Discuss in a few paragraphs any aspect of the handout articles on the Middle Ages that you found interesting or surprising. Did these articles present a view of this period that might have challenged your preconceptions? If you need further prompts, consider the "Questions to Ponder"
Due Friday PM
45 comments:
sample
What I found interesting in the handout articles was the way one of the articles presented the issue of church and state. I never thought of viewing the participants of the conflict as two states, one being "an old clerical state" and the other being the "new secular state". I also thought it was interesting how the article described one of the causes of the dilemma. I like how it explained that when a society advances in technology, government, and so on, it becomes harder to keep the moral ideas of the less advanced society with the new politics of the advanced society. I also thought it was interesting how the author then tied that idea with the idea that some morals of the old society can sometimes outlive the advanced society. I like how it used the example of the fall of Rome and the survival of the church. I was surprised by how organized the Catholic church was during the feudal and medieval eras. I didn't know that it kept written records which probably lead to its success in being a unifying force. I wasn't surprised by how much the Popes and leaders of the Catholic church got involved in politics once they gained power. If the church had that much power over most of Europe, why didn't it conquer Europe to create a larger empire, especially after the Black Death? I understand that the rulers of the European countries were not going to just give up their land, but the church had a large majority of the people on their side. Why didn't they use the people of the countries to rebel against the rulers? After the Black Death there was an increase in the importance of the church in people's mind. They church could have channeled that into creating a larger empire.
I don't think any of the articles drastically changed my preconception of the period. For example, I knew that trade routes were important for introducing new products to both sides of the trade, but it showed me what an influence trade had on spreading ideas from the Middle East to western civilization. I knew that mathematics such as the concept of zero was first created in India, but I didn't know that the carvel ships that were used by the Europeans first appeared in the Middle East. I think that a lot of the articles were interesting but they did not overly surprise me.
Upon reading the first few pages of "World History: A New Perspective" by Clive Ponting, I felt that I woud be in for a very boring read. The early centuries have never interested me and I did not think anything could change that. However, some aspects very surprisingly caught my interest. My favorite part of Ponting's article was the segment about how "Islam was the main route for the diffusion of knowledge and technology to Christian Europe." I have always liked learning about derivatives, which this section covered, teaching me about words that I use today.
Besides words, I also enjoyed reading about technology making its way into the western world and how Europe was affected. I often forget how advanced our present society is, and reading about how mind-blowing something as simple as a compass or gunpowder was in those days still shocks me - it's difficult for someone typing at a computer while on the Internet to imagine life without digital watches or cars or even bicycles. For example, the use of the watermill (such a simple invention to me) was revolutionary as it slowly (9th - 12th century) became more and more productive and able to do more jobs. Even a clock was highly advanced in the time period, which is something that we Americans today take for granted.
Next, this article helped me understand how far behind Europe was than the eastern world. Before I read these articles, I knew how mathematically skilled the Middle East was, having learned previously that they came up with the concept of zero and Arabic numerals. But I had always assumed that Europe, though not necessarily at the same speed, was around as advanced as the rest of the globe at the time. Clive Ponting taught me that this was not the case. Europeans were years, decades, even centuries behind other societies and it took a long time before they even started catching up. But, as ideas transferred into this backwards area, those technologically challenged people not only used inventions such as watermills and horse collars and horseshoes - they bettered them. I realized that medieval Europe was not only a continent that hoped to get up to speed with the rest of the world - it wanted to pass it.
While reading the handout packet, I was surprised to see how dominant the Islamic world was in this era. In previous years learning about the medieval ages, we discussed Europe, but never the Islamic world. I found it very interesting to read about how powerful they were. For example, this region was largely responsible for politically and economically transforming Eurasia. They controlled most of the Mediterranean economic zone and remained economically stable by exporting more than they imported.
In addition, the Islamic world was also a leader in the science and technology world, something that surprised me. I would have never guessed that much of Europe's knowledge about our world was diffused from another region since in previous school years, Europe had been portrayed as a powerful region itself.
Another topic that interested me was Ponting's comparison of the development of the growth of Greek and Roman religions and Christianity. One idea that especially caught my attention was that many of the differences in the two religions have to do with how they grew with the state. For example, the Greek and Roman religions coordinated objectives with the state, while Christianity was created as a powerful separate entity, and therefore in the future ran into a lot of problems with the state. These conflicts ultimately helped shape the Church. Since separation of church and state is a huge concept in today's society, I would have never thought that a religion could be so heavily influenced by the government.
This article greatly influenced my perception of the Medieval Ages. I learned that contrary to popular belief, Europe actually wasn't that powerful at the time. They did not have a centralized government, their trade was poor, and their knowledge of the world around them was shadowed by regions such as the Islamic world.
I was particularly interested in the first section of the packet, in which is discussed the status of the medieval world outside of Europe. In my experience, most documentation of this time period focuses almost exclusively on Europe with only superficial touches on the rest of the world. I have known for a while that Islamic and Chinese culture and systems were superior to those of medieval Europe, but I did not know to the extent that they were superior. Also, I had heard nothing up until this point about the lands around the Indian Ocean (excluding the Islamic World) during this time period.
I was interested to learn from this assessment of the Indian Ocean countries that Europe seemed to be the farthest behind in development. Of all of the regions of the Old World, Europe was one of the most violent, unstable, and underdeveloped. I hypothesize that there were two factors leading to this state of affairs in Europe. One is the land itself. Compared to the parts of Asia and Africa that supported great empires during this time period, Europe had scarce resources. With a few exceptions such as wood and stone, most commodities were hard to come by and had to be imported from other regions. Also, as the least stable parts of Europe had a harsh, cold climate, growth of culture and political systems was likely stunted by the constant struggle to stay alive. Though the other extreme of climate could be found in most of the Islamic World, the cold was a much greater impediment to food growing and other tasks than the heat could be. The other major factor, I believe, was religion. In Asia, religion was fully integrated into society. Rulers in Islamic countries had to obey their religion or risk usurpation. In China, the ruler was considered a god in human form, and to disobey him was to bring the wrath of heaven down upon oneself. In Europe, though religion was extremely influential, it was not quite as integrated into society. By making a nation of itself, the Catholic Church was viewed as a rival by most rulers. Since it was seen as a controlling foreign force, people who did not follow the moral code put forth by the church could often take refuge with their sovereign. This tension between the church and the people it viewed as its subjects caused a great deal of unrest and chaos throughout the middle ages.
I was struck by the question of, if the other parts of the world were so advanced, what allowed Europe to surpass them in future centuries and in effect conquer the world. I think that the sheer greatness of these countries led to their downfall. These countries had built great empires and great societies and so grew comfortable with their place in the world. It came to a point where when progress offered itself to them, they dismissed it in favor of their once-great but now obsolete ways. Europe, however, was not a land of proud empires, but small nations ever-locked in a battle for survival. When they saw an opportunity to improve themselves they took it. This, combined with the cutthroat practices of most Europeans when it came to acquiring power, allowed for a dynamic expansion around the world while the old powers stagnated and rotted away from within.
One of the most interesting aspects of the middle Ages was the science and technology of European and Islamic countries. It was very surprising that Europe was so far behind the Islamic countries. Before reading this handout I just assumed that Europe would be the most technologically advanced because that is the most well known area during the middle Ages. In reality though, Europe was backwards during this time, well behind Islam’s technologies. Islam spread towards the West, eventually getting to Europe.
In the Islamic world, ships were ‘carvel’ built with a feature of a lateen sail. This new sail allowed ships to sail a lot closer to the wind, unlike European ships. These features were not adopted until later by the Europeans. All over the Islamic world, shipyards and ports were built. In the 10th century Tunis could hold over 200 ships.
The most interesting part of the reading was the part about how Islamic troops had special fireproof clothing. This was around the 7th century and the Islamic were advanced enough to have this, which was very surprising to me. Recently I saw on the news where there was a segment on how the U.S military was also fireproofing their clothing.
