If any state in the Low Countries got it, I've seen it said that it would most likely be the prince-bishopric of Liège instead of the electorate of Cologne
A Italian candidate for HRE crown
- Thread starter Nuraghe
- Start date
While not exactly a candidate for the title of Holy Roman Emperor, I can see the Duchy of Milan playing a important role in HRE politics if it joins the HRE, maybe as going so far as to be a elector of the HRE.
Utrecht could also be a serious candidate for this ( given its prestige, of being a very ancient seat, dating back to around 707 AD ) without excluding Lorraine ( which could aspire to the title, as a way to protect itself from particularly aggressive neighbors ) and finally there is still Lyon ( place where the kings of Burgundy / Arles were crowned ) and which was not permanently conquered by France until 1311
Last edited:
only reason I suggested Liège was because Cologne was anti-Wittelsbach in Ludwig IV's election, Liège was pro. So it would be a "reward" for loyalty of sorts
I think this is tricky to pull off. The HRE evolved in such a way that the German princes really thought that they were electing the King of Germany. The 'teutonicum' moniker may have originally intended to be derogatory, to imply that the Emperor wasn't a Roman Emperor, but somewhere along the line it was at least partially internalized and the German princes felt that the Emperor was both the Roman Emperor and the King of Germany. Obviously he literally was but I think there was a sense among the German princes that he had to be both and the German King had to be a German so therefore his election should be governed by Germans.
IIRC there were grumblings on that basis which said that the King of Bohemia should not have been an Elector since Bohemia was not a German prince/state so its King should not have a role in selecting the German King. This weird kind of German chauvinism manifests in the way the Empire was administered. As mentioned, the Prince Archbishop of Trier was nominally Arch-chancellor of Burgundy and the Prince Archbishop of Cologne was nominally Arch-chancellor of Italy. So people who were clearly German princes were in theory in charge of Imperial government in Italy and Burgundy. Which only worked because there really wasn't much Imperial government in those Kingdoms. This was then reinforced with Imperial Reform when Italy was not encircled. Which demonstrates the German position that the Reichsitalien should be excluded from participation in the government of the Reich since the original purpose of the Imperial Circles was to elect members to the Reichsregiment.
This is all to say that an Italian Elector would require a fundamental reshaping of the structure and conception of the Empire in away that really runs contrary to the general trendline from the 14th century onwards that concentrated the Imperial state in practice in Germany as a German institution to the exclusion of Burgundy, Italy and even Bohemia. The issue of Bohemia is perhaps a quirk that resulted from Charles IV carving it out of the HRE to the supposed benefit of his own dynasty (his bulls as Emperor basically put Bohemia outside the HRE as Bohemia was given an independent Chancellery and the the right to regulate it own succession free of Imperial oversight with the King of Bohemia's only remaining attachment to the Empire effectively being that he was Arch-Cupbearer and thus ex-officio a Prince Elector). But in Italy as other people have mentioned, there are local forces at play; the opposition of the Papacy, the power of the communes, the relative weakness of the feudal nobility.
To effect this change I would think the POD would have to be relatively early. Something that shifts the balance of power in the Empire slightly and allows things to build to a point where it would be seen as logical/natural for there be at least one (or more) Italian princes made an Elector. But Imperial Italy and the Empire as a whole would probably look very different as a result. Maybe Henry VII is early enough to get there. But I wonder if it would have to be earlier, during the Hohenstaufens or during the interregnum immediately after.
IIRC there were grumblings on that basis which said that the King of Bohemia should not have been an Elector since Bohemia was not a German prince/state so its King should not have a role in selecting the German King. This weird kind of German chauvinism manifests in the way the Empire was administered. As mentioned, the Prince Archbishop of Trier was nominally Arch-chancellor of Burgundy and the Prince Archbishop of Cologne was nominally Arch-chancellor of Italy. So people who were clearly German princes were in theory in charge of Imperial government in Italy and Burgundy. Which only worked because there really wasn't much Imperial government in those Kingdoms. This was then reinforced with Imperial Reform when Italy was not encircled. Which demonstrates the German position that the Reichsitalien should be excluded from participation in the government of the Reich since the original purpose of the Imperial Circles was to elect members to the Reichsregiment.
