This post may contain affiliate links, meaning I get a commission if you decide to make a purchase through my links, at no cost to you. The products that I advertise are the ones I believe in.
Her name is Joyeuse meaning ‘joyous’ and she is the magnificent sword of Charlemagne that accompanied him on his rise to power from Frankish King in 768 to Holy Roman Emperor in 800 to the posthumously acknowledged ‘father of all Europe’ after his death in 814. Joyeuse has a 32.6 inch blade with its overall length being 41.3 inches, it weighs only 3.59 pounds and must have been a joyous marvel to wield! The story of how Charlemagne’s Excalibur-esque sword ended up in Italy in the year 1495 will pommel you to the hilt.
Charlemagne And His Sword
Charlemagne is said to always have had his sword by his side, even when not actually wearing it, for it was a great source of power and comfort. Only his immediate family had cause to effect its removal, as author Derek Wilson relates, such as the king’s arrival back home after a long battle: “his sons falling over themselves to help him divest himself of gloves and sword, while his daughters rushed out with flowers and fruit” (Wilson 2006: 53).
It was in battle, conquering lands and consolidating Frankish tribes under his rule, did Joyeuse gain its ultimate fame – Joyeuse would be come so famous that it was actually heralded as a holy relic after Charlemagne’s death. Charles I, also known as Charles The Great, is best known by the French equivalent “Charlemagne” (Charle = Charles; Magne = Great) who is said to have been quite the mighty figure on horseback.
“Then could be seen the iron Charles, helmeted with an iron helmet, his hands clad in iron gauntlets, his iron breast and Platonic shoulders protected with an iron breastplate; an iron spear was raised on high in his left hand; his right always rested on his unconquered sword.”
Einhard 1969: 109
Charlemagne not only conquered all of Western Europe from France to Germany and Austria, making him the king of the Franks, he also conquered almost all of Italy, making him king of the Lombards as well. When I say “almost” all of Italy, the one region he never managed to conquer was Benevento; the people of Benevento are an incredible story in and of themselves as they remained free and independent throughout Viking, Frankish, Greek, and a whole slew of other invasions. Charlemagne tried in 787, “sorry Charlie.”
It was through Charlemagne’s campaigns in Italy between 772 and 787 that his sword first made its appearance there. Charlemagne was extremely forward-thinking and knew well that his goal of maintaining a hold over the conquered Lombards may not be as easy as buttering your garlic bread so he installed his second-born son Pepin to become “Pepin King of Italy” in 781.
It was 19 years later, in the year 800, that Charlemagne and his sword were to reappear in Italy, this time for his coronation in Rome as the very first Holy Roman Emperor. This was a title and charge that Charlemagne took extremely seriously as he saw himself as the protector of Christendom against invading tribes from the east such as the Avars, Moors, Saracens, and Slavs. Author Johannes Fried describes the magnitude of Charlemagne’s ambitions in his magnum opus of biographical scholarship.
“Indeed, Charlemagne may well have had intentions very similar to those of his father: to independently fashion a consensual emperorship of the kind that had been in preparation since 797/798, one that was designed to give leadership to the whole of ‘Christendom’; to assume a proper imperial title that accorded with the real extent of his power” (2016: 423).
Charles The Laughable
Charlemagne’s coronation was in the year 800, the sword of Charlemagne would not appear again in Italy for almost another 700 years, generations after his death. Enter Charles VIII of France who was affectionately given the moniker l’Affable, or ‘someone who is affable (likable).’ I pronounce it laughable.
Charles VIII was crowned King of France in 1484 and got sucked into Italian politics during his reign at the behest of the then-Pope Innocent VIII in 1489. Six years later in 1495 Charles VIII leads over 30,000 men into Italy with the intention of sacking Naples and claiming it as his own, he brought the sword of Charlemagne with him!
Although Charles VIII’s overtures into Italy were grossly overstated, in realty he was just a pawn in a power play between competing political factions. When I say “factions,” read families. Charles VIII’s self-aggrandized march on Naples was nothing more than an affectation induced by internecine political rivals 1,000 miles away ensnaring him in a somewhat laughable situation.
It all started with the collapse of Medici power in Florence under Piero de Medici, the great-grandson of founding banker Cosimo de Medici (1389-1464). His role as head of the Medici family was less than stellar, in fact his ineptitude not only cost the Medici their financial status as Europe’s premier bankers but they were also exiled in disgrace when Charles VIII occupied Florence in 1494.
Author Paul Strathern tells us in his elegant account of the Medici family: “The Milan-Florence-Naples axis, which had been carefully maintained by Lorenzo de Medici and had kept the peace in Italy for so long, now lay in ruins” (2017: 208).
This vacuum created by the temporary downfall of the Medici power base is what led to a religious interloper named Savonarola to take hold of Florence, quash all Renaissance ideals and punt its ethos all the way back to medieval asceticism.
To make a long and extremely convoluted story short, Duke of Milan Lodovico Sforza was not only an enemy of the Florentine Medicis, he was also an enemy of the Naples ruling families. Sforza engineered, let’s say baited, the King of France to march down into Italy and basically attempt to solve his problems against Florence and Naples for him. It was the same old Milan v. Florence v. Naples business remixed.
