0 Comments
Social
Political
Religious
Intellectual
Technology
Economic
AP Euro. 2nd PD. 12/ 16/ 2018 Scientific Revolution [Prompt]: Write about how the Scientific Revolution impacts the future from multiple aspects. [Introduction]: The Scientific Revolution took place in the 17th Century and was also named the “intellectual revolution” because of the establishment of new scientific ideas, research, and discoveries. It’s important to note that science was a well known concept prior to the 17th Century. Aristotle for example, discovered the geocentric theory (earth is the center of the universe) in the 4th Century B.C.E. His findings would later be challenged by Nicolaus Copernicus. He founded the heliocentric theory, which suggested that the earth actually rotates around the sun. This provided a basis for multiple questions and discoveries to be made. [Religious]: Science and the church experienced conflict due to the difference between scientific discovery and church teachings. Galileo Galilei, a catholic himself, confirmed Copernicus’ heliocentric theory through experimentation and his refracting telescope. Upon the church’s discovery they asked Galileo to recant, as he was put on trial for his discoveries. The main reason the church was in opposition was because these new scientific discoveries were contrary to their literal interpretation of the Bible. They concluded that earth was at the center of the universe because humans were on earth and man was the pinnacle of all creation. The indirect challenge to authority eventually leads to enlightenment thinkers purposefully challenging authorities. Their ideals leads to freedom of press and speech, in the United States Constitution. [Technology]: Technologically, there were advances that solidified scientific discoveries. Galileo’s innovated refracting telescope, allowed him to see things in space that no one else has seen previously. He discovered the 4 Galilean moons orbiting around Jupiter, and mountains and craters in the moon, which disregarded the belief that the moon had a smooth surface. The innovated movable type printing press allowed Galileo’s book; “Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems” to be published and spread quickly. Isaac Newton, founder of three laws of motion, also innovated the telescope by using reflecting mirrors instead of refracting lenses. His method produced a clearer image. Ultimately, technological advancements during this time allowed new discoveries to happen. The idea of improving a product by innovation is a concept that has lasted years and will continue in the future beyond my generation. [Intellectual]: The Scientific Revolution was also named the “Intellectual Revolution” because of the new ideas that emerged during the time. Important Scientists at the time came up with new concepts of scientific and social concepts. Johannes Kepler, a German mathematician and astronomer, discovered the laws of planetary motion, which described motions of planets in the solar system. Isaac Newton depended on Kepler's discoveries during his own experimentation. He discovered the three laws of motion, which incorporated the basic principles of modern physics, and ultimately results in the laws of universal gravitation. This era also endured new social concepts like inductive (conclusions are made through observation and deductive (starts with a premise, leads to a certain conclusion) reasoning. The difference between these two is that deductive reasoning searched for certainty and inductive reasoning searched for probability. The emergence of inductive reasoning through research of new scientific concepts, is a solid example of empiricism. Empiricism being the concept that knowledge is derived from sense experience. A large aspect of the Scientific Revolution was the intellectual ideas that emerged from it. The published work of new intellectual scientists leads to inspiration of new works that incorporate the basis of scientific and philosophical ideas. [Conclusion]: I have a confident belief that without the Scientific Revolution, the Enlightenment may have not been as successful when it came to standing up against the church, and spreading new governmental ideas. Overall the Scientific Revolution has a major impact on future events as it influenced majority of Enlightenment ideals, and because we still see scientific attributes in modern society.
