No More Learning

They required the
king to acknowledge the peculiarly independent position, the ancient and
barbaric law, of the Saxons. They met him at Minden, where he
was keeping his Christmas court. Their condition was proposed and
accepted, and their homage, hitherto deferred, was duly performed to
their now recognised sovereign'.
Since the time of Otto III, the jurisdiction over the rich nunnery of
Gandersheim had been the cause of a fierce dispute between the bishops
of Hildesheim and the archbishops of Mayence. It had been one of the
reasons for the breach between Aribo and the late Emperor, who had in
1022 decided in favour of the Hildesheim claim. While Conrad remained
in Saxony the matter was brought up before him. The outlook was
ominous for Bishop Godehard; Conrad was not likely to give cause for a
quarrel with the powerful archbishop to whom he owed his crown, and
whom he had already favoured by conferring on him the archchancellor-
ship of Italy, in addition to the archchancellorship of Germany which
he had previously held. Moreover, the influential Abbess Sophia, the
daughter of the Emperor Otto II, was known to favour the claims of
Aribo. On the other hand, Conrad could not lightly reverse a decision
made by his predecessor only two years before, and he may also have felt
some resentment towards Aribo for the latter's refusal to crown his
queen.
Postponements and compromises were tried in vain. At last, in March
1 This interpretation of the rather confused evidence is Bresslau's, s. 12 and
n. 7. Cf. also his edition of Wipo, Script. Rer. Germ. 1915, p. 11, n. 1.
сн. XI,


## p. 256 (#302) ############################################

256
The Burgundian Question
1025, at a sparsely attended synod held at Grona, a provisional judgment
was given in favour of the Bishop of Hildesheim; the decision was con-
firmed two years later at a more representative gathering at Frankfort,
but it was not until 1030, a year before his death, that Aribo had a
meeting with his opponent at Merseburg, and finally renounced his claims
which, according to the biographer of Godehard, he confessed that he had
raised “partly in ignorance, partly out of malice. ”
The rebellion, which disturbed the opening years of the new reign,
is closely connected with the question of the Burgundian succession and
with the revolt in Lombardy. Rodolph III, the childless King of Bur-
gundy, had in 1016 recognised his nephew the Emperor Henry II as the
heir to his throne; he maintained however, and probably with justice,
that with the Emperor's death the compact became void. Conrad, on
the other hand, took a different view of the case; the cession, he argued,
was made not to the Emperor but to the Empire, to which he had been
duly elected. Against him stood a formidable row of descendants of
Conrad the Peaceful in the female line, two of whom, Ernest, Duke of
Swabia, whose mother, Queen Gisela, was the niece, and Odo, Count
of Blois, whose mother, Bertha, was the sister of Rodolph, aspired to the
inheritance. To make his intentions clear Conrad, in June 1025, occupied
Basle which, though held by Henry II, actually lay within the confines
of the Burgundian kingdom. As his presence was needed elsewhere, he
left his wife Gisela, herself a niece of King Rodolph', to bring the Bur-
gundian question to a satisfactory issue. The success of her efforts is to
be seen in the Burgundian king's refusal to assist Ernest of Swabia in his
second revolt (1026), in his submissive attendance at the Emperor's
coronation at Rome (Easter 1027), and in his recognition, at Muttenz
near Basle, later in the same year, of Conrad's title to succeed to his
kingdom. Ernest, whose hopes in Burgundy were shattered by the
occupation of Basle, decided to oppose Conrad with arms.
. He allied
himself with Count Welf, with the still disaffected dukes of Lorraine,
and with Conrad the Younger who, having heard no more of the proffered
rewards by which his cousin had secured his withdrawal from the electoral
contest, had openly shewn his resentment at Augsburg in the previous
April
In France, Odo of Blois and Champagne was interested in the downfall
of Conrad; in Italy, the trend of events moved in the same direction.
There the Lombards, taking advantage of the death of Henry II, rose
1 This marriage connexion with the Burgundian house constituted, Poupardin
concludes, Conrad's title to be designated by Rodolph and to be chosen by the
Burgundian princes, but brought with it no actual right of succession. Cf. Pou-
pardin, Le Royaume de Bourgogne, p. 151.
2 Conrad the Younger stood in the same relation to Rodolph Ill as did Ernest;
his mother Matilda was Rodolph's niece. He appears, however, to have raised no
claim to the throne of Burgundy. Cf. Poupardin, loc. cit.


