The prospect
brightened
a little with the death in
December of Henry the Black, Duke of Bavaria, who shortly before had
withdrawn from the world to spend his closing years in the monastery of
Weingarten.
December of Henry the Black, Duke of Bavaria, who shortly before had
withdrawn from the world to spend his closing years in the monastery of
Weingarten.
Cambridge Medieval History - v5 - Contest of Empire and the Papacy
To attribute to the Crusades the rise of the cities of Italy
in particular, or of Western Europe as a whole, is to ignore the fact
that the towns of the West had been steadily recovering for centuries
before the Crusades began, and, even if that movement had never taken
place, there is good reason to suppose that they would still have won their
emancipation from feudalism, have created their organs of local self-
government, and developed their trade with its system of internal
organisation. Gibbon writes: “ The estates of the barons were dissi-
pated and their race often extinguished in these costly and perilous
expeditions. Their poverty extorted from their pride those charters of
freedom which unlocked the fetters of the slave, secured the farm of the
CH, X.
## p. 328 (#374) ############################################
328
Development of the towns
peasant and the shop of the artificer, and gradually restored a substance
and soul to the most numerous and useful part of the community. The
conflagration which destroyed the tall and barren trees of the forest
gave air and scope to the vegetation of the smaller and nutritive plants
of the soil. ” The rhetorical method of writing history is a pleasant
one, but we are no longer permitted the untroubled serenity of the
classical historian.
It is, indeed, impossible to set down any general effects which the
Crusades had upon feudal society as a whole. Many of the “ tall and
barren trees of the forest” were destroyed in the East, and much of the
martial energies of the nobles of the West found an outlet in crusading
less destructive of civil peace than they could have found at home. By
so much the task of kingship, especially in France, was lightened, the
growth of the central power at the expense of feudalism made easier.
The Counts of Toulouse, of whom four in less than 6fty years died in
the East, provide an example of the failure of a house to consolidate
its fiefs because of a too passionate love of crusading. So also the lands
of the house of Bouillon passed into the female line for a similar
reason, to be absorbed by marriage into other fiefs. Yet the total ex-
tinction of a noble house was not a common event, and the most striking
example of the union of a great fief with the royal demesne in twelfth-
century France-a union which, in the event, was only temporary-was
solely due to the failure of male heirs to the house of Aquitaine and
had nothing to do with the Crusades. The charters of liberties obtained
by the French and English towns cannot, for the most part, be attributed
to the Crusades, though exception should be made for Richard Coeur-
de-Lion's great auction of liberties before his departure to the Holy
Land. Yet, at the most, such charters were only ante-dated by the
necessities of their grantors. They could not exist had not towns been
quietly growing during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, had not
groups of merchants, or of tenants acquiring a mercantile character,
formed themselves to purchase exemption from feudal dues. The Cru-
sades in some cases certainly provided opportunities for the towns; they
did not create the civic demand for “liberties. ”
So too, in the general question of the relation of the Crusades to the
development of European commerce, it is impossible to make the progress
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries depend upon them. The case is
best illustrated with reference to the Italian cities, in particular to
Venice, Genoa, and Pisa. It has been very clearly shewn, as for example
by Heyd, that before the Crusades began the products of the East, silk,
sugar, and spices especially, were reaching Europe not only by land
from what is now Russia but even more by way of Italy. Here, before
the First Crusade, Amalfi and Venice were the two chief agents in
supplying Western Europe with the Eastern luxuries which her de-
veloping civilisation led her to desire. Amalfi fell out of the race with
## p. 329 (#375) ############################################
The conquests of Venice, Genoa, and Pisa
329
the Norman Conquest of South Italy and the attempt of the Norman
rulers to regulate commerce too rigidly in the interests of politics.
Venice therefore was left, at the period when the Crusades began, as the
chief agent of the Levantine trade in Italy, and her position was
rendered the more advantageous by the large concessions in Constan-
tinople and the Eastern Empire granted in 1082 by Alexius Comnenus
when Amalfi had fallen under the power of Robert Guiscard. But this
position was not to remain unchallenged. The crusaders, as they poured
into Italy for the journey to Palestine, sought transport and maritime
assistance not only from Venice but from Genoa and Pisa as well, while
these two cities were not slow to perceive in the needs of the crusading
hosts a source of profit to themselves, and in the conquests that might be
made in Syria a means to obtain secure access to the trade between East and
West. In the first three Crusades, and in the intervening years between
them, Venice, Genoa, and Pisa all took an active part, not merely in
trans-shipping crusaders but in the actual work of conquest. The Genoese
were largely responsible for the capture of Arsūf, Caesarea, and Acre,
the Pisans for that of Laodicea, the Venetians for that of Sidon and
Tyre. Moreover, the diversion of the crusading effort to capture these
towns, strategically sound as it was for defensive purposes, was dictated
mainly by trading interests. All three cities received wide privileges
both in the seaports and inland towns of all the crusading states of
Syria, and they all benefited equally in one respect—that they had for
almost a hundred years secure markets for their Eastern trade. Further,
the crusaders who had settled in Palestine depended upon the West for
vital necessities, for armour, for horses and ships, for wine and woollen
goods, and, above all, for reinforcements to maintain their position.
Pilgrims flocked to see in security the newly-recovered Holy City, and
a very large proportion of all the carrying-trade for this flow of people
to and from Palestine was in the hands of the Italian cities. More
shipping was required and was built; every year Venice sent two feets
to Syria; Genoa and Pisa did the same. The rivalry of the Eastern
Empire, the necessity for dependence upon Constantinople as a market,
was almost removed, and there can be no question but that the Crusades
brought to all three cities in the twelfth century a steady increase of
prosperity and wealth. Statistics, unhappily, do not exist by which this
increase can be measured, but one event stands out as evidence of the
height of power and success to which the events of the twelfth century
had brought Venice.
The Fourth Crusade could not have been planned by the Venetians
of 1100 with any hope of success. Yet in 1204 they were able to provide
the naval equipment for a force consisting of “4500 horses, 9000 squires,
. . . 4500 knights, and 20,000 sergeants on foot,” to pay the expenses of
the whole, and to overturn the Empire which it had been the primary
object of the First, as it was professedly the object of the Fourth, Crusade
CHIx.
## p. 330 (#376) ############################################
330
Nationality and the Crusades
to protect. In the division of the spoils which followed the capture of
Constantinople Venice received her reward. One-third of the great city
itself fell beneath her sovereignty, and all the ports and islands of the
Eastern Empire were secured for her commerce to the exclusion of her
rivals. It is true that Venice was unable to retain her monopoly intact,
for the Genoese and Pisans intrigued with the representatives of the
deposed Emperors at Nicaea and received concessions in the ports which
remained under their control; but this did not prevent the Venetians
from reaping a rich harvest from their new dominions during the thirteenth
century. Venice took then a position of superiority over the other Italian
cities which she never lost, even when the Latin Empire had fallen and
the kingdom of Jerusalem had perished with the fall of Acre. And,
as the prosperity of Venice depended on the development in north-western
Europe of markets for the products of the East which she supplied, the
Crusades must be regarded as an important cause of the development of
the chain of commercial republics along the Rhine Valley into Flanders,
as also of the increased prosperity of Marseilles and the towns of southern
France. Undoubtedly the more constant intercourse with the East aroused
a new demand for the luxuries which it alone could supply, and the silks,
sugar, and spices which flowed through Damascus and Egypt became the
indispensable necessities of the nobles and their ladies, to say nothing of
the rich bourgeois, of France, Germany, and England. On the other
hand it is impossible to claim that the Crusades introduced these Eastern
products to the West; nor must it be forgotten that the development of
creative manufacture in the towns of Western Europe had begun before
the Crusades started, and that, without the wealth produced in steadily
increasing quantities by the gildsmen of the West, Europe would have
had no means of purchasing the Eastern wares to satisfy the craving
which the experience of crusades and pilgrims taught.
If an indeterminate answer must be given to the question “What
effects had the Crusades on the economic life of Western Europe? " it is
equally difficult to define their relation either to the growth of a sense of
nationality in the Western nations or to the great development of
Western thought which took place during the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries. The term “nationality” is not easy to define, but, by the end of
the period with which this volume deals, “Frenchmen” had a feeling of
their difference from “Englishmen,” “Germans,” or “ Italians," more acute
than at the beginning of the Crusades. That, like other international move-
ments, the Crusades accentuated the sense of national unity and even of a
natural hostility between nations is, à priori, likely enough and, so early as
1146, evidence of this can be found in the account of the Second Crusade
written by Odo of Deuil, who certainly nourished a hearty dislike for
both Greeks and Germans as such. His dislike for the Greeks may have
been stimulated by their heretical opinions, though it is rather their
excessive flattery and their guile that appear to have aroused him; at
## p. 331 (#377) ############################################
Revived study of Greek
331
any rate no such explanation will account for his hard sayings about the
Germans. “Nostris etiam erant importabiles Alemanni,” he says, and
goes on to give instances of the trouble created by King Conrad's host
for the French who followed after, and of the direct affronts offered to
the French by German soldiers, finishing his complaint by saying, “Thus
the Germans, going before us,disturbed everything; so that the Greeks fled
from our peaceful army. ”Further evidence tending in the same direction
may be seen in the national name and character of the Teutonic Order,
founded in 1190, which are in striking contrast to those of the older
international Orders of the Hospitallers or Templars. Yet it is not often
that this note of national separateness and rivalry is sounded in the
chronicles of the Crusades, and the development of “nationality” can only
be in part attributed to the rivalries which arose in the mixed hosts of
Christendom travelling towards or engaged in the Holy War.
The coincidence of the thirteenth-century “Renaissance” with the
period of the Crusades is striking, and it would be rash to deny any share
in the outburst of intellectual energy which marks the thirteenth
century to the new ideas and broadened outlook of those who, having gone
on crusade, had seen the world of men and things in a way to which the
society of the tenth and eleventh centuries was unaccustomed. But it
must be admitted that a man may travel much and yet see little, may
preserve intact the narrowness of vision with which he set out. St Louis,
as Joinville shews him to us, or Joinville himself, was not intellectually
changed by his crusading. And when we examine the great motive force
of the thirteenth century “Revival of Learning” it is Aristotle from whom
the impulse proceeded, and Aristotle first brought back to the West by
way of Spain and the Moorish versions of his works. It is true that, so
early as 1128, James of Venice translated into Latin some of the works of
Aristotle, but the greater impulse to the absorption of Greek philosophy
by the Western Church came from the study and translation of the Arabic
versions of the Aristotelian writings and the commentaries upon those
writings made by the scholars of Musulman Spain, in particular by
Avicenna and Averroës. In the thirteenth century, however, the conquest
of the Eastern Empire by the crusaders of 1204, and the discontent felt
by Western scholars with the versions of Aristotle which had come to
them at second hand, led to the direct translation of Aristotle's works
from the Greek, as well as to Latin versions of other Greek writings. Thus
Robert Grosseteste translated the Analytica Posteriora and is said to have
written a commentary upon the Nicomachean Ethics, while later in the
century St Thomas Aquinas, refusing to rely upon the faulty Arabic
versions, was able to find in William of Moerbeke, Archbishop of Corinth
from 1275 to 1286, a Greek scholar capable of translating the whole of
Aristotle's writings from the original Greek into tortured Latin. In this
task William of Moerbeke may have received some assistance from another
1 MPL. CLxxxv, S. Bernardi Clarae-Vallensis opera, iv, col. 1217.
CH, Tx.
