Otto I, also called Otto the Great, is seen by many as one of the greatest medieval rulers. His name is usually associated with the foundation (or consolidation of the Holy Roman Empire, depending on the sources, although the modern vỉew generally considers Otto, rather than his father Henry the Fowler or Charlemagne, as the founder), the victory in the Battle of Lechfeld gained him, according to historian Jim Bradburn, a reputation as the great champion of Christendom, and the Ottonian Renaissance. Although historians in different eras have never denied his reputation as a successful ruler, the image of the nationalist political strongman which was usually perceived during the nineteenth century has been questioned by more recent sources. Modern historians explore the emperor's capability as a consensus builder, as well as the participation of princes in contemporary politics and the important roles played by female actors (notably his wives Eadgyth and Adelaide of Italy) and his advisors in his endeavors. Mentioned also is that Otto did have a strong character. In many cases, Otto chose his own way, which also led to rebellions. He often emerged victorious in the end.
Historiography
Politics and the Imperial Church system
Kurt Reindel comments on the legacy of Otto as the following: Otto I’s achievement rests mainly on his consolidation of the Reich. He deliberately made use of the bishops to strengthen his rule and thus created that “Ottonian church system of the Reich” that was to provide a stable and long-lasting framework for Germany. By his victorious campaigns, he gave Germany peace and security from foreign attack, and the preeminent position that he won as ruler gave him a sort of hegemony in Europe. His Italian policy and the acquisition of the imperial crown constituted a link with the old Carolingian tradition and was to prove a great responsibility for the German people in the future. All areas under Otto’s rule prospered, and the resultant flowering of culture has been called the Ottonian renaissance.
In the nineteenth century, Otto the Great was often considered a leader who brought the Germans the first place among European people. In his and R. Köpke's 1876 Kaiser Otto der Grosse, Ernst Dümmler, "the author of the most detailed description of Otto's government to date", described a "youthful upswing, a national trend went through the hearts of the people under Emperor Otto [...]" Writing in 1926, Robert Holtzmann continued this sentiment, praising Otto as the ruler who "showed the way and goal of Medieval German history, and not only initiated the German imperial period, but truly dominated it for centuries to come."
In the recent decades, scholars had revised certain important concepts about medieval politics, not only concerning Germany but also Western and Central Europe in general. Beginning with Gerd Althoff and Hagen Keller's 1985 work on Henry the Fowler and Otto I, royal or imperial rulership has been seen as a phenomenon that happened both above and in the conflicts between magnates. The princes were partners in policy formulating processes and the monarch's position could only develop gradually. This was by no means a continuous process with clear patterns. In this form of rulership, called "consensual rulership" by Bernd Schneidmüller (konsensuale Herrschaft), consultations and assemblies were important for building consensus, although absolute consensus was not needed and consensus could also be enforced by might, but the monarches could not always coerce and likely had no desire to rule absolutely without consent. The consensus through which the monarch cooperated with the princes would become disturbed in the Salian period. This does not mean that Otto was not a strong-willed ruler or just a mediator. By contrast, as Laudage writes, even as a young ruler, Otto "consciously accomplished a break in continuity and set himself apart from his father by more strongly emphasizing his decision-making power and authority". Partly inheriting conflicts with the nobles from his father's reign, partly creating such conflicts himself by vigorously defending his rights to allocate offices and intervening in the nobility's power structure, in the end, he emerged victorious from those conflicts (the most serious came from his own family).