The Fire of the Middle Ages

Otakumonkey

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
30
Location
Jersey
Modern historians have abandoned the use of the phrase “The Dark Ages” "because of the unacceptable value judgment it implies" of the time period. The more common phrase used to describe this time period in Europe, roughly between CE 400 and CE 1400, is “the Middle Ages ”. However, the adjective “dark” is appropriate as the light of civilization was all but extinguished with the fall of the Roman Empire in the west. What filled in the emptiness left by the fall of Empire was the emergence of Christendom. William Manchester, an American historian, describes the Europe of the Dark Ages as a superstitious world in where the concept of Christendom was a reality. This was not the triumph of Christian ideals by far, but rather of the Universal Mother Church, in which all members and all aspects of society were bound. The politics, economics, religion, social mores, intellectual strivings, and the arts were aspects of the all-enveloping Christendom.
.
The politics of the Middle Ages most often concerned the power struggle between the church and the autocracies of Christian Europe. The bureaucracies that were set up by the Roman Empire in Western Europe totally disappeared with the fall of Rome. What filled this massive void were hundreds of pagan chieftains and warlords, who with their families, set up their power bases all over Europe. Over time, Church missionaries and officials arrived, converting the masses and creating their own power bases in order ensure that these newly created domains fell under the control of the Pontiffs in Rome. As years passed, various fiefdoms joined together, and eventually, with the blessing of the Church, various kingdoms such as the Holy Roman Empire were formed. A conflict soon emerged between over who held more temporal power. The struggle between the Holy See and the increasingly powerful crowned heads of Europe was still unresolved after centuries of turmoil. Manchester tells us “that in 1076 the Holy Fathers of the Vatican were still fighting the Holy Roman emperors”, trying to resolve an issue on who would appoint bishops and priests with authority to do God’s work. “An exasperated Gregory VII, resorting to his ultimate sanction, excommunicated Emperor Henry IV. That literally brought Henry to his knees. He begged for absolution and was granted it only after he spent three days and nights prostrate in the snows of Canossa, outside the papal castle in northern Italy.” However, this repentance was short-lived. “Changing his mind, (Henry IV) renewed his attack, and, undeterred by a second excommunication, drove Gregory from Rome.” In short order a new pope was elected, this time one who was more sympathetic to the Holy Roman Empire’s desires. It was another century before the papacy broke away from the control of the emperors. Still, the conflicts remained. Very little was resolved until Pope Innocent III brought the papacy and the Church to the height of its power in the thirteenth century. During the Middle Ages hidden intrigue, manipulation, murder, excommunications, war, and such were the tools of norm for politics.


A part of the imperial infrastructure that all but disappeared with the fall of the Roman Empire was trade. There was no economy to speak of during the Dark / Middle Ages. “It says much of the Middle Ages,” according to Manchester, “ that in the year 1500, after a thousand years of neglect, the roads built by the Romans were still the best in the continent.” No sane merchant was to travel these roads, as bandits and outlaws were abundant. Most of the other trade roots were in such disrepair they were unusable. All of the European harbors were in such terrible condition that none were able to be used at all, at least till the eighth century when basic sea commerce began to remerge. In the Dark Ages, the skills needed to craft and produce goods were forgotten. One of the skills lost was bricklaying. Manchester tells us that, “in all of Germany, England, Holland, and Scandinavia, virtually no stone buildings, except for cathedrals, were raised for ten centuries.” However, an agricultural economy did exist, but on a rather limited scale. All of the advances that the Romans had made in farming were lost. As Manchester tells us the serfs’, “basic agricultural tools were picks, forks, spades, rakes, scythes, and balanced sickles”. The lack of plows was a major problem in Northern Europe, where the hard and heavy earth had to be “sliced, moved, and turned by hand”. Horses and oxen were available, but were used more as a food than a tool to use in farming due to the fact that “the horse collar, harness, and stirrup did not exist until around 900 CE…. Peasants worked harder, sweated more, and collapsed more often than their animals.” The crops produced by the peasants would be given to the local lords, who in turn, offered the peasants protection. The crops would then be given to the Church, who in turn, offered the lords salvation.



