West European Studies

Italian renaissance period was one of the most productive periods in the history of art. Most outstanding art pieces in various fields such as architecture, sculpture and also painting were created. It is in this period that great artists came up with wonderful innovations in various fields making the beginning of an era in the history of arts.

Major aspects in Italian renaissance art development
The works of art that were created during this period were a clear indication of the level of creativity that existed among the artists. The works have had several understandings by both historians and critics bringing out the level of mystery that was involved in art works. Renaissance developed through three major stages with each stage having its own unique aspects. The first level was the Early Renaissance, followed by high renaissance and finally late renaissance. Early renaissance occurred between the years 1400-1475 AD, after which high renaissance followed from 1475 to 1525 AD and finally the late renaissance period that existed from 1525 to 1600(Hampton 2003, p.19).

Early renaissance period
Artistic works during this period were not stagnant because of the efforts from artists who believed that art shouldnt remain static but instead it should always be improved. They studied various styles that had been used by previous artists in prehistoric Rome and Greek after which they assembled the ideas and came up with contemporary art. These artists were mostly concerned with the human body and as a result, they painted realistic figures about it. This concept of painting was later called realism. Most of the drawings in renaissance art were drawings of individuals who were involved in their daily activities such as eating and dancing (Barnes 2006, p.50).

Artists came up with another concept that was referred to as linear perspective. This perspective developed into a major obsession in majority of painters. It helped in giving paintings a more practical space effect. A lot of studies about square and octagonal baptistery had been undertaken by Brunelleschi after which he used the idea in helping Masaccio come up with his trendy trompe loeil niche. This idea was so interesting to some artists until it prompted some of them into experimenting it in many of their works. Its through this works that popular paintings such as Battle of San Romano that enlisted the help of hills together with broken weapons to express the concept of linear perspective were created. Through use of this concept, painters were able to express the fantasy of space with distance using a flat surface (Jacobs 1999, p. 52).

According to Crewe (2002, p.200), the modern-day ideas were embraced and focus changed from worldly ideas through the influence of the church, although other artist became curious about the church with believe in religion diminishing and started reflecting the same in their creative works. One of the examples of such works is a portrait that was done by Jan Van Eyck called Arnolfini portrait in which there was a couple who were getting married in a room with the bride pregnant. This was unusual as it was ridiculous in those days for a marriage ceremony to be undertaken outside the church with the bride pregnant (Connors 2004, p.99).

High renaissance Art period
During the period, a lot of concentration was put on paintings of human anatomy. They were determined to bring out the human image in the natural possible way. Principles like secularism were encouraged which made people to focus more on ways of improving self by doing things in their preferred ways. Majority of paintings that were painted during the period were paintings of people learning instead of worshiping (Seidel 2002, p.97).

Late renaissance Art
They were mainly focused on stylemanner compared to substance. Because the artists major aim was to out do those in High renaissance, they were not innovative. Their themes were strange with loud colors. They portrayed human beings with abnormal features such as limbs and came up with paintings that were tormenting to people. Some paintings were clumsy with painting of naked people. This formed one of the aspects of Italian renaissance art. Giorgio and also Giovanni were some of the most admired artists of the time although Michelangelo who was an artist in the high renaissance period also did the paintings (Luchs 2001, p. 48)

Renaissance Art and science
They were closely related as they were both striving to have an understanding of the physical world. Paintings that were done by artists helped a great deal in understanding science with paintings of the human body simplifying the study of human anatomy. They also helped in the study of mathematics where by they helped in developing a three dimensional fantasy over a place that was two dimensional. Although previously similar effect had been achieved by use of empirical ways, it was simplified and became an important tool in art creation (Massi 2006, p. 503).

Leonardo da vincis Last supper painting
This painting was painted by Leonardo da Vinci for his employer Duke who had requested him to sketch the spiritual scene in question. He did it on a wall of a dinning area. The paintings measurements were 460 by 880 cm and it took three years to finish the drawing. The painting appeared outstanding as a result of human and certain emotions that were displayed from the paintings of disciples and the delightful thought of the last supper. The painting represented activities that happened an evening prior to betrayal of Jesus by Judas where he had congregated all his disciples at the table and explained to them of the events that were about to occur (Jacobs 1999, p. 52).

Analysis
In the picture were the disciples of Jesus together with him. The picture divides them into four groups with the first one containing Bartholomew, Lesser and James. James appears surprised while Andrews hand is up with a frightened look on his face. The 2nd group is composed of Judas, peter together with John. Judas is holding a silver bag while is using another hand to take bread. Simon is having a knife on the right hand while leaning towards John a symbol of his defense for Christ.
Thomas, James and Philip form the third group. They look shocked with the hand of Thomas up and Philip requesting for something while James appears to be terrified. The final group is a group of Simon, Thaddeus together with Mathew who appear to be talking to one another.

Lisa del Giocondo was another portrait that was painted by Leonardo. He painted it using oil paint on a panel that was made of timber. Its measurements were 77 by 53 cm. He painted it after he was asked by Lisas spouse to do so in celebration of their second son and he also intended to use its beautification of their new house. The painting was passed on until it was sold to King Francois by Salais inheritor after which it remained public treasure (Crewe 2002, p.200).

Masaccio
According to Goffen (1999 p.207), Masaccios first work was an Altarpiece that came into lime light in 1961. He did the painting in a church by the name San Giovenale that was near Masaccios homeland. It represented the Virgin Mary at the middle of the panel with angels, to the left panel were St. Bartholomew together with Blaise and on the right panel were Anthony with St. Juvenal. Although many of the paintings frames have disappeared, his idea of using volumetric figure to express three-dimensionality was noted. His second work was done jointly by him and Masolino where he painted Saint Anne with the Virgin Mary holding a child. It is said that St. Anne and Angels were painted by Masolino and those of the child and Mary were done by Masaccio.

Mankind has practiced slavery since the beginning of recorded history. References to this practice in which individuals are considered to be properties of others are evident in the Bible and other ancient literary materials. Societies that practiced slavery usually held individuals against their will and forced them to do various chores. By around the 15th century, the European traders started to engage in slavery around the coasts of Africa, especially at the historic Slave Coast, which consisted of countries in Africas West Coast. The interests of the traders shifted from the usual trade in gold that they had practiced for a long time to trade in slaves, which they considered to be readily available.

The trade in slaves was very fruitful and it mainly began for one main reason to supply workforce to the European countries. As the empires were increasing in size, they wanted increased manpower to aid in its expansion. The indigenous Europeans were not very much reliable since they were susceptible to ailments and were unable to work in extreme climatic conditions. However, the West Africans were tremendous laborious. They were experienced in agricultural practices, could withstand unfavorable climatic conditions, and they could be forced to work without much complaint.

There was much brutality that accompanied the selling of the Africans as slaves. To begin with, they were forced at gun point to get into the ships.  Aboard the ships, they made the horrific voyage to their destinations (Manning 111). They were chained and mercilessly packed into quarters that was not appropriate for movement or poorly ventilated therefore, most of them found solace in suicide through jumping overboard. These unfavorable conditions made most of them to suffer from malnutrition and various diseases and, eventually, early deaths before they were able to reach their new world.

In order to validate their actions, the traders dehumanized the African race which they were using for their own profit. They referred to the Africans as Black cattle that made the blacks to be regarded as an inferior race. The results of these are still evident in the current acts of racism present in our world. At first, the Europeans could not differentiate between works that were to be done by whites, blacks, or Indians since there was no racial demarcation in labor practices. However, the coming of many African slaves soon changed that perception (Berlin 1). Black slaves were unlike other slaves and they were given certain tasks to accomplish. It was then perceived that slave work could only be done by the African race.

