Rev. Alban Butler (1711–73). Volume VII: July. The Lives of the Saints. 1866.
July 15St. Henry II., Emperor
A.D. 1024. ST. HENRY, surnamed the Pious and the Lame, was son of Henry, duke of Bavaria, and of Gisella, daughter of Conrad, king of Burgundy, and was born in 972. He was descended from Henry, duke of Bavaria, son of the emperor Henry the Fowler, and brother of Otho the Great, consequently our saint was near akin to the three first emperors who bore the name of Otho. St. Wolfgang, the bishop of Ratisbon, being a prelate the most eminent in all Germany for learning, piety, and zeal, our young prince was put under his tuition, and by his excellent instructions and example he made from his infancy wonderful progress in learning and in the most perfect practice of Christian virtue. The death of his dear master and spiritual guide, which happened in 994, was to him a most sensible affliction. In the following year he succeeded his father in the dutchy of Bavaria, and in 1002, upon the death of his cousin Otho III., he was chosen emperor. 1 He was the same year crowned king of Germany at Mentz, by the archbishop of that city. He had always before his eyes the extreme dangers to which they are exposed who move on the precipice of power, and that all human things are like edifices of sand, which every breath of time threatens to overturn or deface; he studied the extent and importance of the obligations which attended his dignity; and by the assiduous practice of humiliations, prayer, and pious meditation, he maintained in his heart the necessary spirit of humility and holy fear, and was enabled to bear the tide of prosperity and honour with a constant evenness of temper. Sensible of the end for which alone he was exalted by God to the highest temporal dignity, he exerted his most strenuous endeavours to promote in all things the divine honour, the exaltation of the church, and the peace and happiness of his people. | 1 | ||
| Soon after his accession to the throne he resigned the dukedom of Bavaria, which he bestowed on his brother-in-law Henry, surnamed Senior. He procured a national council of the bishops of all his dominions, which was assembled at Dortmund, in Westphalia, in 1005, in order to regulate many points of discipline, and to enforce a strict observance of the holy canons. It was owing to his zeal that many provincial synods were also held for the same purpose in several parts of the empire. He was himself present at that of Frankfort in 1006, and at another of Bamberg in 1011. The protection he owed his subjects engaged him sometimes in wars, in all which he was successful. By his prudence, courage, and clemency he stifled a rebellion at home in the beginning of his reign, and without striking a stroke compelled the malecontents to lay down their arms at his feet, which when they had done he received them into favour. Two years after he quelled another rebellion in Italy, when Ardovinus or Hardwic, a Lombard lord, had caused himself to be crowned king at Milan. This nobleman, after his defeat, made his submission, and obtained his pardon. When he had afterwards revolted a second time, the emperor marched again into Italy, vanquished him in battle, and deprived him of his territories, but did not take away his life, and Ardovinus became a monk. After this second victory, St. Henry went in triumph to Rome, where, in 1014, he was crowned emperor with great solemnity by Pope Benedict VIII. On that occasion, to give a proof of his devotion to the holy see, he confirmed to it, by an ample diploma, the donation made by several former emperors, of the sovereignty of Rome and the exarchate of Ravenna: 2 and after a short stay at Rome, took leave of the pope, and in his return to Germany kept the Easter holydays at Pavia; then he visited the monastery of Cluni, on which he bestowed the imperial globe of gold which the pope had given him, and a gold crown enriched with precious stones. He paid his devotions in other monasteries on the road, leaving in every one of them some rich monument of his piety and liberality. But the most acceptable offering which he made to God was the fervour and purity of affection with which he renewed the consecration of his soul to God in all places where he came, especially at the foot of the altars. Travelling through Liege and Triers, he arrived at Bamberg, in which city he had lately founded a rich episcopal see, and had built a most stately cathedral in honour of St. Peter, which Pope John