Rudolf of Rheinfelden

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The grave slab of Rudolf von Rheinfelden in Merseburg Cathedral is the oldest bronze grave slab in Central Europe. It was once gold-plated and decorated with precious stones. The grave slab bears the inscription: King Rudolf, carried away for the law of the fathers, to lament for his merit, is buried here in the grave. As king he had, had he ruled in peacetime, no one since Karl comparable in skills of spirit and sword. Where his own won, he fell, holy victim of war. Death became life to him: for the church he sank.

Rudolf von Rheinfelden (also Rudolf von Schwaben ; * around 1025; † October 15 or 16, 1080 near Hohenmölsen ) was Duke of Swabia from 1057 to 1077 .

Initially a supporter of King Henry IV , his brother-in-law, he took a contrary position to this during the disputes of the investiture dispute and was elected by the opposition on March 15, 1077 in Forchheim to be the rival king . After several armed conflicts between him and Heinrich, he lost his life in 1080 in the battle of Hohenmölsen after a serious wound.


Rudolf's father was Count Kuno von Rheinfelden, who lived before 1024 and was a stepbrother of Ita von Lothringen (* 23 July around 995 ; † after 1035 ), who was married to Radbot Count von Habsburg († 30 June before 1045). His mother is unknown.

In 1048 Rudolf appears for the first time in a document from Emperor Heinrich III. as Count in Sisgau near Rheinfelden , this is on the Upper Rhine on the border between Swabia and Burgundy. The family property extended on the one hand to the Black Forest - the St. Blasien monastery was a kind of house monastery of Rudolf - but on the other hand it extended far into Burgundy in what is now western Switzerland. The family belonged to the great Burgundian noble families. The exact family relationships of Rudolf von Rheinfelden cannot yet be fully clarified. His relationship to the then already extinct Burgundian royal house by Rudolf II of Burgundy (912-937) is considered to be certain. He was also cousin of the Duke of Lorraine and a relative of the Liudolfinger . This kinship with the ruling family gave him additional legitimacy as a candidate for the election of a king, even if this may seem contradictory at first glance. But for a king's elevation in the Middle Ages, the principle of heredity (royal blood or at least royal kinship) was the necessary prerequisite for the electoral principle of the great .

Political rise

The grave slab of Rudolf von Rheinfelden is located in the Merseburg Cathedral

His political rise began with the death of the Swabian Duke Otto von Schweinfurt . Empress Agnes named him the new Duke of Swabia in 1057 and gave him the administration of Burgundy. Due to his proximity to the ecclesiastical reform idea, Rudolf had good relations with the empress, who had promoted the St. Blasien monastery together with him . However, a controversy had developed about the award of the Duchy of Swabia , because Berthold von Zähringen made a claim to the Duchy and invoked a ring from Henry III, which he had given him as pledge. This problem was solved with the promise of the Empress Agnes that the Zähringer would receive the next free duchy, which was the case a little later with the Duchy of Carinthia .

For the dynastic consolidation of the Salian ruling house, Rudolf was betrothed to the imperial daughter Mathilde von Schwaben , who was still underage . Frutolf von Michelsberg reports that Rudolf kidnapped eleven-year-old Mathilde from a monastery owned by Bishop Rumold von Konstanz , where she was taken into care. Mathilde died at the age of twelve on May 12th, 1060. By marrying Adelheid von Turin , daughter of Count Otto von Savoyen , in 1062 the family ties to the Salians were renewed. Since Adelheid was a sister of Bertha , the wife of Heinrich IV, Rudolf became a relative of Heinrich again. Their daughter Agnes was married to Berthold II von Zähringen . The daughter Adelheid was married to King Ladislaus I of Hungary around 1078 .

Formation of an anti-Sali opposition in the empire

After the death of Heinrich III. on October 5, 1056 and the time of Henry IV's minority, that is, during the reign of Empress Agnes, the powerful princes of the empire gained considerable influence on imperial politics. This process was intensified by the kidnapping of the eleven-year-old Heinrich IV in April 1062 by the Archbishop of Cologne ( coup d'etat by Kaiserswerth ), who then decisively determined imperial policy. At the side of Annos von Köln, Rudolf drove Archbishop Adalbert of Bremen out of power in 1066 . After Henry came of age and the declaration of age on March 29, 1065, he took the policy of his father Heinrich III. who had tried to establish extensive royal household power in Saxony by building castles and buying land. During the time of Henry IV's minority, the Saxon nobility had largely brought these extensive areas under their control. The attempt to regain these areas and the construction of new hill- top castles gave rise to an oppositional movement. Heinrich relied more on the ministerials supported by the Salian monarchy in the conduct of the imperial business , so that in protest against this development the Upper German dukes Rudolf of Swabia, Berthold of Carinthia and Welf of Bavaria distanced themselves from the royal court. As early as 1073, the princes are said to have intended to elevate Rudolf of Swabia to king instead of Heinrich IV.

