Lecture Notes

Developed by Lee M. Pappas and Nicholas C. J. Pappas

Lecture 1: An Introduction to History.

• A.  Introduction.
• B.  Why Study History
• C.  Why Study World History. 
  • 1. Economic History.
  • 2. Social History.
  • 3. Political History.
  • 5. Cultural History.
• D.  Historical Evidence.
  • 1. Material.
  • 2. Written.
  • 3. Oral & Visual.

Lecture 2:  The World in the 15th Century.

• A.  The Islamic World.
  • 1. Social and Cultural decline.
  • 2. Political Strengths.
  • 3. Gunpowder Empires.
• B.  South and East Asia.
  • 1. The Rise of Ming China.
  • 2. Expansion or Isolation.
  • 3. Japan.
  • 4. India.  
• C. Africa, Americas & Oceania.
  • 1. Isolation.
  • 2. Seperate developments.
• D. Conclusion.

Lecture 3:  Fifteenth Century Europe:  Social and Economic Changes

• A. The Medieval Legacy to the Era of Crisis: From roughly the time of the Carolingian Renaissance in the 1000s A.D. to around 1300, Europe experienced social and economic boom times. The social chaos and political anarchy caused by the collapse of the Roman Empire in the 450s A.D., followed by the incursions of the Vikings, Magyars, and Moors in their raids around the 900s were finally over and Europe emerged from the Early Middle Ages. During the Medieval period, the feudal aristocracy and the Catholic church emerged as the dominant political force and were instrumental in imposing social and economic order in the countryside. Peasants were organized within the manorial system as serfs; the guild system dominated economic life and imposed its own wage, price, and production controls in the system; and, in religious life, the church reached its zenith of power and influence over not only the spiritual but the secular life of Europe. Indeed, Europeans were feeling vigorous enough to launch an expansion of western Christendom between the 11th and 13th centuries in the form of the Crusades and missionary efforts in the Baltic border lands. However, the 14th century would be an era of multiple crises that would either weaken or even destroy many of the medieval institutions of Europe that seemed the most durable, and in their stead, pave the way for the development of modern Europe.
  • 1. Overpopulation from Medieval Times: Between the 11th and 13th centuries, Europe, organized along strict feudal/manorial lines, finally experienced the social and political organization neccessary for successful agriculture and sufficient crop yields. Since much of Europe had been virgin forest and unsettled land after the fall of the Roman Empire, the way was paved for its settlement: with increased crop yields, the population grew; as it grew, new areas had to be cleared and settled; as these new areas were settled, the increased harvests contributed to more population growth, and so forth. This population boom continued unabated until the beginning of the 14th century, when it was forced to taper because all the most easily cultivatable land had been claimed and, the guild system had imposed such tight economic controls that commercial life in the towns had begun to stagnate. In other words, the population of Europe had spurted upward without a simultaneous increase in production.
  • 2. Climatic Changes: The population situation came at a most unfortunate time, since, almost at the same time, the climate of Europe suddenly turned colder and wetter. Indeed, some historians believe that Europe may have entered a "mini Ice Age" in the 14th century, as evidenced by the heavy clothing depicted on portraiture of the time and later. These climatic changes meant crop failures. Crops either froze in the fields or else were subject to rot in the granaries from the dampness of incessant rains.
  • 3. Widespread Famine: The burgeoning population, dependent on an expanding food supply to meet their needs, now found themselves subject to periodic and widespread famines. Areas not actually killed off by starvation were so debilitated by hunger and chronic malnutrition that the population were ravaged by other destructive forces such as exposure (because of the increasingly cold weather), disease (such as rickets, beri-beri, and scurvy), and various plagues.
  • 4. Plague: The culture and lifestyles of the Medieval population was actually conducive to disease transmission which led to periodic and massive outbreaks of all manner of epidemics and plagues. Whole families lived together in close, cramped quarters, sleeping 10 to a straw pallet on the floor of a cottage whose basement was typically the animal stables. Because of the cold weather, people rarely washed (it was believed to cause sickness) or changed clothes until they rotted off of their bodies. As a result, in addition to the usual smallpox, typhus, typhoid fever, cholera, scarlet fever, measles; and, diseases caused by unsanitary conditions such as polio, hepatitis, and disentary, there was the first outbreak, in 1346, of an entirely new disease--The Bubonic Plague. This deadly disease was spread into Europe by the westward migrations of the Mongols, among whom lived rats--whose fleas carried the bacterium Yerisina pestis. The Bubonic Plague attacked the lymph nodes (known as buboes), causing them to swell and burst beneath the skin. As a result, the afflicted were often covered with black and blue marks, which caused the disease to earn the name "The Black Death." Victims suffered great fever, unquenchable thirst, delirium (they often tore off their clothes and threw themselves into fountains, ponds and streams and between screams, they gulped huge quantities of water) and ultimately died usually within 24 hours! It is estimated that upwards of 60% of Europe's population died off after this first wave of plague. This disease continued to ravage Europe at irregular intervals clear into the 19th century, when Joseph Lister and Louis Pasteur arrived at the germ theory of disease transmission.
  • 5. Peasant Uprisings: The breakdown in social and political order following famine and plague led to the outbreak of peasant uprisings. Initially, the upper classes seemed to be spared by these ravages. It was probably due to the fact that these classes initially retained the means to remain better fed during hard times which means that their resistance to disease was better; they did not typically sleep huddled together over their own stables; and, they had the means to change their clothes more frequently. Nevertheless, the peasantry found themselves squeezed between their own hard times and the duties and obligations they owed to the lord of the manor. Adding insult to injury for the peasantry was the appearance that the upper classes' lifestyle had remained unaffected while they themselves were starving and dying while still having to maintain their usual work load. These social tensions led to massive peasant uprisings and revolts such and the Jacquerie in France in 1358 and Wat Tyler's Rebellion in England in 1381. These uprisings started as tiny pockets of discontent which exploded in strength and scope very quickly. Typically, after a few initial victories, these revolts were savagely suppressed and few reforms were ever forthcoming.
  • 6. Wars: In addition, wars were common in the 14th century. There were frequent wars between feudal lords and between the feudatories and their own king. Wars between kings, such as the 100 Years' War (1337-1453) were more spectacular and featured Edward III's and Henry V's claim to the French throne, and Joan of Arc's 6 month-long rally in 1429 that inspired the French to drive the English back to the French port of Calais. Unfortunately, after she helped to gain the cowardly dauphin Charles VII the throne of France, Joan was captured in battle by the English, who hated her and gleefully handed her over to church authorities who tried her as a witch and heretic. The ungrateful Charles didn't attempt to save her and she was burned at the stake on May 30, 1341.
• B. The Aftermath of the Era of Crisis: Not surprisingly, all over Europe, these multiple disasters increased the peoples' feelings of fear, superstition, pessimism, fatalism, and religiosity. Nowhere are these feelings more graphically illustrated than in the paintings of the era. The well-known and highly stylized, almost cartoonlike "medieval" art, which lacked perspective and detailing gave way to very realistic figures. The themes turned deeply religious, emotionally intense, and introspective. Figures were depicted in tortured, writhing and contorted, greatly suffering poses. Christ's agony on the Cross was a great theme in many paintings, as was the "Dance of Death" which featured skeletons who cavorted among the living; as well as the Last Judgement which graphically showed the tortures of the damned. In literature, authors often mentioned the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: Famine, War, Plague, and Death. These themes became very deeply embedded in the popular culture and the artistic community would continue to draw on them for inspiration well into the 15th century.
  • 1. Changes in the Countryside: Ironically, the depop-ulation of Europe following the 14th century brought about drastic changes in the social, political and economic order of Europe. There were changes in land tenure and in the manorial system. In order to recover their prosperity, manor lords had to entice a smaller number of peasants back to work with greater incentives such as reductions in the peasants' manorial duties and a lightening of restrictions on their rights. Often peasants would hold out for a contractual relationship spelled out on paper and worked to get a rent-based agreement instead of the labor-service based one. Thus serfdom began increasingly to break down in Europe. Peasants also worked to obtain the right to sell their own produce on the open market in nearby towns, or even to ship their produce to areas farther afield. This mechanism broke down manorialism's subsistence-based, closed economy (the manor grows what the manor eats--no more, no less).
  • 2. Changes in the Town: As towns were repopulated, they developed new urban institutions to replace the old ones which had contributed to the economic stagnation of the late13th century. For example:
    • a. The Guild System broke down because of the deaths of so many master craftsmen. The remaining artisans were able to charge higher fees for their goods regardless of guild directives. In addition, the demand for workers in the towns neccessitated higher wages. Guild guidelines on these issues and others increasingly became disruptive of civil order and ultimately caused the guilds to become marginalized and increasingly irrelevant.
    • b. Bankers, insurers, and individual entrepreneurs now found, with the decline of guild influence in the marketplace, that the economy was open to them. They gradually came to make up a whole new breed of townsman who made his wealth through trade: the middle class capitalist. These merchants, wealthy enough to buy their education and interested in expanding their trade, were responsible for inventing new ways of handling money and trade transactions. Many of the mechanisms of modern banking--lines of credit, check writing, loans, simple and compound interest payments, and investment--all developed in the following century. These merchants also did much to create modern bureaucracies staffed by literate, highly-trained experts who worked for a salary (rather than feudal obligation or Chivalric code, etc.) These changes, which contributed to the overall, longrange decline of the feudal world of the Middle Ages, would be instrumental in ushering in the period of the Renaissance in western Europe. This Renaissance would have its beginnings in the Italian city-states of Florence, Genoa, and Venice.

