1885 northwest rebellion
Charlemagne, also known as Charles the Great is known as one Europe’s best and most powerful leaders. His actions helped to get Europe together under one ruler. At the time of his coronation, he was already king of the Franks and the king of the Lombards#. Now he added a new title under his belt, which was Charles Augustus, Emperor of Rome. There many accounts of the coronation and two of them, the one written by Einhard and the other which was recorded in the Royal Frankish Annals are popular sources for the event. However, both show two different accounts. With the discrepancies between the two, it puts the reliability and validity into question. It is not fair to say that one is superior to the other or that they are both right or wrong. This essay will examine the reliability of both accounts through their history, closeness, and interaction with Charlemagne himself. Who was Einhard to begin with? Einhard was born about 775 with a Frankish background and was raised and educated at the monastery of Fulda which was a main center for learning#. Charlemagne being a man who loved learning and studying gathered around him people who were able to educate him in subjects from Greek and Lat
How accurate though is his telling of the coronation? Today, people will never know what happened at the coronation. Yes Einhard was alive at that time and also a personal confidant of Charlemagne. So this being true, he would have a first hand account of Charlemagne’s thoughts and feelings towards the situation directly from Charlemagne himself. Yes some aspects of his portrayal may seem a little bit overblown such as when he described the Pontiff Leo, the one who had crowned Charlemagne as Emperor, had his eyes gouged out their sockets and his tongue cut out#. How would one be able to survive injuries like that back then with the primitive medicine they had? With these kinds of injuries, how was Leo able to even perform the crowning? Even though this part of the coronation excerpt seems questionable, his portrayal of Charlemagne is not. There is very little room for doubt seeing as both were actually good friends. Charles was noted to say that he would not have even entered the church if he knew of the intentions that Leo despite it being the most celebrated feasts of the Christian calendar#. Another reason for this is that seeing as how Charlemagne had a surprise coronation on Christmas day in the year 800 and that he was a dedicated follower of the Christian Church, it was the perfect timing because Charles was eventually going to be in the church for mass#. Yes he did save Leo from the people of Rome# but did not expect this thanks in return. Charlemagne seemed content with his leadership and for him to earn another title, and not just any title but the Emperor of Rome itself, was not needed#. Charles only started using the title several months after the coronation# The only real reason to take the crown was to be noticed as an equal by the Byzantine Emperor#. This was not needed to show the power that Charles wielded. Then why would Pontiff Leo crown Charlemagne? Because the Pope needed his protection from the Roman people#. With the most powerful man at that time with three reigning titles to his name, who would want to mess with Leo with that kind of support or back up? The Royal Frankish Annals tells of a differ
Some topics in this essay:
Leo Annals,
Einhard Charlemagne’s,
Pontiff Leo,
Charlemagne Emperor,
Annals Unfortunately,
Frankish Annals,
Charlemagne Einhard,
Christian Church,
Emperor Rome,
Charles Europe’s,
pontiff leo,
royal frankish annals,
royal frankish,
frankish annals,
carolingian culture,
sources event,
charlemagne einhard,
emperor rome,
author information,
regards annals,
author unknown,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1455
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
CUSTOMER SERVICES
| |
|