Customer Reviews

Charlemagne

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The nations of Europe have been homes to various wars for centuries, until a bunch of the countries got together after the Second World War to create a common economic market, and perhaps prevent any more of these conflicts. It created a form of European identity that has now become the European Union. But the *idea* of Europe, a unified area of diverse cultures that nevertheless falls under the rule of one authority, can be traced back to Charlemagne, the Frankish emperor of the late 8th and early 9th centuries. In his new book, Charlemagne, Derek Wilson examines the emperor's life, but he also examines the myth of Charlemagne through the ages. He looks at how subsequent rulers have used the Charlemagne for their own ends, and how his attempts to conquer and hold together as much of Europe as possible, to have one Europe, has been a precursor to what we have now. Many rulers have tried to duplicate his achievements, but none of them have done so as completely, or perhaps as fairly, as Charlemagne did, even if it was done through conquest.

Charlemagne is a fairly short book, but it does pack a lot of information into it. Wilson begins by giving a short history of Europe up until the time of Charlemagne's birth, including an interesting set of maps, one of which is the European Economic Community in 1957 and one that is the extent of Charlemagne's empire in 814. The two look very similar, with only the southern part of Italy not being included in Charlemagne's area. Food for thought, but Wilson goes on to say that, while Charlemagne's story demonstrates this desire for unity, it is basically a story, full of military actions, barbarian invasions, and political/religious intrigue. His father and grandfather began all of this, but it was Charlemagne's force of personality that really made it work. This introduction is a good one, setting the scene in a very interesting manner but never losing sight of the fact that many stories have been added to Charlemagne's over the years to support what somebody wants to do. The whole thing is a story, and we don't have a lot of primary sources about his life. Those we do have could very well be biased, as the most prominent biography of the time was written during the reign of one of Charlemagne's sons, and it really makes the son look good. Contemporary biographies seem to gloss over military defeats, with scarcely a mention of the disastrous foray into Moslem Spain, for example.

What's even more interesting is that a full third of the book doesn't talk about Charlemagne himself, but about how his image has carried on through the years since his death. We see the beginnings of it as the Empire falls apart shortly after his death, as his sons just don't have the forcefulness that their father had. The Empire does survive through one of his son's reign, but it doesn't survive for long. Wilson uses this to show how much the idea of Europe was a personal thing at the time, with the various warring factions that were under one umbrella starting to feel the chafe as Charlemagne's personal influence waned with his death. Wilson then proceeds to give us a brief history of Europe up to the modern day, placing the legend of Charlemagne within that context, from the rise of the Holy Roman Empire through the years until its final death. Wilson details the fall of remains of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806, after a long period where it survived basically in name only, as well as how Napoleon (and even Hitler) used the legend of Charlemagne to further their own ends. I found this part of the book fascinating as I was fairly unfamiliar with him and his influence, despite knowing the basics about him being the first emperor of western Europe. One interesting bit of history that I did not know is that Charlemagne divided his empire into three pieces for his three sons. One basically takes the shape of France, one the shape of Germany (at least western Germany), and there's a piece in the middle that encompasses the land which Germany and France have been fighting over for centuries.

It's intriguing things like this which makes Charlemagne a great read. Wilson does a deft job giving us Charlemagne's history too, both of the man as he's growing up and becoming king, how he wrests control of the entirety of his father's kingdom from his brother, as well as his time as Emperor, when Pope Leo III crowned him (though the details of this crowning, as well as the impetus for it, remain obscured by history) Emperor of the West and as he expanded his lands. Wilson gives us as much detail as probably exists about Charlemagne's life and times, emphasizing how religious he was and how learned (he could read, but he couldn't write, and he loved scholarly discussions to be carried out over dinner). He doesn't gloss over the bad parts, however, even saying that, in modern times, Charlemagne would be considered a tyrant. But he points out that many of the cultural traditions in the lands that he conquered were allowed to remain, though he admits this perhaps was because of the difficulty in governing far-away provinces.

What I found most interesting and well-presented about this section, however, is how Wilson gives us a sense of the time around Charlemagne. The political struggles between the two remaining parts of the Roman Empire, as well as the religious ones (even giving a brief accounting of the controversy in Constantinople over the use of iconography in Christian practices) were simply fascinating. This, combined with the examination of Charlemagne's legacy (as well as his legend) makes Charlemagne a wonderful read for anybody interested in the history of the Middle Ages. It may even be of interest to those looking for the history of European unity. It all started right here, even if it was by the sword. And the idea, though sometimes submerged, has never truly died.

