The collection Two Lives of Charlemagne contains two different biographies of Charlemagne who was a king of the Franks and a christian emperor of the West in the 8th century. The first biographical account was written by his courtier Einhard who knew him personally and well. On the other hand, the second account was penned by Notker the Stammerer was born twenty-five years after the king’s death. Even though these two versions indicate the same king’s life, there were many differences between the two. Einhard’s writing focused on the emperor’s official life and his military campaign. However, Notker provided more of a perspective about the king’s legacy and seemed more hyperbolic as well as mythical. This paper will compare and contrast the …show more content…
The two narratives of Charlemagne’s life written by Einhard and Notker differed in the style of writing. Einhard wrote the biography mostly in a chronological order. He began with the history of the previous kings who governed the Franks before Charlemagne, went on with the birth of Charlemagne and his life, and ended with his death. This biography also indicated all the major events of his life that Einhard knew such as the war against the Northmen and the Aquitanian war. As a result, Einhard’s work was well organized and easy to follow. However, Notker’s work consisted of stories or tales that were not arranged systematically. Although the stories were certainly interesting, they were written in a random order which made them seem more like a leisure reading than a historical biography of a king. This difference in the style between the two biographies can be explained by the different purposes in which each writings had. Einhard wrote the memoir for history to remember his emperor. He stated, “but I had resolved rather to risk the judgements of men, and to endanger my own feeble talent by writing, than to neglect the memory of so great a man for the sake of sparing …show more content…
Einhard, as a servant of Charlemagne, had witnessed the entire life of his king. It made him possible to describe the personal life of his king in great detail. For example, he stated what activities his king chiefly enjoyed, what clothes he was accustomed to wear, and even what he used to do between meals. According to Einhard, “In summer, after the midday meal, he would take off his clothes and shoes as if it were night and would rest for two or three hours.” This indicated that Einhard described the adult life of his king with details and that Einhard knew the subject he was writing about extremely well. His writing also showed the military campaign that Charlemagne conducted. For instance, he stated, “While he was vigorously and almost constantly pursuing the war with the Saxons, and had placed garrison at suitable points along the frontier, he attacked Spain with as large a force as he could” (Einhard, p. 24). While Einhard’s work mostly focused on the official life of Charlemagne and his military campaign, Notker’s writing consisted of anecdotes about the king based on the stories he heard during his childhood. Notker, as mentioned earlier, was born twenty-five years after the death of Charlemagne and wrote the biography seventy years after the king’s death. In often cases, the anecdotes tended to be exaggerated; therefore, they seemed as if they were myths or fictional stories. Also, Notker’s writing was
After contemplating Einhard’s purpose for writing The Life of Charlemagne it is important to examine his qualifications for doing so. Early on in the introduction there is a brief history on Einhard and his education.
Charlemagne—Charles, King of the Franks—obviously has a fan in Einhard. His powerful work, The Life of Charlemagne, details the king’s life from the building of his empire, through the education of his children, and culminating in his final living words: the division of his possessions and the instructions for the preservation of his kingdom. At first glance, the inclusion of Charlemagne’s will seems an odd choice to end an essay that demonstrates thoroughly the specifics of the great man’s life. After all, who needs to know which child gets his gold, and which archbishop he favored the most. Einhard reveals the ignorance in this assumption by doing just the opposite: using Charlemagne’s will as the final and most convincing illustration of the king’s life and character.
The most famous work about Charlemagne is a book entitled The Two Lives of Charlemagne which consists of two separate biographies published into one book and tells the story of Charlemagne's life as two different people experienced it. Apart from this, there are many other places you can turn to learn more about the life of the king of the Franks, including letters, capitularies, inventories, annals, and more. However, each of these sources seem to paint a different picture of Charlemagne. In one, he seems to be a very average guy; in another, a mythical being, almost god-like; and a strong and firm political leader in yet another. It is because of this of this that we will never really know exactly who Charlemagne was or what he was like, but we do have an idea of what he did and how he lived thanks to those who decided to preserve it.
The reason Einhard wrote his biography of Charlemagne was to explain to the world how this man, who was also his personal friend, was a great leader. Einhard begins by telling some history of Charlemagne’s family and ancestry. Einhard then goes on to tell about every war Charlemagne was ever involved in. Einhard’s main reason for writing this description of Charlemagne’s reign is just to inform people of what he believe to be the reign of the greatest ruler of all time. He seemed proud to have lived at the same time as Charlemagne. He thought Charlemagne made no mistakes in the wars he was involved with. Einhard was proud of what Charlemagne did for the churches at the time of his reign. “Whenever he discovered one in his kingdom that was old and ready to collapse he charged the responsible bishops and priests with restor...
