Essay Sample on The Two Lives of Charlemagne: Sources from Middle Ages to Modern Times

Introduction

As narrated by the authors Einhard and Notker, "The Two Lives of Charlemagne" are two middle-aged sources of narrative about the various events of Charlemagne's entire life. Considering the current sources by authors, Mathew Innes, as well as Rosamond Mckitterick, illustrate how the history got recorded during the middle ages periods. Again, modern authors also explained how people could have viewed accounts during the early periods of life. Therefore, studying each of these particular sources of history assists us in understanding how history writing is very significant in recorded history, as well as how it influenced Charlemagne during the medieval era. Besides, we shall also look at how the philosophers and authors recorded the history of Charlemagne.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In general, the book, Two Lives of Charlemagne consist of two varied life history of Charlemagne, who was a famous ruler of Swathe, Western Europe during the period of middle ages. The first literature version is entitled "Life of Charles," with whom Einhard is the author while the other literary work is called "Of Charlemagne," written by Notker the Stammerer. Hence, having read both literature versions of the Charlemagne's life, I realize that both versions have significant disparities based on the styles applied, an audience as well as the emotions involved in the story (Mayr-Harting, & Henry p. 1123). Again, having read these particular literary works regarding the life of Charlemagne, people can notice how he shaped up and controlled his rulings as well as the European histories during the early periods of middle ages. Nevertheless, to some extent, both literature narratives have strong admiration of the dignified man with whom we believe deserve and worthy of being remembered in history. Firstly, in Einhard's case, who was a renowned member of the Royal Court, and was well aware and understood better the personal lives of the kings (Ganz, & David p. 43). The closeness of Einhard to the King was such vital that he could recollect the entire version of the life of the King at his old periods. Generally, the King had already died, which indicated how Einhard's memory, as well as observation, was still fresh to assist him during the process of writing the literature. Therefore, the primary focus in this given version of Einhard is the original life of the ruler, Charlemagne. His account majorly entails all types of wars that the ruler participated in, major political decisions he made during his periods of ruling in the middle ages, and the various civil society programs and projects he initiated and implemented. However, he kept low and covered less in his work about the information related to the family of the King since it was the time convention. Hence, based on the work quality in the literature version, this style of Einhard is suggestive of the individual who participated in the writing process during the climax of the Roman Empire.

On the other hand, the literature version written by Notker gets considered as less academic as well as lighter-hearted. In this case, the author examines various liberties and is like to have decided to sacrifice the accuracy of history to achieve the aesthetic effect. Indeed, in this situation, the language applied is generally florid, as well as the painted picture of the King is overall more extensive than the King's life (Ganz, & David p. 50). Typically, of the two given versions of literature, his work is, without a doubt, regarded as more hyperbolic, that is, not subservient. In this case, Notker's version is considered to be humorous. This aspect gets clearly shown during the self-deprecating humor whereby he refers to himself as a stammering individual, an older adult who is very toothless as a method of differentiating himself from other Notkers in the Court of the King.

In addition to that, Notker also emphasizes the attributes of King's personality like his generosity and mind acuity to his followers, the prudent decision-making process of the King, the set of rules, principles, and regulations that the King follows during his judgments. He also indicates some side effects of the King during his reigning periods, such as his spiteful nature, his intolerance for the rebels in his kingdom, as well as the brutality and the severe consequences of some of his punishments on the offenders (Ganz, & David p. 46). Without a doubt, analyzing Charlemagne's version, someone cannot avoid being in the magic realism world. Indeed, if unique stories by authors like Salman Rushdie as well as Garcia Marquez were believed to be the pioneers of new literary fiction, then it is accurate enough to conclude that Notker's literature work is one of his original expressions in the form of non-fiction version.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Notker's literature work is directly shown to the fiction techniques, as this is indicated based on the various styles applied, areas he stressed on. While in Einhard's Literature work, someone may be impressed since the job meant for the elite audience like his fellow historians, intellectuals, and the courtiers. Therefore, this analysis is very vital in helping to understand history during the middle-age periods, especially the life of King Charlemagne.

Works Cited

Davies, Wendy, and Paul Fouracre, eds. The Languages of Gift in the Early Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Ganz, David. "Einhard's Charlemagne: The Characterisation of Greatness." Charlemagne: Empire and Society (2005): 38-51.

Mayr-Harting, Henry. "Charlemagne, the Saxons, and the Imperial Coronation of 800." The English Historical Review 111.444 (1996): 1113-1133.