## p. 257 (#303) ############################################

Rebellion of Duke Ernest
257
in revolt against the imperial domination. The men of Pavia, mindful
of the recent destruction of their city at the hands of the late Em-
peror, burnt the royal palace; the north Italian princes, in defiance of
Conrad, offered their crown first to King Robert of France, then, on his
refusal, to William V, Duke of Aquitaine, who accepted it for his son.
The duke's only hope of success in the dangerous enterprise he had
undertaken lay in keeping Conrad engaged in his own kingdom. With
this object he set about organising the opposition in Lorraine, France,
and Burgundy; he met Robert of France and Odo of Champagne at
Tours, and the French king agreed to carry a campaign into Germany.
The combination, so formidable in appearance, dissolved into nothing.
Robert was prevented by the affairs of his own kingdom from taking the
field against Conrad; Odo, engaged in a fierce feud with Fulk of Anjou,
was powerless; William of Aquitaine on visiting Italy found the situation
there less favourable than he had been led to expect, and thereupon gave
up the project; the dukes of Lorraine, no longer able to count on foreign
aid, made their submission to the Emperor at Aix-la-Chapelle (Christ-
mas 1025). After the collapse of the alliance, continued resistance on
the part of Ernest was useless; at Augsburg early in the next year,
through the mediation of the queen, his mother, he was reconciled with
Conrad who, to keep him from further mischief, insisted on his accom-
panying him on the Italian campaign upon which he was about to
embark.
It was a wise precaution, and Conrad would have been better advised
had he retained his ambitious stepson in his camp; instead he dispatched
him to Germany to suppress the disorders which had arisen there in his
absence. Welf, obdurate in his disobedience, had attacked and plundered
the lands and cities of Bruno, Bishop of Augsburg, the brother of the
Emperor Henry II, the guardian of the young King Henry III, and the
administrator of Germany during the king's absence in Italy. Ernest,
back among his old fellow-conspirators and acting, no doubt, on the advice
of his evil genius, Count Werner of Kiburg, instead of suppressing the
rebellious Welf, joined with him in rebellion? The second revolt of
.
Ernest was however as abortive as the first; he invaded Alsace, pene-
trated into Burgundy, but finding to his discomfiture, in Rodolph, not
an ally but an enemy, he was compelled to make a hasty retreat to
Zurich, whence he occupied himself in making plundering raids upon
the
rich abbeys of Reichenau and St Gall. Conrad's return soon ended the
affair. Ernest and Welf answered the imperial summons to Ulm (July
1027), not however as suppliants for the Emperor's mercy, but, supported
by an armed following, with the intention either of dictating their own
1 The attitude of the younger Conrad in this rebellion is ambiguous. Wipo, c. 19,
says of him “nec fidus imperatori, nec tamen multum noxius illi. ” His submission
and condemnation to a short term of imprisonment in 1027, mentioned by Wipo,
c. 21, proves his implication.
17
C. MED, H. VOL. III. CH. XI.


## p. 258 (#304) ############################################

258
Failure and death of Ernest
terms or, failing that, of fighting their way to safety. The duke had
miscalculated his resources; at an interview with his vassals he discovered
his mistake. They were prepared, they said, to follow him as their oath
required against any man except the Emperor; but loyalty to the
Emperor took precedence to loyalty to the duke. Ernest had no choice
but to throw himself on Conrad's mercy; he was deprived of his duchy
and imprisoned in the castle of Gibichenstein near Halle. Welf was
condemned to imprisonment, to make reparation to the Bishop of
Augsburg, and to the loss of a countship in the neighbourhood of
Brixen.
Ernest, after less than a year's captivity, was forgiven and reinstated
in his dukedom. But the course of events of 1026 was repeated in 1030.
Ordered by the Emperor to execute the ban against Count Werner, who
had persisted in rebellion, he disobeyed, and was, by the judgment of
the princes, once more deprived of his dukedom and placed under the
ban of the Empire (at Ingelheim, Easter 1030). After a vain attempt to
persuade Odo of Champagne to join him, he and Werner withdrew into
the Black Forest, where, making the strong castle of Falkenstein their
headquarters, they lived for a time the life of bandits. At last, in
August, the two rebels fell in a fierce encounter with the Emperor's
troops under Count Manegold.
The rebellions of Ernest, dictated not by any dissatisfaction at
Conrad's rule but rather by personal motives and rival ambitions, never
assumed dangerous proportions. The fact that even the nobility of
Swabia, with few exceptions, refused to follow their duke is significant
of the strength and popularity of Conrad's government. The loyalty of
Germany as a whole was never shaken. Duke Ernest, a little undeservedly
perhaps, has become the hero of legend and romance; he has often been
compared with Liudolf of Swabia, the popular and ambitious son of
Otto the Great. The parallel is scarcely a fair one; Liudolf rebelled
but once and with juster cause; and after his defeat, he lived loyally and
died fighting his father's battles in Italy. Ernest, though twice for-
given, lived and died a rebel.
In September 1032 Rodolph III ended a weak and inglorious reign.
Conrad had been solemnly recognised as heir by the late king at Muttenz
five years before and had been entrusted with the royal insignia, the crown
and the lance of St Maurice. Some of the Burgundian nobles had even
already taken the oath of allegiance to the German king; but the
majority both of the ecclesiastical and secular lords, especially in the
romance-speaking district of the south, stood opposed to him. His
powerful rival, Odo, Count of Blois and Champagne, had at first the
advantage, for Conrad at the critical moment was busily occupied with the
affairs of Poland, and when, after the submission of the Polish Duke Mesco,
he hastened to Strasbourg, he found a large part of Burgundy already in
the hands of the enemy (Christmas 1032). In spite of the severity of


## p. 259 (#305) ############################################

Acquisition of Burgundy
259
a
the weather, which was sufficiently remarkable to supply the theme of a
poem of a hundred stanzas from the pen of Wipo, the Emperor decided
to make a winter campaign into Burgundy. He marched on Basle and
proceeded to Payerne, where he was formally elected and crowned by his
partisans; but the indescribable sufferings of his troops from the cold
prevented his further progress, and he withdrew to Zurich.
In the spring, before resuming operations in Burgundy, he entered into
negotiations with the French King Henry I, which resulted in a meeting
of the two at Deville on the Meuse. What actually took place there is
not recorded, but it seems clear that an alliance against Odo was formed
between them. Again the affairs of Poland prevented Conrad from com-
pleting his task, and on his return thence he found that his adversary had
penetrated the German frontier and plundered the districts of Lorraine
in the neighbourhood of Toul. Conrad retaliated with a raid into Count
Odo's territory and brought him to submission; the latter renounced
his claims, agreed to evacuate the occupied districts, and to make
reparation for the damage caused by his incursion into Lorraine. The
matter was not however so easily settled; not only did Odo not evacuate
the occupied parts of Burgundy nor make satisfaction for the harm he
had perpetrated in Lorraine, but he even had the audacity to repeat his
performance in that country. Conrad determined on a decisive effort;
Burgundy was attacked on two sides. His Italian allies, Marquess
Boniface of Tuscany and Archbishop Aribert of Milan, under the
guidance of Count Humbert of Maurienne, led their troops across the
Great St Bernard, and following the Rhone Valley, made their junction
with the Emperor, operating from the north, at Geneva. Little re-
sistance was encountered by either army. At Geneva Conrad was again
solemnly recognised as king and received the submission of the greater
number of Odo's adherents. The town of Morat alone held out defiantly;
attacked by the German and Italian forces in conjunction, it was taken
by assault and demolished. With it were destroyed the last hopes of
Conrad's adversaries; they submitted, and Burgundy, furnishing the
Emperor with his fourth crown, became an undisputed and integral part
of the imperial dominions. If Burgundy was never a source of much
strength or financial profit to the Empire, its inclusion was by no means
without its value. Its geographical position as a barrier between France
and Italy, and as commanding the western passes of the Alps, made it an
acquisition of the first importance. In the last year of his reign Conrad
visited his new kingdom. A solemn and well-attended gathering of
ecclesiastical and secular nobles assembled at Soleure, and for three days
deliberated over the means of establishing peace and organised govern-
ment in a land, which for many a year had known nothing but lawlessness
and anarchy.
а
сн. х.
17-2


