The ideal king in the Middle Ages is quite obviously only a truly Christian one. This is more than the popular concept of rex pacificus– a peaceful king. What I want to show here is that in Liudprand's tale Henry is a pious king, one chosen by higher authority and at the same time one who behaved in the ideal fashion towards his subjects.

The concept and construction of rex pacificus emerged in the period of the later Carolingians, but was rooted in Charlemagne's reign. Pacificus became part of his title in documents. He was depicted as the ultimate peaceful king and guarantor of peace. This was not limited to the adjectives used to describe Charlemagne, but was also part of the argument for the whole dynasty's right to rule. The abolishment of the last Merovingian King Childeric III happened because he only acted like a peacemaker, while the Carolingian Mayor of the Palace Charles Martel (and implicitly his descendants) were peacemakers in fact.

In this construction there is a strict demand for a king to protect his subjects. Such an understanding of his role can be seen in the oldest surviving English coronation ordo, where it is said that the peace and safety of a kingdom were guaranteed by the Maker. By his grace and power the land was defended. The king was in a way God's vessel and consequently he protected his subjects.

The idea of rex pacificus brings back the already mentioned description of the attendance at Conrad's deathbed scene in Antapodosis and the difference with Widukind's version. Scholars have not taken enough notice of who was present in these accounts. In Antapodosis Eberhard of Franconia, Burchard of Swabia, and Giselbert of Lotharingia are present. Widukind mentions only Eberhard, while other sources mention no names at all. Before explaining the difference, the context of this story in Res Gestae must be fleshed out.