Lecturing with Chapter 6

I had only as one lecture this week, as I'm traveling off to give a paper. Since the students are discussing peasants at the end of the week, so I devoted the lecture to matters rural . . . and tried to cover 5 things:

1. Defined manorialism; discussed its murky origins; described how it worked; and considered its relationship to both “those who fight” and “those who pray.” In the process, I hope the students learned to distinguish village from manor from parish. 3. Briefly treated the matter of how elites saw peasants--that is, either as cursed descendants of Cain or Ham . . . or as blessed poor.

3. Discussed the first agricultural revolution, covering basically what's in the chapter, but with more oomph, good pictures, and lots of enthusiasm for humble peasants. (I set this up as a counter to the "Great Man Theory of History" I had offered up for Charlemagne.)

4. Reviewed some basic stuff about peasant lives, focusing on household, as well as village, parish, and manor. I emphasized how house and farmyard offered scope for individualized economic activity, which I set up in distinction to the cooperation required in village fields and pastures.

5. Primary Source prep. The students are reading a manorial court session, so I introduced them to the manor (Walsham) and to court rolls generally.

Lecturing with Chapter 5

This was a feudal week. Here's how it went (spread over 2 classes):

Last week, I had covered the essentials of the origins of feudalism. This week, I covered it’s two stages:

AGE OF FEUDAL LORDS, c. 900-1100. Armed thugs, prominence of war in all aspects of life; marginality of women; castles and castellans; details of the lord-vassal tie.

AGE OF FEUDAL KINGS, c. 1100+. I began by discussing the slow dilution of feudalism.

--Lord-vassal ties less intimate thanks to heritable fiefs, multiplication of feudal ties, and formalization of obligations (always ready to fightà40 daysàscutage).

--The reassertion (in some places) of royal or duchal power . . . creating less decentralization and less public power in private hands.

I then discussed the long, slow growth of royal power in some parts of Europe. I used England and France as examples of how kings slowly reasserted power, esp. through bureaucracy, territorial acquisition, justice, and national assemblies. I highlighted only a few figures (e.g. Philip Augustus, Louis IX, and Philip the Fair for France) and and emphasized these four mechanism of royal aggrandizement. Did it very fast: I hope the brief story I told will help them make sense of the political history in the chapters ahead.

Finally, I dealt with growth of courtly culture. I talked here about how knights, still having to excel at military prowess, now had to serve their lords as diplomats, advisors, supervisors, and the like—and also to compete with a growing cadre of literate churchmen-bureaucrats. And, of course, they also had to excel at courtship and love. Lots of talk about courtly love. The upshot was the knights had an impossible set of roles to juggle, and ladies were stuck on a pedestal from which they were adored or hated. . . .

Quiz Questions for Chapter 5

Between 800 and 1000, Western Europe was

(a) reabsorbed briefly into the Byzantine empire.

(b) devastated by the “little ice age.”

(c) divided, invaded, and reorganized.

Which is an area untouched by Viking raiders?

(a) Ireland.

(b) Russia.

(c) Italy.

In the 9^th century, the “Danelaw” was

(a) Jutland.

(b) part of Sweden then under Danish control.

(c) part of Britain then under Danish control.

Alfred the Great

(a) united all of non-Danish England under his authority.

(b) crowned Charles the Bald in 843.

(c) created the new monastic rule known as Alfredism.

The textbook talks of West and East Francia. Most of West Francia eventually became the kingdom of France. Most of East Francia became part of

(a) the Lombard Kingdom.

(b) the Magyar imperium.

(c) the Holy Roman Empire.

Which of the following was NOT a characteristic of early feudalism?

(a) public power in private hands.

(b) the lord-vassal tie.

(c) powerful kingship.

A critical new technology in the development of feudalism was

(a) the heavy, wheeled plow.

(b) the stirrup.

(c) the longbow.

Which match is NOT correct?

(a) Louis the Pious: Charlemagne’s heir.

(b) Otto: Holy Roman Empire.

(c) Hugh Capet: Saxony.

Hugh, Earl of Chester died

(a) in the Battle of Hastings.

(b) in rebellion against his king.

(c) as a monk.

The Treaty of Verdun in 843

(a) established the Papal States.

(b) divided Charlemagne’s empire among his three grandsons.

(c) ended the War of Spanish Succession.

The ninth and tenth centuries were a time of renewed pressure on Europeans from

(a) the imperial ambitions of the Byzantine emperors.

(b) Viking raiders, Magyar horsemen, and Muslim pirates.

