Friday, November 13, 2009
Blog Hasan
War and Failure in North Africa
This week’s sections open with a description of two battles in North Africa which occurred in 1511. The first battle described is the one led by the Sultan of Fez to recapture the city of Tangier, which is met with great resistance and a large number of dead Muslim warriors. The second appears to be more successful. This is an campaign led by the Lame Sharif to siege the city of Agadir, which seems to meet much more success in the beginning. Both, however, end in failure (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16xm4KAt50k ). As our constant narrator tells us, not a single line of his writings deal with the battle, but rather entirely with the reactions of their leaders. This is very interesting to me, as often the reaction to failure is more important than the actual failure itself.
First, we see the reaction to the defeat at Tangier by the Sultan of Fez. This reaction is typical of what is seen in today’s political world. The Sultan attempts to spin the defeat to show it as less severe than it was. The Sultan claims that the number of dead is not that bad, and that it has shown that the Muslims are willing to fight, can rally the population of the Muslim world, while not attracting the attention of vengeful Portuguese leaders. However, outside the Sultan’s tent the dead number more than three hundred and the soldiers who remain alive are distraught. Included in great detail is the account of one man whose son was killed in the battle.
Later, we see the account of the Lame Sharif and his reactions to the battle at Agadir. There the Muslim forces were met with greater success in their siege. However, the attack is called off seemingly prematurely, and the Portuguese hold the city. When confronted and asked to explain why the siege was lifted, the Lame Sharif explains that he had no desire to take the city, as it would require his army to remain there to resist Portuguese attempts to retake the city from him. He explains that his goal is not to take a single city, but rather to take over as the head of all the Muslim states. This is a goal that is clearly self-serving and does not have the best interests of the Muslim world at heart. Yet when that is pointed out to him, the Sharif merely becomes angry.
My question pretty much boils down to looking for your reactions to failure, comments on theirs, etc…
Hasan
Interesting enough, this section sheds light on some similar life styles that we have today. Specifically how the soldier says that he has not seen his family in months. That is something that in common today. If you look at the war we are currently in, or conflict, soldiers of the United States are on tour of somewhere near a year, and only come home every couple months to see their family as well. I also found it interesting how they dealt with death. We talked about it on Wednesday session, but to see someone publicly killed is today is not norm. The norm today is death is supposed to be peaceful and private. If someone were killed today like a hanging in a town square, that would be seen as just wrong.
I would like to see the book go more in depth of how the ottoman soldiers were, were they strict or were they seeing it as a job? I am just curious because it seem pride in ones country back in the 15th and 16th century was the reason for die, unlike today it is fighting for pride, but money is still a big issue for signing up.
In this week’s reading, Hasan was exiled from his community for supporting the pardon of his brother-in-law who was the suspected murderer of Zarwali. After that, Hasan describes his arrival in Cairo and the onset of the plague, children being affected first. Hasan says that everyday there will hundreds of deaths. He finally traveled to Rome, where the Pope X baptized him under his new Christian name, “Leo Africanus.” I thought the most interesting part of this week’s reading was learning about the religion.
Hasan and Hibin
However, I am continually fascinated by the romance in the novel. As mentioned in previous blogs, his relationship with his slave Hibin is extremely complicated. He leaves her with his family instead of taking her with him, what does that say about his love for her and relationships men had with slaves in this time period? I feel that there is a social boundary that is impossible to cross in these times, and all of the relationships in the novel seem extremely rigid. There is a way to marry, and there is a way to love your slave. These boundaries cannot be crossed.
This is interesting in comparison to today’s standards. I was wondering where our boundaries lie today in the US. Certainly there are laws that display the social norms, but I feel that family has more to do with relationship standards than society as a whole. It seems that in general we value monogamy, and marriage as a tribute to that bond between two adults of opposite sexes. In different families and locations there are other standards put on top of that. For example: whether or not premarital sex is frowned upon, how early dating should begin, what types of people should date (based on gender, age, race, class). There are a host of unspoken rules today, just as there were in Hasan’s time. I keep wondering in this class if society really does change, or if each society just interprets human nature with a different set of rules.
--Arielle Parris
Blog 10
Hasan is currently working as a diplomat in Constantinople. His wife Nur then gives birth to a baby girl. Sadly he is captured by pirates and used as a slave. Because of scandals surrounding his family (his brother allegedly committing murder) this was deemed a form of exile. As a result of these unfortunate mishaps Hasan is brought closer to Rome where he is then baptized and is given the name Leo Africanus.
