World History 4th Nine Weeks

The Crusades, like so much of the modern conflict, were not wholly rational movements that could be explained away by purely economic or territorial ambition or by the clash of rights and interests. They were fueled, on all sides, by myths and passions that were far more effective in getting people to act than any purely political motivation. The medieval holy wars in the Middle East could not be solved by rational treatises or neat territorial solutions. Fundamental passions were involved which touched the identity of Christians, Muslims and Jews and which were sacred to the identity of each. They have not changed very much in the holy wars of today.

---Karen Armstrong, Holy War, 1988

Beginning in the 11th century, the people of western Europe launched a series of armed expeditions, or Crusades, to the East and Constantinople. The reason for the Crusades is relatively clear: the West wanted to free the Holy Lands from Islamic influence. The first of early Crusades were part of a religious revivalism. The initiative was taken by popes and supported by religious enthusiasm and therefore the Crusades demonstrated papal leadership as well as popular religious beliefs. They were also an indication of the growing self-awareness and self-confidence of Europe in general.

Europe no longer waited anxiously for an attack from outside enemies. Now and for the first time, Europeans took the initiative and sent their armies into the Holy Lands. It took courage to undertake such an adventure, a courage based on the conviction that the Crusades were ultimately the will of God. An unintended consequence of the Crusades was that the West became more fully acquainted with the ideas and technology of a civilization far more advanced than their own. The Crusades also highlight the initial phase of western expansion into new lands, a movement of the peoples of Europe that has influenced the course of western civilization ever since.

From the third century (200s AD) on, Christians had visited the scenes of Christ's life. In Jerusalem, St. Helena had discovered what was believed to be the True Cross and her son, CONSTANTINE (c.274-337), built the Church of the Holy Sepulcher there. Before the Muslim conquest of the 7th century, pilgrims came from Byzantium and the West in search of sacred relics for their churches. Pilgrimages were a dangerous business and could only be taken amidst hardship. But by the reign of Charlemagne, conditions had improved for western pilgrims: Caliph Harun al-Rashid (763-809) allowed Charlemagne to endow a hostel in Jerusalem for the use by pilgrim traffic.

Stability in both the Muslim and Byzantine worlds was essential for the easy and safe continuance of pilgrim traffic. But in the early 11th century this stability broke down as the Egyptian ruler of Palestine, Hakim (c.996-1021), abandoned the tolerant practices of his predecessors, and began to persecute Christians and Jews and to make travel to the Holy Lands difficult once again. Hakim destroyed Constantine's Church of the Holy Sepulchre and declared himself to be God incarnate.

By 1050 the Seljuk Turks had created a state in Persia. In 1055 they entered Baghdad on the invitation of the Abbasid caliph and became the champions of Sunnite Islam against the Shi'ite rulers of Egypt. In the 1050s Seljuk forces raided deep into Anatolia, almost to the Aegean. Their advance culminated in the Byzantine defeat at Manzikert in 1071, followed by the occupation of most of Asia Minor and the establishment of a new sultanate at Nicaea. Jerusalem fell in 1071 and became part of the new Seljuk state of Syria.

In 1081, and amid disorder, palace intrigue and the capital in danger, the general Alexius I Comnenus (1081-1118) came to the Byzantine throne. He held off a Norman attack on the Dalmatian coast through an alliance with Venice, and he played one Turkish potentate off against another, slowly reestablishing a Byzantine foothold in Asia Minor. Civil wars among the Turks and the increase of brigands made pilgrim traffic exceedingly difficult.

The schism between Eastern and Western churches provided the papacy with an additional incentive to intervene in the east. In 1073 Pope Gregory VII (c.1020-1085) sent an ambassador to Constantinople, who reported that the emperor was anxious for reconciliation. Gregory VII planned to reunite the churches by extending the holy war from Spain to Asia. He would send the Byzantines an army of western knights, which he would lead himself.

Pope Urban II (c.1042-1099) carried on the tradition of Gregory VII. To his Council of Piacenza (1095) came envoys from Alexius, who asked for military help against the Turks. Since Turkish power was declining, perhaps it was a good time to strike. Historians have never understood why Pope Urban II promulgated the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont in 1095. Perhaps we can glean some purpose by looking at the speech itself.

Oh, race of Franks, race from across the mountains, race chosen and beloved by God, as shines forth in very many of your works, set apart from all nations by the situation of your country, as well as by your Catholic faith and the honor of the Holy Church! To you our discourse is addressed, and for you our exhortation is intended. We wish you to know what a grievous cause has led us to your country, what peril, threatening you and all the faithful, has brought us.

From the confines of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a horrible tale has gone forth and very frequently has been brought to our ears: namely, that a race from the kingdom of the Persians, an accursed race, a race utterly alienated from God, a generation, forsooth, which has neither directed its heart nor entrusted its spirit to God, has invaded the lands of those Christians and has depopulated them by sword, pillage, and fire; it has led away a part of the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by cruel torture; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of its own religion. They destroy the altars, after having defiled them with their uncleanness. They circumcise the Christians, and the blood of the circumcision their either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font. When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels, and, dragging forth the end of the intestines, bind it to a stake; then with flogging they lead the victim around until his viscera have gushed forth, and he falls prostrate upon the ground. Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks, and then, attacking them with naked swords, they attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow. What shall I say of the abominable rape of the women? To speak of it is worse than to be silent. The kingdom of the Greeks is now dismembered by them, and deprived of territory so vast in extent that it can not be traversed in a march of two months. On whom, therefore, is the task of avenging those wrongs and of recovering this territory incumbent, if not upon you? You, upon whom above other nations God has conferred remarkable glory in arms, great courage, bodily energy, and the strength to humble the hairy scalp of those who resist you. . . .

What are we saying? Listen and learn! You, girt about with the badge of knighthood, are arrogant with great pride; you rage against your brothers and cut each other in pieces. This is not the soldiery of Christ, which rends asunder the sheep-fold of the Redeemer. The Holy Church has reserved a soldiery for herself to help her people, but you debase her wickedly to her hurt. Let us confess the truth, whose heralds we ought to be; truly, you are not holding to the way which leads to life. You, the oppressors of children, plunderers of widows; you, guilty of homicide, of sacrilege, robbers of another's rights; you who await the pay of thieves for the shedding of Christian blood; as vultures smell fetid corpses, so do you sense battles from afar and rush to them eagerly. verily, this is the worst way, for it is utterly removed from God! If, forsooth, you wish to be mindful of your souls, either lay down the girdle of such knighthood, or advance boldly, as knights of Christ, and rush as quickly as you can to the defense of the Eastern Church. For she it is from whom the joy of your whole salvation have come forth, who poured into your mouths the milk of divine wisdom, who set before you the holy teachings of the Gospels. We say this, brethren, that you may restrain your murderous hands from the destruction of your brothers, and in behalf of your relatives in faith oppose yourself to the Gentiles. Under Jesus Christ, our Leader, may you struggle for your Jerusalem. . . . But if it befall you to die this side of it, be sure that to have died on the way is of equal value, if Christ shall find you in His army. God pays with the same coin, whether at the first or the eleventh hour. You should shudder, brethren, you should shudder at raising a violent hand against Christians; it is less wicked to brandish your sword against Saracens. It is the only warfare that is righteous, for it is charity to risk your life for your brothers.

Pope Urban II emphasized the appeal received from the Eastern Christians and painted the hardships that now faced pilgrims to Jerusalem. He summoned his listeners to form themselves, rich and poor alike, into an army, which God would assist. Killing each other at home would give way to fighting a holy war. Poverty at home would be relieved by riches obtained from the East. If a man were killed doing the work of God, he would automatically be absolved of his sins and assured of salvation. The audience greeted the oration with cries of "God wills it," and the First Crusade had been launched.