During the Saxon uprisings in the first half of the seventies, Rudolf von Rheinfelden was still loyal to King Henry IV. After the Saxon Bruno, Rudolf was considered the driving force among the princes who literally incited the king into the Saxon War. The Battle of the Unstrut against the Saxons should have opened Rudolf. As the leader of the Swabian contingent, Rudolf also contributed to its victory on June 9, 1075 in the Battle of the Unstrut. From then on, however, Rudolf moved further and further away from the king. As early as the beginning of the seventies, Rudolf was repeatedly associated with conspiracies aimed at disempowering Henry IV. According to an isolated piece of news, Rudolf is even said to have been a confidante and participant in the outrage of the Saxon princes directed against Heinrich IV. The royal side is said to have caused Rudolf to be forcibly removed. It was not until the mediation of Empress Agnes in 1072 and again in 1074 that the agreement between Rudolf and Heinrich was restored, at least externally.

Ban of Henry IV.

Mathilde von Tuszien and Hugo von Cluny as advocates of Henry IV. (Vita Mathildis des Donizio, around 1115. Vatican City, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Ms. Vat. Lat. 4922, fol. 49v)

Only when Pope Gregory VII pronounced the ban on Heinrich in February 1076 did Rudolf decide to proceed openly. At a meeting of princes in Trebur in October 1076, the southern German dukes - among them the Duke of Bavaria, Welf IV. And the Duke of Carinthia, Berthold von Zähringen - tried to secure a new election as Henry IV's most determined opponent. Heinrich, who was at the same time on the other side of the Rhine in Oppenheim , constantly lost supporters and was therefore forced to compromise. Overall, a large (but heterogeneous) anti-Sali party had emerged, which gave Heinrich a one-year period to resolve it if he wanted to remain king. The matter of kingship was then to be discussed at a princely convention in Augsburg in February 1077 in the presence of the Pope.

One month before the deadline, Heinrich set out on the journey across the Alps to meet the Pope, who was on the said route to Augsburg. Rudolf responded by attempting to block the way to Italy for the king, who was striving for absolution, by guarding the Burgundian and Swabian passes - but he did not succeed. Gregor, for his part, now feared a military conflict with Heinrich and therefore sought refuge in the castle of Canossa with the margravine Mathilde of Tuszien, who was well-disposed to him . Heinrich, however, only wanted to be released from the ban. According to Gregorian sources, he is said to have waited barefoot in the snow in front of the castle gate for three days, dressed only in a hairy penitent robe. But Gregor hesitated and only accepted him back into the church on January 28, 1077 after three days of penance .

This act seems to have been a defeat for Heinrich, but in this way the king was able to counteract a strengthening of the opposition to the princes. The main weapon was knocked out of the hands of his opponents. In the short term, he was able to prevent the interaction between pope and prince and in this way save the crown. In the short term it was Gregory, who had to suffer a diplomatic defeat by his opponent from the shame of excommunication freed. In the long term, however, the walk to Canossa damaged the kingship, since the penance was tantamount to subordination of the secular to the spiritual power and the sacred character, that is, the religious legitimation of the kingship was thus damaged. The king, as the Lord's anointed, lost authority.

Election and coronation

The Prince's Day in Forchheim

The release of the ban did not prevent the German princes from electing Duke Rudolf on March 15, 1077 in Forchheim, Franconia, as German king. This place was probably chosen because several royal elections had already taken place there in the 9th and 10th centuries, which should give Rudolf's election an additional symbolic legitimation. The course of the election corresponded to the usual procedure, apart from the fact that this was the first election of an opposing king in Roman-German history. However, there was one special feature that should be repeated again and again in the future. In the run-up to the election, the princes began to make certain demands, that is, they demanded individual election promises. At this point the papal legates who were present stepped in and declared that this was tantamount to simony and that Rudolf was not the king of the individual princes (singulorum) , but king of the entire people (universorum) . Not personal advantages, but the suitability of the candidate should be decisive for the choice. Nevertheless, Rudolf had to make two general promises: On the one hand, he approved the free canonical election of bishops without secular, i.e. royal, interference. On the other hand, he undertook to renounce hereditary succession to the throne and any designation and thus to recognize the right to free election of a king.

The archbishops of Mainz , Salzburg and Magdeburg , the bishops of Worms , Passau , Halberstadt and Würzburg appeared as spiritual voters . As secular comrades-in-arms Otto von Northeim , Berthold I of Carinthia , Welf IV of Bavaria and possibly Magnus of Saxony (not secured) were on. This brought together the most powerful dukes of southern Germany, whose political ascent had only begun through Heinrich's mother - Empress Agnes. The spiritual element clearly predominated, however, and the attempt to win additional allies by postponing the election had failed.