Part 2:
I feel that this was a very interesting chain of events. I felt bad that Hasan a.k.a. Leo Africanus was punished for a crime that his brother may or may not have commited. This is especially unfortunate because he has a new born.
Part 3:
Why do you think in these times people's families were punished for their potential wrong doings? Is this something we still see today?
Leo Africanus pt. III
Luxury, Exile, Slavery...and Freedom?
It was very interesting to me how the relationship between Pope Leo X and Hasan developed, as well as Hasan's reaction to his enslavement. The Pope immediately takes a liking to Hasan. He is given anything he requests. The door to his room is eventually unlocked, and while taking classes and teaching classes for the Pope, he is eventually "freed." But, how free is he? He resists responding to the Luther-supporting Hans (a student) out of respect for his "protector." Does he forget how he came to be there? His curiosity for learning seemed to make him submissive to his situation. Not once does the reader get the impression that this was some sort of injustice!
How are we to understand this? The most troubling thing for Hasan is when his name is changed to Leo Africanus and the lack of regular prayer to guide men's daily lives. His identity seems to be at risk and he makes his new name sound more Arabic. I am surprised that he does not feel more passionate about the luxury and corruption Christianity.
From Fez to Cairo to Mecca to Rome
Although Leo Africanus is known for his extensive travels, this week’s readings proves this fact. The story transpires from
Besides the reoccurring theme of religion, I found one more thing very interesting in the readings—the apathy toward war and death. In the first few paragraphs of the reading, Hasan comments that he did not have one description or “progress” of battle in his writing. He focused more on the kings and courts and the courtiers. When the mentions of hundreds upon hundreds of bodies on the battlefield is made, it seems as though this is of no importance. Furthermore, Hasan, depicts the story of an old man with his dead son’s body without any emotion at all. Again, more deep into this section, when Hasan is talking to Nur’s son, he apathetically talks about stepping over a Turkish head. The boy seems to have no emotional reaction to this at all, he simply shrugs his shoulders when asked about it. So, my question is why is this apathy so rampant? I understand warfare and death were more common in this time, but I would expect a bit more sadness or at least shock to the death of family members. Were these people just more used to war than we are today?
Leo and The Year of the Grand Turk
In spite of the title, Leo's work is not a comprehensive description of the entire African continent. There is no mention, for example, of Christian Ethiopia or of the lands to the south of the Sudanic zone, which already were familiar to European readers from contemporary Portuguese and Italian reports. As mentioned above, Alvise Cadamosto's description of his voyages to West Africa was first published in Italy in 1507. The first volume ") of the "Asia" by João de Barros, which describes the advance of Portuguese discoveries on African coasts until 1498 with extensive accounts of Gold Coast, Benin, and the kingdom of Congo, was published in Portugal in 1552. "The Prester John of the Indies" by Francisco Alvares, providing an accurate description of Ethiopia, was published in Portugal in 1540.
The emphasis in Leo's work is, understandably, on Morocco: the description of Fez alone takes as much space as the two entire books reserved for Tunisia and Libya. Even if the author's primary focus is geographical, an historical aspect is always present, albeit sometimes superficially, as most passages contain at least one or two historical anecdotes related to the respective area. As to the composition and approach, Leo's work represents the traditional literary genre of "the routes and the realms" which was famoured by medieval Arab geographers and historians, such as Ibn Hawqal, al-Bakri, and al-Umari, whose works Leo used as sources for his own work. Hence we may characterize Leo's "Description of Africa" as the final contribution of Islamic learning to Western civilization, in the sense that it offered new, hitherto unknown knowledge to Western scholars; the end of the cultural exchange which had begun in the eleventh-century Spain and Sicily. On the other hand, Leo's work was by no means unique to his readers. Similar approach was used by many Renaissance scholars, who considered geography, ethnography, and history inseparable subjects.
Leo's knowledge was above all based on his own experiences and observations. I have already referred above to his great voyages which are supposed to have taken him almost everywhere in the Islamic Mediterranean, from southern Morocco to Arabia, and across the Sahara. The question whether these voyages represent events that really took place or whether they are just a literary invention by a cunning captive who wanted to impress his patron has some relevance when we are estimating Leo's reliability as an historical source from the point of view of modern historiography. Considering, however, his repution and influence on the development of European geography of Africa, the question is less meaningful. Until the early nineteenth century, Leo's European readers were not capable of distinguishing facts from fiction in his text, any more than medieval readers had been able to separate reality from imagination in Marco Polo's "Travels". This concerns particularly Leo's description of the city of Timbuktu, which he depicts as an African version of Zipangu.