Christianity was the core of every individual aspect of the Middle Ages. “It was a paradox: ,” Manchester explains, “the Church had replaced imperial Rome as the fixer of European frontiers, but missionaries found teaching pagans the lessons of Jesus to be an almost hopeless task. Yet converting them was easy. As quickly as the barbaric tribes had overrun the empire, Catholicism’s overrunning of the tribesmen was even quicker.” Christianity’s victories were very deceptive; very few of the new converts understood their faith. Paganism remained deeply entrenched in their ways of life. As a result, Christianity was slowly infiltrated and to some extent, subverted, by the paganism it had attempted to do away with. Manchester explains:, “Medieval man simply could not bear to part with Thor, Hermes, Zeus, Juno, Cronus, Saturn, and their peers. Idol worship addressed needs the Church could not meet. Its rituals, myths, legends, marvels, and miracles were peculiarly suited to people who…were always vulnerable to random disaster.” Pagan holidays still enjoyed wide popularity; therefore, the Church attempted to expropriate them. The Saturnalia, when even slaves enjoyed great liberty, became Christmas; the resurrection of Attis, Easter. Pentecost replaced the Floralia, All Souls’ Day replaced a festival for the dead, and the feast of the purification of Isis and the Roman Lupercalia were transformed into the Feast of the Nativity. The Christianity of the Middle Ages gained so much appeal with the masses due to the fact that it took several pagan events and ideas, and made it its own. This was the world of Christendom.


In the Middle Ages, there was no concept of time, no concept of the individual. The peasant lived in insular communities, rarely traveling within three miles from the place of birth in all of his short life. According to Manchester, the peasant folk, “ were baptized, shriven, attended mass, received the host at communion, married, and received the last rites never dreaming they should be informed about great events, let alone have any voice in them. Their anonymity approached the absolute. So did their mute acceptance of it.” Although they called themselves Christians, medieval Europeans were ignorant of the Gospels. The Bible existed only in a language they could not read. The mumbled incantations at Mass were meaningless to them. Manchester tells his reader that the medieval European “believed in sorcery, witchcraft, hobgoblins, werewolves, amulets, and black magic, and were thus indistinguishable from pagans. If a lady died, the instant her breath stopped servants ran through the manor house, emptying every container of water to prevent her soul from drowning, and before her funeral the corpse was carefully watched to prevent any dog or cat from running across the coffin, thus changing her remains into a vampire. Meantime, her lord, praying for her salvation, was lying prostrate, his head turned eastward and his arms stretched out, forming a cross. Nothing in the New Testament supported such delusions and rituals; nevertheless the precautions were taken—with the blessings of the clergy.” As shown, the Medieval Christian lived his or her short, violent life in constant fear, mostly due to delusional superstitions, with blessings, not refutations, of the Church.



During the Middle Ages, intellectual strivings and innovation became stagnant. The devout of the Church scorned reason. “Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153),” Manchester tells us, “the most influential Christian of his time, bore a deep distrust of the intellect and declared that the pursuit of knowledge, unless sanctified by a holy mission, was a pagan act and therefore vile. Except for the works of Augustine, Aquinas, Chaucer, and a few others, literary works of the time period did not exist for the simple reason that the majority of the population could neither read nor write. Since the time of Rome, no invention was created that held any significance except for the introduction of waterwheels in the 800s and windmills in the late 1100. No startling new ideas had appeared; no new territories outside Europe had been explored. Everything was as it had been for as long as the oldest European could remember. Manchester describes the thought process of the time as, “The sun moved round (the Earth) every day. Heaven was above the immovable Earth, somewhere in the overarching sky; hell seethed far beneath their feet. Kings ruled at the pleasure of the Almighty; all others did what they were told…. The Church was indivisible, the afterlife a certainty; all knowledge was already known. And nothing would ever change”. Thus, in the medieval mindset, there was no reason for intellectual pursuits, as Christendom was already the way that God desired it to be.



The Church also restricted the arts of the Middle Ages. If art was created that was not sanctioned by the Church, or did not fall with in normal Christian tradition, it was considered heresy and sacrilege, and was soon destroyed. The only true great works of art that survive from the period are the majestic cathedrals. Even the creative types had no sense of the individual, as historians know absolutely nothing of the architects and builders. Manchester tells us that “each of these great soaring medieval cathedrals, our most treasure legacy from that age, required three or four centuries to complete. Canterbury was twenty-three generations in the making; Chartres, a former Druidic center, eighteen generations.” It did not matter to the builders and the architects that no one would know who they were. Their identity was irreverent. Manchester said it best “They were glorifying God” and that was all that mattered.



The world of Christendom encompassed all aspects of Medieval society. The politics, economics, religion, social mores, intellectual strivings, arts, everything fell under the control of the Church. If something did not agree with the Church and its teachings, it was branded as heresy and destroyed. If something did not fit in, such as the one million Jews living in Europe, it was hated and ignored. Life would never change, the Church taught, as God’s Kingdom on Earth had been established, and the return of Christ was eminent. This was the world of the Middle Ages. A world lit only by the fires of the Church.
 
this article would be a very nice addition to the conquest forum in the thread about dark ages, if the debate on if they were really dark ages comes uo again (would not be surprised, its one of theings me and Mr.Oda somthing or other clash on in our friendlly duel somtimes :D (and it supports my argument :))

but also, did you know that dark ages applies to ALL peoples in the beginning of that period-why?- beacuase its know known that a asteriod impacted the earth causing a bit of a dust cloud recorded by the literate civs at the time,including Byzantium, and China, this in turn cause a bit of famine, and all things associated with scaricity of food
 
No, I did not know that. Thank you=-)
 
Originally posted by Xen
but also, did you know that dark ages applies to ALL peoples in the beginning of that period-why?- beacuase its know known that a asteriod impacted the earth causing a bit of a dust cloud recorded by the literate civs at the time,including Byzantium, and China, this in turn cause a bit of famine, and all things associated with scaricity of food
Never heard of that one... :hmm:

In any case, China's 'dark' age wasn't that dark, and ended swiftly in the 6th century, with the restoration and foundation of the Second Empire.
 
*Smirks* here I am, Xen. As you expected me to be, I'm sure. And I have much to say about this article. Such as the fact that it seems to be unfortunately based on the works of an extremely biased scholar with many bones to pick with the church.

First nitpick : 400 to 1400 is a very rough and not commonly accepted definition of the Middle Ages. The more commonly debated ones are :

Beginning :
CE 476 : Fall of the Western Roman Empire
CE 312 : End of Constantin's Reign
VIth Century CE : End of the barbarian invasions

End :
1492 : Columbus reaching America
early XVIth century : Break-up of the Catholic church, beginning of the religion wars (Luther himself was born in 1483).
1453 : Fall of Constantinople.

Second Nitpick
You point out peasants being unable to read as a "great darkness of the middle age". Great darkness, yes. But of the middle age? Peasants and the poorer individuals (slaves) very often had little to no education well after the end of the Middle Age - and well before the start of it. The difference is that when it comes to the Middle Age, we actually *focus* on peasants life and the downthrodden of societies, whereas most historians chose to ignore them - shrug them aside - to focus instead on the middle and high classes when it comes to the adjacent romans and renaissance era.

Third nitpick
"The light of civilization", gone? Strange claim. Are we not talking of the society (Medieval Europe) that came up with the soaring cathedrals many still admire today, with gothic architercture, the society which left behind such wonders as the Tapestry of Bayeux, the society which created the first universities? Certainly, the cathedrals were religious buildings...but so was the greek parthenon, and that has never stopped anyone from considering it a great symbol of the greek civilization.

No civilization? Hardly.



My main bone to pick is the absolutely ridiculous claim on the lack of trade throughout the middle age. To claim that is to ignore - wheter by choice or by sloppy research - that the check was created in the middle age, as well as serious banking.

It is just as well showing ignorance that an important factor of Columbus' journey west were to find new road by which to reach China after the fall of Constatinople in the middle 15th century (late Middle Age) closed the land route (the same land route which had been used - wheter to its end or to a trading outpost in asia, the debate goes on - by the Polo family of Venitian MERCHANTS centuries earlier)?

And what to say of the great rivalry for COMMERCIAL proeminence in Italy between Genoa and Venice? Certainly, if merchans did not dare travel far from their town, these two cities on opposite sides of the peninsula would never have had any business getting involved in trade. Yet the two rivaled for commercial proeminence throughout the peninsula. The Venitian merchants, it is said (though again the point is debated), precipitated the fall of Constantinople due to their influence on the fourth crusade.

And what to say of the Hanseatic league? Covering northern Europe and Holland, it was a key commercial zone, where the trade roads going north to Bergen (Norway), north-east to Novgorod (mmodern Russia) west to england and south to italy met, a key trading point of the network linking the cities. A minor deal, perhaps. In the later Middle Age, said Hanseatic League had trade posts - permanent buildings with people to manage them on a permanent basis - ranging from Novgorod in Russia to London in England, across the width of Europe.

Trade route in the Middle Age went across Europe, ranging from the Middle East to Spain passing through the Byzantine empire, Italy and France, or ranging form Novgorod to south of the Sahara, passing through Germany and Italy both.

In addition, several industrial (in the sense of focused primarily on producing goods rather than food) areas developed in the Middle Age. The fact that these developped clearly indicate that they were able to trade off any produced surplus - otherwise they would simply have produced what they needed like any village. The fact that they were able to turn toward "industrial" production clearly indicate that they were able to trade for any food they needed with outside sources. They focused on producing a variety of things : metalwork, fabric (england), scuplture, glasswork, pottery, dyes (north-east france, germany, the netherlands), as well as silk clothes, ceramic and the like (Italy).

And then there is the role of great Fairs. The six great fairs of Champagne (france) where Italian merchants came to sell products from the south (Ivory, Silk stuff() and the Mediteranean bassion and went back home carrying wool and other merchandises acquired from northern europe.

This is not the sign of an absent trade. Neither are the existence of major cities - a city by its very existence imply active trade. A large city imply very active trade. Cities of 50 000 to 100 000 inhabitants, while not common, did exist : Napoli, Genoa, Venice, Bologna, Florence all fit the bill. London had 40 000 inhabitants - which, is plenty large enough. Some cities of the Netherland had at least a comparable size.

There is NO fact to support the claim of absent trade in the late Middle Age.

I may adress the church later.
 
Maybe I should correct it, and state "untill the late middle period, trade was all buy non-existant in Western EUROPE". I left out a HUGE chunk of this book, so I suggest that you read it before you judge it. Manchester does seem to have a bias against the church, and I happen to agree with him that it was the major stifling point of the middle ages, despite all the good we KNOW it did. However, the agruement of my paper is not to continue to use the term "dark". The arguement was that the "light" of the world at this time was the Church, therefore, the term the "dark ages" does not work. Therefore, the Middle Ages, the time after the fall of Rome and before the rebirth of Europe, is the proper term.

Civilization did not die with the fall of Rome. All one has to do is look at Islamic Civilazation (another essay I wrote). One can even look east at Byzantium. That was not the point of this essay, which was fully concentrating on Western Europe. Maybe I should have been more clear, but I did write it at the beginning of my senior year of highschool.
 
I was assuming your point was as stated in teh first paragraph :

"However, the adjective “dark” is appropriate as the light of civilization was all but extinguished with the fall of the Roman Empire in the west"

If your point is that the light of the Roman civilization became the light of the Christian church - then I have no difficulties with this article whatsoever. I would however recommend that you slightly ammend the one or two difficult passage, as readers of civfanatics might get confused by an article stating that there was no trade in the Middle Age - especially if XIII suceed in getting me to write an article on trade in the Middle Age.

And of course the one passage I quoted above might use some rewording if you are of the opinion that dark age is NOT appropriate...

For the records, I was also adressing only Europe (and pretty much focused on the western Europe : Italy, France, Germany, England, etc.
 
Yes, I shall change the wording around a bit. I wrote this as a summer assignment, before I took the class, and really havn't looked at it since. I'll update it. Thanks for pointing out the things I should have caught=)
 
Top Bottom