The coronation in Mainz

Rudolf now moved via Bamberg and Würzburg to Mainz, where he was ordained king on March 26, 1077 by the local Archbishop Siegfried I , one of the main participants in Forchheim. However, since the anointing did not meet with approval from the Mainz citizens who were loyal to the institution, he had to leave the city shortly afterwards under the impression of a revolting crowd together with the bishops. The clergy appointed by Simonie also took part in the uprising, as they feared losing their offices. After all, Rudolf's negative attitude towards the simonist practice was known. In this question, Rudolf stood entirely on the side of the Gregorians, who tried to fight them. After a little odyssey, he retired to Saxony, where he enjoyed the strongest support in the empire.


The election of Rudolf as the opposing king generated very different responses. For the time being, the Pope was neutral and took neither Heinrich's nor Rudolf's side. Gregor claimed the role of arbiter in the controversy for the throne. As a result, Rudolf's position remained weak and he did not succeed in securing a larger power base in the empire. On the contrary: shortly after his election, his support among dignitaries began to crumble. He lacked the followers he needed to build up his young kingship. Only in Saxony did it find broad support. In the royal camp the general opinion was that Gregory VII himself was the initiator of the election of the king at Forchheim. Gregor VII is said to have sent Rudolf a crown with an inscription, in the text of which reference was made to the award. But this is not considered credible. The followers of Henry IV accused Rudolf of Swabia of a lack of gratitude and loyalty. According to the author of the Vita Heinrici IV. Rudolf let himself be seduced by greed (avaritia) , the main vice of the people, and in this way became a traitor to Heinrich IV. The rising of the king was seen as an illegal act, as usurpation. The anti-kingship also meant an attack on the divine order, since all rulership can be derived from God.

The antagonistic kingdom of Rudolf 1077-1080

The only surviving seal of Rudolf von Rheinfelden on a document dated March 25, 1079

Although excluded from his home country Swabia, Rudolf remained a dangerous opponent of Heinrich. Heinrich withdrew all fiefs and dignities from the rebellious princes on a court day in Ulm at the end of May 1077 and imposed the death penalty on the supporters.

First arguments

In the period that followed, there were repeated military conflicts between Heinrich and the Prince's opposition. The armies of Heinrich and Rudolf first met at Würzburg . Separated by the Rhine and Neckar, similar to Trebur / Oppenheim, negotiations began that were initiated by princes from Heinrich's army. A princely convention in the presence of papal legates was agreed for November 1st, but this did not materialize, although both negotiating parties had sworn to force Heinrich and Rudolf to hold this meeting. Berthold von Reichenau (with an anti-Salary attitude) blamed Heinrich for blocking the meeting place. A reproach that seems realistic in view of the events in Tribur and Oppenheim, because Heinrich had to be warned by his experiences with the momentum of such gatherings. He also rejected any interference by the papacy.

The war year 1078 began early in March with a successful campaign by Heinrich against the Formbachers in Bavaria. The attempt to excommunicate Rudolf at the fasting synod in 1078, however, was unsuccessful. Berthold von Reichenau reports of negotiations that subsequently took place between Heinrich and the Saxon princes, but which failed because of the question of the exchange of prisoners due to Heinrich's title of the opposition as rebels and oath breakers.

Battle of Mellrichstadt

Rudolf donates an estate complex to the Episcopal Church in Meißen. The document from March 25, 1079 is the only document from King Rudolf of Rheinfelden that has ever been preserved.

On August 7, 1078, Heinrich threatened the unification of the oppositional armies from Saxony and southern Germany, which he had to prevent at all costs. While Heinrich himself opposed Rudolf near Mellrichstadt , an army of 12,000 farmers took up the fight against Welf and Berthold on the Neckar. In Mellrichstadt, the oppositional army won a victory despite the flight of Rudolf, the archbishops of Mainz and Magdeburg and the bishops of Merseburg and Worms thanks to Otto von Northeim, who remained on the battlefield. The peasant army on the Neckar was crushed by Welf and Berthold. Nevertheless, Heinrich had achieved his goal. The two armies remained separate from then on.

The end of the year marked the low point of the anti-royalty. Rudolf fell seriously ill, so that his followers were already expecting his death. Berthold I. von Zähringen died in November.

In the following, Heinrich made numerous attempts to get the followers of Rudolf on his side, which was not without success. At times it seemed as if he could win Saxony over without any armed conflict. But Rudolf's most important allies, Welf von Bayern and Otto von Northeim, remained in the opposition. As a result, there was repeated devastation and looting in Swabia, where the two princes had withdrawn after Heinrich had expropriated them from their lands. This did not detract from their loyalty.

In the spring of 1079 Heinrich stayed in the Palatinate in Fritzlar (in that year he transferred ownership of this city to the Archdiocese of Mainz). There he was attacked by a Saxon army of Rudolf's party members. Heinrich escaped, but the city was captured and devastated.

