Depictions of the Byzantine princess Theophanu
Theophanu (955–991) was a Byzantine princess who became Holy Roman Empress through marriage to Emperor Otto II. As the trusted political partner of her husband and later the regent of her young son Otto III, she left a remarkable legacy as one of the most powerful female rulers of the Ottonian era as well as of the Holy Roman Empire's history in general. Her reign is associated with the exchange of political, religious and cultural ideas and international activities between the Western Empire and the East, including the Byzantine Empire as well as the Slavic countries. Although the empress's personal role in some aspects of these processes (especially the contact between the Macedonian Renaissance and Ottonian Renaissance) is a subject of debate, she is often depicted in historiography and (recently revitalized) artistic portrayals as a cultured, spirited woman who had to adapt to a difficult situation after her husband's death and whose political vision was unfulfilled due to the early deaths of herself and her son. This image is also influenced by the masculine posture she adopted in her lifetime as "coimperatrix" and even "imperator" (she was the only Roman-German empress associated with these titles).
Historiography.
There is discussion regarding whether her title "coimperatrix" and the power associated with it were the result of Frankish and Saxon traditions or Byzantine influence. On one hand, it seems the portrayal of a female counterpart to an imperator or emperor had Byzantine origins, her education blended Byzantine and Ottonian element with some authors such as Simon MacLean opine that the Ottonian court played the main role. Harper Norris notes that, "The Ottonians were a Saxon dynasty, and the grants of land two years into her consortship highlight that Theophanu was being vested with power as a Saxon ruler, connecting her to the rest of the Saxon line".
Giulia Bellato remarks that like her mother-in-law Adelheid, Theophanu relied on a network that went beyond their already advantageous roles as mothers and wives of the emperors, whose stronger authority supported them. Even when being sidelined or even pushed out of official functions, they could rely on association with the magnates, friends and ecclesiastical connections, such as when Theophanu wielded power in Pavia.
Bunker opines that while in her lifetime, Theophanu benefitted from an empowered concept of female rulership inherited from Adelheid, the latter's longevity and popularity partly negated her posthumous legacy, even though Theophanu influenced imperial policy even in death through her descendants.
Reacted to Gerd Althoff's image of the empress as a conservative ruler whose reign was marked by reaction rather than design, Maclean notes that in widowhood, Theophanu did face difficulties because she was an outsider like Editha previously and because the title of "consors" (working partner of the emperor) was available to powerful men who might usurp it if they were strong enough, and that the charters issued in Otto III's minority "were intended to shape alliances and thus help Theophanu intervene decisively in the complicated politics of the succession crisis and the related struggle for Lotharingia—but at the same time they were couched in a conservative language of confirmation, friendship, and the continuing authority of the late emperor." But there was a change after June 985, when Henry the Quarrelsome totally submitted to Otto III's authority. MacLean opine that the title she used in 989 "Theophanius gratia divina imperator augustus" (she had been "consors regni" from the start of her marriage even though at this point her husband's title was only "king"; she became "coimperatix" in 974 and soon after that "coimperatrix augusta") displayed "an autonomous, masculine, imperial status", and was "not only a sign of her own confidence or a manifestation of her Byzantine identity, but also an attempt to outface her mother-in-law by appropriating the collective authority of the "dominae", for herself." Jestice claims that the fact she could claim power as regent and then passed intact authority to her son was "an extraordinary tribute to the power and position of the women of the Ottonian family.", as the situation in 984 worked against a female regent: the cream of the imperial army was already destroyed in the 982 Battle of Stilo; this was followed by the 983 Slavic rebellion that "erased decades of Ottonian advances into Slavic lands"; Theophanu was still seen as Greek and did not even have physical control of her son. Jestice opines that the fact there were essentially no rebellions from the nobles shows that basically people and institutions accepted both the monarch and his regent. Knut Görich agrees with Phyllis Jestice that Theophanu's defeat of Henry the Quarrelsome in 984 was the clearest evidence for her authority.
Economou writes that the greatest achievement of her regency was maintaining peace and preventing upheavals by revolts (which allowed interstate commercial and cultural life to develop, which brought prosperity to cities such as Magdeburg), as well as her cultural work, such as the introduction of Byzantine protocol in Germany. Her most lasting legacy was probably the transformation of the German language through a "Greek Committee of Wise Men" (scholars from the Constantinople School, an institution established by Emperor Constantine VII). She was also able to maintain German supremacy in Bohemia, by forcing Boleslaus II, Duke of Bohemia to accept Otto III's authority.
Odilo Engels opines that Theophanu managed to combining the task of stabilizing the border after Otto II's defeat at Capo Colonna (Battle of Stilo), which included achievements such as preventing a French invasion, and initializing new concepts. She aimed at conversion of the empire of Kiev and development of Christianity in Poland – this was why she focused on the strategic position of the Memleben Abbey and gave open support for Mieszko I in Poland, thus fighting the Liutizes (Liutizi) and Bohemians every year since 985. Her concept proved incompatible with that of Adelheid, thus they could not reconcile and Theophanu tried to assert herself in Italy at the expense of Adelheid's authority.
