Byzantine Emperors, Manouel I, Charles the Bald

Charlemagne was a ruthless warrior, but he had other achievements as well.

Emperor Manouel I

 He provided a good government for his kingdom in which he had outdoor meetings.

In these meetings, the mass could vote by shouting out their agreement or disagreement with his offered laws. He charged property taxation, called tithes, so that there would be money to pay for improvements like the five hundred foot bridge up the Rhine River and the cathedral at Ravenna.

He raised education too, He brought in teachers from other lands to restore schools. He even started out a school at his palace, Aachen castle. He had monks copy books in the scholarly language of Latin, in order to maintain them. Charlemagne ruled for about forty seven years.

He provided a prosperous and stable country for his people during an era of uncertainty in Europe. He died at the age of seventy two, ruler of a kingdom that included what is now modern France, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, half of Italy, half of Germany, part of

Austria, and the Spanish border area. Louis the Pious (778 – 20 June 840), also called the Fair, and the Debonaire, was the King of Aquitaine from 781. He was also King of the Franks and co-Emperor (as Louis I) with his father, Charlemagne, from 813. As the only surviving adult son of Charlemagne and Hildegard, he became the sole ruler of the Franks after his father's death in 814, a position which he held until his death, save for the period 833–34, during which he was deposed. Above: Byzantine Emperor Manouel I, Komnerios and his second wife Maria of Antioch, 1118 - 1180 A.D.

Emperor Charles the Bald

During his reign in Aquitaine, Louis was charged with the defence of the Empire's southwestern frontier. He conquered Barcelona from the Muslims in 801 and asserted Frankish authority over Pamplona and the Basques south of the Pyrenees in 812.

As emperor he included his adult sons, Lothair, Pepin, and Louis, in the government and sought to establish a suitable division of the realm among them. Left Emperor Charles the Bald 823 - 877 A.D.

The first decade of his reign was characterised by several tragedies and embarrassments, notably the brutal treatment of his nephew Bernard of Italy, for which Louis atoned in a public act of self-debasement.

In the 830s his empire was torn by civil war between his sons, only exacerbated by Louis's attempts to include his son Charles by his second wife in the succession plans. Though his reign ended on a high note, with order largely restored to his empire, it was followed by three years of civil war. Charles the Bald (823 – 877), was Holy Roman Emperor (875–877, as Charles II) and King of West Francia as Charles II. He was the youngest son of the Emperor Louis the Pious by his second wife Judith. In 875, after the death of the Emperor Louis II (son of his half-brother Lothair):

Charles the Bald, supported by Pope John VIII, traveled to Italy, receiving the royal crown at Pavia and the imperial insignia in Rome on 29 December. Louis the German, also a candidate for the succession of Louis II, revenged himself by invading and devastating Charles' dominions, and Charles had to return hastily to Francia. After the death of Louis the German, Charles in his turn attempted to seize Louis's kingdom, but was decisively beaten at Andernach on 8 October 876.

Emperor Charlemagne

The first Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) formalised Christianity as the state religion of the Roman Empire, and Rome became the centre of Christianity. When Rome was sacked by the Germanic tribes in 410 A.D, though the Papacy remained in Rome, Constantinople became predominant. In 800 A.D. Pope Leo III crowned Charles I, king of the Franks (Charlemagne) as Holy Roman Emperor (even though there was already a Roman Emperor in Constantinople).

Under the protection of the Frankish Emperors, the Pope was once again able to exert authority. The Frankish Realm or occasionally Frankland, was the territory inhabited and ruled by the Franks from the 3rd to the 10th century. Under the nearly continuous campaigns of Charles Martel, Pepin the Short, and Charlemagne—father, son, grandson—the greatest expansion of the Frankish empire was secured by the early 9th century. Above left Charles I, and  king of the Franks (Charlemagne) Holy Roman Emperor, on the right of the image wearing his crown.

The Holy Roman Emperor: 800 AD: It is now 799 A.D, and for the third time in half a century, a Pope is in need of help from the Frankish kings. After being physically attacked by his enemies in the streets of Rome (their stated intention is to blind him and cut out his tongue, to make him incapable of office), Pope Leo III makes his way through the Alps to visit the king of the Franks Charles I at Paderborn. Left Charles I, king of the Franks (Charlemagne) Holy Roman Emperor, on the right of the image wearing his crown.

It is not known what is agreed, but Charles I travels to Rome in 800 to support the pope. In a ceremony in St Peter's, on Christmas Day, Leo is due to anoint Charles I's son as his heir. But unexpectedly (it is maintained), as Charles I rises from prayer, the pope places a crown on his head and acclaims him emperor.

Charles I (Charlemagne - Charles the great) expresses displeasure but accepts the honour. The displeasure is probably diplomatic, for the legal emperor is undoubtedly the one in Constantinople.

