Einhard, in his account of Charlemagne, and Ibn Battuta, in his account of Mansa Sulaiman, give witness to the way these two kings ruled their lands and provide an insight on how culture has an effect on people’s views of their leaders. Although each one lived in different cultures, each ruler embodied similar characteristics, such as the influence of religion on their realms. However, there are several distinct differences as well, and each narrative contains cultural bias that cannot be ignored. Overall, each account thoroughly analyzes each ruler and infuses their observations with the culture of the time, which is integral in order to gain an accurate depiction of who these men were. First, each ruler embodied an aspect of his …show more content…
In a similar vein, Mansa Sulaiman is portrayed as embodying his religion, except within the context of the Islamic religion. Like Charlemagne, the sultan was involved with religious ceremonies. Since he lived in a place governed by Sharia Law, there was no separation of Church and State. Thus, unlike in Einhard, there was an established religious hierarchy in this realm. Mansa Sulaiman participated in religious festivals and services, such as the Feast of Sacrifices and the Feast of Fast-breaking. In his domain, strict observance of times of prayer and memorization of the Quran were a top priority. Children who appeared to be falling short of learning the Quran by heart had fetters made for them, and people must come early to pray at the mosque or they will not be able to find a spot because of the multitude that will be gathered there. However, Ibn Battuta witnessed some characteristics that he perceived as unbecoming of a Muslim ruler. For instance, he was uncharitable, even to the point that his subjects became angry about his miserliness. Ibn Battuta was personally affected by this quality when he arrived in the sultan’s city, and received no hospitality from the sultan, save a small amount of food. There were also aspects of paganism that survived from the culture preceding Islam in this country. For instance, the people ate animals that were not ritually slaughtered, and the sultan provided a slave woman to cannibals for food. Another pagan aspect,
The Life of Charlemagne is an edited version from the original book Two Lives of Charlemagne. The author of the original biography is Einhard, who was his close friend and younger contemporary. He wrote this biography, after his death in 814 CE to honor Charlemagne and his contributions to the Frankish dynasty. In the historical context Charlemagne is believed to have contributed largely in flourishing the Carolingian Empire. In the book, The Life of Charlemagne, Einhard describes Charlemagne’s personal life rather than the actual historical legacies. The biography seems to have many personal bias opinions which makes the source hard to trust. One example from the text itself is when he describes King Charlemagne’s physical appearance, “His neck was short and rather thick, and his stomach a trifle too heavy, but the proportions of the rest of the body prevented from noticing these blemishes (Brophy, 250).” Even Though, the author describes the king with great details, he is positive throughout each text and avoids giving any flawed comments.
Charlemagne, was a man influenced in learning and education, in fact William the Conqueror made alterations to the English language dictionary. He incorporated various words from other languages such as French. Yet, stronger in education, Charlemagne was surrounded by scholars from different areas and he opened a palace school where he recruited the best teachers. Adding to this, both conquerors, incorporated religion in their skills of conquering. This means, faith was an important element on how they ruled and their actions. However, Charlemagne and William indeed were very different. In fact, Charlemagne’s rule was maintained by the strength of his personality, meaning a unified royal authority came first. While William the Conqueror was desperate on winning more lands and was brutal on battles, Charlemagne focused his reign on education and
Ibn Battuta’s 1331 journey to West Africa provides a contrast of two worlds: Battuta’s pre-modern Islamic culture conflicting with African societies’ interpretation of Muslim beliefs and tribal traditions. He is especially critical of the various roles of women he observes—thus, allowing us insight into his own judgments formed by his culture and society.
After having read both versions of the life of Charlemagne there is no doubt that they differ greatly in the sense of style, audience, and emotion. By reading these two descriptions of Charlemagne's life we are able to decipher somewhat of the life he led as a shaper of early medieval European history. However, both of these versions possess the admiration of a noble man who they believe is worthy enough to be noted in history to some degree.
In this essay I will be discussing the life and innovations of Ibn Battuta and how he influenced the Islamic empire which impacted the world at the time and later civilizations to this day. I will first introduce the innovator then talk about his innovations and how his innovations have short term impacts and long term impacts to this world.
-Like the one at Linisfarne the monasteries to the south look more and like banks waiting to be robbed.
The two lives of Charlemagne as told by Einhard and Notker are two medieval sources about the accounts of the life Charlemagne. Modern sources by Matthew Innes and Rosamond Mckitterick discuss how history was recorded during the medieval period and how it was suppose to be viewed in the early ages. Observing each of these sources helps get an understanding of how the writing of history is important in recorded history and how it affected how the history of Charlemagne was recorded.
Charlemagne is described by Janet Nelson as being a role model for Einhard. Einhard himself writes in the first paragraph of The Life of Charlemagne, “After I decided to write about the life, character and no small part of the accomplishments of my lord and foster father, Charles, that most excellent and deservedly famous king, I determined to do so with as much brevity as I could.” I feel that these are sincere words about the man who cared for Einhard. I feel that Einhard’s purpose for writing The Life of Charlemagne is to praise the works of his “foster-father” and create a historical document that would describe the great deeds of Charlemagne so that he would not be forgotten throughout time as a great leader and man.