Towards the end of October, the brother of the bishop of Salamanca, a Spaniard and a Captain, captured on the sea a Turkish ambassador whom the Grand Turk had dispatched to the king of Tunis on the Barbary Coast. The man was taken to Rome with twelve other captives and placed in the house of the above mentioned bishop at Sant'Agostino in Rome, where the Cardinal of Nantes had once lived. Then the said ambassador was taken to the Sant'Angelo.
Becoming Leo Africanus
This section of Hasan’s life was very interesting, although I believe I enjoyed the previous readings more. There wasn’t one part that stood out completely more interesting than the others. All the places Hasan travelled and things he did and observed stood out, like watching the battles at Agadir and traveling to Cairo. I also found all the religious tension intriguing.
One thing I find interesting about Hasan and the culture is that in this section he meets and marries his third wife. I have found every marriage or romance story in Leo Africanus to be quite interesting. Just in this section before Hasan heads to Cairo, there was Hasans relationship with his slave girl, Hiba. I could not grasp their relationship. First, there was the section where they were trapped inside the cave because of snow when Hasan realizes his love for Hiba because he decides to bring her back to her family instead of reselling her to another person. Another section that shows his “love” for her is when he leaves Hiba’s ancestors and Timbuktu is the first place he decides to go. Timbuktu is important to Hasan and Hiba because it is the place where they shared their first kiss. But then if he loves her, one would think that he would want her to be with him on all his next journeys, and that he would not have given (sold) her back to her family. So I guess my question is, what do you think of love and marriage in Leo Africanus, and what do you think of marriage in the book overall?
Leo Africanus
In Rome, Leo was acquainted with Lutheranism. I’ve never read of this time in a narrative style and it’s actually really fascinating. The Protestant Reformation is one of the most major movements of the Christian church and here I am reading a first-hand experience from someone living through it. Not only does Maalouf weave in historical figures but he also includes major historical movements that impact the plot equally as strongly. I haven’t got the time to do research at the moment, and I’m positive Maalouf did a ton, but I wonder if anyone has caught any historical inaccuracies? This work is fiction since it is written as a narrative, but it is set to the back drop of historical events. But in every other case of this, there is usually one or two things that are slightly changed for the plot to run smoothly. So my question is if there are any in Leo Africanus.
Leo Africanus Reading 3
One item of discussion that i find particularly interesting in the incorporation of religion and state. I guess it is very much related to technological advances, but at the time they felt the plague was caused by the "Most High." Today we know that the disease is cause by a virus. Also how religion was used to incorporate conquests known as "Holy Wars." Again, today if a country like USA were to declare war supporting religious conquest as it goal, we would have utter chaos,yet the states or Monarch's governing convinced millions to do so. It still amazes me to see the depth that religion is tied into how the state governs over the people. They seem to utilize it as a strategic tool of governing rather than a omniscient being. My question to everyone is, what steps or changes occurred for split of religion and state?
Leo Africanus, Part 3
Moreover, I think it's really shocking to realize just how easily people were exiled back in these times, for some really silly reasons really. I mean, now-a-days (or perhaps even to someone who doesn't follow the religion?) they seem silly. Hasan's willingness to stand up for his family should be commended, not discouraged and punished. But, alas, if this did not happen, would we have such a great story afterward? Hasan's exile led him to Cairo, and new places to travel to, stories to tell.
All's Fair In Love And War
Leo Africanus started to get a lot more enjoyable towards the middle and end, and I think I've got a handle on some of the themes that seem to be emerging. (Although it's been a while since I analyzed a work of literature and I might be a little rusty!)
Written in a memoir-style of "this is my life's tale", the eponymous narrator often displays not-very-subtle foreshadowing of "doom" that will afflict him in the next chapter. ("Little did I know then that this would be my undoing" etc.) In fact, this "doom-predicting" happens so frequently that I think it certainly shapes how we read the story of this Hasan, this Leo Africanus.
I read this story as having a decisively fatalistic edge to it. Hasan's exciting life is wrought with big changes that he clearly has no control over. His life fluctuates like a roller-coaster between good fortune and bad, and his telling of his story reflects his helplessness to maintain control of his own destiny in the face of Big Events like wars and women.
