On Christmas Day in the year 800 AD, Pope Leo III called Charlemagne to his Church and unbeknownst to the King of the Franks, declared him Emperor and Augustus of the Roman Empire. Charlemagne would go onto rule as Roman Emperor until 814, when he unfortunately succumbs to a fever and dies at the age of seventy-two. A decade or so later, his foster-son and member of his court, Einhard, took it upon himself to memorialize Charlemagne, so that all of prosperity could know of his greatness. Throughout this biography, Einhard highlights all of Charlemagne’s greatest escapades, while also emphasizing his righteous, honorable character. Interestingly enough, these righteous, honorable characteristics are one’s often connected with a Germanic prince, …show more content…
Specifically, Tacitus devotes much of his Germania to the description of Germanic princes. These princes were highly revered and had much of the power that a Roman Emperor would. Unlike a Roman Emperor, however, these princes earned their power through dynastic succession. In Rome, emperors gained control through corruption and manipulation, not necessarily through a blood right to rule. Einhard makes sure to prove that Charlemagne gained his throne through all the proper channels. In fact, after Pepin, Charlemagne’s father, died, a general assembly agreed that both he and his brother Carloman would rule in conjunction. The fact that a general assembly decided on this again shows Germanic principles. Tacitus in his Germania accentuates the German tribes sense of democracy. In fact, the Germanic tribes are described to hold assemblies to decide most matters of the state. Additionally, Einhard comments that Carloman died of natural causes and then Charlemagne was “unanimously elected King of Franks.” (Einhard 3) The mentioning that Carloman died of natural causes is important, for it further stresses that their was no corruption in Charlemagne’s succession onto the throne. It was a completely natural process, not a forced one which would have been common in
Charlemagne was also known as Charles the Great. He was king of the Franks and he united the majority of Western Europe during the early Middle Ages. On top of that, he laid the foundations for modern France and Germany. He attempted to unite all Germanic peoples into one kingdom and convert his subjects to Christianity. Being a skilled military strategist, he spent much of his reign in warfare so that he could manage to accomplish his goals. Because of his position, he encouraged the Carolingian Renaissance.
Charlemagne lived a really long time for this century. Reigning for forty-four years is an extremely long time. Most people did not even live forty-four years! Due to his lengthy time as a ruler, he was able to complete so many tasks and truly be a legitimate ruler.
With the fall of the Carolingian Empire, Europe was left in a frantic and militaristic state marked by violence amongst fluctuating kingdoms and territorial leaders. In the early 12th century, however, France was beginning to experience a positive change in the monarchy when Louis the VI became king in 1108. Also known as Louis the Fat (due to his massive weight towards the end of his life), Louis was able to assert his force as king by giving just, and often violent, punishments to criminals and enemies. Once a confidant to the king and eventually the abbot of St. Denis, Suger writes about Louis’ various acts in The Deeds of Louis the Fat. These deeds helped to shape France’s monarchy into a powerful, centralized unit that would continue for
"The Murder of Charles the Good." Readings in Medieval History. 4th ed. Toronto: Published by University of Toronto Press, 2010. 382-93. Print.
The Carefully Crafted Legend: Einhard’s distortions in The Life of Charlemagne Einhard’s The Life of Charlemagne is a famous biography that provides a firsthand account of the deeds and character of Charles the Great. Einhard was a close contemporary to Charlemagne and his court, with Walahfrid Strabo’s preface describing how there “was almost no one else among the many officials of the king’s majesty to whom the king . . . . Entrusted so many secrets.” Despite Einhard’s seemingly well researched and honest biography, there are far too many distortions and inconsistencies in this work to completely trust this work. Einhard’s information on Charlemagne’s birth and early childhood is suspect.
In Germania, Publius Cornelious Tacitus analyzes the culture of the tribes in the region, in order to aid in the development of the Roman empire. Tacitus writes about both the good and bad aspects of the Germanic culture. Although he is writing about Germania in a way which makes it seem as though he favors their ways, the major purpose is to persuade the Roman empire into strengthening their culture through intimidation. Germania was the Roman and Greek word for the region in northern Europe inhabited mainly by Teutonic Suebians or Gothic peoples. It stretches from the Danube to the Baltic Sea, and from the Rhine in the west to the Vistula.