David Roy

I found Derek Wilson's book on Charlemagne fascinating, not so much for the life of Charlemagne which is interesting, but for his ability to put Charlemagne into context. The biographical part of this book is quite short and does not provide a huge amount of detail. Rather it is a well-written review of the life of the true and mythical figure that has become Charlemagne.

Wilson's ability to put the life and myth of Charlemagne into context is excellent. It begins with the placing of Charlemagne into the battles and debates of his own life. It continues through the immediate successors of Charlemagne and the split of his "empire." His chapters on the use of Charlemagne in literature and the other arts after his death is fascinating. The use of Charlemagne for dynastic legitimacy is also made clear on multiple levels- beginning with the political and religious.

The book sheds light on many facets of the middle ages and early renaissance through these explorations. As a result I was left with a few overwhelming impressions. First the vibrancy of a period commonly referred to as the dark ages. Second, the amazing ability for idea to travel even before modern printing, easy roads, and the paper-let alone the internet. Man's ability to expand his horizons, or impair them, becomes apparent. The book also brought up many questions for future exploration in my mind, such as the role of Byzantium, the fourth crusade, the establishment of dynastic power post-Charlemagne and the papacy and reformation. I consider this a positive.

In the end, to summarize, I recommend this book to those interested in Charlemagne, his legacy, and the development of a modern Europe.

Derek Wilson's biography on Charlemagne proves to be well written and nicely researched book. Its pretty short but to the point. The life story of Charlemagne related to this book probably won't add much to those who got a good background on his life already. It basically geared toward novice readers on the subject. However, what make Wilson's book bit more interesting was how he related Charlemagne's concept of an European empire into today's context. The book spent much time discussing the elements of modern European Union concepts and how it traced back to Charlemagne's. The book also followed the mythology of Charlemagne as each secceding would-be European conquerors would used him as an example, guide or symbol to their own needs. In some ways, the author made this ruler of Dark Age Europe, important to the way we see the economic and political unity of Europe today.

Thus, I can joined the previous reviewer in saying that I whole heartedly recommended this book to anyone who have a slightest interest in this subject and maybe,that reader might gain some insight as well on the concepts of the origin of European unity.
(Reason I didn't give "five" stars was that biographically wise, there wasn't anything truly new written here.)

I feel an obligation to make as much a clamour over the books I treasure, as over those I treasure trashing; and to that end, Derek Wilson will now take it on the chin from one who wholly regrets the purchase of his most recent mess and work of propaganda, so-named "Charlemagne."

Wilson's biography of Charlemagne is short in length - no surprise there - but, too, it is short in temperament. Behind Wilson's self-loving prose is a wit born of clenched teeth and furrowed brows. If you can, recall being in the presence of professorial wit: politically oblique in nature, unworkable in structure, poisonous, unfunny, and appreciated (disingenuously and artfully) by only a certain few fawning graduate students who, with nervous, knowing titters and nods, wish to win professorial favour by saluting the feeble attempt at humour. Recall that manner of wit if you can, for in this book you will find yourself molested by it from cover to cover.

While Derek Wilson presents his subject through the most prosaic of biographical vectors: birth-death-consequentiality, he entangles the otherwise contemporary apolitical story of Charles the Great with his own rah-rah essay on the necessities of the European Union (yawn-yawn). His premise (excuse) for such a rotten bit of scheming is a connection he determines between the geographical disposition of Charlemagne's realm and those independent national properties of the EU; where the 1957 precursor EEC "territory [was] almost completely coterminous with Charlemagne's empire." This is where the connection to Charlemagne ends, but where Wilson, leaning in such a position to move forward anyway, carries fruitlessly onward.

The professor explains that the Soviet Union served well as a moderating force against the capricious inclinations of the United States of America. Europe was in grave danger living amidst this unsettled balance between two political behemoths, and "stood the risk of being swamped by [either] Soviet totalitarianism or American globalization." Some balance indeed.

With the end of the Cold War came a settling of this balance; and an opportunity for an unimpeded America to freely assault the entire world, (including Derek Wilson's family), with American cookies, Coca-Cola, Seinfeld reruns, Hip-Hip CDs and i-Pods on which to hear them. While the brutal swampings continued around the world (and in the county of Devon), "...the 'free world' had to look to the Middle East for its enemies," and I, upon reading these words, had to clench my teeth and furrow my brows till Wilson's work found its end on page 203.

Whether or not his EU advocating worked on the souls of some readers, or whether his parachronistic sleight of hand was thought seamless by others, matters not a whit. The offense committed by this author is an offense of which every purchaser of his book is a victim. Professor Wilson cheated those who wanted from "Charlemagne" only Professor Derek Wilson's learned wisdom on the subject advertised; all 226 pages worth.

