The Final Post and an overview of this last eighth

This post is going to be more of a reflection on the course in general. Overall I was definitely satisfied with my adventure into the arts and humanities. Taking a course load of all stem classes has its advantages (no essays), but I really appreciate the books and the writing that I did this quarter. I feel like its actually contributed to making myself a more subjective individual. Of the books and reading we read this quarter I had a few favorites. I enjoyed reading the colloquy by Desiderius Erasmus  on pilgrimage for the reason that it was clear to see how the conversation was shifted towards showing a specific opinion. This was my first time reading an argument that was set up as a conversation and I enjoyed it greatly. I also enjoyed Galileo's dialogue on a chief two-world system for similar and different reasons. I enjoyed it more for its historical significance than for the actual content, but I also found the way he presented it, as a dialogue, interesting. It seems as though that is a popular way for intelligent people to express their ideas without being declared heretics. My favorite reading this quarter was definitely Candide. I had read it in my freshman year of high school with no context and quit halfway through because I had no idea what was going on, but with context it was infinitely more understandable. Looking at the problems and the lifestyles of authors at the time they are writing their works makes reading them much more interesting. Next year I definitely plan on diving in for some more history if I have any units available. What a great quarter and a great class!

Reflection on the final

Out of the final and into spring break. Not a bad end to the quarter. This week has been extremely hectic. Especially because all my finals were on Thursday Friday and Saturday. That left Tuesday and Wednesday completely free and compelled me to study in almost every second of free time that I had. With chemistry 2B and math 21B, taking a final that had nothing to do with math was quite relaxing. Unfortunately taking a history test and taking a math test require a completely different mindset that I feel I was somehow able to switch to. This quarter's material was pretty interesting to me. I enjoyed learning about the scientific revolution and the contributions made to both mathematics, physics, and philosophy by the people living in this era.

John Harrison and Navigation

When we began to discuss the age of discovery it made me remember a character who I always thought was interesting and thats the 18th century clockmaker, John Harrison. Merely a carpenter with knowledge of clockwork mechanisms, Harrison developed clocks that were accurate enough to determine longitudinal location using a sextant. This technique required having a clock that would stay on London time for the entirety of a sea journey so that by comparing the star charts and figuring out local time, one could determine where they were longitudinally. Harrison's advances in clockmaking were prompted by the longitude prize which was established by the royal society of London. Harrison encountered many struggles and eventually developed four separate clocks whose designs were far beyond their time.

Reflection Upon The Midterm

Well I'm glad thats over. For one, pumping out these blog posts isn't nearly as annoying or difficult as I had imagined it to be. Mostly because its a train of thought sort of process that allows me to write down whatever comes to mind without fear of correction or correcting what I write. Obviously I'm going to make sure everything is grammatically sound, but there's no need to perfect the style in which it is written. Anyway, back to the point of this blog. I finished the midterm at around 1:26PM Pacific Time and walked away feeling somewhat accomplished. I had completed the first half of my first college humanities course and I felt that one, I had actually learned a lot, and two, that I might not have failed the midterm. While I had procrastinated studying until the two days before the midterm I had already felt somewhat knowledgable because the material that we were learning was interesting and therefore easier to retain. I only hoped that during the midterm I wasn't hit with a wave of stupidity as everything I had learned instantly vanished from my brain. Luckily, this was not the case. Instead I recognized five out of the six identifications (lucky me) and had been looking at the images that were on the test earlier that morning. In addition the essay question was comparing Erasmus and Hans Behem. I had completely read peasant fires and found it interesting and I had ready Erasmus' colloquy earlier that week and had also paid attention. Who knew that paying attention and finding the material interesting could help you on the test? The only slip-up I had was that halfway through my brain completely forgot about the word for those things that you pay for to get time off your time spent in purgatory (indulgences..duh) and I was super stressed that I wouldn't remember what they were called. I just left empty spaces in my writing and moved on then came back to them when I finally remembered the word.. Indulgences. I guess in the style of Kathy Stewart we can blame Satan for that one. Overall though I think I did pretty well. I'll definitely be disappointed if I see anything less than a B in my gradebook.

Post 6: Overview of the first half of the quarter (The Eighth?)

