Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Charlemagne coronation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Charlemagne coronation
On Christmas day, 800a.d, there was an emperor in the west for the first time since the fall of the Western Roman Empire. But this emperor, Charlemagne, was different from all his predecessors. He was not a native Roman, nor Greek. In fact, he was what they would consider a barbarian. He was the king of the Franks, a Germanic tribe which gained dominance over much of the old western empire. Charlemagne’s coronation would lead to the birth of a new western European identity, one that was separate from the old Roman and Germanic ones that predated it. The coronation gave Charlemagne the legitimacy he needed to unite these two vastly different cultures under one nation.1 The coronation would also solidify his relation with the Catholic church,
a institution that was integral for the development for western European civilization.2 Finally, Charlemagne’s elevation to emperorship caused a deterioration of relations between his new Holy Roman Empire and the Byzantine empire. This allowed Western Europe to develop its culture separately from the Greek east.3
The collection Two Lives of Charlemagne contains two different biographies of Charlemagne who was a king of the Franks and a christian emperor of the West in the 8th century. The first biographical account was written by his courtier Einhard who knew him personally and well. On the other hand, the second account was penned by Notker the Stammerer was born twenty-five years after the king’s death. Even though these two versions indicate the same king’s life, there were many differences between the two. Einhard’s writing focused on the emperor’s official life and his military campaign. However, Notker provided more of a perspective about the king’s legacy and seemed more hyperbolic as well as mythical. This paper will compare and contrast the
Throughout his essay, Einhard makes constant references to Charlemagne’s piety. He notes that the king “cherished with great fervor and devotion the principles of the Christian religion.” Charlemagne built the basilica at Aix-la-Chapelle, and “was a constant worshipper at this church.” (Einhard, 48)…. He embodied the Christian doctrine to give to the poor, and had close relationships to the popes in Rome. A pessimist might find reason to believe these actions were purely opportunistic or at least had mixed motives—his relationships with the Vatican were monetarily beneficial—but Einhard’s inclusion of Charlemagne’s will removes all doubt. “In this division he is especially desirous to provide…the largess of alms which Christians usually make.” (Einhard, 52). In death, Charlemagne gave much of his wealth to the Church via the archbishops of each city in his empire, and further stipulated that upon the death of one of them, a portion of the remaining inheritance should go directly to the poor, as should the profit of the sale of his library.
Charlemagne is a known for his success to try to maintain his empire. This new empire will embrace the unity of Christian faith. Under Charlemagne, new lands are conquered and a Renaissance is embraced. He even tries to revive the Christian faith. Charlemagne is a man that hopes to be an inspiration to the next generation. These deeds of Charlemagne is seen in the Two Lives of Charlemagne. In the Two lives of Charlemagne, both Notker’s and Einhard’s goal is to portray Charlemagne as a man of good character, a man that accomplishes many deeds and a man that hopes to provide an outlet for the next generation.
Charlemagne is described by Janet Nelson as being a role model for Einhard. Einhard himself writes in the first paragraph of The Life of Charlemagne, “After I decided to write about the life, character and no small part of the accomplishments of my lord and foster father, Charles, that most excellent and deservedly famous king, I determined to do so with as much brevity as I could.” I feel that these are sincere words about the man who cared for Einhard. I feel that Einhard’s purpose for writing The Life of Charlemagne is to praise the works of his “foster-father” and create a historical document that would describe the great deeds of Charlemagne so that he would not be forgotten throughout time as a great leader and man.
The Relationship of Political and Religious Societies in the Age of Charlemagne, Based of Einhard's The life of Charlemagne sections 15-33
The two lives of Charlemagne as told by Einhard and Notker are two medieval sources about the accounts of the life Charlemagne. Modern sources by Matthew Innes and Rosamond Mckitterick discuss how history was recorded during the medieval period and how it was suppose to be viewed in the early ages. Observing each of these sources helps get an understanding of how the writing of history is important in recorded history and how it affected how the history of Charlemagne was recorded.
...become great and victorious. There is the concept of how everything that Charlemagne did was for his enemies to be converted to Christianity and nothing else. Through the different interpretations, the argument for religious motives was the strongest. Charlemagne used military tactics in a misguided attempt to further the kingdom of God.
Charlemagne, or Charles the Great, reigned during a time of much turmoil and upheaval in Europe during middle ages. Charlemagne’s background and family history contributed much to his rise to power. The triumphs of his past lineage prepared him to take on the task of governing the Frankish Empire, and defending it from invaders. Charlemagne accomplished much during his supremacy. He not only brought education back into medieval Europe, but also invented an efficient way to govern his people. His conquests against the many adversaries of the Holy Roman Empire expanded his empire across the majority of Europe. His conquests also formed strong ties between the Catholic Church and the State. Charlemagne’s drive to convert Europe’s primitive and pagan tribes to Christianity nearly effaced the Saxons, whom he battled with for the majority of his reign. The crowning of Charlemagne as Holy Roman Emperor created a turning point in history. Within years after his death, however, his once great empire amounted to nothing. Charlemagne’s reign as King of the Franks and as Holy Roman Emperor greatly influenced the course of Europe during the middle ages.
