1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Xelga [282]
2 years ago
13

What were the major empires in between the 11th-16th centuries?

History
2 answers:
Whitepunk [10]2 years ago
5 0

Explanation:

The development of such major Sudanic kingdoms and empires as Ghana, Mali, Songhai, the Hausa states, and Kanem-Bornu along the southern fringes of the Sahara had a number of important consequences for the history of western Africa as a whole

nlexa [21]2 years ago
5 0
The precise term Sacrum Romanum Imperium dates only from 1254, though the term Holy Empire reaches back to 1157, and the term Roman Empire was used from 1034 to denote the lands under Conrad II’s rule. The term “Roman emperor” is older, dating from Otto II (died 983). This title, however, was not used by Otto II’s predecessors, from Charlemagne (or Charles I) to Otto I, who simply employed the phrase imperator augustus (“august emperor”) without any territorial adjunct. The first title that Charlemagne is known to have used, immediately after his coronation in 800, is “Charles, most serene Augustus, crowned by God, great and pacific emperor, governing the Roman empire.” This clumsy formula, however, was soon discarded.

Holy Roman Empire
Holy Roman Empire
Imperial Crown of the Holy Roman Empire, 10th century; in the treasury of Hofburg palace, Vienna.
Erich Lessing/Magnum
These questions about terms reveal some of the problems involved in the nature and early history of the empire. It can be regarded as a political institution, or approached from the point of view of political theory, or treated in the context of the history of Christendom as the secular counterpart of a world religion. The history of the empire is also not to be confused or identified with the history of its constituent kingdoms, Germany and Italy, though clearly they are interrelated. The constituent territories retained their identity; the emperors, in addition to the imperial crown, also wore the crowns of their kingdoms. Finally, whereas none of the earlier emperors from Otto I had assumed the imperial title until actually crowned by the pope in Rome, after Charles V none was emperor in this sense, though all laid claim to the imperial dignity as if they had been duly crowned as well as elected. Despite these anomalies and others, the empire, at least in the Middle Ages, was by common assent, along with the papacy, the most important institution of western Europe.


Theologians, lawyers, popes, ecclesiastics, rulers, rebels like Arnold of Brescia and Cola di Rienzo, literary figures like Dante and Petrarch, and the practical men, members of the high nobility, on whom the emperors relied for support, all saw the empire in a different light and had their own ideas of its origin, function, and justification. Among these heterogeneous and often incompatible views, three may be said to predominate: (1) the papal theory, according to which the empire was the secular arm of the church, set up by the papacy for its own purposes and therefore answerable to the pope and, in the last resort, to be disposed of by him; (2) the imperial, or Frankish, theory, which placed greater emphasis on conquest and hegemony as the source of the emperor’s power and authority and according to which he was responsible directly to God; and (3) the popular, or Roman, theory (the “people” at this stage being synonymous with the nobility and in this instance with the Roman nobility), according to which the empire, following the tradition of Roman law, was a delegation of powers by the Roman people. Of the three theories the last was the least important; it was evidently directed against the pope, whose constitutive role it implicitly denied, but it was also a specifically Italian reaction against the predominance in practice of Frankish and German elements.

Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content.
Subscribe Now
It is also important to distinguish between the universalist and localist conceptions of the empire, which have been the source of considerable controversy among historians. According to the former, the empire was a universal monarchy, a “commonwealth of the whole world, whose sublime unity transcended every minor distinction”; and the emperor “was entitled to the obedience of Christendom.” According to the latter, the emperor had no ambition for universal dominion; his policy was limited in the same way as that of every other ruler, and when he made more far-reaching claims his object was normally to ward off the attacks either of the pope or of the Byzantine emperor. According to this view, also, the origin of the empire is to be explained by specific local circumstances rather than by far-flung theories.

Load Next Page
Hope this helps !
You might be interested in
What word ending in "ism" is another word for this kind of compound government?
aleksandrvk [35]
The answer is Federalism 
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Did anyone else have a terrible day on July 9th and 10th? It seems like those were the worst days. (free points)
anzhelika [568]

Answer:

Not particularly.

Explanation:

I honestly can't even keep track of time nowadays though.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of the following best identifies the major economic activities of the Spanish colonies? (How
Sphinxa [80]

Answer:

d

Explanation:

3 0
2 years ago
What is the difference between an inhabited and uninhabited territory?
g100num [7]
A. Inhabited territories have a permanent population, & uninhabited territories don’t.
5 0
3 years ago
Fin de siècle, French for "end of the century," refers to the art of the:
Kay [80]
It refers to the artists of the turn of the century, that is the art made at the beginning of the 20th century. It mostly refers to modernists and symbolism who created in this period and whose art was full of things like pessimism and cynicism. Modernity in general is associated with it.
5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What was the name given to the group headed by eustakio mendizabel benito at the start of 1970?
    13·1 answer
  • Overtime,many trading posts established along the frontier
    9·1 answer
  • HISTORY HELP PLEASE!!!!?
    10·2 answers
  • Read the following passage and answer the question:
    11·1 answer
  • How did hitler manipulate the term aryan for nazi purposes?
    14·1 answer
  • Explain why Jefferson used round tables for guest dinners rather than rectangle tables
    12·1 answer
  • Will give brainliest (Market economies are characterized by)
    10·1 answer
  • Can someone help me with my paragraph about the ancient Olmec civilization!!! All I need is some facts about it put into paragra
    15·1 answer
  • Which is not a factor of production?
    11·2 answers
  • -What are the main causes of WWI? Be sure to include an example to represent each cause.
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!