Coming in to the History 004B I was definitely excited to learn, yet I had my mind set on certain things. When I thought of the renaissance and the early modern era only specific examples came to mind: The Scientific Revolution, the heretical accusations thrown at these scientists, and the great art that the renaissance was famous for. Because of this, I was somewhat surprised when the class began with a look at the black plague and seemed to focus much on the the changes in religion that were happening during this period. While I had recognized that religion was no doubt an important aspect of the Renaissance I had greatly underestimated its influence over the people of the period. Religion wasn't something that people focused on once every Sunday. It was deeply ingrained in their daily lives and was the reason for all natural phenomenon and coincidences. As a result, the power of the church was immense and the pope was arguably the most powerful person on the entire planet. The scope of his rule had no geographical boundaries like the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, but applied to every human being who believed in God above and a Hell below. It was this power, but more specifically the grasp for this kind of power, that led to the Renaissance. Money that came from victims of the plague was funneled into universities where priests began to learn and those with money could send their children for education. While the Medici began to rise as a powerful family in Florence, they recognized that the power of the pope was inbounded, and sponsored a young priest who would later become a pope himself. Through the powerful relationships formed by the Medici and the vast amounts of wealth they acquired, the medici sponsored a multitude of famous artists throughout florence and become one of the most respected families in Italy. Their family was made the official bankers of the Papacy, and their wealth acted as a catalyst for artistic, scientific, and literary innovation and learning. A new obsession with the classics of greek and rome called humanism shaped these new artworks and ideas as people began to build upon the knowledge of the "old masters." The great sums accumulated by this papacy led to a life of luxury and ease for the clergy, but created a feeling of injustice among the peasantry. Those who belonged to the hard working underclass felt cheated as the clergy was exempt form taxation and lived a life of luxury from the taxes that were collected from laborers. A man named Martin Luther ended up putting and end to this through a new form of christianity called Lutheranism which built upon the objections made by Erasmus to schism the church. This is pretty much what the entire first eighth was about, though without any of the details. At this point I have a greater respect for the power of religion upon societies and the consequences that can come form social polarization to the extremes.

Erasmus and a Pilgrimage for Religion's Sake

The early modern christian humanist, Erasmus, was a famous theologian who questioned the traditions of the church and the rituals of christianity in many of his writings. His works were later looked up to for inspiration by Luther and his contemporaries. In his colloquy, Pilgrimage for Religion's Sake, Erasmus' views on the traditions of the catholic church can easily be discerned from his generous use of satire. In this colloquy, Erasmus uses a conversation between two christians to point out the practices that he believes are useless and wrong in order to promote reform in the church. The first practice that Erasmus attacks is pilgrimage. In the colloquy, Menedemus finds Ogygias who nobody has seen for years and asks him about where he was. Ogygias then recounts his pilgrimage to a specific statue of Mary all the way in England. Menedemus, representing the thoughts of Erasmus, asks Ogygias how that statue of Mary is different that any other statue of the Virgin Mary that one could find anywhere in Europe. By doing so, Erasmus is questioning the purpose of going on a pilgrimage. His argument is that going to far away locations in order to pray at a specific site is pointless because the divine are omnipotent and can listen to one pray from any location. In addition, Erasmus also criticizes the praying to saints for pointless or unlawful help. In a letter that was supposedly written by the Virgin Mary she says that so many people pray for pointless things that it is impossible to fulfill everyones needs and that those people who's needs she cannot fulfill end up believing less in the power of Mary. Erasmus' thoughts about Catholic traditions and theological ideas are firmly represented in this Colloquy.

Peasant Fires: Its the remix to ignition; hot and fresh from perdition

As we are transported into the world of Hans Behem, Wunderli reveals a society of much tension. The great gap between the peasantry and the high living of the lords as well as the clergy created much indignation in the peasantry which was primarily directed at the clergy: lords and nobles were expected to live luxuriously; however, the clergy was not. The preaching of Hans Behem, and the many pilgrims he gained shows the general agreement and agitation among the peasants that wished for the church to live a more minimalistic lifestyle, for this was the lifestyle that god favored. Any unnecessary wealth was potentially an example of avarice. To cure this behavior, Hans Behem called for a bonfire of the vanities in which people burned their unneccessary belongings to show their devotion. These bonfires were not unique to the ideas spread by Hans Behem, but have other occurrences throughout Europe. In 1497, Savonrola held a bonfire of the vanities in the city of florence where high tensions between the classes also occurred. He accused those who did not participate to be unchristian. These ideas can be traced back to St. Bernadino of Siena and St. John of Capistrano. Both of which advocated propertylessness. St. Bernadino is accredited with the first "real" bonfire of the vanities and preached many sermons about living as ascetics. While this movement became somewhat popular with St. Bernadino it gained momentum throughout the 15th century as the lower class become increasingly agitated and tensions increase.

Machiavelli and A Song of Ice and Fire [SPOILER ALERT]

The multiple rules that Machiavelli lays down in The Prince and the advice that he gave reminded me immensely of George R. R. Martin's a song of ice and fire. Many of the rules and consequences of not following these rules can be seen displayed in the unfolding of fictional events which take place in Martin's immense epic. Here are but a few of the connections that can be made.

"When you see a minister thinking more of himself than of you, and in all his actions seeking his own ends, that man can never be a good Minister or one that you can trust" (Machiavelli, 62).

This rule is unfortunately ignored by a multitude of characters throughout the series. Petyr Baelish, a.k.a. Littlefinger, was notoriously self serving and served as master of coin on the small council. Working for himself, Baelish held power over the entire city guard through his commandeer over the King's wealth. Instead of helping Ned Stark overthrow Joffrey, he paid off the guard to capture Ned and help execute him as a traitor, breaking his word. In analyzing Ned Stark's faults we can find that he breaks one of Machiavelli's Rules as well:

"Thus, it is well to seem merciful, faithful, humane, religious, and upright, and also to be so; but the mind should remain so balanced that were it needful not to be so, you should be able and know how to change to the contrary" (Machiavelli, 46). 

