. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Das Zweikaiserproblem kennzeichnet den Widerspruch zwischen dem universalen Anspruch des Kaisertums, wonach es der Idee nach nur einen Kaiser geben durfte, und der realen Tatsache, dass mehrere Personen diesen Titel f\u00FCr sich beanspruchten. Im engeren Sinne bezeichnet es den Streit, der sich nach der Kaiserkr\u00F6nung Karls des Gro\u00DFen durch den Papst im Jahr 800 zwischen dem so etablierten westlichen Kaisertum und den Kaisern des Byzantinischen Reiches ergab."@de . . . . "85485"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "1123446419"^^ . . . . . . . . . . "Problema dei due imperatori"@it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Problem of two emperors"@en . . . . . . . . "Das Zweikaiserproblem kennzeichnet den Widerspruch zwischen dem universalen Anspruch des Kaisertums, wonach es der Idee nach nur einen Kaiser geben durfte, und der realen Tatsache, dass mehrere Personen diesen Titel f\u00FCr sich beanspruchten. Im engeren Sinne bezeichnet es den Streit, der sich nach der Kaiserkr\u00F6nung Karls des Gro\u00DFen durch den Papst im Jahr 800 zwischen dem so etablierten westlichen Kaisertum und den Kaisern des Byzantinischen Reiches ergab."@de . . . . "\u96D9\u5E1D\u554F\u984C\uFF08\u82F1\u8A9E\uFF1Aproblem of two emperors\uFF0C\u6E90\u81EA\u5FB7\u8A9E Zweikaiserproblem\uFF09\u662F\u4E00\u500B\u6B77\u53F2\u5B78\u8853\u8A9E\uFF0C\u7528\u65BC\u63CF\u8FF0\u666E\u4E16\u5E1D\u570B\u6982\u5FF5\u4E4B\u4E2D\u7684\u6B77\u53F2\u77DB\u76FE\uFF0C\u5373\u5728\u4EFB\u4F55\u4E00\u500B\u7D66\u5B9A\u7684\u6642\u9593\u88E1\u53EA\u6709\u4E00\u500B\u771F\u6B63\u7684\u7687\u5E1D\uFF0C\u4F46\u662F\u7D93\u5E38\u6709\u5169\u500B\u6216\u66F4\u591A\u7684\u4EBA\u8072\u7A31\u5177\u6709\u8A72\u8077\u4F4D\u7684\u6CD5\u7D71\u4E26\u64D4\u4EFB\u6B64\u4F4D\u3002\u8A72\u8A5E\u8A9E\u4E3B\u8981\u7528\u65BC\u4E2D\u4E16\u7D00\u7684\u6B50\u6D32\uFF0C\u7279\u5225\u662F\u5E38\u7528\u65BC\u541B\u58EB\u5766\u4E01\u5821\u7684\u62DC\u5360\u5EAD\u7687\u5E1D\u8207\u5FB7\u610F\u5FD7\u5730\u5340\u7684\u795E\u8056\u7F85\u99AC\u7687\u5E1D\u4E4B\u9593\u95DC\u65BC\u54EA\u500B\u7687\u5E1D\u4EE3\u8868\u5408\u6CD5\u7684\u7F85\u99AC\u7687\u5E1D\u7684\u9577\u671F\u722D\u8AD6\u3002"@zh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Friedrich I. Barbarossa.jpg"@en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Il problema dei due imperatori (in tedesco Zweikaiserproblem) \u00E8 un termine storiografico usato soprattutto per indicare la disputa tra gli Imperatori romani d'Oriente e gli Imperatori del Sacro Romano Impero per il titolo di legittimo Imperatore romano."@it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "right"@en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "62750319"^^ . . . . . . . . "61"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "The problem of two emperors or two-emperors problem (deriving from the German term Zweikaiserproblem) is the historiographical term for the historical contradiction between the idea of the universal empire, that there was only ever one true emperor at any one given time, and the truth that there were often multiple individuals who claimed the position simultaneously. The term is primarily used in regards to medieval European history and often refers to in particular the long-lasting dispute between the Byzantine emperors in Constantinople and the Holy Roman emperors in modern-day Germany and Austria as to which monarch represented the legitimate Roman emperor."