May 23, 2011

Which job would I least like to have in history?

In medieval Europe, surgery was not provided by physicians but instead by barber. Since surgery was considered more of a trade then a profession, most surgeons would also become barbers to make ends meet. They were generally in charge of looking after soldiers before or after a war. During the early Middle Ages, most priests would conduct the surgery of the patient. However, many were concerned with the act of a priest producing blood from the sick. So in 1215, a papal decree was passed which would prohibit priests from performing surgery. Since barbers were already skilled with a razor, they were then given the profession of a surgeon also. The extent of this occupation would include bloodletting, which was thought to bring the patient back into general good health. There was also pulling teeth, performing enemas and surgeries, selling medicines, and of course cutting hair to consider. The intensity of this trade was a literal life or death matter. If one little mistake was made whether it was too much of the blood drawn or an inch away from the proper place that needed to be cut, the life of the patient would be at risk. Because of this, the pressure that barber surgeon had to bear was immense. Also, needed would be skilled hands, a strong stomach, and a giving heart. To be a successful barber surgeon, there would be several instruments constantly in use; all of which would need great experience to master the mechanism. The phobia or disgust of blood or anything remotely gory would also have to be limited to none; for these elements would be assumed with the act of a surgery. Compassion would hopefully make this vocation a more reasonable one, for the occasional deaths of patients would be a possibility. A barber surgeon seems to be a very unusual profession for the people of the 21^st century. However, this occupation was one of the most popular medical practitioners during this time era. They were faced with many obstacles, which were difficult to overcome if overcame at all. There was always another patient, who would leave their lives in the barber surgeons’ hands.

May 18, 2011

Foxy Fox and the Third Crusade

http://storybird.com/books/foxy-fox-and-the-third-crusade/

May 5, 2011

Why is it so important to understand the Spanish Inquisition to really understand the culture of the Middle Ages?

The culture of a civilization contains not only the traditions that were passed down from generation to generation or the different ways of human expression such as clothing and art, but also the way of how that development lives. Culture would include the function of the government, the different beliefs of religion, and also the society of the people. The Spanish Inquisition, which was a tribunal to ensure the conversion to Christianity, was established roughly around 1480. During this time, hundreds were converted. Some of these conversions were in consequence to being tortured, while others were because of free will. But also, hundreds ended up dead in the result of refusing to convert or because of the crime of heresy. The Spanish Inquisition changed the following years of Middle Ages in more than one way; but also, it contains a greater understanding to the culture of the Middle Ages from this cause and effect chain.

The government is what keeps every civilization prosperous. “The Romans used the inquisitorial process as a form of legal procedure employed in the search for evidence. (Bragg, 2006)” This justice system was highly unjust and even unethical because of the act of torture that was involved. However, this certain type of government did sustain the culture of the Middle Age’s for almost four hundred years. Either way, successful or not, the government of the Spanish Inquisition did affect the civilization of that time period, and also the more that would follow. By the biased rule towards Christianity, the people of that time learned how unfair executing people for their religion was. Ultimately, this only influenced the culture of the Middle Ages.

Religion is just one of the dominant components that consisted of the Middle Ages’ culture. “Once Rome's religion changed to Christianity under Constantine, it retained the inquisitorial trial method but also developed brutal means of dealing with heretics who went against the doctrines of the new religion. (Bragg, 2006)” The rise of Christianity was the main focus during the Spanish Inquisition. Because of this, innumerable amounts of cultural aspects can be revealed. This shows that the culture of the Middle Ages did care about God. In the case of the Spanish Inquisition, their beliefs were so deep that they even ended up killing people for not believing in Christ. Their faith for the Lord did cause them to make immoral decisions, since God also gave us the right to free will. These choices that were made affected not only the great believers of the Spanish Inquisition but also the many human beings that would come after them. It is undeniable that the Spanish Inquisition did affect the culture of the Middle Ages, which is why this significant event is so useful to help understand the culture of this era.

