Charlemagne: A Biography

by Derek Wilson

An absorbing biography of the great leader who was the bridge between ancient and modern Europe — the first major study in more than twenty-five years.

Charlemagne was an extraordinary figure: an ingenious military strategist, a wise but ruthless leader, a cunning politician, and a devout believer who ensured the survival of Christianity in the West. He also believed himself above the rules of the church, siring bastards across Europe, and coldly ordering the execution of 4,500 prisoners. Derek Wilson shows how this complicated, fascinating man married the military might of his army to the spiritual force of the Church in Rome, thereby forging Western Christendom. This is a remarkable portrait of Charlemagne and of the intricate political, religious, and cultural world he dominated.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, European History, Medieval History, Medieval, France

226 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2005

About the author

Derek Wilson has been a writer of historical fiction and non-fiction for 50 years. His much acclaimed prize-winning works have largely centred on 16th and 17th century Europe. He has used various pen names for his fiction, his current Thomas Treviot Tudor crime series being written under the name D.K. Wilson. The first 2 books in this series - The First Horseman and The Traitor's Mark are based on real unsolved Tudor mysteries and have received enthusiastic plaudits. Readers have favourably compared this innovative series with the books of C.J. Sansom and S.J. Parris.
Recent non-fiction triumphs include The Plantagenets, Holbein: Portrait of an Unknown Man, and Charlemagne: a Biography.
Derek Wilson graduated from Cambridge and spent several years travelling and teaching in Africa before becoming a full-time writer and broadcaster in 1971. He has frequently written and appeared on radio and television and is popular as a public speaker having appeared at several literary festivals,British Museum, Hampton Court Palace, The British Library and other prestigious venues.

Reviews

[Paulkelly05 · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book reads like a term paper from a mediocre student. The thesis is forced, the cynicism is heavy, and the bizarre comparisons to political events 1000 years later makes one wonder who would publish this.
The thesis is that the current European Union can trace its origin to Charlemagne. Do prove such a thesis, you have to be able to separate Charlemagne from Christianity, no easy feat. Secondly, you have to ignore the 1200 years of history between the two points.
Unfortunately, the facts of Charlemagne are badly intertwined Charlemagne's mythos. So the author rightly questions all texts involving Charlemagne. But rather than trying to tease out the facts, he rejects all questionable texts and creates his version of what he wants Charlemagne to be (sans Christianity).
The book oozes multiculturism, internationalism, relativism, self-debasement of Europe and all other stereotypes of an academic. Even the bizarre jabs at former President Bush, how is that relevant in a book about Charlemagne?
In short, this book is worthless.

[Mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

This one gets 2 Stars only because I did actually learn something: peripatetic: traveling from place to place, especially working or based in various places for relatively short periods and capitulary: a civil or ecclesiastical ordinance. The guy used these like he was getting paid on how many times he could squeeze one in. He should be charged with misleading advertising. This was barely a bio of Charlemagne...it was more a thesis on how Europe came to be an idea that would wind up as the EU. Charles the Great only comes in for about 1/2 the book. His life, campaigns, policies, travels, etc. were not covered in the level of detail I was looking for or expecting. That said, the book isn't bad. He admits a lack of info on Charlemagne and proceeds to speculate on many parts of his life and actions. He traces the legend of Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Emperor as a force in the history. This was educational but too shallow as he covers 1200 years of European history up to establishing the EU. His style is a bit scatterbrained as he jumped around in history rapidly...one moment we are at year 800 and suddenly back to 780. He is also a snide British academic writing in 2005 so he has to get in the obligatory anti-American comment, have to maintain street cred with his fellow ivory tower pals, don't you know. Did not see what that had to do with Charlemagne but, of course, I'm just not that smart. I will say he whetted my appetite to learn more about a very turbulent time at the end of the 8th and beginning of the 9th Centuries. Vikings, Abbasids, Umayyads, Byzantines, Popes, Saxons, Avars, Lombards, Celts, etc all mixing and roiling the stage.

