"Charlemagne is usually considered as the translation of Carolus
Magnus. 'Challemaines si vaut autant comme grant challes.'
(_Chro. de St. Denis_, 1. i. c. 4.) Charlemagne is merely a
corruption of Carloman, Karlmann, the strong man. In the
above-cited chronicle itself, the words Challes and Challemaines
are used for Charles and Carloman (_maine_, a corruption of
_mann_, as _leine_ of _lana_). In the _Chronicle of Theophanes_ a
still more conclusive text is found: he calls Carloman [Greek:
Karoullomagnos]; _Scr. fr._ v. 187. The two brothers must have
borne the same name. In the 10th century, Charles the Bald was
dignified, though most undeservedly, with the same title of
Great, through the ignorance of the Latin monks.--_Epitaph. ap
Scrip. fr_. vii. 322.

... Nomen qui nomine duxit
De Magni Magnus, de Caroli Carolus.

A similar kind of blunder was made by the Greek
writers in the name Elagabal, which they transformed
into Heliogabal, from "[Greek: Helios], the sun."

With regard to Charles Martel, Michelet does not allude to M. Collin de
Plaucy's explanation, and adopts the old version--

"Son surnom païen de Marteau me ferait volontiers douter s'il
était chrétien. On sait que le marteau est l'attribut de Thor, le
signe de l'association païcune, celui de la propriété de la
conquête barbare."--Vide Michelet's _Origines du Droit Français_.

Charles was notoriously at variance with the Church. I should consider