The acceptance of the principles of democracy was facilitated during the Enlightenment era when individuals refused to be led by blind faith, and one outstanding example is Marquis de Condorcet who fought relentlessly for the abolition of slave trade. The French thinker, mathematician, and revolutionary, different from most of his contemporaries, represented the ideals of the Age of Enlightenment and rationalism. Condorcet could not compromise philosophical principles with political convenience and he held the view that slavery was not only inhuman, but also was not acceptable under any conditions. He regarded the practice of slavery to be equivalent to a capital crime (Rodriguez 183). In advocating for the abolition of slavery he authored a booklet called Reflections on Negro Slavery which played a pivotal role in the ultimate abolition of slavery.

1. Discuss the reasons for the outbreak of the Reformation. What long term and short term factors led Luther (1483   1546) to condemn the practices of the Church What additional criticisms did Luther have Lastly, what impact did the Reformation have on German society during Luthers life after the posting of his 95 theses in 1517

The decades of renaissance and reformation in Europe were characterized by religious, political and legal conflict. For instance, in Germany, conflict in the church was triggered by the opposition of Martin Luther and his followers against the Roman Catholic Church. During the early sixteenth century, they made efforts to defend the right of the German Christians to worship in ways other than those that had been sanctioned by the Pope in Rome. Many residents in Germany s imperial cities supported  the reformation due to the grievances they had  against the Catholic Church (Ozmet, p.69). The opposition of Luther and his followers against the Catholic Church led to the establishment of the Protestantism which was further divided into Lutherans, Calvinists and Pietists. The publication of Luther s Ninety Five Theses in 1517 marked the beginning of reforms within the church because it criticized the church for corruption through the selling of indulgences, neglecting the true essence of Christian teachings, oppression of protestants by the Catholic church, intrusion of the church into political leadership and for undermining the freedom  of the Christians (Ozmet, p.67).

There were short and long term factors that led to the condemnation of the Catholic Church practices by Martin Luther during the reformation. One major factor was the Roman Catholic Church system of selling and abusing indulgences. Luther condemned the practices of the Catholic Church in order to introduce reforms in the church. Luther s opposition to the selling of indulgences and doctrinal policies of the Catholic Church was clear when he placed the Ninety-Five Theses on the door of All Saints Church (Ozmet, p.71). The doctrine of indulgences had been formulated in the thirteenth century and supported the church s doctrine of purgatory and sacrament of penance. The sacrament of penance was expected to provide forgiveness of sins to the Christians but it was abused when individuals were allowed to purchase indulgence. For example, the Dominican Johann Tetzel sold special plenary indulgence in order to raise money for the rebuilding of the Saint Peters in Rome. The popes support for this confirmed the existence of systematic corruption in the Catholic Church. Luther also rejected the Catholic Churchs sacramental system and condemned the selling of church s clerical positions. As a result, Luther intended to restore the true essence of Christian teachings that had been undermined by the Catholic Church. He therefore condemned the Catholic Church for teaching that salvation could be achieved through the church system rather than through grace and faith in Christ. Moral corruption that included the abuse of responsibility and privilege by priests through absenteeism and simony was witnessed in the Catholic Church. Simony was the use of influence or wealth by individuals to purchase ecclesiastical office and pluralism whereby the clergy could hold numerous leadership positions simultaneously. Furthermore, priests abused or ignored the practice of celibacy and this led to the immoral conduct of the clergy. Many Christians lacked confidence in the papacy, hence questioned his legitimacy and the conduct of the Roman Catholic Church clergy. For instance, the effect of the renaissance on the papacy made some Catholic popes concentrate more on art and classical nature instead of spiritual matters. The Catholic Church rulers suppressed the protestant religious reforms and this was also of great concern to Luther and his followers. Since Luther was opposed to the Catholic church doctrine and teachings as well as the conduct of Catholic church clergy, he sought for the freedom of the Christians and demanded for the establishment of self-regulating and biblically informed Christian communities (Ozmet, p.69). He wanted the church to act as a Gemeinde whereby a community of fellow believers are spiritual equals who take moral responsibility for each other s welfare.

After the reformation that had Luther post the Ninety Five Theses in 1517, efforts to introduce religious reforms triggered great changes in the German society through changes in the social, political and religious systems. The establishment of Protestantism led to divisions in the church which resulted to religious and social conflicts in the society. For example, the formation of other branches of Protestantism such as Calvinism, Lutheranism and Pietism led to conflicts between the followers. The reformers worked to achieve reforms in the social, political and domestic circles. This was achieved by securing reforms in institutions and law by co-opting the established power. This formed a new German civic society whereby the cumulative effects caused  by the reformation led to changes  in education, politics, domestic life and social welfare (Ozmet,p.87). Reforms in the German society supported the struggle for honest institutions and just laws. The political leadership aided the growth of Protestantism when Luther had German princes exhorted to become  emergency bishops . The bishops provided protestant churches with the authority, administration and force that were required for the maintenance of the Protestant churches. Religion became integrated in the civil life through Germany s welfare system, new schools and domestic arrangements. The unification of the German people in linguistics and culture witnessed was centered on hymns, bible teachings, catechism and vernacular sermons that were given by Luther. Schools in the German society began providing both secular and religious education.

2. After the chaos of the Thirty Years of War, absolutism arose in many German states. What is absolutism and how was it ultimately practiced in Prussia Indeed, how do you explain Prussias successful increase in power and influence under the leadership of the Hohenzollerns

The Thirty Years of War were catastrophic for the German society due to the effects of the religious conflict that was witnessed during the period (Ozmet, p.111). Absolutism arose in German states when Germany was split into various states. The end of the war period after the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia had transformed the German states during the eighteenth century into absolute states (Ozmet, p.125). The Treaty of Westphalia empowered the German states to be sovereign where independent states became absolute monarchs. The rise of absolutism can be attributed to the chaos caused by religious wars which had the religious divisions affect the political leadership of the absolute states. There was no political unity among states. The states spun further away from the unifying of the Hapsburg imperial hub when states such as Bavaria, Austria, Wurttemberg, Saxony and Brandenburg-Prussia became centralized powers. The states had their own professional armies, foreign alliances, baroque palaces, state bureaucracies and courts. However, the Hapsburg Austria remained as the seat of the Holy Roman Empire of Germany.

In Prussia, absolutism was practiced through the establishment of a dynasty of kings to provide leadership. Absolutism was progressive in Prussia and political checks and balances were still in existence (Ozmet, p.126).Various special government agencies were created to support strategic economic development. The king advocated religious pluralism and permitted the freedom of the press. This earned him the title of  Prophet of unlimited freedom press . The state had strong military forces which increased the power of the state in Europe. Education was provided to all citizens and civil reforms were supported. The reforms aimed at addressing social problems that were experienced in the state. Under the leadership of the Hohenzollerns, there was successful increase in power and influence in Prussia. This was due to be establishment of a dynasty of kings who lived long and had great ability to conquer other states and build Prussia (Ozmet, p.129). For example, Frederich William  Great Elector  laid military and economic foundations by bending the nobility to his rule. Prussia had its own hereditary crown. Although Prussia had a small land mass and a population of only three million people, Prussia had Europe s third strongest army. Frederick set the expansion of Prussia when he challenged Austria. This allowed Prussia to expand between 1648 and 1786. Frederick II  the Great  who ruled Prussia from 1740 to 1786 had the Prussian army grow in numbers under the Hohenzollern s leadership. After 1740, civic reforms and military ventures of Frederick transformed Prussia into a premier state in Germany and one of the great powers in Europe. Prussian virtues of obedience and discipline were observed. These virtues were considered to be the pillars of the Prussian military. The Prussian political leadership managed to pursue the codification of the Prussian law and the opening up of civil service to the middle classes. The emergence of Pietism in Prussia promised its adherents Orthodox Protestantism and state authority that the Calvinists and the Lutheran shad failed to provide. Prussian society was characterized by formulaic religions, rigid class divisions and iron rule. Furthermore, the creation of special government agencies for strategic development increased the success and rise of power of Prussia. The top down integration of Pietism and old politics whereby the doors of government, schools and military became opened to Halle s graduates who served as teachers, chaplains and administrators were vital in the success of the states in Germany and Europe. The integration promoted religious and social reforms and increased the church-state cooperation in Prussia under the leadership of the Hohenzollerns.