On the more popular level, it was Peter the Hermit (c.1050-1115), an unkempt old man who lived on fish and wine, who proved to be the most effective preacher of the Crusade. In France and Germany he recruited an undisciplined mob of peasants, including women and children. They believed Peter was leading them to the New Jerusalem, flowing with milk and honey. The followers of Peter came up the Rhine, across Hungary, where 4000 Hungarians were killed in a riot over the sale of a pair of shoes, and into Byzantine territory at Belgrade. The Byzantines, who had hoped for a well-trained army, were appalled by Peter's mob. They proceeded to arrange military escorts and to take all precautions against trouble. Despite their efforts, the undisciplined crusaders burned houses and stole everything, including the lead from the roofs of churches. Once in Constantinople, the crusaders were graciously received by Alexius Comnenus, who shipped them across the Straits as quickly as possible. In Asia Minor, they quarreled among themselves, murdered the Christian inhabitants and scored no success against the Turks. They were eventually massacred.

At the upper levels of European society no kings had enlisted in the Crusades, but a number of great lords had been recruited including Godrey of Bouillon (c.1061-1100) and his brother Baldwin (1058-1118), Count Raymond of Toulouse, Count Stephen of Blois (c.1097-1154), and Bohemond (c.1057-1111), a Norman prince from southern Italy. Better-equipped and disciplined, the armies led by these lords converged on Constantinople by different routes.

Emperor Alexius found himself in a difficult position. He was willing to allow the crusaders from Europe to carve out principalities for themselves from Turkish occupied land. At the same time, however, he wanted to assure himself that Byzantine lands would be returned to his control and that any new states created would be his dominions. He understood the practice of European vassalage and the importance attached to an oath taken to an lord. So, he decided to require each European lord to take an oath of liege homage to him upon their arrival. Alexius had to resort to bribery in order to obtain such oaths.

The armies were ferried across the Straits. There was no one in command but the armies did act as a unit, following the orders of the leaders assembled in council. In June 1097 at Nicaea, the Seljuk capital, the Turks surrendered at the last minute to Byzantine forces rather than suffer an assault from the Crusader armies. Crossing Asia Minor, the crusaders defeated the Turks at Dorylaeum, captured the Seljuk sultan's tent and treasure, and opened the road to further advance. Godfrey's brother Baldwin, marched to Edessa, an ancient imperial city near the Eurphrates, strategically situated for the defense of Syria from attacks coming from the east. Baldwin became count of Edessa, lord of the first crusader state to be established (1098).

Meanwhile, the main body of the army was besieging the great city of Antioch which was finally conquered after seven months. Antioch became the second crusader state under Bohemond. The other crusaders then took Jerusalem by assault in July 1099, followed by the wholesale slaughter of Muslims and Jews, men, women, and children, an event recorded by FULCHER OF CHARTRES. Godfrey of Bouillon was chosen as "defender of the Holy Sepulcher," and the third crusader state had been founded. When Godfrey died not long afterward, his brother Baldwin of Edessa became the first king of Jerusalem in 1100. Venetian, Genoese and Pisan fleets assisted in the gradual conquest of coastal cities ensuring the flow of communications, supplied and reinforcements between the East and the West. In 1109 the son of Raymond of Toulouse founded the fourth and last crusader state near the seaport of Tripoli.

Early in their occupation of the eastern Mediterranean the crusaders founded the military orders of knighthood. The first of these were the Templars, created around 1119 by a Burgundian knight who sympathized with the hardships of Christian pilgrims. The Templars banded together to protect the helpless on their pilgrimage. The Templars took vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience and were given headquarters near the ruins of the Temple of Solomon. St. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) inspired their rule, based on the rules for his own Cistercians and confirmed by the pope in 1128. A second order, the Hospitalers, was founded soon after the Templars, and was attached to the ancient Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem.

Composed of knights, chaplains, and brothers under the command of a grand master, with branches both in the East and in Europe, the two military orders were the most effective fighting forces in the Holy Land. Each had a special uniform: the Templars wore red crosses on white, the Hospitalers white crosses on black. Later, a third, purely German group became the order of the Teutonic Knights with headquarters at Acre (they word black crosses on white).

The orders grew very wealthy. They had fortresses and churches of their own in the Holy Land as well as villages from which they obtained necessary supplies. Western monarchs endowed the knights richly with lands in Europe. Over time, the original intent of these military orders became lost in personal conflicts. The knights were, after all, a quarrelsome lot. They often allied themselves with Muslims, and so completely lost sight of their original vows of poverty that they engaged in banking and large-scale financial operations. In the early 14th century the Templars were destroyed by Philip IV (1268-1314) of France. The Hospitalers moved first to Cyprus and then to Rhodes in the early 14th century. They were driven to Malta by the Turks in 1522 and continued there until Napoleon's seizure of the island in 1798.

It is a wonder that the crusader states lasted as long as they did. It was neither their castles nor the existence of military orders that made their success possible but the disunity of the Muslims. When the Muslims did achieve unity, crusader states fell. So, in the late 1120s, Zangi, governor of Mosul on the Tigris, succeeded in unifying the local Muslim rulers, In 1144 he took Edessa. Two years later Zangi was assassinated, but the Muslim reconquest had begun.

In response to the conquest of Edessa, St. Bernard preached the so-called Second Crusade. Thanks to the enormous enthusiasm he unleashed, King Louis VII (1120-1180) of France and King Conrad III (1093-1152) of Germany came to the East. But the Second Crusade proved to be a failure. Relations with the Byzantines were worse than ever. The western armies were almost wiped out in Asia Minor. When the remnants of this army reached the Holy land, they found themselves in conflict with the local lords who feared that these newcomers would take over their kingdom. The crusader's failure to take Damascus in 1149 brought its own punishment. In 1154 Zangi's son took Damascus. "Because of my preaching, towns and castles are empty of inhabitants. Seven women can scarcely find one man," St. Bernard once boasted. Now he could only lament that:

we have fallen on evil days, in which the Lord, provoked by our sins, has judged the world, with justice, indeed, but not with his wonted mercy. . . . The sons of the Church have been overthrown in the desert, slain with the sword, or destroyed by famine. . . . The judgments of the Lord are righteous, but this one is an abyss so deep that I must call him blessed who is not scandalized therein.

The next act of Muslim reconquest was carried out in Egypt by a general who was sent to assist one of the quarreling factions in Cairo. This general became vizier of Egypt and died in 1169, leaving his office to his nephew Saladin (1137-1193), a chivalrous and humane man who became the greatest Muslim leader during the period of the Crusades. Saladin brought the Muslims cities of Syria and Mesopotamia under his control and distributed them to faithful members of his own family. By 1183 his brother ruled Egypt and his sons ruled Damascus and Aleppo. In 1187 Jerusalem fell and soon there was nothing left to the Christians except the port of Tyre and a few castles.

These events made a Third Crusade (1189-1192) necessary. The Holy Roman emperor, Frederick Barbarossa (c.1123-1190) led a German force through Byzantium, only to be drowned (1190) before reaching the Holy Land. Some of his troops, however, continued on to Palestine. There they were joined by Philip Augustus of France and Richard the Lionhearted (1157-1199) of England, former rivals in the West. The main thrust of the Third Crusade was the siege of Acre, which was finally captured in 1191. Jerusalem could not be taken but Saladin signed a treaty with Richard allowing Christians to visit the city freely.