The two lives of Charlemagne as told by Einhard and Notker the Stammerer are very different accounts of the life of the great Emperor. Einhard gives us a historical overview of the life of Charlemagne who lived from 742 to 814 A.D. Charlemagne was also known as Charles the Great and the King of the Franks.Charles was one of four children born to Pepin the Short, A Mayor of the Palace of the Carolingian Empire. He had one brother, Carloman and two sisters, Gisela and Pepin.Since women at the time didn’t inherit power, when Pepin the Short died, the kingship of the Carolingian Empire was divided and shared by Charlemagne and his brother, Carloman. Unfortunately, Carloman died early and unexpectedly as a young man and
The Life of Charlemagne, written by the Frankish scholar Einhard, is a biography on the personal life and achievements of Charlemagne, a ruler of the Franks and the king of Italy. He ruled from 774-800. Einhard, a male Frankish scholar, was born to noble parents in the Main Valley, around 770 A.D. He was educated in the monastery of Fulda, and shortly after sent to the palace school of Charlemagne in Aachen. Eventually becoming a personal adviser and a close friend to the king of the Franks, he influenced the king in all the ways of higher thinking and even inspired the king to desire a higher education for himself. The king even tried his hand at learning to write, however to no avail. Einhard was able to give deeper insight into the life of Charlemagne, as he was present during many of the events that took place. He also had the advantage of hearing firsthand accounts from the king. The Life of Charlemagne is thought to have been written between 829 to 836, composed by Einhard while living in Seligenstadt. Einhard wrote the accounts of Charlemagne so that there would be a historical account describing the emperor’s day to day life. “His two immediate reasons for writing were the personal knowledge which he possessed of Charlemagne, and the debt of gratitude which he owed to this remarkable king and emperor.” He was a man that possessed a drive for knowledge and insight into the future. By working under Charlemagne, he was able to grow in that knowledge and even
After reading two versions of “The Life of Charlemagne”, one written by a person who lived with Charlemagne, and one who didn’t, it is evident that Charlemagne is portrayed in a negative way by the author, the Monk of St. Gall, and in a positive way by Einhard. Einhard was very close to Charlemagne. He lived at the same time and with Charlemagne himself. His version of “The Life of Charlemagne” was writing right after his death. The Monk of St. Gall wrote his version more than 70 years after Charlemagne’s death. He did not live with or even at the same time as Charlemagne. This is probably one of the reasons the view on the ruler are completely different.
We now leave this in-depth description of Charlemagne given by Einhars, and take a look at a new essay by Fichtenau entitled "A New Portrait of Charlemagne." Instead of describing Charlemagne as Einhard does, we find that Fichtenau's essay rather rebuilds Charlemagne. Fichtenau talks about how things like his personality were strung together in the wrong way by Einhard. He talks about how his personality is predictable, because all Emperors must have the same values. He talks of how in generosity, as Einhard's description showed as being out of the kindness of his heart, was actually a result of what actions would follow his generous jesters. Fichtenau uses his whole essay to rebuild Charlemagne to what kind of ruler he believes he is. He does say that without the great ruling and personality of Charlemagne, then it would have taken generations for this empire to reach its peak. "What remains is
Einhard, born in 775 in an ancient Frankish homeland, in a valley of the River Main, was taken into Charlemagne’s court sometime between 791 and 792. After the scholar Alcuin retired to the monastery, Einhard became a go to source for answers for Charlemagne. After Charlemagne’s death Einhard felt compelled to write a biography about his king and friend, writing that, ○“In any event, I would rather commit my story to writing, and hand it down in posterity, in partnership with others, so to speak, that to suffer the most glorious life of this most excellent king, the greatest of all the princes of his day, and his illustrious deeds, hard for men of later times to imitate, to be wrapped in the darkness of oblivion” (Einhard 16). Einhard spent twenty-two years in Charlemagne’s court and ○“Although
Although Ibn Battuta seems to be content with all facets of nature, and speaks highly of the morals and purity of many men, discord appears when his beliefs are challenged by the perception of unconventional behavior, such as the wood burning ceremony in Om Obida, Persi, or the burning of widows in Hindustan, “The woman adorns herself, and is accompanied by cavalcade of the Infidel Hindoos and Brahmans, with drums, trumpets and men following her, both Infidel and Muslim alike” (emphasis mine) He also remarks about his shock regarding the public nudity of women. This is another example of direct
Usama ibn Manqidh a Muslim warrior and writer who lived during 1095-1188 in Shayzar, Syria. The First Crusade happened in 1096 and the Crusaders seized Jerusalem, Usama would grow up among the Christians infiltrating the Holy Land. In the year before Usama dies, Jerusalem is recaptured by Muslim general Saladin. Usama lived during a time of great tension and dislike between Muslims and Christians, giving the reader his perspective of the invading Christians in his home land. He was also a tremendous story teller and would sometimes exaggerate details in his memoirs to make a better story, even though some details are exaggerated his insight of the Crusades is important. Usama ibn Manqidh’s perspective of the Crusades is valuable, he expresses in his memoirs the distinctions between Muslims and Christians through their cross cultural interactions that took place during the Crusades.