Charles' Military Success

2794 Words6 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Leadership

Charles' Military Success

Many historians argue that the single biggest factor contributing to

Charles's military success was by his own skilled and ingenious

leadership. Whereas there were also other arguments of what might have

contributed to Charles's military success. One of the arguments that

could be argued is that Charles had superior resources compared to his

enemies, which may be argued by some historians. Whereas other

historians may argue that the weaknesses of Charles's enemies, lead to

his military success.

Other historians may argue that many of Charlemagne's enemies were

weaker than the Franks, which may have been the single most factor

leading to Charles's military success. In the Lombard campaign in

773-774, Desiderius's Lombard kingdom was institutionally quite well

developed. But it was political weakness, which lead to Charles's

conquest. Charles never expected to become king of Lombardy, and he

had granted pope large amounts of land, which is 2/3 of Italy. The

reason why Desiderius loses political support was because the bishops

disliked Desiderius as he took the papa's land, which was a

disrespectable act. Desiderius weakened his own rule. Also the Dukes

were keen with having a king North of the Alpes, as they believed that

it would make him more independent. Therefore they wanted to transfer

lands from Desiderius to Charles. An example of land that has in turn

been given to Charles is Hildebrand of Spoleto and Arichis of

Benevento. Also in the Saxon campaign in 772-804, the Saxons were also

politically disunited. Saxony was divided into four tribes: West

phalians, East phalians, Norhudi and Angrarions. The...

... middle of paper ...

...s realised he should build fortifications on the near main

estuaries. It was important for him to protect churches and

monasteries, trading centres, example of trading centres are Dorectad

and Quentorii. Charles was able to protect those that needed to be

protected. The estuaries he tried to protect were Loine, Seine and

Rheine. In order to protect estuaries, he stationed a fleet at

Boulogne and had restored an old Roman house. Naval power played an

important role in the conflict in the Mediterranean according to

Collins, as well as other campaigns. King says that, 'Charles was well

aware of the value of fleets and the need for protection against those

of oterher, as the capitularies, among other sources, indicate.' Also

according to Collins Naval power was a factor in the confrontation

with Godfred, king of the Danes.

Show More
Related

  • How strong was the opposition to personal rule in England between 1629-1640

    952 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first of these is Religion. Charles came under attack from, in simple terms, the Protestants and the Catholics. He had this attack on him for many different reasons. He was resented by the Catholics, because he was a protestant. To be more precise, he was an Arminian, which was a sector from the protestant side of Christianity. On the other side of the spectrum, he is resented by the puritans, as they see him as too close in his religious views to Catholicism. Furthermore, he is disliked by the puritans as he put restrictions on their preaching and themselves. The puritans were a well organised opposition to Personal rule. The top puritans, linked through family and friends, organised a network of potential opposition to the king and his personal rule. This ‘Godly party’ as they became known, was made up of gentry, traders, lawyers and even lords. This group of powerful and extremely influential people was the most well organised opposition to Charles’ personal rule.

    Read More

  • Differences Between Charlemagne And The Carolingian Empire

    600 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Essay On Charles Perkins

    576 Words  | 2 Pages

    Did you know that it wasn’t until 19__ until an Australian Aboriginal graduated university? Well it was and that person was Charles Perkins.

    Read More

  • Charlemagne and the Saxon War

    1617 Words  | 4 Pages

    Charlemagne’s father, Pepin, died of dropsy on 24 September, 768 and left his two sons, Charlemagne and Carloman, with William, the Duke of Aquitania. After Pepin died, the whole kingdom was divided evenly between the two sons. It was split in such a way that Charlemagne would govern the part that belonged ...

    Read More

  • Marquis de Lafayette

    1219 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Marquis de Lafayette is best remembered for the part he played in the American War of Independence. He contributed in helping the Americans gain free control over the colonies by breaking away from British home rule. For sixty years he fought with consistency and insight for political ideals and social reforms that have dominated the history of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Hence, Lafayette can be attributed to the spreading of liberty and freedom throughout America and France. Therefore, he is viewed as a symbol of liberalism in a once absolutist world.

    Read More

  • American Revolution: The Siege of Charleston

    1319 Words  | 3 Pages

    The American Revolution: the war for our independence. This revolution opened the door to our liberty, freedom, and basically what America is now. Most Americans have heard the stories of famous battles, important people (George Washington for instance), and everything in between. However, this was only for our side of the American Revolution and a small fraction of people have been told of Britain’s campaign of the revolution. The only thing people have been told was the Britain lost the war. What of Britain’s triumphs, strategies, and everything that happened in the span of a few years? Not many people know it, but the British struck a major blow against the Patriots in the last few years of the war. Even though the United States won the American Revolution, Britain struck a major blow against the colonists when the British successfully and brutally took the town of Charleston, South Carolina.

