Matthias Becher. Charlemagne. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2003.

vi
+ 170 pp. $15.00, paper, ISBN 978-0-300-10758-6.

Reviewed by Hans J. Hummer

Published on H-HRE (August, 2006)

Matthias Becher's Charlemagne is one of a re‐ pened upon six (pp. 52, 106, 126, 128, 135, 138). In
cent spate of studies of the great Frankish ruler. It addition, Charlemagne's height of 1.8 meters
also joins a list of works by continental scholars should have been calculated to six feet, rather
that have been rapidly translated due to the rela‐ than an improbable seven (p. 3). Despite these
tive dearth of comparable English-language treat‐ nuisances, the volume should be useful to general
ments (a shortage that may soon end). Conse‐ readers interested primarily in political history;
quently, this book probably should have included in general surveys of the Middle Ages where an
an introduction, either by the translator himself instructor might desire concise coverage of the
or another scholar, which might have justified period and its legacy; and where secondary
why this study was deemed worthy of wider cir‐ sources are preferred to primary documents. To
culation. Presumably, the conciseness of the vol‐ that end, it is well illustrated for classroom use,
ume, and the possibility of issuing it as affordable with a map, genealogical tables of the Frankish
paperback, made it attractive to Yale University kings, and six glossy pictures. If primary sources
Press as a text that could be marketed for class‐ occupy a prominent place on the syllabus, howev‐
room use and to a general audience. er, Einhard's livelier ninth-century biography
David Bachrach has provided an overall lucid would do much of the same, or else the docu‐
translation. A useful chapter-by-chapter list of ments could be pared with Roger Collin's biogra‐
suggested readings has also been appended, al‐ phy, which gives a much better sense of the ten‐
though strangely it does not include any of the dentiousness of Carolingian accounts. If one is
other recent biographies of Charlemagne. The looking for a wider-angled treatment of Charle‐
production team at Yale, furthermore, should magne and his times, Alessandro Barbero's biog‐
have seen to the excision of errors that inevitably raphy is preferable.
creep into manuscripts composed on computer Becher's treatment is divided into an intro‐
screens. Although I wasn't looking for them, I hap‐ duction, seven chapters devoted largely to the pol‐
 H-Net Reviews

itics of the reign, and finally an eighth chapter, certain for a long time about what the name for
which is an epilogue on Charlemagne's legacy. the empire should be in future" (p. 17), but he at‐
The five-page introduction rapidly dispenses the tributes this to the technical problem of working
colorful personal biographical details from Ein‐ out the proper titulature--although Charlemagne's
hard's account, outlines the difficulties of meeting behavior might also gainsay well-laid plans.
modern expectations of biography with medieval The second chapter offers a brief history of
sources, and concludes that the study "is an indi‐ the Franks up to Charlemagne's accession in 768.
vidual interpretation based on years of engage‐ Here Becher presents an admirable synthesis of
ment with the sources and the scholarly litera‐ the accumulation of research that has elucidated
ture" (p. 6). This no doubt is the case, although the late Roman fiscal, ecclesiastical, and adminis‐
that declaration might be qualified by noting that trative foundations of the preceding Merovingian
the study is preoccupied with themes Becher has Frankish kingdoms. The survey begins to suffer a
written a lot about: succession, family politics, im‐ bit, however, as the author moves into the sev‐
perial-papal politics, and royal lordship. Becher's enth century. At this point, the account gives way
survey does not dwell much on the cultural, reli‐ to a traditional decline-of-the-Merovingians, rise-
gious, and social history of the reign, all of which, of-the-Carolingians narrative. This bypasses a
when they do arise, are reflexively treated as sub‐ growing body of scholarship which has done
sets of politics. Becher might be right that the mo‐ much to reevaluate the late Merovingian era.
tivations of medieval figures are often elusive, but Becher might not agree with it--and there is room
he nonetheless assumes throughout that motives to be critical of the replacement of a crisis-ridden
can safely be attributed to hard-headed political Merovingian kingship and a steadily rising Car‐
calculation. Einhard's engaging and very human olingian dynasty with its reverse image, an essen‐
ruler is difficult to find here. tially stable Merovingian kingship and a crisis-rid‐
The first chapter, "The High Point of His den Carolingian family--but he might have made
Reign," begins in media res with the events of tactical use of this work. Becher's own researches
Christmas day, 800, when Charlemagne was on the family crises propelling Pippin to the king‐
crowned emperor by Pope Leo III. The aim pre‐ ship, work which Becher rightly grants a promi‐
sumably is to grab the reader's attention with the nent place in this volume, would have meshed
famous coronation drama and to establish Charle‐ well with the more subtle reinterpretations of late
magne's relevance (for a German audience) as the Merovingian politics.
seminal figure behind the "founding of the me‐ Chapter 3 takes up Charlemagne's youth and
dieval empire that would later continue as the early career. Here and elsewhere, family politics
Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation until drives much of the survey and, by extension, the
1806" (p. 8). In Becher's view, Charlemagne, hav‐ depiction of the motivations of Frankish rulers.
ing taken charge of events in Rome and papal af‐ This is surely an important aspect of the story, but
fairs, was firmly in control of the situation and in his pursuit of incontestable, transparent fact,
had effectively orchestrated his own elevation Becher grants family concerns a primacy that is
well in advance. This is a legitimate interpreta‐ not as automatically inferable from the evidence
tion, shared by kindred scholars past and present, as he seems to assume. The chapter begins with
although it is fair to point out that Becher side‐ Charlemagne's birth, which Einhard mis-dated by
steps scholarly interpretations that have empha‐ eight years to sidestep, in Becher's view, the sor‐
sized Leo's agency, the ad-hoc nature of the enter‐ did family politics of the late 740s. While this is
prise, and Charlemagne's own ambivalence. Bech‐ possible, one would need to explain why a biogra‐
er does concede that "Charlemagne remained un‐

