Author Topic: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant  (Read 371950 times)

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1840 on: September 27, 2012, 10:28:42 PM »
Durants'  S  o  C
Vol. VI  THE REFORMATION
Pgs 163 - 167





                                          John Huss:   1369-1415
Huss had begun life in the village of Husinetz, and was known as John of Husinetz, which he later shortened to Huss. Toward 1390 he came as a poor student to Prague, where he earned his way by serving in the churches. He joined in what Paris would later term the gay “ Bohemian” ways of university youth. In 1396 he received his degree of master of arts, and began to teach at the university; in 1401 he was chosen dean of the faculty of arts. As head of the Bethlehem Chapel he became the most famous preacher in Prague. He preached in Czech, and taught his congregation to take an active part in the service by singing hymns.

His accusers later affirmed that in the very first year of his ministry he had echoed Wyclif’s doubts as to the disappearance of bread and wine from the consecrated elements of the Eucharist. Unquestionably he had read some of Wyclif’s works; he had made copies of them which still exist with his annotations; and at his trial he confessed to having said “Wyclif, I trust, will be saved; but could I think he would be damned, I would my soul were with his.” In 1403 the opinions of Wyclif had won such vogue in the university of Prague that the chapter -- the administrative clergy -- of the cathedral submitted to the university masters forty-five excerpts from the writings of Wyclif, and asked such doctrines be barred from the university. Several masters, including Huss, answered  No; but the majority ruled that thereafter no member of the university staff should, either publicly or privately, defend or adhere to any of the forty-five articles.

Huss must have ignored this prohibition, for 1408 the clergy of Prague petitioned Archbishop Zbynek to reprove him. The Archbishop proceeded cautiously, being then in conflict with the king. But when Huss continued to express sympathy for Wyclif’s views Zbynek excommunicated him and several associates ( 1409); and when they persisted in exercising their priestly functions he placed all Prague under an interdict. He ordered all writings of Wyclif that could be found in Bohemia to be surrendered to him; 200 manuscripts were brought to him; he burned them in the courtyard of his palace. Huss appealed to the newly elected Pope John XXIII. John summoned him to appear before the papal court. He refused to go.

In 1411 the Pope, desiring funds for a crusade against Ladislas, King of Naples, announced a new offering of indulgences. When this was proclaimed in Prague, and the papal  agents seemed to the reformers to be selling forgiveness for coin, Huss and his chief supporter Jerome of Prague, publicly preached against indulgences, question the existence of purgatory, and protested against the Church’s collecting money to spill Christian blood. Descending to vituperation, Huss called the Pope a money grubber, even Anti-Christ. A large section of the public shared Huss’ views and subjected the papal agents to such ridicule and abuse that the  king forbade any further preaching or action against the offering of indulgences. Three youths who violated this edict were hauled before the city council; Huss pleaded for them, and admitted that his preaching had aroused them; they were condemned and beheaded. The Pope now launched his own excommunication against Huss; and when Huss  ignored it John laid an interdict upon any city where he should stay ( 1411) On the advice of the king, Huss left Prague, and remained in rural seclusion for two years.

In those years he wrote his major works, some in Latin, some in Czech, nearly all inspired by Wyclif, some echoing the heresies and anticlericalism that a remnant of the Waldensians had brought with them into Bohemia in the Twelfth and Thirteenth centuries. He rejected image worship, auricular confession, and the multiplication of ornate religious rites. He gave his movement a popular and nationalistic character by denouncing the Germans and defending the Slavs.

In a tract on “ Traffic in Holy things.” he attacked the simony of the clergy; in “De sex erroribus” he condemned the taking of fees by  priests for baptism, confirmation, Masses, marriages, or burials. His treatise “De ecclesia” became his “apologia” and his ruin; from its pages were drawn the heresies for which he was burned. He followed Wyclif into predestinarianism, and agreed with Wyclif, Marsilius, and Ockham that the Church should have no worldly goods. Like Calvin, he defined the Church neither as the clergy nor as the whole body of Christians, but as the totality, in Heaven and on Earth, of the saved. Christ, not the Pope is the head of the Church; the Bible, not the pope, should be the Christians’ guide. The pope is  not infallible, even in faith or morals; the pope himself may be a hard headed sinner or heretic.  Accepting a legend widely credited at the time ( even by Gerson ), Huss made much of a supposititious Pope John VIII who ( said the legend ) had revealed her sex by giving unpremeditated birth to a child on the streets of Rome. A pope, Huss concluded, is to be obeyed only when his commands conform to the law of Christ. “To rebel against an erring pope is to obey Christ.”

When a general council met at Constance in 1414 to depose three rival popes and enact a program of ecclesiastical reform, a chance seemed open to reconcile the Hussites with the Church. Emperor Sigismund, heir apparent to the childless Wenceslaus IV, was anxious to restore religious unity and peace in Bohemia. He suggested that Huss should go to Constance and attempt a reconciliation. For this hazardous journey he offered Huss a safe conduct to Constance, a public hearing before the council, and a free and safe return to Bohemia in case Huss should reject the judgment of the assembly. Despite the anxious warnings of his associates, Huss set out for Constance ( October 1414), escorted by three Czech nobles and several friends. About the same time Stephen of Palecz and other Bohemian opponents of Huss went to Constance to indict him before the council.

Arrived, he was at first treated courteously, and lived in freedom. But when Palecz laid before the council a list of Huss’s heresies they summoned and questioned him. Convinced by his replies that he was a major heretic, they ordered him imprisoned. He fell ill and for a time was close to death; Pope John XXIII sent papal physicians to treat him. Sigismund complained that the action of the council violated the safe conduct that he had given Huss; it answered that it was not bound by his action; that his authority did not extend to spiritual concerns; that the church had the right to overrule the state in trying an enemy of the church. In April Huss was removed to the fortress of Gottlieben on the Rhine; there he was placed in fetters and was so poorly fed that he again fell gravely ill.

  Meanwhile his fellow heretic, Jerome of Prague, had rashly entered Constance, and had nailed  to the city gates, to the doors of churches, and upon the houses of cardinals, a request that the Emperor and  the council should give him a safe-conduct and a public hearing. At the urging of Huss’s friends he left the city and began to return to Bohemia; but on the way he stopped to preach against the council’s treatment of Huss. He was arrested, brought back to Constance, and jailed.

Huss on July 5, after seven months of imprisonment, was led in chains before the council, and again on the seventh and eighth. Confronted with extracts from his book, “On the Church,” he expressed his willingness to recant such as could be refuted from Scripture ( precisely the position taken by Luther at Worms ). The council argued that Scripture must be interpreted not by the free judgment of individuals but by the heads of the Church, and it demanded that Huss should retract all the quoted articles without reservation.  Both his friends and his accusers pleaded with him to yield. He refused. He lost the good will of the vacillating Emperor by declaring that a secular as well as a spiritual authority ceases to be a lawful  ruler the moment he falls into mortal sin.

Further efforts were made to secure some semblance of retraction from Huss. He gave always the same reply: he would abandon any of his views that could be disproved from Scripture. On July the 6th, 1415, in the cathedral of Constance, the Council condemned both Wyclif and Huss, ordered that Huss’s writings be burned, and delivered him to the secular arm. He was at once unfrocked, and was led out of the city to a place where a pile of faggots had been prepared. A last appeal was made to him to save himself with a word of retraction; he again refused. The fire consumed him as he chanted hymns.

Jerome, in a forgivable moment of terror recanted before the Council the teachings of his friend. Remanded in prison he gradually regained his courage. He asked for a hearing, and after a long delay he was led before the assembly. The charges were read to him one by one, and he answered each without retraction. When he was at last allowed to speak freely he almost won over the Council by his fervor and sincerity. He reviewed some of the historic cases in which men had been killed for their beliefs; he recalled how Stephen the Apostle had been condemned by priests, and held that there could hardly be a greater sin than that priests should wrongly slay a priest. He reaffirmed his faith in the doctrine of Wyclif and Huss, and branded  the burning of Huss as a crime certain to be punished by God. The council gave him four days to reconsider. Unrepentant he was condemned ( May 30) and was lead to the spot where Huss had  died. When the executioner went behind him to light the fire, Jerome bade him, “Come in front, and light it before my face; if I feared death I should never had come here.” He sang a hymn till he choked with smoke.




mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1841 on: September 28, 2012, 01:50:28 PM »
Enjoyed reading these passages for the history review, but i'll refrain from commenting for fear of offending some w/ my thinking that the Church has been foolish throughout it's lifetime.