Battle of Flarchheim

Another important battle finally occurred on January 27, 1080 in Flarchheim, Thuringia . After Heinrich had gathered his army from Bavaria, Bohemia, Franconia, Swabia and Burgundians, he went with them to Saxony. On the way he particularly devastated the territories of Archbishop Siegfried von Mainz, who then banned him and his followers. Although many of his followers were lost, Rudolf managed to raise an impressive army. Nevertheless, the battle seemed already lost for Rudolf when Otto von Northeim suddenly managed to turn the fight and yet emerge victorious. The loss of the Holy Lance , however, was felt as a disgrace.

Attempts to find a balance always failed. The Pope often tried to convene a meeting of princes to clarify the king's question. Numerous envoys and legates were en route between Rome and the empire. But again and again the plans were thwarted and the negotiations failed.

Recognition of Rudolf by the Pope

At the Synod of Lent on March 7, 1080 Pope Gregory VII gave up his wait-and-see attitude and declared Rudolf the rightful king. Heinrich was again excommunicated and deposed at the Synod of Lent. Although the Pope had repeatedly shown sympathy for the opposing king in advance, he preferred to leave the decision to an ordinary prince's day.

At the time of his recognition by the Pope, Rudolf could no longer benefit from it. The royal side noted with satisfaction that Rudolf's sphere of influence was largely limited to Saxony. It was therefore not infrequently mocked as rex saxonum . In large numbers the princes and also the people sided with the king. Berthold von Reichenau could only explain this deposition movement through massive bribery and seduction by Simonistic bishops.

Heinrich took decisive action against the Pope and struck back. After 19 German bishops had already met in Mainz on May 31, 1080 to declare the Pope deposed, Heinrich called a meeting in Brixen . With the participation of a total of 30 bishops from Italy, Germany and Burgundy, a deposition decree was finally drawn up and Wibert von Ravenna was solemnly elected (counter) Pope Clement III on June 25, 1080 elected.

Location in Swabia and Bavaria

From then on, Swabia became one of the main battle zones of the outbreak of civil war. The rift went through all walks of life and families. Nevertheless, immediately after the election, Rudolf lost large parts of the moderate opposition wing, so that a scheduled court day did not materialize. The lower classes, the middle nobility, the lower clergy, but above all the ministerials who were promoted by Heinrich in their social advancement, held significantly more faithful to Heinrich.

Bavaria was quickly lost to the followers of Rudolf. Only the Formbachers fought on the side of Rudolf, while Heinrich, in particular, received great support from Regensburg. The bishops of Passau and Salzburg were driven out. The main resistance center was the area around Augsburg, in which Welf IV managed to put up protracted resistance after his initial escape to Hungary.

Death and succession

Rudolf points to the severed hand of the oath

After numerous fights, the decision was finally made on October 15, 1080 in the Battle of Hohenmölsen . This battle had no clear winner. As king Heinrich had to flee himself and other parts of his army also got into serious distress. But it was worse for Rudolf, who received a fatal wound: A knight of Heinrich, whose name has not been passed down despite his important deed, cut off the right hand of the opposing king and stabbed him in the abdomen with a sword. From Heinrich's side, death through the loss of the hand of the oath was interpreted as a visible sign of divine punishment for the person breaking the oath.

Rudolf died a day later of a serious stomach injury, was laid out in Merseburg Cathedral and was buried there. Probably by Werner von Merseburg commissioned tomb is the oldest figurative grave sculpture in Central Europe since the Romans. It shows Rudolf von Schwaben in full size with the insignia of the temple crown, imperial orb and scepter . Given the nature of Rudolf's burial, when Henry IV visited the tomb and urged his entourage to intervene, he is said to have noticed that he wished all his enemies were buried so honorably. The severed hand was also kept in the cathedral, as it was hoped that it could later become a relic. Nowadays the hand is in the exhibition of the Dom-Museum. After the untimely death of his unmarried son Berthold, his family inheritance fell to the Zähringer family.

The death of the opposing king dealt a severe blow to the opposition to Henry IV. In order to prevent the risk of the uprising collapsing, preparations that were not immediately apparent were made for the raising of a successor. After much deliberation, the princes elected Hermann von Salm from Luxembourg as the new rival king in 1081. However, this was limited to his sphere of influence, Saxony, and thus could not prevail against Henry IV. His influence was so small that he never posed a threat to Heinrich. The power of the anti-kingship was broken. After Hermann's death in 1088 it was not renewed.


