10) Otto III, Henry II (and, in passing, the Second Coming of Jesus Christ), 983–1024
- Created by: Sammy98Jayne
- Created on: 08-01-18 22:39
The Religious Stance of Otto III and Henry II
The reigns of Otto III and Henry II represent a peak in the rise of sacral kingship. Both seemed to be genuinely devout, for example Otto III was known to write many letters to the saints and holy men, and was also a vigorous supporter of missionary work in the east.
Henry II was known for his mini city of God. He founded a new and grand bishopric at Bamberg in East Franconia. The city had a cathedral, a large Benedictine monastery and several colleges of secular canons. The most significant of these churches was the Benedictine Abbey. It was believed Jesus would rule in Bamberg during his second coming, and this is one theory why Henry didn't have any sons as he was keeping it open for Jesus to rule. Henry also undertook a pilgrimage 1022 to the most famous shrine of the Archangel Michael in Monte Gargano in Apulia. He gave religious communities many outstanding artworks, including various vestments, like the 'star-cloak'.
It's questioned whether their religious convictions informed their policies as rulers.
Otto III - Five Points of Controversy
The period of Otto III's majority has been the subject of much debate.
- He spent a lot of time in Italy, especially in his last 3 years when he was there almost continuously.
- He was the first emperor to secure the election of a non-Roman pope. He appointed his brother Bruno (Gregory V), and then his tutor, Gerbert of Reims (Sylvester II).
- He built a fortified palace at the top of Palatine Hill during his 2nd Italian expedition.
- He introduced many Roman/Byzantine customs into the rituals of his court and was crticised for it.
- His actions seem to have generated much discontent in Germany, especially in Saxony and Thuringia, leading some to believe that if he had not died when he did, there would have been a major rebellion against him. Some sources seem to claim there was a rebellion during the end of his reign, but this could be a 12th century invention.
Percy Schramm’s Interpretation
Schramm's interpretation of Otto III's reign written in 1929 still defines debates about the period. He argued that Otto envisaged a total reorganisation of the Ottonian realm which had 3 elements:
- The subordination of the papacy to imperial authority.
- The abandonment of itineration in favour of the establishment of Rome as the permanent capital of a renewed empire.
- The redefinition of the empire as a multi-ethnic state where all peoples would have equal status (the saxons would lose the privileged status they had enjoyed under the Liudolfing kings, for example).
Schramm suggests that Otto III was attempting a revival of the Roman Empire using artistic materials and literacy to build his theory. Although the general evidence is very ambiguous making it difficult to tell what Otto III was doing.
Other Explanations
Some less extreme ways of explaining Otto III's actions include:
- Italy needed serious attention as no Ottonian male had been there since his father Otto II had died there. One of his regents, his mother Theophano, had visited Rome but was only able to issue documents in her own name rendered in a masculine form.
- Otto III resorted to the appointment of non-Roman popes because the situation had got so bad. This was risky as the popes lacked the local connections they needed to give their authority substance. Their reigns were short and much troubled.
- The construction of the fortified palace on Palatine Hill seems to have been necessary because Otto III had so few supporters in the city and Palatine Hill was the most defensible part of the city.
- There is no evidence to suggest the palace was intended as a long-term administrative centre or that he intended to make Rome his capital.
- The conspiracies against Otto III can be explained as a product of his failure to exert his presence in the north in his final 3 years. In the absence of access to a king, there was growing resentment at the failure of the king to do the most basic parts of his job.
A Better Interpretation?
There are 3 items which suggest that Otto III was trying to reform the papacy's relationship with the empire, but in a different way:
- The name chosen by Gerbert when he became pope, Sylvester, was used because of Sylvester I who according to legend had cured Emperor Constantine and received the 'Donation of Constantine' (a forgery which the papacy used to assert its claim to territorial jurisdiction in central Italy and the West). So, the adoption of the name suggests a desire to address issues to do with the basis of papal power.
- Otto adopted the titles 'servant of Jesus Christ and august emperor of the Romans according to the will of God our Saviour and liberator’, and later ‘servant of the apostles’. It's crucial to note that the pope was the ‘servant of the servants of God’. It seems there was a conscious attempt to imply that the emperor's position in Christendom was in some way parallel to the pope's.
- The opening words of a controversial charter implied a desire to re-build papal power and resources. Otto's aim seems to have been to turn the papacy into a loyal ally in the same way many bishops and archbishops had done.
But it's difficult to say what Otto's aims were because he died when he was just 21. It's hard to say what he would have gone on to do once he had secured his power. Although it doesn't seem as though Otto had a grand scheme.
Did Henry II Change Direction?
Historians following Schramm's interpretation go on to say that Henry II responded to the hostility generated by Otto III's programme of imperial renewal by retreating from the imperial pretensions of his predecessor. He did put off going to Rome until 1014 for the imperial title, but their argument rests on 2 mistaken assumptions. One is an inflated idea of what Otto III was attempting to achieve, and the other was a failure to appreciate the weakness of Henry's position during the first half of his reign.
His succession to the throne was unexpected. As a Duke of Bavaria, he had a strong power base in the south-east, but there were other contenders for the throne. 8 months of negotiation was required before he could secure the recognition of all the stem duchies. He faced many rebellions to begin with and faced a feud with the Polish ruler.
His reign was punctuated with many conflicts with the Poles in the marches. He appears to have lost a large part of land to them. So, he was in no position to continue with Otto III's programme of imperial renewal in the first half of his reign. But, it appears he did intend to continue with Otto's work but the Poles got in the way as he did eventually go to Rome to be made emperor.
Continued
The imperial coronation was accompanied by the re-assertion of the imperial programme developed by Otto II and Otto III. Henry began discussions with pope Benedict VIII as to how the 2 heads of Christendom might work together to bring about a general reform of the Church in Germany and Italy. These discussions resulted in a joint synod held at Pavia in 1022. It had been long implied that the Pope and Henry were working together to renew Christendom.
The reign also saw the continuation of visual imagery that had been developed to fashion the Ottonians as emperors. Imperial propaganda seems to have been worse under Henry than it had been for Otto.
Comments
No comments have yet been made