Author Topic: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant  (Read 371951 times)

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1800 on: August 10, 2012, 10:53:43 PM »

"I want to know what were the steps by which
man passed from barbarism to civilization (Voltaire)"

   



What are our origins?
Where are we now?
Where are we headed?
Share your thoughts with us!
   Volume Five (The Renaissance)
       
"Four elements constitute Civilization -- economic provision, political organization, moral traditions, and the pursuit of knowledge and the arts. "
 
"I shall proceed as rapidly as time and circumstances will permit, hoping that a few of my contemporaries will care to grow old with me while learning. "
       
"These volumes may help some of our children to understand and enjoy the infinite riches of their inheritance."
       
"Civilization begins where chaos and insecurity ends."






This volume, then, is about YOU. Join our group daily and listen to what Durant and the rest of us are saying. Better yet, share with us your opinions.
[/center]

SeniorLearn Contact: JoanK & Discussion Facilitator: Trevor
 


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The ** above mark several pages about art in the Netherlands that seem to be little more than a retelling of ugly arts, much as already discribed. I have left those pages out, as I think they add nothing whatsoever to the S  o  C. == Trevor

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1801 on: August 11, 2012, 01:54:48 PM »
Good idea, Trevor.

I took the description of the last volume out of the heading. Sorry I was so slow in realizing it was outdated.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1802 on: August 12, 2012, 11:46:02 PM »
Durants'  S  o  C
Vol. VI  The REFORMATION
Pgs 144-145



                                                  MIDDLE  EUROPE  1300-1460

Since man lives by permission of physical geography, it is his fate to be divided by mountains, rivers, and seas into groups that develop, in semi-isolation their diverging languages and creeds, their climatically conditioned features, customs, and dress. Driven by insecurity to suspect the strange, he dislikes and condemns the alien, outlandish looks and ways of other groups than his own. All those fascinating varieties terrain-- mountains and valleys, fiords and straits, gulfs and streams-- that make Europe a panorama of diverse delight, have broken a population of a minor continent into a score of peoples cherishing their differences, and self-imprisoned in their heritage of hate. There is charm in this mosaic of originalities, and one would deprecate a world of people confined in identical myths and pantaloons. And yet, above and beneath these dissimilarities of costume, custom, faith, and speech, nature and man’s needs have forced  upon him an economic uniformity and interdependence that became more visible and compelling as invention and knowledge topple barriers away. From Norway to Sicily, from Russia to Spain, the unprejudiced surveying eye sees men not so much as diversely dressed and phrased, but as engaged in like pursuits moulding like characters: tilling and mining the earth, weaving garments, building homes, altars, and schools, rearing the young, trading surpluses, and forging social order as man’s strongest organ of defence and survival. For a moment we shall contemplate Middle Europe as such a unity.

In Scandinavia man’s prime task was to conquer the cold, in Holland the sea, in Germany the forests, in Austria the mountains; agriculture, the ground of life, hung its fate on these victories. By thirteen hundred the rotation of crops had become general in Europe, multiplying the yield of the soil. But from 1347 to 1381 half the population of  Central Europe was wiped out by the Black Death; and the mortality of men arrested the fertility of  the earth. In one year Strasbourg lost 14,000 souls, Cracow 20,000, Breslau 30,000. For a century the Harz mines remained without miners. With simple animal patience men resumed the ancient labours, digging and turning the earth. Sweden and Germany intensified their extraction of iron and copper; coal was mined in Aachen and Dortmund, tin in Saxony lead in Harz, silver in Sweden and the Tyrol, gold in Carinthia and Transylvania.

The flow of metals fed a growing industry, which fed a spreading trade. Germany, leader in mining, naturally led in metallurgy. The blast furnace appeared there in the fourteenth century; with the hydraulic hammer and the rolling mill it transformed the working of metals. Nuremberg became an ironmongers’ capital, famous for its cannon and bells. The industry and commerce of Nuremburg, Augsburg, Mainz, Speyer, and Cologne made them almost independent city-states. The Rhine, Main, Lech, and Danube, gave the south German towns first place in the overland traffic with Italy and the East. Great commercial and financial firms, with far-flung outlets and agencies, rose along these routes, surpassing, in the fifteenth century, the reach and power of the Hanseatic League. The league was still strong in the fourteenth century, dominating trade in the North and Baltic seas; but in 1397 the Scandinavian countries united to break this monopoly; and soon thereafter the English and Dutch began to carry their own goods. Even the herring conspired against the Hanse; about 1417 they decided to spawn in the North Sea rather than the Baltic; Lubeck, a pillar of the league, lost the herring trade and declined; Amsterdam won it and flourished.

Underneath the evolving economy the class war seethed -- between country and city, lords and serfs, nobles and business men, merchant guilds and craft guilds, capitalists and proletarians, clergy and laity, Church and state. In Sweden, Norway and Switzerland serfdom was going or was gone, but elsewhere in Middle Europe it was taking on new life. In Denmark, Prussia, Silesia, Pomerania, and Brandenburg, where peasants had earned their freedom by clearing the wilderness, serfdom was restored in the fifteenth century by a marital aristocracy; we may judge the harshness of these Junkers from a proverb of the Brandenburg peasants, which wished long life to the Lord’s horses, least he should take to riding his serfs. In the Baltic lands  the barons and Teutonic knights, at first content to enserf the conquered Slav inhabitants were induced, by the labour shortages that followed the Black Death and the Polish war of 1409 to impress into bondage any idlers “who roam on the roads and in the towns;” and treaties were made with  neighbouring governments for the extradition of fugitive serfs.

The mercantile ‘Bourgeoisie’, favoured by the emperors as a foil to the barons, ruled the municipalities so definitely that in many cases the city hall and merchant’s guildhall were one. Craft guilds were  reduced to subjection, submitted to municipal regulation of wages, and were prohibited from united action; here as in England, and France, proud craftsmen were turned into defenceless ‘proletaires.’ Now and then the workers tried revolt. In 1348 the artisans of Nuremburg captured the municipal council and ruled the city for a year, but the Emperor’s soldiers restored the patrician merchants to power. In Prussia an ordinance of 1358 condemned any striker to have an ear cut off. Peasants rebellions flared up in Denmark ( 1340, 1441). Saxony, Silesia, Brandenburg, and the Rhineland ( 1432), in Norway and Sweden ( 1434); but they were too laxly organised to achieve more than a passing cathartic violence. Revolutionary ideas circulated through cities and villages. In 1438, an anonymous radical wrote a pamphlet expounding an imaginary “ Kaiser Sigismund’s Reformation” on socialistic principals. The stage was slowly prepared for the Peasants’ War of 1525.

 


JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1803 on: August 13, 2012, 01:00:48 PM »
There's no one like the Durants at their best.

"All those fascinating varieties terrain-- mountains and valleys, fiords and straits, gulfs and streams-- that make Europe a panorama of diverse delight, have broken a population of a minor continent into a score of peoples cherishing their differences, and self-imprisoned in their heritage of hate."

Wow, that makes me think!

