Our comparative essay will focus on ancient leaders, Constantine and Charlemagne. Both individuals established themselves as notable leaders. They both made strides to further the causes of those that they led. I will attempt to highlight common themes of both rulers. Were they similar or different?
1. Compare the situation and methods of rule and their apparent ideals and practices.
We will begin our comparison by taking a look at Constantine. He was a Roman Emperor and he ruled from 306 to 337 A.D. He was the son of Flavis Valerius Constatius and Helena. His methods of rule and ideals were more focused on reform of administrative, financial, social and military policies. The government was restructured during his rule to separate …show more content…
They both desired to further the cause of Christianity. However the differences lie in the methods by which they went about it. Constantine aided the causes of Christianity through governmental policy. Christianity was at one time an illegal practice that was done behind closed doors. Constantine made it acceptable for individuals to be practices their faith in the open. An example of this was the fact that Constantine laid the groundwork for the Patriarchate of Constantinople to become a major spiritual center. As for Charlemagne he sponsored missionary efforts, and encouraged the spread of Benedictine monasteries. He also encouraged the reproduction of theological manuscripts. Despite the aforementioned we must acknowledge the fact that Charlemagne wanted to make people believers even if it had to come by force. An example of this would be the war that Charlemagne started against the Saxons better known as the Saxon …show more content…
I have always heard that even if you chose not to believe in a certain faith, the fact remains that you have to believe by believing that. The difference is that while Christianity seemed to take easier within the Roman emperor. However it appears to have been more forced amongst the people that Charlemagne. In November 1922, British Archaeologist Howard Carter discovered the Tomb of King Tutankhamen (Sayre, 2014). Scientific advances allowed for a CT scan to be performed on the remains of King Tutankhamen in later years. The scan revealed that King Tutankhamen had head trauma and broken ribs (6 Secrets of King Tut, n.d.). However in 2005 and 2010 it was discovered that King Tut had a broken leg and DNA testing revealed he also had malaria. Therefore I will conclude that illness and injury were the most plausible cause of his
1. Compare the situation and methods of rule and their apparent ideals and practices.
We will begin our comparison by taking a look at Constantine. He was a Roman Emperor and he ruled from 306 to 337 A.D. He was the son of Flavis Valerius Constatius and Helena. His methods of rule and ideals were more focused on reform of administrative, financial, social and military policies. The government was restructured during his rule to separate …show more content…
They both desired to further the cause of Christianity. However the differences lie in the methods by which they went about it. Constantine aided the causes of Christianity through governmental policy. Christianity was at one time an illegal practice that was done behind closed doors. Constantine made it acceptable for individuals to be practices their faith in the open. An example of this was the fact that Constantine laid the groundwork for the Patriarchate of Constantinople to become a major spiritual center. As for Charlemagne he sponsored missionary efforts, and encouraged the spread of Benedictine monasteries. He also encouraged the reproduction of theological manuscripts. Despite the aforementioned we must acknowledge the fact that Charlemagne wanted to make people believers even if it had to come by force. An example of this would be the war that Charlemagne started against the Saxons better known as the Saxon …show more content…
I have always heard that even if you chose not to believe in a certain faith, the fact remains that you have to believe by believing that. The difference is that while Christianity seemed to take easier within the Roman emperor. However it appears to have been more forced amongst the people that Charlemagne. In November 1922, British Archaeologist Howard Carter discovered the Tomb of King Tutankhamen (Sayre, 2014). Scientific advances allowed for a CT scan to be performed on the remains of King Tutankhamen in later years. The scan revealed that King Tutankhamen had head trauma and broken ribs (6 Secrets of King Tut, n.d.). However in 2005 and 2010 it was discovered that King Tut had a broken leg and DNA testing revealed he also had malaria. Therefore I will conclude that illness and injury were the most plausible cause of his