[Michael · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a really awful book. Hardly a biography. The thesis is tenuous and the author's historical takes are un-nuanced and lack any serious form of analysis. The author has a progressive and agnostic bias and all motives of Charlemagne (and everyone else) are assumed to be self-serving and politically expedient. For example, Charlemagne's campaign in Iberia was not truly a proto-crusade, just an excuse to expand his realm. The author's only rationale is that he allied himself with a weaker sultanate.

The thesis presents Charlemagne as a myth reinvented every age as the progenitor archetype of Europe. True Christian knight for the middle ages and transnationalist tyrant rolemodel for Napolean, etc. His role is over exaggerated, especially after the middle ages, and it gets drawn out way too much for too many chapters.

The author is also seething in contempt for the papacy in all ages and fails to understand its role. He sees no theological distinctions with Protestantism and presents it as Christianity in a different cultural wrapping. He takes swipes at the crusades, the Bush Administration, and presents Catholic Europe as a myth built on medeival forgeries. Not a serious read.

[Tony · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wilson's "Charlemagne A Biography" is perhaps the most deceptively titled non-fiction book I have come across. While the work does contain a biography of Charlemagne, this covers only approximately half the book. (Charlemagne does not appear until page 25 and dies on page 131 of 203.) The final third of the work covers future European leaders and the author's increasingly tortured attempts to connect them to Charlemagne. The true subject of Wilson's book is his argument that Charlemagne founded a European mentality and culture that eventually blossomed into the current European Union. This may well be true. But, I was seeking "Charlemagne A Biography".

[Hashem Tarabishi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Enjoyed the sections about Charlemagne, not so much the parts about the forging of modern Europe.

[Erik Graff · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a readable introduction to the life of the emperor Charles the Great (768-814) both as it was lived and as it has been reconstructed in accord with the purposes of future generations. The author himself does this in terms of the vision of the present day European Union.

Other, more detailed and scholarly biographies exist. This serves as a good preparation for further study.














0

[Jose · Rating 1 out of 5]

Charlemagne was a Great Man,Catholic,Warrior,intellectual despite not being able to Write and great statesman. Derek Wilson has done a good job of portraying him as the Father of Europe and a Warrior who was sincere in defense of Christendom.The Author goes off track sometimes and wants to assert his opinion regarding The Current European Union,his calls to renew the Great Europe in the Mold of Charlemagne in the Current E.U. is what I can read between the lines of his off-topic ramblings here and there.Towards the end of the book he can't help but throw the usual jab at the Bush Administration.He at one points Calls Charles a Dictator even though the author admires him,He wants to do comparisons of King Charles and Napoleon(No Comparison) and it seems might be hostile to Rome himself although he spares nothing towards the Decadent East.
His prose is good,but his bias is showing.He too wants to have his cake and eat it too,since He Points out eloquently that Charlemagne was no brute without knowledge,he knew many languages,he was restrained but yet could be ruthless,had his own moral ambiguity despite his sincere Catholic Beliefs.He had faults like many others,don't we all have faults?The book touches on Charles in several sections starting with Family,His reign and the Myth.The Author naively finds fault with the Crusades and The Inquisition(failing to understand it was State NOT Church-founded) even though the author slams the Crusades he does point out the aggressive Moslem Expansion. It seems he too wants to have his cake and eat it too as he says.Overall there are many faults to find in this book but it comes from the Author not Charles and not the Author's view on Charles or what he writes but his off-topic musings here and there.It is a Decent book and it is fair to the Warrior-King.

[Bruce · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you are looking for a biography about Charlemagne, this isn't it. The book deals more with the establishment of Christianity and its legacy down to the present, than it does with Charlemagne's life, the politics of the time, his campaigns, battles, and how he forged his empire.

[Eric W · Rating 1 out of 5]

This wasn't a worthwhile biography.

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed the majority of the book that is focused on Charlemagne and his context but agree with a number of other reviewers that the final third is really another argument. A title like "Charlemagne and the Creation of Europe" would have hinted at the broader focus of the book.

