Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) book. Happy reading Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Pocket Guide.

Save time, save money!

If you do not receive an email within 10 minutes, your email address may not be registered, and you may need to create a new Wiley Online Library account. If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username. Tools Request permission Export citation Add to favorites Track citation.

Share Give access Share full text access. Share full text access. Please review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article. Get access to the full version of this article. View access options below. You previously purchased this article through ReadCube. Institutional Login. Log in to Wiley Online Library.

Purchase Instant Access. The Germans had not even a common name. Since the eighth century most probably the designations Franks and Frankish extended beyond the boundaries of the Frankish tribe. It was not, however, until the ninth century that the expression theodisk later German Deutsch , signifying "popular," or "belonging to people" made its appearance and a great stretch of time divided this beginning from the use of the word as a name of the nation. The work of uniting Germany was not begun by a tribe living in the interior but by one on the outskirts of the country.

The people called Franks suddenly appear in history in the third century. They represented no single tribe, but consisted of a combination of Low and High German tribes. Under the leadership of Clovis Chlodwig the Franks overthrew the remains of the Roman power in Gaul and built up the Frankish state on a Germano-Romanic foundation. The German tribes were conquered one after another and colonized in the Roman manner. Large extents of territory were marked out as belonging to the king, and on these military colonies were founded. The commanders of these military colonies gradually became administrative functionaries, and the colonies themselves grew into peaceful agricultural village communities.

For a long time political expressions, such as Hundreds , recalled the original military character of the people. From that time the Frankish ruler became the German overlord, but the centrifugal tendency of the Germanic tribes reacted against this sovereignty as soon as the Merovingian Dynasty began slowly to decline, owing to internal feuds. In each of the tribes after this the duke rose to supremacy over his fellow tribesmen.

Von Hippel Award: C. N. R. Rao / Meyer Galow Prize: M. Heitzmann / Ernst Haage Prize: H. Oberhofer

From the seventh century the tribal duke became an almost independent sovereign. These ducal states originated in the supreme command of large bodies of troops, and then in the administration of large territories by dukes. At the same time the disintegration was aided by the bad administration of the counts, the officials in charge of the territorial districts Gau , who were no longer supervised by the central authority. But what was most disastrous was that an unruly aristocracy sought to control all the economical interests and to exercise arbitrary powers over politics.

These sovereign nobles had become powerful through the feudal system, a form of government which gave to medieval Germany its peculiar character. Caesar in his day found that it was customary among the Gauls for a freeman, the "client," voluntarily to enter into a relation of dependence on a "senior.

From this Gallic system of clientship there developed, in Frankish times, the conception of the "lord's man" homagium or hominium , who by an oath swore fealty to his suzerain and became a vassus , or gasindus , or homo. The result of the growth of this idea was that finally there appeared, throughout the kingdom, along with royalty, powerful territorial lords with their vassi or vassalli , as their followers were called from the eighth century.

The vassals received as fief beneficium a piece of land of which they enjoyed the use for life. The struggle of the Franks with the Arabs quickened the development of the feudal system, for the necessity of creating an army of horsemen then became evident. Moreover the poorer freemen, depressed in condition by the frequent wars, could not be required to do service as horsemen, a duty that could only be demanded from the vassals of the great landowners.

In order to force these territorial lords to do military service fiefs were granted from the already existing public domain, and in their turn the great lords granted part of these fiefs to their retainers. Thus the Frankish king was gradually transformed from a lord of the land and people to a feudal lord over the beneficiaries directly and indirectly dependent upon him by feudal tenure. By the end of the ninth century the feudal system had bound together the greater part of the population. While in this way the secular aristocracy grew into a power, at the same time the Church was equally strengthened by feudalism.

The Christian Church during this era — a fact of the greatest importance — was the guardian of the remains of classical culture. With this culture the Church was to endow the Germans. Moreover it was to bring them a great fund of new moral conceptions and principles, much increase in knowledge, and skill in art and handicrafts. The well-knit organization of the Church, the convincing logic of dogma, the grandeur of the doctrine of salvation, the sweet poetry of the liturgy, all these captured the understanding of the simple-minded but fine-natured primitive German.

It was the Church, in fact, that first brought the exaggerated individualism of the race under control and developed in it gradually, by means of asceticism, those social virtues essential to the State. The country was converted to Christianity very slowly for the Church had here a difficult problem to solve, namely, to replace the natural conception of life by an entirely different one that appeared strange to the people. The acceptance of the Christian name and ideas was at first a purely mechanical one, but it became an inner conviction. No people has shown a more logical or deeper comprehension of the organization and saving aims of the Christian Church.

None has exhibited a like devotion to the idea of the Church nor did any people contribute more in the Middle Ages to the greatness of the Church than the German. In the conversion of Germany much credit is due the Irish and Scotch, but the real founders of Christianity in Germany are the Anglo-Saxons, above all St.

Among the early missionaries were: St. Columbanus, the first to come to the Continent about , who laboured in Swabia; Fridolin, the founder of Saeckingen; Pirminius, who established the monastery of Reichenau in ; and Gallus d. The cause of Christianity was furthered in Bavaria by Rupert of Worms beginning of the seventh century , Corbinian d. The great organizer of the Church of Bavaria was St. The chief herald of the Faith among the Franks was the Scotchman, St. Kilian end of the seventh century ; the Frisians received Christianity through Willibrord d. The real Apostle of Germany was St.

Boniface, whose chief work was in Central Germany and Bavaria. Acting in conjunction with Rome he organized the German Church, and finally in met the death of a martyr at the hands of the Frisians. After the Church had thus obtained a good foothold it soon reached a position of much importance in the eyes of the youthful German peoples. By grants of land the princes gave it an economic power which was greatly increased when many freemen voluntarily became dependents of these new spiritual lords; thus, besides the secular territorial aristocracy, there developed a second power, that of the ecclesiastical princes.

Antagonism between these two elements was perceptible at an early date. Pepin sought to remove the difficulty by strengthening the Frankish Church and placing between the secular and spiritual lords the new Carlovingian king, who, by the assumption of the title Dei gratia , obtained a somewhat religious character.