2
 H-Net Reviews

pher working at least eight decades later would papal alliance, papal tensions with the Lombards,
have felt inclined to cover up the now-dim fates of the appeals for Frankish protection that culminat‐
Grifo and Drogo (and how adjusting Charle‐ ed in Charlemagne's coronation as emperor, and
magne's birthday was going to do that). Becher the tense diplomatic negotiations between the two
reasonably infers from other sources Charle‐ empires that followed. This Bismarckian story of
magne's likely early training and education, and high diplomacy, and the account of external
quickly sketches the future king's poorly docu‐ events in the previous chapter, might have been
mented early career. He then moves to the death more profitably interwoven with the internal af‐
of Pippin and the consequences of the ensuing ri‐ fairs of the empire, however, and thus set within
valry between Charlemagne and his brother Car‐ a richer interpretative framework. As it is, Charle‐
loman: Charlemagne's marriage to a Lombard magne's pursuit of the "highest secular dignity"
princess, his repudiation of her after Carloman's (p. 93) seems at times to be mere personal vanity
sudden death, and the invasion of the Lombard and at other times to be a self-evident drive for
kingdom after King Desiderius extended protec‐ dominion. Much needed, therefore, is a back‐
tion to Carloman's widow and young son. This sce‐ ground summary of the Frankish church. Becher's
nario is plausible enough, and in places has great contention that Charlemagne sought to dominate
interpretive power, but the emphasis on succes‐ ecclesiastical affairs and relegate to Pope Leo
sion anxieties risks overuse here and elsewhere. "only the task of praying" (p. 93) lacks sophistica‐
Chapter 4 turns to Charlemagne's eastern tion.
conquests: the campaigns against the Saxons, Chapter 6 examines the ruling of the empire.
Bavaria, and the Avars. Becher has written about Here Becher struggles to blend his own expertise
Saxony elsewhere, so not surprisingly he devotes on the problem of loyalty and oaths with a wider
more space to those campaigns than to the others. sketch of governance. While his survey lacks the
He skillfully evokes the arduousness of the Saxon admirable elegance and coherence of his earlier
wars and draws attention to the Frankish set‐ review of the bases of Merovingian rule, he does
backs and the ensuing crises of rulership that are point out the difficulties of ruling an obstreperous
downplayed in contemporary accounts. The cam‐ Frankish aristocracy and the lack of statist institu‐
paigns into Bavaria and against the Avars, on the tions, both of which made oaths a prominent fea‐
other hand, are given short shrift, and are much ture of order. He describes many of Charle‐
more interesting and important than they appear magne's major decrees as efforts to consolidate
here. Becher subordinates them to Saxon events, his rulership in the aftermath of internal crises of
which he grants overriding strategic importance. loyalty, although the relationship between the two
When the Saxons appear to be pacified, he argues, issues might have been clearer had readers been
Charlemagne is able to "turn to affairs in the given a better sense of the empire's internal dy‐
south-east of his kingdom" (p. 71). Even then, namics. The east Frankish conspiracy of 785, for
Becher portrays plans elsewhere as often hinging example, the greatest threat mounted to Charle‐
on the course of events in Saxony. magne's rule from within, is accorded less than a
Chapter 5 continues the theme of foreign rela‐ sentence, and then only as a device to set up,
tions, with a focus on imperial rivalry and jeal‐ along with the conquest of Bavaria, the issuance
ousy: the relations between Charlemagne, Byzan‐ of one of Charlemagne's greatest decrees, the Ad‐
tine rulers, and the popes. The presentation is monitio Generalis. Also, Becher's commendable
fairly straightforward and conventional, offering emphasis on the weakness of institutional author‐
a recapitulation of the long-standing Byzantine- ity and the ad hoc nature of Charlemagne's de‐
crees sits in tension with his observation that the

