Well that was an awesome semester. Thanks everyone! But don't mourn
its passing too soon. The internet is a treasure trove of amazing
medieval information. Here I'm just highlighting a few places you could
go in particular for podcasts (online audio files) about historical topics, including
medieval ones, by famous historians from all over the world.
For
example, did you know that the BBC History Magazine has a free online
section with audio interviews and brief talks? You can hear the latest
one, or browse the archive for whatever topic takes your fancy, from the
Crusades to WWII: http://www.historyextra.com/podcast-page
If you want a bit more detail, try the online lectures available [on almost any topic] from the Universities of Oxford (http://itunes.ox.ac.uk/) and Cambridge (http://www.cam.ac.uk/video/itunesu.html).
Did
you know that our own Clare Monagle is also a podcasting sensation?
Check her out on Radio National talking about the medieval concept of
'political theology': http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/encounter/politics-and-god/3126076
And if you enjoyed the Robert Bartlett series Inside the Medieval Mind, linked earlier in semester, you could follow up by listening to this interview with him about making the series and what he wanted people to learn.
The end of semester doesn't have to be the end of medieval!
Naturally, there are also other Medieval and Renaissance units you can take here at Monash - just check out the Handbook!
In semester 2, look for ATS1317 (Renaissance Europe); ATS2603 (Age of
Crusades); and ATS2604 (Arthur: History and Myth). In summer 2012 there
will be the exciting travel unit ATS2612 (Renaissance in Florence). And
in 2013 look our for ATS3288 (Angels & Demons: Rome, the Papacy and
the World); ATS2572 (Crisis and renewal in the late Renaissance);
ATS2573 (Relics and legends); and ATS2579 (Witches and depravity).
See you then...
Kathleen
P.S.
Comments remain open, so those of you still writing your essays, please
feel free to post queries about citation, etc., below.
Monday, 21 May 2012
Monday, 14 May 2012
Test Revision
So I'm just putting this here to provide a space for those who would
like to make use of a communal discussion to help them think about the
unit and revise for the test on Monday.
Details, in case you missed them, are:
Kathleen
 |
| God the Geometer, Codex Vindobonensis 2554 |
Details, in case you missed them, are:
- The test takes place in the lecture slot on Monday 21 May.
- It is expected to take about an hour, but you can take up to two if required.
- It will follow an essay format.
- It will take the form of a statement you must discuss with reference to primary sources.
- Select primary sources will be provided.
- A mock test is available on Blackboard
- The marking criteria are listed in the Unit Guide
- There is no exam in the exam period.
- There is no tutorial in week 12 after the test.
- Please submit outstanding essay hard copies to the SOPHIS essay box (Menzies W604).
Kathleen
Wednesday, 9 May 2012
Unit feedback
Dear Students,
You will have received an email from SETU (Student Evaluation of
Teaching and Units), inviting you to evaluate ATS 1316. Please do so! We
really want to know what you think.
These surveys are taken extremely seriously by the University. They
are used when staff members apply for promotion, or for other jobs.
They are also used to make changes to the units for next year, drawing
on student comments. These blogs, for example, emerged out of comments
by students that they sometimes felt disconnected during first year.
Hence, we have tried to build community and encourage your readings by
running these blogs.
So let us know what you think of the unit. YOU ARE VERY POWERFUL!
P.S. You will also see a link on the right to a survey specifically asking you about the blog. We are really interested in your feedback on this learning tool in particular. This is separate from the University's SETU feedback.
Thanks!
Kathleen
P.P.S. Read on below for the Black Death blog!
Renaissance in Florence
 |
| Prato |
Also, consult the University handbook for more detail about prerequisites, etc., here.
You may also want to contact the course coordinator, Peter Howard.
The Black Death blog follows below...
Tuesday, 8 May 2012
The Black Death
Explain the nature of the ‘flourishing urban civilization’ that Margaret King describes in Italy
prior to the Black Death. What were the economic foundations of the
civilizations of Florence and Venice?
The thirteenth century in Venice and Florence saw growing prosperity economically which would provide opportunities to pursue arts and culture that would create an ‘early-Renaissance’. Merchant success in Florence began with two enterprises, Banking and Wool brought both by a close relationship with the Church. The close bond with the papacy gave the chance for merchants to collect Tithes and taxes as the position of the Pope’s tax representative.