Judgment of the contemporaries

Like Heinrich IV. Rudolf von Schwaben was also judged differently depending on his political position. Both supporters and opponents, however, unanimously emphasized his personal virtues, his prudence and cleverness as well as his bravery in war: sources close to the Pope praised Rudolf as an extremely strong, famous and martial man (vir fortissimus et famosus et in armorum exercitatione probatus) Lampert von Hersfeld closed his annals In 1077 with the election of Rudolf von Rheinfelden as king, demonstrating the re-implementation of his ideals, which Heinrich IV did not correspond to at all. For the Swabian Gregorian Bernold , the anti-king Rudolf von Rheinfelden assumed a central position as patron of his own St. Blasien monastery. For him, "Rudulf was a second Maccabees who oppressed the enemy in the front row". In an antique way he celebrated him as pater patriae . Heinrich's followers, on the other hand, interpreted Rudolf's death as a judgment from God and the loss of the hand of the oath as a “reflective punishment” for his breach of faith. Journalism close to the king branded Rudolf as an oath breaker. His perjury was very easy to prove to Rudolf, it was just difficult to list them all. Possibly the burial place in Merseburg can be interpreted as a conscious reaction of the Saxons, with whose help a targeted rehabilitation of Rudolf was intended or even his veneration as a saint was intended. The inscription that adorns his tomb even placed him on the side of Charlemagne with regard to the wisdom of his counsel and his efficiency . On the royal side, this portrayal was viewed as a provocation. During a visit by Henry IV, his companions took offense at the royal splendor of the tomb. But Henry IV is said to have reacted calmly with the statement: "May all my opponents lie so royally buried."

Research history

The historical judgment on Rudolf von Rheinfelden is mainly based on his low political success. The verdict of Wilhelm von Giesebrecht was of the greatest influence in his history of the German Empire . It continues to have an effect in recent times. Giesebrecht drew Rudolf von Schwaben's picture of an upstart who was filled with compulsive ambition and disregarded the limits of loyalty.

The opposition to the princes and the anti-kingship of Rudolf von Rheinfelden were rarely treated as a separate topic, but mostly only dealt with in connection with King Heinrich IV. The topic was often only integrated into other sections. Three major studies have appeared on the person of Rudolf. In 1870 Oscar Grund dealt with the opposition to the princes and wrote the book The Election of Rudolf von Rheinfelden as the Gegenkönig . Above all, Grund dealt intensively with the developments that led to the anti-kingship. In 1889 Wilhelm Klemer wrote his work The War of Henry IV against Rudolf the Counter-King 1077-1080 . It was based in particular on the Brunonis de bello Saxonico liber in the Scriptores of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica (MGH) , the annals of Berthold von Reichenau and the chronicle of Bernold von Konstanz , the authors of which were all on the side of Heinrich's opponents. In 1939 Heinz Bruns published Das Gegenkönigtum Rudolf von Rheinfelden and its contemporary political requirements . It is still considered the standard work on the subject. The reading reveals an easily understandable work free of National Socialist ideas, which conveys a broad knowledge of the processes before and during the anti-kingship. The other two monographs are from the 19th century. The election of a king is detailed in the annals of the German Empire under Henry IV. And Henry V described. In the third volume, which covers the period from 1077 to 1084, Gerold Meyer von Knonau devotes himself intensively to Heinrich's discussion with Rudolf von Rheinfelden. The work, published in 1900, is the most detailed representation of the time of Henry IV to date.

Walter Schlesinger (1973) analyzed in detail the individual phases of the proceedings in his treatise The Election of Rudolf von Schwaben as the Gegenkönig in Forchheim in 1077 and placed them in a historical context. In the same year, Hermann Jakobs, in his essay Rudolf von Rheinfelden and the Church Reform, focused on the relationship between the anti-king and the papacy .

Jörgen Vogel (1984) based his study on Rudolf von Rheinfelden, the prince opposition against Heinrich IV. In 1072 and the reform of the St. Blasien monastery , primarily on the historian Lampert von Hersfeld and the monk Frutolf von Michelsberg . Lampert von Hersfeld was a staunch opponent of Heinrich. His annals were rated in older research as tendentious and partly propagandistic. His presentation and evaluation of Heinrich's move to Canossa has long been based on older research and the general assessment (see Reich Chancellor Otto von Bismarck in his speech to the Reichstag on May 14, 1872: “Don't worry, we're not going to Canossa - neither physically still mentally ”.). Only recent research has recognized Lampert's work in its peculiarities. Frutolf von Michelsberg is also at the center of the essay Frutolf's report on the year 1077 or The retreat of Rudolf von Schwaben by Karl Schmid .

In his essay Swabian dukes as applicants for the throne: Hermann II. (1002), Rudolf von Rheinfelden (1077), Friedrich von Staufen (1125), On the development of the imperial idea and the responsibility of princes, the understanding of elections and voting procedures in the 11th and 12th centuries , Hagen Keller ( 1983) Rudolf von Schwaben placed him in the larger historical context and compared him with other Swabian aspirants to the throne. Tilman Struve (1991) examined The Image of the Anti-King Rudolf of Swabia in contemporary historiography .