Wars and Women! These are the two forces in life, as expressed in this book, that man can never control. Wars, or rather, the whims of politicians, religious leaders, and rulers (and even just regular really rich guys with a lot of influence). Much of Hasan's life is spent catering to the whims of fat, greedy self-important sultans and politicians to try to save his own family and himself from humiliation and misfortune, and caught up in trying not to endanger himself getting caught up in political and religious rebellion. An adventurer and diplomat at heart, Hasan holds no clear convictions of religion or politics, but is certainly a man to take up arms for the women in his life.
Women, of course, are also major players in shaping the road Hasan takes through life, through the slave-girl Hibin who he loves but can never bear him a son and whom he eventually returns to her people in Africa, to his unattractive cousin Fatim who he has to marry (although lucky for him she eventually dies in childbirth!) as a promise to his dying uncle, to the princess Nur who entreats him to become stepfather to her young fatherless son, who is destined to one day rule Constantinople.
Of course this helping-women-streak was all started by his half-sister Miriam, who entreats him to save her from an arranged marriage with the violent, generous Zarwali. Her desperate plea to her estranged brother moves him to a point that he endangers everything to free her from this marriage. Although it ends up with her in a leper colony, Hasan's friend Harun marries her and takes her out of the city (and then makes her join him in his quest being what sounded suspiciously like being a Muslim Robin Hood, but hey, that sounds more fun than having to be married to some old guy). Then Harun kills the Zarwali for revenge and Hasan is banished for accessory to murder. The point is, Hasan's actions rarely have the effects he intended, but they certainly make life exciting.
Hasan is an adventurer through life, his individual path a boat and the tides of history the waves that push him one way or another. His lack of firm conviction towards wars and politican disputes, his lack of a nation to call his own, all of these make him the perfect person to tell us how great historical events are experienced by the "everyman" (of course, an "everyman" with significant more opportunities for travel and influence than every other everyman, but still.) He's just some dude trying to make a buck and score some chicks, and if he has to talk to some sultans or leaders of religious rebellion to do that, then, that's just how you gotta roll to stay in the game.
-katie dempsey
leo Africanus 3
In this section of reading Hasan receives his new name, Leo, at his baptizing in Rome, Italy. Around this time, while working as a diplomat in Constantinople, Egypt, during the rule of the Ottoman Empire, his wife Nur gave birth to a girl. However, not long after he was captured by Italian pirates because of his position of power and was used as a slave. This was a form of exile because of scandals that surrounded his family, in that his brother was accused of murder. It is this that brought him to Rome and closer to the Pope and his religion and allowed him to be baptized and adopt the name Leo Africanus.
This is so interesting I think because it seems so unlikely to happen. I could not have predicted in the beginning of the book that Leo would become baptized and a Catholic by choice and that he and the Pope would share so many thoughts and ideas. It is very interesting that the pope almost instantly trusted Leo, especially because he was brought into Rome one a slave ship. Also, I think it is interesting that Leo spends time contemplating the issue of separation of church and state. However, he is of the opinion that the army should use religion as their support. However, personally I think that they should stay away from each other. I think that with religion in the mix war gets too personal… not that war shouldn’t be personal, because it should. But I think it should be a different type of personal. War should be personal because you are taking the lives of other human beings not because your religion or beliefs tell you it is.
--- DOROTHY SMITH
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Exiled for Loyalty
I love the idea of Hasan taking a new name. Our names because our identity throughout our lives. What we choose to be called and how we choose to introduce ourselves to the world is extremely telling. On the most basic level, our names can dictate our heritage, in some cases our religious background, and even the formality (when you choose to be called Matthew instead of Matt). Nicknames can form bonds within groups, can give an individual to embrace a different name or version, or even distinguish an individual from a crowd.
Its interesting to me that Hasan chose to take the name Leo Africanus. The name is so different from his cultural identity. Or rather his childhood cultural identity. From the first page of the book Hasan declares himself not a man of a nation or tribe, but a man of travel.
Can anyone truly become a man of travel? Or are we forever burdened with our cultures? Is our ability to distinguish ourselves apart from our previous cultures contingent on our own perspectives, others perspective of our cultures, or both?