0 Comments
Vincent Fiery- In Defense of Columbus
Christopher Columbus is a person who has come under a large amount of scrutiny over the years, especially recently with the Columbus day debacle. I stand by a firm belief that Christopher Columbus is not strong enough or evil enough in his intentions to be considered a villain and although he does have many positive effects on the world he most certainly can not be considered a hero. Columbus helped to connect two worlds and usher in a new age of trade, connectivity, disease, war, death, and prosperity of differing levels. Overall Columbus is just a bad guy that did some good things but in the end is really neither a hero or villain. To start of it is best to observe why Columbus may be considered a villain. Columbus killed a large amount of natives through the forcible oppression and domination of the local American peoples. Columbus would also help start a precedent that would be the first encomienda system resulting in Native American slavery and death for years to come. His expeditions would spread syphilis to the Old World and allow for the start of the Atlantic Slave Trade to America resulting in massive implications around the world. Supervising the situation over America it is made clear that Columbus expressed opinions of cultural superiority over the natives and desired for their oppression from his very first meeting between him and the natives. The Columbian Exchange started by Columbus would lead to massive levels of animal extinction and a decrease in diversities of food and life. His discoveries would also lead to many wars and more forms of cultural and economic oppression. This explanation on Christopher Columbus outlines him clearly as a villain but other views could help him to plead his case against the accusations. While Columbus did do some bads things it should be made clear that many good things came from his voyages. Columbus helped move the world forward towards a new age with many of his actions. Columbus's voyage would allow for massive population increases due to the spread of new foods and massive amounts of trade and wealth that would help nations consolidate power and become more cohesive units which would usher in many new advancements. His actions would also eventually positively affect the Americas with the transfer of Old World animals that would shape the life of many native tribes and peoples of the Americas. Columbus also facilitated the introduction of quinine to Europe which would help cure malaria. Columbus would help increase the ability of a global economy to thrive and help start the commercial revolution which saw many new forms of wealth that were not as strictly based in the old aristocracy. The discovery of the new lands would also provide hope to settlers that wanted a new life free of governmental burden. All these things could make Columbus sound like a good man but coupled with his bad deeds it shows that he is neutrally moral at best. The last most important piece of the Columbus story is the influence he had over the many things that occurred under him. It should be noted that many of the things occurring under Columbus and his voyages are not really heavily controlled by Columbus. Columbus may have wanted to spread god's word, gain glory, and acquire wealth but overall his goal was not to perpetuate mass genocide or mass amounts of slavery. Many ideas adopted by Columbus were reused and many things that happened were out of his control. Many of Columbus actions were motivated by fear and a need to sate the lust of the Spanish empire. The reason why it is easy to argue that Columbus simply isn't a villian is that he did not have bad enough intentions to be considered evil. Columbus acted out of fear, self-preservation, and basic desires. The actions taken by Columbus cannot be equated to say Hitler's actions because he simply did not have a high enough level of power or influence and did not have the strength of intention a man like Hitler had. Columbus did very little that one would say was evil when one looks at basic conquering rules and recycled ideas. Columbus is not mean spirited enough to anyone's knowledge to know if he truly wished to exterminate a population out of pure hatred or did anything past the normal standards he might have sought. God might judge him poorly but still then he did bring many natives into the lords fold and did not commit many actions himself that would be considered truly evil. Patience Moses The Age of Exploration occurred from the early fifteenth century and lasted till the early 17th century. The Muslims had monopolized trade between Europe and Asia after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, and had also increased the prices for goods. This, and the inventions of cutting-edge maritime technologies prompted Europeans to search for new trading routes to Asia. Christopher Columbus developed the idea of sailing west to get to the East, and with money from Ferdinand and Isabella, he travelled with his crew, and arrived in the Carribeans in 1492. Centuries later, between fifty and ninety percent of Native American populations had been killed, and some tribes became extinct. To replace the depopulating labor force, Europeans imported about 10 million slaves from Africa, killing many other millions on route to the Americas, and forced them to work on plantations and mines. The Age of Exploration lead to the exploitation and deaths of Africans and Native Americans, but its impacts on Europe was quite different. Europe enjoyed population growth from New World plants, and a boost to its economy