Innocent III (1160-1216) came to the papal throne in 1198 and called for the Fourth Crusade. A number of powerful lords answered the call and decided to proceed by sea. The Venetians agreed to furnish transportation and food and also contributed fifty warships on condition that they would share equally in all future conquests. Enrico Dandolo (c.1108-1205) agreed to forgive the debt temporarily if the crusaders would help him conquer Zara, a town on the eastern side of the Adriatic that had revolted against Venetian domination. So the Fourth Crusade began with the sack and destruction of a Roman Catholic town in 1202! The pope excommunicated the crusaders.

The crusaders then turned their sights on a new goal: Constantinople. The German king, Philip of Swabia proposed that the massed armies escort Alexius, a prince with a strong claim to the throne, to Constantinople and enthrone him. If successful, Alexius would finance the subsequent expedition, the goal of which was Egypt. In the spring of 1203, the fortified crusaders attacked Constantinople. Despite advanced warning, the usurper Alexius III, had done little to prepare the city. In the initial assault, the crusaders won a complete naval victory though the city held its ground. A second attack by both land and sea broke through the defenses and Alexius III fled the city. The young Alexius was then crowned Alexius IV. The city was eventually damaged when a group of Franks set fire to a mosque in the Saracen quarter and Alexius IV refused to make the promised payment. Convinced that Alexius IV could not make peace with the crusaders, a faction of senators, clergy and the populace deposed Alexius, who was later murdered in prison by yet another usurper.

In March 1204 the crusaders and Venetians agreed to seize the city a second time and to elect a Latin emperor. This siege ended in a second capture and a three-day sack of Constantinople. The pope criticized the outrage. Whole libraries and collections of art were destroyed but the Venetians managed to salvage what they could and sent it all back to Venice. Of particular importance were sacred relics including a fragment identified as the True Cross and part of the head of John the Baptist.

Faith at its purest and most innocent was perhaps inherent in one of the most horrifying and disastrous episodes, the so-called CHILDREN'S CRUSADE of 1212. For these children, faith, love and hope could destroy the infidels where force alone had failed. Their motivation was more simple, more primitive and naive. Their faith and love was part of that general trend toward regeneration and spiritual awakening that we mentioned at the start of this lecture.

There were two Children's Crusades which started simultaneously in 1212, one from the Rhineland, the other in the Loire valley. A ten year old boy, Nicholas, preached the Children's Crusade at Cologne and is said to have recruited more than 20,000 children to his cause. When the pilgrims reached Italy, many of the girls were taken into brothels and others were taken as servants. Those boys who eventually carried on to the east were sold as slaves.

In May 1212, there appeared at Saint-Denis, a twelve year old boy by the name of Stephen. He was alleged to have gathered 30,000 children but at Marseilles they fell into the hands of thieves and were sold as slaves at Alexandria. Over 2000 alone perished when their ships sank in the Mediterranean. The Children's Crusades were not merely a brief episode but rather part of that deeply rooted unrest which had disturbed the conscience of the masses. Above all, the miracles associated with Stephen (it's said that animals, birds, fish and butterflies joined him) point forward to two other figures -- St. Francis of Assisi and Joan of Arc.

In the Fifth Crusade (1218-1221) the Christians attempted the conquest of Egypt on the notion that this was the center of Muslim strength. That Crusade was a miserable failure. Emperor Frederick II (1194-1250) personally led the Sixth Crusade (1228-1229). No fighting was involved. Speaking Arabic and long familiar with the Muslims from his experience in Sicily, Frederick secured more for the Christians by negotiation than any crusader had secured by force since the First Crusade. In 1229 he signed a treaty with Saladin's nephew that restored Jerusalem to the Latin world. Bethlehem and Nazareth were also handed over and a ten year truce was signed.

The last two major crusades were organized by the saintly king of France, Louis IX (1215-1270). In 1248, Louis attacked Egypt with the idea of then regaining Palestine. A horrible strategist, Louis' and his army were defeated, taken prisoner, and made to pay an enormous ransom to obtain their freedom. Louis tried again in 1270, leading his troops on an expedition to Tunis in North Africa. There was no success here either as Louis and much of his army died from plague.

Slowly, the Christian possessions in the Holy Lands were retaken. Acre, the last stronghold of the crusaders, surrendered in 1291.

The ultimate effect of the Crusades on European history is certainly debatable. What is certain is that the crusaders made very little direct impact on the east where the only visible remnants of their conquests were their castles. There may have been some broadening of perspective that comes from the exchange and the clash between two cultures, but the interaction between Muslim and Christian was more meaningful in Spain and Sicily than it was in the Holy Lands.

The Crusades did manage to reduce the number of quarrelsome and contentious knights in Europe. The Crusades provided an outlet for their penchant for fighting and it has been argued that European monarchs were able to consolidate their control much more easily now that the warrior class had been reduced in number.

The Crusades also contributed to the economic growth of the Italian port cities of Genoa, Pisa and Venice. Of course, the great wealth and growing population of 11th century Europe had made the Crusades possible in the first place. The Crusades may have enhanced trade but they certainly were not the cause of the revival of trade. Italian merchants would have pursued their trade with the east regardless of whether or not the Crusades took place.

In general, it can be said that the almost incredible success of the First Crusade helped raise the self-confidence of the medieval west. For centuries Europe had been on the defensive against Islam -- now a western army could march into a center of Islamic power and take their coveted prize. With this in mind, the 12th century became an age of optimism and rebirth (see Lecture 26). To the Christians of the west it must have seemed as if God was on their side and that they could accomplish anything. But there was a negative side to the crusading balance sheet. There is no escaping the fact of the Crusader's savage butchery -- of Jews at home and of Muslims abroad. The Crusades certainly accelerated the deterioration of western relations with the Byzantine Empire and contributed to the destruction of that realm, with the disastrous consequences that followed. And western colonialism in the Holy Land was only the beginning of a long history of colonialism that has continued into the 20th century.

Watch Power Point on Crusades

Day 3

Mar. 21

World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Crusades—Mr. Orr Lecture

Do Chapter 12 Section 2 work sheet together

Economic and Cultural Revival

Towns flourish---Venice, Pisa and Genoa controlled trade in Mediterranean Sea, Flanders on the north coast and towns around the Baltic controlled trade between Europe and N. Atlantic

Barter system becomes impractical…needed a common medium of exchange

Thomas Aquinas

Faith

Reason

Scholars rent classrooms, churches taught in open air, Teachers read and discuss texts (books). Universities set up rules…get specialized and spreads across Europe by the 1200’s

As towns grew there is a need for educated officials. Courts and contracts become common this creates a need for lawyers

Heavier plows—cultivate new lands, increased production; Collar harness for animals—plow more land; Three field system—increases land productivity

The Divine Comedy, Song of Roland, Canterbury Tales, Beowulf

Peter Abelard

Pg. 250-253 History the Definitive Visual Guide

Day 4

Mar. 23

World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Opener:

Find Thomas Aquinas in your text….who was he and why is he important in history?

Copy the paragraph in which he is mentioned.

Aquinas Website: http://www.iep.utm.edu/aquinas/

Scholasticism

Both an outgrowth and a departure from Christian monastic schools,^[1] European scholasticism was both a method of learning taught by the academics (scholastics, school people, or schoolmen) of medieval universities circa 1100–1500, and a program of employing that method in articulating and defending orthodoxy in an increasingly pluralistic context.