The Augustinian conception of the Kingdom of God early influenced the Frankish State; political and religious theories unconsciously blended. The union of Church and State seemed the ideal which was to be realized. Each needed the other; the State needed the Church as the only source of real order and true education; the Church needed for its activities the protection of the secular authority. In return for the training in morals and learning that the Church gave, the State granted it large privileges, such as: the privilegium fori or freedom from the jurisdiction of the State; immunity, that is exemption from taxes and services to the State, from which gradually grew the right to receive the taxes of the tenants residing on the exempt lands and the right to administer justice to them; further, release from military service; and, finally, the granting of great fiefs that formed the basis of the later ecclesiastical sovereignties.

  1. Fifty Years of Europe, 1870-1919!
  2. PaperToyLifeStyle.
  3. {{ ::item.Name }}?
  4. Natural Allergy Remedies;
  5. Searching for God?
  6. Using Playful Practice to Communicate with Special Children (nasen spotlight)!
  7. Der Oberhof, First Edition - AbeBooks.

The reverse of this picture soon became apparent; the ecclesiastics to whom had been given lands and offices in fief became dependent on secular lords. Thus the State at an early date had a share in the making of ecclesiastical laws, exercised the right of patronage, appointed to dioceses, and soon undertook, especially in the time of Charles Martel, the secularization of church lands.

Category: Arcade

Consequently the question of the relation of Church and State soon claimed attention; it was the most important question in the history of the German Middle Ages. Under the first German emperor this problem seemed to find its solution. Real German history begins with Charlemagne The war with the Saxons was the most important one he carried on, and the result of this struggle, of fundamental importance for German history, was that the Saxons were brought into connexion with the other Germanic tribes and did not fall under Scandinavian influence. The lasting union of the Franks, Saxons, Frisians, Thuringians, Hessians, Alamanni, and Bavarians, that Charlemagne effected, formed the basis of a national combination which gradually lost sight of the fact that it was the product of compulsion.

From the time of Charlemagne the above-named German tribes lived under Frankish constitution retaining their own old laws, the leges barbarorum , which Charlemagne codified. Another point of importance for German development was that Charlemagne fixed the boundary between his domain and the Slavs, including the Wends, on the farther side of the Elbe and Saale Rivers.

It is true that Charlemagne did not do all this according to a deliberate plan, but mainly in the endeavour to win these related Germanic peoples over to Christianity. Charlemagne's German policy, therefore, was not a mere brute conquest, but a union which was to be strengthened by the ties of morality and culture to be created by the Christian religion. The amalgamation of the ecclesiastical with the secular elements that had begun in the reign of Pepin reached its completion under Charlemagne.

The fact that Pepin obtained papal approval of his kingdom strengthened the bond between the Church and the Frankish kingdom. The consciousness of being the champion of Christianity against the Arabs, moreover, gave to the King of the Franks the religious character of the predestined protectors of the Church; thus he attained a position of great importance in the Kingdom of God. Charlemagne was filled with these ideas; like St. Augustine he hated the supremacy of the heathen empire.

This type was kept in view when Charlemagne undertook to give reality to the Kingdom of God. The Frankish king desired like Solomon to be a great ecclesiastical and secular potentate, a royal priest. He was conscious that his conception of his position as the head of the Kingdom of God, according to the German ideas, was opposed to the essence of Roman Caesarism, and for reason he objected to being crowned emperor by the Pope on Christmas Day, On this day the Germanic idea of the Kingdom of God, of which Charlemagne was the representative, bowed to the Roman idea, which regards Rome as its centre, Rome the seat of the old empire and the most sacred place of the Christian world.

Charlemagne when emperor still regarded himself as the real leader of the Church. Although in he confirmed the gift of his father to the Roman res publica , nevertheless he saw to it that Rome remained connected with the Frankish State; in return it had a claim to Frankish protection. He even interfered in dogmatic questions. Charlemagne looked upon the revived Roman Empire from the ancient point of view inasmuch as he greatly desired recognition by the Eastern Empire. He regarded his possession of the empire as resulting solely from his own power, consequently he himself crowned his son Louis.

Yet on the other hand he looked upon his empire only as a Christian one, whose most noble calling it was to train up the various races within its borders to the service of God and thus to unify them. The empire rapidly declined under his weak and nerveless son, Louis the Pious The decay was hastened by the prevailing idea that this State was the personal property of the sovereign, a view that contained the germ of constant quarrels and necessitated the division of the empire when there were several sons.

Louis sought to prevent the dangers of such division by the law of hereditary succession published in , by which the sovereign power and the imperial crown were to be passed to the oldest son. This law was probably enacted through the influence of the Church, which maintained positively this unity of the supreme power and the Crown, as being in harmony with the idea of the Kingdom of God, and as besides required by the hierarchical economy of the church organization. When Louis had a fourth son, by his second wife, Judith, he immediately set aside the law of partition of for the benefit of the new heir.

An odious struggle broke out between father and sons, and among the sons themselves. In the emperor was captured by his sons at the battle of Luegenfeld field of lies near Colmar. Pope Gregory IV was at the time in the camp of the sons. The demeanour of the pope and the humiliating ecclesiastical penance that Louis was compelled to undergo at Soissons made apparent the change that had come about since Charlemagne in the theory of the relations of Church and State.

Gregory's view that the Church was under the rule of the representative of Christ, and that it was a higher authority, not only spiritually but also substantially, and therefore politically, had before this found learned defenders in France. In opposition to the oldest son Lothair, Louis and Pepin, sons of Louis the Pious, restored the father to his throne , but new rebellions followed, when the sons once more grew dissatisfied.

In the emperor died near Ingelheim. The quarrels of the sons went on after the death of the father, and in Lothair was completely defeated near Fontenay Fontanetum by Louis the German and Charles the Bald. The empire now fell apart, not from the force of national hatreds, but in consequence of the partition now made and known as the Treaty of Verdun August, , which divided the territory between the sons of Louis the Pious: Lothair, Louis the German , and Charles the Bald, and which finally resulted in the complete overthrow of the Carlovingian monarchy.

