NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
The Crusades Every child and every adult must have ever heard about Richard the Lionheart, Coeur de Lion. Nobody doubts that this historic figure was a real hero, an honorable man, who could do everything for his native land England. There are a lot of legends (e. g Robin Hood), fairy tales and novels (Walter Scotts Ivanhoe) either about Richard the Lionheart himself or about some hero whom noble king Richard I helps. It happens so that the older a historic figure is, the less it is known about his / her real life and character. There might even exist written sources, but to what extent can they be trusted?
It should be taken into consideration that all these sources are subjective and were written under the influence of the authors attitude to the person whom he wrote about. And if, for instance, in the times of Richard the Lionheart he was considered a hero (that is why he was called the Lionheart) in the chronicles he was a hero too. As an example the chronicle The Third Crusade: An Eyewitness Account of the Campaigns of Richard Coeur-de-Lion in Cyprus and the Holy Land can serve. The unknown author was un doubtfully influenced by Richards I charisma. It can be traced in his work. He compares Richard to Achilles, Roland and Alexander the Great to the powerful and heroic people.
And if Alexander the Great is proved to be a historic personality, Achilles and Roland are mostly legendary ones, whose modern images have been to a great extent created by peoples imagination. These characters are endowed with all the qualities, people appreciate: strength of spirit and body, honesty, kindness, dignity, etc. Such a comparison suggests that the author of the chronicles believed that Richard I possessed all these characteristics too. Lets compare the description of Richard the Lionheart with the description of Roland and trace what these characters have in common and what features are different, and also analyze if the comparison between them is valid.
First of all it should be found out who Roland was. As it was already mentioned Roland is mostly legendary personality. Certainly, once there existed such a man, but few facts are known about his biography and most information is taken from the old French epic poem of the 11 th century, which is called The Song for Roland. Roland is the main character of the poem and as all the heroes he is handsome, strong, noble, devoted to his country and duty. At the times of Roland and Richard the Lionheart, the struggle against so-called infidels or pagans (Jews and Muslims) was considered an honourable deed.
Both Roland (in the Battle of Roncevaux Pass) and Richard I (in the third Crusade) led this struggle and people treated them as heroes. As Roland is an epic hero of an epic poem he hardly reminds a real man of blood and flesh. Roland possesses no negative feature, he always turns to be right, while his containers are wrong. He is ready to protect his native land (uncle Charlemagne represents its embodiment in the poem) even with the cost of his life. He possesses no vanity and his words While I'm alive there's no man you need fear" (The Song of Roland, n.
p) just show his readiness to protect his country. As any epic hero Roland has superhuman force. Heavily wounded he continues to fight with his enemies. As any knight Roland has his cod of honour, which doesnt let him blow his horn Olifant to summon the rest of the army, but obliges him to fight despite the fact that enemy's army exceeds his own in number. As a real knight after he knows that he has fulfilled his duty, Roland calmly meats death: But Rolland felt that death had made a way Down from his head till on his heart it lay; Beneath a pine running in haste he came, On the green grass he lay there on his face; His Olifant and sword beneath him placed, Turning his head towards the pagan race And for his sins his glove to God upraised. (The Song of Roland, n. p) This is a stereotype of a hero, and the author of the Chronicle of the Third Crusade, comparing Richard the Lionheart to Roland tries to make some kind of a heroic stereotype of Richard I too.
The question, if the comparison of Richard and Roland is valid has two answers. The answer depends on what Richard is meant. If talking about Richard from folklore, then, of course, such comparison is valid, as in this case two characters from different legends are compared. But when we talk about Richard I the historical personality, a really existing man with his bad and good features of character then such comparison has no sense, except the case when it is made to emphasize the fact that Richard the Lionheart really existed. And, of course, such comparison cant present a reliable historical picture of Richard I. Some people may become frustrated when learning about real Richard and not because Richard was a bad man, but just because he was a man and no real man can compete with noble Roland from The Song for Roland.
Historic Richard the Lionheart was quite a controversial man. He was a clever politic leader and head of his military forces, but at the same time he could do foolish things, which nobody would have expected from him. He was not very respectful to his father (he even prepared several plots against him), he lacked foresight and a sense of responsibility and he was not a very great patriot of his country (according to historical facts only six months of his ten-year reign in England he spent in the country, he just claimed that the weather in England was always cold and running), Richard was even said to have committed various rapes and murders. So, how can such a man be compared with Roland from The Song? But at the same time he possessed features of typical epic hero. He is believe to be six feet four inches tall, among people who claimed to knew him well he was known as noble and courageous man, he even forgave his brothers John attempt to seize his throne (while he was in The Third Crusade) and made him his heir.
Richard I was a man who knew victories and losses, he possessed a great will as he manged to reach Jerusalem leading his army, although he never conquered it. Summing up all said above, it should be told that chronicles and eyewitness accounts cant serve as the only historical sources. As they were written by ordinary people they cant contain the objective information, as personal opinion of righter and opinion of people of certain era influenced it. In our case witness account describes a heroic personality with no lacks, while in life Richard I appeared to be un doubtfully great, but still a man with advantages and disadvantages.
On the other hand, such accounts and chronicles can give psychological portrait of the author, as well as of the whole society, as they show peoples believes, aims and hopes. From such accounts we can always get trustworthy information of the traditions and customs of the society of the described period. Scientists can get some hints of historical events and situation of different historically known places. So, in spite of the fact that chronicles and eyewitness accounts contain subjective information they, firstly, much more reliable than legends and tails and secondly, they can contain very important information, that cant be found in other sources as for many years it was the only way to right down the historical events.
Bibliography The Third Crusade: An Eyewitness Account of the Campaigns of Richard Coeur-de-Lion in Cyprus and the Holy Land. Translated by Kenneth Fenwick, London: Folio Society, 1968. The Song of Roland (n. d. ) web
Free research essays on topics related to: epic poem, third crusade, epic hero, song of roland, eyewitness accounts
Research essay sample on Song Of Roland Epic Hero