Not so much a philosophy or a theology as a method of learning, scholasticism placed a strong emphasis on dialectical reasoning to extend knowledge by inference, and to resolve contradictions. Scholastic thought is also known for rigorous conceptual analysis and the careful drawing of distinctions. In the classroom and in writing, it often takes the form of explicit disputation: a topic drawn from the tradition is broached in the form of a question, opponents' responses are given, a counterproposal is argued and opponent's arguments rebutted. Because of its emphasis on rigorous dialectical method, scholasticism was eventually applied to many other fields of study.

As a program, scholasticism was part of an attempt at harmonization on the part of medieval Christians thinkers: to harmonize the various "authorities" of their own tradition, and to reconcile Christian theology with classical and late antique philosophy, especially that of Aristotle but also of neoplatonism.^[2] (See also Christian apologetics.)

The main figures of scholasticism were Anselm of Canterbury, Peter Abelard, Albertus Magnus, Duns Scotus, William of Ockham, Bonaventure and Thomas Aquinas. Thomas Aquinas's masterwork, Summa Theologica, is often seen as the highest fruit of Scholasticism. However, important work in the scholastic tradition was carried on well past Thomas' time, for instance by Francisco Suárez and Molina, but also among Lutheran and Reformed thinkers.

Watch Church and University power point—take notes…to third slide on University

Watch movie on the Barbarians…The Vikings

Day 5

Mar. 2

World History 2B SIP Day 45 minute period

Home Top of page

History Guide

Do the following:

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

Day 6

Mar 29

World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Opener:

Identify the following in Ch 15 Section 1 pg. 364

Venice—ideally situated wealthy powerful renaissance city..right up there with Florence as a place where the renaissance begins.

city-states—where the renaissance began in Italy in the 1300’s AD

humanists—tried to go back and study Greco-Roman beliefs…seeking fulfillment in daily life, valued the dignity and worth of each individual and participated in a variety of activities

(Italian)

Rome—Wealth and power of Popes and Church in the 1500’s Rome replaces Florence as the leading Renaissance city

northern Europe—Place where artists introduced the use of oil paints

classical style—Greco-Roman style of sculpture and art and architecture (churches, palaces and villas)

condottieri--hired soldiers…mercenaries

Early Renaissance Power point – stop at Early Renaissance Sculpture

Day 7

Mar 31, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Opener Do 15.3 work sheet on the Protestant Reformation

Go over 15.1 and 15.2 Study sheets

High Renaissance Power point

Lectures: The Western Tradition

The Protestant Reformation (Notes)

The Reformation gave “old enemies new battle cries and shook Christendom to its very core”

In the Middle Ages the focus of life was local and small as the 15^th Century and 16^th Century Modern Monarchs and Modern Monarchies appear…nation-states…we call countries.

Fathers of the Modern State—All powerful

Louis XI France 15^th (1400’s)

Ferdinand Spain 15^th 16^th Centuries

Henry VIII—Born 1491-1547 England

Goals of Modern State

1. Secure obedience of people

Neutralize dissent

Gain monopoly of force

Maintain law and order

The King is only one who could use violence

2. Exert control over economic life

Distribution of goods and services

Grasp as much as he could for himself

3. Focus people’s patriotism from the local to the national level

4. The state had to dominate the religion of society or align itself with religious leaders (Popes and Bishops)

Keeping track of economic transactions and having enough money to purchase the weapons (technology) of violence allowed Kings to dominate people.

Also revived Roman Law—Statutes

Laws used by the King’s lawyers to enforce obedience from religious leaders and the vassals of the kingdom.

Rise of Nationalism…past glory used to build patriotism and justify future grabs of power/land

Prince—keep order…collect taxes…used taxes to keep better order…

Relationship between the Prince (government) and the individual taxpayer which results in tension.

Have to have consent---all people can not participate (area too big and too many people) so representation is the solution.

Some opposed royal authority…most supported the King

Need administrators…soldiers…

War greatest industry

Diplomacy-the carrying on of war in another form

Religion was losing importance

Pope was an Italian Prince selling off church offices

Church was selling indulgences…forgiveness of the punishment for sins.

Money empowers the monarchs to build armies to conquer others

10/31/1517 Martin Luther nails up 95 Theses to the door of the Wittenberg Cathedral

Against the misuse of Indulgences and Absolution…proposing a debate was acceptable behavior…but in this case within 50 years the governmental system in Europe was in disarray …religious wars and people splitting up because of religious differences destroyed the order of the Kings

Stop #27 at 19:00 Lectures: The Western Tradition #27

Watch Engineering an Empire—Da Vinci’s world

Day 8

Apr. 11, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Opener: Do the first three questions on page 378

…1. Salvation by faith alone. No amount of good works helps. Only trust in God’s Grace + Mercy wins salvation. 2. Religious truth + authority lie only in the Bible, simplified church doctrine and ritual…spoke in the local language in church. 3. No hierarch of Clergy but a community of believers. Useful occupations are any that serve God and Neighbor

…Pope Leo X (10) tried to persuade Luther to withdraw his criticisms of the Church…Luther refused

…Person could be made just or “good” by having faith in God

…Pope sold church offices to his friends…Priests sold indulgences…certificates that reduced or cancelled a person’s punishment for sins

…nearly struck by lightning, frightened him…flet like God was punishing him…became a monk…did not feel any better doing all the “monk stuff”

…encourages people to think more about human emotions and focus on life in this world rather than life after death

…France, England, Netherlands, Germany, and Scandinavian Countries

…Lutheranism

…Translated the New Testament into German…a language “common” people could read

…He refused to withdraw his criticisms of the Church

Do worksheet on Chapter 15 Section 4 The Spread of Protestantism, pg. 379 in World History text.

Arise, O Lord, and judge Thy cause. A wild boar has invaded Thy vineyard. Arise, O Peter, and consider the case of the Holy Roman Church, the mother of all churches, consecrated by thy blood. Arise, O Paul, who by thy teaching and death hast illumined and dost illumine the Church. Arise all ye saints, and the whole universal Church, whose interpretations of Scripture has been assailed. (papal bull of Pope Leo X, 1520)

It truly seems to me that if this fury of the Romanists should continue, there is no remedy except that the emperor, kings, and princes, girded with force and arms, should resolve to attack this plague of all the earth no longer with words but with the sword. . . . If we punish thieves with the gallows, robbers with the sword, and heretics with fire, why do we not all the more fling ourselves with all our weapons upon these masters of perdition, these cardinals, these popes, and all this sink of Roman (scourge) that ceaselessly corrupts the church of God and wash our hands in their blood so that we may free ourselves and all who belong to us from this most dangerous fire? (Martin Luther, 1521)

Young people have lost that deference to their elders on which the social order depends; they reject all correction. Sexual offenses, rapes, adulteries, incests and seductions are more common than ever before. How monstrous that the world should have been overthrown by such dense clouds for the last three or four centuries, so that it could not see clearly how to obey Christ's commandment to love our enemies. Everything is in shameful confusion; everywhere I see only cruelty, plots, frauds, violence, injustice, shamelessness while the poor groan under the oppression and the innocent are arrogantly and outrageously harassed. God must be asleep. (John Calvin)

15^th Century---century of great change

Humanist artists—individualism and self-creativity

Authors—Petrarch—restore the dignity of mankind

Political Philosophers—Machiavelli—how should men rule and be ruled (take religion out of politics!)

