FREDERICK AUGUSTUS I. (1750-1827), king of Saxony, son of Elector Frederick Christian, was born at Dresden, 23d December 1750, succeeded his father, under the guardianship of Prince Xavier, in 1763, and was declared of age in 1768. In the following year he married Princess Maria-Amelia of Deux-Ponts. On account of the claims of his mother on the inheritance of her brother, the elector of Bavaria, he sided with Frederick the Great in the short Bavarian succession war of 1778 against Austria; and he afterwards joined the league of German princes formed by that monarch. In 1791 he declined the crown of Poland. He refused to join the league against France in 1792, but when war was declared his duty to the German empire necessitated his taking part in it. He maintained his neutrality during the war between France and Austria in 1805, but in the following year he joined Prussia against France. After the disastrous battle of Jena he concluded a treaty of peace with Napoleon at Posen, 11th November 1806, and, assuming the title of king, he joined the Rhenish confederation. Having taken part in the subsequent wars of Napoleon, he fell into the hands of the allies after the entry into Leipsic, 19th October 1813; and although he regained his freedom after the congress of Vienna, he was compelled to give up the province of Wittenberg to Prussia. The remainder of his life was spent in developing the agricultural, commercial, and industrial resources of his kingdom, reforming the administration of justice, establishing hospitals and other charitable institutions, encouraging art and science, and promoting education. He had a special interest in botany, and originated the beautiful botanical garden at Pillnitz. His reign throughout was characterized by justice, probity, moderation, and prudence. He died May 5, 1827.

See lives by Weisse, Leipsic, 1811; Herrmann, Dresden, 1827; and Pölitz, Leipsic, 1830.

For the next three years a great variety of matters detained him in Germany. Immediately on his return from Italy he put vigorous measures into execution against the robber knights; and in September 1156 he reconciled Henry the Lion by the restoration of the duchy of Bavaria, while at the same time he pacified Henry Jasomi,rgott, his rival, by raising Austria to the rank of a duchy. Adelaide, whom he’married in 1147, he had divorced in 1153 on the pretext of kinship; and, having in 1156 married Beatrice, daughter of the count of Burgundy, he received at Besançon in 1157 the homage of the Burgundian nobles. In the same year he was successful in compelling King Boleslaus of Poland to acknowledge him as his feudal lord, obtained by persuasion the same allegiance from King Geisa of Hungary, and rewarded Duke Ladislaus of Bohemia for his faithful services by giving him the rank of a king. About this time he published a manifesto against the pretensions of the Pope to confer beneficia upon him; and when Frederick in the beginning of 1158 was preparing for a second campaign in Italy, the pope sent an embassy to explain that he did not use the word in its feudal sense.

Frederick’s chief purpose in this expedition was to quell the pride of Milan. Descending into Italy by four différent roads, with an army of 100,000 foot and 15,000 horse, he in 1158 laid siege to the city, which, after defying for a month his persistent and furious attacks, w as compelled from scarcity of provisions to surrender, and with humiliating forms to take the oath of allegiance. He then held another diet at Roncaglia, at which, besides settling a number of standing disputes, he recovered the right of instituting podestas to administer justice in the cities, assumed the nomination of the consuls, and deprived the cities and barons of the right of going to war. The adoption of these regulations —which if within the legal prerogatives of the emperor had nevertheless fallen into abeyance, and were utterly opposed to the strong spirit of independence struggling into existence in the cities—may be said to mark the first stage of his waning influence in Italy. And a second stage was reached when, on the death of Pope Adrian IV. in 1159, he determined to support the anti-pope Victor IV.; for from that time he had to contend wñth the ceaseless opposition and intrigues of Pope Alexander III., who fulminated against him a sentence of excommunication, March 24, 1160. It is true that Frederick in 1162 was able to spread terror throughout Lombardy by the capture and demolition of Milan; butin 1164 the cities of Verona, Vicenza, Padua, Treviso, and Venice formed a defensive league, and expelled the podestas and other foreign oppressors from their territories. In 1163 Frederick had punished the rebellion of Mainz against its archbishop by razing its walls and filling up its trenches; but having, on the death of Victor IV., promoted the election of the new anti-pope f Pascal III., he was detained by fresh religious and political contentions in Germany till the end of 1166. Disregarding the embers of conflagration in the north of Italy, he now pushed on towards Rome, to which Alexander had returned the previous year. Doubtful as to the propriety of at once attacking the city, he laid siege to Ancona; but when he learned that the Roman citizens had rashly allowed themselves to be defeated at Tusculum, he raised” the siege, and going to Rome took forcible possession of part of the Leonine city, and attacked and captured the Vatican. On the following Sunday (August 1, 1167) the empress received in St Peter’s the imperial diadem from Pascal III., and Frederick the circlet of gold which was the sign of patrician dignity. Meanwhile behind him the cities of Lombardy had formed their famous league; even Lodi was forced to yield its assent to the alliance; and Milan springing into existence almost as by the wand of an enchanter, gave evidence of its defiant and unquenchable hostility by the demolition of the castle of Trezzo, which contained the emperor’s treasure. Even at Rome his position was far from enviable, for Alexander HL, having taken refuge in the Colosseum, was prepared to offer a desperate resistance. Accordingly Frederick fell upon the curious expedient of proposing that both Alexander and Pascal should resign, and another pope be elected. The citizens clamorously supported the proposal, but Alexander prevented its accomplishment by suddenly leaving Rome for Benevento. Immediately on his departure, and, to the superstitious fancies of the time, as if in token of the wrath of heaven at his expulsion, and at the sacrilegious violence done to the most sacred edifice of the holy city, suddenly, in the midst of a day of burning and sultry splendour, the whole German army with scarcely an exception was smitten by a pestilence of unexampled virulence, to which the terrors of superstition imparted both additional horror and a more deadly fatality. Frederick led the haggard and terror-stricken crowd of survivors with great difficulty to Pavia, whence at the end of the year he set out for Germany attended by about 30 horsemen; and at Susa he only saved himself from death at the hands of the citizens by escaping during the night on foot accompanied by two followers. For nearly seven years after this luckless flight he remained in Germany. On the death of Pascal III. in September 1168 he supported the new anti-pope Calixtus III., but by doing so he only lent additional vigour to the Lombard league, who this year had founded the city which in honour of their patron Alexander III. they named Alexandria; and in 1173 they took an oath not to leave off waging war against the emperor till they drove him out of Italy. Resolved, however, on a final effort, Frederick, having collected an immense army, set out in October 1174 on his fifth and last Italian expedition. He burned Susa to the ground, and captured Asti; but failing in a treacherous attack on Alexandria, made after he had granted it a truce, he endeavoured to negotiate a peace with the League. Final terms could not, however, be agreed upon, and notwithstanding the crushing blow which his fortunes at this time sustained through the defection of Henry the Lion, he resolved when recruited by a new army from Germany to risk the battle at Lignano, which resulted in his total defeat, 29th May 1176. Having in this battle been crushed beneath his horse, he was believed to have fallen, either wounded or dead, into the hands of the confederates; but on the third day afterwards he arrived at Pavia unhurt, but so worn out by hunger and fatigue as to be scarcely recognizable. Finding his case now desperate, he at last agreed to acknowledge the pontificate of Alexander, and also at Venice, 25th July 1177, concluded a truce of six years with the cities. He then turned his attention to Henry the Lion, who owned himself vanquished in 1181, and was banished to England. On the expiry of the treaty of Venice, the famous treaty of Constance was signed, 25th June 1183, by which, while the supremacy of the empire was formally recognized, the independent jurisdiction of the cities was substantially guaranteed. Henceforth, Frederick resolved to rule Italy more by conciliation than by compulsion, and while re-establishing his influence in Lombardy by granting such favours to the Milanese as secured their lasting alliance and friendship, he virtually placed Sicily under his immediate government by arranging a marriage between Constance, heiress of that kingdom, and Henry his eldest son, who, having been elected King of the Romans in his infancy, received the crown of Italy on the day of his marriage, 27th June 1186, from the patriarch of Aquileia.