## p. 260 (#306) ############################################

260
Polish aggressions
The Eastern Frontier.
During the years 1030–1035 Conrad was chiefly occupied with the
restless state of the eastern frontier of his kingdom. It is a dreary story
of rebellion, ineffective campaigns, fratricidal wars. Poland, Hungary,
Bohemia, the Wendish lands to the north-east, demanded in turn the
Emperor's attention. Boleslav Chrobry had, during the previous reign,
been assiduously building up a strong position for himself in Poland ; in
the peace of Bautzen (1018) he had been the chief gainer at the expense
of the Empire; on the death of Henry II he had taken a further step
and boldly assumed the title of king. Conrad was neither strong enough
nor at liberty to deal at once with this presumptuous duke; but while at
Merseburg in February 1025, he took the wise precaution of securing the
loyalty of the neighbouring Slavonic tribes of the Lyutitzi and the
Obotrites.
In the summer Boleslav died ; his younger son Mesco, having suc-
cessfully driven his elder brother Otto Bezprim to Russia (or perhaps
Hungary), assumed the kingship and the policy of his father. By 1028
his aggressions had become intolerable. The eastern parts of Saxony were
raided and plundered; the bishopric of Zeitz suffered so severely that it
had to be removed to the better fortified Naumberg, a town of Eckhard
of Meissen, near the junction of the Unstrut and the Saale; the Lyutitzi,
helplessly at the mercy of the tyrannical Mesco, pleaded for German
assistance. Conrad assembled an army beyond the Elbe. But the cam-
paign was a complete failure: the troops were scattered and worn out by
long marches through forests and swamps; Bautzen was besieged, but not
captured; and the Emperor, despairing of making any headway, withdrew
to Saxony. The only success was achieved by Conrad's ally, Břatislav,
the son of the Duke of Bohemia, who managed to recover Moravia from
the Poles. The death of Thietmar, Margrave of the East Mark (January
1030), was the occasion for another and more serious incursion on the
part of the Polish prince, united this time with a band of disloyal Saxons.
In the region between the Elbe and the Saale a hundred villages are said
to have been destroyed by fire, more than 9000 men and women taken
into captivity. The enemy were only beaten off by the courage and
resource of Count Dietrich of Wettin.
Conrad was unable to take the matter in hand, for he was engaged in
a war with Stephen of Hungary. The relations between the latter country
and the Empire had been growing yearly more strained. Werner, Bishop
of Strasbourg, Conrad's ambassador to Constantinople in 1027, had been
denied a passage through Hungary, and was compelled to take the more
hazardous route by sea. The Bavarian nobles, no doubt, gave ample
provocation for this hostile attitude by their attempts to extend their
possessions across the Fischa, the boundary at that time between Germany
a


## p. 261 (#307) ############################################

Hungary; subjection of Poland
261
and Hungary. According to one account the actual cause for quarrel
arose through the Emperor's refusal to grant, at the request of King
Stephen, the dukedom of Bavaria to his son Henry (he was the nephew
of the Emperor Henry II, whose sister Gisela had married Stephen of
Hungary). In 1030 Conrad took the field against him; this, like the
Polish campaign, was a miserable disaster. Conrad did no more than
ravage the border country as far as the Raab, and retired with an army
imperilled by famine, while the Hungarians pursued the retreating Ger-
mans and captured Vienna, which celebrated city is now for the first time
mentioned under this name. Bratislav, who had gained the only success
in the Polish campaign of the previous year, was again conspicuous for his
services to the Empire; he defeated the Hungarians and devastated their
country as far as the town of Gran. The young King Henry, who as
Duke of Bavaria was closely concerned with the affairs of Hungary, was
entrusted with the settlement of the quarrel with King Stephen. By the
cession of a small tract of country lying between the Fischa and the
Leitha he secured, in the spring of 1031, peace and the restoration of
Vienna.
Conrad, relieved of danger from Hungary, was at liberty to cope effec-
tively with the troublesome Duke of Poland. Allied with Mesco's banished
brother Otto, Conrad organised a combined attack; while he advanced
from the west, Otto Bezprim and his protector Yarosláv, Prince of Kiev,
were to attack from the east. Mesco, thus threatened from two sides, soon
gave way and agreed to the terms stipulated by the Emperor. He was
required to surrender the border territory which his father had acquired
by the treaty of Bautzen (1018), the prisoners and booty captured in the
raids
upon Saxony, and also the Upper and Lower Lausitz which were
attached respectively to the Meissen and the East Marks. Poland was
thus once more confined within the limits of the old duchy as it was
before the ascendancy of Boleslav Chrobry. The attack of Bezprim had
not synchronised with that of the German troops; it took place after
this peace had been concluded. He too, however, was successful; he drove
Mesco from the throne, of which he himself took possession, and, by
recognising the overlordship of the Emperor, was himself recognised as
the lawful duke of Poland. His reign, characterised by the most brutal
savagery, was cut short in the next year (1032) by assassination, engineered
in part by the enemies he had made in his own circle, in part by the in-
trigues of the brother he had expelled. Mesco promptly returned from
Bohemia, where he had taken refuge with Duke Udalrich. In spite of his
apparent willingness to enter into friendly relations with the Emperor,
we hear of a renewed outbreak of war before the end of the
But
Conrad was anxious to rid himself of the vexatious business and to be
free to make good his claim to the Burgundian crown. He therefore
received the duke's submission at Merseburg (1033), and allowed him to
retain his dukedom, subject to his feudal superiority and reduced in extent
year.
CH. AI.


