Ian’s review of King and Emperor: A New Life of Charlemagne > Likes and Comments

Uh oh, beware the scholarly in-fighting tomes! That's a shame. He really was such an influential character and having a good grasp of esp how his sons ruled (or didn't) their areas is the foundation of understanding Europe today.

That’s too bad, Ian. I know very little about Charlemagne as well but this seems like it’s more scholarly than readable.

Berengaria wrote: "Uh oh, beware the scholarly in-fighting tomes! That's a shame. He really was such an influential character and having a good grasp of esp how his sons ruled (or didn't) their areas is the foundatio..."

In fairness she didn't slag off her colleagues that much (though I have read books where academics have spent most of the book doing that). This author was always polite and where she disagreed with other historians she made it clear that these were simply differences in interpretation.

She does actually talk about how Charlemagne ruled, arguing that he had a good grasp of administrative detail. He appointed his three sons as kings of Francia, Lombardy and Aquitaine, but the author suggests he took more interest in Lombardy, something she puts down to its cultural importance as the most direct inheritor of Roman law and custom.

She stops with Charles' death, arguing that the book is a biography of him and is not about his legacy.

David wrote: "That’s too bad, Ian. I know very little about Charlemagne as well but this seems like it’s more scholarly than readable."

That's how I found it David. One for the specialist rather than the generalist.

I really enjoyed your review on King and Emperor: A New Life of Charlemagne, Ian, I had been looking forward to it ever since I saw that you were reading it on Goodreads. It's too bad that you didn't enjoy it as much as you had hoped.

I have been searching for a good biography of Charlemagne, but I would probably read an accessible history on him before diving into a scholarly study like this one, initially, at least. I hope you have a great day, Ian, all the best!

Andrew wrote: "I really enjoyed your review on King and Emperor: A New Life of Charlemagne, Ian, I had been looking forward to it ever since I saw that you were reading it on Goodreads. It's too bad that you didn..."

Thanks very much Andrew. You've read some very scholarly biographies yourself, but I would definitely have benefited from reading a more introductory work on Charlemagne.

I'm sorry this was such a dry read. Impressive (?) that he had so many children.

My father went to The States to do some research in 1967, and took the family with him. My mother decided to sign up for a degree course studying Charlemagne. I think she found him fascinating - but presumably she was given better reading fodder than this.

Caroline wrote: "I'm sorry this was such a dry read. Impressive (?) that he had so many children.

My father went to The States to do some research in 1967, and took the family with him. My mother decided to sign ..."

I can imagine your mother would have found him fascinating Caroline. This particular book wasn't the right choice for me.

In evolutionary terms, there is greater variability in the number of children produced by men, who can have many children as long as they have access to enough women. In the past elite males did have that sort of access. I seem to remember that about 20 years ago, someone concluded that about 0.5% of all the men in the world carried the Y-Chromosome DNA of a man who had lived in central Asia in the 12th century, and probably that man was Genghis Khan. The proportion rose to 8% amongst males living in the former territory of the Mongol Empire.

Gosh, that's an impressive legacy!

Hats off to you for finishing the book, Ian. Charlemagne came up in school history but only briefly. You could easily have been a history teacher!

I think her approach to charlemagne was an effective one, but certainly not everyone's cup of tea.

Perhaps you might find Roger Collins' book "early medieval europe" more worthwhile as that would put Charles in the vontext of his ancestors and descendants, while Nelson despite going a bit backwards really dumps the reader in the middle of the story in which Charlemagne was more or less already deeply committed to wars with the saxons and a close relationship with the papacy, plus had this incredible powerbase that he could exploit.

J.C. wrote: "Hats off to you for finishing the book, Ian. Charlemagne came up in school history but only briefly. You could easily have been a history teacher!"

Thanks Jeanne! Yes, he was a significant figure, but the "Dark Ages" gained its name for a reason.

Jan-Maat wrote: "I think her approach to charlemagne was an effective one, but certainly not everyone's cup of tea.

Perhaps you might find Roger Collins' book "early medieval europe" more worthwhile as that would ..."

Thanks for that Jan-Maat. I'll add that book to the list!

I know you are well versed in Historical Non Fiction Ian and do not pin two weak stars without careful reflection. An excellent review. The book sounds like a slog. No joy in a twisted madrigal. Its above my paygrade.
;)

I am obsessed with the computer game Civilization and I have been on a quest to read a book on each of the leaders from it. I haven’t managed Charlemagne yet and if this had been shorter and not boring, I would have considered it. If you have any other Charlemagne books you’ve enjoyed please let me know.

Sportyrod wrote: "I am obsessed with the computer game Civilization and I have been on a quest to read a book on each of the leaders from it. I haven’t managed Charlemagne yet and if this had been shorter and not bo..."

Unfortunately this was my first attempt at a biography of him!

There are others on GR but I can't offer an opinion of them.

Thanks anyway.