Having thus at last brought his long life-struggle to an honourable if not very triumphant close, it might have been expected that Frederick would now have been content to doff his armour, and to pass his remaining days in peace. But hearing in 1187 of the victorious progress of Saladin against the Christians in Syria, his martial ardour was again kindled, and he resolved to enter the lists against the redoubtable Saracen conqueror. This purpose he was, however, unable to carry fully out, for after two successful battles in Asia Minor, he was drowned before reaching Syria while crossing a small river in Pisidia, June 10, 1190.

Frederick I. is said to have taken Charlemagne as his model; but the contest in which he engaged was entirely different both in character and results from that in which his great predecessor achieved such a wonderful temporary success. Though Frederick failed to subdue the republics, the failure can scarcely be said to reflect either on his prudence as a statesman or his skill as a general, for his ascendency was finally overthrown rather by the ravages of pestilence than by the might of human arms. In Germany his resolute will and sagacious administration subdued or disarmed all discontent, and he not only succeeded in welding the various rival interests into a unity of devotion to himself against which papal intrigues were comparatively powerless, but won for the empire a prestige such as it had not possessed since the time of Otto the Great. The wide contrast between his German and Italian rule is strikingly exemplified in the fact that, while he endeavoured to overthrow the republics in Italy, he held in check the power of the nobles in Germany, by conferring municipal franchises and independent rights on the principal cities. Even in Italy, though his general course of action was warped by wrong prepossessions, he in many instances manifested exceptional practical sagacity in dealing with immediate difficulties and emergencies. Possessing great physical beauty, frank and open manners, untiring and unresting energy, and a prowess which found its native element in difficulty and danger, he seemed the embodiment of the chivalrous and warlike spirit of his age, and was the model of all the qualities which then won highest admiration. Stern and ambitious he certainly was, but his aims can scarcely be said to have exceeded his prerogatives as emperor; and though he had sometimes recourse when in straits to expedients almost diabolically ingenious in their cruelty, yet his general conduct was marked by a clemency which in that age was exceptional. His quarrel with the papacy was an inherited conflict, not reflecting at all on his religious faith, but the inevitable consequence of inconsistent theories of government, which had been created and could be dissipated only by a long series of events. His interference in the quarrels of the republics was not only quite justifiable from the relation in which he stood to them, but seemed absolutely necessary. From the beginning, however, he treated the Italians, as indeed was only natural, less as rebellious subjects than as conquered aliens; and it must be admitted that in regard to them the only effective portion of his procedure was, not his energetic measures of repression nor his brilliant victories, but, after the battle of Lignano, his quiet and cheerful acceptance of the inevitable, and the consequent complete change in his policy, by which if he did not obtain the great object of his ambition, he at least did much to render innoxious for the empire his previous mistakes.

The principal contemporary authorities for the reign of Frederick I. are the chronicle of Otto bishop of Freisingen, to which is prefixed a letter of Frederick containing a summary of the early events of his reign; the continuation of this chronicle from 1158 to 1160 by Radevic, one of the canons of Otto; the chronicle of Otto Morena of Lodi, continued from 1162 to 1167 by his son Acerbus; and the life of Pope Alexander III. by the cardinal of Aragon. The chief modern writers are Mutatori, Annali d' Italia; Sismondi, Histoire des Républiques Italiennes ; H. v. Biinau, Leben und Thaten Friedrichs I., Leipsic, 1722; Chenier, Histoire de la lutte des papes et des empereurs de la maison de Souabc, &c., 2d edition, Paris, 1856; F. von Raumer, Geschichte der Hohenstaufen und ihrer Zeit, 4thed., Leipsic, 1871; P. Scheffer-Boichorst, Friedrichs letzter Streit mit der Curie, Berlin, 1866; K. Fischer, Der Kreuzzug Friedrichs L, Leipsic, 1870; H. l’rutz, Kaiser Freidrich I., 3 vols., Dantzic, 1871-73; Fr. X. Wegele, Kaiser Friedrich I. Barbarossa, ein Vortrag, Nordlingen, 1871; Dettloff, Der erste Römerzug Kaiser Friedrichs I. Göttingen, 1877; Bryce, Holy Roman Empire; Mihnan, History of Latin Christianity ; 0. Vignati, Storia diplomatica della lega Lombarda, Milan, 1866; Teste, History of the Wars of Frederick I. and the Communes of Lombardy, English translation, 1877; and E. A. Freeman in his first series of Essays.

FREDERICK I. (1657-1713), the first king of Prussia, was born at Königsberg, 1657. He was the son of the Great Elector by his first marriage. In consequence of a fall from the arms of his nurse his spine was so seriously injured that he was deformed for life. His stepmother intrigued against him incessantly in the interests of her children; and she succeeded in persuading her husband to make a will whereby Frederick should receive only the electoral title and the electoral lands, the remaining territories being divided among his half-brothers. On his accession in 1688 this will was set aside, with the sanction of the emperor, whose support he had obtained beforehand by signing away in his father’s lifetime his rights in Schwiebus, a proceeding which, he afterwards maintained, restored his claim to the Silesian principalities. Frederick, having a strong love of pomp and show, strove hard to make his court an imitation of that of Louis XIV. Although without his father’s firmness and energy, he seized every occasion of increasing his dominions by purchase; and he obtained, partly in virtue of certain claims inherited from his mother, partly through the influence of William III. of England, the principality of Neufchatel. It had been the intention of the Great Elector to give William III. vigorous support both in his struggle for the English crown and in the wars with France which were seen to be inevitable. Frederick gave effect to this purpose, and his troops played an important part in the battle of the Boyne. In the course of his reign he exercised considerable influence on European politics by placing auxiliary forces at the disposal of friendly princes. The accession of Augustus the Strong of Saxony to the throne of Poland fired his ambition, and for years he endeavoured to induce the emperor Leopold I. to recognize him as king of Prussia. At last, in November 1700, the emperor consented, insisting, however, on various strict conditions, one of which was that in the approaching war of the Spanish succession Prussia should contribute a force of 10,000 men to the Austrian army. Immediately after receiving the imperial sanction, Frederick started with his whole court for Königsberg, where, on January 18, 1701, with much ceremony he crowned himself. He sent 20,000 men into the war of the Spanish succession, and a portion of them did excellent service at the battle of Blenheim. In 1706 Prince Leopold of Dessau led 6000 Prussians to victory at Turin. Frederick died on the 25th February, 1713. By his extravagance he not only exhausted the treasure amassed by his father, but burdened his country with heavy taxes. He was not, however, an unpopular sovereign, and by making Prussia a kingdom he undoubtedly advanced it several stages towards its future greatness. He founded the university of Halle and the Berlin Academy of Sciences, and was fond of protecting enlightened men who suffered persecution. He was three times married, his second wife, Sophie Charlotte, sister of George I. of England, being well known as the friend of Leibnitz and as one of the most cultivated princesses of the age.

See Puffendorf, De rebus gestis Friderici III. (Berlin, 1734); W. Hahn, Friedrich, der erste König von Preτιssen (3d ed., Berlin, 1876); Carlyle, History of Friedrich II. of Prussia.