Art-historical aspects are dealt with in the essay The Merseburg Tomb Slab of King Rudolf of Swabia and the assessment of the ruler in the 11th century by Helga Sciurie , which, however, contains little information on the historical process. Eduard Hlawitschka devoted himself to a genealogical examination of Rudolf , who tried to clarify the complicated family relationships of the Swabian Duke in his contribution On the Origin and Related Relatives of the Opposing King Rudolf von Rheinfelden - Genealogical and Political-Historical Investigations .

Recent research paid little attention to Rudolf von Schwaben. Only the monograph King Depositions in the German Middle Ages by Ernst Schubert (2005) dealt in more detail with the anti-king of Henry IV. The focus of this work is the genesis of the imperial constitution. Schubert also deals with the kingship of Henry IV and also deals with its endangerment and the “de facto deposition” of the king by Rudolf von Rheinfelden. The current biography of Heinrich IV. From 2006 by Gerd Althoff also contains a chapter on the arguments between the two kings.


  • Edmund von Oefele (Ed.): Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi 4: Annales Altahenses maiores. Hanover 1891 ( Monumenta Germaniae Historica , digitized version )
  • Oswald Holder-Egger (Ed.): Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separately in editi 38: Lamperti monachi Hersfeldensis Opera. Appendix: Annales Weissenburgenses. Hanover 1894 ( Monumenta Germaniae Historica , digitized version )
  • Ian Stuart Robinson (Ed.): Bertholds and Bernolds Chronicles . Latin and German. Translated by Helga Robinson-Hammerstein. (Selected sources on German history in the Middle Ages; Freiherr vom Stein memorial edition. Vol. 14). Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 2002, ISBN 3-534-01428-6 . Contains: Ian Stuart Robinson: Die Bertholdchronik: Introduction, pp. 1–10; Bertholdchronik (first version), pp. 19–33; Bertholdchronik (Second Version), pp. 35–277. (Review)
  • Lampert von Hersfeld : Annalen , ed. by Oswald Holder-Egger. Newly translated by Adolf Schmidt, Erl. by Wolfgang Dietrich Fritz, 4th edition, Darmstadt 2000 (selected sources on German history in the Middle Ages, Freiherr vom Stein - commemorative edition 13).
  • Bruno's Saxon War. Newly translated by Franz-Josef Schmale . In: Sources on the history of Emperor Heinrich IV (= selected sources on German history in the Middle Ages, Freiherr vom Stein - commemorative edition 12). Darmstadt 1963, pp. 191-405.
  • Dietrich von Gladiss (Hrsg.): Diplomata 17: The documents of Heinrich IV. (Heinrici IV. Diplomata). Part 1: 1056-1076 Berlin 1941 ( Monumenta Germaniae Historica , digitized version )
  • Sources on the investiture dispute. First part: Selected letters from Pope Gregory VII , trans. by Franz-Josef Schmale, Darmstadt 1978 (Selected Sources on German History of the Middle Ages, Freiherr vom Stein - Memorial Edition 12a).
  • Vita Heinrici IV. Imperatoris , newly translated. by Irene Schmale-Ott . In: Sources on the history of Emperor Heinrich IV., Darmstadt 1963 (Selected sources on the German history of the Middle Ages, Freiherr vom Stein - Memorial Edition 12), pp. 407–467.



  • Johann Friedrich Böhmer Böhmer: Regesta Imperii III. Salisches Haus 1024–1125. Part 2: 1056-1125. 3rd department: The regests of the empire under Heinrich IV. 1056 (1050) - 1106. 5th edition: The regests of Rudolf von Rheinfelden, Hermanns von Salm and Konrads (III.). Directories, registers, addenda and corrigenda, edited by Gerhard Lubich , with the assistance of Dirk Jäckel / Matthias Weber, and Cathrin Junker / Lisa Klocke / Markus Keller, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2018, ISBN 978-3-412-51149-4 , ( Digitized version ).


  • Gerd Althoff: Heinrich IV. (= Figures of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance). Darmstadt 2006.
  • Egon Boshof : The Salians. 5th updated edition. Kohlhammer Verlag, Stuttgart 2008, ISBN 3-17-020183-2 .
  • Heinz Bruns: The anti-kinghood of Rudolf von Rheinfelden and its temporal political requirements. Nieft, Bleicherode 1939 (Berlin, University, Phil. Dissertation, Jan. 16, 1940).
  • Lutz Fenske: Nobility opposition and church reform movement in eastern Saxony. Origin and effect of the Saxon resistance against the Salian monarchy during the investiture dispute (= publications of the Max Planck Institute for History. Vol. 47). Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 1977, ISBN 3-525-35356-1 (At the same time: Frankfurt / M., University, dissertation, 1969).
  • Werner Goez : Church reform and investiture dispute 910–1122. 2nd updated edition. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 2008, ISBN 978-3-17-020481-2 .
  • Gerold Meyer von Knonau: Yearbooks of the German Empire under Heinrich IV. And Heinrich V., third volume: 1077 (end) to 1084. 1900 (ND Berlin 1965)
  • Michaela Muylkens: Reges geminati. The "Gegenkönige" in the time of Henry IV. (= Historical studies. Vol. 501). Matthiesen, Husum 2012, ISBN 978-3-7868-1501-3 (also: Bonn, Universität, Dissertation, 2009).
  • Monika Suchan : royal rule in dispute. Conflict settlement in the reign of Henry IV between violence, conversation and written form (= monographs on the history of the Middle Ages. Vol. 42). Hiersemann, Stuttgart 1997, ISBN 3-7772-9721-6 .
  • Ernst Schubert : deposition of the king in the German Middle Ages. A study on the development of the imperial constitution (= treatises of the Academy of Sciences in Göttingen, Philological-Historical Class. Volume 3, 267). Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2005, ISBN 3-525-82542-0 .


