Psychomachia by Jennifer Mongold

The Imagery of Psychomachia
Mongold 1
Psychomachia which is often translated as “Battle of the Souls” or “The Fight for Mansoul” discusses the ordeal and conflict of one’s inner soul between virtues and vices (Prudentius1, Wikipedia). There are many theories about this piece, such as the derivation of the seven deadly sins, morality plays and the more modern “Good Angel” vs. “Bad Angel” or “Devil” from this poem. Although the first is a misconception, the other two are very likely (Wikipedia, Muppet Wiki). What makes this piece of literature interesting, though, is not the modern takes and derivatives, but the actual piece itself with its vivid descriptions and the artwork which accompanied the manuscripts.
The poem first begins with a preface involving Abram and Lot, but then quickly turns to the battle between the Virtues and the Vices. First, Faith takes on Worship-of-the-Old-Gods also known as pagan idolatry and smites her head down. Second, is the battle between Chastity and Lust the Sodomite which ends with a sword-thrust to Lust’s throat. Our third battle involves Long-Suffering, who aids all of the virtues, and Wrath who eventually kills herself because her efforts are useless against Long-Suffering. The next fight is between Lowliness who has help from Hope, an angel type of figure, and Pride in which Pride falls into the pit set by Deceit. It goes on to list other Virtues involved and then we see Soberness and Indulgence whose battle is quite lengthy. It appears at one point that Indulgence could win the combat, but Soberness makes a speech and frightens the horses driving Indulgence’s chariot with a wooden cross which leads to the trampling of the Vice. After the death of their leader, Indulgence, many of the Vices retreat or run away, but then Greed makes her appearance. She targets the priests who are saved by Reason. Greed then turns into a Virtue known as Thrifty which turns out to be a trick that Good Works sees through. She then battles Avarice, who we know as Greed or Thrifty. Avarice gets her come-uppance, however, as she is rent limb from limb. At this severe blow the rest of the Vices leave and Peace declares the end to violence. Discord is slippery, though, and infiltrates the Virtues injuring Concord who then deals with the Vice to restore order so that the Virtues can construct, under Wisdom’s supervision and instruction, their temple which in itself is beautiful in its description. And thus, the poem ends peacefully and methodically this way with the lesson learnt and everything that is right and good established (Prudentius 275-343).
One interesting thing about the story and the characters is that all of the Vices and Virtues were female. Females don’t normally play the part of these heroic warriors fighting in huge battles, especially not important battles. This situation, however, is easily “accounted for by the gender of abstract nouns in Latin”, the original language of the poem. Although this explains the earliest translations, this is not an explanation as to why “the Virtues remain female for the rest of their career in literature and art” while the Vices change and vary in sex or, in some cases become non-human depending on the tradition or whim of the artist (Norman 13). H.J. Thomson, for example, chose to make the Virtues and Vices all female, except for one. Out of all of the Virtues and Vices who were focused on enough to be given pronouns in order to specify gender, Desire was the only male. He is barely in the story, but is briefly mentioned in the first retreat with the line, “Desire turns his back in flight” (Prudentius 309). It is a surprising reversal of roles for a medieval text to make the “Fight for the Mansoul” between women.
Not only is the story complicated, action packed and captivating, both within the plot as well as outside of it, it would be just like many other works from this time period without the imagery it provides both in and out of the text. The poem itself is less than a thousand lines long, but is filled with vivid descriptions and each manuscript contained several illustrations to go along with the story (Prudentius). Many of the manuscripts of Prudentius written before the thirteenth century contain anywhere from two to ninety illustrations (Norman 13). These illustrations supposedly “derive from a cycle of eighty-nine drawings which originated in the fifth century” (Greenberg). It is these illustrations from Psychomachia that “derived from the very intentions of the text” which “provided a pictorial base for subsequent illustrations of the theme”, that is the theme involving a battle between Virtues and Vices, and “became the primary source for . . . the iconography of the psychomachia allegory in the Middle Ages” (Norman 11-12). So it is not only the poem, Psychomachia, which was groundbreaking and inspirational for future ideas and generations, but the artwork that is linked with it through the manuscripts.
Looking strictly at the text, however, is very important for this work. For this poem that he wrote in the fifth century, Prudentius had a simple allegorical framework which he elaborated on with a number of physical details with or without allegorical importance. Due to this piece, Prudentius is the primary source for this psychomachia allegory. The poem is important for another reason because without the poem there would not be such importance or revere connected with the illustrations. With the text, the illustrations are literal representations of it as most medieval artists tried to do on principle. The text and picture are literal reflections of one another as we see when comparing the two. The only difference one might discover is a slight variation in weapons among the characters. But, since these are literal representations, the artists were only concerned with what represented those actions from the text and relied upon the text for explanation (Norman11-12).

Although, as stated previously, Prudentius is the primary source for the psychomachia allegory, he was not the first to have thought of this theory. St. Paul and Tertullian both spoke of “a battle between good and evil, virtue and vice,” but Prudentius was able to take this concept and develop it into an elaborate allegory which involved specific Virtues and Vices entering into “a variety of single combats as part of one great battle.” Prudentius took this Christian concept and merged it with a more pagan literary form with the classic epic tradition to write a Christian epic. This proved a popular idea of his which was picked up by the illustrators who “followed his lead by freely borrowing motifs and details from classical pagan art.” By doing this, Prudentius “created a new literary mode in his adaptation of pagan epic to Christian allegory” and the illustrators “established a new allegorical iconography” (Norman 12-13).

While this new allegorical iconography was created and all the illustrations stemmed from a common original, they can be roughly split into two distinctive iconographic groups. There is a northern group which includes the French and Anglo-Saxon manuscripts, which used a technique called “outline drawing,” and a southern group including manuscripts from the Rhine and Meuse valleys (Greenberg, Norman 13). “The illustrators were following a tradition that was clearly defined and essentially conservative,” but the northern group’s Virtues wore “long garments with a mantle often drawn over the head,” unless specifically stated in the text otherwise. The Vices are drawn in “long or short tunics, sometimes with a mantle fastened on the shoulder, and occasionally in a short, belted garment fastened on one shoulder, leaving one arm bare.” The southern group, however, has the Virtues appearing “as warriors in mail with helmets” while the Vices are drawn in “a short costume with the skirt divided into three parts resembling flames. Their hair is disheveled and flies out in flame-like strands.” The individual characters are able to be identified through an action rather than an attribute. These two genres of illustrations based on region, rather than hindering any establishment of iconography, actually help with it because it is these variations which “play an important role in developing the iconography of the Virtues and Vices” (Norman 13-14).