## p. 262 (#308) ############################################

262
War with Bohemia and the Wends
by a strip of territory on the western frontier, which was annexed to the
East Mark. The power of Poland was crushed. On Mesco's death in 1034
the country relapsed into an almost chronic state of civil war in which
Conrad, wearied with Polish affairs, was careful not to involve himself.
In the meanwhile difficulties had been growing up in the neighbouring
country of Bohemia. Udalrich, for some years past, had shewn insubor-
dination to his feudal lord: in 1031 he had refused his help for the Polish
campaign; summoned to the diet of Merseburg (July 1033) to answer for
his conduct, he had defiantly remained absent. Conrad was too busily
engaged with Odo, his rival to the Burgundian throne, to deal himself
with his disobedient vassal. He entrusted the task, therefore, to his son
Henry, now a promising youth of sixteen years; his confidence was not
misplaced, for a single campaign in the summer brought the duke to
subjection! At a court held at Werben he was condemned, banished,
and deprived of his lands. His brother, the old Duke Jaromir, was dragged
from his prison at Utrecht, where he had languished for more than twenty
years, to be set again over the duchy of Bohemia. The arrangement was,
however, not a permanent one; Udalrich was pardoned at Ratisbon (April
1034), but not content with the partial restoration of his duchy, he seized
and blinded his hapless brother. His misdeeds brought a speedy retribu-
tion; he died the same year, choked or perhaps poisoned while eating his
dinner. Jaromir was disinclined a third time to undertake the title and
duties which had brought him only misfortune; at his wish Břatislav,
who had on the whole deserved well of Conrad, received the dukedom as
a fief of the Empire.
Further north, a feud had broken out between the Saxons and the
Wendish tribe, the Lyutitzi, whićh gave rise to mutual incursions and
plundering. At the request of both parties, the Emperor permitted the
issue to be determined by the judgment of God in the form of a duel.
Unluckily, the Christian champion fell wounded to the sword of the
pagan; the decision was accepted by the Emperor, and the Wends, so
elated by their success, would have forthwith attacked their Saxon oppo-
nents, had not they been constrained by oath to keep the peace and been
menaced by the establishment at Werben of a fortress strongly garrisoned
by a body of Saxon knights. But the peace was soon broken, the fortress
soon captured; and two expeditions across the Elbe (1035 and 1036)
were necessary before the Lyutitzi were reduced to obedience. In the first
Conrad was seldom able to bring the enemy to an open fight; they re-
treated before him into the impenetrable swamps and forests, while the
Germans burnt their cities, devastated their lands. We have a picture
a
1 For an examination into the confused chronology of these events and of the
conflicting passage in the Annales Allahenses see Bresslau, Jahrbücher 11. Excurs. iii.
p. 484 f. , and Bretholz, Geschichte Böhmens und Mährens (1912), p. 127. Seydel,
Studien zur Kritik Wipos, Dissertation, Berlin, 1898, places these events a year later,
1034.


## p. 263 (#309) ############################################

Alliance with Denmark
263
from Wipo of the Emperor standing oftentime thigh-deep in the morass,
fighting himself and encouraging his men to battle. The punishment,
meted out to the prisoners captured in this exploit, leaves an indelible
stain on the otherwise upright character of the Emperor. In their heathen
fanaticism they had sacrilegiously mutilated the figure of Christ on a
crucifix; Conrad avenged the outrage in like fashion. Drawn up
before
the cross they had dishonoured, their eyes put out, their hands and feet
hacked off, they were left to die miserably. The second attack, of which
the details are not recorded, appears to have been decisive; the Wends
submitted, and had to pay the penalty for their revolt at the price of an
increased tribute.
The wisdom of Conrad's diplomacy is perhaps most evident in his
relations with his powerful northern neighbour Knut, King of England,
Denmark, and, in 1030, Norway. Had Conrad permitted the hostility
which had existed under his predecessor to continue, he would have found
in Knut a formidable opponent always ready to disturb the stability of
the imperial authority on the north-eastern border of Germany. His
policy towards Poland, Bohemia, and more especially the Wendish country
across the Elbe, could scarcely have met with so large a measure of success.
The rulers of Poland and Denmark were closely related; both countries
were at enmity with Germany; an alliance between them seemed natural
and inevitable. Thus Conrad lost no time in bringing about, through
the mediation of Unwan, Archbishop of Bremen, friendly relations with
Knut (1025). This alliance was drawn closer some ten years later by the
marriage of their children, Henry and Gunnhild, and by the cession to the
Danish king of the March and the town of Schleswig. Though the German
frontier was thereby brought back to the Eider, the gain outweighed the
loss. Knut was zealous for the advancement of the Christian religion; he
kept in close touch with the metropolitans of Bremen, Unwan and his
successors, and promoted their efforts towards the conversion of the
heathen. From Gerinany he drew churchmen to fill high positions in his
English kingdom, as for instance Duduco, Bishop of Wells, and Wichmann,
Abbot of Ramsey! Unfortunately, this powerful and useful ally of the
Empire survived the treaty of 1035 but a few months: he died in Novem-
ber of the same year, and the Danish ascendancy soon crumbled away
under the rule of his successors.
Italy under Conrad 11.
We have already noticed how the death of the Emperor Henry II
had been the signal in Italy for a general revolt against the imperial
authority; for this movement, which found its expression in the burning
of the royal palace at Pavia and in the offer of the Lombard crown to a
1 Cf. Freeman, Norman Conquest, 11. App. note L. p. 598 f.
H. XI.


