READING HALLTHE DOORS OF WISDOM |
GERMANY AND THE WESTERN EMPIRE
CHAPTER VII. ITALY IN THE TENTH CENTURY
THE death of the
Emperor Lambert in October 898 dealt a blow to the royal power in North Italy,
the Regnum Italicum of the
tenth century. In place of the born ruler, who had mastered his own vassals and
made himself protector of the Papacy, there succeeded Berengar, mild and
cheatable. Berengar, too, was weak in resources. His own domains lay awkwardly
in the extreme north-east, in Friuli and the modern Veneto, not like Lambert’s
in the centre; and he had not like Lambert the support of a large group of the
great nobles and bishops who formed the real source of power in Italy. Two
magnates in especial were equally faithless and formidable, Adalbert the Rich,
Marquess of Tuscany, in the centre, and Adalbert, Marquess of Ivrea, on the
western frontier. In vain did Berengar marry his daughter Gisela to Adalbert of
Ivrea and give the Tuscan his freedom from the prison to which Lambert had
consigned him for revolt. A plot was hatching, when disaster befell king and
kingdom.
Already in 898
the Hungarians, or Magyars, had raided the present Veneto from their newly-won
settlements on the river Theiss. In 899 a larger swarm made its way from
Aquileia to Pavia. Berengar, always a gallant warrior, strove to rise to the
occasion. From the whole Regnum Italicum his
vassals came to the number of 15,000 men-at-arms. Before them the outnumbered
Magyars fled back, but were overtaken at the river Brenta.
Their horses were worn out, they could not escape, and the tradition, perhaps
influenced by a sense of tragedy, tells of their proffers refused by the
haughty Christians. Yet on 24 September they surprised their heedless foes and
scattered them with fearful slaughter. For nearly a year the Lombard plain lay
at their mercy, though few fortified cities were taken and they did not cross
the Apennines. Amid his faithless vassals, with his land desolated, Berengar
submitted to pay blackmail, which at least kept the Magyars his friends if it
did not save Lombardy from occasional incursions. The only mitigation of the
calamity was the defeat of the Hungarians on the water when in 900 they
assaulted Venice under her doge Pietro Tribuno.
Berengar had lost
men, wealth and prestige, he was too clearly profitless for his subjects, and
the death at Hungarian hands of many bishops and counts left the greatest
magnates greater than ever. The plot against him, already begun, gathered
strength. It was headed by Adalbert II the Rich of Tuscany, whose wife Bertha,
the widow of a Provençal count, was daughter of Lothar II of Lorraine and thus
grand-daughter of the Emperor Lothar I; and its object was to restore Lothar
I’s line to Italy in the person of Louis of Provence, grandson of the Emperor
Louis II. The Spoletan party, the Empress
Ageltrude, and Pope John IX, the old partisan of Lambert, were, it seems, won
to the plan, and the hand of the Byzantine princess Anna, daughter of Leo VI,
was obtained for the pretender. When Louis came to Italy in September 900,
Berengar, faced by a general defection, could only retreat beyond the Mincio, while his rival, surrounded by the magnates,
proceeded to Rome to receive the imperial crown in February 901 from the new
Pope Benedict IV. But Louis had no great capacity, and the magnates were fickle
of set purpose, for, says the chronicler Liudprand in a classic passage, they
preferred two kings to play off one against the other. In 902 a counter-change
was brought about. Berengar advanced to Pavia, and Louis, who had been unable
to get away quickly enough, was allowed to withdraw on taking an oath never to
return. Within three years (905), however, Bertha once more tempted her kinsman
to invade Italy. He was to be furnished, perhaps, with a Byzantine subsidy'.
Once more Berengar fled east, this time to Bavaria, for Adalard, Bishop of
Verona, his chief stronghold, called in his rival. Louis heedlessly thought
himself secure and was surprised and captured (21 July) by Berengar to whom the
Veronese citizens, though not their bishop, were always loyal. No risks were
taken by the victor, and Louis was sent back to Provence blind and helpless. By
an atrocity unlike his usual dealings Berengar at last secured an undisputed
throne. Real control over great nobles and bishops he was never to obtain.
While the Regnum Italicum lay invertebrate in the hands of the
magnates, South Italy was even more disordered and tormented. For sixty years
the land had suffered from the intolerable scourge of Saracen ravages. While a
robber colony, established almost impregnably on the river Garigliano, spread desolation in the heart of Italy over
the Terra di Lavoro and
the Roman Campagna, the true base of the
Muslims lay in Sicily. There the mixed Berber and Arab population, who had
swarmed in under the Aghlabid dynasty
of Kairawän, were on the point of completing
the conquest of the Christian and Greek eastern portion of the island, and the
brief cessation of their direct raids on the mainland which began c. 889 did
not last long.
Subdivision and
intestine wars for independence and predominance paralyzed South Italy in its
struggle against the Saracens. The greatest power there was the Byzantine
Empire, after Basil I and his general Nicephorus Phocas had revived its power
in the West. Two themes were set up in Italy, each under its strategos or general, that of Longobardia with its capital at Bari which included
Apulia and Lucania from the river Trigno on the Adriatic to the Gulf of Taranto, and
that of Calabria with its capital at Reggio which represented the vanished
theme of Sicily. These detached and frontier provinces, usually scantily
supplied with troops and money owing to the greater needs of the core of the
Empire, were beset with difficulties occasioned by the hostility of the
Italians to the corrupt and foreign Greek officials. The Lombard subjects in
Apulia were actively or potentially disloyal; and a long strip of debatable land
formed the western part of the Longobardic theme,
which was always claimed by the Lombard principality of Benevento, its ancient
possessor. Then there were the native Italian states, all considered as its
vassals by Byzantium in spite of the competing pretensions of the Western
Empire. Three of these, Gaeta, Naples and Amalfi, were coast towns, never
conquered by the Lombards, and, like Venice, had long enjoyed a complete
autonomy without formally denying their allegiance to East Rome. They were all
now monarchies, all trading, and all inclined to ally with the Saracens, who
were at once their customers and their principal dread. The three remaining
states were Lombard, the principalities of Benevento and Salerno and the county
of Capua. The prince of Salerno acknowledged Byzantine suzerainty. Benevento
had been conquered by the Greeks in 891, only to be recovered by the native
dynasty under the auspices of the Spoletan Emperors
of the West, and then conquered by Atenolf I
of Capua in 899. This union of Capua and Benevento was the beginning of some
kind of order in a troubled land, hitherto torn by the struggle of furious
competitors.
It was the
Saracen plague, however, which at length brought the petty states to act
together. If the invasion of Calabria by the half-mad Aghlabid Ibrahim
who had conquered Taormina, the last Byzantine stronghold of Sicily, and
threatened to destroy in his holy war Rome itself, “the city of the dotard
Peter”, ended in his death before Cosenza in 902, and civil wars distracted Sicily
till she submitted to the new Fatimite Caliphate at Kairawan;
the Moslems of the Garigliano still ate
like an ulcer into the land. The countryside was depopulated, the great abbeys,
Monte Cassino, Farfa, Subiaco and Volturno, were destroyed and deserted. At last the warring
Christians were so dismayed as to be reconciled, and Atenolf of
Capua turned to the one strong power which could intervene and professed
himself a Byzantine vassal. Help was long in coming when a warrior Pope stepped
in to consolidate and enlarge the Christian league.
Rome had
undergone strange vicissitudes since the death of Emperor Lambert, but they had
had a clear outcome, the victory of the land-owning barbarized aristocracy over
the bureaucratic priestly elements of the Curia. After the death of Benedict IV
(903) the revolutions of a year brought to the papal throne its old claimant,
the fierce anti-Formosan Sergius III (904-11), over two imprisoned and perhaps
murdered predecessors. Sergius owed his victory to Frankish help, possibly that
of Adalbert the Rich of Tuscany, but he was also the ally of the strongest
Roman faction. Theophylact, vesterarius of
the Sacred Palace and Senator of the Romans, was the founder of a dynasty. He
was chief of the Roman nobles; to his wife, the Senatrix Theodora,
tradition attributed both the influence of an Empress Ageltrude and, without
real ground, the vices of a Messalina; his daughter Marozia was only too
probably the mistress of Pope Sergius and by him the mother of a future Pontiff,
John XI, and finally married the new Marquess of Spoleto, the adventurer
Alberic. The power of these and of other great ladies, which is a
characteristic of the tenth century, and sometimes their vices, too, won for
them the hatred of opposing factions whose virulent report of them has fixed
the name of the “Pornocracy” on the debased papal
government of that unhallowed day. Two inconspicuous successors of Sergius III
were followed, doubtless through Theophylact’s and
Theodora’s choice, by the elevation of the Archbishop of Ravenna to the papal
see as John X (914-28). This much-hated pontiff, who like Formosus had been
translated to the indignation of the strict canonists, was no mere instrument
in his maker's hands. He at once took the lead in the war with the Saracens.
The Byzantine regent Zoe was sending a new strategos,
the patrician Nicholas Picingli, with
reinforcements to Bari. From the south Picingli marched
in 915 up to Campania, adding the troops of Atenolf’s successor
at Capua, Landolf I, and of Guaimar of Salerno to his army. Even the rulers of
the sea-ports, Gaeta and Naples, appeared in his camp decorated with Byzantine
titles. From the north came Pope John and his Romans accompanied by the Spoletan levies under Marquess Alberic. A Byzantine fleet
occupied the mouth of the Garigliano, and after
a three months’ blockade the starving Saracens burst out to be hunted down by
the victors among the mountains.