Critical questions can arise about Einhard's work for the simple fact he was a palace official of Charlemagne. Einhard was a minister of his Royal Majesty. He was highly respected for his knowledge, intellect, brilliance, integrity and character. He shared a personal relationship with the King and his family. It can be believed that his book was to make sure that the greatness of Charlemagne was recorded for history and maybe not the facts. The way he recorded the history of Charlemagne could have been more ...
Every historian interprets the past differently and with distinctive perspectives, resulting in many sides to one story. Often the reader must decide which perspective is more logical, likely, or coherent. Recounting one war took a lot of time and effort because of the necessity to include all sides of the story. Becher, Barbero, Collins and Backman have approached the life of Charlemagne with different points of view; however, Barbero seems to have the strongest argument for the cause of the Saxon War. The other historians were less willing to see the Saxon war as a religious war. The life of Charlemagne was interesting to historians because it was filled with many vigorous wars that he fought including the infamous Saxon War. From the beginning of his life, Charlemagne was destined to rule a nation and lead his people into war, achieving both triumphant victories and devastating defeats. He died of sickness in old age, thus leaving the kingdom in the hands of his son. The Saxon war was the most persistent, yet hostile war he fought because of the determination and severity of the enemy. However, the questions remain: “What actually caused the Saxon war? What gave it life? What are all the different events that occurred during this war? What are some of the strategies used during this war?” The wars he fought resulted in his success as a ruler and as a historical figure to reflect on when considering the greatness of kings.
All throughout history, people have been fighting, there have been wars and conflicts ever since man has become ‘civilized’ enough to raise an army. And, many, many if not almost all of these conflicts have involved religion in some way or another (Ben-Meir). The question is why, and how, do people use God as justification for fighting and killing one another. Isn’t killing supposed to be wrong in God’s eyes? Whatever happened to ‘Thou shalt not Kill’? And how is it that hundreds of thousands of people have died by the hands of those who call themselves Christians?
Charlemagne was known to be “a man of enormous intelligence.” (book) “The upper part of his head was round, his eyes very
Charlemagne is a known for his success to try to maintain his empire. This new empire will embrace the unity of Christian faith. Under Charlemagne, new lands are conquered and a Renaissance is embraced. He even tries to revive the Christian faith. Charlemagne is a man that hopes to be an inspiration to the next generation. These deeds of Charlemagne is seen in the Two Lives of Charlemagne. In the Two lives of Charlemagne, both Notker’s and Einhard’s goal is to portray Charlemagne as a man of good character, a man that accomplishes many deeds and a man that hopes to provide an outlet for the next generation.
“The apprenticeship of a King” describes how Charlemagne gained power through conquest and diplomacy. In 768, King Pippin died and his kingdom was divided between his two sons. Charles, the elder, and the younger was Carloman. The author says that little is known of Charles’ boyhood. When he was of the right age, it is recorded that he worked eagerly at riding and hunting. It was the custom of the Franks to ride and be practiced in the use of arms and ways of hunting. We may reasonably infer that acquiring these skills formed a major part of his early education. Charles was not a “man of letters” and the author makes no attempt at explaining this other than to point out that literacy was considered unimportant at that time for anyone other than the clergy and Charles didn’t become interested in “letters” until later in life. Bullough explains a number of experiences in public duties and responsibilities, which were assigned to Charles by his father, thus, giving him an apprenticeship to rule the kingdom. For some reason tension between Charles and his brother began shortly after their accession. The author explains a number of conflicts. The younger brother died however, at the end of 771 and a number of prominent people in his kingdom offered allegiance to Charles. Bullough names and explains those subjects. The result was the re-uniting of those territories, which helped to establish the kingdom of the Franks.
There are many distinct differences between Medieval society as illustrated by Achen in 800 AD and Roman society as illustrated by Pompeii in 79 AD, with some similarities. There are many aspects to examine, such as education, religion, tolerance, social classes, materialism, view of time, infra-structure, trade and cities.
How far were the events in Scotland responsible for the failure of Charles I’s Personal Rule?
3. Bulfinch, Thomas, and Richard Martin. Bullfinch's Mythology: The Age of Fable, the Age of Chivalry, Legends of Charlemagne. New York: HarperCollins, 1991. Print.
Great leaders come once in a generation. Two tremendous examples of historical leadership come in the form of Beowulf and The Rule of Saint Benedict. Beowulf and The Rule of Saint Benedict provide clear depictions of ideal leaders and subjects.
The Relationship of Political and Religious Societies in the Age of Charlemagne, Based of Einhard's The life of Charlemagne sections 15-33