Two Portraits of Charlemagne

Рет қаралды 5,186

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 58

@zephlodwick1009 2 ай бұрын

This reminds me of how William the Conquerer is best known as a graybearded man, as shown in a portrait made 100s of years later. However, Normans were mainly cleanshaven, as shown in the Bayeu Tapestry, which was commossioned by William's brother.

@schrodingersmoose 2 ай бұрын

Crazy how medieval anachronisms can define images of people to this day. Great video, can’t wait to see more!

@DeutschlandDenDeutschen1848 2 ай бұрын

Is it that crazy considering he died 1200 years ago and we barely have any picture?

@Evan-cv2ws 2 ай бұрын

This is an absolutely wonderful production, and I truly hope you can make more of a similar quality!

@magako_v.3 2 ай бұрын

Amazing to actually list the sources you provided, thanks m8!

@valmarsiglia 2 ай бұрын

There's also an equestrian statue thought to be of Charlemagne that's consistent with the numismatic depictions, though there's a chance it's of his grandson Charles the Bald. But yeah, Charlemagne did not have flowing long hair and a beard. If you want that classic king look, Edward III is your man. That's pretty much become standard practice though, showing images of older figures from centuries or even millennia after they lived. The trope I love is when they show silent-movie footage when discussing ancient history. What is the mentality at work there? Is it felt to be more authentic because it's just a little closer in time?

@ianw884 2 ай бұрын

Sutton huah dig on that thang

@bughead 2 ай бұрын

On baby

@italianbaxter8386 2 ай бұрын

I really like your channel! Very well researched, I hope you gain a lot more subscribers soon, you deserve it

@Moondog911 2 ай бұрын

This video has greatly changed my outlook on all of history

@matthewatierney 2 ай бұрын

You make the stuff exciting and accessible without dumbing any of it down. So awesome.

@charlessiegfriedlevy6973 2 ай бұрын

YES FINALLLY SOURE LIST.YOURE THE BEST

@EvangelinoFranca 2 ай бұрын

Dude, great video, it's interesting to see how the interpretation of historical figures is always intertwined with the era in which they are depicted. I hope you keep up the good work!

@ovcole 2 ай бұрын

This channel is going places

@BiJaRaC 2 ай бұрын

Great video, especially for your first one!! I never thought about the legitimising factor of anachronistic portraits, fascinating stuff

@desmondeliot5454 2 ай бұрын

Cant believe my brother is a pngtuner

@yecksd Ай бұрын

tell your brother to get back to work and make me another damn video

@grandcommander1140 2 ай бұрын

Really great video! Truly an intressting topic!

@ImprovStorytime 2 ай бұрын

I am shocked you’re not more popular!??

@Renfaery 2 ай бұрын

To say the least, I was shocked to see a KZbinsona of the Sutton Hoo helmet on my reccomended page. That being said, I am intrigued.

@Cam-rt9uq 2 ай бұрын

Homestuck >:)

@Renfaery 2 ай бұрын

@@Cam-rt9uq Calliope.

@legomasteramazing 2 ай бұрын

I love learning about the HRE, hoping you can do this with Alfred the Great

@SuttonWho-p7t 2 ай бұрын

I'm working on a similar video about Alfred. It won't be the next video but it should come out in the next few months.

@legomasteramazing 2 ай бұрын

@@SuttonWho-p7t Looking forward to it and to the channel's growth

@henriquec.6358 2 ай бұрын

Great video! 🇧🇷

@oddglorfindel1106 2 ай бұрын

Nice video, would love to see some videos on details of how figures like the Great Bretwalda King Offa styled himself alike to Charlamagne

@Michal-je1hx 2 ай бұрын

Amazing video! Hope for more

@adamtierney-eliot7609 2 ай бұрын

This is great, thank you. Medievalist Podcast just did an episode on Charlemagne that may be worth checking out.

@rupertBluza 2 ай бұрын

Interesting stuff. Putting footnote numbers directly in the video is a really neat idea.

@maccatx6564 2 ай бұрын

Great video. Always liked good symbolism in art history.

@heinzelmann6502 2 ай бұрын

Good video. Thanks for the sources

@unisangalaxystudio 2 ай бұрын

Very amazing video, wonders who Next Louis I

@Siegbert85 2 ай бұрын

Funnily enough, when I think of Charlemagne an image of the coin and the equestrian statue pops in my mind... maybe I have seen those images first when I learned about him. The Dürer depiction always felt wrong to me... I except it as a generic HR emperor in my mind, but never the actual Charlemagne.

@richbrooke3008 2 ай бұрын

Can I just say, I love your channel name!😂

@kata_zonda 2 ай бұрын

Very good video, hope you keep making more ^^

@faresedres951 2 ай бұрын

fantastic video

@gaha-eu5wd 2 ай бұрын

Intresting

@Sir_Howie 2 ай бұрын

Need more medieval and HRE content. Subbed.

@Siegbert85 2 ай бұрын

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it generally speaking the German side that would depict Charlemagne with both the Fleur-de-Lis and the imperial eagle while the French would only use the Fleur-de-Lis? I was under the impression that the Germans knew full well that France had a better claim towards him than they did while they only wanted to claim him because of the imperial title that originated with him.