As the imperial power grew weaker, the Church gradually raised itself above the State. The scandalous behaviour of Lothair II, who, divorced himself from his lawful wife in order to marry his concubine, brought deep disgrace on his kingdom. The Church however, now an imposing and well-organized power, sat in judgment on the adulterous king. In this way a long-enduring boundary was definitely drawn between the growing powers of Germany and France.

By a curious chance this boundary coincided almost exactly with the linguistic dividing line. Charles the Fat , the last son of Louis the German, united once more the entire empire. But according to old Germanic ideas the weak emperor forfeited his sovereignty by his cowardice when the dreaded Northmen appeared before Paris on one of their frequent incursions into France, and by his incapacity as a ruler. Consequently the Eastern Franks made his nephew Arnulf king. This change was brought about by a revolt of the laity against the bishops in alliance with the emperor.

The danger of Norman invasion Arnulf ended once and for all by his victory in at Louvain on the Dyle. In the East also he was victorious after the death of Swatopluk, the great King of Moravia. The conduct of some of the great nobles forced him to turn for aid to the bishops; supported by the Church, he was crowned emperor at Rome in Theoretically his rule extended over the West Frankish Kingdom, but the sway of his son, Louis the Child , the last descendant of the male line of the German Carlovingians, was limited entirely to the East Frankish Kingdom. Both in the East and West Frankish Kingdoms, in this era of confusion, the nobility grew steadily stronger, and freemen in increasing numbers became vassals in order to escape the burdens that the State laid on them; the illusion of the imperial title could no longer give strength to the empire.

Vassal princes like Guido and Lamberto of Spoleto, and Berengar of Friuli, were permitted to wear the diadem of the Caesars. As the idea of political unity declined, that of the unity of the Church increased in power. The Kingdom of God, which the royal priest, Charlemagne, by his overshadowing personality had, in his own opinion, made a fact, proved to be an impossibility.

Full text of "Deutschland (Germany) Organ of the German intercommunication interests"

Church and State, which for a short time were united in Charlemagne, had, as early as the reign of Louis the Pious, become separated. The Kingdom of God was now identified with the Church. Pope Nicholas I asserted that the head of the one and indivisible Church could not be subordinate to any secular power, that only the pope could rule the Church, that it was obligatory on princes to obey the pope in spiritual things, and finally that the Carlovingians had received their right to rule from the pope.

This grand idea of unity, this all-controlling sentiment of a common bond, could not be annihilated even in these troubled times when the papacy was humiliated by petty Italian rulers. The idea of her unity gave the Church the strength to raise herself rapidly to a position higher than that of the State. From the age of St. Boniface the Church in the East Frankish Kingdom had direct relations with Rome, while numerous new churches and monasteries gave her a firm hold in this region. At an early date the Church here controlled the entire religious life and, as the depositary of all culture, the entire intellectual life.

She had also gained frequently decisive influence over German economic life, for she disseminated much of the skill and many of the crafts of antiquity. Moreover the Church itself had grown into an economic power in the East Frankish Kingdom. Piety led many to place themselves and their lands under the control of the Church.

  1. UWWTD Treatment Plants- Treatment map.
  2. Zwei Grad mehr in Deutschland: Wie der Klimawandel unseren Alltag verändern wird (German Edition)!
  3. Destinations.
  4. Von Hippel Award: C. N. R. Rao / Meyer Galow Prize: M. Heitzmann / Ernst Haage Prize: H. Oberhofer!

There was also in this period a change in social life that was followed by important social consequences. The old militia composed of every freeman capable of bearing arms went to pieces, because the freemen constantly decreased in number. In its stead there arose a higher order in the State, which alone was called on for military service. In this chaotic era the German people made no important advance in civilization. Nevertheless the union that had been formed between Roman and German elements and Christianity prepared the way for a development of the East Frankish Kingdom in civilization from which great results might be expected.

At the close of the Carlovingian period the external position of the kingdom was a very precarious one. The piratic Northmen boldly advanced far into the empire; Danes and Slavs continually crossed its borders; but the most dangerous incursions were those of the Magyars, who in brought terrible suffering upon Bavaria; in their marauding expeditions they also ravaged Saxony, Thuringia, and Swabia. It was then that salvation came from the empire itself. The weak authority of the last of the Carlovingians, Louis the Child, an infant in years, fell to pieces altogether, and the old ducal form of government revived in the several tribes.

This was in accordance with the desires of the people. In these critical times the dukes sought to save the country; still they saw clearly that only a union of all the duchies could successfully ward off the danger from without; the royal power was to find its entire support in the laity. Once more, it is true, the attempt was made by King Conrad I to make the Church the basis of the royal power, but the centralizing clerical policy of the king was successfully resisted by the subordinate powers.

Henry I was the free choice of the lay powers at Fritzlar. On the day he was elected the old theory of the State as the personal estate of the sovereign was finally done away with, and the Frankish realm was transformed into a German one. The manner of his election made plain to Henry the course to be pursued. It was necessary to yield to the wish of the several tribes to have their separate existence with a measure of self-government under the imperial power recognized.

Thus the duchies were strengthened at the expense of the Crown. The fame of Henry I was assured by his victory over the Magyars near Merseburg By regaining Lorraine, that had been lost during the reign of Conrad, he secured a bulwark on the side towards France that permitted the uninterrupted consolidation of his realm.

The same result was attained on other frontiers by his successful campaigns against the Wends and Bohemians. Henry's kingdom was made up of a confederation of tribes, for the idea of a "King of the Germans" did not yet exist. It was only as the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" that Germany could develop from a union of German tribes to a compact nation. As supporters of the supreme power, as vassals of the emperor, the Germans were united. This imperial policy was continued by Otto I, the Great During his long reign Otto sought to found a strong central power in Germany, an effort at once opposed by the particularistic powers of Germany, who took advantage of disputes in the royal family.

Otto proved the necessity of a strong government by his victory over the Magyars near Augsburg , one result of which was the reestablishment of the East Mark. After this he was called to Rome by John XII, who had been threatened by Berengarius II of Italy, and by making a treaty that secured to the imperial dignity a share in the election of the pope, he attained the imperial crown, 2 February, It was necessary for Otto to obtain imperial power in order to carry out his politico-ecclesiastical policy.

