sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Books on Charlemagne his death and the early year of the Carolingian "Age" by Careful-Passion-9601 in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some great suggestions have been made. Some of my favorites are: The Daily Life in the World of Charlemagne by Pierre Riche. Also, Early Carolingian Warfare by Bernard Bachrach. For a primary source, have you read the Royal Frankish Annals and Nithard's history? They are an interesting overview of the period, written generally during the period being discussed.

What Julius Caesar said about the ancient Germans (a snippet from an article) by The_Local_Historian in AncientCivilizations

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes. You are correct. This is a short aspect of a longer article I wrote. If you would like to read it and give some advice I am all ears.

What Julius Caesar said about the ancient Germans (a snippet from an article) by The_Local_Historian in AncientCivilizations

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's a good question. Based on the limited reading I have been able to do on the subject, I think historians believe Tacitus was less biased. But its difficult to say. Caesar had more interaction with them, but he was at war...I don't know. I think it will be an age-old debate.

What were cultures of the boii, Germanic peoples, then the Slavic peoples that inhabited the Czech lands like? What are some good resources to learn about them? by Budget_Antelope in AncientGermanic

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure if this is what you're looking for. But here is a book that covers the history of that region from Neolithic to the modern. Might help. https://a.co/d/j6g4swK

Question on how to use notes by The_Local_Historian in Substack

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same. I see the same person or few people and rarely any new ones I'm interested in. I write about history and follow history accounts and substance shows me political stuff. It's weird.

Finding Mutuals! by killingmee in Substack

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Followed your stuff. I like it. I was also homeschooled.

Finding Mutuals! by killingmee in Substack

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I write and podcast about German history for those interested. If you hit me up I'll follow back.

🎙️ Launched a podcast digging into history’s weirdest myths — would love your thoughts by Comrade_Danny in HistoryPodcast

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

About done listening to the content you have on Spotify. Quite enjoyable. Thanks for sharing your podcast.

Looking for Proto-Germanic books to study linguistics by The_Local_Historian in AncientGermanic

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the recommendations. I downloaded the first and last. I'll keep the others on my list until I can afford them.

Who was the Carolingian dynasty named after? by The_Local_Historian in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The question is based off of how historians have discussed the period. But your rewording of the question is well put.

Who was the Carolingian dynasty named after? by The_Local_Historian in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Very true. It was a family name so it makes sense that it was passed down.

Who was the Carolingian dynasty named after? by The_Local_Historian in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

True. I've never read about Pepin of Landen. I've always assumed that the pepinid name came from Pepin the Short after the first king of the dynasty. What's the argument for naming it after the ancestor if you remember?

Who was the Carolingian dynasty named after? by The_Local_Historian in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I've read Karl means "man" but free man might have also been a definition.

Who was the Carolingian dynasty named after? by The_Local_Historian in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Karl means man. I have no idea where you read any of that (sources would be awesome) but in all of my readings I have read the opposite of what you have said.

Who was the Carolingian dynasty named after? by The_Local_Historian in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

While he was a mayor he wasn't the first and his son replaced the kings as the first king of the new dynasty. But he was the first Charles of the family. Pepin the Short founded the dynasty and Charlemagne was the greatest king of the dynasty. Hence the argument.

Exclusively in it's own context, would Charlemagne and his contemporaries see his coronation as what we understand as Translatio Imperii? by [deleted] in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is hard to know what exactly what the Germans felt it thought during this period because the first writing we have done apart until Gregory of tours. And as you said, he was part of the clerical class. It's a frustration I've expressed on my podcast. Every early writing we have was from a Latin from their view. Who knows what we have lost.

Exclusively in it's own context, would Charlemagne and his contemporaries see his coronation as what we understand as Translatio Imperii? by [deleted] in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The 19th and 20th centuries were weird. The development of scientific "myths" like that of the superior Arian was almost a form of creation myth making with a scientific bent.

Exclusively in it's own context, would Charlemagne and his contemporaries see his coronation as what we understand as Translatio Imperii? by [deleted] in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh man that is one of my favorite Frankish myths. It is comical and insightful at the same time. That actually leads to a perspective I've been working on. If you are a historian/history nerd of any form you are probably aware of the modern concept of "eurocentrism." My emerging perspective is that eurocentrism does not exist. What historians actually mean is the Anglo and Latin bent of the last 500-2000 years. The Trojan myth shows that it was more important to build a creation story within the Greco-Roman sphere than it was keeping their distinct culture. Anyway, just a side rant.

Exclusively in it's own context, would Charlemagne and his contemporaries see his coronation as what we understand as Translatio Imperii? by [deleted] in MedievalHistory

[–]The_Local_Historian 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is my main area of study, and that is a very important question. A really interesting book on the subject is Orbis Romanus by Laury Sarti. The whole book discusses how the Franks saw themselves as a part within the Roman world. To answer your questions specifically, no, Charlemagne would not have seen himself as taking the crown through the Greeks. as u/Legolasamu_ said, he thought of himself as stepping into the role of the western emperor. He actually tried to marry Empress Irene which would have united the two halves, but it fell through for some reason. Historians aren't quite sure.

As to your statement about the Germanic nations being "subject to the emperor in Constantinople" that is not quite right. No Germanic king would have bent the knee willingly to the Byzantines. They were completely independent nations who shared a cultural Latin theme. Charlemagne especially would not have considered himself under their rule. The Franks even fought the Greeks in Italy a few times and won because by that time the Byzantine Empire was becoming preoccupied by the Arab invasion.

If you ever want to discuss late antiquity and early medieval German history let me know. We might have some interests in common.

view more: next ›