Conclusion
The political and religious leadership in Germany and Europe after the sixteenth century was shaped by the events that unfolded during the renaissance and reformation period. The outbreak of the reformation in Germany had a great impact on the German society because it led to the establishment of Protestantism and triggered reforms in the political and social systems. Martin Luther who led the reformers played a critical role in introducing reforms in the church. After the thirty years of war that was marked by religious conflicts, rise of absolutism in Germany led to the division of the German Empire into sovereign states. Some states such as Prussia managed to become powerful and successful in Germany and Europe.

France is a Western Europe country with a population of approximately 60.4 million people as by July 2004. France has a diversity of religions but the dominant religion is Roman Catholic with Jewish religion having the least followers (Kwintessential, 2010). These preliminary diversities in ethnicity and religion signal a diverse French culture. This paper discusses French culture by looking into different beliefs and attitudes common to French people. Language is also a central part of French culture as well as other important values.

A diverse French culture
Every people have their identity which is mainly entrenched in their culture. The French are not exceptional for the French culture is rich in almost all dimensions. The culture is usually best felt when you explore philosophy or by looking at the unique literary and art work. The input of French people in philosophy is outstanding with prominent philosophers like Rene Descartes (1600s) prided as the pioneers of modern philosophy. Montaigne is also a renowned sixteenth century philosopher who is celebrated for his ability to institute as part of art. Other French philosophers include Voltaire, Pascal and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (LERC, 2010). Having such renowned philosophers indicate that the French culture has been very influential not only in European countries but also in the Western nations and practically the whole world.

A peoples art is a mirror of the people and what their values are all about. French art is in the form of literature, theatre as well as other forms of art. Some of the art works are very old thus portraying a rich history of the French culture. Some of the French artists who are known worldwide include Claude Monet who is known for his contribution to impressionist art which is an impression of ones view about nature (Cauderlier, 2009). Other artists include Edouard Manet, Auguste Renoir and Armand Guillaumin. The cathedrals of France such as the Notre Dame and Chartres cathedral are popular structures that showcase French artistry. In particular, the Notre Dame cathedral has its walls decorated with statues as well as gargoyles. On the other hand, Chartres cathedral has its windows made of about 3,000 m2 of stained glass (LERC, 2010). All these are magnificent features of the French art work.

Writing, poetry and theatre make up a beautiful French literature. France prides of the Academie francaise which is made of prominent writers. The Hunchback of Notre Dame was for instance the work of novelist Victor Hugo in the 1800s. Among other French writes whose works have been influential in development of culture include Alexandre Dumas and Charles Baudelaire (LERC, 2010). In poetry, the works of Ronsard and Lamartine regarding nature and love are still influential (French Language, 2010). French theatre is also a unique symbol of French culture. For instance, Moliere has several comedies which portray the vanities of human nature as a satire. Other playwrights include Racine and Corneille. These pieces of literature unique to French people are a source of pride and identity to the French people thereby displaying one aspect of their culture.

Language is an important aspect in the French culture. French is the predominant language with about 88 percent of the communicating through French with even most of the rest speaking French and another language. Other spoken languages which are spoken by a small percentage of people include German dialects, Flemish, Italian, Catalan dialects, Breton and Basque. Immigrants have such dialects as the Corsu, Kabyle as well as Antillean Creole (Kwintessential, 2010). French people not only utilize verbal communication but they also regularly use non-verbal communication mainly in form of gestures. For instance, an eye contact is mainly used to signify equality or to act as a cue for friendship request. Shaking hands among acquaintances is also highly regarded by French people. Specific gestures are used for counting (using fingers starting from the thumb) whereas covering ones mouth with the hands indicates making an apology or an acknowledgement that one has made a mistake (LERC, 2010).

French people also have their food which is unique and defines them. French cuisine varies mainly according to regions in France as regions influence availability of food. The most common traditional meal is the baguette and cheese accompanied by wine. Other meals have several courses with an air of sophistication. Since each region has different ingredients, each region seems to specialize in such ingredients but the foods have commonalities such as use of olive oil and tomatoes. In addition to the influence of local availability, French foods also vary depending on the influence of bordering countries and immigrants (sauerkraut common Alsace which borders Germany) Lunch break usually takes about two hours for most people (FPSi, 2010)

The French society also has unique family and societal values, customs and etiquettes which are an important feature of the French culture. The family is highly valued and they are families are composed of few children. The roles of each family member are clearly defined with the parents being guardians and providers. The extended family offers support either financially or emotionally. French people usually develop open and polite dealings with family members and friends. Exchange of gifts bears some given etiquettes. For instance, one is not supposed to give an even number of flowers. Nevertheless, number thirteen is said to be unlucky and therefore such a number of flowers should not be given. It is also a requirement to open gifts immediately they are received (Kwintessential, 2010).

French people are time conscious and they value keeping time. For instance, one is not supposed to be late for dinner for an invited dinner for more than ten minutes without prior explanation for being late. There are unique table manners such as being a requirement to finish food in ones plate. Business is usually conducted formally and courtesy is among the most important etiquettes. For a person who cannot speak French, it is always preferable for them to apologise if they are to establish a meaningful relationship. Dark-coloured suits are recommended for as business wear for men while women can do with either business suits or if it has to be a dress, then it must be elegant and having soft colours (Kwintessential, 2010). This is an exemplary culture as it has been adopted in the business environment virtually all over the world.

Conclusion
French culture is interesting, unique in many ways and has influenced other cultures in the world. The philosophy, art and literature are renowned worldwide and are an identity for the French people. French culture is also clearly defined in language, foods, general etiquettes in the society as well as unique business etiquettes. The French culture is undoubtedly interesting and influential especially if one considers every minor detail of the culture. As French, one finds reason to be proud of their culture which is outstanding even in the modern world.

The renaissance represents a period of an enormous study and renewal of classical antiquity. Literally, the term renaissance means rebirth and is used to refer to the rebirth of learning that first started in the 14th century in Italy, spread to England by the 16th century and then to the North where it ended in mid 17th century. Intellectual and geographical discoveries also characterized the renaissance. This rebirth and the discoveries brought a tremendous change in the civilization of the Western countries. Renaissance thinkers such as Aquinas, Martin Luther and Niccolo Machiavelli usually regarded their work as ushering the modern age, distinct from the mediaeval and ancient eras. The study of the renaissance revolves around five aspects which are interrelated (Paul, 2002). First, despite their association with the classical antiquity, renaissance thinkers maintained some vital continuities of some aspect of their past. Second, significant changes in the political arena also symbolized this era. Third, the Humanism movement was established to express to ideals of that period. Fourth, there was imitation, a literary doctrine associated with the humanist movement and which had an immense impact on the creation of literary works. Lastly, there was the reformation which brought tremendous changes in modern life as well as in the creation of literary works. The newly rediscovered history, moral philosophy and literature classics, these renaissance thinkers were strongly aligned to the classical antiquity values. A logical thinking of renaissance is clearly expressed in the writings of Martin Luther, Aquinas and Nicolo Machiavelli.