XVIII. took a journey into Germany to consecrate in 1019. The emperor obtained of this pope, by an honourable embassy, the confirmation of this and all his other pious foundations; for he built and endowed other churches with the two monasteries at Bamberg, and made the like foundations in several other places; thus extending his zealous views to promote the divine honour and the relief of the poor to the end of time. Bruno, bishop of Ausburg, the emperor’s brother, Henry, duke of Bavaria, and other relations of the saint complained loudly that he employed his patrimony on such religious foundations, and the duke of Bavaria and some others took up arms against him in 1010; but he defeated them in the field; then pardoned the princes engaged in the revolt, and restored to them Bavaria and their other territories which he had seized. | 2 | ||
| The idolatrous inhabitants of Poland and Sclavonia had some time before laid waste the diocess of Meersburg, and destroyed that and several other churches. St. Henry marched against those barbarous nations, and having put his army under the protection of the holy martyrs St. Laurence, St. George, and St. Adrian, who are said to have been seen in the battle fighting before him, he defeated the infidels. He had made a vow to re-establish the see of Meersburg in case he obtained the victory, and he caused all his army to communicate the day before the battle, which was fought near that city. The barbarians were seized with a panic fear in the beginning of the action, and submitted at discretion. The princes of Bohemia rebelled, but were easily brought back to their duty. The victorious emperor munificently repaired and restored the episcopal sees of Hildesheim, Magdeburg, Strasburg, Misnia, and Meersburg, and made all Poland, Bohemia, and Moravia tributary to the empire. He procured holy preachers to be sent to instruct the Bohemians and Polanders in the faith. Those have been mistaken who pretend that St. Henry converted St. Stephen, king of Hungary, for that prince was born of Christian parents; but our saint promoted his zealous endeavours, and had a great share in his apostolic undertakings for the conversion of his people. | 3 | ||
| The protection of Christendom, and especially of the holy see, obliged St. Henry to lead an army to the extremity of Italy, 3 where he vanquished the conquering Saracens, with their allies the Greeks, and drove them out of Italy, left a governor in the provinces which he had recovered, and suffered the Normans to enjoy the territories which they had then wrested from the infidels, but restrained them from turning their arms towards Naples or Benevento. He came back by Mount Cassino, and was honourably received at Rome; but during his stay in that city, by a painful contraction of the sinews in his thigh, became lame and continued so till his death. He passed by Cluni, and in the duchy of Luxemburg had an interview with Robert, king of France, son and successor of Hugh Capet. 4 It had been agreed that, to avoid all disputes of pre-eminence, the two princes should hold their conference in boats on the river Meuse, which, as Glaber writes, was at that time the boundary that parted their dominions; but Henry, impatient to embrace and cement a friendship with that great and virtuous king, paid the first visit to Robert in his tent, and afterwards received him in his own. A war had broke out between these two princes in 1006, and Henry gave the French a great overthrow; but being desirous only to govern his dominions in peace, he entered into negotiations which produced a lasting peace. In this interview, which was held in 1023, the conference of the two princes turned on the most important affairs of church and state, and on the best means of advancing piety, religion, and the welfare of their subjects. After the most cordial demonstrations of sincere friendship they took leave of each other, and St. Henry proceeded to Verdun and Metz. He made frequent progresses through his dominions only to promote piety, enrich all the churches, relieve the poor, make a strict inquiry into all public disorders and abuses, and prevent unjust usurpations and oppressions. He desired to have no other heir on earth but Christ in his members, and wherever he went he spread the odour of his piety, and his liberalities on the poor. | 4 | ||