The society of a time period is very significant for the culture that also exists. “For over half a millennium a system of mass terror reigned. Thousands were subject to secret courts, torture and punishment. (Secret Files of the Inquisition)” Clearly, this major of an event would have made some impact on the culture of the Middle Ages. Thousands of people’s lives were taken from this memorable event, mainly influencing the society of the Middle Ages. The population rate most likely would have decreased with so many accused of heresy, and then having them endure the consequences for the beliefs they did not follow. Many of others who were not considered heretics were also affected, such as the countless families and friends who had to cope with the death of a loved one. The Spanish Inquisition truly affected the society of the Middle Ages, which is one of the main reasons why it so crucial to understand the Spanish Inquisition first before looking further into the Middle Ages’ culture.

This civilization can be very insightful in terms toward the culture of the Middle Ages, which was a time of real growth in an innumerable amount of ways. The Spanish Inquisition influenced the later years of this time period, and ultimately changed history. During this time, the government relied more on religion as it became the main core of the Spanish Inquisition. The society of the Middle Ages would also be forever changed in a result of this catastrophic event. Because of this, the Spanish Inquisition is one of the key ways to understand an aspect from the Middle Ages’ culture.

Bibliography

Bragg, M. (2006, June 22). The Spanish Inquisition. Retrieved 2 2011, May, from BBC History: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p003c1bw

Secret Files of the Inquisition. (n.d.). Retrieved 5 May, 2011, from PBS History: http://www.pbs.org/inquisition/

May 3, 2011

Rough Draft. Why is it so important to understand the Spanish Inquisition to really understand the culture of the Middle Ages?

The culture of a civilization contains not only the traditions that were passed down from generation to generation or the different ways of human expression such as clothing and art, but also the way of how that development lives. Culture would include the function of the government, the different beliefs of religion, and also the society of the people. The Spanish Inquisition, which was a tribunal to ensure the conversion to Christianity, was established around 1480. During this time, hundreds were converted. Some of these conversions were in consequence to being tortured, while others were because of free will. But also, thousands ended up dead in the result of refusing to convert or because of the crime of heresy. The Spanish Inquisition changed the following years of Middle Ages in more than one way; but also, it contains a greater understanding to the culture of the Middle Ages from this cause and effect chain. The Spanish Inquisition did change the following years of the Middle Ages in more than one way; however, this does not mean that the Spanish Inquisition would help understand the culture of the Middle Ages.

Religion is just one of the dominant components that consisted of the Middle Ages’ culture. “Once Rome's religion changed to Christianity under Constantine, it retained the inquisitorial trial method but also developed brutal means of dealing with heretics who went against the doctrines of the new religion. (Bragg, 2006)” The rise of Christianity was the main focus during the Spanish Inquisition. Because of this, innumerable amounts of cultural aspects can be revealed. This shows that the culture of the Middle Ages did care about God. In the case of the Spanish Inquisition, their beliefs were so deep that they even ended up killing people for not believing in Christ. Their faith for the Lord did cause them to make immoral decisions, since God also gave us the right to free will. These choices that were made affected not only the great believers of the Spanish Inquisition but also the many human beings to come. It is undeniable that the Spanish Inquisition did affect the culture of the Middle Ages, which is why this significant event is so useful to help understand the culture of this era.

The society of a time period is very significant for the culture that also exists. “For 350 years under Papal Decree, Jews, then Muslims and Protestants were put through the Inquisitional Court and condemned to torture, imprisonment, exile and death. (Bragg, 2006)” Clearly, this major of an event would have made some impact on the culture of the Middle Ages. Thousands of people’s lives were taken from this memorable event, mainly influencing the society of the Middle Ages. The population rate most likely would have decreased with so many accused of heresy, and then having them endure the consequences for the beliefs they did not follow. Many of others who were not considered heretics were also affected, such as the countless families who had to cope with the death of a loved one. The Spanish Inquisition truly affected the society of the Middle Ages, which is one of the main reasons why it so crucial to understand the Spanish Inquisition first before looking further into the Middle Ages’ culture.