The textile industry blossomed from Papacy’s victory in the Two Sicilies which exported wool from their sheep-herding enterprise to Florence for production. Venice’s economic development began from trading basic commodities like salt and fish for timber and metal that would establish a ship manufacturing and managing industry for international trade. With a sudden economic boom Guilds were created which would involve and intrigue merchants and workers in political affairs. Urban renewal was now attainable with a strong economy resulting in new infrastructure such as Churches, guildhalls, hospitals, bridges, roads and walls for protection built with new architectural designs. Arts and culture had taken a new turn from revolving entirely around Christianity to reflecting on the cities and connecting more directly to the people. The economic foundations of banking and wool in Florence and shipping and trade in Venice provided the stable opportunity for exploration in arts and culture before the disaster of the Black Death.
--Tom
The Legal and Political Structures of Florence and Venice During the days of the Renaissance
Italy was not a single political entity, but was divided up into city-states and territories. According to Margaret King, Venice and Florence were one of the few remaining republics. Although they did not have the democratic political systems in place that we have become accustom to, there were many political structures that placed the notion of liberty in high regard. In Italy, particularly Florence and Venice, in which the renaissance flourished, participation in governance and belief in liberty was a large aspect and the foundations of modern political ideology. One, who contributed to these theories, was Marsilius of Padua. He wrote the Defensor Pacis (“Defender of the peace”) between 1320 and 1324, which was an immensely ‘original work of political theory’. The Defensor pacis ‘sketched out the contours of the modern state as an entity that was both autonomous and secular, and which provided security and order to its citizens, who were the source of its power and legitimacy’. Whilst Marsilius was declared a heretic and spent his later years at the imperial court, it still forms the basis of our current political foundations.
Cities within medieval Europe and the era of the Renaissance had an established legal system. With courts, laws and rules that generally followed the same code from city to city. The Italian judicial system was based upon Roman law and followed, to a certain extent, the notions of their political and legal systems. There was one group of intellectuals that had a major influence over Italian cities at that time. These intellectuals were known as Jurists. These were men trained in Roman law. Jurist’s were prominent among the ‘citizen leaders’ and took part in the development of communes. They were held in high-regard within Florence, Venice and Italy in general during these times. The Jurist’s were men, generally those who came from money, who were schooled and trained (within schools of law in Italian universities) in order to produce the valuable service of compiling ‘urban law codes, to document contracts and exchanges of property, and to negotiate alliances and treaties of peace with other states’. Bartolus of Sassoferrato was one such Jurist, who developed a political theory, in which wealthy cities such as Venice and Florence were ‘best ruled by a combinations of prominent men’. These theories developed by Bartolus and Marsilius serve as a basis for further liberal and democratic theories and form the foundations of our own political and legal systems today.
-- Ben
Does the extract from Petrarch’s Letter to Posterity indicate an optimistic or pessimistic sense of his legacy?
Francesco Petrarch (1304 – 1374) was a medieval writer who composed both literary and scholarly texts. His work Letter to Posterity, composed in 1351, is a perfect example of the legacy and influence he had not only on the Renaissance, but on all future generations. Margaret King referred to Petrarch as an ‘inaugurator of the Renaissance’, as his works were all based on the study of classical antiquity, and as such had a great influence on early Renaissance writers. However his legacy was not just based on this, but on his self-awareness and thoughtfulness as a composer.
In the extract provided in this week’s readings from the Letter to Posterity, Petrarch manages to convey a sense of truly humble self-consciousness despite his comfortable upbringing and lifestyle. One of the most fascinating things about the extract is that it can be considered as both optimistic and pessimistic in regards to Petrarch’s ‘legacy’. On one hand the very fact that Petrarch is writing the letter in the first place indicates that he does have some hope that his works will live on, and will teach generations to come about the people he writes about and inadvertently about the value of modesty and self-awareness.