Ned Stark, to his demise, did not "know how to change to the contrary" and in his grasp to maintain what was upright and faithful to his kingdom, Ned was betrayed and executed. Petyr Baelish on the other hand executed this rule flawlessly. He would play the role of an honest and caring honorable gentleman and when it served him would pursue the course of action which would lead to the greatest personal gain. In his own words, Machiavelli would doubtlessly describe Baelish as more fox than lion and "he who was best known to play the fox has had the best success" (Machiavelli, 46).

Cersei Lannister and her son, Joffrey, are at fault for abusing the privilege of a fortress. The Red Keep separates them from their citizens and, as a result, leads them down a path that would make Machiavelli roll over in his grave. The citizens of King's Landing, living in the poverty caused by the their isolation from the rest of the kingdom and the use of taxes upon luxury for the elites and war, began to hate the lords and ladies residing in the Red Keep. As machiavelli says it is never good to have your own subjects hate you and indeed he goes as far as to say

"...I shall applaud him who builds fortresses, and him who does not; but I shall blame him who, trusting in them, reckons it a light thing to be held in hatred by his people" (Machiavelli, 58).

Cersei and Joffrey are completely oblivious to the the words of Machiavelli and ignore the hatred of their subjects thinking that their fortress will protect them. This is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he Machiavelli preaches and they pay the consequences. Cersei is eventually imprisoned by her people (in the form of the church) and is completely shamed in front of her people. Machiavelli would be furious of their decisions, but would probably rest easy knowing they got what was coming to them.

Week Two: The Renaissance and the Power of the Medicis

In the years following the black plague a new period began that pulled humanity from its dark middle ages. The Renaissance completely shifted the culture of western civilization from its god and church fearing mindset to a new logical and nostalgic mentality that wished to bring back the achievements and knowledge of the classical era that had been forgotten throughout the middle ages. In Florence, Italy this movement was catalyzed by the power of wealthy merchant families acting as patrons of the arts: People who would sponsor certain individuals to pursue a profession. One family in particular stood out as a powerful patron and as the most powerful family in Italy at the time. This family was called the Medici. The ideas from this era that served as most interesting to me was this idea of patronage and the way it helped both society and the family serving as a patron.

The Medici served as patrons to numerous craftsman and artists throughout Florence. By acting as patrons they were able to increase their honor and assist in progressing the arts. One example of a craftsman the Medici were patrons of is Brunelleschi. This architectural genius was obsessed with the genius of roman architecture, in particular the pantheon. By the medici's patronage Brunelleschi was able to design and construct a dome for the unfinished cathedral of florence and by doing so created a wonder of architecture by building the largest unsupported dome in the world and increased the honor of the Medici family by having completed the centerpiece of Florence's city. This relationship between patron and artist repeated itself throughout the renaissance. A patron would sponsor an artist who would then have the money and time to perfect his craft and innovate, which would then create innovative new techniques, which would bring honor to the patron family. It was this mutually beneficial relationship that ultimately created the great rebirth in art and knowledge that came to be known as the Renaissance.

Week One: The Plague Strikes Europe

In the mid fourteenth century Europe fell victim to a devastating illness that came to be known as the Black Plague. Originating in china, this plague found its way to Europe through trade routes that carried it to the city of Kaffa, and through Genoese sailors to Messina, a major trading port in Italy. This plague then spread from Sicily to the rest of Europe infecting everyone from peasants to the nobility. Death had no bias; it took lives from everyone which resulted in the deadliest natural disaster of all time. The plague took the lives of an estimated 50 million people; about half of the population of Europe at the time. Something that I found interesting as a result of the plague was people's view of death and how they represented it. More specifically through the portrayal of death in paintings and art. In class we looked at a series of paintings by the german artist Hans Holbein which were made after the black death.   

One of the themes in these prints was that death can strike anyone, anywhere, at any time, and struck quickly. This themes are obviously similar to the way the black plague struck. Without any knowledge of modern medicine the way the plague spread and its cause was a mystery so it appeared to strike for no reason. In addition, the plague would kill quickly, usually within 2-4 days. This caused death to go from being a rarer occurrence in which one would be ceremoniously passed on to the afterlife. I was curious however to see how this new portrayal of death was different from pre-plague artistic representations. As I searched for about forty five minutes I found that it was difficult to find paintings from before the plague with death as a subject at all. The closest I could come to a difference was this painting.

This painting, called The Procession of Saint Gregory (c. 1300) shows death as the angel in the top right corner. The sheathing of its blade is a depiction of Saint Gregory's procession successfully stopping the effects of the plague. Due to the scarcity of paintings portraying death, it seems as though the Black Plague could have created an obsession with death once it struck. The constant dying of people and the retched atmosphere appears to have created a new movement of art in which death was consistently portrayed as a skeleton.