745 A.D.: It was a time filled with anarchy in Europe—Germanic groups that inhabited Europe remained disorganized and without central authority. It was also a time of new beginnings and influences. April 2, 745 was the day of the birth of Charlemagne who would later rise to the throne of emperor of the Roman Empire. Born as son of Pepin III (the Short) and heir to the Frankish throne, he rose to be one the most well-known kings in history—Charlemagne, the Frankish king and Roman emperor. Not only did he conquer an inundation of lands and peoples, he also promoted education and influenced the trade of his empire through coining for the greater good (Bhote …). Living in a time period in which Europe was muddled, Charlemagne is outstanding as he successfully created one of the most prominent empires in Europe by bringing numerous peoples under his control (McGill).
Any woman that is a relative of Charlemagne is regarded highly by Einhard. Charlemagne’s mother, sister and daughters are written about with the highest respect. They are portrayed as honorable, calm women who never caused any trouble. Charlemagne’s Bertrada, despite being a woman, was highly active in politics. Bertrada seemed to favor Charlemagne over her son other son Carloman. Her diplomatic skills may have helped Charlemagne’s success in his early years. She even arranged a marriage with Desiderius’ daughter, Desiderata, to secure an alliance with Lombardy. Even though her influenced may have diminished over the years her relationship with her son remained excellent. She lived with Charlemagne in court. The only time their relationship became strained was when Bertrada suggested to Charlemagne to marry Desiderate. When Charles sent Desiderata back to Lombardy, Bertrada was not pleased with her son. But this did not stop her from having a loving relationship with her son. Einhard writes: “Bertrada, also spent her old age in great honor with him. He treated her with the greatest respect, to the point that there was never any trouble between them [.]” Bertrada continued to live with Charlemagne until she died in 783. Charlemagne ensured that his mother was buried alongside her husband at St. Denis Basilica. Einhard also makes mention to Charlemagne’s sister. Gisela. Gisela was intended to marry the heir of the Byzantium Empire however she dedicated herself to the religious life. She served as an abbess at the convent at Chelles. Charlemagne is said to have “treated her with the greatest affection.” Charlemagne even had one of his daughters named after his sister.
Charlemagne is known to be one of the most notable leaders from the Frankish reign and era. After Pepin the Short died in 768, his lands, the Frankish kingdom which he established had been divided by tradition between his two sons, Charlemagne and Carloman. However, after Carloman's death and the quick disposition of his two sons, the heirs to his portion of the kingdom, Charlemagne soon became the sole leader of the Franks. This consolidation of power on Charlemagne’s part soon left him in a position of great supremacy and soon he began the military conquests that would mark his reign. By doing so, he not only was able to extend his control by establishing a supreme Frankish empire but also elated him into the realm of a ‘great’ leader. The first ten years of his reign were marked by the traditional business of his house- fighting and military conquest. However, soon afterwards his military campaigns took on another role, not only that of conquest, expansion and plunder but now could be seen within his campaigns a growing sense of his Christian mission. One of the most notable crusades of this era is perhaps his fight against the Saxons, whom to Charlemagne were a fierce pagan people, settled along the course of the Wiser and Elbe rivers and east of the Rhine.
Charlemagne was “a key figure in European history”. He was the king of the Franks of the Carolingian dynasty. When he reigned (768-814), Charlemagne accomplished much in his own land and outside of it. He is called the Father of Europe and Charles the Great. The Carolingian Dynasty “peaked under… Charlemagne (after whom the dynasty in named)...” But, even with these great accomplishments, was Charlemagne a good king? Before this issue is addressed, it must be known what qualities make a good king.
After Charlemagne's death, the Carolingian Empire was divided in three parts by the Treaty of Verdun in 834. This division weakened the Empire, many battles took place and it allowed the Viking's invasions from the north. It was around that time that the hereditary character of feudalism and the power of the fiefs, in...
With the decline and fall of the western empire, the classical age of Rome came to a close as disease, warfare and corruption conspired to bring about the downfall of an ailing empire that had once conquered the known world. Where once enlightened despots had ruled a debauched and unwieldy polity, now barbarians stood over the ruins of a once thriving metropolis. In its absence a new world would arise with new values and ideals. Turning their back on a pagan past the Christian children of these wild men from the north would spawn the greatest houses of future European nobility, and when they looked back for a legacy, they would not see their ancestors as pillagers picking at the bones of a defiled Rome, but instead as its trusted guardians, partnering with the Church to carry her legacy through the “Dark Ages”.
At the height of Charlemagne’s reign in the late 700’s, there was constant warfare between the Franks and other nations in order to gain power and wealth. As warfare increased, a persisting problem had arisen to the occasion: the means of identification. As soldiers battled sword on sword there was no way for a fellow army man to know if he was killing his friend or foe. Adding on, conflict and bloodshed increased between the neighboring provinces and developed the forms and arts of heraldry in order to ensure the safety of the armies.