From Hasan to Leo
This section of the reading begins with Hasan’s time in Constantinople as a diplomat. During his time there, the Ottoman empire is rising to the height of its power, perhaps due to a mostly peaceful time. For the time, Constantinople stands out for its peaceful blend of cultures and religions. Ironically, though, the Ottomans look to disturb the peace by looking for ways to expand their territory. One such way is to take over the Mameluke Empire and its central city, Cairo. Despite the attempt by Hasan and Nur to warn the city and the Mamelukes’ courage in the city’s defense, the Ottomans prove too strong and ransack Cairo. After the birth of his daughter, Hasan and family leave the city and enter into a nomadic lifestyle.
Hasan’s adventures continue about a year later. He is captured by an Italian pirate, and because of Hasan’s skills as a traveler, scholar, and diplomat, he is taken to be placed in the service of Pope Leo X. He falls into favor with the Pope, and is baptized and christened Leo, which directly leads to the name Leo Africanus. Hasan utilizes his skills to become a scholar in the city of Christianity, and through his experiences, he learns of the earliest forms of Lutheranism, the movement to purify the Catholic Church by removing its corruption.
These last chapters were very interesting in their use of real historical figures in combination with Hasan’s storybook adventures. Also interesting is Hasan’s time in Rome, as there are many similarities between Rome and the other major cities Hasan has lived in, like Constantinople and Fez. It seems that Hasan is at the center of many of the major cultural and religious movements of the time. Also evident in the reading is that conflict extends beyond religion or politics, but is rather a combination of a broad range of factors, from politics to religion to race to economics to sheer coincidence. It is this historical lesson that is still applicable today, as many of our current topics for debate, like immigration or the economy, are multi-faceted issues, hence the debate. So, with these issues, is there a single solution we should be looking for or should me merely settle for the compromises that leave room for improvement?
Leo Africanus - Blog 3
I found the following phrase the most interesting one of this entire section: “Even if we could pardon your brother-in-law for what he has done, how could we pardon him for the things we accuse him of having done?” (251). This seems to be common throughout history. Once society or governments find a scapegoat, that person is blamed for anything and everything. Even if they are truly innocent of all crimes, they are built up to be horrible in the public image. This allows the government to hold someone up as the anti-citizen so that everyone else is aware of how they should not behave. This, to me, seems related to later in the section when the Ottoman soldiers began arresting anyone by accusing them of being a Circassian in disguise. The truth is irrelevant; the only thing that matters is the perception of those in power. It basically comes down to arbitrary assignment of blame.
Although this was only briefly mentioned, I would have liked to know more about the practice of female “excision” in Cairo. When Nur gives birth to a daughter, the midwife offers to do this operation, which Hasan politely declines by saying that it is not a practice that is followed in his country. The woman looks surprised and upset by this fact, but I cannot tell if that is because she came expecting to do the operation and was disappointed that she would not be able to, or if she disapproved of Hasan’s daughter not having an excision. However, if she disapproved that strongly, I do not understand why she would not have made an argument in favor of it. Why did this practice came into being in the first place? I understand that it had a religious aspect, but I would have liked it to have been better explained in the story.
Leo Africanus: Commentary 3
While in Constantinople Hasan serves as a diplomat. The Ottoman Empire, currently being run by the Turkish were beginning to take over the country. In the midst of turmoil between the Mamlukes and the Ottomans fighting for authority, Hasan’s wife, Nur, gives birth to a baby girl. Almost immediately following the birth of his daughter, Hasan is captured by Italian pirates because of his position as a diplomat. He is then brought to the Pope (Leo X), where he forms a very unusual (but positive) relationship. They shared many of the same opinions, ideals, and even religious perspectives. He ends up being baptized, there in Italy, and undergoes a name change from Hasan to Leo Africanus.
My question for this week would be - what was it about Hasan/Leo Africanus that attracted Pope Leo X so much? Why do you think he and Hasan were so quick to build a friendship/relationship that would lead to a baptismal? Giving the circumstances that Hasan was kidnapped, taken away from his wife and newborn – don’t you think Hasan would’ve desired more to be released to return to Egypt?
Leo
The ending of Maalouf’s chapter of being captured I feel like it was written as a cliffhanger to keep the reader interested. Whatever the case he kept me reading about how he was taken to Rome. I wanted to talk about how people dealt with power in that time. Power was ruling, the ottoman how supreme power, but how did it come about, what were the so scared of? I want to know how they can be across continents and still able to sustain a family life. Think about it, today were have social tools to connect with people at a moment notice. They come home and it almost like they never left. Hasan describes his palace as only looking different on the outside, but the family was sad, but still connected to him.