## p.
264 (#310) ############################################

264
Imperial coronation
French prince, the great noble families of north Italy, the Otbertines,
the Aleramids, the Marquesses of Tuscany and of Turin, were mainly
responsible. On the other hand the bishops under Aribert, the powerful
Archbishop of Milan, stood by Conrad; indeed Aribert with several
other bishops, presenting himself before the new king at Constance
(June 1025), assured hiin of his loyalty, of his willingness to crown him
king of Italy, and of the warm reception that awaited him when he
should set foot across the Alps; other Italian lords appeared a little
later at Zurich to perform their homage. Encouraged by these mani-
festations of loyalty and by the collapse of the attempt of the lay
aristocracy to raise a French prince to the throne, Conrad made his
plans for an Italian expedition in the ensuing spring. By the route
through the Brenner and Verona, in March he reached Milan, where,
since Pavia, the old Lombard capital and place of coronation, was still
in revolt, he was crowned by Aribert in the cathedral of St Ambrose.
The Pavese, fearful of the result of their boldness, had sought pardon
from Conrad at Constance, but their refusal to rebuild the palace they
had destroyed prevented a reconciliation. Conrad punished them by a
wholesale devastation of the surrounding country, and leaving part of
his army to complete the subjection of the rebellious city, he passed
eastward through Piacenza and Cremona to Ravenna; here his stay was
marked by a scene of the wildest uproar. The citizens rose against the
German soldiers with the hope that by force of numbers they might
succeed in driving them from the town. Their hope was vain; the
imperial troops soon gained the upper hand, and Conrad descended from
his bedchamber to stop the slaughter of the defeated and defenceless
burghers. The incident, related by Wipo, of the German knight who
lost his leg in the riot is characteristic of the king's generosity; he ordered
the leather gaiters of the wounded warrior to be filled with coin by way
of compensation for the loss of his limb.
The heat of the Italian summer drove Conrad northward, to pass
some two months in the cooler and more healthy atmosphere of the
Alpine valleys. The autumn and winter were spent in reducing to sub-
mission the powerful houses of the north-west and of Tuscany. This
accomplished, Conrad could proceed unhindered to Rome. The corona-
tion of Conrad and his wife Gisela at the hands of Pope John XIX took
place on Easter Day (26 March 1027) at St Peter's in the presence of two
kings, Knut and Rodolph, and a vast gathering of German and Italian
princes and bishops. Seldom during the early middle ages was an im-
perial or papal election altogether free from riot and bloodshed. Conrad's
was no exception. A trivial dispute over an oxhide converted a brilliant
and festive scene into a tumultuous street-fight between the Romans
and the foreigners. A synod was held shortly after at the Lateran, in
which two disputes were brought up for decision: the one, a question of
precedence between the archbishops of Milan and Ravenna, was settled


## p. 265 (#311) ############################################

Italian politics
265
in favour of the former; in the other, the long-standing quarrel between
the patriarchs of Aquileia and Grado, the former triumphed; the see of
Grado was made subject to the Patriarch of Aquileia, and the Venetians
were thereby deprived of their ecclesiastical independence.
In South Italy, Conrad accepted the existing state of things without
involving himself further in the complexity of Greek and Lombard
politics; he contented himself merely with the homage of the princes of
Capua, Benevento, and Salerno. By the summer he was once again in
Germany. In a little more than a year the Emperor had succeeded in
winning the obedience of the north, the recognition of the south, of
Italy, a position with which he might reasonably rest satisfied. An
interval of ten years divides the two expeditions of Conrad across the
Alps, and the second was made at the request of the Italians themselves.
But he had motives of his own for intervention in the affairs of Italy in
1036; his policy had been to strengthen German influence in two ways:
first by the appointment of German clergy to vacant Italian bishoprics,
and secondly by encouraging the intermarriage of the German and
Italian princely houses; so Gebhard of Eichstedt received the arch-
bishopric of Ravenna, while the majority of the suffragan sees in the
province of Aquileia and not a few in Tuscany were filled with Germans.
The success of the latter policy is exemplified by the marriages of Azzo of
the Otbertine family with the Welfic heiress Kunigunda, of Herman of
Swabia with Adelaide of the house of Turin, of Boniface of Tuscany
with Beatrix, the daughter of Duke Frederick of Upper Lorraine. Such
a policy ran counter to the ambition of the Archbishop of Milan, who
for his part strove to exercise an overlordship in Lombardy, and, it was
said, “disposed of the whole kingdom at his nod. ” Such a man must
be suppressed if Conrad was to maintain his authority in Italy.
The immediate situation, however, which precipitated the Emperor's
expedition was due to the feud which had arisen between the smaller
and greater tenants, the valvassores and the capitanei; while the here-
ditary principle was in practice secured to the latter, it was denied by
them to the former. It was customary for the Italian nobles to have
houses and possessions in the neighbouring town, where they lived for
some part of the year; a dispute of this kind thus affected the towns no
less than the country. In Milan one of the vavassors was deprived of
his fief by the domineering archbishop. It was sufficient to kindle the
sparks of revolution into a blaze; negotiations failed to pacify the
incensed knights, who were thereupon driven from their city by the com-
bined force of the capitanei and the burghers. The Milanese vavassors,
joined by their social equals from the surrounding districts, after a hard
fight and heavy losses, defeated their opponents in the Campo Malo
between Milan and Lodi. It was at this stage that both parties sought
the mediation of the Emperor.
Conrad had watched with interest the turn of events in Italy, and
CA. XI.