This is all to say that an Italian Elector would require a fundamental reshaping of the structure and conception of the Empire in away that really runs contrary to the general trendline from the 14th century onwards that concentrated the Imperial state in practice in Germany as a German institution to the exclusion of Burgundy, Italy and even Bohemia. The issue of Bohemia is perhaps a quirk that resulted from Charles IV carving it out of the HRE to the supposed benefit of his own dynasty (his bulls as Emperor basically put Bohemia outside the HRE as Bohemia was given an independent Chancellery and the the right to regulate it own succession free of Imperial oversight with the King of Bohemia's only remaining attachment to the Empire effectively being that he was Arch-Cupbearer and thus ex-officio a Prince Elector). But in Italy as other people have mentioned, there are local forces at play; the opposition of the Papacy, the power of the communes, the relative weakness of the feudal nobility.
To effect this change I would think the POD would have to be relatively early. Something that shifts the balance of power in the Empire slightly and allows things to build to a point where it would be seen as logical/natural for there be at least one (or more) Italian princes made an Elector. But Imperial Italy and the Empire as a whole would probably look very different as a result. Maybe Henry VII is early enough to get there. But I wonder if it would have to be earlier, during the Hohenstaufens or during the interregnum immediately after.
How about the Duchy of Milan, the Duchy of Ferrara, and the House of Savoy join up together by marriage alliances? I can easily see them feeling envious of the success of Venice and linking up together to assert their power in northern Italy.
I quite agree with your analysis, but I would just like to make a small clarification, namely that in the imagination of the Italian ruling class of the time ( which should not be taken lightly from the 13th to the 15th century ) this idea of a local electorate originally had to be a compromise solution between the two typical tendencies of the region ( the autonomist one which did not want to have anything to do with the imperial authority and the one which actively sought the jurisdictional umbrella of the HRE ) furthermore this solution had been further validated, by The sudden absence of the main actor of the peninsula ( the Papacy ) which, no longer being able to exercise its role as a balance needle, further aggravated a pre-existing situation of political chaos in the region, which is why many exponents of the Italian intelligentsia looked with renewed hope to the Imperial attempts at creation / reform of some form of "" central government "" in the region, especially keeping in mind that the Emperors of the period spent a lot of time locally ( and even held their court in Rome itself for months at a time ) which did further increase expectations dramatically, finally it must be said that Henry VII, Albert I, Ludwig IV themselves were not so immune to the charm of the idea, given that they gave it more than a simple thought, considering that it would It was an ingenious way to incorporate the region into the governmental apparatus of the HRE, but without the use of force, and at the same time strengthening and legitimizing the actions of the Ghibelline faction, aka the pro-imperial party
to conclude I would just like to point out this thing, that technically the Italians had no problem with an originally German emperor, but their real complaint was another : if HRE is composed of the following parts, Germany ( where the emperor and the most important princes ) Burgundy / Arles ( an almost non-entity in this period, as a component kingdom of the Empire ) then followed by the church ( headed by the Pope, who legitimized the rise of a sovereign to the role of Caesar, as well to be the leader of the Guelph party ) and finally Italy (which legally held the two most important crowns, the iron and imperial one) because we ( Italians ) cannot have a say in the management of the res publica of the Empire ( especially after the Papacy has become a "French puppet" ) ?, this was the real thorny issue between the relationships between Italian potentates and the HRE, that is, understanding what role the most prestigious kingdom had within the imperial system, a theme that continued until Max I, who with his imperial reforms of 1495 , had to painfully come to terms with his inability to exercise any type of imperial government on the peninsula and therefore abandon his ideas of expanding the reforms to Italy too, leaving the Italian princes in a sort of legal limbo within the functions of the Reich
Last edited:
I can't speak too much to the Italian perspective in the period in question (seems like 13-14th centuries) so I would defer on that issue. I guess my question is just that from Italian side, the viability of building up an Imperial administration in Imperial Italy when there's a faction there (Guelphs) which were anti-Imperial seems questionable. But I suppose in some ways maybe its not all that different from the movement among German princes to limit the Emperor's authority in favor a more collegial form of government and shared sovereignty. Though I still think it would require tweaking the politics of the Guelphs so that they're more explicitly focused as anti-Emperor while remaining pro-Imperial. Though as the intelligentsia I get the impression that its somewhat muddled. Dante condemned Frederick II in the Inferno but then he seems to have pro-Imperial sentiments in later writings (condemning Rudolf for not coming to Italy).
