Life Of Charlemagne Analysis

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.

The first account of Charlemagne's life was by his courtier, Einhard, who thought it would be a tragedy if history forgot such a noble ruler. Furthermore, not only does he believe that it should be him to write about Charlemagne's life, but only him. He

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.

Charlemagne and Augustus used their large militaries to expand their vast empires. Charlemagne was considered a warrior king. He would lead his army into all of their battles. During the thirty three year war (772- 804) with the Saxons he lead every battle except for two. Those two battles were at Detmold and at the bank of the river Hase. The enemy were so routed and overthrown in these two battles that they never afterwards ventured to take the offensive or to resist the attacks of the King, unless they were protected by a strong position. The Saxon war is the Frank 's most well known war. The Franks and Charlemagne also fought in other

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.

The two lives of Charlemagne as told by Einhard and Notker the Stammerer are very different accounts of the life of the great Emperor. Einhard gives us a historical overview of the life of Charlemagne who lived from 742 to 814 A.D. Charlemagne was also known as Charles the Great and the King of the Franks.Charles was one of four children born to Pepin the Short, A Mayor of the Palace of the Carolingian Empire. He had one brother, Carloman and two sisters, Gisela and Pepin.Since women at the time didn’t inherit power, when Pepin the Short died, the kingship of the Carolingian Empire was divided and shared by Charlemagne and his brother, Carloman. Unfortunately, Carloman died early and unexpectedly as a young man and

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.

We now leave this in-depth description of Charlemagne given by Einhars, and take a look at a new essay by Fichtenau entitled "A New Portrait of Charlemagne." Instead of describing Charlemagne as Einhard does, we find that Fichtenau's essay rather rebuilds Charlemagne. Fichtenau talks about how things like his personality were strung together in the wrong way by Einhard. He talks about how his personality is predictable, because all Emperors must have the same values. He talks of how in generosity, as Einhard's description showed as being out of the kindness of his heart, was actually a result of what actions would follow his generous jesters. Fichtenau uses his whole essay to rebuild Charlemagne to what kind of ruler he believes he is. He does say that without the great ruling and personality of Charlemagne, then it would have taken generations for this empire to reach its peak. "What remains is

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

Another aspect of Einhard’s writing that must be questioned is his mention of friendships with other kings as this is another area which seems to have a strong subtext. Einhard mentions that Charlemagne made some alliances through friendship however these friendships often have a deeper reason for their existence than purely his friendly nature: fear. When “Alfonso [II], the king of Galicia and Asturias… ordered that in Charle’s presence he was only to be referred to as his subject” he may have been acting out of humility. However as this is not the first time The Life of Charlemagne mentions people acting humble in the presence of the Charlemagne it can be assumed that either it was normal to act this way in front of another king, or that

Although the work concerned classifies itself as a vita, it still fulfills the principles of a Speculum Principum. It described how Charlemagne maintained himself as a good king and what he did that made him good, so in that sense it could be construed as a Speculum Principum, but mainly, describes a history depicting Charlemagne’s conquests and life. One of the best things it does for historians is it gives a greater look into what a 9th century chronicler or historian viewed kingship as. Charlemagne described as tall, at “slightly over six feet tall” along with his physical presence commanded every room he entered and he remained dignified whether he sat or stood. Einhard also gives further descriptions into his physical body, clothing, his interests, but also his moral standpoints, oddly enough Charlemagne was not much of a drinker (only three per meal, considered nothing at the time) like one would assume most medieval kings are portrayed. From Einhard’s standpoint, historians learn what the biographers of kings viewed as important in terms of kingship and this proves crucial in understanding why the Speculum Principum were written. These next three writers prove themselves as the strongest and best-writers works on the Speculum

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