On the other hand, however, Petrarch sees himself as ‘one of your own clock’, as ordinary and mortal. He discusses his faults and his attributes without seeming falsely modest or displaying any sort of arrogance. He is hopeful that his works might have some lasting effect on future generations, but he is not vain or cocky or expectant that this will be the case. Petrarch seems to really be taking into account how he, himself, can pass on the knowledge that he has been able to gain only through experience and age. His self-awareness as a writer and as a man is very important as it was not an incredibly common feature of composers. The fact that he is writing an auto-biography is very telling; he sees how important his role is within his own works and why people might want to know what type of man he was.
In this extract Petrarch seems to be both hopeful about what the future may bring, and about his effect on it, but his sense of humility and modesty are also predominant features of his personality and prevent him from having total confidence in his legacy.
--Hannah
How does king characterize the economic and social impact of the Black Death? Do the documents relating to the Black Death reflect King’s understanding of the impact of the Black Death?
The thirteenth century in Venice and Florence saw growing prosperity economically which would provide opportunities to pursue arts and culture that would create an ‘early-Renaissance’. Merchant success in Florence began with two enterprises, Banking and Wool brought both by a close relationship with the Church. The close bond with the papacy gave the chance for merchants to collect Tithes and taxes as the position of the Pope’s tax representative.
The textile industry blossomed from Papacy’s victory in the Two Sicilies which exported wool from their sheep-herding enterprise to Florence for production. Venice’s economic development began from trading basic commodities like salt and fish for timber and metal that would establish a ship manufacturing and managing industry for international trade. With a sudden economic boom Guilds were created which would involve and intrigue merchants and workers in political affairs. Urban renewal was now attainable with a strong economy resulting in new infrastructure such as Churches, guildhalls, hospitals, bridges, roads and walls for protection built with new architectural designs. Arts and culture had taken a new turn from revolving entirely around Christianity to reflecting on the cities and connecting more directly to the people. The economic foundations of banking and wool in Florence and shipping and trade in Venice provided the stable opportunity for exploration in arts and culture before the disaster of the Black Death.
--Tom
The Legal and Political Structures of Florence and Venice During the days of the Renaissance
Italy was not a single political entity, but was divided up into city-states and territories. According to Margaret King, Venice and Florence were one of the few remaining republics. Although they did not have the democratic political systems in place that we have become accustom to, there were many political structures that placed the notion of liberty in high regard. In Italy, particularly Florence and Venice, in which the renaissance flourished, participation in governance and belief in liberty was a large aspect and the foundations of modern political ideology. One, who contributed to these theories, was Marsilius of Padua. He wrote the Defensor Pacis (“Defender of the peace”) between 1320 and 1324, which was an immensely ‘original work of political theory’. The Defensor pacis ‘sketched out the contours of the modern state as an entity that was both autonomous and secular, and which provided security and order to its citizens, who were the source of its power and legitimacy’. Whilst Marsilius was declared a heretic and spent his later years at the imperial court, it still forms the basis of our current political foundations.
Cities within medieval Europe and the era of the Renaissance had an established legal system. With courts, laws and rules that generally followed the same code from city to city. The Italian judicial system was based upon Roman law and followed, to a certain extent, the notions of their political and legal systems. There was one group of intellectuals that had a major influence over Italian cities at that time. These intellectuals were known as Jurists. These were men trained in Roman law. Jurist’s were prominent among the ‘citizen leaders’ and took part in the development of communes. They were held in high-regard within Florence, Venice and Italy in general during these times. The Jurist’s were men, generally those who came from money, who were schooled and trained (within schools of law in Italian universities) in order to produce the valuable service of compiling ‘urban law codes, to document contracts and exchanges of property, and to negotiate alliances and treaties of peace with other states’. Bartolus of Sassoferrato was one such Jurist, who developed a political theory, in which wealthy cities such as Venice and Florence were ‘best ruled by a combinations of prominent men’. These theories developed by Bartolus and Marsilius serve as a basis for further liberal and democratic theories and form the foundations of our own political and legal systems today.
-- Ben
Does the extract from Petrarch’s Letter to Posterity indicate an optimistic or pessimistic sense of his legacy?
Francesco Petrarch (1304 – 1374) was a medieval writer who composed both literary and scholarly texts. His work Letter to Posterity, composed in 1351, is a perfect example of the legacy and influence he had not only on the Renaissance, but on all future generations. Margaret King referred to Petrarch as an ‘inaugurator of the Renaissance’, as his works were all based on the study of classical antiquity, and as such had a great influence on early Renaissance writers. However his legacy was not just based on this, but on his self-awareness and thoughtfulness as a composer.