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1804 on: August 14, 2012, 11:04:36 PM »
Quote
that make Europe a panorama of diverse delight, have broken a population of a minor continent into a score of peoples cherishing their differences, and self-imprisoned in their heritage of hate.

To write that Europeans have a 'heritage' of hate, had to have been written by a hater of Europe. It does not sound like Will Durant. Durant was of European heritage himself, and I have read his works including his books on philosophy, and hating Europeans was not part of his work. 

People who throw around the word 'hate' are suspect in my eyes, and I do not remember Will Durant using that word to describe any other group of people, even though we have read of every atrocity in the world being committed by every group we have studied from Asia through the Arabian peninsula.

Durant said that the 'lust for power' underlay all forms of politics, but he never referred to any group as a whole as having a 'heritage of hate' until this comment on Europe.

The invasions of Europe from the East was not about hate according to history, but about the 'easterners' whether Arab or Mongol wanting to take Europe for their own. They wanted what Europe had, and that is called 'greed', not hate. The Europeans fought back, and that is called 'survival' not hate.

Emily

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1805 on: August 18, 2012, 11:13:36 PM »
 
The Durants'  S  o  C
Vol. VI  The REFORMATION
Pgs 145-147



                                      THE ORGANIZATION OF ORDER

Order is the mother of civilization and liberty; chaos is the midwife of dictatorship; therefore history may now and then say a good word for kings. Their medieval function was to free the individual in rising measure from local domination, and to centralize in one authority the power to legislate, judge, punish, mint, and make war. The feudal baron mourned the loss of local autonomy, but the simple citizen thought it good that there should be, in his country, one master, one coinage, one law. Men rarely hoped, in those half-illiterate days, that even kings might disappear, and leave no master but the laws and blunders that men had freely made.

Scandinavia had some remarkable monarchs in the fourteenth century. Magnus II of Sweden organized  the conflicting laws of his kingdom into a homogeneous national code (1347) In Denmark Eric IV disciplined the barons and strengthened the central power; Christopher II weakened it; Waldemar IV restored it, and made his country one of the major forces in European politics. But the supreme figure in the Scandanavian dynasties of this age was Waldemar’s daughter Margaret. Married at ten (1363 ) to Haakon VI of Norway, who was the son of Magnus II of Sweden, she seemed destined by blood and marriage to unite the kindred thrones.  When her father died ( 1375) she hurried to Copenhagen with her five year old son  Olaf, and persuaded the baronial and ecclesiastical electors to accept him as king and herself as regent. When her husband died  (1380) Olaf inherited the crown of  Norway; but as he was still only ten, Margaret, now  twenty-seven, there too acted as regent. Her prudence, tact, and courage astonished her contemporaries, who were accustomed to male incompetence or violence; and the feudal lords of Denmark and Norway, after dominating many kings, proudly supported his wise and beneficent queen. When Olaf came of age ( 1385) her diplomacy won for him the succession to the Swedish throne. Two years later he died, and her patient, far-seeing plans for the unification of Scandinavia seemed frustrated by his death. But the royal council of Denmark, seeing no male heir available who could match “Margrete” in ability to maintain order and peace, overrode Scandinavian laws against a woman ruler, and elected her Regent of the Realm ( 1387). Proceeding to Oslo, she was chosen Regent of Norway for life ( 1388) and a year later the Swedish nobles, having deposed an unsatisfactory king, made her their queen. She prevailed upon all three kingdoms to recognise her grandnephew Eric as heir to the thrones. In 1397 she summoned the three councils of state to Kalmar in Sweden; there Sweden, Norway and Denmark were declared forever united, all to be under one ruler, but each to keep its own customs and laws. Eric was crowned king, but as he was only fifteen, Margaret continued to act as regent till her death (1412). No other European ruler of the age had so extensive a realm, and so successful a reign.

Her grandnephew did not inherit her wisdom. Eric allowed the Union to become in effect a Danish Empire, with a Council at Copenhagen ruling the three states. In this empire Norway declined, losing the literary leadership that she had held from the tenth to the thirteenth century. In 1434 Engelbrekt Engelbreksson led a revolt of Sweden against the Danish hegemony; he gathered at Arborga (1435 ) a national diet of nobles, bishops, yeomen and burghers; and this broad based assembly became, through a continuity of 500 years, the Swedish Riksdag of today. Engelbreksson and Kark Knutsen were chosen regents. a year later the hero of the revolution was assassinated, and Knutsen ruled Sweden as regent, then intermittently as king, till his death (1470).

Meanwhile Christian I (1448-81) began the Oldenburg dynasty that governed Denmark till 1863 and Norway till 1814. Iceland came under Danish rule during Margaret’s regency (1381). the high point of the island’s history and literature had passed, but it continued to give chaotic Europe an unheeded lesson in competent and orderly government..

The strongest democracy in the world at this time was in Switzerland. In the history of that invincible country the heroes were the Cantons. First were the German-speaking “forest cantons” of Uri, Schwyz, and Unterwalden, which in 1291 united a confederation of  mutual defence. After the historic victory of the Swiss peasants over the Hapsburg army at Morgarten ( 1315) the Confederation, while formally acknowledging the sovereignty of the Holy Roman Empire, maintained a virtual independence. New  cantons were added; Lucerne ( 1332), Zurich (1351), Glarus and Zug (1352), Bern (1353); and  the name Schwyz was in 1352 extended to the whole. Encouraged to autonomy by geographical barriers, and accepting French, German, or Italian speech and ways according to the slope of its valleys and the course of its steams, each canton made its own laws, through assemblies chosen by the vote of the citizens. The extent of the franchise varied from canton to canton, and from time to time, but all cantons pledged themselves to a united foreign policy and to the arbitration of their disputes by a federal diet. Though the cantons fought one another, nevertheless, the constitution of the Confederation became and remains an inspiring example of federalism-- the union of self governing regions under freely accepted common agencies and laws.

To defend its liberty the Confederation required military training of all males, and military service, at call, from all men between ten and sixty years of age. The Swiss infantry, armed with pikes and sturdy discipline, provided the most feared and expensive legions in Europe. The  cantons, to eke out their income, leased their regiments to foreign powers, and for a time “made Swiss valour an article of merchandise.” Austrian overlords still claimed feudal rights in Switzerland, and occasionally tried to enforce them; they were repulsed at Sempach (1386) and Nafels ( 1388 ) in battles that merit some remembrance in the records of democracy. In 1446 the Treaty of Constance once more confirmed the formal allegiance of Switzerland to the Empire, and its actual liberty.



mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1806 on: August 19, 2012, 04:27:30 PM »
I believe we may see Ariel's influence in this passage.

I know little about Scandinavian history, what is it that combines Sweden, Norway and Denmark into Scandinavia? Was it the Norseman? Was it Margaret? Are there cultural similarities?

I also don't remember that i learned any Swiss history, that was interesting.

Jean

Brian

  • Posts: 221
    • Brian's Den
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1807 on: August 20, 2012, 09:17:00 AM »
I am sorry to have missed so many posts lately - it is not that I am no longer interested - I have replaced my trusty old computer with a new one,  and am having problems getting back to the sites to which I previously contributed.

I will pay better attention from now on.