Lecture 4:  Fifteenth Century Europe:  Cultural Changes:  The Renaissance.

• A. The Renaissance Marks a Rebirth of Learning: Renaissance is a French term which means rebirth or revival. In European history, it is roughly a 200 year period from the beginning of the 15th to the end of the 16th centuries, during which time there was a strong revival of learning, spurred on by the activities of the newly wealthy classes and their interest in educational pursuits. More specifically, the Renaissance marked a rediscovery of ancient Greek and Roman ideas, art, culture and philosophy. The intellectuals of the time engaged in a bit of snobbery and coined the word Renaissance to distinguish their own enlightenment from the squalor and barbarism which had characterized the medieval world since the fall of the Roman Empire.
  • 1. The End of Medieval Scholasticism: Indeed, the thinkers of the day sincerely believed that they were responsible for "rescuing" European civilization from the Dark Ages, a thousand year stretch of stagnation into which the Catholic church had led it. It is true that the medieval world had been dominated by the church and the prevailing intellectual theme of the Middle Ages had been Scholasticism, in which all learning was aimed at a better understanding of the fundamental truths of Christianity by defining, systematizing, and reasoning. By the time of the Renaissance, scholasticism had taken on the meaning of those who insisted on a narrow-minded, reactionary, and pedantic insistence on religious tradition.
  • 2. The Birth of Humanism and Individualism in Learning: Renaissance scholars engaged in a new philosophy of learning, that of Humanism, which emphasized the "humane" literature of the ancient classical writers who had regarded man as a living person interacting in a vital, dynamic world. These "Humanist" scholars initially studied rhetoric, or literary prose composition and exposition. They soon began to delve into other areas such as history, astronomy, physics, mathematics, chemistry, medicine, poetry, philosophy, politics, and the fine arts. The entire focus of scholarship thus shifted away from otherworldly contemplations to more mundane, or secular ones. Thus, by extension, the focus was away from God and religion, to man and society. Individualism became the byword of the Humanists. Whatever study contributed to the better understanding of the individual in his life in the here-and-now was fodder for the Humanists. Renaissance individualism was characteristized by the search for great heroes and great accomplishments--the person was elevated over the spirit.
  • 3. The Ideal of the "Renaissance Man:" The ideal Renaissance man was one who had an insatiable curiosity, broad interests and many talents. He should be the master of all he undertook or studied, and he should be engaged in studying many things. He should work toward developing a sharp, critical, questioning mind which did not rely on unquestioning faith; and, he should work toward maximizing his potential throughout his lifetime. Even now, we have a certain awe and respect for someone who is talented in several different pursuits simultaneously. The most famous Renaissance men during the time were Lorenzo de Medici "The Magnificent" of Florence--capitalist, banker, politician, and patron of the arts; Leonardo daVinci--painter, sculptor, architect and inventor; Michaelangelo--painter and sculptor; Galileo--physics (discovered the law of falling objects), mathematics (dynamics and motion), astronomy (developed the telescope and produced evidence to support Copernicus' theory that the Earth revolves around the sun); and, Niccolo Machiavelli--formulated early principles of scientific statesmanship and founded the modern study of political science. Other notables are Dante (Divine Comedy); Petrarch ("the Father of Humanism"); Boccaccio (The Decameron).
• B. Why the Renaissance Began in the Italian City-States: As was mentioned in the previous lecture, the Italian city-states of Venice, Genoa, and Florence had had a head start in the creation of wealth in the aftermath of the Crisis of the 14th Century. Obviously, Italy was the initial center of the Renaissance because the ruins and remains of the Roman Empire stimulated curiosity about this past civilization. In addition, these city-states were proximate to the advanced civilizations of the Byzantines, Muslim Arabs, and Ottoman Turks, with whom they were impressed and from whom they received new ideas. Indeed, these eastern civilizations had been the repository of much of western Europe's culture and learning since the collapse of Roman rule. Many Renaissance scholars found, to their surprise, that copies of supposedly long-lost ancient Greek or Roman texts could be found written in Arabic script in some Islamic library in the Muslim world. The vast quantities of money flowing into these city-states from their middleman control of trade goods destined for western European markets freed the newly wealthy classes to enjoy the leisurely pursuit of knowledge and allowed the educated to fancy themselves patrons of the arts. Most of the great works of Renaissance art and civic beautification projects were commissioned by rich Renaissance men who wanted to be surrounded by the things they had studied in books. The Renaissance also stimulated the development of a new form of economic organization--capitalism; while, in turn, capitalism allowed for the further evolution of the Renaissance.
  • 1. The Development of Capitalism: Capitalism is the economic system in which private individuals invest money in order to make more money. They let their money work for them. This springs from a natural human impulse--whatever their form of government--to make a profit and to advance themselves and their families. The capitalistic motive has always existed; however, after the fall of the Roman Empire, western civilization disintegrated and money all but went out of circulation for hundreds of years. At the height of the Crusades in the 12th and 13th centuries, soldiers returning from the Holy Lands not only brought back tales of the great and wonderful Muslim civilization they fought against but they also brought back a taste for earstern trade goods such as spices and silks. The Italian city-states gained notariety both for their work in ferrying the Crusaders from Europe over to Constantinople and the Holy Lands and for coming back on the return voyage loaded with those eastern goods. With the sack of a fellow Christian city, Constantinople, during the Fourth Crusade in 1204, the Venetians gained control over the failing Byzantine Empire for the next 50 years, together with all its wealth and its control over the east-west caravan routes. Thus, the Venetians became the earliest of the Italian city-states to gain the capital neccessary to finance both the Renaissance and overseas expansion. Even following their ouster from Constantinople in 1261, the Venetians continued, by virtue of their superior fleet, to control the sea-based trade routes and maintain dominance in the eastern Mediterranean, Adriatic, Aegean, and Black Seas. Genoa and Florence soon followed suit. During the Renaissance, Italian merchants began to accumulate vast fortunes from east-west trade, they looked for ways to invest their capital.
  • 2. Early Investment Opportunities: They began by lending it to various kings, who were always strapped for cash, so they could raise their own paid armies, thus liberating them from dependence on the feudal nobility for the raising of troops. This political dynamic was responsible for the ultimate ascendency of European monarchs over their aristocracy which not only caused the further decline of feudalism, but led to the period of political absolutism of the 17th century. Not coincidentally, there was a veritable explosion of great monarchs of the 15th and 16th centuries, many of whom were contemporaries of each other: Ivan the Terrible, Suleyman the Magnificent, Henry VIII & Elizabeth I, Francis I, Philip II, Charles V, Shah Ismail. Renaissance capitalists also invested in newfangled enterprises, the earliest precursors of the corporation--the Chartered Trading Company and the Joint Stock Company. These new organizations would get involved in brand-new overseas investment opportunities.
• C. The Renaissance Moves Northward: By the middle of the 16th century, Italy had begun to decline as a center of the Renaissance. By then, most of the important trade routes were via the Atlantic, therefore the Mediterranean declined as an entrepot for eastern goods. Thus, most of the more notable advances of this movement began to be made in the Netherlands, France, and England, while Portugal and Spain took the early lead in overseas exploration. As the Renaissance shifted northward, its character changed, coming to differ significantly from the Italian in several respects.
  • 1. Northern (Religious) Humanism: The classical studies that had been introduced to the north by students who had studied in Italy brought with it the Humanist bent in philosophy. Both northern and southern Humanism rejected medieval scholarship and valued classical civilization; however, the north was less concerned with sensuality, aesthetics, and the enjoyment of life, which had characterized the Italian Renaissance. Ironically, northern Humanism became more religious in nature and was concerned with purifying the Christian religion and encouraging a return to Simple Christian Piety. The northern Humanists attacked the abuses of the Church; they deemphasized ritual observance as the core of relgious life; they worked to refine the Bible by going back to the original Hebrew and Greek texts; and, in education, Classicism became the paramount style--education was changed to favor what came to be known as the "Humanities," from the Humanists' interest in classical civilizations.
  • 2. The Invention of Printing: The northern Humanists' desire to reform the Bible and attack the abuses of the Church naturally led them to conclude that the public ought to be able to read the Bible for themselves and thus be liberated from church dictates. Toward those ends, a German printer by the name of Johann Gutenberg invented movable type and created the first mass-produced copy of the Bible in 1450. These Gutenberg Bibles circulated widely and were printed in the vernacular--common native languages. Soon, all manner of literature, most of it directed toward self-help ("how to" books), cookbooks, and dime novels (the "Blue Books") all were tremendously popular. In addition, northern Renaissance literature seemingly became more nostalgic as it began to feature elements of medieval popular culture.
  • 3. Political Changes: In the area of politics, the northern Renaissance saw an increase in pomp and ceremony which was commensurate with the rise of the proto-absolutist national monarchies. Also, the more independence European monarchs gained from their feudal aristocracy, the more they became interested in military contests and conquest, both in Europe and abroad as they gained overseas empire. Finally, and probably most importantly, the northern European Renaissance witnessed these newly powerful, independent monarchs' first attempts to gain control over the Catholic churches within their realms. This contest for preeminence between the church and the state in European politics will be known as the Reformation.