His intention was to make the Church an organic feature of the German constitution. This he could only do if the Church was absolutely under his control, and this could not be attained unless the papacy and Italy were included within the sphere of his power. The emperor's aim was to found his royal power among the Germans, who were strongly inclined to particularism, upon a close union of Church and State.

The Germans had now revived the empire and had freed the papacy from its unfortunate entanglement with the nobility of the city of Rome. The papacy rapidly regained strength and quickly renewed the policy of Nicholas I. By safeguarding the unity of the Church of Western Europe the Germans protected both the peaceful development of civilization, which was dependent upon religion, and the progress of culture which the Church spread. Thus the Germans, in union with the Church, founded the civilization of Western Europe. For Germany itself the heroic age of the medieval emperors was a period of progress in learning.

The renaissance of antiquity during the era of the Ottos was hardly more than superficial. Nevertheless it denoted a development in learning, throughout ecclesiastical in character, in marked contrast to the tendencies in the same age of the grammarian Wilgard at Ravenna, who sought to revive not only the literature of ancient times, but also the ideas of antiquity, even when they opposed Christian ideas.

Germany now boldly assumed the leadership of Western Europe and thus prevented any other power from claiming the supremacy. Moreover the new empire sought to assert its universal character in France, as well as in Burgundy and Italy. Otto also fixed his eyes on Lower Italy, which was in the hands of the Greeks, but he preferred a peaceful policy with Byzantium. Otto II aimed at a great development of his power along the Mediterranean; these plans naturally turned his mind from a national German policy. His campaign against the Saracens, however, came to a disastrous end in Calabria in , and he did not long survive the calamity.

His romantic son sought to bring about a complete revival of the ancient empire, the centre of which was to be Rome, as in ancient times. There, in union with the pope, he wished to establish the true Kingdom of God. The pope and the emperor were to be the wielders of a power one and indivisible. This idealistic policy, full of vague abstractions, led to severe German losses in the east, for the Poles and Hungarians once more gained their independence.

In Italy Arduin of Ivrea founded a new kingdom; naturally enough the Apennine Peninsula revolted against the German imperial policy. Without possession of Italy, however, the empire was impossible, and the blessings of the Ottonian theory of government were now manifest. The Church became the champion of the unity and legitimacy of the empire.

In he defeated Arduin and thus attained the Imperial crown. The sickly ruler, whose nervousness caused him to take up projects of which he quickly tired, did his best to repair the losses of the empire on its eastern frontier. He was not able, however, to defeat the Polish King Boleslaw II: all he could do was to strengthen the position of the Germans on the Elbe River by an alliance with the Lusici, a Slavonic tribe. Towards the end of his reign a bitter dispute broke out between the emperor and the bishops. At the Synod of Seligenstadt, in , Archbishop Aribo of Mainz, who was an opponent of the Reform of Cluny, made an appeal to the pope without the permission of the bishop.

This ecclesiastical policy of Aribo's would have led in the end to the founding of a national German Church independent of Rome. The greater part of the clergy supported Aribo, but the emperor held to the party of reform. Henry, however, did not live to see the quarrel settled. The sovereigns of this line were vigorous, vehement, and autocratic rulers. Conrad had natural political ability and his reign is the most flourishing era of medieval imperialism. The international position of the empire was excellent.

Internal disputes kept the Kingdom of Poland from becoming dangerous; moreover, by regaining Lusatia the Germans recovered the old preponderance against the Poles. Important gains were also made in Burgundy, whereby the old Romanic states, France and Italy, were for a long time separated and the great passes of the Alps controlled by the Germans. The close connexion with the empire enabled the German population of north-western Burgundy to preserve its nationality.

Conrad had also kept up the close union of the State with the Church and had maintained his authority over the latter. He claimed for himself the same right of ruling the Church that his predecessors had exercised, and like them appointed bishops and abbots; he also reserved to himself the entire control of the property of the Church. Conrad's ecclesiastical policy, however, lacked definiteness; he failed to understand the most important interests of the Church, nor did he grasp the necessity of reform.

The aim of his financial policy was economic emancipation from the Church; royal financial officials took their place alongside of the ministeriales , or financial agents, of the bishops and monasteries. Conrad sought to rest his kingdom in Germany on these royal officials and on the petty vassals. In this way the laity was to be the guarantee of the emperor's independence of the episcopate. As he pursued the same methods in Italy, he was able to maintain an independent position between the bishops and the petty Italian despots who were at strife with one another.

Thus the ecclesiastical influence in Conrad's theory of government becomes less prominent. This statesmanlike sovereign was followed by his son, the youthful Henry III Unlike his father Henry had a good education; he had also been trained from an early age in State affairs. He was a born ruler and allowed himself to be influenced by no one; to force of character and courage he added a strong sense of duty. His foreign policy was at first successful.

He established the suzerainty of the empire over Hungary, without, however, being always able to maintain it; Bohemia also remained a dependent state. The empire gained a dominant position in Western Europe, and a sense of national pride was awakened in the Germans that opened the way for a national spirit. But the aim of these national aspirations, the hegemony in Western Europe, was a mere phantom. Each time an emperor went to Italy to be crowned that country had to be reconquered.

Even at this very time the imperial supremacy was in great danger from the threatened conflict between the imperial and the sacerdotal power, between Church and State. The Church, the only guide on earth to salvation, had attained dominion over mankind, whom it strove to wean from the earthly and to lead to the spiritual. The glaring contrast between the ideal and the reality awoke in thousands the desire to leave the world. A spirit of asceticism, which first appeared in France, took possession of many hearts.

As early as the era of the first Saxon emperors the attempt was made to introduce the reform movement of Cluny into Germany, and in the reign of Henry III this reform had become powerful. Henry himself laid much more stress than his predecessors on the ecclesiastical side of his royal position. His religious views led him to side with the men of Cluny. The great mistake of his ecclesiastical policy was the belief that it was possible to promote this reform of the Church by laying stress on his suzerain authority.

He repeatedly called and presided over synods and issued many decisions in Church affairs. His fundamental mistake, the thought that he could transform the Church in the manner desired by the party of reform and at the same time maintain his dominion over it, was also evident in his relations with the papacy. He sought to put an end to the disorder at Rome, caused by the unfortunate schism, by the energetic measure of deposing the three contending popes and raising Clement II to the Apostolic See.