Jean

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1842 on: September 28, 2012, 06:27:54 PM »
Quote
that the church had the right to overrule the state in trying an enemy of the church.

Between the 'State' and the 'Church' life was cheap, and it was so easy to eliminate dissenters. The beheading of three youths for repeating Huss was no more than a blip on a radar screen.

I am grateful for the gift our founding leaders gave us separating church and state. The power of life and death was snatched away from the church and their evil hands.

Emily

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1843 on: September 29, 2012, 10:28:23 PM »
I had been reading a book called "The English Wars" about the history of the English language. Unfortunately, it got returned to the library by mistake, so I can't quote it, but the section on the gradual establishment of English as the official language in England, replacing the french that was used by the upper class was interesting. I'm not apt to think of language as having political importance, but of course it does; a common language being an important part of establishing pride in a common heritage.

Chaucer was important in this: a major work in English. Much later, Shakespeare was important in the pride in England that bloomed after Henry Eighth left the Catholic church: not only the English religion was better than that of the continent, but all things English including the English language.

And of course, church services all over Europe began to be held (by the Protestants) in the local language. And the bible so translated. This of course has great religious significance in terms of the protestant belief that each individual can understand religion without needing a priest to interpret. but I wonder if it had significance in terms of nationalism as well.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1844 on: October 01, 2012, 10:02:25 PM »
Quote
JoanK

 but I wonder if it had significance in terms of nationalism as well.

I would say yes. A common spoken language is necessary for a nation to be cohesive. Reading and writing in the common language creates a unified people. Nationalism follows as night follows day, and not just for the large countries, but for the smaller ones as well.

Emily




3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1845 on: October 10, 2012, 02:43:45 AM »
Durants'  S  o  C
Vol.VI  THE REFORMATION
Pages 167 - 169

                                     THE BOHEMIAN REVOLUTION
                                                  1415  -   1436


The news of Huss’s death, relayed by couriers to Bohemia, aroused a national revolt. An assembly of Bohemian and Moravian nobles sent to the council of Constance ( Sept. 2, 1415) a document signed by 500 leading Czechs; it upheld Huss as a good and upright Catholic, denounced his execution as an insult to his country, and proclaimed that the signatories would fight to the last drop of their blood to defend the doctrines of Christ against man-made decrees. A further declaration pledged the members to obey thereafter only such papal commands as agreed with Scripture; the judges of such agreement were to be the faculty of the University of Prague. The university itself hailed Huss as a martyr. The Council summoned the rebellious nobles to appear before it  and answer charges of heresy; none came. It ordered the university closed; the majority of masters and students went on with their work.

About 1412 one of Huss’s followers, Jakoubek of Strzibo, had proposed that the early Christian custom of administering the Eucharist in both forms -- sub utraque specie --  Wine as well as bread -- should be restored throughout Christendom. When the idea captivated the rank and file of his supporters, Huss gave his approval. The council forbade it and defended the abandonment of the primitive custom on the ground that it risked the spilling of Christ’s blood. After Huss’s death the University of Prague and the nobles led by Queen Sophia, adopted lay communion in both kinds as a command of Christ, and the chalice became the symbol of the “Utraquist” revolt. The followers of Huss formulated in 1420 the “Four Articles of Prague” as their basic demands; that the Eucharist should be given in wine as well as bread; that ecclesiastical simony should be promptly punished; that the Word of God should be preached without hindrance as the sole standard of religious truth and practice; and that an end should be put to the ownership of extensive material possessions by priests and monks. A radical minority among the rebels rejected the veneration of relics, capital punishment, purgatory, and Masses for the dead. All the elements of the Lutheran  Reformation were present in this Hussite revolt.

King Wenceslaus, who had sympathized with the movement, possibly because it promised to transfer church property to the state, now began to fear it as threatening civil as well as ecclesiastical property. In the “New Town “ that he had added to Prague, he appointed only anti-Hussites to the council, and these men issued  punitive regulations designed to suppress the heresy. On July 30, 1419, a Hussite crowd paraded in the New Town, forced its way into the council chamber, and threw the councillors out of the windows into the street, where another crowd finished them off. A popular assembly was organized, which elected Hussite  councillors. Wenceslaus confirmed the new council, and then died of a heart attack (1419).

The Bohemian nobles offered to accept Sigismund as their king if he would recognize the Four articles of Prague. He countered by demanding from all Czechs full obedience to the Church, and burned at the stake a Bohemian who refused to  renounce the “lay chalice “. The new Pope, Martin V, announced a crusade against the Bohemian  heretics, and Sigismund advanced with a large force against Prague (1420). almost overnight the Hussites organised an army; nearly every town in Bohemia and Moravia sent impassioned recruits; Jan Zizka, a sixty year old knight with one eye, trained them, and led them to incredible victories. Twice they defeated Sigismund’s troops. He raised another army, but when a false report came that Zizka’s men were approaching, this new host fled in disorder without ever sighting an enemy. Inflated with success , Zizka’s Puritans now adopted from their opponents the idea that religious dissent should be suppressed by force; they passed up and down Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia like a devastating storm, pillaging monasteries, massacring monks, and compelled the population to accept the Four Articles of Prague. The Germans in Bohemia, who wished to remain C atholic, became the favourite victims of Hussite  arms. Meanwhile, and for seventeen years ( 1419- 36) Bohemia survived without  a king.

Diverse and conflicting elements had united to make the Bohemian revolution. The native Bohemians resented the wealth and arrogance of the German settlers, and hoped to drive them from the country. The nobles coveted ecclesiastical properties and thought them worth an excommunication. The middle classes hoped to raise their modest power, as against the nobility, in the Diet that ruled Prague and gave some government to Bohemia. The serfs, especially on church estates, dreamed of dividing those blessed acres, and at worst of freeing themselves from villein bonds. Some of the lower clergy, fleeced by the hierarchy, gave the rebellion their tacit support, and provided for it the religious services interdicted by the Church.

When the arms of the Hussites had won them most of Bohemia, the contradictions in their arms broke them into fratricidal factions. After the nobles had seized most of the property they felt that the revolution should subside. While the serfs who had tilled these lands for the Church clamoured for their division among themselves as freemen, the noble appropriators demanded that the peasants should serve the new masters on the same servile basis as before. Zizka supported the peasants, and for a time besieged the now conservative “Calixtine” or chalice Hussites in Prague. Tiring of the struggle, he accepted a truce, withdrew to eastern Bohemia, and founded a “horeb Brotherhood” dedicated to the Four Articles and to killing Germans. When he died (1424 ) he bequeathed his skin to  be made into a martial drum.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1846 on: October 13, 2012, 02:43:03 AM »
Durants'  S  o  C
Vol. VI  THE REFORMATION
Pgs 169 - 172


                  THE BOHEMIAN REVOLUTION  (cont.)

In the town of Tabor another party of Hussites formed, who held that real Christianity required a communistic organization of life. Long before Huss there had been in Bohemia little groups of Waldensians, Beghards, and other irrepressible heretics mingling religious with communistic ideals. They had maintained a salutary quiet until Zizka’s troops had over thrown the power of the Church in most of Bohemia; now they came into the open, and captured doctrinal leadership at Tabor. Many of them rejected the Real Presence, Purgatory, prayers for the dead, and all the sacraments except baptism and communion, and discouraged the veneration of relics, images, and saints; they proposed to restore the simple ritual of the Apostolic Church, and repudiated all ecclesiastical rites and robes that they could not find in early Christianity. They objected to altars, organs, and the splendour of church decoration, and they destroyed such ornaments wherever they could. Like later Protestants, they reduced divine worship to communion, prayer, Scriptural readings, a sermon, and the singing of hymns; and these services were conducted by clergymen indistinguishable from the laity in dress. Most of the Taborites deduced communism from millenarianism: Christ would soon come to establish His Kingdom on earth; in that Kingdom there would be no property, no Church or state, no class distinctions, no human laws, no taxes, no marriage; surely it would please Christ, when he came, to find such a heavenly utopia already established by His worshipers. At Tabor and some other towns these principals were put into practice; there, said a contemporary professor in the University of Prague, “ all is held in common, no one owns anything for himself alone; so to own is considered a deadly sin They hold that all should be equal brothers and sisters“.