@en . "\uB450 \uD669\uC81C \uBB38\uC81C"@ko . . . . . . . . . "Isaac II Angelos.jpg"@en . . . . "\u96D9\u5E1D\u554F\u984C"@zh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Il problema dei due imperatori (in tedesco Zweikaiserproblem) \u00E8 un termine storiografico usato soprattutto per indicare la disputa tra gli Imperatori romani d'Oriente e gli Imperatori del Sacro Romano Impero per il titolo di legittimo Imperatore romano. Secondo la concezione medievale cristiana, l'Impero romano era indivisibile e il suo imperatore aveva una posizione egemone su tutti i cristiani, compresi quelli che vivevano al di fuori dei confini imperiali. In seguito alla caduta dell'Impero romano d'Occidente nel corso della Tarda Antichit\u00E0, il Papa e i nuovi regni romano-barbarici nell'Europa Occidentale continuarono a riconoscere la legittimit\u00E0 del titolo di Imperatore romano assunto dagli imperatori della superstite pars orientis (cio\u00E8 l'Impero bizantino). La situazione cambi\u00F2 nel 797 allorquando il titolo imperiale fu assunto da una donna, l'imperatrice Irene. Papa Leone III, rifiutando l'idea che una donna potesse assumere il titolo di imperatore, consider\u00F2 vacante il titolo imperiale e ci\u00F2 gli forn\u00EC il pretesto per incoronare \"Imperatore dei Romani\" il re dei Franchi Carlo Magno nel Natale dell'800, attuando cos\u00EC una translatio imperii (\"trasferimento dell'Impero\") dai Greci ai Germani. Nel corso dei secoli, la disputa sul titolo imperiale, sorta in seguito all'incoronazione di Carlo Magno, avrebbe costituito uno dei principali punti di attrito nei rapporti diplomatici tra i due imperi, anche se raramente ebbe come conseguenza scontri militari, anche a causa della distanza geografica che separava i due stati. Con il trattato di Aquisgrana dell'812 i due imperatori trovarono un compromesso parziale riconoscendosi reciprocamente il titolo di Imperatore ma non quello di \"Imperatore romano\". Il Sacro Romano Imperatore era considerato dai Bizantini l'Imperatore (o Re) dei Franchi e successivamente Re di Germania, mentre le fonti occidentali attribuivano all'Imperatore bizantino il titolo di Imperatore dei Greci o Imperatore di Costantinopoli. A complicare la situazione, il titolo imperiale fu occasionalmente rivendicato dai sovrani bulgari e serbi, portando a conflitti militari con Bisanzio. La Quarta Crociata, pur portando alla momentanea caduta dell'Impero bizantino e alla sua sostituzione con l'Impero latino, non pose fine alla disputa. Gli imperatori latini, pur riconoscendo i sacri romani imperatori come gli imperatori romani legittimi, rivendicarono per s\u00E9 lo stesso titolo, che tuttavia non era riconosciuto dal Sacro Romano Impero. Nel tentativo di raggiungere un compromesso, Papa Innocenzo III propose il concetto di divisio imperii (divisione dell'impero), secondo cui l'egemonia imperiale sarebbe stata divisa tra Occidente (il Sacro Romano Impero) e Oriente (l'Impero latino). Anche se l'Impero latino sarebbe stato distrutto dall'Impero di Nicea, che ricostitu\u00EC l'Impero bizantino nel 1261 sotto la dinastia dei Paleologi, lo stato bizantino declin\u00F2 inesorabilmente e i suoi imperatori preferirono ignorare il problema dei due imperatori per favorire rapporti diplomatici pi\u00F9 stretti con l'Occidente per via della necessit\u00E0 di ottenere aiuti contro gli altri nemici dell'Impero. Il problema dei due imperatori si ripresent\u00F2 in seguito alla Caduta di Costantinopoli nel 1453, allorquando il sultano ottomano Mehmed II, ambendo all'egemonia universale, rivendic\u00F2 la dignit\u00E0 imperiale assumendo il titolo di