For this assignment I selected (life of charlomegn exe) written by Einhard. Einhard was coutier and friend to Charlemegne. Charlomegne was King of the Franks, and later crowned Emperor of the Romans. Charlemagne was born in the year 742 and would rule between the years 768- 814. As a ruler Charlemagne was determind to unite Western Europe and to fully convert to christianity. Charlemagne actually translates to Charles the Great. He would do great things in his life, inspinring the Carloingian Renaissance, and unifying much of Western Europe. He would ensure the preservation of Christianity in the West and ultimatly lay path to modern Europe.
F
When it comes to the question of the articles relevance today, I find it to be highly applicable. Visonary people transend the ages and that is exactly what Charlemnegn did. He was such a visionary man that he was crowed Holly Roman Emperor in his time. Charlemegn truly understood how to lead a people. Too his people Charlem would go down as one of the most revered and respected leaders of all time. His leadership would spark a renassance like period within his life span. He was very modernistic in his understanding of the relevance of education and he was extreamly humble as a leadership figure. In fact he was not at first pleased to be crowned Holly Roman Emperor and as the texts say on most days he dressed like an ordinary person. Its visionary people like Charlemegne who can singlehandely change and inspire an entire society to think differently. I think the type of leadership Charlemegne achieved transcends the ages. He definatly saw a bigger picture than the moment he was in and his vision went well beyond his own lifespan. I compare his leadership over his people to moder day fgure Barak Obama. Regardless of political view it is impossible to say that Barak Obama did not bring revoulutionary changes to American govenment. I think every now and then a person is born who is truly destined to lead and leave a lasting mark on history. I think if Charlemagne were born today he would have had similar impact. For living 1200 years ago, Charlemagne was a very advanced individual.
I believe that Charlomegn was a revered and highly effective leader but
The Life of Charlemagne is an edited version from the original book Two Lives of Charlemagne. The author of the original biography is Einhard, who was his close friend and younger contemporary. He wrote this biography, after his death in 814 CE to honor Charlemagne and his contributions to the Frankish dynasty. In the historical context Charlemagne is believed to have contributed largely in flourishing the Carolingian Empire. In the book, The Life of Charlemagne, Einhard describes Charlemagne’s personal life rather than the actual historical legacies. The biography seems to have many personal bias opinions which makes the source hard to trust. One example from the text itself is when he describes King Charlemagne’s physical appearance, “His neck was short and rather thick, and his stomach a trifle too heavy, but the proportions of the rest of the body prevented from noticing these blemishes (Brophy, 250).” Even Though, the author describes the king with great details, he is positive throughout each text and avoids giving any flawed comments.
Charlemagne, or Charles the Great, was a powerful king who reunited most of Western Europe through his conquests. He was an able administrator and brought about economic reforms to bring prosperity in his kingdom. Charlemagne is famous for his work towards the development of education like building of schools and standardization of curriculum. He ended the Dark Age in Western Europe by initiating the Carolingian Renaissance, a period of cultural enhancement. Charlemagne also took several steps to spread Christianity in his vast empire, paving the way for making it the dominant religion in Europe. Here are the 10 major accomplishments and achievements of Charlemagne, who is called the Father of Europe due to his immense contribution in the development of the continent.
After having read both versions of the life of Charlemagne there is no doubt that they differ greatly in the sense of style, audience, and emotion. By reading these two descriptions of Charlemagne's life we are able to decipher somewhat of the life he led as a shaper of early medieval European history. However, both of these versions possess the admiration of a noble man who they believe is worthy enough to be noted in history to some degree.
Charlemagne, the greatest king of the dark ages, shaped the standards of Europe and influenced the people for thousands of years, solidifying the idea that the dark ages weren’t so dark. After the death of his father, Frankish king Pippin III, in 768, the realm was divided into two sections. Charlemagne and his brother, Carloman, both received the sections, and a feud started almost immediately. When Carloman died in 771, Charlemagne took control of both sections in hopes of reuniting the Frankish realm. He was king of the Franks from 768-814, and he was also the first emperor of the Holy Roman Empire from 800-814 (Frassetto). Because of his generosity, attractive personality, and need for knowledge, Charlemagne was a very respected leader. During his reign, he was able to conquer and gain control over almost all of the mainland of Europe. Though it took over 50 battles to do so, he was able to unite a large portion of
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.