## p. 332 (#378) ############################################
332
Military results: check to Turkish advance
member of the Dominican order, Henry of Brabant, and, in view of the
enormous influence exerted by the theological writings of St Thomas, it
is at least interesting to be able to point to these translations as the source
upon which he relied in the task of incorporating the thought of Aristotle
in his great Summa Theologiae. Yet in general the course of the great
movement of medieval thought which began soon after the year 1000
gives little evidence of having been affected by the Crusades. To them
indeed we owe the work of the greatest medieval historian, William of
Tyre, and, on the purely literary side with which we cannot here deal,
their influence was profound in the development of vernacular romances.
But the growth of an articulated system of philosophy, theology, and
politics began before the Crusades, and went on steadily throughout their
course with no more assistance from that movement than was given by
such improvements in the Aristotelian texts as we have already men-
tioned.
It remains to consider the military results of the Crusades upon the
West. Their influence on the improvement of the art of war and military
architecture must be left to be described in special chapters in a future
volume. With regard, however, to the ever-wavering frontier of East and
West, it is clear that the foundation of the Latin States of Syria during
the First Crusade and the course of the twelfth century checked for the
moment the Muslim
advance upon Constantinople which had threatened
its very existence. But against the assistance rendered to the Eastern
Empire in the First Crusade must be set its overthrow in the Fourth-a
blow from which, despite its revival at the end of the thirteenth century,
it never wholly recovered. Whether therefore it is fair to attribute to the
Crusades the delay of nearly three hundred years in the Turkish advance
into the Balkan lands is a problem perhaps incapable of decision, though
the diversion of Muslim effort to the Holy Land probably outweighs
by much the disintegrating effect of the Fourth Crusade and the foun-
dation and fall of the Latin Empire. And on this view the Crusades
must be given credit for providing Western Europe with time to con-
solidate itself into centralised national States, far better able than those
of the eleventh century to defend themselves against the renewed
Muslim advance when it came in the sixteenth century. Nor, in that
renewed struggle between East and West, must the gallant defence of
Rhodes and Cyprus, and later of Malta, by the crusading Knights of St
John, be forgotten.
It was however another and younger order of crusading Knights
which left the deepest mark upon the history of Europe. Founded in 1190,
during the Third Crusade, by certain citizens of Bremen and Lübeck as
a hospital, and raised in 1198 to the rank of an order of Knights, the
Teutonic Order under its great Master, Hermann von Salza, transferred
its energies from the Holy Land to the forcible conversion of infidels
nearer home. Already in East Prussia the Knights of the Sword of
## p. 333 (#379) ############################################
The Teutonic Knights
333
Livonia were engaged in the difficult task of converting the mixed heathen
population of Letts, Slavs, and Wends to Christianity, and the Teutonic
Knights, after absorbing this order in 1237, carried on the same work
with great energy and striking success for the next eighty years. They
founded Thorn, Königsberg, Marienberg—to which in 1309 they trans-
ferred their headquarters—and finally, in 1311, they captured Dantzig.
They allied themselves with the Hanseatic League, and sought by
every means to develop trade in the dominions won by their swords. To
their activities in the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries is due the
Germanisation of East Prussia, as to their weakness in the fifteenth
century, to their defeat at Tannenberg and the recovery of Dantzig and
the mouth of the Vistula by the Polish kingdom, is due the problem
of giving Poland access to the sea which has cost so much anxiety since
the Treaty of Versailles. The junction of the lands of the Teutonic
Order with those of the Hohenzollern house at the Reformation brought
Prussia into the affairs of Western Europe.
Yet, despite the tangible conquests of the Teutonic Order in north-
eastern Germany and, what should not be forgotten, the assistance given
by such Orders as those of Calatrava, Santiago, and Alcántara to the
Christian monarchs who reconquered Spain from the Moors, it is perhaps
in the realm of ideas that we must seek for the most permanent influence of
the crusading movement. Just as it was itself the product of a Christendom
that at the outset of the struggle felt itself morally united, so it has in
turn been the exemplar in later times of many movements undertaken on
a smaller scale indeed, and using the weapons of reason rather than of
war. Never since the fall of Acre has “ Christendom" acted as a united
whole; for never since has it enjoyed unity. Yet the memory of the
failure in which the Crusades ended has only served to heighten the value
of the ideal which created them and won, especially in the First Crusade,
all their success. Our modern use of the word “Crusade” is in fact a
testimony of our belief in the effectiveness of action possible where large
groups of men share a common ideal, and the grounds of that belief are
to be found in the events narrated in this volume.
сн. Іх.
## p. 334 (#380) ############################################
334
CHAPTER X.
GERMANY, 1125–1152.
The Saxon wars, the imperial struggle with the Papacy, had brought
to the front a new nobility. The Hohenstaufen, the Wittelsbachs, the
Wettins emerge to replace the families which, in consequence of the wars,
had become extinct. In like case Lothar, the son of a petty count, one
Gebhard of Supplinburg, rose to the first rank among German princes.
By his marriage he acquired a pre-eminent position in Saxony; for his
wife Richenza was the heiress of Henry of Nordheim and Ekbert of
Meissen. In 1106, on the death of Magnus, Duke of Saxony, the last of
the Billungs, he succeeded to the duchy and to the power which that
family had sedulously built up since the time of Otto the Great. During
the reign of the Emperor Henry V, Lothar as Duke of Saxony had been
conspicuous for his activity in extending his influence in the Wendish
districts and for his constant opposition to the Salian house. In 1125 he
was raised to the throne.
His election marks a change in the German kingship. Though always
elective in theory, owing to the strength of the Saxon and Salian rulers
it had been rendered in practice hereditary. At the diet of Forchheim
in 1077 the German princes passed a resolution, accepted by the Pope,
in favour of spontaneous election'. Effect was given to this resolution in
1125. Henry V died childless, his nephew, Frederick of Swabia, was passed
over, and Lothar without a shadow of hereditary claim-his pedigree is
lost beyond one generation—won the throne by right of election. During
the twelfth century the elective principle becomes firmly established.
Lothar is succeeded by his rival Conrad, and Conrad's son is passed over
in favour of his nephew. The attempt of the Hohenstaufen Emperors to
restore the principle of hereditary succession meets with very limited
success. The Electoral College of princes is gradually forming itself and
establishing its control.
It is fortunate that of an election so important in the history of the
German kingship a detailed and contemporary account has come down
to us? Immediately after the completion of the obsequies of the late
Emperor, writs of summons were issued to the princes to attend an
electoral council at Mayence on the feast of St Bartholomew (24 August).
i Bruno, De Bello Saxonico, SGUS, ed. Wattenbach, p. 67.
2 The author of the Narratio de Electione Lotharii (MGH, Script. xii, 509–512) is
unknown, but he is presumed to have been one of the clergy present at the election
from the diocese of Salzburg, and a member of the extreme Church party.
## p. 335 (#381) ############################################
Election of Lothar of Supplinburg
335
The gathering was a large one'; it included, besides the German princes
and their vassals, two papal legates and Suger, Abbot of St Denis, the
famous minister of the French King Louis VI.
The natural choice would have been Frederick of Swabia. He was
nearly related to the Salian house, he was executor of the late king, heir
to his private estates, guardian of his widow Matilda, the daughter of
Henry I of England, to whose care were entrusted the imperial insignia;
he was well qualified by age—being then thirty-five years old—and by
his personal character and attainments. The head of the house of
Hohenstaufen, he was possessed of considerable private wealth; in addition
to his own duchy of Swabia, he could command the interest of Eastern
Franconia, over which his younger brother Conrad exercised ducal
powers.
But he was out of sympathy with the Church party; and the Church party
was strong under the able leadership of Archbishop Adalbert of Mayence.
Already before the meeting at Mayence Archbishop Frederick of Cologne
had dispatched an embassy to Charles, Count of Flanders, inviting him
to stand for election; the count however declined the offer. Archbishop
Adalbert was more successful. His candidate Lothar commended him-
self to the Church dignitaries on the ground of his enmity to the Salian
house, to the lay princes because he was advanced in years”, destitute of a
male heir, and therefore unable to found a dynasty to deprive them of
their power of election.
At Mayence the business of selection was delegated to a committee
of fortys, ten representatives from each tribe, Bavaria, Swabia, Franconia,
and Saxony. Three names were submitted: Frederick, Leopold, Margrave
of Austria, and Lothar. From this moment the skilful diplomacy of
Archbishop Adalbert comes into play. He had already, by means not
too reputable, if we are to believe Bishop Otto, succeeded in persuading
the Empress to surrender the insignia; now, by addressing awkward
questions to the candidates, he managed to place Frederick in a dilemma.
1 It is often stated, on the authority of Ordericus Vitalis, XII, 43, that 60,000
persons were present at the election. So e. g. Giesebrecht, Kaiserzeit, iv, 7; Zeller,
Histoire d'Allemagne, iv, 9. This figure was however commonly used to denote a
large indefinite number, and very frequently by Ordericus, who e. g. estimates the
attendance at the famous meeting at Salisbury in 1086 at 60,000 (v11, 11), and reckons
also the number of knight's fees in England at 60,000 (iv, 7). The usage may be
traced to the Babylonian numerical system; see Johannes Schmidt, Die Urheimat
der Indogermanen und das europäisch. Zahlsystem, p. 46 sq. in Abhandlungen der
Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1890.
? Probably fifty years of age; he was born according to the Ann. Disibodi a few
days before the battle of the Unstrut, 9 June 1075, at which his father was killed.
Cf. Neu. Arch. XLIII (1922), p. 641.
3 Wichert, Die Wahl Lothars, FDG, XII, 96 sq. , xvi, 374 sqq. and Schirrmacher,
Entstehung des Kurfürstentums, p. 8, hold that the committee was composed of only
ten members in all, that in consideration of the limited number of princes qualified
to vote at the preliminary election the number forty was too large. The committee
of forty is however generally accepted. See e. g. Bernhardi, p. 31 sq.
CH. X.
## p. 336 (#382) ############################################
336
Campaign in Bohemia
Lothar and Leopold had first with unnecessary humility declined to
come forward, and later agreed to abide by the decision of the electors.
Frederick, on the other hand,“ ready to be chosen but not to choose a
king,” refused to give a direct answer to the question whether he would sub-
mit to the result of election; he must, he said, consult his followers; and
he left the council. By this action he lost the confidence of the assembled
princes; he appeared to deny the doctrine of free election and to set his
reliance on hereditary right. The question was settled by the turbulent
mob of Saxons, who broke up the deliberations of the council by their
shoutings and acclamation of Lothar as king. He was raised on the
shoulders of the enthusiastic crowd amidst a tumult only calmed by the
intervention of the papal legate. The Bavarians refused to comply with this
irregular ending of the proceedings in the absence of their duke. But
their duke's son was already the affianced husband of Lothar's only
child; there was no danger from that quarter. The Duke, Henry the
Black, hurried to the scene, and Lothar III was duly elected on 30 August.
