Vedran Sulovsky | University of Cambridge (original) (raw)
Uploads
Thesis Chapters by Vedran Sulovsky
An overview of Frederick Barbarossa's (1152 - 1190) political iconography as it appears in visual... more An overview of Frederick Barbarossa's (1152 - 1190) political iconography as it appears in visual and textual sources, mostly concentrating on Aachen and the remodeling of the German royal coronation. I covered the royal and imperial seals and golden bulls, the Cappenberg head, the appearance of the sacrum imperium, the canonisation of Charlemagne, the brachiary of Charlemagne, the Barbarossaleuchter and the Karlsschrein as parts of Frederick Barbarossa's imperial programme. This was my view in 2015 (it has been three years since then), and I disagree with many of the points that I had made in my MA, including the choice of material. Still, my bibliography and footnotes may be useful to other scholars until I address all the flaws of my MA thesis in my PhD.
Papers by Vedran Sulovsky
Zeitschrift des Aachener Geschichtsvereins, 2019
This is the article version of my initial studies of the Karlsschrein in Aachen. To be followed u... more This is the article version of my initial studies of the Karlsschrein in Aachen. To be followed up in the first book.
German History, 2021
The opening paragraphs: Previous scholars have held that sacrum imperium (literally: holy empire... more The opening paragraphs:
Previous scholars have held that sacrum imperium (literally: holy empire) was an ideological construct of Frederick Barbarossa (1152-1190) and his chancellor Rainald of Dassel (1156-1159, then archbishop of Cologne [1159-1167]), who were supposedly attempting to 're-sacralize the state' and reshape the relationship between the Empire and the papacy. This article will show that neither contemporary imperial nor papal sources presented the terminology in such a light. Rather, the idea of sacrum imperium symbolizing a resurgent German state was the product of the national tradition of modern German historiography, which sought to either glorify its past (as in the prewar period) or to document the start of Germany's exceptionalism, its so-called Sonderweg (as in the postwar period). The term sacrum imperium was adopted by the German imperial chancery in 1157. It started gaining currency from 1174 onward, and in 1184 it was expanded to sacrum Romanum imperium (holy Roman empire). It was not before 1254 that it became a part of the standard terminology of the imperial chancery.
The term, however, had had a long history before it became the name of the Holy Roman Empire. It gradually gained currency at the imperial court from 1136 until 1167, and 1157 was an important turning point. Until now scholars have considered the evidence from 1136 until 1157 to be of little significance because they made a sharp distinction between the imperial chancery, which they ahistorically treated as a bureaucratic unit, and the imperial court. However, not only did sacrum imperium permeate the imperial court at least from 1136, but the court started using the phrase under Italian influence, which was waxing, together with imperial involvement in Italy, after 1130.
History Compass, 2019
Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederic... more Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederick Barbarossa in 1157. It later developed into the title Holy Roman Empire (of the German nation), the name of Europe's largest polity for many centuries. Where other country names were based on the peoples inhabiting them, the Empire's name is of unknown provenance, though it obviously imitates the Roman Empire. I intend to survey the extant theories on its origin and meaning and show how 20th-century national discourse affected scholarly opinion. It is maintained that sacrum imperium was introduced by Rainald of Dassel to resacralise the Empire after the imperial defeat in the Investiture Controversy. Many opinions were based on this (1) that sacrum imperium means that the state is holier than the Church, (2) that Charlemagne's canonisation was a thinly veiled canonisation of the Empire, and (3) that Rainald of Dassel translated the three kings to Cologne to prove that there was no intermediary between the emperor and God. I will show that these views are derived from Zeumer's 1910 modelling of Rainald of Dassel after Otto von Bismarck and his 1872 Reichstag speech against Pope Pius IX.
History Compass, 2019
Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederic... more Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederick Barbarossa in 1157. It later developed into the title Holy Roman Empire (of the German nation), the name of Europe's largest polity for many centuries. Where other country names were based on the peoples inhabiting them, the Empire's name is of unknown provenance, though it obviously imitates the Roman Empire. I intend to survey the extant theories on its origin and meaning and show how 20th-century national discourse affected scholarly opinion.
It is maintained that sacrum imperium was introduced by Rainald of Dassel to resacralise the Empire after the imperial defeat in the Investiture Controversy. Many opinions were based on this (1) that sacrum imperium means that the state is holier than the Church, (2) that Charlemagne's canonisation was a thinly veiled canonisation of the Empire, and (3) that Rainald of Dassel translated the three kings to Cologne to prove that there was no intermediary between the emperor and God.