Clement crowned him emperor and made him Patrician of Rome. Thus Henry seemed to have regained the same control over the Church that Otto had exercised. But the papacy, purified by the elevated conceptions of the party of reform and freed by Henry from the influence of the degenerate Roman aristocracy, strove to be absolutely independent. The Church was now to be released from all human bonds. The chief aims of the papal policy were the celibacy of the clergy, the presentation of ecclesiastical offices by the Church alone, and the attainment by these means of as great a centralization as possible.

Henry had acted with absolute honesty in raising the papacy, but he did not intend that it should outgrow his control. Sincerely pious, he was convinced of the possibility and necessity of complete accord between empire and papacy. His fanciful policy became an unpractical idealism.

Consequently the monarchical power began rapidly to decline in strength. Hungary regained freedom, the southern part of Italy was held by the Normans, and the Duchy of Lorraine, already long a source of trouble, maintained its hostility to the king. By the close of the reign of Henry III discontent was universal in the empire, thus permitting a growth of the particularistic powers, especially of the dukes. His wife Agnes assumed the regency for their four-year-old son, Henry IV , and at once showed her incompetence for the position by granting the great duchies to opponents of the crown.

She also sought the support of the lesser nobility and thus excited the hatred of the great princes. A conspiracy of the more powerful nobles, led by Archbishop Anno Hanno of Cologne, obtained possession of the royal child by a stratagem at Kaiserswert and took control of the imperial power. Henry IV, however, preferred the guidance of Adalbert, Archbishop of Bremen, who was able for the moment to give the governmental policy a more national character.

Thus in he restored German influence over Hungary, and the aim of his internal policy was to strengthen the central power. At the Diet of Tribur, , however, he was overthrown by the particularists, but the king by now was able to assume control for himself. In the meantime the papacy had been rapidly advancing towards absolute independence. The Curia now extended the meaning of simony to the granting of an ecclesiastical office by a layman and thus demanded an entire change in the conditions of the empire and placed itself in opposition to the imperial power.

The ordinances passed in for the regulation of the papal elections excluded all imperial rights in the same. Conditions in Italy grew continually more unfavourable for the empire. The chief supporters of the papal policy were the Normans, over whom the pope claimed feudal suzerainty.

The German bishops also yielded more and more to the authority of Rome; the Ottonian theory of government was already undermined. The question was now raised: In the Kingdom of God on earth who is to rule, the emperor or the pope? In Rome this question had long been settled. The powerful opponent of Henry, Gregory VII, claimed that the princes should acknowledge the supremacy of the Kingdom of God, and that the laws of God should be everywhere obeyed and carried out. The struggle which now broke out was in principle a conflict concerning the respective rights of the empire and the papacy.

But the conflict soon shifted from the spiritual to the secular domain; at last it became a conflict for the possession of Italy, and during the struggle the spiritual and the secular were often confounded. Henry was not a match for the genius of Gregory. He was courageous and intelligent and, though of a passionate nature, fought with dogged obstinacy for the rights of his monarchical power. But Gregory as the representative of the reform movement in the Church, demanding complete liberty for the Church, was too powerful for him.

Aided by the inferior nobility, Henry sought to make himself absolute. The particularistic powers, however, insisted upon the maintenance of the constitutional limits of the monarchy. The revolt of the Saxons against the royal authority was led both by spiritual and secular princes, and it was not until after many humiliations that Henry was able to conquer them in the battle on the Unstrut Directly after this began his conflict with the papacy. The occasion was the appointment of an Archbishop of Milan by the emperor without regard to the election already held by the ecclesiastical party.

Sabah T. Baerows, M. Paul Bernard Thomas: The Oberhof. Bayabd Taylor : The Dead to the Living. Mangan: The Spectre-Caravan. Loewenberg 1 Introduction to the Philosophy of History. Translated by J. Loewenberg 73 Introduction to the Philosophy of Art. By Henry Wood roethe's Correspondence with a Child.

By Martin Schiitze Immermann's Miinchhausen. Translated by Sarah T. Barrows Nikolaus Lenau Prayer. Translated by Charles Wharton Stork.. Translated by Charles Wharton Stork Seclusion. Translated by Charles Wharton Stork. Translated by Charles Wharton Stork r. Translated by M. Translated by C. Brooks The Lion's Ride. Brooks The Spectre-Caravan. Translated by Bayard Taylor Hurrah, Germania! Translated by Kate Freiligrath-Kroeker. Translated by William G. Translated by A. Coleman The Call of the Road. Coleman Autumn Days.

Coleman The Death of Tiberius. Lessing The Master of the Oberhof. By Benjamin Vautier The Oberhof. By Benjamin Vautier Lisbeth. By Benjamin Vautier Oswald, the Hunter. By Hans am Ende Eduard Morike. By Hans am Ende Ferdinand Freiligrath. Hasenclever Dusk on the Dead Sea. By Eugen Bracht Death on the Barricade. By Hader Journeying. Few thinkers indeed have ever so completely fascinated the minds of their sympathetic readers, or have so violently repulsed their unwilling listeners, as Hegel has.

To his followers Hegel is the true prophet of the only true philosophic creed, to his oppo- nents, he has, in Professor James's words, "like Byron's corsair, left a name 'to other times, linked with one virtue and a thousand crimes. Unlike Spinoza's, his life offers nothing to stir the imagination. Briefly, some of his biographical data are as follows : He was born at Stuttgart, the capital of Wiirtemberg, August 27, His father was a government official, and the family be- longed to the upper middle class. Hegel received his early education at the Latin School and the Gymnasium of his native town.

At both these institutions, as well as at the University of Tiibingen which he entered in to study theology, he distinguished himself as an eminently indus- trious, but not as a rarely gifted student. The certificate which he received upon leaving the University in speaks of his good character, his meritorious acquaintance with theology and languages, and his meagre knowledge of philosophy. After leaving the University he spent seven years as family tutor in Switzerland and in Frankfurt-on-the-Main. Soon after, in , we find him as Frivat-Docent; then, in , as professor at the University of Jena.