FREDERICK I. (1369-1428), elector and duke of Saxony, surnamed the Pugnacious, eldest son of Landgraf Frederick the Severe of Thuringia and of Catherine countess of Henneberg, was born at Altenburg, March 29, 1369. On the death of his father in 1381, he and his two brothers succeeded to the inheritance under the guardianship of their mother, but were compelled to grant a portion of it to their father’s two brothers. The death of one of their father’s brothers in 1407 occasioned a renewal of the inheritance dispute with the remaining brother, and an amicable settlement was not arrived at till 1410. Previous to this Frederick had distinguished himself in wars against the Lithuanians, Hungary, and King Wenzel of Germany; and having in 1420 collected an army against the Hussites, he was for a time so uniformly successful, that in 1423 the emperor Sigismund, in recognition of his valuable services, created him elector and duke of Saxony. With these honours, however, Sigismund also laid upon him the whole burden of the Hussite war; and the result was that, by an overwhelming defeat at Aussig in 1426, nearly all the Saxons capable of bearing arms were either killed or placed hors de combat. Frederick did not long survive this disaster, dying at Altenburg, 4th January 1428. The university of Leipsic was founded by Frederick in 1409.

See life by Spalatin in Mencke’s Scriptores rerum Germ. ; and life by Horn, Leipsic, 1733.

FREDERICK I. (1425-1476), elector palatine, surnamed the Victorious, second son of Elector Louis HL, was born in 1425. He inherited a part of the palatinate on the death of his father in 1439, but delivered it up to his brother Louis IV. On the death of Louis in 1449, he became guardian of the infant heir Philip, and administrator of the kingdom. In 1452, on account of the threatening relation in which the neighbouring princes stood to the palatinate, he resolved to assume the office of elector for life, on the understanding that his children should not hold the rank of princes, and that his nephew should be his successor. This led to a combination against him headed by the emperor Frederick III., but he managed to defend himself against all attacks, and in 1462 defeated at Seckenheim a combined army sent against him under the command of elector Albert Achilles of Brandenburg, after which he remained in undisturbed possession of his kingdom till his death, 12th December 1476. Under him the palatinate received an addition of more than 60 fortresses and towns. Through his marriage with the daughter of a citizen of Augsburg he had two sons, the elder of whom, Frederick, adopted the ecclesiastical profession, and the younger, Louis, was the founder of the family of the princes and counts of Lowenstein.

See lives by Kremer, in 2 vols., Frankfort and Leipsic, 1765; and by Menzel, from 1454 to 1464, Munich, 1861.

Though crowned in infancy king of the Romans, he actually inherited from his father no other throne than that of Naples and Sicily. In 1208 he entered upon the personal government of his kingdom, and in the following year he was married to Constance of Aragon. About this time, Otto, second son of Henry the Lion, had, on account of the murder of Philip of Hohenstaufen by Otto of Wittelsbach, obtained undisputed possession of the throne of Germany; but immediately after his coronation at Rome in 1209 the inevitable jealousy between pope and emperor led to the usual results, and when Otto was meditating the subjugation of Naples and Sicily, he was met in 1211 by a bull of excommunication. At a diet held at Nuremberg in October of the same year it was resolved to offer the crown of Germany to the young king of Sicily. Innocent III. on certain conditions gave his sanction to the offer; and to Frederick, even had he seen in it nothing to incite his imaginative ardour, it must have appeared almost in the form of an unexpected deliverance from impending ruin. Having therefore resolved to dispute his ancestral throne with his rival, he set out in the spring of 1212 on his romantic and hazardous quest. Landing at Genoa on the 1st of May accompanied by only a few adherents, he made his way over the Alps by unfrequented passes to Coire, and learning at St Gall that Otto was about to occupy Constance, he by great good fortune was able to anticipate him by three hours. The town at once declared in Frederick’s favour, and Otto, without seriously attempting to resist his progress in southern Germany, retired to Saxony. In November of the same year Frederick made a treaty with Philip of France, and in December he was elected king - at Frankfort, and crowned at Mainz. By inherent force of character, aided by his unrivalled diplomatic skill and his bold and rapid movements, he had won success almost without striking a blow; and his task was at least denuded of all difficulty through Otto’s disastrous defeat by Philip at Bouvines, near Tournay, 27th July 1214. Any further organized resistance was thus rendered impossible against the progress of the Hohenstaufen, who in July 1215 ascended the marble throne of Charlemagne at Aix-la-Chapelle, and received the silver crown. At a solemn ceremony which followed he took the cross; but even after the death of Otto in May 1218 he was fully occupied in establishing his influence in Germany. In 1220 he succeeded in obtaining the election of his son Henry to the German throne, but the favour was dearly rewarded by the charter which by the independent privileges it conferred upon the princes virtually dissolved the unity of the kingdom. The election was contrary to a promise made to Pope Innocent III. to appoint Henry king of Sicily, but Pope Honorius III., anxious for the success of the crusade, was pacified without much difficulty, and Frederick leaving Germany in the autumn of 1220 was crowned emperor at Rome on the 22d November, renewing at the same time his oath to set out on the crusade with all possible speed. His absence in Germany had permitted the growth of disorder and confusion in his southern kingdom; and to restrain the licence of the Apulian nobles he now established at Capua a tribunal to revise their privileges, while, to deliver the Christians in Sicily from.the attacks to which they were continually exposed from the Saracen mountain tribes, he transferred 2000 Saracens to Lucera, an expedient which also established in Italy a convenient instrument of resistance to the papal power.

The departure of the crusade, at first fixed for 1223, was deferred till 1225, and even then it w*as found necessary to delay it for two years longer; but, his wife Constance having died in 1222, he gave a pledge that his ambition coincided with the papal wishes by marrying in 1225 Yolande, daughter of King John of Jerusalem; and he also bound himself by heavy penalties to set out with a stipulated force in August 1227. The hostilities between him and the Lombard league, begun in 1226, were suspended through the intercession of Pope Honorius in February 1227, and the Lombards agreed to furnish a certain number of knights for the expedition. In March Honorius died, and was succeeded by Gregory IX., who on the very day of his accession addressed a new and imperative warning to the emperor against delay in the fulfilment of his oath. Frederick actually set out at the time agreed upon, but returned three days afterwards, and, asserting as his reason a serious illness, permitted the armament to be dissolved, whereupon Gregory without further negotiation launched against him, September 30, the solemn bull of excommunication. The appeal to Christendom with which Frederick met the church’s fulmination is remarkable in that, so far from contenting himself with defending his own conduct, he, besides denouncing the temporal pretensions of the pope as menacing the whole of Christendom with an “unheard-of tyranny,” asserted that instead of rolling in wealth and aspiring to worldly influence the church’s representatives ought to cultivate the simplicity and self-denial of the early Christians. In resolving to set out on the crusade, notwithstanding his excommunication, Frederick was therefore actuated, not merely by the wish to take possession of a secular throne, or to demonstrate the sincerity of his purpose to keep his oath, but by the determination to assert his right still to act as the temporal head of the church. His preparations were not delayed by the death of his wife Yolande in April 1228, and he set sail from Otranto on the 29th June. Meanwhile, by securing the favour of the Frangipani aιid the other Roman patricians, he procured the expulsion of Gregory from Rome; but the subtle spiritual influence of the papal ban was not affected by this seeming victory, and tidings of his excommunication reaching the Holy Land almost simultaneously with his arrival, the Knights of the Temple and the Hospital refused to take part in the crusade. Frederick, however, by mere diplomatic tact succeeded in persuading the sultan of Egypt to agree to a treaty, by which the church obtained possession of Jerusalem and the holy places on granting to the Saracens, besides various other privileges, free access to Bethlehem; and on the 18th March 1229 he, without any religious ceremony, crowned himself with his own hands king of Jerusalem. Such a striking and unexpected success wrought almost immediately throughout Europe a complete revolution of opinion in his favour; and when shortly afterwards he succeeded in defeating the papal forces which had invaded his dominions, the pope deemed it expedient to come to terms, and released him from the ban of excommunication 28th August 1230.

