Jacob Weinzapfel

Hon H-211
W3: Final
Fiction can be a very important aspect of telling a story, but it is not always in the best
interest of the author to use fiction. When speaking to a smaller, more identifiable person or
group, nonfiction can be a very strong style to use. As the audience grows larger, though,
nonfiction is not as easily constructed to fit for every reader or listener. The scope of ones crisis
will have an effect on the size of audience an author writes to. Dhuoda, Abelard and Heloise, Ibn
Shaddad, Prokopios, Homer, and the author of Beowulf all use varying degrees of fiction or
verisimilitude to get their point across when facing their crises. The authors that were writing to
fewer people had crises that affected fewer people, so they used less fiction. The authors writing
to a larger audience had much larger scale crises and thus used and increased amount of fiction.
This was the case because those writing to a single person or smaller group were writing to
provide direct instruction to their reader(s). Fiction was used for larger audience because it was
better at affecting their audiences emotions. The authors whom wrote to a moderate amount of
people used nonfiction to list the facts but included elements of fiction to convey their message.
Dhuodas conflict comes from the separation between her and her son. Dhuoda was
writing almost exclusively to her son, William, and uses a straightforward nonfiction style to do
this. She writes using almost no fiction at all because it would not help her point if she were to
do so. Using nonfiction, though, she has a way to get her point across. By doing her work in this
way, she was able to effectively communicate her points to her son. This can be seen in Book 3
of her writing where she says, if the time comes that God finds [a man] worthy to give him
children of his own, he will not wish them to be rebellious or proud or full of greed, but humble

and quiet and full of obedience (Dhuoda, 22). She uses this to say that William should be
humble, quiet, and obedient rather than rebellious, proud, or greedy, and she says it very
explicitly. It is not hidden behind anything as it most likely would have been were the piece
written fictitiously.
Dhuoda must use very specific, direct instruction to William because she could only write
a short work to him in a one-way, one-time communication. She is writing a mere pamphlet to
her son to guide him in the right direction for his life, so she has to be as straightforward as
possible without disrespecting the Charles the Bald. This approach also works very well because
it doesnt beat around the bush. She is very blunt in telling William what she wants him to know.
She is able to effectively communicate everything in a condensed form. Another example of this
directness comes in Book 4 where she says, [Coveters] have lived for a short time and then are
delivered up to the long death of hell (Dhuoda, 59). While this quote does need a very small
amount of interpretation, it is still very direct and specific. Dhuoda uses this because it is a very
useful explanation of her point that William should not covet people or things. It provides
William with his mothers view and also gives a strong deterrent from going against the view.
Heloise uses many of the same nonfiction, straightforward approaches in her writing as
Dhuoda. Her crisis also stems from her separation from a loved one, Peter Abelard. Heloise
writes her letters to Abelard in this straightforward way to show her views on many things
including her unending love for him, her depression over missing him, and also matters of
religious importance. In writing to him, she also used a more direct approach to let Abelard know
what she wanted to say, even though her topic was different. In her letter responding to
Abelards letter to his friend, she writes, My tears, which I could not refrain, have blotted half
your letter; I wish they had effaced the whole, and that I had returned it to you in that

condition (Abelard and Heloise, 24). Heloise writes that she wishes Abelard would have seen
how badly he had hurt her through her tears that had blotted out his entire letter. Like Dhuoda,
she writes using a nonfiction, straightforward approach to communicate to Abelard just how
deeply he hurt her. This best describes her situation in a way that is both direct and profound, so
she can show Abelard her true feelings without hiding behind any fictitious elements.
In Peter Abelards letters, a small amount of boastfulness starts to come out. While he
addressed his letters to mainly a single person, he usually wrote in a way were he expected that
more than one person would read it. His crisis, unlike Dhuoda and Heloise, comes from his lack
of separation from Heloise. He is trying to distance himself from her and grow closer to God.
Abelard wrote mostly in the same style as the first two authors, although with a protrusive
amount of braggadocios exaggeration. This can be seen prominently in the first letter when he
writes about the maid that was in love with him along with Heloise. He seems to be exaggerating
here to show off to his friend. When writing to Heloise in Letter 3, he uses such boasts to show
how close he is to God and that he is no longer infatuated with her anymore. He writes, Come,
if you think fit, and in your holy habit thrust yourself between my God and me, and be a wall of
separation (Abelard and Heloise, 49). By writing this to Heloise, he is showing that she is no
longer coming between him and God. He tries to confront his conflict by telling Heloise to leave
him alone so as not to interfere with his relationship with God.
As the authors begin writing to a larger audience they also turn to more fiction in their
works. Ibn Shaddads is faced with the possibility of his nation losing the war to the Franks
because of the lack of solidarity and vision that will most likely come after the death of their
leader, the sultan Saladin. Ibn Shaddad wrote for the purpose of enhancing the image of Saladin.
Ibn Shaddad wanted to do this so that his empire that he loved so much would have a better