@SuttonWho-p7t 2 ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! Generally, German artists were more likely to utilize the joint coat of arms, but it also appears in French art. For example, the illustration of the Nine Worthies at 7:45 was produced by a French workshop. Frequently they would include both symbols, but emphasize the Fleur-de-Lis half. One manuscript illustration I’ve seen shows Charlemagne holding a shield with both symbols, but wearing a surcoat with only the Fleur-de-Lis. Adrian Ailes shows a few examples of this in the essay I cited. Thanks again for the insightful question!

@DeutschlandDenDeutschen1848 2 ай бұрын

When you say "claim" you mean the royal lineage?

@Siegbert85 2 ай бұрын

@@DeutschlandDenDeutschen1848 I was rather thinking of a sort of national symbol.

@DeutschlandDenDeutschen1848 2 ай бұрын

@@Siegbert85 What is the narrative then? Both countries descend from frankish states. The french are literally called "franks" however they are not that closely related to them. The french are mostly roman colonized celts by ancestry and language. French is a romance language. For example "Charlemagne" is not the real name of the guy. It's the deep fried version of "Karolus Magnus" wich is a name and a title in latin, not in frankish. The franks were romaphile Germanics. They admired roman civilization and power as all germanic people eventually did but they didn't straight up try to be romans. As this video says Charlemagne prefered the frankish "national style" of clothing to the roman one. The frankish name of "Charles" was most likely Karl or Karlo. The German Karl der Große / Karl the Great is a much more faithful name both in terms of the sound and preserving the meaning of the title. German is a Germanic language way more related to that of the franks. And we have some knowledge about the ethnic beliefs of the franks. In a book that was written for the Grandson of Karl the Great by a diplomat and historian that knew his Grandfather it is written about the origin of the franks: Alii vero affirmant eos de Scanza insula, quae vagina gentium est, exordium habuisse, de qua Gothi et caeterae *nationes* *Theotiscae* exierunt: quod et idioma linguae eorum testatur. Est enim in eadem insula regio, quae, ut ferunt, adhuc Francia nuncupatur. Domino autem annuente de his in sequenti opere plenius enarrare cupimus. I don't have a professional translation of this but I think it says that the franks, the goths and the other "nationes Theotiscae" are said to have a common national origin (vagina gentes) on the scandanavian peninsula (wich was believed to a be an island). And it also makes a reference to language supporting this. Karl the Great wrote himself around 770: De desertoribus. Si quis adeo contumax aut superbus extiterit, ut, dimisso exercitu, absque iussio vel licentiam regis domum revertatur, et quod *nos* *Teudisca* *lingua* dicimus herisliz fecerit, ipse ut reus maiestatis vitae periculum incurrat, et res eius in fisco nostro socientur. "Teudisc" and "Theotisc" are old versions of modern "Dutch" and "deutsch". It obviously has an ethnic meaning here and doesn't mean only "not latin" as sometimes suggested. "Teudisc/Theotisc" is linked to ideas of ancestry and certain vocabulary like "herisliz" wich was so relevant at the time that it was included in latin texts. Obviously the meaning has changed a bit over the time. The dutch do not call themselves "duutsch" anymore but "nederlands". Considering that the nationes theotiscae were said to have scandinavian origin and even include the goths "teudisc" can only mean "Germanic" here, though I assume only west germanic people used this as an endonym. I am very confused by statements saying "theodiscus" had no ethnic meaning since this is from a manuscript that has to be less than 30 years apart from the original draft and not something from the 17th century after it was copied a thousand times. So I don't know why these statements seem to go completely ignored. It's Cod. Sang. 622 So I think this is good evidence to say that Karl the Great was pretty German or pretty Deutsch even. The capital of Karl's Empire were he died was also in Germany in Aachen. But the french certainly wanted to be franks more. The modern nation wich is actually the most frankish as a whole is the Netherlands. They don't seem to mind though.

@Siegbert85 2 ай бұрын

@@DeutschlandDenDeutschen1848 I wouldn't say it's about ethnic identity but statehood rather. Charlemagne fits right in to a long unbroken line of Frankish kings whereas what would become Germany was largely a product of his conquests. So, while the Frankish empire would become evenly split after him in terms of Frankish statehood, the West had the longer tradition while the East got to have the imperial crown. Had the latter not been the case I doubt Charlemagne would play such a big role in Germany's rememberance culture.

@brendanmuller7301 2 ай бұрын

Now do the same about william of normandy

@pete-i7p 2 ай бұрын

Cool

@aslkhonkhoshimkhujaev5996 2 ай бұрын

Does 4:06, “Holds the globe representing the earth,” mean that people in the 9th century were aware of the spherical nature of the Earth?

@flubaldooble1615 2 ай бұрын

yeah the idea spread from the Romans and Greeks ending up being pretty widely adopted throughout the world even after the fall of Rome and its a myth that the catholic church suppressed it. what they did try to suppress tho was heliocentrism.

@SuttonWho-p7t 2 ай бұрын

Yep! Scholars like Bede and Isidore of Seville preserved knowledge of the round Earth in their writings. Both were commonly read throughout the Middle Ages, so the Earth's spherical shape was well known during the period, at least among the literate.

@prkp7248 2 ай бұрын

Brunoletto Latini in his proto-encyclopedia from XIII century give arguments for why earth is round. Although they are quite weird, that still means that it was university knowledge, as this book is, in big part, based on notes from accademic lectures.

@eidechsentyp1236 2 ай бұрын

@@flubaldooble1615I wouldn’t say they tried to suppress heliocentrism, they paid Galileo to publish a book about his findings. He was tried for insulting the pope in that book.