Bibliography

Bragg, M. (2006, June 22). The Spanish Inquisition. Retrieved 2 2011, May , from BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p003c1bw

April 28, 2011

How do Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express different understandings about religious theology?

Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals played a big role in the different European civilizations, especially in the theology of religion. So because of this, the archaeologists tried to express their religious views through the structure of Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals. Through the architecture of Romanesque Cathedrals, fortitude and sanctuary were clearly displayed in the case of an invasion occurring. In the Gothic Cathedrals, it was all about the light being shown throughout the stain glass windows that aligned the cathedral’s walls. This light represented all the glory of God that could not be described in nearly enough words, which was also a sufficient way of spreading the faith they believed in. These cathedrals stood for more than just a building of holiness; they also expressed a deeper meaning in religious theology of that time.

Throughout the years, the construction of Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals were very different in comparison. But not only did just the structure of these magnificent buildings change, the purposes of each of them were also very distinct. The interior of both the two different cathedrals contrasts with each other (Figure 3 & Figure 6). In a Romanesque Cathedral, its columns were massive in comparison to Gothic Cathedrals’ (Figure 3 & Figure 6). For Romanesque columns were made from a thicker material (Figure 3). Therefore, making them wider in base, and even more so larger in general (Figure 3). By making Romanesque columns a greater size, the appearance of them is much more powerful (Figure 3). For this look was very essential because Romanesque Cathedrals were supposed to represent a guard for the soul. In regard to Gothic Cathedrals, they instead contained more elegant columns with a much more extensive designing and skinner widths (Figure 6). This was because Gothic Cathedrals were in more of favor for appearance than safety. With further notice to the interiors, it would seem that the same theology would present itself throughout the rest of each of the cathedrals.

The amount of light that entered a Romanesque Cathedral greatly differed in relation to the extent of light that shown through a Gothic Cathedral (Figure 5). Since large windows only proposed a threat to their sanctuary if the need of that shelter may be, windows were not an option in the structure of Romanesque Cathedrals. Instead, they constructed soaring towers that rose above the base of the cathedral (Figure 2). This also provided them with protection, giving them the ability to launch arrows or spears throw the narrow tower windows. The variety in form and quantity of towers depended on the region in which the cathedral was built. However, Gothic Cathedrals were the reverse, for invasions were no longer a prospect. So the archaeologists were given the option to increase the amount of windows used in a cathedral (Figure 5). Because of this, light was one of the main focuses in Gothic Cathedrals. Also in the religious aspect, the light shining through into the cathedral represented God’s first creation. Towers and windows are simple things to comprehend; although, even simple things can contain a deeper meaning.

Just by the simple appearance of the exterior of the cathedrals, many contrasts can be made (Figure 1 & Figure 4). The Romanesque Cathedral looks more of like a fortress instead of a place for prayer (Figure 1). The reason behind this was because of the possibility of invasions that could take place. The sturdy, strong look of the Romanesque cathedrals was supposed to intimate the enemy (Figure 1). But protecting their lives was not the only challenge the people were faced with; they were also in preparation of Judgment Day. As for Gothic Cathedrals, many contained pointed arches to emphasis the great height of the building, and clerestory windows for the ability to brighten the central area of the cathedral (Figure 4). It is said to not judge people by their first impression, but instead take the time to determine what each person’s true self really is. This could also be said about Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals, for their deeper meaning lies within the structure of them.

Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals contained a much greater meaning than looks may perceive them as. For these cathedrals, express the theology of religion that was believed at the time. From the exterior to the interior, remarkable beliefs are within the structures. Towers, windows, and columns, of both cathedrals are just some of the evidence of the faith in which each cathedral holds within. These glorious cathedrals that plummet into the sky can represent many other different aspects in the society of the people living in that era, but most importantly religious theology.