A Bohemian peasant turned philosopher, Peter Chelcicky, went further, and wrote in vigorous Czech a series of Tolstoyan  tracts advocating a pacifistic anarchism. He attacked the powerful and the rich, denounced war and capital punishment as murder, and demanded a society without lords or serfs, or laws of any kind. He bade his followers take Christianity literally as they found in the New Testament; to baptise only adults, to turn their backs upon the world and its ways, upon oaths and learning and class distinctions, upon commerce and city life; and to live in voluntary poverty, preferably tilling the land, and completely ignoring “civilization” and the state. The Taborites found this pacifism unsuited to their temperament. They divided into moderate and advanced radicals ( these preached nudism and a communism of women), and the two factions passed from argument to war. In the course of a few years unequal abilities developed inequalities of power and privilege, finally of goods; and the apostles of peace and freedom were replaced by ruthless lawgivers wielding despotic force.

 Christendom heard with horror of this supposedly communistic Christianity. The baronial and burgher Hussites in Bohemia began to yearn for the Church of Rome as the only organisation strong enough to stop the immanent dissolution of the existing social order. They rejoiced when the council of Basel invited reconciliation. A delegation from the Council, without papal authorization, came to Bohemia, and signed a series of compacts so worded that complaisant Hussites and Catholics  could interpret them as accepting and rejecting the Four Articles of Prague (1433). As the Hussites refused to recognise these compacts, the conservative Hussites joined with the surviving orthodox groups in Bohemia, attacked and defeated the divided Taborites and put an end to the communistic experiment. (1434) The Bohemian Diet made its peace with Sigismund, and accepted him as king (1436).

But Sigismund, accustomed to crowning his victories with futility, died the following year. During the chaos that ensued, the orthodox party secured the upper hand in Prague. An able provincial leader, George of Podebrad, organised an army of Hussites, captured Prague, restored the Utraquist Jan Rokycana to the archiepiscopal see, and established himself as Governor of Bohemia ( 1451). When Pope Nicholas V refused to recognize Rokycana, the Utraquists mediated a transfer of their allegiance to the Greek Orthodox Church, but the fall of Constantinople to the Turks ended the negotiations. In 1458.  Seeing that Podebrad's excellent administration had restored order and prosperity, the Diet chose him king.

Podebrad in 1464 invited the monarchs of Europe to form a permanent federation of European states, with its own legislature, executive, and army, and a judiciary empowered to settle current and future international disputes. The kings did not reply; the reinvigorated papacy was too strong to be defied by a League of Nations. Pope Paul II declared Podebrad a heretic, freed his subjects from their oaths of obedience, and called upon Christian powers to depose him (1466) Matthias Corvinus of Hungary undertook the task, invaded Bohemia, and was crowned king by a group of Catholic nobles 9 1469). Podebrad offered the throne to Ladislas, son of Casimir IV of Poland. Then worn out with war and dropsy, he died aged fifty-one ( 1471). Bohemia, now Czechoslovakia, honours him as, next to Charles IV, her greatest king.

The Diet accepted Ladislas II, and the nobles took advantage of his youthful weakness to consolidate their economic and political power, to reduce the representation of the towns and burghers in the Diet, and to debase into serfdom the peasantry that had just dreamed of utopia. Thousands of Bohemians, during this period of revolution and reaction, fled to other lands. * In 1485 the Catholic and Utraquist parties signed the treaty of Kutna Hora, pledging themselves to peace for thirty years.

In Eastern Bohemia and Morovia the followers of Chelcicky formed (1457) a new sect, the Jednota Bratrska, or Church of the Brotherhood, dedicated to a simple agricultural life on the principles of the New Testament. In 1467 it renounced the authority of the Catholic Church, consecrated its own priests, rejected purgatory and the worship of saints, anticipated Luther’s doctrine of justification  by faith, and became the first modern church to practice Christianity. By 1500 it claimed 100,000 members. These “Moravian Brethren” were almost exterminated in the fury of the Thirty Year’s War; they survived through the leadership of John Comenius; they still exist, in scattered congregations in Europe, Africa, and America, astonishing a violent and sceptical world with their religious toleration, their unassuming piety, and their peaceful fidelity to the principles they profess.

*  The French, confusing the Bohemian exiles with Gypsies who in the fifteenth century were entering Western Europe, supposedly from Bohemia, made ‘Boheme’ their word for Gypsy. The name Gypsy is a corruption of “Egyptian’ and reflects the claim of the tribe to have come from ‘Little Egypt’. Burton traces them to India. In Byzantine lands they took the name Rom-- i.e. (eastern) Roman; in the Balkans and Central Europe they were called by variants of Arzigan (Czigany, Zigeuner, Zingary), a word of uncertain origin. In European records they first appear in the early fourteenth century as wondering groups of craftsmen, musicians, dancers, fortune-tellers, and --in general belief -- thieves. Usually, they accepted baptism, but they took religion and Commandments lightly, and soon ran foul of the Inquisition. Aside from the gay varicoloured dress and ornaments of their more prosperous women, their contribution to civilization lay in dancing and music-- whose alternations of sadness and exuberance have inspired some major composers.



Brian

  • Posts: 221
    • Brian's Den
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1847 on: October 14, 2012, 12:56:59 PM »
Excellent job Trevor,  and what a lot of work !

The main thing I learned from the post was an understanding of the origin of the Gypsies
or "Egyptsies" and the reason for their indifference to religious edicts.

At least we have benefited from their musical prowess.

Brian

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1848 on: October 14, 2012, 03:04:16 PM »
I remember reading a long time ago a book that explained the Gypsy religeon, and compared it to the Amish and other groups. Don't remember aby details now, but apparently they were able to maintain it through the inquisition. It did say that they had one set of moral principles toward other gypsies and another toward outsiders. That is true of many groups, unfortunately.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1849 on: October 15, 2012, 03:24:20 PM »
A painting of Jan Hus before the 'Council of Constance' by Vaclav Brozik.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bro%C5%BE%C3%ADk,_V%C3%A1clav_-_Hus_p%C5%99ed_koncilem_6._%C4%8Dervence_1415.jpg

Emily

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1850 on: October 15, 2012, 04:27:09 PM »
The Council of Constance was called mainly to settle the 'Three Popes Controversy'. They eventually deposed John XX111 and Benedict X111. Pope Gregory X11 sent them his resignation and they eventually elected Martin V.

Many Catholics wanted 'reform' in the church. Jan Hus was one of them. He appeared before the Council, and received a death sentence. His fellow reformer got the same treatment. They were burned at the stake.

It was better and 'smarter' to be an infidel than a follower of an Arab cult and be branded a heretic. The 'Smart Ones', I read recently had banded together and formed their own organization sans occultism of course.

Emily

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1851 on: October 15, 2012, 04:56:17 PM »
I know this information is important historically, as the whole Protestant Reformation is an important historical event for many, many reasons, including its relationship to Europeans coming to the western hemisphere, but as i read i just think "oh my goodness, what silliness."

I did learn something new - i had not read before about the relationship of the term Gypsy to Egyptians. One of the best things, IMO, the gypsies gave the world is Django Reinhardt's music

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=django%20reinhardt&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CMgBELcCMAk&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DVpmOTGungnA&ei=n3h8UP-EJe-70QGJ7YHQDQ&usg=AFQjCNHpkgamxSWPHnkXWB52AFw03n4nDA&sig2=NVTNEb5gVTyx2KyQAWk1hg

(i dont know how to shorten that link, but it works.  ;D)

And what is "the communism of women?"