Martin Luther
The writings of Martin Luther enhanced the start of the protestant reformation and facilitated for the Christian humanism that characterized the renaissance especially in the 16th and 17th centuries. At this time, the church had compromised its principles for secularism, wealth corruption and power, Luthers literary works emphasized on Christian faith and salvation as the only means to reaching God and thus were widely received as in them Christian humanists found inspiration. The 95 Theses, Sola Scriptura were a reaction to the practices of the then Roman Catholic church especially the papacy such as selling indulgencies. In Concerning Christian Liberty, he writes,

This bad system has now issued in such a pompous display of power and such a terrible tyranny that no earthly government can be compared to it (Luther 1483-1546, p. 357).

The writings later became the basis for the protestant reformation and also prompted reforms within the Catholic Church itself. As noted in the introductory part, reformation was an important aspect of the renaissance as it had and immense contribution to both the literary works and to the modern life. His writings such as the Sola Scriptura, Concerning the Christian Liberty, and the 95 Theses helped the Christian humanists in deriving the ideals that became the basis for the reformation (Paul, 2002). Luther did the first bible translations form Latin to make it more understandable to the people. The various writings of Luther managed to instill an urge for change in Christianity due to his their emphasis on Christian liberty though salvation and faith rather than in organized religion as was with the then secular Roman Catholic. He writes,

For what is impossible for you by all the works of the law, which are many and yet useless, you shall fulfill in an easy and summary way through faith. (Luther 1483-1546, p. 350)

Disputing organized religion of those days, these writings formed a new sense of identity which influenced the logical thinking behind the establishment of several new religions such as the Lutheran and Calvinists during the renaissance. The church was thus reborn such that the dominance of the Roman Catholic and the papacy was no more. The writings of Luther, largely founded on skepticism and faith, also became the basis for the separation of church and state.

Aquinas
Aquinas wrote two of his most influential writings, Summa Contra gentiles and Summa Theologica between the year 1252 and 1273. In renaissance rhetoric, humanism basically presented a reaction to the scholasticism of Aristotle. Aquinass Summa Theologica was one such reaction as through it he proved the existence of God. He writes,

In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause  of itself for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossibleTherefore it is necessary  to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God (Benson, et al. 1982)  

The scholastics believed in a logical association between thought and words while Humanism as espoused in the Summa sought to distinguish between intangible meditation and physical utterance. In the renaissance among the Christian humanists, common usage had great priority over logical rules. Thus, the Summa represented the logical thinking of renaissance. In the summa, Aquinas expresses the religious ideals of the renaissance by proving that God does exist. The Summa was one of the motivations leading on to the formation the humanism movement.      

Niccolo Machiavelli
Through out the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Niccolo Machiavellis writings especially The Prince had an immense contribution to the political ideals as well as the humanist movements. The writings of Machiavelli came at a critical time when the Medici government installed by the Spanish was highly detested by the Florentine people (Paul, 2002). It was the tradition of the Wets that political theory be assessed by the same moral standards used to assess human actions. That is, politics was regarded as an extension of moral codes or ethics. In the Discourse on Livy and The Prince, Machiavelli described his political ideals as an independent entity without any recourse to ethics. Machiavellis writings furthered Aristotles strict scientific method. His political ideology of acquiring and keeping authority or power and the dissociation of this authority or power from morality formed the basis of the logical thinking behind many tyrannical authorities and some humanist movements of the renaissance. However, his writings received a lot of criticism and this created a new interest in literary work as authors sought to study and review his philosophies.

In both The Prince and the Discourse on Livy, Machiavelli expressed high praises for winners and this winning spirit became the motivation of reformists of the renaissance. For instance, he praises popes Julius II and Alexander VI for their political and military success despite their alleged ungodliness. He writes of them in Chapter XVI that, We have not seen great things done in our time except by those who have been considered mean (Benson, et al. 1982) Machiavelli relates virtue to a lady in The Prince and this is seen a representation of the ideology of human potential with regard to politics during the renaissance. Hence, the renaissance humanists logical thinking was a translation of the principles outlined in the Discourse on Livy and The Prince. Like Machiavelli the humanists sought to address the flaws in man that made it difficult to have an ideal system of government. That the renaissance was characterized by tremendous changes in all every aspect of the society is undeniable. It is also worth noting that art, more specifically writing had an immense contribution to the renaissance. To date, some of the developments of the renaissance are still being experienced.  

Power is a very controversial idea. There is no standard and exact definition of what it is but the whole mankind has a full understanding of what its about. Each generation, each nation and each individual have its own experience of what is power is and therefore, power is not a naive idea that we are yet to understand instead a dynamic idea that keeps on acquiring new meanings for itself.

Germany is one of the most important countries in the history not only of Europe but in the whole world, and it will forever be remembered as once the most powerful nation there ever was. The fame of Germany is greatly allocated to one of the Worlds most cruel dictator, Adolf Hitler. He is responsible for the death of thousands and thousands of Jews all over Europe and for the bloodshed that had stained the fraternity within the European continent.

I could not imagine any historical book or discussion not touching on the part of our time where Hitler was hailed king, in fact even more. He was like a god who was worshipped by people (maybe not at all because of love but of fear, nonetheless he was still worshipped) and took the lives that he wants to take without any fair justifications. Hitler was one of the very few powerful men who shaped history the way it is now. Though it is very clear that Hitler contributed negatively to our past, it cannot be denied that he has become an icon in history an interesting subject for contention and debate.

Hitler is no doubt powerful, he was able to implement the kind of laws that he likes and was able to turn the nation and a major part of the world into a place as he would like it to be. He is a very powerful man, but the power that Hitler possessed relied greatly on oppression, on cruelty and on abuse. His power comes from annihilating those whose power is smaller than his. With the aid of his influence as a military official and with his political power he was able to acquire more and more power as he grew to be as what he came to be.

Hitlers power is the kind of power that comes from other people, therefore it is external. He needs other people to determine his power, without them he becomes weak. So in order to further strengthen and maintain the power that he possesses he needs to do more crime and cruelty  more murder, more rape, and more racial punishments. As the people below him have lesser physical and political power they have no choice. The more people he kills, the more powerful he becomes, therefore he is in great dependence to torture and bloodshed as it is his only way to find himself powerful. That power is very frail and temporary as it comes from another source, not that type of power that comes from within. The dependency of Hitler to external measures of power was very evident when his regime fell and he flew from Germany but later on committed suicide. Had he possessed the kind of power for that came from within him, that which does not need to be glorified by the weakness of others, he could have led Germany to being the most famous nation in the world through positive means, not by creating an image of a country where people suffered.

In George Orwells Book, 1984 he also made a manifestation of what power is. This  power is greatly similar with that which Hitler showcased, it took most of its lessons from the Nazi regime as it was written after the fall of Nazism.

In one of the scenes in Chapter 3, OBrien said that they are interested only in power, not in luxury not in money but in power alone. He even said that long life and happiness are nothing as they only will power. He also said that power is not a means but an end. This tells us the historical context of the book, since it was written shortly after the fall of Hitler and his Nazi Party.

OBrien further asserts that power is collective, that only through being with the majority that a person can be called powerful because what he lacks can be complemented by the others. Tow heads are better than one, how much more three or four working on a common end with multitudes of skills and abilities.

OBrien also said that suffering or inflicting pain upon the subject is the only way to guarantee that he will follow or he will recognize the power that the person in position possesses. According to OBrien obedience is not enough as the person can always chose not to obey the second time, but if they are able to build and instill fear and suffering in him, then they have him in his neck.

