A. D. 1125-1190 Convinced that nothing was to be gained by the attempt CHAP. VI to create a division among the Germans, Adrian IV, in February, 1158, wrote a conciliatory letter to the Emperor, explaining that the word "beneficium" had been used by him in its ordinary sense of "good deed," and not in its technical, feudal sense of "fief"; while by the expression "conferring" the crown, he had only meant to say that he had "placed it" upon the Emperor's head! claims of the Pope and the But the time for conciliation was already past. Frederick Conflicting had resolved to assert his absolute lordship over the world; and Adrian, foreseeing the inevitable conflict between the Emperor and the Italian cities, had opened negotiations for an alliance with them. The imperial envoys, ignoring the sovereignty of the Pope, had already entered into the Patrimony of St. Peter, demanding for the Emperor tribute and vassalage from the Italian bishops. A sharp dispute at once arose, the Pope protesting against the disregard of his rights as head of the papal state; the Emperor replying contemptuously that, before Constantine bestowed his favors upon it, the Church had possessed no princely rights, that all the territories of the Holy See were gifts from the kings, while the bishops were rightly subordinate to the Emperor, for even Christ had paid tribute to Caesar for himself and Peter. It was evident that the conflict which had been closed by the diplomacy of Calixtus II was now to be reopened, but with a far deeper and wider chasm of separation between the pretensions of the two great rivals for world-monarchy. The negotiations of the Pope's legates with Frederick soon disclosed the irreconcilable nature of the opposing theories. In response to the absolute and universal sovereignty claimed by the Emperor, Adrian IV presented the rights of the Papacy. No tribute should be paid to the Emperor within the papal territory, except the customary "fodrum,” contribution of forage for the army, at the time of coronation; no representatives of the Emperor should be sent into the Patrimony of St. Peter except with the Pope's ap or A. D. 1125-1190 CHAP. VI proval, for all the regalian rights therein belonged to the Holy See; no oath of vassalage to the Emperor should be taken by the Italian bishops, but only the general oath of allegiance. To all this, Frederick replied, " As Emperor by the will of God, I would be only the bearer of an empty title, if the power of the city of Rome were released from my hand." Defection of the Romans and death of Adrian IV The Roman republicans, still clinging to the teaching of Arnold of Brescia, received with satisfaction the estrangement of the Pope and the Emperor, and perceived in this attitude their opportunity to end the papal supremacy in Rome. When, therefore, Frederick arrived in Italy, in July, 1158, at the head of an army of more than a hundred thousand men gathered from all parts of the Empire, envoys of the Senate were despatched to assure him of the loyalty of the Romans and their eagerness to recognize his authority. Although supported by other cities of Italy, which were in alliance with him, Adrian IV thus found his cause abandoned by the Romans; while Frederick, who had, at the time of his coronation by the Pope, treated the Senate with scorn and contempt, now gladly opened negotiations with it for the destruction of the papal influence. Believing himself able to force the Pope to agree to a concordat in which the imperial supremacy would be recognized, Frederick now sent envoys to employ the leverage of the Roman Senate for the accomplishment of this design; but these negotiations were doomed to failure. Stern and inflexible, Adrian IV withdrew to Anagni, where he had resolved to direct the anathema of the Church against the Emperor; when, on September 1, 1159, death overtook him. In the midst of trials which would have entirely broken the spirit of a weaker man, Adrian IV had, by his practical wisdom and courageous initiative, carried the Papacy through a period of exceptional danger. While, by his diplomacy, he had fortified his position in Rome, and formed a powerful league of allied states and nobles who had become his friends or vassals, he had not been able to destroy the Roman com A. D. 1125-1190 mune, which was then in open hostility to him. In his last CHAP. VI hours, Adrian confided to a fellow countryman, John of Salisbury, that, in his life as a mendicant monk, he had never experienced such bitter need as in the chair of St. Peter. "Would to God," he cried, "that I had never left my fatherland, or the monastery of St. Rufus! Where in the world can a man be found so miserable as the Pope?"1 The grief of the dying pontiff over the conduct of the Frederick's Romans was augmented by the overthrow and humiliation of his allies in the north of Italy. Two opposing leagues had been formed: one, consisting of Brescia, Piacenza, Parma, and Modena, under the leadership of Milan, to resist the aggressions of the Emperor; the other, headed by Pavia, followed by Cremona, Lodi, and Como, and inspired by hatred of the others, to support his cause. The spirit in which Frederick was conducting his campaign marks a new era in European history. He had expressed his determination to overthrow with force both the pretensions of the Pope and the independence of the Italian communes; but, surrounded by his formidable army, on November 14, 1158, he opened a diet at Roncaglia, before which he