This decisive
victory began an era of revival in Southern Italy. Though Calabria and even Apulia
remained open to Saracen raids, which recommenced when the Fatimite Caliph
Mahdi conquered Sicily in 917; though from c. 922 onwards Hungarian bands now
and again worked their way south; a comparative security was restored. The
deserted campaign could be slowly repopulated, the monasteries could claim once
more their ravaged possessions and, as the century wore on, be rebuilt. Not a
little of this wanly dawning prosperity was due to the stability which was at
last acquired by the princely houses. The rulers of Capua-Benevento, Salerno
and the rest reigned long and transmitted an assured, if not unharassed, dominion to their heirs. Their thriving was
soon shown in hostility to their Byzantine suzerain. Picingli’s victory
had not ameliorated the government of the Italian themes. Calabria, the Greek
character of which was being accentuated by the inrush of refugees from Sicily,
might only be restive at exactions due to blackmail paid to the Fatimite Caliph
for respite from his subjects’ raids; but the Lombards, who were predominant in
Apulia, hankered for autonomy, and in spite of bribes in cash and titles, were
inclined to side with the aggressive prince of Capua. Landolf I
took advantage of the Apulians’ discontent and
the weakness of the strategoi, with their
insufficient means and their coast harried by Saracen and Slav pirates. In
concert with Guaimar II of Salerno and the
Marquess Theobald I of Spoleto he overran c. 927 the greater part of Longobardia and held it some seven years. Not till
the Eastern Empire could ally with a strong king of the Regnum Italicum was it possible to oust Landolf and his allies.
The strong king
was long in coming. Berengar indeed received in December 915 the imperial crown
from John X, in disregard of Louis the Blind’s rights, perhaps in reward for
his concurrence in Alberic’s assistance at the Garigliano,
perhaps to counterbalance the then dangerous might of the Eastern Emperor in
the south. But Berengar was no whit more powerful thereby. Hungarian raids
still occurred and a more persistent enemy began to trouble western Lombardy.
At the close of the ninth century bands of Saracen pirates coming from Spain
had established themselves in a fortified settlement on the coast of Provence,
on the Golfe du St Tropez, called
Fraxinetum, the name of which is preserved in Garde-Freinet.
Thence, as their numbers grew, they conducted terrible raids on the surrounding
territory. Provence was the worst sufferer, but, since the Saracens made the
Alps their favorite plundering centre, Italy too was a victim. The Alpine
valleys were desolated, the great roadside abbeys, such as Novalesa, were destroyed. Bands of pilgrims to the graves
of the Apostles at Rome were robbed and massacred, till the intercourse of
Italy with the north-west was in danger of ceasing. Here again the magnates
fought in isolation when only a combined effort could root out the evil.
Berengar seems to have done nothing, perhaps he could do nothing, but his
discredit naturally increased.
Rodolph II and Hugh of Provence
The fickle
magnates meanwhile were looking out for another rival king. Bertha of Tuscany,
whose husband Adalbert II was dead, again worked for the restoration of the
line of Lothar I and brought in her son by her first marriage, Hugh, Duke of
Provence, who ruled his native country during Louis the Blind’s incapacity.
This first attempt failed (c. 920) and then a group of northern magnates headed
by Adalbert of Ivrea, now husband of Bertha's Tuscan daughter Ermingarde, invited Rodolph II, King of Jurane Burgundy.
The accustomed tragicomedy followed. Rodolph came in 922 and was recognized
north of the Apennines, while Berengar held out in Verona and won infamy by
letting in his Hungarian allies who this time penetrated to Campania. Next year
the rivals fought one of the rare pitched battles of the time at Fiorenzuola
near Piacenza where Berengar had the worse and the death of 1500 men depleted
the scanty ranks of the kingdom's military caste. Thenceforth Berengar
vegetated, seemingly under truce, at Verona till his murder by one of his
vassals on 7 April 924. He had watched, rather than caused, the anarchy of the
realm, just as his lavish grants to the prelates registered rather than caused
the cessation of a central government.
Rodolph was not
more fortunate. He had two kingdoms, and while he was in Burgundy the Magyars
laid Lombardy waste. They burnt Pavia itself in 924 and only left Italy to pass
over the Alps and be exterminated by pestilence in Languedoc. The hopes of the
house of Lothar revived. Adalbert of Ivrea was dead, and his widow Ermingarde joined with her brother Guido of Tuscany
and Lampert, Archbishop of Milan, in calling in
once more her half-brother Hugh of Provence. In 925 they revolted, twice
repelled Rodolph’s efforts at reconquest,
and on 6 July 926 elevated Hugh to the throne. In him a strong king had come.
Hugh, wily and voluptuous, had his domains and vassals in Provence behind him
and a group of magnates in his favor in Italy. He set himself to increase the
latter by endowing his Provencal kindred. One nephew, Theobald I, was given the
march of Spoleto, another, Manasse, Archbishop of Arles, was later put in
charge of three sees in commendam.
A Provençal immigration set in to the disgust of the Italian nobles. Hugh, who
no more than his contemporaries ventured to reconstitute the ancient royal
government or to recall the alienations of revenue and administrative
functions, did succeed in making the great vassals, as well as the bishops, his
nominees.
To be crowned
Emperor was the natural goal of Hugh’s ambition. Without the protectorate over
the Papacy an Italian king had but a maimed dominion in central Italy, and to a
mere protection of the Papacy the functions of the Emperor had been reduced
since the time of Lambert. Indeed it seems that Hugh came into Italy with the
Pope’s approval and struck a bargain with him at Mantua in 926. John X was in a
dangerous plight. Theophylact was dead, Marquess Alberic was dead, their
daughter and widow, the sinister Marozia, led their Roman faction, and had
become hostile to the self-willed Pope. If John X probably strengthened himself
by obtaining the Spoletan march, which
Alberic had held, for his own brother Peter, perhaps in return for Berengar I’s
coronation, Marozia gained far more power by her marriage to Marquess Guido of
Tuscany. In the faction-fighting Marquess Peter was driven from Rome c. 927,
but a terrible Hungarian raid which lacerated Italy from Friuli to Campania
enabled him to re-enter the city. Tradition charged on him an alliance with the
raiders. In any case he was slaughtered by the Romans in 928 and his brother
the Pope was thrust into prison to die or be murdered without much delay.
Marozia now was supreme: “Rome was subdued by might under a woman’s hand”, says
the wrathful local chronicler. Two Popes, so shadowy that they were forgotten
in a few years, wore the tiara in turn till in 931 she raised her own son,
probably by Sergius III, to the pontificate as John XI. But Marozia was
weakened by the death of Guido and looked around her for a potent consort. She
found one in Guido’s half-brother, Hugh of Italy, then a widower. King Hugh may
have been baffled in his original scheme of becoming Emperor by the fall of
John X; he had also been drawn off by the Hungarians and a revolt at Pavia.
Now, however, he was so firm on his throne as to secure the election of his boy
son Lothar II as co-regent. His contract with Marozia is the ugliest episode of
the time. He feared his half-brother Marquess Lambert of Tuscany, himself a
descendant of Lothar I and a possible rival; and he could not marry his
half-brother Guido’s widow. Therefore he seized and blinded Lambert, and
announced that his two half-brothers were not true sons of Bertha. With the way
thus cleared he entered Rome in 932 and married Marozia. But the senatrix and her husband miscalculated and did no
more than garrison the castle of Sant Angelo.
Before Hugh was crowned the Romans rose against the hated Burgundian foreigner.
Their leader was Marozia’s own son
Alberic, whom she had borne to Alberic of Spoleto, a youth who knew Hugh's
treatment of inconvenient relatives. Sant'
Angelo was besieged and taken, and although Hugh made his escape Marozia and
John XI were imprisoned. Of Marozia no more is said.
The rule of
Alberic marks the open and complete triumph of the Roman landed aristocracy
over the bureaucratic clerical government of the Papacy. His state resembled
the city monarchies of Naples or Gaeta. On him as “prince and senator of all
the Romans” was conferred, it seems by popular election, the exercise of the
Pope’s secular power in Rome and its duchy. Though the act was revolutionary
and ultra vires, no denial of the
Pope’s sovereignty was made. It was enough that John XI and his four successors
were docile instruments of the prince. Perhaps Alberic dreamed of further
change, of reviving a miniature Western Empire, for he tried to win a Byzantine
bride, and, even when baffled, surnamed his son Octavian. “His face was bright
like his father’s and he had old-time worth. For he was exceedingly terrible,
and his yoke was heavy on the Romans and on the holy Apostolic See”. His stern
domination seems to have been a blessing to Rome and its duchy, which he
secured, while King Hugh about 938 seized on Ravenna and the Pentapolis which
had indeed been ruled by the Italian emperors since the days of Guy (Guido).
The turbulent Roman nobles and his own treacherous kindred were kept in order,
the submissive churchmen protected by a pious usurper who favored monastic
reform and was the friend of St Odo of Cluny. It was all Alberic could do,
however, to maintain himself against the persistent efforts of King Hugh to conquer
Rome. A first siege of the city in 933 was a failure, a second in 936 ended in
a treaty by which Alberic married Hugh’s legitimate daughter Alda. This pacification did not last, although negotiated
by St Odo, and in 941 Hugh by bribes and warfare was so successful as just to
enter Rome. Somehow he was expelled, “by the hidden judgment of God” according
to our only narrator. Yet he would not give up the war until 946 when he had
become a king under tutelage. Alberic thenceforth ruled unchallenged till his
death in August 954.
Hugh and Alberic
had been rival suitors for the alliance of the Eastern Emperor Romanus I Lecapenus, and in 935 Hugh had won the prize, partly
through the pressure he could exercise in the south, partly no doubt through an
eligibility to which the isolated prince of the Romans could lay no claim.
Hugh, by calling off Theobald I of Spoleto, enabled the Byzantines to recover
the lost districts of Apulia, and eventually the alliance was sealed by the
marriage of Hugh’s illegitimate daughter to a Byzantine prince, the future
Emperor Romanus II. The two powers suffered in common from the Hungarians and
Saracens. Against the Magyars little was done save to pay blackmail, although
in 938 some raiding bands as they retreated from Campania, were exterminated by
the Abruzzans. Common action was, however,
attempted against the Saracens of Fraxinetum, who, besides their formidable
brigandage on the West Alpine passes, raided even as far as Swabia and by sea
must have troubled the Byzantines. In 931 the Greeks attacked them and, landing
at Fraxinetum, made a slaughter, while it may be that at the same time Hugh's
vassals revenged the destruction of Acqui by
cutting to pieces the Saracen raiders and occupying for a moment the passes.