[David Shelton · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really interesting book on the history of Charlemagne. The main focus is on Charlemagne's long term impact on Europe rather than an in-depth biography. The writing is good and definitely gave me a better perspective of what an incredibly important figure Charlemagne was.

[G · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think I expected more biography & less reporting. There have to be other books, more thoroughly written, on this subject. Gonna have to look for them.

[John · Rating 2 out of 5]

Charlemagne, aka Charles the Great, ruled the Frankish kingdom of what is now western Europe from 771 to 814. Initially, the rule was split with his younger brother, who conveniently died at an early age. Through military conquest and the force of his personality, he built the kingdom to the point that it roughly comprised present-day France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands at his death, and he earned the title Father of Europe.
Charlemagne presents a problem for the biographer. Although he was clearly a man of rare abilities and intelligence, he was semiliterate and left no written record. His only contemporary biographer had an agenda and can't be considered completely reliable. Later biographers added legend to the mix. Perhaps for this reason, Charlemagne never seems to come to life in this biography. This is history without a lot of story.
Derek Wilson spends about half of the book on Charlemagne himself and the rest tracing his influence through the rest of European history, bringing in everyone from Napoleon to Voltaire to Hugo to Hitler and Churchill.
The section on Napoleon was the most interesting to me. Napoleon failed in two areas were Charlemagne succeeded, Wilson argues. Taking them in reverse order, Charlemagne, unlike Napoleon, allowed the people in his realm "a considerable degree of regional autonomy."
The other difference was God. Napoleon led a secular state; Charlemagne was a king who served under the Almighty. "Charles could, and did, appeal to something greater than himself," Wilson writes. "... He regarded himself as the servant of a higher power with a responsibility to rule wisely and justly here and prepares his subjects for eternity."

[Alec · Rating 2 out of 5]

This biography of Charlamagne was pretty interesting. I picked it up on a whim at the library because I didn't know much about him. Still don't as there was a dearth of too much personal information (I like the gossipy biographies better). The author's main point was that Charlemagne's mythology set the stage for a lot of the impetus behind a united Europe. It wasn't too jargony, though I thought the author assumed a lot of familiarity with the rulers of Europe throughout the ages, and didn't always say just who he was talking about right away.

[J · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is not just about Charlemagne. It is not so much a biography as an overview of over 1200 years of European history. While it did put some events in perspective for me, it was not what I expected from the title.
Perhaps if my expectations had been different I would have rated it higher.

[Ryan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a short biography of Charlemagne, King of the Franks, the first crowned emperor of the post-Roman western world. The author begins by establishing the history of Charles’ father Pepin the Short, who overthrew the Merovingian kings after appealing to the Roman pope when he asked: “Is it wise to have kings who have no power or control?” As the author describes, in the Merovingian kingdom of the time, “enjoyment of power gradually took the place of effective exercise of power.” The pope had interest in having a strong ally to defend his interests in Italy, and so blessed the Carolingian usurpation.

The story then turns to Pepin’s son Charles, who inherits the kingdom and proceeds on a lifelong campaign to strengthen its defenses, expand its borders, and unite his people under Christian law and teaching. Rule and religion were the pillars of Charlemagne’s kingdom, and he earnestly saw it as his duty to both protect and enlighten his subjects. The author places us in this medieval mindset at this time in history, amidst this culture of piety and barbarity:

“…our imaginations need to be jolted so that we can place ourselves alongside the warriors, scholars and missionaries who created and led the first Western empire. They were men who believed simply, felt passionately, saw complex issues in black and white, were aggressive in word and deed and understood this world as but a shadow of a greater reality.”

Charlemagne had ruled for three decades when he traveled to Rome and was crowned emperor on Christmas day of 800 CE, an act that would raise the statures of both men involved: Charles receiving the western Roman throne that had stood vacant for more than three centuries, and Pope Leo III asserting a spiritual dominion over the secular throne. The author also talks about the controversy about whether Charles was aware of the coronation beforehand and whether his noted surprise was honest or simply feigned humility.

However, at only 200 pages, this book does not linger long. Charles dies 14 years later, and his empire disintegrates as his heirs fight over the scraps of his empire. The remaining third of the book follows a wide view of European history, from the Habsburgs to Hitler, telling a story of Charlemagne as more than man, but myth - the story of a continent always trying to unite but whose French-Germanic split that originated in the aftermath of his death continually sowing the central European plains in blood.

“That Greater Francia did not survive was not his fault, and the adventure did not end either with his death or with the demise of his empire. What lived on was the ‘idea’ of Europe. Something came into being between 771 and 814 that had not existed before – a community of people and tribes, united by religion, respect for classical culture, commitment to the rule of law and a sense of belonging to something larger than their own political units.”

This book does not succeed, or even try, to give the reader an intimate look at Charlemagne’s life or beliefs. Everything is presented dryly, and quickly, and at a great emotional distance. The author writes well, and many of his phrases sing sweetly, but even after reading this I don’t feel as if I learned much about Charles the person. Whether that is a stylistic choice in a book that aims more for the story of Charlemagne’s mythic history, or just from a lack of reliable information from thousand-year-old sources, I can’t say. A well-written yet slightly underwhelming biography.

[Thomas Radigan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Charlemagne is a household name, but like many ancient historical figures, most people don't know exactly what he was famous for. I learned in high school that he was successful in uniting Europe, but his sons messed it up. The reality was not so simple, and this book points this out.

So what is so disappointing about this book? A number of things. For one, it jumps back and forth in a confusing way between historical periods and the phases of Charlemagne's life (there are even notes at the bottom telling us to see another part of the book if we are confused). Second, it tells us less about Charlemagne the man himself than we expect. Yes, we need to know about his ancestry, his relatives, and the people around him, but the book jumps around and sometimes repeats itself. It also mentions how he wanted to create not so much an empire as a stable proto-Europe safer from internal dissension and external enemies, and to promote Christianity which he genuinely believed in.

But the book makes the case that Charlemagne wanted to create a united Europe, and even supposedly created the idea, the result manifesting itself in the modern European Union many centuries later. Never mind that the Roman Empire was essentially the same thing, and then as now, Europe was a mosaic of many languages and cultures. The author also conveniently ignores the dissolution of Yugoslavia, or how the Soviet Union dissolved because there was never any "Soviet" culture, or how Eastern and Western Europe look upon one another as essentially aliens (this from a Romanian woman). It is unlikely that Charlemagne could have possibly united Europe even today, even with the brute force methods he used during his reign.

[Joshua Neil · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wilson's 'Charlemagne: The Great Adventure' upset a lot of readers by seemingly misleading them in its summary: purported to be a biography of the emperor's life, the book is rather a glimpse into the formation of 'Europe' as a concept across the centuries, centralised around the idea that it all began with Charlemagne and his reforms.
Looked at this way, the book could easily disappoint: while full coverage is given to the scope of Charlemagne's life, it is general rather than specific: different campaigns and reforms are given in broad terms, without details of battles or specific impacts (though to what extent these are actually known, I am not sure). It also extends well past Charlemagne's life, looking at his impact on the European continent right up until the present day.
As a thesis, however, the book is of much more interest. While I have my doubts as to the credibility of its central tenet, that Charlemagne was the founder or initial piece in the jigsaw that is modern Europe, the book gives good coverage of who Charlemagne is, and is excellent for beginners to the subject, talking through his life, battles, policies and impacts on the world. The writing is lucid and clear, though the narrative isn't as specific, linear and clear as, say, Runciman, and tends to flit around in time a little too much. Nevertheless, this is an excellent book for people learning to know enough about Charlemagne's life to fit him easily into their knowledge of the period, but perhaps not one for scholars on the topic.

[Kabaal van Napels · Rating 3 out of 5]

Informative but not a great read

"Charlemagne" tells the story of the life and legacy of one of the great kings in Medieval Europe. Wilson creates an interesting picture of the Dark Ages and of one of the founding fathers of modern Europe. He combines the main events in the life of Charles the Great with anecdotes from contemporaries and a general explanation of Medieval society. The latter part of the book deals with Charlemagne's legacy up to the present day.

The image that emerges of Charlemagne is one of a semi-educated warrior king and an enlightened despot. Yet, his legacy can still be felt up to this day: from the reform of standardized script to the boundaries of European nations. Two elements of the book I found most interesting were the struggle and often-complicated relationship between pope and king for authority over the people, and Charlemagne's relationship with one of the other great empires of its day, the Byzantine Empire.

Although the book only counts 200 pages, I found it hard going at times. The writing style did not appeal, the book lacked pace and the analysis that deals with Charlemagne's legacy only scratches the surface. All in all, Charlemagne is informative for readers looking for an initial insight in European and medieval history. However, it is in my opinion not a great read.

[Marlene Wessel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not a historian. So, perhaps my rating is based solely on the fact that I read the entire book, understood what I was reading and learned a few things that I hadn't known before. I chose the book because in one of my Ancestry forays into the past, I found that Charlemagne is in our family lineage. Knowing that not one of drop of blood or DNA from Charlemagne has carried this far forward, I still wanted to know more about him. Having learned from a documentary, that he was responsible for establishing Christianity throughout Europe and unifying and solidifying the belief among his nations, I wanted to learn further. I really appreciated that Derek Wilson tied and wove centuries and realms together cohesively while explaining why future monarchs, kings and rulers exemplified Charlemagne's philosophies and methods of rule. It clarified and made our current place history, as a result of Charlemagnes actions and beliefs, more unified and outlined a progressive timeline for me that I never grasped prior. So, onto additional history books to learn more. This was the first step for me and I felt that it was a worthy and informative read.

[Kathryn · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was more than about Charlemagne. About half of this book is specifically about Charlemagne, and then the other half of the book is the impact and influence that Charlemagne had on future kings, emperors, and Europe

This book starts with the formation of Europe. There were times, where I wanted to give this book 2 stars because it was redundant and repetitive and sometimes a non linear timeline. In these places, it was a real grind to get through. There were a few times that I felt that this book was a four or five star. In balance, I gave it three.

This book helps me understand more about the Franks and the relationship between France, Germany and other parts of Europe. It also helps me understand how the Habsburg dynasty fits in. It also helps me understand the basis of Hitler’s premise to reunify Europe.

Whether it be from this book or another book, I think it’s important for people to understand Charlemagne and the profound impact he had on the formation of Europe, expansion of Christiandom and the Catholic Church. This book attempts to separate fact from myth noting that legends and myths of Charlemagne were rallying points throughout the centuries.

[Edward Tong · Rating 4 out of 5]

I learned quite a bit about Charlemagne from this book, and in the process, I understood a little bit more about the makeup of Europe.
The author devotes about half of the book on the life of Charlemagne and the other half is focussed on the impact of his kingdom long after his death. Although the latter part seems to be long and at times the arguments are a little bit stretched, it incites me to reflect on the whole idea of Europe, which is now at a cross-road with the crisis in Ukraine. The nations of France and Germany come from the empire of Charlemagne. If they stand together, they can form a powerful force against external adversaries. Europe needs a strong leader now, someone like Charlemagne.
The author reports that Charlemagne considered himself to have a high calling, to spread Christianity to the "barbarous" tribes. Under his rule, the tribes were allowed to keep their own traditions and laws. All these gave rise to the Carolingian renaissance. Today, we need a strong leader, like Europe, who values high morality and yet allows the people to practice their beliefs and traditions.

[James (JD) Dittes · Rating 5 out of 5]

The history of Charlemagne ends about 60% of the way through this book, and is much thinner than I had expected. It is a "just the facts" biography that--to a fault--omits the legends and chivalric hyperbole often heaped upon this king.

But what makes Wilson's Charlemagne worth reading is the analysis he applies, describing how this Frankian warlord turned papal rescuer became the "father of Europe." By examining pretenders to the empire created by Charlemagne--Otto, Frederick Barbarossa, Louis XIV, Maximilian Hapsburg, and Napoleon--Wilson shows how various mirages--of a unified Western Europe, of "Christendom" co-ruled by Pope and emperor, of virtuous knighthood--are myths based upon myths based upon myths.

