Two Lives of Charlemagne Book

I 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.