But no permanent result was obtained. Rather the ravage of the Fraxinetan Saracens grew worse, and in 935 the
Fatimites sent a fleet from Africa which stormed Genoa. At last Hugh and
Romanus I were roused to a joint campaign. In 942 a Byzantine fleet burnt the
Saracens' ships with Greek fire, and blockaded Fraxinetum by sea, while Hugh
with his army invested it by land. The Saracens could have been rooted out,
when Hugh made a treaty with them: they were to hold the Swabian passes against
any attempted invasion by Hugh’s exiled nephew Berengar of Ivrea. Perhaps Italy
was somewhat spared in consequence, but the Alps continued the scene of their
brigandage.
The fear of
invasion had been with Hugh since the beginning of his reign, and in his
western policy it was obscurely entangled with his desire to retain Provence.
He evidently wished to consider the kingdom of Provence as annexed to his
Italian crown after the death of the Emperor Louis the Blind in 928, but in
spite of his wide lands and numerous relatives there he could not obtain
recognition as sovereign. King Raoul of France also nourished ambitions to rule
on the Rhone, and it may be that Hugh hoped to block his way, as well as to buy
off an invasion threatened by Rodolph II of Jurane Burgundy, when c. 931 he
made, on the evidence of Luitprand, a treaty with Rodolph II by which there was
ceded to Rodolph II “all the territory Hugh had held in Gaul before he became
king of Italy”. We may doubt whether this ineffective treaty referred to more
than one or two districts; in any case Rodolph II lost them again, and his
death in 937 opened out a new prospect. Hugh contrived to marry Rodolph II’s
widow Bertha himself and to betroth Rodolph’s daughter
Adelaide to his own son Lothar II. Though the rights of Rodolph’s young son Conrad were not disputed, Hugh
probably hoped to be the real ruler of Jurane Burgundy, when a greater
competitor appeared on the scene.
The German
princes had by no means abandoned hopes of Italian conquest since the Emperor
Arnulf’s death, although the internal troubles of Germany, seconded by Hugh’s
gifts and embassies, precluded a royal campaign. Duke Burchard of Swabia had
aided his son-in-law Rodolph II; in 934 Duke Arnulf of Bavaria suffered defeat
in an invasion of the Veneto. But now the German king, Otto the Great, was
strong; he was determined to secure his south-western frontier, and perhaps
already dreamed of reasserting Arnulf's position and taking the imperial crown.
In some way he gained possession of young Conrad, and controlled the government
of Jurane Burgundy. All that Hugh seems to have kept was the Valley of Aosta,
and his lands in Provence.
The perpetual
danger of an invasion was increased by the readiness of the magnates to call in
a foreign king at any discontent. Although national consciousness was present
in Italy, and in a strongly localized form was marked in Rome, the great
vassals were still as their ancestors of the ninth century had been, members of
the mainly Frankish noble houses which were scattered and endowed throughout
Charlemagne’s Empire. In Italy they were mostly new-comers, only Italian in
their objection to fresh magnates from beyond the Alps. Hugh’s safety, on the
other hand, lay in the introduction of new men from Provence, his kinsmen and
allies, which he could the more readily effect as the magnates he found in
possession had struck but short roots since the days of the Emperor Guy. Even
so he could not much depend on his nominees; the instinct and the opportunity
for feudal turbulence were too strong. Among the bishops the saintly
Frank, Ratheri of Verona, had to be
deposed for adherence to Duke Arnulf’s invasion. In central Italy he could root
out the ancient dynasts, but could not implant loyalty to himself. On Lambert’s
deposition he had given the march of Tuscany to his full brother Boso, once a
count in Provence, who in turn vanished in his prisons in 936. Soon after
Theobald I of Spoleto died and was replaced by Anscar,
son of Adalbert of Ivrea and Hugh’s half-sister Ermingarde of
Tuscany. This was such a risky appointment in view of the wrongs which Hugh had
done to Ermingarde’s family that the
chronicler Luitprand explains it as intended to remove Anscar from his powerful friends in the north. In any
case rumor said that the king stirred up against the new Marquess of Spoleto a
Provencal, Sarlio, Count of the Palace, who had
married Theobald I’s widow. In 940 Anscar was
slain in battle, and Hugh then turned on Sarlio whom
he forced to take the cowl. The king by now seemed to be finding surer
instruments in his own bastard children, of whom the eldest Hubert, Marquess of
Tuscany in 936, Marquess of Spoleto and Count of the Palace c. 942, kept a firm
hand on central Italy, while others were designed for ecclesiastical preferments.
Hugh’s astute
perfidy alarmed the Italian nobles more and more and especially their greatest
remaining chief, Anscar’s half-brother,
Berengar, Marquess of Ivrea. Everything conspired to make Berengar dangerous
and alarmed. He was heir through his mother of the Emperor Berengar I, his wife
Willa was daughter of the fallen Boso of Tuscany, his march of Ivrea gave him
command of the western gates of the kingdom, and its extent and Anscar’s fate pointed him out as Hugh’s next destined
victim. The story goes that Hugh intended to seize and blind him, but that the
Marquess was forewarned by the young co-regent Lothar II, and with his wife
fled to Duke Herman of Swabia by whom they were conducted to the German king,
Otto the Great.
Otto, while he
did not actively assist the exile, would not give him up in spite of the
redoubled presents of King Hugh, and Berengar was able to plot with the
malcontents of Italy for a rebellion. In the meantime Hugh, feeling his throne
shake under him, made feverish efforts to recover his vassals' loyalty. Berengar’s
great domains were distributed among leading nobles; the counts Ardoin Glabrio of
Turin, Otbert and Aleram are henceforward in the first rank of
magnates; and an unusual number of royal diplomas were issued in 943.
But Saracen and
Hungarian marauding did not increase Hugh’s hold on his subjects. It is clear
that besides lay plotters the great prelates and his own kin were ready to
revolt. When Berengar saw the time was come, in the mid-winter of 944-5, he
made his venture over the Brenner towards Verona, the Count of which, Milo, an
old adherent of Berengar I, was in his favor. The decisive moment came when
Manasse of Arles, who was in charge of the frontier bishopric of Trent,
deserted his uncle. A general defection was headed by Archbishop Arderic of Milan, and Hugh at Pavia could do nothing
better than send in April the unhated Lothar
II to Milan to appeal to the rebels. The assembly was moved and declared the
youth sole king, but, when Hugh tried to escape to Provence with his treasure,
Berengar in fear of a new invasion had him intercepted and reinstated in August
as nominal joint king. In this humiliating position Hugh remained till April
947 when somehow he gained leave to abdicate and retire to Provence with the
treasure with which he still hoped to engineer a fresh invasion. But he died on
10 April 948.
Berengar II
Meanwhile
Berengar was ruling, in the name of Lothar II, as “chief councilor of the
realm” He seems to have done his best to promote his clerical partisans, but
his main reliance was on his fellow magnates. Although no doubt he recovered
much of his own domains, he was evidently obliged to buy support by consenting
to alienations like that of Turin to Ardoin Glabrio. Even Hubert was left unmolested in Tuscany, if a
new Marquess was appointed to Spoleto. How little Berengar was master of the
kingdom was shown when he nominated Manasse of Arles to the see of Milan. The Milanese townsmen elected a rival
Adalman, Manasse obtained adherents in the countryside, and the two competitors
fought for five years without decisive result. It was, however, in foreign
affairs that Berengar’s weakness was most obvious. Hugh had been in relations
with all his neighbors, Berengar shrank into isolation; Byzantium neglected
him, Provence submitted to Conrad of Jurane Burgundy, the protégé of
Otto the Great, Germany loomed ever more formidably in the north, the
Hungarians under their chief Taxis proved in 947 by ravages which reached
Apulia that Italy was no better defended than before.
Weakness and the
greed of wealth which belonged to Berengar’s own character brought unpopularity
which was exemplified in the accusations that he made a large profit out of the
tax levied for blackmail to the Magyars, and that he was the deviser of the
sudden death of Lothar II in November 950. Berengar still had sufficient
following to secure the election of himself and his son Adalbert as joint kings
on 15 December 950, but the disaffected were numerous. Lothar left no son, and
his widow Adelaide of Jurane Burgundy with her rich dower was the centre of an
opposition in which the bishops, who had suffered under Berenga’s exactions, took the leading part. Berengar
II's expedient was to ride rough-shod over the ex-queen’s rights. Her dower was
seized on, she was ill-used and imprisoned, if we may trust later tradition she
was required to marry the young King Adalbert. She only gained safety by an
adventurous escape to the protection of Bishop Adalard of Reggio, who according
to a credible later story consigned her to the impregnable castle of his vassal
Adalbert-Atto at Canossa.
This was in
August 951, but a champion was already near at hand, whose advent shows that
Adelaide’s persecution at the hands of Berengar II was not unprovoked. Germany,
the most powerful of the kingdoms which arose from the shattered Carolingian
Empire, had prospered under the Saxon dynasty and neither her King Otto the
Great nor the dukes of her southern duchies, Bavaria and Swabia, were inclined
to let slip the opportunity of conquering their wealthy and weak neighbor of
Italy. These princes were all near kinsmen, for Henry of Bavaria was Otto's
brother and Liudolf of Swabia was Otto’s eldest son; but, while Henry and
Liudolf who were bitter rivals were imitating the local ambitions of the dukes
their predecessors, Otto probably had a greater model in his mind—he would
revive the Empire as Arnulf had held it and be suzerain of western Christendom;
that he would so win the hand of the beautiful queen he rescued would give an
additional attraction to the enterprise. The two dukes, being near at hand,
made hasty invasions for their own ends first of all, Henry with some success,
Liudolf with failure. Then came Otto at the head of an imposing force, to which
both dukes brought contingents. He crossed the Brenner Pass and reached Pavia
at the end of September 951, without any resistance being offered him. The
churchmen in fact were on his side, led by the versatile Archbishop Manasse,
and Berengar II could only flee to one of his castles. But the adhesion of the
bishops of the Lombard plain was not enough, and in his triumph Otto’s
difficulties began.