Appendix

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Bibliography

Figure 1 - San Vittore alle Chiuse, exterior, 11^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abaziasanvittorefrasassi.jpg, photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 2 - Cluny Abbey, tower, 10^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abbaye_de_Cluny,_2010_crop.jpg, photograph taken in 2010.

Figure 3 - Basílica di San Giovanni e Paolo, interior, 13th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Santi_Giovanni_e_Paolo_Venice_interior_01_crop.jpg, photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 4 - Notre-Dame de Reims, facade, 12^th century, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cathedral_Notre-Dame_de_Reims,_France.jpg, photograph taken in 2004.

Figure 5 - Saint Chapelle, choir, 13^th century, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paris-SainteChapelle-Interieur.jpg, photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 6 - Basilica of Saint Denis, interior, 7^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StDenis_Chorumgang.JPG, photograph taken in 2005.

April 27, 2011

Rough Draft. How do Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express different understandings about religious theology?

Throughout the years, the construction of Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals were very different in comparison. But not only did just the structure of these magnificent buildings change, the purposes of each of them were also very distinct. The interior of both the two different cathedrals contrasts with each other (Figure 3 & Figure 6). In a Romanesque Cathedral, its columns were massive in comparison to Gothic Cathedrals’ (Figure 3 & Figure 6). For Romanesque columns were made from a thicker material (Figure 3). Therefore, making them wider in base, and even more so larger in general (Figure 3). By making Romanesque columns a greater size, the appearance of them is much more powerful (Figure 3). In regard to Gothic Cathedrals, they instead contained more elegant columns with a much more extensive designing and skinner widths (Figure 6). This was because Gothic Cathedrals were in more of favor for appearance than safety. With further notice to the interiors, it would seem that the same theology would present itself throughout the rest of each of the cathedrals.

The amount of light that entered a Romanesque Cathedral greatly differed in relation to the extent of light that shown through a Gothic Cathedral (Figure 5). Since large windows only proposed a threat to their sanctuary if the need of that shelter may be, windows were not an option in the structure of Romanesque Cathedrals. Instead, they constructed soaring towers that rose above the base of the cathedral (Figure 2). The variety in form and quantity of towers depended on the region in which the cathedral was built. However, Gothic Cathedrals were the reverse, for invasions were no longer a prospect. So the archaeologists were given the option to increase the amount of windows used in a cathedral (Figure 5). Because of this, light was one of the main focuses in Gothic Cathedrals. Towers and windows are simple things to comprehend; although, even simple things can contain a deeper meaning.

Just by the simple appearance of the exterior of the cathedrals, many contrasts can be made (Figure 1 & Figure 4). The Romanesque Cathedral looks more of like a fortress instead of a place for prayer (Figure 1). The reason behind this was because of the possibility of invasions that could take place. The sturdy, strong look of the Romanesque cathedrals was supposed to intimate the enemy (Figure 1). As for Gothic Cathedrals, many contained pointed arches to emphasis the great height of the building, and clerestory windows for the ability to brighten the central area of the cathedral for the light represented God’s first creation (Figure 4). It is said to not judge people by their first impression, but instead take the time to determine what each person’s true self really is. This could also be said about Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals, for their deeper meaning lies within the structure of them.

Appendix

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Bibliography

Figure 1 - San Vittore alle Chiuse, exterior, 11^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abaziasanvittorefrasassi.jpg, photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 2 - Cluny Abbey, tower, 10^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abbaye_de_Cluny,_2010_crop.jpg, photograph taken in 2010.

Figure 3 - Basílica di San Giovanni e Paolo, interior, 13th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Santi_Giovanni_e_Paolo_Venice_interior_01_crop.jpg, photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 4 - Notre-Dame de Reims, facade, 12^th century, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cathedral_Notre-Dame_de_Reims,_France.jpg, photograph taken in 2004.

Figure 5 - Saint Chapelle, choir, 13^th century, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paris-SainteChapelle-Interieur.jpg, photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 6 - Basilica of Saint Denis, interior, 7^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StDenis_Chorumgang.JPG, photograph taken in 2005.