  • Eduard Hlawitschka : On the origin and the side relatives of the opposing king Rudolf von Rheinfelden - Genealogical and political-historical investigations. In: Stefan Weinfurter (Ed.): The Salians and the Empire. Volume 1: Salier, Nobility and Imperial Constitution. Thorbecke, Sigmaringen 1991, ISBN 3-7995-4133-0 , pp. 175-220.
  • Hermann Jakobs: Rudolf von Rheinfelden and the church reform. In: Josef Fleckenstein (Ed.): Investiture controversy and Reich constitution (= lectures and research. Vol. 17). Thorbecke, Sigmaringen 1973, pp. 87-116.
  • Hagen Keller: Swabian dukes as applicants for the throne: Hermann II (1002), Rudolf von Rheinfelden (1077), Friedrich von Staufen (1125), on the development of the imperial idea and the responsibility of princes, understanding of voting and electoral processes in the 11th and 12th centuries. In: Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins 131 (1983), pp. 123-162.
  • Walter Schlesinger : The election of Rudolf of Swabia as the opposing king in 1077 in Forchheim. In: Josef Fleckenstein (Ed.): Investiture controversy and Reich constitution (= lectures and research. Vol. 17). Thorbecke, Sigmaringen 1973, pp. 61-85.
  • Karl Schmid : Frutolf's report on the year 1077 or Rudolf's retreat from Swabia. In: Dieter Berg, Hans-Werner Goetz (Ed.): Historiographia mediaevalis. Studies of historiography and source studies of the Middle Ages. Festschrift for Franz-Josef Schmale on his 65th birthday. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1988, ISBN 3-534-10255-X , pp. 181-198.
  • Karl Schmid: Nobility and Reform in Swabia. In: Josef Fleckenstein (Hrsg.): Investiture dispute and Reich constitution (= lectures and research. Vol. 17). Thorbecke, Sigmaringen 1973, pp. 295-319
  • Ernst Schubert : Tomb or Monument? In: Heiner Lück, Werner Freitag (ed.): Historical research in Saxony-Anhalt. A colloquium on the occasion of the 65th birthday of Walter Zöllner (= treatises of the Saxon Academy of Sciences in Leipzig, Philological-Historical Class. Vol. 76, No. 3). Hirzel, Stuttgart et al. 1999, pp. 35-40.
  • Helga Sciurie: The Merseburg grave slab of King Rudolf of Swabia and the assessment of the ruler in the 11th century. In: Jahrbuch für Geschichte und Feudalismus 6 (1982), pp. 173-183.
  • Heinz Stoob : About the change of focus in the Low German aristocracy during the fight against the Salian ruler. In: Dieter Berg (Ed.): Ecclesia et regnum. Contributions to the history of church, law and state in the Middle Ages. Festschrift for Franz-Josef Schmale on his 65th birthday. Winkler, Bochum 1989, ISBN 3-924517-24-X , pp. 121-127.
  • Tilman Struve : The image of the anti-king Rudolf of Swabia in contemporary historiography. In: Klaus Herbers u. a. (Ed.): Ex ipsis rerum documentis, contributions to medieval studies, commemorative publication for Harald Zimmermann on his 65th birthday. Thorbecke, Sigmaringen 1991, ISBN 3-7995-7072-1 , pp. 459-475.
  • Heinz Thomas : Archbishop Siegfried I of Mainz and the tradition of his church. A contribution to the election of Rudolf von Rheinfelden. In: German Archive for Research into the Middle Ages 26 (1970), pp. 368–399.
  • Jörgen Vogel: Rudolf von Rheinfelden, the prince opposition to Heinrich IV. In 1072 and the reform of the St. Blasien monastery. In: Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins 132 (1984), pp. 1–30.
  • Helga Wäß: Tumba for the opposing king Rudolf von Rheinfelden / von Swabia († 1080). In: Dies .: Form and Perception of Central German Memory Sculpture in the 14th Century. Vol. 2: Catalog of selected objects from the High Middle Ages to the beginning of the 15th century. Bristol / Berlin 2006, p. 428 ff. (With illustration no.638 ) - ISBN 3-86504-159-0 .
  • Gerd Wunder : Contributions to the genealogy of Swabian ducal houses. In: Journal for Württemberg State History 31 (1973), pp. 7–15.