Brian.

Brian

  • Posts: 221
    • Brian's Den
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1808 on: August 20, 2012, 09:25:21 AM »
I don't know whether Ariel had anything special to do with the last passage that Trevor put up for us, but I am quite sure that this sentence came directly from the pen of Durant himself.

Quote
Order is the mother of civilization and liberty; chaos is the midwife of dictatorship

Brian

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1809 on: August 20, 2012, 02:39:42 PM »
A King Olaf always shows up in crossword puzzles, along with a Saint Olaf. Probably not the same Olaf.

Amazing how little i know about either Scandenavia or Switzerland, compared to the rest of Europe. Recently, I was in a restaurant, and the people at the next table were talking to the waitress in a language I'd never heard before. I was listening, trying to fiogure ouit what language it was, and finally asked the waitress. They were Swedish. I wish I had asked about the roots of the language, I couldn't pick out any Latin or Germanic roots, as you can with most European languages.

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1810 on: August 20, 2012, 02:40:25 PM »
Ha, it's a descendant of Old Norse, and "mutually intelligible" with Norwegian and Danish. It's also spoken in a few parts of Finland (although I believe the Finns do not consider themselves Scandinavian).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_language

bluebird24

  • Posts: 415

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1812 on: August 22, 2012, 03:08:18 PM »
Bluebird: that's an absolutely fascinating site: I could spend forever on it.

I notice how many of the maps are round, with land in the center, and an ocean encircling it. The oldest map (Babylonian ) is like that: maybe the Greeks got their idea from them.

I love the description of the islands that lay beyond the ocean:

'The accompanying text mentions seven outer regions beyond the encircling ocean. The descriptions of five of them have survived[4]:
 the third island is where "the winged bird ends not his flight," i.e., cannot reach.
 on the fourth island "the light is brighter than that of sunset or stars": it lay in the northwest, and after sunset in summer was practically in semi-obscurity.
 The fifth island, due north, lay in complete darkness, a land "where one sees nothing," and "the sun is not visible."
 the sixth island, "where a horned bull dwells and attacks the newcomer"
 the seventh island lay in the east and is "where the morning dawns."'

They are so close to seeing the world as a sphere!

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1813 on: August 28, 2012, 06:09:13 AM »
Durants'   S  o  C
Vol. VI  The REFORMATION.
Pgs. 147 - 150



                                 GERMANY CHALLENGES THE CHURCH

Germany too was a federation, but its constituent parts were ruled not by democratic assemblies but by secular or ecclesiastical princes acknowledging only a limited fealty to the head of the holy Roman Empire. Some of these states  -- Bavaria, Württemberg, Thuringia, Hesse, Nassau, Meissen, Saxony, Brandenburg, Carinthia, Austria, and the Palatinate -- were ruled by dukes, counts, margraves, or other secular lords; some -- Magdeburg, Mainz, Halle, Bamberg, Cologne, Bremen, Strasburg, Salzburg, Trier, Basel, Hildesheim -- were politically subject in varying degrees to bishops and archbishops; but nearly a hundred cities had by 1460 won charters of practical freedom from their lay or church superiors. In each principality delegates of the three estates -- nobles, clergy, commons -- met occasionally in a territorial diet that exercised some restraint, through its power of the purse, on the authority of the prince. Principalities and free cities sent representatives to the Reichstag or Imperial Diet. A special  Kurfurstentag, or Diet of Electors, was called to choose a king; normally it was composed of the king of Bohemia, the duke of Saxony, the margrave of Brandenburg, the count palatine, and the archbishops of Mainz, Trier, and Cologne. Their choice created only a king, who became the acknowledged head of the Holy Roman Empire when he was crowned emperor by the Pope; hence his precoronation title of “King of the Romans.” He made his capital primarily in Nuremburg, often elsewhere, even in Prague. His authority rested on tradition and prestige rather than on possessions or force; he owned no territory beyond his own domain as one feudal prince among many; he was dependent upon the Reichstag or Kurfurstentag for funds to administer his government or to wage war; and this dependence condemned even able men like Charles IV or Sigismund to humiliating failures in foreign affairs. The destruction of the Hohenstaufen dynasty by the powerful popes of the thirteenth century had fatally weakened the Holy Roman Empire founded ( ad. 800) by Pope Leo III and Charlemegne. In 1400 it was a loose association of Germany, Austria, Bohemia, Holland, and Switzerland.

The conflict between Empire and papacy revived when, on the same day in 1314, two rival groups of electors chose Louis of Bavaria and Frederick of Austria as rival kings. John XXII, from his papal seat at Avignon, recognized both as kings, neither as emperor, and argued that since only a pope could crown a king as emperor, he should be accepted as judge of the validity of the election; moreover, said the ambitious pontiff, the administration of the empire should belong to the papacy between the death of an emperor and the coronation of his successor. Louis and Frederick preferred  the arbitrament of war. At Muhldorf (1322) Louis defeated and captured Frederick, and henceforth assumed full Imperial authority. John ordered him to resign all titles and powers, and to appear before the papal court to receive sentence as a rebel against the Church. Louis refusing, the Pope excommunicated him (1324 ), bade all Christians in the Empire to resist his rule, and laid an interdict upon any region that recognized him as king. Most of Germany ignored these edicts, for the Germans, like the English, rated the Avignon popes as servants or allies of France. In the progressive weakening of faith and papacy men were beginning to think of themselves as patriots first and Christians afterward. Catholicism, which is supernational, declined; nationalism, which is Protestant, rose.

At this juncture Louis received aid and comfort from incongruous allies, Pope John's bull “Cum inter nonmulla (1323) had branded as heresy the notion that Christ and the Apostles refused to own property, and he had directed the inquisition to summon before its tribunal the “ Spiritual Franciscans” who affirmed that view. Many friars retorted the charge of heresy upon the  Pope; they expressed holy horror at the wealth of the Church; some of them called the aged pontiff Antichrist; and the general of the Spirituals, Michael Cessna, led a large minority of them into open alliance with Louis of Bavaria ( 1324 ). Emboldened by their support, Louis issued at Sachsenhausen a manifesto against “John XXII, who calls himself pope”; denounced him as a man of blood and a friend of injustice, and who was resolved to destroy the Empire; and demanded that a general council should try the Pope for heresy.