through the influx of gold and raw materials, but it also suffered from New World diseases and from a later inflation. The Columbian Exchange, a consequence of the Age of Exploration, saw the transfer of New World plants to the Old World. Europe, and even the rest of the world, enjoyed crops like potatoes, maize, cassava, tomatoes, cocoa, chili peppers, avocados and blueberries. Of all these crops, potatoes had the biggest impact in Europe, especially in Ireland. Potatoes could be grown with minimum labor in cold, damp climates unsuitable for Old World staples. They provided caloric and nutritional improvements that led to a massive population increase. In the 16th century, the population increased by about 20 million. Potatoes became such an important staple food in Ireland that an average Irish worker often ate ten pounds of potatoes everyday. This crop was able to feed thousands of workers during the Industrial Revolution until the Great Famine in 1845. Tomatoes, cocoa, and chili peppers also increased vitamin intake and improved taste. One negative impact of this exchange was that the population growth led to the increase in the demand for food, which further led to the rise in prices, and contributed to the inflation. There are few examples of diseases being spread from the New World to the Old World, but the most notable exception is the venereal syphilis. Although it appeared in Europe around 1493, the first well-recorded outbreak occurred in 1495 among French troops besieging Naples, Italy. It was brought to Europe sailors who had acquired it from the natives through sexual contact, and then upon their return to Europe, worked as mercenaries for royal families. Europeans were fond of ascribing the disease to each other. The Italians called it the “French disease” and vice versa, the Russians called it the “Polish disease”, and the Turks called it the “Christian disease.” The name-calling was often used as a form of propaganda. Syphilis affected many notable individuals, including numerous family members of the Tudor and Valois families. Even though the disease was less deadly than the Old World diseases brought to the New World, it was known to have caused a lot of social disruption throughout Europe. The Age of Exploration had, arguably, the greatest impact on the economy of Europe. This is because the major motive of European countries financing expeditions around the globe was “Gold”. Europeans were looking for a new route to Asia to replace the land routes that Muslims had taken over. But they were also hoping that there were new lands that would provide gold, and other treasures. When gold was discovered on the Americas, everything changed. Spanish settlements established in the New World grew into colonies whose sole purpose was to provide gold and other raw materials, and bolster the Spanish economy. Spain, perhaps more than any other country, benefited the most from the exchange of goods and the influx of precious metals from the Americas. Unfortunately, this massive flow of gold and silver, as many historians believe, led to the inflation that caused the fall of Spain. There was an increase in the supply of money compared to goods, and this led to higher prices. Regardless, they were able to enjoy a golden age, and with the wealth, were able to build the world’s largest and most powerful fleet. Exploration and trade also led to the growth of capitalism, or investing money for profit, especially in the Netherlands and England. Merchants gained great wealth, and used their profits to fund other voyages and to start trading companies, like the British East India Company and the Dutch East India Company. People invested in these joint-stock companies and shared in their profits as well. The Age of Exploration had negative and positive impacts, not only in Europe, but in Africa and in the Americas. But overall, Europe stood to benefit from the latter, as they enjoyed greater economic benefits, at the cost of millions of native American deaths, and Africa’s future dependence on Europe. Patience Moses
On October 31st, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses Against the Sale of Indulgences. Although the Protestant Reformation did not begin with Luther, it climaxed with him. Other reformers like John Wycliffe and Jan Hus had challenged the Catholic Church before him, but has been burned at the stake. Luther never intended to break away from the Church and create a new religion, but his ideas ended up being the foundation for Lutheranism. From there, other sects of Christianity developed. There were Calvinists, Anglicans, Anabaptists and many others. But the road to the growth and acceptance of these religions saw many conflicts, ranging from revolts to wars. While most of the actions of rulers and nation-states to resolve the conflicts between Protestants and Catholics were peaceful, some were intense and violent. But they almost always involved a compromise. To resolve the conflict between Protestants and Catholics, some rulers took a more peaceful approach, using treaties and edicts. The Peace of Augsburg, created in 1555, declared that “Whoever reigns, his religion.” This meant that each German prince had the freedom to declare whether his principality would be Lutheran or Catholic, and people were allowed safe passages to other cities of their religion. Although the Peace of Augsburg met some resistance and eventually fell apart, it was still a relatively peaceful effort. The Peace of Westphalia (1648) reinstated the Peace of Augsburg at the end of the Thirty Years War, and added Calvinism to the list of legally