---

Lecture 5:  Sixteenth Century Europe:  Cultural Changes--The Reformation.

• A. The Causes of the Reformation: The Reformation, or the challenge to papal authority, was inevitable as conditions changed in Europe as a result of the Renaissance.
  • 1. Widening Horizons--Individualism & Nationalism: As social, physical, and intellectual horizons widened, the Catholic Church was increasingly seen to be inadequate for the changing times. The emphasis on individualism and the corporeal (rather than spiritual) world, the new focus on nationalism and capitalism, and, the spread of the printing press and vernacular Bibles to an increasingly literate public all threatened the position of the Church.
  • 2. Resistance from National Monarchies: It could not continue to be both a religious and a political institution, because the newly emergent powerful monarchs and their rising nationalities would not accept political interference from outside their own boundaries: directives from Rome might conflict with national interests. For example, the Church tried citizens in their own courts; it owned vast amounts of land in various countries; and, was exempt from many domestic taxes. Kings also disliked the moral curbs placed on their policies and behaviors.
  • 3. Capitalists' Concerns: In addition, Renaissance interest in capitalism promoted the idea that strong national governments could better protect trade and profit than a far away Church; and, the business classes came to resent any of their national wealth that was siphoned off by tithes to Rome; and, came to severely criticize and resist the canonical prohitions against the taking of interest on loans, and the concept of the profit motive itself. In short, the northern Renaissance became the cancer that ate away at, and ultimately destroyed, the foundations of Europe's religious unity.
• B. Earlier Threats to Church Influence: In 1303, the Pope, Boniface VIII asserted papal supremacy over the French king, Philip IV's attempt to tax the church on French soil. Philip responded by taking the Pope prisoner; and shortly afterward, a Frenchman, Clement V, became Pope and moved the papal see to Avignon. From then until 1378, the popes all lived at Avignon and this period in history is known as the "Babylonian Captivity." In the interim, a great deal of anti-papal sentiment had been growing. In 1378, Pope Gregory XI's decision to return to Rome precipitated a crisis known as the Great Schism in which several competing popes were elected by their own factions in their respective countries. Finally, in 1417, as a result of the Conciliar Movement, the Council of Constance (1414-1417)was convened and the Great Schism was healed with the election of a pope who satisfied all disputants. This debacle did much to damage the prestige of the papacy among many Europeans.
  • 1. Abuses Within the Church: Even popes had become patrons of the arts as a result of the Renaissance and they needed money to finance their collections. They therefore began the practice of simony (the sale of church offices) to the highest bidder as a means of expanding their income. Not only were the clergy thus elected unfit for their duties, but there were many cases in which a person held several Church offices at the same time.In addition, many clergymen ignored their vows of celibacy and openly kept mistresses on the side. There was also the famous problem of the sale of dispensations and indulgences. A dispensation was a remission from Church laws which permitted a person to do something normally against canon law (like marrying one's cousin); while an indulgence was a remission from punishment due to sins forgiven during confession. The theory was that the souls of people who had committed venal (rather than mortal) sins had to spend a certain time after death in an intermediate mini-Hell called Purgatory. There they were to be "purged" of those sins in preparation for salvation. The living could "give" a "contribution" to the Church for an indulgence which could shorten the time their dead relative spent in Purgatory. Finally, there was the sale of false sacred relics which the Church passed off as authentic. Noah's Ark could have been built with pieces of the True Cross. The income from these sources allowed the Church to finance the building of St. Peter's Cathedral in Rome. The public came to believe that the Church cared more about its own financial wellbeing than their spiritual one.
  • 2. Various Early "Heretical" Movements: In the 14th and 15th centuries, there were several attempts at reform that, although ultimately failed, did pave the way for the Reformation. The most important of these early reformers were:
    • a. John Wycliffe (1320-84), a priest and theologian at Oxford who attacked the Church because of its wealth, its political power, and the worldliness of its clergy. He denied the supremacy of the Pope; believed in the primacy of the Scriptures; denied transubstantiation; expressed his opposition to war; and, condemned various practices of the Church such as the sacraments, confession, pilgrimage, and clerical celibacy. He believed in predestination and also translated the Bible into English which was against Church doctrin, into order to enable the common people to read it for themselves and gain guidance by it. His followers were known as the Lollards, and after his death, they were ruthlessly persecuted and driven underground where their movement survived until the advent of the Reformation. Another pre-Reformation radical was
    • b. Jan Huss (1369-1415), a Bohemian, or Czech, priest who picked up Wycliffe's teachings in order to spread them throughout Central Europe. Huss was promised safe passage by the Council of Constance which desired only to question him. The Council treacherously reneged on its promise when Huss arrived, and promptly excommunicated, arrested, and tried him as a heretic. He was found guilty and was burned at the stake. Huss' supporters jumpstarted the Hussite Wars (1419-34) a series of rebellions that were ultimately suppressed by the Holy Roman Emperor's armies.
• C. Martin Luther (1483-1546) Starts the Reformation: Martin Luther was born in Saxony, in central Germany. Because from an early age he was convinced that he was damned, he became an Augustinian friar and professor of theology at the University of Wittenberg. As a Catholic monk, he practiced the traditional penances but remained uneasy about his salvation. Thus, Luther began to question certain aspects of Christianity, such as the sinfulness of the individual vs. the justice of God. How does a sinful person attain the righteousness necessary to gain salvation? He deduced that sinners couldn't earn salvation through good works and attention to sacraments. Human salvation comes from faith alone, through the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus Christ. This led him to question other aspects of Church practices, such as simony, pluralism, the sale of indulgences, and clerical celebacy.
  • 1. The Ninety-five Theses: Since Luther believed that monetary donations had no control over salvation, when papal agents came to Germany in 1517 to further the sale of indulgences, Luther responded by nailing his Ninety-five Theses to the door of the Wittenberg Cathedral. These Theses made statements about, and challenged the sale of, indulgences. The Theses made him the hero of religiously discontented groups who gravitated around Luther and encouraged him to broaden his attack. Also, townsmen supported Luther because they believed that he accepted the concept of making money. However, at the time, Luther was attempting to encourage reform of the Church, not its division. At any rate, he went on to deny the authority of the Pope; and, insisted on the final authority of the Bible which individuals should be able to read for themselves. In other words, Luther advocated a "priesthood of all believers." He also appealed to the princes of the German principalities to undertake these reforms if the Church wouldn't do it. He also took the opportunity to renounce his vow of celebacy and married an ex-nun who agreed with his philosophy. In response, Pope Leo X excommunicated him in 1520.
  • 2. The Diet of Worms: In 1521, Luther was ordered to appear before the general assembly of German princes (300 of them!) of the Holy Roman Empire, known as the Diet, in the city of Worms. He was to explain his beliefs while they were to consider action against him. Luther wanted to encourage their assistance; however, the princes, were afraid of both the Pope and Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V. Thus caught in the middle, they were reluctant to openly support Luther, but secretly, they saw an opportunity to increase their own power if the Church could be curbed. Charles V, a conservative who wanted to maintain his own power base, was firmly behind the Pope and managed to get the princes to ask Luther to recant: he refused and the princes were forced to declare Luther a heretic and passed a law outlawing him and his teachings. He was able to go into hiding because some of his princely friends worked behind the scenes to hide him out for nearly a year. Ultimately, however, the Lutheran Reformation was successful in Germany because the princes were crypto-reformist themselves and stalled Charles' pro-Catholic efforts; and, Charles himself, was distracted by his rivalry with the French over wars of conquest in Italy.
  • 3. Popular Revolts and the Spread of Lutheranism: Peasants saw Luther's attack on authority as a sanction for rebellion; and thus galvanized, they organized themselves into a separate church, the Protestant, or Lutheran, church. Lutheranism spread quickly from Germany into the rest of Scandinavia, all of which established National Protestant, or Lutheran, Churches. Unfortunately, the act of denying the authority of the Pope led to bloodshed. In the Peasants' Rebellion, peasant leaders in Germany took the opportunity to demand better conditions and, united under the Lutheran banner, they attempted to overthrow serfdom. Likewise, in the Knights' War, German princes declared themselves to be Lutheran and used it as an excuse to seize Church lands and plunder the Catholics' wealth. This situation was denounced by Luther, who believed these uprisings were actually threatening the legitimacy of his message. Finally, in 1555, the Holy Roman Emperor was forced to agree to the Peace of Augsburg, which allowed for popular sovereignty among the princes as to which religion they and their subjects would declare themselves to be.