Renaissance—man makes his own history—we create our own destiny

Helps to secularize society in Europe

Growth of Royal Power

Centralized Monarchies

Discovery of “New” lands

New lands brought wealth (new gold and silver)

People go crazy for money (British, Dutch, Italians, and Germans)

1543—Scientific Revolution

Lasts til the 17^th century with the discoveries of Isaac Newton

People moved to towns which became cities

Universities were formed and became popular

Printing Press developed by Johann Gutenberg 1451

Cheap and numerous books---most popular and one of the first Gutenberg Bible

Books were very popular---people could not wait for the next book to be published

Peter Abelard

Peter Abelard: Historia Calamitatum [The Story of My Misfortunes]-- The Story of My Misfortunes

Day 9

Apr. 13, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Renaissance terms

Explain the historical significance of each of the following

1. Anabaptists

2. Anglican

3. Annul

4. Catholic Reformation

5. Council of Trent

6. Humanism

7. Indulgence

8. Jesuits

9. Johann Gutenberg

10. Lutheran

11. Patron

12. Peace of Augsburg

13. Perspective

14. Predestination

15. Protestant

16. Reformation

17. Renaissance

18. Secular

19. Utopia

20. William Shakespeare

Text Activity site.

Take group quiz

Renaissance Flipcards

Day 10

Apr. 15, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

The Protestant Reformation (Creativity power point)

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

…

The Impact of Luther and the Radical Reformation—The Spread of Protestantism

By the early 1520s, Luther had attracted a vast following while the printing presses spread his message and reputation across Germany. With his death in 1546, we can find people of all social classes who had clearly sided with Luther and Lutheranism. The major question we must ask remains this: why did Lutheranism cut across class lines and appeal to so many people? What was so passionate about Luther's message that made people turn their back on the Roman Church?

The explanations for Luther's success may be endlessly debated by scholars but for the most part, and leaving theological opinion aside, we can say that the people were prepared for the message Luther delivered. Is it simply a matter of Luther appearing at the right time and in the right place? Perhaps. Since the 15th century there had been a growing resentment against clerical privilege. The clergy paid no taxes and were exempt from those civic responsibilities that increasingly fell on the shoulders of the urban dweller. Added to this simple fact was the increased visibility of the clergy -- there in the cities the common person could witness the luxury and splendor of a church whose purpose was to minister the spiritual needs of its flock but which now seemed indifferent, lax and, in a word, corrupt. Luther, then, offered an alternative that was appealing perhaps for the simple reason that is was an alternative.

Luther's religion was also spread by preachers who were to deliver approximately one hundred sermons per year, each lasting about forty-five minutes. Although Luther thought the Eucharist to be one of the most important sacraments in the Lutheran religious gathering, it was clearly the sermon that became the central focus of the service.

Meanwhile, German peasants in the countryside flocked to Luther's camp. Such a development was perhaps unsurprising since Luther himself was of peasant stock. The peasants also backed Luther's criticism of the authority of the Roman Church. In 1520, Luther had written, "A Christian man is the most free lord of all and subject to none" (On Christian Liberty). Such a statement would have fallen on ready ears since there were numerous instances of social unrest throughout the 15th century. The situation was made worse in the 16th century by crop failures in 1523 and 1524. In 1525, representatives of the peasants of Swabia drew up what were called the "Twelve Articles," a document that expressed their grievances. The Articles focused on social and economic grievances and clearly were not intended to raise debate about theological issues. Furthermore, the peasants complained that the nobility had seized the common lands of the villages and had increased dues and taxes at the same time. So, the peasants appealed to Luther because they believed that he could prove that their demands were in accordance with Scripture.

But Luther was no revolutionary and wished to avoid social rebellion at all costs. In his An Admonition to Peace, he took the side of the peasantry and criticized the manorial lords. However, he did not justify armed force. In Swabia, Thuringia, the Rhineland and elsewhere, the peasants spoke of "God's righteousness," and the "Word of God," in an effort to have their social and economic grievances addressed. But support from Luther was not to come. Luther had, of course, spoken many times of the freedom of the Christian, but he was speaking in terms of religious faith and not matters pertaining to society. Freedom meant independence from Rome. In response to the peasant's rebellion Luther wrote AGAINST THE MURDEROUS, THIEVING HORDES OF PEASANTS. In the wake of this tract the nobility quelled the rebellion and by 1525, it is quite possible that 100,000 peasants had been killed.

There were also across Europe a growing number of humanists who were attracted by Luther's message. Luther's call for a more personal and immediate religion based on faith, the focus on the Scriptures in the liturgy and in life as well as the abolition of Catholic ceremony were just the kind of reforms that northern Christian humanists had been willing to address. For instance, Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531) took Luther's message into the city of Zurich and, as we have already seen, John Calvin took Lutheranism into Geneva (see Lecture 3).

In 1523 Luther offered his German translation of the New Testament. Since Luther had argued persuasively that everyone at the right to read and comments on the Scriptures, his translation attracted supporters from the literate middle classes. For the merchant and other members of the commercial classes, Luther perhaps offered hope that salvation may even be possible for the person whose sole interest was financial gain.

Meanwhile Luther wrote hymns, psalms and a variety of other works. His A Mighty Fortress Is Our God was perhaps his most important hymn (indeed, it is the one hymn truly attributable to Luther's pen), since it reflected deep human feelings and gave to be listener key points of Luther's doctrine. The Large Catechism, intended for an adult audience, contained brief expositions on the main articles of a Lutheran faith. The Small Catechism did pretty much the same thing only in a condensed version and was intended for the education of children.

By the mid-16th century, many inhabitants of towns and villages had deviated from Christian dogma: many of these people were heretics; many believe that Nature was God (pantheism); and still more believe that witches had just as much spiritual power as did priests. The number of radical groups which appeared during the 16th century makes them difficult to classify. They make up what historians call the Radical Reformation.

There were men and women, many of them poor and illiterate, who claimed to have knowledge of their own salvation through an inner light. That is, these men and women believed they had a direct an immediate communication from God to his chosen people. Should this be that surprising? Such a knowledge made his chosen people free.

These Saints, as they called themselves, said the poor shall inherit the earth which they believed was now governed by the anti-Christ, i.e., the Pope. Their task was to purge the world of evil and make the world ready for the second coming of Christ. For these people, the Holy Scriptures became inspiration for their brand of social revolution. All of this, as you might have expected, was condemned by both Luther and Calvin (as well as the Church). The largest group of radical reformers were the Anabaptists (literally "re-baptizers," used as a term a derision).

Luther and Zwingli had argued that infant baptism marked the moment of one's entry into the Church, even though this had no sanction in the Bible. The Anabaptists believed the first baptism did not count since only mature adults could make a conscious choice for Jesus not to young children who are totally incapable of understanding God's grace. The Anabaptists were a diverse group of people. Some rejected the Trinity while others refused to take oaths, pay taxes, hold public office or serve in the army. Since the Anabaptists gave the individual free choice, it was indeed possible that Church organization was unnecessary since many believed in personal communication with God. Many radicals formed their own voluntary associations and abandoned the world in order to pursue their faith, regardless of what Luther or the Church might think. Many practiced a primitive communism in which everything was held in common, including property and wives. When all of this was coupled with their idea that the end of the world was imminent, their mission was one of urgency.

Of course, Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli detested the radicals. By practicing a Protestant faith that deviated from Lutheranism or Calvinism, Luther and Calvin both argued that the radicals were damned. At an imperial Diet held in 1529, the death penalty was issued against all Anabaptists.

In 1534, the Melchiorites, an inflammatory sect of Anabaptists, captured the German city of Münster. They immediately burned all books except the Bible, banned the use of money and seized the property of non-believers. They killed Protestants and Catholics and practiced polygamy and sexual excess. Their leader, John of Leyden, had sixteen wives. As to be expected, they proclaimed the Day of Judgment was close at hand. Lutheran princes and Catholic bishops joined forces to condemn and defeat the Anabaptists, who were placed in cages and hung from the church steeples where they were eventually tortured and left to die. The radicals were pursued wherever they found themselves and to survive, many of them fled to Poland, the Low Countries, England and to the New World.