A fortnight later, 13 September, he was solemnly crowned at Aix-la-
Chapelle.
The opening years of the reign were marked by widespread unrest. In
Bohemia, in Lorraine, even in his own dukedom of Saxony, the authority of
the new king was disputed or openly disregarded. In Swabia and Franconia
the party of the Hohenstaufen was in the ascendant. Duke Frederick
had eventually done belated homage to Lothar, but almost immediately
quarrelled with him over the issue of the Salian inheritance. After his
coronation the king proceeded to Ratisbon, where he held a diet in
November. To the assembled princes he put the question whether estates
that had been confiscated from outlaws or had been acquired by exchange
with imperial lands should be regarded as imperial or private property.
The problem was raised on general grounds, but its real application was
obvious. The Salian Emperors had largely increased their territorial
position by both these means, and the lands so acquired were included in
the Hohenstaufen inheritance. The diet decided against Frederick ; he
refused to give up the fiefs in question, was found guilty of high treason
at the Christmas court at Strasbourg, and at Goslar in January 1126
was placed under the ban of the Empire.
Lothar's position, by no means strong, was sensibly weakened by the
conspicuous failure of his first military enterprise. It arose over the
question of the succession to the Bohemian dukedom, in which, with
singular lack of judgment, he supported the weaker claims of Otto of
Olmütz against those of the popular candidate, Soběslav, a brother of the
late King Vladislav I (ob. April 1125). Otto appealed, not in vain,
for Lothar's assistance at the diet of Ratisbon. In midwinter the king
crossed the Erzgebirge into Bohemia with a small band of Saxons.
Wearied by long marches through the snow-covered mountains and ex-
hausted by lack of provisions, they emerged into the valley of Kulm to
## p. 337 (#383) ############################################
Possessions of the house of Welf
337
find a large force of Bohemians under Soběslav awaiting their coming
(February 1126). The advanced troops were all but annihilated by the
overwhelming numbers of the enemy; and Lothar had no choice but to
make terms. The death of his protégé on the battle-field facilitated
matters, and Lothar found in his conqueror a submissive and loyal ally.
Soběslav recognised Lothar's election, did homage for his dukedom, and
in after time proved his loyalty by signal services in the field.
The king could not press forward the punitive expedition against
Frederick of Hohenstaufen which had been arranged for Whitsuntide 1126
until his own position in Germany was more secure. The uselessness of
doing so had been proved by an abortive campaign in Swabia in the
autumn of 1126.
The prospect brightened a little with the death in
December of Henry the Black, Duke of Bavaria, who shortly before had
withdrawn from the world to spend his closing years in the monastery of
Weingarten. His son and successor Henry, called the Proud, was young
and energetic, the heir to enormous wealth, the chosen husband of
Gertrude, Lothar's only child. His inheritance comprised, in addition
to the duchy of Bavaria, the greater part of the private property of his
family in Bavaria and extensive possessions round Lüneburg in Saxony
which passed to him through his mother Wulfhild, daughter of Magnus
Billung. The rest of the inheritance in Bavaria and Swabia fell to Henry's
younger brother Welf VI'. The projected marriage, which was in after
years to upset the balance of ducal power in Germany by the union of
Saxony and Bavaria in the hands of one man more powerful almost
than the king himself, was carried out on the borders of Swabia and
Bavaria near Augsburg on 29 May 1127. The immediate result was
that Lothar could now in co-operation with Henry of Bavaria prosecute
the war against the Hohenstaufen with vigour and with fair prospects of
success. His position was further improved by his alliance in the same
year with Conrad of Zähringen. In March William, Count of Bur-
gundy (Franche Comté), was murdered. His inheritance fell naturally
to his cousin Rainald, who immediately occupied the lands without
waiting to be formally invested by the king. Lothar took advantage of
this remissness and granted the rectorship of Burgundy to Conrad of
Zähringen who was also connected with the late count, thereby not only
gaining a new ally for himself but also detaching a strong supporter
from the party of the Hohenstaufen.
Yet the tide of events still went against the king. Nuremberg suc-
cessfully resisted his attack. For ten weeks the armies of Lothar,
supported by the levies of Henry and Soběslav from Bavaria and Bohemia,
invested the town. The Bohemian allies ravaged the country, burnt the
1 There were also claims upon lands in Italy through Azzo, Marquess of Este,
who married Cunegunda, sister of the childless Welf III. Henry the Proud and
Welf VI were their great-grandsons. But these claims were not made good
C. MED, H. VOL. V. CH. X.
22
till 1154.
## p. 338 (#384) ############################################
338
War with the Hohenstaufen
churches, and so incensed the population that they had to be sent home.
At last Conrad of Hohenstaufen, lately returned from the Holy Land,
advanced with fresh troops for its relief. Without risking a battle, Lothar
withdrew first to Bamberg, then to Würzburg, whither he was pursued by
Conrad, who however contented himself with celebrating a tournament at
the very gates of the town as a mark of his disdain and returned, as he
had come, to Nuremberg.
The efforts of the Hohenstaufen had met with such success that they
now purposed to wrest the crown itself from Lothar. Frederick waived
his claim of seniority in favour of his brother Conrad, who was duly
elected king by his supporters on 18 December 1127. Spires declared for
him and drove out its bishop; but this was the last triumph of his party.
The election of Conrad was the turning-point in the conflict. By it not
only the German kingship but also the German Church was assailed; the
whole weight of the ecclesiastical power was thrown into the scale on the
side of the legitimate king. Realising that the odds against him in
Germany were too heavy, Conrad, early in the year 1128, crossed the
Septimer to try his fortunes in Italy.
The Rhenish town of Spires now became the centre of the Hohenstaufen
resistance. After a siege of nearly three months the burghers asked for
terms, agreed to give hostages, and made promises for their future loyalty
(November 1128). Lothar was now free to attend to business in other
parts of his kingdom. Lorraine was hostile to him; a rising of the citizens
of Aix-la-Chapelle during his stay in the town in January 1127 was only
pacified by liberal concessions ; Godfrey the Bearded, Duke of Lower
Lorraine, supported the pretensions of the Hohenstaufen. The duke was
drawn into a dispute over the inheritance of Charles the Good, Count of
Flanders, who in March 1127 had been murdered in the church of
St Donatian at Bruges, on the side of William Clito the son of Duke
Robert of Normandy. While he was thus engaged, Lothar seized his duchy
and handed it over to Walram, Count of Limbourg, the son of Henry,
Godfrey's predecessor in the dukedom. Godfrey soon succeeded in re-
covering the greater part of his possessions, and the only result of Lothar's
intervention was the further dismembermentof the old Lotharingian duchy.
In the meanwhile Henry of Bavaria remained in the south to cope
with Frederick of Swabia. The latter was keeping Lent at the monastery
of Zwifalten on the banks of the Danube when Henry happened to be
visiting his family estates in the same neighbourhood. The opportunity
of finding Frederick unaware of his presence and with but a few companions
was too much for his sense of honour. Coming one night to the monastery
with a body of armed followers, he set fire to the dwelling-rooms of the
monks in which he rightly imagined Frederick to be. The latter escaped
from the flames with the help of the monks and took refuge in the church
tower. Henry surrounded the church, broke in the doors, even disturbed
the brethren at their prayers with threats of death, but all to no effect.
## p. 339 (#385) ############################################
Failure of the Hohenstaufen in Germany and Italy 339
Frederick, safe in his tower, defied his sacrilegious assailant, who not only
had to retire in disgust but had to pay for his scandalous behaviour by
forfeiting the advocacy of the monastery. The Hohenstaufen still had a
strong position in Franconia and Swabia; there was yet hope in the Rhine
country in spite of the submission of Spires. The insincerity of the
promises made to Lothar on the occasion of its surrender was revealed
when Frederick proceeded there with the view to making it again the
centre of resistance. The townsmen readily threw over the king for the
duke. The fortifications were strengthened, the garrison increased;
Frederick himself after completing his arrangements departed for Swabia,
leaving the conduct of affairs in the city to his wife Agnes of Saarbruck.
In June 1129 Lothar appeared before the walls. Month after month
the siege dragged on without either side shewing signs of giving in. At
last the king in despair sent an urgent appeal for help to his son-in-law,
who was engaged in besieging a rebellious subject, Frederick of Bogen, in
his castle of Falkenstein. Henry, leaving the siege in charge of his sister
Sophia, responded immediately to the royal summons with a body of six
hundred Bavarian knights. The joint strength of Bavaria and Saxony
turned the scale. From midsummer till past Christmas the townsmen,
under the gallant leadership of Agnes, held out in spite of every hardship
and privation. Eventually deprived of all hope of relief, for a force
brought to their aid by Frederick was driven off, they submitted and on
the feast of Epiphany 1130 opened their gates to the king.
With the capture of Spires the opposition in the Upper Rhineland
was crushed. Before long Nuremberg, the chief strong-point of resistance,
fell before Lothar's attack; and with it went all hopes of success for the
party of the Hohenstaufen in Germany. In Italy too Conrad's initial
success was not long maintained. Notwithstanding his excommunication
by Honorius II he was welcomed at Milan, crowned by its archbishop at
Monza and again in the cathedral of St Ambrose with the Iron Crown
of Lombardy. But this was the limit of his achievement. An attempt
to acquire the possessions of the late Countess Matilda ended in failure
the towns of Lombardy which had at first received him declared against
him; his supporters one by one abandoned his cause and left him almost
alone. In despair he gave up trying to establish himself in Italy and re-
crossed the Alps (1130), only to find that in Germany also the family
cause was as good as lost.
Yet years dragged on before the brothers admitted defeat. Their
opponents were too busily occupied with other matters to press the issue
to a conclusion. The petty quarrels and rivalries of ambitious princes
kept Saxony in ceaseless turmoil. Albert of Ballenstädt and Henry of
Groitsch, Conrad of Wettin and Herman of Winzenburg, each strove
to increase his own power at the other's expense. The murder in one of
these feuds of a trusted follower of the king, one Burchard of Loccum,
by Herman of Winzenburg, Landgrave of Thuringia, called for Lothar's
CH. X.
22-2
## p. 340 (#386) ############################################
340
Destruction of Augsburg and Ulm
intervention in the affairs of his old duchy. Herman was found guilty
of high treason in December 1130, and sentenced to the confiscation of
his fiefs. Before another year was out Albert the Bear for some similar
offence was deprived of the East Mark. The rebellious town of Halle
suffered the severest of punishments. It fell before Lothar's assault, its
inhabitants were put to death, mutilated, or in some cases allowed their
safety on payment of heavy fines. By such stringent methods as these
Lothar restored the peace of Saxony.