The king was further encouraged by the appearance, at his court in Nuremberg, two professors from the univesity of Paris -- Marsilius of Padua and John of Jandun -- whose book, “defensor Pacis’, attacked the Avignon papacy in terms that must have pleased the royal ears. “ What do you find but a swarm of simoniacs from every quarter? what but the clamour  of pettifoggers, the . . . abuse of honorable men? There justice to the innocent falls to the ground, unless you can buy it for a price.” Echoing the Albigensian and Waldensian preachers of the thirteenth century, and anticipating Luther by two hundred years, the authors argued that Christianity should be based exclusively upon the Bible. A general  council of the church should be summoned not by the pope but by the emperor; the latter’s consent should be required for the election of any pontiff; and the pope, like everybody else, should be subject to the emperor. Delighted to hear this , Louis decided to go to Italy and have himself crowned emperor by the people of Rome. Early in 1327 he set out with a small army, some Franciscans and two philosophers whom he employed to compose his public pronouncements. In April the Pope issued new bulls, excommunicating John and Marsilius, and ordered Louis to leave Italy. But Louis was welcomed into Milan by the ruling Visconti, and received the iron crown as the formal sovereign of Lombardy. On January the 7th, 1328, he entered Rome amid the acclimations of a populace resentful of the papal residence at Avignon. He established himself in the Vatican Palace and summoned a public assembly to meet at the Capitol. To the multitude there he appeared as a candidate for investiture with the Imperial Crown. It gave its tumultuous consent; and on January 17 the coveted  diadem was placed upon his head by the old syndic Sciarra Colonna -- that same unrelenting foe of the papacy who, almost a quarter of a century before, had fought and threatened with death Boniface VIII, and who again symbolised for a moment the challenge of the rising state to the weakened Church.

Pope John, now seventy-eight, never dreamed of accepting defeat. He proclaimed a holy crusade to depose Louis from all authority, and bade the Romans, under pain of interdict, to expel him from their city and return to papal obedience. Louis replied in terms recalling his excommunicated predecessor Henry IV; he convoked another popular assembly, and in its presence issued an Imperial edict accusing the Pope of heresy and tyranny, deposed him from ecclesiastical office, and sentencing him to punishment by secular powers. A committee of Roman clergy and laity, under his instructions, named Peter of Corvara as a rival pope. Reversing the roles of Leo III and Charlemagne, Louis placed the papal tiara upon Peter’s head, and proclaimed him Pope. Nicholas V (May 12, 1328 ). The Christian world marvelled, and divided into two camps, almost along the same lines that would divide Europe after the Reformation.

Petty local events changed the situation dramatically. Louis had appointed Marsilius of Padua spiritual administrator of the Capital; Marsilius ordered the few priests who remained in Rome to celebrate Mass as usual, despite the interdict; some who refused were tortured; an Augustan friar was exposed in a den of lions on the Capitol. Many Romans felt that this was carrying philosophy too far. The Italians had never learned to love Tuetons; when some German soldiers took food from the markets without paying for it, riots ensued. To support his troops and retinue Louis needed money; he imposed a tribute of 10,000 florins ( $250,000) upon the laity, and equal sums upon the clergy and Jews. Resentment mounted so dangerously that Louis thought it time to return to Germany. On August 4, 1328, he began a retreat through Italy. Papal troops took possession of Rome the next day; the palaces of Louis’s Roman supporters were destroyed, and their goods confiscated  to the Church. The people made no resistance, but returned to their devotions and their crimes.

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1814 on: August 29, 2012, 03:13:11 PM »
How much division and quarreling there has always been in Europe, and in the church!!

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1815 on: August 31, 2012, 06:32:16 PM »
Quote
'A swarm of simoniacs' and a 'clamour of pettifoggers'

Simoniacs and pettifoggers are not two words much in use today, if at all. I don't use them, but perhaps in religious circles they may still be used.

Simoniacs: the buying or selling of church offices

Pettifoggers: a lawyer whose methods are petty, underhanded, or disreputable. (I like the word 'shyster' for these types.)

I called a neighbor, who was a judge, and asked him if he had heard the word 'pettifogger' used to describe a lawyer. He laughed and said, 'no' but he had heard them called almost every other name in the book over the years.

Emily

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1816 on: September 02, 2012, 12:35:09 AM »
Durants' S  o  C
Vol. Vi The REFORMATION
Pgs  150 - 152




Louis was consoled at Pisa by receiving another recruit, the most famous philosopher of the fourteenth century . William of  Ockham had fled from a papal prison in Avignon; now hw offered his services to the Emperor, saying ( according to an unverified tradition ), “Tu me defendas gladio, ego te defendam calamo”-- “Defend me with the sword, and I will defend you with the pen.” He wrote vigorously, but he could not save the situation. Louis had alienated all the ruling elements in Italy. His Ghibelline adherents had hoped to rule the peninsular in his name for their own good; they were chagrined  to find him assuming all the powers and  perquisites of government; moreover, he made them levy unpopular taxes for his exchequer. As his forces were ill proportioned to his pretensions, many Ghibellines, even the Viscounti, abandoned him and made what peace they could with the Pope. The Antipope, left to his own resources, submitted to arrest by papal officers, was led before John XXII with a halter around his neck, threw himself at the Pope’s feet and begged for pardon (1328). John forgave him, embraced him as a returned prodigal, and imprisoned him for life.

Louis returned to Germany, and sent repeated embassies to Avignon offering recantations and apologies for papal pardon and recognition. John refused, and fought on until his death (1334). Louis recovered some ground when England, beginning the Hundred Years’ War, sought his alliance; Edward III recognised Louis as Emperor, and Louis hailed Edward as King of France. Seizing the opportunity provided by this alliance of two major powers against the papacy, an assembly of German princes and prelates at Rense ( July 16, 1338) proclaimed that the choice of a German king by the German electors could not be annulled by another authority; and a diet at Frankfurt-am-Main (August 3, 1338) declared the papal pronouncements against Louis null and void; the Imperial title and power, it ruled, were the gift of the Imperial electors, and needed no confirmation by a pope. Germany and England ignored the protests of Pope Benedict XII, and moved a step toward the Reformation.

Reckless with success, Louis now decided to apply to the full the theories of Marsilius, and to exercise ecclesiastical as well as secular supremacy. he removed papal appointees from church benefices, and put his own candidates in their place; he appropriated the funds that papal collectors were rising for a crusade; he dissolved the marriage of Margaret of Carinthia -- heiress to much of Tyrol -- and wedded her to his own son, who was related to her by a degree of kinship canonically invalidating marriage. The repudiated husband, his elder brother Charles, and their father, King John of Bohemia, vowed vengeance; and Clement VI, who had become the pope in 1342, saw an opportunity to unseat the aging enemy of the Papal See.Skillful diplomacy won elector after elector to the view that peace and order could be restored in the Empire only by deposing Louis and making Charles of Bohemia emperor; and Charles, as the price of papal support, pledged obedience to papal commands. In July 1346, an electoral diet at Rense unanimously declared Charles to be king of Germany. Louis, having failed to secure a hearing at Avignon for his offers of submission, prepared to fight to the death for his throne. Meanwhile, aged sixty, he hunted vigorously, fell from his horse, and was killed. (1347).

Charles IV, as King and Emperor, governed well. The Germans disliked him because he made Prague the Imperial capital; but in Germany as well as in his homeland. he improved administration, protected commerce and transport, reduced tolls, and maintained an honest currency; and to the whole Empire he gave a generating of comparative peace. In 1356 he acquired equivocal fame in history  by issuing a series of regulations known as the Golden Bull -- though they were only a few of many documents bearing the Imperial golden seal. Perhaps convinced that his long absence from Germany necessitated such an arrangement, he granted to the seven electors such powers as almost annulled the Imperial authority. the electors were to meet annually to legislate  for the realm; the king or emperor was to be merely their president and executive arm. They themselves in their own states were to enjoy full judiciary power, ownership of all minerals and metals in the soil, the right to mint their own coinages, to raise revenue, and, within limits, to make war and peace. The Bull gave its legal sanction to existing facts, and tried to build upon them a co-operative federation of principalities. The electors however, absorbed themselves in their regional affairs, and so neglected their responsibilities as an Imperial council that Germany remained only in name. The local independence                                                                                                                    of the electors made possible the protection of Luther by the  elector of Saxony, and the consequent spread of the protestant faith.

