Holy Roman Empire , German Holy Roman Empire , Latin Sacrum Romanum Imperium , the separate land complex in west and Central Europe , which was first governed by Franconian and then from German kings for 10 centuries (800–1806). (For the history of the areas that are at different times from the rich , see France ; Germany ; Italy .)
How was the Holy Roman Empire formed?
Although the term "Holy Roman Empire" was not used until much later, the empire is Carl the Large back , the 768 take control of the Franconian took over. The close relationships of papalism on the Franks and their increasing alienation from the Eastern Roman Empire led 800 for the coronation of Charlemagne through Pope Leo III. As "Roman" emperor.
Where was the Holy Roman Empire?
The Holy Roman Empire was located in western and central Europe and included parts of what is now France , Germany and Italy .
What was the Holy Roman Empire known for?
The Holy Roman Empire ruled much of western and central Europe from the 9th to the 19th centuries. It envisioned the dominion of Christianity established in the tradition of ancient Roman Empire and featured a strong papal authority off.
Why did the Holy Roman Empire fall?
The power of the Holy Roman Emperor was gradually dismantled, beginning with the Investiture Dispute by the 11th and 16th centuries the empire was so decentralized that it was little more than a loose federation was. The empire ended in 1806 when Franz II . His title as Holy Roman Emperor rich in view of ascent Napoleons to power abdicated .
Nature of realm
The exact term Sacrum Romanum Imperium dates as late as 1254, although the term Holy Empire dates back to 1157, and the term Roman Empire was used from 1034 to refer to the lands under the rule of Konrad II . To call. The term "Roman Emperor" is older and comes from Otto II. (Deceased 983). However, this title was not used by Otto II's predecessors Charlemagne (or Charles I) to Otto I, who simply used the expression imperator augustus ("August Kaiser") without a territorial addition. The first title Charlemagne used immediately after his coronation in the year 800 is:"Charles, the quietest Augustus, crowned by God, the great and peaceful Emperor, who rules the Roman Empire.” This clumsy formula was soon deprecated.
These conceptual questions reveal some of the problems associated with the nature and early history of the empire. It can be viewed as a political institution, or viewed from the standpoint of political theory, or in context history of Christianity as secular counterpart of a world religion. The history of the empire must not coincide with the history of its constituent Kingdoms of Germany and Germany confused or identified Italy , although they are clearly related. The constituent territories retained their identity; The emperors wore the crowns of their kingdoms in addition to the imperial crown. Finally, while none of the previous emperors of Otto I had assumed the imperial title until actually being crowned by the Pope in Rome , after Charles V was none emperors in this sense, although all laid claim to the imperial dignity as if duly crowned and elected . Despite this and others Anomalies was the empire at least in Medieval by popular consent along with the Papacy the most important institution in Western Europe.
Theologians, lawyers, popes, ministers, rulers, rebels like Arnold of Brescia and Cola di Rienzo , literati like Dante and Petrarch and the practitioners, members of the high nobility on whom the emperors relied, saw the empire in a different light and had their own ideas of origin, function and justification. Among these heterogeneous and often irreconcilable views, it can be said that three prevail:(1) the papal theory, according to which the empire was the secular arm of the church, set up by the papacy for its own ends and therefore answerable to the pope and in the last resort to be disposed of by him; (2) the Imperial or Frankish theory, the conquest and Hegemony as the source of the Emperor's power and authority more emphasized and after which he was directly responsible to God; and (3) popular or Roman theory ('the people' in this phase is synonymous with nobility, and in this case Roman nobility), according to which the empire after the tradition of the Roman law a Delegation was of power by the Roman people. Of the three theories, the last was the least important; it was apparently directed against the pope, whose constitutive role it implicitly denied, but it was also a specifically Italian reaction against the dominance of Frankish and German elements in practice.
It is also important to distinguish between the universalist and localist conceptions of the empire, which have been the source of considerable controversy among historians. According to the former, the empire was a universal monarchy, a “commonwealth of the whole world, whose sublime unity transcended every minor distinction”; and the emperor “was entitled to the obedience of Christendom.” According to the latter, the emperor had no ambition for universal dominion; his policy was limited in the same way as that of every other ruler, and when he made more far-reaching claims his object was normally to ward off the attacks either of the pope or of the ByzantineKaiser. According to this view, the origin of the empire can also be explained by specific local circumstances rather than by distant theories.