The Philosopher King

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.

Four philosophers met together to discuss political, economic, and social questions. They all met in Europe and it was the period of time of high intellectual ideas. This meeting helped improve our capitals and our democrats. The four philosophers were John Locke, Voltaire, Adam Smith, and Mary Wollstonecraft. They called this period of time the Age of Enlightenment or the Age of Reason. All four thinkers have main ideas that are both the same and different.

In this letter, Petrarch offers advice on how to rule as an effective leader. He uses various examples and sources to support his theories of how a good ruler should rule by laying out a good model. Petrarch emphasizes the first quality of a good

In Danielle Evans’s collection of short stories Before You Suffocate Your Own Fool Self, the story “The King of a Vast Empire” talks about how traumatic events affect a family’s bond. The main trauma in this story is a car accident that haunts this family. Liddie, Terrance, and their parents got in a car accident one night. The dad was driving the car when he was going around a dark curve in the road and hit another car. The other car was stopped in the middle on the road because there was a fallen lumber in the middle of the road that their dad was trying to remove. The other car did not have their emergency lights on. When the dad hit the car, all of the kids in the backseat was killed

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.

Niccolò Machiavelli, a Florentine philosopher and political aficionado from the 16th century and Socrates, a classical Athenian savant who lived during the 5th century B.C., are both judged as being forefathers to modern western political science and thought. The two great men both came from erratic epochs within their respective nations of Italy and Greece: wars, transitions of power, and domestic conflicts left their countries void of sustainable leadership and in desperate need of a brighter future. But despite being from equally hopeless times, their theories on how their societies (and ultimately, future ones) should function in order to prosper, are divergent. In this essay, I will argue that Socrates would

Notker wrote his book seventy years after the death of Charlemagne in the form of a series of anecdotes about Charlemagne from the stories he heard as a child. Some of these anecdotes go more in-depth on basic information provided by Einhard. In other cases, the anecdotes tend to be exaggerated, therefore, making it hard to give Notker a lot of credibility. Yet, his work is widely read and studied as one of the works that describes the accounts of Charlemagne life.

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.

In Life of Alexander, Plutarch employs extensive methods to depict Alexander as a man of both great ambition and self-control, despite Alexander’s degeneration of character by the end of his life. In the modern world, the regression from just conqueror to unrestrained tyrant is completely congruent with the contemporary concept of ambiguous morality. In the ancient world, however, everything is expressed and understood in clear constructs; therefore, one’s character cannot change within a lifetime—it can only be revealed. The history of Alexander the Great is well-known, so Plutarch has to address common knowledge and beliefs while persuading the audience to believe in his portrayal of Alexander. Plutarch establishes Alexander as a great ruler whose out of character actions are made sensible with reinterpretations of situations and are neutralized with stories proving his positive traits. Through these methods, Plutarch successfully resolves the issue of Alexander’s conflicts in character and is able to create a convincible and consistent character.

He is also remembered because of the Carolingian Renaissance which took place under his direction and leadership. Although he was not a learned man, he revered and respected knowledge. He attracted many scholars to his palace. Theology and the literary

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.

Imagine the feeling of sitting in room isolated from the rest of the world, left alone with your thoughts and kept guarded away from freedom. What would one with their spare time? Would one contemplate escape? Would one sit alone with their thoughts and fixate on what has led to such a lonely end? Would one compose a letter to those who detained them? Perhaps these are the same thoughts that inspired the words of Socrates, in Plato’s Crito or the emotional words that were spewed on paper by Dr. Martin Luther King while detained in Birmingham Jail. The philosophy of Socrates and Dr. Martin Luther King are grounded in peace. Both philosophers are faced with conflict from the laws put in place by the society that they are in. The purpose of this essay is to compare how each philosopher discusses the concept of law. The fictional tales of Socrates was inspiration to the belated Dr. King as he strived to challenge the status quo set for society. Throughout Plato’s poems Socrates constantly stretched the mental capabilities of those who conversed, and at times even challenged him. Dr. King was not fearful of “Causing tension to the mind” of those around him. In particular Dr. King challenged his ideals of those who opposed his approach of nonviolent protesting. In “The letter from a Birmingham Jail” Dr. King response to a clergyman in form of a letter. This letter expresses the many obstacles put in front of Dr. King as he strives to create an equal society for African-American or

Two of the more memorable emperors to the Romans were Augustus Caesar (27 BC to 14 AD), and Caligula (37 AD to 41 AD). Although only having ruled the empire by a separation of 23 years and belonging to the same family (through marriage and adoption), their empires couldn’t have been more different. It is possible to determine the impact of an emperor’s rule based on their many vices and virtues, as well as the choices that they make in relation to them. The author Suetonius expressed in his writings the many vices and virtues that put into perspective the kind of leaders that these emperors appeared as to their polis. As we explore the concept of vices and virtues, as well as what kind of ideals these two rulers represented, we will begin to be presented with a clearer picture of what an ideal emperor would have looked like. A vice can be described as an immoral or wicked behavior; while a virtue can be described as a behavior showing high moral standards. Suetonius and the Roman people had a high interpretation of the concept of virtue and vice, as well as their role in the ruler’s life.

	Throughout his life, Aurelius was never able to be happy being an emperor. Even though he had money and privileges, and was royalty, he never became tranquil, or at peace with himself, with these material riches. It is evident when a person reads Meditations that Aurelius would much rather have lived the quite life of a philosopher than the public life of an emperor. He always wished that, at some point in his life, maybe when the wars were over, he would have some time to actively pursue philosophy. He never received that opportunity. However, he did, in the midst of all the wars he fought in, find the time to write down his thoughts into a