Jean

Brian

  • Posts: 221
    • Brian's Den
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1852 on: October 15, 2012, 06:46:13 PM »
Would this be the answer to your question Mabel ? : -

Quote
An American woman comrade, C. Perkins Stetson, wrote some years ago: “As women become free, economic social factors, so becomes possible the full social combination of individuals in collective industry.” That industrial freedom is what Russian women now possess; and the task that lies before English working women is to stand with their men in the ever-intensifying struggle for the ownership and control by the proletariat of the means of life.

www.marxists.org/archive/montefiore/1920/11/04.htm

Brian


JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1853 on: October 15, 2012, 09:33:18 PM »
Where else can I come to the computer and find a discussion of art, religion, music, and communism in one place?

You certainly have no trouble guessing which one is hus in the picture, as well as who has the power and who doesn't.

I like the Gypsy jazz. Kind of insulting to call it "minor jazz".

So the "communism of women" means "stand with your man"? No wonder we're confused!

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1854 on: October 15, 2012, 09:43:52 PM »
Ditto to everything you said Joan!  ;D ;D

I don't know Brian, that statement was from 1920, do you think they meant the same thing in the 15th century?

Jean

Brian

  • Posts: 221
    • Brian's Den
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1855 on: October 15, 2012, 10:59:02 PM »
Mabel - - -

The Durants knew about Karl Marx,  and although the word "Communism" has been
in use since Biblical time,  I don't think it has been linked to "Women" before the time
of Marxism.

I may be wrong - - -  it won't be the first time !

Brian

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1856 on: October 16, 2012, 06:17:17 PM »
Durants'  S  o  C
Vol.VI  THE REFORMATION
Pgs  172  -  174



                                           POLAND:   1300-1505  
The maintenance of peace is difficult even in regions deriving unity and protection from geographical barriers; consider how much more difficult it is in sites exposed on one or more borders to neighbours always avid, sometimes tempting, sometimes powerful. Poland in the fourteenth century was half stifled by Teutonic knights, Lithuanians, Hungarians, Moravians, Bohemians, and Germans pressing upon her frontiers. When Ladislas the Short became grand prince of Lesser -- southern -- Poland (1306), he faced a multitude of enemies. The Germans in Greater -- western --  Poland rejected his authority; the Knights seized Danzig and Pomerania; the margrave of Brandenburg plotted to destroy him; and Wenceslaus III  of Bohemia claimed the Polish throne. Ladislas fought his way through this sea of troubles by arms, diplomacy, and marriage, united Lesser and Greater Poland into a coherent kingdom, and had himself crowned at Cracow, his new capital (1320). Dying at seventy-three (1333), he bequeathed his uneasy throne to his son, Casimir the Great.

Some might begrudge Casimir III this title, since he preferred negotiation and compromise to war. Resigning Silesia to Bohemia, and Pomerania to the knights, he consoled himself by acquiring Galicia, around Lwow, and Mazovia, around Warsaw. He devoted his reign of thirty-seven years to administration, bringing  varied territories under one law, “that the state might not look like a many-headed monster.” Under his direction a  group of Jurists unified the divergent legislation and customs of the provinces into the “Statutes of Casimir.” -- the first codification of Polish laws, and a model of humanitarian moderation by comparison with contemporary codes. Casimir protected Jewish, Greek orthodox, and other racial or religious minorities, encouraged education and the arts, established the University of Cracow ( 1364), and built so extensively that men said had found a Poland of wood and had rebuilt it in stone. He so wisely promoted all phases of the nation’s economy that farmers hailed him as “the peasants’ king.” Merchants throve in the security of peace, and all classes called him Great.

Having no male heir he left his crown to his nephew Louis the Great of Hungary (1370), hoping to win for his country the protection of a strong monarchy, and a share in the cultural stimulus that the Angevin dynasty had brought from Italy and France. But Louis was absorbed in Hungary, and neglected Poland. To keep the proud nobles loyal to him in his absence he granted them, by the “Privilege of Kasa” (1374), exemption from most taxes, and a monopoly of high offices. A war of  succession followed his death, ( 1382). The Seym or Parliament recognized his daughter Jadwiga, eleven years old, as king; but disorder ended only when Jagello, Great Prince of Lithuania, married Jadwiga ( 1386 ), uniting his spacious realm with Poland, and bringing a masterful personality to the Government.

The growth of Lithuania was a major phenomenon of the fourteenth century. Gedymin and his son Olgierd brought under pagan rule nearly all western Russia; some of these were glad to find, under the Great Prices, a refuge from the Tartar Golden Horde that held eastern Russia in fief When Jagello succeeded Olgierd( 1377) the Lithuanian Empire, governed from Wilno, reached from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and almost to Moscow itself. This was the gift that Jagello brought to Jadwiga, or Poland was the dowry that she brought to him. She was only sixteen at their marriage; she had been reared as a Roman Catholic in the finest culture of the Latin Renaissance. He was thirty=six, illiterate and heathen but he accepted baptism, took the Christian name of Ladislas II, and promised to convert all Lithuania.

It was a timely union, for the eastward advance of the Teutonic Knights was endangering both wedded states. The “Order of The Cross,”  originally dedicated to Christianizing Slavs, had become a band of martial conquerors taking by the sword whatever terrain they could snatch from pagan or Christian, and establishing a harsh serfdom over lands once tilled by a free peasantry. In 1410 the Grand Master, from his capital in Marienburg, ruled Estonia, Livonia, Courland, Prussia, and eastern Pomerania, shutting Poland off from the sea. In a ferocious Northern War, the Grand Master's army and that of Jagello--- each we are told numbering 100,000 strong-- met in the battle of Grunewald or Tannnenburg (1410). The Knights were defeated and fled, leaving behind them some 14,000 prisoners and 18,000 slain  -- among these the Grand Master himself. From that day the Order of the Cross rapidly declined until in the peace of Thorn, (1466) it ceded Pomerania and western Prussia to Poland, with the free port of Danzig as a door to the sea.

During the reign of Casimir IV ( 1447- 1492 ) Poland attained the apex of her spread, her power, and her art.  Though himself quite illiterate, Casimir ended the Knightly scorn of letters by giving his sons a thorough education. Queen Jadwiga, dying, left her jewels to finance the re-opening of Cracow University -- which, in the next century, would teach Copernicus. Literature, as well as science and philosophy, used the Latin tongue; In Latin Jan Dlugosz wrote his classic “History of Poland”(1478) In 1477 Viet Stoss of Nuremburg was invited to Cracow he stayed there seventeen years, and raised the city to a high place in the art of the time. For the Church of Our Lady he carved choir stalls, and an enormous altarpiece, forty feet by thirty-three, with a central shrine of the Assumption as impressive as Titan's painting, and with eighteen panels depicting the life of Mary and her Sons -- panels almost worthy, though in wood, to bear comparison with the bronze doors that Ghiberti had made for the Florentine Baptistery a generation before. With these works Gothic sculpture in Poland reached its crown and end. In the reign of Casimir’s son  Sigismund I ( 1506-48) Polish art accepted the style of Italian Renaissance. Lutheranism seeped in from Germany, and a new age began.



Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1857 on: October 17, 2012, 11:55:23 AM »
Cracow's great altar by Viet Stoss....

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

Emily

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1858 on: October 17, 2012, 03:14:58 PM »
"The growth of Lithuania was a major phenomenon of the fourteenth century." Who knew!

Our view of history in the US is narrowed down to about four countries in Europe and the US.

that altar is amazing. Equally amazing that it was rescued and put back in one piece.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1859 on: October 17, 2012, 05:39:37 PM »
Quote
Podebrad in 1464 invited the monarchs of Europe to form a permanent federation of European states, with its own legislature, executive, and army, and a judiciary empowered to settle current and future international disputes. The kings did not reply; the reinvigorated papacy was too strong to be defied by a League of Nations.

So, George of Podebrad was the first to suggest a 'European Union' in 1464. What a shame they did not unite and stop the foolish wars that seemed never ending. Every time a competent leader came along the 'church' did everything they could to quash or kill them. It was and is all about money and power today as yesterday.

Emily

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1860 on: October 17, 2012, 06:23:58 PM »
Quote
he bequeathed his uneasy throne to his son, Casimir the Great.

Some might begrudge Casimir III this title, since he preferred negotiation and compromise to war.

I was surprised to see Durant write these words. So to be great in most peoples eyes, one would have to be a militant military leader who settled everything by 'WAR'.