In the extract provided in this week’s readings from the Letter to Posterity, Petrarch manages to convey a sense of truly humble self-consciousness despite his comfortable upbringing and lifestyle. One of the most fascinating things about the extract is that it can be considered as both optimistic and pessimistic in regards to Petrarch’s ‘legacy’. On one hand the very fact that Petrarch is writing the letter in the first place indicates that he does have some hope that his works will live on, and will teach generations to come about the people he writes about and inadvertently about the value of modesty and self-awareness.
On the other hand, however, Petrarch sees himself as ‘one of your own clock’, as ordinary and mortal. He discusses his faults and his attributes without seeming falsely modest or displaying any sort of arrogance. He is hopeful that his works might have some lasting effect on future generations, but he is not vain or cocky or expectant that this will be the case. Petrarch seems to really be taking into account how he, himself, can pass on the knowledge that he has been able to gain only through experience and age. His self-awareness as a writer and as a man is very important as it was not an incredibly common feature of composers. The fact that he is writing an auto-biography is very telling; he sees how important his role is within his own works and why people might want to know what type of man he was.
In this extract Petrarch seems to be both hopeful about what the future may bring, and about his effect on it, but his sense of humility and modesty are also predominant features of his personality and prevent him from having total confidence in his legacy.
--Hannah
How does king characterize the economic and social impact of the Black Death? Do the documents relating to the Black Death reflect King’s understanding of the impact of the Black Death?
Just
before the Black Death, King characterizes the thirteenth century as a growing ‘flourishing
urban civilization’ that would eventually progress into the Renaissance. She highlights the growth in the economy, the
increase in popularity and the evolution of new ideas and revolutions such as
workers rights and changing political structures.
King,
by starting her chapter with all the growth and changes of the thirteenth
century, is able to directly juxtapose the changes that the fourteenth century Black
Death bought into society. As Giovanni
Boccaccio states ‘And, in this great affliction and misery of our city, the
reverend authority of laws, divine and human, was almost wholly ruined’, the
previous developments of ideas stopped in the face of the influenza. As the plague ravaged the cities; the strict
religious focus began to relent and give way to humanism and skepticism, as
God, it seems, did nothing to save or aid his people. During the plagues reign,
people did not follow any of the rules they had depended on religiously before;
for example, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’ juxtaposes with the quote byGiovanni Boccaccio ‘The fact was that one citizen avoided another, that almostno-one cared for his neighbor’. King claims that the plague only
temporarily stopped the ‘flourishing urban civilization’ rather than completely
stopping it as she argues that the Renaissance wouldn’t have otherwise taken
place.
--Alanah
 |
| Plague in a city |
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
The Crusades and Christian Love
Sir Steven Runciman on the Crusade
Steven Runciman locates reasons for the failure of the subsequent crusades in the events of the First Crusade. Summarise his argument in relation to the impact of the First Crusade in particular.
Runciman believes that the tragedy of Byzantine Empire was caused by a movement (namely the first Crusade) launched by a ‘noble-minded’ Pope with ‘good will’ and misunderstandings, and Crusades were simply great barbarian invasions. The only way I find from the given material to argue that the failure of the subsequent crusades were caused by the events of the first Crusade is that the series of Crusade failed to secure Byzantine Empire and such failure emerged in the events of the first Crusade. Runciman presents the impact of the First Crusade in different aspects. In Politics, the misunderstandings between the west and Byzantium lead to a situation that people were not sympathy to each other. In religion, the intolerant attitude towards Greek of Latin Christian and the tolerant attitude towards Muslim of Byzantines even worsened the political misunderstandings. In military, the west did not efficiently help Byzantium out from Turks as promised, rather raised a war against the whole Muslim which put Byzantium into a dangerous position. In economics, to cater the huge armies worsened the decayed economic situation of Byzantium and the wealthy of Constantinople might stimulate the greed of the Latin west.
What does he mean when he refers to a ‘melancholy pile of misunderstandings’ throughout the First Crusade?
