The Two Lives of Charlamagne is a compilation of two biographies written by Einhard and Notker. Each version of Charlamagne’s life is very different and shows to very unique men. Many Historians have speculated which of the two accounts is most accurate and it is really unclear which could be the most accurate account. Today I will discuss the similarities and differences in Einhard and Notker’s accounts and my questions about the novel. My first question about the novel is, who put these two accounts together and why? I find it interesting that whoever did this chose to set the novel up in the way that they did and I wonder if they too did not know which account was more accurate and that is why they put both accounts together. I believe …show more content…
Einhard’s biography is meant to look more from the historical side of things. Einhard discuss Charlamagne’s life as a child and how he became king. He doesn’t focus on one central part of Charlamagne’s reign, but discusses his education, relationships, children, the many accomplishments he made for the kingdom. It is clear in his righting that Einhard thinks very highly of Charlamagne and I think that is where most of Einhard’s biases come from. Einhard was a minister to the king and was able to live a pretty lavish lifestyle because of him. Einhard states in the preface of the book, “made me greatly his debtor as well in death as in life,” this statement shows me that Einhard felt like he owed his life to Charlemagne and that he would do anything for him. I think that this is the main reason that Einhard is so biased in his writing. Just like in the book The Life of St. Benedict, the Einhard isn’t going to write about the things that Charlamagne did wrong. In all honesty, he probably can’t even see the wrong that is happening in Charlamagne’s life, and that is why we can’t trust this account of Charlamagne’s
This passage is interesting if the reader knows nothing about the book at this point the reader might question the passage, what does this mean? If you are one of the few people who read a book completely cover to cover, the publishers page states "This is a work of fiction. Except for a few details regarding the author's own life all incidents, names, and characters are imaginary (O'Brien Prologue). You have no what is going to be real or fiction.
This is a small example of how Einhard was a very educated man and in other accounts he was highly regarded as a poet. Einhard was not only skilled enough to write on Charlemagne, he was almost obligated to do so. After a quick summary of some of the highlights of Einhard’s career the introduction to The Life of Charlemagne says,
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.
He will travel to church every so often to maintain a close relationship with the pope. This is not the only detail that provides that he did more than just this for the Christian faith. Charlemagne, according to Notker, wanted to set an example of what a good Christian person is. Like taking food during Lent and doing certain processes in order that he does not break the fasting code (). Charlemagne is described with many adjectives of his behavior. Einhard and Notker seem to both establish he is a man that did care for the nature of his kingdom. It is noted that Einhard elaborates more on the personal life of Charlemagne. Einhard personally knew the family of Charlemagne. Notker on the other hand, often mentions people that Charlemagne appointed during his reign.
All three writers explore self-deception using specific characters, none of whom have the same world-view as the other characters in their respective texts. The
After Briony admits that her atonement was not entirely truthful, the reader may question the reliability of the narrator. Briony's novel displays the story from different perspectives, and when she acts as an omniscient narrator from any other perspective than her own she is unreliable. Briony is simply telling the story from an alternative point of view with no evidence of the specific characters' own personal interpretations, but merely her own observations of their personality, the other characters only exist through her creations. "When I am dead, and the Marshalls are dead, and the novel is finally published, we will only exist through my inventions." (McEwan, p. 350)
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
Although both authors claim their stories are true, and thereby that their characters are realistic, there seems to be a gap between the authors' claims and the "reality" of the characterization. This question is closely connected to the fact that both novels belong to the earliest English novels. There was no fixed tradition that the authors worked in; instead the novel was in the process of being established. The question arises whether the two works lack a certain roundness in their narrators.
The book has some things it only has, which supports the idea that the book and movie
The relationship between politics and faith in the age of Charlemagne would not have been possible or necessary without the people's true belief in their religion. Einhard himself reveals the depth of his faith when he sites the numerous omens foretelling Charles' death, as well as speaking of the "Divine ordination, (page295)" of Louis. The business of religion was taken seriously by all parties mentioned in Einhard's Life, and the church, being an integral part of the western world, could thus hardly have been ignored. In addition, the strong forces of competing religions made the question of faith one of great import in the West, making a solid Catholic union absolutely necessary. The alliance of Rome and the Frankish Empire was not entirely without its drawbacks, but its rewards are seen in the survival of Charlemagne's name into the present.
The reader can pick out the fiction because the author will add in the dialogue of exactly what characters in a random point in their lives. In time, the only way that the conversation would have been documented word for word would be if someone was constantly writing down everything that each character said. Even though this is possible, it is highly unlikely
Since both the movie and the book focus on that one line, they are both more similar than different.
Naturally two books related to each other in this way have their similarities and differences in certain areas. Most of the similarities between both books fall in the areas of historical correctness and act...
The main character, Edie, provides the narration of the story from a first person point of view. She tells her story based on an event from her past. Because she narrates the story the reader is unable to be sure if what she tells of the other characters is completely accurate. Because one does not hear other character's thoughts one could question whether Edie interpreted them correctly. Or has time caused her to recall her story different from the way it actually happened? For example, Edie says it is hard for her to recall how she felt when she had to do dishes without a dishwasher and heated water. It had been so long ago her perception had been altered. Sometimes time can play a role in why truth can be so hard to see.