In his old age Charles secured the Imperial succession of his son by wholesale bribery (1378). Wenceslaus IV had some virtues , but he loved alcohol and his native land; the electors resented his tastes, and deposed him (1400) in favour of Rupert III, who left no trace on history.  Sigismund of Luxembourg had at the age of nineteen been chosen King of Hungary  (1387); In 1411 he was elected King of the Romans, and soon assumed the title of emperor. He was a man of  varied accomplishments and personal charm, handsome and vain, generous and amiable, occasionally cruel; he learned several languages and loved literature only next to women and power. His good intentions might  have paved a small inferno, but his courage failed him in crisis. He tried honourably to reform the abuses and weaknesses of the German government; he passed some excellent laws, and enforced a few of them; but he was frustrated by the autonomy and inertia of the electors, and their unwillingness to share in the cost of checking the advancing Turks. In his later years he consumed his funds and energies in fighting the Hussites of Bohemia. When he died (1437 ) Europe mourned that one who for a time had been the voice of European progress had failed in everything but dignity.

He had commended his son in law, Albert of Hapsburg, to the electors of Bohemia, Hungary, and Germany. Albert II graced the three crowns, but before his abilities could bear fruit he died of dysentery in a campaign against the Turks (1440). He left no son, but the electors voted the royal and imperial crowns to another Hapsburg, Frederick of Styria; thereafter their choice fell repeatedly to a Hapsburg prince, and the imperial power became in effect the hereditary possession of that talented and ambitious family. Frederick  III made Austria an archduchy; the Hapsburgs made Vienna their capital; the heir presumptive was regularly the Archduke of Austria; and the genial quality of the Austrian and Viennese character entered like a graceful feminine theme to cross with the brusque masculinity of the north in the Teutonic soul.
                                                                                                  

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1817 on: September 02, 2012, 11:33:17 AM »
This is reminding me of my European history college classses. Since leaving college i have focused my self-education on American history. Except for teaching a few survey courses of Western Civ i have not increased my knowledge of European history very much.

Jean

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1818 on: September 02, 2012, 09:12:13 PM »
William of Ockam is famous in scientific circles for the idea of Ockham's razor --- If a simple answer exists, don't bother with a complicated one.

(At least, I assume it's the same Ockham. If a simple Ockham exists, don't bother to find another one).

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1819 on: September 02, 2012, 09:16:51 PM »
Actually, I looked it up. OCkham didn't invent the idea, but used it a lot and it was named after him. Wicci states it :from competing hypotheses, chose the one that makes the fewest assumptions.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1820 on: September 05, 2012, 05:37:11 AM »
JoanK. There is much more on Ockham coming up later. Durant gives us much more about him several pages ahead.  Trevor.

bluebird24

  • Posts: 415
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1821 on: September 05, 2012, 01:33:21 PM »

bluebird24

  • Posts: 415

bluebird24

  • Posts: 415
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1823 on: September 05, 2012, 01:36:41 PM »
Where is Ockham?

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1824 on: September 05, 2012, 02:47:07 PM »
Bluebird: that's very interesting, although the philosophy got too deep for me.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1825 on: September 05, 2012, 02:51:04 PM »
Where is Ockham?

Ockham ( /ˈɒkəm/) is a small village near East Horsley, in Surrey, England. The village lies to the east of the A3 between Cobham and Guildford. Other neighbouring villages include Ripley, Wisley and Effingham.

Ockham appears in Domesday Book of 1086 as Bocheham. It was held by Richard Fitz Gilbert. Its domesday assets were: 1½ hides, 1 church, 2 fisheries worth 10d, 3 ploughs, 2 acres (8,100 m2) of meadow, woodland worth 60 hogs. It rendered £10.

Most notably, Ockham is believed to be the birthplace of William of Ockham—famous Mediaeval philosopher and the proponent of Occam's razor

Emily

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1826 on: September 05, 2012, 03:00:06 PM »
Thanks, Emily.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1827 on: September 05, 2012, 04:36:42 PM »
Durant introduces us to the Hapsburgs who ruled all over Europe and even into Mexico. Frederick and Carlotta ruled for a short time as Emperor and Empress of Mexico.

I bought a necklace once that had brownish green stones in it, and my children called it my Empress Carlotta necklace.

I liked the motto of the Austrian rulers. 'Let others go to war, merry Austria will marry.' And that they did, expanding their power to many lands. After 1918 they no longer ruled, but they kept their titles and the last Archduke I found was born in 1996, so he would be sixteen years old. Or perhaps he was a Count, it doesn't matter, I don't condone so called 'aristocracy'.

After deaths and imprisonments and failure to produce heirs, the Hapsburgs came along and gave them a long line of succession.

Quote
The House of Habsburg and also known as House of Austria is one of the most important royal houses of Europe and is best known for being an origin of all of the formally elected Holy Roman Emperors between 1438 and 1740, as well as rulers of the Austrian Empire and Spanish Empire and several other countries.

The House takes its name from Habsburg Castle, a fortress built around 1020–1030 in present day Switzerland by Count Radbot of Klettgau, who chose to name his fortress Habsburg. His grandson, Otto II, was the first to take the fortress name as his own, adding "von Habsburg" to his title. The House of Habsburg gathered dynastic momentum through the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries.

By 1276, Count Radbot's seventh generation descendant, Rudolph of Habsburg, had moved the family's power base from Habsburg Castle to the Archduchy of Austria. Rudolph had become King of Germany/Holy Roman Emperor in 1273, and the dynasty of the House of Habsburg was truly entrenched in 1276 when Rudolph became sovereign ruler of Austria, which the Habsburgs ruled for the next six centuries.

A series of dynastic marriages enabled the family to vastly expand its domains, to include Burgundy, Spain, Bohemia, Hungary, and other territories into the inheritance.

Emily

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1828 on: September 06, 2012, 11:06:34 AM »
Correction................

It was Maximilian who was emperor of Mexico, not Frederick.

I came by to write about something else and in looking for the last post saw that I had written Frederick instead of Maximilian.

I was considering looking for a biography on Frederick and must have had him on my mind.