According to Runciman, there were three main misunderstandings between Pope Urban and the Byzantium. First, Alexius Comnenus, the Byzantine emperor, wanted mercenaries to drive the Turks back in Anatolia which was almost entirely lost. However, the Pope, with a ‘noble mind’ according to Runciman, organized a whole army to succor him over which he had no control. Second, though the emperor wanted to recover as much of Anatolia as possible, he never meant to stand against the whole Islamic world. However the Pope expected to go on after succoring Byzantium to establish Christian rule over Palestine, ‘so that pilgrims could be ensured forever’. Third, the two misunderstandings above made the Byzantines embarrassed by the appearance of crusading armies and not wholly in sympathy with their aims, which made the Crusaders fell they were impious.
--Shang
Jonathan Riley-Smith - 'Crusading as an Act of Love'
The first reading for this week looks at
Riley-Smiths writing on the Crusades as acts of Christian love and charity.
Riley-Smith suggests that this love 'encompasses love of God and love of
ones neighbour' (p32.) and was
important in the conception and promotion of the crusades. He consistently
references writings of Popes during the times of the crusades (e.g Innocent
III, Urban II) and other contemporary people of authority (e.g Odo of Deuil).
It is these writings and these individuals who promoted, supported and provided
the "propaganda" for the crusades.
It is important to consider that in order for the crusades to be successful, the church had to appeal to communities and present crusading in ways people understood and that encouraged support, e.g comparing 'crusading love' to 'love of family' (p.49) and viewing crusading as vengeance for other Christians.
Pope Urban's sermon at Clermont:
Your full brothers, your comrades, your brothers born of the same mother, for you are sons of the same Christ and the same Church
Baldric of Dol: 'It is much less evil to brandish the sword against the Muslims; in a particular case it is good, because it is charity to lay down lives for friends'
It is also important to note the biblical texts which were used in support of the crusades: "Whoever doth not carry his cross and come after me cannot be my disciple" (Luke xiv, 27)
Particularly interesting is the idea of 'loving ones enemy' (p31.) and 'punishment imposed through love' (p42.) that were expressed by St Augustine and adopted by some of the Popes in support of crusading. Would this reasoning be accepted today? Again (like past blogs) we come to the differences in Christian beliefs and Christianity's role in society between the middle ages and today.
In particular consider these ideas in relation to the fourth crusade. Do you believe the crusades were undertaken through charity and love? What could be some arguments for and against this?
--Gen
Steven Runciman locates reasons for the failure of the subsequent crusades in the events of the First Crusade. Summarise his argument in relation to the impact of the First Crusade in particular.
Runciman believes that the tragedy of Byzantine Empire was caused by a movement (namely the first Crusade) launched by a ‘noble-minded’ Pope with ‘good will’ and misunderstandings, and Crusades were simply great barbarian invasions. The only way I find from the given material to argue that the failure of the subsequent crusades were caused by the events of the first Crusade is that the series of Crusade failed to secure Byzantine Empire and such failure emerged in the events of the first Crusade. Runciman presents the impact of the First Crusade in different aspects. In Politics, the misunderstandings between the west and Byzantium lead to a situation that people were not sympathy to each other. In religion, the intolerant attitude towards Greek of Latin Christian and the tolerant attitude towards Muslim of Byzantines even worsened the political misunderstandings. In military, the west did not efficiently help Byzantium out from Turks as promised, rather raised a war against the whole Muslim which put Byzantium into a dangerous position. In economics, to cater the huge armies worsened the decayed economic situation of Byzantium and the wealthy of Constantinople might stimulate the greed of the Latin west.
What does he mean when he refers to a ‘melancholy pile of misunderstandings’ throughout the First Crusade?
According to Runciman, there were three main misunderstandings between Pope Urban and the Byzantium. First, Alexius Comnenus, the Byzantine emperor, wanted mercenaries to drive the Turks back in Anatolia which was almost entirely lost. However, the Pope, with a ‘noble mind’ according to Runciman, organized a whole army to succor him over which he had no control. Second, though the emperor wanted to recover as much of Anatolia as possible, he never meant to stand against the whole Islamic world. However the Pope expected to go on after succoring Byzantium to establish Christian rule over Palestine, ‘so that pilgrims could be ensured forever’. Third, the two misunderstandings above made the Byzantines embarrassed by the appearance of crusading armies and not wholly in sympathy with their aims, which made the Crusaders fell they were impious.