The poem Psychomachia by Prudentius has always had influence, whether it is now or in the fifth century when it was first written. From combining pagan and Christian elements in harmony for a story which had Christian and pagan characters battling to having women warriors battling it out for man’s soul, Prudentius was a contemporary in an age considered to be “dark.” He took a small concept, expanded it and created something so huge it reached farther than just his audience to whom he wrote for at the time. Little children now know the basic concept of the psychomachia allegory without even reading the poem, just because they’ve most likely seen a cartoon or show which had a character undergoing an internal conflict with the “mini-me” versions of the character dressed as an angel and a devil to help the character come to a decision. It was an inspiring and influential piece for illustrators as well as being wildly popular with the present day audience of the fifth century and it not only reached the audience whom it was created for, but it continues to reach a modern day audience whether they realize it or not.


Works Cited
1) Greenberg, Hope, comp. 10th and 11th Century Clothing in England: a Portfolio of Images. 3 Sept. 2003. University of Vermont. 30 May 2008 .
2) Norman, Joanna S. Metamorphoses of an Allegory: The Iconography of the Psychomachia in Medieval Art. American University Studies. Series IX, History; Vol. 29. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 1988.
3) Prudentius. Prudentius. Vol. I. Trans. H.J. Thomson. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969.
4) "Psychomachia." Muppet Wiki. 30 May 2008 .
5) "Psychomachia." Wikipedia. 23 Nov. 2007. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 30 May 2008 .
6) A Detail from the Psychomachia; the Allegorical Struggle for Possession of the Soul. Cambridge. The Parker Library. Corpus Christi College. 30 May 2008 .
7) 32 B517 LStd 4,38A 075133 Stettiner, R., Die illustrierten Prudentiushandschriften (1895-1905), II, pl. 141. .
8) 32 B517 LStd 4,40A 075137 Stettiner, R., Die illustrierten Prudentiushandschriften (1895-1905), II, pl. 145Stettiner, R., Die illustrierten Prudentiushandschriften (1895-1905). .

Medieval Marriage by Dan Sutton

Carolingian and Medieval Marriage


Carolingian marriage had much of the same structure and tradition that contemporary marriage has: families gathering, vows exchanged, a transition of wealth, and consummation of the partnership. However, in Carolingian society, marriage had a slightly different connotation given to it; this fact lies in the question of love. Today people marry because they want to spend the rest of their worldly lives together; in medieval society marriage was most often used as a political tool to bring powerful families together. And while we as a civilization are debating the definition of marriage, the Carolingians were known to have had two definitive types.

Muntehe

Muntehe, by practice, was a transfer of guardianship over a woman from her kin group to her husband. This type of union was based heavily on the social status of the woman and, predictably, the man and woman would be of a similar status background thus insuring that both parties’ families were benefiting. Generally, the benefits of such a binding union (and this was the more legally binding of the two) were the transfer of wealth between families and also the continuation of the bloodlines of both families. One of the main points of interest in this type of marriage is that consent on behalf of the participants was not very important in order for the couple to be married; very often the two had never even met and the families had already given their blessing, which was the only legal consent that was needed in such situations (Karras, The History of Marriage and the Myth of Friedelehe).

Along with the parental consent of the couple to wed, often a bride-price was to be paid by the man. A bride-price would be a monetary amount with which the groom often “purchased” either the wife or the rights to the guardianship of the woman and of her property. An interesting fact, though, is that this bride-price was most often paid to the woman and not to her family. The practice of payment eventually evolved into both a bride-price and a dowry which was the promised wealth and property that the woman brought to the union (Thomas, Medieval and Renaissance Marriage: Theory and Customs). Beyond these monetary agreements there were four conditions that were used to legally bind a muntehe marriage, written out by Hincmar, the Archbishop of Rheims, which states:

1. The partners had to be of equal and free rank and must give their consent
2. The woman must be given by her father and dowered
3. The marriage must be honored publicly
4. The union was completed by sexual consummation (Duby, 34)

As time past, the rules of this more permanent marriage began to change where consent became an important fixture of the proceedings. There were two types of consent: verba de futuro and verba de praesenti. Verba de futuro is very similar to the action of becoming engaged in today’s world; it was the consent of the parties to marry in the future shone by the example in the wording of “I will take you as my wife”. In contrast the promise of verba de praesenti or in the same vein “I do take you as my wife” was used as the final step for the couple to be wed and for the women to then move into her new husband’s quarters. (Thomas, Medieval and Renaissance Marriage: Theory and Customs). It is also important to include that Muntehe was much more difficult to dissolve (or get a divorce) then the upcoming Friedelehe; however, if the marriage was not consummated, it could still be dissolved and the parties were allowed to remarry-this rule coming from the ecclesiastical side of things.

Friedelehe

Friedelehe is a type of marriage in the Carolingian period that more closely relates to our modern version of the practice. In this type the woman is recognized more as a “wife” due to the fact that the marriage is by choice rather than as a symbolic act to make peace or benefit two families. Very often this union was for a lower class crowd or if the man was marrying below his status. Friedelehe may have its origins as an early form of Germanic marriage as shown in Tacitus’s writing “alone among the barbarians they are content with one wife, except for a few who, not because of lust but because of their nobility enter into several marriages” (Karras, The History of Marriage and the Myth of Friedelehe). In this marriage the woman would receive a “morgengabe” or monetary morning gift from the groom after the consummation; it is suggested by historian that this was a present to recognize that the wife had remained a virgin. Notice, though, that this is not a dowry and no possessions were transitioned; thus, allowing this particular form to be much more easily dissolved then the Muntehe version. Moving deeper into the Carolingian period, the status of Friedelehe has been downgraded and the women in the relationship were now known as concubines. And while Friedelehe was an official marriage in which the offspring were considered legitimate, the church became consistently more vocal against these non-binding practices. This lead to celebrating Friedelehe without legal proceedings thus why there are no legal accounts of the practice. (Karras, The History of Marriage and the Myth of Friedelehe). Due to the church pressure this marriage type was also not able to be publicly celebrated. (Stone, Bound From Either Side). It is interesting to note that Charlemagne allowed his daughters to enter into these agreements as opposed to the more binding kind so that he would not have to transfer any money or property permanently to the spouses.