One of the most important changes in the Islamic world was the replacement of the wheeled vehicle by the camel. A camel was a lot cheaper to keep than an ox, it could travel further, it did not need roads to travel on, and one person could control six camels at a time. Since there were many pluses to the use of the camel, it spread throughout the Islamic world.
The Islamic world had many advantages, and its ideas and technologies began to spread to Europe. Europe also got many ideas from Greek science. This included Arabic numerals, the concept of zero, and mercantile credit. During this time Europe was backwards and far behind the Islam’s. Between 400 and 1000, Europe barely used any metal, and used a very heavy plow for farming. However, Europe began to slowly acquire new ideas and inventions from the East. At around the 15th century, Europe was starting to adopt the advances from the rest of Eurasia.
Throughout my reading of the Middle Ages there were two aspects that surprised me about the time period. First was the weakness of the government and the strength of the church. Before reading I knew how important religion was in the Middle Ages but I never realized how much power the church had. The fact that religion created the basis for the governments particularly surprised me since I have always thought of them as completely separate. Even when the governments were formed they were so unstable that nothing was ever organized. I have previously known that the Middle Ages didn’t have sophisticated governments like today but I don’t understand how they functioned without any structure. These aspects caused me to be surprised about the life style of the Middle Ages.
The second aspect of the Middle Ages that surprised me was how advanced the Middle East was compared to Europe. I have always thought of it as the opposite that I found it very interesting how Europe was so behind in technology, trade and more. The Middle East was so prosperous that I’m also interested to learn how, as time went on, they fell behind in intelligence. The handouts about the Middle Ages interested me because they challenged my preconceptions in many ways. In some ways I realized the people were more advanced than I had originally thought, while in other ways I was surprised how they functioned due to their lack of knowledge.
I have always admired how efficient and influential trade seemed to be in the Middle Ages, but I had never truly understood the inner workings of this system, nor was I quite aware of the profound effect it had during this time period. I feel that this handout shinned a great light and illuminated facts that had previously hidden in the shadows of ignorance that lurked in my mind. After reading I felt like a parched woman coming out of the Sahara desert and happening upon many bottles of ice cold Poland Spring water and a cleansing bath, both of which invigorated my spirit and gave me a new skin in which I wear to today to comprehend the meanings and facts of history.
Before reading this handout I had the impression that Europe was an almighty force throughout time, because in grammar school we learn how many European explorers and philosophers changed the course of history, such as Columbus and Magellan. What I guess I could not grasp was that not every powerful being, be it a person or a country, starts off that way. Take, for example, the number of people that lived in a typical English town during the Middle Ages, a mere 1,300 people. Another surprising aspect was how this reading was largely centered around the influence of Islam, as well as Asia, on trade. It described how the currency most trade was based off of was the dinar, a type of golden coin. Though I do not find it strange that Islamic individuals discovered the many positives of coined money, it amazed me that there was enough gold and technology in the Middles Eastern area to support the vast expanse of trade that occurred, ranging from far away China all the way to places like France. Ultimately, I was realized that this article not only wants to shed light on the possible stimuli to European dominance, but the fact that Europeans were willing to take the time and advance the advancements presented by Islam and Asia, so much so that it made Europe become the image that I had always envisioned since I first learned about it as a kid.
I must say that the most surprising part of the article was when the author stated, “The Europeans only became aware of Aristotle through the works of Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and the commentary of Ibn Rushd (Averröes). One would think that Aristotle would be a household name in Europe seeing that he was from Greece, yet the very fact that Europeans did not can prove how primitive and lacking in the fruits of knowledge this place, which I had once perceived as GREAT, was.
My favorite part of this article was the glorification of Muslim and Asia inventions and knowledge, also known as the sections titled Science and Technology: China and Science and Technology: Islam and Europe. These sections (though the first was cut short) introduced many of the concepts that are still applied today, such as the Arabic numerals 1-9. The most interesting was the concept of zero (an Indian concept) a number that is very unusual. Second was the Chinese “junk”, apparently some sort of vessel. At first I thought that the author was referring to the boats as very bad and useless, a thought that contradicts what is being presented in the section, but eventually I discovered that these ships were very advanced, surpassing those built by Europe AND Islam.
AnnMarie Augusto
AP European History
Mr. Kirby
2 September 2009
After reading “World History: A New Perspective,” by Clive Ponting, I was enlightened by the many struggles European countries experienced during the Middle Ages. The most fascinating account that Ponting contemplated on was the passionate exertion of power the papacy portrayed along with the constant competitiveness with the secular state. I was intrigued by the effort of the church to demand the cooperation of the state in sustaining the truth and in stifling error. I did assume that it would not take long for the political leaders to overpower the religious institutions. It was interesting to read about the Pope’s role in society and the obligations they had toward the church and their people.
I was not aware of the many advances that occurred during the Middle Ages, and was amazed at the technological knowledge that was shown through many influential people. For example, I was astonished at the weight-driven clock that surfaced as early as the eleventh century as the first significant development of time keeping. The ogive arch and the idea of gothic architecture and cathedrals also were interesting to me because of the stunning structural design and brilliant ideas behind them.
The complexity of the Islamic trade was also surprising to me. It was startling to me how vast of an economic zone Islam created to spread their European trade routes. But also astonishing how meager the trade actually ended up being in the Medieval Ages. Their ignorance toward the world around them most likely hurt them in their trading aspirations. Learning about the variety of raw materials Europe was able to produce was also an eye opener. For instance, wine, wool, timber, fish, furs, and silks were some of the major trading materials that produced results in the Middle Ages of the trading system. This article greatly changed my perception on the life of medieval society and the internal and external struggles they endured throughout the time period.
Prior to reading Clive Ponting’s, “World History: A New Perspective” I thought I would be reading about Europe in a state of pride and prestige; however this was not the case. As a matter in fact, Ponting portrayed Europe as backwards and unsophisticated in contrast to other parts of the world that were flourishing at the lush hands of trade, for example the Islamic World. It benefited significantly from Eurasian trade alongside India and China. I was intrigued by how Baghdad was among the wealthiest cities in the Islamic World and how within a few decades it transcended from being a small town to becoming the largest city in the world partly due to trade, especially since how the media portrays it in modern day society. I also was unaware of the fact that the Islamic World had their own currency consisting of the dinar and dirhem during this era, that were being widely circulated throughout more prominent parts of the Eurasian trade such as China and India. Meanwhile, Europe still used barter as a means of transaction for their meager goods. Also, I was astonished at how advanced the Islamic World was compared to Europe concerning the world of finance and accounting. They set up banks, issued checks, credit, and bills of exchange. Being a Muslim myself, it was surprising to read about how Muslim bankers went ahead and found loopholes surrounding the Islamic prohibition on interest and participated in every part of this trade.
Furthermore, Ponting’s perspective made me understand the many reasons why Europe was falling behind the other civilizations perhaps by decades and centuries by means of development and trade. For instance, I did not know that commercialization and industrialization was far vaster in India and China than Europe, which was still taking baby steps in comparison. I also thought it was fascinating how Europe was exposed to Aristotle’s work pertaining to Greek science through the Islamic world. Once again Muslims such as Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd were responsible for rediscovering and translating the great works of Aristotle.
In general, I would have never guessed that the Islamic world would have such an impact and influence on Europe. Europe took many ideas from the Islamic world such as ameliorating the water-mill in order to make it more sufficient and by incorporating the ogive arch into Gothic architecture. I also thought that Europe would have played a significant role in the Eurasian trade, however this proved to be incorrect during this time period. After reading these articles, I have learned that it is imperative to evaluate the perspectives of other civilizations in order to get a greater and a well rounded understanding of the Middle Ages.
The Middle Ages of Europe witnessed an explosion of growth, innovation and development, eventually leading to Europe’s dominance in the world. This was in all ways an amazing feat. It seems almost impossible that Europe, relatively unpopulated, poor, and unenlightened, could have ever rivaled or surpassed the amazing civilizations of the eastern world, especially as they are portrayed by Ponting. It is generally held true that competition leads to new ideas while lack thereof does not. At the beginning of the Middle Ages, the eastern empires were unrivaled in wealth and technology. Unwillingly, perhaps, they paved the way for European dominance.
