Cultural depictions of Frederick Barbarossa

Today, when a tradition-establishing form of commemoration for the emperor is no longer necessary, scholars like Kurt Görich call for neutrality and warn against the instrumentalization of the historical person in the other way.

[1] Modern historians generally reject nationalist myths, while portraying the emperor as an influential ruler who suffered many setbacks but often managed to recover.

He reestablished in Germany, enhanced the imperial position, but also made mistakes when trying to assert his authority over North Italian communes, leading to a prolonged struggle.

His successful diplomatic efforts together with a developing circumstance also opened new possibilites for the imperial position, notably through the marriage of his son Henry VI with Constance of Sicily.

[12][13] In 2010, Professor Gianluca Raccagni of the University of Edinburgh summarized the current knowledge on Frederick's rule as the following:[21] There are good reasons for Frederick’s enduring legacy and fame through the centuries, since he was deeply involved in expanding the influence of the Holy Roman Empire, enjoyed a long and remarkably stable rule in Germany (relatively speaking), was engaged in a momentous struggle with the papacy and the Lombard city communes, and had extensive contacts with the other Christian rulers in Europe and the Mediterranean, not to mention the crusade that he undertook and during which he died.

Frederick came very close to killing the autonomy of the Italian city-states shortly after their birth, to re-establishing imperial control over the papacy, and to expanding his hegemony in the Mediterranean as well.

[24] According to John Freed, until the end of the nineteenth century, even scholars in Germany had to rely on a semi-popular history to get a general overview of Frederick's reign.

[32] Jean-Yves Mariotte highly praises the works but adds that more clarity on the subjects of the imperial function or the financial aspect of the monarchy might widen the perspective.

Jahrhundert, in which he extensively discusses Frederick's attachment to the concept of honor imperii, which was tied to not only his self-understanding as a ruler, but also rights and duties, and also subject to balancing acts with what was politically possible.

Loud also notes Görich credibly shows Frederick as a man of ambition, calculation and skills – one of those was "an ability to satisfy and to recompense those who were not necessarily within his inner circle".

According to Laudage, it was because the emperor lived in an environment in which many issues raised in diets and councils were ultimate conflicts of honours (Ehrkonflikte): "In a society that lacked a written imperial constitution, it was crucial to constantly and demonstratively assert one's own reputation and position in the social hierarchy."(p.

[39] Bernd Schütte notes that Laudage "ascribes to the emperor and his advisors the decisive initiative in all fields, always future-oritented and accompanied by far-reaching ideas and plans."

Plassmann notes that Freed ignores Knut Görich's point that argues that, "Frederick was universally accepted 'as king and emperor and managed to push for the succession he wanted'".

According to Plassmann, Frederick achieved an "unusual level of acceptance" within Germany, which helped him to survive excommunication, pestilence, a crushing defeat against the Italian opposition and the defiance of one of the mightiest princes of the realm and ended up as the unquestioned leader of the German host on the third crusade".

[47] Schumann notes that the work Federico Barbarossa nel dibattito storiografico in Italia e in Germania, edited by Manselli and Riedmann, is a definite synthesis of non-nationally oriented historiography approaches (combining German and Italian research results) of the last forty years.

[45] Knut Görich opines that Italian writers tend to assume that responsibility the destruction of Milan lay solely with Frederick, but the cities in alliance with him played an important role too.

Alfredo Pasquetti notés that German accounts show that the destruction was understood as a kind of revenge, but at the same time, the authors believed it to be justice and justified it with the hope that once the subjugation of Milan was completed, more glorious enterprises could be undertaken.

He was resourceful enough to leverage fissures among his opponents and to free himself from the consequences of serious setbacks, intuitively wise enough to offer his adversaries compensation for their losses while still building in future checks and balances, and politically realistic enough to believe in imperial honor and sovereignty while accepting the possible and practical when necessary.Jenny Benham notes that the 1177 treaty of Venice ushed in a period of prosperity for the Sicilian kingdom, while the emperor and his descendants gained a claim to lordship of Sicily, and thus most of Italy, which would be realized by Constance and Henry later.

[50] Joseph F. Byrne remarks that although the successes of the Italian communes were short-lived, in the long run, their resilience against Europe's greatest monarch reinforced a communal ethic that would last for another two centuries and beyond.

Byrne opines that Frederick was a flexible politician, but in Italy, his blind spot made him refuse to understand the Italian communes' commitment to their liberties and thus, for a quarter of a century, unable to formulate a satisfactory.

On the other hands, the emperor showed an interest in the deeds of historical rulers, as evident in Otto of Freising's Chronica de duabus civitatibus, a Latin world chronicLe recording history from the creation of man to Frederick's era, and Gesta Friderici Imperatoris, a notable early Hohenstaufen historiographical work.

[61][62] After the wedding with Beatrice, together with the arrival of trouvères and troubadours like Guyot de Provins from Burgundy and Provence, the art of minnesang developed in Barbarossa's court.

John Freed writes that, "This jarring depiction and its ambivalent assessment of Frederick’s reign were soon covered up with a layer of paint that was not removed until the beginning of the twentieth century.