The title of Emperor remained in the Carolingian family for years to come, but divisions of territory and in-fighting over supremacy of the Frankish state weakened its power and ability to lead. The papacy itself never forgot the title nor abandoned the right to bestow it. When the family of Charlemagne ceased to produce worthy heirs, the pope gladly crowned whichever Italian magnate could best protect him from his local enemies. This devolution led to the dormancy of the title from to The title was revived when Otto I was crowned emperor in , fashioning himself as the successor of Charlemagne.
The empire would remain in continuous existence for nearly a millennium, as the Holy Roman Empire, a true imperial successor to Charlemagne. Skip to main content.
Search for:. Nonetheless, Charlemagne used these circumstances to claim that he was the renewer of the Roman Empire, which would remain in continuous existence for nearly a millennium, as the Holy Roman Empire.
Although one of the aims was ostensibly to reunite the entire Roman Empire, given that many at the time including the pope did not recognize Empress Irene of the Byzantine Empire as a legitimate ruler, the two empires remained independent and continued to fight for sovereignty throughout the Middle Ages. When Odoacer compelled the abdication of Romulus Augustulus, he did not abolish the Western Empire as a separate power, but caused it to be reunited with or sink into the Eastern, so that from that time there was a single undivided Roman Empire … [Pope Leo III and Charlemagne], like their predecessors, held the Roman Empire to be one and indivisible, and proposed by the coronation of [Charlemagne] not to proclaim a severance of the East and West.
By whom, however, could he [the Pope] be tried? In normal circumstances the only conceivable answer to that question would have been the Emperor at Constantinople; but the imperial throne was at this moment occupied by Irene.
That the Empress was notorious for having blinded and murdered her own son was, in the minds of both Leo and Charles, almost immaterial: it was enough that she was a woman. The female sex was known to be incapable of governing, and by the old Salic tradition was debarred from doing so. Licenses and Attributions. CC licensed content, Shared previously. Roland nominates Ganelon for the post; Ganelon's response is bitter rage.
He threatens his stepson: "If God should deign that I come back again, then I shall stir up such a feud with you that it will last as long as you're alive! Ganelon rages, fearing that he may meet the same fate as Basan and Basil. Charlemagne responds by saying simply, "When I command, it's up to you to go" Charlemagne now bestows the staff and glove upon his messenger Ganelon, according to ceremony, but Ganelon, reaching out to take the glove, lets it drop.
Seeing this, the Franks foresee that the embassy will have dire consequences for them. Ganelon leaves the council, with the staff, the letter, and Charlemagne's blessing.
The temporality of The Song of Roland is extremely straightforward. It begins at the beginning and ends at the end—the order in which the narrated events happen and the order in which they are told is identical.
This sort of temporal organization, while it is the simplest, is not the most common; many ancient epics begin in the middle and then use flashbacks to fill in what happened before. Since the entire story told is set in motion by Ganelon's treachery, the story begins by explaining how this betrayal came about. While the temporal order is simple, the poet plays with the duration of events, forming a rhythm out of them. This rhythm is particularly pronounced in this first section of the poem: we have one laisse of summary, letting us know where we are and giving us some basic exposition, then the scene of Marsilla's council, then another single laisse summarizing the journey of the Saracen messengers to Charlemagne's camp, then the scene of Blancandrin's presentation of the peace offer, then one laisse summarizing how the camp goes to bed and wakes up, and then the very dramatic scene of the council of the Franks.
There is an alternating rhythm of telling the quick narrative summaries and showing the longer dramatic scenes, filled with dialogue. The first laisse tells us of the inevitability of the defeat of Muslim evil by Christian good.
Because the Christian God is all-powerful and deeply concerned with the fate of his worshippers, there is no doubt that they will eventually win, although they must struggle. The Saracens are doomed from the start by their worship of false gods.
They really haven't got a chance: "Marsilla While there is the most absolute of differences between the Franks and the Saracens—the former are good and the latter are evil—they organize themselves identically. The Saracens are the precise image of the Franks, only reversed. In the scene of Marsilla's council and the scene of Charlemagne's council, we can see that the Saracens and the Franks conduct themselves identically in matters of manners and forms.
However, they place an unholy trinity of idols at the apex of their feudal pyramid, instead of the one true God of the Christians, and so they are always ultimately serving evil, however loyal and true they are to the lord immediately above them in their society. The effect of basing a society around anything but the Christian God is a constant tendency toward evil, whatever the limited virtues of certain Saracens.
This is shown by the ease with which the Saracens in Marsilla's council assent to a plan of saving their own honor and lands by offering a false peace to Charlemagne, which will inevitably end in the execution of their own sons who they will offer as hostages.
The most important characters—our hero and martyr Roland, his great comrade Olivier, the despicable traitor Ganelon, the perfect Christian king Charlemagne—of the poem are introduced in the dramatic scene of Charlemagne's council. The narrator gives us some basic information about them directly, and tells us at the beginning that Ganelon is a traitor, but we must figure out their motivation and characters by their speeches to each other. Appearance, certainly, is no clue to character in The Song of Roland ; we are told that our chief villain is extremely handsome We first are introduced to Roland by his bold speech of laisse 14, arguing that the Franks should pay no attention to the Saracens' offer of peace.
He recalls how the Saracens have deceived the Franks with just such offers in the past, and he seems to be motivated by an underlying understanding that the war that Charlemagne's men are fighting in Spain is sacred. Their cause is too large for offers of treasure to mean anything in relation to it; their reasons for fighting are not such as allow compromise with the enemy.
He speaks like a crusader. The theme of Roland's pride is also introduced in this first speech; he boastfully lists the cities he has conquered as part of his argument for why they must not accept the Saracens' peace.
Ganelon, however, in his speech of laisse 15 countering Roland's, urges pragmatic considerations, for he, unlike Roland doesn't understand the war as absolute and sacred. In the debate among the council as they try to decide who should go to Marsilla, it becomed clear that Ganelon bitterly resents his stepson.
0コメント