Pope Agapetus, at
Alberic’s instigation, refused his request to be crowned Emperor, for the Roman
prince had no mind to nullify his life’s work by introducing a foreign Roman
Emperor; and the king’s marriage to the rescued Adelaide roused against him a
domestic enemy. His son Liudolf, in thorough discontent at the influence of his
stepmother and her ally Henry of Bavaria, departed for Germany to scheme
revolt. Otto himself followed in February 952, having after all acquired only
some half of the kingdom of which he assumed the title. He left his son-in-law
Duke Conrad of Lorraine with troops to hold Pavia and continue the war. The
king had scarcely gone, however, before Conrad and Berengar II came to terms,
both perhaps being well aware how little trust could be placed in the Lombard magnates.
Together they came to Otto at Magdeburg in April, but Otto’s terms were not so
lenient as Conrad imagined. Berengar was received with haughty discourtesy, and
dismissed to attend a diet at Augsburg in August, whither he was accompanied by
the chief Lombard prelates. There he and Adalbert became Otto’s vassals for
the Regnum Italicum from which
they were compelled to cede the marches of Verona, Friuli and Istria to Duke
Henry of Bavaria. Thus Otto, although withdrawing from Italy, kept its eastern gateway
in German hands.
Berengar II
returned to Italy burning with wrath against the bishops and nobles who had
caused his disasters and the mutilation of his kingdom. He and his queen Willa
earned an evil name for greed and cruelty, since they needed wealth to enrich
the enfeebled kingship and were hungry for revenge. Among their lay foes
Adalbert-Atto underwent a long vain siege in
his castle of Canossa, but the chief sufferers were the churchmen. The series
of grants to them, which had continued so persistently under former kings,
almost ceases under Berengar. At Milan, Manasse’s rival
Adalman was induced to resign, and he himself was dispossessed in favor of a
new Archbishop, Walpert. Exiles began to make their way to Otto’s court, among
them our chief informant about these Italian kings, the chronicler Liudprand,
who thereby became the bitter enemy of Berengar II with his house and wreaked
his revenge in his historical writings. If there had survived another
business-like Italian chronicle, like that of Flodoard for
France, Liudprand would have earned more gratitude from posterity than he does
for his vivid narrative, his pointed character-sketches, and the brush-like
abundance of ‘local colour’ with which he
overlays his scanty facts. As it is, in his Antapodosis (Retribution)
we have a difficulty in obtaining a firm foothold for history amid the
crumbling and quaking mass of rancorous, if often contemporary, gossip which
Liudprand loves to heap up. Of noble birth, bred at King Hugh’s court, and once
Berengar II’s secretary, he was in the best position to give accurate and full
information, but he had a soul above documents. It is hardly his fault that he
depended on oral tradition for all events before his own time, for there seems
to have been no Italian chronicle for him to use, but he evidently made no
record at the time and when he wrote rested wholly on a memory which rejected
dates and political circumstances and was singularly retentive of amorous
scandal however devoid of probability. He does not even tell in his unfinished
work the cause and events of his persecution by Berengar to which he frequently
alludes, while sketching with fine precision the diary of his reception at
Constantinople whither he first went as Berenga’s envoy.
For what interested him he could remember and tell to the life. To his credit
be it said he was no liar, though he may be found suppressing an unpleasant
fact; what he heard he told, and perhaps we may grant him that he gave a ready,
and sometimes a determined, belief to the gossip of anterooms and the tradition
of wrathful factions. It is unfortunate, for he was a practical statesman, and
knew and sometimes reveals the motives of his times.
Berengar had had
a free hand in Italy, and had even recovered Verona, because Otto was occupied
in German revolts and frontier wars, but in 955 occurred the decisive victory
of the Lechfeld in which Otto put an end
once for all to Hungarian raids. He had succeeded where all the Italian kings
had failed, he had rescued central Europe, and was therefrom with
little doubt its destined ruler. His intervention in Italy, Henry of Bavaria
being now dead, was renewed by the agency of his reconciled rebel son Liudolf.
In 957 the duke made his invasion with the usual rapid success. Berengar II fled,
Adalbert was defeated in battle, and all Lombardy had submitted when Liudolf
died of fever at Pombia near Lake
Maggiore, the first German victor to lose his gains owing to the alien climate
of Italy.
The death of
Liudolf was followed by the immediate recovery of his lost ground by Berengar.
He came back with a new series of bitter feuds, to pursue. Walpert of Milan and
other prelates fled to Otto, and Manasse became once more a pluralist by
returning to Milan as Berengar’s partisan. Among the lay magnates
Marquess Otbert went into exile; a general
disaffection existed among those who retained their possessions. The king was
still eager as Hugh had been before him to amass an imposing royal demesne and
to create trusty great vassals. Hitherto central Italy had been faithful to
him; now, however, Spoleto seems an enemy, perhaps owing to the new turn of
affairs at Rome. On his deathbed in 954 prince Alberic had bound the Romans by
oath to elect his son and heir by Alda,
John-Octavian, Pope when Agapetus should die. In December 955 the promise was
kept and the boy became Pope as John XII. Thus the Pope recovered control of
Rome by uniting with the Papacy the chief ship of the strong faction of
Alberic. Any design of a permanent principate must
have been given up; it was perhaps too anomalous, and it is significant that
John renewed the long forgotten habit of dating by the years of the Byzantine
Emperors. But the Roman nobles remained in power to the continued subjection of
the ecclesiastical bureaucracy. John XII himself was a dissolute boy whose
pontificate was a glaring scandal. No gleam of competence redeemed his
debauchery, though he was not without secular ambitions. About 959 he made war
on the co-regent princes of Capua-Benevento, Paldolf I
(Pandulf) Ironhead and Landolf III, with the aid of Marquess Theobald II of
Spoleto. He failed, and gave way, for prince Gisulf of
Salerno assisted his neighbors; and then Berengar attacked Spoleto on an
unknown pretext. Theobald was driven out, and Spoleto taken over by the king
possibly to be conferred on his own son Guido. Did Berengar demand the imperial
crown? In any case King Adalbert ravaged Roman territory, and John XII was in
such straits as to appeal for German intervention, thus strangely showing how
the ancient policy of the Popes could recur in the unclerical son
of Alberic.
It was in the
summer of 960 that the Pope's envoys, the Cardinal-deacon John and the scriniarius Azo,
reached Otto the Great in Saxony. The Pope's prayer for help was seconded by
the Lombard exiles and by the messages of numerous magnates. Otto was now
unembarrassed in other directions, and could resume his old schemes with the
knowledge that he would have at last allies and support south of the Apennines.
He was not ready to move, however, till August 961, when he crossed the Brenner
Pass in force. Adalbert may have attempted to gather troops to bar the defiles
north of Verona, but the universal defection of counts and bishops made
resistance impossible, and the German king entered Pavia, whence Berengar had
fled after spitefully burning the royal palace. Otto and the infant son Otto II
whom he had left in Germany were at once acknowledged as co-regent kings of
Italy without further ceremony. All their deserted rivals could do was to hold
out in strong castles on the spurs of the Alps and in the Apennines where one
magnate at least, Marquess Hubert of Tuscany, remained true to them.
Otto was able to
disregard his enemies while he proceeded through Ravenna, thus avoiding the
Tuscan route, to receive the promised imperial crown. On 31 January 962 he
encamped on Monte Mario outside Rome, and according to custom certain of his
vassals took on his behalf an oath to respect the Pope’s rights. The custom was
old, but the terms of the oath were new, for John XII wished for an ally, not a
suzerain, and the German king promised not to hold placita or
intervene in Rome without the Pope's assent, to restore such alienated papal
lands as he should become master of, and to bind whomever he should appoint to
rule the Regnum Italicum to be
the Pope’s protector. The Romans disliked a foreigner, and Otto bought his way
by elusive promises and fallacious expectations. On 2 February he entered the
Leonine city and was crowned with Adelaide in St Peter's by the Pope. A Roman
Emperor of the West, successor of Charlemagne, once more existed. It was of
evil omen that Otto’s sword-bearer stood on guard against his assassination
while the sacring was enacted.
On their side
Pope John and the Romans swore fealty to the Emperor with an express promise
not to aid or receive Berengar and Adalbert. They found that Otto considered
the situation changed by his new dignity. It is true that the privilege he
granted to the Papacy on 13 February was even more generous than the old
Carolingian donations in the matter of territory—for it added a large strip
of Spoletan land to Rome and its duchy,
the Exarchate, the Pentapolis, the Tuscan territory, the Sabina and the
southern patrimonies, not to mention the vaguer supposed donation of 774 which
was now confirmed without any clear idea of its meaning. But the pact of 824
was also expressly revived, by which the election of the Pope was submitted to
imperial confirmation, and the Emperor's suzerainty in the papal lands was
reserved and exercised in Rome itself by his missus. The scheme of setting up a
vassal king of Italy, if ever really entertained, was abandoned. Although the
terms of Otto’s oath were not precisely infringed, the change in the spirit of
the new treaty was manifest—Pope John had become a subject.
There was still
Berengar II to conquer, and the Emperor returned to Pavia, driving Hubert of
Tuscany into exile on the way. Berengar was holding out in the impregnable
castle of S. Leo in the Apennines, queen Willa and her sons in strongholds near
the lakes in the north. Willa was now compelled to surrender on terms which
allowed her to rejoin her husband: their sons were pressed hard, and Adalbert
made his escape to the Saracens of Fraxinetum and Corsica. There he entered
into relations with Pope John who was heartily weary of his new subordination.
Meantime Otto was secure in the north, his partisans were placed in power,
Liudprand was Bishop of Cremona, Adalbert-Atto Count
of Modena and Reggio, Otto’s nephew Henry of Bavaria in firm possession of the
march of Verona. So the news of the Pope's dubious loyalty only urged the
Emperor to finish with Berengar by blockading him in S. Leo in May 963, while
he still negotiated with John. The Pope on his side had grounds of complaint,
for the Exarchate had not been restored to the Apostolic See on the ground that
Berengar must first be conquered. On the other hand Otto had documentary proof
that John was trying to rouse the Hungarians against him, and when he heard
that Adalbert had been welcomed by John at Civitavecchia he seems to have decided
to take the extreme measure of deposing his quondam ally. It was a hazardous
course, for in the general belief the Pope could be brought to no man’s
judgment, and the Romans, even those not of Alberic's faction, resented any
diminution of their autonomy.