Marriage Proceedings

While Friedelehe has its own set of marriage proceedings, they are not as well documented as that of Muntehe arrangements. There are known to be two separate segments in a medieval marriage: the betrothal and the wedding. The betrothal was a more solemn event (at least in Frankish culture) where the parents of the groom and bride-to-be met and discussed the proceedings and usually the transfers of wealth, property, and anything else having to due with the dowry. It is mentioned that many things that are apparent today started in these medieval ceremonies: exchanging of rings, sealing the marriage by handshake between the bride’s father and groom, the sealing by a kiss. In short, the betrothal always included some passing of material between the two families as a sign of promise of marriage in the future (Thomas, Medieval and Renaissance Marriage: Theory and Customs).
After some time had past since the betrothal (usually to get preparations in order) the wedding occurred. Prior to the twelfth century, there is no evidence suggesting that the nuptials actually took place in a church. It is actually known that early on in these marriages, a priest was not required to attend and if one did it was just to bless the couple, not to actually lead them in the marriage ceremonies. When this process does come about, which is speculated to be when the betrothal moved into the church, the bride and groom would do an exchange much like this.
"I, (MName)., give my body to you, (FName) in loyal matrimony."
"And I receive it(f)."
"I, (Fname), give my body to you, (Mname)."
"And I receive it(m)" (Thomas, Medieval and Renaissance Marriage: Theory and Customs).
Once the ceremony was over the families would join in a feast and then the consummation would occur. This was the true sealing of the marriage and afterwareds the bride would then have a ceremonial removal to her husband’s house.
Marriage Laws
There were many rules and regulations to pre-marriage and marriage in Charlemagne’s time. I will include just a few that were named in the book Carolingian Civilization by Paul Edward Dutton.
“If any man’s wife is dead, he has the right to take another, likewise, also, in the case of a woman. If he takes a third wife, he shall fast for three weeks; if he takes a fourth or a fifth, he shall fast for twenty-one week” (Dutton, 249)
“If anyone who has a lawful wife puts her away and marries another, she whom he marries is not his. He shall not eat or drink, nor shall he be at all the conversation with her whom he has wrongly taken or with her parents. Moreover, if the parents consent to it, they shall be excommunicated. If a woman seduces the husband of another woman, she shall be excommunicated from the Christians.” (Dutton, 249).
Both of these laws come from The Penitential of Halitgar which was written around the late 820’s. The next law comes from the Capitularies of Charlemagne and is in reference to the Saxon Territories.
“If anyone shall have made a prohibited or illegal marriage, if a noble (he shall pay) 60 solidi, if a freeman 30, if a litus 15.” (Dutton, 68”).
As shown, these marriage laws and codes did not just apply to royals or just to laypeople, they affected all. But one of the most interesting rules was that of consanguinity or incestual marriage. Councils during the Carolingian period ruled that no marriage was permitted within at least three degrees with many more saying it should be beyond four to five. However, the only way people really knew this was oral history due to the fact that they genealogists (if there were one in the area) only wrote down the male line; this lead to genealogist having to give consent on a marriage proving the couple to be, at least partially, unrelated. (Duby, The Chivalrous Society).

Works Cited
Duby, Georges. The Chivalrous Society. Berkeley, California: University of California P, 1981.
Duby, Georges. The Knight- the Lady- and the Priest: the Making of Modern Marriage in Medieval France. New York, New York: Pantheon, 1983. 34.
Dutton, Paul E. Carolingian Civilization. 2nd ed. Ontario, Canada: Broadview P, 2004. 86-249.
Karras, Ruth. "The History of Marriage and the Myth of Friedelehe." Early Medieval Europe 14 (2006): 119-151.
Stone, Rachel. "'Bound From Either Side': the Limits of Power in Carolingian Marriage Disputes, 840-870." Gender and History 19 (2007): 467-482.
Thomas, Kirsti. "Medieval and Renaissance Marriage: Theory and Customs." 20 May 2008 .

Medieval Swords by Alex Hunt

Medieval Swords
The Sword was not the most common weapon of the medieval period, although it is most widely known. The sword dates back to the Stone Age where they used sharp, flat pieces of flint and had bone or wooden handles. Though these are technically called swords what we would recognize as swords really only be possible with metallurgy (start of Bronze Age). Fuller was a hammered or ground groove, making the sword lighter without reducing strength. Blade was the part used to cut. The average was 25” to 31” in length and 2” to 2.5” in width. Pummel was the part used to counterweigh the blade and secure the tang. Also usually had a rich design. Also used as a weapon. Tang was the unsharpened part of iron which the hilt is made around. Upper guard and lower guard were used to protect the hand from sliding sword blades of your opponent and keeping your hand from sliding to your own blade. Depending on style of pommel, you can tell what time period the sword is from. For example, washer style was used during the continental Germanic period. Also the boat, hat, and animal pommel were popular in the early Anglo-Saxon period. The triangular and pyramid pommel came from the early Viking period. The lobed style was used in the middle of the Anglo-Saxon period or around the 9th C. Tea-cosy and brazil nut style were used in the middle to late period of the Anglo-Saxons, or the 10th C. The making of a sword I found very interesting. It is called “pattern welding”. It is a time consuming and labor-intensive technique. It made blades very durable and robust. The blades were springy and hard to break which could be why Roland could not break his sword on the rock. Another common way to make a sword was to order blades from Rhineland. Rhineland was an area in West Germany located on both sides of the river Rhine. They then would add there own hilt to the blade they had received. Hilts were typically made from bone or wood. The full metal hilt and the hammered one piece of steel came around later in the late 9th C. This is the technique that everyone sees in movies. This involves a guy hammering away at a piece of metal to make a sword. Historians believe the reason they went to this technique is because the found better ore. In the sixth century swords appeared that had a staple and ring attached to it. At first it was thought that something was put through the ring to keep the sword in place if the user’s grip slackened. However they were solid so nothing could be put through them. Historians also found swords where the ring was removed. They believe that the rings were marks of honor for knights. In the 700’s sword detail took a decline. Also archeologists found less swords buried with dead from this time period. Historians think this is because of the Christian influence. Material objects were not supposed to be held in such high regard. In the 800’s it again started to become popular to have decorated swords. Saxon swords started to have the cross guard bend away from the hand and also were shorter and not as thick. This was to help secure enemy weapons in the cross guard in hopes of disarming them.
The Sword, in Germanic hands was always a hacking and slashing weapon. It had a shallow fuller and a long, flat blade. The pommel was richly made and historians often could tell rank of the sword wielder by the pommel.
There are many different versions of the story of King Arthur and his sword Excalibur. I am going to tell you about Sir Thomas Malory’s Excalibur. Arthur broke the sword he pulled from the stone fighting King Pellinore. King Pellinor was the father of Percival, who later went on the Grail quest with Galahad and Sir Bors. Merlin saves Arthur by putting King Pellinor to sleep. Merlin takes Arthur to a lake and at that lake is a lady and a sword being held out of the water by a hand. Arthur speaks with Lady of the Lake and asks for the sword. She lets Arthur have it in exchange for a gift. Arthur agrees and rows to the sword and gets it. Sometime later King Arthur is killed by Mordred. Sir Bedivere is with the king. The King asks him 3 times to throw the sword back into the water. Sir Bedivere lies to Arthur two times about throwing the sword into the water. When he finally does a hand comes up and grabs the sword.