The fate of Augsburg affords another example of the stern measures
employed by the king to suppress local risings, but in this instance he
had less justification for his action. On the journey to Italy in August
1132, a dispute arose in the market between the townsfolk and the soldiers
and quickly spread through the whole city. The king, suspecting treason,
ordered the troops to punish the burghers. From noon till night the
town was in a tumult; men, women, and children were massacred in the
streets and houses; churches and monasteries were broken into, plundered,
and burnt. As on previous occasions the Bohemian troops in the royal
army were conspicuous for their barbarity and excess. In a state of com-
plete desolation Augsburg was left as a warning to other towns not to
risk the king's displeasure.
During Lothar's absence in Italy (September 1132-August 1133)
Henry of Bavaria remained in Germany to deal with the Hohenstaufen.
But rebellions in his own duchy kept him too busily occupied to effect a
decision. The appointment of Henry of Wolfratshausen in August 1132
to the see of Ratisbon against the wishes of the king and himself led
to serious trouble. The bishop, aided by his advocate, the duke's old enemy
Frederick of Bogen, made stubborn resistance. For some months fighting
continued, the armies plundering and burning after the manner of medieval
warfare round Ratisbon and Wolfratshausen, a castle near the site
of the present town of Munich. At last the two armies, the bishop's
strengthened by the adhesion of Leopold of Austria, faced each other
on the banks of the Isar to bring matters to a final issue. At the critical
moment Otto of Wittelsbach, the count palatine, intervened as mediator
and reconciled the contending parties.
It was not till August 1134 that the Emperor and his son-in-law
were free to deal decisively with the Hohenstaufen. The Swabian town
of Ulm had now become the centre of resistance. After a short siege
Henry captured the town, which was thereupon almost totally destroyed
by the devastations practised by the Bavarian soldiers. Lothar had in
the meanwhile overrun Swabia without opposition. The brothers were
in desperate straits: their castles were captured; their supporters deserted.
Frederick was the first to realise the futility of further resistance; he
approached the Empress Richenza and begged her to intercede on his
behalf. At Fulda towards the end of October the reconciliation was
effected. The terms of his submission, settled at the crowded diet of
## p. 341 (#387) ############################################
Ecclesiastical policy
341
Bamberg (March 1135), were favourable in the extreme: he was freed
from excommunication, and received back his dukedom and his possessions;
for his own part he had only to promise to accompany the Emperor on
the Italian campaign which had been planned for the next year—a con-
dition imposed no doubt at the request of St Bernard who was present at
the court in the papal interest. Conrad held back for some months longer,
but finally made his peace with the Emperor at Mühlhausen in September
under the same lenient conditions as those imposed upon his brother.
Lothar owed his crown to the support given him by the leaders of
the Church hierarchy. Did he reward their confidence by granting on
that occasion definite concessions? The question is crucial and contro-
versial. That some settlement was reached seems clear, but its precise
nature cannot be determined. We have no reliable information. A famous
passage formulates a position, but it is more likely the position at which
the leaders of the party aimed than the one actually attained? More
profitable results may be found from the evidence of Lothar's actual
relations with the Church during his reign. After his election we are told
he neither received nor exacted homage from the spirituality, contenting
himself merely with the oath of fealty; and even this he remitted in the
case of Conrad, Archbishop of Salzburg, in deference to the latter's
scruples in the matter. The most important change was with regard to
the royal presence at elections. Here again Lothar bent to the wishes
of the Church party and refrained from exercising the right granted him
by the Concordat of Worms. Two elections took place within a month
of his accession-Eichstätt and Magdeburg—and in neither case was he
present. Indeed there is scarcely an instance during the first five years
of his reign of his disturbing episcopal elections by his presence'. The
ecclesiastical princes had no cause to complain of the conduct of the man
they had set upon the throne. Lothar even if he wished it could not
afford to quarrel with the Church; but to support the orthodox Church
party was natural to him. As Duke of Saxony he had been bred up to
1 Narratio de Electione Lotharii, MGH, Script. xii, c. 6.
2 See Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, IV, p. 118, n. 2. The passage in
the Narratio mentions three points: 1. Free election without the presence of the
king; 2. Investiture with the regalia by the sceptre after consecration ; 3. The right
of the king to exact the oath of allegiance. As the citation of the wording of a
document this breaks down on the second point; for the old practice of investiture
with the regalia before conse ation continued to prevail.
3 Or were the concessions granted in the Concordat by Calixtus II only intended
for Henry V personally, and not for his successors? There is no mention of the
latter in the document, and Otto of Freising (Chron. vii, 16) expressly tells us that
at Rome it was interpreted in this way “hoc sibi soli et non successoribus datum
dicunt Romani. ” See D. Schäfer, Zur Beurteilung des Wormser Konkordates, in
Abhandlungen der Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1905.
4 See Hauck, op. cit. p. 128, n. 1; also for the whole question Bernheim,
Lothar III und das Wormser Concordat, Strasbourg, 1874.
CH, X.
## p. 342 (#388) ############################################
342
Lothar and the papal schism
the traditional policy of opposition to the anti-hierarchical Salians; and
this policy he maintained as king.
When Honorius II died in February 1130 and the two factions in
Rome each chose its own candidate to fill the papal throne, Lothar was
faced with the necessity of making a momentous decision. Though not
as yet crowned Emperor, the long attachment of the imperial title to the
King of Germany gave Lothar the unquestioned position of temporal
ruler of Christendom. The rival Popes Anacletus II and Innocent II, the
one master of Rome, the other a refugee in France, each appealed anxiously
to him for recognition. Each had his supporters in Germany. Ana-
cletus found an advocate of his pretentions in Adalbero, Archbishop of
Bremen, who happened to be in Rome at the critical moment; Innocent
saw his claims upheld by the most advanced Churchmen, represented by
Conrad of Salzburg, Norbert, and Otto of Bamberg. But Lothar hesitated.
Perhaps he feared a split in the ranks of the Church party on whose
support he relied so much. It was not till Louis VI of France at Étampes,
under the influence of Bernard, had declared for Innocent that Lothar,
urged also by Innocent's legate Walter of Ravenna, consented to take
action. He summoned a meeting at Würzburg in October to discuss the
question. Only sixteen bishops presented themselves, but the sixteen
were unanimous for Innocent. Lothar accepted the decision without
hesitation, and immediately sent Conrad of Salzburg and Ekbert of
Münster to carry Germany's recognition to the Pope in France.
At Innocent's suggestion a personal interview between Pope and king
was arranged; Liège near the French frontier was chosen as a convenient
meeting place for both parties. Thither on 22 March 1131 came Innocent
accompanied by thirteen cardinals, a large number of French bishops, and
the indispensable Bernard. Lothar received him with due humility; he
performed the office of groom for the pontiff when he dismounted, signifying
by his act that he claimed to be but the servant of the Bishop of Rome;
he made promises to enter Italy to destroy the invaders of the Holy
See. But these cordial relations were almost upset at the very meeting
which had given them birth. Lothar, it seems, raised the vexed question
of episcopal elections; he evidently wished to recede from the concessions
he had made at the time of his accession, to revive the royal influence
over elections, in short to claim those privileges which the Concordat
had granted to the Crown. A quarrel was prevented by the eloquence
of Bernard. It is impossible to say whether any understanding was
reached. But a change of attitude is perceptible in Lothar’s dealings
with the Church during the year following: he appears to have tried to
exert some control over elections to bishoprics'; but the Church party
1 Notably in the cases of Adalbero of Münsterol to the archbishopric of Trèves
at Easter 1131, and of Henry of Wolfratshausen to the see of Ratisbon 19 August
1132. See Hauck, op. cit. iv, p. 151 sg.
## p. 343 (#389) ############################################
Civilising of the Wendish country
343
resented his action so strongly that rather than quarrel he tacitly re-
linquished his pretensions.
The relations with the Pope continued to be friendly. In August 1132
Lothar carried out his promised campaign in Italy to end the schism, and
on 4 June 1133 at the Lateran received as his reward the imperial crown.
Again Lothar took occasion to raise the crucial subject of episcopal
elections, and, in spite of loud protests from the Gregorian party in
Germany, obtained concessions contained in a document dated 8 June 1133
which amounted to a confirmation to himself of the rights allowed to the
Emperor in the Worms Concordat? We should expect to find a complete
reversal of policy in consequence. Nothing of the sort is perceptible.
Lothar too well realised the value of the Church support; he used his
power with a refinement of tact; he was often present at elections but
his presence was scarcely felt. The settlement at the Lateran, which came
so near to disturbing the peaceful relations between Church and State,
in practice made little or no change in Lothar's attitude of conciliatory
friendship towards the Church. The reign of Lothar from the point of
view of Church politics marks the consummation of the victory of the
hierarchy.
Throughout his reign we see Lothar, with an energy surprising
in a man of his age, busily occupied in a succession of wars both at
home and abroad: now he is campaigning against the Hohenstaufen,
now settling contested claims to an inheritance, now fulfilling the supreme
function of his imperial office by taking up arms against the enemies of
the Church. But more enduring results matured from the work which
alike as duke and king had always been nearest to his heart—the expansion
of Germany eastwards, the revival of German influence, the re-establish-
ment of the Christian religion and civilisation in the Wendish regions.
In this sense an annalist is justified in describing Lothar as “the imitator
and heir of the first Otto. "» Since the tenth century nothing had been
done, and even the districts then brought under German intluence had
since lapsed once more into paganism and barbarism. Lothar was ready
to promote with his support and encouragement every enterprise which
led in this direction. So Otto of Bamberg was able to make his second
journey to Pomerania in 1127, and to see his work established on a firm
basis. So also the Premonstratensians were able to pursue their missionary
labours in Brandenburg with the co-operation of Albert of Ballenstädt,
who in 1134 was enfeoffed with the North Mark as a reward for his services
1 Nos igitur, maiestatem imperii nolentes minuere sed augere, imperatoriae
dignitati(s plenitudinem tibi concedimus et debitas et canonicas consuetudines pre-
sentis scripti pagina confirmamus. Interdicimus autem, ne quisquam eorum, quos
in Teut(onico) regno ad pontificatus honorem vel abbatiae regimen evocari contigerit,
regalia usurpare vel invadere audeat, nisi eadem prius a tua (potes)tate deposcat,
quod ex his, quae iure debet tibi, tuae magnificentiue faciat. MGH, Const. 1, 168 sq.
and printed in Bernheim, Quellen zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites, 11, p. 70.
? Ann. Palidenses sub anno 1125. MGH, Script. xvi, 77.
OH, X.
## p. 344 (#390) ############################################
344
Relations with Denmark
in the Italian campaign, and on the death of Pribislav of Brandenburg
without heirs received that district in addition. The priest Vicelin made
progress in Holstein and the district about Lübeck.