--Shang
Jonathan Riley-Smith - 'Crusading as an Act of Love'
 |
| Jonathan Riley-Smith |
It is important to consider that in order for the crusades to be successful, the church had to appeal to communities and present crusading in ways people understood and that encouraged support, e.g comparing 'crusading love' to 'love of family' (p.49) and viewing crusading as vengeance for other Christians.
 |
| Urban II preaching at Clermont |
Your full brothers, your comrades, your brothers born of the same mother, for you are sons of the same Christ and the same Church
Baldric of Dol: 'It is much less evil to brandish the sword against the Muslims; in a particular case it is good, because it is charity to lay down lives for friends'
It is also important to note the biblical texts which were used in support of the crusades: "Whoever doth not carry his cross and come after me cannot be my disciple" (Luke xiv, 27)
Particularly interesting is the idea of 'loving ones enemy' (p31.) and 'punishment imposed through love' (p42.) that were expressed by St Augustine and adopted by some of the Popes in support of crusading. Would this reasoning be accepted today? Again (like past blogs) we come to the differences in Christian beliefs and Christianity's role in society between the middle ages and today.
In particular consider these ideas in relation to the fourth crusade. Do you believe the crusades were undertaken through charity and love? What could be some arguments for and against this?
--Gen
The Fourth Crusade
 |
| Route of the Fourth Crusade |
The Fourth Crusade has been cemented in history as having
one of the most controversial and improbable end-games. Beginning with Pope Innocent III’s
call-to-arms in 1198 to re-capture the Holy City and further the cause of
Christendom, excitement quickly spread through Europe against the
less-than-ideal political climate of the time.
Arriving in Venice in 1201, the idea was to acquire supplies and ships,
and sail down to Egypt, making their way up to Jerusalem from there.
 |
| Sack of Constantinople |
However, an ill-fated treaty led to a diversion to
Constantinople. What was supposed to be
a crusade against the Muslims became an attack on Byzantium. The Crusaders laid siege on the city in 1203,
and a stalemate ensued until 1204 when, after gaining some ground and
favourable conditions, and with the help of the Venetians, the holy warriors
brutally captured the city. Following
the infamously horrific ‘Sack of Constantinople’, the great Byzantine Empire
was conquered, and sitting on its throne was the ill-equipped Emperor Baldwin
I, previously known as Baldwin of Flanders. After a shameful and embarrassing
turn of events, the Crusaders had not regained their Holy City, destroyed an
Empire, usurped its throne, and set it up for devestation. In the words of Donald Queller and Thomas
Madden in The Fourth Crusade, ‘[It
was] the result no-one could have forseen, for it was the most improbable of
all outcomes: a Flemish knight now reigned in the city of the Caesars’.
--Tiff
Why was the fourth crusade was so controversial? Discuss with reference to the
various accounts in the primary sources
The fourth crusade was in Constantinople (modern
day Istanbul in Turkey) in 1204 and was launched by Pope Innocent III (see above). Its
initial aim was to retake Jerusalem from the Muslims, by arranging a Venetian
fleet to transport a the Crusaders to Egypt. Here they planned to conquer the
land and then march to Jerusalem and re-claim the Holy Land. However, this
initial aim of the Fourth Crusade never came to be. Instead, they attacked
Constantinople, one of the largest and wealthiest cities in the Christian
world, but also the capital of the Byzantine empire.
The controversies surrounding the Fourth
Crusade, steam from the reasoning and cause of the actual attack of the
Crusader on the Byzantine Empire’s capital. From the Primary sources, there
seems to be two prominent reasons.
The first being that the fourth crusade was
a series of unfortunate accidents which turned out to be good grace of God.