| It is incredible how attentive he was to the smallest affairs amidst the multiplicity of business which attends the government of the state; nothing seemed to escape him; and whilst he was most active and vigilant in every duty which he owed to the public, he did not forget that the care of his own soul and the regulation of his interior was his first and most essential obligation. He was sensible that pride and vain-glory are the most dangerous of all vices, and that they are the most difficult to be discovered, and the last that are vanquished in the spiritual warfare; that humility is the very foundation of all true virtue, and our progress in it the measure of our advancement in Christian perfection. Therefore, the higher he was exalted in worldly honours the more did he study to humble himself, and it is said of him, that never was greater humility seen under a diadem. He loved those persons best who most freely put him in mind of his mistakes, and these he was always most ready to confess, and to make for them the most ample reparation. Through misinformations, he for some time harboured coldness towards St. Herebert, archbishop of Cologn; but discovering the innocence and sanctity of that prelate, he fell at his feet, and would not rise till he had received his absolution and pardon. He banished flatterers from his presence, calling them the greatest pests of courts; for none can put such an affront on a man’s judgment and modesty, as to praise him to his face, but the base and most wicked of interested and designing men, who make use of this artifice to insinuate themselves into the favour of a prince, to abuse his weakness and credulity, and to make him the dupe of their injustices. He who listens to them exposes himself to many misfortunes and crimes, to the danger of the most foolish pride and vain-glory, and to the ridicule and scorn of his flatterers themselves; for a vanity that can publicly hear its own praises, openly unmasks itself to its confusion. The Emperor Sigismund giving a flatterer a blow on the face, called his fulsome praise the greatest insult that had ever been offered him. St. Henry was raised by religion and humility above this abjectness of soul which reason itself teaches us to abhor and despise. By the assiduous mortification of the senses he kept his passions in subjection; for pleasure, unless we are guarded against its assaults, steals upon us by insensible degrees, smooths its passage to the heart by a gentle and insinuating address, and softens and disarms the soul of all its strength. Nor is it possible for us to triumph over unlawful sensual delights, unless we moderate and practise frequent self-denials with regard to lawful gratifications. The love of the world is a no less dangerous enemy, especially amidst honours and affluence; and created objects have this quality that they first seduce the heart, and then blind the understanding. By conversing always in heaven, St. Henry raised his affections so much above the earth as to escape this snare. | 5 | ||
| Prayer seemed the chief delight and support of his soul; especially the public office of the church. Assisting one day at this holy function at Strasburg, he so earnestly desired to remain always there to sing the divine praises among the devout canons of that church, that, finding this impossible, he founded there a new canonry for one who should always perform that sacred duty in his name. In this spirit of devotion it has been established that the kings of France are canons of Strasburg, Lyons, and some other places; as in the former place the emperors, in the latter the dukes of Burgundy, were before them. The holy sacrament of the altar and sacrifice of the mass were the object of St. Henry’s most tender devotion. The blessed Mother of God he honoured as his chief patroness, and among other exercises by which he recommended himself to her intercession, it was his custom, upon coming to any town, to spend a great part of the first night in watching and prayer in some church dedicated to God under her name, as at Rome in St. Mary Major. He had a singular devotion to the good angels and to all the saints. Though he lived in the world so as to be perfectly disengaged from it in heart and affection, it was his earnest desire entirely to renounce it long before his death, and he intended to pitch upon the abbey of St. Vanne, at Verdun, for the place of his retirement; but he was diverted from carrying this project into execution, by the advice of Richard the holy abbot of that house. 