Bibliography
Pollington, Stephen. English Warrior from Earliest Times. Norfolk England: Anglo- Saxon Books, 2002
Malory, Sir Thomas. Le Morte Darthur Oxford New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 1998.
Wikipedia.org

Medieval Medicine by Cory Meddles

Medicine during the middle ages was a subject that was looked at in a much different perspective than how it is perceived today. Medicine as it is performed today is much more accurate, precise and logical compared to the middle and dark ages. The middle ages relied on much more theological and spiritual theories rather than actual physical and medical theories. During the middle ages scientific method was very sparse in Western Europe and this is probably one of the main reasons there was very little logical theory used in medieval medicine.
As far as medical “technology” had come before entering the Middle Ages, it is easy to admit that it did not make much of an advance or leap in success during the majority of this time. During this time much focus encircled healing the soul rather than the body. Many theologians and even some medical practitioners believed that the cause of diseases and illness came through sin, destiny and even astral influences. This eventually led to a massive death total in Western Europe. Since that much of medieval medicine was based on religion and spiritual aspects, it’s not surprising that churches did much of the medical teaching in the Middle Ages. The church stated that in some cases God would send illness as a punishment to sinners and other evil-doers and the only way to cure yourself was to pay repentances, and this was the theory that the Western Civilization lived by to cure diseases and illnesses.
Church and religion was primarily one of the main focus points during the dark ages. Much of life during the middle ages set their goals and values based on religion which is arguably different from today. Even though there is still a large religious population existing on earth today, it was still much larger during the middle ages. It is easy to say that much of man and woman based their daily lives and values on religious boundaries. So it might sound weird to someone to say that medicine and other medical subjects were based significantly on religion and spirituality, but back then that is all they had to base there ideas on and technology was not a factor.
The actual cures that the population of the Western civilization had for their diseases were still not logical antidotes or remedies but were more reasonable as a whole. Humours were the main underlying principle of medieval medicine. The medieval theory believed that within every person there were four humours or fluids that needed to be present to keep a person healthy. These for humours were the black, yellow, phlegm and blood biles. For instance they believed if someone had too much of the phlegm humour, then they would develop lung problems because the phlegm bile was produced in the lungs. The main logical aspect of this treatment was the fact that they had actual working remedies for these problems. Patients were put on diets, or were exposed to blood-letting by leaches to reduce the blood bile.
A good portion of the medieval medicine ideas came from an ancient Greek physician known as Galen. Galen was a man of many interests and looked into many professions before focusing on medicine. He did much of his studies like dissections and other experiments of that sort on pigs, apes and other animals because dissection of the human body was strictly against roman law. Dissection of these animals taught him a lot but did lead to a lot of knowledge mistakes on the human body because humans and animals are obviously structured much differently internally. He finally became more understanding of the human body when he became a physician for a gladiator school. Working on many cases of trauma and open wounds let him gain more knowledge on the human body and he called this “windows into the body.”
Galen’s research and experiments set a tone for the rest of the world to absorb. Galen was one of the first, and quite possibly the first person to actually start to understand the functions of the human body. Galen gained much experience from working on his gladiator subjects and discovered a lot of different aspects about the human body, for example: body functions, body parts, and other things in that such nature. What is most incredible about this is that Galen did not have the tools or technology that the current people that live on this earth have now. Galen must have been a very intelligent individual to be able to work with individuals such as the gladiators and his other patients and be able to comprehend what was going on with their body. This is primarily why he was a role model for much of medieval medicine.
The prior remedies were not the only assessments made during the middle ages. Herbs were also a tool used in the belief of the Christian faith in the Western civilization. The herbs proved as a form that God has given a form of “prescription” for every illness, these usually coming from animals, vegetables or minerals since it was believed that God created everything on earth. All of these seemed to carry a type of signature that indicated what part of the body or fulfillment that they medicated. The seeds of skull caps were used to cure headaches basically because they resembled little skulls and white spotted leaves were used for tuberculosis because they looked like diseased lungs. Besides the use of herbs and fulfillment of humours, other Christian beliefs were used, for example certain shrines. Many ill patients were brought to specific shrines that were supposably used to cure patients of specific illnesses and diseases. Although sometimes possible “miracles” occurred, this belief turned out to be a great downfall for the medieval period. What is known as the “Black Death” plague Leprosy killed many people of the Western civilization because the use of spiritual and religious forms of medication simply did not work.
Although in the middle ages they were obviously not as technologically advanced as we are today, surgeons and physicians did exist. But there was a big difference between the two. For the most part physicians aided to problems that surfaced inside the body and surgeons dealt with other problems like wounds, broken bones, amputations and other severe medical problems. This makes sense because that is how the medical world works today, physicians are basically the people who are able to diagnose the problems and the surgeons focus on the technical work. After a noticeable amount of people were not being healed correctly, the people demanded that surgeons, physicians and others of that sort to be medically trained for a number of years to be able to practice on patients which is still demanded upon to this day. Many medical professionals were scholars and priests which made sense because even though medicine was starting to become a little more logical it still followed a Christian path. Any untrained physicians were liable to be prosecuted and fined.
Even though it is stated that medical advancement did not take place during the middle ages, there are reasons why the practice stayed in place and at least made an attempt to become better. This reason is because of the up-rise of epidemics. The “Black Death”which was actually a pandemic which killed over seventy-five million people in Europe in the 1340’s. But that was not the only epidemic. Other diseases occurred, for example Leprosy. Leprosy is an infectious disease that is caused primarily by mycobacterium. This disease is a close relative to tuberculosis but is different in the fact that it cannot be grown outside of other living animal cells. This was unknown back in the Middle Ages however because of the lack of technology and killed many Western civilians. The main remedies used to attempt to cure these people came from obviously religion. As stated earlier, shrines, statues and prayer were used to help heal the diseased people but it was not a successful attempt.
For an overview, for the most part medieval medicine was very useless in most cases and did not enhance until they started to follow Islamic practices which were much more enhanced and useful. Islamic practices were much more helpful because they focused on other medical interests rather than just religion. The Islamic medical field seemed to be much more advanced than Western Europe. They based their medical practices on more logical boundaries than Western Europe. The Islamic practices were more focused on physical medical attention which was more logical and is the main practice today. Islamic physicians actually traveled to help cure many of the people of the medieval Western civilization. It cannot be certain what other medical tools or remedies were used in this time because not all of that time of history was recorded but it is certain that we have come a dramatically long way since then.