Lecture 6: Lecture Protestants, Catholics and the Wars of Religion.

• While Lutheranism was essentially sober, restrained, and moderate in nature as it spread throughout Germany and Scandinavia, the Protestant wave produced far reaching religious change in other areas in Europe. In this, the extremist second phase of Protestantism, the tone became radicalized, totalitarian, and intolerant.
• A. The Increasing Radicalization of the Movement: In Switzerland, two individuals, Ulrich Zwingli (1448-1531) and John Calvin (1509-1564) contributed to Protestantism.
  • 1. Ulrich Zwingli: Zwingli, a vicar in Zurich, started the movement and drew his main support from the guilds in Switzerland. His theological ideas differed in two main respects from Luther's. First, Luther had kept 2 sacraments, baptism and the Eucharist, in Lutheranism but Zwingli regarded even these last two as meaningless symbols, thus he discarded them. Second, Zwingli advocated revolution. His brand of religion was called "Reformed Protestantism," and advocated a union of church and state, but it caused such tensions to develop between the Protestants and Catholics in Switzerland that civil war broke out in 1531. The Catholics won out but Zwingli was captured and executed in the fighting. Both sides signed a peace treaty in 1531 resembling that of the Lutheran Knights' War in which each canton was allowed to decide its own religion.
  • 2. John Calvin: However, the most powerful of the new crop of Protestants was John Calvin. He was a French lawyer and itinerant preacher who was forced to escape to Geneva in 1536 because his ideas were so radical. While he was unsuccessful in his native country, his ideas took off once he was able to broadcast them from abroad. He thus became the leader of the French Reformation from Switzerland. Unlike Lutheranist nationalism, Calvin's message was agressively international and missionary in its approach; it was willing to use the military when necessary; and, it made the state subservient to the church only because Calvin didn't consider himself a secular leader but a religious one, and thus, his political constructs were self-servingly designed to enhance his own religious ambitions.
  • 3. Terrible Idiosyncracies Creep into Calvin's Message: Calvin referred to the scriptures more frequently and avidly than Luther had; interpreted them more narrowly; and, enforced his interpretations more rigidly. In other words, since Calvin's own personality was variously dogmatic, monomoniacal, and absolutist, the church he envisioned developed likewise. Because of this, as Calvinism spread, it was able to maintain a great deal of uniformity because most of its clergy were trained in Geneva. At any rate, Calvin's church allowed the general congregation to participate in church functions and to make decisions about its government within a body known as the Presbytery. But above this body there was a hierarchy of courts which turned out a network of espionage agents who not only undertook the surveillance of public morality with ruthless efficiency but, as overlapping agencies, spied on one another as well. The most well-known doctrine of Calvinism was that of Predestination, or the idea that God, who knows the past, present, and future, must know beforehand which people will be saved or damned. Calvin personally viewed man as sinful and corrupt and not deserving of salvation, but those who are saved are known as "The Elect." One could gain knowlege of whether or not he was among the elect by working hard and living a sternly moral, religious life. If he became rich and successful in his lifetime, it was a sign that God had favored him to be among the elect after his death. This facet of Calvinism advanced the development of capitalism by introducing the idea of The Work Ethic: work was not only a yardstick of electhood, it was also a way of avoiding idleness which was the playground of the Devil.
  • 4. Calvin's Theocracy: While he was in Geneva, Calvin was invited to help organize a Protestant Church which gave him his first opportunity to try out his ideas. Because of continued religious unrest there, the city council invested him with strong political powers. As a result, by 1555, Calvin became the absolute dictator of a totalitarian theocracy. He forbade any outward show of ostentation; dancing and merrymaking. He also created an Index of Prohibited Books. Geneva became a city ruled by a church, since only those whom Calvin regarded as the faithful could vote and hold office. A contemporary wrote, "never was such a busybody in a position of high authority." Being a dictator, Calvin tolerated no opinion but his own; and, as a result, in 5 years 58 people were executed as heretics and 70 others were banished.
  • 5. The Radical Extremist Wing of Protestants: The most extremist of the Protestant sects were the Anabaptists, which comes from a Greek word meaning "to baptize again." They rejected the practice of child baptism and required members to be baptized again as adults. The Anabaptists, who came mostly from the worker and peasant classes, wanted to return to the practices of the early Christian church which had been an association of voluntary believers with no connection to the state. They gained control of the city of Munster in Germany and forced all other Catholics and Protestants to either convert or get out. They then abolished all private property, established a communist state, and followed Old Testament practices, including polygamy. A combined army of Protestants and Catholics defeated the Anabaptists in 1535. They subsequently adopted pacifism and avoided all contact with the state. Their descendants are the Mennonites (founded by Menno Simons, 1496-1561), and the Amish. (The Quakers are a 17th century offshoot of Puritan Separatists, as were the Pilgrims, and Shakers are an 18th century offshoot of the Quakers).
• B. The Spread of Calvinism Around Europe: Strangely enough, many people around Europe were eager to adopt Calvinism.
  • 1. In France: French Calvinists, the Huguenots, had been subjected to repeated persecutions, banishments, and wholesale massacres since 1517. In spite of this, French Calvinism spread, even into the upper classes. However, since the bulk of them were an important middle class element, they had been contributing greatly to the French economy. With every persecution, the French economy would take a nosedive. In addition, a total of 9 civil wars broke out between 1562 and 1589, which would also contribute to economic chaos. At one particularly brutal event, the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, some 20,000 Huguenots were slaughtered at the order of the Queen Mother, Catherine de Medici. So, in 1598, the new king Henry IV, a Huguenot, issued the Edict of Nantes which granted toleration to the Huguenots. The revocation of the Edict in 1685 by Louis XIV led to a massive flight of 500,000 Huguenots from France to various Protestant countries in Europe and then on to the north American colonies. France was crippled by this brain drain for generations to come. Their civil rights weren't restored until 1787.
  • 2. In Holland and Scotland: In Holland, the Dutch Reformed Church became the dominant dominant religion and it preached Calvinism. The official state religion of Scotland became Presbyterianism, which was established by John Knox, a disciple of Calvin's back in Switzerland.
  • 3. In England: In England, Henry VIII (1491-1547), broke with the Catholic church over the Pope's refusal to grant him a divorce from Catherine of Aragon. Parliament passed the Act of Supremacy (1534) which established an independent Anglican Church of England (whose practices were still largely Catholic) and made the king its head. This act was welcomed by most Englishmen who were infected by the Protestant movement taking place on the continent. His daughter Mary I was a Catholic, like her mother, and tried by force to restore the old religion, thus earning her the nickname of Bloody Mary. During the course of his second daughter Elizabeth I's reign, Protestant Anglicanism was firmly established in England.
  • 4. The Results of the Protestant Movement: In the long run, the Protestant Reformation and its philosophers, had a profound effect on the development of other movements such as capitalism, liberalism, democracy, and nationalism by the way they interpreted the Bible, the role of the church in society, and the people's role in the church. Politically, the Reformation was a victory of the state over the church, which ultimately led to the separation of church and state. Calvinism was important in this movement because it opened the avenues by which the average layperson could participate in the decisionmaking of an institution that supposedly had authority over him, thus accustoming average people to the idea of participatory government. Protestantism was therefore a major step toward the development of Democracy because the essentially Humanist base of its philosophy emphasized the rights of the individual, and provided an important precedent of successful revolt against powerful authority. On the negative side, the Reformation broke down the monolithic power of the Catholic church and thus paved the way for the development of political absolutism
• C. The Wars of Religion in Europe: One of the major results of the Reformation was the end of religious unity in Europe. Henceforth, Italy, Spain, France, Belgium, Ireland, southern Germany, Austria, Poland, and Hungary remained primarily Catholic; while, Holland, England, Scotland, northern Germany, Switzerland, and Scandinavia became Protestant. An immediate result of this division was the growth of religious intolerance during the 16th and 17th centuries. A series of religious wars broke out, some of which we've mentioned in the course of talking about the Reformation: the civil wars in Germany with the Lutherans; the civil war in Switzerland with Zwingli and Calvin; the civil war in France involving the Huguenots. But the most famous of these religious wars was the 30 Years' War (1618-48). The conflict was between the Protestants (led by Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden) and the Catholics (led by the Hapsburg rulers of Austria). Ultimately, it became a dynastic struggle as the French (pro-Protestant) and the Spanish (pro-Catholic) got sucked into the conflict. The battleground was the German lands of the Holy Roman Empire. It was the most brutal and destructive war up until the world wars of the 20th century and nearly caused the economic and political collapse of Germany. The war ended with the Treaty of Westphalia which resulted in France becoming more powerful, the emergence of the Netherlands and England as international players, and the gradual decline of Spain.
• D. The Catholics' Counter-Reformation: The Counter-reformation began in Spain with the introduction of the
  • 1. The Inquisition: The Holy Office, or the Inquisition had its roots in the 13th century. However, it was reconvened in 1492 after the Spanish Reconquista as a patriotic move in order to purge the country of Moslems and Jews and thus unify the state, but also to achieve higher standards for the clergy and stamp out heresies. This Inquisition was carried forward with the advent of Protestantism and was used elsewhere, in France and Italy, where Catholic influence was strong.
  • 2. New Monastic Orders: In addition, the Catholic Church created several new monastic orders such as the Theatines, the Capuchins (who were a branch of the Franciscans), and Ursulines. The most famous of these, however, was the Society of Jesus, or Jesuits, founded in 1540 by Ignatius Loyola, a Spanish former soldier. The Jesuits, organized with intense discipline and militancy, dedicated themselves to win back Protestants, combat heresy, and spread Catholicism through missionary activity abroad. They became the paramilitary "shock troops" of the Catholic church. They actively involved themselves in politics and used intrigue and even force whenever necessary.
  • 3. The Council of Trent 1545-63: The Church also convened the Council of Trent in 1545 which not only undertook extensive internal reforms between 1545-1563, but also published its own Index of Prohibited Books in 1557. While the Inquisition and even the Counter-reformation itself petered out by the end of the 16th century, the Jesuits continued strong for over 200 years.