Winston does not want to live in a world that OBrien describes, that which he asserts they will later on create. But Winston does not have any choice because the Big Brother has control over practically everything in Oceania.

George Orwell tells us that even at the end of Hitlers rule there is still a lot to think of. Freedom should still be fought in other parts of the world. The likes of Stalin in Russia continue to oppress people to his delight and Mao of China continues to enslave people politically and socially.

The Power that Hitler showed is that which relied greatly in external forces, George Orwell showed the same kind of power but calls on people to build a new foundation for power, both individually and politically, that kind of power which relies not in bossism and does not feed the ego alone, but that which creates better societies and more opportunities for improvement.

As the power that Hitler showed is very much dependent on external forces in the likes of annihilating people and building a feeling of threat and fear to be obeyed, it feeds only the ego and is deeply rooted in self  praise. Such kind of power is no power at all because in the absence of other people, e.g. the weaker ones, then there is no venue to showcase or acquire power.  True power is the one that comes from within. In the same context that OBrien in 1984 said that they need to persecute a person in order to control his obedience and loyalty, it again focuses on the dependency of a stronger force to a weaker force. In a more elaborated standard, the Nazi Party had guns and had deep influence in the military which are very powerful people in the society.

True Power is genuine. It does not oppress or plant fear among the people, true power further empowers people in order that all of them may be strong and build a rigid and society and generations ahead.

During the first century AD, each of the Roman empires emperors desired to expand their empire.  Some did it for riches, others did it to keep their neighbors in order.  By the beginning of the 100s, the Roman Empire had expanded to Gaul and most of central Europe (Burstein 325).  They also controlled Britain, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, north Africa, and the eastern coast of the Mediterranean (Burstein, 325).  The empire would soon become too large for any one emperor to successfully control by himself.

Augustus, the adopted son of Julius Caesar, ruled Rome, as emperor, until AD 14 (Shek, 329).  His rise to power is credited as marking the beginning of the Roman Empire (Shek, 329).  He was a powerful emperor of Rome and made many improvements to the capital city, such as creating a fire department, building roads, and aqueducts (Shek, 329).

The social structure of the Roman Empire, during the first century AD, was mainly based on the family of the men.  Men were more respected than women and their social ranking was based on the wealth and status of their family (httpwww.pbs.orgempiresromansempireorder.html).  Women were generally to be submissive to men they had little rights (httpwww.pbs.orgempiresromansempireorder.html).  Social classes were well known and unbending people knew their place and had to follow their traditional roles and rules (httpwww.pbs.orgempiresromansempireorder.html).

One of the most well-known forms of entertainment in the Roman Empire was gladiator events.  Gladiators were men, who were usually slaves or criminals, and were usually forced to fight to the death (httpwww.unrv.comculturegladiator.php).  They would either fight other humans or animals (httpwww.unrv.comculturegladiator.php).  Although sometimes gruesome, many people in Roman society would show up in order to witness these events.  

The Roman Empire was a thriving place at times, with exciting social events, a well formed social hierarchy, and rapid growing territory.  Although the Roman empire was one of the most successful empires in the world, it ultimately failed.  Each emperor took pride in the size of his empire, but it ultimately became too large for them to rule successfully and its demise was unstoppable.

Despite their differences in both work and focus, Charles Darwin and Karl Marx
did find a common ground on certain points of belief. Karl Marx held a firm belief that
nature existed for the benefit of man, and had begun to do so due to mans early attempts
to control natures actions. In his viewpoint, nature is not an independent entity from
mankind. Mother Nature serves man, who controls it through the use of invention and
progress in technology. Man manipulated and analyzed nature from the perspective of
how it is utilized by mankind.

Darwin believed that species were formed due to a natural struggle that
occurred within nature. Different animals showed variation in their development
over generations had been caused by small changes within the genetics of the parents.

The genetic variations that were passed on to the young were those that helped the
particular species survive in the environment in which they lived. Those animals
who did not have a stronger variation in their genetics eventually died off due to natural
selection.

The basic beliefs that they agreed on primarily fall in the following areas
a struggle for survival, the influence of one entity upon another to effect change and in
the presence of variations within a process of change. These beliefs, though agreed upon,
differed primarily in the context in which they were applied.

The struggle for survival is one point on which Darwin and Marx could agree,
except that they viewed it in two different contexts. For Marx, the struggle for survival
was based within a human context. Social classes were in a state of struggle for survival,
with the working-class struggling against the ruling class. Darwin, on the other hand,
saw struggle for survival within the evolution of species in nature. As he observed
during his travels, Darwin noted how natural selection ruled the process of certain
animals surviving because they have adapted to the environment and pass those traits on
while others who hadnt died off.

Though they focus on different areas, the two did see within their particular
realm of study be struggle that was occurring in either nature or within the singular
scope of mankind. Marx believed that economic circumstances within a society could
act and influence man without him necessarily being aware of it and at times not able
to control it either.

In contrast, Darwin, held that nature exerted influence on the development of a
species in that in order to survive, that particular animal had to adapt to the environment.
In order to adapt, the genetic makeup of the animal was changed over generations as
the most advantageous changes led to survival. The environment, through its influence,
set up the circumstances so that animals who could not adapt effectively went extinct.


Marx, in his writing of Das Kapital, he comments on Darwins idea of variation
within a process of change. He discusses Darwins belief that certain internal organs of
many plants and animals didnt specialize in one job, but might have many different
ones to perform. This variation in job roles leaves room for change to occur in the
future in that organs functioning within the body. He saw this as being similar to
the history of man with tools. Some started out as being used for a variety of purposes,
but as the work became more specialized, so did the tools.

As a whole, Marx was able to find many applications for Darwins theories within
his own work on the social structure of mans existence. He supported many of Darwins
theories, while rejecting others. Darwin did not maintain an open correspondence with
Marx regarding his work, especially later in life when Marx sent him a copy of his work.

In the correspondence, though, another possible middle ground is found between
the two on the subject of religion. Marx makes reference to the weakness in the history of
religion to observe the effects of mans technology on both the natural world and in the
formation of social relationships. He felt that studying society from the abstract
viewpoint of the church was not very feasible or scientific.

Darwin had responded to an earlier from Marx regarding religion in an evasive
manner. He would not write openly himself about it, as he feared offending others
close to him. But, as Colp states, as Darwin matured into his later years his own views
went more to the side against Christianity. In this manner, he may have been more
sympathetic to Marxs viewpoints on the subject, those he chose not to openly express
them in public.

Darwin and Marx were two towering figures in their time, and their writings
had huge influence on many areas of society. Though separated by language, ideology
and geography, the two did find within each others similarities in thought. They also
inadvertently influenced one another in the theories that they projected. Marx found
support for his work on social structure, change and development within Darwins
descriptions of the natural world. In turn, Darwin found sympathy with Marxs
religious stance at the latter part of both of their lives.

Even after their deaths, the two theories of Darwinism and evolution would find
a similar voice in the literature and later interpretation of their work. This cemented even
further the influence that the two had upon one another in their correspondence and
reading of one anothers ideals.

Despite a difference of around two millennia, or 2000 years, the claims to freedom of the Greek philosopher Socrates and the German Leader of the Protestant Reformation Martin Luther lend themselves to both similarities and differences. Although there are more differences than similarities, the two works have both not only expressed the dreams and aspirations of these two great man but especially changed the societies in which they lived, although gradually. This paper will discuss the similarities between Socrates claims in the Apology and those of Luther in Concerning Christian Liberty. This paper will discuss the similarities between Socrates claims to freedom in the Apology and those of Luther in Concerning Christian Liberty.