Johannes Fried sees Theophanu's eastern policy as "passive", considering that the troops that fought both the Liutizes and the Bohemians were just Saxon noble contingents instead of being "imperial". Jestice argues that the campaign could have been "both imperial and predominantly Saxon in nature". She points out two major evidences of Theophanu's personal role in the wars against the Slavs during her regency. The first one is a letter written by Gerbert of Aurillac, the future Pope Sylvester II, to Abbot Raimund of Aurillac around September 986—January 987. Gerbert reports on the successful summer eastern expedition of Otto III, who had led his army against the Wends (the Wends were a member of the Liutizi confederation). "Otto", with "his presence and by the strength of his soldiery", had demolished 46 fortified settlements. According to Gerbert, a new expedition was being prepared, and Theophanu had ordered Gerbert to give his report to Saxony in March. Gerbert himself would command troops from Bobbio in Italy (this meant the imperial government had been summoning troops from areas other than Saxony too) in the new campaign. The second evidence is Thietmar's account of Theophanu's involvement in the conflicts between Mieszko and Boleslaus: Mieszko asked for help from Theophanu, who sent Margrave Ekkehard of Meißen, Archbishop Giselher of Magdeburg and two Saxon counts, although Archbishop Giselher made a deal with Boleslaus instead of fighting him and the German effort to make peace failed. Theophanu's embassy to Kiev in 990 also showed her concern with the events of the Slavic world.
Azat Ordukhanyan opines that one of her most notable contributions was a concept of a Pan-European state system, and she did try to realize this in her lifetime. Bunker opines that Theophanu did not try to change the Western empire drastically. She herself adapted to the West's conditions and tried to gradually introduce Byzantine ideas and institutions, hoping that eventually the process would be accomplished through her son Otto III. Unfortunately, Theophanu's and Otto III's early deaths put an end to this plan as well as any hope that a unified Roman empire could be recreated. Religious revival in the West also started to paint the Byzantine Empire as corrupted. Herrin agrees that the deaths of Theophanu and Otto III changed history, but opines that Theophanu did at least manage to introduce novel ideas in the West and thus fulfilled exceptionally an ambassador's role for the Byzantine culture.
Regarding her lack of religious honour in comparison with other notable Ottonian women like Matilda of Ringelheim, Adelheid and Kunigunde of Luxembourg, Jestice writes that, "Theophanu failed to win a posthumous reputation for holiness, which probably had more to do with lack of anyone to promote a cult after her son's death than any failure in her lifetime." Gunther Wolf is credited with demonstrating the founding role of the empress in establishing the cult of Saint Nicholas in the West.
Review by Christine Kleinjung (German)
Review by Knut Görich
Depictions in arts.
Contemporary arts.
The marriage between Theophanu and Otto II was the encounter point between the Macedonian Renaissance and the Ottonian Renaissance, although Theophanu's personal role in this process is disputed. Jacqueline Lafontaine-Dosogne emphasizes the impact of the Macedonian Renaissance on the Ottonian Renaissance: " In a number of cases Byzantine objects have been given a new setting or put to a new use. In the history of artistic interaction between Byzantium and the West, the period of Theophano left its mark; not until the Crusades flooded Europe with Byzantine objects, especially after the taking of Constantinople by the Latins in 1204, would the West receive such generous exposure to the rich influence of the material culture of Byzantium.", while E.Voordeckers opines that the marriage let to the merging of the two movements while denying Theophanu's personal agency. Despite her role in the reception of Byzantine cultural influence being the subject of great debate, Theophanu was nevertheless a prominent patron of arts and architecture.
Jestice notes that "What makes Ottonian portrayals of rulership distinctive is that the women of the ruling house were often included. In western Europe before Theophanu there are hardly any artistic representations of ruling women.71 That situation was transformed in the latter years of the tenth century, however. Images of Theophanu were especially prevalent, but Adelheid and their successors Kunigunde, Gisela, and Agnes are also represented in art" 
Only a few of the Ottonian architectural projects survive.Saint Pantaleon's Church, Cologne still retains the architectural layout and some important relics from the time of Theophanu, although the rich sculptural decoration has been damaged."
The (now ruined) Memleben Abbey, established by Theophanu and Otto II, had an unusual size and was perhaps intended as an Imperial Mausoleum.
Cohen opines that the Marriage Charter of Empress Theophanu is "the most spectacular monument associated with Theophano [...], standing over four feet tall and written in gold and silver ink on dyed purple parchment."
Commemoration.
As Theophanu descended from Armenian aristocracy, she has become a modern symbol of integration for Armenians living in Germany.
In 2007, a "FrauenOrt" in Magdeburg was created and dedicated to Theophanu together with Adelaide and Editha.
Kaiserin-Theophanu-Schule is a Gymnasium named after her in Cologne.
In 2022, Wichelen celebrates the 1050th year of the event of its bestowal on Theophanu as a dowry gift (also the first time the town was mentioned in a historical document). A month-long commemoration of her is being organized.
See also.
 ;templatestyles src="Div col/styles.css"/ ;
References.
 ;templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" / ;