Lecture 7: The Ottoman Empire and the Muscovy.

• A. Early Russian History, 6th-15th Centuries: In the 6th and 7th century, Viking traders, known as the Varangians, entered the loosely, tribally organized Slavic area that corresponds to present-day Kiev and established an overland trade route that stretched as far south as Constantinople, in the Byzantine Empire. The Slavs contributed timber, caviar and fish, furs, and amber to this growing trading nexus.
  • 1. Rurik Establishes Kievan Rus: As a result of contacts with the Byzantines, the Slavs were able to establish various governments along the main trade route south, and the legendary Slavic merchant Rurik founded a tsardom in Kiev in 855, thus establishing the state known as Kievan Rus. Rurik and his aristocratic descendants ruled Russia until 1598. Since Kiev's main focus was toward Constantinople, it was natural that it would derive much of its civilization from the Byzantines.
  • 2. Russia Converts to Christianity: For example, in the 9th century, the Greek Orthodox Saints Cyril and Methodius went north from Byzantium in order to Christianize the Slavs. In so doing, they had to create an alphabet for the Slavs, based on the Greek alphabet and named Cyrillic, so they could record and transmit the liturgy. Prince Vladimir I, who converted to Christianity in 989, ordered his people to do likewise, and thus the Russian Orthodox Church was founded. Unfortunately, Russia did not have the rule of primogeniture to keep feudal fiefdoms intact, thus holdings became increasingly fragmented. As a result, by the 12th century, Kiev began to decline as rival princes set up their own regional governments and disputes arose over succession to the throne.
  • 3. Mongol Invasion: Since the Russian aristocracy, or Boyars, were less powerful than their feudal counterparts in the west, Kievan Rus was unable to fight off the Mongol invasion of 1236. This catastrophic event brought about the demise of Kievan Rus as the Mongols of the Golden Horde under Batu Khan created their own government and further separated Russia from contacts with the west. All trade and communication with the west ceased for the next 2 centuries, and Russian culture became more influenced by Oriental patterns during the Mongol period. As a result, Russia missed out on the major advances of the Renaissance and, as the Mongols encouraged its political fragmentation as well, Russians lost whatever nationalistic sentiment they may have had.
• B. The Rise of Muscovy: Since Kiev was on the steppes, it was open to invasion; therefore, resistance to the Mongols had to come from another quarter. Moscow, which was in the forest thickets on the Volga riverine system, became the new center. Its prince, Ivan Kalitsa ("Moneybags"), was the chief tax farmer for the Mongols in his region. He kept a portion of the take and thus Moscow gradually began to dominate the entire northwest. In 1480, the Grand Duke Ivan III "The Great" refused to send on the annual tribute of taxes, defied a Mongol army sent against him, and soon afterward, established Moscow as the capital of a new Russian state.
  • 1. Ivan IV Grozny, or "The Terrible" (1533-1584): His successor, Ivan IV, became the first Tsar of Russia; and, under his leadership, Muscovy was soon able to expand eastward, driving out the Mongols, reconquering old Russian territories and incorporating new Siberian lands. Ivan was responsible for establishing many of the institutions that we come to recognize as uniquely Russian. For example, he concentrated political power and established the absolute autocracy which came to characterize tsarism. The tsar was known as "Tsar Batushka," or "little father." He knew best and his will was unquestioned and, as such, he had the power of life and death over his subjects without being subject to any laws himself. The present governments continue to rule with the same kind of autocratic absolutism. In addition, in order to fight the Mongols, Ivan had to give total control of the peasantry over to the Boyars, thus establishing the institution of serfdom in Russia at precisely the same time it was going out of style in the west. This would contribute to retarding Russia's economic development well into the 19th and 20th centuries. And finally, since Constantinople had fallen to the Ottoman Turks in 1453, the new Russian state no longer had a Byzantine Empire to emulate. Ivan therefore invented the theory that Russia was heir to Byzantine civilization, which had itself been heir to Roman civilization. Moscow became the "Third Rome," hence Ivan's adoption of the term "tsar," or "caesar," and from his time onward, Russians have used their mission to protect Orthodox Christians as an excuse to meddle abroad.
  • 2. Ivan's Increasing Distemper: In his later years, Ivan became increasingly violent and tyrannical. Bouts of insane fury alternated with periods of repentence and prayer. Some claim it was because of the abuse and humiliation he suffered at the hands of the Boyars while he was a child. But, as an old man, he retaliated by creating the Oprichnina, a corps of secret police whom he alone controlled. He set these Oprichniks against the Boyars with sadistic ruthlessness and instituted a reign of terror until he had crushed them. In one particular fit of rage, he even murdered his own son and heir, the very able and promising Ivan. Ivan the Terrible may have also been married at least seven times; each time he tired of a wife, he'd either force her into a convent or arrange to have her murdered.
  • 3. The Time of Troubles and the Rise of the Romanovs: Upon Ivan's death, he was temporarily succeeded by his weak and incompetant son Feodor I (1584-98). With his death, an assembly of Boyars elected Ivan's favorite, Boris Godunov to the throne, but with his death in 1605, civil war broke out. During this "Time of Troubles," political anarchy reigned since no single Boyar could gain control of the throne and 4 different pretenders (the false Dmitris) arose, all claiming to be the long-lost son of Ivan the Terrible. Finally, by 1613, all sides were sick of the political chaos and even the Boyars were moved to elect the 17 year old nephew of Ivan, Michael Romanov, as tsar. His heirs ruled Russia until 1917.
• C. Early Ottoman History, 6th-15th Centuries: The nomadic Turkic peoples began to migrate westward out of Mongolia and Central Asia sometime in the 6th-7th centuries. The first civilization they came in contact with were the Muslims of the Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad. Due to their barbarism and warlike nature, the Turkic tribesmen (who were pagans and animists) were converted to Islam and gradually recruited into the Caliphal armies as mercenary soldiers.
  • 1. The Seljuks and Ottomans: By the 900s, the tribe of the Seljuk Turks had come to dominate the Caliphate as secular rulers, their general having been given the title of Sultan (Commander of the Faithful). By the 1200s, other waves of nomadic Turkic tribes had also entered the Caliphate, and these groups were stationed on the march borderlands between the Christian Byzantine Empire and Muslim Abbasid lands in Asia Minor. The Ottoman Turks, led by a semi-legendary tribal chieftain named Osman Bey, was one among many such leaders whom the Seljuk sultans had granted a feudal fiefdom sometime between 1280 and 1300. His instructions were to make religious war, or Jihad, against the infidel from that fiefdom.
  • 2. Gradual Destruction of the Byzantine Empire: By the 14th century, the Byzantine Empire was no longer in a position to push the Turks back, thus Osman and his successors were fabulously successful in eating away at the shrinking Byzantine state by bypassing Constantinople and conquering Thrace, thus cutting the capital off from Europe. Dynastic struggles within the Byzantine court contributed to its demise as the Ottoman Turks were recruited by one or another of the contenders to the throne. By 1453, the Ottomans had not only conquered all the way up into the Danube Valley, but had captured Constantinople, as well, under Sultan Mehmed II "The Conqueror."
  • 3. The Nature of Ottoman Administration: The Ottoman Empire was able to skyrocket to power and prominence in world affairs because they instituted several novel approaches to statecraft.
    • a. First, the Ottomans were lucky in having produced a long line of able rulers who were also field commanders of the army. As princes, most of these sultans had gained military and political experience by being taken by their fathers on campaign as wing commanders and by being posted to provincial duty as governmors and administrators. They thus had a firm grasp on the nature and extent of their imperial duties upon becoming sultan themselves.
    • b. Second, the Ottomans instituted a religio-political system on their subject peoples called the Millet System. This system separated the various subjects not by nationality or language, but by religion. There was the Muslim, Orthodox Christian, Jewish, and Armenian millets; and, each of these had a religious head: the Grand Mufti, the Patriarch of Constantinople, the Grand Rabbi, and the Catholicos, respectively. Each of these individuals was responsible for maintaining order within his own millet and functioned as the two-way conduit between the sultan and his subjects. These confessional groups were kept segregated from one another in their own neighborhoods in the city and were required through sumptuary laws to maintain a strict dress code which identified their millet affiliation. When confessionally mixed groups met on the city streets, they could tell the religion and status of others and whether or not they should bow or concede or take the right of way. This kept mixups from happening and prevented conflicts from breaking out between relgious groups.
    • c. Third, the Ottomans discovered the talents and abilities of each of their subject peoples and made good use of them. The Greeks, for example, had a talent for seamanship and languages. They thus predominated in the Ottoman navy and went into the Ottoman administration and ambassadorial corps as record keepers, translators, and emissaries. After 1492, the Ottomans sent an invitation to the Sephardic Jews of Spain to come and settle in the empire which they did by the thousands. The Ottomans welcomed them, gave them millet status, and derived great benefit from their trading and merchanting skills. The Serbs, Montenegrins, Albanians, and Circassians excelled at the art of war and were thus drafted into two Ottoman inventions, the Janissary Corps through the mechanism of the Devshirme. The Devshirme was also known as the "blood tax," or "the levy of boys," because the Ottomans would send out agents into Christian territories and collect a certain number of boys, ages 7-10; bring them back to Constantinople; convert them to Islam; and then, as slaves of the sultan, send them to the Palace school to learn the Ottoman language and the art of war and statecraft. Those who excelled became members of the Ottoman bureaucracy (tax collectors, record keepers, administrators, governors, generals, viziers and advisors to the sultan). Those who didn't excel went into the military units--the least able became bashibozuks or akinji (berserkers and raiders), then the yaya and müsellem (infantry and cavalry), and finally, the elite Janissary Corps. This group was given special prestige and often served as the personal force of the sultan himself.
    • d. Fourth, the Ottoman sultans began the practice of succession by fratricide, which allowed not the eldest, but the strongest and most cunning, to succeed to the throne. The other princes would immediately be put to death so they couldn't become a party to usurpation plots. This grim, but effective mechanism was responsible for keeping the sultanate strong and in the hands of the most capable candidate through the course of 10 sultans. In addition, the Ottomans maintained large harems of women from around the world. This practice prevented inbreeding which was common among the royal houses around the rest of Europe. And, to keep the women in this polygamous society from becoming involved in various palace conspiracies to put forward their own sons as "heirs apparent," the sultans dispensed with the practice of having a primary "queen" and secondary wives. As an alternative, the reigning sultan maintained all of his women as co-equal slave concubines, none of whom knew whose son would ultimately be favored by circumstance to become the next sultan.
    • e. Fifth, and finally, the Ottomans were among the first to take advantage of new military technologies as they came on the market. They were among the first to create whole corps dedicated to the new weaponry: they created an artillery corps (Topçu), grenadier (barutçu), engineering (Mühindizlik) and musketeer corps (Tufanci). When they lacked experts in a field, they imported them from abroad to teach the new techniques.
• D. The Golden Age of the Ottomans Under Süleyman the Magnificent (1520-66): The nine previous sultans were all responsible for contributing to the grandeur and splendor of the Ottoman Empire at its height under Süleyman. He represented a pure distillation of the enormous personal power, ruthlessness, talent and energy of all of his successors, combined. Unfortunately, Süleyman took the first steps which would ultimately lead to the dissolution of the Ottoman state. First, he married his favorite concubine, a Ukrainian woman named Roxelana (Hürrem Sultan) who maneuvered her husband to designate her son, Selim, as the heir apparent. Instead of being eliminated in the game of survival of the fittest, he became Selim II, also known as "Selim the Sot." He was a weakling alcoholic who was ruled by his harem, instituting a century-long period known as the Sultanate of the Women. He left affairs of state in the hands of viziers who came to dominate state affairs. And finally, when he died, he designated an heir of his own, and thus, the Empire came to have a traditional system of succession which ultimately led to its demise. Rather than killing off his brothers, the ruling sultan kept these creatures in lifelong house arrest in a series of rooms in the palace known as "The Cage."

Lecture 8:  The Expansion of Europe:  Initial Phase and General effects, 1400-1600.