In the interval of peace which followed, Frederick occupied himself in forming for his Sicilian kingdom a code of laws, the main features of which were the superseding of irresponsible feudal and ecclesiastical jurisdictions by a uniform civil legislation administered under direct imperial control; the toleration extended to Jews and Mahometans, and the severe enactments against schismatics; the provisions for the emancipation of the peasants; the regulations for the encouragement of commerce, which contain perhaps the first enunciation of the modern doctrine of free trade; and the establishment of annual parliaments, consisting of barons, prelates, and representatives from the towns and cities. He also devoted much of his attention to the advancement of learning and of the arts and sciences. The university of Naples, founded in 1224, bat whose operations had been for some time suspended, he now restored and liberally endowed; at the medical schools of Salerno he provided Arab, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew teachers for the students of these different nationalities; and he caused the translation into Latin of the works of Aristotle and of other philosophers both Greek and Arabic. He himself was learned both in Mussulman arts and sciences and in Christian scholasticism and philosophy; he knew Latin, Greek, French, German, Arabic, and Hebrew. He had a great interest in architecture, and he fostered the infancy of Italian sculpture and painting; he and his minister Peter de Vinea were among the first cultivators of Italian poetry; he also devoted much attention to natural history, and besides forming large collections of rare and curious animals wrote a treatise on the art of falconry, which shows a minute acquaintance with the habits of birds. With the influences of Western civilization there was conjoined at his castles on the Apulian shore an Oriental luxury and splendour; and in the harem of the Christian emperor his accusers found a convenient corroboration of their insinuation regarding his secret enmity to the Christian faith.

The short period of peaceful progress was broken in 1234 by the rebellion of Frederick’s son Henry, who, secretly instigated by the pope, joined the Lombard league. The revolt was, however, suppressed on the arrival of the emperor in Germany in 1235, and Henry was sent as a prisoner to the castle of San Felice in Apulia. In the same year Frederick married Isabella, sister of Henry III. of England. Conrad, second son of the emperor, was chosen king by the German princes in January 1237; and Frederick, after the disastrous defeat of the Lombards at Cortenuova, November 27th of this year, appointed, in October 1238, his natural son Enzio king of Sardinia. Alarmed at the success of the imperial arms, Gregory, in March 1239, renewed against the emperor the ban of excommunication; but the latter advancing into the states of the church, captured Ravenna, Faenza, and Benevento; and after gaining, through the help of Enzio, a brilliant victory over the Genoese fleet, was nearing Rome when Gregory died August 21, 1241. After the short pontificate of Celestine IV. and an interregnum of eighteen months, Cardinal Sinibald Fiesco, up to this time one of the emperor’s chief friends, became pope as Innocent IV. in June 1243. At once negotiations were entered into for an arrangement between them; but the papal demands were too humiliating to permit of their acceptance; and Innocent, suddenly making Lis escape to Lyons, not only renewed, July 17, 1245, the church’s ban against the emperor, but declared his throne vacant. Henry Raspe of Thuringia, elected by the papal party king of the Romans in May 1246, gained a victory over Conrad at Frankfort on the 5th August, but, suffering a total defeat near Ulm, February 17, 1247, died shortly afterwards; and between his successor William of Holland and Conrad the struggle was carried on with indecisive results. In this same year Peter de Vinea, the minister and most intimate friend of Frederick, was discovered plotting against his life; on 18th February 1248 Frederick’s army in Italy was surprised and utterly routed by a sally of the citizens of Parma; in May 1249 his son Enzio was defeated and captured by the Bolognese; and, although in 1250 various successes in the north of Italy and the prospect of new and powerful alliances seemed to promise him a speedy and complete triumph, his strength had been so worn out by his arduous struggle, and his spirit so broken by such a succession of disasters that he died somewhat suddenly on the 13th December, at his hunting lodge of Fiorentino (also called Firenzuola), near Lucera.

The general contemporary opinion regarding Frederick II. is expressed in the words stupor mundi ; and whatever amount either of approbation or censure may be bestowed upon his career, wonder and perplexity are the predominant sentiments which its contemplation even yet awakens. It was not merely that his mental endowments were exceptionally great, but that, owing to his mingled German and Italian blood, the various influences to which he was subjected in his early years, the strange times in which he lived, and the events with which destiny had connected him, his character was exhibited in such multiform aspects and in such an individual and peculiar light that in history we look in vain for his parallel. As to the nature of his religious faith there are no data for arriving at a certain conclusion. The theory of Μ. Huillard-Bréholles that he wished to unite with the functions of emperor those of a spiritual pontiff, and aspired to be the founder of a new religion, is a conjecture insufficiently supported by the isolated facts and statements and the general considerations on which it is made to rest. Indeed the character of Frederick seems to have been widely removed from that of a religious enthusiast; and at every critical period of his life he was urged to daring and adventurous projects rather by external circumstances than by either the promptings of ambition or the consciousness of any divine commission. On any theory his enactments in reference to religion are, however, somewhat enigmatical. His perse-cutioh of heretics may not have been entirely due to a desire to vindicate his orthodoxy before his Christian subjects; but although his ideas regarding freedom of conscience were either inconsistent or hampered in their action by a regard to expediency, his toleration of the Jews equally with the Mahometans prevents us ascribing his toleration of the latter either to secret sympathy with that form of faith or wholly to political considerations. He was in all probability a believer in astrology, and he shared in many of the other superstitious ideas of his time; but there is no indication that he dreaded any other than temporal consequences from the ban of the church; and if certain features of the Christian system had perhaps an attraction for him, yet both from his reported jests and serious conversation it is evident that his Christian belief, if he possessed one, bore little resemblance to that current in his age. In the extravagant accusations of cruelty, perfidy, and licentiousness with which the church has assailed his memory there is some nucleus of truth; but a candid judgment will arrive at the conclusion that few exposed to such pernicious influences have shown such a decided preference for goodness and truth, and that there have been almost none who against such immense difficulties have wrought to such wise purpose in behalf of human progress and enlightenment, or have fought such a resolute and advantageous battle in behalf of spiritual freedom. In this contest he was not an immediate victor; and indeed the dissolution of the imperial power in Italy which followed bis death must be chiefly traced to the fact that his policy was governed by principles too much in advance of his age. But although the beneficial results of his reign are not at a first glance so palpable and undeniable as some of its injurious results, yet so far was he from being a mere untimely precursor of the new era which dawned in Europe more than two centuries after his death that, perhaps in a greater degree than any other, he was instrumental in hastening its arrival, both by sowing the first seeds of the Renaissance in Italy, and by giving to the old system of things a shock which was felt throughout Europe, and continued to work silently long after its reverberations had passed away.

After the death of Frederick the followers of Abbot Joachim continued to assert that he was still alive, and both in Sicily and Germany impostors sprang up who attempted to personate him. The superstition that the “emperor continued to haunt the castle of Kyffhäuser,” at one time thought to refer to Frederick Barbarossa, has now been shown to have had its origin in the tradition that Frederick II. still lived after he had ceased to exercise the functions of emperor.