As for Italian asperations to have a role in the Empire, again, I would defer to you on what the sentiment south of the Alps was towards the Empire. My thinking was just that from the German perspective there may be reticence to bring in one or more Italian princes to the administration of the Empire as Electors and Imperial office holders. I guess there would have to be some kind of trans-alpine solidarity such that the German princes could see themselves as making common cause with the Italians to regulate/limit the power of the Emperor and thus make the Germans willing to bring some Italian princes into the system. So that's where I'm skeptical, I'm not sure how achievable that is. If the desire is just one sided ie the aspirations of the Italians, then I think Germans would want to just ignore them and Emperor would have no interest in conceding anything to anyone.
you actually got the point right, that is, the complex relationship that existed in Italy between local potentates and the central authority, and the ease with which political actors changed coats ( going from the Guelph party to the Ghibelline party and vice versa ) in a complicated tug-of-war tightrope between the autonomist push and the search for Imperial protection / support ( which could be compared to the aspirations of the German princes to limit imperial power ) as regards the question of Italian aspirations for a role of greater weight in the government of the HRE, it must be considered that the major exponents of this ideology were the most ardent Ghibellines ( mainly the lords of the cities of the Po Valley and the last remaining princely possessions ( such as Monferrato ) who also had important links beyond the Alps ( both with the German princes and above all with the families in struggle for the imperial title, especially Wittelsbach and Habsburg ) even if the great interregnum had weakened their abilities to coordinate with their German counterparts, and the fall of Naples to the Anjou had further complicated their situation ( for them the transfer of the Papacy to Avignon was a second rebirth from a political point of view, because it also coincided with the fracture of the Guelph party into two opposing factions ( the black Guelphs and the white ones, with the former pushing for a search for a compromise between the Papacy and Emperor) finally it must be said that Milan, the most active from this point of view ( together with the Roman exponents ) among the pro-imperial ones, had tried to cultivate as many alliances as possible with the German political realities, succeeding in its aim at times, to conclude , I know that the main proposal from the Italian Ghibellines was to expand the number of electors to 9 members, obviously including their representative and an important princely family of Germany ( if I'm not mistaken, the Welfs were proposed, so that they could act as a counterbalance to the Saxony and Luxembourg Bohemia ) and it seems that the court of Ludwig IV really liked this idea ( but he wanted to discuss it again after having resolved the threat posed by the anti-King Charles IV, and then went to Italy to deal with the problem of Guelph Tuscany ( a serious headache for his Italian plans, it's also the place that "caused" Henry VII's death, so winning it would have been a huge propaganda boost for his government )
Would the possibility of a Burgundian candidate be unlikely enough that it could just be brought up and dismissed in this thread? Since it's been mentioned as a non-entity. What if there was just a really hyper-competent and ambitious guy there, a Joey Smallwood for the HRE if you will.
Interesting. I'm not a medievalist so I'm not terribly familiar with the intricacies of the guelph ghibelline conflict. It sometimes seems like the overarching 'conflict' was just taken on by local feuding families as a way to perpetuate their pre-existing struggles ie that the two sides weren't always made up of 'true believers' in their side's supposed cause. I did imagine Monferrato as probable candidate for an Elector since it has one of the oldest lineages in northern Italy, both dynastically and territorially so that makes sense. But regardless if the connections were there and at least some number of German princes were convinced of the advantages to them of adding an Italian Elector then I could see it happening.
