I'm cheating a little by starting with a story that has been around since around 1099 AD (approximately). Not a lot of people will read this book outside of a literature class and I honestly can't blame them.
The reason why I bought this book was because of a song I found on Youtube. "The Song of Roland" is a ballad about a knight who is tricked into fighting the Sarasans. He is inevitably betrayed by another knight who convinces the king the horn he hears is just Roland hunting. Roland and his army are slaughtered and later is considered a tragic hero. This is a a good summary of what happens in the book, though not exactly.
A quick summary: (Spoilers alert)
French King Charles, also known as Charlemagne, is convinced to invade Spain to drive out the "pagans" who are supposed to be early Muslims. The book starts 9 years into this war and he received a message from the Spanish king Marsiliun that they should come to some kind of peace agreement. Charlemagne asks his knights who should go to deliver his demands and his nephew Roland offers to go but is shut down by his step father Ganelon for being too prideful and quick-tempered. In return, Roland suggests Ganelon goes and Charlemagne agrees. Ganelon believes he is being sent to his death and conspires with the Spanish King to kill Roland.
Fast forward and Roland is selected to march in the rear guard where he and his army is attacked. They fight long and hard in an "epic" battle but Roland, his friend Oliver, and all of their knights are slaughtered. By the time Charlemagne realizes Ganelon has betrayed them, it is too late. Charlemagne reaches the battlefield, finds everyone dead, and then chases after Marsiliun who has been wounded and retreated to his castle.
This is the halfway point in the story.
Marsiliun calls for the aid of the Emir who arrives and fights Charlemagne. After a long battle, the French are successful, they take over Spain, a hundred thousand of the "pagans" are baptized and turn to Christianity, and back in France Ganelon and his entire family are executed for his treason.
The End.
I honestly did not enjoy this book as much as I thought I would. First of all-- and I know this is just nit-picking-- I expected it to be written more like Beowulf's long verses since they are often paired together in collections of medieval poetry. Instead, it is written in short narrative snippets that range from a few sentences to a few pages long.
Along with this narrative style that the translator-- W.S. Merwin-- chose, whole sections of the narrative are repeated, offering a few minor variations between them, but doing little to actually advance the plot. This is true to the original poem's style.
The Song of Roland was originally La Chanson de Roland, an epic poem written in the French adaption of the Andalusian Arabic poetry form known as qasida.A qasida is a long poem centered around a single rhyme and is accompanied by musical instruments. This makes it easier to remember and recite the poem. However, it also means the performer could skim over some points or even pick and choose which versions they want to recite depending on the circumstances. Again, this was written sometime around 1099 AD.
My biggest problem with this poem is the obvious Christian-centrism propaganda throughout the poem. The "pagans" are Islamic and call on Mahomet for aid, however they also worship other idols like Appolin. One of Charlemagne's orders after defeating the Emir was to go into the temples and destroy all of the images of the "pagan" idols. Anyone who has done any research into the history of Islam-- which I will admit, I've only done a little of-- will know that Islam does not permit the use of images in their religion. There are no portraits of Muhammad in their places of worship and they are a monotheistic religion, worshiping Allah and no others. To add insult to injury, the author calls the Muslims "That race of the devil" (CXC) while the French are God's "instruments of His true justice" (CCXLII).
The greatest offense, though is how the author clearly wants readers and listeners to believe Charlemagne is in the right throughout this entire poem. God and the angels directly intervene in the battles, much like the gods do in the Iliad, and Charlemagne is somehow in the right despite his cruelty. For example when he and the Emir are about to engage in battle, they both offer the other a chance to surrender, with the Emir promising to make Charlemagne rich and powerful if he will become a vassal to the Emir. Charlemagne refuses and says "It is not for me to render either peace or love to a pagan" (CCLX). For anyone who has read the Bible, especially the New Testament, they may react the same way I did. Charlemagne is choosing to slaughter thousands of people in God's name, completely ignoring Christ's teachings to "love thy neighbor" and his command to preach to the Gentiles. I actually found myself grinning at Emir Baligant's response: "You have begun a bad sermon"(CCLX).
A similar offense is when Charlemagne actually does defeat the Emir and takes over the city. "[H]is bishops bless water, and the pagans are led into the baptistry [sic]. If anyone resists Charles, he is hanged or Burned or put to the sword, and more than a hundred thousand of them are baptized and become true Christians. But not the Queen. She is to be led captive into sweet France, where the King hopes that she will be converted by love" (CCLXVI).
My actual notes for this section read: "RAGE! Yes, because Jesus said slaughter anyone who doesn't get sprinkled with holy water after being attacked for 10 years, those are the people who will love me as I intended. And why would the queen convert after all of this? Charles just needed an excuse to keep her and that was the best lame-ass one he could think of."
I did not enjoy this book. After reading it, though, i did a little research and some things started to make more sense. The original author of the text recorded these events in 1099 (as I've said) however, Charlemagne and Roland lived and fought in Spain sometime in the year 788. Roland was attacked by the native Basques, not the Muslims that Charles was fighting against. On top of that, Charles actually failed to invade Spain and spent the rest of his reign just maintaining a strong boarder with Spain. All of this means the original author chose to alter facts in order to help demonize the Muslims. The Song of Roland was a propaganda poem used to encourage people to go fight during the Crusades in the Holy Lands (Merwin, pg xiii).
The reason why I had such a hard time with this story was because it is part of my religion's history and not one I am proud of. It is like the Iliad in the sense of creating a larger than life hero that the early church could use to further their political agendas with little to no regard to the actual teachings of the religion they represented.
Despite my many issues with this story, I do recommend people read it. It is one of the oldest poems from European history and it is eye opening into the politics of the time period. Medieval knights worked hard to ensure their name would be remembered long after they died, and this poem ensures that for Roland, his friend Oliver, the traitor Ganelon, Charlemagne, and even King Marsiliun. This is a flawed and important piece of history that should be read, at least once, by anyone who can trace their lineage to this region, history, or religion.
Comments
Post a Comment