Dates and a warning about the title
The Holy Roman Empire is hard to date because it did not have a single founding moment. Many historians point to the coronation of Otto I as emperor in Rome in 962, and others start with Charlemagne’s imperial coronation in 800. The term “Holy” came into regular use later, and the full phrase “Holy Roman Empire” appeared more gradually still. The empire also did not end in the Middle Ages: it lasted until 1806, when Francis II gave up the imperial title. This article covers the medieval part of the story, from Otto to the late fifteenth century, when the empire was already a loose union of territories.
Otto I and the Ottonian empire
Otto I, king of the East Franks (the German-speaking lands), defeated the Magyars at the Lechfeld in 955, a victory that raised his prestige across Christendom. In 962 the pope crowned him emperor. Otto saw himself as the successor to Charlemagne, and he worked to secure the loyalty of the great dukes by relying on bishops and abbots, whom he appointed and endowed with land. Churchmen could not pass lands on to heirs, so this made them more dependable servants than hereditary nobles.
The Ottonian rulers also looked to Italy. Their claim to be emperor was tied to the city of Rome, and they repeatedly crossed the Alps. That Italian focus brought prestige, but it also took kings away from Germany for long periods, which gave local lords room to build their own power.
The Salians and the clash with the papacy
The Salian dynasty took over in the eleventh century. The best-known conflict of the age was the Investiture Controversy, a dispute over who had the right to appoint bishops. Since bishops were both spiritual leaders and major landholders, the stakes were high. Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV fell out in the 1070s. In 1077 Henry traveled to Canossa in northern Italy to seek forgiveness, in a famous scene of royal penance. The fight continued for decades, and it was settled by the Concordat of Worms in 1122, which separated the church’s grant of a bishop’s spiritual office from the ruler’s grant of his lands.
The compromise was a real loss of imperial control over the church, but it did not settle the larger question of how church and state should share authority, which kept arising for centuries.
The Hohenstaufen and the Italian problem
Under the Hohenstaufen family, the empire reached a high point of ambition. Frederick I, called Barbarossa, fought for years to assert imperial rights over the wealthy cities of northern Italy. These cities banded together in leagues, and Frederick suffered a defeat at Legnano in 1176. He remained a powerful ruler and died in 1190 while traveling east on one of the Crusades. His grandson Frederick II ruled both Germany and the kingdom of Sicily, and he spent much of his career in conflict with the papacy.
After Frederick II died in 1250, the line of Hohenstaufen rulers faded, and a period often called the Interregnum followed, during which no king was generally accepted across the realm. The exact start and end are debated, but the usual picture is that between the middle of the thirteenth century and the election of Rudolf of Habsburg in 1273, central authority was very weak. Historians still discuss whether this was a collapse or the continuation of a trend that had been underway for a long time.
Electors, princes and the Golden Bull
By the later Middle Ages the emperor was chosen by election, not by simple inheritance, and a small group of great princes took the leading role. The Golden Bull of 1356, issued by Emperor Charles IV, set out the procedure and named seven imperial electors: three archbishops (Mainz, Trier and Cologne) and four secular rulers, including one of the Bohemian kings, whose realm lay inside the empire. The document gave the electors strong rights in their own lands and reduced the chances of disputed elections. It also confirmed that princes, not the emperor, were the main holders of power in their territories.
This is often described as a sign of imperial decline, though it can be read another way: the Golden Bull gave the empire a clear constitutional rule that lasted for centuries. The empire became less a centralized monarchy and more a structure in which the emperor, princes and cities negotiated.
Why the emperors lost ground
Several explanations are usually offered, and none is accepted as complete.
- The Italian ambitions. Repeated campaigns south of the Alps drained money and attention.
- Dependence on princes. The emperor needed their support to rule, so each concession made them stronger.
- Election. Candidates paid for votes with privileges and land, which weakened the crown’s resources.
- Fragmentation. Hundreds of territories, from large duchies to small free cities and church lands, developed their own courts and laws.
- Rival powers. France, the papacy and the northern Italian cities all had reasons to resist a strong emperor.
By contrast, kingdoms such as France and England were building up royal revenues and officials in the same centuries.
The Habsburgs and the late Middle Ages
The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries saw emperors from several families, including the Luxembourg dynasty, whose members also ruled Bohemia. The Habsburgs, who had gained power in Austria in the late thirteenth century, took the imperial crown regularly from the mid-fifteenth century. They focused more on strengthening their family lands than on rebuilding imperial government. Emperor Maximilian I, who ruled from the end of the fifteenth century, tried reforms including an imperial court and regular assemblies, with only partial success.
Medieval observers did not necessarily think the empire was in decline. They saw it as a unique, God-ordained office, even if its real power was limited. What changed over time was the gap between that ideal and the political reality, in which the emperor’s authority depended largely on his own family territories and the cooperation of the princes.