After Rome’s fall in 476 CE, Europe began its long dark ages from 5th century to 15th century; there was no definite ruler or civilized culture. Ceaseless battles and wars between the Germanic tribes confined Europe from development, and the churches abused their power, growing more and more. However, continental Europe began to find a ray of hope when the Franks began to unite the splattered tribes. Clovis, the king of Salian Franks, established the Merovingian Empire and consolidated his power in Europe. As the time passed, this empire was in truth controlled by the advisors of the kings, the mayors of the palace, because the do-nothing were kings overly dependent on the mayors. They passed on their jobs to their sons, and the family was …show more content…
Before Charlemagne attacked the Lombards, he sent his wife back to Lombardy and marched into Italy in 773, besieging and capturing Pavia. Despite the previous king being his wife’s own father, Charlemagne continued with his steadfast goal of expanding his empire, and he declared himself as the king of Lombardy in 774, ending two hundred years of Lombard royal rule. However, this was not the end of his military campaigns; after he made the Lombards a district under him, he extended his power to Saxony without rest. Charlemagne attacked the Saxons for a long 32 years from 772 and finally rooted them out in 804, gaining large land in the north. At the beginning of the reign of Charlemagne, the Saxons were small independent political communities, which only combined in time of war. In 772, Charlemagne marched northwards, destroyed the Irminsul, a huge tree trunk which was the center of Saxon religion, and reached Weser. Since Charlemagne had an invincible army, the Engers professed their submission and gave hostages. Still, the recalcitrant Saxons did not surrender …show more content…
Since he united surrounding tribes from his numerous military campaigns, his empire consisted of various people who had their own government, culture, and language. To merge the different people into one empire, he needed constant and thorough governing. First, he divided his vast empire into three hundred districts and assigned a count for secular business, a duke for military matters, and a bishop for religious affairs. The frontiers were ruled by special commanders, the margraves. He personally appointed capable people on position so that he could make sure that they are loyal to him. He held a meeting annually, called “Field of May” and asked the conditions of their regions. Following the initial conquest of these different peoples, one of Charlemagne’s most important tasks was to ensure that they would not turn against him and disrupt the progress of his empire. Dividing his land into such a large number of districts and allowing the people of various cultures rule themselves to a certain extent carried high risk, and he knew this. But he also knew that it was a risk worth taking to maintain and grow the prosperity of his empire. Besides the counts and margraves, he had royal inspectors, called missi dominici, meaning the envoys of the lord, to travel around the counties and supervise them. As a two-man team, missi
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
In the Frankish empire, there were numerous different cultures which inhabited it. A cultural dividing line can be draw down the Rhine River. On the left bank of the Rhine, you had the lands of Christian, Romanised Gaul, while on the right bank of the Rhine resided pagan Germania.* Culturally, linguistically and religiously, these two cultures could not have been more different from each other. In Gaul, the people had become Romanised and Christianised over the centuries by their roman overlords. Gaul was also heavily settled by the Franks, since they were feodrati for Rome. When the Western Roman Empire fell, it was easy for the Franks to move in and assume control over the territory. With the Franks conversion to Christianity in 496 The Franks were able to mix well with the Gallo-Roman land owners and peasants, leading Gaul to slowly transform itself into Francia.* The coronation of Charlemagne further enhanced his authority over his Gallic dominions by linking himself with the old Western Roman Empire.* This allowed him to be seen as a legitimate successor to the emperors of old, instead of a chieftain of a conquering
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.
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 church too performed many personal functions for Charlemagne of a less-than-political nature, including his last rites, the care of his sister in her convent, and his own burial. The church also acted as a kind of legal authority, witnessing his inheritance arrangements.
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.
Every historian interprets the past differently and with distinctive perspectives, resulting in many sides to one story. Often the reader must decide which perspective is more logical, likely, or coherent. Recounting one war took a lot of time and effort because of the necessity to include all sides of the story. Becher, Barbero, Collins and Backman have approached the life of Charlemagne with different points of view; however, Barbero seems to have the strongest argument for the cause of the Saxon War. The other historians were less willing to see the Saxon war as a religious war. The life of Charlemagne was interesting to historians because it was filled with many vigorous wars that he fought including the infamous Saxon War. From the beginning of his life, Charlemagne was destined to rule a nation and lead his people into war, achieving both triumphant victories and devastating defeats. He died of sickness in old age, thus leaving the kingdom in the hands of his son. The Saxon war was the most persistent, yet hostile war he fought because of the determination and severity of the enemy. However, the questions remain: “What actually caused the Saxon war? What gave it life? What are all the different events that occurred during this war? What are some of the strategies used during this war?” The wars he fought resulted in his success as a ruler and as a historical figure to reflect on when considering the greatness of kings.