So in that case I wonder what the Electors would look as a body if an Italian is added to their ranks. One of the privileges of the Electors was their ability to assemble as a body on their own initiative without needing the consent of the Emperor (the Reichstag had to be convened by the Emperor). But how often would an Italian travel north of the alps if the German Electors are primarily assembling to address 'local' issues ie something pertaining solely to the Kingdom of Germany. OTOH maybe if the Electors span outside of the Kingdom of Germany and have special privileges their lack of 'German-ness' detaches them somewhat from the government of the Empire and they become more specialized in solely the Imperial election and capitulation, defining/circumscribing the Emperor's prerogatives. So the remit of the Electoral assembly would be the whole Empire by (Germany, Italy and Burgundy) but the Reichstag would still seemingly be limited to Germany so it or maybe an ATL Reichsregiment could become a more important vehicle for Imperial government in Germany. But I guess that all depends on the form that Imperial reform (circles, legal reform etc) takes when it inevitably happens later on. Unless you're imaging Imperial Reform happening much earlier alongside the addition of the Italian elector?
regarding a Canossa family with descendants ( albeit through Matilda's marriage ) and a Burgundian representative as possible electors, it would serve at least a Pod in the first decades of the 11th/12th century, but this could drastically change the course of the development of the HRE, because it would influence be it the survival of the Salians ( who had their main power base in Burgundy / Franconia ) or the development of the Staufer family, considering the importance that Frederick I gave to his coronation in Arelate, without forgetting the continuation of the investiture controversy and the conflict between the Frankish party ( pro-Salians, it is proto-Ghibellines ) and the Saxon one, led by the Welfs ( which tied themselves to the papal policies and became the Guelph faction ), now technically, nothing prevents a political exponent of royal Burgundy from making his way into the hierarchies of the HRE, I can for example mention Lorraine, who was notoriously a Staufer loyalist, considering that the original block of voters was not stabilized until 1257, albeit unofficially, the possibilities are there, but the changes should be taken into account
Unless Burgundia is exceptionally centralised for the time, it simply doesn't have the resources needed to produce a stable line of Emperors. Traditional Burgundy also is even more distant from Germany than Italy is, and exposed to external pressure (France and Aquitaine). If you mean Early Modern Burgundy (traditional Lotharingia), the same concerns apply, except now it's Italy that is even more out of reach (and while only France is a threat, it also is closer by).
I agree again with your ideas, actually for an Italian it would be quite difficult ( but not impossible ) to constantly cross the Alps to participate in every meeting of their fellow voters ( depending on where the meeting takes place ), in particular if they concern purely German issues, it may be that the constituency here evolves as an originally consultative body that assists the Emperor for matters of supranational importance ( outside of local problems, I will try to give two random examples, there is a serious ecclesiastical controversy to be designated between Trento and Aquileia, given that they are two entities belonging to different kingdoms, the electoral college comes into play to assist / advise the Emperor in managing this, or there is an unclear inheritance issue that crosses both sides of the Alps ) and which legally validates his policies, as well as balance its weight in the imperial government ( or in case of absence and regency they take his place ), now if I'm not mistaken the Otl Golden Bull itself was certainly considered a clear imperial reform ( albeit considered incomplete ) for the time, but since you're mentioning the diet ( 1 ), the army and the system of the imperial circles, I am sure that they too will be implemented long before Otl ( there is evidence that Max, for his reforms, was largely based on previous projects of Albert II and Sigismund I, among which the administrative subdivision of the the empire into local entities ( aka the Kries ) to facilitate their government, therefore it is believed that a broad program of reform policies will follow the drafting of this ATL Golden Bull, also because a party that in OTL stole enormous quantities of resources and time has been addressed with partial success ( I am obviously talking about the various attempts by the imperial side to forcefully impose any form of central government / authority on the peninsula, coming directly from above, which in this scenario is "resolved" with a compromise solution )
