The Life of Charlemagne by Einhard

1381 Words3 Pages

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that Einhard’s purpose for writing The Life of Charlemagne is to praise the works of his “foster-father” and create a historical document that would describe the great deeds of Charlemagne so that he would not be forgotten throughout time as a great leader and man.
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.
“He was born soon after 770 and was given his father’s name. The family sent him as a boy to the great monastery of Fulda, where he was educated, and made a grant to the abbey of land which they held in the Maingau. In the 790’s he was sent by the abbot to Charlemagne’s court, where he became the pupil of Yorkshireman Alcuin who had gone to teach there, and succeeded him as teacher at the palace school.”
This is a small example of how Einhard was a very educated man and in other accounts he was highly regarded as a poet. Einhard was not only skilled enough to write on Charlemagne, he was almost obligated to do so. After a quick summary of some of the highlights of Einhard’s career the introduction to The Life of Charlemagne says,
“This sketch of Einhard’s career makes it clear that we ...

... middle of paper ...

...to be emperor.
I find Einhard’s account credible because he was described as someone who was so entrusted by Charlemagne that he knew the events that were going on and could give an accurate depiction of how Charlemagne was changing his society. However I do feel that Einhard described the coronation differently than Tierney by leaving out so much of the Church’s insistence on the coronation of Charlemagne. Though the entire biography is brief, it seems almost like Einhard rushed through the coronation which is something I would have found as a monumental part of his rule. It is interesting to me that Einhard would not go more in depth onto how Charlemagne felt about the coronation and what steps he took to treat it with the care he believed it required. However on all other accounts of the life of Charlemagne I feel Einhard is a credible source.

Open Document