79 of 82 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great medieval sources for Charlemagne, December 8, 1999
By A Customer
It's really bizarre how this book has gotten all those 1-star reviews. Most of them seem to have read it thinking it was a novel, though considering the book's title they must not be very perceptive. While Einhard's Life is a little dry in parts, I greatly enjoyed Notker's. The translator's notes are very informative, particularly on the battle of Roncevalles, where Charlemagne's general Roland was killed. To someone genuinely interested in learning more about Charlemagne than what is mere common knowledge, I suggest ignoring the bad reviews and get this book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
73 of 78 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
History isn't literature!, February 26, 2003
Those of you who claimed this book bored you obviously thought you were picking up an Arthurian romance or some kind of fantasy/sci-fi epic. This is history, people, not an adventure story! What's more, it's history from the period in which it happened, what we call a primary source. Of course it's not going to read like a modern novel. People in the Middle Ages wanted solid content, not useless fluff. This work is great for introducing students to the life of a great leader written by someone who was actually there. I use it with my tenth grade students and they love it because it gives you a snapshot of the man under the crown.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
28 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
1,200 years old, July 16, 2006
Looking at the three 'one-star' reviews this book has received, I would point out they are all written in the same style, are close in date and look suspiciously like they were all written by the same person.
Yes, this is a wonderful primary source.
With Einhard's story you are actually reading the work of a person who knew Charlemagne (who lived approx. 742-814AD).
Prior to Charlemagne there basically was no Germanic literature. Charlemagne encouraged book learning and the writing of what had before then been either purely oral or simply not remembered. We are looking at the birth of Germanic Literature and also the birth of Germanic recorded history. Before this, (apart from a few glosses in the 7th Century) there is only the archaeological record and the writings of neighbouring literate cultures like the Romans about their Germanic neighbours to turn to for illumination.
These glimpses into the minds of people whose culture and outlook on the world are both so different to our own but also has so profoundly impacted the development of our modern day life are fascinating.
Charlemagne after all followed in the footsteps of the Roman Caesars in his attempt to create a great and literate civilisation and by doing so deeply influenced the Anglo-Saxons in England. Some of the earliest Saxon writings were commissioned by Charlemagne and his son, Louis the Pious. Alfred the Great was deeply influenced by his example. It was Alfred the Greats encouragement of Anglo-Saxon literature that established sound foundations for later developments in English literature.
I preferred Einhard as I think he succeeded in showing Charlemagne the man to a greater degree than Notker writing a hundred years later. Already with Notker the 'legendising' of Charlemagne made him more one dimensional and also as you can see in the foot notes more inaccuracies creep into Notker's text. There is also something more primitive and 'mystical' about Einhard. Mystical, mind you when one of Charlemagne's rivals 'mysteriously' dies. ;) But this is not really a criticism of Notker as he gives a feel for the development both of Germanic culture one hundred years further on and also some insight into the making of the legend of Charlemagne.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