chance of prospering after Saladins death In the introduction, translator D.S. Richards explains,
Ibn Shaddad himself says at the very end of this work, it was written out of a pious wish to
record the moral excellencies of its main subject, the Sultan Saladin, and to keep his memory
alive amongst Muslims (Ibn Shaddad, 4). . He was writing to a larger audience than either of
the first authors because he wanted everyone possible to read about his wonderful leader. He
writes of Saladin as a humble person that is brave, reverent, holy, and everything else that fits
into the mold of the perfect ruler.
Ibn Shaddad wants to influence his countrymen so he uses a high amount of
verisimilitude. Ibn Shaddad almost certainly had elements of fiction in his work. His descriptions
of things that happened in Saladins life may have portrayed him in a very prestigious way, but
there was almost no way that he could possibly be perfect in every way that Ibn Shaddad
described him. Ibn Shaddad used many anecdotes that boasted Saladins outstanding reputation
including when he wrote about his generosity. He wrote, We totaled up the number of horses he
gave away on the plains of Acre alone, and it came to 10,000 (Ibn Shaddad, 26). He goes on to
say that this would be considered one of the smaller gifts of his. It does not seem very probable
that Saladin would give away as much as this without using up all of his resources. He does not
just exaggerate Saladins willingness to give, though. Ibn Shaddad has anecdotes like this about
his kindness, bravery, reverence, religious, and almost every other positive aspect of a person. In
another instance of Saladins greatness, Ibn Shaddad writes of his bravery: During one of the
fiercest engagements on the plain of Acre he had withdrawn to the hill, to rally the men and to
stop their flight, to shame them into resuming the battle. He persisted until the Muslim army was
victorious that day (Ibn Shaddad 27). It is interesting to point out here that Saladin was never
able to fulfill his duty of making a pilgrimage to Mecca because he was perpetually ill. There are

also many other points throughout this work, that Ibn Shaddad himself point out, in which Ibn
Shaddad is ill. If this was the case, then it makes the fact that he was fighting in the front lines all
that more unbelievable. This fictional aspect of his writing helped in fulfilling his goal of trying
to avoid the slackening efforts of future Muslim crusaders.
Prokopios was in a similar situation as Ibn Shaddad in that he was writing to future
readers to affect the ideals of people about his leader; however, he was writing to tarnish
Justinians name not ameliorate it. Prokopios believed that Justinian and Theodora, the rulers of
the Roman Empire during Prokopios life, were destroying the nation. Prokopios audience was
anyone that would listen to him and take heed to not repeat the dastardly acts of Justinian and
Theodora. Hopefully, for Prokopios sake, this would be a larger audience than a single person or
just a handful of people. The readers of this soon after Justinians reign would most likely know
of Justinians disgraceful, evil ways in which he had terrorized his Roman empire, but future
readers may not have known of such things. In fact, before this book was uncovered much after
Prokopios death and the fall of Rome, many people believed Justinian to be a great emperor and
leader of Rome. It was not until The Secret History was found that historians began to question
Justinians rule.
Seeing as Prokopios audience was much larger than that of Dhuoda, Abelard, and
Heloise, he used much more verisimilitude. Fiction, here, better affected those who would be
reading the work because the nature of his crisis affected a larger group. If Prokopios were to just
tell the details of the story exactly how they went, it may have been somewhat effective, but by
telling the story in this way, he was able to highlight the most important parts of Justinians reign
in a negative way. In Part 2 of his work, Prokopios writes, [Justinian and Theodora] put on a
human form, thereby becoming man demons, and in this way demolished the entire world