While Luther and Calvin struggled against the Anabaptists and other radical sects, the Roman Church was also gathering momentum to enact a genuine reform movement -- the Catholic Reformation (see Lecture 5).

Watch Engineering an Empire DaVinci’s World

Day 11

Apr. 19, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Opener: Read Pgs. 386-389 Do Questions on Page 389—Read Questions before you read selection from Machiavelli’s The Prince

Machiavelli

Niccolo di Bernardo dei Machiavelli

Born: 3 May 1469
Birthplace: Florence, Italy
Died: 22 June 1527
Best Known As: Author of The Prince

Machiavelli believed that man's nature was both good and evil, but for the purposes of discussing politics, he argued that human nature was essentially evil. Perhaps this says something to us? After all, he was discussing human behavior in the here and now, not in some future state of affairs. (Real politick)

Machiavelli introduced a secular concept of the state -- a state divorced (separated) from the church or the religious. He was not anti-religious but he was anti-clerical. He regarded the Church as a social force, thus neglecting its spiritual force. Machiavelli would have agreed with Karl Marx when he wrote that "religion is the opiate of the people." Napoleon would have agreed as well. The Church hindered the strong by preaching to them to be meek and mild.

Machiavelli turned away from morality, religion and the papacy and believed that the state was a work of art -- the deliberate artistic creation of men. In advising the prince, Machiavelli believed that he was also advising the state since the interests of the prince are the same as the interests of the state. For Machiavelli, this secular belief showed that the intervention of God or Providence as the decisive factor in history was completely unfounded. It was real men, men such as the prince, who were the truly decisive factors in human history. The state and the prince, furthermore, were conceived to be one and the same thing. The essence of any state is power and the maintenance of the power. Since the state is synonymous with the prince, then power is to be maintained at all times.

And so Machiavelli's book advised the prince how to make his country maintain power at all costs. Because the prince is identified with the state, the ordinary principles of morality do not apply to him. Anything may be done, in other words, if it promotes the common good by maintaining the power of the prince. For Machiavelli, the existence of the state and its acquisition of power, were ends in themselves. In other words, power is an end in itself. Or, as Machiavelli would have it, "the end justifies the means.” A prince must be entitled to do whatever he wants provided it is for he satisfaction of the community as a whole and not for personal gain. A corollary of this way of thinking is the idea that in war, the chief aim is the complete destruction of the enemy -- and to realize that aim, anything is possible.

The prince should not hesitate to fool and deceive his people. Above all, the prince ought to be a good propagandist. People are easily fooled -- it is to the prince's advantage to spread false doctrines among the people. Why? Because these lies and deceptions preserve the state from upheaval and insure tranquility and stability. Just the same, Machiavelli argued that the prince should not commit himself to useless cruelty -- useful cruelty, I suppose, was okay. In general, the prince ought to be feared rather than loved -- feared, but not hated. This would avoid conspiracies. He also cautioned the prince to respect women and property -- attacks on either would decrease popular support for the prince.

Machiavelli was a practicing politician and a diplomat as well. He understood the nature of Florentine politics extremely well. But, he was also a humanist and this made him think of politics as a secular (non religious) affair, divorced from religious or theological implications. After all, religion meant little more to him than the cement which held society together. Finally, he was also a scientist -- the first political scientist.

Creativity Power point on Machiavelli (watch)

Day 12

Apr. 21, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Today’s lecture:

The Age of Discovery

Mid to late 15^th Century—AGE OF DISCOVERY/Expolration

European sailors left their shores and ventured into the “great unknown”

Left the “Old World”---entered the “green sea of darkness”

1. Portuguese

2. Spanish

3. British

4. French

5. Dutch

Originally they call the place they go—the Other World

Eventually they call it Mundus Novus—New World

Costs were minimal—risks were high—discovered entire continents

Historians have in the past recognized this as a great achievement

Recent scholarship has recognized that:

Everywhere the Europeans went the encountered native people

Discovered nothing…folks already there

1^st encounter is friendly…but then gold or silver is discovered (or some other valuable commodity) and the “Old Worlders” start to exploit the natives

Exploration becomes exploitation

Columbus’s example serves well here

Discovers Hispanola (Haiti and Dominican Republic) 1492

1494 second voyage—one of his guys captures 1,500 natives—500 are to be taken back to Spain to show Ferdinand and Isabella—200 of these die at sea…others are treated as virtual slaves…

March 1495—first documented armed conflict between Natives and Europeans.

1492—250,000 natives…1538—500 left! Disease, cruelty and war took the rest.

Why did the Europeans take to the Ocean Sea?

Why did the age of “Renaissance” turn into the “Age of Discovery”

1. Willingness and courage to learn about and understand new cultures. This just flows naturally from the whole idea of Renaissance. Experience, observe and learn as much as possible.

2. The religious desire to save souls…the myth of Prester John…powerful king of a legendary Christian nation “in the east”…it was believed that PJ ordered all Christians to join him in a crusade like battle against the infidels of the east. Was no real Prester John and there was no Christian kingdom in Asia…but people of this age believed he existed and were looking for him. In 1415…Portuguese sailors were told to look for Christians on the coast of Africa…never found any!

3. Economic…western Christian nations were shrinking, Islam on the march---Europe vulnerable to attacks from “infidels” from the east. Europeans knew the east had riches…knew there was stuff that could “make you rich”…just had to be brave and adventurous enough to go get it! Simple desire for Gold and Silver (Spain).

4. Political, cultural…”imperialism”…making the King/Queen’s realm larger. This idea is made possible by improvements in technology (better boats, better navigation equipment) made it possible for European nations to “colonize” others. They read about this in Classical literature (Greek and Roman)…if they could do it why can’t we?

Goal—Direct route to India and the Far East (China/Japan)

Spices—pepper, cinnamon, nutmeg, ginger and cloves and 245 more varieties European food bland and terrible…spices were wanted starting in 1291, two guys from Genoa, Italy take off for India (Doria & Vivaldo).

Knowledge of geography was sketchy at best…the known world was that around the MS thought Africa and Asia connected (Indian Ocean surrounded by land)

Danger…run out of stuff! Ocean travel not a sure thing…sea monsters (whales, sharks), holes in the sea that sucked in ships, wild natives (cannibals), shallow water ripped the bottom out of ships (reefs and shoals), storms, and just the conditions on the boat:

In 1521, Magellan recorded that:

we were three months and twenty days without refreshment from any kind of fresh food. We ate biscuit which was no longer biscuit but its powder, swarming with worms, the rats having eaten all the good. It stank strongly of their urine. We drank yellow water already many days putrid. We also ate certain ox hides that covered the top of the yards to prevent the yards from chafing the shrouds, and which had become exceedingly hard because of the sun, rain and wind. We soaked them in the sea for four or five days, then placed them for a short time over the hot embers and ate them thus, and often we ate sawdust. Rats were sold for half a ducat apiece, and even so we could not always get them.

They did not know where they were going!

Needed: courageous (stupid) men, good leader and a strong ship.

Mapping:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_world_maps

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Discovery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldseem%C3%BCller_map

…

…

The Catholic Reformation

It can be assumed that the Catholic Church could never have predicted the force of the Protestant Reformation. This is especially so in terms of the numbers of noblemen and other wealthy individuals who were attracted to the theology of Luther and Calvin. The Church did try respond but their response -- internal reform -- was weak. One reform did come, it came from man who was not even a member of the clergy. Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556) was a soldier and Spanish reformer who sought to create a new religious order. He fused the best of the humanist tradition of the Renaissance with a reformed Catholicism that he hoped would appeal to powerful economic and political groups, that is, those types of people now attracted to Luther and Calvin.