• Overview: The European discovery of America was a complete accident: a momentous piece of serendipity on the part of men who had set out to look for something else. When it was discovered, nobody wanted it. And most of the exploration for the next 50 years afterwards was done in the hope of finding a way either through it or out around it. And finally, when it was accepted, it ended up being named for a man who had nothing to do with its discovery.
• A. Revival of the Trade Routes: The contacts between Europe and the Far East go back to Greek and Roman antiquity. During the Dark Ages, after the fall of Rome in the 5th century, A.D., the Arabs and Islamic culture prevailed in the Mediterranean: it was they who preserved books and learning, created the first universities, advanced the sciences of mathematics, astronomy, and navigation, and conducted the vast majority of whatever trade there was between Far East and Far West. Crusaders returning from the Holy Lands in the Levant (modern-day Syria, Lebanon, and Israel) from the 11th-13th centuries, came back with glowing reports on the fabulous wealth, variety, and high culture of the Near East. Furthermore, as reports spread, missionaries like the Franciscan Friars who travelled to Persia, India, China, and Japan; and adventurers like the Polo Brothers (Nicolo, Maffeo, and Marco) who returned from visiting the Kublai Khan in China in the 13th century, all managed to revive an East-West trade that had all but disappeared. By 1400, all kinds of luxuries and necessities such as silks, precious stones, porcelain, carpets, knick-knacks, Japanese laquerware, gold and silver, and spices and drugs, were being carried in shipping lanes that ran from Asia to the head of the Persian Gulf. From there, items were unloaded, packed onto camel caravan, taken overland through Baghdad, to Beirut on the Mediterranean. There, they were reloaded onto ships bound for the Italian city-states--Venice, Genoa, and Florence--which acted as the middlemen in the goods' distribution to their final destinations. Along the way, the goods changed hands often and increased in price many times over. Other, more northerly routes such as the Silk Road consisted of long trips by very large camel caravans that crossed the whole of Asia. The Italian middlemen in this trade became merchant princes; while their cities, which monopolized the trade between the West and the Levant, grew into wealthy centers that ushered in the period of the Renaissance.
• B. A Route to the Orient Leads to the New World: During the 15th century, the emerging nations of western Europe--Portugal, Spain, France, and England--became increasingly dissatisfied with the Italian monopoly on Levantine and Far Eastern trade and began to look around for a way to bypass the middlemen. They also objected to the length of time it took for goods to travel by caravan as well as the hazards imposed by predatory bandits along the way. In addition, the balance of trade was becoming increasingly unfavorable for these 4 nations as precious gold and silver supplies drained eastward, while mainly goods came west.
  • 1. Portugal Leads the Way East: Portugal was the first European nation to establish direct contact with the Far East. Its mariners were trained in the school established in 1418 by Prince Henry the Navigator. In 1488, Bartolomeo Diaz sailed down the west coast of Africa and managed to round the Cape of Good Hope, before he was forced to turn back by his mutinous crew. Ten years later, Vasco de Gama attained fame by finally rounding the Horn and reaching India. Magellan landed in the Philippines; and another of his ships completed the first circumnavigation of the globe between 1519 and 1522. By the early 1500s then, Portuguese traders had established trading posts in Africa, India, China, Japan, and the East Indies, making Lisbon a very rich city. And in America, Brazil was accidentally discovered and claimed for Portugal by Pedro Cabral in 1500.
  • 2. Spain Explores Westward to the New World: A very brash, self-confident, and conceited man was Christoforo Colombo, a Genoese sailor. For several years he tirelessly promoted a plan to establish a direct ocean route to the Indies by sailing due west. He figured the distance between the Canary Islands and Japan to be about 2400 miles as the crow flies, rather than the 10,600 miles that it actually was. Nobody really doubted at the time that he could do it, but they were better geographers than he, and they knew their distances. He demanded, among other things, 3 ships and a hereditary title to undertake the voyage, but there were no takers. Finally, Queen Isabella of Spain's intuition came to his aid and she agreed to finance his voyage. He set sail on Aug. 3, 1492 and finally reached the island of San Salvador in the Bahamas on Oct. 12 of that year. In this, and three later voyages Columbus discovered parts of the Americas. Although he was to die in disgrace and neglect because he failed to deliver on his promise to get to the Indies (he died still clinging to his belief that he had discovered some part of the East Indies), he alone predicted the value of the New World for humanity: "By the Divine Will I have placed under the sovereignty of the King and Queen an Other World, whereby Spain, which was reckoned poor, is to become the richest of all countries."
  • 3. Conquistadors and Colonists: Soon, others were also exploring the Americas and the competition became so stiff between Portugal and Spain that Pope Alexander VI was forced to step in and mediate with the Papal Line of Demarcation outlined in the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494), which divided the New World lengthwise in half from the north to the south poles. Spain got the land WEST of this line and Portugal got what was EAST of it. While Spain got control over most of the Western Hemisphere, Portugal made up for it by gaining control over most of the East Indies, India, and Asia, setting up a series of fortresses and trading posts along the sea routes they frequented. Spanish noblemen and gentlemen-adventurers began to swarm over the Americas. Balboa crossed the Isthmus of Panama to the Pacific in 1513, while Ponce de León landed in Florida the same year. The discovery of precious metals ignited a frenzy of gold fever in Spain. Greed changed the Spanish attitude toward the Americas from one of trade to one of ownership as Spaniards everywhere rushed to cash in. Cabeza de Vaca's tales of the Seven Cities of Gold with emerald-studded walls only fueled the fires of conquest. 32 year old Hernando Cortés began the process with his lightning-fast and ruthless conquest of the Aztec Empire at Teotihuacan Mexico between 1519-1521. Like shoppers at a bargain basement sale, others quickly followed in the free-for-all land grab: Pizzaro in Peru (1531), Mendoza in Argentina (1535); DeSoto along the Mississippi (1539-42); Coronado beyond the Rio Grande (1540); and Menendez in Florida (1565). By 1575, 175,000 Spaniards were organized in the Americas to exploit its resources, either Christianize or eliminate the Indians, and remove the gold and silver; and Spain acquired more territory in one generation than Rome had conquered in 5 centuries.
