This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This is unfinished. I plan to add more and tweak what is here, plus add inline citations. Srnec (talk) 06:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Interesting stuff. Hope my tweaks aren't premature. Would a footnote about the historic Charlemagne's struggles to gain some literacy be apropos his having writing tablets at bedside? Have the "words" been interpreted as runes? They are opaque as they stand. --Wetman (talk) 04:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
(I hope it's all clarified. The Visio seems almost like magical realism juxtaposed to the Einhard quotation. And specifically, I have not exhaustively mined the Geary article.) You wouldn't happen to have any resources to write/start an article on visionary literature, would you? There is certainly enough information out there. Srnec (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Magic realism is not far off the mar!. There's apocalyptic literature, which I folded neatly up four years ago and set afloat like an origami boat and never looked back. The broader the subject, I find, the less I enjoy the company. I'm for the byways, and this article was news to me. Who had the dream about Charlemagne's unspeakable sin that the angel wrote down and deposited on an altar? Or am I the one dreaming? --Wetman (talk) 06:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I know the story of the sin, but not of the dream, angel, or altar. There are many variations of this legend, but I wouldn't think it would be too hard to find out which one you have in mind. Srnec (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
(I prefer the byways, too. Why do you think I asked you to start/write it?) Srnec (talk) 23:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)