P.s
in fact, now that I think about it, Monferrato would be ( together with Milan, which naturally allows control of almost the entire Po Valley, as well as being the richest and most populous city in the region, finally its archbishopric is a very important political player at a local level, but this would imply having to deal again with a possible umpteenth Lombard league or with the Papacy ) a perfect candidate for the role, for various reasons, the first being its prestigious lineage, its geographically strategic role ( it is one of the main strongholds for accessing the rest of the peninsula ) and in its vicinity there is the largest quantity of minor HRE fiefdoms ( mainly imperial counts, which varied between 250/300 in total ) of the region, therefore he would be an ideal candidate also because he could be considered " fairly neutral " by other Italian political entities
1 ) that technically speaking some of them were held in Italy, see the two organized in Roncaglia by Frederick I, or those presided over by his nephew a few decades later
@isabella @Kellan Sullivan
@hirsch91 @Evil Crusader
Last edited:
Naturally, I am of the opinion that the interruption of the Ottonians' systematic practice of involving the German aristocracy in their Italian campaigns ( giving them possessions to govern on site ) was one of the most important "mistakes" for the failure to develop a lasting imperial identity in the HRE ( which also sees the princes actively engaged in "managing / supervising" Italy ) certainly the first Salians / Staufen tried to bring this practice back into vogue ( but with disappointing results in most cases ) ultimately deciding on a divergent solution in governing the two constituent parts of the HRE, which contributed to further distancing the "administrative systems" of the two kingdoms ( Italy and Germany ) also due to the fact of having to deal with different local problems ( the powerful German nobility on the one hand, and municipal development combined with the clash with the Papacy on the other ) but technically speaking a fairly skilled Emperor both militarily and politically, and with a solid power base, could exercise considerable influence in both parts of the Reich ( a pact that tried to obtain results with the policy of small steps ) even well into the 15th century ( just look at Sigismondo, who despite his thousand problems had managed to exercise a fair amount of authority in royal Italy, even after the further deblace of the imperial influence caused by the governments of Wenceslaus and Robert of the Palatinate ), therefore " only " two things would be needed : the first is a less chaotic political-dynastic situation in the HRE, the second is the continuous participation of the German aristocracy in imperial politics in Italy (complete with mixed marriages with the Frankish - Lombard local ruling class ) to facilitate the inclusion of an Italian prince in the electoral college of the Reich ( which in turn further validates the empire's claim to " Romaness " ( both against papal criticism and against the Rhomanoi ) given that it would no longer be valid to say that the most important decisions of the Reich are an exclusive prerogative of the German princes alone )
@ Madhukar_Shah I think this part of the discussion might be vaguely interesting to you 😜
Last edited:
I think you have the right idea that the creation of the Italian electorate has to begin before the Golden Bull. I do think if the Canossas survive they have a great opportunity to become electors because they likely accumulate so much power that their exclusion becomes impossible. Additionally, if Matilda's successors maintain good relations with the Pope, this could perhaps be something that is being pushed by the Pope or maybe after an interregnum in which the Pope's candidate wins, one of the concessions is that the Pope's favorite Italians, the Canossa, become electors. Alternatively, I think you go with an Italian who is a periphery Italian. Like a Montferrat that gains Burgundian lands or Provence or something along those lines and is a view as a Burgundian-Italian elector instead of just an Italian. I do like Montferrat because they have the prestige of being Palaiologoi, which should give them a little more edge.