## p. 266 (#312) ############################################

266
The feudal edict of 1037
certainly as early as July 1036 decided to visit Italy for the second
time. The appeal of the opposing parties, therefore, came very oppor-
tunely. “If Italy hungers for law, I will satisfy her," he remarked on
receiving the news. He crossed the Brenner in December, spent Christmas
at Verona, and reached Milan early in the new year. On the day
following his arrival a popular rising occurred which was imputed, not
without some reason, to the instigation of Aribert. Lacking confidence
in his strength to deal with the situation in the stronghold of his
enernies, Conrad decided that all questions of difference should be deter-
mined at a diet to be held at Pavia in March. Here numerous com-
plaints were brought against the arrogant archbishop, foremost amongst
his accusers being Hugh, a member of the Otbertine family, who held
the countship of Milan. The Emperor demanded redress; the arch-
bishop defiantly refused to comply. Conrad, judging his conduct treason-
able, took the high-handed measure of thrusting him into prison under
the custody of Poppo, Patriarch of Aquileia, and Conrad, Duke of
Carinthia. Poppo, however, was not sufficiently watchful of his important
prisoner, and suffered for his negligence the displeasure of the Emperor.
A certain monk, Albizo by name, had been allowed to share with his
lord the hardships of prison; through his agency escape was effected.
One night, while the faithful Albizo feigned sleep in the bed of the
archbishop, the sheets drawn close over his head to prevent recognition,
Aribert in the harmless guise of a monk passed safely through his
gaolers, mounted a horse waiting in readiness, and rode in haste to Milan,
where he was welcomed with enthusiasm by the patriotic burghers.
With reinforcements brought by his son from Germany Conrad
besieged Milan, but without much success; it amounted only to some
indecisive fighting, the storming of a few strongholds, the devastation of
the surrounding country. But if the siege of Milan produced little
military result, it drew forth the most important constitutional act of
the reign, one of the most famous documents of feudal law, the edict
of 28 May 1037. This celebrated decree solved the question at issue
between the greater and the smaller vassals. As in Germany Conrad had
shewn himself in sympathy with the small tenants, so in Italy he now
secured to them and to their successors the possession of their lands
against unjust and arbitrary eviction by their lords. “No vassal of a
bishop, abbot, abbess, marquess, count, or of anyone holding an imperial
or ecclesiastical fief. . . . . shall be deprived of it without certain and proved
guilt, except according to the constitution of our ancestors and by the
judgment of his peers. " The next two clauses deal with the rights of
appeal against the verdict of the peers: in the case of the greater
vassals the hearing may be brought before the Emperor himself, in the
case of the smaller either before the overlords or before the Emperor's
missi for determination. Then, the succession of the fief is secured to the
son, to the grandson by a son, or, these failing, to the brother. Aliena-


## p. 267 (#313) ############################################

Proceedings against Archbishop Aribert
267
tion or exchange without the tenant's consent is prohibited; the Emperor's
right to the fodrum“as it was taken by our ancestors" is affirmed. Finally,
a penalty of a hundred pounds of gold, to be paid half to the imperial
treasury, half to the injured party, is enjoined for disobedience. By
these concessions the Emperor bound to his interests the strongest and
most numerous military class in North Italy, and at the same time struck
a blow at the dangerously powerful position of the Lombard episcopate.
The heat of the summer prevented any serious campaigning for some
months. The siege of Milan was raised, the army dispersed. The
Emperor, however, did not relinquish his efforts to overthrow the Arch-
bishop of Milan; in spite of the remonstrances of his son and many others,
he took the unprecedented step of deposing Aribert without reference to
an ecclesiastical synod. The Papacy was weak and submissive; John XIX
had allowed himself to be inscribed in a document among the fideles of
the Emperor'. He was now dead (1033), and his nephew, a bad man
certainly, but not so bad as he is painted in the scurrilous party literature
of the succeeding generation, young perhaps, but not the mere boy of
twelve he is usually accounted", was raised to the pontificate under the
name of Benedict IX. He, no doubt, cared little for the duties incumbent
on his office; at all events, when he visited the Emperor at Cremona, he
made no protest against the uncanonical action of Conrad. Aribert
retaliated by organising a conspiracy with Conrad's enemy and late rival
for the throne of Burgundy, Odo of Blois. But it soon collapsed; after
two incursions into Lorraine, Odo was defeated and killed at Bar on
15 November 1037 by Duke Gozelo. The three Lombard bishops of
Vercelli, Cremona, and Piacenza, who were implicated, were banished to
Germany.
Towards the end of the year Conrad again took the field, this time
with the object of ordering the affairs of the southern principalities. On
his march southward the burgbers of Parma revolted and were punished
by the destruction of their city (Christmas). At Spello the Emperor had
another interview with the Pope, who now imposed the sentence of ex-
communication on the Archbishop of Milan (Easter 1038). It was
probably also on this occasion that a constant source of confusion and
trouble in the Roman courts was removed; this was the indiscriminate
use of Lombard and Roman law, which gave rise to endless disputes
between Lombard and Roman judges. The Emperor's edict now esta-
blished that in Rome and Roman territory all cases should be determined
according to Roman law.
1
1 “Qualiter nos communi fidelium nostrorum decreto, pape scilicet Johannis et
Popponis patriarche venerabilis, Aribonis Moguntini archiepiscopi," etc. Cf. Bresslau
1, 148, n. 4.
2 See the suggestion of R. L. Poole (“Benedict IX and Gregory VI,” Proceedings
of the British Academy, Vol. viii. p. 217) that Rodulf Glaber misread a statement that
Benedict had been Pope per ann. xii. for puer ann. xii.
CH, XI.