To me negotiation and compromise would be preferable to war. It may not always work, but should be the first resort, not the last. If that does not work, then fight to the death.

Casimar's wife Jadwiga could be called 'Great' for her support of education. How refreshing to read about two people who are admirable and were a benefit to their country.

Emily

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1861 on: October 17, 2012, 08:56:43 PM »
EMILY: I think Durant is being sardonic (is that the right word here). There are always some who wish to benifit from a war. Including nobles who get their wealth from war.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1862 on: October 25, 2012, 10:24:03 PM »
Durants'  S  o  C
V ol. VI  THE REFORMATION
Pgs 175  -  178



                                          The Ottoman Tide

                                  Second blooming in Byzantium  1261 - 1373

The Byzantine Empire, bloodlessly restored under a new Palaeologus dynasty 1261, survived despite itself for almost two centuries. Its territory was reduced by the advance of the Moslems in Asia and Europe, by the expansion of the Slavs in its rear, and by scattered fragments of its former self retained by the Christian enemies who had sacked Constantinople in 1204 -- Normans, Venetians, and Genoese. Industry lingered in the towns of the empire, but its products were carried in Italian Vessels that paid no revenue into the treasury. Of the once numerous middle class only a  fringe remained.   Above it were luxurious nobles and prelates gorgeously garbed, who had learned nothing from history and had forgotten everything but their privileges. Below were turbulent layers of monks who salted piety with politics, and peasant proprietors lapsing into tenancy, and tenant farmers slipping into serfdom and proletaires dreaming of  egalitarian utopias.. A revolution in Salonika (1341) expelled the aristocracy, pillaged palaces, and set up a semi-communistic republic that ruled for eight years before it was suppressed by troops from the capital. Constantinople was still a thriving nexus of commerce, but a Muslim traveller in  1330 noted  “many destroyed houses, and sown fields within the city walls“; and a  Spanish diplomat about 1409, wrote : “Everywhere throughout the capital are great churches, palaces, and monasteries, but most of them are in ruins.” The glory had departed from the Queen of the Bosporus.

In philosophy the old contest between Platonists and Aristotelians recaptured the stage. Gemistus Pletho in 1400 wrote a treatise bearing Plato’s title, “THE LAWS”, in which he proposed the replacement of both  Christianity and Mohammedanism by the religion of ancient Greece, merely transforming all the Olympians but Zeus into symbolic personifications of creative processes or ideas; Pletho did not know that religions are born, not made. He returned to Mistra, subsided theologically, became an archbishop, and died at ninety-five.

The revival of art was as marked as the rejuvenation of letters. In the frescoes that increasingly replaced expensive mosaics in the decoration of churches and palaces, the ecclesiastical hold relaxed and figures of vivid fantasy and secular story appeared beside the legends of the saints. Greece was now again a centre of great art. On the eastern  coast of Greece, high on the promontory of Mount Athos, monasteries had been raised in the tenth century, and in most centuries since: in the fourteenth the majestic Pantocrator, in the fifteenth, St. Paul’s.

While Byzantine art experienced this final ecstasy, the Byzantine government declined. The army was in disorder, the navy in decay; Genoese or Venetian vessels controlled the Black sea, and pirates roamed the Greek archipelago. A band of mercenaries from Catalonia captured  Gallipoli (1306), mulcted the commerce of the Dardanelles, and set up a republic of robbers in Athens (1310); no government succeeded in suppressing them, and they were left to be consumed by their own violence. For many years the Byzantine Emperors were so fearful of the Christian West that they had no energy or courage to resist the Moslem advance. When that fear subsided the Ottoman Turks were at the door.

Some of the emperors bought their own destruction. In1342 John VI Cantacuzene, involved in a civil war, asked aid of Ockham, Sultan of the Ottomans; Ockham sent him ships and helped him take Salonika; the grateful emperor gave him his daughter Theodora as an extra wife; the sultan sent him an extra 6000 troops. When John Palaeologus undertook to depose him, John Cantacuzene robbed the churches of Constantinople to pay Ockham for 20,000 more Turks, and promised the Sultan a fortress in the Thracian Chersonese. In the hour of his apparent victory the people of Constantinople turned against him as a traitor, and revolution transformed him overnight from an emperor into an historian. (1355). He retired to a monastery, and wrote the history of his times in a last attempt to overwhelm his enemies.

John V Palaeologus found no ease on the throne. He went to Rome as a suppliant (1369) and offered, in return for help against the Turks, to bring his people into obedience to the papacy. Before the high altar of St. Peter’s he abjured the Greek Orthodox Church. Pope Urban V promised aid against the infidels, and gave him letters to the princes of Christendom. But these were busy with other affairs. Instead of receiving assistance, John was held at Venice as a hostage for the payment of Greek debts. His son Manuel brought the money; John returned to Constantinople poorer than before, and was denounced by his people for foreswearing the Orthodox creed. Failing in a second attempt to get succour from the West, he recognized Sultan Murad I as his suzerain, agreed to provide military aid to the Ottoman army, and gave his beloved Manuel as hostage for the fulfilment of his pledge. Appeased for the moment, Murad spared Byzantium, and turned to subjugate the Balkans.


3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1863 on: October 25, 2012, 10:36:05 PM »
Durant's remark "Pletho did not know, religions are born, not made."
I do not agree with Durant on this one. I think religion, like all other  human ideas are made by man.  I think such things as mathematical laws are facts that pre-exist man, but not religion. Religions have the smell and colour of man's story telling.  -- Trevor

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1864 on: October 25, 2012, 10:39:48 PM »
From what I've seen of Durant, I would have thought he would agree with you.

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1865 on: October 26, 2012, 07:53:51 PM »
Durant's remark "Pletho did not know, religions are born, not made."
I do not agree with Durant on this one. I think religion, like all other  human ideas are made by man.  I think such things as mathematical laws are facts that pre-exist man, but not religion. Religions have the smell and colour of man's story telling.  -- Trevor

Thank you Trevor. I had just come in to read and highlighted that very quote to comment. You have saved me the effort.

Man has created thousands of gods over their time on this earth. I once kept a list, and still take note of any new god I encounter in my reading.

Why did man need the occult and supernatural? He was scared of living and afraid of dying. Did all his finagling help him beat the grim reaper, NOPE.

Emily


Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1866 on: October 27, 2012, 12:38:59 PM »
Quote
On the Eastern coast of Greece, high on the promontory of Mount Athos, monasteries had been raised...

Here are photos of some of those monasteries. Click on the photo shown and you will go back to others. Click on them and click again to return.

http://www.orthodoxphotos.com/Monasteries_and_Churches/Mount_Athos/8.shtml

Emily

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1867 on: October 27, 2012, 04:55:35 PM »
Wow! I guess you can't be a monk if you're afraid of heights!

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1868 on: October 28, 2012, 09:00:29 PM »
The Durants'  S  o  C
Vol VI THE REFORMATION
Pgs  178 - 181


                                     THE BALKANS MEET THE TURKS.

Hitherto the fourteenth century had been for the Balkans a peak in their history. In Wallachia, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Albania, hardy Slavs cut the forests, mined and tilled the earth, pastured flocks, and eagerly bred their own replacements. From the Adriatic to the Black Sea, from the black Sea to the Baltic, Slavs, Italians, Magyars, Bulgars, Greeks, and Jews carried the trade of East and West, and cities sprouted in their path.

The great man of Serbia at this time was Stephen Dushan. His father Stephen Urosh III, begot him in a brief detour from monogamy, gave him the affectionate name of Dusha -- i.e. Soul --  and had him crowned as heir apparent. When a more legitimate son arrived, and received fond nicknames in his turn, Stephen deposed his father, allowed him to be strangled, and ruled Serbia with a strong hand for a generation. “Of all men of his time,” wrote a contemporary, “he was the tallest, and terrible to look upon.” Serbia forgave him everything, for he waged a successful war. He trained a large army, led it with masterly generalship, conquered Bosnia, Albania, Epirus, Acarnania, Aetolia, Macedonia, Thessaly. Transferring his capital from Belgrade to Skopje, he convened there a parliament of nobles, and bade it unify and codify the laws of his diverse states; the resultant Zabonik Tsara Dushana, or Law book of Czar Dushan ( 1349). Financed and perhaps stimulated by this political exaltation, Serbian art in the fourteenth century rivalled the contemporary flourish in Constantinople and the Morea; magnificent churches were built, and their mosaics were freer and livelier than those normally allowed by the more conservative ecclesiasticism of the Greek capital. In 1355 Dushan assembled his armies for the last time. He asked them whether they preferred to be led against Byzantium or Hungary. They answered that they would follow him wherever he chose to lead. “To Constantinople !” he cried . On the way he fell sick and died.