Emily

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1829 on: September 06, 2012, 02:46:46 PM »
I find the Hapsburgs very interesting. .......i'm reading, tho not commenting much, enjoying your comments.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1830 on: September 09, 2012, 12:30:32 AM »
Durants’  S  o  C
Vol. VI   THE REFORMATION
Pgs.  154- 156



The Gothic style lingered in Germany long after it had given way, in  Italy and France, to the classic influences of the Renaissance. Now it crowned the  thriving cities of Central Europe with churches not as overpowering in grandeur as the great shrines of France, yet lifting the spirit with a quiet beauty and unpretentious dignity. (Among  much cathedral building in the 12-15 centuries), Nuremberg gloried in four famous churches that gave piety a schooling in art and taste.  The Stefansdom, or Cathedral of St. Stephen (1304-1476), was a beloved landmark; its steep roof covered nave and aisles in a single span, and fell to Mars in 1945. The Frauenkirche, or church of Our Lady  ( 1355-61), with its richly sculptured vestibule, was almost demolished in the Second World War, but is now restored; and every day at noon the four manikin electors in the famous clock of the facade, bow to Charles IV in untiring acknowledgment of his famous Bull. Sculpture was still crude, but the churches in Breslau and Hallgarten, and the Sebalduskirche in Nuremberg, received stone or wood Madonnas of some nobility.

The cities beautified not only their churches but their public buildings, their shops, and their homes. Now rose those gabled and half-timbered houses that give the German towns a wistful medieval charm for idealizing modern eyes. The Rathaus, or Council Hall, was the centre of civic life, sometimes also the rendezvous of the greater guilds; its walls might bear frescoes, and its woodwork was usually carved with Teutonic fullness and strength. The Rathaus of Cologne ( 1360-1571), which had seated the first general convocation of the Hanseatic League; of Münster (1335), where the Treaty of Westphalia was signed; of Brunswick, a fourteenth century gem of  civic Gothic; of Frankfurt-am-Main (1405), where the electors dined a newly chosen emperor: All were destroyed in the Second World War. In Marienburg the Grand Masters of the Teutonic Order built their massive Deutschordenschloss (1309-80). With its sculptures, churches, and secular architecture, Nuremberg, in the three centuries between 1250 and 1550, represented the German spirit at its highest and best. The meandering streets were mostly narrow and unpaved; yet  the future Pope Pius II wrote of Nuremberg:

“ The imperial castle proudly dominates the town, and the burghers’ dwellings seem to have been built for princes. In truth the kings of Scotland would gladly be housed so luxuriously as the common citizen of Nuremberg.”

In the German cities the industrial and minor arts -- in wood, ivory, copper, bronze, iron, silver, gold, -- reached now the full ripening of their medieval growth. Artists and weavers composed amazing tapestries; the wood engravers prepared for Dürer and Holbein; the miniaturists illuminated fine manuscripts on the eve of Gutenberg; woodworkers carved gorgeous furniture; and the metal founders cast for the churches, in the fifteenth century, bells whose beauty of tone has never been surpassed. Music was not merely an art; it was half the leisure life of the towns. Nuremberg and other cities staged great carnivals of popular drama and song. The ‘Volkslied’ expressed the pious or amorous sentiments of the people. The middle classes made a mass attack upon the problems of polyphony; the guilds competed in gigantic choruses; butchers, tanners, bell casters, and other mighty men contested the Meistersinger prize in tumultuous vocal tournaments. The  first famous school of Meistersinger was established at Mainz in 1311. Students who passed through the four degrees of Schüler, Schulfruend, Dichter, and Saenger ( scholar, friend of the school, poet, and singer) earned the title of Meister. The romantic and idealistic strain of the minnesingers was brought to earth as the German burghers tied their lusty realism to the wings of song.

Since the business class dominated the cities, all the arts except church architecture took a realistic turn. The climate was cold and often wet, discouraging nudity; the pride and cult of the body did not find a congenial home here , as in Renaissance Italy, or ancient Greece. We read in a chronicle of 1380: “There was in Cologne at this time a famous painter named Wilhelm, whose like could not be found in all the land. He portrayed men so cunningly that it seemed they were alive.” Meister Wilhelm was one of many “primitives,”  such as  The Master of the Heisterbacher Altar -- who, chiefly under Flemish influence created a discipline of mural painting in Germany, and suffused the traditional Gospel themes with an emotional piety traceable, it may be, to Eckhart and other German mystics.

In Stephen Lochner, who died at Cologne in 1451, this preliminary development ends, and we reach the zenith of the early school. His ‘Adoration of the Magi’, now a prize of the Cologne Cathedral, can bear comparison with most paintings produced before the middle of the fifteenth century: a lovely Virgin at once modest and proud, a delightful infant, the Wise Men of the East, very German but credibly wise, the composition orthodox, the colouring bright with blue and green and gold. In ‘The Virgin of the Rose Trellis’ and ‘The Madonna of the Violet‘, ideal young German mothers, of a soft and pensive beauty, are portrayed with all the technical resources of a medieval art visibly moving toward modernity.

Germany was on the threshold of its greatest age.







3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1832 on: September 14, 2012, 04:59:26 AM »
DURANTS'    S  o  C
Vol  VI.  THE REFORMATION
Pgs 156-159



                                                             GUTENBERG
What put an end to the middle ages? Many causes, operating through three centuries : the failure of the crusades; the spreading acquaintance of renascent Europe with Islam; the disillusioning capture of Constantinople; the resurrection of classic pagan culture; the expansion of commerce through the voyages of Henry the Navigator’s fleet, and Columbus, and Vasco da Gama; the rise of the business class, which financed the centralization of monarchical government; the development of national states challenging the supernational authority of the popes; the successful revolt of Luther against the papacy; printing.

Before Gutenberg nearly all education had been in the hands of the Church. Books were costly; copying was laborious and sometimes careless. Few authors could reach a wide audience until they were dead; They had to live by pedagogy, or by entering a monastic order, or by pensions from the rich or benefices from the Church. They received little or no payment from those who published their works; and even if one publisher paid them they had no copyright protection, except occasionally by a papal grant. Libraries were numerous, but small; monasteries , cathedrals, colleges, and some cities had modest collections, seldom more than 300 volumes; the books were usually kept inside the walls, and some were chained to lecterns or desks. Charles V of France had a library  renowned for its size -- 910 volumes; the library of Christ  Church priory at Canterbury was probably as large as any outside Islam, having some 2000 volumes in 1300. The best publicized library in England was that of Richard de Bury St. Edmunds, who wrote affectionately of his books in ’THE PHILOBIBLON’  (1345), and made them complain of their mistreatment by “that two- legged  beast called woman who insisted on exchanging them for fine linen or silk.”

The business classes found literacy useful in the operations of industry and trade; women of the middle and upper classes escaped, through reading,  into a world of compensatory romance; by 1300 the time had passed when only the clergy could read. It was this rising demand, even more than the increased supply of paper and the development of an oily ink, that led to Gutenberg. Moslems had brought paper manufacture to Spain in the tenth century, Sicily in the twelfth; it passed into Italy in the thirteenth, into France in the fourteenth; the paper industry was a hundred years old in Europe when printing came. In the fourteenth century, when linen clothing became customary, cast off linens provided cheap rags for paper; the cost of paper declined, and its readier availability co-operated with the extension of literacy to offer a material and market for printed books.