Bibliography

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_medicine

http://library.thinkquest.org/15569/hist-6.html

http://www.maggietron.com/med/epidemics.php

The Cambridge History of Medicine, Porter, Roy,

Visualizing Medieval Medicine And Natural History, 1200-1550, Jean A. Givens, Karen M. Reeds, Alain Touwaide

Medieval Medicine by Cory Meddles

Medicine during the middle ages was a subject that was looked at in a much different perspective than how it is perceived today. Medicine as it is performed today is much more accurate, precise and logical compared to the middle and dark ages. The middle ages relied on much more theological and spiritual theories rather than actual physical and medical theories. During the middle ages scientific method was very sparse in Western Europe and this is probably one of the main reasons there was very little logical theory used in medieval medicine.
As far as medical “technology” had come before entering the Middle Ages, it is easy to admit that it did not make much of an advance or leap in success during the majority of this time. During this time much focus encircled healing the soul rather than the body. Many theologians and even some medical practitioners believed that the cause of diseases and illness came through sin, destiny and even astral influences. This eventually led to a massive death total in Western Europe. Since that much of medieval medicine was based on religion and spiritual aspects, it’s not surprising that churches did much of the medical teaching in the Middle Ages. The church stated that in some cases God would send illness as a punishment to sinners and other evil-doers and the only way to cure yourself was to pay repentances, and this was the theory that the Western Civilization lived by to cure diseases and illnesses.
Church and religion was primarily one of the main focus points during the dark ages. Much of life during the middle ages set their goals and values based on religion which is arguably different from today. Even though there is still a large religious population existing on earth today, it was still much larger during the middle ages. It is easy to say that much of man and woman based their daily lives and values on religious boundaries. So it might sound weird to someone to say that medicine and other medical subjects were based significantly on religion and spirituality, but back then that is all they had to base there ideas on and technology was not a factor.
The actual cures that the population of the Western civilization had for their diseases were still not logical antidotes or remedies but were more reasonable as a whole. Humours were the main underlying principle of medieval medicine. The medieval theory believed that within every person there were four humours or fluids that needed to be present to keep a person healthy. These for humours were the black, yellow, phlegm and blood biles. For instance they believed if someone had too much of the phlegm humour, then they would develop lung problems because the phlegm bile was produced in the lungs. The main logical aspect of this treatment was the fact that they had actual working remedies for these problems. Patients were put on diets, or were exposed to blood-letting by leaches to reduce the blood bile.
A good portion of the medieval medicine ideas came from an ancient Greek physician known as Galen. Galen was a man of many interests and looked into many professions before focusing on medicine. He did much of his studies like dissections and other experiments of that sort on pigs, apes and other animals because dissection of the human body was strictly against roman law. Dissection of these animals taught him a lot but did lead to a lot of knowledge mistakes on the human body because humans and animals are obviously structured much differently internally. He finally became more understanding of the human body when he became a physician for a gladiator school. Working on many cases of trauma and open wounds let him gain more knowledge on the human body and he called this “windows into the body.”
Galen’s research and experiments set a tone for the rest of the world to absorb. Galen was one of the first, and quite possibly the first person to actually start to understand the functions of the human body. Galen gained much experience from working on his gladiator subjects and discovered a lot of different aspects about the human body, for example: body functions, body parts, and other things in that such nature. What is most incredible about this is that Galen did not have the tools or technology that the current people that live on this earth have now. Galen must have been a very intelligent individual to be able to work with individuals such as the gladiators and his other patients and be able to comprehend what was going on with their body. This is primarily why he was a role model for much of medieval medicine.
The prior remedies were not the only assessments made during the middle ages. Herbs were also a tool used in the belief of the Christian faith in the Western civilization. The herbs proved as a form that God has given a form of “prescription” for every illness, these usually coming from animals, vegetables or minerals since it was believed that God created everything on earth. All of these seemed to carry a type of signature that indicated what part of the body or fulfillment that they medicated. The seeds of skull caps were used to cure headaches basically because they resembled little skulls and white spotted leaves were used for tuberculosis because they looked like diseased lungs. Besides the use of herbs and fulfillment of humours, other Christian beliefs were used, for example certain shrines. Many ill patients were brought to specific shrines that were supposably used to cure patients of specific illnesses and diseases. Although sometimes possible “miracles” occurred, this belief turned out to be a great downfall for the medieval period. What is known as the “Black Death” plague Leprosy killed many people of the Western civilization because the use of spiritual and religious forms of medication simply did not work.
Although in the middle ages they were obviously not as technologically advanced as we are today, surgeons and physicians did exist. But there was a big difference between the two. For the most part physicians aided to problems that surfaced inside the body and surgeons dealt with other problems like wounds, broken bones, amputations and other severe medical problems. This makes sense because that is how the medical world works today, physicians are basically the people who are able to diagnose the problems and the surgeons focus on the technical work. After a noticeable amount of people were not being healed correctly, the people demanded that surgeons, physicians and others of that sort to be medically trained for a number of years to be able to practice on patients which is still demanded upon to this day. Many medical professionals were scholars and priests which made sense because even though medicine was starting to become a little more logical it still followed a Christian path. Any untrained physicians were liable to be prosecuted and fined.
Even though it is stated that medical advancement did not take place during the middle ages, there are reasons why the practice stayed in place and at least made an attempt to become better. This reason is because of the up-rise of epidemics. The “Black Death”which was actually a pandemic which killed over seventy-five million people in Europe in the 1340’s. But that was not the only epidemic. Other diseases occurred, for example Leprosy. Leprosy is an infectious disease that is caused primarily by mycobacterium. This disease is a close relative to tuberculosis but is different in the fact that it cannot be grown outside of other living animal cells. This was unknown back in the Middle Ages however because of the lack of technology and killed many Western civilians. The main remedies used to attempt to cure these people came from obviously religion. As stated earlier, shrines, statues and prayer were used to help heal the diseased people but it was not a successful attempt.
For an overview, for the most part medieval medicine was very useless in most cases and did not enhance until they started to follow Islamic practices which were much more enhanced and useful. Islamic practices were much more helpful because they focused on other medical interests rather than just religion. The Islamic medical field seemed to be much more advanced than Western Europe. They based their medical practices on more logical boundaries than Western Europe. The Islamic practices were more focused on physical medical attention which was more logical and is the main practice today. Islamic physicians actually traveled to help cure many of the people of the medieval Western civilization. It cannot be certain what other medical tools or remedies were used in this time because not all of that time of history was recorded but it is certain that we have come a dramatically long way since then.