Charles VIII was enticed to come to Naples and resuscitate his freeze-dried claim to the throne via his father’s mother’s watered line. I call that laughable, for he truly believed that he actually had a legitimate claim to the throne of Naples at that time. Although he was temporarily crowned in 1495, it was clearly a patronizing act to everyone else but him.
You see, although kind of a dupe, Charles VIII did have a flea’s arse of a claim to the throne. Well, I guess I also have a claim to the English Crown if I’m a descendant of a Plantagenet – if I’m delusional that is. The only legitimate connection Charles l’Affable had to Italy was through his great-great grandmother Taddea Visconti who was, ironically, of Milanese royalty back in the 1300s.
On a side note, Charles VIII also had a minor hand in the Wars of the Roses which was concluding itself around the same time as his march on Naples in 1495. Around 1484 Charles VIII aided and abetted Henry VII (Tudor) and his Welsh band of outlaws who fled England for safe haven in France. Henry VII’s men were not welcome in Brittany as they were seen as enemies of the rightful claimants to the English throne and it’s here that Charles VIII of France saw a perfect opportunity to befriend Henry Tudor because “there was no excitement in the French court at the prospect of a renewed Anglo-Breton alliance” (Jones 2014: 289).
Louvre Well Enough Alone
On February 22nd, 1495 after marching into Naples unopposed, Charles VIII was to be crowned its new king and then glad-handed out of town in a manner that would make even P.T. Barnum cringe. Feeling ingratiated, “three months later, seated on the throne and bearing the sword of Charlemagne, Charles VIII was duly crowned King of Naples” (Strathern 2017: 221, emphasis added).
That’s how the Sword of Charlemagne ended up in Italy! Although there was a brief battle fought near Parma, Italy called the Battle of Fornovo in 1495, it also was a bit laughable as both sides had claimed they won after the battle was over, and according to Paul Strathern “the Marquis of Mantua insisted that the victory was his, as he had diverted and captured half of Charles VIII’s booty train, including Charlemagne’s sword” (ibid: 222). I don’t know what booty train he was riding, but he definitely did NOT steal the sword!
The Sword of Charlemagne has been carried and used in official coronations from the time of Charlemagne himself down until the 1800s. The sword was housed in the Basilica of St Denis from around 1505 until it was moved to the Louvre Museum in 1795 where it has remained ever since.
The story of how Charlemagne’s sword ended up in Italy is both multi-generational and multi-national, it is also full of historical ironies. Charlemagne, embodied by his sword, is such a powerful symbol of the creative energy that existed in Europe during the time when it was transitioning from medieval antiquities to Renaissance movements such as Humanism and the beginnings of scientific inquiry.
SOURCES CITED:
- Strathern, Paul. 2017. The Medici: Power, money, and ambition in the Italian Renaissance. New York: Pegasus Books.
- Fried, Johannes. 2016. Charlemagne. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [translated by Peter Lewis].
- Wilson, Derek. 2006. Charlemagne. New York: Doubleday.
- Einhard and Notker The Stammerer. 1969. Two Lives of Charlemagne. New York: Penguin Books.
- Jones, Dan. 2014. The Wars of the Roses: The Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors. New York: Penguin.
- Family History Foundation. Books About Charlemagne. familyhistoryfoundation.com
SIGN UP to stay up to date on the latest posts from the Family History Foundation.
Discover more from Family History Foundation
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“This vacuum created by the temporary downfall of the Medici power base is what led to a religious interloper named Savonarola to take hold of Florence, quash all Renaissance ideals and punt its ethos all the way back to medieval asceticism.”
Typically ignorant enlightenment-era revisionism. Savonarola was a populist priest who cared about the poor whom the elitist Medici horrendously oppressed by debt and low wages in order to enrich themselves. The Catholic Church had rules against the oppression of the poor which the Medici ignored. Instead, they preferred to return to decadent and aggrandizing paganism, an “every man for himself” attitude, as opposed to the communal attitude of medieval Christian Europe. The Medici ignored the Church’s rules against usury that protected the poor from debt. And where did they get the idea that you could keep loaning out money all while minting new coins, putting everyone in debt while diluting their wealth? Ancient Rome. This was part of the “darker side” of the renaissance’s obsession with turning back the clock to antiquity. Sure, the renaissance movement produced great art, but people ignore the other, darker side, which included the growing hegemony of greedy bankers, the seeds of absolute monarchism, religious division (protestantism), and immorality.
Savonarola tried to restore justice and stop Florence from sliding back into regressive paganism, which, by the way, also included a growing tolerance of homosexuality and pedorasty (socially-whitewashed pedophilic rape), based on the ancient Greek model. Maybe he went too far in some areas, but he should be respected for trying to restore justice and morality in Florence. Sadly, he was murdered by the “enlightened” renaissance leaders.
Thank you for your response. Yes, Savonarola had his charm, however, he was also no saint! In all fairness he was driven to excesses like so many of his contemporaries. Both serve as dichotomous foils to one another in an entangled and fascinating period of history.