About

It’s a blog. About the 8th century.

But more than that, it’s a repository of knowledge about Pepin le Bref, son of Charles Martel, father of Charles the Great. That’s all that most people know about him, which is a pity. The Hammer gets lots of attention, particularly for Poitiers. Charles, of course, is known, by name if nothing else, to virtually everyone in Christendom, more than twelve centuries after his death.

The shame of it is that Pepin is as least as deserving as his father of more attention, if not his son. He took a step than even Martel was unwilling to take, and officially deposed the last Merovingian king. Note that this was not a passive act, like living the throne unfilled after the previous resident’s demise. Rather, Pepin deliberately and publicly removed a king, a move fraught with political, social, and even spiritual import.

Pepin also took the previously unthinkable step (OK, I’m sure Martel thought of it, but he didn’t do anything about it) of assuming the kingship for himself and his family. He was careful about this momentous move, but he did it. Would Charles have done the deed, if the father had wavered? Perhaps. It is feckless to speculate on the impact to Charlemagne’s renaissance if Pepin had not seeded the ground.

Pepin represents the quite literal ending of one era, and the beginning of another. This could be one reason why he receives so little attention – if mentioned at all, it is at the very end of a book about the Merovingian kingdoms, or the very beginning of yet another Charlemagne biography. Whatever the reason, the goal of this blog is to build him a little corner of cyberspace for his own. By nature there is much here outside of Pepin’s life, but the primary focus is from Poitiers to Roncesvalles.

10 thoughts on “About”

  1. I just discovered this site. I’m a retired medieval historian–very late medieval–so I have some appreciation for this material. I also taught history online for about twenty years, having built my own course sites by hand, so I also have an appreciation for the work that lies behind this site, even with the aid of modern tools. Keeping up this sort of blog over a span of years is no small accomplishment.

    So, well done and thank you.

    Reply
    • Many thanks for the kind words! Years of on-again, off-again studies led me to the eighth century. The source material is so limited that even an amateur like me can get my hands (and head) around all of the available translated sources. If you check out my bibliography, I think I’ve listed just about every English translation out there. If you know of anything else, please drop a line.

  2. Thanks for all your hard work. I’ve started to dig into your content and I find it interesting and enjoyable.

    I’ve seen some mention about a bibliography. I’d love to see it but I can’t seem to find it. Any help finding it?

    Anyway, thanks again

    Reply
    • Many thanks for the kind words! I hope you enjoy the site.

      The bibliography is under the “Resources” menu at the top of the page. Here’s the direct link: http://www.8thcentury.com/bibliography/

      If you ever have a topic you’d like to see explored or a question looking for an answer, feel free to drop me a note.

  3. I strongly support your call for the translation of these Latin-Medieval manuscripts into English, available on one comprehensive website. The professionals should take the initiative in a joint project involving all universitiy departments that have the researchers who can divide this work. It seems to me rather a matter of initiative and organization, and of course some good will. Hope others will join this call.

    Reply
    • One of the biggest problems (at least as far as I understand these things) is that, absent some huge grant, there is no academic incentive to translate everything that won’t sell. And I mean sell in the literal sense. Look at how many editions of the Life of Charlemagne there are out there, and more come out every few years. That’s because professors will actually use a new edition in their medieval history classes, and thus there will be a demand.

      But how many classes might require reading the Carolingian capitularies? Prof P.D. King has said of the standard collection by Boretius, “nothing is more necessary in the field of Carolingian scholarship than that this edition, often seriously defective, should be replaced.” King wrote that in 1987; Boretius dates from 1885!

      There is some hope in that PhD candidates in Latin must create an original translation, but all too often those theses simply languish in university cellars.

      Anyway, we all share your frustration.

    • What kind of incentive (funding) would readers imagine a qualified and respected academic would require to oversee and co-write a manuscript by a grad stud/postdoc level, as Bentonian writes below? Would you consider it a three year project? More or less? My WAG is US $100K.

  4. Hi, Recently I got disgruntled with XIth century. Even though sources start to be “Relatively” good for this period it is too late for me. I’m interested exclusively in Europe. I’ve tried VIIth century CE but I find it to be completely uncredible. VIIIth century seems to be significantly better, but as most of the writing has been made in the last quarter of this century how far can we go backwards for it to be trustworthy? As you have studied it which decade would you say starts to be plausible as for our knowledge about it?
    I mean I hate it when: there are no sources for 660s and supposedly there was a siege of Constantinople somehwere in the 670s which might be completely made up, didn’t happen at all – I want to avoid it if i decide to go deeper into the VIIIth so please write what you think about sources for VIIIth century and our understanding of this period.

    I know that it gets better in the IXth but now I’m deciding how far can I “safely” go back in order not to feel like I’m reading about pure speculation (vide VIIth).

    Reply
  5. I’ll write once again as this is important and I’d like to know your opinion.

    As most sources for the 8th century were written around 780 at the earliest, or rather in the IXth century how far back can we trust them? How far back would you say that they mostly speculate on rumours?
    Overall when in 8th century we can speak about high probability that the described events really happened in a similiar way to what sources tell us? Do you see any particular date after which we start to be given more solid information
    ( Francia, Italy and Byzantine as most sources are about those anyway)?

    Reply
    • Hey Mike, I’m so sorry, but somewhere my comments notification got disabled. I’ll dig in and get that fixed.

      I started writing down my best answer to your critical question, and quickly realized that I was deep into a topic that deserved a bigger space. Look for my take soon! Thanks for your patience, and, again, my apologies.

Leave a Comment

HTML tags are not allowed.

2,576 Spambots Blocked by Simple Comments