A crown that had to be won
Medieval Germany did not follow the clear rules of father-to-son succession that many kingdoms eventually adopted. The ruler of the Holy Roman Empire was chosen, at least in theory, by the leading nobles of the realm. Some dynasties, such as the Ottonians and Salians, managed to pass the throne to a son for several generations, but each time the princes were expected to approve the choice, and a weak or unpopular heir could be passed over.
That elective element, together with the emperor’s claim to a title blessed by the pope, produced a three-sided contest. The emperor wanted to rule effectively, the princes wanted to protect their own lands and rights, and the papacy wanted freedom from imperial control and, at times, a say over who wore the crown. This article concentrates on that contest and on how the electoral system emerged from it. The general outline of the empire’s institutions is a separate subject.
Emperors and popes
The relationship between emperor and pope was cooperative at first. The early emperors protected the papacy, and the popes crowned them. But disputes soon appeared about who stood above whom, and in the eleventh century they became open conflict.
The central issue was the appointment of bishops and abbots, who held both spiritual office and large estates. Emperor Henry IV and Pope Gregory VII clashed over this in a dispute historians call the Investiture Controversy. The pope excommunicated the emperor, and some German princes used the opportunity to challenge Henry. His journey to Canossa in 1077 to seek absolution is the best-known scene of the era. The compromise that eventually came, the Concordat of Worms of 1122, split the choice of a bishop’s spiritual and temporal roles between church and ruler.
The larger question of papal supremacy did not disappear. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, emperors such as Frederick Barbarossa and Frederick II were drawn into long struggles with popes over northern and southern Italy. Supporters of the papal cause and of the imperial cause became rival factions in Italian cities, often called Guelfs and Ghibellines, and local feuds took on a wider meaning.
The princes’ growing independence
Each clash between emperor and pope created openings for the princes. A prince who supported the emperor could demand privileges in exchange, and one who sided with the pope could weaken the crown. Over time, great nobles and bishops came to hold their lands with extensive rights of justice, coinage and fortification, often confirmed by imperial charters. This was a gradual change that varied by region. In France and England, medieval kingship moved in the opposite direction over the same centuries, with crowns slowly gathering power from the great lords rather than losing it.
The emperor’s resources were mainly drawn from his own family lands, so a ruler from a wealthy family had an advantage. When a dynasty died out or failed, the next king had to build his own base. The crown also had to bargain, and elections were occasions for princes to extract promises.
Double elections and the Interregnum
A contested election could produce two kings at once. One notable case came around 1198, after the death of Henry VI, when one group chose Philip of Swabia and another chose Otto of Brunswick. Pope Innocent III took an active part in judging between the claimants. Otto, whom the pope supported, was later crowned emperor, but he lost the pope’s backing, and his defeat at the Battle of Bouvines in 1214, fighting alongside England against the French king, ended his hopes.
The worst period of uncertainty came after the death of Frederick II in 1250 and the collapse of his dynasty’s authority in Germany. For roughly two decades, rival kings were chosen, some of them foreign princes with little presence in the empire. This is the Interregnum. It ended with the election of Rudolf of Habsburg in 1273, but the memory of disorder strengthened the argument for a clearer procedure.
The imperial electors take shape
By the thirteenth century, a small group of princes had become the chief voters. The idea is often linked to their offices at court: the archbishops of Mainz, Trier and Cologne, and the secular princes who held ceremonial positions such as cupbearer or marshal. The exact process by which the group became fixed is debated, and different explanations stress custom, family interests and papal influence.
The imperial electors were formally defined in the Golden Bull of 1356, issued by Emperor Charles IV. The seven were the three archbishops, the king of Bohemia, the Count Palatine of the Rhine, the duke of Saxony and the margrave of Brandenburg. The text said a majority could decide, that the election would take place at Frankfurt, and that electors’ lands should not be divided. It also gave them considerable privileges, which strengthened them as a body.
Pope or no pope
A related question was whether a king chosen by the electors still needed papal approval to rule as emperor. In 1338, electors meeting at Rhense declared that the candidate chosen by them was king, and could act as emperor, without needing confirmation from Rome. This was a strong statement against papal claims, made during a conflict between Emperor Louis IV and the pope. It did not end the symbolism of a papal coronation, which continued for a long time, but it marked a shift in emphasis. Elsewhere in Europe, coronation rituals and anointing served a similar purpose of presenting a ruler as divinely sanctioned, yet few kingdoms tied the idea so closely to a rival authority in Rome.
What the system produced
The electoral arrangement had clear effects. It ensured that no ruler could take the throne without winning over a small number of powerful men, and it made the emperor dependent on their goodwill. Rulers often sought election of a son as heir during their own lifetime. It also encouraged electors to extract concessions, and it contributed to the fragmented, negotiated character of the empire.
At the same time it gave the system a certain stability. After 1356 the empire largely avoided the kind of prolonged rival-king situation seen earlier, and the Habsburg family eventually provided emperors almost without a break from the fifteenth century. The tension between emperor, princes and popes remained, but the rules for choosing the ruler were by then well understood.