It was the king's activities in Nordalbingia which involved him in
the tangled affairs of Denmark. In 1131 the land was plunged into civil
war by the murder of Canute, the son of the late King Eric, at the hands
of Magnus, the son of the reigning King Niel. Canute was ruling in
Schleswig, and had also been enfeoffed with the county of Wagria and
the land of the Obotrites by Lothar. His firm hand kept the turbulent
Wendish population under control; the country prospered; Christianity
and civilisation began to revive. But the success of his rule and the un-
certainty of the succession to the Danish throne brought upon him the
jealousy of his cousin Magnus.
in particular, or of Western Europe as a whole, is to ignore the fact
that the towns of the West had been steadily recovering for centuries
before the Crusades began, and, even if that movement had never taken
place, there is good reason to suppose that they would still have won their
emancipation from feudalism, have created their organs of local self-
government, and developed their trade with its system of internal
organisation. Gibbon writes: “ The estates of the barons were dissi-
pated and their race often extinguished in these costly and perilous
expeditions. Their poverty extorted from their pride those charters of
freedom which unlocked the fetters of the slave, secured the farm of the
CH, X.
## p. 328 (#374) ############################################
328
Development of the towns
peasant and the shop of the artificer, and gradually restored a substance
and soul to the most numerous and useful part of the community. The
conflagration which destroyed the tall and barren trees of the forest
gave air and scope to the vegetation of the smaller and nutritive plants
of the soil. ” The rhetorical method of writing history is a pleasant
one, but we are no longer permitted the untroubled serenity of the
classical historian.
It is, indeed, impossible to set down any general effects which the
Crusades had upon feudal society as a whole. Many of the “ tall and
barren trees of the forest” were destroyed in the East, and much of the
martial energies of the nobles of the West found an outlet in crusading
less destructive of civil peace than they could have found at home. By
so much the task of kingship, especially in France, was lightened, the
growth of the central power at the expense of feudalism made easier.
The Counts of Toulouse, of whom four in less than 6fty years died in
the East, provide an example of the failure of a house to consolidate
its fiefs because of a too passionate love of crusading. So also the lands
of the house of Bouillon passed into the female line for a similar
reason, to be absorbed by marriage into other fiefs. Yet the total ex-
tinction of a noble house was not a common event, and the most striking
example of the union of a great fief with the royal demesne in twelfth-
century France-a union which, in the event, was only temporary-was
solely due to the failure of male heirs to the house of Aquitaine and
had nothing to do with the Crusades. The charters of liberties obtained
by the French and English towns cannot, for the most part, be attributed
to the Crusades, though exception should be made for Richard Coeur-
de-Lion's great auction of liberties before his departure to the Holy
Land. Yet, at the most, such charters were only ante-dated by the
necessities of their grantors. They could not exist had not towns been
quietly growing during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, had not
groups of merchants, or of tenants acquiring a mercantile character,
formed themselves to purchase exemption from feudal dues. The Cru-
sades in some cases certainly provided opportunities for the towns; they
did not create the civic demand for “liberties. ”
So too, in the general question of the relation of the Crusades to the
development of European commerce, it is impossible to make the progress
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries depend upon them. The case is
best illustrated with reference to the Italian cities, in particular to
Venice, Genoa, and Pisa. It has been very clearly shewn, as for example
by Heyd, that before the Crusades began the products of the East, silk,
sugar, and spices especially, were reaching Europe not only by land
from what is now Russia but even more by way of Italy. Here, before
the First Crusade, Amalfi and Venice were the two chief agents in
supplying Western Europe with the Eastern luxuries which her de-
veloping civilisation led her to desire. Amalfi fell out of the race with
## p. 329 (#375) ############################################
The conquests of Venice, Genoa, and Pisa
329
the Norman Conquest of South Italy and the attempt of the Norman
rulers to regulate commerce too rigidly in the interests of politics.
Venice therefore was left, at the period when the Crusades began, as the
chief agent of the Levantine trade in Italy, and her position was
rendered the more advantageous by the large concessions in Constan-
tinople and the Eastern Empire granted in 1082 by Alexius Comnenus
when Amalfi had fallen under the power of Robert Guiscard. But this
position was not to remain unchallenged. The crusaders, as they poured
into Italy for the journey to Palestine, sought transport and maritime
assistance not only from Venice but from Genoa and Pisa as well, while
these two cities were not slow to perceive in the needs of the crusading
hosts a source of profit to themselves, and in the conquests that might be
made in Syria a means to obtain secure access to the trade between East and
West. In the first three Crusades, and in the intervening years between
them, Venice, Genoa, and Pisa all took an active part, not merely in
trans-shipping crusaders but in the actual work of conquest. The Genoese
were largely responsible for the capture of Arsūf, Caesarea, and Acre,
the Pisans for that of Laodicea, the Venetians for that of Sidon and
Tyre. Moreover, the diversion of the crusading effort to capture these
towns, strategically sound as it was for defensive purposes, was dictated
mainly by trading interests. All three cities received wide privileges
both in the seaports and inland towns of all the crusading states of
Syria, and they all benefited equally in one respect—that they had for
almost a hundred years secure markets for their Eastern trade. Further,
the crusaders who had settled in Palestine depended upon the West for
vital necessities, for armour, for horses and ships, for wine and woollen
goods, and, above all, for reinforcements to maintain their position.
Pilgrims flocked to see in security the newly-recovered Holy City, and
a very large proportion of all the carrying-trade for this flow of people
to and from Palestine was in the hands of the Italian cities. More
shipping was required and was built; every year Venice sent two feets
to Syria; Genoa and Pisa did the same. The rivalry of the Eastern
Empire, the necessity for dependence upon Constantinople as a market,
was almost removed, and there can be no question but that the Crusades
brought to all three cities in the twelfth century a steady increase of
prosperity and wealth. Statistics, unhappily, do not exist by which this
increase can be measured, but one event stands out as evidence of the
height of power and success to which the events of the twelfth century
had brought Venice.
The Fourth Crusade could not have been planned by the Venetians
of 1100 with any hope of success. Yet in 1204 they were able to provide
the naval equipment for a force consisting of “4500 horses, 9000 squires,
. . . 4500 knights, and 20,000 sergeants on foot,” to pay the expenses of
the whole, and to overturn the Empire which it had been the primary
object of the First, as it was professedly the object of the Fourth, Crusade
CHIx.
## p. 330 (#376) ############################################
330
Nationality and the Crusades
to protect. In the division of the spoils which followed the capture of
Constantinople Venice received her reward. One-third of the great city
itself fell beneath her sovereignty, and all the ports and islands of the
Eastern Empire were secured for her commerce to the exclusion of her
rivals. It is true that Venice was unable to retain her monopoly intact,
for the Genoese and Pisans intrigued with the representatives of the
deposed Emperors at Nicaea and received concessions in the ports which
remained under their control; but this did not prevent the Venetians
from reaping a rich harvest from their new dominions during the thirteenth
century. Venice took then a position of superiority over the other Italian
cities which she never lost, even when the Latin Empire had fallen and
the kingdom of Jerusalem had perished with the fall of Acre. And,
as the prosperity of Venice depended on the development in north-western
Europe of markets for the products of the East which she supplied, the
Crusades must be regarded as an important cause of the development of
the chain of commercial republics along the Rhine Valley into Flanders,
as also of the increased prosperity of Marseilles and the towns of southern
France. Undoubtedly the more constant intercourse with the East aroused
a new demand for the luxuries which it alone could supply, and the silks,
sugar, and spices which flowed through Damascus and Egypt became the
indispensable necessities of the nobles and their ladies, to say nothing of
the rich bourgeois, of France, Germany, and England. On the other
hand it is impossible to claim that the Crusades introduced these Eastern
products to the West; nor must it be forgotten that the development of
creative manufacture in the towns of Western Europe had begun before
the Crusades started, and that, without the wealth produced in steadily
increasing quantities by the gildsmen of the West, Europe would have
had no means of purchasing the Eastern wares to satisfy the craving
which the experience of crusades and pilgrims taught.
If an indeterminate answer must be given to the question “What
effects had the Crusades on the economic life of Western Europe? " it is
equally difficult to define their relation either to the growth of a sense of
nationality in the Western nations or to the great development of
Western thought which took place during the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries. The term “nationality” is not easy to define, but, by the end of
the period with which this volume deals, “Frenchmen” had a feeling of
their difference from “Englishmen,” “Germans,” or “ Italians," more acute
than at the beginning of the Crusades. That, like other international move-
ments, the Crusades accentuated the sense of national unity and even of a
natural hostility between nations is, à priori, likely enough and, so early as
1146, evidence of this can be found in the account of the Second Crusade
written by Odo of Deuil, who certainly nourished a hearty dislike for
both Greeks and Germans as such. His dislike for the Greeks may have
been stimulated by their heretical opinions, though it is rather their
excessive flattery and their guile that appear to have aroused him; at
## p. 331 (#377) ############################################
Revived study of Greek
331
any rate no such explanation will account for his hard sayings about the
Germans. “Nostris etiam erant importabiles Alemanni,” he says, and
goes on to give instances of the trouble created by King Conrad's host
for the French who followed after, and of the direct affronts offered to
the French by German soldiers, finishing his complaint by saying, “Thus
the Germans, going before us,disturbed everything; so that the Greeks fled
from our peaceful army. ”Further evidence tending in the same direction
may be seen in the national name and character of the Teutonic Order,
founded in 1190, which are in striking contrast to those of the older
international Orders of the Hospitallers or Templars. Yet it is not often
that this note of national separateness and rivalry is sounded in the
chronicles of the Crusades, and the development of “nationality” can only
be in part attributed to the rivalries which arose in the mixed hosts of
Christendom travelling towards or engaged in the Holy War.
The coincidence of the thirteenth-century “Renaissance” with the
period of the Crusades is striking, and it would be rash to deny any share
in the outburst of intellectual energy which marks the thirteenth
century to the new ideas and broadened outlook of those who, having gone
on crusade, had seen the world of men and things in a way to which the
society of the tenth and eleventh centuries was unaccustomed. But it
must be admitted that a man may travel much and yet see little, may
preserve intact the narrowness of vision with which he set out. St Louis,
as Joinville shews him to us, or Joinville himself, was not intellectually
changed by his crusading. And when we examine the great motive force
of the thirteenth century “Revival of Learning” it is Aristotle from whom
the impulse proceeded, and Aristotle first brought back to the West by
way of Spain and the Moorish versions of his works. It is true that, so
early as 1128, James of Venice translated into Latin some of the works of
Aristotle, but the greater impulse to the absorption of Greek philosophy
by the Western Church came from the study and translation of the Arabic
versions of the Aristotelian writings and the commentaries upon those
writings made by the scholars of Musulman Spain, in particular by
Avicenna and Averroës. In the thirteenth century, however, the conquest
of the Eastern Empire by the crusaders of 1204, and the discontent felt
by Western scholars with the versions of Aristotle which had come to
them at second hand, led to the direct translation of Aristotle's works
from the Greek, as well as to Latin versions of other Greek writings. Thus
Robert Grosseteste translated the Analytica Posteriora and is said to have
written a commentary upon the Nicomachean Ethics, while later in the
century St Thomas Aquinas, refusing to rely upon the faulty Arabic
versions, was able to find in William of Moerbeke, Archbishop of Corinth
from 1275 to 1286, a Greek scholar capable of translating the whole of
Aristotle's writings from the original Greek into tortured Latin. In this
task William of Moerbeke may have received some assistance from another
1 MPL. CLxxxv, S. Bernardi Clarae-Vallensis opera, iv, col. 1217.
CH, Tx.