5 He had married St. Cunegonda, but lived with her in perpetual chastity, to which they had mutually bound themselves by vow. It happened that the empress was falsely accused of incontinency, and St. Henry was somewhat moved by the slander; but she cleared herself by her oath, and by the ordeal trials, walking over twelve red hot plough-shares without hurt. Her husband severely condemned himself for his credulity, and made her the most ample satisfaction. In his last illness he recommended her to her relations and friends, declaring that he left her an untouched virgin. His health decayed some years before his death, which happened at the castle of Grone, near Halberstadt, in 1024, on the 14th of July, towards the end of the fifty-second year of his life; he having reigned twenty-two years from his election, and ten years and five months from his coronation at Rome. His body was interred in the cathedral at Bamberg, with the greatest pomp, and with the unfeigned tears of all his subjects. The great number of miracles by which God was pleased to declare his glory in heaven, procured his canonization, which was performed by Eugenius III. in 1152. His festival is kept on the day following that of his death. 6 | 6 | ||
| Those who by honours, dignities, riches, or talents are raised by God in the world above the level of their fellow-creatures, have a great stewardship, and a most rigorous account to give at the bar of divine justice, their very example having a most powerful influence over others. This St. Fulgentius observed, writing to Theodorus, a pious Roman senator: 7 “Though,” said he, “Christ died for all men, yet the perfect conversion of the great ones of the world brings great acquisitions to the kingdom of Christ. And they who are placed in high stations must necessarily be to very many an occasion of eternal perdition or of salvation. And as they cannot go alone, so either a high degree of glory or an extraordinary punishment will be their everlasting portion.” | 7 |
| Note 1. The empire of the West, which had been extinguished in Augustulus, was restored in the year 800, in the person of Charlemagne, king of France, who extended his conquests into part of Spain, almost all Italy, all Flanders and Germany, and part of Hungary. The imperial crown continued some time in the different branches of his family, sometimes in France, sometimes in Germany, and sometimes in both united under the same monarch. Lewis IV. the eighth hereditary emperor of the Franks, was a weak prince, and died in the twentieth year of his age, in 912, without leaving any issue. These emperors, in imitation of the Lombards, had created several petty sovereigns in their states, who grew very powerful. These princes declared that by the death of Lewis IV. the imperial dignity had devolved on the Germanic people; and excluding Charles the Simple, king of France, the next heir in blood of the Carlovingian race, elected Conrad I. duke of Franconia; and after him Henry I. surnamed the Fowler, duke of Saxony, who was succeeded by three Othos of the same family of Saxony. After St. Henry II. several emperors (the following Henries, and two Frederics in particular) were of the Franconian family. Rodolph I. of the house of Austria was chosen in 1273. There have been four dukes of Bavaria emperors, five of the house of Luxemburg, three of the old Bohemian royal house, &c. But in 1438, Albert II. duke of Austria and marquis of Moravia, was raised to that supreme dignity, which from that time has remained chiefly in that family. The ancient ducal house of Saxony was descended from Wittekind the Great, the last elected king of the Saxons, who afterwards sustained a long obstinate war against Pepin and Charlemagne, submitted to the latter, and being baptized by St. Lullus in 785, was created by Charlemagne, first duke of Saxony. St. Henry II. was the fifth emperor of the Saxon race, descended from Wittekind the Great. [back] |