• C. Naming the New World: Amerigo Vespucci, who ran a ships-chandlery business in Florence, outfitted Columbus' voyages. He made several trips to the New World, either as a passenger or junior officer on the ship of one of Columbus' captains. However, in 1504, letters supposedly from him were printed in Florence in which he said a lot of chatty, gossipy, and amusing things, described the customs of the Indians and whatnot, but in which it was intimated that Vespucci himself had been the captain of all four original voyages, and that the first (in which he discovered the continent) took place in 1497--a year before Columbus. A young instructor in France was coming out with a new map of the world, and he was so charmed with the printed letters that he believed Vespucci's story he named the continent after him.
• D. Challenge to Hegemony by France, Holland, and England: Within the space of 15 years France, England, and Holland also made their settlements in the Americas, in the Lesser Antilles, which Columbus discovered but Spain had bypassed in favor of the big islands and the mainland.
  • 1. France: France was beginning to feel its oats as a European power under the rule of Francis I, and served notice in 1515 that it would not permit Spain and Portugal to divide the New World between them. Yet, France's early exploratory efforts were very modest. They based their claims mostly on the fishing they conducted along the Grand Banks, and by the explorations of Verrazano, who sailed along the coast of North America in 1524, exploring from Cape Fear to Newfoundland; Jean Ribaut and René de Laudonnière, who established Fort Caroline on St. John's River, Newfoundland; and Jacques Cartier, who attempted to establish settlements along the St. Lawrence in 1534-35.
  • 2. Netherlands: The Dutch provinces of the Netherlands, like the English, preyed upon Spanish shipping and commerce with America and also managed to strip the Portuguese of their valuable Asian and African trading posts such as Java, Malaya, The Spice Islands, and Ceylon. In fact, in the 17th century, England came to regard the Dutch as their greatest rivals overseas. But the Dutch didn't have any surplus population to export to secure their overseas possessions, thus its merchants were forced to rely upon the strength of their trade with the natives rather than conquest and colonization.
  • 3. England: For the English, a Genoese countryman of Columbus' named Giovanni Caboto (John Cabot), gave England her claim to all territories east of the Rockies and north of Florida in 1497 during the reign of Henry VII. And later, under Elizabeth I, the most important accomplishments affecting the Americas were the privateering activities of Francis Drake aboard his famous ship the Golden Hind. He was knighted by Elizabeth following one voyage in which he brought in some $9 million in pirated gold. Oddly, though, colonization efforts under Elizabeth were slow. Sir Humfrey Gilbert tried unsuccessfully to establish a settlement in Newfoundland in 1583. And Sir Walter Raleigh sent out several colonial expeditions, one of which was the Roanoke Colony of 1587, whose inhabitants simply disappeared. The only clue was a single word, CROATOAN, carved on a fencepost on the abandoned fort. It has been one of the most enduring mysteries in the history of the New World. Although the English were engaged in war with Spain from 1588 (the Year of the Spanish Armada) to 1604, from it England gained the confidence, wealth, and military strength to emerge from its backwater isolation as a major European player with big ambitions.
• E. Weaknesses of the Iberian Overseas Empires: Spain and Portugal eventually suffered under the weight of their respective empires, due mainly to the manner of colonization and subsequent rule. First, rather than working by proxy through charters and grants which insulated the mother country from possible failures, Spain and Portugal both took a direct hand in the establishment of their empires: all finances for the colonies came from and were a drain on the royal treasury, especially during economic downturns. Second, by destroying rather than upgrading the civilizations they encountered, and imposing their own viceroys and bureaucrats (who weren't elected locally, but always sent directly from the mother country) they prevented their possessions from attaining self-sufficiency. Third, by disenfranchising and excluding the natives from participation in self-government, both Powers created a large, silent but resentful underclass which would later work to destabilize the colonial regimes. Fourth, by shortsightedly imposing the encomienda manorial system, then later the hacienda system, and land-bound peasants (at a time when feudalism was on its way out in Europe), Spain and Portugal encumbered their possesions with an outmoded social and economic system, one which continues to handicap Latin America today. Fifth, by not developing the financial and commercial institutions (namely, a market economy) to exploit and market the wealth and produce of their new possessions on a long-term basis, they were stuck with lands that were fairly undeveloped once the rounds of rapaciousness had sucked them dry. And Finally, Spain and Portugal were forced to gradually abandon lucrative trade routes because of the money it was costing to prevent French, Dutch and English privateers (who weren't financed by their respective governments, but who shared the take with them in order to be left alone) and pirates from seizing the cargoes.
• F. Conclusions: The positive aspects of the discovery and colonization of the Americas may be found in the increase in Europe's knowledge about the world, their broadened intellectual horizons, and the Age of Enlightenment these discoveries helped to usher in. The great wealth generated by the colonies made the merchanting profession respectable for the first time, contributed to the growth of the middle classes, made social and class boundaries more fluid, and spelled the end of Feudalism in Europe. Modern capitalism and the market economy owe their existence to the discovery of the New World, while Christianity was brought to the Americas, together with an end to the practice of human sacrifice among the natives. The down-side to this tale is in the price the Indians had to pay for their contact with the Europeans. They and their civilization were either disrupted or destroyed for good. One thing for sure, they were never the same again. Columbus' experiences with the Indians are a good example of what was a pretty repetitive story. Columbus' men had signed on with their captain for the sole purpose of acquiring gold but the Indians didn't bring any in and there wasn't any nearby. The natives had little gold to trade with, and when their appetite for beads and trinkets was quickly satisfied, they simply stopped coming in. Even though the land was good enough to farm on, when Columbus' men found out gold couldn't be gathered off the beaches, they instantly wanted to go home. Thus, in order for Columbus to make a go of his colony of Isabela, he began to require a gold tribute from every native--one which was too high and which they didn't have anyway. Next, he divided up all the land, together with the Indians on it, among the Spanish colonists in a system of forced labor, while he raided other islands for more laborers. Indians who refused to work were either slaughtered or sold as slaves. Within 50 years, the native population of the island of Hispaniola (today's Haiti and Domenican Rep.) which had numbered around 300,000, in 1555 was extinct. Slaves were then imported from Africa to work the sugar and cotton plantations and to dig for gold.