He also looks at the sad history of the two modern halves of Charlemagne's empire, France and Germany, and how their struggle over centuries for his mantle and his legitimacy--from Charles the Bald to Charles de Gaulle--impacted Europe and the world.

A very worthwhile read, if one that left me still with questions about the historic Charlemagne.

[Nicholas Lefevre · Rating 3 out of 5]

If I had to type all of the "greats" before "grandfather" his relationship to me I would fill the page. I thought I should learn more about him than I learned in high school.

Turns out he wasn't called Charles the Great just because he was my great...grandfather. He fathered the Carolingian Empire which united Western Europe for the first time after the fall of the Roman Empire.

I love modern history books that pull together vivid depictions from the authors touring the sites and reading letters, diaries, and all manner of sources. Unfortunately, this is not a modern history so it lacks the sources that allow vivid recounting. It's more of a names and dates history. Add in the fact that we're dealing with Franks and Lombards it's a struggle to even put events in their proper place.

I guess if he'd set up a generation skipping trust for me I would have worked harder at this book. He didn't.

[Sonya · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well-written description of the man and his myth. The basic argument is that Charlemagne was the founding father of Europe. Easily read in a scholarly style but not overly dry or dense. It also shows how the sources are biased and that he was pretty ruthless at times which contradicted his idea that he was creating a reformed, Christian society like Augustine's "City of God." It makes him more interesting to me to see the flaws, the issues, the complexity, that made up the man. It also backs up my experience in that schools teach students about him more in the style of the myth than what was reality. (Much like all other "great" men.)

[Eduardo Garcia-Gaspar · Rating 2 out of 5]

El autor provee dos cosas, la vida de Carlomagno y, al final, ocupando como una cuarta parte de su obra, una serie de especulaciones de la influencia del personaje desde su muerte hasta nuestros días. Hubiera yo preferido ampliar la biografía que soportar las especulaciones, las que no dejan de tener puntos interesantes, pero no satisfacen.
De haber sabido eso antes, hubiera seleccionado otro libro, aunque no me arrepiento de haber leído este, el que me dio lo que creo que es un perfil razonable acerca de Carlomagno.

[Bjarke Knudsen · Rating 4 out of 5]

A compact affair - by genre standards - from Mr. Wilson. I enjoyed his biography of Henry VIII, and found this one similarly pleasing. You are given a thorough "walkthrough" of the life and times of the great man himself - in a way that disassembles the "fairy tale image" - and then, after the natural finale of the biographical part, Wilson takes a look at Charlemagne's "hagiography". How his name and legacy influenced the history and culture of Europe as a concept.

A lot has been written about this Franconian lord, but Wilson's book is a good "base primer".

[Pete · Rating 3 out of 5]

I know more about Charlemagne now than I did before I read this book. That's the good. But as others have pointed out, he exists for about half of this book and the rest is filler. Some historical reference leading up to the birth of the subject is understandable, but loosely tied influences post mortem, spanning over a millennium, is ridiculous. Charlemagne died at the 2/3 mark and the last third does a speed run through European history and the (supposed) mark he left on it. I love history but if I want to know about midieval Europe, I'll read a book dedicated to it.

[Sean Reeves · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is more about Charlemagne's historical impact than about the man himself, about whom surprisingly little is known at a personal level. This is not the fault of the author but the book nonetheless disappoints as a biography. However, it's an interesting enough read and does a good job of providing an overview of how, over the centuries, historical figures have drawn upon a more mythical than real Charlemagne to enhance their own status or justify their own agendas.

[Robby Rami · Rating 5 out of 5]

A little dryer than the first Charlemagne bio I read, but chock full of fascinating information about the Frankish king. Interestingly, the author changes direction in the latter third of the book to talk about how Charlemagne’s ideals still resonate with those who wish to see a peaceful and united Europe.