Web links

Commons : Rudolf von Rheinfelden  - Collection of images, videos and audio files


  1. Elisabeth Handle, Clemens Kosch: Location determinations. Thoughts on the burial place of Rudolf von Rheinfelden in Merseburg Cathedral. In: Christoph Stiegemann, Matthias Wemhoff (ed.): Canossa 1077. Shaking the world. History, art and culture at the rise of the Romanesque. Volume I: Essays. Munich 2006, pp. 526-541, here: p. 530.
  2. European Family Tables New Series, Volume XII Schwaben, Plate 95 A; The Counts of Rheinfelden; Marburg 1992
  3. ^ Ernst Schubert: Deposition of kings in the German Middle Ages. A study on the development of the imperial constitution. Göttingen 2005, p. 136.
  4. Ekkehardi Uraugiensis chronica . In: Georg Heinrich Pertz u. a. (Ed.): Scriptores (in Folio) 6: Chronica et annales aevi Salici. Hanover 1844, p. 198 ( Monumenta Germaniae Historica , digitized version )
  5. ^ Lampert, Annalen 1073.
  6. Bruno, De bello Saxonico c. 44.
  7. ^ Lampert Annalen 1075.
  8. Annales Altahenses maiores 1072; Lampert, Annalen 1072
  9. ^ Lampert, Annalen 1073.
  10. Detailed overview of sources in: Tilman Struve: The image of the Gegenkönigs Rudolf von Schwaben in contemporary historiography. In: Klaus Herbers, Hans-Henning Kortüm, Carlo Servatius (eds.): Ex ipsis rerum documentis, contributions to medieval studies, commemorative publication for Harald Zimmermann on his 65th birthday. Sigmaringen 1991, pp. 459-475, here: p. 463.
  11. ^ Sigebert von Gembloux, Chronica 1077.
  12. ^ Tilman Struve: The image of the anti-king Rudolf of Swabia in contemporary historiography. In: Klaus Herbers, Hans-Henning Kortüm, Carlo Servatius (eds.): Ex ipsis rerum documentis, contributions to medieval studies, commemorative publication for Harald Zimmermann on his 65th birthday. Sigmaringen 1991, pp. 459-475, here: p. 463.
  13. ^ Vita Heinrici IV. Imperatoris, cap. 4th
  14. ^ Liber de unitate ecclesiae I 13.
  15. a detailed description of the seal can be found on Wikisource in Die Siegel der Deutschen Kaiser und Könige, Volume 5, p. 23
  16. ^ Tilman Struve: The image of the anti-king Rudolf of Swabia in contemporary historiography. In: Klaus Herbers, Hans-Henning Kortüm, Carlo Servatius (eds.): Ex ipsis rerum documentis, contributions to medieval studies, commemorative publication for Harald Zimmermann on his 65th birthday. Sigmaringen 1991, pp. 459-475, here: p. 473.
  17. ^ Otto von Freising, Gesta Friderici I. imperatoris I 7.
  18. ^ Boso, Les vies des Papes , in: Le Liber pontificalis. Texts, intruduction et commentaire 2, edited, by Louis Duchesne, Paris 1886–1892, pp. 351–446, here: 361–368, especially p. 367.
  19. Bernold Chron. 1080.
  20. ^ Vita Heinrici IV. Imperatoris, cap. 4th
  21. Wenrich von Trier, cap. 6th
  22. Elisabeth Handle / Clemens Kosch, location regulations. Reflections on the burial place of Rudolf von Rheinfelden in Merseburg Cathedral, in: Canossa 1077. Shaking the world. History, art and culture at the rise of the Romanesque. Volume I: Essays, ed. by Christoph Stiegemann / Matthias Wemhoff, Munich 2006, pp. 526-541, here: p. 535.
  23. Otto von Freising, Gesta Friderici I., lib. 1, cap. 7th
  24. ^ Wilhelm Giesebrecht: History of the German Imperial Era. Vol. 3, 5th edition 1890, p. 520.
  25. Oscar reason: The election of Rudolf von Rheinfelden as the antagonist. Leipzig 1870.
  26. ^ Wilhelm Klemer: The war of Henry IV against Rudolf the anti-king 1077-1080. Küstrin 1889.
  27. ^ Heinz Bruns: The antagonistic rule of Rudolf von Rheinfelden and its time-political prerequisites. Berlin 1939.
predecessor Office successor
Otto III. Duke of Swabia
Friedrich I.
predecessor Office successor
Counter-king in the Roman-German Empire
Hermann von Salm
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on April 16, 2007 .