Similarities
The claims of Socrates and Luther to certain freedoms share a few similarities.

An Exhortation to Oppose Established Institutions. Both Socrates and Luthers claims for freedom exhorted people to oppose established institutions. While Socrates tried to undermine the immoral ways of Athenian society, Luther wanted to expose the defects in the theological bases of the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.

Socrates, on one hand, criticized Athenian society when he said, If there were a law at Athens, such as there is in other cities, that a capital cause should not be decided in one day, then I believe that I should have convinced you (Apology). And somehow he implied a certain attachment of Athenians to money when he said, I tell you that virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue come money and every other good of man, public as well as private. (Apology)

On the other hand, Luther exhorted Christians and Catholics to question the theological basis of the Catholic doctrines. He expressed his opposition when he mentioned every time he mentioned that works were not a path to spiritual salvation but only faith and faith alone. Aside from this, he mentioned that it will profit nothing that the body should be adorned with sacred vestments, or dwell in holy places, or be occupied in sacred offices, or pray, fast, and abstain from certain meats, or do whatever works can be done through the body and in the body. (Luther)

Differences
The claims of Socrates and Luther to certain freedoms also lend themselves to a number of differences from the notion of their freedoms to the way they have presented their claims.

Notion of Freedom. Socrates and Luther were both fighting for different kinds of freedoms.
First of all, one of the freedoms that Socrates was fighting for was more of a freedom of expression, or specifically a general freedom to question the logic that operated behind the Athenian justice system. The Athenian Meletus accused Socrates of being a doer of evil, and corrupter of the youth, and he does not believe in the gods of the state, and has other new divinities of his own (Apology). To this accusation, Socrates sarcastically claims his freedom of expression by saying, If my offence is unintentional, the law has no cognizance of unintentional offences you ought to have taken me privately, and warned and admonished me (Apology). This is the more personal freedom that Socrates was fighting for in the course of his defense. Socrates proved Meletus illogic several times during his defense so Socrates was indirectly making here a claim for the freedom of the mind through logic.

As for the other freedom that Socrates seemed to have been fighting for was the freedom of philosophy. This freedom was implied when Socrates said, Men of Athens, I honor and love you but I shall obey God rather than you, and while I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy (Apology). Such a statement was naturally taken by the Athenian court as a defiance of the authority of the state that defined obedience to God as obedience to the laws rather than to ones philosophy.

Furthermore, Socrates claim for this freedom and his defense of it in Platos Apology was more of a defense of personal convictions considering that Socrates himself was on trial at the time that he declared his claims for this freedom.

Based on the aforementioned points, the idea of freedom of Socrates was different from that proposed by Luther. Luthers ideas were more on religion rather than on logic and philosophy. Luther expressed the nature of the freedom that he claims when he said, For faith alone, and the efficacious use of the word of God, brings salvation (Luther). This therefore is a freedom from works, and is explicitly stated by Luther when he said, this faith cannot consist at all with works(Luther) and that no work can cleave to the word of God (Luther).

The Context in which the Soul was Mentioned. Both Socrates and Luther emphasized the importance of the soul but they mentioned the soul in different contexts.

Socrates was indirectly saying that the soul could not live without wisdom and truth, and therefore philosophy. He mentioned the soul in the following line O my friend Athenian, whydo you care so much aboutmoney and honor and reputation, and so little about the wisdom and truth and the greatest improvement of the soul (Apology). In the aforementioned line, Socrates was indirectly saying that the soul had to be sustained with wisdom and truth, both of which could be acquired through philosophy.

Luther, on the other hand, described a soul that was totally independent of the body and therefore needed its own separate sustenance which is the word of God. He mentioned What can it profit the soul, that the body should be in good condition, free, and full of life, (Luther) and what harm canevil do to the soul (Luther). Then he said, Let us therefore hold it for certain and firmly established, that the soul can do without everything, except the word of God (Luther). Through these statements, Luther firmly established that, it is not wisdom and truth as Socrates said, but the word of God which can sustain the soul. And finally Luther stated, the word of God cannot be received and honoredbut by faith alone (Luther). Thus, Luther had finally established the importance of faith in the salvation of the soul. Faith was to Luther what philosophy was to Socrates. According to Luther, faith brought the word of God to sustain the soul, while Socrates implied that philosophy brought wisdom and truth for the same purpose.

Humility and Pride. Another difference between Socrates and Luther is that while Socrates maintained humility when he mentioned God, Luther proclaimed pride.

Socrates may have had mixed emotions during the entire trial but he was in all humility when he said, but the truth isthat God only is wiseand that he is using only my name as an illustration (Apology). For Socrates, he was but a mere powerless human being in front of God and in all humility he said, And so I go my way, obedient to the god, and make inquisition into the wisdom of anyone (Apology). Previously in his trial, Socrates mentioned that his friend Chaerephon asked the Oracle at Delphi, which was to believed to speak Gods voice, whether there was anyone wiser than Socrates was, and the Oracle in the person of a Pythian prophetess answered that there was no man wiser (Apology). To this Socrates justified his teaching of philosophy as an act of obedience to God.

While Socrates treated God in all humility in his claim for the freedom of philosophy, Luther proclaimed a certain pride in God as a Christian. This was evident when he said, A Christian man is the most free lord of all, and subject to none (Luther) and especially when he said, all we who believe in Christ are kings and priests in Christ (Luther). Luther also hinted at this pride when he said, when Godis honored with all the honor of which He is worthy, then in return He honors us on account of that faith (Luther). While Socrates somehow believed in a God who only directed and advised, Luther believed in a highly interactive one and one of kindness, on which he established his whole claim for freedom from works.

On the Subject of Appeal. On the question on whose claim for freedom was more compelling, Luther seemed to have fared better than Socrates on the basis of his logical presentation which was almost without any emotional trappings found mostly in the latters claims.

Luther logically stated the thesis for his claims for freedom in saying that A Christian man is the most free lord of all, and subject to none a Christian man is the most dutiful servant of all, and subject to everyone (Luther), and he goes on to explain this twofold thesis until he arrived at the importance of the word of God, faith, and duty, all in a perfectly logical and organized manner.

Socrates, on the other hand, presented his claim for freedom in a rather emotional series of arguments, which was understandable due to the circumstances he was in at the time he made such claims. His thesis was not clear as most of his points were rather implicitly said, perhaps out of reverence for the judges in the Athenian court. The basis of his defense was perhaps considered weak by the court for although it was stated by the Oracle to his friend Chaerephon, the friend was dead. The alleged words of the Oracle herself may have also been suspected by some Athenian justices at that time and by the accuser Meletus himself for Meletus remained relentless in his accusation all throughout and the Athenian justices in the end pronounced Socrates guilty.

Moreover, there were some inconsistencies in Socrates statements that may have caused confusion among the Athenian justices. First, his mention that God only is wise (Apology) contradicts his belief that there was no man wiser than him (Apology). Secondly, his mention of the truth is that I have no knowledge of the kind (Apology) does not agree with all his strong convictions. Thirdly, the fact that he said, Men of Athens, I honor and love you (Apology) does not at all assume make his audience think that he would say something vindictive like I prophesy to you my murderers thatpunishment far heavier than you have inflicted on me will surely await you (Apology). Are these the true words of a philosopher or is the whole argument a psychological account of a dead man walking  All these confusing statements could have been the reason behind the fact that the votes for and against him are so nearly equal. (Apology)

On the Subject of Risk. When it came to which one between Socrates and Luther was more threatening to the social order of his day, it would be Martin Luther. It is because Martin Luther, in his Concerning Christian Liberty, somehow gave hints that his criticisms were somehow directed against the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church which was extremely powerful in the 16th century during which he wrote his essay.