The contemporary documents bearing on the reign of Frederick are unusually numerous. Most of those not contained in the Faedcra of Thomas Rhymer, the Annales cedes, post Baronium of Raynaldus, or the historical collections of Mura tori, Bouquet, Böhmer, or Pertz will be found in the great work of Huillard-Bréholles, Historia Diplomatien Fredcrici Secundi, 12 vols., Paris, 1852-1861. The principal ancient chronicles are the Historia Major Angliae of Matthew Paris; the chronicle of the Franciscan monk Salim bene, first published in Monumenta ad provincias Parmensem et Placentinam spectantia, Parma, 1857; the Life of Gregory IX., by the Cardinal of Aragon; the Annales Mediolanenses 1230-1402; the Chronicon Rerum per Orbem Gestarum (1159-1242) of Richard de San Germano; and the Chronicon Placentinum and Chronicon de rebus in Italia gestis, published in one volume by Μ. Huillard-Bréholles, Paris, 1856, the former printed from the copy in the Imperial Library, Paris, and the latter never before published, and printed from the copy in the British Museum. The chief modern authorities are Muratori, Cherrier, Von Raumer, Milman, Freeman as above under Frederick I.; Giannone, Storia del Regno di Napoli, 1723; ∏oeffer, Kaiser Frcdcrich II., Munich, 1844; the great work of Huillaιxl-Breholles, and also his Vic et Correspondance de Pierre de la Vigne, Paris, 1866; T. L Kington, History of Frederick the Second, Emperor of the Romans, London, 1862; Schirrmacher, Kaiser Friedrich II., 4 vols., Göttingen, 1859 -65; Winkelmann, Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs II. und seiner Reiche, vol. i., Berlin, 1863, vol. ii., Revel, 1865, and a continuation for the years 1239-41 in the Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte, xii. 261-294, 521-566; A. del Vecchio, La legislazione di Federico II. Imperatore, Turin, 1874; and Reuter, Geschichte der religiösen Aufklärung im Mittelalter, vol. ii., Berlin, 1877.

FREDERICK II. (1712-1786), king of Prussia, born on the 24th January 1712, was the son of Frederick William I., and is usually known as Frederick the Great. He was brought up with extreme rigour, his father devising a scheme of education which was intended to make him a hardy soldier, and prescribing for him every detail of bis conduct. So great was Frederick William’s horror of everything which did not seem to him practical, that he strictly excluded Latin from the list of his son’s studies. Frederick, however, had free and generous impulses which could not be restrained by the sternest system. Encouraged by his mother, and under the influence of his governess Madame de Roucoulle, and of his first tutor Duhan, a French refugee, he acquired an excellent knowledge of French and a taste for literature and music. He even received secret lessons in Latin, which his father had invested with all the charms of forbidden fruit. As he grew up he became extremely dissatisfied with the dull and monotonous life he was compelled to lead; and his discontent was heartily shared by his sister, Wilhelmina, a bright and intelligent young princess for whom Frederick had a warm affection. Frederick William, seeing the divergence of his son’s tastes from his own, gradually conceived for him an intense dislike, which often found expression in violent outbursts of anger. So harsh was his treatment that Frederick frequently thought of running away and taking refuge at the court of his uncle, George II. of England; and he at last resolved to do so during a journey which he made with the king to South Germany in 1730, when he was eighteen years of age. He was helped by his two friends, Lieutenant Katte and Lieutenant Keith; but by the imprudence of the former the secret was found out. Frederick was placed under arrest, and the king abused him so cruelly on board a yacht at Frankfort that some courtiers had to interfere, and to separate them. Warned by Frederick, Keith escaped; but Katte delayed his flight too long, and a court martial decided that he should be punished with two years’ fortress arrest. The king changed this sentence into one of death, and the young soldier was executed outside the fortress of Cüstrin, in which Frederick was kept a close prisoner. On the way to the place of execution Katte had to pass the crown prince’s window. “Pardonnez moi, mon cher Katte,” cried Frederick, who was broken-hearted at the fate he had brought upon his friend. “La mort est douce pour un si aimable prince,” replied Katte. The same court martial which had judged him decided that, as a lieutenant-colonel attempting to desert, the crown prince had incurred the legal penalty of death. For some time the king actually thought of giving effect to the sentence; and he at last relented only in consequence of grave expostulations from the emperor and the kings of Sweden and Poland.

For about fifteen months Frederick now lived in the town of Cüstrin, having an establishment of his own, but serving as the youngest councillor at the Government board there. He took great care not to offend his father, and was partially restored to favour. In 1732 he was made colonel commandant of a regiment in Ruppin, and in the following year he married, in obedience to the king’s orders, the Princess Elizabeth Christina, daughter of the duke of Brunswick-Bevern. The palace of Rheinsberg in the neighbourhood of Ruppin was built for him, and there he lived until he succeeded to the throne. These years were perhaps the happiest of his life. He discharged his duties with so much spirit and so conscientiously that he ultimately gained the esteem of Frederick William, who no longer feared that he would leave the crown to one unworthy of wearing it. At the same time the crown prince was able to indulge to the full his personal tastes. He carried on a lively correspondence with Voltaire and other French men of letters, and was a diligent student of philosophy, history, and poetry. Two of his best known works were written at this time,— Considérations sur l’état présent du corps politique de l'Europe and his Anti-Macchiavel. In the former he calls attention to the growing strength of Austria and France, and insists on the necesssity of some third power, by which he clearly means Prussia, counterbalancing their excessive influence. The second treatise, which was issued by Voltaire in Hague in 1740, contains a generous exposition of some of the favourite ideas of the 18th century hilo-sophers respecting the duties of sovereigns.

In 1740 he became king. He maintained all the forms of government established by his father, but ruled in a far more liberal and enlightened spirit; he tolerated every form of religious opinion, granted considerable freedom to the press even in political discussion, was most careful to secure an exact and impartial administration of justice, and allowed every one with a genuine grievance free access to his presence. The Potsdam regiment of giants was disbanded, but the real interests of the army were as carefully studied by Frederick as by Frederick William. On the year of his accession, the emperor Charles VI. died. Frederick at once began to make extensive military preparations, and it was soon clear to all the world that he intended to enter upon some serious enterprise. He had made up his mind to take possession of Silesia. For this resolution he is often abused still by historians, and at the time he had the approval of hardly any one out of Prussia. He himself, writing of the scheme in his Mémoires, laid no claim to lofty motives, but candidly confessed that “it was a means of acquiring reputation and of increasing the power of the state.” He firmly believed, however, that he had inherited lawful claims to the Silesian principalities; and although his father had recognized the Pragmatic Sanction, whereby the hereditary dominions of Charles VI. were to descend to his daughter, Maria Theresa, Frederick insisted that this sanction could refer only to lands which rightfully belonged to the house of Austria. He could also urge that, as Charles VI. had not fulfilled the engagements by which Frederick William’s recognition of the Pragmatic Sanction had been secured, Prussia was freed from her obligation. Frederick cannot fairly be charged with having let loose the elements of war which desolated Europe during the next few years, for, independently of him, the elector of Bavaria instantly protested against the Pragmatic Sanction, and there can be no doubt that in any case France would have taken advantage of so favourable a chance of breaking the power of Austria.

