Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Features of medieval education
Impact that Charlemagne had on the future shape of medieval Europe
Features of medieval education
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Charlemagne’s Impact on Europe Charlemagne once said, “Right action is better than knowledge, but in order to do what is right, we must know what is right” (historymedren.com). Charlemagne proved himself to be a successful leader, and he was an inspiration to others who desired to rule Europe. He was born in 742, and very little information is known about his adolescence. Europe was trapped in its fourth century of the “dark ages” when Charlemagne was born but this quickly changed after Charlemagne became the ruler of Europe and exhibited his strong leadership skills. (livescience.com).He put a large emphasis on education and revealed that he was an inquisitive individual as he studied and spoke in many different languages. Charlemagne’s desire for success, his emphasis of culture, and his quest for knowledge ended Europe’s unproductiveness and led to great prosperity. Charlemagne was known to be “a man of enormous intelligence.” (book) “The upper part of his head was round, his eyes very …show more content…
His initial reason for traveling to Rome was to “set the affairs of the church in order, because all was confusion;” however, his final trip to Rome caused him to be crowned emperor. (christ203). One of the affairs of the church was that Pope Leo “tore out his eyes and cut out his tounge” (christ203). Although Charlemagne did not expect to be crowned emperor, it allowed the pope to obtain military security from Charlemagne (book). “He was the first Emperor to rule since the Fall of Rome”-reword (livescience.com) His motto as Emperor was “Revival of the Roman empire.” (book). Charlemagne also realized the laws of the Romans were faulty. “He decided to add what was missing, sort out the discrepancies, and correct what was wrong.” (chrisitan203). Pope Leo then said "life and victory to Charles Augustus, crowned by God, the great and peaceful emperor of the Romans." (add somewhere)
Before Charlemagne and the Carolingian empire, there was in no proper sense a “Western Europe”. For the romans, everything geographically was centered around Mare Nostrum, the medditerrian.* The lands surrounding the Mediterranean sea, Hispania, Italy, Greece, and north Africa were all seen as being closer to together geographically and culturally, then the lands of Gaul or Germania. Even after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, Europe was seen as everything away from the northern coast of the Mediterranean, usually only Gaul and Rhineland.*
After contemplating Einhard’s purpose for writing The Life of Charlemagne it is important to examine his qualifications for doing so. Early on in the introduction there is a brief history on Einhard and his education.
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.
...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.
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.
“The apprenticeship of a King” describes how Charlemagne gained power through conquest and diplomacy. In 768, King Pippin died and his kingdom was divided between his two sons. Charles, the elder, and the younger was Carloman. The author says that little is known of Charles’ boyhood. When he was of the right age, it is recorded that he worked eagerly at riding and hunting. It was the custom of the Franks to ride and be practiced in the use of arms and ways of hunting. We may reasonably infer that acquiring these skills formed a major part of his early education. Charles was not a “man of letters” and the author makes no attempt at explaining this other than to point out that literacy was considered unimportant at that time for anyone other than the clergy and Charles didn’t become interested in “letters” until later in life. Bullough explains a number of experiences in public duties and responsibilities, which were assigned to Charles by his father, thus, giving him an apprenticeship to rule the kingdom. For some reason tension between Charles and his brother began shortly after their accession. The author explains a number of conflicts. The younger brother died however, at the end of 771 and a number of prominent people in his kingdom offered allegiance to Charles. Bullough names and explains those subjects. The result was the re-uniting of those territories, which helped to establish the kingdom of the Franks.
Although both the Mongol Conquest and the Crusades had a significant impact on Europe, but I feel it is safe to say the Crusades had a greater long-term impact. The Crusades had two very major effects on Europe, a great increase in King’s authorities and power as well as learning many new things from each other. There was also a significant difference in the amount of power and control over the church. There were four different Crusades, each representing a different military campaign by European Kings and and lords to get the Holy Land back from Muslim control. These four Crusades had more effects than just a war.
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
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
The Church played a vital role in the kingdom of Charlemagne. It gave a sense
Much of Rome needed to be rebuilt. He rebuilt the Capitol and many of the public building, he built a new temple to Jupiter and a new stadium for chariot races he liked, and he even built a new palace for himself. Many of the properties he built these on were stolen from citizens. He raised the standards of the Empire, he was viewed as a good leader and a generous person. He considered himself a military man, even though he had no experience. He sent messages to the army giving them recommendations and increased their pay, he was hoping to gain some admiration with the army. With him spending this money, it caused the economy to go bad. Almost causing the empire to go