What really boggles my mind is how the pens lost to the devils at home for the second time. I understand that we have a lot of injuries but we have sid the kid and he knows how to win da cups. He is like Hasan who had to learn the way of his enemy as they kept him captive. The question I have is why Christian leaders gave their name to their converted captives? Why did Leo X name Hasan Leo Africanus? HMMMM I wonder.
Leo Africanus
In the beginning of the reading Hasan is exiled from his community for his contribution in defending his brother, who was accused of murder. Hasan left with no choice but to leave, took his slave Hiba and a few guards and was off to yet another place he would call home. During his travels, a storm killed the guards and Hasan realized his love for Hiba. He then decides to take Hiba back to her family. Her family agrees to buy her back, but Hasan refuses the money.
Later, Hasan is captured by an Italian pirate. He is then moved to Rome and taken in by Pope Leo X. In Rome, Hasan becomes an academic scholar and continues to teach and learn, just as he has throughout most of the book. In Rome Christianity is practiced, so Hasan is baptized and renamed Leo Africanus. I found this part of the book interesting because, when we first started reading I wasn't sure where the name Leo Africanus came from. But now I see where the name came about.
Following Leo Africanus's life has been very interesting. I think it is cool that throughout all the drastic changes that have occurred in each section, Leo has still remained somewhat the same guy. But what I don't understand is how he has been able to just pick up and leave place after place, but do it like its not big deal. I guess when you have no choice that's what you have to do.
-Justin Lovett
Leo Africanus and Globalization
Leo Africanus
One thing that I found interesting is the movement of Hasan in his life. He went from a diplomat in Constantinople to baptized in Rome. Since the Ottoman Empire was so strong during this time it makes sense that Hasan would be pushed out. It is bizarre that he was captured as a slave on a ship and presented to the Pope, and then the Pope basically takes him in. It is interesting to me that the Pope would be so quick to trust Leo, especially since the Ottoman Empire was taking over some many areas.
The separation of church and state is an issue that is brought up by Leo. Leo believes that the military should be backed up with religion. I understand during this time that religion was very closely tied to the culture. I do not agree with the military being backed by religion, and believe that separation of church and state should be practiced. I believe this because of the world I grew up in of democracy, which is the reason for my ideas, but Leo and the Pope grew up in a different reality. But, Leo and the Pope are both extremely close with their religion, so they see religion being part of every aspect of their lives. When it comes to war, I believe that regardless of what a person’s religion, if they believe in what is being fought for then they belong in the fight.
blog - 11
While in Rome Hasan meets Pope Leo X and proclaims in front of him“God is great.” He comes to learn that his time in Rome will be spent learning and teaching. He must learn Latin, catechism, gospel, Hebrew and Turkish. In return he must teach Arabic to seven students. Although Hasan was technically in captivity mentions his time was “without pain for the body and highly profitable for the mind.”
I found it interesting how receptive Hasan was to his captors and similarly how much interest the Romans took in Hasan. I found myself wondering If I were put in a situation like this would I be able to gracefully accept my captor’s will as Hasan did.
Leo Africanus
Blog Post Leo Africanus
This week, Hasan’s wacky adventures brought us to one of the most important parts of the story, the rebirth of Hasan as Leo Africanus. He has found himself in Rome, the world center of Christianity. He is baptized and rechristened Leo under Pope Leo X. He becomes a teacher and a scholar in Rome. It is also in Rome that he comes upon Lutheranism, a new movement in Rome to purify the Catholic Church and its various corruptions.
But how did he get there? The reading begins with Hasan’s exile from his community. He was exiled for defending his brother in law who was accused of murder. He left with a bang, scattering coins to the townspeople. He left with his slave Hiba and some guards. However, on their journey, a storm struck which killed Hasan’s guards, and Hasan and Hiba sought refuge in a cave. The two were snowed in, and it was during this time that Hasan realized that he loved Hiba. They were rescued by shepherds, who acted generously to help them.
The two of them then head to Timbuktu, and to Cairo, and also in Constantinople before Rome. What I found most interesting in this section is how Hasan / Leo seems to live many lives, have many families and lovers, yet is so disposed to pick up and leave for another part of the world. Perhaps he is an explorer at heart, and he seems to fit in no matter what part of the world he is living in.
The one question I have for this section of the reading is about Leo’s move to Rome. How did he so quickly become ingratiated with the pope and become such a well respected figure in Rome?