    Read More

  • King Charles I Murder Essay

    619 Words  | 2 Pages

    Through the analysis of the document, ‘King Charls His Speech’, a number of questions and answers result. However, the question of why was Charles I executed is only briefly answered by Charles I’s speech itself, when Charles I states, ‘for all the world knows that I never did begin a War with the two Houses of Parliament.’ Despite this question only being briefly answered by King Charles himself, through his speech immediately before his death, a number of historians have given detailed reasons as to why Charles I was executed.

    Read More

  • The Similarities And Differences Of The Carolingian Empire And The Roman Empire

    1201 Words  | 3 Pages

    Upon evaluating each empire, there are likings between both the Carolingian Empire and the Roman Empire, along with their leaders, Charlemagne and Augustus. Both leaders in their own veneration were experienced military men with dexterity in engaging in war to expand their sway and authority. Each had attained an abundance of land at the beginning of their sovereignty, and during their walk of life had exponentially accumulated an extensive empire. The crucial variance that permitted the Roman Empire to continue to withstand itself was the supervision of the

    Read More

  • British Generals in the Great War

    995 Words  | 2 Pages

    the Somme that had raged from the 1st of July 1916, when over 19 000

    Read More

  • Essay On Defensive Imperialism

    2084 Words  | 5 Pages

    It has been debated by varying scholars as to whether Caesar Augustus’ foreign policy to expand Rome’s empire had more to do with defensive imperialism as a response to encroaching threats, or rather, an aggressive, unprovoked move to claim hegemony over the known world. However, I would like to postulate in support of the former theory that in an attempt to restore and ensure long-lasting security to their empire, Augustus was forced to take proactive measures in order to preserve it. With territorial boundaries normally running along the rivers so as to provide a better defensive posture, he felt it necessary to expand the northern border to the river so as to secure their autonomy and position. Perhaps if he could establish a wide buffer of room along Roman lands, he could ensure the safety of the people, the cities, and most of all—the government.

    Read More

  • Matthew Dodd's Leadership In The British Military

    331 Words  | 1 Pages

    Matthew Dodd is a 19th century British war veteran. Being the main character of this book, was left behind during a retreat led by Lord Wellington of the British Army off the lines of Torres Vedras. While his leadership knew he was missing in action they proceeded to retreat anyways. Private Dodd set off and didn’t let anyone, or anything prevent him from finding his way through enemy territory. He knew his situation and continued on with the mission to kill any apposing Frenchmen. He continued to skirmish through enemy lines traversing through with great fatigue and starvation. During his lonesome journey he singlehandedly used guerilla warfare tactics and maneuvers to besiege a French convoy. Private Dodd discovers in a French City a Bridge under construction in efforts to form an attack on the British army. But before they were able to finish building Dodd set the support ropes on the bridge ablaze to impede their attack.

    Read More

  • Execution of King Charles I

    660 Words  | 2 Pages

    King Charles I left us with some of the most intriguing questions of his period. In January 1649 Charles I was put on trial and found guilty of being a tyrant, a traitor, a murderer and a public enemy of England. He was sentenced to death and was executed on the 9th of February 1649. It has subsequently been debated whether or not this harsh sentence was justifiable. This sentence was most likely an unfair decision as there was no rule that could be found in all of English history that dealt with the trial of a monarch. Only those loyal to Olivier Cromwell (The leader opposing Charles I) were allowed to participate in the trial of the king, and even then only 26 of the 46 men voted in favour of the execution. Charles was schooled from birth, in divine right of kings, believing he was chosen by God to be king, and handing power to the parliament would be betraying God. Debatably the most unjust part of his trial was the fact that he was never found guilty of any particular crimes, instead he was found guilty of the damage cause by the two civil wars.

    Read More

  • The Failure Of Charles I's Personal Rule

    1284 Words  | 3 Pages

    How far were the events in Scotland responsible for the failure of Charles I’s Personal Rule?

    Read More

  • Air Chief Marshall Sir Hugh Dowding: The Hero of the Battle of Britain

    1386 Words  | 3 Pages

    Few tales from history have held as much fascination as that of the Battle of Britain. The notion of the RAF fighting against the might and power of the Luftwaffe, and winning, has captured the imagination of generations. Yet few people know who the man responsible for the victory really was. Most of the time, Prime Minister Winston Churchill is portrayed as the man who saved Britain. To some extent, this is true. If Churchill had not kept up the spirits of the British people, and had not refused to give in to Germany, then the battle would have been lost. But the man who actually kept the Germans from taking control of Britain was Air Chief Marshall Hugh Dowding. He not only won the battle, but quite possibly saved the free world. Dowding won the battle by his backing and use of radar, his insistence of a strong fighter force instead of a bomber force, and his brilliant, revolutionary defensive tactics.

    Read More

  • Life Of Charlemagne Summary

    1208 Words  | 3 Pages

    The blessing of the church helped to unify and strengthen the resolve of the Frankish people as they withstood or conquered the heathen Viking and eastern Germanic tribes. The fact that Charles was Christian and was backed by the Catholic church must have certainly helped keep other christian powers from allying with these barbarians. For Rome, there were suddenly new peoples to convert, and keep from direct opposition to the The Great Christian Emperor.

    Read More

More about Charles' Military Success

Open Document