Papers > History > Comparison of Einhard and Noetkers histories of Charlemagne
|
Featured Papers from Direct Essays
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a preview of a paper to view the full text you need to signup and login.
|
Comparison of Einhard and Noetkers histories of Charlemagne
|
|
|
Charlemagne is a popular figure in history books because he achieved what no other ruler of his time did, to unify the entire western portion of Europe. ... Perhaps this is why biographers such as Einhard and Noetker chose him as their subject, or perhaps not. It seems when reading these biographies that a hidden agenda is revealed, seen in the anecdotes of Noetker, and the added and missing passages in Einhard’s work. ... These men wrote not only because of the debt owed to their patron, but to mold Charlemagne into the man they wanted him to be. ... These works were written mainly to influence the minds of those who would read it, one attempting to create in Charlemagne the ideals of a Roman emperor, and to legitimize his son Louis as Holy Roman Emperor, and the other to idealize Charlemagne as a Christian ruler and to bring the church into focus. ... Einhard was born to a noble family and educated in a monastery. After completing his education he joined the imperial court and soon found himself advisor and friend to King Charlemagne. The king shared many imperial problems with Einhard and he therefore had a vast knowledge of the happenings of the empire. Even after Charlemagne’s death Einhard remained friendly with Louis the Pious, Charlemagne’s successor. Einhard stated that his purpose for writing the history was to provide a way for the public to understand Charlemagne’s day to day life, and “omitting from all this nothing which ought to be known or, indeed, which is worthy of being recorded” Einhard may have had access to court documents, as Charlemagne’s will is included in full in the text. ... Noetker’s work was written a full seventy years after Charlemagne’s death. ...
Einhard wrote in the fashion of Suetonius which is satisfying to the reader in that it is short, organized and clear. He followed so closely to the Suetonian style that Philipp Jaffe, who carefully analyzed the Suetonian model, was able to list thirty two passages in which Einhard “owes clear debts either of subject matter or vocabulary to the De vita Caesarum” written by Suetonius.
|
|
|
To link to this page, copy the following code to your site:
|
|
Paper Information
|
|
|
Title: Comparison of Einhard and Noetkers histories of Charlemagne
Words: 1696
Rating: None
Pages: 6.8
submitted by: mamapot
If you think this paper shouldn't be here then
|
|
|
|
|
Signup & Login
|
|
|
If you don't currently have a login then Signup here
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Written Papers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Custom Papers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