But Otto knew
that John XII’s scandalous life and government had made men inclined to admit
even a Pope's deposition, and were driving his Roman opponents even to alliance
with the foreign Emperor. Accordingly in October Otto left a blockading force at
S. Leo and marched on Rome, where his partisans rose. John XII and Adalbert
fled to Tivoli laden with much church-treasure, and the Romans surrendered.
They gave hostages and swore never to elect a Pope save by the choice of Otto
and his son. The engagement was novel, going far beyond the Carolingian right
to confirm an election and receive the Pope's fealty, but Alberic had already
exercised the same power and Otto's imperial crown was unsafe without it.
Canonical form
was as nearly as possible observed in John’s deposition. A synod, in which the
Pope’s central Italian suffragans predominated, was presided over by the
Emperor and attended by the Roman clergy and nobles; John was accused of gross
misconduct and was summoned by Emperor and synod to clear himself in person. A
brief letter in reply merely threatened with excommunication and suspension any
bishops who should elect a new Pope. The synod sent a second summons retorting
the threat and criticizing the illiteracy of John whose Latin smacked of the vernacular,
but John was not to be found by the messengers. It was clear that the three
canonical summonses could not be delivered to the culprit, and Otto now came
forward in his own person and denounced John for his breach of fealty to
himself. Thereupon on 4 December Emperor and synod declared John deposed and
elected the protoscriniarius, a layman,
Pope as Leo VIII.
Otto was in the
full tide of success. Just after Christmas S. Leo at last surrendered and
Berengar II and his wife were sent captive to Bamberg where they both died in
966. So Otto confidently dismissed much of his army. But John XII was stronger
than he seemed, for his uncanonical deposition
and a layman’s uncanonical election had
roused qualms among a section of the churchmen, and the Romans were fretting
under their subjugation. A sudden rising failed before the swords of Otto’s
tried warriors; yet, when Otto went eastwards to take possession of the Spoletan duchy, John XII had only to appear before
Rome with troops for the gates to be opened. Pope Leo just escaped with his
life, and John was reinstated. After mutilating his former envoys to Otto, John
and Azo, presumably on a charge of forgery, a
synod of the nearest bishops in February 964 annulled Otto’s synod in which
most of them had participated and declared Leo an intruder. Otto, whose missus
had been ill-treated, naturally refused to change his policy. While his army
was collecting, however, John XII died on 14 May of paralysis, and the Romans
made a bid for independence by electing a learned and virtuous Pope, Benedict
V. It was a vain manoeuvre. Otto starved out the city, mutilating all who tried
to pass his blockading lines. On 23 June the surrender was made, and Leo VIII
reinstated. Benedict was deposed and sent to a saintly exile at Hamburg. By now
at any rate it was agreed that Otto's grants to the Popes were only for show,
for of all the lands bestowed by his charter the duchy of Rome and the Sabina
alone were left to the Papacy.
In this way Otto
the Great brought into existence the Romano-Germanic Empire of the West, or, to
give it its later and convenient name, the Holy Roman Empire, compounded by a
union of the German kingdom with the Regnum Italicum and
with the dignity of Roman Emperor. It was intended and supposed to be a revival
of the Empire of Charlemagne which had broken up on the deposition of Charles
the Fat, although its title had remained until the fall of Berengar I to
express a protectorate of the Papacy. It was also a reassertion of that claim
to pre-eminence in Western Europe which had been made by Otto's predecessor
Arnulf as chief of the Carolingian house. Arnulf's Empire, indeed, furnishes
the transitional form between that of Otto and that of Charlemagne, for Otto’s
title implied less than Charlemagne’s had. Otto was considered the lay chief of
Western Christendom, its defender from heathen and barbarians, the supreme
maintainer of justice and peace; but, whereas Charlemagne was ruler of church
and state, Otto’s power over the church was protective in its character. The
Pope was unquestioned spiritual chief of Christendom; Otto was at the same time
his suzerain with regard to the papal lands, and his subject as a member of the
Church. The arrangement was only workable because the Papacy was weak. In
secular matters Otto’s Empire lacked the universality of Charlemagne’s. Not
only were France and Christian Spain outside its frontiers, but within it the
nascent force of nationality was beginning to make itself felt. The German
monarch was a foreigner in subject Italy, disguised as the fact might be by the
absence of national feeling among the Italian magnates. “He had with him
peoples and tribes whose tongues the people did not know”. This meant constant
disaffection, constant suppression. The popular hatred burnt most fiercely at
Rome and found utterance in a Roman monk: “Woe to thee, Rome, that thou art
crushed and trodden down by so many people; who hast been seized by a Saxon
king, and thy folk slaughtered and thy strength reduced to naught!”
In the details of
government, also, Otto had not the control which Charlemagne exercised.
Although the decline of the royal power must not be overrated, especially in
Germany, even there feudalism, seignorial independence
and state disorganization, had made great strides. In Italy, where he was too
often an absentee, the royal demesne was depleted and the lay vassals were out
of hand. Otto met this difficulty by a clever balancing of the two groups by
whom he had been called in, the great secular magnates and the bishops. Of
these, the first were the Marquesses, a title
given in Italy to the ruler of several counties. Towards them Otto was
conciliatory; even Hubert in the end was restored to Tuscany, and the Lombards,
some four or five in number, were the Emperor's faithful vassals. They were
survivors in the struggle for existence among the counts which had raged in the
dissolution of the Carolingian order. Under the pressure of civil war, of
Hungarian and Saracen ravage, old dynasts had vanished, new had come and had
either vanished too, or had remained weakened. In their place or by their side
ruled the bishops in the Lombard plain. Since 876 they had been permanent
royal missi in their dioceses, and
thus had at least in name supervision over the counts. Like other magnates the
bishops during the years of anarchy had increased their “immunity” inside their
domains, by increase of exemptions and jurisdictions and by grants of the
profitable royal rights of market and toll and the like, while those domains
also grew through the piety or competitive bribery of the kings and nobles. Not
least among the sources of the bishops’ power was their influence over their
cities, inherited from Roman times. In anarchy and disaster they stepped into
the breach at the head of their fellow-citizens, whatever civic feeling existed
gathered round them, and fragment by fragment they were acquiring in their
cathedral cities the “public functions” whether of count or king. In its
completed form this piecemeal process resulted in the city and a radius of land
round it being excised from its county and removed from the count's
jurisdiction. Thus Bergamo, Parma, Cremona, Modena, Reggio and Trieste were at
Otto’s accession under the rule of their bishops. Otto came as the ally of the
bishops and deliverer of the Church. He exercised whether by pressure on the
electors or by mere nomination the appointment to vacant sees and great abbeys,
and thus gained non-hereditary vassals of his own choice who were the safest
supporters of his monarchy. He favored of set policy these instruments of his
power as counterweights to the feudal magnates. Fresh cities, Asti, Novara, and
Penne in the Abruzzi, were wholly given over to their bishops, and the
immunities on episcopal lands steadily grew, so that they too were in process
of being excised from the counties in which they lay. The work was slowly done
by Otto and his successors both in Italy and Germany, but there was no
countering tendency. The functions granted were either those of the hereditary
counts or those which the kings had been unable to perform. By transference of
these to the churchmen Otto and his heirs recovered control of much local
government by seeming to give it away, and secured faithful, powerful adherents
selected for capacity. Their monarchy came to rest, especially in Italy, on
their control of the Church; all the more essential to them therefore became
the subjection or the firm alliance of the Papacy.
Scarcely had Otto
left Italy when the death of his nominee, Pope Leo VIII, early in 965
endangered his new Empire. The Romans with a show of duty sent an embassy to
beg for the exile Benedict as Pope, and Adalbert appeared in Lombardy to raise
a revolt. Duke Burchard of Swabia, indeed, defeated Adalbert, and the Romans
elected the Bishop of Narni as Pope John
XIII at the Emperor’s command, but, though John was of Alberic’s kindred, the
mere fact that he represented German domination enabled rival nobles to raise
the populace and drive him into exile. He was not restored till in 966 the news
of Otto’s descent into Italy with an army provoked a reaction. Punishment was
dealt out to the rebels, severer for the Roman enemies of the Pope than for the
Lombard rebels against Otto. John XIII’s exile seems to have occasioned fresh
schemes of the Emperor. Paldolf I Ironhead of Capua-Benevento, with whom the Pope had found
an asylum, appeared in Rome in January 967 and was there invested by Otto with
the march of Spoleto, at the same time becoming Otto’s vassal for his native
principality. Otto thus created a central Italian vassal of the first rank and
enlarged his Empire. One motive, no doubt, was the wish to give peace and
security to the Spoletan march; but the
main purpose was clearly to begin the annexation of South Italy to the Regnum Italicum. This design, which was in pursuance of old
Carolingian claims, was bound to find resistance in the Eastern Empire. The
Byzantines looked on Otto’s imperial title as a barbaric impertinence; they
considered Capua-Benevento as part of the Longobardic theme;
and they were determined to maintain their dominion in Italy.
The Eastern Roman
Emperors were always handicapped in their dealings in Italy; their province
there was too important to be let go, too remote to be the object of their
chief energies. The fall of King Hugh had been followed by outbreaks in Apulia,
and at the same time the Saracen raids became a grave danger when the Fatimite
Caliph Mansur once again recovered the revolted colony of Sicily in 947.
Calabria was overrun by his troops; even Naples was besieged; and, although in
956 the patrician Marianus Argyrus restored
Byzantine authority over subjects and vassals, the peace which suspended,
rather than closed, the Saracen war was no more conclusive than the fighting.