Founded in 1534, the Society of Jesus or the Jesuits, formed the backbone of the Catholic or Counter Reformation. The Jesuits combined the ideas of traditional monastic discipline with a dedication to teaching and preaching. Why they did this is pretty clear -- they wanted to win back converts. As a brotherhood or society, the Jesuits sought to bypass local corruption and appealed to the papacy to leading international movement -- they would not attach themselves to local bishops or local authorities. The purpose of this international movement was to revive a Catholic or universal Christianity.

As theologians, the Jesuits highlighted one central flaw in Protestant theology, that of predestination. Predestination offered hopes of salvation for the literate and prosperous. It also, however, included the possibility of doom, despair and the abyss for other individuals. In response, the Jesuits offered hope -- and that hope to the form of religious revival based on ceremony, tradition in the power of the priest to offer forgiveness. In essence, the Jesuits made Christianity more emotional. Keep in mind, that one of the reasons why the Reformation indeed took place was because the people wanted a more emotional and direct spiritual life. The Jesuits urged princes to strengthen the Church in their territories. They even developed the theology that permitted "small sins" in the service of a just cause. In other words, a small sin was okay if and only if it led to some greater good.

By the 17th century, the Jesuits had become some of the greatest teachers in your, especially in France. They had also become one of the most controversial religious groups within the Church. Was their religion merely a disguise for political power? Or, where they the true voice of a reformed Church? The Jesuits helped to build schools and universities, design churches and even helped to produce a unique style of art and architecture. This style -- called the Baroque -- was emotional and was intended to move the heart.

By the 1540s, the Counter Reformation was well underway. There were several attempts to reform the Church from within. For example, the Jesuits imitated the Dominicans and Franciscans. Oddly enough, many looked to humanists like Erasmus as a key to the Church's total reformation. Many reformers attacked abuses as had Luther, but they avoided any clash with the spiritual authority of the clergy or the Pope.

The Counter Reformation also took aggressive and somewhat hostile measures against the followers of Luther and Calvin. The Church tried to counteract Protestantism by offering something more dramatic, emotional and sentimental to the faithful. For individuals unmoved by the appeal of the Jesuits and who still adhered to Protestant heresy, the Church resorted to more severe measures. The Inquisition, founded in the 13th century, expanded its activities and heretics were subject to punishment, torture and death. Keep in mind, however, that wherever Protestantism obtained official status -- England, Scotland, Geneva, Germany, and Scandinavia -- Catholics were persecuted.

One instrument that the Catholic Church had at its disposal was censorship. After 1520, the Church was quick to censor and burn books which might have spread the Protestant Faith. The Church intended to destroy all heretical literature: all Protestant books were burned; so too were the works written by reform-minded Catholic humanists; Petrarch and Erasmus had to go as well. The Index of Prohibited Books became an institution within the Church and was not abolished until 1966. The policies of the Counter Reformation -- education, preaching, church building, persecution, and censorship -- did succeed in bringing some people back to the Church. And, in 1545, the Council of Trent met to institute concrete changes in policy and doctrine. Between 1545 and 1563, the Council modified and unified Church doctrine: it abolished numerous corrupt practices and abuses and also gave final authority to the Pope. In general, the Council purged the Church. It clarified issues like faith, good works, and salvation. It passed a decree that said the Church would be the final judge in biblical matters. The Council demanded that the Scriptures be understood literally.

All compromise between Protestant and Catholic was rejected. The Reformation had split Europe and the repair of that split was just not to be. The Reformation shattered the religious unity of Europe -- to this end, the Christian matrix was demolished. Within the matrix more windows were opened and more walls smashed, and the Church, as an institution, suffered a severe setback in terms of its moral authority and political power. By strengthening the power of monarchs, the Reformation helped to produce the modern state. Protestant rulers, of course, rejected papal claims to power. Not only that, these rulers asserted their own authority over their own churches (e.g. Henry VIII in England).

In an indirect way, Protestantism contributed to the growth of political liberty. Liberty as an ideal, however, was still 200 years in future. There were tendencies unleashed during the Reformation that provided justification for challenging the authority of monarchs. Since all men are governed by the laws of God, punishment should be given to those who break these laws -- kings included. So, in 1649, the English execute Charles I.

the Reformation also contributed to the establishment of an ethic of individualism. Protestants interpreted the Bible for themselves. They faced salvation or damnation on their own. The Reformation has also been seen as involving out of early capitalism. For Max Weber, Protestants found salvation without assistance. How? By hard work, thrift, sobriety and a work ethic. So, Protestants to fill the calling by a work ethic, the Protestant work ethic, an individualistic work ethic with.

The end result of the Reformation was basically this: (1) Luther, Calvin, the Anabaptists and Jesuits all forced every man woman to make a choice. The Medieval Matrix implied that one had to conform to the standards of the Church and everything it represented. But what was now different was that the individual had a choice regarding what it was he wished to conform to. (2) The Reformation also split Europe, a division which would eventually lead to European wars, civil wars, king killing, revolts and rebellion. Europe would not truly recover from Martin Luther's Reformation until the 18th century, if it can be said it ever did recover.

SIR THOMAS MORE

The world of SIR THOMAS MORE was decidedly different from that of either Leonardo or Machiavelli. He was educated in law at Oxford, served as sheriff and Member of Parliament for London, treasurer under Henry VIII, speaker of the House of Commons, and in 1529 became Lord Chancellor of England, a position second only to that of the king. He was also a statesman with vast experience in the everyday political life of the English nation. And, he was a humanist -- a man of many talents who lived life to the fullest. Unlike Machiavelli, however, More's sympathies were with the common man, despite his vast income. Contrary to Machiavelli, he advanced the strange notion that the state exists for the common good of its subjects and not the power of the prince.

Unlike either Leonardo or Machiavelli, Thomas More was a profoundly religious man. His most famous book Utopia was inspired by the Sermon on the Mount. In Utopia More writes of an island in which all goods are held in common, there is no money and people spend their days doing good deeds for one another. But More's Utopia was something more than just wishful thinking, the sort that Machiavelli condemned in The Prince. More found the cause of social evil not in God, fate or Original Sin. Man was not by nature evil. On the other hand, More located evil in the social structures created by man. He wanted to construct a city of man on earth, a city he believed would be pleasing in the eyes of God. The Utopia was written at the same time as Machiavelli's Prince and was composed in Latin and later translated into English in 1556, years after More's death in 1535. Utopia was inspired by More's chance meeting with a Portuguese sailor who had sailed with Amerigo Vespucci (America named after him) on the last of three of his four voyages. Utopia is a short book in two parts. In the first part, More describes the current state of England -- a sad kingdom void of Christian fellowship. In part two, More shows us an ideal commonwealth in which the problems posed in part one have been addressed and corrected. Utopia is a description of an island called Utopia, which exists "nowhere" and it relates how people lived in this ideal state.