Bibliography

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_medicine

http://library.thinkquest.org/15569/hist-6.html

http://www.maggietron.com/med/epidemics.php

The Cambridge History of Medicine, Porter, Roy,

Visualizing Medieval Medicine And Natural History, 1200-1550, Jean A. Givens, Karen M. Reeds, Alain Touwaide

Medieval Hairstyles by Julie Toeniskoetter

Medieval Hairstyles
By: Julie Toeniskoetter
Hair is one of the many features we can use today to distinguish ourselves from one another. The color and texture help define who we are in terms of ethnicity, and how we style our hair allows us to be individuals. However hair used to have a much more symbolic purpose. From the time of the barbarians until the time of Charlemagne, hair was used to establish status. Different hairstyles represented different occupations and the status one had in society.
During the Late Antiquity hair was symbolic of age. Tacitus described the act of the Germans growing their hair from the time of maturity until they have made their first kill. Only then are they allowed to shave their beard and cut their hair. He also described them as having red hair rather than the traditional blond. This could be because the blood of their enemies dyed it red. According to Tacitus, the Germanic tribes were mostly interested in warfare. Germanic men piled hair on top of their heads to make themselves seem bigger and scarier. It is similar to a dog that would raise it’s fur when it felt threatened. To keep their hair up, they would cover the many knots with butter to help them stick. In this case, hair was mostly used as a prop to enhance the image of a fierce warrior and symbolize young men’s arrival into the military lifestyle.
From these Germanic tribes rose the Merovingian Dynasty. These German kings distinguished themselves with their long flowing hair. They began growing it from birth and never cut it, nor was anyone else allowed to cut it. The Merovingians established a hierarchical system based on the length of one’s hair. The king often had hair down his back. Free men who were below the king had hair, but it did not touch their shoulders. Slaves had shaved heads. It was a grave offense to offer a slave a wig so that he could pass for a free man. During this time hair meant that you were a free man, so to forcibly shave someone was a big deal. Kings often used shearing to get rid of political rivals. Many sons, cousins, and nephews were forcibly sheared to keep them out of the way. By cutting their long hair they were reduced in rank and could not claim the throne. Foreign enemies were also sheared as a sign of submission to the Merovingian king.
The tonsure was also another way to get rid of political enemies. The tonsure is the hairstyle of monks, characterized by a ring of hair surrounding a mostly bald head. The tonsure symbolized one’s submission to God and was thought to be a reminder of his “enslavement” to God (Dutton 14). While many monks chose to be tonsured, many members of the royal or aristocratic families were tonsured against their will. This was far more drastic than cutting the hair short because it forced people into the monastery. Many of the Merovingian king’s sons were often tonsured and sent to the monastery to avoid a struggle for the throne. However, some of the royal family actually chose to be tonsured. Chlodovald (also known as Saint Cloud), the grandson of King Childebert I famously gave up his claim for power by entering the church (Dutton 15). Later Carloman, Pepin’s brother, also gave up his kingdom as well.
It is clear that the Merovingians viewed hair as a symbol of power and rank. To them, the ultimate humiliation was losing their hair. However, many who were shorn hid away in a monastery or small town and simply waited for their hair to grow back. This worked for some, like the merchant Euphronius and Theuderic III. However stories tell of others who weren’t so lucky. Chararic, the Salian king, and his son were captured by Clovis I and were tonsured. However they openly defied him by threatening to grow their hair back and return to power. Upon hearing this Clovis had their heads chopped off. He was forced by their defiance to choose the more permanent solution (Dutton 13).
Eventually the Merovingians were deposed by the mayors of the palace. Ironically, Pepin the Short followed the Merovingian tradition by having King Childeric III sheared and put into a monastery. What better way to show your power by taking it the way the old regime did. Einhard portrays the Merovingians as a figureheads who did nothing but sit on their throne growing their hair. He felt the Carolingians had a right to depose the old monarchs and take power.
Unlike the Merovingian kings with their long flowing curls, the Carolingians kept their hair short and only in some cases did they grow short beards on their faces. This is considered a reaction to the long hair that the Merovingians prided themselves for. Charlemagne in particular is only described as having short hair and a mustache. The short hair was a very roman style, and it went along with the other Roman elements that he was trying to bring back to his empire. Religion also played a role in the transition from long hair to short because long hair represented the pagan Germanic style, whereas short hair was more Christian.
During the Carolingian period, hair began to lose its significance in the royal household. Short hair was simply more Christian and Roman; it was not used to define a free man or a man of rank. The practices of shearing and tonsuring one’s enemies had mostly disappeared, though Charlemagne and Louis the Pious did use it occasionally to get rid of their rivals as the Merovingians did. Overall, rather than focusing on hair, Charlemagne focused on bringing the empire together and reorganizing the education and monastic systems.
One distinguishing feature about the Carolingians was that many wore mustaches. Charlemagne, Louis the Pious, Lothar, and Charles the Bald were all at some point depicted with mustaches. This was the new dominant royal hairstyle. They could not grow their beards or their hair, because that would be too reminiscent of the old regime. It is thought that Charlemagne may have mimicked the mustache of Theoderic the Great, a Roman Emperor whom he admired.
| By the end of the Carolingian period, hair had lost much of the symbolism and power it had had. Hair had gone from big knots piled on top of one’s head, to long flowing curls, to short and defiant. The only hairstyle that had lasted was the tonsure of the monks. The bald head with a ring of hair around it stayed significant and unchanging throughout both the Merovingian and Carolingian periods.

Works Cited

Fanning, William. "Tonsure." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 14. New York: Robert
Appleton Company, 1912. 30 Jun. 2008

Dutton, Paul M. Charlemagne's Mustache. Palgrave MacMillan, 2004. 1-42.

Einhard: The Life of Charlemagne, translated by Samuel Epes Turner, (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1880)

Tacitus: The Agricola and Germania, A. J. Church and W. J. Brodribb, trans., (London: Macmillan, 1877), pp. 87ff

Medieval Tatoo by Corey Ross

Medieval Tattoo
Corinna Ross

When examining the tradition of tattooing, one finds very little specific information on the medieval European tradition. Most tattooing of the early 5th century can be traced to one of two traditions: pagan tribal or Roman slavery. It is not until the late 8th century when devotional tattooing becomes a notable form and none of these forms resembles the form of “fashion” which tattooing has taken in today’s popular culture.

In speaking of a pagan tradition at this time, there are many cultures to which one might turn, but here it is referring to the ‘Northmen’: the Anglo-Saxons and/or the Celtic traditions and perhaps Viking in the later Medieval era. One term commonly used for the pagan inking is the Latin ‘picti’ which means painted. Tattooing was heavily used as a symbol of status among the warrior class and its defensive impact by making them appear more ferocious and imposing in battle. The subsequent generations of these tribal tattoos have become some of the most popular in today’s tattoo culture, with its intricate knotting and its appealing designs; it has remained through the ages.

Another class frequenting these types of markings in the pagan custom is the sage, the other ‘nobility’, for the educated could communicate their oral traditions and translate them through images –a different language. One example is in an Irish legend of Túán, which has been “alive for centuries” but the stories have been “passed down to them is conflated with the literal inscribing of the story” (Caplan, p.41), this does not necessarily mean that these stories were always tattooed on an individual but also refers to the use of vellum inscriptions, however the storytelling is an important part of many of the cultural tattoos of this region and of the artwork which is seen in many of the later manuscripts. This can also be seen as a direct tie from the skin of man to the skin of an animal and, hence, to some of the very earliest manuscripts produced using vellum. These were all voluntary markings and they were brandished proudly. There is strong reason to believe, as noted by a contributor in Caplan, that these ‘picti’ may have been used to share cultural history and pass the wisdom of the tribes, as the legend of Túán implies.