Although Socrates opposed the Athenian justice system in the Apology, Socrates only did so on the streets and, in the Apology, in court. Moreover, his audience in the streets may not have reached a considerable number for his act to qualify as sedition and he may not have directly instigated opposition to the government for his usual subject when he taught was philosophy using the Socratic Method. Socrates could not be compared to Jesus Christ who was in greater danger with the Roman authorities and whose followers started organizing themselves with ceremonies.

The Roman Catholic Church, whose basic tenet of spiritual salvation through good works was criticized by Luther, was unlike the Athenian justice system but was in fact an institution that dominated the whole of Europe at the time that Luther wrote his criticism. Besides, the Catholic Church always had with her the support of the monarchs of England, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany and the other countries during Luthers time. Most of all, most opposition to the rules of the Catholic Church met with extreme sanctions from the Inquisition.

Although Martin Luther did not exactly mention the Roman Catholic Church in his Concerning Christian Liberty, every Catholic of his time basically knew that the institution that regarded works as a path to salvation was indeed the Roman Catholic religion. In his essay, Luther mentioned a number of lines that specifically targeted the tenets of the Catholic Church, but the most obvious one is this
it will profit nothing that the body should be adorned with sacred vestments, or dwell in holy places, or be occupied in sacred offices, or pray, fast, and abstain from certain meats, or do whatever works can be done through the body and in the body. (Luther)

Conclusion
Both Socrates and Martin Luther claimed that they were entitled to certain freedoms. Socrates demanded freedom of expression and freedom of philosophy within the Athenian society of whose system he was implicitly critical. Martin Luther, on the other hand, wanted freedom from works as a means to salvation, and this freedom he particularly called Christian liberty. Socrates and Luthers claims were similar in that they exhorted people to oppose the established Athenian society and the Roman Catholic Church. The claims to freedom of both men were also different in the nature of the freedom they were fighting for, in their views of the soul, and in terms of mood, appeal and risk. Although there are more differences than similarities, the two works have both not only expressed the dreams and aspirations of these two great man but especially changed the societies in which they lived, although gradually.

1. In what ways might the early-medieval empires of the Carolingians, Abbasids, and Byzantines be seen as a break with the civilization of the Mediterranean in Roman and immediate post-Roman times
This is dependent on the geographic areas where they were situated.  The Carolingians were concerntrated in what is now Franced and Germany.  In their case, their culture was primarily Germanic in nature.  Snce they embraced Christianity, they had the support of the nascent Christian church as well which encouraged the, to grow. The Abbasids came to power in Persia and were able to wrest control from the Greek rulers.  Islam helped make them distinct.  The Byzantines saw themselves as the continuation of the Roman Empire as the west appeared to be declining and decided to establish themselves a new capital instead of taking over Rome.

2. Describe the main steps in the gradual split between eastern and western Christendom from the fourth to the eleventh century  What were the main issues dividing Byzantium from Europe by the end of this development
This was primarily due to the irrconcilable differences of theology and practice of the two churches.  The eastern church used Greek while the west stuck with Latin the west is centralized under the Popes authority while the eastern churches are localized with patriarchs in each local jurisdiction and are subordinate to the (Byzantine) emperor.  It was these differences that caused the two churches to split in 1054.

3. Why might we consider Basil II a strong and successful ruler  How did his reign lay the foundations for later problems in the Byzantine Empire
Basil II was able to bring stability to the empire and he managed to expand its eastern frontier.  Internally, he managed to defeat the rebellious leaders, further consoldiating his power. The foundatons he laid would later bring problems to later rulers as they would eventually want to break away.
The Crusades

4. What was a  crusade  
A crusade means any action or campaign taken with a cause.  In this case, these were military expeditions launched by Europe to free the Hold Land from Muslim occupation.

5. How can we understand the Crusades as a result of the breakdown of this early-medieval world order of Carolingians, Abbasids, and Byzantines
The Crusades came at the time when there was a break down of medieval civilization as former Roman territories became autonomous and these rulers see rivals as a threat and they end up fighting one another.  The Byzantines in particular did not care much of what went on in the west and minded their own business.

6. Why was Crusading appealing to people in the West by the later eleventh century  How did it help solve the problem of aristocratic violence plaguing Europe since the later ninth century
The Crusades gave the west a measure of peace after years of fighting one another.  What it essentially did was give the westerners another enemy to fight with the purpose of bringing them together.

7. How did Crusading involve a reconsideration of the nature of violence in the West
The understanding of violence differed.  This was because the westerners were given a mission by the Church and this gave a some sense of purpose in the violence they would inflict.  They felt empowered by God and they would practically justify their actions as such and the Jews and Muslims were the unfortunate victims.

8. What were the consequences of the First Crusade
The First Crusade did free the Holy Land and led to the creation of  Crusader Kingdoms  which were extensions of kingdoms of the lords in Europe. Strategically, it eased the pressure of Seljuk attacks on the Byzantine Empire as well.

9. How do rifts between Muslim groups in the Eastern Mediterranean region help us understand the success of the First Cruade  How do divisions among Christians in the region give insight into the failures of subsequent Crusades
The Arab tribes were not in good terms with the Seljuk Turks who were the actual reason why the Crusades were launched. Despite the earlier success the each Crusade, it was apparent that the disunity and mistrust the leaders had towards one another would show once they had no Muslim enemy to fight.  It can be inferred here that their alliance was temporary and they still had their vested interests to look out for.

10. Why might the Fourth Crusade and the crusade of Frederick II be considered  ironic successes  
Militarily, the Fourth Crusade was a success.  But the political ramifications of their act would cause long-term problems as they lost a key strategic ally among the Byzantines, thus widening the gap between the east and western churches as well. In the case of Frederick II, it was similar but when he launched his crusade, he did it without papal  authorization  or support.
Medieval Spain Convivencia and Reconquista

11. In what ways can we compare the relations between Christians and Muslims in medieval Spain to interfaith relations in the Crusader States
Prior to the reconquista, Christians, Jews and Muslims live in a period called  convivencia  or coexistence.  What this implied was they were living harmoniously together, contrary to the belief that they were eternal enemies.  The Crusader states did not help much in interfaith relations as their primary goal was to protect Christian pilgrims.  Muslims and even Jews were regarded as the enemy.

12. How was medieval Spain a society characterized by  convivencia   What were the limits of tolerance and coexistence
Beneath that peaceful coexistence lay antagonism as Christians were harboring animosities towards the Muslims.  The extent of this peaceful coexistence went as far as cultural exchanges which ironically helped enrich Spanish culture as seen in cities such as Granada and Toledo.

13. Describe how  intra-faith  (i.e., within the Muslim and Christian sides respectively) played a role in the Spanish  Reconquista
The inter-faith relations between Christians and Muslims in Spain proved to be complex that it would be hard to determine how it caused the reconquista in the midst of convivencia.  The Reconquista was more of repopulating the rest of Spain with Christians as tensions with the Muslims increased though some Christian rulers did have Muslim allies who were instrumental in the Reconquista.
The Rise of Monarchical Power

14. What are the major powers of kings in the High Middle Ages (ca. 1050-1300)  How do these kings compare with earlier examples we have seen of kings
Majority of these kings ruled absolutely, deriving their power mainly by Divine Right where they derive their legitimacy to rule from God.

15. What were the ideological roots of kingship in this period  What institutions supported monarchical power
Essentially, it was the church that supported monarchical power during the Middle Ages, which was characterized by the union of Church and State, the source of Divine Right.  This was further underscored whenever monarchs were crowned by the Bishop or Pope which symbolized this union as well as underscore the primacy of the Church over the state.