## p. 268 (#314) ############################################

268
Affairs of South Italy
a
Conrad made the initial mistake in 1024 of liberating, at the request
of Guaimar, Prince of Salerno, Paldolf (Pandulf) IV of Capua, the wolf
of the Abruzzi, as Aimé of Monte Cassino calls him, who had been cap-
tured in Henry II's campaign of 1022 and since been held a close prisoner,
This act led to the recrudescence of Byzantine power in South Italy, for
Paldolf kept on friendly terms with the Greek government. The catapan
Bojannes at once set to work to put his valuable ally in possession of his
old principality; and in this he was assisted by Guaimar of Salerno, who
with lavish grants bought the support of some Norman adventurers under
Ranulf. This formidable combination made their first task the capture
of Capua. The town fell after a siege of eighteen months; Paldolf V of
Teano surrendered and Paldolf IV was restored. This was the situation
that Conrad was forced to recognise on his first Italian expedition in
April 1027. But Paldolf was not content with the mere recovery of his
former possessions. On the death of Guaimar, the only effective rival
to his power, he sought to extend his frontiers at the expense of his
neighbours. He captured Naples by treachery and drove out its duke,
Sergius IV. The latter was restored two years later by the aid of the
Norman bands of Ranulf; in reward for this service Ranulf was invested
with the territory of Aversa (1030), the nucleus of the Norman power in
South Italy, which was to be in the succeeding centuries one of the most
important factors in the history of Europe. Ranulf, a skilful but entirely
unscrupulous ruler, soon deserted his benefactor and allied himself with
Paldolf, who was now at the height of his power. The latter's rule, how-
ever, became daily more intolerable; and a body of malcontents, joined
soon by the renegade Ranulf, taking advantage of a quarrel between
Paldolf and Guaimar IV of Salerno, decided to appeal for the interven-
tion of the Emperors of the East and the West.
No response came from Constantinople. Conrad however, already in
Italy, accepted the invitation. Seemingly at Troia', the Emperor entered
into negotiations with Paldolf, ordered him to restore the property of the
Abbey of Monte Cassino which he had seized, and to release the prisoners
he had captured. Paldolf on his part sent his wife and son to ask for
peace, offering 300 pounds of gold in two payments, and his son and
daughter as hostages. The terms were accepted, the first half of the
indemnity paid; then the son escaped. Paldolf changed his attitude,
refused to carry out the rest of his bargain, and withdrew to the castle
of Sant' Agata. Conrad in the meantime entered Capua without resist-
ance and invested Guaimar with the principality. Capua and Salerno
were thus once more united in one hand as they had been under Paldolf
Ironhead in the days of Otto II. At the same time Conrad officially
recognised the new Norman colony at Aversa as a fief of the Prince of
Salerno.
1 So Bresslau, 11. p. 307, n. 1, following the notice in the Ann. Altah. 1038. But
cf. Chalandon, Hist. de la Domination Normande, 1. 83.


## p. 269 (#315) ############################################

Conrad's death
269
>
His work in the south completed, the Emperor returned northward.
On the march the troops suffered severely from the heat; pestilence
broke out in the camp, and many, among them Queen Gunnhild and
Herman, Duke of Swabia, perished; Conrad himself was overcome with
sickness. Under these circumstances it was impossible to renew the siege
of Milan. Leaving, therefore, injunctions with the Italian princes to
make an annual devastation of the Milanese territory, the Emperor
made his way back to Germany.
Conrad never recovered his strength. At Nimeguen in February 1039
he was overcome by a more severe attack of the gout; in May he was
well enough to be removed to Utrecht, where he celebrated the Whitsun
festival. But he grew rapidly worse, and died the following day (4 June).
His embalmed body was borne through Mayence and Worms to Spires,
the favourite city of the Salian emperors, and was buried in the crypt of
its cathedral church.
Conrad, once he had gained the mastery in his kingdom, was deter-
mined to secure the inheritance to his son; he was not only the first, but
by a definite policy the founder, of the Salian dynasty. So at Augsburg
in 1026 he designated his youthful son Henry, a boy of nine years old, as
his successor; his choice was approved by the princes, and the child was
duly crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle in 1028. The theory of hereditary suc-
cession seems to have been a guiding principle in the policy of Conrad II.
He had suffered himself from the absence of it; for his uncle, the
younger brother of his father, had acquired the Carinthian dukedom
of his grandfather, and on his death it had passed out of the family
altogether to the total disregard not only of his own claims, but also
of those of his cousin, the younger Conrad, the son of the late duke.
Adalbero of Eppenstein must in his eyes have been looked upon as an
interloper. Personal wrongs doubtless biassed his judgment when the
Duke of Carinthia was charged with treasonable designs at the Diet of
Bamberg in 1035. Adalbero was deposed and sentenced to the loss of
his fiefs. The court witnessed a strange scene before the verdict was
obtained; the assent of the young King Henry, as Duke of Bavaria, was
deemed necessary, and this the latter steadfastly refused to give; he was
bound, he afterwards explained, by an oath to Adalbero taken at the
instance of his tutor, Bishop Egilbert of Freising. Entreaties and
threats availed nothing; the son was obdurate, and the Emperor was
so incensed with passion that he fell senseless to the floor. When he
recovered consciousness he again approached his son, humbled himself
at his feet, and finally, by this somewhat undignified act, gained his
end'. But the successor to the fallen duke was well chosen; it was the
1 See the letter addressed to Bishop Azecho of Worms in Giesebrecht, 11. 712.
Cf. also Neues Archiv, m. 321.
CH, x.