During the Middle Ages, Europe had the necessity of expanding its economic, political and social horizons, as it was rapidly expanding in population. Through new contacts with the eastern world (due to the revival of trade), Europe gained many new technological advances such as the “carvel” ships, gunpowder, new horse-collars and foot-stirrups, iron horseshoes, windmills, the magnetic compass and weight-driven clock from Asia. In addition to simply incorporating these devices into their culture, Europeans also adapted and improved them, thus strengthening their importance and place in Europe. Europe, coming up from behind, was determined to pave its way in the world. European traders began to dominate the seas and seize formally eastern dominated trading cities and ports in the Far East.
Before I began to read the handout packet I decided to first look-ahead at the titles of the sections. I saw that the handout would cover topics such as science, technology, and trading. My initial thought was that I would be fairly familiar with the content, but I actually knew less than I expected. In seventh grade we had learned about the middle ages and focused on topics such as the Black Death and the feudal system. The course made it clear that Europe was not very industrial and the vast majority of the people lived in rural areas. So it was not to surprising to me that Europe mainly traded within itself. The course did not emphasize, if I remember correctly, that Europe was actually far less technologically advanced when compared to the eastern Islamic world.
I was under the impression that Europe would be more civilized and advanced than the Islamic world. In reality it was the Islamic world that was so far ahead of the Europeans. For example, when referring to the Islamic ships, Ponting said, “the ships…they were far in advance of those of Europe.” Unlike the European clinker built ships, which were constructed with overlapping planks, the Islamic carvel built ships had evenly placed planks and a lateen sail which allowed for sailing ‘closer to the wind’.
Another example of the superior Islamic technology was the replacement of wheeled vehicles. The Europeans had always used horses, oxen, or mules to pull their carriages. There were many problems with this form of transportation. The carriages required roads to be effective, the horses and mules did not have proper harnesses, and only limited loads could be carried. Meanwhile the Islamic world had a far better form of transport, the camel. When the north Arabian saddle was developed these camels became widely used throughout the Islamic world. The camel was superior to the European carriages for many reasons. Less equipment was needed, the camels could travel twice as far in a day, and one man could control and travel with six camels. Also, the camels did not require roads, this was hugely important to the Islamic world because they no longer had to waste resources and time on maintaining roads.
Although Europe began to at least catch up to the Islamic world in the fields of science and technology in the fifteenth century, this was because the Europeans were simply adopting the ideas of the Islamic world.
Something that I found most interesting about the Middle Ages was the way Europe compared to other areas such as the Middle East. Clive Ponting clearly showed how the Middle East was far more advanced than Europe. I originally had the notion that Europe would already be one of the strongest world powers, but it actually was far from it. While reading I discovered that the Middle East flourished in the area of trade by selling products such as silks, dyes, and other manufactured goods. In doing this they also developed an impressive money economy, banking, and credit system while Europe struggled with less sophisticated trade in their separate city sates.
In addition Europe also fell behind in technology compared to the world of Islam which developed the camel. It was very effective to that time period in that they did not need roads as opposed to wheeled transportation and was cheaper than other animals. China also was sophisticated in its technological findings with the lateen sail which improved ships sailing abilities which were again for more advanced than in Europe. In my opinion the Middle Ages was indeed a “Dark Age” for the Europeans.
In the packet “A World History” by Clive Ponting I realized many new and interesting events and people that helped to shape the world then and now. What was of particular interest to me is the dominance of the Islamic world over Europe both through trade and militarily. The Muslims were much more advanced in their practices than those of the European Christians. Such as how much more technologically advanced they were. Nowadays the west is way farther ahead than that of the Middle East but for a time Europe was made up of third world countries instead of the Middle East. The Islamic world had much richer educational institutions as well as more affluence in world affairs. This challenged my notion that the west had always been the dominant civilization. I realized though that the fall of the Roman Empire really only hurt Western Europe and the rest of world was able to continue especially the Islamic world due to their cohesiveness brought about by their common religion.
Another interesting fact that I learned was about how powerful the Roman Catholic Church was to the political theatre of Europe as well as how instrumental its teachings were in the lives of everyday people. It is hard to imagine now especially in the secular culture of the United States that a religious institution can have more say and sway over the actions of people in a country than even that of the country’s government. Also how even those at the lowest level instrumenting the church’s teaching might not be able to stand them as well for the low level if any education that was to people even to royalty. Sometimes the Clergy were more interesting in their mortal lives such as gaining wealth and power than in their spiritual lives which we would believe would be their main priority. On the flip side some of the peasants and other folk were obsessed with their spiritual life and neglected their mortal life. Clive Ponting helped me realized how skewed some of my views were of what happened in history and I was surprised at how much I really didn’t know.
I was more interested in the ‘science and technology’ section in the selection from “World History: A New Perspective” than the section on trade. Although I found the trade section interesting, some parts seemed dry and my mind would occasionally wander. I was aware of the advances made in the sciences and mathematics arenas by Islamic scholars but knew much less on the advancements made in warfare. I had no idea of the developments in incendiary warfare produced by Islamic armies. Some of them, specifically fireproof clothing and the ‘zarraya’, a de facto flamethrower, seem advanced even for this day and age. To think that these were created in the 600s frankly blows my mind. Likewise, I had previously heard of “Greek fire” (most effectively being deployed in grenades, I had not thought grenades were that old either) but had no idea that it was actually “Syrian fire.” I am always interested in the origins of words, and was uninformed as to the fact that such delicious words as ‘sugar,’ ‘syrup,’ and ‘sherbet’ are derived from Arabic.
However, I was much more interested in the passages on the relationship between church power and state power. I find the connection between the two make for interesting discussions and often have wide-reaching implications in global politics. I enjoy politics and history and predictably liked Ponting’s theories on the origins of organized societies and the development of political states. I liked how Ponting described the early stages of a society as needing a unifying force in order to survive, become more complex, and remain a cohesive unit. I found it remarkable that the church was at times more of a state and better organized than many of the various European states. I knew about the fantastic record keeping done by the ecclesiastical bureaucracy, but didn’t know about the involuntary membership, legal or taxation powers, or army. However, relationships between the Roman Catholic Church and the various European states often were strained as each tried to exert its authority over the other in accordance with the coordinate powers theory (bishops are bound by secular laws in secular affairs, while lay government officials were bound by religious standards in religious affairs) in which the Church viewed itself as a higher authority than the state.
I also liked the comparison between religion and state relations in the Islamic world to the relations in Europe mentioned previously. The give and take relationship in Muslim states enlightened me to the dependency both the religious leaders and secular leaders had to each other. The religious leaders had no official powers, so without the backing of the lay government they could not exert any sort of punishment. On the other hand, the lay government was seen as a defender of the religion from threats both outside and inside the state. Both politicians and religious leaders were able to wield considerable amounts of power, and I like how Ponting juxtaposed the ideas so they were easier to comprehend.
When reading "A World History" by Clive Ponting I learned a couple of interesting facts about Europe that I had not known before. I always thought that Europe had a good grasp on being as advanced as the rest of the world, but apparently it was the other way around. Europe was in the back waters of the world as you can say. Some examples that were listed within the packet that proved for Europe being less advanced were were the sanitation. People were not very healthy back in the dark ages because they would sleep with their animals like pigs and chickens and throw their garbage into the streets. Socially, Europe did not communicate with other countries that much. That is why their trade was basically with in the continent. Also technologically they could not compare with China and the Middle East.
Another reason why Europe was less advanced was the limited trade they were involved in. Europe did not have items that other countries wanted or were interested in, so it made things hard on Europe by making them be forced to just trade silks, dyes, and other goods that were not that valuable.
The last reason why Europe was behind the rest of the countries was because of their religion or belief system. They could not accept other religions and only believed in catholisism. In the end that really hurt them.
These things that I read in the packet helped me get a better understanding of Europe and they struggled, but managed to keep trying and catch up with the world.
