| Nat129, I put a note in the description briefly explaining why the Carolingians are not included, but there's a 200 word limit. I'll go into depth here: Charlemagne conquered and ruled over an area that includes much of western Europe. His son Louis became emperor and following the Frankish custom, that empire was split among Louis' sons. In 843, after much civil war amongst the brothers a treaty was signed at Verdun, which split the empire into three regions of government, one east of the Rhine (Louis the German's, from which would come the Holy Roman Empire),one west of the Rhine (Charles the Bald's, from which would emerge France) and the region of Lorraine (Lothair's portion, which would be a contested region for centuries to come). Both France and Germany have a claim to Carolingian/Frankish origin. Both retained aspects of Carolingian government. But neither is identical to, or shares all the essential features of, that Empire. The last Carolingian ruler in the eastern portion died in 911 A.D., and was replaced by a new Saxon dynasty of kings. Eventually one of these kings was crowned emperor by Pope John XII, but this emperor and those who followed him never had the same role relative to Europe or exercised the same universal authority as Charlemagne. I would argue that their "empire" had a Carolingian flavor, but was manifestly not the same institution that Charles the Great established. Of course, Otto would have regarded himself as the successor the Charlemagne's office (as Charlemagne regarded himself as in some sense Roman) but it seems to me that just as one cannot say that Charlemagne's empire was the "Roman" empire, there is a similar (although less severe) break between Charlemagne's empire and that German institution that eventually developed from Louis the German's portion of his grandfather's empire. This seems to be the way most modern medieval historians treat the issue. |
Ivy League 
Famous Wars 
Original 13 Colonies