His academic activi- ties Avere interrupted by the battle of Jena. For the next two years we meet him as an editor of a political journal at Bamberg, and from to as rector of the Gymna- sium at Nuremberg. He was then called to a professor- ship of philosophy at Heidelberg. In he was called to Berlin to fill the vacancy left by the death of Fichte. From this time on until his death in , he was the recognized dictator of one of the most powerful philosophic schools in the history of thought.

Navigation menu

It is no easy task to convey an adequate idea of Hegel's philosophy within the limits of a short introduction. There is, however, one central thought animating the vast range of his whole philosophic system "which permits of non-tech- nical statement. This thought will be more easily grasped, if we consider first the well-known concept of permanence and change.

They may be said to constitute the most funda- mental distinction in life and in thought. Religion and poetry have always dwelt upon their tragic meaning. That there is nothing new under the sun and that we are but ''fair creatures of an hour" in an ever-changing world, are equally sad reflections. Interesting is the application of the difference between permanence and change to extreme types of temperament. These extreme types, by no means rare or unreal, illustrate the deep-rooted need of investing either permanence or change with a more fundamental value.

And to the value of the one or the other, philoso- phers have always endeavored to give metaphysical expres- Permission Berlin Photographic Co. Some thinkers have proclaimed change to be the deep- est manifestation of reality, while others have insisted upon something abiding behind a world of flux. The question whether change or permanence is more essential arose early in Greek philosophy. Heraclitus was the first one to see in change a deeper significance than in the permanence of the Eleatics.

A more dramatic opposition than the one which ensued between the Heracliteans and the Eleatics can scarcely be imagined — both schools claiming a monopoly of reason and truth, both distrusting the senses, and each charging the other with illusion. Now the significance of Hegel's philosophy can be grasped only when we bear in mind that it was just this profound distinction between the permanent and the changing that Hegel sought to under- stand and to interpret.

He saw more deeply into the reality of movement and change than any other philosopher be- fore or after him. Very early in his life, judging by the recently published writings of his youth, Hegel became interested in various phases of movement and change. The vicissitudes of his own inner or outer life he did not analyze.

He was not given to introspection. Romanticism and mysticism were foreign to his nature. His temperament was rather that of the objective thinker. Not his own passions, hopes, and fears, but those of others invited his curiosity. With an humane attitude, the young Hegel approached religious and historical problems.

The dramatic life and death of Jesus, the tragic fate of "the glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome," the discrepancies between Christ's teachings and the positive Christian religion, the fall of paganism and the triumph of the Christian Church — these were the problems over which the young Hegel pon- dered. Through an intense study of these problems, he dis- covered that evil, sin, longing, and suffering are woven into the very tissue of religious and historical processes, and that these negative elements determine the very mean- ing and progress of history and religion.

And thus his genius came upon a method which revealed to him an orderly un- folding in the world with stages of relative values, the higher developing from the lower, and all stages constitut- ing an organic whole. The method which the young Hegel discovered empiric- ally, and which the mature rationalist applied to every sphere of human life and thought, is the famous Dialectical Method.

This method is, in general, nothing else than the recognition of the necessary presence of a negative factor in the constitution of the world. Without such an element to overcome, the world would indeed be an inert and irrational affair. That any rational and worthy activity entails the encounter of oppo- sition and the removal of obstacles is an observation com- monplace enough.

A preestablished harmony of foreseen happy issues — a fool's paradise — is scarcely our ideal of a rational world. Just as a game is not worth plajdng when its result is predetermined by the great inferiority of the opponent, so life without something negative to overcome loses its zest.

But the process of overcoming is not any- thing contingent; it operates according to a uniform and universal law. And this law constitutes Hegel's most cen- tral doctrine — his doctrine of Evolution. In order to bring this doctrine into better relief, it may be well to contrast it superficially with the Darwinian theory of transformation. In general, Hegel's doctrine is a concept of value, Darwin's is not. What Darwinians mean by evolution is not an unfolding of the past, a pro- gressive development of a hierarchy of phases, in which the later is superior and organically related to the earlier.

No sufficient criterion is provided by them for evaluating the HEGEL 5 various stages in the course of an evolutionary process. The biologist's world would probably have been just as rational if the famous ape-like progenitor of man had chanced to become his offspring — assuming an original en- vironment favorable for such transformation.

Some cri- terion besides the mere external and accidental "struggle for existence" and ''survival of the fittest" must be fur- nished to account for a progressive evolution. Does the phrase "survival of the fittest" say much more than that those who happen to survive are the fittest, or that their survival proves their fitness? But that survival itself is valuable : that it is better to be alive than dead ; that exist- ence has a value other than itself; that what comes later in the history of the race or of the universe is an advance over what went before — that, in a word, the world is sub- ject to an immanent development, only a comprehensive and systematic philosophy can attempt to show.

The task of Hegel's whole philosophy consists in show- ing, by means of one uniform principle, that the world manifests everywhere a genuine evolution. Unlike the par- ticipants in the biological "struggle for existence," the struggling beings of Hegel's universe never end in slaying, but in reconciliation. Their very struggle gives birth to a new being which includes them, and this being is "higher" in the scale of existence, because it represents the preserva- tion of two mutually opposed beings. Only where conflicts are adjusted, oppositions overcome, negations removed, is there advance, in Hegel's sense; and only where there is a passage from the positive through its challenging negative to a higher form inclusive of both is there a case of real development.

The ordinary process of learning by experience illustrates somewhat Hegel's meaning. An individual finds himself, for instance, in the presence of a wholly new situation that elicits an immediate, definite reaction. In his ignorance, he chooses the wrong mode of behavior. Embittered and disappointed with himself, he experiences great mental sorrow. But he soon learns to see the situation in its true light; he condemns his deed and offers to make amends. And after the wounds begin to heal again, the inner struggles experienced com- mence to assume a positive worth.

They have led him to a deeper insight into his own motives, to a better self-com- prehension. And he finally comes forth from the whole af- fair enriched and enlightened. Now in this formal example, to which any content may be supplied, three phases can be distinguished. First, we have the person as he meant to be in the presence of the new situation, unaware of trouble. Then, his wrong reaction engendered a hostile element.