## p. 332 (#378) ############################################
332
Military results: check to Turkish advance
member of the Dominican order, Henry of Brabant, and, in view of the
enormous influence exerted by the theological writings of St Thomas, it
is at least interesting to be able to point to these translations as the source
upon which he relied in the task of incorporating the thought of Aristotle
in his great Summa Theologiae. Yet in general the course of the great
movement of medieval thought which began soon after the year 1000
gives little evidence of having been affected by the Crusades. To them
indeed we owe the work of the greatest medieval historian, William of
Tyre, and, on the purely literary side with which we cannot here deal,
their influence was profound in the development of vernacular romances.
But the growth of an articulated system of philosophy, theology, and
politics began before the Crusades, and went on steadily throughout their
course with no more assistance from that movement than was given by
such improvements in the Aristotelian texts as we have already men-
tioned.
It remains to consider the military results of the Crusades upon the
West. Their influence on the improvement of the art of war and military
architecture must be left to be described in special chapters in a future
volume. With regard, however, to the ever-wavering frontier of East and
West, it is clear that the foundation of the Latin States of Syria during
the First Crusade and the course of the twelfth century checked for the
moment the Muslim
advance upon Constantinople which had threatened
its very existence. But against the assistance rendered to the Eastern
Empire in the First Crusade must be set its overthrow in the Fourth-a
blow from which, despite its revival at the end of the thirteenth century,
it never wholly recovered. Whether therefore it is fair to attribute to the
Crusades the delay of nearly three hundred years in the Turkish advance
into the Balkan lands is a problem perhaps incapable of decision, though
the diversion of Muslim effort to the Holy Land probably outweighs
by much the disintegrating effect of the Fourth Crusade and the foun-
dation and fall of the Latin Empire. And on this view the Crusades
must be given credit for providing Western Europe with time to con-
solidate itself into centralised national States, far better able than those
of the eleventh century to defend themselves against the renewed
Muslim advance when it came in the sixteenth century. Nor, in that
renewed struggle between East and West, must the gallant defence of
Rhodes and Cyprus, and later of Malta, by the crusading Knights of St
John, be forgotten.
It was however another and younger order of crusading Knights
which left the deepest mark upon the history of Europe. Founded in 1190,
during the Third Crusade, by certain citizens of Bremen and Lübeck as
a hospital, and raised in 1198 to the rank of an order of Knights, the
Teutonic Order under its great Master, Hermann von Salza, transferred
its energies from the Holy Land to the forcible conversion of infidels
nearer home. Already in East Prussia the Knights of the Sword of
## p. 333 (#379) ############################################
The Teutonic Knights
333
Livonia were engaged in the difficult task of converting the mixed heathen
population of Letts, Slavs, and Wends to Christianity, and the Teutonic
Knights, after absorbing this order in 1237, carried on the same work
with great energy and striking success for the next eighty years. They
founded Thorn, Königsberg, Marienberg—to which in 1309 they trans-
ferred their headquarters—and finally, in 1311, they captured Dantzig.
They allied themselves with the Hanseatic League, and sought by
every means to develop trade in the dominions won by their swords. To
their activities in the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries is due the
Germanisation of East Prussia, as to their weakness in the fifteenth
century, to their defeat at Tannenberg and the recovery of Dantzig and
the mouth of the Vistula by the Polish kingdom, is due the problem
of giving Poland access to the sea which has cost so much anxiety since
the Treaty of Versailles. The junction of the lands of the Teutonic
Order with those of the Hohenzollern house at the Reformation brought
Prussia into the affairs of Western Europe.
Yet, despite the tangible conquests of the Teutonic Order in north-
eastern Germany and, what should not be forgotten, the assistance given
by such Orders as those of Calatrava, Santiago, and Alcántara to the
Christian monarchs who reconquered Spain from the Moors, it is perhaps
in the realm of ideas that we must seek for the most permanent influence of
the crusading movement. Just as it was itself the product of a Christendom
that at the outset of the struggle felt itself morally united, so it has in
turn been the exemplar in later times of many movements undertaken on
a smaller scale indeed, and using the weapons of reason rather than of
war. Never since the fall of Acre has “ Christendom" acted as a united
whole; for never since has it enjoyed unity. Yet the memory of the
failure in which the Crusades ended has only served to heighten the value
of the ideal which created them and won, especially in the First Crusade,
all their success. Our modern use of the word “Crusade” is in fact a
testimony of our belief in the effectiveness of action possible where large
groups of men share a common ideal, and the grounds of that belief are
to be found in the events narrated in this volume.
сн. Іх.
## p. 334 (#380) ############################################
334
CHAPTER X.
GERMANY, 1125–1152.
The Saxon wars, the imperial struggle with the Papacy, had brought
to the front a new nobility. The Hohenstaufen, the Wittelsbachs, the
Wettins emerge to replace the families which, in consequence of the wars,
had become extinct. In like case Lothar, the son of a petty count, one
Gebhard of Supplinburg, rose to the first rank among German princes.
By his marriage he acquired a pre-eminent position in Saxony; for his
wife Richenza was the heiress of Henry of Nordheim and Ekbert of
Meissen. In 1106, on the death of Magnus, Duke of Saxony, the last of
the Billungs, he succeeded to the duchy and to the power which that
family had sedulously built up since the time of Otto the Great. During
the reign of the Emperor Henry V, Lothar as Duke of Saxony had been
conspicuous for his activity in extending his influence in the Wendish
districts and for his constant opposition to the Salian house. In 1125 he
was raised to the throne.
His election marks a change in the German kingship. Though always
elective in theory, owing to the strength of the Saxon and Salian rulers
it had been rendered in practice hereditary. At the diet of Forchheim
in 1077 the German princes passed a resolution, accepted by the Pope,
in favour of spontaneous election'. Effect was given to this resolution in
1125. Henry V died childless, his nephew, Frederick of Swabia, was passed
over, and Lothar without a shadow of hereditary claim-his pedigree is
lost beyond one generation—won the throne by right of election. During
the twelfth century the elective principle becomes firmly established.
Lothar is succeeded by his rival Conrad, and Conrad's son is passed over
in favour of his nephew. The attempt of the Hohenstaufen Emperors to
restore the principle of hereditary succession meets with very limited
success. The Electoral College of princes is gradually forming itself and
establishing its control.
It is fortunate that of an election so important in the history of the
German kingship a detailed and contemporary account has come down
to us? Immediately after the completion of the obsequies of the late
Emperor, writs of summons were issued to the princes to attend an
electoral council at Mayence on the feast of St Bartholomew (24 August).
i Bruno, De Bello Saxonico, SGUS, ed. Wattenbach, p. 67.
2 The author of the Narratio de Electione Lotharii (MGH, Script. xii, 509–512) is
unknown, but he is presumed to have been one of the clergy present at the election
from the diocese of Salzburg, and a member of the extreme Church party.
## p. 335 (#381) ############################################
Election of Lothar of Supplinburg
335
The gathering was a large one'; it included, besides the German princes
and their vassals, two papal legates and Suger, Abbot of St Denis, the
famous minister of the French King Louis VI.
The natural choice would have been Frederick of Swabia. He was
nearly related to the Salian house, he was executor of the late king, heir
to his private estates, guardian of his widow Matilda, the daughter of
Henry I of England, to whose care were entrusted the imperial insignia;
he was well qualified by age—being then thirty-five years old—and by
his personal character and attainments. The head of the house of
Hohenstaufen, he was possessed of considerable private wealth; in addition
to his own duchy of Swabia, he could command the interest of Eastern
Franconia, over which his younger brother Conrad exercised ducal
powers.
But he was out of sympathy with the Church party; and the Church party
was strong under the able leadership of Archbishop Adalbert of Mayence.
Already before the meeting at Mayence Archbishop Frederick of Cologne
had dispatched an embassy to Charles, Count of Flanders, inviting him
to stand for election; the count however declined the offer. Archbishop
Adalbert was more successful. His candidate Lothar commended him-
self to the Church dignitaries on the ground of his enmity to the Salian
house, to the lay princes because he was advanced in years”, destitute of a
male heir, and therefore unable to found a dynasty to deprive them of
their power of election.
At Mayence the business of selection was delegated to a committee
of fortys, ten representatives from each tribe, Bavaria, Swabia, Franconia,
and Saxony. Three names were submitted: Frederick, Leopold, Margrave
of Austria, and Lothar. From this moment the skilful diplomacy of
Archbishop Adalbert comes into play. He had already, by means not
too reputable, if we are to believe Bishop Otto, succeeded in persuading
the Empress to surrender the insignia; now, by addressing awkward
questions to the candidates, he managed to place Frederick in a dilemma.
1 It is often stated, on the authority of Ordericus Vitalis, XII, 43, that 60,000
persons were present at the election. So e. g. Giesebrecht, Kaiserzeit, iv, 7; Zeller,
Histoire d'Allemagne, iv, 9. This figure was however commonly used to denote a
large indefinite number, and very frequently by Ordericus, who e. g. estimates the
attendance at the famous meeting at Salisbury in 1086 at 60,000 (v11, 11), and reckons
also the number of knight's fees in England at 60,000 (iv, 7). The usage may be
traced to the Babylonian numerical system; see Johannes Schmidt, Die Urheimat
der Indogermanen und das europäisch. Zahlsystem, p. 46 sq. in Abhandlungen der
Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1890.
? Probably fifty years of age; he was born according to the Ann. Disibodi a few
days before the battle of the Unstrut, 9 June 1075, at which his father was killed.
Cf. Neu. Arch. XLIII (1922), p. 641.
3 Wichert, Die Wahl Lothars, FDG, XII, 96 sq. , xvi, 374 sqq. and Schirrmacher,
Entstehung des Kurfürstentums, p. 8, hold that the committee was composed of only
ten members in all, that in consideration of the limited number of princes qualified
to vote at the preliminary election the number forty was too large. The committee
of forty is however generally accepted. See e. g. Bernhardi, p. 31 sq.
CH. X.
## p. 336 (#382) ############################################
336
Campaign in Bohemia
Lothar and Leopold had first with unnecessary humility declined to
come forward, and later agreed to abide by the decision of the electors.
Frederick, on the other hand,“ ready to be chosen but not to choose a
king,” refused to give a direct answer to the question whether he would sub-
mit to the result of election; he must, he said, consult his followers; and
he left the council. By this action he lost the confidence of the assembled
princes; he appeared to deny the doctrine of free election and to set his
reliance on hereditary right. The question was settled by the turbulent
mob of Saxons, who broke up the deliberations of the council by their
shoutings and acclamation of Lothar as king. He was raised on the
shoulders of the enthusiastic crowd amidst a tumult only calmed by the
intervention of the papal legate. The Bavarians refused to comply with this
irregular ending of the proceedings in the absence of their duke. But
their duke's son was already the affianced husband of Lothar's only
child; there was no danger from that quarter. The Duke, Henry the
Black, hurried to the scene, and Lothar III was duly elected on 30 August.