Leo Africanus: The End Part
When Hasan goes (i.e. is taken) to Europe, he experiences much of the same politics in Rome that he experienced in the cities of North Africa and Constantinople. The Papal States (and Rome especially) feel threatened by the successful conquests of the Ottomans, as well as fellow European states like parts of the Holy Roman Empire. The climax of the end chapters is the advance of the wacko, eclectic, and mutinous armies of Charles V. Casting a shadow over these events is the Protestant Reformation, which acts as if it were a ghost in the machine of European, and, as we have learned from Hasan, world history.
In these last chapters I enjoyed Maalouf's implementation and use of real historical figures in Hasan's narrative. While casually browsing Wikipedia to get background knowledge on the events portrayed in Leo Africanus, I was surprised and very pleased at the amount of historical figures and accuracies, as well as the close relationship between historical fact and artistic license that Maalouf exhibits in his book.
Historically, I think it is a mistake to assume that relitgion is to blame for the many conflicts that plagued the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance. I think Maalouf's (Hasan's) account of history tells us that the tumultuous period of history that Hasan lived through did not revolve around a single black-and-white issue. Instead, Maalouf creates a character who is religious, and who was expelled from the place of his birth, whose family experiences the everyday politics of a city like Fez, who grows up to be a merchant and diplomat, who is captured by the Pope for diplomatic reasons... Such details show us that Hasan's time was multi-dimensional.
Looking at the global picture with a historical lens today, as well as the smaller micro-conflicts and problems in/between/amongst societies, I think Maalouf's lesson is still prevalent. No conflict is one-dimensional; everywhere conflicts have dimensions of race, trade, religion, power, as well as rich amounts of history. To end with a question: what issues of history are related to globalization?
-Stefan Larson
Commentary 10
A year later, Hasan’s wife Fatima died during childbirth, along with their son. This devastated Hasan, although he forced himself to continue with his life. The Sultan ordered Hasan to his palace to discuss Zarwali’s death. Hasan argued that he was not the murderer, Huran was, but was still objected to punishment for banishing Zarwali and putting him into a dangerous situation. For that, Hasan was equally banished as punishment. Hasan’s next stop was Cairo. He was enamored by the religious beauty and wealth of the Capital. Unfortunately, a pandemic of disease hit Cairo by storm, killing hundreds of people daily. Eventually, the pandemic ceased and spirits were lifted.
I stop my summary here because I am most interested in the effects of this widespread disease of Cairo and its people. The 16th century seems a little late for the Bubonic Plague, but I am not a history buff. What illness was spreading exactly? What were the immediate and long term effects on the people and the city, besides high morbidity?
Commentary 10
A year later, Hasan’s wife Fatima died during childbirth, along with their son. This devastated Hasan, although he forced himself to continue with his life. The Sultan ordered Hasan to his palace to discuss Zarwali’s death. Hasan argued that he was not the murderer, Huran was, but was still objected to punishment for banishing Zarwali and putting him into a dangerous situation. For that, Hasan was equally banished as punishment. Hasan’s next stop was Cairo. He was enamored by the religious beauty and wealth of the Capital. Unfortunately, a pandemic of disease hit Cairo by storm, killing hundreds of people daily. Eventually, the pandemic ceased and spirits were lifted.
I stop my summary here because I am most interested in the effects of this widespread disease of Cairo and its people. The 16th century seems a little late for the Bubonic Plague, but I am not a history buff. What illness was spreading exactly? What were the immediate and long term effects on the people and the city, besides high morbidity?
Leo Africanus Blog 3
I found the section where Hasan was banished to be very interesting. Harun, who was pardoned before by the sovereign two years earlier had been seeking and finally achieved his revenge on the Zarwili. Harun had captured him along the road and basically scared the old man to death. He then buried the body under a fig tree nearby, not removing the Zarwili’s clothes, shoes or jewels. The sovereign told Hasan that the body had been discovered near his sisters and her husband’s house, still possessing everything, showing the killing was one of revenge and not robbery. Even though he is not guilty of the crime, the sovereign decides that since Hasan left a criminal at large, which resulted in a murder, along with several other acts that Hasan should be banished from Fez for at least two years. Hasan actually didn’t mind a two month vacation from Fez and after a month of getting his affairs together left Fez.
My Question is do you think Hasan should have been punished for the actions of Harun? Is he responsible for what he did?
A year later he is captured by an Italian pirate and brought back to Rome as a captive, though he is seen as valuable cargo being a scholar and diplomat. This gains him an audience with Pope Leo X, who takes an immediate liking to him and has him baptized as Leo Africanus. In another interesting perspective, we see the birth of the Protestant Revolution through his eyes as it reaches Rome.
