Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The reign of charlemagne and his impact on the western world
Influence of the catholic church during the medieval times
The reign of charlemagne and his impact on the western world
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
It was the year 742 and no one knew that the emperor of most of western europe, the king of Franks, and one the most influential rulers was born……. Charlemagne!
So ‘Who was charlemagne and how did he influence the development of Medieval Europe?’
Charlemagne was born in the famous Francia/Frankia, also known as the Kingdom of the Franks. He grew up in a world where life was dictated to wealth, power and status. The feudal system demonstrated the rights and privileges given to the different classes. The high ranking nobles lived in castle with their knights, ladies and retinues. Others enjoyed their life in their Manors while the peasants,serfs, freemen and villeins spent their life surrounded in village life. In 768 this great man came to
…show more content…
To understand his political influence you need to understand that Charlemagne had three major roles as a king, he controlled the army, defended the church, and was the supreme judge. Therefore one of his major changes was that he replaced old system of trial by ordeal and replaced it with trial by jury which was seen as one of the most important doings Charlemagne did for his people. During his campaign, he fought in many brutal wars including the bloody war in Aquitaine; which was started by his father. Charlemagne also took over northern Italy, dethroned king Desiderius, and then proclaimed himself the King of Italy in 774. With the Pope’s hatred of Charlemagne, he soon accused him of violation of prearranged agreements. This angered Charlemagne and he went to war and defeated pope and his scheme with two campaigns. Overall Charlemagne political reign showed that charlemagne accomplished many things for his people in particular his success in many wars although he was soon defeated in the campaign against …show more content…
A negative short term effect charlemagne contributed to was the intellectual activity of Western Europe beginning a slow recovery since the fall of the Roman Empire. Short term, Charlemagne established a substantial empire in France and Germany, and in the long term, when Charlemagne died, his empire did not last long after his death. The empire was then divided for each of his three grandsons. In the short term, Charlemagne helped expand Christianity in Western Europe after a brutal war, as a positive long term effect Christianity eventually expanded across Europe. In the short term he was also able to unify Western Europe after the time of Rome’s fall, as well as his contribution to the Roman Empire that had expanded due to his power. In the Long term, the Roman Empire helped many citizens to convert to
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.
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.
The most famous work about Charlemagne is a book entitled The Two Lives of Charlemagne which consists of two separate biographies published into one book and tells the story of Charlemagne's life as two different people experienced it. Apart from this, there are many other places you can turn to learn more about the life of the king of the Franks, including letters, capitularies, inventories, annals, and more. However, each of these sources seem to paint a different picture of Charlemagne. In one, he seems to be a very average guy; in another, a mythical being, almost god-like; and a strong and firm political leader in yet another. It is because of this of this that we will never really know exactly who Charlemagne was or what he was like, but we do have an idea of what he did and how he lived thanks to those who decided to preserve it.
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.
Charlemagne’s father, Pepin, died of dropsy on 24 September, 768 and left his two sons, Charlemagne and Carloman, with William, the Duke of Aquitania. After Pepin died, the whole kingdom was divided evenly between the two sons. It was split in such a way that Charlemagne would govern the part that belonged ...
All throughout history, people have been fighting, there have been wars and conflicts ever since man has become ‘civilized’ enough to raise an army. And, many, many if not almost all of these conflicts have involved religion in some way or another (Ben-Meir). The question is why, and how, do people use God as justification for fighting and killing one another. Isn’t killing supposed to be wrong in God’s eyes? Whatever happened to ‘Thou shalt not Kill’? And how is it that hundreds of thousands of people have died by the hands of those who call themselves Christians?
Throughout the Ages there have been many leaders who were known for their great rule. One of these great men during the 8th century was Charlemagne. The Life of Charlemagne was written by Einhard, a Frankish elite who had the privilege of working in the courts of Charlemagne. The book did not come out till after Charlemagne’s death but, it goes through his life in a thematic fashion. Einhard sets the book by first addressing deeds, habits, and then administration. This writing was one of the first of its kind. While there were many biographies written on the lives of saints known as hagiography, this was the first of its kind to be written about a secular ruler since the time of Antiquity. I will begin by talking about Charlemagne’s rise to power, then about his character and personality, and finally his relationship with his family.
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.
Being in control of a country takes dedication because there are several contributions needed to keep their people happy. In Charlemagne’s reign, he had great tactics in persuading his people through influential lectures and victorious wars. Charlemagne was a very ambitious lord, who many soldiers and people looked up to because of his superiority in executing laws that would benefit his country. They followed his way of ruling, which was mainly performed by the court officials to initiate the plans and suggest new ideas to the lord. The rapid increase of Charlemagne and his ruling started due to the influence of the Germanic tribe, Juedo-Christian, and Greco-Roman cultures throughout the Middle Ages. These cultures had demonstrated the important aspects of being a leader. From these traditional beliefs, the change of governing a country has become different than it used to because of how it affected the power of the ruler. Through these three cultural traditions, the spread of the Charlemagne’s reign and his creations during the Middle Ages will be known for several centuries to come.
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
Christians went from being persecuted to dominating Rome rather quickly. In a world where separation between church and state does not exist, a Christian becoming the sole emperor of Rome symbolized a huge turning point in history. The power switched and the Pagans in turn became persecuted. Christians rose up and took control of all aspects of Roman society. The Pagan past was destroyed, banned, or forgotten about. Those Christians that did not agree with how things were being run either left the empire and became monks or formed their own sect. All of Rome changed.
King Charlemagne from The Song of Roland and King David from the Bible are very similar in some ways. For most of the book, Charlemagne’s goal was to defeat the Saracens, who were the enemies of the Christians. The Song of Roland writes, “‘Here now is come King Charlemagne our land to overthrow./ I have no host of battle to meet in his might,/ nor store enough of henchmen to beat him in the fight’” (II). King David was most famously known for defeating the Philistines, the enemy of the Israelites, with one single throw of a stone.
Einhard, in his The Life of Charlemagne, makes clear the fundamental integration of politics and religion during the reign of his king. Throughout his life, Charles the Great endeavored to acquire and use religious power to his desired ends. But, if Charlemagne was the premiere monarch of the western world, why was religious sanction and influence necessary to achieve his goals? In an age when military power was the primary means of expanding one's empire, why did the most powerful military force in Europe go to such great lengths to ensure a benevolent relationship with the church? One possibility may be found in the tremendous social and political influence of Rome and her papacy upon the whole of the continent. Rather than a force to be opposed, Charlemagne viewed the church as a potential source of political power to be gained through negotiation and alliance. The relationship was one of great symbiosis, and both componants not only survived but prospered to eventually dominate western Europe. For the King of the Franks, the church provided the means to accomplish the expansion and reformation of his empire. For the Holy Roman Church, Charles provided protection from invaders and new possibilities for missionary work.
Religion is among one of the aspects that defines culture. This was a key concept for those living in the Middle Ages, whose lives were dominated by religion. More specifically, those in high positions of the church dominated their lives because the church provided a unified culture, or belief system. In fact, in the Early Middle Ages, rulers needed the support of the church to legitimize their rule. This was the case for Charlemagne, who united much of Western Europe and converted his subjects to Christianity. Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the Romans in 800(History). “The assumption of the title of emperor of Charlemagne in
His belief in the need for education among the Frankish people was to bring about religious, political, and educational reforms that would change the way we live. history of Europe. Charlemagne was born in 742 at Aachen, the son of Pepin (or Pippin) the Short and grandson of Charles Martel. His grandfather, Charles, had begun the process of. unifying western Europe, in the belief that all people should be Christian.