Printing itself, as imprinting, was older than Christianity. The Babylonians had printed letters or symbols upon bricks, the Romans and many others upon coins, potters upon their wares, weavers upon cloths, bookbinders upon book covers; any ancient or medieval dignitary used printing when he stamped documents with his seal. Similar methods had been employed in the production of maps and playing cards. Block printing -- by blocks of wood or metal engraved with words, symbols, or images --  goes back in China and Japan to the eighth century, probably beyond. The Chinese in this way  printed paper money in or before the tenth century. Block printing appeared in Tabriz in 1294, in Egypt toward 1300; but Moslems preferred calligraphy to printing, and did not serve in this case as in so many others, to carry cultural developments from the east to the west..

Typography -- printing with separate and movable type for each character or letter -- was used in China as early as 1041. In 1314 Wang Chen employed nearly 60,000 movable wooden type characters to print a book on agriculture; he had tried metal type first, but he had found that it did not take or hold ink as readily as wood. Movable type, however, offered little advantage or convenience to a language that had no alphabet, but had 40,000 separate characters; consequently block printing remained customary in China till the nineteenth century. In 1403 a Korean emperor printed a large number of volumes from movable type; characters were engraved in hard wood, molds of porcelain paste were made from these models, and in these molds metal type was cast.

In Europe printing from movable type may have developed first in Holland; according to Dutch traditions not traceable beyond 1569, Laurens Coster of Haarlem printed a religious manual from movable metal type in 1430; but the evidence is inconclusive. Nothing further is heard of movable type in Holland till 1473, when Germans from Cologne set up a press in Utrecht. But these men had learned the art in Mainz.

Johann Gutenberg was born there of a prosperous family about 1400. His father’s name was Gensfleisch -- gooseflesh; Johann preferred his mother’s maiden name. He lived  most of his 40 years in Strasbourg, and appears to have made experiments there in cutting and casting metal type. On August 22, 1450, he entered into  a contract  with Johann Fust, a rich goldsmith, by which he mortgaged his printing press to Fust for a loan of 800 guilders, later raised to 1600. A letter of indulgence issued by Nicholas V in 1451 was probably printed by Gutenberg; several copies exist, bearing the oldest printed date, 1454. In 1455 Fust sued Gutenberg for repayment; unable to comply, Gutenberg surrendered his press. Fust carried on the establishment with Peter Schöffer, who had been employed by Gutenberg as a typesetter. Some believe that it was Schöffer who had by this time developed the new tools and technique of printing; a hard punch of engraved steel for each letter, number, and punctuation mark, a metal matrix to receive the punches, and a metal mold to hold the matrix and letters in line.

In 1456 Gutenberg with borrowed funds, set up another press. From this he issued, in that year or the next, what has been generally considered the first  type-printed book, the famous and beautiful “Gutenberg Bible “ -- a majestic folio of 1,282  large double-columned pages  In 1462 Mainz was sacked by the troops of Adolf of Nassau; the printers fled, scattering the new art through Germany. Gutenberg struggled painfully through one financial crisis after another, until Adolf gave him (1465) a benefice yielding a protective income. Some three years later he died.



mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1833 on: September 14, 2012, 12:38:25 PM »
This is my favorite passage from The Durants about the "Dark/Middle Ages."

Wasn't Gutenberg Life Magazine's  Most Influential Person of the millennium? Actually, i think on several lists?  I'm sure all the readers on SeniorLearn would agree. The arguement was that because of the movable type press, any other person/idea that might have been on the list got saved and circulated, therefore becoming more important then they might otherwise have been w/out Gutenberg. A lot more was going on during the "Dark Ages" than the name would imply. That is the general theme in college Western Civ teachings about the era. the first paragraph of this passage sets us up for the exciting times to follow. Looking firward to it.

Thanks again Trevor for posting the passages.
Jean

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1834 on: September 14, 2012, 11:47:40 PM »
As I was typing up my last letter piece for  S  o  C, I was visited by a friend, a retired school teacher, who told me the following story. He was with a group traveling through Europe and when in Mainz he, because of his knowledge of German -- he was head of the language section at his school-- he became the groups leader. They visited the place in Mainz where Gutenberg did his work, and were shown just how Gutenberg had printed his famous bible. They were shown just how the type was assembled and printed onto the pages.

 My friend asked if he could print a few words using Gutenberg's method. The demonstrator agreed, so my friend began assembling the type into a short passage in English. Suddenly, a bell rang and some office person came and told the group to leave, as it was now lunch hour  and the visitors must go. The tourists all protested, but to no avail. "Ve haf vays to arrange our time." my friend said, mimicking  the English/ American parody of a German speaking English. And so he never got a copy of type produced using Gutenberg's method.   -- Trevor

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1835 on: September 15, 2012, 12:32:56 PM »
What a coincidence, Trevor. Who would have thought any friend could come up with a Gutenberg story!?! How disappointing for him not to have finished his project. I could be stereotypical and make a comment about German discipline and rigidity, but i won't  :D

I've forgotten Gutenberg's birthdate, but i think we should celebrate it, especially on this site, SeniorLearn. (smile).

Jean

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1836 on: September 16, 2012, 04:01:44 AM »
Durants'  S  o  C
Vol.V  The REFORMATION
Pgs 159-160
 

                                   GUTENBERG (cont.)



Doubtless his use of movable type would have been developed by others had he never been born; it was an obvious  demand of the times; this is true of most inventions. A letter written in 1470 by Guillaume Fichet of Paris suggests how enthusiastically the invention was welcomed: “ There has been discovered in Germany a wonderful new method for the production of books, and those who have mastered the art are taking it from Mainz out into the world . . . The light of this discovery will spread from Germany to all parts of the Earth.” But not all welcomed it. Copyists protested that printing would destroy their means of livelihood; aristocrats opposed it as a mechanical vulgarization, and feared it would lower the value  of their manuscript libraries; statesmen and clergy distrusted it as a possible vehicle of subversive ideas. It made its triumphant way nevertheless. In 1464 two Germans set up a press in Rome; in or before 1469 two Germans opened a printing shop  in Venice; in 1470 three Germans brought the art to Paris; in 1471 it reached Holland, in 1472 Switzerland, in 1473 Hungary, in 1474 Spain, in 1476 England, in 1482 Denmark, in 1483 Sweden, in 1490 Constantinople. Soon half the European population was reading as never before, and a passion for books became one of the effervescent ingredients of the Reformation age. “At this very moment,” writes a Basel scholar to a friend, “ a whole wagon load of classics, of the best Aldine editions has arrived from Venice. Do you want any? If you do, tell me at once, and send the money, for no sooner is such a freight landed than thirty buyers rise up for each volume, merely asking the price, and tearing one another’s eyes out to get hold of them.” The  typographical revolution was on.

To describe all its effects would be to chronicle half the history of the  modern mind. Erasmus, in the ecstasy of his sales, called printing the greatest of all discoveries, but perhaps he underestimated speech, fire, the wheel, agriculture, writing, law, even the lowly common noun. Printing replaced esoteric manuscripts with inexpensive texts rapidly multiplied, in copies more exact and legible than before, and so uniform that scholars in diverse countries could work with one another by references to specific pages of specific editions. Quality was often sacrificed to quantity, but the earliest printed books were in many cases models of art in typography and binding. Printing published -- i.e., made available to the public -- cheap manuals of instruction in religion, literature, history, and science; it became the greatest and cheapest of all universities, open to all. It did not produce the Renaissance, but it paved he way for the Enlightenment, for the American and French revolutions, for democracy. It made the Bible a common possession, and prepared the people for Luther’s appeal from the popes to the Gospels; later it would permit the rationalist’s  appeal from the Gospels to reason.