| Note 2. On the authenticity of this diploma of Henry II. and also of those of Pepin, Charlemagne, and Otho I. see the Dissertation of the Abbé Cenni, entitled, Esame de Diplomi d’Ottone è S. Arrigo, printed at Rome in 1754. That the see of Rome was possessed of great riches, even during the rage of the first persecutions, is clear from the acts of universal charity performed by the popes, mentioned by St. Dionysius of Corinth, and after the persecutions by St. Basil and St. John Climacus. From the reign of Constantine the Great, many large possessions were bestowed on the popes for the service of the church. Cenni (Esame di Diploma di Ludovico Pio) shows in detail from St. Gregory the Great’s epistles, that the Roman see, in his time, enjoyed very large estates, with a very ample civil jurisdiction, and a power of punishing delinquents in them by deputy judges, in Sicily, Calabria, Apulia, Campania, Ravenna, Sabina, Dalmatia, Illyricum, Sardinia, Corsica, Liguria, the Alpes Cottiæ, and a small estate in Gaul. Some of these estates comprised several bishoprics, as appears from St. Gregory, l. 7, ep. 39, Indict. ii. The Alpes Cottiæ that belonged to the popes included Genoa and the sea-coast from that town to the Alps, the boundaries of Gaul, as Thomassin (l. 1, de Discipl. Eccl. c. 27. n. 17,) takes notice, and as Baronius (ad an. 712, p. 9,) proves from the testimony of Oldradus, bishop of Milan. And Paul the Deacon writes, that the Lombards seized the Alpes Cottiæ, which were the estate of the Roman see. “Patrimonium Alpium Cottiarum quæ quondam ad jus pertinuerant apostolicæ sedis, sed a Longobardis multo tempore fuerant ablatæ.” (Paul. Diac. l. 6, c. 43.) Father Cajetan, in his Isagoge ad Historiam Siculam, points out at length the different estates which the Roman see formerly possessed in Sicily. The popes were charged with a great share of the care of the city and civil government of Rome. St. Gregory the Great mentions that it was part of their duty to provide that the city was supplied with corn (l. 5, ep. 40, alias l. 4, ep. 31, ad Maurit.) and that he was obliged to watch against the stratagems of the enemies, and the treachery of the Roman generals and governors. (l. 5, ep. 42, alias l. 4, ep. 35.) And he appointed Constantius, a tribune, to be governor of Naples. (l. 2, ep. 11 alias ep 7.) Anastasius the Librarian testifies that the popes, Sisinnius and Gregory II. both repaired the walls of Rome, and put the city in a posture of defence. From these and other facts Thomassin observes that the popes had then the chief administration of the city of Rome and of the exarchate, made treaties of peace, averted wars, defended and recovered cities, and repulsed the enemies. (Thomass. de Benefic. 3, part. l. 1, c. 29, n. 6.) When the Lombards ravaged and conquered the country, the emperors continued to oppress the people with exorbitant taxes, yet being busy at home against the Saracens, refused to protect the Romans against the barbarians. Whereupon the people of Italy, in the time of Gregory II. in 715, chose themselves in many places leaders and princes, though that pope exhorted them every where to remain in their obedience and fidelity to the empire, as Anastasius the Librarian assures us: “Ne desisterent ab amore et fide Romani imperii admonebat.” Leo the Isaurian and his son Constantine Copronymus persecuted the Catholics; yet Zachary and Stephen II. paid them all due obedience and respect in matters relating to the civil government. Leo threatened to destroy the holy images and profane the relics of the apostles at Rome. At which news the people of Rome were not to be restrained; but having before received with honour the images of that emperor, according to custom, they, in a fit of sudden fury, pulled them down. Pope Stephen II. exhorted the emperor to forbear such sacrileges and persecutions, and at the same time gave him to understand the danger of exasperating the populace, though he did what in him lay to prevent by entreaties both the profanations threatened by the emperor, and also the revolt of the people: “Tunc projecta laureata tua conculcarunt—Aisque: Romam mittam, et imaginem S. Petri confringam.—Quòd si quospiam miseris, protestamur tibi, innocentes sumus a sanguine quem fusuri sunt.” On the sacrileges and cruelties exercised by the Iconoclasts in the East, see the Bollandists, August ix. To prevent the like at Rome, some of the Greek historians say that Pope Gregory II. withdrew himself and all Italy from the obedience of the emperor. But Theophanes and the other Greeks were in this particular certainly mistaken, as Thomassin takes notice. And Natalis Alexander says: (Diss. 1, sæc. 8,) “This most learned pope was not ignorant of the tradition of the fathers from which he never deviated; for the fathers always taught that subjects are bound to obey their princes, though infidels or heretics, in those things which belong to the rights of the commonwealth.” The case was, that when the emperors refused to protect Italy from the barbarians, the popes, in the name of the people, who looked upon them as their fathers and