But even so short a record of Charlemagne's contribution is diminished further by Wilson's offering of a mere 203 pages of content text. He fills the balance with such rubbish as "Notes" of no consequence, "Selected Biographies" of probable bias, and an "Index," where one can find such pertinent entries as: "Bush Administration," "Third Reich," and "Marx, Karl."

Derek Wilson's decision to dedicate the last third of his already anemic book to rallying support for the EU cause is a bad one. Rather than offering his readers a class in the history of the European Economic Community, Wilson might have better told the story of Charlemagne; or, better yet, told in greater detail the story of Charlemagne's illustrious grandfather, Charles Martel.

In so failing, Wilson owes every cheated reader 75 good pages on the subject of something closer to Charlemagne than his own sour grumblings over Donald Rumsfeld's comments regarding the inconsequentiality of "Old Europe," which, if judged by Derek Wilson's approach to history, seem spot on.

This short but thoroughly engaging little book fills a niche that seems to have been overlooked for far too long - a biography of one of those legends that seems too distant to ever separate legend from fact. Mr. Wilson does a fine job of giving us the details of what we know about this king who was, perhaps, the dominant force in western European culture. Whether you agree with the premise or not, the impact of Charlemagne on the west can hardly be dismissed.

This volume includes a glossy photographs and artwork in the center. The begginning of the book includes a genealogy of the Carolingians along with a timetable for chronological placement of events and people.

The writing is clear and enjoyable. A worthy addition to any history or biography library.

Europe would not be Europe as we know it if Charlemagne had not come along, and Derek Wilson has done a wonderful job in bringing the important ruler to life. We see Charlemagne as man, emperor and myth. The first section illustrates very well the type of person that Charlemagne was, which transitions very well into him as ruler. In many respects the two could be the same sections since he ruled because of the type of man he was, and the man made him the ruler that he was. In both respects we see his conquests as he spread the "faith" and enhanced his status over vast amounts of territory. In the end Wilson shows Charlemagne as a forceful personality - bordering on to mythical status during his life - that was the glue that held his empire together, fragmenting almost immediately after he passed away.

The third section, though, is very interesting in and of itself. It is a very good analysis of Charlemagne The Myth throughout the years after his death to present day. Wilson's ability to transition fluidly from Frederick Barbarossa to Louis XIV, to Napoleon to Hitler, and others in between, allows the reader to get a very full account of how much Charlemagne affected Europe's governments and to how it affects Europe today.

Any lover of history should definitely read something on Charlemagne, and Derek Wilson's biography is a very good place to start. I would recommend.

4.5 stars.

I can wholeheartedly recommend this book. The idea that Charlemagne was responsible for the creation of a concept of a unified Europe that is embodied in today's EU is not original, as is witnessed by the book "Charlemagne: Father of a Continent" by Alessandro Barbero and Allan Cameron, released in 2004. (Full disclosure: I have not read Barbero and Cameron's book.) However, Barbero and Cameron take more than 400 pages, where Wilson takes just over 200.

Charlemagne was lucky in that his brother, who inherited half of the France of the time, died young, thus giving him control of a unified France, or Carolingian Empire, which he could use as a base to push his western border out to include Saxony, Bavaria, and Lombardy. He did so in cooperation with the Pope, with the goals of spreading Christianity to the heathen, and creating a Christian Europe. He was also lucky in that he lived into his 70's, much longer than the vast majority of his contemporaries, which allowed him the time to accomplish much in terms of the unification of this territory and its culture. At the same time, he allowed a good deal of regional autonomy, which contributed to the stability of his conquest.

In Charlemagne's time, French nobility did not pass on their territory to the oldest son, but split it up among all their progeny; so when Charlemagne died, his conquests were not permanent. One of his sons, Louis "this Pious", outlived the others and so kept most of the territory. However, the Germanic peoples split from France soon thereafter and thus was born the German / French rivalry that roiled the Continent thereafter. In all the turbulence that followed, the author shows how the ideal of a unified Europe never died.

Wilson tells the story of Charlemagne's life as well as analyzing his impact up through the present day. Great read.

There have been numerous more reviews since I bought this book, and although most are highly positive, it is important to note that this book is not a biography, and is generally quite disappointing. Rather, it reads like an Op Ed piece, with many claims having little in supportive evidence or references (e.g., Europe was defined by the Carolingians, the Papacy and Celtic missionaries?), and references to modern history (3rd Reich and Co.). The book does not flow smoothly, with many forward references and jumps in time. Not recommended.

