PDA

View Full Version : Charles the Saxon Butcher As an Avatar Choice?



Winslow Hunt
Friday, December 19th, 2008, 02:46 PM
As someone who is heavily Saxon I was surprised and offended that one of the avatar choices is Charle"magne". As I'm sure most know, Charles the Butcher was directly involved in Christianizing the continental Saxons. A mass murder of 4500 Saxon's, chopping down the Irminsul and warring against them and subjegating them as a folk.
Just because someone was Germanic doesn't make them a hero and this picture should be removed as an avatar choice. I wonder am I the only one on here who noticed this? If this is the wrong forum for this thread to be in feel free to move it.

Psychonaut
Friday, December 19th, 2008, 06:30 PM
Charlemage did create one of the largest Germanic empires Europe has ever seen. Were it not for him the histories of France, Germany and the Low Countries would be vastly different. Also, there are probably just as many people here who are descended from the Franks as there are Saxons. ;)

Winslow Hunt
Friday, December 19th, 2008, 06:58 PM
Charlemage did create one of the largest Germanic empires Europe has ever seen. Were it not for him the histories of France, Germany and the Low Countries would be vastly different. Also, there are probably just as many people here who are descended from the Franks as there are Saxons. ;)


Creating an empire is not something I would be proud of. Imperialism and empires are against the spirit of our Teutonic ancestors, who valued freedom as an important part of their beliefs. Also, I don't see how any of what you just mentioned is something to be proud of. So? The histories of those countries would be different. They would be independent and not have been under his subjugation. That sounds good to me. Also, so there just as many descended from the Franks on here. Does that take away from the crimes he committed?

SwordOfTheVistula
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 01:19 AM
This standard would rule out just about every famous person in history.

Winslow Hunt
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 06:26 AM
This standard would rule out just about every famous person in history.

But this is a Germanic forum, and this is the infamous butcher and converter of Saxons. Not sure what is so hard to understand about how that could be considered offensive and for that matter how I'm the first person to have had a problem with it? This guy was no Great Man, he didn't bring culture, the Saxons and Frisians had their own just fine and they should have been left alone.

Anfang
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 07:14 AM
As someone who is heavily Saxon I was surprised and offended that one of the avatar choices is Charle"magne". As I'm sure most know, Charles the Butcher was directly involved in Christianizing the continental Saxons. A mass murder of 4500 Saxon's, chopping down the Irminsul and warring against them and subjegating them as a folk.
Just because someone was Germanic doesn't make them a hero and this picture should be removed as an avatar choice. I wonder am I the only one on here who noticed this? If this is the wrong forum for this thread to be in feel free to move it.

Hey Winslow, You are in my neck of the Woods, I like It up there.

I also hate KDM, no "buts" about it. I have been to Verden. Everybody there knows exactly what the site is even cynical people there Dislike his memory.
I dont feel that people who do not have saxon blood should say "Oh well, those were crazy days,he did build an Empire however". It makes me feel like going to their ancestral homeland and killing 5000 civilians.


KDM slaughtered all of those *defenseless* people at the orders of an Italian Pope. Great Germanic hero he was.

I do Medieval reenactment. Allways as a Saxon, never a Frank

Besides, I believe in authenticity, and I would have to put animal urine on myself to play a Christian crusader circa 762 AD.

CordeliaforLear
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 07:59 AM
Pardon me, but this strikes me as a bit PC, being offended by a Germanic king 1200 years ago for 'historical grievances.'

Psychonaut
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 08:28 AM
But this is a Germanic forum, and this is the infamous butcher and converter of Saxons. Not sure what is so hard to understand about how that could be considered offensive and for that matter how I'm the first person to have had a problem with it? This guy was no Great Man, he didn't bring culture, the Saxons and Frisians had their own just fine and they should have been left alone.

According to this Skadi poll (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=27397), 30.14% of the 509 respondents considered the Franks to have the most impressive achievements and history, with most of that group referencing either Charlemagne or his grandfather Charles Martel.

Rik
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 09:21 AM
Many great Germanic kings nearly killed complete other Germanic tribes during minor battles. I guess. The ancient Germanics were an ferocious people , going at war with eachother was common.

SwordOfTheVistula
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 11:30 AM
This is the infamous butcher and converter of Saxons. Not sure what is so hard to understand about how that could be considered offensive and for that matter how I'm the first person to have had a problem with it? This guy was no Great Man, he didn't bring culture, the Saxons and Frisians had their own just fine and they should have been left alone.

That roughly parallels the debate regarding the Germany's third empire, and just about any other historical leader from Germanic history: William the Conqueror, Bismarck, Lincoln, Patton, Eisenhower, as well as assorted leaders from the American Revolution, various periods of English history, viking raiders, etc.

Jäger
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 12:01 PM
Imperialism and empires are against the spirit of our Teutonic ancestors, who valued freedom as an important part of their beliefs.
If they were smart, they valued Germanic freedom, which says nothing about e.g. Slavic slavery ;)

Agrippa
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 02:26 PM
That roughly parallels the debate regarding the Germany's third empire, and just about any other historical leader from Germanic history: William the Conqueror, Bismarck, Lincoln, Patton, Eisenhower, as well as assorted leaders from the American Revolution, various periods of English history, viking raiders, etc.

To say it blunt, if searching for truly pangermanic heros in history, you will find not too many if any at all. This was true throughout the Germanic history and it was true for most other ethnocultural units as long as they were not united under one rule at least.
Now guess, how you unite proud and independent people of many tribes under your rule? By good will and friendly words alone? Rather not.