guardians, and as the head of the commonwealth, sought protection from the French, as Thomassin observes, (p. 3, de Benef. l, 1, c. 29.) The continuator of Fredegarius seems to say, that Gregory III. and the Roman people created Charles Martel Patrician of Rome, by which title was meant the protection of the church and poor, as De Marca (De Concordiâ, l. 3, c. 11, n. 6,) and Pagi explain it from Paul the deacon. At least Pope Stephen II. going into France to invite Pepin into Italy, conferred on him the title of Patrician, but had not recourse to this expedient till the Eastern empire had absolutely abandoned Italy to the swords of the Lombards. Pope Zachary made a peace with Luitprand, king of the Lombards, and afterwards a truce with king Rachis for twenty years. But that prince putting on the Benedictin habit, his brother and successor Astulphus broke the treaty. Stephen II. who succeeded Zachary in 752, sent great presents to Astulphus, begging he would give peace to the exarchate; but could not be heard, as Anastasius testifies. Whereupon Stephen went to Paris, and implored the protection of king Pepin, who sent ambassadors into Lombardy, requiring that Astulphus would restore what he had taken from the church of Rome, and repair the damages he had done the Romans. Astulphus refusing to comply with these conditions, Pepin led an army into Italy, defeated the Lombards, and besieged, and took Astulphus in Pavia; but generously restored him his kingdom on condition he should live in amity with the pope. But immediately after Pepin’s departure he perfidiously took up arms, and in revenge put every thing to fire and sword in the territories of Rome. This obliged Pepin to return into Italy, and Astulphus was again beaten and made prisoner in Pavia. Pepin once more restored him his kingdom, but threatened him with death if he ever again took up arms against the pope; and he took from him the exarchate of Ravenna, of which the Lombard had made himself master, and he gave it to the holy see in 755, as Eginhard relates: “Redditam sibi Ravennam et Pentapolim, et omnem exarchatum ad Ravennam pertinentem, ad S. Petrum traditit.” Eginhard, ib. Thomassin observes very justly that Pepin could not give away dominions which belonged to the emperors of Constantinople; but that they had lost all right to them after they had suffered them to be conquered by the Lombards, without sending succours during so many years to defend and protect them. These countries therefore either by the right of conquest in a just war belonged to Pepin and Charlemagne, who bestowed them on the popes; or the people became free, and being abandoned to barbarians had a right to form themselves into a new government. See Thomassin (p. 3, de Beneficiis, l. 1, c. 29, n. 9). It is a principle laid down by Puffendorf, Grotius, Fontanini, and others, demonstrated by the unanimous consent of all ancients and moderns, and founded upon the law of nations, that he who conquers a country in a just war, nowise untaken for the former possessors, nor in alliance with them, is not bound to restore to them what they would not or could not protect and defend: “Illud extra controversiam est, si jus gentium respiciamus, quæ hostibus per nos erepta sunt, ea non posse vindicari ab his qui ante hostes nostros ea possederant et amiserant.” (Grotius, l. 3, de Jure belli et pacis, c. 6, 38.) The Greeks had by their sloth lost the exarchate of Ravenna. If Pepin had conquered the Goths in Italy, or the Vandals in Africa before Justinian had recovered those dominions, who will pretend that he would have been obliged to restore them to the emperors? Or, if the Britons had repulsed the Saxons after the Romans had abandoned them to their fury, might they not have declared themselves a free people? Or, had not the popes and the Roman people a right, when the Greeks refused to afford them protection, to seek it from others? They had long in vain demanded it of the emperors of Constantinople, before they had recourse to the French. Thus Anastasius testifies that Pope Stephen II. had often in vain implored the succours of Leo against Astulphus: “Ut juxta quod ei sæpius scripserat, cum exercitu ad tuendas has Italiæ partes modis omnibus adveniret.” The same Anastasius relates, that when the ambassadors of the Greek emperor demanded of Pepin the restitution of the countries he had conquered from the Lombards, that prince answered, that as he had exposed himself to the dangers of war merely for the protection