Any basis for this idea ?
>>1144932
Well I mean, have you ever seen him in person? Know anyone who has? Didn't think so.
>>1144932
No.
>>1144932
When I found this image, it seemed like the Swiss author talked up Charlie to be a very magnificent person. What little I got from the old German involved his fashion, his strength, and the care he gave to his daughters.
I am not sure if you are asking for a basis FOR the myth of Charlemagne, or if you are asking for a basis AGAINST the idea that he is a myth. Clear it up for me a little.
Also, he was objectively real so there's that. Not sure how one can argue such a thing
>>1144932
What, phantom time hypothesis?
Op here not sure how it was called but my question basically is
Was charl the great real
I recall some obscure historian claiming he and 500 yrs of history aren't real
What does he base this idea on and are his ideas any good
I mean, thinking that some ancient king who left behind a very decentrilzied tribal kingdom is mythical is one thing, but one that left behind an empire that stretched from the Iberian peninsula to the Baltic sea and had his own Renaissance?
>>1144932
>>1148002
> >
> >
> >
>>1147972
I know who you're talking about, disregard that schizo all-cap typing autist
he thinks the monks who recorded history just made everything up because they were the only ones copying things down
>>1148129
thought so too but just was curious if he based his "idea" in reality or just his own ani
>>1144932
No, Einhard was a contemporary who wrote a biography about him.
>>1148002
subtle
nobody unfortunate enough to be called Carl will ever be able to accomplish anything great, no matter how hard they try
therefore Carl the Great is a myth
q.e.d