Kayser-i R\u00FBm (Cesare dell'Impero romano). I sultani ottomani rivendicarono per s\u00E9 stessi il titolo di imperatori romani, non riconoscendolo ai Sacri Romani Imperatori, definiti k\u0131ral (re) dalle fonti turche. La disputa tra Ottomani e Tedeschi per il titolo imperiale si protrasse fino alla Pace di Zsitvatorok del 1606, con la quale gli Ottomani, accettando il principio compromissorio della divisio imperii, riconobbero il titolo imperiale dei Sacri Romani Imperatori. In seguito alla caduta di Costantinopoli i sovrani russi, ritenendosi gli eredi dell'Impero bizantino, assunsero il titolo di Zar (derivante da \"Cesare\"). Il Sacro Romano Imperatore accett\u00F2 di riconoscere il titolo imperiale allo zar di Russia solo nel 1726, in occasione di un'alleanza militare, pur continuando a disconoscerlo come suo pari."@it . . "182"^^ . "The Imperial Ideology"@en . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "174"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "\u96D9\u5E1D\u554F\u984C\uFF08\u82F1\u8A9E\uFF1Aproblem of two emperors\uFF0C\u6E90\u81EA\u5FB7\u8A9E Zweikaiserproblem\uFF09\u662F\u4E00\u500B\u6B77\u53F2\u5B78\u8853\u8A9E\uFF0C\u7528\u65BC\u63CF\u8FF0\u666E\u4E16\u5E1D\u570B\u6982\u5FF5\u4E4B\u4E2D\u7684\u6B77\u53F2\u77DB\u76FE\uFF0C\u5373\u5728\u4EFB\u4F55\u4E00\u500B\u7D66\u5B9A\u7684\u6642\u9593\u88E1\u53EA\u6709\u4E00\u500B\u771F\u6B63\u7684\u7687\u5E1D\uFF0C\u4F46\u662F\u7D93\u5E38\u6709\u5169\u500B\u6216\u66F4\u591A\u7684\u4EBA\u8072\u7A31\u5177\u6709\u8A72\u8077\u4F4D\u7684\u6CD5\u7D71\u4E26\u64D4\u4EFB\u6B64\u4F4D\u3002\u8A72\u8A5E\u8A9E\u4E3B\u8981\u7528\u65BC\u4E2D\u4E16\u7D00\u7684\u6B50\u6D32\uFF0C\u7279\u5225\u662F\u5E38\u7528\u65BC\u541B\u58EB\u5766\u4E01\u5821\u7684\u62DC\u5360\u5EAD\u7687\u5E1D\u8207\u5FB7\u610F\u5FD7\u5730\u5340\u7684\u795E\u8056\u7F85\u99AC\u7687\u5E1D\u4E4B\u9593\u95DC\u65BC\u54EA\u500B\u7687\u5E1D\u4EE3\u8868\u5408\u6CD5\u7684\u7F85\u99AC\u7687\u5E1D\u7684\u9577\u671F\u722D\u8AD6\u3002"@zh . . . . . . . . . . "Zweikaiserproblem"@de . . . "The problem of two emperors or two-emperors problem (deriving from the German term Zweikaiserproblem) is the historiographical term for the historical contradiction between the idea of the universal empire, that there was only ever one true emperor at any one given time, and the truth that there were often multiple individuals who claimed the position simultaneously. The term is primarily used in regards to medieval European history and often refers to in particular the long-lasting dispute between the Byzantine emperors in Constantinople and the Holy Roman emperors in modern-day Germany and Austria as to which monarch represented the legitimate Roman emperor. In the view of medieval Christians, the Roman Empire was indivisible and its emperor held a somewhat hegemonic position even over Christians who did not live within the formal borders of the empire. Since the collapse of the Western Roman Empire during Late antiquity, the Byzantine Empire (which represented its surviving provinces in the East) had been recognized by itself, the pope and the various new Christian kingdoms throughout Europe as the legitimate Roman Empire. This changed in 797 when Emperor Constantine VI was deposed, blinded, and replaced as ruler by his mother, Empress Irene, whose rule was ultimately not accepted in Western Europe, the most frequently cited reason being that she was a woman. Rather than recognizing Irene, Pope Leo III proclaimed the king of the Franks, Charlemagne, as the emperor of the Romans in 800 under the concept of translatio