed in the ears of the people. By the
martyrdom of Arnold an ill-omened seal was set to the compact between


## p. 419 (#465) ############################################

Meeting of King and Pope
419
Pope and Emperor which was only to bear fruit in bloodshed and was soon
to be dissolved. Frederick had not hesitated to comply with the first re-
quest of the papal ambassadors, but with regard to their other demands he
replied that he had already sent to the Pope Archbishop Arnold of
Cologne and Anselm, Archbishop-elect of Ravenna, to discuss these points,
and therefore could give no answer until they returned. The dispatch of
these ambassadors, when made known to the Pope, increased his suspicions.
He feared some underhand dealing and, giving up his original intention
of proceeding to Orvieto, withdrew to Civita Castellana, a strong and
well-fortified place. There he received the imperial envoys, whom he
informed, in his turn, that he could give no reply until the cardinals
whom he had sent to Frederick should have returned. Thus both embassies
turned back, leaving things where they were. Meeting however on the
way, they resolved to return together to the king, who had reached
Viterbo. There the negotiations were concluded, the king swearing to
respect the life and liberty of the Pope and to observe the stipulations
as agreed before. Among those present at the conferences was Cardinal
Octavian of St Cecilia who, it would appear, was not in agreement with
the other cardinal-legates of the Pope. Probably already at that time
he represented in the Curia the leaning towards closer ties with Germany
and greater compliance with the policy of the Emperor. It is certain
that he was already on friendly terms with Frederick and an object
of suspicion to the dominant and stricter party who, as we shall see
later on, were not without reasons for suspicion. The conditions and
place of meeting having been settled, the Pope and the king moved
forward. Frederick with his court and army encamped at Campo Grasso
in the territory of Sutri, and the Pope, now assured of his personal safety,
left Civita Castellana and came down to Nepi, where on the following
day he was met by a large company of German barons who accompanied
him in solemn procession along with his bishops and cardinals to the
tent of the king.
But here a new surprise awaited him, reviving all his doubts and
suspicions. Frederick, on the Pope's arrival, did not advance to offer his
services as squire to hold Hadrian's bridle and stirrup. The cardinals
were thrown into great excitement. The Pope himself, disturbed and
uncertain what to do, dismounted unwillingly and seated himself on
the throne prepared for him. The king then knelt before him and
kissed his feet and drew near to receive the kiss of peace. But the Pope
firmly refused. “Thou hast denied me,” he said, “the service which, out
of reverence for the Apostles Peter and Paul, thy predecessors have
always paid to mine up to the present time, and until thou hast satisfied
me I will not give thee the kiss of peace. ” The king replied that he was
not bound to this act of service. Through the whole of that day and
of the next the dispute on this point of ceremonial went on. So obstinate
was the contention that some of the cardinals, either from exasperation
CH. XIII.
27-2


## p. 420 (#466) ############################################

420
Advance to Rome
or fear, left the camp and returned to Civita Castellana. The question
was more serious than it seemed to be, for Frederick by his refusal
wished to shut out even the semblance of homage to the Pope, and by so
doing implicitly denied that he was in any way indebted to the Pontiff for
the imperial crown. But the unshakeable firmness of the Pope carried
the day. The existence of ninth-century precedents for the papal claim
was a notorious fact, and among the followers of the king the older men
could remember having seen the Emperor Lothar pay this very service
to Innocent II. Frederick besides had too many reasons for hastening
on the coronation to put obstacles in his own way over a matter of
form. The camp was moved a little farther away to the neighbourhood
of a lake in the district of Nepi, and here, according to arrangement, the
king and Pope met, coming from different directions; Frederick, in
the presence of the army, fulfilled the functions of squire, holding the
Pope's bridle for about a stone's throw and the stirrup as he dismounted.
Agreement having thus been secured, Hadrian and the king advanced
towards Rome together, journeying and halting in company and keeping
up friendly conversations, in the course of which the Pope reiterated his
grievances against the Romans and the King of Sicily, calling upon
Frederick to give him his promised help in restoring the papal authority
in Rome, and in providing him with security against his powerful and
aggressive neighbour in the south. As they drew near to Rome, they
were met by the ambassadors sent by the senate and people of Rome to
greet Frederick. The Pope's presence and his evident alliance with the
king had not yet quelled the high spirit of the Romans. They still felt
conscious of a strength real enough to contest the possession of Rome,
and, with the glamour of ancient Roman greatness before them, they used
the language of lords and dispensers of the Roman Empire, demanding a
tribute and sworn guarantees for the safety and liberties of the city.
Frederick, in agreement with and at the advice of the Pope and the
cardinals, haughtily repulsed their audacious requests. The ambassadors
withdrew to the Capitol in wrath, there to convey the news of the rejection.
Wounded in their pride and determined not to surrender the liberty
won after so many years of conflict with the Popes, the Romans made
ready to avenge this outrage. The Pope, who understood the Roman
temper, advised the king to act quickly and cautiously. The Leonine
city was still the Pope's. It was necessary to keep it in their hands,
and therefore a strong band of men was at once sent to occupy it by
night. In order to reassure Frederick, the Pope proposed that Cardinal
Octavian, his faithful adherent, should act as their leader.