The Roman slaves, on the other hand, were involuntarily marked with a letter or shortened word on the forehead; a letter referring to their crimes, i.e. ‘fur’ meaning ‘thief’, this was originally done to identify escaped slaves and became common to both criminals being sent to the mines and even those who had been sentenced to death. The placement of the tattoos was very important. Aside from being a particularly painful process and location for the ‘stigmata’, the forehead is also clearly visible to anyone passing: difficult to hide, difficult to escape and stands as a constant reminder to the individual themselves when they look upon their own reflection. The punishment seeps into their very soul in this manner and they are constantly identified with their label or ‘stigmata’. It also seems that the marking of the skin was believed to be visible in the afterlife at this time and criminals could carry this marking with them to the world which awaited beyond. During this time and in this reign, one of the most frequently punished crimes was that of being Christian. There is a late reference in Roman laws allowing criminals to be marked on their hands or feet. Both of these locations are still highly painful and regionally difficult to hide (Roman sandals and traditional dress leaving both exposed and visible).

However, as the Roman Empire dwindled and Christianity expanded, there a new movement in tattooing, that of memorializing and commemoration. The movement from the forehead to other locations in Roman tradition is important to the development of other traditions, especially among Christian tattooing during this era and the next several generations. During the Early Medieval period, Christianity becomes increasingly popular and some of these more dedicated Christians begin to tattoo themselves with the same markings with which their Christian-slave predecessors had been marked. Monastics are also noted with tattoos similar to those believed to be referenced in the bible:

In the book of Revelation, a work replete with mentions of marks and seals both positive and negative, John, writing near the end of the first century, describes a vision of a martial Christ as ‘the Word of God’, leading the armies of heaven:’And he has on his cloak and on his thigh the name inscribed: “King of kings and Lord of lords”…. One of these, a monk named Clemantianus, was found ‘having [the words] written on his thigh: “Mani, the disciple of Jesus Christ”’. (Caplan, p.29)

However, in 786-7 A.D., Pope Hadrian I and the Council of Northumberland denounce and forbid tattooing throughout the Empire if it is in the pagan tradition of tattooing which was considered ‘diabolical.’ It does allow, even considers religious or spiritual tattoos worthy of having, them as a deep expression of one’s devotion to God. This practice persists within monastic life for centuries—whether it was accepted and through the later period when it was not by some of the church leaders including today when it is generally not approved.

Christian tattooing also had a great increase during the Crusade with the soldiers participating and commemorating their journey to Jerusalem as well as the increasing popularity of the pilgrimage. Many returned home from Jerusalem with Coptic tattoos, perhaps similar to those which persist even today due to woodblocks which can be dated to at least as early at the 18th century. These designs are usually representative of the particular mission or pilgrimage and have location specifications based on design chosen and the age and gender of the recipient.


If one looks at early manuscripts such as the Book of Kells and compares it to the knot-work that is seen in many of the pagan Celtic tattoing, one can imagine that these Middle Aged Christian tattoos would begin closely echoing some of their Anglo-Saxon predecessors, as did much of the manuscripting of the era. This may be especially true since those tattoos which were ‘approved’ by the church were being marked on its most devout monastics, some of the very same that were-daily- copying the Celtic scrolls and patterning and designs into their lovely books.



Drawi Celtic Cross Rendering An example of an Insular-style animal pattern from the Book of Kells

It may be important to note that there is no mention of pagans halting their traditional practices of tattooing unless Christian conversions directly affected the regions. While Christian tattooing comes and goes underground and resurfaces, there is a consistency of existence among research within the pagan cultures of this practice. The causes may vary between a cultural defense mechanism to storytelling, it remains in practice. Civilized tattooing seems to definitely migrate in and out of practice and favor, just as it did for the Greeks and Romans.

There is another practice which has not, thus far, been mentioned and that is the practice of medicinal or magical tattooing, which may have some relation to the medieval period. However, not much research has been established in this vein. Based on other cultural regions at this time and even much earlier, one might deduce that some forms of tattooing—perhaps especially amongst women, which are little mentioned in European history—might have participated in this form of tattooing for the health of themselves, their husbands, and their children as so many women of other cultures did, including South and North American, Pacific Islanders, African, and Arab.

The reasons for tattooing will always vary from person to person, from culture to culture. The acceptance of tattooing will probably always differ for the same reasons, but in the Middle Ages, tattooing did exist throughout Europe and it did persist, whether it was fashionable or not and most of it can be seen in some of today’s tattoo generation in some small way. Most importantly, tattooing is able to tell a different part of the story of an everyday people for a period which only limited facts are thus far known. It is able to express depth of faith, depth of persecution, tribal stories and status symbols (this is a jewelry that cannot be taken off) and a level of belonging—to a faith, to a people, to a region.



Images dated 400 A.D. (Tribal Tattoos Through History)
http://www.vanishingtattoo.com/400adpicts.htm

http://www.vanishingtattoo.com/images/tattoo_2/400adpict.gif


Bibliography:

Caplan, Jane. Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and American History. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 2000. pps 17-45.

Celtic Cross History and Symbolism, Stephen Walker. April 17, 1996. < http://www.celtarts.com/celtic.htm>

The Christian Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt. 1992-2001. Copt-Net.

Gilbert, Steve. Tattoo History: A Sourcebook, New York: Juno Books, LLC, 2000. pps.149-156.

Jones, C.P. “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding in Graeco-Roman Antiquity.” The Journal of Roman Studies, vol. 77, 1987. pps 139-155.

The Poor Blogger. Saturday, January 07, 2006. < http://poor-blogger.blogspot.com/2006/01/coptic-christian-tattoos.html>

Tattoo Symbol. 2002-2007. Terisa Green, PhD. < http://www.tattoosymbol.com/christian/christian1.html> and < http://www.tattoosymbol.com/christian/christian2.html>

Ancient Celtic Art vs. Medieval Celtic Art. 2007. WP Ancient-Celts.com
< http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://ancient-celts.com/ChiRhoDetail.jpg&imgrefurl=http://ancient-celts.com/AncientVsMedievalArt6.html&h=496&w=487&sz=248&hl=en&start=71&um=1&tbnid=0aMJ_tDTCkIDzM:&tbnh=130&tbnw=128&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dceltic%2Bcross,%2B%2522book%2Bof%2Bkells%2522%26start%3D54%26ndsp%3D18%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN>

Tribal Tattoos Through History. 1999-2007. Vanishing Tattoo.