A fortnight later, 13 September, he was solemnly crowned at Aix-la-
Chapelle.
The opening years of the reign were marked by widespread unrest. In
Bohemia, in Lorraine, even in his own dukedom of Saxony, the authority of
the new king was disputed or openly disregarded. In Swabia and Franconia
the party of the Hohenstaufen was in the ascendant. Duke Frederick
had eventually done belated homage to Lothar, but almost immediately
quarrelled with him over the issue of the Salian inheritance. After his
coronation the king proceeded to Ratisbon, where he held a diet in
November. To the assembled princes he put the question whether estates
that had been confiscated from outlaws or had been acquired by exchange
with imperial lands should be regarded as imperial or private property.
The problem was raised on general grounds, but its real application was
obvious. The Salian Emperors had largely increased their territorial
position by both these means, and the lands so acquired were included in
the Hohenstaufen inheritance. The diet decided against Frederick ; he
refused to give up the fiefs in question, was found guilty of high treason
at the Christmas court at Strasbourg, and at Goslar in January 1126
was placed under the ban of the Empire.
Lothar's position, by no means strong, was sensibly weakened by the
conspicuous failure of his first military enterprise. It arose over the
question of the succession to the Bohemian dukedom, in which, with
singular lack of judgment, he supported the weaker claims of Otto of
Olmütz against those of the popular candidate, Soběslav, a brother of the
late King Vladislav I (ob. April 1125). Otto appealed, not in vain,
for Lothar's assistance at the diet of Ratisbon. In midwinter the king
crossed the Erzgebirge into Bohemia with a small band of Saxons.
Wearied by long marches through the snow-covered mountains and ex-
hausted by lack of provisions, they emerged into the valley of Kulm to
## p. 337 (#383) ############################################
Possessions of the house of Welf
337
find a large force of Bohemians under Soběslav awaiting their coming
(February 1126). The advanced troops were all but annihilated by the
overwhelming numbers of the enemy; and Lothar had no choice but to
make terms. The death of his protégé on the battle-field facilitated
matters, and Lothar found in his conqueror a submissive and loyal ally.
Soběslav recognised Lothar's election, did homage for his dukedom, and
in after time proved his loyalty by signal services in the field.
The king could not press forward the punitive expedition against
Frederick of Hohenstaufen which had been arranged for Whitsuntide 1126
until his own position in Germany was more secure. The uselessness of
doing so had been proved by an abortive campaign in Swabia in the
autumn of 1126.
The prospect brightened a little with the death in
December of Henry the Black, Duke of Bavaria, who shortly before had
withdrawn from the world to spend his closing years in the monastery of
Weingarten. His son and successor Henry, called the Proud, was young
and energetic, the heir to enormous wealth, the chosen husband of
Gertrude, Lothar's only child. His inheritance comprised, in addition
to the duchy of Bavaria, the greater part of the private property of his
family in Bavaria and extensive possessions round Lüneburg in Saxony
which passed to him through his mother Wulfhild, daughter of Magnus
Billung. The rest of the inheritance in Bavaria and Swabia fell to Henry's
younger brother Welf VI'. The projected marriage, which was in after
years to upset the balance of ducal power in Germany by the union of
Saxony and Bavaria in the hands of one man more powerful almost
than the king himself, was carried out on the borders of Swabia and
Bavaria near Augsburg on 29 May 1127. The immediate result was
that Lothar could now in co-operation with Henry of Bavaria prosecute
the war against the Hohenstaufen with vigour and with fair prospects of
success. His position was further improved by his alliance in the same
year with Conrad of Zähringen. In March William, Count of Bur-
gundy (Franche Comté), was murdered. His inheritance fell naturally
to his cousin Rainald, who immediately occupied the lands without
waiting to be formally invested by the king. Lothar took advantage of
this remissness and granted the rectorship of Burgundy to Conrad of
Zähringen who was also connected with the late count, thereby not only
gaining a new ally for himself but also detaching a strong supporter
from the party of the Hohenstaufen.
Yet the tide of events still went against the king. Nuremberg suc-
cessfully resisted his attack. For ten weeks the armies of Lothar,
supported by the levies of Henry and Soběslav from Bavaria and Bohemia,
invested the town. The Bohemian allies ravaged the country, burnt the
1 There were also claims upon lands in Italy through Azzo, Marquess of Este,
who married Cunegunda, sister of the childless Welf III. Henry the Proud and
Welf VI were their great-grandsons. But these claims were not made good
C. MED, H. VOL. V. CH. X.
22
till 1154.
## p. 338 (#384) ############################################
338
War with the Hohenstaufen
churches, and so incensed the population that they had to be sent home.
At last Conrad of Hohenstaufen, lately returned from the Holy Land,
advanced with fresh troops for its relief. Without risking a battle, Lothar
withdrew first to Bamberg, then to Würzburg, whither he was pursued by
Conrad, who however contented himself with celebrating a tournament at
the very gates of the town as a mark of his disdain and returned, as he
had come, to Nuremberg.
The efforts of the Hohenstaufen had met with such success that they
now purposed to wrest the crown itself from Lothar. Frederick waived
his claim of seniority in favour of his brother Conrad, who was duly
elected king by his supporters on 18 December 1127. Spires declared for
him and drove out its bishop; but this was the last triumph of his party.
The election of Conrad was the turning-point in the conflict. By it not
only the German kingship but also the German Church was assailed; the
whole weight of the ecclesiastical power was thrown into the scale on the
side of the legitimate king. Realising that the odds against him in
Germany were too heavy, Conrad, early in the year 1128, crossed the
Septimer to try his fortunes in Italy.
The Rhenish town of Spires now became the centre of the Hohenstaufen
resistance. After a siege of nearly three months the burghers asked for
terms, agreed to give hostages, and made promises for their future loyalty
(November 1128). Lothar was now free to attend to business in other
parts of his kingdom. Lorraine was hostile to him; a rising of the citizens
of Aix-la-Chapelle during his stay in the town in January 1127 was only
pacified by liberal concessions ; Godfrey the Bearded, Duke of Lower
Lorraine, supported the pretensions of the Hohenstaufen. The duke was
drawn into a dispute over the inheritance of Charles the Good, Count of
Flanders, who in March 1127 had been murdered in the church of
St Donatian at Bruges, on the side of William Clito the son of Duke
Robert of Normandy. While he was thus engaged, Lothar seized his duchy
and handed it over to Walram, Count of Limbourg, the son of Henry,
Godfrey's predecessor in the dukedom. Godfrey soon succeeded in re-
covering the greater part of his possessions, and the only result of Lothar's
intervention was the further dismembermentof the old Lotharingian duchy.
In the meanwhile Henry of Bavaria remained in the south to cope
with Frederick of Swabia. The latter was keeping Lent at the monastery
of Zwifalten on the banks of the Danube when Henry happened to be
visiting his family estates in the same neighbourhood. The opportunity
of finding Frederick unaware of his presence and with but a few companions
was too much for his sense of honour. Coming one night to the monastery
with a body of armed followers, he set fire to the dwelling-rooms of the
monks in which he rightly imagined Frederick to be. The latter escaped
from the flames with the help of the monks and took refuge in the church
tower. Henry surrounded the church, broke in the doors, even disturbed
the brethren at their prayers with threats of death, but all to no effect.
## p. 339 (#385) ############################################
Failure of the Hohenstaufen in Germany and Italy 339
Frederick, safe in his tower, defied his sacrilegious assailant, who not only
had to retire in disgust but had to pay for his scandalous behaviour by
forfeiting the advocacy of the monastery. The Hohenstaufen still had a
strong position in Franconia and Swabia; there was yet hope in the Rhine
country in spite of the submission of Spires. The insincerity of the
promises made to Lothar on the occasion of its surrender was revealed
when Frederick proceeded there with the view to making it again the
centre of resistance. The townsmen readily threw over the king for the
duke. The fortifications were strengthened, the garrison increased;
Frederick himself after completing his arrangements departed for Swabia,
leaving the conduct of affairs in the city to his wife Agnes of Saarbruck.
In June 1129 Lothar appeared before the walls. Month after month
the siege dragged on without either side shewing signs of giving in. At
last the king in despair sent an urgent appeal for help to his son-in-law,
who was engaged in besieging a rebellious subject, Frederick of Bogen, in
his castle of Falkenstein. Henry, leaving the siege in charge of his sister
Sophia, responded immediately to the royal summons with a body of six
hundred Bavarian knights. The joint strength of Bavaria and Saxony
turned the scale. From midsummer till past Christmas the townsmen,
under the gallant leadership of Agnes, held out in spite of every hardship
and privation. Eventually deprived of all hope of relief, for a force
brought to their aid by Frederick was driven off, they submitted and on
the feast of Epiphany 1130 opened their gates to the king.
With the capture of Spires the opposition in the Upper Rhineland
was crushed. Before long Nuremberg, the chief strong-point of resistance,
fell before Lothar's attack; and with it went all hopes of success for the
party of the Hohenstaufen in Germany. In Italy too Conrad's initial
success was not long maintained. Notwithstanding his excommunication
by Honorius II he was welcomed at Milan, crowned by its archbishop at
Monza and again in the cathedral of St Ambrose with the Iron Crown
of Lombardy. But this was the limit of his achievement. An attempt
to acquire the possessions of the late Countess Matilda ended in failure
the towns of Lombardy which had at first received him declared against
him; his supporters one by one abandoned his cause and left him almost
alone. In despair he gave up trying to establish himself in Italy and re-
crossed the Alps (1130), only to find that in Germany also the family
cause was as good as lost.
Yet years dragged on before the brothers admitted defeat. Their
opponents were too busily occupied with other matters to press the issue
to a conclusion. The petty quarrels and rivalries of ambitious princes
kept Saxony in ceaseless turmoil. Albert of Ballenstädt and Henry of
Groitsch, Conrad of Wettin and Herman of Winzenburg, each strove
to increase his own power at the other's expense. The murder in one of
these feuds of a trusted follower of the king, one Burchard of Loccum,
by Herman of Winzenburg, Landgrave of Thuringia, called for Lothar's
CH. X.
22-2
## p. 340 (#386) ############################################
340
Destruction of Augsburg and Ulm
intervention in the affairs of his old duchy. Herman was found guilty
of high treason in December 1130, and sentenced to the confiscation of
his fiefs. Before another year was out Albert the Bear for some similar
offence was deprived of the East Mark. The rebellious town of Halle
suffered the severest of punishments. It fell before Lothar's assault, its
inhabitants were put to death, mutilated, or in some cases allowed their
safety on payment of heavy fines. By such stringent methods as these
Lothar restored the peace of Saxony.
