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.

Lecturing with Chapter 1

This was a bit of a mish-mash week. I did not stick to the syllabus, and instead blended the two days of lecture into coverage of three topics:

1. Medieval Overview

• Chronology
• Social Structure

Here, I aimed to do two things. First, I wanted to give the students an overview of the 1000-year sweep of medieval history and the master narrative that drives its history. So, I discussed the Early, Central, and Later Middle Ages using the same set of criteria for each—context (e.g. climate, migrations); economy; politics; religion; intellectual life. The tale was familiar: early medieval difficulties; central medieval apogee; later medieval woes coupled with plucky responses. Second, I needed to set them thinking about “hierarchy, mutuality, and exclusion” for their first essays, so I threw up the picture of the Three Orders found on p. 135 of the textbook, and talked it through with them. This might have been jumping the gun too much chronologically, but they needed the concepts now.

2. Rome after Rome

• Anxieties about Rome’s “fall”
• Practical legacies
• Dreams of Renewed Empire
• Claims of Glorious Ancient Ancestors

I did all the usual stuff here: interrogated the “fall” of Rome; discussed the many interpretations of its causes; reviewed the many ways in which Rome survived in the medieval West; talked about its legacy in the Holy Roman Empire. Item d is particularly good for the USC Trojans—I talked about Aeneas and Brutus and the ways that Romans and medieval people and even we today like to link ourselves to the glory that was Greece (and Rome).

3. Early Christianity

• establishment (Jesus, c. 4 BCE-30 CE; Paul, c. 5 BCE-67 CE; “terribly terrific” third century; security & triumph in the fourth century)
• consolidation (theology; papacy; classically)

My objective here was to reemphasize the story in the textbook with an eye to the exchange between Pliny the Younger and Trajan in 112 CE that they are discussing in sections this week. So I hope they got a good sense of how Christianity developed in its first century. But we went way beyond, too—to cover expansion, toleration, theological developments (Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Council of Nicaea), the assertion of papal authority (Leo I, Gregory I), and the integration of classical ideas into Christianity (Boethius, Cassiodorus).

Basically, then, I've covered 2 of the 3 elements of the medieval synthesis. We'll get to barbarians next week. In the meantime, we continued to work on the diversity theme in discussion sections:

Discussion #2: Christians, as the Romans Saw Them

READING: Pliny's Letter about Christians to the Emperor Trajan, 112 C.E. and Trajan's Reply

Question for discussion paper: What did pagan Romans imagine about Christians in their midst?

So, not a bad week, and I think we are now settled into the semester. They are not laughing at my jokes, so it could be a looong semester . . . here's hoping they are chuckling inside.

Quiz Questions for Chapter 1

I give my students short quizzes at the beginning of each week. It’s a sure-fire way to get them to read the assigned chapter on time. Writing the quizzes is a dreary business, but it's pedagogically effective, and I have made it somewhat less burdensome by giving many more quizzes (14) than the students need (10). This helps the students improve their final quiz grade (if they take all 14, only the best 10 count), and it helps me by eliminating the need for make-up quizzes. (Each quiz has ten questions.)

In any case, I’ll post here the questions I’ve used, chapter by chapter. On my quizzes, I also have map questions (from a map of modern Europe) and questions from lectures, but I’ll post here only the textbook questions. Feel free to use them. As you’ll notice, I’ve not given the answers in the hope that any student who encounters these will be inspired to do the reading and research necessary to obtain the answer.

Which of the following statements about the “fall of Rome” is accurate?

(a) only the Western empire “fell.”

(b) it was caused by lead poisoning.

(c) even a vibrant economy could not prevent it.

The term “hagiography” means the

(a) adulation of the emperor.

(b) claim of Rome to primacy over the Church.

(c) writing of saints’ lives.

St Augustine died in

(a) 330.

(b) 430.

(c) 530.

Early Christians debated

(a) the balance between humanity and divinity in Jesus.

(b) the place of Greco-Roman pagan ideas in Christian theology.

(c) both of the above.

(d) neither of the above.

Which of the following statements about the Pax Romana (or Roman Peace) is true?

(a) it lasted from c. 31 BCE to 180 CE.

(b) it was brought about by the triumph of Christianity.

(c) it happened only in the Eastern Empire.

Wergild, compurgation, and ordeal are terms associated with barbarian

(a) metal-work.

(b) law.

(c) kinship.

As you can see, these are straightforward. I aspire to questions that cannot be answered without exposure to the chapter but otherwise easily can. So, for example, the St Augustine question might look picky, but it really isn't given the extensive coverage of him (in text, in bio, in photo) in the chapter.

The Semester Begins . . .

Phew. The first week is over. We managed to do pretty much what we had planned:

Lecture #1: Introduction

I arranged my introduction a little differently this time; rather than handing out the syllabus right away, I waited until the end of class. I spent the lecture time covering two main things:

1. Medieval Europe History. I took each of these words apart, which enabled me to talk about (a) how “medieval fits into the master narrative of Europe history, (b) how “Europe” is an iffy geographical and institutional concept that nevertheless is very imaginatively powerful (also how it arose from Carolingian discourses and was linked with “Christendom”), and (c) what “history” is and is not. Along the way, I got them thinking in terms of timelines and maps, and I also offered them what I call “swing dates”—that is dates that a novice can hold onto in order to master chronology: 476; 800; 1215; 1348; 1517 (I almost used 1453 . . . and probably should have).

2. The Course. Before I gave them the syllabus, I outlined the course objectives and modes of evaluation. We returned to these the next day.

Lecture #2: The Middle Ages as “Other”

I ended up squeezing three things into this class:

1. Discussion of the syllabus. All the usual enthusiasms and admonitions.

2. A brief warm-up for their reading of Beowulf. I focused mostly on the history of the manuscript, which gave me an opportunity to show them said manuscript and let them consider its challenges.

3. The Middle Ages as Other. Because my course fulfills a diversity requirement, it’s important set up terms at the beginning. So I defined what I meant by “other” and “othering”; I explained that we will often observe medieval people doing this “othering” (e.g., Christians & Jews, English & Irish, etc.); and I then offered the historiographical example of how the middles ages are constructed as utterly “other” in relation to the modern—either utterly horrible or utterly sweet. This enabled me to (I hope) demolish and delegitimize “othering.” We’ll see.

Discussion #1: Imagining Beowulf, Then and Now

READING: Beowulf, lines 1-2210 (pages 3-151). Question posed in advance: What in Beowulf’s world is familiar even today?

I don’t actually teach the discussions, I can report only on my design and hopes. In this case, I figured probably half of this discussion section would be consumed by nitty gritty stuff—details of the course and getting to know each other, so I assigned only the first bit of Beowulf. I told the students that they would find it fun and rousing . . . and weird, and that I wanted them to work against that weirdness by *not* “othering” the people of Beowulf—that is, by looking for the ways in which its characters were as human as we are. Hope it worked!

That’s it. A decent start, but oh is my desk piled high with stuff to do! Another semester begins . . .