Utopia was also written in response to England's sever economic problems. More wrote with an urgent sense that the world around him, the end of the medieval world, was crumbling. And it was. A new kind of economic organization seemed to be invading England and More was very much afraid of it. "Is not this an unjust and unkind public weal," More wrote,

which giveth great fees and rewards to gentlemen, as they call them, and to goldsmiths, and to such other, which be either idle persons, or else only flatterers, and devisers of vain pleasures; and of the poor ploughmen, colliers, labourers, carters, ironsmiths, and carpenters: without whom no commonwealth can continue? But after it hath abused the labours of their lusty and flowering age, at the last when they be oppressed with old age and sickness, being needy, poor, and indigent of all things, then forgetting their so many painful watchings, not remembering their so many and so great benefits, recompenseth and acquitteth them most unkindly with miserable death. And yet besides this the rich men not only by private fraud, but also by common laws, do every day pluck and snatch away from the poor some part of their daily living. So whereas it seemed before unjust to recompense with unkindness their pains that have been beneficial to the public weal (will, desire), now they have added to this their wrong and unjust dealing given the name of justice, yea, and that by force of law. Therefore when I consider and weigh in my mind all these commonwealths, which nowadays anywhere do flourish, so God help me, I can perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men procuring their own commodities under the name and title of the commonwealth.

More writes of the English enclosure movement in which the peasant's land -- given to them in common by the grace of God -- has been taken away by the lords so that they may cultivate a new cash crop: sheep. And the sheep, formerly meek and tame, "now eat up and swallow down the very men themselves." Against the new economics of enclosure, commerce and the exploitation of the poor for the benefit of the rich, More proposed his Utopia. Taking literally the maxim that "the love of money is the root of all evil," More eradicated gold from his ideal community.

As a man, More was a devout Catholic with a strong ascetic (simple) bent. Even after he had established himself as a successful lawyer and statesman, he continued to wear a hair shirt and slept on a plank with a log for a pillow. But, he eventually married (twice) and had an intelligent daughter from his first marriage. Rather than enter monastic orders, More treated the world as his monastery. He sought to fulfill God's purpose by doing good works in this world -- in this way he foreshadowed the Puritans of the 17th century.

In his Utopia, More criticized his own world. What bothered him the most was that the Christian ideals that were supposedly the foundation of his age, were in fact absent. For More, Utopia became an egalitarian society in which everyone works, prays and studies. There were no artisans, warriors or scholars for there was no longer any division of labor. The New World discoveries had a strong influence on More and More's Utopia, as already noted, was based on a factual account of Vespucci's travels published in 1507. More also had a brother-in-law who had set out for the New World late in 1516 and this added to his interest in lands which lay to the west of the Atlantic.

In 1516, while More was writing Utopia, he was invited to enter government service as an advisor to Henry VIII (1491-1547, r. 1509-1547). More flatly refused. He knew that a king and a philosopher could never work together. In the end, however, More entered the government feeling he could better carry out justice as a judge. This was in 1517 or 1518. He served as speaker for the House of Commons in 1523 and found himself, quite unwillingly, deeply involved in the government. He also found himself in the midst of a struggle that would cost him his life.

Henry VIII had married Catherine who, through successive attempts, produced one stillborn child after another. There was no male heir to the throne of England. Henry VIII (Wives of Henry VIII ) wished to divorce Catherine of Aragon (1485-1536), who was his deceased brother's wife, and marry the court mistress, Anne Boleyn (c.1500-1536). However, the Church at Rome would not grant a divorce. Henry VIII got around this problem by petitioning all the universities of England and Europe to argue for a divorce. The Archbishop of Canterbury was also petitioned. Eventually, Henry VIII solved the problem by breaking away from Rome, himself thus becoming the head of the Church of England. All lords of the realm were asked to sign an oath swearing that Anne Boleyn was Henry's lawful queen and that any male child would become the heir to the throne. More accepted the fact that any male child would have the legal right to the throne but he refused to accept Anne as queen. After a lengthy trial, in which More was locked up in the Tower of London, Sir Thomas More was found guilty of treason and was beheaded.

More has come to represent the symbol of the intellectual who holds fast to his beliefs rather than succumb to more powerful forces. More was a Renaissance scholar devoted to the New Learning. He was also a successful lawyer who emerged from the rising middle class. Caught between the currents of his own time, More entered the service of the state while retaining his old Christian loyalties. He perished at the hands of his executioner, a symbol of the triumph of stronger and more brutal ideas than his own. St. Thomas More—martyr.

Desiderius Erasmus, 1466-1536 Desiderius Erasmus

The Dutch humanist, Desiderius Erasmus, was born at Rotterdam, apparently on October 28, 1466, the illegitimate son of a physician's daughter by a man who afterwards turned monk. He was called Gerrit Gerritszoon (Dutch for Gerard Gerardson) but himself adopted the tautalogical double name by which he is known. He attended the school of the "Brothers of the Common Life" at Deventer. On his parents' death his guardians insisted on his entering a monastery and in the Augustinian college of Stein near Gouda he spent six years -- it was certainly this personal experience of the ways of the monks that made Erasmus their relentless enemy. At length the Bishop of Cambrai made him his private secretary. After taking priest's orders Erasmus went to Paris, where he studied at the Collège Montaigu. He resided in Paris until 1498, gaining a livelihood by teaching. Among his pupils was Lord Mountjoy, on whose invitation probably Erasmus made his first visit to England in 1498. He lived chiefly at Oxford, and through the influence of John Colet his contempt for the Schoolmen was intensified.

In 1500 he was again in France, and for the next six years lived chiefly at Paris. To this period belong his Adagiaand Enchiridion Militis Christiani. In 1506 he made a short visit to England, carried out a long-desired journey to Italy, and at Padua acted as tutor to Alexander, Archbishop of St. Andrews, natural son of James IV of Scotland. His visit closed with a short stay in Rome, whence he carried away a far more friendly impression than did Luther when he made his visit.

The accession of Henry VIII, and the invitation of Lord Mountjoy, induced Erasmus once more to make England his home. In his satire, Encomium Moriae (1509), we have him in his happiest vein, as the man of letters and the critic of kings and churchmen. Erasmus resided chiefly at Cambridge, where he acted as Margaret professor of Divinity and professor of Greek. After 1514 he lived alternatively in Basel and England, and from 1517 to 1521 at Louvain. In 1519 appeared the first edition of his Colloquia, usually regarded as his masterpiece. The audacity and incisiveness with which it handles the abuses of the Church prepared men's minds for the subsequent work of Martin Luther.

In 1516 was published his annotated New Testament, virtually the first Greek text, and in 1519 his edition on St. Jerome in nine folio volumes. In both of these works the aim of Erasmus was to introduce a more rational conception of Christian doctrine, and to emancipate men's minds from the frivolous and pedantic methods of the Scholastic theologians. But when the Lutheran revolution came he found himself in the most embarrassing position. Those of the old order fell upon him as the author of all the new troubles. The Lutherans assailed him for his cowardice and inconsistency in refusing to follow up his opinions to their legitimate conclusions. In 1521 he left Louvain, where the champions of the old faith had made his stay unendurable and with the exception of six years in Freiburg, he spent the rest of his life at Basel.

He edited a long succession of classical and patristic writers, and was engaged in continual controversies. The most important of these were with Ulrich von Hutten, Luther, and the Sorbonne, Hutten judged Erasmus harshly for not taking his place by the side of Luther; and with Luther himself Erasmus, after long hesitation, crossed swords in his De Libero Arbitrio (1523). Attacked by men like Hutten on the one side, he was as fiercely assailed on the other by the Sorbonne. By his Ciceroniansus he raised against himself new adversaries -- those humanists, namely, who set style above matter. Yet during his last years Erasmus enjoyed great fame and consideration. He died July 12, 1536.

Erasmus stands as the supreme type of cultivated common sense applied to human affairs. He rescued theology from the pedantries of the Schoolmen, exposed the abuses of the Church, and did more than any other single person to advance the Revival of Learning.

Read Excerpt from The Prince for remainder of the hour—discuss if time allows.

Day 13

Apr. 27, World History 2B

Home Top of page

History Guide

Go over the following

…