His empire was too heterogeneous to be held together except by a man of alert intelligence and disciplined energy. Bosnia seceded, and attained for a proud moment, under Stephen Trtko, the hegemony of the Balkans. Bulgaria under John Alexander had its last great age. Wallachia, once part of the Byzantine Empire, detached itself ( 1290 ) and ruled the spreading delta of the Danube. Moldavia threw off its allegiance to Hungary (1349).

Upon these centrifugal statelets the Turkish blight fell even  before John V Palaeologus made Byzantium vassal to Murad I. Suleiman, the dashing son of Sultan Orkhan , had led Turkish troops to the aid of John VI Cantacuzene; he received, or took, as his reward the fortress of Tzympe on the European side of the Dardanelles ( 1353). When an earthquake shattered the walls of nearby Gallipoli, Suleiman moved into the defenceless town. At his invitation Turkish collonists crossed from Anatolia and spread along the northern coast of the sea of Marmora almost to Constantinople itself. With an expanding Turkish army Suleiman marched into Thrace and captured Adrianople (1361) Five years later Murad made it his European capital. From that centre the Turks would for a century aim their blows at the divided Balkans.

Pope Urban V, recognizing the significance of this Turkish infiltration into Europe, called upon all Christendom for another Crusade. An army of Serbs, Hungarians, and Wallachians marched gallantly toward Adrianople. At the river Maritsa they celebrated their unresisted advance with a feast. Amid their cups and revelry they were surprised by a night assault from a relatively small Turkish force. Many were slain before they could arm; many were drowned trying to retreat across the river; the rest fled.(1371) In 1385 Sofia capitulated, and half of Bulgaria fell to the Ottomans. In 1386 they took Nish, in 1387 Salonika. All Greece lay open to the Turks. For one heroic year little Bosnia stemmed the tide. Stephen Trtko joined forces with the Serbians under Lazar I, and defeated the Turks at Plochnik (1388) A year later Murad marched west with an army that included many Christian contingents. At Kosovo he was met by a coalition of Serbs, Bosnians, Magyars, Vlachs, Bulgars, Albanians, and Poles. A Serb knight, pretended to be a deserter and informer, made his way into  Murad’s tent, killed the sultan, and was hacked to death. Murad’s son and heir, Bajazet I rallied the Turks to angry courage, and led them to victory. King Lazar was captured and beheaded; Serbia became a tribute-paying vassal of the Turks, and its new king, Stephen Lazarevitch, was compelled to send arms and men to Bajazet. In 1392 Wallachia under John Shishman joined the roster of Balkan states tributary to the Ottomans, Only Bulgaria and Byzantium remained capable of defence.

In 1393 Bajazet invaded Bulgaria. After a siege of three months Trnovo , the capital fell; the Churches were desecrated, and the palaces set on fire; the nobles were invited to a conference and were massacred. The Pope again appealed to Christendom, and king Sigismund of Hungary summoned Europe to arms.. France, though engaged in a life or death struggle with England, sent a force of cavaliers under the count of Nevers; The counts of Hohenzollern and the Grand Master of the Knights of St., John came with their followers; the Elector Palatine brought a company of Bavarian horses. John Shishman renounced his vassalage and came with his troops to fight  under the Hungarian King.

The united army, 60,000 strong, marched through Serbia and besieged the Turkish garrison in Nicopolis. Warned that  Bajazet with an army from Asia was coming to raise the siege, the French knights, gay with wine and women, promised to annihilate it. For his part Bajazet vowed he would stable his horse at the high altar of St. Peter’s in Rome. He placed his weakest troops in front, with strategy that should have been obvious. The French knights plunged through them triumphantly, then through 10,000 Janissaries, then through 5000 Turkish  cavalry, then charged recklessly up a hill. Just beyond its summit they found themselves faced with the main force of the Turkish army -- 40,000 lancers. The nobles fought nobly, were killed or captured or put to flight, and the allied infantry behind them were disordered by their rout The Hungarians and Germans were nevertheless driving back the Turks when Stephen  Lazarevitch of Serbia led 5,000 Christians against the Christian army, and won the crucial battle of Nicopolis for the Sultan (1396).

Maddened by the sight of so many of his men lying dead on the field, and by the claim of the rescued garrison that the Christian besiegers had killed their Turkish prisoners, Bajazet ordered that the 10,000 captives be put to death. The Count of Nevers was allowed to choose twenty-four knights to be saved for the ransom they might bring. Several thousand Christians were slaughtered in a bloody ritual that went on from sunrise to late afternoon until the Sultans officers persuaded him to spare the rest. From that day until 1878 Bulgaria was a province of the Ottoman Empire. Bajazet now took most of Greece, and then marched against Constantinople.




JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1869 on: October 29, 2012, 05:47:51 PM »
Again, this is all completely new to me. "From that day until 1878 Bulgaria was a province of the Ottoman Empire. "

Emily

  • Posts: 365
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1870 on: November 06, 2012, 02:45:51 PM »
I went to my Millennium Atlas that I bought in the year 2,000 to see how the map of Europe had changed since the 14th century where our 'Story' has us at the moment.

Then I went looking for a 14th century map of Europe to see how these countries looked before the invasion of the Muslim Turks.

I found a map of Europe that takes us from the year 1000 to the year 2000. Just click on the link and when it loads click the start bar at the left (like youtube video) and the entire map of a changing Europe proceeds before your eyes. Watching the Mongol invasion was harrowing, but then here come the muslim Turks as their invasion of Europe unfolds.

I hope all of you enjoy this map journey as much as I did.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/the-map-of-europe-1000-ad-to-today/

Emily

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1871 on: November 06, 2012, 08:18:38 PM »
That was amazing!! I knew Europe was unstable, but I had no idea how much,

I was frustrated that there weren't changing dates on the map. I kept thinking "When was that?"

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1872 on: November 06, 2012, 09:55:08 PM »
The DURANT'S   S  o  C
THE REFORMATION  Vol. VI
Pgs 181 - 184


                     The LAST YEARS OF CONSTANTINOPLE   1373  -  1453

No other government ever so fully deserved to fall  as the Byzantine. Having lost the will to defend itself, and unable to persuade the too sophisticated Greeks that it is sweet and noble to die for one’s country, it sent no contingent to the Christian armies at the Maritsa, Kosovo, or Nicopolis. It provided 12,000 soldiers for the Sultan in 1379; and it was Byzantine troops that, on the order of John VII Palaeologus, compelled the Byzantine city of Philadelphia, in Asian Minor, to surrender to the Turks (1390).

When Bajazet resumed the siege of Constantinople ( 1402), the Byzantine Empire was reduced to its capital: Bajazet commanded both coasts of the Sea of Marmora, controlled the Dardanelles, ruled nearly all of Asia Minor and the Balkans, and passed safely between his Asiatic and European capitals. The final hour seemed to have struck for the beleaguered city. Starving Greeks let themselves down over the walls, and deserted to the Turks in order to eat. Suddenly from the Moslem East an “infidel” saviour appeared for the outpost of Christendom. Timur the Lame __ Tamerlane the Great __ had determined to check the growth and insolence of Ottoman power. As the Tatar hordes  rolled west Bajazet abandoned the siege of Constantinople, and hurried to regroup his forces in Anatolia. Turks met Tatars at Ankara ( 1402); Bajazet was defeated and captured. The Turkish tide ebbed for a generation; God at last seemed to be on the side of the Christians.

Under the wise rule of Manuel II Byzantium recovered most of Greece and parts of Thrace. But Mohammed I reorganized the Turkish army, and Murad II led it, after a major defeat, to major victories. The Muslims still drew inspiration from the belief that to die for Islam was to win paradise; even if there should be no paradise and no houris, they were impartial enough to consider the Greek maidens beautiful. The Christians were not so impartial. Greek Catholics hated Roman Catholics and were hated in turn.