Frederick sent an ambassador to Vienna, offering, in the event of his rights in Silesia being conceded, to aid Maria Theresa against her enemies. The queen of Hungary, who regarded the proposal as that of a mere robber, haughtily declined; whereupon Frederick immediately invaded Silesia with an army of 30,000 men. His first victory was gained at Mollwitz on the 10th of April, 1741. Under the impression, in consequence of a furious charge of Austrian cavalry, that the battle was lost, he rode rapidly away at an early stage of the struggle,—a mistake which gave rise for a time to the groundless idea that he lacked personal courage. A second Prussian victory was gained at Chotusitz, near Czeslau, on the 17th May 1742, by which time Frederick was master of all the fortified places of Silesia. Maria Theresa, in the heat of her struggle with France and the elector of Bavaria, now Charles VII., and pressed by England to rid herself of Frederick, concluded with him, on the 11th June 1742, the peace of Breslau, conceding to Prussia Upper and Lower Silesia as far as the Oppa, together with the county of Glatz. Frederick made good i use of the next two years, fortifying his new territory’, and repairing the evils inflicted upon it by the war. By the death of the prince of East Friesland without heirs, he also gained possession of that country. He knew well that Maria Theresa would not, if she could help it, allow him to remain in Silesia; accordingly, in 1744, alarmed by her victories, he arrived at a secret understanding with France, and pledged himself, with Hesse-Cassel and the palatinate, to maintain the imperial rights of Charles VII., and to defend his hereditary Bavarian lands. Frederick began the second Silesian war by entering Bohemia in August 1744, and taking Prague. By this brilliant but rash venture he put himself in great danger, and soon had to retreat; but in 1745 he gained the battles of Hohenfriedberg, Sorr, and Hennersdorf; and Leopold of Dessau (“Der alte Dessauer”) won for him the victory of Kesselsdorf in Saxony. The latter victory was decisive, and the peace of Dresden (December 25, 1745) assured to Frederick a second time the possession of Silesia.

Frederick had thus, at the age of thirty-three, raised himself to a great position in Europe, and henceforth he was the most conspicuous sovereign of his time. He was a thoroughly absolute ruler, his so-called ministers being mere clerks whose business was to give effect to his will. To use his own famous phrase, however, he regarded himself as but “the first servant of the state;” and during the next eleven years he proved that the words expressed his inmost conviction and feeling. All kinds of questions were submitted to him, important and unimportant; and he is frequently censured for having troubled himself so much with mere details. But in so far as these details related to expenditure he was fully justified, for it was absolutely essential for him to have a large army, and with a small state this was impossible unless he carefully prevented unnecessary outlay. Being a keen judge of character, he filled the public offices with faithful, capable, energetic men, who were kept up to a high standard of duty by the consciousness that their work might at any time come under his strict supervision. The Academy of Sciences, which had fallen into contempt during his father’s reign, he restored, infusing into it vigorous life; and he did more to promote elementary education than any of his predecessors. He made canals between the Oder and the Elbe, and the Oder and the Havel, and all kinds of manufacture, particularly silk manufacture, owed much to his encouragement. To the army he gave unremitting attention, reviewing it at regular intervals, and sternly punishing negligence on the part of the officers. Its numbers were raised to 1G0,000 men, while fortresses and magazines were always kept in a state of readiness for war. The influence of the king’s example was felt far beyond the limits of his immediate circle. The nation was proud of his genius, and displayed something of his energy in all departments of life. Lessing, who as a youth of twenty came to Berlin in 1749, composed enthusiastic odes in his honour, and Gleim, the Halberstadt poet, wrote of him as of a kind of demi-god. These may be taken as fair illustrations of the popular feeling long before tbe Seven Years’ War.

He despised German as the language of boors, although it is remarkable that at a later period, in a French essay on German literature, he predicted for it a great future. He habitually wrote and spoke French, and had a strong ambition to rank as a distinguished French author. Nobody can now read his verses, but his prose writings have a certain calm simplicity and dignity, without, however, giving evidence of the splendid mental qualities which he revealed in practical life. To this period belongs his Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire de Brandebourg, and his poem L’Art de la Guerre. The latter, judged as literature, is intolerably dull; but the former is a narrative of seme value, throwing considerable light on his personal sympathies as well as on the motives of important epochs in his career. He continued to correspond with French writers, and induced a number of them to settle in Berlin, Maupertuis being president of the Academy. In 1752 Voltaire, who had repeatedly visited him, came at Frederick’s urgent entreaty, and received a truly royal welcome. The famous Hirsch trial, and Voltaire’s vanity and caprice, greatly lowered him in the esteem of the king, who, on his side, irritated his guest by often requiring him to correct bad verses, and by making him the object of rude banter. The publication of Doctor Akakia, which brought down upon the president of the Academy a storm of ridicule, finally alienated Frederick; while Voltaire’s wrongs culminated in the famous arrest at Frankfort, the most disagreeable elements of which were due to the misunderstanding of an order by a subordinate official.

The king lived as much as possible in a retired mansion, to which he gave the name of Sanssouci,—not the palace so called, which was built after the Seven Years’ War, and was never a favourite residence. He rose regularly in summer at five, in winter at six, devoting himself to public business till about eleven. During part of this time, after coffee, he would aid his reflections by playing on the flute, of which he was passionately fond, being a really skilful performer. At eleven came parade, and an hour afterwards, punctually, dinner, which continued till two, or later, if conversation happened to be particularly attractive. After dinner he glanced through and signed cabinet orders written in accordance with his morning instructions, often adding marginal notes and postscripts, many of which were in a caustic tone. These disposed of, he amused himself for a couple of hours with literary work; between six and seven he would converse with his friends or listen to his reader (a post held for some time by La Mettrie); at seven there was a concert; and at half-past eight he sat down to supper, which might go on till midnight. He liked good eating and drinking, although even here the cost was sharply looked after, the expenses of his kitchen mounting to no higher figure than £1800 a year. At supper he was always surrounded by a number of his most intimate friends, mainly Frenchmen; and he insisted on the conversation being perfectly free. His wit, however, was often cruel, and any one who responded with too much spirit was soon made to feel that the licence of talk was to be complete only on one side.

At Frederick’s court ladies were seldom seen, a circumstance that gave occasion to much scandal for which there seems to have been no foundation. The queen he visited only on rare occasions. She had been forced upon him by his father, and he had never loved her; but he always treated her with marked respect, and provided her with a generous income, half of which she gave away in charity. Although without charm, she was a woman of many noble qualities; and, like her husband, she wrote French books, some of which attracted a certain attention in their day. She survived him by eleven years, dying in 1797.

Maria Theresa had never given up hope that she would recover Silesia; and as all the neighbouring sovereigns were bitterly jealous of Frederick, and somewhat afraid of him, she had no difficulty in inducing several of them to form a scheme for his ruin. Russia and Saxony entered into it heartily; and France, laying aside her ancient enmity towards Austria, joined the empress against the common object of dislike. Frederick, meanwhile, had turned towards England, which saw in him a possible ally of great importance against the French. A convention between Prussia and Great Britain was signed in January 1756, and it proved of incalculable value to both countries, leading as it did to a close alliance during the administration of Pitt. Through the treachery of a clerk in the Saxon foreign office, Frederick was made aware of the future which was being prepared for him. Seeing the importance of taking the initiative, and, if possible, of securing Saxony, he suddenly, on the 24th August 1756, crossed the frontier of that country, and shut in the Saxon army between Pirna and Königstein, ultimately compelling it, after a victory gained over the Austrians at Lowositz, to surrender. Thus began the Seven Years’ War, in which, supported by England, Brunswick, and Hesse-Cassel, he had for a long time to oppose Austria, France, Russia, Saxony, and Sweden. Virtually, the whole Continent was in arms against a small state which, a few years before, had been regarded by most men as beneath serious notice. But it happened that this small state was led by a man of high military genius, capable of infusing into others his own undaunted spirit, while his subjects had learned both from him and his predecessors habits of patience, perseverance, and discipline. In 1757, after defeating the Austrians at Prague, he was himself defeated by them at Kolin; and by the shameful convention of Closter-Seven, he was freely exposed to the attack of the French. In November 1757, however, when Europe looked upon him as ruined, he rid himself of the French by his splendid victory over them at Rossbach, and in about a month afterwards, by the still more splendid victory at Leuthen, he drove the Austrians from Silesia. From this time the French were kept well employed in the west by Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, who defeated them at Crefeld in 1758, and at Minden in 1759. In the former year Frederick triumphed, at a heavy cost, over the Russians at Zorndorf; and although, through lack of his usual foresight, he lost the battle of Hochkirchen, he prevented the Austrians from deriving any real advantage from their triumph, Silesia still remaining in his hands at the end of the year. The battle of Kunersdorf, fought on August 12, 1759, was the most disastrous to him in the course of the war. He had here to contend both with the Russians and the Austrians; and although at first he had some success, his army was in the end completely broken. “All is lost. Save the royal family,” he wrote to his minister Friesenstein; “the consequences of this battle will be worse than the battle itself. I shall not survive the ruin of the Fatherland. Adieu for ever !” But he soon recovered from his despair, and in 1760 gained the important victories of Liegnitz and Torgau. He had now, however, to act on the defensive, and, fortunately for him, the Russians, on the death of the czarina Elizabeth, not only withdrew in 1762 from the compact against him, but for a time became his allies. On October 29 of that year he gained his last victory over the Austrians at Freiberg. Europe was by that i time sick of war, every power being more or less exhausted. The result was that, on February 15, 1763, a few days after the conclusion of the peace of Paris, the treaty of Hubertusburg was signed, Austria confirming Prussia in the possession of Silesia.