My question is: Why does Hassan, aka Leo, have this loyalty to a pope who treats him as no more than a pet? Also, is the peace he observes merely foreshadowing for inter-religious bloodshed to follow?
Leo in Rome!!
In the following year, Hasan is captured by an Italian pirate that has been looking for a traveler, scholar and diplomat. Hasan is brought to Rome the seat of Christianity where he is received by Pope Leo X. Hasan is now an academic inside of Rome doing some teaching and learning. He is baptized and renamed Leo but comes to be known as Leo Africanus. In his time in Rome, he is introduced to a fledgling Lutheranism. The main focus of this movement is against the extraction of German gold to pay for churches in Rome and against the indulgences that Rome has come to rely on.
What is most interesting is how Hasan, now Leo, is able to remain loyal to the Pope that received him as a son while at the same time acknowledging the obvious problems with the Roman church. The question then becomes: is it inevitable at this point that bloodshed between Christians will happen? Why with the looming religious war within Christianity is the Pope so concerned with Leo?
Religion and Politics
While reading this section I continued to reflect on the importance of religion in the Medieval ages. First, in the wars between the Muslim Africans, and the Christian Portuguese. The war is fought over a mixture of greed and religion. Both sides want to control powerful African cities, like Agadir, and also use the power of religion, to support their holy war. My impression was that, while the Sultans and kings desire riches, they use the power of religion to gain support amongst the people. One Muslim man Hassan encounters says, "Tell the sultan not to weep for those who have died, for their reward is guaranteed on the Day of Judgment. My eldest son has died, and I myself am ready to follow him to Paradise as soon as my master commands it!" All the while the sultan is in his tent, not in the least concerned that hundreds of his soldiers are dead, because he has shown sufficient ardor for the holy war, without pushing the Portuguese into striking back. The power of holy war should never be underestimated, as Hassan continues to see during his time in Rome. He is there while Martin Luther threatens Papal power, and European society is on the brink of destruction over the division of the Church.
While the world has changed significantly since the days of Leo Africanus, Tumanbay and the Sultans, many elements of their times remain. Religion is still an important factor in many wars, still today, we hear of "jihad" the fight in the cause of Allah or the conflict in Ireland between Catholics and Protestants which peaked in the 1980's. And while today in America we support the separation of church and state, religion still affects elections, politics and laws. Basically, we see religion as less important than during the Middle Ages, yet with globalization and the power of the internet, religions are interacting more than ever before. So, how has all of this interaction affected religion today?
Week 11
The capital of the Islamic world moved from Cairo to Constantinople with the central Islamic power shifting from the Mamluks to the Ottomans. Constantinople was a major city is the Byzantine Empire and was envied by Muslims since the time of the prophet Muhammad. Mehmed II finally conquered this city and quickly transformed it into the capital of the Islamic world.
As far as religious war goes I feel that there are more between people of different religions than of the same religion. This is because with ideals, each side believes that God is "on their side" therefore they will win a battle or war. I think its ironic since each side feels the divine fighting on their behalf when obviously this could not be the case. As far the the Protestant Reformation, I feel that anytime an individual stands up against a religion to say that it is "wrong", obviously there will be some repercussions. During the history of religion it has often been linked with its own military since there was no seperation of church and state. I feel that religion should be completely independent of any sort of military simply because religion is a set of beliefs which should not punish those who believe differently or impose its beliefs on others.
Leo Africanus
What I found intersting about this portion of the book was the mention of hospitality and the role it played with the shepards. Hasan said he had heard the proverb 'they always have a dagger in their hands, either to slit your throat, or to slit the throat of a sheep in your honour.' The shepards took the idea of generosity very seriously playing the good host when asked for generosity. I found this to be interedting because during the times of war and uncertainty I would not have figured hospitality to be on the list of things to do. Maybe this is just who shepards were.
What I did not really understand was Hasan's reluctance to take the money from Hiba's family once she was back with them. Yes, it is a noble thing for him to act uninterested in the money considering he loves her but lets be realistic. I personally found Hasan to be preoccupied with money especially during this time. He threw gold coins out to random people and had guards watching his fortune. And soon after that his money was stolen so I figured he would be anxious for the money. Do you think he just did not want to appear anxious and materialistic or do you think Hasan really loved Hiba enough to forgo the money awaiting him?