In the tribal past whole tribes were largely eliminated, like the Langobards did to the Gepids - even worse, they united with the Avars, this foreign and most likely in its core Turkic people against their brethren!

But on the other hand, they did right so in a way, because so they could stay strong, but their foes being eliminated. Its all a question of political unities in the end.

As for Charlemagne, he brought up the higher culture in Europe again, with a strong Christianity, with the papism etc., etc. The later being the hardest part of his heritage, not his slaughtering of the Saxons.
Most people feeling with the Saxons historic fate and dont like the Franks do so primarily because they stood for the old, the Heathen, tribal, Germanic-Indoeuropean past of Germanics, but finally all of Europe.
A Saxon who is a devoted Christian, or at least was so in the past, might have favoured the Franks and so might a sympathiser of Heathenry at least partly with the Saxons.

But in the end, there was no real alternative to the new state and strong Christian influence in post-Roman occidental Europe, if considering that fact and the circumstances of the time, the Franks did, in the end, pretty well.

And they managed to unite most continental Germanics, under one rule, one idea of an Empire and as a common people for a certain time, founded Germany and the occidental culture which allows us to write here in an internet forum about this issue.

The Saxon way had its advantages and its a pity that the Franks had many bad sides too, but in the end, the Saxon way was no alternative and for that reason, the resistance had to be crushed, to bring them into the new Empire, to secure the border and to open the way for the expansion of Germanics and the new highly evolved occidental culture further East.

If considering all facts, the Franks under Charlemagne came closest to a Pangermanic and great European empire before the German efforts in the 20th century. And again, because of the circumstances, it was a bloody path because it had to be.

In the end every person in history and present days has good and bad aspects, and in the end if we admire one, we do so because of specific aspects and the whole impression, not every detail, not every action.

Winslow Hunt
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 03:35 PM
According to this Skadi poll (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=27397), 30.14% of the 509 respondents considered the Franks to have the most impressive achievements and history, with most of that group referencing either Charlemagne or his grandfather Charles Martel.

Argumentum ad populum

Loki
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 04:17 PM
Testing ...

I think this one I am using right now looks better than the selectable one. ;)

CordeliaforLear
Saturday, December 20th, 2008, 07:05 PM
Testing ...

I think this one I am using right now looks better than the selectable one. ;)

Thats a snazzy avatar you right-wing oppressor!;)

Winslow Hunt
Sunday, December 21st, 2008, 01:15 AM
"Right wing oppressor". How about just oppressor and butcher? Someone who shouldn't be celebrated and should be reviled. I think I'll just let this go because most aren't seeing where I'm coming from it seems and to be honest I find it a little strange on a message board that professeses to be for Germanic culture. I guess if it's a Germanic Emperor it's just fine though.

Hauke Haien
Sunday, December 21st, 2008, 01:36 AM
Please return to a calm and non-provocative style of discussion.

CordeliaforLear
Sunday, December 21st, 2008, 02:34 AM
The rationale behind this argument is neo-marxist from the get-go, and therefore has no merit for anyone that is interested in preserving their heritage against the onslaughts of serious, well-organized reparations-diggers.

Let 1200 year old bygones be bygones, and let us honor our ancient kings in peace, please.

Leonhardt
Monday, December 22nd, 2008, 12:21 PM
The Franks chopped off the heads of the entire Alamanni royal court, but I still do not doubt that they were Germannic.

Germannic language is where the term "vendetta" comes from. In many cases it refers to the entire tribe.

The Franks also burned the Knights Templar at the stake in order to avoid paying their debts. It is a mean old world.

Thusnelda
Monday, December 22nd, 2008, 01:15 PM
I donīt have much sympathy for Charlemagne because of his degenerated and brutal campaign against Germanic heathens but we have to acknowledge that his influence on the Germanic world was not only a negative one.

So I donīt find his avatar "the best one" from the repertory... :|I just accept it with a slight discomfort.

Sigurd
Monday, December 22nd, 2008, 04:02 PM
Being largely descended from the Bavarii, followed in degree of descendancy by the Saxones, I could not think of a less appropriate person to venerate.

What is his legacy after all? Slaughter of the Saxons, Burner of the Books, Thumper of the Bible and Oppressor of the Bavarians. Enough reasons for me to dislike his legacy for the most part.

Oh sure was he the first to unify the Germanic tribes one way or the other - but at what cost? His rise to power was the nemesis of Continental Heathenry, his style of reign overly centralistic as is uncharacteristic for Germanic tribes in their tradition and his mission was the spread and manifestiation of Christianity.

Sure one can say that Christianity manifesting itself was eventually inevitable, but he speeded it. The sources he supposedly destroyed are vast, and he was a missionary by the sword.

Sure, his contribution was also in part positive, but one must see the big picture ... even as far as empire-building goes, one should attribute a greater part to Otto the Great. The only thing I can unreservedly hold to Charlemagne's honour is that he founded the Weihenstephan abbey in Freising, which would later go on to brew the most excellent of wheat beers. :D

Otto the Great managed to balance the undivisibility of the realm with an alliance between the tribes, and their common cause and mission of defense of Germanendom as it were was what made Germany in its federal, tribalistic approach of national consciousness. I consider his contribution greater than Charlemagne's.

If people wish to have Charlemagne as an avatar and proclaim him as a hero for the great service he did to Christianity in Europe, then sure go ahead. But to me it is little different from having Boniface as an avatar: He exhibits nothing whatsoever that I stand for. ;)