The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, NapoleonBevan, Wilson Lloyd
History
The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, Napoleon
Bevan, Wilson Lloyd
History; Kings and rulers
There was no limit to his interests, and he brought in a high
conception of duty. Up to the close of his life nothing was too small
to escape his personal supervision; he kept count of the chickens
on his personal estates, dictated his capitularies, and learned the
art of writing, a rare accomplishment, and deemed among the Teutonic
races the special work of a cleric. He presided over assemblies and
councils, ordered the system of chanting in his private chapel, and
hardly a year passed by that he did not visit one of the frontiers of
the Empire. His mental capacity was characterized by something of the
mobility which belonged to the Renaissance period, a trait not seen
among medieval rulers, and perhaps paralleled only in the case of
Frederick II. His talents were not employed towards futile ends; he
economized them, and while he was open to impressions, he kept with
scrupulousness his store of energy under control. He was free from
Napoleon’s defect of fitting all things as parts of a rigid system, and
he knew when to keep his hands from disarranging a firmly established
social order.
It may be that a larger measure of interference from him would have
prevented the growth of feudal privileges which the land system of
Western Europe was already producing. This evolution he did not
oppose; in some cases his own acts furthered it. The court and “missi”
under his direction became, as it were, observers and directors of a
naturally developing type of local administration which the general
ordinances of the Empire did nothing to repress. Feudal customs, still,
of course, in their germ, were pressed into the service of the state,
as for example when the lord was required to appear accompanied by his
dependents at the general military assembly of the King. The Emperor
was quick in reconciling local divergencies, and in discerning some
easily practicable method of making seemingly irreconcilable factors
contribute mutually to his ends. When a governmental order failed,
he was fertile in discerning an immediate remedy, careless whether
the innovation of a reform could be theoretically accommodated to the
administration as it before existed. Wherever the structure he planned
turned out faulty, he went to work with the spirit of an artist who
thinks more of the safety of the whole building than of the harmony of
its parts. His ideal of rule was always before him, yet there was none
of the stage effect of which Napoleon was so fond. He did not try to
impress upon others principles that did not attract his own sympathies.
He believed in what he did and believed the way he was doing it was
consistent with his own ideals of right, personal and social. The
empire was to be a community guided by Christian standards, a visible
embodiment of the City of God, as understood in his day.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account