justified his procedure by an appeal to law. This renaissance of imperial rule, destined to become the model and inspiration of modern absolutism in its struggle with mediaeval feudalism, appealed to the intelligence of the age as no Frankish or German emperor had ever made appeal. Neither Charles the Great nor Otto I had based his power upon a comprehension of the laws by which the ancient. Caesars had held their authority. But Frederick perceived 1 The story that Adrian IV authorized by a papal bull the invasion and conquest of Ireland by Henry II is now so far discredited by the conclusions of critical scholarship regarding the authenticity of the document upon which it is based, that it has not been mentioned in the text. The curious may find the alleged bull in Henderson, Select Documents, pp. 10, 11, whose introductory comments were written before Scheffer-Boichorst and Pflugk-Harttung had completed their studies on this subject. appeal to Roman law A. D. 1125-1190 CHAP. VI that the professors of Bologna were of more value to his government than whole armies of fighting men, for they were able to conquer without a blow whole populations by an appeal to law and custom. The Pandects of Justinian, of which a copy had recently been discovered, furnished to absolutism a complete armory of legal weapons, the edicts and decrees by which the Roman emperors had built up their unlimited authority. As emperor, all these resources were at Frederick's disposal; and he employed them with a skilful hand. No one could read and comprehend this ancient legislation, apart from the knowledge of imperial usurpations, without being deeply impressed by the maxim, "Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem." 1 The Emperor, therefore, became "lex animata in terris,”—the living law for the whole earth, responsible to no one but God, in whose name he proclaimed his legislation. All four of the learned doctors of Bologna — Bulgarus, Martinus, Jacobus, and Hugo-supported the claims of Frederick, but not with equal obsequiousness. Walking, one day, with Bulgarus and Martinus, it is said, the Emperor asked them if he was, in reality, the master of the world. "Yes," replied Martinus. "No," replied Bulgarus, "not as 1 The pretensions of Frederick I were not only in contradiction to the Teutonic traditions, but even in excess of the powers which, in strict legality, had belonged to the Roman emperors. The doctrine that whatever was pleasing to the prince had the force of law was modified, as we have seen (Note 1, page 14, of this volume), by the principle that his authority was derived from the people. The lawyers of Frederick's time had overlooked this historical basis of Roman law, and justified his pretensions by the abuses of imperial authority which had grown up in the period of personal absolutism. Even Charles the Great had never taken the ground that the will of the Emperor was the ultimate source of law. On the contrary, that great ruler based his government on the wisdom of the national assemblies. See the letter written by Hincmar on the representative régime of Charles the Great, with the comments of Viscount De La Guéronnière, Le droit public de l'Europe moderne, Paris, 1876, pp. 19, 23; also Carlyle, A History of Mediaeval Political Theory in the West, p. 238. A D. 1125-1190 to property." Martinus, having proved the better courtier, CHAP. VI received upon his return the present of a horse. Bulgarus contented himself with making a Latin pun upon the incident.1 That Frederick deeply appreciated the services of the professors of law, is evident from the "Privilegium Scholasticum," or fundamental charter of the universities. In this famous document, he not only accorded special immunities to students, including the right of free passage everywhere, but made all doctors of law equal in rank to knights of the Empire. The reason for this liberality is frankly stated by Frederick himself to be, "that those whose knowledge illuminates the world and renders men obedient to God and the Emperor, are worthy of his praise and protection." 3 In a free forum of debate, the rights which the Diet of Roncaglia conceded to the Emperor might, perhaps, have been contested; but, in the presence of a hundred thousand armed men ready to do their master's bidding, and recalling the fate of Tortona, in whose ruins the Emperor had left the record of his wrath, no one presumed to dispute either the premises or the logic of the learned jurists. Bowing in silent humility before their new Caesar, the representatives of the Italian cities surrendered their independence into the hands 1 The words of Bulgarus, as reported, are, "Amissi equum, quia dixi aequum." Savigny, Geschichte des römischen Rechts, IV, p. 44. 2 For the "Privilegium Scholasticum," see Pertz, Mon. Germ. Hist., Leges, IV, p. 114. * The importance of the lawyer in the subsequent affairs of the Empire is illustrated by the following words of Villari, who says, after speaking of the professors of Roman law as "the natural champions" of the Empire: "Nor did the communes themselves raise any objections to these claims. After Frederick's defeat, they continued to draw up their statutes, laws, and public instruments in his name. Even as late as the fifteenth century, we find that notaries still gave validity to public documents by making them run in the name of the Empire." — Villari, The Two First Centuries of Florentine History, p. 405. The general surrender and the revolt of Milan |