I fully agree with your ideas, especially regarding the Canossa family, who if they survived would certainly enter the pool of voters, also because they have numerous factors to their advantage ( the main one is their state property in Italy, the largest among the regional nobility, followed by we have papal support, and family ties with the Lorraines and Salians, furthermore if Matilda ended up producing an heir with Godfrey the Hunchback, said prince would inherit both his mother's and father's domains in Lorraine, making it impossible for Henry IV and his sons to ignore him or antagonize him unnecessarily ) now Monferrato would also be a worthy candidate for the role ( also having important links with various ruling families ( in particular the Capetians and the Stauffen ) but also the prestige of belonging to one of the oldest families in Italy and in front line regarding the Crusader movement ( which allowed him to build important ties first with the Konmenos and then with the Paleologos ) without forgetting that I am the greatest exponent of the Ghibelline faction among the Italian princes, finally I believe that even a possible Duke of Spoleto could be considered for the role ( especially in a scenario where the Normans fail to create a unified kingdom south of the Papal States )
Very curious side note on the Italian situation of the 14th century, which concerns a possible interesting development, namely the creation of a Luxembourg fiefdom in the region, let's take a small step back, i.e. to immediately after the death of Henry VII and the subsequent disputed election between Habsburg and Wittelsbach ( in this scenario we must look at the political actions of John I of Bohemia, who managed to skilfully juggle between the two factions, also thanks to the excellent ties close with the Parisian court and in particular with Philip VI, which allowed him to play on multiple fronts ) so much so that he received the consent of Pope John XXII for the creation of his personal fiefdom in Lombardy in 1329 ( 1 ), this gave rise to many military campaigns in Italy, in particular than 1331 and 1333, which even saw the participation of the King of France ( these were also the first trips and military expeditions of the future Charles IV in the region, in which I also participate in the failed campaign to free Lucca from Pisan control, in the meantime Charles took the time to found the nearby fortress and subsequent city of MonteCarlo, and near Modena in October 1332, the young Charles achieved his first military success, fun fact in those years Charles met Petrarca for the first time during his visit to Mantua ) now imagining that these Luxembourg incursions into the peninsula are actually successful ( very difficult ) this would force Charles to have to review the position of the Italian kingdom within the imperial apparatus, from here he could start another possible development for the formation of an Italian representative among the constituency ( I don't even rule out that it could be created by giving it to a Luxembourg cadet, as happened for Brandenburg in OTL, even if it would cause quite a bit of controversy and even possible conflicts ), but I would like to explore this hypothesis further after further reading on the topic, so for now just take it as a curiosity
@Kellan Sullivan @Andristan @Madhukar_Shah @isabella @Vitruvius
1 ) the capital chosen by John for the Lordship of Luxembourg in Italy was the city of Parma
@Kellan Sullivan @Andristan @Madhukar_Shah @isabella @Vitruvius
1 ) the capital chosen by John for the Lordship of Luxembourg in Italy was the city of Parma
Last edited:
I wanted to expand a little on the part concerning the emperors of the 14th century and their relationship with Rome ( understood as a city ) especially after my latest discoveries on the matter, as we all know three sovereigns were crowned in the City : respectively Henry VII in 1312, Louis IV in 1328, and finally Charles IV in 1355, while the Pope was in Avignon, this detail contributed to strengthening an already pre-existing element, as a valid alternative to papal legitimation, namely the importance of the recognition of the popular will for the aspiring Emperor ( a practice already conceived and attempted during the first experience municipality of the City in the 12th century, when there were two attempts made by the Roman Senate to convince first Conrad III of Swabia in 1148 and then subsequently Frederick the Barbarossa in 1153, to come to Rome to obtain the imperial title through acclamation of the Roman people, bypassing the Pope ( 1 ) this phenomenon contributed particularly to the classicizing discourse that the Italian Ghibelline authors used to describe the Imperial presence in Rome, in particular in the numerous sources that speak of the stay in the city of Henry VII and Louis IV ( given that both remained in the Eternal City for several months and presided over numerous assemblies with the Roman people on the Capitoline Hill ( 2 ) before making their official entry into the Eternal City, the aspiring Augustus were welcomed by the Roman people outside the