When Venetians hunted and massacred Greek Catholics in Crete for refusing to accept the Roman ritual and papal supremacy, Pope Urban V joined Petrarch in congratulating the doge on his firm protection of the one true Church (c. 1350). Most Balkan States hated their neighbours more than the Turks, and some preferred to submit to the Moslems, who taxed no more than the Christian rulers, persecuted heresy less or not at all, and allowed four wives.

Murad II reconquered Greece, Salonika, and most of Albania. Serbia resisted manfully under George Branković ; a combined army of Serbians and Hungarians under Hunyadi János defeated Murad at Kunovitza ( 1444) and Branković  ruled Serbia until his death at the age of ninety ( 1456). Murad signed a peace with the Emperor Constantine XI Palaeologus, and retired to Adrianople to die ( 1451 ).

Mohammed II surnamed the Conqueror, came to the Ottoman throne at twenty-one. He confirmed the treaty with Constantine and sent his nephew Orkhan to be brought up ( possibly as a spy ) at the Byzantine court. When other Moslem powers challenged his authority in Western Asia, Mohammed ferried his army across the straits and left his European possessions in charge of the Vizier Khalil Pasha, known for his friendliness to Byzantium. Constantine thought the revolt in Asia offered an opportunity to weaken the Turks in Europe. But he had neglected to secure either his alliances in the west or his communications to the south. Mohammed made peace with his Moslem enemies, and with Venice, Wallachia, Bosnia, and Hungary. Crossing back to Europe he raised a powerful fortress on the Bosporus above Constantinople, thereby ensuring unimpeded passage  of his troops between the continents. He hired Christian gunsmiths to cast for him the largest cannon yet known, which could hurl stone balls weighing  600 pounds. In June 1452 he declared war, and began the final siege of Constantinople with 140,000 men.

Constantine led the defence with desperate resolution.. He equipped his 7,000 soldiers with small cannon, lancers, bows and arrows, and crude firearms. He supervised every night the repair of the damage done to the walls during the day. Nevertheless the ancient defences crumbled more and more before the battering rams and superior artillery  of the Turks; now ended the medieval fortification of cities by walls. On May 29 the Turks fought their way across a mote filled with the bodies of the slain, and surged over or through the walls into the terrorized city. The Greeks at last fought bravely; the young Emperor was everywhere in the heat of the action, and the nobles who were with him died to a man in his defence. Surrounded by Turks, he cried out, “Cannot there be found a Christian to cut off my head?” He threw off his Imperial garments, fought as a common soldier, disappeared in the rout of his little army, and was never heard of again.

The victors massacred thousands, till all defence ceased. Then they began the rampant plunder which had so long been the substance of their hopes. Every usable adult among the defeated was taken as a prize; nuns were ravished like other women in an impartial mania of rape; Christian masters  and servants, shorn of the garb that marked their state, found themselves suddenly equalised in indiscriminate slavery. Pillage was not quite uncontrolled; when Mohammed II found a Moslem piously destroying a marble pavement of St. Sophia, he smote him with the royal scimitar, and announced that all buildings were to be reserved for orderly rapine by the Sultan. St. Sophia was transformed into a mosque after proper purification; all its Christian insignia were removed, and its mosaics were whitewashed into oblivion for 500 years. On the very day of the city’s fall, or on the ensuing Friday, a muezzin mounted the tallest turret of Hagia Sophia, and summoned the Moslems to gather in it for prayer to victorious Allah.

The capture of Constantinople shook every throne in Europe. The bulwark had fallen that had protected Europe from Asia for a thousand years. That Moslem power and faith which the Crusaders had hoped to drive back into Asia had now made its way over the corpse of Byzantium, and through the Balkans to the very gates of Hungary. The papacy, which had dreamed of all Greek Christianity submitting to the rule of Rome, saw with dismay the rapid conversion of millions of south-eastern Europeans to Islam. Routes of commerce once open to Western vessels were now in alien hands, and could be clogged with tolls in peace or closed with guns in war.

In one sense nothing  was lost, only the dead had died. Byzantium had finished its role, and yielded its place, in the heroic and sanguinary, noble and ignominious procession of mankind.






JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1873 on: November 07, 2012, 04:39:10 PM »
"In one sense nothing  was lost, only the dead had died. Byzantium had finished its role, and yielded its place, in the heroic and sanguinary, noble and ignominious procession of mankind."

Durant really lets you feel the "procession of mankind", doesn't he. This is just what we need after the heat of an election, which tends to give us an ant's-eye view of history.

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1874 on: November 12, 2012, 08:01:25 PM »
DURANTS'  S  o  C
Vol VI   The  REFORMATION
Pgs  184 - 186



                                     HUNYADI  JÁNOS   1378  -  1456
The population of Hungary, numbering some 700,000 in the fourteenth century, was a fluctuating mixture of Magyars, Pannonians, Slovaks, Bulgars, Khzars, Patzinaks, Cumans, Slavonians, Croats, Russians, Armenians, Walachians, Bosnians, and Serbs: in summary, a minority of Magyars ruled a majority of Slavs. In the nascent cities a mercantile middle class and an industrial proletariat began to form in the fourteenth century; and as these were mostly immigrants from Germany, Flanders, and Italy, new racial tensions were added to the ethnic maze.

When  Andrew III died, ending the  Arpád dynasty (907-1301), a war of succession further divided the nation, and peace returned only when the higher nobility, having made the monarchy elective, conferred the crown of St. Stephen upon Charles Robert of Anjou (1308). Charles brought with him French ideas of feudalism and chivalry; Italian ideas of business and industry. He promoted the development of Hungary’s gold mines, encouraged enterprise, stabilized the  currency, cleansed the judiciary, and gave the nation a competent administration. Under Charles and his son Louis,  Hungary became a western state, eager to win the help of  the West against the proliferating East.

Louis I, wrote Voltaire, “ reigned happily in Hungary forty years.”(1342-82) and not so happily “in Poland twelve years. His people gave him the surname Great, which he well deserved; and yet this prince is hardly known (in Western Europe ) because he did not reign over men capable of transmitting his fame and virtues to other nations. How few know in the fourteenth century there was a Louis the Great in the Carpathian mountains!” His character mingled urbane culture and chivalrous sentiments with military ardour and capacity. He indulged occasionally in wars- - to avenge his murdered brother in Naples, to recover from Venice the Dalmatian ports that had long seemed to Hungary its due outlets to the sea, and to check the aggressive expansion of Serbia and Turkey by bringing Croatia, Bosnia, and northern Bulgaria under Hungarian control. By example and percept he spread the chivalric ideal among the nobility, and raised the level of manners and morals in his people. In 1367 Louis founded the university of Pécs, but this, along with much of Hungary’s medieval glory, disappeared in the long and exhausting struggle with the Turks.

Louis’s son in law, Sigismund I, enjoyed a reign whose length ( 1387- 1437) should have made possible long-term and and farsighted policies. But his tasks were greater than his powers. He led a huge army against Bajazet at Nicopolis, and barely escaped from that disaster with his life. He realized that the Turkish advance  was now the paramount problem in Europe; he devoted great care and failing funds to fortifying  the southern frontier, and built at the junction of the Danube and the Save the great fortress of Belgrade. But his election to the Imperial Office compelled him to neglect Hungary during long absences in Germany; and his acquisition of the Bohemian crown widened his responsibilities without enlarging his capacities.

Two years after his death the spreading Turks invaded Hungary. In this crisis the nation produced its most famous hero. Hunyadi János received his surname from the castle of Hunyadi in Transylvania, a stronghold granted to his father for services in war. János  --i.e  John -- was trained for war almost  daily in  his youth. The  repulse of the Ottomans became the absorbing devotion of his career. When they entered  Transylvania he led against them newly disciplined troops inspired by his patriotism and his general ship. It was in that battle that Simon Kemény, beloved in Hungarian literature, gave his life for his leader. Knowing that the Turks had been instructed to seek out and kill Hunyadi, Simon begged and received permission to exchange costumes with him. He died under concentrated assaults while Hunyadi directed the army to victory ( 1442 ). Murad II dispatched 80,000 new troops to the front. Hunyadi lured them, by feigned retreat, into a narrow pass where only a fraction of them could fight at one time, and again Hunyadi’s strategy triumphed. Harassed by revolts in Asia, Murad sued for terms, and agreed to pay a substantial indemnity. At Szeged, King Ladislas and his allies signed with Murad’s representatives a truce pledging both sides to peace. Ladislas swore on the Bible, the Turkish ambassadors on the Koran (1442).