It would be difficult to overrate the importance of the contribution thus made by Frederick to the politics of Europe. Prussia was now universally recognized as one of the great powers of the Continent, and she definitely took her place in Germany as the rival of Austria. From this time it was inevitable that there should be a final struggle between the two nations for predominance, and that the smaller German states should group themselves around one or the other. Frederick himself acquired both in Germany and Europe the indefinable influence which springs from the recognition of great gifts that have been proved by great deeds.

His first care after the war was, as far as possible, to enable the country to recover from the terrific blows by which it had been almost destroyed; and he was never, either before or after, seen to better advantage than in the measures he adopted sor this end. Although his resources had been so completely drained that he had been forced to melt the silver in his palaces and to debase the coinage, his energy soon brought back the national prosperity. Pomerania and Neumark were freed from taxation for two years, Silesia for six months. Many nobles whose lands had been wasted received corn for seed; his war horses were within a few months to be found on farms all over Prussia; and money was freely spent in the re-erection of houses which had been destroyed. The coinage was gradually restored to its proper value, and trade received a favourable impulse by the foundation of the Bank of Berlin. All these matters were carefully looked into by Frederick himself, who, while acting as generously as his circumstances would allow, insisted on everything being done in the most efficient manner at the least possible cost. Unfortunately, he adopted the French ideas of excise, and the French methods of imposing and collecting taxes,—a system known as the Regie. This system secured for him a large revenue, but it led to a vast amount of petty tyranny, which was all the more intolerable because it was carried out by French officials. It was continued to the end of Frederick’s reign, and nothing did so much to injure his otherwise immense popularity. He was quite aware of the discontent the system excited, and the good-nature with which he tolerated the criticisms directed against it and him is illustrated by a well known incident. Riding along the Jäger Strasse one day, he saw a crowd of people. “See what it is,” he said to the groom who was attending him. “They have something posted up about your Majesty,” said the groom, returning. Frederick, riding forward, saw a caricature of himself: “King in very melancholy guise,” says Preuss (as translated by Carlyle), “seated on a stool, a coffee-mill between his knees, diligently grinding with the one hand, and with the other picking up any bean that might have fallen, i Hang it lower,’ said the king, beckoning his groom with a wave of the finger; ‘lower, that they may not have to hurt their necks about it.’ No sooner were the words spoken, which spread instantly, than there rose from the whole crowd one universal huzzah of joy. They tore the caricature into a thousand pieces, and rolled after the king with loud i Lebe Hoch, our Frederick for ever,’ as he rode slowly away.” There are scores of anecdotes about Frederick, but not many so well authenticated as this.

There was nothing about which Frederick took so much trouble as the proper administration of justice. He disliked the formalities of the law, and in one instance, “the Miller-Arnold case,” in connexion with which he thought injustice had been done to a poor man, he dismissed the judges, condemned them to a year’s fortress-arrest, and compelled them to make good out of their own pocket the loss sustained by their supposed victim,—not a wise proceeding, but one springing from a generous motive. He once defined himself as “l’avocat du pauvre,” and few things gave him more pleasure than the famous answer of the miller whose windmill stood on ground which was wanted for the king’s garden. The miller sturdily refused to sell it. “Not at any price?” said the king’s agent; “could not the king take it from you for nothing, if he chose?” “Have we not the Kammergericht at Berlin ?” was the answer, which became a popular saying in Germany. Soon after he came to the throne Frederick began to make preparations for a new code. In the year 1749-51 his grand-chancellor, Von Cocceji, a man of wide knowledge and solid judgment, finished “The Project of the Corporis Juris Fridericiani,” which was afterwards made the basis of a legal system drawn up by the grand-chancellor Von Cramer—a system that came into operation in 1794 under Frederick’s successor.

Looking ahead after the Seven Years’ War, Frederick saw no means of securing himself so effectually as by cultivating the good will of Russia. In 1764 he accordingly concluded a treaty of alliance with the empress Catherine for eight years. Six years afterwards, unfortunately for his fame, he joined in the first partition of Poland, by which he received Polish Prussia, without Dantzic and Thorn, and Great Poland as far as the Netzefluss. Prussia was then for the first time made continuous with Brandenburg and Pomerania. Frederick would have run great risks had he refused to take part in this arrangement; but it was none the less a shameful violation of international law, the full penalty for which has perhaps not even yet been paid.

F∙ ∙The emperor Joseph II., being of an ardent and impulsive nature, greatly admired Frederick, and visited him at Neisse, in Silesia, in 1769, a visit which Frederick returned, in Moravia, in the following year. The young emperor was frank and cordial; Frederick was more cautious, for he detected under the respectful manner of Joseph a keen ambition that might one day become dangerous to Prussia. Ever after these interviews a portrait of the emperor hung conspicuously in the rooms in which Frederick lived, a circumstance on which some one remarked, “Ah yes,” said Frederick, “I am obliged to keep that young gentleman in my eye.” Nothing came of these suspicions till 1777, when, after the death of Maximilian Joseph, elector of Bavaria, without children, the emperor took possession of the greater part of his lands. The elector palatine, who lawfully inherited Bavaria, came to an arrangement, which was not admitted by his heir, the duke of Zweibrücken, afterwards King Maximilian I. of Bavaria. The latter appealed to Frederick, who, resolved that Austria should gain no unnecessary advantage, took his part, and brought pressure to bear upon the emperor. Ultimately, greatly against his will, Frederick felt compelled to draw the sword, and in July 1778, crossed the Bohemian frontier at the head of a powerful army. No general engagement was fought, and after a great many delays, the treaty of Teschen was signed on the 13th May 1779. . Austria received the circle of Burgau, and consented that the king of Prussia should take the Franconian principalities. Frederick never abandoned his jealousy of Austria, whose ambition he regarded as the chief danger against which Europe had to guard. He seems to have had no suspicion that evil days were coming in France. It was Austria which had given trouble in his time; and if her pride were curbed, he fancied that Prussia at least would be safe. Hence one of the last important acts of his life was to form, in 1785, a league of princes (the “Fürstenbund”) for the defence of the imperial constitution, believed to be imperilled by Joseph’s restless activity. The league came to an end after Frederick’s death; but it is of considerable historical interest, as the first open attempt of Prussia to take the lead in Germany.