accepted religions. Unfortunately, some actions taken to resolve the religious conflicts were violent, and only resulted in bloodshed. The German Peasants Revolt (1524-1525) was an uprising based on misinterpreted ideas of Luther about equality in the eyes of God. Luther clarified that he spoke of a spiritual and heavenly equality, and not an earthly one. He then urged the German princes to put down the revolt and restore order and stability in Europe. Over 100,000 or more peasants were dead by the time the nobility had restored order. Another example is Queen Mary I of England, who declared all the Protestant reforms established by her predecessor null and void in an effort to restore Catholicism in England. Under her regime, Protestants were persecuted mercilessly, and about 300 of them were martyred. All these actions to resolve religious conflicts involved a compromise. They never allowed complete toleration of other religions. The Elizabethan Religious Settlement, created by Queen Elizabeth I of England, is a good example of compromise. The settlement undid the Catholicism of Queen Mary and restored the Anglican Church as the official church in England. Rather than being aggressive with her policies, she allowed the Catholics to keep on practicing their faith as long as they remained unobtrusive. This was a compromise that resolved the conflict in England without much resistance. To prevent the conflict in France, a country with a Catholic majority, King Henry IV of Navarre converted from Calvinism to Catholicism. Then he established the Edict of Nantes which declared Catholicism the official religion, but gave Protestants the freedom to worship in certain cities. It also reinstated the civil rights of Protestants and ended the religious conflicts in France. Even though some of the actions taken by rulers and nation-states were more peaceful than others, most of them did not have long-lasting effects. The most effective was the Peace of Westphalia. It ended the Thirty Years War, which ended up being the last major religious war in Europe. Sydney Shumaker Protestants and Catholics have been at odds from the very beginning, starting with Luther’s nailing of the ninety-five theses on the church doors in Germany. Throughout history this has meant conflict after conflict, and battle after battle. Many different rulers chose to find several different solutions to the growing problems around these two groups, between creating edicts and peace agreement to even going as far as exiling certain religions from the country, rulers were trying to do just about anything to solve the conflicts around them. Many ruler attempted to solve the problems in a more peaceful route, with the use of peace agreements and edicts. One key example of this is the Edict of Nantes, which was signed by King Henry IV, which allowed Protestants to exist in certain areas of the country. This edict helped put a pause to the religious battles by allowing the Protestants to have a place where they were not only allowed but also could practice their religion. The Edict of Nantes was not the only example of this, the Peace of Augsburg, signed by Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, is also a good example of this. The Peace of Augsburg allows for whoever is reigning to pick the religion, this helped the religious arguments die down as generally the ruler would go by the code of Politique, putting politics over religion, and do what was best for the majority of the nation-state. However, creating an edict or peace agreement is not the only attempt rulers would make in order to get rid of religious tension. Many rulers decided to go a slightly more intense route with the exiling or attempting to get rid of different religious groups which were causing problems. One ruler who chose to use this method was Mary I. Mary I, also known as Bloody Mary, attempted to reconvert England to Catholicism through the murder of around three hundred Protestants. Mary attempted to have Protestants convert through fear, even going as far as attempting to have Thomas Cranmer, an important Protestant, renounce Protestantism right before being burned on the stake for being a Protestant. Many were outraged by this and refused to convert. Others, such as John Knox, even went as far as writing his distrust and dislike of Queen Mary I. Queen Mary wasn’t the only ruler who attempted to get rid of a religious group, Queen Elizabeth I also attempted to get rid of religious groups. Instead of the mass murder, however, Elizabeth exiled the Jesuits after be told by the Pope she was an unfit ruler. The Jesuits, she believed, were very close to Spain during a time where the King of Spain was attempting to overthrow Elizabeth. While at first this doesn’t seem very religious the fact that King Philip II, king of Spain, was very Catholic while Elizabeth chose to be more religiously tolerant. While the more aggressive attempts seem to be much different from that of the peace agreements and the Edicts, both types have several similarities. Both of the solution types did have several things in common, one of those being the fact that they all eventually failed, or didn’t work out the way they were hoped to. More often than not, a new ruler would take over and completely change how things were run. This would change whether or not that method would still be effective, but also if the method alone would be left to stand. While one could argue that after Elizabeth I died, England stayed rather religiously tolerant, that resulted more from the simple fact that she ruled for so long, rather than the fact that