While reading the article “World History: A New Perspective” by Clive Ponting, I came across a few aspects that truly caught my attention. First off, I found it interesting that no individual power dominated or even attempted to gain trade advantages in the Indian Ocean. According to my previous knowledge, most countries during this time period were constantly striving for control or for anything that would put them ahead of others. Therefore, I was surprised they didn’t even try to control the trade routes.
Secondly, I was not expecting there to be as many problems regarding the church. I already knew that the Middle Ages had faced several economic issues, but I was not aware of the struggles within the church, or at least to this extent. Before reading this article, I wasn’t aware of how powerful the church was in terms of governmental issues. I knew that the church and state used to be linked to one another, but I never imagined that the church would have such strength outside of religious matters. To my surprise, the church had a much greater influence on nonreligious events as well.
Furthermore, I never knew how far behind Europe was compared to other countries in terms of technological advancements and trade. In middle school we were constantly studying the advancements of Europeans and the different things they did that marked significant turning points in history. However, I now know that we skipped a major portion of their background, the time period where they were in a sense working “backwards.” Although I was aware of how advanced the Islam world was, I always just assumed that Europe was right there with them. Fortunately, Clive explained otherwise. He helped me understand that Europe was extremely slow at adopting new technologies which were already present in Islam. According to Clive, “Islam was the main route for the diffusion of knowledge and technology to Christian Europe. It was through this route that Europe became acquainted with Greek science, Aristotle and numerous crucial technologies…” (370). As one can see, without the help of the Islamic world Europe would have moved at an even slower pace. In terms of advancements, the thing that interested me the most was the fact that after all this time of being behind; in just a few centuries Europe somehow became a leading power. Overall, I enjoyed these readings because they challenged my original assumptions of the Middle Ages.
While reading "World History: A New Perspective" by Clive Ponting, I found several things that surprised me. From previous knowledge, and even from the Spielvogel textbook, I hadn’t fully realized that the Islamic and Eastern worlds during the High Middle Ages had been as advanced in relation to Europe as they were. Virtually all European advances stemmed from those made by these other groups. Reading this handout made me realize just how backwards Europe was in government, knowledge, and trade. This is something hard to grasp given Europe’s reputation from the Renaissance and beyond as a leader in almost all areas.
I also enjoyed Ponting’s observations of the relationship between the developments of church and state. I hadn’t realized how “unusual” the development of Christianity was in comparison to other religions of the time, which tended to grow with the state.
I also felt that the examples provided by Ponting gave insight into the reasons for the success of Islamic trade. His mention of the use of camels, the development of money systems, ship technology, and the development of tradable finished products were all enlightening to me. In our culture, the successes of the western world are given a greater emphasis; it was fascinating to learn that the basis of much of our own technologies came from the eastern world.
Perhaps the greatest surprise came with the discovery that Christian Europe gained knowledge of Aristotle’s literature and philosophy through translations made by Islamic scholars. The development of Europe during this time was truly dependant on Islamic and Asian discoveries and contributions.
Clive Ponting's World History surprised me a great deal. I am very surprised to learn how slow Europe was technologically, and economically compared to the Middle East and Asia. Ponting even describes Europe as backwards to stress how behind they were. Technologically, he expresses how the Middle East was more advanced in algebra, teaching methods, and weaponry. While Asia had more advanced ships with the Chinese junk, and the stern-post rudder, as well as in architecture with the ogive arch. Europe appeared to be centuries away from catching up to the rest of Eurasia in any of these fields.
Economically, I was well aware of the extensive trade routes covering Eurasia to move silk, slaves, spices, and other things across the continents. What I was unaware of, was the intricate system of banking the middle eastern traders were using along with that trade. Before reading these articles, if anyone were to ask me about trade, finance, or banking during and before the Middle Ages, the idea of an exchange of credit and representative bills for goods would never have come across my mind. It amazes me how the traders and bankers were able to keep track of all the money and goods that was changing hands every day. Today, banks haven't perfected this, and they have the advantage of computers, calculators, phones, and every other technological advance since. It is also interesting how the Europeans seemed to have no real desire to create coinage and outgrow tthe simple barter system, while the Middle East had been using gold and silver coins in small transactions for years. And then, when places such as France attempted to produce coins, they failed and had to stop production. The European situation was drastically different than the Middle East and Asia, and that is what make it's progress in the late middle ages and during the renaissance all the more impressive and astonishing.
I found many aspects of these articles to be very intriguing. First of all, I found the considerable contrast between the Islamic and European technological advances to be unexpected. This information did in fact challenge my preconceptions of Europe during this period. I have always thought of it to be a technologically advanced continent, when in reality and when compared with Islam, it was not. Islam produced three types of water-mill, fireproof clothing for their military, a flamethrower, and lastly the invention of substituting wheeled vehicles with the camel. Europe on the other hand, produced such technologies as the heavy plough which had many disadvantages considering its weight and the mere fact that few peasants could even afford it.
Also, Europe was the last area to adopt simple inventions such as the stirrup, which was already in use in many other countries. Overall, Europe had developed little until it was able to adopt other culture’s science and technology, one of them being the water-mill.
Another aspect of the articles that interested me was the regularity of conflict that arose between religion and government. The reason for constant struggle between the two was due to the fact that the church had the right of independence from governmental authority. Medieval Christianity caused the most conflict during the Middle Ages. The government and church disagreed on many controversial issues, excommunication being a prime example. Islam, contrasting Christianity, had few complications developing alongside society and was able to cooperate with the rule of its government.
I found nothing significant in Ponting's "World History: A New Perspective" that couldn’t be summarized in several minutes. Europe’s slow start in Eurasian dominance is new information that makes the current global circumstances (Western supremacy) more impressive, but none of Ponting’s writing was as contemporary as “The State and Religion: An Exploratory Comparison in Different Cultures.” This packet explained relationships between religion and government throughout history with specific examples in patterns that still apply and can be used to predict the future of global religions. The description of Christianity as an extreme exception to usual religions fits perfectly as if the religion itself, not any figures in it (corporeal or divine), is its own entity. Christianity is a bully, shaping states and possessing more power than any government in the history of the planet ever had. While Popes may come and go and Pagans may not conform Christianity will endure. The religion has split more than any state, been linked to more human deaths than any natural disaster, and survived the fall of the state of its origin. There can be no balance of power between government and the church in The West in the presence of Christianity, as Western tradition, morals, and governments are all steeped in Christian roots. Christianity will not die with a whimper, and a bang great enough to subdue the planet’s most powerful man-made entity would leave an immortal impression in human history.
I found several topics interesting in the handout articles. I was surprise to learn that Islam was significantly more advanced than Europe in technology and economics. I found it interesting that Islamic institutions of learning were the model for development of the university. Although I found Europe far behind the Islamic advancements, I do acknowledge Europe's ability to adapt and make an effort to catch up with the rest of Eurasia's technology. In the section labeled "The State and Religion: An Exploratory Comparison in Different Cultures," I agreed with the statement concerning the requirements for a civilization to function successfully. I believe that cooperation and organization is needed for a civilization to survive and thrive. Although, I do feel that the first stages of this organization, such as monarchy, will eventually alter to fit the needs of the growing population. In addition, I also found the issues dealing with church and government interesting. Since the Catholic church evolved separate from the state, contradictions between government and Catholic belief became clear. It was new to me to learn that the church created its own central government, but I was not surprised to read that interests of religion were superior to the interest of secular rulers if a conflict aroused.
After reading this packet, my view on Europe changes significantly. I had believed that Europe was advanced, when in fact they were far behind from the rest of Eurasia. I was unaware that Europe’s technology derived from the Islamic world. Europe’s position during the middle ages surprised me in knowing how great the struggles were between the church and government. I had a basic idea that Church officials would contradict secular rules, but I did not know the church had its own centralized government. I believe that Europe’s limited trade and constantly contradicting powers caused their initial weakness compared to the Islamic world. Once Europe began opening trade outside of Europe, they were able to adapt to the improved technology and even improve it. Thus catching them up to the Islamic advancements and later giving them strength in several areas.
My favorite article in the summer reading handout packet was “The Later Eurasian World”. I found it very interesting that before the 15th and 16th centuries, Europe lagged behind the Islamic and Asian Empires technology wise. It was impressive to see how location and geography can impact the growth and development of two regions. For example, Islam was located between Europe and China. Therefore, it served as the center of trading between these two regions. Also, due to the location, Islam was the principal inheritor of famous Greek scientific findings and theory’s developed by the early Roman Empire. Islam’s location near India also allowed Islamic scholars to inherit some Indian mathematical systems as well. This knowledge allowed Islam to advance in the development of knowledge and technology.
It was not until the 15th and 16th centuries when Europe developed the same Greek philosophy that the Islamic world had been using for centuries. Then again, it was because of Europe’s location far away from Islam and the rest of Asia which caused them to lag behind in technology and other advancements. The reason why Europe and Asia began trading at such a late date was because it was easier to travel by sea rather then by land. By the late 10th century, much of the Arab world of trading was based around the ‘Sea of China’. Trading with the Asian world started in the 7th century which is why Roman philosophy spread to Asia more quickly than to Europe.
This article challenged my preconceptions about the Islamic, Asian, and European worlds during the Middle Ages. Originally, I thought that the European world was always ahead in technology and other developments. I think that the reason why this thought originated was because in prior classes where we talked about the Middle Ages, we only covered what was happening in Europe rather than Asia and other regions. Because presently Europe is ahead of a lot of the Islamic nations technology wise, I assumed that the same applied centuries ago. It is interesting to find out that I was wrong and that there are several reasons why Europe lagged behind Asian technology in the Middle Ages.
Many things surprised me when reading World History: A New Perspective by Clive Ponting. Something as simple as Finance seemed to surprise me the most. When trading was at one of its highest points in Europe, the people of the middle ages were able to create a financing system which is similar to the idea modern day credit card, based on the “buy now pay later” system. Even though money was rarely used in trade, it is still a similar idea. With all of the trade going on around the world and no computers or telephones to keep track of everything like we have no, it amazed me that they were able to think of this way that worked for them.
Going into the reading, I previously thought, that Europe was one of the most advanced places during the time of the Middle Ages. But, after reading, this article seemed to prove me wrong. I soon learned that the Islamic world was much more powerful then Europe then I would have ever thought. One example of when technology of the Islamic world proved to be better than Europe was that building of the ships. Islamic ships were “carvel build” which allowed the ship to sail closer to the wind then ever before. Also, the Islamic world was the first to use the 3 types of water mills, and use camel, instead of the wheeled vehicle. These were also something Europe did not catch onto until many years later.
Overall, this packet did prove to be very interesting and opened my eyes to many things that I didn’t see or know about European History prior to reading it.
Connor Fitzgerald
Ap European history
Mr. Kirby
September 4 2009
The whole packet was filled with information that intrigued me, but the most interesting part for me was “The State and Religion: An Exploratory Comparison in Different Cultures”. This delved deep in to the relationship between “Church and state”, from the beginnings of society’s where it’s “some form of religion and the government some form of monarchy”. I thought this compression to be very true in most cases they also talked about the leaders and how a high priest is the same as a king is some society’s as a king is the high priest in others. “The king who is high priest of his people, the high priest who wields the ultimate political authority is common and familiar figures.”
Also the Christian church was talked about in detail many parts of its history and struggle for power as an “old clerical state” versus a “new secular state” was very interesting and I would have never have thought of the church versus state that way. The Christian religion had salvation but only if you received your sacraments, these sacraments could only be conducted by them. Since they only had the power to give out theses sacraments and they are the only things that could save you from an eternity in hell, they could force your hand so to speak. They said that salvation was drastically more important then happiness in this world. The Christian churches struggle for power and conflicts between church and sate was nothing like the other religion talked about in this section Islam. “In fact almost impossible, to have conflicts between religious institutions and politician institutions.” This is because there wasn’t anything like the church or priest in Islam. In fact they didn’t have a sacraments or a priesthood which were the backbone of the Christian Church. This section was great from the beginning of most religions to an extreme side of the spectrum (Christianity) to a more common maturity of religion Islam.
Easily, the topic I found both more interesting and most surprising was “Islam at the Centre of Eurasian Trade”. I had no idea that Islam played such a vital role in linking Eurasia through trade, and was so far ahead of Europe in almost every aspect; although I knew that the Islamic world was ahead of Europe, I had no idea that it was as advanced as described in this reading. I find it astounding that a civilization was able to link areas that were so far away, such as China and north-west Europe, so long ago. One fact I found particularly amusing was the size of Baghdad compared to a typical town in England and even Constantinople, in both physical size and population; Baghdad had about 900,000 people and was five times the size of Constantinople, while Leicester, a typical English town, had a measly 1,300. This really spoke to me and showed me how much more powerful the Islamic states were compared to England at the time.
Something I found really reflective of the differences between the Islamic and European worlds was the complexities of their financial and trading systems. Asia and the Islamic world boasted cities of nearly one million people, credit and banking systems, round trips across the Indian Ocean, and a plethora of manufactured goods to trade, such as dyes and silks. Furthermore, the trade was not completely dominated by one group of people. On the other hand, Europe’s trade was conducted mainly over land at fairs like those at Champagne, and was dominated by the northern Italian cities like Venice. However, even Venice’s trade was miniscule compared the Islamic world; Venice had just twenty ships in 1400, while the Islamic world had thousands. Even Europe’s financial system was behind, as they used bartering instead of credit or specie.
Although the whole handout challenged my concept of Eurasia during the Medieval Period, I found Ponting’s “Islam at the Centre of Eurasian Trade” challenged my preconceptions the most, and was most interesting as a result. Before reading this, I believed that Europe was just barely behind the Islamic world; now, I realize that this was not the case at all. Instead, Europe really borrowed most of the technological advances of this period from the Islamic world, and was still many, many years behind. Related to this, Ponting’s reading really challenged my preconception of not just how advanced a specific portion of the world was, but how advanced the known world was as a whole. I had no idea that so long ago, traders could travel thousands of miles and still use the same currency and system of credit there as at home, or could utilize breeding techniques to create better camels. My vision was much cruder and more brutal.
As naive as it was, I thought the world in the Middle Ages consisted of Europe and that’s it. After reading “A New Perspective” by Clive Ponting it greatly opened my eyes to how far behind Europe was as a society during the Middle Ages. It never really occurred to me that the Islamic world was really thriving in so many ways. The advancements in science with the ‘scientific method’, in mathematics with advanced thinking of algebra, and other such advanced showed just how far ahead they were compared to Europe. Trade was another thing Europe was far behind in. Europe did not produce much gold or silver and in doing so it very much changed how trade was done with the Islamic world. Almost all trades were done through bartering until in the late fifteenth century Europe opened up mines.
Religion had a large role in the Middle Ages as well. I was aware that the papacy was important but it had a greater power than I was previously aware of. With the creation of the church as a state and an overall ruling authority, it felt the need to interject with people other nations. This created many conflicts throughout the Middle Ages such as the Crusades.
After reading these articles my preconceived notions of the Middle Ages were shattered. Europe had a lot to improve upon in trade, technology and overall as a society. It gave me a large understanding of what was going on throughout the entire world and made me view the time period very differently that I did before.
To me the most striking characters of the Middle Ages were the Black Death, the odious feudal system, and the constant struggles between kingdoms. I always thought that it was justified to call the Middles Ages the “Dark Ages.” After reading the summer handouts, my biased judgments have changed a little.
In the article “The Laicization of French and English Society in the Thirteenth Century,” the author discussed how lay governments gradually became dominant in the French and English societies. The author argued that laicization, or the establishment of secular government, was caused by the monarch’s lust for power over the church, the growing nationalism within individuals, the expanded size of bureaucracies, economic changes, and the introduction of the ideas of uncertainty to the pious Christians. Even from the very early years of Europe, the church and state had always quarreled over control for wealth and land. Sometimes a realm may be under the jurisdiction of both the monarch and pope, but who had the stronger control over this land and its inhabitants? This question plagued the Europeans for centuries until the gradual development of a stronger lay government, at least in the French and English societies. The authority of the lay government had stronger control over its subjects, thus the ambiguity of secular government’s power was distinguished. The power of the church hence was limited. The clergymen had no choice but to focus their attention on social welfare. The clear separation of church and state proved to be stable and efficient for the society.
One other article that really made me think was “World History: a New Perspective” by Clive Ponting. Ponting presented to the readers the sharp contrast between the Medieval Europe and the more advanced Asian and Islamic civilizations. While new technological advancements were periodically made by the Arabs and the Chinese, Europeans still heavily relied on ancient tools and ideas. Because of the lack of capital to invest in solid scholar institutions, most of the Europeans remained illiterate. With only a few educated individuals, Europe of course remained backward in trade, technology, arts, and almost every other aspect. Although the information that Ponting wrote supported my previous opinions, I somehow decided that the “Dark Ages” was not an exactly valid name for the Middle Ages.
Even though the people were still plagued by diseases, ignorance, superstition, and constant warfare, this period served as a time for transformations. During this period, the separation of church and state, revival of art and literature, and radical ideas emerged. All of these developments served as important roles in later European history. For instance, the revival of art and literature led to the cultural “rebirth;” the separation of church and state lessened number of conflicts; and radical ideas led to the emergence of the reformed church. Evidently, without this “Dark Ages,” much of European societies would still remain behind the Asian and Islamic worlds.
While reading the packet, what stuck with me was the discussion of the Eurasian trade network. The change that came with the spread of Islam particularly caught my attention. In this day and age, when everyone has different beliefs and religion does not play so big a role in every aspect of our lives, it is hard to wrap my head around the idea of any one religion having such a widespread impact. It not only united the countries and traders throughout the Middle East and Africa, it made the trade routes easier to travel and trade by. Islam affected more than just affect the lives of those who practiced it, but also the lives of Chinese, Indian, and other traders who found it easier to trade because the trade routes were no longer divided by traders and countries who made their own rules. From the articles I really got the sense that the trade improved dramatically due to the spread of Islam.
This led me to compare the effect of Islam on the eastern world to the effect of Christianity on the western world. While Islam improved trade in Asia and Africa, Christianity had little to no effect on Europe’s suffering trade. Christianity was as widespread in Europe as Islam was in the east, but Europe still remained in the dark with none of the benefits that were cropping up everywhere in the eastern world. This highlights the unofficial separation of church and state in Europe and the difference made by Christianity developing separate from the government. If religion were as intertwined with the government in Europe as it was in the Islamic world, would Europe have still been so far behind? Islam also brought stability to Eastern governments. If Christianity played a bigger political role, would it have been able to do the same for the fragmented rural countries of Europe?
A part of Clive Ponting’s “World History” that I found particularly interesting was the Laicization of French and English society in the Thirteenth Century. During the Middle Ages religion was a very important part of everyday life. In the article it said that a person normally would consider their greatest allegiance to the church. It just seems natural that this would be true during these times. After the fall of the Roman Empire the church gave European society at least some structure and became equal or almost higher in authority than the government of the land. I never really gave it much thought to how unheard of and preposterous this would seem in modern times. In some countries there is still a connection between the two institutions, but in America it is almost completely dissolved. I liked learning about the reversal of roles between the church and state because I feel as if this is a topic I have not learned a lot about. It was interesting to see how many clergy members were actually involved in the government. They held such power during those times. In the beginning the church was able to overpower the state. But as times changed the state gained more support it was able to exercise some control over the church as was further seen in the Spielvoge text. Thus I really liked this section because it was interesting to see how European society transformed into more of the one we know today.
Another section of this article that I found interesting and a bit surprising was the section of Monarchy and Papacy. First of all again it shed light on to the fact that the church during this time help a lot of power over the governments to be able to instigate a change in the leader of an empire as well as the fact that to become a king one needed the blessing of the pope or religious figure. While it makes sense in some ways to me because of the time period and the want of the church to stay involved in goverment it seems like it is making a king equal with a religious leader. In a time so apposed to any sort of heresy, where people who are heretics are executed, it just seems odd. It is elevating a king to a very high authority and when the church is starting to fear the growing strength of the state by doing this I would think it would give a king more power.
Furthermore this section surprised me because it really showed how instable the Middle Ages were. While they were not necessarily completely the “Dark Ages”, they were defiantly behind a great deal to the civilizations of the east where they had long established governments and flourishing cities that Europe the time could only dream about. This section showed the political instability greatly because it shows how one man ,Pepin III, with the assistance and backing of the pope usurped the French throne. While he was already royalty he just took control of another country. This just goes to show how far civilization has advanced since this time period and how much hardship Europe had to overcome during this time period.
Over the summer while reading "World History: A New Perspective" I learned several things, one of which is about European trade. I was surprised to learn one of the most important developements in the eleventh century was the expansion of European trade. Although European trade expanded slowly, it was able to get in touch with Flanders, Scandinavia, the Baltic and Russia. I was very much impressed with how the Europeans were able to expand their trade with all those countries and areas.
Another aspect that i learned was about technology and several of the advances that were made. Islam had made several significant advances in technology revolving mostly around shipbuilding. The ships created were carvel built, which i never knew before. A main feature on the boat was the Lateen Sail, which allowed the boat to sail closer to the wind. All the techniques that Islam had develooped were later adopeted by the Europeans which i though was interesting because they had already developed the 'clinker' built ships.
i also learned that the Chinese had used magnetism to create compasses and maps which allowed sailors to see the routes and the point of direction they were headed.
This article changed my preconceptions a little bit because i had never really thought of where the Europeans learned how to build their ships. I always just assumed that the Europeans made that advance in technology themselves.
In this handout, Clive Ponting vividly describes many interesting and significant ideals and characteristics of the Middle Ages. However, one article that grabbed my attention was the discussion of church and state, and its impact on society in Europe. Ponting thoroughly expresses the struggles of the clashing ideals and power between the Pope and the secular rulers of Europe.
In the Middle Ages, Ponting describes how big a role the church played in the society. Its roles often overlapped with the secular government, which made it hard for both sides to stay independent and strong. For example, the medieval church could make its own laws and regulations followed by courts for discipline. Taxation and participation in church was also mandatory. One role I found really surprising was how the church often could form its own army. Moreover, the church was advanced in that, they kept records and had somewhat of a legal system. All of these tasks that the church had both strengthen it and challenged the lay government for power. However, even with the strength of the church, the secular government was always necessary and crucial. This part made sense to me because the church, important as it was, could not take the place of a government dealing mostly with politics and not so much with religion.
Ponting also explains how many people, such as Pope Gelasius, felt that the church was stronger and should have had more power than that of a lay ruler. So, when the two powers overlap, people’s loyalty had to be in the hands of the church. Overall, the desire of the church and lay authority was to be independent of each other and to each have power in the society. But as history can show, this was an impossible feat and through this, the struggle between them heightened.
After reading these handout articles, I found many aspects of this article very interesting. For example I never knew that the trading system that existed in the middle ages was as extensive or as vast as it actually was. This trading system was so vast that it essentially united all of Eurasia, thus it had a tremendous effect on the lives of many people. Even though most of the trading was concentrated around the areas of Levant and Mesopotamia it was quite extensive for its time. In the east, this extensive trading system stretched all the way to china, to the south it stretched to central Africa, to the west it united the areas along the Atlantic Coasts and, to the north it brought together the areas along the Great Russian Rivers. Clearly this trading system united a lot of people and allowed the people to communicate in a way that otherwise would have been impossible.
Another aspect of this article that surprised me was the fact that Europe was far less advanced both technologically and socially than other areas during this time. In the modern age it always seems that all the new technological advances and social advances usually have their birth place in the Europe. The areas in the Middle East and Asia were far more advanced in algebra, teaching methods and weaponry. The areas in Middle East and Asia were also able to produce finished products that were very valuable, thus they were able to trade these good to other areas and communicate with other cultures. The Europeans on the other hand were not able to create these finished products and thus had nothing to trade with other areas. Essentially there was no communication between the European Nations and the areas of the Middle East and Asia, which might be the reason why the Europeans were so far behind. At that time it seemed like the Europeans would never be able to catch up with the Middle East or Asia.
The summer reading handout articles challenged my preconceptions of the Middle Ages, particularly the notion that this period also known as the “Dark Ages” was a time of complete social backwardness compared to the rest of the world. The reading from Ponting, in particular, acknowledged this thought through comparisons to the Islamic and Asian worlds’ grandeur, established through large centralized governments. But the other handouts showed evidence of the development of complex separate religious/political entities, which were clearly unique to the world at the time and gradually evolved to the model for Western civilization that we know today with secular/religious portions separate.
The handout articles particularly eye-opening for me, however, were not so much those that developed the idea of Europe’s disorganization as those that explored the ideas behind this discrepancy. One passage I found intriguing was from the second reading, “The State and Religion”, which alleges that the driving force behind the division of Eastern/Western cultures’ development was due to, in the Europeans’ case, lack of church/state unification. Thinking on the cultures that were provided as counterexamples for the scattered European states, that is, the Greek, Roman, and Arabic civilizations, I gained a better understanding of why the entwined role of religion and government provided a stronger base for a developed civilization than the separate roles achieved in Europe during the Middle Ages.
(Related to the last point: I also recently read the results of a survey in which present-day Americans hold the highest relative value in religion compared to all the other developed countries. While I’m not familiar with the methods in which the survey was conducted, I am curious as to whether a connection can be gleaned from possible conflicts between religion and government even today, and how these might undermine the stability of the government. After all, America has been “alive” far shorter than the civilizations of Ancient Greece/Rome.)
I had also learned before that the Roman Catholic church (RCC) had conflicts with individuals that challenged it in terms of science (e.g. Galileo), but did not realize the extent of its conflict with lay governments. Indeed, the RCC functioned as a completely separate entity, intent on not only keeping the full extent of its ecclesiastical powers but also expanding into temporal powers, as explored in the third reading, “Monarchy and Papacy”. Likewise, the final reading, “The Laicization of French and English Society in the Thirteenth Century”, explored the subsequent gradual transfer of power from religious authorities to lay authority. One point in the article regarding the scale of allegiance particularly captured my attention – that in which the medieval people acknowledged their identity first as a Christian, then a Burgundian, and finally a Frenchmen. The shift today would be astounding – most people I know would probably acknowledge themselves first as American citizens, or by their culture – Asian, or Chinese, for instance, rather than by the region in which they lived, or their religion.
While reading Spielvogel's Western Civilization, I was impressed with all the advances the Europeans were making and was under the impression they were a somewhat progressive+ region. However, after reading the handouts, I was amazed to find out how far behind Europe really was from Asia, not only technologically but economically as well. For example, Islam had already established a sophisticated trading system involving the usage of their own currency and even credit, far more refined than the bartering system that was in place in Europe. This was a major problem for Europe,especially since with no currency they could not buy goods from the Islamic world. Another contrast between the two economies was that Europe was still producing raw materials, while Islam was already creating high-quality manafactured goods. In addition, technologically Islam and China were far ahead. China had thier advanced "junk" ships while Islam had their nearly impressive carvel ships with features like "lateen sails" that allowed the ship to sail closer to the wind. Another significant contribution was Islam's idea to use the camel for transporting goods, also leading to the creatuib of a special saddle specifically designed for the camel's body and for its comfort. The most technological deficiency Europe had was the fact that it did not use metal up until 1000, and even after its discovery it still was not properly utilized. Metal was an essential material in the Middle Ages and the face that Europe did not use it until much later on further displays how far behind they really were.
Therefore, Ponting completely altered my perception of the Middle Ages. Before, the Middle Ages to me was simply a time when Europe dominated and developed, and I also always associated it with the Black Plague. Now I know that Islam, China, and India were far more sophisitcated in that they had intricate trading systems, better technology, and in addition strong centralized governments that unified the nations, allowing them to achieve their amazing accomplishments.
After reading “World History: A New Perspective,” by Clive Ponting, I was extremely impressed with the amount of growth and innovation that had occurred during the middle ages. The drastic change from an underdeveloped, inefficient continent to an economic powerhouse in a matter of a few centuries is truly amazing. I was also shocked by how far LESS developed Europe was in comparison to Eastern Civilizations in terms of Trade, Science, Technological, and other fields. It was my presumption that Europe had always been ahead of such regions.The first section of this packet is really what had awed me the most. Although I had known of Eastern economic involvement with the rest of the world, I had no idea to the extent in which they were COMPLETELY dominating Europe.
I was also ignorant of the true extent of power the Roman Catholic Church had during this time period. In an era of “fine lines” between church and state, I was shocked to discover how enthralled the Catholic Church was in the Middle Ages, and how they, in many instances, had more power than government itself. I also loved the comparison of religious-based architecture in the piece. It was interesting to learn the history behind the beautiful architecture that’s still across Europe today.
In many aspects of “World History: A New Perspective", I found the reading to be quite different than what I had imagined about the Middle Ages. To begin with, I was intrigued by how the Islamic World affected Eurasia. I had always imagined it to be the opposite but I was proven wrong. I was unaware of how greatly the Islamic World played a role in the structure of Eurasia such as trades and politics. What fascinated me was that the Islamic World linked together almost all of Eurasia through an open trading system. And as linkages were made, other areas became prosperous and transformed into trade routes. Moreover, the complexity and vastness of the Islamic trading network of the ocean interested me. It was interesting to me how technology advances allowed convoys to sail by ships and significantly connect with other areas.
Next, I was astounded by how much Europe compared to the Middle East. In addition, I was surprised to learn how behind Europe was, economically and technologically. Rather than being prosperous and at lead, Europe was actually at the end of the Eurasian trade. Europe lacked a lot and was slow. Ponting elaborated on how the Europe’s sophistication continued for centuries and that really stunned me. However, although Europe was at the far end, I was impressed how from the eleventh to the fourteenth centuries European trade, it experienced and went through a lot of outside resources and developed in that way. Overall, this reading really challenged my perception of the Middle Ages.
While I was reading the handout packet the thing that struck me as most surprising was the delay in Europe’s adoptions of new technologies. While other areas, specifically Islamic countries, were constantly adapting and improving things- one example would be their use of camels instead of wheel-based transportation because of poor roads- Europeans stayed much the same or their technology was not nearly as efficient. The development of the plough displays this perfectly. The metal plough was much heavier then scratch ploughs so it was more efficient in northwest Europe, which had much heavier soil then the rest of the continent. It was surprising to me that one of the most important European innovations of that era was so cumbersome, as it could not be individually owned and the eight oxen needed to pull it was often rented. This seemed to defeat the purpose of the new plough, to save the farmer time, as they would have limited time with the plough and oxen as it was, and the investment would need to be made repeatedly, instead of once.
Another thing that thoroughly surprised me was what that some of the most famous types of art in Europe was developed from Islamic countries. While I knew that the Middle East was very innovative, it never occurred to me that something like the ogive arch (which to many conjures the image of Gothic European cathedrals) was built on an Islamic arch. I was also shocked to find out that glassworks truly originated in the Islamic world, as I have been to Venetian glass guilds and would never have supposed that something Italy is so famous for could have come from anywhere else.
It is jarring to think that Europe was once not a leader in innovation, as it is today. It seems almost unfathomable to think how far behind the rest of Eurasia Europe truly was. That was what most surprised me from the readings in the handout packet.
Prior to my reading of "World History: A New Perspective" by Clive Ponting, my idea of the Middle Ages was quite tainted with ignorance. I typically associated the title "Middle Ages" with images of knights jousting in armor, of lavish castles, and of a world divided by social class. While this perspective is not necessarily inaccurate, it is however, very incomplete. Being a Muslim myself, I was very intrigued to see Ponting's first topic discuss the influence of Islam in Eurasian trade and culture. Islam very much brought together and centralized Eurasian commerce, allowing cities and towns to prosper. It is interesting to compare cities in the Middle Ages with their current state. For example, during the middle ages Baghdad was a lavish and rich prospering city. Today it is torn apart by warfare and poverty. Whatever happened to Islam? Although Islam played a large economical role in the world, I believe its downfall to be very much the result of warfare. Rather than focus on commercial pursuits, the Muslims were forced to prepare for battle. Although The Crusades were not very successful, it did manage to distract Muslims away from other non-military pursuits.
There are a few things that surprised me about these handouts. For one, the handouts showed a view much more critical of Europeans in the Middle Ages. They showed how the other cultures in the world at the time were more advanced, richer and healthier than the Europeans were at the same time. I am so used to the Euro-centric view of things presented as they are in popular culture and in most history classes. For example, it just seems that European have always dominated the cultural landscape of the world, while, in all actuality, they were inferior to the Mid and Far East for much of the medieval age. In the world of trading, Baghdad, Cairo, and Damascus were much larger trading cities than English cities, which were very, very small, or even Constantinople, which was quite sizable. For example, Baghdad was 5 times larger than Constantinople, and had a population of 900,000. Islamic currency was the main currency used in trading.
Another thing that changed my perception was when the Roman Catholic Church was said to pretty much be its own state. I am so used to the lesser place the Roman Catholic Church has taken in today's society that hearing about it as being equal in power with a country is very surprising. According to these articles, since both the state and the church claimed their power from god, they both had great power. However, they said that since the church had power in religious affairs, it had greater power than the state overall because of the importance of religion during the time period. This is uprising because I'm used to the mostly secular nature of today's society, and thinking of the Church as the main deciding force in the state sector is confusing and totally opposite to what I'm used too.
Reading through these articles this summer many topics struck me as surprising. I never realized how far the church reached into all levels of governments, ranging from the Pope who oversaw much of Europe to the priests and bishops who governed small towns and cities. However, I believe the influence of the Roman Catholic Church was one of the leading causes as to why European society was so far behind that of the dominantly Muslim East. I was surprised to see how much the average European persons life revolved around the church. It seems to me that these people spent much of their time working and praying in hopes of achieving total salvation and avoiding time in purgatory. Was this lifestyle of total devotion to the Catholic Church a reason why very few new ideas came out of Europe in the Middle Ages? As surprised as I was of the extent of church power, nothing surprised me more of how quickly laicization swept over Europe.
Reading the first chapters of Speilvogel’s Western Civilization, I was amazed of the number of small, independent feudal systems that controlled small regions all of Europe. It was interesting to me that the rulers of these monarchies only remained in power if they had the consent of their people. I never knew that the Middle Ages saw so many revolts, led by peasants and serfs against their governments. I would have never predicted that these small secular governments would surpass the church in their influence and power over their populations in only a few centuries. The laicization of Europe, in my opinion, led to the age of rebirth of the European culture, economics, artistry, and religion. I believe this to be true because people now had the opportunity to divert the energy that they had poured into the church into new ideas, such as the invention of the mechanical clock.
I had always had the preconception that The Middle Ages were a time of total stagnant thinking across Europe and Asia. However, upon completing the summer reading I realized just how far ahead the Muslim world was in almost every field from agriculture, and metallurgy to mathematics and science. The Muslims were quite literally centuries ahead of the Europeans. This challenged the way I viewed the medieval world completely. I had never thought such a time of discovery and invention took place in a time commonly known as the Dark Ages.
What I found truly fascinating about the reading "World History" by Clive Pointing was the concept that Islam played a central role in the trade of the Middle Ages. Generally, the Middle Ages conjure an image of European advancements and culture. I had never, previous to this reading, considered Islam as playing a central role in the development of the Middle Ages. You very rarely hear about Damascus, Baghdad, or Cairo, despite their prominent wealth and prosperity throughout the Middle Ages. In fact, the economy of the Middle Ages would likely have been far different had it not been for the expansion of Islam. Furthermore, Islam's advancements in the fields of payment revolutionized economy in the middle ages. For example, bank notes and the credit system became prominent in trade in the Middle Ages as early as the eleventh century.
Another topic that fascinated me was the "backwardness" that constantly plagued Europe throughout the Middle Ages. For example, Europe used very little metal throughout the Middle Ages. Meanwhile, Islam and China were making great strides in the fields of scholarship and technology. In fact, even the spread of the teachings of Aristotle to Europe can be attributed to Islamic scholars. In actuality, Europe made relatively few revolutionary developments throughout the Middle Ages.
I found the most intruiging article to be the one concerning the laicization of Europe from the twelfth century onward. The thorough explanation of the political nature of laicization was, I thought, decidedly fascinating.
I was surprised to learn that the movement to a more secular populus and government was not a "conscious" decision (so to speak) the regal and fuedal authorities made spontaneously and effectively, but rather a progressive, methodical, and "semi-conscious" revolution whose key players were, surprisingly, the lower classes and officials. These people, whose original allegiance lay (according to the article) firstly with the Church, secondly with local lords, and lastly the regency, witnessed the economic boom give rise to more influential and more stable secular powers. Ambitious men now had a new opportunity to gain power and prestige, and as the secular kingdoms expanded so did the number of low-ranked officials. So, while the heads of the government did not dare attack the Church, these clerks could not be so easily controlled. They often criticized their rivals (who happened to be the clerics) and thus slowly turned public opinion toward the ever-expanding monarchies.
At the same time, secular governments began to define and curb the power of Rome as well as its previously-inherent authority. They began to tax and legislate in spite of the Church, enlisted many laymen as knights, seemed to provide ample opportunity for personal gain, etc. All these factors combined to create a strange and unexpected awe and loyalty toward the states. Eventually, the states could assert their power directly through formal proclamations delaring the final, imoerative nature inherent in a kingly decision. When forced to choose, most people sided with the secular governments, which had successfully rose to become more immediate and pressing than the Church.
This movement, which we would today call a "grassroots" progression, is what most surprised me. I had always assumed that from the twelfth to fourteenth century or so, powerful local lords with ambition had merely begun to claim more authority as well as property. I surmised that the Chruch's efforts to suppress this "revolt" had turned public support toward the lay government, not that a slow cultural and economic secularization had preceeded any open declaration of worldly (or otherworldly) authority over another (or over all). I was furthermore surprised that the Papacy apparently did nothing to hinder this blantant abandonment until it was too late. By the time Bonafice stood opposed to the secular governments, one (France) was able to brand him a heretic and successfully depose him (and later the Templars), proving that indeed the power had changed hands completely.
The ensuing "love-hate" relationship with the Papacy and the Empire would be a major factor in the development of both Europe and Christianity.
Salman Rahman
AP European History
Mr. Kirby
The aspects of the handout articles that really appealed to me while reading was how Europe in the Medieval Ages was a backward world compared to the Middle East, Eurasia, and Asia. I was very much surprised at how Europe in the Early Medieval Age was the last place to get advanced in all aspects of human life. It made my preconception about Europe in the middle ages simply wrong. As a child I have always read and heard that most great philosophers, mathematicians, and poets, like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Homer, were all from the European countries. Hence, I viewed Europe as the leader in all aspects of life, especially the philosophical and technological aspects. However, after reading the summer articles I came up to know that all these great men where either from before or after the Dark Ages of Europe. I thought of the Dark Age as a period when Europe suffered from the bubonic plague. I was really fascinated to know that all ideas and inventions came to Europe in the late middle ages or through the Islamic caliphates and dynasties.
As a child I have always heard from my parents about Baghdad, Damascus, and Cairo as great cities of the world from ancient times and was interested to learn more about them. I learned that cities were one of the major trading centers and flourished during the early middle ages. However, I was saddened thinking about the fate of the city of Baghdad which lay in ruins today once again. I knew about the inventions that came from India, Islam, and Asia but didn’t have a clue that Europe lagged so much behind these places. I was mostly surprised at knowing the fact that the teachings and philosophies of Aristotle also reached Europeans through Islam. Islam also played a major role in flourishing the Eurasian trade routes, economy, and even politics. Furthermore, it was also quite interesting learning that the Christian church and the state authority kept fighting throughout the Middle Ages in Europe.
Post a Comment