We should no take Benjamin of Tuleda seriously because he writes in a way that he tries to glorify each city and puts them in the best light he can, and possibly skew our perception of what the city was actually like. He is biased because of the diction he uses to describe the caliph and the city court. He describes the caliph as being a humble, nice guy. He could have simply stated what the caliph did and what power he had, but Benjamin goes on to describe how great, and strategic the caliph is like how he feeds the insane, pays the hospice workers, keeps his family under control, and how all his actions have good intentions. Benjamin also describes the court of Baghdad as this very green, luxurious place to be. Rather than saying that the court had a garden, and a big palace, Benjamin says that the trees always bore fruits, there many sorts of animals, there was a lake fed by a river the connotation of the description is one of amazement and awe, not cold hard facts. The king is able too indulge in a feast and his servants always have an abundant of game from his garden implying that there are many animals in the court and it is a very nice place to live for humans and animals. There’s always a little pretty detail in the description. When describing the palace Benjamin says it is filled with marble, and riches. He goes through the effort to mention all that the palace holds which ends up glorifying the palace as a very rich and luxurious place instead of a just a big palace, which is a lot less unbiased. He also talks about the Dar-al-Maristan next to palace that houses and cares for insane people, instead of leaving his description at that he goes and says that they are fed well from the caliph himself making the hospital and the caliph sound very, very appealing.