imperii (transfer of imperial power). Although the two empires eventually relented and recognized each other's rulers as emperors, they never explicitly recognized the other as \"Roman\", with the Byzantines referring to the Holy Roman emperor as the 'emperor (or king) of the Franks' and later as the 'king of Germany' and the western sources often describing the Byzantine emperor as the 'emperor of the Greeks' or the 'emperor of Constantinople'. Over the course of the centuries after Charlemagne's coronation, the dispute in regards to the imperial title was one of the most contested issues in Holy Roman\u2013Byzantine politics and though military action rarely resulted because of it, the dispute significantly soured diplomacy between the two empires. This lack of war was probably mostly on account of the geographical distance between the two empires. On occasion, the imperial title was claimed by neighbors of the Byzantine Empire, such as Bulgaria and Serbia, which often led to military confrontations. After the Byzantine Empire was momentarily overthrown by the Catholic crusaders of the Fourth Crusade in 1204 and supplanted by the Latin Empire, the dispute continued even though both emperors now followed the same religious head for the first time since the dispute began. Though the Latin emperors recognized the Holy Roman emperors as the legitimate Roman emperors, they also claimed the title for themselves, which was not recognized by the Holy Roman Empire in return. Pope Innocent III eventually accepted the idea of divisio imperii (division of empire), in which imperial hegemony would be divided into West (the Holy Roman Empire) and East (the Latin Empire). Although the Latin Empire was destroyed by the resurgent Byzantine Empire under the Palaiologos dynasty in 1261, the Palaiologoi never reached the power of the pre-1204 Byzantine Empire and its emperors ignored the problem of two emperors in favor of closer diplomatic ties with the west due to a need for aid against the many enemies of their empire. The problem of two emperors only fully resurfaced after the Fall of Constantinople in 1453, after which the Ottoman sultan Mehmed II claimed the imperial dignity as Kayser-i R\u00FBm (Caesar of the Roman Empire) and aspired to claim universal hegemony. The Ottoman sultans were recognized as emperors by the Holy Roman Empire in the 1533 Treaty of Constantinople, but the Holy Roman emperors were not recognized as emperors in turn. The Ottomans called the Holy Roman emperors by the title k\u0131ral (king) for one and a half centuries, until the Sultan Ahmed I formally recognized Emperor Rudolf II as an emperor in the Peace of Zsitvatorok in 1606, an acceptance of divisio imperii, bringing an end to the dispute between Constantinople and Western Europe. In addition to the Ottomans, the Tsardom of Russia and the later Russian Empire also claimed the Roman legacy of the Byzantine Empire, with its rulers titling themselves as tsar (deriving from \"caesar\") and later imperator. Their claim to the imperial title was rejected by the Holy Roman emperors until 1726, when Charles VI recognized it as part of brokering an alliance, though he refused to admit that the two monarchs held equal status."@en . . . . . . . . . . "The choice of the Holy Roman emperor Frederick I Barbarossa to march through the Byzantine Empire during the Third Crusade in 1189 caused the Byzantine emperor, Isaac II Angelos , to panic and nearly caused a full-scale war between the Byzantine Empire and Western Christianity."@en . . . . . . . . . . . .