IMC 2017: Sessions

Session 625: Creating the Ideal Virtuous Ruler in the 12th Century: Western, Byzantine, and Islamic Responses to Crisis

Tuesday 4 July 2017, 11.15-12.45

Sponsor:Texas Medieval Association (TEMA)
Organiser:Scott Hieger, Independent Scholar, Dallas, Texas
Moderator/Chair:Shaun Tougher, School of History, Archaeology & Religion, Cardiff University
Paper 625-aIdeal Virtuous Kingship in Deeds of Frederick Barbarossa by Otto von Freising
(Language: English)
J. Christian Petersen, Braniff Graduate School of Liberal Arts, University of Dallas, Texas
Index terms: Crusades, Historiography - Medieval, Lay Piety, Politics and Diplomacy
Paper 625-bClassical Leadership Archetypes in the History of Niketas Choniates
(Language: English)
Scott Hieger, Independent Scholar, Dallas, Texas
Index terms: Byzantine Studies, Crusades, Political Thought, Politics and Diplomacy
Paper 625-cRashidun al-Malik: Ibn al-Qalanisi and the Islamic Response to the Leadership Crisis in Face of the Crusades
(Language: English)
Joe Morrel, Braniff Graduate School of Liberal Arts, University of Dallas, Texas
Index terms: Crusades, Islamic and Arabic Studies, Mentalities, Political Thought
Abstract

In the 12th century, three authors from three different cultures sought to define virtuous rulership. Otto von Freising, Niketes Choniates, and Ibn al-Qalanisi, each in their own way, manufactured the ideal virtuous ruler within the framework of their unique cultural requirements. Otto von Freising endeavored to promote Barbarosa as the ideal Christian ruler to solidify the growing might of the Holy Roman Empire. Unlike the Christian west, Choniates attempted to resurrect an ideal Roman ruler as a foil for Byzantine imperial decline. In an effort to counter Christendom, Ibn al-Qalanisi exalted Nur ad-Din to reforge an Islamic ideal of rulership as a sword to defend Dar al-Islam from the onslaught of the west. Each built a bulwark of idealized self in response to the socio-political stress of the other contending empires. With these three papers, the panel’s intentions are two-fold: first, to present the striking similarities in virtue, and second, to demonstrate the fundamental differences underlining the concept in each society.