Einhard described the Merovingian kings as weak, in order to show how powerful Charlemagne was. The Life of Charlemagne left an impact for centuries because it explained the importance of the studies of the Carolingian empire. Einhard thrived during Charlemagne’s life and believed that he could accurately portray him. Through Einhard’s Life of Charlemagne and Charlemagne’s Capitulary of the Missi, it was
When Charlemagne ascended the throne and had full control of the empire, he wanted to not only rule both his people and Romans, he was also interested in his people and the ones he conquered to convert to Christianity. (Pages 258-259). Charlemagne exceedingly cared about government as much as he cared about religion, which is why one of the things he did when first became an emperor was to make sure that the Pope Hadrian I, got his land back from the Lombard Kingdom and he has also helped the Pope on countless occasions. (Pg. 259). Yes, Charlemagne was truly successful in linking religion and governing, his people or the Romans did not rebel against him and during his ruling he was able to offer people opportunities to learn and deepen their understanding of the Christian faith.
Author of the book, Becoming Charlemagne, by Jeff Sypeck provides a clear glimpse into the life of one of the world’s greatest kings and ruler and later emperor Charlemagne, otherwise known as Karl or Charles the Great. Sypeck creates a vivid and strong look into the time of Charlemagne, early medieval Europe and some other important world leaders, including Pope Leo III, Irene the Byzantine emperor, Alcuin the scholar and Harun al-Rashid ruler of Baghdad. These figures are crucial to the story of Karl becoming Charlemagne, and their stories included in the book help form and symbolize Charlemagne the Ruler. Understanding Charlemagne and early medieval Europe is presented vibrantly throughout the book by in-depth stories, facts and a clear
Charlemagne was the one of the great rulers of early European history. He was the King of the Franks in the 8th century and facilitated great expansion of his empire through conquest and diplomacy. Einhard was a monk who lived under Charlemagne’s rule, and, in a glowing light, he wrote a biography of Charlemagne. Einhard describes many of Charlemagne’s achievements, and he also writes about Charlemagne’s character. Einhard believed Charlemagne was a great leader because of his military success, his beautification of the kingdom, and his exceptional character qualities.
In her chapter on the historiography of Roman exemplarity, Christina Shuttleworth Kraus examines this loss of power through the transition of exempla as the res gestae populi Romani to the res gestae divi Augusti (Kraus, 2). In early Roman history, exemplarity rested in the hands of popular consciousness; the citizens of Rome had the sole power of deciding which events or people to raise up to the status of exempla. This system of exemplarity that is explained in detail by Matthew Roller’s four stage model of the creation of exempla by public discourse (Roller, 216-217). However, Roller’s framework begins to collapse when Augustus intentionally influences exemplary power through his coercive Res Gestae. Rather than looking to the past for the great deeds of common people like the Sabine women or Lucretia, Roman citizens of the Augustan period had their attention directed towards the persona of one man, an exemplar in the form of an emperor.
The Life of Marius, written by Plutarch, is a fascinating ancient source detailing the career of the Roman Gaius Marius, 127-86BC. While there are interpretive and reliability issues, the Life of Marius is a particularly useful and significant source. It is our only extensive primary source on Marius, who was a key political figure of late Republican Rome. Additionally, Plutarch’s work indicates not only many crucial military and political development in Rome in the time period, but also gives a reflection of Plutarch’s own Rome and its values and political climate.
Primary Source Paper 2 The Life of Charlemagne was written by Einhard a little after Charlemagne death in 814. Einhard wrote the biography to make sure that Charlemagne’s legacy would not be forgotten. He would list many points in this biography, but I’ve decided to only point out three of them. These three chapters are his deeds, his family life, and his life with the Christian religion.
The Holy Roman Empire consisted of multi-ethnic territories during the early medieval periods until its collapse in 1806 after the Napoleonic wars. The territories in the Holy Roman Empire included the Kingdom of Germany, Italy, Burgundy as well as other numerous small kingdoms. The Holy Roman Empire was centrally located in Europe and mainly occupied the present day Germany. Ancient Egypt was an old civilization found in the Northeastern Africa. The Ancient Egypt occupied the present country of Egypt.
Using the word ‘emperor’ doesn’t change the profuse amount of power the emperor has. Cassius says that “since the final authority for the government devolves upon them, they must be kings.” He explains that they use the title ‘emperor’ to appeal to the people, leading them to believe they actually had a say in who ruled the empire, when in reality, they did not. The rulers are trying to give the impression that they do not have as much power as they do. They do this because, they do not want to appear as if they have more power than has been giving to them.