Chrlemagne Vs Charlemagne

751 Words2 Pages

Charles I was the son of Pepin the Short. He is often referred to as Charles the Great, or Charlemagne. Charlemagne was King of the Franks, a Germanic tribe in Europe that was located in present-day France. As ruler, he had a goal to unite all of his people. He strived to have everyone follow the same religion. His subjects were all Christian. Charlemagne was extremely faithful to his religion. This is a speculated cause of the 30 Years War between the Saxons. The Saxons were pagan; they believed in more than one god. Charlemagne had a drive to convert this tribe to Christianity. He did not lose this war. As a way to get people to convert, they were threatened with death if they did not follow Christian traditions. Charlemagne ordered the slaughter …show more content…

The way Charles ruled was completely contrary to how Charlemagne did. Charlemagne believed in a government that would benefit the people. Charles ruled under his own desires and impulses. Rarely, did Charles think about his people when making decisions. Charles also ruled without consent of any other political body. Charlemagne was consistent in summoning a body of officials to talk about political matters with. While Charlemagne would not agree with Charles’ actions. He also would not agree with the punishment of death. Charlemagne ruled with the goal of unification. He would know if a leader was killed, that would throw a country into turmoil and dissemblance. However, Charles would to be killed if found guilty. It was the only way to end the civil war. Knowing this, Charlemagne would have to side with Charles as guilty. If the war is over than the country could go back to fair rule. Charlemagne would find Charles I as guilty for …show more content…

He was acting out of his own desire which is wrong. However, there were no laws stopping him. As a monarch, he had the right to do what he wanted. Nothing was illegal about the actions he took to getting his way. Parliament is controlled by the king and he has the right to dismiss it, which he did numerous times. Charles thought what he was doing was for the good of the country. In a monarchy, what the king says goes. There are plenty of rulers in the past who did much worse things than dismiss parliament numerous times and they never even had a trial against them. King Charles I should not be found guilty of

Show More
Related

  • 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

  • Charlemagne

    941 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Two Lives of Charlemagne

    696 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Charlemagne and the Saxon War

    1617 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...become great and victorious. There is the concept of how everything that Charlemagne did was for his enemies to be converted to Christianity and nothing else. Through the different interpretations, the argument for religious motives was the strongest. Charlemagne used military tactics in a misguided attempt to further the kingdom of God.

    Read More

  • Charlemagne's Coranation

    1461 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order to discuss motivations behind the coronation, it needs to be established what actually happened leading up to that christmas day in the year 801. Since there are many historical contradictions between primary sources from the time, we will rely on summaries presented by historians for the moment and address the contradictions later on. Barbero provides the most complete summery in chapter four of his book Charlemagne.1 Starting around the year 700 there was a divergence between the eastern and western halves of the Roman empire. The emperor was greek and ruled from the eastern half, while the Pope resided in Rome located in the western half. There developed a barrier between the two that transcended language. The emperor diverged in his theology by adopting iconoclasm, or the destruction of idols. This was in direct conflict with roman theology, which celebrated the images of Christ and the saints. At...

    Read More

  • Research Paper On Charlemagne

    1211 Words  | 3 Pages

    Charlemagne 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.

    Read More

  • The Impact of Charlemagne Upon Europe

    1618 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Joan of Arc

    942 Words  | 2 Pages

    All of King Charles important decisions involve his advisors and are usually decided based on public response. King Charles will not have the support of his people if he does not have their satisfaction. Therefore Charles must do whatever it takes, even if it means he has to sacrifice Joan, in order to prove he is powerful and that he is the rightful king. When Joan first arrives and meets Charles at the castle of Loches, and she tells him of her plans and her mission from God, he acts as if the whole deal is a joke at first. It actually comes to the point where Joan kneels down in front of Charles and "clasps his knees and weep hot tears" (p.72) in order to implore him to believe her. King Charles agrees with Joan because he re...

    Read More

  • Henry V Christian King Essay

    526 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the play Henry V written by Shakespeare. Henry was presented as the ideal Christian king. His mercy, wisdom, and other characteristics demonstrated the behavior of a Christian king. Yet at the same time he is shown to be man like any other. The way he behaves in his past is just like an ordinary man. But in Henry’s own mind he describes himself as “the mirror of all Christian kings” and also a “true lover of the holly church.

    Read More

  • Louis XIV

    967 Words  | 2 Pages

    over the stupidest things, when Charles II were to die with no kids, he made

    Read More

  • Life Of Charlemagne Summary

    1208 Words  | 3 Pages

    Einhard, in his The Life of Charlemagne, makes clear the fundamental integration of politics and religion during the reign of his king. Throughout his life, Charles the Great endeavored to acquire and use religious power to his desired ends. But, if Charlemagne was the premiere monarch of the western world, why was religious sanction and influence necessary to achieve his goals? In an age when military power was the primary means of expanding one's empire, why did the most powerful military force in Europe go to such great lengths to ensure a benevolent relationship with the church? One possibility may be found in the tremendous social and political influence of Rome and her papacy upon the whole of the continent. Rather than a force to be opposed, Charlemagne viewed the church as a potential source of political power to be gained through negotiation and alliance. The relationship was one of great symbiosis, and both componants not only survived but prospered to eventually dominate western Europe. For the King of the Franks, the church provided the means to accomplish the expansion and reformation of his empire. For the Holy Roman Church, Charles provided protection from invaders and new possibilities for missionary work.

    Read More

  • Causes of the 1642 Civil War: An Analysis

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    They both wanted more power than the other. If Charles had not held such a great belief in ‘the divine right of kings’, he might have been able to avoid a lot of the tensions which built up to and resulted in the civil war. Charles’ personality played a part and showed his opponents that he was arrogant and had little understanding or sympathy for the fears and aspirations of his people. Ultimately, Charles lacked many of the personal qualities needed to be a successful monarch. Finally, he was not good at developing good relationships with and support amongst the politicians and noblemen he needed to rule the country

    Read More

  • Charlemagne, or Charles the Great, King of the Franks

    2129 Words  | 5 Pages

    Charlemagne, or Charles the Great, King of the Franks. Charlemagne, or Charles the Great, King of the Franks (742-814), was a strong. leader who unified Western Europe through military power and the blessing of the Church. The Church. The Church.

    Read More

  • The Reformation in Europe: Three Individuals that Made It Happen

    783 Words  | 2 Pages

    Since many people were questioning the church, this led to what people refer to as the wars of religion. Henry was one of the 16th century kings of France. He was the first protestant king. He was later converted to Catholicism, but continued to let the protestant people worship, though they were very limited. This was the one of the first times both religions were allowed to be practiced in Europe.

    Read More

  • Charles Martel: The Life Of Charles Martel

    1563 Words  | 4 Pages

    Charles Martel was born during the late 7th century in what is now modern day Belgium. His father Pippin the Middle served as Mayor to the Palace of the King of the Franks and had an affair with a mistress which produced one of his bastard children, Charles. Instead of the King having power in the court they were essentially a figurehead and at the same time the Mayor of the Palace was really the king or the commander in chief of the army so Charles’ father Pippin was very powerful. Charles started out life at a disadvantage because just before Pippin’s death he was forced to disown any of the bastard children he had created which included Charles. Therefore Charles was no longer in line to become the next Mayor of the Palace and he lost all political standing while one of Pippin’...

    Read More

More about Chrlemagne Vs Charlemagne

Open Document