16. What were the limitations on royal power  Who opposed monarchy
Despite ruling absolutely, there were things monarchs could not do when it came to exercising their power, such as arbitrarily raising taxes or appointing bishops which fell under the purview of Church authority. In the case of England, it was the barons who opposed the monarchy and they showed their power influence by getting King John to sign the Magna Carta which took away some of his powers and gave it to them.
Papal Power and Religious Reform

17. What core values characterized the movement of religious reform in the High Middle Ages
It the result of the lack of appeal of the rural monastic values.  Several individuals tried to enliven the profession of faith by proffering different ideas such as those brought up by the Albigensians and Waldensians which were branded heretical by the Church as their ideas ran counter to mainstream teaching.

18. How did the papacy in the High Middle Ages practically exercise its power  What ideological foundations lay behind those powers  How were those points supported
By the time of Pope Innocent II, the Papacy had asserted its infalliability and made it known that the Popes word was absolute and above reproach or question.  Tradition was primarily the basis as the Pope is the Vicar of Christ and successor to Peter, the first pope.  The Pope would issue decrees or encyclicals to reaffirm these points.

19. How did the early medieval papacy compare with the papacy of the High Middle Ages
The Papacy became even more powerful in the High Middle Ages compared to the earlier period. The Crusades had decimated most of Europes leaders and with the lack of strong capable leaders, the Church, through the Pope, took it upon itself to take the lead in bringing about stability during these times.

20. In what different ways did different religious orders interpret the ideals of the reform movement in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries
Religious orders such as the Franciscans and Dominicans were formed to counter the heresies arising during those times.  The  reform  movements they saw were born out of the gradual urbanization of towns as mercantilism was phasing out feudalism and individual thinkers developed new ideas that were commensurate to this new trend and this was something the religious orders did not tolerate as they appear to be deviating from the teachings of the Church and dealt with them severely.

21. Who was threatened by the rise of papal power  How would you describe the relationship of the high-medieval reform movement and heresy  How did the church respond to heresy
If there were those threatened by the rise of papal power, it would be some of the monarchies because they saw the Church as political rivals for power.  They were trying to capitalize on the revitalized economy of Europe following the Crusades and brought in new ideas.  These new ideas prompted some to come up with their own interpretations of church teachings which ran counter to the norm and as such were branded as heretics and soundly persecuted.

Europeans on the Silk Road

22. What motivated Europeans to travel to the Far East along the so-called  Silk Road   What conditions made it possible for such journeys to take place
The Crusades was a blessing in disguise if seen from an economic point of view as the link between the orient and occident was reestablished.  They west was attracted by the wonders and the imagined wealth of the orient and they wanted to partake of it.  Through the Crusades, the Silk Road made it possible to travel over land.

23. What were the effects of this contact with the East on Europe itself
It helped put an end to feudalism and brought in mercantilism.  Land was no longer the  currency  or basis of wealth but from the goods, as well as the currency in silver and gold.

24. How might Marco Polo s account of Kubilai Khan have attempted to shift European attitudes toward the Mongols  How is his account based on European ideas
It made Europeans more interested in the material wealth of the orient and from the way Marco Polo described them, they forgot about how  barbaric  the Mongols were.  Naturally, when Marco Polo wrote his account, he was writing it as a European.  Essentially, he was a  tourist  in China and that was how he described the things he saw there.
Crises of the Fourteenth Century

25. Why might historians refer to the fourteenth century as a time of crisis
This was punctuated by war and an epidemic of greater proportions no one had ever experienced before as it practically affected most of Europe.

26. What were the root causes of the Hundred Years War  How did motivation of the conflict shift over time
This was primarily due to dispute in claims as lords of England and France disputed territories that was bestowed or considered their birthright.

27. How would you explain the significance of the Hundred Years War  How did it represent a more  modern  war
It introduced new tactics in fighting, such as the employment of longbowmen whose skills negated the capabilities mounted knights plus the fact the English employed mobile infantry and developed tactics in defeating knights.

28. What were some of the social consequences of the Hundred Years War
It helped arouse nationalist sentiments, especially among the French.  As for the English, the longer the war went, the lesser the support they enjoyed as they felt it was no longer a worthwhile venture andhot tired of it.

29. What socio-economic and demographic factors contributed to the Black Death
The thriving mercantilist economy of Europe brought it the carriers or the disease in rats from th orient plus the face that cities and towns were greatly congested as populations increased in greater numbers.

30. How would you characterize the response to the Black Death in religious terms  In what ways did the Black Death lead to a questioning of authority
The Church failed to address the problems brought by the Black Death as they themselves were affected by the plague, and this had somehow revealed their vulnerability and disproved infallability.  This had led people to seek answers elsewhere.
Humanism and New Religiosity

31. What essential traits characterized the religious revival of the later Middle Ages  How was this reform different from the reforms of the high-medieval church
This emphasized increased faith in the individuals abilties, coupled with devotion to Christianity which made it different from early reform movements which were branded as heretical.

32. How did late-medieval religion challenge existing church elites  Why might the late-medieval religion be called  populist
They espouse teachings that appeal to the masses and these were all based on Scriptures.  It sought to bring Christianity closer to the people which was what it was meant to be, rather than let it be an exclusive domain of the elites.

33. Describe the central features of the humanist movement.  How did Christian humanism develop out of this phenomenon
It mainly focuses on the individual.  It empowers the individual to seek answers rather than depend on others to provide it.  In relation to Christianity, it still allowed one to maintain a closer relationship with God through the exercise of free will.

34. Why would Christian humanist principles have been a threat to the established clerical elite
Because it did not come from them and their approach was  revolutionary.  It did not adhere to their standards which was characterized by ascetic living that was their hallmark.  Christian humanism emphasized that this was not necessary.

35. What would say is the relationship between Christian humanism and the late-medieval religious revival
They were similar to an extent but the former did not try to introduce anything new such as challenge existing doctrines but simply made use of existing teachings and presented it in a new light.
The Birth of Printing

36. How did developments in high-medieval society pave the way for the birth of the printing press  In what ways might the advent of print be seen as a  conservative  phenomenon
The economic deveopment of the high middle ages, also had an effect of the social and intellectual life of Europeans. Entrepreneurship spurred the likes of Guttenberg to come up with technology that could produce manuscripts at a faster rate as the demand for reading materials increased and speed was essential.
The Age of Discovery

37. In what ways might the changing global political situation in Asia during the later fourteenth and fifteenth c. have led to the European  Age of Discovery
This was brought about by the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks.  This had closed the Silk Road and it prompted the west to seek alternate routes to the orient.

38. How does the unique history of the Iberian peninsula help explain the participation of the Spaniards and Portuguese in the  Age of Discovery
This can be attroibuted to its geographic location on the western coast of Europe where they face both the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean.  Both Spaniards and Portuguese had taken part in the Crusades and developed an adventurous streak which would serve them well.

39. How did Columbus s voyages rest on a foundation of medieval ideas  How was his  discovery  revolutionary  Why did he himself refuse to accept this discovery
Columbus had read Marco Polos account, and probably the accounts of other travelers to the orient which would serve as his basis for planning his own expeditions and believe that the world was not flat.  His discovery was revoultionary in the sense that he tried to travel to the orient by taking a westward route which he thought would be shorter and faster.

40. What central differences distinguished the Portuguese colonial expansion from that of the Spanish in the early Age of Discovery
The Portuguese took the lead in the Age of Discovery and they expanded eastward.  To avoid disputes, the Treaty of Tordesillas, gave the western hemisphere to Spain which was not so bad at all as the territories they occupied was greater.