Charlemagne was not only a king of one of the various "barbarian" groups that arose after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, but something that exists very rarely in human history. He was a warrior, a devout believer in faith, a politician, and an intellectual who ruled not only a mere kingdom but a dozen separate and squabbling regions and peoples who at time were only united in their differences. However, it was Charlemagne who united most of Western Europe into not only a single political force (brief though it was) but a single cultural force whose importance cannot for any reason be ignored by not just the student of history but even the average individual who includes him or herself as a member of the "West". Charlemagne should rightly be called the father, or at least one of the fathers, of not just modern Europe but also the idea of the Europe itself.

However, Wilson doesn't just focus on the historical records of Charlemagne (few they are in comparison to the many myths that grew during the centuries after his death), but also the idea of what Europe itself is in light of Charlemagne's rule and accomplishments. What is Europe? If one believes the answer is easy then perhaps really hasn't studied the question closely. Europe, like any other region, has gone through too many countless migrations, changes, rulers, and faiths to be called a single cultural "people". It was men such as Charlemagne, and other such as Napoleon and even Hitler, who attempted to unite this divisive group into a single "empire" and cultural heritage. Granted, while the division his empire faced after his death was unavoidable, and was actually planned for, his rule and cultural influence through the Church ensured a legacy that outlasts almost all other would be conquerors. Most of the focus of the book is on this idea of a greater European identity which gives it an almost political science feel instead of a straight history but in doing so gives Charlemagne's accomplishments more credit than perhaps a normal history book could have done.

The European Union is often compared to Charlemagne's great conquests and rightfully so. Wilson compares the six original members of the European Economic Community, who united from the ruins of the Second World War and would later give birth to the EU itself, to the exact region of Charlemagne's Francia and with it the idea that once more Europe could be more than just a group of smaller republics always at war with each other. Indeed, the European Union has ended almost any chance of open conflict breaking out between EU members especially as population movements and markets bring the states closer together. While the EU does a very "un-Charlemagne" thing by trying to lay down a single form of standards across its members, it does show the reality of what Europe can look when united and not divided.

The only criticism I had for Wilson's work is that he could he have taken out chapters 9-12 or at least created a single epilogue that would have merged all of them into chapter 13. While Charlemagne was indeed used and ignored by future Europeans as Wilson's describes, a more concise reasoning for this would have cut out some of the more "rambling" parts of the book. I understand that there was an attempt to give a greater idea of Europe's development after Charlemagne's death but Wilson became a little too detailed oriented about post-Charlemagne Europe and that distracted from the main aim of the book.

An excellent book for anyone interested in not only this rare, if not tragic, ruler and the ideas that would shape his world and later history because Europe, at least as we known it in terms of politics, history, and religion, would not have been possible for the works of this single man and his empire.

Derek Wilson's biography and study on the life and legacy of the Frankish king/emperor Charlemagne is an eminently readable book that I found quite illuminating. For starters, I knew next to nothing on the subject of this book. In essence, Wilson's thesis concerns how Charlemagne was a key player in defining Europe as a political and cultural entity. He might even go so far as to say he was the father of Europe. In addition to his lengthy reign which ran roughly from AD 770 - 814, Wilson studies the impact he had on future leaders and the nature of European affairs from Charlemagne's time up through the modern age.

Even after reading this book, I still don't know all that much about the man. Wilson consults the sources, both primary and secondary, and he is wise in saying how the earliest sources could tend to neglect certain aspects of the man and events of his reign, like military setbacks. In addition to this, there is the problem of the myths that developed after his death. I'm glad the author delves into this topic and the impact these stories (both true and false) had on later generations of Europeans, especially in France and Germany.

The central theme found in many of Charlemagne's actions was that which concerned his faith, i.e. the idea that he had a responsibility to promote the Christian faith and establish God's kingdom within the territories he controlled. His relations with the nobility, the clergy, and popes are discussed. His reign was truly one where the temporal and spiritual combined. Some aspects of his personal and family life are detailed, as well as primary source information from Charlemagne's acquaintance with men like Alcuin. His own ancestors histories and the intra-family fights and struggles for power certainly provide examples of the more ambitious and ruthless sides to this man.

Much information on various aspects of Charlemagne's life is sketchy and will never be known, but his legacy was quite palpable. If his own empire cracked and divided after less able successors tried their hands at ruling, what he was able to accomplish or at least tried in theory, generated powerful impressions that passed down through the centuries. Wilson's analysis of the legacy of Charlemagne was extremely helpful and very appropriate, especially in helping us define the ideas that helped shape Europe. Maybe some of Wilson's points are debatable, which I could say with more confidence if I had read more on this subject. Definitely worth reading.