Loathar I by Sean Adams

Lothar I
Lothar I was born in the year 795 and passed away in the year 855. He was the grandson of Charlemagne and the son of Louis the Pious. His childhood is rather unknown due to the lack of sources written about young Lothar. However, being a member of a royal bloodline meant that he must have had a rather easy and privileged childhood with no responsibilities. He probably heard stories from his grandfather about the old days of Germanic tribes and their native language. He must have also been schooled in Latin both the language and the written word. He would have eaten the best food and worn the most elaborate clothing made of silk and jewelry and golden trinkets. However, what is commonly accepted by most researchers, is the belief that he was an active member within the court of his grandfather, Charlemagne. This, of course, would have given first hand knowledge of being a ruler and an emperor. It could also explain his future actions of treachery and lust and hunger for power.
His adult life is better understood and in 821 he married a beautiful woman by the name of Irmengarde who was the daughter of Hugo, Count of Tours. This marriage, like all marriages within nobility, was more than likely arranged to gain wealth, land, and prestige, rather than two people meeting and falling in love. This would solidify his father’s reign by uniting Hugo within his own bloodline, thus insuring allegiance and soldiers whenever needed. He had three sons, Louis II, who was the oldest, Lothar II and Charles, all of whom would carry on the bloodline and reign of the Carolingians.
Lothar’s adult life was also blessed because he was the oldest son and this would come to benefit him quite well. He lusted for power of his own, even though he had been crowned co- emperor by his father. He led a revolt against his father and ruled for about a year until his father regained power. Then, on his death bed, Louis the Pious divided his lands evenly among his sons. Louis even included Charles, his step son from his marriage with Judith, (who had fought for her son to be recognized as a legitimate heir to be worthy of receiving part of the vast kingdom) in his decision. Louis did not want any fighting or insurrection, like what Lothar had done to him.
Lothar I inherited not only land, Italy and many others, but also the title of being crowned emperor and received the royal insignia proving this. In April 823 he was crowned emperor by the pope Paschal I, in order to give legitimacy to his reign as emperor like all the emperors before him. This, of course, gave him reign over the Western region, but there was still an Eastern emperor. Lothar became greedy with power and he soon wanted all the lands for himself. He had seen his grandfather’s reign firsthand and his vast empire and great power and he wanted the same.
His brothers Charles and Louis II decided it was time to lead a revolt against Lothar rather then lose their inheritance and have one man being emperor again. They remembered that he had led a revolt against their father in his lust for power. They became fearful of the possibility of their own deaths because Lothar I would not want anyone challenging his authority. In 842 they made a pledge together to reinstate the order and dream of peace among the sons that their father had wanted when he divided the lands as one of his last acts.
. The brothers fought Lothar I on June 25th of 842 at Fontenoy. Lothar’s men were instructed to take as much gold and valuables as possible before retreating from his brother’s combined armies. He was defeated but not totally powerless. Nevertheless the defeat showed him that the combined forces of his brothers was too overwhelming and would mean certain demise for him. So in 843 he decided it was best to make peace, rather than being completely stripped of his power. In the Treaty of Verdun he did just that. He retained power within Italy and Belgium and the Netherlands down the Rhine River to Switzerland and his brothers divided the rest amongst themselves. He would reside mainly in Italy and would not cause any more insurrections worthy of his brothers fighting him again and making any more treaties.
He remained in power until 855 when he became ill. Knowing that he had not long for this world he divided his lands among his 3 sons and joined the monastic order. He entered the monastery of Prum and died six days later.
Thus was the life of Lothar I, son of Louis the Pious, and grandson of Charlemagne. When researching this paper I found mainly the same basic information about Lothar I, his life, his rule, and the end of his life. I found that Lothar seemed like a treacherous man who was full of greed and power hungry. This can be seen when he lead a revolt against his own father because he wanted power immediately rather then waiting until his father’s demise. He decided that he would rather strip Louis the Pious of everything he had inherited and gained on his own rather then spending as much time with his father until his death.
Even after he had gained power and was later stripped of it, his father still gave him and his brothers land and wealth so there would be no fighting. This, of course, was a wise decision because he wished for nothing but peace and prosperity amongst his sons. This was his way of balancing power. Once Lothar was given such a marvelous gift of land, also being named emperor, he would rather keep it himself then to share it with his brothers. I would have guessed that after the insurgence against his father he would be weary of a revolt happening to him but still he put himself in that position. His brothers did go against him and he was on the verge of losing everything so that is when he wanted peace, if not stopped he would have ruled everything until his death.
Only until his impending demise around 855, did his sons and brothers see his humanity and kindness. He divided his land and joined the monastic order to save his soul and be at peace. However, his hunger for power could be explained by his years in Charlemagne’s court. When you are young and impressionable and are within the presence of great man (whom many people would write about, Alcuin being one such notable author), it is hard not to wish that for one’s self. Perhaps if Lothar I would have had someone as wise and as humble as Alcuin, the bishop, within his own inner circle of advisors the insurrection against his father would never have happened. His lust for being as powerful and as noble as his grandfather, the great Charlemagne, was too great and so he was corrupted with a need for power.
Once he had ascertained this power by crowning himself emperor, he quickly saw the errors of his ways when he had enraged and faced the powerful combined forces of his brothers. This is perhaps when he knew that being emperor was too difficult to keep when you do not have the hearts and minds of all those who should be loyal to you.
Either way love him or hate him, Lothar I has his own place in history; he did carry on the Carolingian line that his grandfather had created. He was a great leader because he remained in power even after assaults on his lands by the Normans and Saragens, until his death and change to the monastic order.
There are historical documents written about his reign and life. Of course reading and learning about him makes historians question his motives and thought process for his actions. However, that is all that studying history is, you read the documents and make your own judgments and predictions based on that information in the context of that time period. So he can be seen as both a devil and an angel, which echos in to our world today. Many of us crave power and wish for it at any costs. We soon find that what we wish for may just be our downfall. When you do whatever you can to ascertain such goals, then you make peace and try to live your life as best as you can in order to make up for past mistakes. So in the end, Lothar I’s life was notable and should be studied so we do not make the same mistakes that he had done with his own life.



Bibliography

“History of France.” Historyworld. http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?ParagraphID=elt. Accessed on May 27th.

“Lothair I.” Online Encyclopedia. http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/LOB_LUP/LOTHAIR_I.html. Accessed on May 27th.

“ Emperor Lothair I.” Leibnitiana. http://www.gwleibniz.com/britannica_pages/emp_lothair_i/emp_lothair_i.html. Accessed on May 27th.

“The Ordinance of Louis the Pius Division of the Empire of the Year 817.” The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/medieval/verdun.htm. Accessed May 27th.

“Lothair I.” Love To Know Classic Encyclopedia. http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Lothair_I. Accessed on May 27th.