It ended the clerical monopoly of learning, the priestly control of education. It encouraged the vernacular literatures, for the large audience it required could not be reached through Latin. It facilitated the international communication and co-operation of scientists. It effected the quality and character of literature by subjecting authors to the purse and tastes of the middle classes, rather than to aristocratic or ecclesiastical patrons. And, after speech, it provided a readier instrument for the dissemination of nonsense than the world has ever known until our time.


A footnote:  The “Gutenberg Bible,” also known as the “Mazarin Bible,” because it was discovered about 1760 in the library left by that cardinal. Forty-six copies survive. The Morgan library of New York in 1953 paid $75,000 to a Swiss monastery for a “Constance Missal” which it believes was printed by Gutenberg before the Bible, probably in 1452.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1837 on: September 18, 2012, 08:58:54 PM »
Re: the footnote on a sale from the Gutenberg press for $75,000 in 1953. I believe that was the year Durant published the 'Reformation'.

Update: Keio University Library in Tokyo paid $5.4 million for an incomplete Gutenberg bible.

A complete copy today estimated to cost $25 million to $35 million. Individual leaves now sell for $20,000 to $100,000 depending on condition and desirability.

Emily

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1838 on: September 19, 2012, 01:20:15 PM »
I think it would be great fun to take a course on the "Impact of Gutenberg", don't you? Of course, while teaching Western Civ i talked about the discussions that historians have had about how much longer it would have taken for the Reformation to take hold if Luther's and other's manuscripts had not been so available as the movable press made them. And as you mentioned the same goes for the writings of the Enlghtenment and john Locke and on to Jefferson, Tho Paine, etc.

We're moving into an exciting period in history in this discussion.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1839 on: September 23, 2012, 06:47:45 PM »
Durants'  S  o  C 
Vol. VI  THE REFORMATION
Pgs 161 - 163



                                      THE WESTERN SLAVS.  1300-1500

                                                                 BOHEMIA 
Heretofore the Slavs had been human flotsam, surging westward at times to the Elbe, southward to the Mediterranean, eastward to the Urals, north even to the Arctic Sea; then in the thirteenth century repulsed in the west by the Livonian and Teutonic knights, and subjected to Mongol and Tartar domination in the east. In the fourteenth century Bohemia led the Holy Roman Empire and the pre-Lutheran Reformation; and Poland, united with a vast Lithuania, became a major power, with a highly cultured upper class. In the fifteenth century Russia freed herself from the Tartars, and unified her far flung principalities into a massive state. Like a tidal wave the Slavs entered history.

In 1306 the death of Wenceslaus III ended the ancient Przemyslid line in Bohemia. After an interlude of minor kings the baronial and ecclesiastical electors brought John of Luxembourg to found a new dynasty ( 1310). His gallant adventures made Bohemia for a generation an unwilling citadel of chivalry. He could hardly live without tournaments, and when these proved too innocuous he sallied forth to war in almost every realm of Europe. It became a ‘bon mot’ of the times that “ nothing can be done without the help of God and the King of Bohemia.”

Brescia, besieged by Verona, begged his aid; he promised to come; at the news thereof the Veronese raised the siege. What Frederick I Barbarossa and Frederick II Wonder of the World had been able to secure by arms, this king obtained almost by the magic of his name. His dashing wars added terrain to Bohemia, but forfeited the affection of the people, who could not forgive him for being so often absent from their country that he neglected its administration and never learned its speech. In  1336, on a crusade in Lithuania, he contracted a disease that left him blind. Nevertheless, when he learned that Edward III of England had landed in Normandy and was moving toward Paris, John and his son Charles, with 500 Bohemian knights, rode across Europe to succour the king of France.

Father and son fought in the van at Crécy. When the French retreated, the blind king bade two knights bind their horses on either side to his, and lead him against the victorious English, saying, “ So will it God, it shall not be said that a king of Bohemia flies from the battlefield.” Fifty of his knights were killed around him; he was mortally wounded and was taken, dying, to the tent of the English king. Edward sent the corpse to Charles with a courtly message; “this day has fallen the crown of chivalry.”

Charles IV was a less heroic but much wiser king. He preferred negotiation to war, and was not too cowardly to compromise; yet he extended the boundaries of his kingdom. In the thirty-two years of his reign he kept the Slavs and the Germans in unwanted peace. He reorganised the government, reformed the judiciary, and made Prague one of the handsomest cities in Europe. He protected the peasantry from oppression, and promoted commerce and industry. He founded the University of Prague, (1347), transmitted to his countrymen the cultural interest he had acquired in France and Italy, and provided the intellectual stimulus that exploded in the Hussite revolt. His court became the centre of the Bohemian humanists, lead by bishop John of Stresa, Petrarch’s friend. The Italian poet admired Charles beyond any other monarch in Europe, visited him in Prague, and begged him to conquer Italy; but Charles had better sense. His reign, despite his Golden Bull, was Bohemia’s Golden Age.

Wenceslaus was a youth of eighteen when his father died ( 1378) His good nature, his affection for his people, his lenience in taxing them, his skill in administration, won him great favour with all but the nobles, who thought their privileges imperilled by his popularity. His occasional hot temper, and his addiction to drink, gave them leverage for displacing him. They surprised him at  his country seat, threw him in prison  ( 1394), and restored him only on his promise to do nothing of moment without the consent of a council of nobles and bishops. New disputes arose; Sigismund of Hungary was called in; he arrested Wenceslaus, his brother, and took him prisoner to Vienna. ( 1402 ) Wenceslaus escaped a few years  later, made his way back to Bohemia, was received with joy by the people, and regained his throne and powers. The rest of his story mingles with the tragedy of Huss.

                                               JOHN HUSS:  1369-1415
Wenceslaus was loved and hated for winking at heresy and scowling at the Germans. A rapid infiltration of Bohemia by German miners, craftsmen, merchants, and students had generated a racial hostility between Teutons and Czechs; Huss would have received less support from people and king had he not symbolized a native resentment of German prominence. Wenceslaus did not forget the archbishops of Germany had  led the movement to depose him from the Imperial throne. His sister Anne had married Richard II of England, and had seen -- probably had sympathized with-- the attempt of Wyclif to divorce England for the Roman Church. In 1388 Adelbert Ranconis left a sum to enable Bohemian students to go to Paris or Oxford. Some of these in England secured or transcribed works by Wyclif, and took them to Bohemia. Milíĉ of Kromêříže and Conrad Waldhouser roused Prague with their denunciations of immorality in laity and clergy; Matthias of Janov and Thomas of Stitny continued  his preaching; the Emperor, and even Archbishop Ernst, approved; and in 1391 a special church, called the Bethlehem Chapel, was founded in Prague to lead the movement of reform. In 1402 John Huss was appointed to the pulpit of this chapel.