(Prokopios 58). This is utter hyperbole because as much bad that Justinian and Theodora did,
they were not actually demons and they did not actually destroy the whole world. Prokopios is
using this to help bolster his point of them being not only terrible rulers but also terrible people
in general. Prokopios also used more believable examples of their villainy even though it may
not be completely true. About Theodora he writes, Never has there been a person so enslaved to
lust in all its forms. She often went to the potluck dinner parties in the company of ten young
escorts and would bed down with her fellow diners in groups all night long (Prokopios 42).
He continues by saying that she would also do this with the servants and her lust would still not
be satisfied. While this may or may not have happened with Theodora, it is very derogatory and
conveys the message that she came from low class background unbecoming of an empress. By
badmouthing the rulers in this fictitious way, Prokopios was able to convince the readers of their
treachery.
The two epic poems of The Iliad and Beowulf exhibit a much larger amount of fiction
than any of the previous material. These authors were both presented with similar crises in that
they were alive at times when war was waged constantly. They designed their works to be
presented to the largest audiences so they would be able to effectively communicate the status
given to particular characteristics. The Iliad in particular presents many elements of fiction;
however, it is based on many true events. The Trojan War did happen, even though it was not in
that exact way. The Iliad was written around the year 750 A.D. At this time there was lots of war
and feuding going on. There was a propensity for violence at the time, so some things were
valued more highly then than they are now. Things of this nature would include military
prowess, courage, strength, etc. The message that comes about in the Iliad shows this. Achilles
was foretold a prophecy that he would die if he were to go to Troy and fight. He ends up going

anyways. This shows that there was more value in dying in battle than staying out of the battle
and living a full life. Homer uses fictional elements to describe this at the time because it better
draws on the emotions of the audience. By using a prophecy saying that Achilles will die if he
returns, Homer can establish the large magnitude of value that was given to courage at the time
because Achilles returns without regard for his life. Because of the large audience that the Iliad is
written to be recited to, these fictional elements provide a way for the reader or listener to relate
to the story while not confining Homer to a specific storyline that he must abide by.
Another issue that Homer tackled in this epic poem was that of Gods. The Greek religion
was polytheistic which is shown in the Iliad. There are many different gods and types of gods
present throughout. A major aspect of this is that these gods at some points would speak with
and interact with the humans. In many cases they would interfere with one side of the war or the
other in mostly a selfish manner. These things all show the man-like nature of the gods. In one
instance toward the beginning of book 6 Homer writes, And Zeus let loose a huge crash of
thunder from Ida, hurling his bolts in a flash against Achaeas armies. The men looked on in
horror. White terror seized them all (Homer, 234). This is just one of many times that gods
interfere with the war. This example in particular illustrates the terror that the gods can cause if
they are opposed, but later Homer writes of the Argives still fighting against the Trojans after it
is clear that the gods are not on their side at that time. Many of the warriors speak of praying to
the gods, and many do religious rituals as to not oppose the gods. The alliances of some of the
gods changes throughout the story giving them more humanly qualities. Because the story is
mostly fictional, gods can be incorporated in antagonistic roles, and it can be shown how to
appease them. Without this aspect, the story would not develop in a way that would allow for
this instruction to occur.

Beowulf was thought to be written at a time when the author would have had to deal with
the terrors of seemingly unending war, so the author used fiction to explain the value given to the
same warrior characteristics. This comes out in the poem itself. There is a very high
regard given to Beowulf because he is such a noble and valiant warrior. In Beowulfs battle with
Grendel, the author writes, All of Beowulfs band had jumped from their beds, ancestral swords
raised and ready, determined to protect their prince if they could. Their courage was great but all
wasted: They could hack at Grendel from every side, trying to open a path for his evil soul, but
their points could not hurt him, the sharpest and hardest iron could not scratch at his skin
(Beowulf lines 475-483). Grendel is described as a terrible monster that could not be beaten by
swords or any other humanly weapons, but Beowulf eventually kills him with his bare hands.
Beowulf is able to defeat an enemy that no other human could giving him status and glory. If
other humans were able to do this, there would not be as much value given to this noble warrior.
Fiction allows this terrible monster to be in the story, and it gives Beowulf something to kill that
no other human or team of humans can (something that doesnt usually happen in real life). This
helps illustrate the message of honoring warriors at the time, and is presented in a way that could
not have been done in a nonfictional work.
All of these authors present their works in a way that best highlights the message that
they are trying to get across to the reader. In the case of Dhuoda, Abelard, and Heloise,
nonfiction best serves them because it better portrays their thoughts and leaves less to
interpretation. Ibn Shaddad and Prokopios were both writing to help change how history would
view their leaders. This caused them to use verisimilitude and exaggeration so that they could
provide as much of an impact as possible while still keeping many of the facts in line. Homer
and the author of Beowulf used a high degree of fiction and were speaking to a large audience.

This helped them make it easier for such a large group to be able to relate to what they were
trying to express. Overall it can be seen that the size of the audience had a large effect on not
only the style of writing but more specifically whether or not a particular author used fiction or
nonfiction to express their views.