With many of the crusaders failing to meet in the summer of 1202 in Venice meant
that the passaged cost they owed to the Venetians was well under and improvised
their army. Therefore the crusade leaders had little choice but to accept the
Venetians offer to sail to the city of Zara, whereby the takings of this city
will be split fairly and the Crusaders can pay back their dues with their
takings (p.226). However, the City of Zara did not provide the extent of
resources and takings as first envisioned and therefore sought to conquer
elsewhere (p.230). Thus, Alexios Angelos
promised to pay the expense of the voyage and conquer of Constantinople once
his father (the emperor Isaac II) was returned to his rightful place on the
throne (p.230). However they were slow in repaying their debt and the Franks
and Venetians (the crusaders) attack Constantinople. The 1204 war on
Constantinople was debated and justified by the bishops and clergy as a
“righteous
one… for the Greeks were traitors and murders, and also disloyal, since they
had murdered their rightful lord, and were worse than jews… [we] ought not
hesitate to attack the Greeks, for the latter were enemies of God.” (p.232)
However, the collection of documents from
the Sack of Constantinople paint a different picture of the Franks and
Venetians reasoning behind the crusade, being religious difficulties. As the
Byzantines were tolerant of other churches, but the crusaders understood one
uniformed ritual of the church. Thus found it strange and hardly Christian to
see oriental Christian churches (p.251). Thus, the second collection of Primary sources in the reader, focuses on the
Crusader’s destruction of religious relics, devastation of churches, looing of
treasures and anything of religious importance to the Byzantine’s (p.260). Thus
the Byzantines were seen as disloyal and traitors to the Christian cause and necessary
for the Christian army to remain the Constantinople for at least a year “in order to strengthen the empire in its
devotion” (p.262)
What reasoning to think explains the Fourth
Crusade? A series of incidental accidents, religious tensions or a combination
of both?
--Deniz
Tuesday, 24 April 2012
Francis and Dominic
Slocum’s
explanation of the foundation of the Franciscan Order
Kay Slocum
follows the life of Francis Belardorne of Assisi. He was a young man who
involved himself in the conflicts between Assisi and neighbouring towns in
which he was taken captive and placed in prison where he became violently ill.
In seeking out religious consolation Francis heard a voice from the altar at
the Church of St. Damian saying, “Francis, go build my church.” After this he
began, using the materials from his father’s shop, to repair his church. His
father, enraged, imprisoned Francis however Francis managed to escape and
sought refuge with a local bishop. Shortly after Francis dramatically stripped
himself of clothing and proclaimed his allegiance to God and renounced his
father. Such was the beginning of his life as a holy man.
Francis proceeded to repair churches, however, did
not understand fully what his role was in the service of God. This was until a
priest’s sermon allowed Francis to realise that he should live and preach the
apostolic life, a life in which one was completely unburdened by the possession
of personal property or money. Francis, having attracted some followers, drew
up a rule detailing this lifestyle. In contrast to the cloistered monks of the
Cistercian Order Francis advocated a life residing amongst the people surviving
on work and alms. This was inspirational to those, particularly the literate,
who sought to imitate the life of Jesus according to the gospels due to
dissatisfaction with the “moral laxity” of the clergy and tedium of monastic
spirituality. Moreover Francis’ appreciation for the beauty of the natural
world allowed him to create an emotional connection with the populous including
heretics. As Slocum illustrates, however, Francis avoided serious accusations
of heresy himself due to his respect for the priesthood and sacraments. Though
initially reluctant, this allowed Pope Innocent to approve the Franciscan Rule
in 1210.
The Franciscan
Order, now official, began to expand and engage in missionary activity
throughout Europe. Though the order was conceived initially without governance
the increased size required Francis to write the second rule which reinforced
the commitment to authority and established an administrational hierarchy. From
there on the Franciscan Order had its own mature identity which began to
influence further religious orders of holy poverty such as the “Poor Clares.”
Also
Slocum’s explanation of the foundation of the Dominican Order
The Dominican order was different to that of the
Franciscans, although in some ways the two mirrored each other closely. The Dominicans “emphasized learning and education” (p.361) and it “closely resembled the traditional monastic
establishments” (p.361). It was
started as an attempt to control Cathar heresy. Dominic de Guzmán, a Spanish
priest, and his bishop Diego of Osma, began “itinerant
preaching” (p. 361) and eventually became known as the ‘order of
preachers’.
Like the Franciscans, the Dominicans adopted the
apostolic life of poverty, which suggests that this way of life was becoming
more of an ideal sought throughout Europe as it gained wealth.