While expanding his empire across Europe, Charlemagne did remember that he was indeed a Christian, and converted many of the tribes he conquered, to Christianity. However, when 4,500 Saxons resisted, they were slaughtered ("Charlemagne"). But, for better or for worse, by 1000 AD Christianity had spread like wildfire throughout most of Europe, and the Catholic Church, who had crowned our friend Charlemagne the Emperor, had risen to power. Meanwhile, the Seljuk Turks had taken Jerusalem and were threatening Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire (“Crusades”). Near the end of the eleventh century, Emperor Alexius wrote a letter to Pope Urban the II that called for the assistance of his fellow Christians in West (“Crusades”). And, Pope Urban, was more than happy to assemble an army for such a worthy cause, and he also hoped that it might improve the relations between the two
Charlemagne, also known as Charles the Great, became the undisputed ruler of Western Europe, “By the sword and the cross.” (Compton’s 346) As Western Europe was deteriorating Charlemagne was crowned the privilege of being joint king of the Franks in 768 A.D. People of Western Europe, excluding the church followers, had all but forgotten the great gifts of education and arts that they had possessed at one time. Charlemagne solidly defeated barbarians and kings in identical fashion during his reign. Using the re-establishment of education and order, Charlemagne was able to save many political rights and restore culture in Western Europe.
He had a vision of what it meant to be a great king. He followed the history of the kings after Alexander the Great. He believed he had to increase the social, political and intellectual organization of his society. This distinguished himself from any other ruler from the past three hundred years. Charlemagne wanted to recreate what the Roman Empire once was capable of, but even better. As he traveled, he made sure he created a great educational system. He built a chain of schools and provided classes for chil...
The Medieval Times for Europe, from the 400 AD till 1400 AD, are often labeled as “The Dark Ages”. This time period has begun after a turning point known as Fall of Rome. It caused Rome to divide into two well-known civilizations: Medieval Europe, Islam, and The Byzantine Empire. Also, Medieval Europe led to a well known utopian period of “rebirth” identified as the Renaissance. The time period between 400 CE and 1400 CE wasn’t a “Dark Age” for Europe because of progress in academic success, blossom in architecture, and religious unity along with government. It wasn’t a cultural decay or decline because of the legendary time period it led to.
In the year 476 A.D., Rome officially fell as the greatest and most thriving empire at the time. The time period following this downfall was called the Middle Ages, more infamously recalled as the Dark Ages; but were these years truly as dark as historians say? These medieval times lasted for approximately one thousand years, could such a long time period have been all that dreadful? The answer will soon become clear. The Middle Ages deserved to have the alias of the Dark Ages because there were several severe illnesses, the monarchs were cruel, and the crusades brought the death of many.
The early middle ages are generally recognized as a period of decline and stagnation, in the years following the fall of the Roman Empire in ad474, the west is generally viewed by historians as underdeveloped, in comparison to the Byzantine Empire, and the Islamic world. However between 1,000 and 1215 ad, Western Europe began a series of profound changes . The period of tribal migration, war, and colonisation diminishes; this period gives way to a more settled system of emerging nation states. Now it becomes possible for the bourgeoning states to raise taxation such as the Norman Poll tax from the developing money economy, as well as technical advances in farming, and social changes, when taken in conjunction with population expansion this leads to Western Europe evolving, a merchant base, manufacturing, and agricultural production to equal, and even surpass in terms of trade, the Eastern Empire of Constantinople and the Islamic caliphates. The expanding population founds new towns and cities. The new cities such as Venice, in Italy and Lubeck in Germany would have a significant impact on the future development of pan European trade.
Once Charlemagne took power over his father’s entire kingdom he wasted no time in attempting to expand his kingdom. Within the first decade of his reign he had conquered the entire Lombard kingdom as well as portions of Spain and Saxony thereby adding them to the list of Frankish controlled territories.
People in the Dark Ages were engulfed in the shadow of greatness of their predecessors, which 18th-century English historian Edward Gibbon called “barbarism and religion,” (History). Life in Europe during the Dark Ages were quite simple, as there was no efforts in unifying Europe, and the Catholic church was the only real body of power in Europe at this time. European societies were governed by feudalism, in which the king gives land to the nobles, while peasants worked on the land to live there in return. Little is actually known about this era, in that nothing significant was recorded, announcing it a “dark’ era. There was little to nothing significant about this time period in Europe, other than strong Catholic authority. A shift begins during this time period