But Cardinal Giuliano Cesarini, papal legate at Buda, presently judged the time propitious for an offensive. Murad had moved his army to Asia; an Italian fleet, controlling the Dardanelles could prevent his return. The Cardinal, who had distinguished himself for probity and ability, argued that a pledge to an infidel could not bind a Christian. Hunyadi advise peace, and the Serbian contingent refused to violate the truce. The envoys of the western nations agreed with Cesarini, and offered to contribute money and men to a a sacred crusade. Ladislas yielded, an d in person led an attack upon Turkish positions. The promised reinforcements from the West did not come; The Ottoman army, 60,000 strong, eluded the Italian admiral, and crossed back k to Europe. At Varna near the Black Sea-- his standard bearer5 holding the dishonoured treaty aloft on a lance -- Murad inflicted an overwhelming defeat upon Ladislas’ 20,000 men ( 1444). Hunyadi  counselled retreat, the King ordered advance. Hunyadi begged him to stay in the rear; Ladislas plunged into the van of the fight, and was killed. Cesarini did not quite regain his honour by losing his life.

In 1456 the Turks laid siege to Belgrade. Mohammed II aimed against the citadel the heavy artillery that had shattered the walls of Constantinople. Europe had never known such a violent bombardment; Hunyadi led the defence with a skill and courage never forgotten in Hungarian poetry. At last, preferring the anaesthesia of battle to the agonies of starvation, the besieged rushed from the fortress, fought their way to the Turkish cannon, and so decisively vanquished the enemy that for sixty years thereafter Hungary was spared any Moslem attack. A few days after this historic defence Hunyadi died of fever in the camp. Hungary honours him as its greatest man.

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1875 on: November 13, 2012, 03:30:21 PM »
"How few know in the fourteenth century there was a Louis the Great in the Carpathian mountains!”

Indeed. And the poetry. I wonder if any of it has been translated to English.

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1876 on: November 14, 2012, 03:18:40 PM »
So I went to my World Poetry book to find out, and I'm sorry that I did. the polish poet included is Jan Kochanowski 1530-1584

TO A Mathematician

"He discovered the age of the sun, and he knows
Just why the wrong or the right wind blows.
He has looked at each nook of the ocean floor
But he doesn't see that his wife is a -----."

As a mathematician (and wife of a mathematician), I resent that for all mathematician's wives throiugh the ages. I'm sure Poland had much more to contribute to world literature than that!

mabel1015j

  • Posts: 3656
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1877 on: November 15, 2012, 01:57:40 PM »
Emily - that was a great link to the evolving map of Europe. I wish they had put a rolling scroll of the years as we saw the changing map. I remember how surprised i was when in my college Western Civ class i learned that the countries of Europe were not stabilized into the boundaries i knw them to be in 1960, until 1870. Not having had much European history in high school, i had assumed those boundaries had been true for centuries. I was able to tell on the link when it was at 1870 and Italy became the state we know today. I will look at it more than one more time.

Joan, i stand w/ you in your resentment - for all women  :)

The 14th century was so horrific in Europe, i'm glad -again- that i'm living in 20 & 21st centuries in the USA?

3kings(Trevor)

  • Posts: 347
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1878 on: November 16, 2012, 04:27:47 AM »
Durants'   S  o  C
Vol.  VI   The REFORMATION
Pgs.  187 - 190



                                  THE  HUNGARIAN  RENAISSANCE   1456 – 90 
In the half century of security that Hunyadi had won for Hungary, his son Matthias Corvinus led the nation to historic culmination. Matthias was only sixteen at his accession, matured into a good soldier and general, defeated the Turks wherever he encountered them, absorbed Moravia and Silesia, failed to conquer Bohemia. He fought four wars against the Emperor Frederick III, took Vienna and annexed Austria ( 1485 ); the first Austro-Hungarian Empire was Hungarian.

His victories made monarchy transiently supreme over nobility; here, as in Western Europe, centralization of government was the order of the day. At Buda, and in the King’s palace at Visegrad, his court equalled any royal grandeur of the age; great noblemen became his servitors.

Matthias’ diplomacy was cunning and unscrupulous, amiable and generous, he bought with gold what would have cost twice as much by arms. Roaming in disguise among the people, the soldiery, and the courts, he inspected at first hand the behaviour of his officials, and corrected incompetence and injustice without favouritism or fear. He did what he could to protect the weak from the strong, the peasants from the rapacious landlords. While the Church continued to claim the country as papal property, Matthias appointed and disciplined prelates, and enjoyed the furore when he made a seven-year-old Italian lad the primate of Hungary. The merchants of Ferara with rival humour, sent the new archbishop an assortment of toys.

Nobles and prelates joined the King in supporting artists and scholars; even the mining towns of the interior had rich men who sublimated wealth into art. Handsome buildings, civic as well as ecclesiastical, rose not only at Buda but at Visegrad, Tata, Esztergom, Nagyvárad, and Vác. Giovanni Dalmata made notable statues of Hunyadi and other Hungarian heroes. In the parish church of Beszterczebánya another group carved in stone a great relief, ‘Christ in the Garden of Olives,’ astonishing in its careful details and dramatic effect. Almost  all the art of this Hungarian heyday was destroyed or lost in the Ottoman invasions of the sixteenth century. Some of the statues are in Istanbul, to which they were carried by the victorious Turks.

Matthias’ interests were literary rather than artistic. Humanists, foreign or native, were welcome in his court, and received lucrative sinecures in the government. Probably in Italy alone could one find, in the last quarter of the fifteenth century, such a galaxy of  artists and scholars as received sustenance at Matthius’ court. ‘The Sodalitas Litteraria Danubia’, founded at Buda in 1497, is among the oldest literary societies in the world.

The centralized power that Matthias had organized only briefly survived his death ( 1490). The resurgent magnates dominated Ladislas II, and embezzled revenues that should have paid the troops. The army mutinied, the soldiers went home. Freed from taxation, the nobles wasted their income and energies on riotous living, while Islam pressed against the borders, and a bitterly exploited peasantry seethed with revolt. In 1514 the Hungarian Diet declared a crusade against the Turks, and called for volunteers. Peasants in great numbers flocked to the cross, seeing little to choose between life and death. Finding themselves armed, the thought spread among them; why wait to kill distant Turks when hated nobles were so  near? A soldier of fortune, György Dózsa, led them in a wild ‘Jacquerie’; they over ran all Hungary burning castles and massacring all nobles – men, women, children – who fell into their hands. The nobles called in aid from all directions, armed and paid mercenaries, overwhelmed the disorganized peasants, and punished their leaders with frightful torments. For two weeks Dósza and his aids were kept without food; then he was tied to a red-hot iron throne, a red-hot crown was placed on his head, a red-hot sceptre forced into his hand; and his starved companions were allowed to tear the roasted flesh from his body while he was still conscious. From barbarism to civilization requires a century. From civilization to barbarism needs but a day.

The peasants were not slaughtered, for they were indispensable; but the Tripartite Code
(1514) decreed that  “ the recent rebellion …. has for all time to come put the stain of faithlessness upon the peasants, and they have thereby forfeited their liberty, and have become subject to their landlords in unconditional and perpetual servitude…. Every species of property belongs to the landlords, and the peasant has no right to invoke justice and the law against a noble.”

Twelve years later Hungary fell to the Turks.

JoanK

  • BooksDL
  • Posts: 8685
Re: Story of Civilization ~ Will & Ariel Durant
« Reply #1879 on: November 16, 2012, 03:49:15 PM »
" From barbarism to civilization requires a century. From civilization to barbarism needs but a day."

We've seen this over and over again in this journey.