He was at war with himself; he was not what he meant to be. And finally, he returned to himself richer and wiser, in- cluding within himself the negative experience as 'a valua- ble asset in the advance of his development. This process of falling away from oneself, of facing one- self as an enemy whom one reconciles to and includes in one's larger self, is certainly a familiar process.

It is a process just like this that develops one's personality. How- ever the self may be defined metaphysically, it is for every self-conscious individual a never-ceasing battle with con- flicting motives and antagonistic desires — a never-ending cycle of endeavor, failure, and success through the very agency of failure.

A more typical instance of this rhythmic process is Hegel's view of the evolution of religion. Eeligion, in gen- eral, is based on a dualism which it seeks to overcome. Though God is in heaven and man on earth, religion longs to bridge the gulf which separates man and God. The re- ligions of the Orient emphasize God's infinity. God is everything, man is nothing. Like an Oriental prince, God is conceived to have despotic sway over man, his creature.

Only in contemplating God's omnipotence and his own nothingness can man find solace and peace. Opposed to this religion of the infinite is the finite religion of Greece. The gods on high, conceived after the likeness of man, are the expression of a free peo- ple conscious of their freedom. And the divinities wor- shiped, under the form of Zeus, Apollo, Aphrodite — what are they but idealized and glorified Greeks?

Can a more complete antithesis be imagined! But Christianity becomes possible after this struggle only, for in Christianity is con- tained both the principle of Oriental infinity and the element of Hellenic finitude, for in a being who is both God and man — a God-man — the gulf between the infinite and finite is bridged. The Christian, like the Greek, worships man — Jesus; but this man is one with the eternal being of the Orient.

Because it is the outcome of the Oriental and Greek opposition, the Christian religion is, in Hegel's sense, a higher one. Viewing the Oriental and the Hellenic re- ligions historically in terms of the biological ' ' struggle for existence," the extinction of neither has resulted. The Christian religion is the unity of these two struggling op- posites ; in it they are conciliated and preserved.

And this for Hegel is genuine evolution. That evolution demands a union of opposites seems at first paradoxical enough. To say that Christianity is a religion of both infinity and finitude means nothing less than that it contains a contradiction. Hegel's view, strange as it may sound, is just this : everything includes a con- tradiction in it, everything is both positive and negative, everything expresses at once its Everlasting Yea and its Everlasting No. The negative character of the world is the very vehicle of its progress.

Life and activity mean the triumph of the positive over the negative, a triumph which results from absorbing and assimilating it. The myth of the Phoenix typifies the life of reason "eternally preparing for itself," as Hegel says, "a funeral pile, and consuming itself upon it; but so that from its ashes it produces the new, renovated, fresh life. His com- plete philosophy is the attempt to show in detail that the whole universe and everything it contains manifests the process of uniformly struggling with a negative power, and is an outcome of conflicting, but reconciled forces.

An im- pressionistic picture of the world's eternal becoming through this process is furnished by the first of Hegel's great works, the Phenomenology of Spirit. The book is, in a sense, a cross-section of the entire spiritual world. It depicts the necessary unfolding of typical phases of the spiritual life of mankind. Logical categories, scien- tific laws, historical epochs, literary tendencies, religious processes, social, moral, and artistic institutions, all ex- emplify the same onward movement through a union of opposites. There is eternal and total instability every- where.

But this unrest and instability is of a necessary and uniform nature, according to the one eternally fixed princi- ple which renders the universe as a whole organic and orderly. Organic Wholeness! This phrase contains the rationale of the restless flow and the evanescent being of the Hegelian world.

It is but from the point of view of the whole that its countless conflicts, discrepancies, and contradictions can be understood. As the members of the body find only in the body as a whole their raison d'etre, so the manifold ex- pressions of the world are the expressions of one organism. A hand which is cut off, as Hegel somewhere remarks, still looks like a hand, and exists ; but it is not a real hand. Sim- ilarly any part of the world, severed from its connection with the whole, any isolated historical event, any one re- ligious view, any particular scientific explanation, any single social body, any mere individual person, is like an ampu- tated bodily organ.

Hegel's view of the world as organic depends upon exhibiting the partial and abstract nature of other views. In his Phenomenology a variety of interpre- tations of the world and of the meaning and destiny of life HEGEL 9 are scrutinized as to their adequacy and concreteness. When not challenged, the point of view of common sense, for instance, seems concrete and natural.

The reaction of common sense to the world is direct and practical, it has few questions to ask, and philosophic speculations appear to it abstract and barren. But, upon analysis, it is the common sense view that stands revealed as abstract and barren.

General Info

For an abstract object is one that does not fully correspond to the rich and manifold reality ; it is incomplete and one-sided. Precisely such an object is the world of common sense. Its concreteness is ignorance. There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of by common sense. Its work-a-day world is not even a faint reflex of the vast and complex universe. It sees but the immediate, the ob- vious, the superficial.

So instead of being concrete, it is, in truth, the very opposite. Nor is empirical science with its predilection for "facts" better off. Every science able to cope with a mere fragmentary aspect of the world and from a partial point of view, is forced to ignore much of the concrete content of even its own realm. Likewise, art and religion, though in their views more synthetic and therefore more concrete, are one-sided ; they seek to satisfy special needs.

Philosophy alone — Hegelian philosophy — is concrete. Its aim is to interpret the world in its entirety and complexity, its ideal is to harmonize the demands of common sense, the interests of science, the appeal of art, and the longing of religion into one coherent whole. This view of philosophy, because it deals with the universe in its fulness and variety, alone can make claim to real con- creteness. Nor are the other views false. They form for Hegel the necessary rungs on the ladder which leads up to his own philosophic vision. Thus the Hegelian vision is itself an organic process, including all other interpretations of life and of the world as its necessary phases.

In the immanent unfolding of the Hegelian view is epitomized the onward march and the organic unity of the World- Spirit itself. This book may indeed be said to be Hegel's mas- ter-stroke. Nothing less is attempted in it than the proof that the very process of reasoning manifests the same prin- ciple of evolution through a union of opposites. Hegel was well aware, as much as recent exponents of anti-intellec- tualism, that through "static" concepts we transmute and falsify the ''fluent" reality.