When a celebrated general Nicephorus Phocas became Emperor in 963 his vigorous
effort to succor the last semi-autonomous Greeks of Sicily ended in disaster,
and an ignominious peace. Now he found himself on the defensive against the
aggression of the new Romano-Germanic Empire and the Latin West. John XIII was
trying to revive the decadent Latin Church in south Italy by carving out new
archbishoprics for Capua and Benevento from his own Roman province; Otto the
Great was acquiring Capua-Benevento as a vassal state. At first it seemed as if
an arrangement were possible, for Otto asked for a Byzantine bride, Theophano,
daughter of Romanus II, for his son Otto II, whom at Christmas 967 he had
caused the Pope to crown co-regent Emperor; and his Venetian envoy promised
that Otto would respect the Byzantine dominions in Italy. But in 968 the German
monarch made a surprise attack on Apulia and, only after failing to take Bari,
did he send Liudprand of Cremona to Constantinople to conclude the
marriage-treaty. Otto must have thought it easier to fix the frontier with the
territory he claimed already in his possession. The natural effect on the rude
and soldierly Nicephorus was to make him badger Liudprand and prepare an
expedition. The war was indecisive. The exiled King Adalbert, Nicephorus’s Italian ally, could do nothing and
eventually fled to French Burgundy where in 975 he died, while his brother
Conrad submitted to Otto and received the march of Ivrea. Otto on his side when
he warred in person could take no Apulian town
and Paldolf Ironhead was
captured by the Greeks, who yet were soon defeated again. It was the murder of
Nicephorus in December 969 which brought a solution. The new Byzantine Emperor,
John Tzimisces, had his hands full in the East; Otto saw the design of
conquering Greek Italy was hopeless. By the intervention of Paldolf, released for the purpose, they came to terms, and
in April 972 Theophano was married at Rome to Otto II.
Events make it
clear that Otto kept the suzerainty of Capua-Benevento and abandoned further
schemes. Paldolf Ironhead’s wide
central Italian dominion after all formed a convenient buffer-state for both
Empires, no matter to which he was a vassal.
Otto the Great
did not long survive the settlement with Eastern Rome, as he died in Thuringia
on 7 May 973. His character belongs to German history, but his work affected
all Europe. He had created the Holy Roman Empire and in so doing had revived
the conception of Charlemagne which molded the thought and the development of
Western Europe. The union of Germany and north Italy was his doing and the fate
of both for centuries derives from the bias he gave their history. So, too, in
immediate results he closes one era and begins another, for the times of
anarchy and moral collapse following the wreck of Charlemagne’s Empire come to
an end, and a period of revival in government, in commerce and in civilization
is ushered in by the comparative peace he gave. The problem of defense against
the barbarian invader, which had baffled the fleeting Italian kings and had
contributed to their ruin, was solved. Otto himself crushed the Hungarian hordes
for good and all: it was fitting that in his reign the Saracens of Fraxinetum
also, who so long preyed on the routes between Italy and France, should be
abolished. The impulse to this deliverance was given by a crowning outrage.
St Maiolus, Abbot of Cluny, revered throughout
the West, was captured in July 972 while crossing the Great St Bernard Pass
with a numerous caravan of fellow travelers. The Cluniac monks at once raised
the enormous ransom demanded by the Saracens, but the indignation roused by the
event and perhaps a hope of so great a booty at length moved the great barons
on either side of the Alps to act in concert. The Saracens who had seized
St Maiolus were cut off and destroyed, and
a federation of nobles led by the counts of Provence and Ardoin of Turin closed in on Fraxinetum itself. The
Saracen colony was extirpated. Once more the Alpine passes were free to
travelers, save for exactions by the nobles and occasional brigandage.
The Regnum Italicum could now rest under the shadow of the
strong monarchy, untroubled save by the violence of the nobles and the
unappeased strife of Roman factions. Otto the Great had nominated in 973
Benedict VI to succeed to the Papacy, but a relative of John XIII and of
Alberic, Crescentius, son of a Theodora, thrust
in a usurper, the deacon Franco, as Boniface VII in 974. Yet a reaction,
perhaps provoked by the true Pope’s murder, soon came, and the imperial missus,
Count Sico, was able to install the Bishop
of Sutri as Benedict VII, although Franco
contrived to escape to Constantinople with a quantity of church-treasure. The
revolution had not even required a German army, much less an imperial campaign.
Not till December
980 did Otto II (the Red) find leisure or occasion to proceed to Italy. He came
to be reconciled with his mother Adelaide, and perhaps to give her some voice
in affairs. The young Emperor, then aged twenty-five, was not eminently gifted
with a ruler's wisdom; but he was ambitious and energetic, and his ambitions
now were directed to that conquest of the south which his father had abandoned.
There was much that was tempting in the situation of Byzantine Italy, much that
seemed to call for intervention. In answer to the proceedings of Otto the Great
an attempt had been made by the Byzantines to unify the administration by
transmuting the strategos of Longobardia into the catapan or
viceroy of Italy with a superior authority over the strategos of
Calabria. This new system was soon put to hard proof. In 969 the Fatimite
caliphs conquered Egypt, and thus became hostile neighbors’ to the East Romans
in Syria. War broke out and spread to the western provinces of both powers.
Once more Calabria was ravaged by the Muslims under the Sicilian emir Abul-Kasim in 976 and Apulia suffered in the next year.
The only relief given was due to the local payment of blackmail, for the
Byzantines, who had begun the war in spirited fashion by the momentary capture
of Messina, were paralyzed by the campaigns in Syria, by the civil wars which
followed Tzimisces' death, and by the disaffection of the Apulians.
Otto the Red
succumbed to the temptation. The Saracen danger under Abul-Kasim grew
ever more menacing and might affect his own dominions. Civil war in the East
and disaffection in Italy made the Byzantines weak. He might at one and the
same time repel the Muslims and bring the Regnum Italicum to its natural limits. In September 981
he had reached Lucera on the Apulian frontier when he was recalled to secure his
rear. Paldolf Ironhead had
soon extended his central State. When Prince Gisulf of
Salerno was dethroned in 973 by a complot of rebellious nobles and his jealous
neighbors’ of Amalfi and Naples, it was Paldolf who
overthrew the usurper Landolf, his own kinsman,
and restored the old, childless prince as his client. In 977 he succeeded as
prince in Salerno. On Ironhead’s death,
however, in March 981 his great dominion dissolved. One son, Landolf IV, inherited Capua-Benevento, and
another, Paldolf, ruled Salerno. Now
revolutions broke out. The Beneventans were
restive under Capuan rule, and
declared Ironhead's nephew Paldolf II their prince while Landolf IV retained Capua: the Salernitans drove out their Paldolf,
and introduced the Byzantine ally, Duke Manso III
of Amalfi. Otto accepted the separation of Capua and Benevento, but he besieged
Salerno, and obtained its submission at the price of recognizing Manso. He seemed to have secured a new vassal; he had lost
the benefit of surprise and the halo of irresistible success. When with large
reinforcements from Germany he marched through Apulia in 982, the towns did not
join him, although Bari rebelled on its own account, and Taranto surrendered
after a long siege. There he heard of the coming of the Saracen foe from whom
he claimed to deliver his intended conquest.
Abul-Kasim had proclaimed a Holy War and crossed to
Calabria. Otto advanced to meet him. At Rossano he
left the Empress Theophano and, moving south, captured the Saracens’ advance
guard in an unnamed town. He met the main body on the east coast, perhaps near Stilo. Headlong courage and no generalship marked his
conduct of the battle, for he charged and broke the Saracen centre, without
perceiving their reserves amid the hills on his flank. Abul-Kasim had been killed, but meanwhile the exhausted
Germans were attacked by the fresh troops on their flank and overwhelmed. Some
four thousand were slain including the flower of the German nobles; many were
made prisoners; the Emperor himself only eluded capture by swimming to a
Byzantine vessel, from which in turn he had to escape by leaping overboard when
it brought him near Rossano.
With the remnants
of his army Otto beat a retreat to Salerno and Rome. As the news spread over
the Empire his prestige waned, and a mutinous spirit arose in Italy which was,
however, kept in check by the steady adherence of Marquesses and
Bishops to the German monarchy. Otto did his best to re-establish his position.
In May 983 he held a German Diet at Verona, and there obtained the election as
King of Germany of his infant son Otto, whom he thereupon sent north to be
crowned. At the same time he made an effort to bring the independent sea-power
of Venice to subjection.
Venice had
prospered exceedingly during the century. Exempt from Hungarian ravage, she had
contrived to hold the piracy of the distant Saracens and of the Slays of
Dalmatia in check. She had shaken off Byzantine suzerainty and maintained a
privileged intercourse with the Regnum Italicum.
She had already become the chief intermediary between Constantinople and the
West; her wealth, derived partly from her questionable exports of iron, wood
and slaves to the Saracens, was growing rapidly. Even when she was obliged to
surrender the extra-territoriality of her citizens within the Western Empire to
Otto the Great, she obtained in return the perpetuity of her treaty with him.
But she had her special dangers. One was the effort of the Doges to erect an
hereditary monarchy, like that of Amalfi. The other, caused largely by this
effort, was the rise of two embittered factions among the mercantile nobles who
held the chief influence in the State. These troubles affected her relations
with Otto II, for the aspiring Doge Pietro Candiano IV
who had been murdered in 976 had married Gualdrada of
Tuscany, niece of the Empress Adelaide. The efforts of Doge Tribuno Menio did
indeed result in a hollow reconciliation at Verona in June 983. Otto II
restored Venice her privileges with the airs of a suzerain, while Venice
tacitly maintained her independence. Hardly was the bargain struck, however, before
Otto broke it. The civil discord of Venice had ended in the bitter hatred of
the rival families of Caloprini and
Morosini. Now Stephen Caloprini fled to
Verona and offered to be the Emperor’s genuine vassal if restored to Venice as
Doge. Otto characteristically seized the chance of conquest. Venice was
strictly blockaded by land, and might have been forced to yield had not the
Emperor, enfeebled by a foreign climate, died of an overdose of medicine (four
drachms of aloes) on 7 December 983.
The minority of Otto III
Otto had been
preparing for new aggression towards the south, where Transemund,
the new Marquess of Spoleto, and Aloara of
Capua, Paldolf Ironhead’s widow,
might be relied on. His impatient policy had just been shown in the promotion
of a foreign Pope to succeed Benedict VII, for John XIV had been Peter, Bishop
of Pavia and Arch-chancellor of Italy. The restive Romans, still mindful of the
old prohibition of translations, rose against the Lombard Pope at Easter 984.
Their leader was that Franco, now once more Boniface VII, who had been let
loose with his treasure by the incensed Byzantines. He disgraced himself once
more by causing the death of his imprisoned rival, and made himself so hated in
his brief and tyrannous pontificate that on his death in 985 the mob outraged
his corpse through the streets. He had really bought the Papacy from those who
could sell it, the faction led by the house of the Crescentii.
By them Alberic’s rule of Rome was revived in the person of the patrician Crescentius II, son of Crescentius de
Theodora. There was, however, a difference; while preserving his autonomous
power Crescentius II avoided a breach with
the Empire.
He could take
this anomalous position all the more easily because the Empire and the Regnum Italicum were in some sort vacant. The child Otto
III of Germany was acknowledged as rightful heir, but not as sovereign, in
Italy, where the interregnum was filled by admitting the claim of the two crowned Augustas, Theophano and Adelaide, to act for the future
Emperor, this constitutional subtlety being made acceptable by the loyalty
of Marquesses and Bishops to the German
connection. Otto II’s aggressions against Venice and the Byzantines were
promptly abandoned, and the peace of the Empire, tempered by the never wholly
quiescent local broils, continued its beneficent work. Adelaide was soon thrust
aside by Theophano who, Greek though she was, troubled with unruly German
magnates and hampered by Slav revolt beyond the Elbe, yet contrived to rule. In
989 she came to Rome, partly to reaffirm the Empire, partly perhaps in rivalry
with Adelaide. Crescentius II evidently
came to terms, which preserved his patriciate, and she exercised without
hindrance all the functions of sovereignty, even being styled Emperor by her
puzzled chancery unused to a female reign. It was not, however, all by merit of
the adroit and firm-willed lady, for, when a year after her return to Germany
she died in June 991, and Adelaide took her place, the fabric of the Empire
continued unshaken. The idea of the Ottonian monarchy
had captivated men's imagination, the benefits it conferred on lands so
recently wretched were indisputable, and the Italian magnates knew their own
interests well enough to be persistently loyal.
At the head of
the magnates stood Hugh of Tuscany, who for some years had ruled Spoleto as
well, thus once more forming a mid-Italian buffer-fief, like that of his father
Hubert, or of Paldolf Ironhead.
It was Hugh who, when a revolution broke out at Capua on Aloara’s death, set up a second son of Paldolf Ironhead's, Laidulf, as prince, and maintained the suzerainty of the
Western Empire. At Rome, however, Crescentius II
exercised unchallenged sway. Pope John XV had not even the support of the
stricter clergy against his lay oppressor, for he himself had a bad name for
avarice and nepotism. But intervention by the German monarch became certain.
Otto III was now
fifteen and of age; his advisers were anxious to put an end to the anomalous
formal vacancy of the Empire; and in response to Pope John's invitation the
king crossed the Brenner Pass with an army in February 996. No one resisted
him, although the inevitable riot between Germans and Italians took place at
Verona. At Pavia, where he received the fealty of the magnates, he heard of
John XV’s death; at the next stage, Ravenna, he was met by a Roman embassy,
which submissively requested him to name a new Pope. His choice was as bold as
possible; Otto II had only promoted a Lombard; Otto III selected his own cousin
Bruno of Carinthia, a youth of twenty-four, who styled himself Gregory V. Thus
for the first time a German ascended the papal throne. It must have been gall
and wormwood to the Romans, but they made no resistance. On 21 May Otto III was
crowned Emperor by his nominee. Neither Pope nor Emperor was disposed to allow
the patriciate to continue. Crescentius II
was tried for his offences against John XV, condemned to exile, and then
pardoned at the Pope’s request. The victory had been so easy that Otto speedily
left Italy. Gregory, however, was already in difficulties. He was a rash young
man, who was also open to bribes, and the Romans hated their German Pope. In
September he escaped from their hands, and Crescentius resumed
power. Gregory, safe in Pavia, might excommunicate the usurper and act as the
admitted head of the Church. Crescentius did
not hesitate to set up an Anti-Pope. His choice was cunning, if hopeless. Otto
III, following the steps of his predecessors, had sent to Constantinople to
demand the hand of a Greek princess. One envoy died on the mission; the other,
John Philagathus, Archbishop of Piacenza, had
recently returned with a Byzantine embassy to continue negotiations. This
prelate was a Greek of Calabria, who had been the trusted adviser of Theophano
and had obtained the independence of his see from Ravenna owing to her
influence. Being the tutor and godfather of the Emperor, he might seem a persona
grata to him. Perhaps he shared Theophano's policy
of alliance with the Roman patrician. In any case he accepted Crescentius’s offer. But he was everywhere unpopular,
a foreigner at Rome, an ingrate further north, and Otto III was resolved. Late
in 997 the Emperor returned to Italy with imposing forces. By the usual route
of Ravenna he reached Rome with Pope Gregory in February 998. There was no real
resistance. John XVI fled to the Campagna to
be captured, blinded and mutilated by his pursuers and then made a public
spectacle by the revengeful Pope. Crescentius,
who held out in the castle of Sant Angelo,
the ancient tomb of Hadrian, soon was taken and executed. Otto and Gregory
hoped thus to crush the indomitable independence of the Romans. They only added
an injured hero to the traditions of medieval Rome, for Crescentius was widely believed, possibly with truth,
to have surrendered upon assurances of safety.
Otto was still in
Italy, alternately employed in affairs of Church and State, and in the pilgrimage
and penance dear to his unbalanced character, when Pope Gregory died in
February 999. True to his imperial policy, the Emperor selected another
non-Roman, Gerbert of Aurillac, the first
French, as Gregory had been the first German Pope. Gerbert, now Sylvester II,
was the most learned man of his age, so learned that legend made him a
magician. Bred in the Aquitanian abbey of Aurillac,
he knew both Spain and Italy, but the best of his life had been spent at the
metropolitan city of Reims. There he was renowned as a teacher and had taken
eager part in the events which led to the substitution of Hugh Capet for the
Carolingian dynasty of France. His reward had been his elevation to the see of Reims, but this being consequent on the
deposition of his predecessor had brought him into collision with the Papacy,
and in 997 he gave up the attempt to maintain himself. He had, however, a sure
refuge. For long he had stood in close relations to the Saxon Emperors. Known
to Otto the Great, he had been given the famous abbey of Bobbio in 982 by Otto
II, although the indiscreet zeal he displayed led to his retreat to Reims again
on his patron’s death. None the less he had worked in France in the interests
of Otto III in the troublous times of the latter's infancy, and as his hold on
Reims grew weaker he had attached himself in 995 to Otto’s court. There he
speedily became the favored tutor of the boy Emperor, partly sharing, partly
humoring and partly inspiring the visionary schemes of his pupil. In 998 he
became again an archbishop, this time of Ravenna, whence he was called to fill
the papal chair.
Sylvester II was
far too practical a statesman to share in all the dreams of Otto, yet even he
seems to have thought of a renovated Roman Empire, very different from the
workaday creation of Otto the Great, of an Empire as wide as Charlemagne’s
which should be truly ecumenical, and no longer an appendage to the German
monarchy. Otto’s schemes were far stranger, the offspring of his wayward and
perfervid nature. Half Greek, half Saxon in birth and training, bred by
Theophano and Philagathus and under
northern prelates and nobles as well, he not only blended the traditions of
Charlemagne’s lay theocracy with those of the ancient Roman Empire seen through
a long Byzantine perspective, but he also oscillated between the ambitious
energy of an aspiring monarch and the ascetic renunciation of a fervent monk.
The contradiction, not unexampled at the time, was glaring in an unripe boy,
whose head was turned by his dignity and his power. He had his ascetic mentors
who fired his enthusiasms, St Adalbert of Prague, St Romuald of
Ravenna, St Nilus of Calabria. As the fit
seized him he went on pilgrimage or withdrew for austerities to hermitage or
monastery. This visionary ruler lacked neither ability nor a policy, however
fantastic his aims might be. He believed most fully in his theocracy. He was
the ruler of Church and State. The Popes were his lieutenants in ecclesiastical
matters. As time went on he emphasized his position by strange titles; he was
‘servant of Jesus Christ’, ‘servant of the Apostles’, in rivalry with the servos servorum Dei of the Popes. Content with the
practical support they received from him in ruling both the Church and Rome,
Gregory V tolerated the beginnings of this and Sylvester II submitted at a
price to its full development. In a strange, scolding, argumentative diploma
Otto III denounced the Donation of Constantine and that of Charles the Bald,
the one as a forgery, the other as invalid, and proceeded to grant the Pope
eight counties of the Pentapolis hitherto ruled by Hugh of Tuscany. It was a
considerable gift, somewhat modified by the fact that Otto intended to make
Rome itself his chief capital, and treated the Pope as his vassal. He perhaps
saw the revival of the Lombard nobles; he was carried away by the ancient
splendors of the Empire, and, proud of his Greek extraction, he hoped to recall
the past by a gaudy imitation of its outer forms. Those forms he saw in
Byzantium, the continuously Roman. Titles and ceremonies were rudely borrowed.
His dignitaries became logothetes, protospathars and the like: once and again
their names were written in the Greek alphabet as an evidence of culture. To
gain centralization and emphasize unity the German and Italian chanceries were
fused together, to the muddling of their formal and perhaps of their practical
business. Semi-barbarism had a puerile side in the court the German Augustus
held at Rome in his palace on the Aventine, and well might the loyal German
nobles look askance at the freaks of the Emperor. “He would not see delightful
Germany, the land of his birth, so great a love possessed him of dwelling in
Italy”.
In January 1000
Otto paid his last visit to Germany, whither the deaths of two great ladies,
his aunt Abbess Matilda and the aged Empress Adelaide, who had guided the
German Government, called him. In July he returned to Italy, for a storm which
had long been brewing had bur.st. It had its principal origin in the prosperity
which the Ottonian peace had brought to
North Italy. The population had increased, waste and forest were brought under
cultivation, trade thrived in the cities. True to Italian tradition the unrest
appeared in two separate groups of persons, among the country-side nobles, and
among the citizens, but, since the individuals who made up these two groups
were largely identical, it was as yet seldom that the effects of their
discontents were sharply separated. Under the great vassals of the countryside,
the bishops, abbots, marquesses and
counts, were ranked the now numerous greater and lesser vavassors, or capitanei and secundi milites, who were distinguished
not so much by their position in the feudal chain as by the extent of their
lands and privileges, but who in general were vassals of the magnates, not of
the Emperor.