(c) overpopulation and famine.

Around the year 1000, Italy was

(a) united under the Lombard King Ulfrich.

(b) politically dominated by bishops and their cities.

(c) controlled by the emirs of al-Andalus.

Lecturing with Chapter 4

This week was a breeze. I hope you cannot tell it from the textbook, but when I get towards the year 1000, I begin to feel much more comfortable. We aren’t there yet in terms of chapters, but it’s coming, and I’m responding accordingly.

1. CHARLEMAGNE

On Tuesday, I used the topic of Charlemagne as an opportunity to prep the students for their first essay. In other words, I laid out for them the basic essay template and then “performed” it in a lecture. Here’s what I did, using the template as my guide:

Introduction: warm up (start ’em smiling); introduce subject; state thesis.
I cracked a joke or two; offered basic info on Charlemagne, and gave them my thesis: “The Great Man Theory of History still works sometimes . . . and the case of Charlemagne proves it.”

Preliminaries: whatever you need to set the scene: define terms; clarify coverage/set perimeters; give background, etc.
I defined “Great Man Theory of History,” critiquing its male-focus on the side. Then, a bit more info on Charlemagne.

Acknowledge and defang counter-arguments:
I used “luck” as my hook here, saying that one might say that Charlemagne was more lucky than he was great:

--he was lucky in the weather

--he was lucky in his progenitors

--he was lucky in his timing (few invasions)

--he was lucky in his advisers

I countered that:

--Charlemagne was not so lucky in other respects (e.g., 30+ years struggle with the Saxons).

--some of his so-called luck was more cunning than luck (e.g., his relations with Leo III)

--and in any case, luck does not negate greatness

Proof of thesis #1: Charlemagne’s conquests are one proof of his extraordinary personal greatness. This gave me a chance to talk about the usual stuff.

Proof of thesis #2:Charlemagne’s governance is another proof of his extraordinary personal greatness. Again, the usual.

Proof of thesis #3:Charlemagne’s reforms of education and religion are a final proof of his extraordinary personal greatness. Again, the usual.

Conclusion: sum up and go beyond . . . leave ’em smiling
I summed up (in an explicitly perky, not dull way) and then tried to leave them smiling with a joke about it’s good the “Great Man” theory works because we certainly need great men leading us through this economic crisis. But somehow, my PowerPoint shot of Obama and Geithner seemed to leave them cold. Oh well. . . .

2. FEUDALISM

On Thursday, I turned to the first of two days on feudalism. I aim to cover it in one broad sweep (as I did last week with monasticism). Here’s how it went:

1. “FEUDALISM”. I discussed how medieval people would have called it “lordship” or “vassalage.” I talked about differing understandings (esp. from Marx) about what “feudalism” means. I settled on my definition (relations among a small, military elite). And I emphasized that feudalism was never a system, but also a changing, ad hoc arrangement. (I used frat hazing as a analogy; it worked well.)

2. THREE CHARACTERISTICS OF FEUDALISM. I discussed in turn: lord-vassal relationship; decentralization; public power in private hands.

3. ORIGINS. I nodded to antecedents (Roman clientage; barbarian comitatus). Then, I traced how the three characteristics emerged between 700 and 900: lord-vassal relationship in 700s (stirrup, cavalry); decentralization (esp. Verdun, 843 and thereafter); public power in private hands (esp. invasions). I then wrapped this up, as I often do, by imagining ourselves in a government-less world and facing invasion, and resorting to local strong men . . . football team on motorcycles, defending us against the nasty UCLAers . . . always good for a laugh. But it also emphasized that feudalism was an effective response to a desperate situation.

4. THE AGE OF FEUDAL LORDSHIP, 900-1100. Here, I discussed lord-vassal relations a bit more, the importance of local power and violence, and the overriding importance of war in feudal culture (hunting, chess, booty, etc.)

5. HOW DID FEUDALISM RELATE TO MANORIALISM? The usual: most fiefs were manors, but not all; most manors were fiefs, but not all.

6. HOW DID FEUDALISM RELATE TO THE CHURCH? The usual: same elite; ecclesiastical involvement in vassalage and war; lay “advocates.”

Quiz Questions for Chapter 4

The Pseudo-Dionysius and his translator John Scottus helped to stimulate interest in

(a) Neoplatonism.

(b) Catharism.

(c) papalism.

Charlemagne was crowned “Emperor of the Romans” by Pope Leo III in

(a) 800.

(b) 850.

(c) 900.