April 15, 2011

Did the Roman Empire 'decline and fall' or did it evolve into something new?

During the evolution of the Roman Empire there were many sacrifices that were made. A great amount of art was lost, cities and roads were destroyed, and trade routes became extinct (Shenkman, 1993). But most importantly, all of Europe’s peace was demolished by the invasions from the Germanic tribes (Shenkman, 1993). However, there was also one major favorable event that also took place during this time, which was the abolition of slavery (Shenkman, 1993). Many historians mistake this progression as the Roman Empire completely falling because of all the losses it had to endure. Rather than simply declining and falling, the Roman Empire evolved into a new kind of civilization over a great length of time.

One historian, Lucien Musset, who studies the barbarian invasions says, “The Roman Empire did not fall, did not decline, it just transformed but so did the Germanic populations which invaded it. (Decline of the Roman Empire, 2011)” Clearly, Musset also agrees that the Roman Empire was not lost. Instead, stating that it transformed. However, he adds to this belief by saying that the other barbarian tribes that did invade the Roman Empire were also influenced somehow. Therefore, this caused not only the Roman Empire to transform but the Germanic tribes too. Also, meaning that the Roman Empire was influential to the barbarian tribes just as much as the tribes were to the empire. This assumption is very logical, and probably did happen over the time of this evolution. Throughout history, more evidence in this influence of the Roman Empire and Germanic tribes is present. Therefore, this could not have happened if the Roman Empire “fell”.

Henri Pirenne, the author of Pirenne Thesis published in the 1920s, states, “It holds that even after the barbarian invasions, the Roman way of doing things did not immediately change; barbarians came to Rome not to destroy it, but to take part in its benefits, and thus they tried to preserve the Roman way of life. (Decline of the Roman Empire, 2011)” By this statement, Pirenne also adds that the evolution of the Roman Empire did not happen right after the barbarians invaded. Instead, he suggests that this progression took time to finally grow and prosper into a new civilization. Another comment is that the barbicans purpose for the Roman Empire was not to demolish the civilization, but instead retain the Roman Empire’s culture. This suggests that the Roman Empire really did not fall at all, but was really an evolution in history. However, if the Roman Empire did become extinct, then how could the Germanic tribes even want to maintain Roman traditions in there new civilization?

“The decay of Rome has been frequently ascribed to the translation of the seat of empire; but this history has already shewn that the powers of government were divided rather than removed. (Gibbon, 1996)” Meaning that even though it may seem like the Roman Empire’s main emperors were permanently being removed, they weren’t. Instead, they were just divided into other provinces in Europe. The Roman Empire could therefore be easily confused by the head of power being removed, which is actually an untrue statement. They still claimed an equal amount inheritance of legions and provinces (Gibbon, 1996). But more importantly, they also possessed an equal amount of power as they did before (Gibbon, 1996). And because of this, the barbarian leaders did not have complete control over the new civilization. In reality, they were just as equal to the emperors who came before from the Roman Empire. Since there were still Roman emperors, an assumption can be made that the Roman Empire still did exist even if changes were made by the invasions.

Many historians who study the “fall” of the Roman Empire, most likely think it is just that a fall, but really it was a progression. This means that the Roman Empire never really did become extinct. Instead, it evolved into one civilization with the Germanic tribes that invaded. Many reasons support this thesis such as that the barbarians’ main purpose for the invasion was not actually to destroy the empire but to preserve its culture. Another being that after the invasion there were still Roman emperors which actually did possess power over certain provinces just as before. History itself can be interpreted wrongly very easily. Because of this, many historians still believe that the Roman Empire actually did “fall”.

Bibliography

Decline of the Roman Empire. (2011, April 9). Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_the_Roman_Empire#Theories_of_a_fall.2C_decline.2C_transition_and_continuity

Gibbon, E. (1996). General Observations on the Fall of the Roman Empire in the West. Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Internet Medieval Sourcebook: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html

Shenkman, R. (1993). The Fall of Rome. Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Legends, Lies, & Cherished Myths of World History: http://www.tamos.net/~rhay/romefall.html

April 13, 2011

Rough Draft. Did the Roman Empire 'decline and fall' or did it evolve into something new?