Frederick’s chief trust was always in his treasury and his army. By continual economy'he left in the former the immense sum of 70 million thalers; the latter, at the time of his death, numbered 200,000 men, disciplined with all the strictness to which he had throughout life accustomed his troops. He died at Sanssouci on the 17th August 1786; his death being hastened by exposure to a storm of rain, stoically borne, during a military review. He passed away on the eve of tremendous events, which for a time obscured his fame; but now that he can be impartially estimated, he is seen to have been in many respects one of the greatest figures in modern history.

He was rather below the middle size, in youth inclined to stoutness, lean in old age, but of vigorous and active habits. An expression of keen intelligence lighted up his features, and his large, sparkling, grey eyes darted penetrating glances at every one who approached him. In his later years an old blue uniform with red facings was his usual dress, and on his breast was generally some Spanish snuff, of which he consumed large quantities. He shared many of the chief intellectual tendencies of his age, having no feeling for the highest aspirations of human nature, but submitting all things to a searching critical analysis. Of Christianity he always spoke in the mocking tone of the “enlightened” philosophers, regarding it as the invention of priests; but it is noteworthy that after the Seven Years’ War, the trials of which steadied his character, he sought to strengthen the church for the sake of its elevating moral influence. He cannot be truly described as an atheist, for he regarded the world as probably the creation of a demiurgus,—of a demiurgus, however, who could not be supposed to take interest in the petty affairs of men. In his judgments of mankind he often talked as a misanthrope. He was once conversing with Sulzer, who was a school inspector, about education. Sulzer expressed the opinion that education had of late years greatly improved. “In former times, your Majesty,” he said, “the notion being that mankind were naturally inclined to evil, a system of severity prevailed in schools; but now, when we recognize that the inborn inclination of men is rather to good than to evil, schoolmasters have adopted a more generous procedure.” “Ah, my dear Sulzer,” replied the king, “you don’t know this damned race” (“Ach, mein lieber Sulzer, er kennt nicht diese verdammte Race ”). This fearful saying unquestionably expressed a frequent mood of Frederick’s; and he sometimes acted with great harshness, and seemed to take a malicious pleasure in tormenting his acquaintances. Yet he was capable of genuine attachments. He was beautifully loyal to his mother and his sister Wilhelmina; his letters to the duchess of Gotha are full of a certain tender reverence; the two Keiths found him a devoted friend. But the true evidence that beneath his misanthropical moods there was an enduring sentiment of humanity is afforded by the spirit in which he exercised his kingly functions. Taking his reign as a whole, it must be said that he looked upon his power rather as a trust than as a source of personal advantage; and the trust was faithfully discharged according to the best lights of his day. He has often been condemned for doing nothing to encourage German literature; and it is true that he was supremely indifferent to it. Before he died a tide of intellectual life

FREDERICK II. (1411-1464), elector and duke of Saxony, surnamed the Meek, son of the former and of Catherine of Brunswick, was born August 22, 1411, and succeeded his father in 1428. His reign is remarkable only for his long-continued dispute with his uncles and brothers regarding the partition of Saxony—a dispute which, though finally settled in 1451 by the interposition of the emperor in Frederick’s favour, led, in 1455, to the famous attempt by a knight named Kunz von Kaufungen to abduct the two sons of Frederick, Ernst and Albert. A graphic description of the plot and its accidental frustration will be found in a paper on the “Prinzenraub” in Mr Carlyle’s Miscellaneous JForÄs. Frederick died at Leipsic, 7th September 1464.

For the literature connected with the “Prinzenraub,” see W. Schafer, Der Montag vor Kiliani, 1855; and J. Gersdorsi Einige Actenstücke zur Geschichte des Sächsischen Prinzenraubes, 1855.

FREDERICK II. (1482-1556), elector palatine, surnamed the Wise, fourth son of Philip the Noble-minded, was born in 1482, and succeeded his brother Louis as elector in 1544. During the siege of Vienna by Sultan Soliman II. in 1529, he held the command of the army of the empire. In 1535 he married Dorothea daughter of Christian II., ex-king of Denmark. Through the persuasion of Melanch-tho∏ he embraced the principles of the Reformation and joined the Smalkald League, but he afterwards signed the Augsburg Interim, and became reconciled with Charles V. He died in 1556.

FREDERICK III. (1515-1576), elector palatine, surnamed the Pious, eldest son of John II., palatine of Simmern, was born in 1515, succeeded his father in 1556, and became elector palatine on the death of Otto Henry in 1559. On his marriage in 1537 to the Lutheran Princess Maria of Brandenburg-Baireuth, he adopted the Protestant faith, and in 1560 he replaced the Lutheran confession and worship by that of the Reformed or Calvinistic, on which account an unsuccessful attempt was made in 1566 by several of the Lutheran princes to obtain an imperial edict against him. He died 26th October 1576.

See Kluckhohn, Friedrich der Fromme, Nördlingen, 1878. Two volumes of his letters were previously edited by Kluckhohn.

See Chmel, Regesta Fridcrici IV., Vienna, 1838—40; Kurz, Oesterreich unter Kaiser Friedrich IV., Vienna, 1812; Chmel, Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs IV., Hamburg, 1840; Archiv für Ocsterr. Geschichtsqucllcn, vols. x. and xi.; Müller, Rcichstagsstaat unter Friedrich HL, 3 vols.

FREDERICK IV. (1574-1610), elector palatine, surnamed the Upright, son of Elector Louis VI. and of Elizabeth of Hesse, was born in 1574, succeeded his father under the guardianship of his uncle John Casimir in 1583, and after the death of the latter in 1592 ruled as independent governor. His reign is chiefly of importance for the steadfast and firm support he rendered to the Protestant cause. Under his auspices the Protestant union of Germany was formed in 1601. Mannheim, which had greatly increased through the influx of Protestant refugees, was raised by him to the rank of a town. He died in 1610.

France; but he had ultimately to cultivate the friendship of the emperor, from whom he hoped to obtain the Silesian principalities of Liegnitz, Brieg, and Wohlau, which, after 1675, he claimed as his by inheritance. He received the circle of Schwiebus, in Silesia (1686), on condition that he should withdraw his claim and send 8000 men to the help of the emperor in his war with the Turks. Two years afterwards he died. Although famous as a soldier, he was even greater as an administrator. He w as the most economical ruler of his age, yet did no injustice to any branch of the state service. Among the most important of his public works may be named the canal between the Oder and the Spree, which still bears his name. After the revocation of the edict of Nantes, he welcomed large numbers of French refugees to his dominions; and long before that time he had offered every encouragement to Flemish settlers, thus giving a powerful impulse to industry and commerce. He was twice married,—his first wife, Louise Henrietta, being a pious and energetic lady, endowed with so clear and penetrating an understanding that her husband took no important step without consulting her.

See Puffendorf, De rebus gestis Fridcrici Wilhclmi Magni (Berlin, 1695); Förster, Geschichte Friedrich Wilhelms (4th ed., Berlin 1855); W. Pierson, Der Grosse Kurfürst (Berlin, 1873); Carlyle, History of Friedrich II. of Prussia.

See Morgenstern, Uebcr Friedrich Wilhelm I. (Brunswick, 1793); J. C. Droysen, Friedrich Wilhelm I., König von Preussen (2 vols., Leipsic, 1869); Carlyle, History of Friedrich II. of Prussia.

See W. Hahn, Friedrich Wilhelm III. und Louise (2d ed., Berlin, 1876); Duncker, Aus der Zeit Friedrichs des Grossen und Friedrich Wilhelms III. (Leipsic, 1876).

See Varnhagen von Ense’s Blatter aus der Preussischen Geschichte (5 vols., Leipsic, 1868-69); and Briefwechsel Friedrich Wilhelms IV. mit Bunsen (Leipsic, 1873).