 Nevertheless this public alliance between the pope and the ruler of a confederation of Black tribes now reflects the reality of political power in the west. And it launches the concept of the new Holy Roman Empire, which will play an important role throughout the Middle Ages. The Holy Roman Empire only becomes formally established in the next century. But it is implicit in the title adopted by Charlemagne in 800: 'Charles, most serene Augustus, crowned by God, great and pacific emperor, governing the Roman empire.' Above left Ludwik I of Hungary.

The Franks and the Byzantine War: In (801-810) Charlemagne and the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus I waged war on both land and sea for control of Venetia and the Dalmatian coast (modern-day northern Italy, Slovenia and Croatia).

Ludwick  or Louis I

The war progressed well for the Franks, additionally, beginning in 809, Nicephorus was distracted by a new war with the Bulgars.

Therefore, the Byzantines began negotiations with the Franks, and peace was agreed upon in which Charlemagne gave up most of the Dalmatian coast (which he had conquered), in exchange for the Byzantine Emperor recognising him as Emperor of the West.

The Istrian Peninsula remained a part of the Frankish Empire. Then Charlemagne busied himself with driving the Albinos back to the east. Between 802 and 812, Charlemagne fought the Saxons tribes, located to the north. In the beginning of this war, Charlemagne gained his reputation as a ruthless warrior when he massacred over 4,000 Saxons. Still, the warfare with the Saxons continued on. Charlemagne fought the Saxons for thirty years. Above left Ludwik  or Louis I of Hungary 1342 - 1382 A.D.

Finally, he brought Saxony to his kingdom. In (808-810) Charlamagne settled accounts with the Danes, who had given aid and asylum to the Saxon leader Widukind in the Saxon Wars. In (805-806) Charlemagne's forces subdued the Slavic region of Bohemia (modern-day Czech Republic). Above left Emperor Charles the Bald.

Egyptian & Niger-Congo, Symbols

Egyptian vowels may once have been indeterminate, however, the rebus principle is a prominent feature, which suggests Hieroglyphics once wrote a non-Egyptian language with numerous homophones, such as occur in Niger-Congo. The rebus principle is based on homophony, which is not a feature of Egyptian. The same Egyptian sign is freely used for words that are phonetically diverse. But this is true also of Sumerian.

It is explained by a pictographic (ideographic) source. Pictographies of various kinds (ideographic, syllabic, alphabetic) occurs in West Africa, where they provide elaborate pictorial catalogues of man‘s (and woman‘s) worlds (Dalby 1967). They appear to have originally been used in initiation ceremonies and were also employed for purposes of magic. In Africa, they have a meaningful cosmic context and are embedded in the mythology.

Africa therefore, not Egypt, is the probable source of all these pictographies. Unfortunately however documentation from Africa is relatively recent. But some of these scripts or their precedents must go back to antiquity. That is Diop‘s opinion. (Campbell-Dunn, 2009a: 11-12) (emphasis mine) Besides the off-remark separating Egypt from Africa, Campbell-Dunn brings up many salient points that give context to this discourse. As I noted in my 2011 work Passion of the Christ or Passion of Osiris: The Kongo Origins of the Jesus Myth, the Egyptians communicated through the rebus principle. This principle is discussed by wiki as follows:

In linguistics, the rebus principle means using existing symbols, such as pictograms, purely for their sounds regardless of their meaning, to represent new words. Many ancient writing systems used the rebus principle to represent abstract words, which otherwise would be hard to be represented by pictograms. An example that illustrates the Rebus principle is the representation of the sentence ―I can see you‖ by using the pictographs of ―eye—can—sea—ewe.‖ Some linguists believe that the Chinese developed their writing system according to the rebus principle,[5] and Egyptian hieroglyphs sometimes used a similar system.

A famous rebus statue of Ramses II uses three hieroglyphs to compose his name: Horus (as Ra), for Ra; the child, mes; and the sedge plant (stalk held in left hand), su; the name Ra-mes-su is then formed. The hieroglyphic symbols are an outgrowth and expansion of old Kongo-Saharan writing symbols.

These symbols can be seen among the Vai, Mende and even the ancient Cretans. A few examples can be seen below of shared iconographic symbols among the Egyptians and Kongo-Saharan speakers.

The first few examples is taken from Cheikh Anta Diop‘s book Precolonial Black Africa:

A Comparative Study of the Political and Social Systems of Europe and Black Africa, from Antiquity to the Formation of Modern States (1987). The following example actually comes from Linear A in Crete and the Vai script of West Africa. The Linear A borrowed many signs from the ancient Egyptian script but didn‘t borrow the phonetics of the sign. Practically all of the signs in Linear A match Niger-Congo words for those symbols, which brings to question whether they were borrowed necessarily from Egypt or brought with them from Africa. The first example comes from Cambpell-Dunn (2006).