As Professor James says: ' ' The essence of life is its continuously changing character ; but our concepts are all discontinuous and fixed. A concept means a tliat-and-no-other. What if the very concepts we employ in reasoning should exemplify the universal flow of life? Hegel finds that indeed to be the case.

Concepts we daily use, such as quality and quantity, essence and phenomenon, appearance and reality, matter and force, cause and ef- fect, are not fixed and isolated entities, but form a continu- ous system of interdependent elements. Stated dogmati- cally the meaning is this : As concavity and convexity are inseparably connected, though one is the very opposite of the other — as one cannot, so to speak, live without the other, both being always found in union — so can no con- cept be discovered that is not thus wedded to its contradic- tion.

Every concept develops, upon analysis, a stubbornly negative mate. No concept is statable or definable with- out its opposite ; one involves the other. One cannot speak of motion without implying rest; one cannot mention the finite without at the same time referring to the infinite; one cannot define cause without explicitly defining effect.

Not only is this true, but concepts, when applied, reveal perpetual oscillation. Take the terms "north" and ' ' south. But it is a north pole only by excluding the south pole from itself HEGEL 11 — by being itself and not merely what the other is not. The situation is paradoxical enough: Each aspect — the negative or the positive — of anything appears to exclude the other, while each requires its own other for its very definition and expression.

It needs the other, and yet is independent of it. How Hegel proves this of all concepts, cannot here be shown. The result is that no concept can be taken by itself as a ' ' that-and-no-other. The attempt to isolate any logical category and regard it as fixed and stable thus proves futile. Each category — to show this is the task of Hegel's Logic — is itself an organ- ism, the result of a process which takes place within its inner constitution.

And all logical categories, inevitably used in describing and explaining our world, form one sys- tem of interdependent and organically related parts. Hegel begins with an analysis of a concept that most abstractly describes reality, follows it through its countless conflicts and contradictions, and finally reaches the highest category which, including all the foregoing categories in organic unity, is alone adequate to characterize the universe as an organism.

What these categories are and what Hegel's procedure is in showing their necessary sequential develop- ment, can here not even be hinted at. In the history of philosophy, the discrepancy be- tween thought and reality has often been emphasized. There are those who insist that reality is too vast and too deep for man with his limited vision to penetrate ; others, again, who set only certain bounds to man's understanding, reality.

In the history of philosophy, the discrepancy be- parts; and others still who see in the very shifts and changes of philosophic and scientific opinion the delusion of reason and the illusiveness of reality. But all the contra- dictions and conflicts of thought prove to Hegel the sover- eignty of reason. The conflicts of reason are its own nec- essary processes and expressions. Its dialectic insta- bility is instability that is peculiar to all reality. Both thought and reality manifest one nature and one process.

Hegel's bold and oft quoted words: "What is rational is real; and what is real is rational," pithily express his whole doctrine. The nature of ration- ality and the nature of reality are, for Hegel, one and the same spiritual process, the organic process of triumphing over and conquering conflicts and contradictions. Where reality conforms to this process it is rational that which does not conform to it is not reality at all, but has, like an amputated leg, mere contingent existence ; the logical for- mula of this process is but an abstract account of what reality is in its essence.

The equation of the real and the rational, or the dis- covery of one significant process underlying both life and reason, led Hegel to proclaim a new kind of logic, so well characterized by Professor Eoyce as the "logic of passion. Mutual conflict and contradiction appear as their sole constant factor amid all their variable conditions. The introduction of contradiction into logical concepts as their sine qua non meant indeed a revolutionary departure from traditional logic.

Prior to Hegel, logical reasoning was reasoning in accordance with the law of contradiction, i. For Hegel, on the contrary, contra- diction is the very moving principle of the world, the pulse HEGEL 13 of its life. Alle Dinge sind an sich selhst widersprechend, as he drastically says. The deeper reason why Hegel in- vests contradiction with a positive value lies in the fact that, since the nature of everything involves the union of dis- crepant elements, nothing can bear isolation and inde- pendence.

Terms, processes, epochs, institutions, depend upon one another for their meaning, expression, and exist- ence; it is impossible to take anything in isolation. But this is just what one does in dealing with the world in art or in science, in religion or in business ; one is always deal- ing with error and contradiction, because one is dealing with fragments or bits of life and experience. Hence — and this is Hegel's crowning thought — anything short of the whole universe is inevitably contradictory.

In brief, con- tradiction has the same sting for Hegel as it has for any one else. Without losing its nature of ''contradictoriness," contradiction has logically this positive meaning. Since it is an essential element of every partial, isolated, and inde- pendent view of experience and thought, one is necessarily led to transcend it and to see the universe in organic whole- ness. Thus, as Hegel puts his fundamental idea, "the truth is the whole. The essence of the universe is the life of the totality of all things, not their sum. As the life of man is not the sum of his bodily and mental functions, the whole man being pres- ent in each and all of these, so must the universe be con- ceived as omnipresent in each of its parts and expressions.

This is the significance of Hegel's conception of the uni- verse as an organism. The World-Spirit — Hegel's God — constitutes, thinks, lives, wills, and is all in unity.

The evolution of the universe is thus the evolution of God him- self. These ramifica- tions themselves are conceived as constituting complete wholes, such as logic, nature, mind, society, history, art, religion, philosophy, so that the universe in its onward march through these is represented as a Whole of Wholes — ein Kreis von Kreisen. In Hegel's complete philosophy each of these special spheres finds its proper place and elaborate treatment. Whether Hegel has well or ill succeeded in the task of exhibiting in each and all of these spheres the one universal movement, whether or no he was justified in reading into logic the same kind of development manifested by life, or in making life conform to one logical formula — these and other problems should arouse an interest in Hegel's writ- ings.

The following selections may give some glimpse of their spirit. In conclusion, some bare suggestions must suffice to indi- cate the reason for Hegel's great influence.

Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)
Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)
Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)
Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)
Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)
Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)
Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition) Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)

Related Der Ingelheimer Oberhof (German Edition)

Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved