What do you think?
Rate this book
Two Lives of Charlemagne: The Biography, History and Legend of King Charlemagne, Ruler of the Frankish Empire
This splendid edition contains both ancient biographies of Charles the Great by Einhard and the Monk of St. Gall, edited, translated and introduced by Arthur James Grant. Charlemagne is often termed the father of modern Europe, in that he implemented the earliest foundations of Germany, France, Holland and Belgium. Demonstrating great talents in both war and peace, Charles the Great was able to unite much of Europe to an extent unseen since the time of the Roman Empire. Although Charlemagne only reigned for fourteen years, his actions while on the Frankish throne were of far-ranging consequence. His wars against the Saxons, his expedition into Muslim Spain, and his strengthening of relations with the Papacy of Rome helped solidify Christianity within the European continent. Although his reign was violent, it ushered in civilization to Europe via unification of its peoples.
102 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 887
132 people are currently reading
2808 people want to read
About the author
Einhard
75 books25 followersHistorian, born c. 770 in the district of the River Main in the eastern part of the Frankish Empire; d. 14 March, 840, at Seligenstadt. His earliest training he received at the monastery of Fulda, where he showed such exceptional promise that Abbot Baugulf sent him to the court of Charlemagne. His education was completed at the Palace School, where he was fortunate enough to count among his masters the great Alcuin, who bears witness to his remarkable talents in mathematics and architecture, and also to the fact that he was among the emperor's most trusted advisers. Charlemagne gave Einhard charge of his great public buildings, e.g. the construction of Aachen cathedral and the palaces of Aachen and Ingelheim. Charlemagne also availed himself of Einhard's tact and prudence to send him on various diplomatic missions.
The most important of Einhard's works is the Vita Caroli Magni. This, the best biography of the whole period of the Middle Ages, written in close imitation of Suetonius, shows the emperor from the standpoint of the most intimate personal acquaintance with all sides of his character, and with a genuine attempt at truth of portrayal. The diction is in general elegant, though not polished. The annals of the Carolingian Empire, which have been handed down as Einhard's, are, in their present form, older materials worked over. Those for the years between 796 and 820 may date back to Einhard. In addition, we have from his hand the Translatio et Miracula SS. Marcellini et Petri, containing data which are important for the history of culture. The seventy-one letters, written by Einhard between 825 and 830 in a clear, simple style, constitute an important source for the history of Louis the Pious.
(Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia)
The most important of Einhard's works is the Vita Caroli Magni. This, the best biography of the whole period of the Middle Ages, written in close imitation of Suetonius, shows the emperor from the standpoint of the most intimate personal acquaintance with all sides of his character, and with a genuine attempt at truth of portrayal. The diction is in general elegant, though not polished. The annals of the Carolingian Empire, which have been handed down as Einhard's, are, in their present form, older materials worked over. Those for the years between 796 and 820 may date back to Einhard. In addition, we have from his hand the Translatio et Miracula SS. Marcellini et Petri, containing data which are important for the history of culture. The seventy-one letters, written by Einhard between 825 and 830 in a clear, simple style, constitute an important source for the history of Louis the Pious.
(Source: The Catholic Encyclopedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 143 reviews
Read
October 19, 2018I would hesitate to describe either of these two lives as great literature, but both are very interesting, political, biographies of Charlemagne, first Holy Roman Emperor, warlord over much of western and central Europe at the end of the eighth century and beginning of the ninth.
Einhard was a monk in the service of Charlemagne in the latter part of his life, later Einhard married and was made an Abbot - in those days even monastic celibacy was not a huge priority in the Catholic Church, he wrote a careful, diplomatic, account of Charlemagne's activities. Einhard models his Charlemagne on Suetonius's The Twelve Caesars, obviously the implicit message that Charlemagne is the equal of the early Roman Emperors or their modern day equivalent was suitable to his purpose, but it is also incongruous for the peripatetic Christian ruler of what looks like a fairly tribal society sustained by plunder seized in war.
Einhard tells us that his life of Charlemagne is carefully sourced, either from documents available to him or from personal reflections, we are therefore assured that this will be the true portrait of a modern Roman emperor. Early on he tells us that he will focus on "his deeds and habits & the other aspects of his life which need explanation & elaboration" (p.59), everything that is "worthy of being recorded" (ibid.) This is quite interesting, writing, I guess, with the post Charlemagne generation in mind Einhard already thinks that his life and deeds are not self explanatory, they need apparently in contemporary parlance a bit of spin. Einhard plainly was fairly successful because at a greater distance Charlemagne's reign as a Europe conqueror and ambitious warlord looks fairly plain and non-controversial. Then just a few paragraphs later Einhard clarifies his purpose he is determined to provide "a description of Charlemagne's way of life & not the day to day details of his wars" (p.61). What is important then is Charlemagne as exemplar, and specifically for his way of life, not his political activity.
Einhard passes over the awkward relationship between Charlemagne and his half brother and co-king Carloman, while the Carolingians overthrew the Merovingian dynasty, according to Einhard this was only because the Pope told them to do so, and all those wars with their neighbours - the Franks certainly never started none of them we are reassured, well that's ok then, but there are several conspiracies against Charlemagne so plainly even among the rich and powerful there was a degree of discontent, one of these centred around Pepin a hunchbacked son of Charlemagne by a junior wife (or concubine as Einhard, a practised charmer, described her), Charlemagne's own parents were not married until several years after his birth. It is not clear what the problem was, not enough war possibly or more likely discontent over the spoils, either that or Charlemagne's choral policies, Einhard will not say.
Although Einhard was in personal contact with the emperor his portrait is notable cool and distant, we spy a tall, stout, white haired man - and since Einhard was apparently very short, perhaps Charlemagne need not have been a giant to have seemed tall to his biographer.
How different the life written by Notker. Notker's Charlemagne is a very different character, a lively wise cracking, witty man, forever catching out Bishops or nobleman in dereliction of duty, a champion of the good old days when men were men and wore big sheepskin cloaks and not flimsy silken garments. Of course his father, son and Grandsons are cut from the same sheepskin, fully liable to chop off the head of a lion with a single blow or bend swords in their bare heads while despising silver wealth. Indeed Notker digresses so much that I can't help suspect that he was angling from a commission from Charles the Fat, the Great-grandson of Charlemagne, to write more family histories. Notker achieves a carefully naive style, he uses much of the same material as Einhard, even in the same order but abandons Einhard's careful structure in favour for a series of garrulous, gossipy anecdotes, leading with mass of tall tales about incompetent bishops, each prone to being fooled by the Devil (unlike Charlemage's father, Peppin the short who, no fool he, stabs the devil on his way to have a bath). Notker tells us that he learnt about Charlemagne from an old soldier who told him these stories when he was a boy, Notker also tells us that he used to run away rather than listen to these stories - but that is not meant to discourage us apparently. Nonetheless by the time of Notker, only seventy or so years after Charlemagne's death, the old emperor has already become a legendary figure, folkloric rather than historical.
Einhard was a monk in the service of Charlemagne in the latter part of his life, later Einhard married and was made an Abbot - in those days even monastic celibacy was not a huge priority in the Catholic Church, he wrote a careful, diplomatic, account of Charlemagne's activities. Einhard models his Charlemagne on Suetonius's The Twelve Caesars, obviously the implicit message that Charlemagne is the equal of the early Roman Emperors or their modern day equivalent was suitable to his purpose, but it is also incongruous for the peripatetic Christian ruler of what looks like a fairly tribal society sustained by plunder seized in war.
Einhard tells us that his life of Charlemagne is carefully sourced, either from documents available to him or from personal reflections, we are therefore assured that this will be the true portrait of a modern Roman emperor. Early on he tells us that he will focus on "his deeds and habits & the other aspects of his life which need explanation & elaboration" (p.59), everything that is "worthy of being recorded" (ibid.) This is quite interesting, writing, I guess, with the post Charlemagne generation in mind Einhard already thinks that his life and deeds are not self explanatory, they need apparently in contemporary parlance a bit of spin. Einhard plainly was fairly successful because at a greater distance Charlemagne's reign as a Europe conqueror and ambitious warlord looks fairly plain and non-controversial. Then just a few paragraphs later Einhard clarifies his purpose he is determined to provide "a description of Charlemagne's way of life & not the day to day details of his wars" (p.61). What is important then is Charlemagne as exemplar, and specifically for his way of life, not his political activity.
Einhard passes over the awkward relationship between Charlemagne and his half brother and co-king Carloman, while the Carolingians overthrew the Merovingian dynasty, according to Einhard this was only because the Pope told them to do so, and all those wars with their neighbours - the Franks certainly never started none of them we are reassured, well that's ok then, but there are several conspiracies against Charlemagne so plainly even among the rich and powerful there was a degree of discontent, one of these centred around Pepin a hunchbacked son of Charlemagne by a junior wife (or concubine as Einhard, a practised charmer, described her), Charlemagne's own parents were not married until several years after his birth. It is not clear what the problem was, not enough war possibly or more likely discontent over the spoils, either that or Charlemagne's choral policies, Einhard will not say.
Although Einhard was in personal contact with the emperor his portrait is notable cool and distant, we spy a tall, stout, white haired man - and since Einhard was apparently very short, perhaps Charlemagne need not have been a giant to have seemed tall to his biographer.
How different the life written by Notker. Notker's Charlemagne is a very different character, a lively wise cracking, witty man, forever catching out Bishops or nobleman in dereliction of duty, a champion of the good old days when men were men and wore big sheepskin cloaks and not flimsy silken garments. Of course his father, son and Grandsons are cut from the same sheepskin, fully liable to chop off the head of a lion with a single blow or bend swords in their bare heads while despising silver wealth. Indeed Notker digresses so much that I can't help suspect that he was angling from a commission from Charles the Fat, the Great-grandson of Charlemagne, to write more family histories. Notker achieves a carefully naive style, he uses much of the same material as Einhard, even in the same order but abandons Einhard's careful structure in favour for a series of garrulous, gossipy anecdotes, leading with mass of tall tales about incompetent bishops, each prone to being fooled by the Devil (unlike Charlemage's father, Peppin the short who, no fool he, stabs the devil on his way to have a bath). Notker tells us that he learnt about Charlemagne from an old soldier who told him these stories when he was a boy, Notker also tells us that he used to run away rather than listen to these stories - but that is not meant to discourage us apparently. Nonetheless by the time of Notker, only seventy or so years after Charlemagne's death, the old emperor has already become a legendary figure, folkloric rather than historical.
April 11, 2007
There's not much to say about these two 'biographies' of Charlemagne. The first, written by Einhard, a contemporary of Charlemagne, is brief and barren. His military exploits and his dress and manners are detailed, but one gets little indication of what the man was really like. Fine, but boring. The second, written by Notker the Stammerer, a monk at the monastery of Saint Gall, was much more interesting. However, I learned far less about Charlemagne, than about the inept and corrupt bishops of the time. It all reminded me a bit of Chaucer, in a good way - but without the great writing. I guess I'm just not into this stuff enough to appreciate this book.
June 26, 2021
Einhard was a nobleman educated at a monastery, and became a personal friend and courtier of Charlemagne. He later served Louis the Pious, during whose reign in the early 9th century he wrote what is now one of our primary sources on Charlemagne—Life of Charlemagne. Notker the Stammerer was born almost 30 years after Charlemagne’s death, and writes during the reign of Charles the Fat, Charlemagne’s great grandson, about 60 years after Einhard’s work, late in the 9th century. His longer but unfinished account, Deeds of Charlemagne, is not based on his first hand knowledge but on stories, legends, anecdotes, and other written records. It’s not a primary source, but it’s pretty close.
Both present Charlemagne uncritically, as an almighty emperor who can do no wrong and who has no faults, a powerful and fearless man capable only of greatness and magnificence and munificence and leadership, so they aren’t exactly objective. That’s not really important. I love that, in fact. This book is like other old works of history, being fascinating not only for its content but for its place in history.
The contrast between both of these short but absorbing works is worth pointing out. Einhard is brief, giving a high level, and yet satisfactory account of all the main achievements of Charlemagne’s life, illustrating his superior character and his conquests. Notker focuses less on the battles and more on the interior life of Charlemagne, his qualities as a person, his activities and tastes and habits, and a few of the dramatic events in his life, and the lives around him.
Einhard, having not only known Charlemagne personally but having been directly by his side for almost 20 years of his rule, is generally dealing with known facts, things he has either witnessed or was close to, and things he was well informed on. He draws some of his information from the Royal Frankish Annals as well. He borrows heavily from Seutonius’s The Twelve Caesars, frequently taking phrases from that work, intended to describe Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius, Nero, Titus, or Julius Caesar, and applying them to Charlemagne, sometimes completely unchanged, other times modified to more closely describe his king’s character or manner.
Little is known of Charlemagne’s childhood, and Einhard is no more informed on it than anyone else, which he makes clear. He mentions only in passing the Merovingian empire, the rulers of the Franks before Pippin, Charlemagne’s father, takes the throne. Their dynasty ends with the fall of Childric, and Einhard describes the poorness of their family’s claim to the throne, how incapable and unworthy he and presumably others loyal to Charlemagne believed them to be. Pippin’s rule is given a short but sufficient treatment. His brother Carloman gives up his rule after a few years to lead a more contemplative life as a monk in Rome, for reasons that Einhard did not know. After Pippin, Charlemagne and his brother, also named Carloman, rule the kingdom together until Carloman dies.
The Aquitanian war was Charlemagne’s first war, inherited from his father, who was unable to finish it in his lifetime. Charlemagne brings it to a satisfactory end, bringing the enemy under his power. His invasion of the Lombard kingdom is taken up later, another conquest begun but unsuccessfully carried out by his father. The significant developments of this war are discussed in quick succession, as are Charlemagne’s motivations, which differed from those of his father. In the end, Charlemagne marries the daughter of Desidarius, king of the Lombards, in order to insure peace between the kingdoms. As Notker later points out, this only lasts a couple years, since she is incapable of giving Charlemagne children. This gives rise to further tensions.
The Saxon war ends up being one of the most enduring and prolonged engagements in Charlemange’s life, something Einhard chalks up to the Germans’ fierce nature and their worship of demons and their shameless violation of human and divine laws. Einhard details the constant conflict, the ups and downs of this ongoing hostility in which the Saxons are repeatedly crushed by the Franks, exchange hostages, make agreements and promises in peace, only to defy these promises a year later and cause the violence to erupt once more.
In this war, as in all other things we see in Charlemagne’s life, Einhard takes a moment to point out Charlemagne’s tremendousness and greatness of character in how he handles adversity or difficult circumstances, how he rises to every challenge, how he punishes those who deserve it, how he enacts the most perfect rule over his subjects, takes the wisest action at every turn. He takes on multiple wars at a time, throughout his life, never shying away from conflict, never ending a war until victory is declared, enduring until conquest. The Saxon war eventually ends with the Franks conquering and subduing the Germans.
One of the scenes of legendary interest to me was the story of the Basques ambushing his army in Spain, resulting in the death of many, including Roland, for whom the chanson de geste Song of Roland was later composed.
As Life of Charlemagne continues, his later conquests are detailed, his subjugation and defeat of the Bretons and Beneventans, the Bavarians, the Wilzi (Slavs), his defeat of the Avars, cousins of the Huns, his victorious war against the Northmen (Danes), how he expanded his kingdom in his lifetime, his friendships and associations with others, his appearance, his tastes and lifestyle, the great buildings and ornamental works he had erected around his kingdom, his utmost piety and appreciation of learning and the church and moral character, his disdain for expensive clothing and his favor of modesty, his skill at riding and hunting, how he raised his children, how he enforced his law, of the conspiracies against him, and a quick but enjoyable survey of virtually everything one would want to know of him.
Notker bases his work on a blend of oral legends and tales, written documents, and other accounts passed down in time. His approach is different, seemingly more interested in presenting Charlemagne as a nearly mythic figure empowered by God, and he doesn’t shy away from storytelling and what is probably a bit of embellishment. Notker is interested in the tinier details of Charlemagne’s life and character, and so he focuses less on his military accomplishments, not without giving them due credit, and looks at many of Charlemagne’s personal relationships, his favors to others, his love of knowledge from scholars far and wide, his charity and appointments and deeds.
Much is made of his pity and favor toward holy men, bishops in particular, as well as his measured criticism and discipline toward them. We are shown a king, emperor, and Imperator Augustus who has a love for all sorts of high minded things, but does not hold himself above those around him except in authority.
One memorable story from Notker’s work is the story of the twelve clerics who come from Rome to positions in Charlemagne’s kingdom. Their envy toward the Franks drive them to produce each their own bastardized version of the chants at their respective posting, so that all those coming to hear them were met with dissonant and differing chants that were not consistent across the kingdom, devised to embarrass and mock the king. These clerics were later condemned to exile or imprisonment.
Another story tells of how Charlemagne plots with a merchant to shame a greedy bishop by tricking him into buying a painted mouse at a high price, and publicly denouncing him as a hypocrite. This same bishop becomes the subject of a few other intrigues that become more complex and interesting. Many tales of devious bishops and nobles and regular people occur, one after another, some having nothing to do with Charlemagne except for the fates they receive, which Notker interprets as divinity acting through the mighty king. One such example is the man impaled through the torso and genitals by the metal from the bell he constructs, because it is made from weak tin instead of the silver he was given for the task by Charlemagne.
There are episodes of plots against Charlemagne, and his intelligent handling of these situations, and episodes of his envoys avenging their treatment against foreign rulers for their treatment, and a scene of Charlemagne bending the swords of the defeated Danes with his bare hands, scenes of him striking astonishment and fear into those who wish to go to war against him simply by his marvelous appearance, dressed in glistening iron, stories of him sharing his wealth to ensure the loyalty and obedience of subordinate states and people, and the deeds keep going, until they abruptly stop.
These two short books together form our earliest recorded knowledge of Charlemagne, and for centuries they have been published together. This is a great pair of documents that sketch a mythical and real picture of a magnificent king, emperor, and Father of Europe. They tell the story of Charlemagne in a multitude of wars, dramas, activities, and illuminating stories.
Both present Charlemagne uncritically, as an almighty emperor who can do no wrong and who has no faults, a powerful and fearless man capable only of greatness and magnificence and munificence and leadership, so they aren’t exactly objective. That’s not really important. I love that, in fact. This book is like other old works of history, being fascinating not only for its content but for its place in history.
The contrast between both of these short but absorbing works is worth pointing out. Einhard is brief, giving a high level, and yet satisfactory account of all the main achievements of Charlemagne’s life, illustrating his superior character and his conquests. Notker focuses less on the battles and more on the interior life of Charlemagne, his qualities as a person, his activities and tastes and habits, and a few of the dramatic events in his life, and the lives around him.
Einhard, having not only known Charlemagne personally but having been directly by his side for almost 20 years of his rule, is generally dealing with known facts, things he has either witnessed or was close to, and things he was well informed on. He draws some of his information from the Royal Frankish Annals as well. He borrows heavily from Seutonius’s The Twelve Caesars, frequently taking phrases from that work, intended to describe Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius, Nero, Titus, or Julius Caesar, and applying them to Charlemagne, sometimes completely unchanged, other times modified to more closely describe his king’s character or manner.
Little is known of Charlemagne’s childhood, and Einhard is no more informed on it than anyone else, which he makes clear. He mentions only in passing the Merovingian empire, the rulers of the Franks before Pippin, Charlemagne’s father, takes the throne. Their dynasty ends with the fall of Childric, and Einhard describes the poorness of their family’s claim to the throne, how incapable and unworthy he and presumably others loyal to Charlemagne believed them to be. Pippin’s rule is given a short but sufficient treatment. His brother Carloman gives up his rule after a few years to lead a more contemplative life as a monk in Rome, for reasons that Einhard did not know. After Pippin, Charlemagne and his brother, also named Carloman, rule the kingdom together until Carloman dies.
The Aquitanian war was Charlemagne’s first war, inherited from his father, who was unable to finish it in his lifetime. Charlemagne brings it to a satisfactory end, bringing the enemy under his power. His invasion of the Lombard kingdom is taken up later, another conquest begun but unsuccessfully carried out by his father. The significant developments of this war are discussed in quick succession, as are Charlemagne’s motivations, which differed from those of his father. In the end, Charlemagne marries the daughter of Desidarius, king of the Lombards, in order to insure peace between the kingdoms. As Notker later points out, this only lasts a couple years, since she is incapable of giving Charlemagne children. This gives rise to further tensions.
The Saxon war ends up being one of the most enduring and prolonged engagements in Charlemange’s life, something Einhard chalks up to the Germans’ fierce nature and their worship of demons and their shameless violation of human and divine laws. Einhard details the constant conflict, the ups and downs of this ongoing hostility in which the Saxons are repeatedly crushed by the Franks, exchange hostages, make agreements and promises in peace, only to defy these promises a year later and cause the violence to erupt once more.
In this war, as in all other things we see in Charlemagne’s life, Einhard takes a moment to point out Charlemagne’s tremendousness and greatness of character in how he handles adversity or difficult circumstances, how he rises to every challenge, how he punishes those who deserve it, how he enacts the most perfect rule over his subjects, takes the wisest action at every turn. He takes on multiple wars at a time, throughout his life, never shying away from conflict, never ending a war until victory is declared, enduring until conquest. The Saxon war eventually ends with the Franks conquering and subduing the Germans.
One of the scenes of legendary interest to me was the story of the Basques ambushing his army in Spain, resulting in the death of many, including Roland, for whom the chanson de geste Song of Roland was later composed.
As Life of Charlemagne continues, his later conquests are detailed, his subjugation and defeat of the Bretons and Beneventans, the Bavarians, the Wilzi (Slavs), his defeat of the Avars, cousins of the Huns, his victorious war against the Northmen (Danes), how he expanded his kingdom in his lifetime, his friendships and associations with others, his appearance, his tastes and lifestyle, the great buildings and ornamental works he had erected around his kingdom, his utmost piety and appreciation of learning and the church and moral character, his disdain for expensive clothing and his favor of modesty, his skill at riding and hunting, how he raised his children, how he enforced his law, of the conspiracies against him, and a quick but enjoyable survey of virtually everything one would want to know of him.
Notker bases his work on a blend of oral legends and tales, written documents, and other accounts passed down in time. His approach is different, seemingly more interested in presenting Charlemagne as a nearly mythic figure empowered by God, and he doesn’t shy away from storytelling and what is probably a bit of embellishment. Notker is interested in the tinier details of Charlemagne’s life and character, and so he focuses less on his military accomplishments, not without giving them due credit, and looks at many of Charlemagne’s personal relationships, his favors to others, his love of knowledge from scholars far and wide, his charity and appointments and deeds.
Much is made of his pity and favor toward holy men, bishops in particular, as well as his measured criticism and discipline toward them. We are shown a king, emperor, and Imperator Augustus who has a love for all sorts of high minded things, but does not hold himself above those around him except in authority.
One memorable story from Notker’s work is the story of the twelve clerics who come from Rome to positions in Charlemagne’s kingdom. Their envy toward the Franks drive them to produce each their own bastardized version of the chants at their respective posting, so that all those coming to hear them were met with dissonant and differing chants that were not consistent across the kingdom, devised to embarrass and mock the king. These clerics were later condemned to exile or imprisonment.
Another story tells of how Charlemagne plots with a merchant to shame a greedy bishop by tricking him into buying a painted mouse at a high price, and publicly denouncing him as a hypocrite. This same bishop becomes the subject of a few other intrigues that become more complex and interesting. Many tales of devious bishops and nobles and regular people occur, one after another, some having nothing to do with Charlemagne except for the fates they receive, which Notker interprets as divinity acting through the mighty king. One such example is the man impaled through the torso and genitals by the metal from the bell he constructs, because it is made from weak tin instead of the silver he was given for the task by Charlemagne.
There are episodes of plots against Charlemagne, and his intelligent handling of these situations, and episodes of his envoys avenging their treatment against foreign rulers for their treatment, and a scene of Charlemagne bending the swords of the defeated Danes with his bare hands, scenes of him striking astonishment and fear into those who wish to go to war against him simply by his marvelous appearance, dressed in glistening iron, stories of him sharing his wealth to ensure the loyalty and obedience of subordinate states and people, and the deeds keep going, until they abruptly stop.
These two short books together form our earliest recorded knowledge of Charlemagne, and for centuries they have been published together. This is a great pair of documents that sketch a mythical and real picture of a magnificent king, emperor, and Father of Europe. They tell the story of Charlemagne in a multitude of wars, dramas, activities, and illuminating stories.
May 6, 2013
An interesting look at how the people of early medieval europe thought of the famous Charlemagne, and how the facts even then were vague and unanswerable. These predate a lot of the mythology that enveloped him in the centuries after his death.
It is tough for me to review a manuscript (or two) written so long ago, as I am tempted to use modern standards to criticize the authors for what they may not have attempted to do. Historians don't look on Notker kindly, as he messes up the facts and creates mythological fiction in describing the unfailing King. His manuscript also does not appear complete. (Unless it was in vogue to end a major work, commissioned by the king,in the middle of a sentence!) His work is somewhat tedious, and not as refined and neat as the work of Einhard, who actually knew the King!
Try other histories for a full biography of Charlemagne and his times-- these manuscripts here are interesting from an historian's POV but not really for the lay-readers.
It is tough for me to review a manuscript (or two) written so long ago, as I am tempted to use modern standards to criticize the authors for what they may not have attempted to do. Historians don't look on Notker kindly, as he messes up the facts and creates mythological fiction in describing the unfailing King. His manuscript also does not appear complete. (Unless it was in vogue to end a major work, commissioned by the king,in the middle of a sentence!) His work is somewhat tedious, and not as refined and neat as the work of Einhard, who actually knew the King!
Try other histories for a full biography of Charlemagne and his times-- these manuscripts here are interesting from an historian's POV but not really for the lay-readers.
February 24, 2021
The two lives of Charlemagne are well worth the read for anyone with a passing interest in the Middle Ages or Medievalists. So many of the legends I remember as a child are present in these pages, but the value of the two lives cannot be limited to simply retelling the legends surrounding Charles the Great.
This first is by Einhard, who wrote a rare secular history and as a layman his account of Charlemagne's life in the Vita Carolini is unique. Charlemagne was in the unique position, as he himself noted, to "write the public history of this most distinguished and deservedly most famous king" (Einhard's intro). Einhard credits Cicero and Suetonius as his inspiration for the history, and Charlemagne is presented as a 13th Roman Emperor, but the debt to antiquity has been over-exaggerated and the genius of Einhard should not be concidered a mere immitator of the Classical historians. His presentation of Charlemagne is fresh and lively, usually flattering but surprisingly critical at certain points. The layman Einhard writes, not as a secular hagiographer but as a first-hand witness and critical historian.
Einhard is also unique in balancing the religious aspects of early Medieval life, as a married layman and abbot of a monastery, he encapsulates the coherent unity of religious and secular life that the modern reader naturally cleaves. Einhard's insights into the private life of Charlemagne also reveal much of the values of the time, but also the values of the author. Einhard's comment "He bore the deads of his two sons and his daughter with less fortitude than one would have expected" (Book III Section 19) is particularly moving and reveals a very human Charlemagne.
The second of the two lives of Charlemagne, by "the monk" (possibly or likely Notker the Stammerer) of St. Gall is very different from the first. It was written from secondary sources and is more classically Medieval in the treatment of Charlemagne as legend, Saint and hero. The Monk's life of Charlemagne is really an amusing collection of anecdotes regarding the King, and even some anecdotes simply grafted on to the story. It was written with a wider interest in moralizing and is reminiscient of theThe Life of Saint Benedict. But the monk's writing is likewise not without its value, it is substantially longer and includes more details on the beliefs, thoughts and practices of the people of the 9th century, though at times the miracle-stories could drag on and became repetitive.
If one reads Charlemagne's Mustache: And Other Cultural Clusters of a Dark Age in conjunction with Einhard (and to a lesser extent the Monk of St. Gall), one would develop a very detailed and interesting understanding of one of the most important figures in western history.
This first is by Einhard, who wrote a rare secular history and as a layman his account of Charlemagne's life in the Vita Carolini is unique. Charlemagne was in the unique position, as he himself noted, to "write the public history of this most distinguished and deservedly most famous king" (Einhard's intro). Einhard credits Cicero and Suetonius as his inspiration for the history, and Charlemagne is presented as a 13th Roman Emperor, but the debt to antiquity has been over-exaggerated and the genius of Einhard should not be concidered a mere immitator of the Classical historians. His presentation of Charlemagne is fresh and lively, usually flattering but surprisingly critical at certain points. The layman Einhard writes, not as a secular hagiographer but as a first-hand witness and critical historian.
Einhard is also unique in balancing the religious aspects of early Medieval life, as a married layman and abbot of a monastery, he encapsulates the coherent unity of religious and secular life that the modern reader naturally cleaves. Einhard's insights into the private life of Charlemagne also reveal much of the values of the time, but also the values of the author. Einhard's comment "He bore the deads of his two sons and his daughter with less fortitude than one would have expected" (Book III Section 19) is particularly moving and reveals a very human Charlemagne.
The second of the two lives of Charlemagne, by "the monk" (possibly or likely Notker the Stammerer) of St. Gall is very different from the first. It was written from secondary sources and is more classically Medieval in the treatment of Charlemagne as legend, Saint and hero. The Monk's life of Charlemagne is really an amusing collection of anecdotes regarding the King, and even some anecdotes simply grafted on to the story. It was written with a wider interest in moralizing and is reminiscient of theThe Life of Saint Benedict. But the monk's writing is likewise not without its value, it is substantially longer and includes more details on the beliefs, thoughts and practices of the people of the 9th century, though at times the miracle-stories could drag on and became repetitive.
If one reads Charlemagne's Mustache: And Other Cultural Clusters of a Dark Age in conjunction with Einhard (and to a lesser extent the Monk of St. Gall), one would develop a very detailed and interesting understanding of one of the most important figures in western history.
August 5, 2009
I particularly liked Notker the Stammerer's anecdotes for the glimpses into various parts of 8th-century life-- congregational singing, making fun of red-haired people, the difficulty of exchanging envoys and legates, etc. I also thought it fascinating when he said that the quote he just gave from Charlemagne he actually pulled from the Life of Ambrose because Charlemagne said it in Frankish which didn't translate into Latin well.
I'm afraid some of the things that puzzle me most the academics will never mention. All their houses were built on stilts in Aachen? What? In any case, I'm plunging into a 2004 book on Charlemagne in hopes that I emerge less confused.
I'm afraid some of the things that puzzle me most the academics will never mention. All their houses were built on stilts in Aachen? What? In any case, I'm plunging into a 2004 book on Charlemagne in hopes that I emerge less confused.
November 12, 2020
This is a strange volume. First of all the Vita part was redundant after reading the intro bc it was very much a description of facts (“fact”) and not a narrative. But the Gesta was more worthwhile and at times funny and an interesting look into the values of these 8th-9th century people. People don’t change that much over millennia apparently
March 3, 2023
such glowing tales of charlemagne they couldnt be true
July 19, 2023
A fun comparison of writing styles and raises questions as to what belongs in a biography. First time reading a medieval piece of writing like this, it was interesting.
November 12, 2019
This volume contains two of the more important contemporary biographies of the most famous monarch of the Middle Ages, Charlemagne. The first, "Vita Caroli," was written in the early ninth century by Charlemagne's clerk Einhard, who modeled his account after Suetonius's TWELVE CAESARS (minus that author's salacious details). It provides a matter-of-fact narrative of Charlemagne's wars against the Saxons, Avars, and Longobards (apropos of which Einhard quotes the Greek saying, “If a Frank is your friend, he is clearly not your neighbor” [71]); his cultural achievements as a compiler of Frankish laws and literature and the builder of Aachen cathedral; and the portents preceding his death in 814. Einhard also details Charlemagne's physical appearance, style of dress, interest in scholarship, and apparent dyslexia. The second biography, by Notker the Stammerer, appeared late in the ninth century and is much more anecdotal and mythological. Notker's Charlemagne is a man of Biblical strength, wisdom, and charity, a “man of iron” on the battlefield who cut down his enemies “as a man mows a meadow” (157), but in peacetime a modest and generous ruler who donated liberally to the poor and chastised the high-born for their vanity. In short, he is the kind of man a humble Christian monk would admire. The volume's editor encourages readers to compare the two accounts, and in doing so one might ask “Which was more important to Einhard and to Notker: that Charlemagne was a Roman leader, or that he was a Christian leader? Are the two compatible?” In other words, was it possible to be a “Holy Roman Emperor”? (You shut your mouth, Voltaire.)
September 1, 2023
Einhard probably wrote his Vita Karoli Magni (“Life of Charles the Great”) about 830–833, after he had left Aachen and was living in Seligenstadt. Based on 23 years of service to Charlemagne and research in the royal annals, the book was expressly intended to convey Einhard’s gratitude for Charlemagne’s aid to his education. Following the model of Suetonius’ Lives of the Caesars, and particularly the “Life of Augustus,” the work was composed in an excellent Latin style and analyzed Charlemagne’s family, his foreign and domestic achievements, his personal tastes, the administration of his kingdom, and his death.
The Vita Karoli Magni is brief and limited in scope and detail, but it provides a generally accurate and direct account of the period. As an example of the classical renaissance at the Carolingian court and as the first medieval biography of a lay figure, the work was highly admired and copied in its own time.
Gesta Karoli magni, written by the monk Notker of St. Gall (in Switzerland) in 884–887, seems to owe as much to popular anecdotes and oral tradition as to Charlemagne’s biographer, Einhard. By the 12th century, lives of Charlemagne were attributing miracles to him before and after his death, and emperor Frederick I arranged his canonization for political reasons. Charlemagne emerged in literary tradition as head of the recreated empire of the West, champion of Christendom, invincible warrior, great political leader and dispenser of justice, martyr, and saint.
The Vita Karoli Magni is brief and limited in scope and detail, but it provides a generally accurate and direct account of the period. As an example of the classical renaissance at the Carolingian court and as the first medieval biography of a lay figure, the work was highly admired and copied in its own time.
Gesta Karoli magni, written by the monk Notker of St. Gall (in Switzerland) in 884–887, seems to owe as much to popular anecdotes and oral tradition as to Charlemagne’s biographer, Einhard. By the 12th century, lives of Charlemagne were attributing miracles to him before and after his death, and emperor Frederick I arranged his canonization for political reasons. Charlemagne emerged in literary tradition as head of the recreated empire of the West, champion of Christendom, invincible warrior, great political leader and dispenser of justice, martyr, and saint.
September 21, 2022
This was a tough and strange read. Einhard's account felt most informative and concise for me, and I feel I learnt more from that part of the book compared to Notker as it felt more human. I feel like Notker got caught up in describing everything else other than Charlemagne, ascribing big miraculous deeds to him seems to over the top. I know Notker is written for Charles the Fat as a training manual almost but is tedious. It is easier to see his political, religious and military success a lot easier in Einhard, and Charlemagne's dedication to improving learning reminds me of Ælfred the Great's philosophy. Even though I have mixed emotions and frustrations, I enjoyed learning about Charlemagne through the eyes of someone who knew him, much like Asser.
TL;DR, stick with Einhard.
TL;DR, stick with Einhard.
November 2, 2017
Two hagiographies of Charlemagne, one of the forerunners of the European Union-he, in fact established the mediaeval EU with such means that would be more than spurned today. Although these two totally different biographies were written in order to adulate one of the greatest, if not the greatest, ruler of all times, they are interesting because of the information they give the modern reader (not just about Charlemagne himself, but also on the ordinary aspects of the daily life back in the 8th and 9th centuries) and because of their style, alternating between the official and the anecdotal styles which perfectly complement each other.
December 29, 2009
A nice read for people who like reading about historical figures.
The book is split into 2 halves (aside from the hefty intro) by two authors. The first author is the best for a more accurate historical source, while the other, written by a monk, serves as an example of the legend Charlemagne would become. I didn't know much about Charlemagne prior to this reading, and came out with more knowledge than the average person, I suppose.
The book is split into 2 halves (aside from the hefty intro) by two authors. The first author is the best for a more accurate historical source, while the other, written by a monk, serves as an example of the legend Charlemagne would become. I didn't know much about Charlemagne prior to this reading, and came out with more knowledge than the average person, I suppose.
February 17, 2015
I'm the kind of reader who digs reading ancient history and especially primary sources, but generally my knowledge is limited to ancient Rome and Greece, not to medieval history. So this collection of Charlemagne stories was something of a start point for me. I think it’s a good one for anyone, too.
In a nutshell, Charlemagne was a Frankish king who lived in the eighth century. He didn’t quite found the Carolingian Empire, but he greatly expanded it to include most of modern-day France Germany. In 800, Charlemagne was named emperor at a ceremony in Rome, giving him a formal grip of this vast territory. Ruling such a large area was no mean feat: he employed a large number of public servants to keep things running as he fought battles throughout his kingdom.
Sure, he could command an army, but consider the Carolingian Renaissance, too. As Lewis Thorpe points out in his introduction, Charlemagne was illiterate, but had a healthy respect for learning: his schools, where works were copied out by students, kept many Roman writers from falling into oblivion.
So by anyone’s standards, he was an interesting guy. Which is why the two biographies included here are so interesting. Einhard, an adviser at Charlemagne’s court, wrote the first only a few years after the king’s death. An anonymous monk wrote the second a few decades later. The difference between the two shows how quickly the man’s legend was growing into mythology.
Of the two, Einhard’s is the drier and more formal. Structurally, it’s a lot like Suetonius: a formal biography of an emperor. It lays out the life and the man in a set order, dealing with his actions in one book, then his personal life later on. It’s a dry read, where Charlemagne deals with one war after another, subduing them as he goes. But there are interesting little touches, like how he used to enjoy wearing a jerkin made of sheepskin. Still, these details are key to this book because of what comes next.
The second biography is a lot looser and more colourful. Written either by someone named Notker the Stammerer or The Monk of St. Gaul (who may even be the same person), this book is fast and loose with the facts, but doesn’t let anything get in the way of a good yarn.
If the Charlemagne of the first biography seems like a kingly ruler, a smart tactician on the battlefield and a patron of learning at home, in the second he seems less like a statue and more like a real person. Notker packs his book with anecdotes that might not be completely true, but serve to illustrate a point.
My favourite is when a bunch of nobles show up in their finest clothes while Charlemagne breaks out his old goatskin. After spending a day hunting and a night drinking, they’re ordered to show up in the same clothes the next morning. Of course, their clothes are a mess; Charlemagne can’t resist showing off how clean and comfy his simple goatskin still is.
Here’s another. After short riding cloaks become popular among nobles, he demanded they only wear longer ones, saying:
“ ‘What is the use of these little napkins,’ he asked. ‘I can’t cover myself with them in bed. When I am on horseback I can’t protect myself from the winds and the rain. When I go off to empty my bowels, I catch cold because my backside is frozen.”
Only a few decades after his death and the man is quickly becoming a legend. From here it’s not too far to the anonymous epic The Song of Roland, where Charlemagne plays a key role. It’s a little like reading about the legends surrounding Romulus in Plutarch – or even about George Washington and the cherry tree.
But if Notker is more entertaining, he can also be more frustrating, too. His account is wildly inaccurate, getting names and dates all mixed up. And he intersperses his biography with stories about bishops and monks behaving badly, none of which really have anything to do with Charlemagne.
This is where Thorpe’s great editing comes in. In my edition – originally published in 1969 – Thorpe prepared a lengthy introduction, breaking down the history of the Franks and taking detailed looks at each book. And in the back are nearly 30 pages of notes, plus a large index. In all, that’s nearly half the book! His notes are largely helpful, pointing out inaccuracies and allusions (Notker was a fan of Virgil, it seems) and explaining obscure references: which ancient people inspired which story, for example.
There are some things I wished he’d have included, like translations for the many writers he quotes in other languages, usually en francais but sometimes in Latin. I understand a little French (and almost no Latin) and suspect reading them in Google Translate means I’m missing something. Some more maps – there’s only one, showing the empire as it stood in the mid 8th century, well before Charlemagne was named emperor – would’ve been nice, too.
Side note: Penguin has a newer edition out, translated by David Ganz. I’m not familiar with it, but I should point out that at 160 pages, it’s a slimmer volume than this. The notes are probably a little more up-to-date, however.
But really, those are minor gripes for an interesting read. And for someone like me, who was relatively new to this period, it was a good starting place, focused on a key figure and showing both his importance and influence. I’ve already grabbed a copy of Gregory of Tours History of the Franks, too!
In a nutshell, Charlemagne was a Frankish king who lived in the eighth century. He didn’t quite found the Carolingian Empire, but he greatly expanded it to include most of modern-day France Germany. In 800, Charlemagne was named emperor at a ceremony in Rome, giving him a formal grip of this vast territory. Ruling such a large area was no mean feat: he employed a large number of public servants to keep things running as he fought battles throughout his kingdom.
Sure, he could command an army, but consider the Carolingian Renaissance, too. As Lewis Thorpe points out in his introduction, Charlemagne was illiterate, but had a healthy respect for learning: his schools, where works were copied out by students, kept many Roman writers from falling into oblivion.
So by anyone’s standards, he was an interesting guy. Which is why the two biographies included here are so interesting. Einhard, an adviser at Charlemagne’s court, wrote the first only a few years after the king’s death. An anonymous monk wrote the second a few decades later. The difference between the two shows how quickly the man’s legend was growing into mythology.
Of the two, Einhard’s is the drier and more formal. Structurally, it’s a lot like Suetonius: a formal biography of an emperor. It lays out the life and the man in a set order, dealing with his actions in one book, then his personal life later on. It’s a dry read, where Charlemagne deals with one war after another, subduing them as he goes. But there are interesting little touches, like how he used to enjoy wearing a jerkin made of sheepskin. Still, these details are key to this book because of what comes next.
The second biography is a lot looser and more colourful. Written either by someone named Notker the Stammerer or The Monk of St. Gaul (who may even be the same person), this book is fast and loose with the facts, but doesn’t let anything get in the way of a good yarn.
If the Charlemagne of the first biography seems like a kingly ruler, a smart tactician on the battlefield and a patron of learning at home, in the second he seems less like a statue and more like a real person. Notker packs his book with anecdotes that might not be completely true, but serve to illustrate a point.
My favourite is when a bunch of nobles show up in their finest clothes while Charlemagne breaks out his old goatskin. After spending a day hunting and a night drinking, they’re ordered to show up in the same clothes the next morning. Of course, their clothes are a mess; Charlemagne can’t resist showing off how clean and comfy his simple goatskin still is.
Here’s another. After short riding cloaks become popular among nobles, he demanded they only wear longer ones, saying:
“ ‘What is the use of these little napkins,’ he asked. ‘I can’t cover myself with them in bed. When I am on horseback I can’t protect myself from the winds and the rain. When I go off to empty my bowels, I catch cold because my backside is frozen.”
Only a few decades after his death and the man is quickly becoming a legend. From here it’s not too far to the anonymous epic The Song of Roland, where Charlemagne plays a key role. It’s a little like reading about the legends surrounding Romulus in Plutarch – or even about George Washington and the cherry tree.
But if Notker is more entertaining, he can also be more frustrating, too. His account is wildly inaccurate, getting names and dates all mixed up. And he intersperses his biography with stories about bishops and monks behaving badly, none of which really have anything to do with Charlemagne.
This is where Thorpe’s great editing comes in. In my edition – originally published in 1969 – Thorpe prepared a lengthy introduction, breaking down the history of the Franks and taking detailed looks at each book. And in the back are nearly 30 pages of notes, plus a large index. In all, that’s nearly half the book! His notes are largely helpful, pointing out inaccuracies and allusions (Notker was a fan of Virgil, it seems) and explaining obscure references: which ancient people inspired which story, for example.
There are some things I wished he’d have included, like translations for the many writers he quotes in other languages, usually en francais but sometimes in Latin. I understand a little French (and almost no Latin) and suspect reading them in Google Translate means I’m missing something. Some more maps – there’s only one, showing the empire as it stood in the mid 8th century, well before Charlemagne was named emperor – would’ve been nice, too.
Side note: Penguin has a newer edition out, translated by David Ganz. I’m not familiar with it, but I should point out that at 160 pages, it’s a slimmer volume than this. The notes are probably a little more up-to-date, however.
But really, those are minor gripes for an interesting read. And for someone like me, who was relatively new to this period, it was a good starting place, focused on a key figure and showing both his importance and influence. I’ve already grabbed a copy of Gregory of Tours History of the Franks, too!
December 19, 2024
If you don’t like history, you won’t like this. Mainly just anecdotal stories.
August 12, 2025
I remember the January afternoon at the 2016 Kolkata Book Fair when I found my copy of Two Lives of Charlemagne. The fair was its usual glorious chaos—crowds streaming between stalls, the air thick with the mingled smell of old paper, street food, and anticipation.
This was the kind of book you didn’t exactly go looking for, but that seemed to look for you. Its modest cover concealed a window into the 9th century, where a courtier named Einhard had decided to preserve the image of a man who, in his eyes, was the greatest ruler in Christendom.
Einhard’s Vita Karoli Magni is a slim work, written sometime between 817 and 833 CE, yet it carries the weight of centuries. He had served at Charlemagne’s court not merely as an observer but as a trusted insider—a scholar trained under Alcuin in the Palace School of Aachen, someone who could slip behind the public pageantry and see the emperor at his most human.
The intimacy of the relationship shows in every line; there’s both the studied poise of a Latin stylist, modelled after Suetonius’s Lives of the Caesars, and the warmth of a personal memoir.
Reading it, I could almost feel Einhard’s balancing act—wanting to portray Charlemagne in the full dignity of a ruler, yet not succumbing entirely to myth-making. He lingers over details that bring the emperor into focus: his habits at table, his fondness for swimming, his patronage of learning, his building projects, and above all, his devout religiosity.
But there are absences too, deliberate silences where dynastic disputes or moral ambiguities would have complicated the portrait. Einhard’s Charlemagne is a steady hand on the tiller, a builder of Christendom, a man of both sword and scripture.
That partiality doesn’t diminish the value of the work—it’s part of what makes it so historically fascinating. Here is one of the earliest examples of mediaeval biography, still so close to the antique traditions of Rome that Einhard frames his narrative like a classical life. Yet, it also belongs fully to the Carolingian Renaissance, a time when scholarship and statecraft intertwined in ways that would shape Europe for centuries.
As I read, I thought about how this little book, carried across more than a thousand years, still shapes the way we imagine Charlemagne. Historians from Thomas Hodgkin to modern medievalists have leaned on it as a cornerstone, acknowledging that “almost all our real, vivifying knowledge of Charles the Great is derived from Einhard.”
And yet, in reading it today, there’s an unavoidable awareness that we’re hearing not just history but also affection, loyalty, and perhaps a touch of courtly discretion.
Closing the book, I felt the strange intimacy that comes from crossing such a vast gulf of time. I was sitting in my Kolkata apartment in the twenty-first century, but the voice in my head was a ninth-century courtier telling me about his sovereign—a man who swam in the Rhine, prayed with a monk’s diligence, and ruled with a king’s confidence.
The book fair copy I’d picked up felt less like a purchase and more like an inheritance, a slender thread tying me to the world of cloisters, coronations, and candlelit scriptoria.
This was the kind of book you didn’t exactly go looking for, but that seemed to look for you. Its modest cover concealed a window into the 9th century, where a courtier named Einhard had decided to preserve the image of a man who, in his eyes, was the greatest ruler in Christendom.
Einhard’s Vita Karoli Magni is a slim work, written sometime between 817 and 833 CE, yet it carries the weight of centuries. He had served at Charlemagne’s court not merely as an observer but as a trusted insider—a scholar trained under Alcuin in the Palace School of Aachen, someone who could slip behind the public pageantry and see the emperor at his most human.
The intimacy of the relationship shows in every line; there’s both the studied poise of a Latin stylist, modelled after Suetonius’s Lives of the Caesars, and the warmth of a personal memoir.
Reading it, I could almost feel Einhard’s balancing act—wanting to portray Charlemagne in the full dignity of a ruler, yet not succumbing entirely to myth-making. He lingers over details that bring the emperor into focus: his habits at table, his fondness for swimming, his patronage of learning, his building projects, and above all, his devout religiosity.
But there are absences too, deliberate silences where dynastic disputes or moral ambiguities would have complicated the portrait. Einhard’s Charlemagne is a steady hand on the tiller, a builder of Christendom, a man of both sword and scripture.
That partiality doesn’t diminish the value of the work—it’s part of what makes it so historically fascinating. Here is one of the earliest examples of mediaeval biography, still so close to the antique traditions of Rome that Einhard frames his narrative like a classical life. Yet, it also belongs fully to the Carolingian Renaissance, a time when scholarship and statecraft intertwined in ways that would shape Europe for centuries.
As I read, I thought about how this little book, carried across more than a thousand years, still shapes the way we imagine Charlemagne. Historians from Thomas Hodgkin to modern medievalists have leaned on it as a cornerstone, acknowledging that “almost all our real, vivifying knowledge of Charles the Great is derived from Einhard.”
And yet, in reading it today, there’s an unavoidable awareness that we’re hearing not just history but also affection, loyalty, and perhaps a touch of courtly discretion.
Closing the book, I felt the strange intimacy that comes from crossing such a vast gulf of time. I was sitting in my Kolkata apartment in the twenty-first century, but the voice in my head was a ninth-century courtier telling me about his sovereign—a man who swam in the Rhine, prayed with a monk’s diligence, and ruled with a king’s confidence.
The book fair copy I’d picked up felt less like a purchase and more like an inheritance, a slender thread tying me to the world of cloisters, coronations, and candlelit scriptoria.
December 29, 2023
I do not read original works of history for the historical accuracy or even the literature, but because I want to try to see the world of yore through the eyes of the people living in it. Still, even with my expectations appropriately lowered, this book was a huge disappointment.
The book consists of three short "biographies" of Charlemagne. The first is by his contemporary and advisor Einhard. The other two are collections of Charlemagne-related anecdotes by a monk who lived about 70 years later during the reign of Charles the Fat. The first book is down to earth and appears mostly honest, but unfortunately lacks details about the character and deeds of the emperor. Most of the information about Charlemagne is presented in broad strokes, with few exceptions where details are provided such as his traditional Frankish attire. The biographer does not seem interested in the details of any of the wars the emperor fought and only mentions if a war was concluded speedily or not. Charlemagne is presented, of course, in a positive light but some of his failures are also mentioned, such as his failure to learn how to write and to unify the Frankish laws.
The other two books completely depart from historical truth and present totally made up anecdotes in which the past emperor appears as a being of supernatural power and wisdom. In the first book of Notker the Stammerer he does nothing else but go about mediating in ecclesiastical matters, punishing corrupt bishops and rewarding the worthy. The second book describes how all the rulers of the world dripped with admiration and fear for Charlemagne who was the best, the wisest, the strongest, et cetera. At some point he has Charlemagne slay some demon, or perhaps the devil himself. The book is addressed to the current emperor, of the same lineage, and is covered in disgustingly syrupy flattery.
I think it was misleading for Penguin to bundle these books together and call them "Two Lives of Charlemagne", thus implying that the books of Notker had any biographical value.
The book consists of three short "biographies" of Charlemagne. The first is by his contemporary and advisor Einhard. The other two are collections of Charlemagne-related anecdotes by a monk who lived about 70 years later during the reign of Charles the Fat. The first book is down to earth and appears mostly honest, but unfortunately lacks details about the character and deeds of the emperor. Most of the information about Charlemagne is presented in broad strokes, with few exceptions where details are provided such as his traditional Frankish attire. The biographer does not seem interested in the details of any of the wars the emperor fought and only mentions if a war was concluded speedily or not. Charlemagne is presented, of course, in a positive light but some of his failures are also mentioned, such as his failure to learn how to write and to unify the Frankish laws.
The other two books completely depart from historical truth and present totally made up anecdotes in which the past emperor appears as a being of supernatural power and wisdom. In the first book of Notker the Stammerer he does nothing else but go about mediating in ecclesiastical matters, punishing corrupt bishops and rewarding the worthy. The second book describes how all the rulers of the world dripped with admiration and fear for Charlemagne who was the best, the wisest, the strongest, et cetera. At some point he has Charlemagne slay some demon, or perhaps the devil himself. The book is addressed to the current emperor, of the same lineage, and is covered in disgustingly syrupy flattery.
I think it was misleading for Penguin to bundle these books together and call them "Two Lives of Charlemagne", thus implying that the books of Notker had any biographical value.
October 27, 2013
If you have any interest in Carolingians and Charlemagne -- Charles the Great -- this book is well worth reading. After an interesting and detailed introduction by Thorpe, we are presented with Einhard's Life of Charlemagne, modelled both in content and Latin style upon Suetonius' life of Augustus. Despite its literary endebtedness, it is nevertheless an interesting and fairly accurate portrayal of a long-reigning monarch who forged and consolidated much of the West's legacy, as seen through the lens of a man who spent 23 years in the Emperor's service.
Notker the Stammerer (or another monk of St Gall), on the other hand, gives us what feels more like a vaguely connected series of moral tales surrounding Charlemagne and his court, written in 880s (well after Charlemagne's death). Indeed, if one were to take these tales at face value, it is remarkable that so many opportunities for teaching a moral lesson came by Charlemagne in his long reign! Be that as it may, there are truths embedded, and some of the tales are more plausible than others.
In this book, we catch glimpses of the vast host of colourful Carolingian figures -- Abul Abbas (Charlemagne's elephant), Danish Vikings, Alcuin, Louis the Pious, Louis the German, Pippin the Short (such splendidly-named monarchs!), Desiderius of the Lombards, Queen Hildigard, and more. We also see the interests that led to the organisation and reorganisation of the continental church, and the power of Charlemagne as a war leader.
Notker the Stammerer (or another monk of St Gall), on the other hand, gives us what feels more like a vaguely connected series of moral tales surrounding Charlemagne and his court, written in 880s (well after Charlemagne's death). Indeed, if one were to take these tales at face value, it is remarkable that so many opportunities for teaching a moral lesson came by Charlemagne in his long reign! Be that as it may, there are truths embedded, and some of the tales are more plausible than others.
In this book, we catch glimpses of the vast host of colourful Carolingian figures -- Abul Abbas (Charlemagne's elephant), Danish Vikings, Alcuin, Louis the Pious, Louis the German, Pippin the Short (such splendidly-named monarchs!), Desiderius of the Lombards, Queen Hildigard, and more. We also see the interests that led to the organisation and reorganisation of the continental church, and the power of Charlemagne as a war leader.
July 5, 2019
It's bizarre sometimes to read primary documents because it can be a wonderful reminder about how fragile the nature of history and human discourse can be. With a figure like Charlemagne (Charles the Great) we have a figure who is so wrapped in mystery and enigma and persona and rhetoric that it can be easy to forget that he was a real flesh and blood man. These two narratives of the man's life, if you can call them such, offer a fascinating glimpse into the foundations of the history that surround the man.
Whether it's Einhard's encomium/tribute to Charlemagne's greatness as a ruler or Notker's religious meditations with bits of Charlemagne's life interspersed between the gospel and metaphor, these two books coalesced into one narrative offer the students and writers of history a chance for reflection. These are human documents that are riddled with personal bias and so when approaching the life of Charlemagne one has to confront such resources such as these and try to find the man beneath these records.
While casual readers may not find much to this small book, those who are fascinated with Medieval Europe, as well as with the figure of Charles the Great, will surely enjoy the chance to observe how the record of the man was built upon such curious texts. These primary documents reveal how much historical methodology has progressed, and also how each person could approach the monarchy and find some kind of political, spiritual, and personal moral in the life of one of the most interesting and centralizing figures in European history.
Whether it's Einhard's encomium/tribute to Charlemagne's greatness as a ruler or Notker's religious meditations with bits of Charlemagne's life interspersed between the gospel and metaphor, these two books coalesced into one narrative offer the students and writers of history a chance for reflection. These are human documents that are riddled with personal bias and so when approaching the life of Charlemagne one has to confront such resources such as these and try to find the man beneath these records.
While casual readers may not find much to this small book, those who are fascinated with Medieval Europe, as well as with the figure of Charles the Great, will surely enjoy the chance to observe how the record of the man was built upon such curious texts. These primary documents reveal how much historical methodology has progressed, and also how each person could approach the monarchy and find some kind of political, spiritual, and personal moral in the life of one of the most interesting and centralizing figures in European history.