Which of the following was NOT an aspect of the Carolingian intellectual revival?

(a) development of a clearer form of handwriting.

(b) establishment of the first university (in Paris).

(c) preservation of the great works of the Classical-Christian tradition.

Eighth-century Francia witnessed considerable political and religious consolidation. It also saw the development of manorialism which

(a) sought to improve the culture of court life, especially in the winter-time.

(b) linked the landed elite to the peasantry in a web of social and economic obligations.

(c) required that every village in Francia have a resident priest and church.

Compared to the term “Europe,” the term “Christendom” was

(a) identical.

(b) more inclusive.

(c) more exclusive.

Which match is NOT correct?

(a) Leo III: alliance with Empress Irene.

(b) Alcuin: educational reform.

(c) Boniface: missionary activity.

The “Donation of Pepin” helped to found

(a) Burgundy.

(b) the Papal States.

(c) al-Andalus.

“Capitularies” and “missi dominici” are associated with Carolingian

(a) intellectual revival.

(b) monastic reform.

(c) government.

Into which region did Charlemagne’s empire extend?

(a) Britain.

(b) Saxony.

(c) Sicily.

Quiz Questions for Chapter 3

Oops. I forgot to publish these last week. Sorry!

Byzantine government tended to be

(a) defensive and conservative.

(b) poorly funded and weak.

(c) small and minimal.

In the Byzantine Orthodox Church between 500 and 1000, controversy raged about

(a) monophysites and iconoclasm.

(b) clerical celibacy.

(c) the emperor’s status as God’s vice-regent.

Justinian and his empress Theodora lived

(a) c. 350.

(b) c. 450.

(c) c. 550.

Mohammed died in

(a) 632.

(b) 732.

(c) 832.

The split between Sunni and Shi’i Muslims began as a dispute about

(a) who should lead the community of the faithful.

(b) whether Mohammed was human or divine.

(c) how to treat other “peoples of the book.”

Which provides the proper chronological order?

(a) Umayyad dynasty; Abbasid dynasty; al-Mansur in al-Andalus.

(b) Abbasid dynasty; al-Mansur in al-Andalus; Umayyad dynasty.

(c) al-Mansur in al-Andalus; Abbasid dynasty; Umayyad dynasty.

In the tenth century, the greatest city in Western Europe was

(a) Marseilles.

(b) Lisbon.

(c) Cordoba.

Lecturing with Chapter 3

This week, I treated two discrete subjects in lecture.

1. MEDIEVAL ISLAM. I divided this topic in three sections:
a. Neighbors. Here I talked about how the Roman “mare nostrum” had morphed into a region of three civilizations by c. 750. I then described relations among Islam, the medieval West, and Byzantium, c. 750 and 1000. Really, just a brief review of the usual stuff—religious antagonism and misunderstanding; political tensions, esp. over claims to the imperial throne; trade, esp. in luxuries; intellectual imbalance.
b. Medieval Islam. Given the current blast of anti-Islamic sentiment in the USA, I decided to spend a fair bit of time on the fundamentals, so I talked with the students about Muhammad; the Quran, Hadith, and Sunnah; the Five Pillars of Islam; Sharia law; distinctions among Sunni, Shi’ite and Sufi Muslims. It was almost all in the textbook, but I thought it was worth going over again, and their questions indicated that this was, indeed, a good idea.
c. Islamic Iberia. I decided to focus a bit on medieval Europe’s closest Muslim neighbor and especially on the tenth-century heyday in Cordoba under Abd al-Rahman III and al-Mansur. I hit the convivencia angle with perhaps undue enthusiasm; I discussed intellectual life (esp. Ibn Rushd and Maimonides); and I wrapped up with an awesome picture of the Great Mosque of Cordoba. If this worked as I hope, the students have no doubt that tenth-century Cordoba was light years ahead of anything north of the Pyrenees (Paris was my main comparison).