## p. 270 (#316) ############################################

270
Hereditary Fiefs
Emperor's cousin, Conrad, who thus at this late hour stepped into the
dukedom of his father (1036)'.
It was not his aim, however, as sometimes has been suggested, to crush
the ducal power.
In one instance indeed he greatly strengthened it.
A powerful lord was required in the vulnerable border-land of Lorraine;
it was a wise step to reunite the two provinces on the death of Frederick
(1033) in the hands of Gozelo. In the case of Swabia the hereditary
principle prevailed. The rebellious Ernest who fell in the fight in the
Black Forest had no direct heir; “snappish whelps seldom have puppies,"
Conrad remarked on receiving the news of his death; but he had a brother,
and that brother succeeded. When the hereditary line failed, Conrad
followed the policy of Otto the Great of drawing the dukedoms into his
own family; in this way his son Henry acquired Bavaria after the death
of Henry of Luxemburg (1026)” and Swabia on the death of Herman in
Italy (1038).
In Italy, as we have seen, he definitely established by a legislative act
the principle of hereditary fiefs for the smaller and greater vassals alike.
There is no such decree for Germany; none at least has come down to us.
Yet there are indications which suggest that the Emperor, perhaps by
legal decision in the courts, perhaps by the acceptance of what was
becoming a common usage, sanctioned, indeed encouraged, the growing
tendency. Instances multiply of son succeeding father without question
or dispute; families become so firmly established in their possessions that
they frequently adopt the name of one of their castles. Wipo remarks
that Conrad won the hearts of the vassals because he would not suffer
their heirs to be deprived of the ancient fiefs of their forbears. Too
much weight may not be placed on this statement, but it is certain that
Conrad could rely in a marked degree upon the loyalty of the local
nobless. In the revolt of Ernest the nobility of Swabia supported not
their duke but their king; Adalbero after his deposition found himself
unable to raise his late subjects to rebellion. Such loyalty was unusual
in the earlier Middle Ages, and it seems a natural conclusion that these
knights of Swabia and Carinthia had reason to stand by Conrad. From
this rank of society the Emperor reinforced that body of officials, the
ministeriales, who later came to play so important a part at the courts of
the Salian emperors. Conrad's gallant and faithful friend and adviser,
Werner, who lost his life in the riot at Rome which followed the imperial
coronation, and who earned the honour of a grave beside the Emperor
Otto II at St Peter's, is perhaps the first as he is a typical representative
of this influential class.
Conrad II is usually depicted as the illiterate layman", the complete
1 The Carinthian mark (later, in 1056, the mark of Styria) was severed from the
duchy, and bestowed upon Arnold of Lambach.
2 Elected at Ratisbon, July 1027.
3 See Bresslau, 11. 368-374.
4 “Quamquam litteras ignoraret,” Wipo, c. 6.


## p. 271 (#317) ############################################

Relations with the Church
271
antithesis to the saintly Henry who preceded him. Undoubtedly he
sought from the outset of his reign to emancipate himself from the over-
weening power of the Church. He decided questions relating to the
Church on his own authority, often without reference to a Church synod.
He kept a firm hold on episcopal elections; he appointed his bishops and
expected a handsome gratuity from the man of his choice. From Udalrich,
elected to the see of Basle in 1025, we are frankly told that “the king
and queen received an immense sum of money. " Wipo adds that the
king was afterwards smitten with repentance, and swore an oath never
again to take money for a bishopric or abbacy, “an oath which he almost
succeeded in keeping! ” In truth the oath weighed but lightly on his
conscience and affected his practice not at all. If, however, he did nothing
to promote, he did little to hinder, reform. More than one of his
charters bestows lands on Cluniac houses, and by including the kingdom
of Burgundy (a stronghold of the reforming movement) in the Empire,
he insensibly advanced a cause with which he was out of sympathy. The
leaders of the reforming party, Richard, Abbot of St Vannes at Verdun,
and Poppo, Abbot of Stablo (Stavelot), made steady if slow progress in
their work, which met with the sympathetic encouragement of the
Empress Gisela. The ruins of the picturesque Benedictine abbey of
Limburg and the magnificent cathedral of Spires remind us that the
thoughts of Conrad, who once at least is described as “most pious,"
sometimes rose above things merely temporal.
Conrad above all realised the importance of increasing the material
resources on which the Empire depended. By careful administration he
increased the revenue from the crown lands; he revoked gifts made to the
Church by his too generous predecessors, and allocated to himself demesne
lands which had fallen into the hands of the dukes. The reign of Conrad
was a time of prosperity for Germany; he encouraged the small begin-
nings of municipal activity by grants of mint and market rights; the
peace was better kept. To Conrad the cause of justice came first among
the functions of royalty. A story is told of how the coronation procession
was interrupted by the complaints of a peasant, a widow, and an orphan,
and how Conrad, without hesitation and in spite of the remonstrances of
his companions, delayed the ceremony in order to award justice to the
plaintiffs. Stern, inexorable justice is a strong trait in his character.
This strong, capable, efficient ruler did much for his country. The allure-
ments of Italy, the mysteries of Empire, had led his predecessors to
neglect the true interests of Germany. It is to his credit that he restored
the strength of the German monarchy and increased enormously the per-
sonal influence and authority of the Crown. He prepared the way
for his
son, under whom the Holy Roman Empire reached the apogee of its
greatness.
1 “In quo voto pene bene permansit. ” Wipo, c. 7.
CH. .


## p. 272 (#318) ############################################

272
CHAPTER XII.
THE EMPEROR HENRY III.