The Dominicans were unable to create a new rule for
themselves, however the Pope Honorius III gave papal confirmation for the order
to become a branch of the Rule of St Augustine, as it was very close to the
desires of the Dominicans. Unlike St Francis, Dominic readily accepted the need
for administration and organisation and created a “representative form of government of the Order of Preachers” (p.365)
which was unique to it.
In Celano’s
account of Francis’ life, with what values does he imbue the figure of Francis?
Tomas of Celano, in his account of Francis’ life,
portrays him as a pious and devoted man who despises the burdens of material
possession in favour of spiritual wisdom, appreciation of God’s creation and
the apostolic life. Francis is bold yet gentle which serves to create an
enigmatic and almost Christ-like persona. These qualities are illustrated as
Francis, on receiving payment for the sale of his clothes and horse, offers it
almost immediately to a church in disrepair both in order to rebuild the church
and free him of the monetary burden. On the priests refusal of the donation
Francis throws the money out of the window “treating it as if it were dust.” He
does this, according to Celano, because “he wanted to possess wisdom, which is
better than gold, and prudence, which is more precious than silver.” This
contempt for worldly possessions is illustrated further when Francis, on
hearing the priest’s explanation of the gospel, discards all that he owns in
favour of a crude tunic. Even in poverty Francis reinforces his humility
through mortification of the flesh and his devotion to the service to god as he
strips himself of his clothes and hands them to his father, standing before him
completely naked unashamed. This is further established in his capture by the
Saracens in which he remains composed in the face of death and torture. His
dramatic actions are, however, always laced with a selflessness and respect for
all of God’s creation. His generosity is matched with his affection for nature.
Celano’s Francis possessed a powerful emanating grace which earned him much
exultation as a preacher. It in is this romantic balance between confidence and
compassion that Celano achieves the portrayal of Francis as almost a Christ
like figure.
From
Celano’s stories how do you understand Francis’ relationship with the natural
world?
Francis, in Celano’s stories, is profoundly and
connected to the natural world. He believes it crucial that all of creation
should know the word of God and became famous not only for his preaching to the
animals but the command he seemed to have of them.
“…He
exorted all birds, all animals, all reptiles, and even nonexistant creatures to
praise and love the creator for every day, when the name of the saviour was
announced, he himself saw their obedience”
Celano tells us about Francis’ travels as he
returns fish to the water, preaches to the birds and commands wildlife. Perhaps
most notable, however, is the way in which Celano shows Francis’ holiness and
compassion seems to miraculously emanate as if he were a Christ-like conduit of
the grace of God. This can be seen in the story of the woman made able to give
birth safely by touching the reigns of a horse ridden by Francis. His way with
the animals, was so great, that the animals themselves became holy.
Le Goff
places Francis life in the context of increased urbanisation. What argument
does Le Goff make about the impact of urban life upon Francis’ religious life?
In the years preceding Francis’ birth, the
population of Europe increased dramatically, and “people had to be fed, materially and spiritually” (p.1). People began to live closer together and so
more urban societies began to form as built-up areas formed around castles and
churches. Le Goff states that “holiness
related more directly to towns” (p.2), in order to maintain influence over
the population, the Church had to embrace towns and adapt to them.
The importance of possessions and property grew,
creating a more materialistic society. In response to that “the Church was the first to change” (p.3). The Gregorian reforms
were introduced which created strong distinctions between the Church and laity,
it also “involved an aspiration … to
achieve the true apostolic life” (p.4) New Orders appeared which preached a
return to poverty, these Orders were successful because they were able to
connect with the people in urban life who were becoming “increasingly active in religious life” (p.5).
Le Goff suggests that the rise of urbanisation
created a society where religion was more accessible to the people but the
world was becoming “one of exclusion” (p.11),
Francis, in contrast, proclaimed the “divine
presence in all creatures” (p.11). Thus it could be argued that Francis saw
the world as becoming increasingly focused on individuals and their property
and problems. As a result he tried to create a life of equality amongst all,
where the divine was the centre of all life. Throughout his life, St Francis
was often compared to Jesus, many believing that he was a new incarnation of
the Son of God.
--Bobbie & Jeremy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)