During the evolution of the Roman Empire there were many sacrifices that were made. A great amount of art was lost, cities and roads were destroyed, and trade routes became extinct (Shenkman, 1993). But most importantly, all of Europe’s peace was demolished by the invasions from the Germanic tribes (Shenkman, 1993). However, there was also one major favorable event that also took place during this time, which was the abolition of slavery (Shenkman, 1993). Many historians mistake this progression as the Roman Empire completely falling. Ultimately, the Roman Empire evolved into another civilization over a great length in time. Ultimately, the Roman Empire was drastically destroyed.

One historian, Lucien Musset, who is studies the barbarian invasions says, “The Roman Empire did not fall, did not decline, it just transformed but so did the Germanic populations which invaded it. (Decline of the Roman Empire, 2011)” Clearly, Musset also agrees that the Roman Empire was not lost. Instead, stating that it transformed. However, he adds to this belief by saying that the other barbarian tribes that did invade the Roman Empire were also influenced somehow. Therefore, this caused not only the Roman Empire to transform but also the Germanic tribes to meaning that the Roman Empire was influential to the barbarian tribes just as much as the tribes were to the empire. This assumption is very logical, and probably did happen over the time of this evolution. Throughout history more evidence in this influence of the Roman Empire and Germanic tribes is present. Therefore, this could not have happened if the Roman Empire “fell”.

Henri Pirenne, the author of Pirenne Thesis published in the 1920s, states, “It holds that even after the barbarian invasions, the Roman way of doing things did not immediately change; barbarians came to Rome not to destroy it, but to take part in its benefits, and thus they tried to preserve the Roman way of life. (Decline of the Roman Empire, 2011)” By this statement, Pirenne also adds that the evolution of the Roman Empire did not happen right after the barbarians invaded. Instead, he suggests that this progression took time to finally grow and prosper into a new civilization. Another comment is that the barbicans purpose for the Roman Empire was not to demolish the civilization, but instead retain the Roman Empire’s culture. This suggests that the Roman Empire really did not fall at all, but was really an evolution in history. However, if the Roman Empire did was extinct, then how could the Germanic tribes even want to maintain Roman traditions in there new civilization?

“The decay of Rome has been frequently ascribed to the translation of the seat of empire; but this history has already shewn that the powers of government were divided rather than removed. (Gibbon, 1996)” Meaning that even though it may seem like the Roman Empire’s main emperors were permanently being removed, they weren’t. Instead, they were just divided into other provinces in Europe. The Roman Empire could therefore be easily be confused by the head of power being removed, which is actually an untrue statement. They still claimed an equal amount inheritance of legions and provinces (Gibbon, 1996). But more importantly, they also possessed an equal amount of power as they did before (Gibbon, 1996). And because (Shenkman, 1993)of this, the barbarian leaders did not have complete control over the new civilization. In reality, they were just as equal to the emperors who came before from the Roman Empire. Since there were still Roman emperors, an assumption can be made that the Roman Empire still did exist even if changes were made by the invasions.

Many historians who study the “fall” of the Roman Empire, most likely think it is just that a fall. But really, it was instead a progression. Meaning that the Roman Empire never really did become extinct, but it evolved into one civilization with the Germanic tribes that invaded. Many reasons support this thesis such as that the barbarians’ main purpose for the invasion was not actually to destroy the empire but to preserve its culture. Another being that after the invasion there were still Roman emperors which actually did possess power over certain provinces just as before. History itself can be interpreted wrongly very easily. Because of this, many historians still believe that the Roman Empire actually did “fall”.

Bibliography

Shenkman, R. (1993). The Fall of Rome. Retrieved April 12, 2011, from Legends, Lies, & Cherished Myths of World History: http://www.tamos.net/~rhay/romefall.html