2. MONASTICISM. My students are reading the Rule of St Benedict for their discussion this week, so I decided to supplement the treatment of the subject in chapter 2 with a broad overview of medieval monasticism. Here’s how I did it:
a. 400-800: Foundations. I began with different sorts of monasticism (Irish, eremitic, cenobitic); then moved on to St Benedict and his rule; and then discussed at length what I called “lived monasticism”—a large pot that included vows, daily routine, monastic enclosure, oblation, lay involvement. I also discussed the ways in which monks and nuns contributed to larger society (missionary work; retreats; refuge for travelers; alms for poor; education; economic impact; and of course, prayers), and how these communities were funded (labor, endowments, tithes, gifts). I talked briefly about double monasteries, Abbess Hilda, and the estimate that 1 in 4 monastics in this period were women.
b. 800-900: Crisis. You know, you know . . . Vikings, lack of oversight, lax discipline, too much lay involvement.
c. 900-1300: Reform (again and again). Here I marched them through the big reform movements—Cluny, Cistercians, mendicants—trying to emphasize that, although each reform reacted to failure, each reform also spoke to the hopes and promises of the monastic ideal. I ended with 1215, the 4th Lateran’s proscription on the founding of new orders, and the challenges this posed for later internal-only reform.
d. Women in Reformed Orders. I then went back over the same stuff, but from the point of view of women. I set up a problem that needed explanation—that is, the declining presence of women in monastic life (I threw out an estimate of roughly 1 in 12 by c. 1300). Why did this happen? I talked about (i) clerical celibacy and male anxiety; (ii) the poor synch between the new monastic virtues of the reformed orders (Cluniac liturgy; Cistercian taming of wilderness; mendicant preaching) and female roles; (iii) takeovers of female houses, perhaps a result of greater centralization; and (iv) the poverty of female monasteries. I then ended on an upbeat note by reviewing how holy women responded—i.e., female mysticism, female “independents” (anchoresses, vowesses, tertiaries, et al.), and last but not least, beguines.

This was a huge, grand-sweep lecture, but I’m hoping it will give rise to lots of “aha!” moments in the chapters ahead.

And, a confession. I didn’t make it through this lecture—ran out of time with the mendicants. But I didn’t mind, as the students were energetic and even (dare I say?) enthused. Lots of questions, lots of fun. I’ll finish it off on Tuesday.

Lecturing with Chapter 2

This was a one-lecture week because of Rosh Hashanah, and I spent the time on the barbarians—the third part of the medieval sunthesis. It did not go all that well, but here’s what I tried:

INTRODUCTION: I began by linking barbarian settlement to what we had seen last week in terms of longing for glorious ancestors (Aeneas and all that). In other words, I talked about how modern Europeans often have wanted to tie their “Frenchness” or “Englisness” or whatever to barbarian settlers who somehow legitimize their nationhood. I told them this was dangerous and bad history.

THE “REAL” STORY. I then proceeded to tell them how the changes that came over the old Western empire were long and messy and complicated. I laid out Celtic, Germanic, and Slavic language groups; I talked about how varied they were; I talked about Rome’s changing and varied contacts with these groups; and then I used the example of fourth- and fifth-century Italy to describe how muddled and mingled it all was.

FOUR POINTS TO REMEMBER. Next, I set out four things in particular for them to ponder and remember:
• Arianism.
• Social Organization (esp. the comitatus).
• Law (wergild, compurgation, trial by ordeal).
• The historical power of the barbarian legacy (here I got back—as a wrap up—to ties with modern nationalism.

That’s it. We are done with the medieval synthesis. Onward!

Quiz Questions for Chapter 2

When the barbarians moved into transalpine Europe, they encountered a Gallo-Roman population. “Gallo” indicates that this population mingled elements that were Roman and

(a) Celtic.

(b) Basque.

(c) Saxon.

Your textbook says that polygyny was common among the landed classes of seventh-century Europe. “Polygyny” means

(a) a woman can have several husbands.

(b) a man can have several wives.

(c) widows and widowers may remarry.

The kingdom of the Ostrogoths c. 500 encompassed much of modern-day

(a) Italy.

(b) France.

(c) Spain.

Boethius and Cassiodorus are important because they

(a) withdrew Roman forces from Britain in 410.

(b) converted the Visigoths to Christianity.

(c) laid the groundwork for a medieval intellectual tradition.

Compared to Britain and North Africa in the sixth century, Gaul, Italy, and Iberia were

(a) more stable.

(b) more rocked by invasions.

(c) more influenced by paganism.

St Benedict (c. 480-550) is important for his

(a) monastic rule.

(b) work converting the Saxons and Frisians.

(c) translations of Aristotle and Plato.

Arians

(a) settled in in modern-day Netherlands.

(b) ravaged North Africa.

(c) practiced an unorthodox Christianity.

By the eighth century, the intellectual center of Europe had shifted to monasteries in

(a) Spain.

(b) Ireland.

(c) Thuringia.

Which match is NOT correct?

(a) Merovingians and Gaul.

(b) St Bede the Venerable and Theodoric.

(c) Gregory I and the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons.