History questions not worth their own thread

[LightSpectra]

Ah, well free health care is quite different from public hospitals, which existed in the Christian world since at least the 3rd century. In fact you may have heard of the "Knights Hospitaller," which were a knightly order that essentially began as a protection force for a Christian hospital in Jerusalem.

 

[Plotinus]

You mean the fourth century, surely.

 

[Lord Baal]

The Knights Hospitalers weren't around that early, were they?

 

[LightSpectra]

You mean the fourth century, surely.

The documents of the First Council of Nicaea, canon LXX demands that a hospital be built in every major city of the Roman Empire; that's what you're probably thinking of. Though it's recorded (don't have time to fetch the source this moment, I can do so later if you dispute it) that Christians in the city of Rome cared for the sick even before the Edict of Toleration, meaning that there was "health care" by at least the end of the third century.

The Knights Hospitalers weren't around that early, were they?

The Knights Hospitaller didn't become an official military order until the 11th century.

 

[Lord Baal]

Ah, I get it now. I misread your post at the top of this page as stating the the Hospitallers were around in the 3rd Century. Needless to say, I was quite shocked, as that's several hundred years before the Crusades, and even before Christianity was accepted as Rome's (virtual) state religion.

 

[civ_king]

The documents of the First Council of Nicaea, canon LXX demands that a hospital be built in every major city of the Roman Empire; that's what you're probably thinking of. Though it's recorded (don't have time to fetch the source this moment, I can do so later if you dispute it) that Christians in the city of Rome cared for the sick even before the Edict of Toleration, meaning that there was "health care" by at least the end of the third century.



The Knights Hospitaller didn't become an official military order until the 11th century.

I'm talking about proper hospitals not place to isolate the ill

 

[LightSpectra]

I'm talking about proper hospitals not place to isolate the ill

Our modern notion of hospitals, with rooms separated to avoid infections, comes from the Arab world; this is true. But to say that the Moors had "health care" whereas the Christian world did not is absolutely false. One of the imperatives of Christianity is to care for the sick. One of the reasons Christianity was accepted so easily in the Roman Empire after its legalization was due to the fact that Christians had higher survival rates by virtue of their social-medical works.

 

[Tabster]

The Nestorians had a significant influence on Islamic medicine of this era and they were Christians.

 

[say1988]

How come the English developed and maintained a common law system while the rest of Europe has a civil law system?

 

[Agent327]

Our modern notion of hospitals, with rooms separated to avoid infections, comes from the Arab world; this is true. But to say that the Moors had "health care" whereas the Christian world did not is absolutely false. One of the imperatives of Christianity is to care for the sick. One of the reasons Christianity was accepted so easily in the Roman Empire after its legalization was due to the fact that Christians had higher survival rates by virtue of their social-medical works.

I did not know the late Roman empire and/or early Christian church kept statistics on survival rates.

 

[civ_king]

The Nestorians had a significant influence on Islamic medicine of this era and they were Christians.

please elaborate

 

[aronnax]

How come the English developed and maintained a common law system while the rest of Europe has a civil law system?

Simply France.

From Wiki

In the end, despite whatever resistance to codification, the codification of European private laws moved forward. Codifications were completed by Denmark (1687), Sweden (1734), Prussia (1794), France (1804), and Austria (1811). The French codes were imported into areas conquered by Bonaparte and later adopted with modifications in the Netherlands (1838), Italy and Romania (1865), Portugal (1867), Spain (1888), Germany (1900), and Switzerland (1912). These codifications were in turn imported into colonies at one time or another by most of these countries. The Swiss version was adopted in Brazil (1916) and Turkey (1926).

 

[Tabster]

please elaborate

To cut a long story short, the Nestorians were considered heretics and spread to the east, some ending up in Persia where they help set up an academy at Gundishapur, where they teached and translated medicine, astronomy, philosophy and other greek knowledge. The Persians were then conquered by the Islamic forces who then gained this knowledge.

 

[civ_king]

I was thinking about things like disinfectants (100% pure alcohol which IIRC the Arabs did)

 

[Yeekim]

I was thinking about things like disinfectants (100% pure alcohol which IIRC the Arabs did)

It's impossible to get 100% pure alcohol, afaik. The current record is 98% and that was sure as hell not done by Arabs!

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/news/2008/02/080219.aspx

Highest alcohol content in a drink
When Estonia was independent between the two world wars, the Estonian Liquor Monopoly marketed 98 per cent alcohol distilled from potatoes (196 proof in US terminology).

 

[bombshoo]

"In 1916, Austria-Hungary captured the port of Durazzo (Durrës) in Albania, used for assembling and servicing U-boats and for probes of the nearby Otranto Barrage. The retaking of Durazzo by Allied forces on Oct. 2, 1918 was the only Allied naval battle in which U.S. forces took part during the Great War."

Anyone know more about this? Did the USA and Austria-Hungary engage in a naval battle?

Source: http://www.cityofart.net/bship/frameset9.html

 

[Tabster]

Re- Nestorian/medicine, sorry it was something I read sometime ago (can't even remember where), I had to look up name of the academy. so can't really give any real details, if I remember anything I'll let you know.

I was thinking about things like disinfectants (100% pure alcohol which IIRC the Arabs did)

Yes, I have heard that the early Islamic Alchemist were the first to distill alcohol.

But, this is an example of where you might have to carefully consider your choice of words, they may have used the alcohol as we would use a 'disinfectant' but as they had no idea (AFAIK) about infection, or microbes, they weren't really using it as a 'disinfectant' even it appears that way to us. if you see what I mean. (they might have thought that the smell of the alcohol, or the fact it stings when applied to wound might provided the benefit, or have some other reason for using it).

Have you got any other examples ?

 

[Plotinus]

Many high-ranking physicians were Christians under the Umayyads and especially the Abassids, who were quite encouraging of the Christians under their rule since these Christians, being "Nestorian" (a label of dubious value), hated the Chalcedonian Byzantines. A famous example is the ninth-century Hunain ibn Ishaq, an expert on medicine of the eye and personal physician to the caliph. He translated enormous numbers of Greek texts, including much of Galen, into Arabic.

As for ancient Christians and medicine, I believe that xenodocheia - which were the real Christian innovation in this area, and which were basically hospitals for the sick and hostels for foreigners and the homeless combined - were a fourth-century development; Christians simply weren't in a position to run them before the time of Constantine. Their success is indicated by the fact that when the emperor Julian tried to reinvigorate paganism just fifty years after the edict of Milan, one of the things he wanted to do was set up a system of pagan xenodocheia in imitation of the Christian ones - recognising how central they had become to Roman society.

 

[say1988]

Simply France.

Although your quote shows several important areas codifying laws before France (over a century for Denmark), and more adopted the French code years (some nearly a century) after Napoleon. And the custom of Paris was either a forerunner of, or an example, of civil law, since Quebec civil law uses the civil law system adopted in the mid 17th Century.

Why did this happen? And why not in England?
I have also read that Scotland had a civil law system before Union.

Since that time most common law countries codified ,at least significant portions of, their laws, but still maintain the role of judges and precedence.

 

[BCLG100]

The Knights Hospitaller didn't become an official military order until the 11th century.

Not even then, they were not really militarised until the second quarter of the 12th century (though contrary to popular belief were given places to defend prior to the templars). Neither were 'confirmed' though until either the council of Troyes or a Papal Bull in 1149, depending on how you look at the religious power struggle.

Though the Knights of St John themselves were allegedly present in the Holy Land for roughly 500 years prior to the first crusade in 1096 but this is debatable, almost certainly they had some presence in Jerusalem for a 100 years preceding it as iirc one of the Norman Knights who would later go on the first crusade had made a pilgrimage some years prior to the 1st crusade.

Say 1988- I think by saying 'Simply France' he was meaning that the French spread their legal system when they were assimilating countries.

Scotland is an odd one, the Act of Union granted them the right to maintain their Church and legal system but their legal system is not that different to English.

It's tricky to answer your question simply, briefly the English legal system is essentially the soul of the country, it is what (among other things) the English civil law was about. Crucially perhaps, the big thinkers behind codification in the Enlightenment began their thinking when Britain was, relatively speaking, enjoying a massive period of stability. Those that wanted a code could gain no foothold as there was simply no reason to change nor did we get invaded by France.

Also i think you are confusing having a civil law code and codification, essentially a civil law code is the be all and end all for most civil law countries whilst codification merely implies the writing up of statute and in England, contrary to perhaps popular belief, is still quite absent. It is generally only in Criminal and Land law where much of the law has been put into statute and even then there are many avenues which are not.

Personally i wouldn't change the English legal system for anything and it is noticeable that out of the people that write up European Human Rights Acts originally the majority of them were English academics/lawyers, though i am quite sure others would have got there eventually.

The common law system advantages imo more than outweigh its disadvantages.