any of her methods were very effective. These solutions also gave certain religions more power than others. While one might say that the peace treaties and Edicts were fair and equal, that is not exactly true. In both scenarios, while in place, different religions would have more power over others. For the Peace of Augsburg, whichever religion the ruler was to pick would then have superiority and be able to be worshiped. For the Edict of Nantes, it wasnt full scale acceptance, and also wasn’t for everywhere. No matter what solutions the ruler would try and place, more often than not it would end in a similar way as the others. Considering the large time frame of the religious issues, many different solutions were thought of and eventually created as a hopes to stop what was going on around them. Sadly, however, many of these solutions ended up not being as different as they seemed leading to several of the same outcomes over and over again. Emily Alexander
The Renaissance, a time period defined by its rebirth of European culture, occurred from 1300 to 1600 A.D. It was a time that placed a greater emphasis on classical Greek and Roman literature, which in turn influenced the creation of new forms of art and philosophies. Artists such as Leonardo Da Vinci and Michelangelo gained popularity from the Renaissance through their paintings and sculptures that incorporated new artistic techniques including their use of perspective, vivid colors, and more realistic figures. Writers, such as Erasmus and Thomas More, were also able to become popular through their writings, In Praise of Folly and Utopia, which expressed new philosophies of humanism and secularism. Overall, historians claim that the Renaissance was a defining time in European history, but did the Renaissance actually happen? The Renaissance is said to have begun in Florence, Italy in the 14th century when families and individuals in Florence became wealthy as a result of trade that occurred with other empires. This wealth was a key role in funding the arts of the Renaissance. However, this increase in wealth that spawned the Renaissance was only able to affect the wealthy and the painters themselves. The wealthy primarily funded painters to create works of art for themselves, not for the rest of society, and the writings of philosophers did not reach most lower classes who were commonly illiterate. In other words, the rest of society was not impacted by the new arts and ideas of the Renaissance. Around 95% of Europeans probably did not experience the Renaissance in any way where the vast majority of Europeans still lived as peasants or tenants. This means that the new philosophies and arts of the Renaissance did not filter down to the lower classes like new technology does today. As a result, most people were unaffected by the Renaissance. Most of the population was also unaware of the Renaissance occurring. The Renaissance was not an occurrence that had a specific time frame. It did not have a precise start date or end date, and it occurred over about 300 years. It was not a specific event that took place that people knew was going to make history one day. For example, John Green argues that the Revolutionary War or the tearing down of the Berlin Wall were specific occurrences where people became aware they were living amid history. Since the Renaissance occurred over 300 years and did not reach the majority of the population, people were unaware they were living amid history. Today, we acknowledge the Renaissance because it makes sense to us and matters to us now. By giving the Renaissance specific dates, it becomes easier to analyze, study, and understand. Under the Renaissance, historians are able to categorize 300 years under one specific idea. In conclusion, although there was a change in artistic style, learning style, and the understanding of new ideas, the Renaissance was not a thing because it occurred over the course of hundreds of years and most people were unaware of its occurrence. DaShawn Duncan Owens- SPICE overview The SPICE effects of the Renaissance:
Patience Moses
The period between the fall of Rome in 476 C.E., and the 1400s, when the Renaissance began is called the Middle Ages. During the Low Middle Ages, Europe practiced a political, economic, and social system called feudalism. This system, a series of reciprocal relationships between weak kings, strong lords, and serfs, allowed for a lack of travel and trade, since there was no central government to build, repair or provide protection for roads, and the feudal manors were self-sufficient. Even with the presence of some stable governments, the High Middle Ages was still filled with political and religious chaos, diseases and war. From the unsuccessful Crusades, to the corruption and loss of prestige in the Catholic Church, to the Hundred Years’ War to the Black Death, which took one-third of the population, Europe experienced difficult times. The Catholic Church was the most dominant institution of medieval Europe. In fact, the ordained officers of the Church composed The First Estate, the highest social class during that time. The Church affected every aspect of life in Europe. It controlled the learning In Europe. It decided what was true and what was heresy. This philosophy was known as scholasticism. In fact, nearly everything in feudal Europe was under the influence of religion. The Church even claimed authority over the emperor and all other political figures. The people saw the Church as their link to God, as the Church held that doing good works and obeying the sacraments was the way to get to heaven. The Church also had power over the nobility through interdiction, which prohibited the performance of any of the sacraments in a district. The Church had great power and wealth, but began to lose their prestige and credibility because they could not provide answers or solutions to the disasters that struck Europe during the High Middle Ages. The people also began to question the influence of the Church and the authority of the Pope because of issues like the Babylonian Captivity and the Great Schism. The nobility, made up of feudal lords and knights, were another dominant institution in Medieval Europe. They leased property to a vassal, who then paid them with military service and was responsible to them. They were even richer and more powerful than the kings since they provided and paid for soldiers for the royal army. Serfs, which were like peasants, worked on the land owned by the lords. They received protection from the lords and kept part of the production from the land. Serfs suffered the most during the Low and High Middle Ages. They worked all the time with no hope for moving up the social ladder. Their villages and fields were the scenes of battles for the near-constant warfare, and therefore suffered the damages. The only thing that kept them going was the hope of their reward during the after-life. It was The Crusades, a series of religious wars fought by kings and nobles in response to a call from the Pope to reclaim the Holy Land of Jerusalem, that ended feudalism. Although the Crusades were unsuccessful, it re-established trade in Europe, and created the new middle class that consisted of merchants and craftsmen. These new traders and craftsmen replaced feudalism with the guild system. The system allowed members of the guild to control the quality and prices of goods and services, to monopolize trade, and to control the number of people in a business. The Crusades also strengthened the role of kings, who now had more money, and brought about stronger, more centralized governments. People began to look to kings, rather than lords who were mostly killed off during the Crusades. But this new change still had consequences. It was trade that brought the Bubonic Plague from China to Italy, and then to all of Europe, and then left an estimated 25 million to 33 million dead. And even though there were more stable governments now than before, there was still political chaos like the Hundred Years’ War (a series of big wars, raids, and guerilla attacks between England and France), and the peasants’ revolt in England and France. Overall it seems that Europe is not in a good place, compared to other regions of the world during this period. In China, gunpowder was already being used and printing was already invented. The Black Death also wiped out populations in China, but they were still better off than Europe. The Middle Ages was also a golden age for Chinese poetry. In the Muslim world, there were great advancements in learning and knowledge. Muslim scholars translated the works of Greek philosophers and scientists, and they preserved Buddhist and Hindu Manuscripts. But in Europe, there was no advancement in technology, science, and education. But some good things came out of the Middle Ages in europe, like the creation of modern nation-states, the beginning of nationalism, and the exploration of a parliamentary form of government. These things created a root for bigger revolutions that will come down the line. Also, the loss of credibility in the Church created a new sense of curiosity that allowed Europeans to explore and look elsewhere for answers. This allowed for the Renaissance to happen. The medieval European society appears to be a society that will still end up thriving, but not dominating the world. This is because Europe had opened themselves to trade and travel, and had begun to explore the products and lifestyle of the East. Of course, these discoveries are bound to bring a positive change to Europe. Inventions and discoveries would always spread, especially since Europe is geographically placed near the Middle East and East Asia. Ideas would spread and be exchanged and that’s why I say that Europe seems like a society that would thrive. But it does not seem like a society that would dominate the world because compared to other regions, it was still very behind. A lot of political improvements need to be made to get to that status. The national governments, that are already developing, would need to invest more in exploration, technological advancements, and education. Europe would need to open itself to the world and look beyond the Christian dogma. Today, many governments in Europe are parliamentary, where an executive branch is accountable to a legislative branch. After the Hundred Years’ War, England began to explore this form of government which the creation of a national assembly. There are still a number of monarchies in Europe, England being one of them. But today, a constitutional monarchy is practiced. This a type of government where the monarch is still subject to a written or unwritten constitution. Most European countries have a republic form of government. Vincent Fiery The state of Europe during the rule of the Roman Empire was the peak of unified Western Europe and that is the reason why many people tried to resurrect the greatness of the empire. Under Roman rule Western Europe experienced a period of vast wealth, unity, strength, and trade. The administrative ability of the Roman Empire was impressive for quite awhile with for a time a system of representative government. At a point the Roman Empire become too big to sustain itself as the empire lasted long enough to encounter many issues that accumulate overtime. Rome fell due to many reasons the main ones being the inability to properly administer such a vast area, military invasion, and not being able to create enough wealth. When in 476 A.D. the Roman Empire was considered to be officially conquered by the warring German tribes the Western European areas under Roman rule became much less prosperous and very divided. Although the Roman Empire did live on in the Eastern Europe and parts of the Mediterranean it was an essentially different empire with a different culture. Europe was very divided after the fall of Rome and the powerful centralized nations that would eventually dominate Europe had not yet been created. With the fall of Rome the prestige of Europe was lost and trade declined as the world lost reason to trade with most of Europe. The many tribes in Europe had little influence over Europe in the future except for three tribes that dominated parts of Western Europe, The Franks in Northern and Western Europe, The Angles in Great Britain, and the Vandals who did not strongly control any land area. The tribe that would eventually conquer most of Western Europe was the Franks who were ruled by Charlemagne from 768-814 A.D., when he led his people to conquer most of Western Europe. Charlemagne was eventually crowned the Holy Roman Emperor in 800 A.D. and around this time he also installed many good policies and instituted a strong government and led a small period of intellectual resurgence. After the death of Charlemagne the Holy Roman Empire remained but the entirety of Western Europe was led mainly by weak kings and non-centralized governments with the only real authority being the papal authority of the Roman Catholic Church which would come to have a major political and cultural influence on Western Europe. The system of feudalism is the dominant governmental system at the time. Feudalism is the system of a king granting land to other lower nobles in exchange for their support and help in administration of their land. This system keeps many nations from becoming strong mainly because the power is not as centralized as it could be. The system of feudalism is also what helps the Roman Catholic Church to take such great power because they can exert a greater influence due to their ability to have power over these weak nobles and kings. The system of feudalism was not efficient and it allowed for the breakdown of trade and neglect over proper infrastructure due to the self reliance of the system. Europe following the system of feudalism stays in a state of weakness categorized by a lack of learning, trade, and travel. The social structure of Western Europe is in a system where the church is on top and the the kings below them with the peasants and slaves at the bottom, which is characterized as the first, second, and third estates respectively. This system stays in place for a long time but is in the process of changing as the crusades allowed for a change in European culture and economic power. The crusades called by Pope Urban II allowed for a shift in Europe's backwards ways. The crusades allowed for the peasantry to go along with the nobles to the Middle Eastern lands and fight for a higher purpose and gain wealth that was unmatched in Europe as the Muslim Empire was still in its golden age. The crusades were a big deal mainly because they brought wealth and trade back to europe which allowed for certain craftsmen and traders to develop guilds which increased economic prosperity and power in Europe. The technologies gained from the Muslims also helped to lure Europe into a more modern way of life. The system of feudalism is on the brink of collapse also because of this new European wealth and the death of many nobles in the crusades. This led to the rise of the middle class along with the craftsmen as many peasants had wealth to be freed from their estates. Along with these changes the strong nationalized nation states are forming especially with the Holy Roman Empire, France, and Britain. The divide in Western Europe only increases with the hundreds years war as sides start to be chosen and alliances created to shape Western Europe for years to come. The Hundreds years war coupled with the plague essentially acted as another baptism of fire for Western Europe as the economic state and political state of Europe changed with due to the vast amounts of deaths and new governments becoming more and more centralized by the years. The church would undergo a few changes with Europe as the nature of governments and power balances shifted due to the many important events at the time. The state of Europe is currently in a state of weakness as it readies to branch forth into the renaissance. Feudalism and the guild system will still be part of Europe for a long time but these economic systems will be changed and lost gravity in time due to new renaissance ideas. The warlike nature of Europe will keep the many Western European nations in petty rivalries and conflicts for many years in many mainly pointless wars. As the church stays in power it will alter and shape the many kingdoms in many ways including forcing many nations to due its will as it did in the crusades. Europe is becoming more and more cultured as the spread of ideas increases as it did shortly after the crusades. Europe's social hierarchies will still dominate Europe for years to come as it prepares for the massive shift of the renaissance. |
AuthorSamples from Excellent blogs for study purposes! Archives
December 2018
Categories |