July 13, 2023
Einhard spitting fire obviously; Notker writes like he's got his Monk Crew sitting behind him on a Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks type beat, got the whole monastery laughing with these Zany Anecdotes. Too much snark for my taste from Thorpe (ed.; puts B.A. and L.-ÉS-L. (=French B.A.?) after his name despite also putting P.H.D. after his name)--e.g. just on p. 198: n. 125 "This passage, which is very thin [💀], is taken from the revised Annales regni Francorum"; n. 126 "Pepin the Short never visited Rome. The monk has adapted these words from the Annales regni Francorum [...]. Unfortunately the annalist was writing about Charlemagne, not Pepin the Short."; n. 129 "As so often, the Monk has his facts back to front." Alexander Pope would be McLovin' this. Credit where it's due, comprehensive index. Little hard to follow, because big chunks of it aren't alphabetized (topics under e.g. Charlemagne, which occupy two full pages of the index, sorted instead by... place in the preceding book. Kind of defeats the purpose of an index?)
Fun. Wanted to learn a little about the the Carolingians & Charlemagne and read some Early Medieval sources and I got it. Just didn't blow my socks off.
Fun. Wanted to learn a little about the the Carolingians & Charlemagne and read some Early Medieval sources and I got it. Just didn't blow my socks off.
October 18, 2022
It's hard to review this book since one half was great and the other half was just eh, but here it goes: I'm going to start with Notker's half of the book which was a bunch of loosely related fantastical stories, most of which felt incomplete, and the whole life that he presented felt incomplete on the whole. To quote Hiccup Horrendous Haddock the Third "It needs more words." Einhard, however, was hilarious; the part in book 3 where he pretty much gives a casual account of Charlemagne's family like 'There's his wives [names wife] and then that one concubine... what was her name again? Eh I forgot...' and then when he talks about Pepin the Hunchback, the first thing he mentions isn't his disability--or that he was a literal traitor--but the fact that Pepin was hot. Oh man, it was wonderful, though I didn't really feel like I was reading the 13th Caesar of Suetonius, which probably was for the best since that book was scarring.
October 23, 2012
Chronicles of Charlemagne's life by his courtier Einhard and a monk named Notker the Stammerer are presented in this book. Both presented Charlemagne as a fearsome warrior and a man of great Christian piety. Classical and Biblical references peppered both texts, especially Notker's. Notker made parallels with King David's life multiple times. You can also see, especially in Notker's first book, the leadership that Charlemagne had over the church in his domains and the seeds of the Investiture Controversy that later pitted popes against emperors in what would come to be called the Holy Roman Empire.
I assigned the book for my Western Civ to 1648 class, and we had some good discussions over the past week. I enjoyed reading it as well, and want to read more about Charlemagne since my knowledge of him is pretty general.
I assigned the book for my Western Civ to 1648 class, and we had some good discussions over the past week. I enjoyed reading it as well, and want to read more about Charlemagne since my knowledge of him is pretty general.
October 29, 2011
Interesting somewhat. Started the book with no knowledge of Carolingian Renaissance ; had to BS a quick 8 pg paper in 6 hrs.... Would def recommend for those interesting in learning about a ruler who was sought by posterity as a model for rulership , Christian virtues, etc --- would probably not read it again =p
November 11, 2025
First writer is better than the second.
September 27, 2023
Boring
August 17, 2016
This is an interesting read as you have two writers presenting their version of the life of Charlemagne. They could be called biographies but that does not seem to really characterise what that they write. The first is written by Einhard who was present in Charlemagne's reign and the second some years later by a monk named Notker the Stammerer.
Charlemagne also known as Charles the Great or Charles I, was the King of the Franks from 768, the King of Italy from 774, and from 800 the first emperor in western Europe since the collapse of the Western Roman Empire three centuries earlier. The expanded Frankish state he founded is called the Carolingian Empire.
Charlemagne was the oldest son of Pepin the Short and Bertrada of Laon and was initially co-ruler with his brother Carloman I. Carloman's sudden death in 771 under unexplained circumstances left Charlemagne as the undisputed ruler of the Frankish Kingdom. Charlemagne continued his father's policy towards the papacy and became its protector, removing the Lombards from power in northern Italy, and leading an incursion into Muslim Spain. He also campaigned against the peoples to his east, Christianizing them upon penalty of death, at times leading to events such as the Massacre of Verden. Charlemagne reached the height of his power in 800 when he was crowned as "Emperor" by Pope Leo III on Christmas Day at Old St. Peter's Basilica.
That is the historical side of Charlemagne and a bit droll. Mind you Einhard is extremely droll in his explantion and you have no sense of who the King was. Notker does not provide any real insight into Charlemagne either but his anecdotes about priests and bishops in the order is the best parts.
What I found really interesting was both author's focus was on Charlemagne's pious nature and his work for the Church, anytime there was an incident that cast doubt on his character the behaviour was blamed on the influence of a woman.
Both documents expose no fault in Charlemagne's character and he is almost portrayed as a Saint.
I enjoyed the read and I am always amazed that these words exist after all these years.
Charlemagne also known as Charles the Great or Charles I, was the King of the Franks from 768, the King of Italy from 774, and from 800 the first emperor in western Europe since the collapse of the Western Roman Empire three centuries earlier. The expanded Frankish state he founded is called the Carolingian Empire.
Charlemagne was the oldest son of Pepin the Short and Bertrada of Laon and was initially co-ruler with his brother Carloman I. Carloman's sudden death in 771 under unexplained circumstances left Charlemagne as the undisputed ruler of the Frankish Kingdom. Charlemagne continued his father's policy towards the papacy and became its protector, removing the Lombards from power in northern Italy, and leading an incursion into Muslim Spain. He also campaigned against the peoples to his east, Christianizing them upon penalty of death, at times leading to events such as the Massacre of Verden. Charlemagne reached the height of his power in 800 when he was crowned as "Emperor" by Pope Leo III on Christmas Day at Old St. Peter's Basilica.
That is the historical side of Charlemagne and a bit droll. Mind you Einhard is extremely droll in his explantion and you have no sense of who the King was. Notker does not provide any real insight into Charlemagne either but his anecdotes about priests and bishops in the order is the best parts.
What I found really interesting was both author's focus was on Charlemagne's pious nature and his work for the Church, anytime there was an incident that cast doubt on his character the behaviour was blamed on the influence of a woman.
Both documents expose no fault in Charlemagne's character and he is almost portrayed as a Saint.
I enjoyed the read and I am always amazed that these words exist after all these years.
May 19, 2016
This book contains two different biographies of Charlemagne - rather deeds of Charlemagne - the first being written by somebody seemingly close to him, and the other by a monk during the time of his great-grandson, also Charles.
The first is more a series of exploits by Charlemagne and is quite brief, but a nice, quick read.
The second I found much slower. It deals discursively with hobgoblins and demons, Charlemagne and his predecessor (father) and his successors (son, grandson), and seems to bear a stronger relation to the mythical than to the historical. For this reason, perhaps, this work is a more difficult read when one wants history, but probably a more enjoyable read to somebody who enjoys such legends (which I do, but in the right place).
Altogether, the work is decent and made for an acceptable read, but only that: acceptable, not wonderful, not delightful.
The first is more a series of exploits by Charlemagne and is quite brief, but a nice, quick read.
The second I found much slower. It deals discursively with hobgoblins and demons, Charlemagne and his predecessor (father) and his successors (son, grandson), and seems to bear a stronger relation to the mythical than to the historical. For this reason, perhaps, this work is a more difficult read when one wants history, but probably a more enjoyable read to somebody who enjoys such legends (which I do, but in the right place).
Altogether, the work is decent and made for an acceptable read, but only that: acceptable, not wonderful, not delightful.
August 9, 2017
This is another of the classics of early medieval history that I faked reading in grad school. It is a delightful volume. It was pooh-poohed in class because of Notker's poor Latin. Einhard's Life of Charlemagne was preferred. Notker was writing almost one hundred years after Charlemagne. His work shines as an example of the world view of what passed for an educated cleric in the time of the invasions of the Northmen and the Magyars. Consider it a piece of war reportage from the front lines and the book takes on a whole new meaning.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 143 reviews