Does Charlemagne really deserve to be called great? I think Charlemagne does deserve to be called great. This is because he united much of Europe under his rule, he improved many things like education, government, and culture, and he was a great military leader.
One of Charlemagne's reasons for being called great is that he was a great military leader, which is a quality of a leader; to be smart with attacking and protecting the empire. Charlemagne conquered the Saxons, which were a large group of barbarians. However, he overcame them and defeated them. He helped the pope when the Lombard's tried to regain their land, and this is what led him to becoming emperor. He also invaded the Muslims. He conquered a lot of these territories, and this shows how Charlemagne must've been a smart, good, and strategic military leader.
Charlemagne improved and shaped many things in the empire, like government, education, and culture. A quality of a leader is to be able to improve and control your empire and be able to sustain it. Charlemagne noticed how the Franks were not as educated as other civilizations. He set up a school in his palace as well as building schools throughout the empire. His students learned Latin, music, arithmetic, and literature. In culture, he made many things like Rome. He had forums, baths, theatres, and aqueducts. He mostly modeled his capital city, Aachen, after Rome. He also made a basilica in Aachen and decorated it beautifully, because he was religious. He added to the culture with adding many churches throughout the empire. The government he made was shaped when he was crowned emperor of the Roman Empire and when he controlled his empire after Pepin, Martel, and Charles. The way he improved his empire and molded it definitely is in the reason for why he deserves to be called great.
The final reason is that he united much of Europe under his rule and controlled his empire. Europe hadn't been united since the fall of the Roman Empire. He added land to Pepin, Martel, and Charles's kingdom and his empire covered much of western and central Europe. A quality of a good leader in this area is to be able to unite the people and have control. Later in his rule, he was also crowned emperor of the Roman Empire, which gave him more power and the authority to rule such a mass. And it was all this land and conquests which gave him all this that gave him the title of great in the first place. This obviously puts in a lot to why he should be called great.
Charlemagne ruled over all his land, and was a very good ruler indeed. He was given the title Charlemagne, Charles the great, for a reason, and he deserved it. He is a good military leader, which is needed to be able to protect and expand an empire, he improved and shaped his empire, and emperors need to be able to sustain and improve their empires, and he united much of Europe and had his empire united, which is important to keep order and make your empire stay together and not break up and dissipate. Charlemagne definitely should have been given the title Charles the Great