city walls, and then escorted in procession ( this practice was a clear re-enactment of the adventus ceremony, which expressed the consent of the people and thus legitimized the power of the Emperor ) who after being led in triumph to the Capitoline Hill, they were acclaimed by the people as worthy heirs of the Caesars of the past, and therefore able to accept the burden of the Imperium and work to restore the Res Publica, this political development further asserted itself under the reign of Frederick II, who, even if he had never set foot in Rome again after 1220, with his actions had given new life to the Italian pro-imperial current ( particularly from an ideological point of view, given which provided a valid alternative to the concept of empire of papal derivation, skillfully modeling this ideology on the classical Emperors ) it is therefore important to see what he did after his victory against the Lombard league in 1237, when he decided to send the conquered booty to Rome to the league so that it could be displayed ( against the Pope's opinion ) in the Capitoline Hill as a sign of his imperial triumph, complete with a letter in which he stated that it was a gift for the people and the Roman Senate, to which he was deeply devoted and which he wanted to restore with his actions, the past greatness of the city , in turn the subsequent transfer of the Papacy to Avignon, provided a further incentive to the affirmation of this current of thought, which for the first time was actually put into practice, with the visit of Henry VII in the Urbe, given that with the Pope's absence, the traditional acts of imperial submission to the pontiff were lacking ( such as genuflection and the kissing of the feet, or even the coronation itself in St. Peter's, currently held by the troops of Robert of Anjou and allies ) this allowed Henry to have the final say on how to manage the imperial coronation ( 3 ) , creating the conditions for obtaining a legitimation different from the ordinary one, after seeing the impossibility of being crowned in the Basilica, Henry decided to summon all the Roman aristocrats, the Italian Ghibbelines in his procession and the cardinals sent by the Pope, to find a solution to this problem, and it is here that we see for the first once used by an Emperor the political ideas of the reformed SPQR, to guarantee himself official legitimation ( to guarantee greater support he was once again carried in triumph, along the places that had made the history of imperial Rome ( 4 ) so as to further associate himself with his predecessors, and as well as renewing the tradition of distributing the curules /magistrate rank to his commanders and elect new senators ( as he did with Louis of Savoy, and finally crowned in the Lateran, on the day of the patronal feast of Saint Peter and Paul ) same thing then used by Louis IV during his stay and coronation in Rome ( although actually with some differences, he managed to get crowned in St. Peter's, overcoming the resistance of Robert of Anjou ( who had once again gone to the city to prevent his imperial entry ) thanks to the captain of the people Sciarra Colonna ( who had been elected by the senate as its representative ) and even install an anti-Pope, then he headed back to the Capitoline Hill to administer justice and the city government with the senate following him ( complete with a mint that minted coins that depicted him administering the Empire in the Rome and surrounded by the senate or in other historical places of the city, with the aim of detaching his royal right from papal control ) , however with Charles IV there was a completely different situation, given that he decided to obey the Pope, who had asked him not to stay in the city longer than necessary after his coronation ( which Charles maintained, remaining in Rome only one day, between the discontent and popular indignation, who had hoped that he would follow the same practice as his predecessors, contravening the Pope, I think it would be interesting to see what Charles would have done if he had remained in the Urbe ) now all this would serve to make people understand how the political ideal of the Empire in Italy in this period was extremely relevant, both among the Emperors and in large sections of the local intelligentsia, and it is therefore not impossible to see a future Caesar, wanting to include this movement in his political project for the administration of the HRE
1 ) already in 1305 the representatives of the Roman Senate had sent emissaries to the Pope, to ask him to return to the city, subtly threatening him that otherwise they would independently create an Emperor
2 ) where the senatorial palace was built, it is therefore the fulcrum of municipal power in the city
3 ) it must be said that even in Milan he found himself in a situation where he could influence his coronation, so much so that he had a new version of the iron crown created, which was clearly inspired by the classic ones (in laurel)
4 ) in this procession and according to tradition, he swore the oath to the Romans several times
@John Fredrick Parker
Last edited: