Emperor Lothar III fought his way into Rome to be crowned #OTD, June 4, 1133 in the church of the Lateran by Pope Innocent II.
Nothing about this coronation was smooth. The city of Rome was split between two great aristocratic clans, the Frangipani and the Pierleoni. 🧵
Each had put their candidate on the papal throne, the Frangipani Innocent II and the Pierleoni Anaclet II. Anaclet II held Rome and was allied with Roger II of Sicily, who he had made king. (2/
Innocent II had support in France, the empire, parts of Italy and more important than anything else of Bernhard of Clairvaux, the most eminent churchman in Europe. (3/
Rome was divided. The Pierleoni of Anaclet II held the bridge in Trastevere and the ancient Theatre of Marcellus in the Jewish quarter. The Frangipani main fortress was the Collosseum. (4/.
Lothar had sided with innocent II which meant he had to take Rome from Anaclet II if he wanted to be crowned. He mustered an army that travelled with relative ease down to Rome. It was St. Bernhard who had made that possible by haranguing and harassing the major Italian cities.(5
That meant it became an odd kind of imperial progress. No city was entered, no coronation to king of Italy in Monza or Pavia celebrated. The army sort of snuck down the road, saying please and thank you just trying to get to Rome in one piece. (6/
With the army still only about 2,000 men, the question arose what they were supposed to do when they get there. Sure they were the great German knights, but still no match for the mighty Sicilian Normans. (7/
And that is when they hit a patch of good fortune. King Roger of Sicily suddenly found himself having to fight off a major rebellion. Coincidence, maybe, or some well-placed bags of gold coins from the papal purse. To everyone’s surprise, the rebels were successful. (8/
They gave Roger a bloody nose and he had to shelter on the island of Sicily. No way that he could help Anaclet II now. (9/
Next piece of good news was that upon arrival in Rome the Frangipani allies opened the city gates. Anaclet retired to the right bank of the Tiber protected by the Castel Sant Angelo and the Theatre of Marcellus, whilst Innocent II and his Frangipani allies took the left bank. (10
With Anaclet II holding St. Peter, the coronation could only take place in the Basilica of the Lateran. There Lothar III and his wife Richeza were crowned emperor and empress on June 4th, 1133. (11/
Note the date. It is June and Malaria season is kicking off. Anaclet is still sitting pretty, and Roger II is gradually gaining ground in Southern Italy. (12/
Lothar thinks there is another opportunity to renegotiate the relationship between pope and empire. His offer: a revision of the Concordat of Worms plus the lands of Matilda for the continuation of the campaign. And again St. Bernard put a spanner in the works. (13/
No revision of the Concordat. And as for the lands of Matilda, well you can receive them as a papal vassal against a rent of 100 mark of silver annually, but it remains property of the pope and whoever is Margrave of Tuscany has to do military service for him. (14/
Lothar - as so many times before - prefers the sparrow in his hand to a dove on the roof and takes the offer. The position of Margrave of Tuscany and greatest of Italian lords is passed on to the imperial son-in-law, Henry the Proud, head of the house of Welf.(15/
But it was not enough to make him stay. The ink barely dry on the agreement, Lothar packed his bags and went home. If the pope offers no more than basic service, well, all he gets back in return is basic service. (16/
Lothar’s return was also the end of Innocent II’s stay in Rome. A few weeks later the Pierleoni had regained their positions on the left bank and Innocent had to leave by the same route as 3 years earlier. So, nothing had really changed. (17/
Innocent II will return to Rome, so will emperor Lothar III. The struggle between papacy and empire is by no means over. He will have a fresco painted to commemorate the coronation that will cause a rift between his successor and the mighty emperor Frederick Barbarossa. (18/
For more, check out episode 46 of the History of the Germans Podcast available on Apple podcasts, Spotify and all major platforms. this link takes you straight there: pod.fo/e/110a50
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It is estimated that even an average Florentine banker in 1310 had more ready cash than the emperor Henry VII. These commoners had a lot more money than the aristocrats who ruled their cities. The conflict this caused became known as the wars between Guelphs and Ghibellines 🧵(1/
This difference in financial resources already caused frictions, but the bigger issue was that the aristocratic consuls did not run the city in the interest of the merchants and artisans. (2/
A merchant and artisan may be able to defend himself if need be with a sword, but that does not mean they wanted to fight wars for war’s sake. But war for war’s sake was very much the aristocratic raison d’etre. (3/
The Sicilian Vespers shocked the monarchs of Europe. A popular uprising that pushed out a monarch was something the powerful in western europe did not have to contend with for centuries. It took place on March 30, 1282, but it goes back a lot further 🧵(1/19)
Charles of Anjou, count of Provence and king of Sicily was one of the most ambitious and most successful noblemen of the 13th century. Born the 11th son of king Louis VIII of France, he climbed the ladder to first count and then, with papal support, to king of Sicily. (2/
He is most famous in Germany for wrestling Sicily from the heirs of emperor Frederick II. That had been part of a papal strategy to wipe out the imperial dynasty which culminated in the execution of Konradin, the last of the Hohenstaufen in Naples in1268. (3/
Where are the Habsburgs from?
The Habsburgs have woven a complex myth around the first member of their family to rise to king of the Romans. According to that Rudolf was "poor count" who did not need a treasurer because "he only had barely 5 shillings in bad coin". Let's see🧵(1/
Rudolf was born in 1218 the son of Albert, called the Wise of Habsburg. The Habsburgs were nobles based in the Aargau, today a region in North Switzerland. They were named after their ancestral castle, the Habichtsburg, near Brugg. (2/
At the time, this was part of the duchy of Swabia. The ruling dynasty of Hohenstaufen had also been the dukes of Swabia. As vassals of the emperors, the early Habsburgs were involved in many of Frederick Barbarossa’s and Frederick II’s campaigns. (3/
The history of Bremen starts with the creation of its bishopric in 787 when Charlemagne appoints Willehad as a missionary bishop in the newly conquered Saxon lands.
This bishopric rose to heights before coming crashing down to near insignificance. 🧵(1/
The first upgrade was in 848 when Ansgar, the archbishop of Hamburg had to flee his wooden cathedral before a Viking attack. He got himself elected bishop of Bremen on top of Hamburg, creating the archbishopric of Hamburg-Bremen. (2/
The archbishops of Hamburg-Bremen became an important force in the Christianisation of Scandinavia and the Slavic peoples east of the Elbe River.
But their missionary efforts put them at odds with the Saxon aristocrats who preferred to raid and plunder these lands. (3/
If you have even a passing interest in medieval sculpture you have seen the Donor figures in Naumburg cathedral, in particular Uta von Ballenstedt reproduced in hundreds of pictures. But who was she, who was the guy next to her and who are all these other figures? 🧵(1/
The 12 donors of Naumburg had roles in German history that went well beyond just giving money o build the cathedral and pay one of the greatest medieval artists, the unknown "Master of Naumburg" to have their portrait sculptured. (2/
The earliest person depicted is Adelheid of Gernrode (or Countess Gepa). Adelheid was the daughter of emperor Otto II and his glamorous wife Theorphanu, niece of the emperor of Byzantium. She was the abbess of Quedlinburg and as such a powerful prince in her own right. (3/
The late medieval Hanse was an odd structure and very different to the maritime republics of the Mediterranean. Not because it was dominated by trading cities rather than princes, but because of the way it operated. 🧵(1/
Just compare the Hanseatic cities of Lubeck, Hamburg, Danzig/Gdansk, Riga, Reval/Tallinn with the great Italian maritime republics of Venice, Genoa and Pisa.
Both operated in geographically closed oceans, the Mediterranean and the Baltic and transported goods over long distances
But pretty much everything else was different.
Mediterranean trade was mainly in high value, low weight goods, spices, silk, incense, carpets, glass coming into Western Europe in exchange for silver as well as more pedestrian goods like wine, salt, grain, olives and fish. (3/