The subject of this report is the book Becoming Charlemagne: Europe, Baghdad, and the Empires of A.D. 800. While reading this book, it seemed as if the author was quite biased towards Charlemagne, and he wanted him to look better than he really was. Also this book was written as if it were a novel, so it did not come across as a nonfiction book, even though the entire story was based on facts. The author’s main purpose of this book was to better Charlemagne’s image in history by, his portrayal of Charlemagne’s accomplishments, how well the author believes Charlemagne handled the problems that his empire faced, and the writing style that the author chose for this particular
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.
He is also remembered because of the Carolingian Renaissance which took place under his direction and leadership. Although he was not a learned man, he revered and respected knowledge. He attracted many scholars to his palace. Theology and the literary
The Life of Charlemagne, written by the Frankish scholar Einhard, is a biography on the personal life and achievements of Charlemagne, a ruler of the Franks and the king of Italy. He ruled from 774-800. Einhard, a male Frankish scholar, was born to noble parents in the Main Valley, around 770 A.D. He was educated in the monastery of Fulda, and shortly after sent to the palace school of Charlemagne in Aachen. Eventually becoming a personal adviser and a close friend to the king of the Franks, he influenced the king in all the ways of higher thinking and even inspired the king to desire a higher education for himself. The king even tried his hand at learning to write, however to no avail. Einhard was able to give deeper insight into the life of Charlemagne, as he was present during many of the events that took place. He also had the advantage of hearing firsthand accounts from the king. The Life of Charlemagne is thought to have been written between 829 to 836, composed by Einhard while living in Seligenstadt. Einhard wrote the accounts of Charlemagne so that there would be a historical account describing the emperor’s day to day life. “His two immediate reasons for writing were the personal knowledge which he possessed of Charlemagne, and the debt of gratitude which he owed to this remarkable king and emperor.” He was a man that possessed a drive for knowledge and insight into the future. By working under Charlemagne, he was able to grow in that knowledge and even
After reading two versions of “The Life of Charlemagne”, one written by a person who lived with Charlemagne, and one who didn’t, it is evident that Charlemagne is portrayed in a negative way by the author, the Monk of St. Gall, and in a positive way by Einhard. Einhard was very close to Charlemagne. He lived at the same time and with Charlemagne himself. His version of “The Life of Charlemagne” was writing right after his death. The Monk of St. Gall wrote his version more than 70 years after Charlemagne’s death. He did not live with or even at the same time as Charlemagne. This is probably one of the reasons the view on the ruler are completely different.
During the years of St. Augustine, the Roman Empire fell in the west. It was being replaced by regional barbarian kingdoms, and was entering what some historians call the dark ages. It was a traditional, authoritative empire, with vast free-trade and a centralized government. It transformed into a Europe of economic localism, and filled with a minority of educated people. It was now a Christian Europe. A very important person during this new Europe was the Frankish king Charlemagne. His rule was known throughout the world, and Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne the "Emperor of the Romans." On top of this title, he still held all of his other titles. Charlemagne made tons of contributions during this time in Europe. He had
Einhard, born in 775 in an ancient Frankish homeland, in a valley of the River Main, was taken into Charlemagne’s court sometime between 791 and 792. After the scholar Alcuin retired to the monastery, Einhard became a go to source for answers for Charlemagne. After Charlemagne’s death Einhard felt compelled to write a biography about his king and friend, writing that, ○“In any event, I would rather commit my story to writing, and hand it down in posterity, in partnership with others, so to speak, that to suffer the most glorious life of this most excellent king, the greatest of all the princes of his day, and his illustrious deeds, hard for men of later times to imitate, to be wrapped in the darkness of oblivion” (Einhard 16). Einhard spent twenty-two years in Charlemagne’s court and ○“Although
Charlemagne looked very handsome. He had long blonde hair, that glowed in the sun and was also over 6 feet tall. Whenever someone saw him he was either laughing, singing, or joking. Instead of sitting on the throne all the time, he was the kind of king that would roam around the kingdom. He always stroded when
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
To start off, there is a prologue, which reviews the years before the year 1000. It talks about the Germans, The Roman heritage, Christianity, and the Trinity. This prologue was to show if Charlemagne was successful or not. As the book continues to a time around