of St. Peter’s see, not in favour of any other person, he never would suffer the apostolic church to be deprived of what he had bestowed on it. Pepin gave to the holy see the city of Rome and its Campagna; also the exarchate of Ravenna and Pentapolis, comprising Rimini, Pesaro, Fano, Senigallia, Ancona, Gubbio, &c. He retained the office of protector and defender of the Roman church under the title of Patrician. When Desiderius, king of the Lombards, again ravaged the lands of the church of Rome, Charlemagne marched into Italy, defeated his forces, and after a long siege took Pavia, and extinguished the kingdom of the Lombards in 773, on which occasion he caused himself to be crowned king of Italy, with an iron crown, such as the Goths and Lombards in that country had used, perhaps as an emblem of strength. Charlemagne confirmed to Pope Adrian I. at Rome, the donation of his father Pepin. The emperor Charles the Bald and others ratified and extended the same. Charlemagne having been crowned emperor of the West at Rome, by Pope Leo III. in 800, Irene who was then empress of Constantinople, acknowledged him Augustus in 802; as did her successor the emperor Nicephorus III. The Greeks at the same time ratified the partition made of the Italian dominions. This point of history has been so much misrepresented by some moderns, that this note seemed necessary in order to set it in a true light. See Cenni’s Monumenta Dominationis Pontificiæ, in 4to. Romæ, 1760. Also Orsi’s Dissertation on this subject; Cenni’s Esame di Diploma. &c. and Jos. Assemani, Hist. Ital. Scriptores, t. 3, c. 5. [back] |
| Note 3. In the partition of the empire between Charlemagne and Irene, empress of Constantinople, Apulia and Calabria were assigned to the Eastern empire, and the rest of Naples to Charlemagne and his successors. Long before this, in the unhappy reign of the Monothelite emperor Constans, about the year 660, the Saracens began to infest Sicily, and soon after became masters of that island, and also of Calabria and some other parts of Italy. Otho I., surnamed the Great, drove them out of Italy, and laid claim to Calabria and Apulia by right of conquest. The Greeks soon after yielded up their pretensions to those provinces by the marriage of Otho II. to Theophania, daughter of Romanus, emperor of the East, who brought him Apulia and Calabria for her dowry. Yet the treacherous Greeks joined the Saracens in those provinces, and again expelled the Germans. But in 1008, Tancred, a noble Norman, lord of Hauteville, with his twelve sons, and a gallant army of adventurers, went from Normandy into Apulia, and had great success against the Saracens and their confederates the Greeks. From this time the Normans became dukes of Calabria, and counts and dukes of Apulia. Robert Guiscard, the most valiant Norman duke of Apulia, augmented his power by the conquest of Sicily, Naples, and all the lands which lie between that city and Latium or the territory of Rome. In 1130, Roger the Norman was saluted by the pope, king of both Sicilies. [back] |
| Note 4. This Robert loved the church, and was a wise, courageous, and learned prince. He wrote sacred hymns, and among others that which begins, “O Constantia Martyrum;” also, as some say, the “Veni Sancte Spiritus, Et emitte cœlitus,” &c. sung in the mass for Whitsuntide. [back] |
| Note 5. At the entry of the cloister of St. Vanne at Verdun is hung a picture, in which the Emperor St. Henry is represented laying down his sceptre and crown, and asking the monastic habit of the holy abbot Richard. The abbot required of him a promise of obedience, then commanded him to resume the government of the empire, upon which a distich was made, in which it is said: The emperor came hither to live in obedience; and he practises this lesson by ruling. [back] |
| Note 6. Baronius and some others call St. Henry the first emperor of that name, because Henry I. or the Fowler, was never crowned by the Pope at Rome; without which ceremony some Italians style an emperor only king of Germany or emperor elect; though Charles V. was the last that was so crowned at Rome. St. Henry on his death-bed recommended to the princes Conrad the Salic, duke of Franconia, who was accordingly chosen emperor, was crowned at Rome in 1027, reigned with great piety and glory, and was buried in the cathedral church at Spire, which he had built near his own palace. He was succeeded by his son Henry the Black or III. [back] |
| Note 7. S. Fulgent, ep. 6. [back] |