I will show that these views are derived from Zeumer's 1910 modelling of Rainald of Dassel after Otto von Bismarck and his 1872 Reichstag speech against Pope Pius IX.
Nazii i etnichnost v gumanitarnih naukax. Etnicheskie, protonazionalnie i nazionalnie narrativi: formirovanie i representazija [Nations and ethnicity in humanities and social sciences. Ethnic, protonational and national narratives: formation and representation], 2017
In this short piece from 2015, I discussed the "national" identities used by the German court und... more In this short piece from 2015, I discussed the "national" identities used by the German court under Frederick Barbarossa (1152 - 1190). Of course, as the paper was a short one, I could not include many of the relevant pieces. I intend to come back to the topic in the form a more serious and detailed publication.
Tabula, 2016
Original abstract: This article traces the Frankish legacy in the early years of Frederick Barba... more Original abstract:
This article traces the Frankish legacy in the early years of Frederick Barbarossa's reign, from his coronation to the diet of Roncaglia (1152-1158). I demonstrate that Frederick's ideological system was based on a fluctuating set of German, Frankish, and Roman identities, which constituted an imperial identity. By analysing Frederick's words and deeds as reported by his contemporaries and comparing them to the Cappenberg Head which he commissioned, I conclude that Frederick alternated between these various identities based on his political situation, and that new ideological developments during his reign, such as the introduction of the term sacrum imperium, stemmed directly from the political discernment of Frederick and his court.
14.06.2018.
This paper is now 2 years old, and I would now revise much of what I have written coming out of the MA. While I may not have been utterly wrong, the precision of my work back then is somewhat lacking. There are two points which I would change: 1) the Cappenberg head is not necessarily an imperial monument, and 2) the cult of Saint Charlemagne has to be approached much more carefully. As with my other publications: I intend to address the subject of this work in my PhD.
Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU, 2016
This is an article / chapter published in 2016, just a year after my MA. While I had improved upo... more This is an article / chapter published in 2016, just a year after my MA. While I had improved upon my MA by this point, I consider the final work unsatisfactory in two ways now. Firstly, following Horch, Appuhn and Fillitz I overstretched the interpretation of the "imperial iconography" present in the Cappenberg head. Secondly, the recent paper by Knut Görich on the Cappenberg head (2017) addressed the main problem, claiming that this head is not even supposed to be a depiction of Frederick Barbarossa. Currently this seems very likely. I intend to address this in my PhD.
An overview of Frederick Barbarossa's (1152 - 1190) political iconography as it appears in visual... more An overview of Frederick Barbarossa's (1152 - 1190) political iconography as it appears in visual and textual sources, mostly concentrating on Aachen and the remodeling of the German royal coronation. I covered the royal and imperial seals and golden bulls, the Cappenberg head, the appearance of the sacrum imperium, the canonisation of Charlemagne, the brachiary of Charlemagne, the Barbarossaleuchter and the Karlsschrein as parts of Frederick Barbarossa's imperial programme. This was my view in 2015 (it has been three years since then), and I disagree with many of the points that I had made in my MA, including the choice of material. Still, my bibliography and footnotes may be useful to other scholars until I address all the flaws of my MA thesis in my PhD.
Zeitschrift des Aachener Geschichtsvereins, 2019
This is the article version of my initial studies of the Karlsschrein in Aachen. To be followed u... more This is the article version of my initial studies of the Karlsschrein in Aachen. To be followed up in the first book.
German History, 2021
The opening paragraphs: Previous scholars have held that sacrum imperium (literally: holy empire... more The opening paragraphs:
Previous scholars have held that sacrum imperium (literally: holy empire) was an ideological construct of Frederick Barbarossa (1152-1190) and his chancellor Rainald of Dassel (1156-1159, then archbishop of Cologne [1159-1167]), who were supposedly attempting to 're-sacralize the state' and reshape the relationship between the Empire and the papacy. This article will show that neither contemporary imperial nor papal sources presented the terminology in such a light. Rather, the idea of sacrum imperium symbolizing a resurgent German state was the product of the national tradition of modern German historiography, which sought to either glorify its past (as in the prewar period) or to document the start of Germany's exceptionalism, its so-called Sonderweg (as in the postwar period). The term sacrum imperium was adopted by the German imperial chancery in 1157. It started gaining currency from 1174 onward, and in 1184 it was expanded to sacrum Romanum imperium (holy Roman empire). It was not before 1254 that it became a part of the standard terminology of the imperial chancery.