3
 H-Net Reviews

problem of loyalty shows "how difficult it must after his death down to the present day: Charle‐
have been to enforce state authority in the mod‐ magne's role as inspiration to later medieval
ern sense" (p. 100), a statement that seems to say kings, the appropriation or criticism of the emper‐
that Charlemagne was conscious of, and working or for nationalistic purposes, the interest that
towards, a recognizably secular system of govern‐ made the reign an early object of modern critical
ment. Becher tries to reconcile the informal and inquiry for historians, and Charlemagne's most
formal aspects of Frankish rule by proposing a recent incarnation as the "Father of Europe."
transition from one to the other. Having decisive‐ Becher concludes with the startling injunction
ly settled the loyalty issue in 802, Becher's Charle‐ that "the best possible study of Charlemagne is
magne embarked on a "program of royal legisla‐ one free of preconceptions" (p. 149). Yet after his
tion," the "secular aspects" of which included the preceding survey of Charlemagne's legacy, this is
codification of laws, judicial reform, the organiza‐ hardly to be believed possible. Furthermore, his
tion of comital administration in the east, the cre‐ own portrayal of Charlemagne as a creature of
ation of a system of accountancy with the missi political calculation, along with his inclination to
dominici, the organization of the royal court, explicate the reign within the categories of schol‐
management of fiscal lands, monetary policy, mil‐ arship with which he is most familiar, testifies
itary service, and education. Only at the end of amply to the impossibility of escaping the precon‐
the chapter does Becher turn to church reform. ceptions of one's own time and place. This is not a
The impression is of an empire moving ever more criticism. The historically great are relevant be‐
towards bureaucratic government, especially af‐ cause they have meaning from age to age; the
ter 802, although the chronology here is often question is how well, fairly, and persuasively a bi‐
vague and in places defies this teleological presen‐ ographer has translated the figure: Becher has
tation. Becher might have been better served by given us a very secular Charlemagne.
downplaying the secular-ecclesiastical divide, em‐
phasizing the aristocratic bases of royal power,
moving the moral and religious imperatives and
ecclesiastical reform to the center of the story,
and thus imparting more resolutely the preoccu‐
pations and responsibilities of a Carolingian ruler.
Absent that, we're left with a Charlemagne ever
on the lookout for more conquests, titles, and glo‐
ry, though we are not sure why, or to what end
(aside from the self-evident acquisition of power).
Chapter 7 takes up again the problem of suc‐
cession, as Charlemagne tried to control the lines
of affiliation in his own household (swollen as it
was with the offspring of his semi-polygamous
lifestyle), and to make provisions for his succes‐
sion. Becher reviews the arrangements, the subse‐
quent revisions as legitimate sons died, and the
contents of Charlemagne's will.
Chapter 8 offers a remarkably elegant sketch
of Charlemagne's legacy in the succeeding periods

4
 H-Net Reviews

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at
https://networks.h-net.org/h-hre

Citation: Hans J. Hummer. Review of Becher, Matthias. Charlemagne. H-HRE, H-Net Reviews. August,
2006.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=12159

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No