The continued
predominance of city-life in Italy, and the terrors of the recent barbarian
ravages, had turned large numbers of the capitanei and secundi milites into inhabitants,
either partially or solely, of the cities, where they formed the most powerful
class of citizens. Under them were the traders who led the non-noble
city-population.
All three
classes, capitanei, secundi milites and plebeians tended
to be at odds with one another; there were also signs of a resentment at the
bishops’ rule which had once been welcomed. Berengar II, at enmity with the
bishops, had shown signs of courting the townsmen when he granted privileges to
the men of Genoa collectively; the Milanese, in Otto III’s minority, had waged
war on their archbishop Landulf II and the
great family to which he belonged; the Cremonese obtained
from Otto III a diploma which infringed their bishop’s fiscal rights and was
soon quashed on that account. The movement was contrary to the imperial policy
by which the bishops, sometimes of German extraction, were the Emperor's best
agents and counter-weights to the restless nobles. Fresh towns, Lodi, Acqui, Piacenza, and Tortona,
had been placed completely under episcopal rule; the whole province of Ravenna
was made subject to its archbishop's authority by Otto III; lesser privileges
in town and country had been continually given piecemeal to the prelates. Yet
in the country-side the expedient was losing its value. Prelates in
difficulties, prelates of the local noble families, were steadily granting
church land by the leases known as libellariae to
the nobles, thereby impoverishing their churches and strengthening the noble
class, and the consequent feudal disorder was only increased by the growing
divergence in interest between the magnates, the capitanei,
and the secundi milites. The
vast and increasing church estates were being consumed by nominal leases and
over-enfeoffment.
Revolt of Ardoin of
Ivrea
Disorder from
this cause was already marked under Otto II; Pope Sylvester, as Abbot of
Bobbio, had vainly striven to check the system in his abbey; it now led to
civil war. Ardoin, Marquess of Ivrea, was
probably a relative of Berengar II, but his sympathies lay with the lesser
nobles. He and they had profited by spendthrift episcopal grants, and came to
bitter feud with Bishop Peter of Vercelli, possibly because he endeavored to
recall them. In 997 they murdered the bishop and burnt the cathedral. Peter’s
fellow-bishops were up in arms against Ardoin,
and Otto III took stringent action. In 998 he enacted that no church libellaria should outlast the grantor’s life.
In 999, in concert with the Pope, he confiscated Ardoin’s lands
and condemned him to a life of penitent wandering. At the same time he
appointed a stout-hearted German, Leo, to the see of
Vercelli, and granted him the counties of Vercelli and Santhia. It was the first grant of entire counties to a
bishopric in Lombardy, although parallel to the powers conferred on the see of Ravenna. But Ardoin resisted
in his castles, and next year, supported by his accomplices, seems even to have
taken the title of king. Otto returned, but was content to drive Ardoin back and to entrust his uprooting to the local
magnates. The embers of the revolt against the Romano-Germanic Empire were left
to glow. Otto’s wishes at this time seem to have turned to the reassertion of
the claims of the Holy Roman Empire in the south. Since Abul-Kasim’s death in his victory over Otto II, the
Saracen raids, although they inflicted misery on Calabria and South Apulia, had
not been in sufficient force to endanger the Byzantine rule. The catapan Calocyrus Delphinas in 983-4 had subdued the Apulian rebels; nor did Otto III show any disposition
to intervene. But the petty frontier states were a different matter. In 983
the Salernitans had driven out Manso of Amalfi, and under their new prince John II,
a Lombard from Spoleto, remained henceforth neutral and disregarded. Their
neighbors, however, Capua, Benevento, Naples and Gaeta, were more important for
Otto. After a romantic pilgrimage to the famous shrine of Monte Gargano, he sent in 999 the Capuan Ademar, new-made Marquess of Spoleto, to Capua, where Laidulf was deposed and Ademar made
prince. At the same time Naples was seized, its Duke John taken captive, and
the Duke of Gaeta was bribed into vassalage. These successes, which once more
effectively enlarged the Empire, did not last, for in 1000 the Capuans drove out Ademar,
substituting Landolf V of the old dynasty,
and John of Naples recovered his state and independence. A short campaign of
Otto himself next year against Benevento gained at most a formal submission
from the Lombard princes. The fact was that the Emperors could never devote
enough energy or men to the subjugation of the south, divergent as it was in
soil, in organization, and in habits of life from the Frank-ruled, feudalized
and more fertile north.
At the time,
indeed, Otto’s throne was rocking under him. He had offended the Romans by
sparing revolted Tivoli, for which too independent neighbor they nourished a
passionate hatred; nor were their desires for their old autonomy and dislike of
the Saxon stranger diminished by his imperial masquerade. In February 1001 they
broke into revolt and blockaded Otto in his palace on the Aventine, at the same
time closing the gates against his troops who were encamped outside the walls
under his cousin, Duke Henry of Bavaria and Hugh of Tuscany. After three days
Otto prepared a desperate sortie, but at the same time Hugh and Henry entered
by treaty with the Romans. Once more they swore fealty, and listened to the
Emperor's reproaches, the best proof of the strong illusion under which he
labored: “Are you my Romans? For your sake I have left my country and my
kindred. For love of you have I abandoned my Saxons and all the Germans, my own
blood. I have led you to the most distant parts of the Empire, where your
fathers, lords of the world, never set foot, so as to spread your name and fame
to the ends of the earth”. And the crowd half believed in the dream. They
dragged their leaders out and threw them before the Emperor. His nobles were
cooler, and under their persuasions he left the Eternal City, where his escort
still remained. It could not be concealed that he had really been driven out by
the rebels.
His case was
nearly desperate. The German magnates were ready to revolt against the dreamer.
St Romuald counseled him to take the cowl.
Yet Otto, though a visionary, was resourceful and resolute. He summoned fresh
forces from Germany, where Henry of Bavaria kept the princes loyal. He asked
once more, and with success, for a Byzantine bride. He vexed Rome whence his
men were extracted, and prepared for a siege. But his strength was exhausted.
On 23 January 1002 he died at Paterno on
the Tiber just as his reinforcements reached him.
All Italy was in
confusion. The Germans were obliged to fight their way northwards with the
corpse. King Ardoin seized the Italian
crown. John Crescentius, son of Crescentius II, ruled Rome as patrician, and Pope
Sylvester, who had loyally followed his pupil, was content to return thither
despoiled of secular power and soon to die. Hugh of Tuscany was already dead,
to the joy of the ungrateful Otto. But the basis of the Holy Roman Empire was
still firm. Bishops and Marquesses as a
rule were faithful to the Saxon house. If Otto's dreams were over, German
supremacy, the fact, remained.
It was not only
in the Lombard troubles under Otto III that signs were apparent of the medieval
evolution of Italy. His contemporary and friend, Doge Pietro Orseolo II of Venice, was making a city-state a
first-rate power at sea. Within a few years Orseolo curbed
and appeased the feuds of the nobles, he effected a reconciliation with
Germany, he reinstated Venice in her favorable position in the Eastern Empire,
and contrived to keep on fair terms with the Muslim world. In 1000 Venice made
her first effort to dominate the upper Adriatic and it was successful for the
time. The Doge led a fleet to Dalmatia, checking the Slav tribes and giving
Venice a temporary protectorate over the Roman towns of the coast. Byzantium was busied in
war nearer home and glad to rely on a powerful friend. She soon had occasion
for Venice’s active help, for the Saracen raids grew once again to dangerous
dimensions. In 1002 the caid Safi came
from Sicily and besieged Bari by land and sea. The catapan Gregory Trachaniotis was rescued by Venice. Orseolo II arrived with his fleet, revictualled the town, and fought a three days'
battle with the Muslims. In the end, worsted on both elements, they retreated
by night. They still wasted Calabria and the whole west coast of Italy, yet
here too they received a severe check in a naval battle near Reggio in 1006, in
which the fleet of the Tuscan trading town of Pisa played the decisive part.
Thus, even before the Holy Roman Empire reached its apogee, the future
city-states of North Italy had made their first entry into international
politics.
In the security
of the frontiers, in the rebirth of civic life, in the resettlement of the
country-side, in the renewal of intercourse and commerce, the success of
the Ottonian rule was manifest. Nor were
the omens inauspicious in the Church. During the wretched times of anarchy a
demoralization, analogous to that of which the career of King Hugh bears
witness among the magnates, had invaded cathedral and cloister. The Papacy
could be the bone of contention for lawless nobles; a great abbey, like Farfa, could be a nest of murder and luxury in the mid
tenth century. Now at any rate, in the north under Alberic and the Ottos, in the Byzantine south, an improvement, slow
and chequered as it might be, had set in.
But in one aim the Ottos had failed, the
extension of the Regnum Italicum over
all Italy. Sardinia, which vegetated apart ruled by her native ‘judges’ under
an all but forgotten Byzantine suzerainty, might be disregarded; but the
separation of the south of the peninsula from the north left the Holy Roman
Empire imperfect. It was a case where geographical and climatic influences
interacted on historical events and made them, so to say, their accomplices in
molding the future. South Italy as a whole was always a more barren land than
the north, more sunburnt, less well-watered, a
land of pasture rather than of agriculture or of intense cultivation, a land of
great estates and sparse inhabitants. Long separated from the main Lombard
kingdom by Roman territory, and protected by their mountain defiles, the Lombards
of Benevento had fallen apart from their northern kinsmen. Charlemagne had not
subdued them; Eastern Rome, by direct conquest and through her client
sea-ports, had exercised a potent influence upon them; the Saracens held
Sicily. Throughout the two centuries from 800 to 1000 the schism of the two
halves of Italy, which Nature had half prescribed, steadily widened. Even what
they had most in common, the tendency to autonomous city-states, took different
embodiment and met a different destiny. The Norman Conquest only concluded and
intensified a probable evolution.
CHAPTER VIIIHENRY I AND OTTO THE GREAT
|