The term, however, had had a long history before it became the name of the Holy Roman Empire. It gradually gained currency at the imperial court from 1136 until 1167, and 1157 was an important turning point. Until now scholars have considered the evidence from 1136 until 1157 to be of little significance because they made a sharp distinction between the imperial chancery, which they ahistorically treated as a bureaucratic unit, and the imperial court. However, not only did sacrum imperium permeate the imperial court at least from 1136, but the court started using the phrase under Italian influence, which was waxing, together with imperial involvement in Italy, after 1130.
History Compass, 2019
Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederic... more Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederick Barbarossa in 1157. It later developed into the title Holy Roman Empire (of the German nation), the name of Europe's largest polity for many centuries. Where other country names were based on the peoples inhabiting them, the Empire's name is of unknown provenance, though it obviously imitates the Roman Empire. I intend to survey the extant theories on its origin and meaning and show how 20th-century national discourse affected scholarly opinion. It is maintained that sacrum imperium was introduced by Rainald of Dassel to resacralise the Empire after the imperial defeat in the Investiture Controversy. Many opinions were based on this (1) that sacrum imperium means that the state is holier than the Church, (2) that Charlemagne's canonisation was a thinly veiled canonisation of the Empire, and (3) that Rainald of Dassel translated the three kings to Cologne to prove that there was no intermediary between the emperor and God. I will show that these views are derived from Zeumer's 1910 modelling of Rainald of Dassel after Otto von Bismarck and his 1872 Reichstag speech against Pope Pius IX.
History Compass, 2019
Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederic... more Sacrum imperium is a phrase that first appears in the imperial chancery in a document of Frederick Barbarossa in 1157. It later developed into the title Holy Roman Empire (of the German nation), the name of Europe's largest polity for many centuries. Where other country names were based on the peoples inhabiting them, the Empire's name is of unknown provenance, though it obviously imitates the Roman Empire. I intend to survey the extant theories on its origin and meaning and show how 20th-century national discourse affected scholarly opinion.
It is maintained that sacrum imperium was introduced by Rainald of Dassel to resacralise the Empire after the imperial defeat in the Investiture Controversy. Many opinions were based on this (1) that sacrum imperium means that the state is holier than the Church, (2) that Charlemagne's canonisation was a thinly veiled canonisation of the Empire, and (3) that Rainald of Dassel translated the three kings to Cologne to prove that there was no intermediary between the emperor and God.
I will show that these views are derived from Zeumer's 1910 modelling of Rainald of Dassel after Otto von Bismarck and his 1872 Reichstag speech against Pope Pius IX.
Nazii i etnichnost v gumanitarnih naukax. Etnicheskie, protonazionalnie i nazionalnie narrativi: formirovanie i representazija [Nations and ethnicity in humanities and social sciences. Ethnic, protonational and national narratives: formation and representation], 2017
In this short piece from 2015, I discussed the "national" identities used by the German court und... more In this short piece from 2015, I discussed the "national" identities used by the German court under Frederick Barbarossa (1152 - 1190). Of course, as the paper was a short one, I could not include many of the relevant pieces. I intend to come back to the topic in the form a more serious and detailed publication.
Tabula, 2016
Original abstract: This article traces the Frankish legacy in the early years of Frederick Barba... more Original abstract:
This article traces the Frankish legacy in the early years of Frederick Barbarossa's reign, from his coronation to the diet of Roncaglia (1152-1158). I demonstrate that Frederick's ideological system was based on a fluctuating set of German, Frankish, and Roman identities, which constituted an imperial identity. By analysing Frederick's words and deeds as reported by his contemporaries and comparing them to the Cappenberg Head which he commissioned, I conclude that Frederick alternated between these various identities based on his political situation, and that new ideological developments during his reign, such as the introduction of the term sacrum imperium, stemmed directly from the political discernment of Frederick and his court.
14.06.2018.
This paper is now 2 years old, and I would now revise much of what I have written coming out of the MA. While I may not have been utterly wrong, the precision of my work back then is somewhat lacking. There are two points which I would change: 1) the Cappenberg head is not necessarily an imperial monument, and 2) the cult of Saint Charlemagne has to be approached much more carefully. As with my other publications: I intend to address the subject of this work in my PhD.
Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU, 2016
This is an article / chapter published in 2016, just a year after my MA. While I had improved upo... more This is an article / chapter published in 2016, just a year after my MA. While I had improved upon my MA by this point, I consider the final work unsatisfactory in two ways now. Firstly, following Horch, Appuhn and Fillitz I overstretched the interpretation of the "imperial iconography" present in the Cappenberg head. Secondly, the recent paper by Knut Görich on the Cappenberg head (2017) addressed the main problem, claiming that this head is not even supposed to be a depiction of Frederick Barbarossa. Currently this seems very likely. I intend to address this in my PhD.