Which is why Charlemagne had two sons called Pepin.
Which is why Charlemagne had two sons called Pepin.
They both created an empire and both of their empires fragmented after they died, their empires massively affected the culture of large region (West Europe and Middle East) and they were both remembered as great conquerors that people centuries later tried to emulate. Superficially they're quite similar historical figures.
Has signatures turned off.
Well except Louis the Pious and Peppin (but Peppin was not an Emperor).
Dunno Charles was a pretty good conqueror. Considering what he had to work with I'm surprised he was able to keep control over an administration that didn't collapse in those days. Farming, taxation and troop control were extremely difficult not to mention that his army occupied several conquered peoples that resisted viciously multiple times. The occupations of Saxony and the Western Germanic people was difficult enough.
But I'm surprised Charlemagne did not press his claims against Byzantium. He just gave up Venice and the southern region of Italy and his campaigns into the Balkans comprised of little expeditions into Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia. I'm not even sure that these armies ever faced an actual Byzantine army, it must have been some local vassals comprised of Slavic tribesmen at most.
Too many fronts needed to deal. Charlemagne had to face Iberia front, Germania front and Italia front (not to mention none of those fronts ever "stable" in true sense during his whole life time); open another front against another power enemy was a madness itself (only Hitler did that).
Laying the smack down on Byzantium would have made him relatively rich though. On the other hand he probably doesn't want fanatical resistance from Byzantium, who began to view him as a true usurper when he became emperor (or maybe as early as when he saved the pope or encroached on Italy).
He should have gotten the Avars to join his expeditions in Croatia and do some serious raiding into Greece. But the Avars probably made him rich enough anyway. The Avars were such a useless conquest aside from all the plunder they extracted off of them twice (and the tribute they gave). They just sat around and did nothing until some time after he died the Bulgars just encroached on their land and Louis the Pious had to go fight Khan Omurtag.
Krum himself just marched into eastern Pannonia and Charlemagne did nothing about it, he probably didn't care so long as the Bulgars didn't cross the Danube.
I mean at the very least overrunning Italy which would likely prove more challenging for lack of a Frankish fleet. But the Iberian campaign was a bit different; it was a war in which the enemy did not fight if they didn't want and the cities were heavily defended so that the besiegers could not easily resupply themselves or build adequate siege engines and their losses could not be easily replaced. If Charlemagne could supply his large army in Iberia and constantly bring reinforcements across the Pyrenees then the north of the Ebro would have been easily overrun.
Although Iberia was a place where everyone was a hostile. The issue was less about the Moors than the other factors. The Moors themselves couldn't stop killing each other, the locals couldn't stop killing each other either. All Charlemagne had to do was wait and then later on he sent his son over the Pyrenees and his campaign was successful.
Charlemagne went there in the first place expecting allies from the locals and certain Muslim governors which had either been killed or defected by the time he crossed over. The Abbasids provided no effective help either except politically and they were pretty much bogged down in north Africa trying to put down these very same people so there was no real campaigns by them into Iberia either except for coastal raiders and trying to bring some of those governors over to their side.
Charlemagne was expecting an Abbasid army to show up eventually and meet him south of the Ebro. After all the Abbasids offered them most if not all of Spain if he helped them wipe out the rebels. Considering that they were also an issue as far as Tunis and that Iberia a had ceased to be of use to the Caliphate for a couple decades it was a pretty good way to get a permanent ally out of the Carolingian Empire.
Spain, the Afghanistan of the French.
It gave the French their most romantic myth, the Song of Roland.
Eats, shoots, and leaves.
I chuckle when I hear the medieval variant of the Song of Roland. Some people make it seem like if Roncesvalles was the reason Charlemagne lost the war. Even more exaggeration when the enemies are called Moors even though they were actually Basques.
Disgruntled Basques rose up in revolt and attacked Charles as he was retreating back to France and severely mauled his rear guard. That's really the whole truth about the event.
Except Carolingian infantry phalanx:
- Used same type of equipments, shield and weapons.
- All men were standing.
- Actually were trained to charge/offensive march.
The only difference between Greek phalanx and Carolingian phalanx was really one used spear and other used short sword.