The comparisons on the left are a more extensive set of Egyptian and Linear A comparisons with their Niger-Congo names, which I argue, informs us on alternate pronunciations of signs in Egyptian which are attested in the Egyptian language itself. As we can see, the names given to the Egyptian glyphs above are actually the name of those items in Kongo-Saharan languages. A good number of these glyphs in Linear A actually are just morphological variations of the ones in Egypt.

 For instance, Linear A do ―eye‖ is a variant of Egyptian iri ―eye‖ (l <> d); Linear A se ―arm‖ is a palatalized form of Egyptian (k)a ―arm.‖ We argue that the D36 glyph a "paw, claw, hand, arm" was actually pronounced ka (PWS *ka ―arm, hand, cut‖); e.g., Egyptian a ―region, province‖ < PWS *ka ―place, home‖; PWS *gà ―place‖, PWS *gi ―to be in a place‖; PWN KI (KYI, CI) ―village, settlement.‖ Over time the k- was dropped which left us with /a/. The Kongo-Saharan languages can tell us a lot about the Egyptian writing script. Diop reaffirms why we should be looking at those languages from the south in regards to understanding the hieroglyphs. 

Egyptians, Niger-Congo, Mande, Ethiopian

An original Niger-Congo homeland in the general vicinity of the upper Nile valley is probably as good a hypothesis as any. From such a homeland, a westward Mande migration may have begun well over 5000 years ago. Perhaps the earliest division within this group resulted in the isolation of what is now represented only by Bobo-fing.

Egyptian Hieroglyphs & Mande symbol

Somewhat later— perhaps 3500 to 4500 years ago, and possibly from a new homeland around northern Dahomey [now Benin]— the ancestors of the present Northern-western Mande peoples began pushing farther west, ultimately reaching their present homeland in the grasslands and forests of West Africa.

This was followed by a gradual spread of the Southern-Eastern division, culminating perhaps 2000 years ago in the separation of its to branches and the ultimate movement of Southern Mande peoples southeast and westward until Mano and Kpelle, long separated, became once more contiguous. (pp. 119-120) (emphasis mine). The image to the right has Egyptian Hieroglyphs on the left and Mande symbol on the right.

We have to remember that the Greek historian informs us what the Egyptians told him directly concerning their origins and customs. We are told by Diodorus that: They say also that the Egyptians are colonists sent out by the Ethiopians, Osiris having been the leader of the colony…And the larger part of the customs of the Egyptians are, they hold Ethiopian, the colonists still preserving their ancient manners.

For instance, the belief that their kings are gods, the very special attention which they pay to their burials, and many other matters of similar nature are Ethiopian practices, while the shapes of their statues and the forms of their letters are Ethiopian; for of the two kinds of writing which the Egyptians have, that which is known as "popular" (demotic) is learned by everyone, while that which is called "sacred" is understood only by the priests of the Egyptians, who learn it from their fathers as one of the things which are not divulged, but among the Ethiopians everyone uses these forms of letters.

Furthermore, the orders of the priests, they maintain, have much the same position among both peoples; for all are clean who are engaged in the service of the gods, keeping themselves shaven, like the Ethiopian priests, and having the same dress and form of staff, which is shaped like a plough and is carried by their kings, who wear high felt hats which end in a knob at the top and are circled by the serpents which they call asps; and this symbol appears to carry the thought that it will be a lot of those who shall dare to attack the king to encounter death-carrying stings.

Many other things are also told by them concerning their own antiquity and the colony which they sent out that became the Egyptians, but about this, there is no special need of our writing anything.
In other words, the Egyptian culture is the Kushite culture (Ethiopian) of Chad/Sudan as acknowledged by the Egyptians themselves. Even Champollion, that deciphered the hieroglyphs, understood this point.

This would explain why the Kongo-Saharan symbols, along with the words to go with them, became the foundational symbols of the emerging Egyptian language. There are many theses concerning the origins of the Niger-Congo language family with many having them originate west of Lake Chad. I find many of these theories untenable for reasons beyond the scope of our current discourse. But even if we did accept that hypothesis, one couldn‘t deny the fact that Niger-Congo (and Proto-Bantu) speakers were in the Nile Valley as evidenced by the Sumerian data. The Sumerian language has been proven, by way of the comparative method, to be a Niger-Congo language.

Four principle works help to establish this fact: W. Wanger, Comparative Lexical Study of Sumerian and Ntu (“Bantu”): The Sumerian Sanscrit of the African Ntu Languages (1935); Robin Walker, When We Ruled (2006); GJK Campbell-Dunn Sumerian Comparative Dictionary & Sumerian Comparative Grammar (2009); and Hermel Hermstein Black Sumer: The African Origins of Civilization (2012). Hermstein (2012: 85-98) posits an eastern migration of Niger-Congo (Proto-Bantu) speakers, originating from Lake Chad, passing through Sudan, settling in Somalia, then working their way up to present-day Iraq.