The fate of Augsburg affords another example of the stern measures
employed by the king to suppress local risings, but in this instance he
had less justification for his action. On the journey to Italy in August
1132, a dispute arose in the market between the townsfolk and the soldiers
and quickly spread through the whole city. The king, suspecting treason,
ordered the troops to punish the burghers. From noon till night the
town was in a tumult; men, women, and children were massacred in the
streets and houses; churches and monasteries were broken into, plundered,
and burnt. As on previous occasions the Bohemian troops in the royal
army were conspicuous for their barbarity and excess. In a state of com-
plete desolation Augsburg was left as a warning to other towns not to
risk the king's displeasure.
During Lothar's absence in Italy (September 1132-August 1133)
Henry of Bavaria remained in Germany to deal with the Hohenstaufen.
But rebellions in his own duchy kept him too busily occupied to effect a
decision. The appointment of Henry of Wolfratshausen in August 1132
to the see of Ratisbon against the wishes of the king and himself led
to serious trouble. The bishop, aided by his advocate, the duke's old enemy
Frederick of Bogen, made stubborn resistance. For some months fighting
continued, the armies plundering and burning after the manner of medieval
warfare round Ratisbon and Wolfratshausen, a castle near the site
of the present town of Munich. At last the two armies, the bishop's
strengthened by the adhesion of Leopold of Austria, faced each other
on the banks of the Isar to bring matters to a final issue. At the critical
moment Otto of Wittelsbach, the count palatine, intervened as mediator
and reconciled the contending parties.
It was not till August 1134 that the Emperor and his son-in-law
were free to deal decisively with the Hohenstaufen. The Swabian town
of Ulm had now become the centre of resistance. After a short siege
Henry captured the town, which was thereupon almost totally destroyed
by the devastations practised by the Bavarian soldiers. Lothar had in
the meanwhile overrun Swabia without opposition. The brothers were
in desperate straits: their castles were captured; their supporters deserted.
Frederick was the first to realise the futility of further resistance; he
approached the Empress Richenza and begged her to intercede on his
behalf. At Fulda towards the end of October the reconciliation was
effected. The terms of his submission, settled at the crowded diet of
## p. 341 (#387) ############################################
Ecclesiastical policy
341
Bamberg (March 1135), were favourable in the extreme: he was freed
from excommunication, and received back his dukedom and his possessions;
for his own part he had only to promise to accompany the Emperor on
the Italian campaign which had been planned for the next year—a con-
dition imposed no doubt at the request of St Bernard who was present at
the court in the papal interest. Conrad held back for some months longer,
but finally made his peace with the Emperor at Mühlhausen in September
under the same lenient conditions as those imposed upon his brother.
Lothar owed his crown to the support given him by the leaders of
the Church hierarchy. Did he reward their confidence by granting on
that occasion definite concessions? The question is crucial and contro-
versial. That some settlement was reached seems clear, but its precise
nature cannot be determined. We have no reliable information. A famous
passage formulates a position, but it is more likely the position at which
the leaders of the party aimed than the one actually attained? More
profitable results may be found from the evidence of Lothar's actual
relations with the Church during his reign. After his election we are told
he neither received nor exacted homage from the spirituality, contenting
himself merely with the oath of fealty; and even this he remitted in the
case of Conrad, Archbishop of Salzburg, in deference to the latter's
scruples in the matter. The most important change was with regard to
the royal presence at elections. Here again Lothar bent to the wishes
of the Church party and refrained from exercising the right granted him
by the Concordat of Worms. Two elections took place within a month
of his accession-Eichstätt and Magdeburg—and in neither case was he
present. Indeed there is scarcely an instance during the first five years
of his reign of his disturbing episcopal elections by his presence'. The
ecclesiastical princes had no cause to complain of the conduct of the man
they had set upon the throne. Lothar even if he wished it could not
afford to quarrel with the Church; but to support the orthodox Church
party was natural to him. As Duke of Saxony he had been bred up to
1 Narratio de Electione Lotharii, MGH, Script. xii, c. 6.
2 See Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, IV, p. 118, n. 2. The passage in
the Narratio mentions three points: 1. Free election without the presence of the
king; 2. Investiture with the regalia by the sceptre after consecration ; 3. The right
of the king to exact the oath of allegiance. As the citation of the wording of a
document this breaks down on the second point; for the old practice of investiture
with the regalia before conse ation continued to prevail.
3 Or were the concessions granted in the Concordat by Calixtus II only intended
for Henry V personally, and not for his successors? There is no mention of the
latter in the document, and Otto of Freising (Chron. vii, 16) expressly tells us that
at Rome it was interpreted in this way “hoc sibi soli et non successoribus datum
dicunt Romani. ” See D. Schäfer, Zur Beurteilung des Wormser Konkordates, in
Abhandlungen der Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1905.
4 See Hauck, op. cit. p. 128, n. 1; also for the whole question Bernheim,
Lothar III und das Wormser Concordat, Strasbourg, 1874.
CH, X.
## p. 342 (#388) ############################################
342
Lothar and the papal schism
the traditional policy of opposition to the anti-hierarchical Salians; and
this policy he maintained as king.
When Honorius II died in February 1130 and the two factions in
Rome each chose its own candidate to fill the papal throne, Lothar was
faced with the necessity of making a momentous decision. Though not
as yet crowned Emperor, the long attachment of the imperial title to the
King of Germany gave Lothar the unquestioned position of temporal
ruler of Christendom. The rival Popes Anacletus II and Innocent II, the
one master of Rome, the other a refugee in France, each appealed anxiously
to him for recognition. Each had his supporters in Germany. Ana-
cletus found an advocate of his pretentions in Adalbero, Archbishop of
Bremen, who happened to be in Rome at the critical moment; Innocent
saw his claims upheld by the most advanced Churchmen, represented by
Conrad of Salzburg, Norbert, and Otto of Bamberg. But Lothar hesitated.
Perhaps he feared a split in the ranks of the Church party on whose
support he relied so much. It was not till Louis VI of France at Étampes,
under the influence of Bernard, had declared for Innocent that Lothar,
urged also by Innocent's legate Walter of Ravenna, consented to take
action. He summoned a meeting at Würzburg in October to discuss the
question. Only sixteen bishops presented themselves, but the sixteen
were unanimous for Innocent. Lothar accepted the decision without
hesitation, and immediately sent Conrad of Salzburg and Ekbert of
Münster to carry Germany's recognition to the Pope in France.
At Innocent's suggestion a personal interview between Pope and king
was arranged; Liège near the French frontier was chosen as a convenient
meeting place for both parties. Thither on 22 March 1131 came Innocent
accompanied by thirteen cardinals, a large number of French bishops, and
the indispensable Bernard. Lothar received him with due humility; he
performed the office of groom for the pontiff when he dismounted, signifying
by his act that he claimed to be but the servant of the Bishop of Rome;
he made promises to enter Italy to destroy the invaders of the Holy
See. But these cordial relations were almost upset at the very meeting
which had given them birth. Lothar, it seems, raised the vexed question
of episcopal elections; he evidently wished to recede from the concessions
he had made at the time of his accession, to revive the royal influence
over elections, in short to claim those privileges which the Concordat
had granted to the Crown. A quarrel was prevented by the eloquence
of Bernard. It is impossible to say whether any understanding was
reached. But a change of attitude is perceptible in Lothar’s dealings
with the Church during the year following: he appears to have tried to
exert some control over elections to bishoprics'; but the Church party
1 Notably in the cases of Adalbero of Münsterol to the archbishopric of Trèves
at Easter 1131, and of Henry of Wolfratshausen to the see of Ratisbon 19 August
1132. See Hauck, op. cit. iv, p. 151 sg.
## p. 343 (#389) ############################################
Civilising of the Wendish country
343
resented his action so strongly that rather than quarrel he tacitly re-
linquished his pretensions.
The relations with the Pope continued to be friendly. In August 1132
Lothar carried out his promised campaign in Italy to end the schism, and
on 4 June 1133 at the Lateran received as his reward the imperial crown.
Again Lothar took occasion to raise the crucial subject of episcopal
elections, and, in spite of loud protests from the Gregorian party in
Germany, obtained concessions contained in a document dated 8 June 1133
which amounted to a confirmation to himself of the rights allowed to the
Emperor in the Worms Concordat? We should expect to find a complete
reversal of policy in consequence. Nothing of the sort is perceptible.
Lothar too well realised the value of the Church support; he used his
power with a refinement of tact; he was often present at elections but
his presence was scarcely felt. The settlement at the Lateran, which came
so near to disturbing the peaceful relations between Church and State,
in practice made little or no change in Lothar's attitude of conciliatory
friendship towards the Church. The reign of Lothar from the point of
view of Church politics marks the consummation of the victory of the
hierarchy.
Throughout his reign we see Lothar, with an energy surprising
in a man of his age, busily occupied in a succession of wars both at
home and abroad: now he is campaigning against the Hohenstaufen,
now settling contested claims to an inheritance, now fulfilling the supreme
function of his imperial office by taking up arms against the enemies of
the Church. But more enduring results matured from the work which
alike as duke and king had always been nearest to his heart—the expansion
of Germany eastwards, the revival of German influence, the re-establish-
ment of the Christian religion and civilisation in the Wendish regions.
In this sense an annalist is justified in describing Lothar as “the imitator
and heir of the first Otto. "» Since the tenth century nothing had been
done, and even the districts then brought under German intluence had
since lapsed once more into paganism and barbarism. Lothar was ready
to promote with his support and encouragement every enterprise which
led in this direction. So Otto of Bamberg was able to make his second
journey to Pomerania in 1127, and to see his work established on a firm
basis. So also the Premonstratensians were able to pursue their missionary
labours in Brandenburg with the co-operation of Albert of Ballenstädt,
who in 1134 was enfeoffed with the North Mark as a reward for his services
1 Nos igitur, maiestatem imperii nolentes minuere sed augere, imperatoriae
dignitati(s plenitudinem tibi concedimus et debitas et canonicas consuetudines pre-
sentis scripti pagina confirmamus. Interdicimus autem, ne quisquam eorum, quos
in Teut(onico) regno ad pontificatus honorem vel abbatiae regimen evocari contigerit,
regalia usurpare vel invadere audeat, nisi eadem prius a tua (potes)tate deposcat,
quod ex his, quae iure debet tibi, tuae magnificentiue faciat. MGH, Const. 1, 168 sq.
and printed in Bernheim, Quellen zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites, 11, p. 70.
? Ann. Palidenses sub anno 1125. MGH, Script. xvi, 77.
OH, X.
## p. 344 (#390) ############################################
344
Relations with Denmark
in the Italian campaign, and on the death of Pribislav of Brandenburg
without heirs received that district in addition. The priest Vicelin made
progress in Holstein and the district about Lübeck.
It was the king's activities in Nordalbingia which involved him in
the tangled affairs of Denmark. In 1131 the land was plunged into civil
war by the murder of Canute, the son of the late King Eric, at the hands
of Magnus, the son of the reigning King Niel. Canute was ruling in
Schleswig, and had also been enfeoffed with the county of Wagria and
the land of the Obotrites by Lothar. His firm hand kept the turbulent
Wendish population under control; the country prospered; Christianity
and civilisation began to revive. But the success of his rule and the un-
certainty of the succession to the Danish throne brought upon him the
jealousy of his cousin Magnus.