Lecture 9:  The Expansion of Europe:  Overseas Empires and Commercial Development, 1500-1700.

• A. The Commercial and Industrial Ages: The economic history of the modern world may be broken down into two periods. First, there was The Commercial Age from 1500 to 1750, which was characterized by the advent and development of the philosophy of capitalism and the primitive economic system it spawned called Mercantilism. And second, there was The Industrial Age from 1750 to the present, which was characterized by developments in industral techniques, production, and labor which created the Modern Market Economy of true capitalism.. A major philosophical change would take place in the middle of the 18th century which would be nothing short of revolutionary for continued evolution of capitalism.
  • 1. The Meaning of the Commercial Revolution for Europe: During the 16th and 17th centuries, Europe was able to take advantage of all the overseas exploration that was going on. Trade and colonization increased, and capitalism expanded until it encompassed all facets of economic life, pushing other issues such as religion gradually into the background. This period was known as the Commercial Revolution. Trade and commerce increased as new sources of raw materials and new markets opened. The growth of capitalism and the accumulation of funds to invest in large trading enterprises all brought a demand for money to keep up with growing business. In other words: it takes money to make money. This process gained momentum as gold and silver poured into Europe from new discoveries in the Americas and this, in its turn, spurred business and increased the price of goods. In cyclical fashion, as new raw materials poured into production, technological breakthroughs speeded up not only to improve production but to improve the product, as well.
  • 2. Reasons for Exploration: There were several reasons for the earliest voyages of exploration. Of course, there was the renewed interest in the Orient based on the Crusades; there was the motive of bypassing the Italian middlemen states which had accumulated tremendous wealth with their monopoly of the Mediterranean leg of East-West trade; and, there was Europe's desire to maintain a balance of trade and keep its specie reserves from draining eastward. Additionally, however, new maritime technologies such as the invention of the astrolabe to determine latitude and longitude; the magnetic compass; and larger ships with improved rigging and hardware, all came into play. These factors combined with the activities of newly-emergent, Renaissance influenced and humanist-inspired elites created the impetus for exploration.
  • 3. Mercantilism--The Theory: As capitalist notions took hold, the natural by-product of its philosophy was that of Mercantilism, which was the primitive economic belief that there were only a finite amount of resources and wealth in the system; and, that each nation should work to acquire as much of these in order to become as self-sufficient as possible. This was a classic "Zero-sum Game:" whatever one gains, another must lose. The object of this game was, of course, to increase the power of the mother country. As European overseas exploration and hence competition grew, it became imperative to be the first to lay claim to whatever lands were encountered. Any resources discovered in a new land would be lost to the country that didn't take advantage of its opportunity to stake the first claim. Colonies were important in this scenario not only as sources of raw materials for the factories in the mother country, but also as outlets for finished products. The more consumers that could be created, the better it was for trade. However, Europeans did not consider the trade in itself as being valuable; rather, it was what the trade could bring in, which was gold and silver. (SEE BELOW) These two resources were considered to be the only real measure of wealth and power. Mercantilist nations were impressed with the fact that precious metals were in universal demand as the ready means of obtaning other commodities; they therefore attempted to create huge stockpiles of specie as a tangible show of national impressiveness. Besides, whatever gold and silver a nation could hoard was just that much less available to some other nation. The "rule of thumb" for mercantilists was self-sufficiency and exclusivity.
  • 4. Mercantilism--The Practice: In practice, trade existed only to benefit the mother country, and since mercantilists thought there was only a finite amount of trade that could be conducted, governments regulated it in order to bring in the greatest income. As a result, mercantilists looked to the state for protection of their enterprises, and allowed the state, in turn, to regulate commercial activity. The state, therefore, became an organ of business. Thus the governments of Europe passed numerous trade laws which spelled out the rules of the mercantilist economy together with the nature of the relationship of the colony to the mother country. In essence, these laws: maintained high import tariffs to keep out foreign competition; encouraged exports over imports at all times to ensure that the balance-of-trade surplus could be used to acquire gold and silver; all goods destined between the colonies and foreign countries had to go through the mother country first (the Entrepot Principle, which taxed the trade both ways) and, kept all shipping trade in the hands of the mother country's merchant marine. In Britain, these laws were collectively known as the Navigation Acts. In addition, since a certain degree of survivalism and paranoia ruled mercantilist ethics, there was an ever-lengthening list of Enumerated Goods whose export to foreign countries was expressly forbidden. These were goods that could be useful to foreign countries in time of war. Why supply a good that could be used to make war against you?? The list started with goods such as mast timber, tar and pitch, hemp for rigging, and cloth for sailmaking; but, eventually came to include such obscure and arcane items as pig snouts and Wedgewood China.
  • 5. Monopolies: To make these navigation acts work effectively, the government granted monopolies to various enterprises. In Britain, France, and Holland, each of these countries had a company known as the East India Company which had exclusive rights to trade in East Asia. These monopolies excluded foreigners from that enterprise and its area of operations, eliminated domestic competition, and thus got the best returns on investments by instituting price controls.
  • 6. Joint Stock and Proprietary Colonies: Sir Walter Raleigh conducted several failed expeditions to North America, ones which cost him personally upwards of £40,000. The experience nearly bankrupted him. The English learned quickly that the establishment of any colony was a highly expensive business that could financially ruin individuals and small groups. The crown, which was forever broke and dependent on Parliament for funds, was in no better position to finance these ventures. For example, Queen Elizabeth I's annual budget was between £10-20,000 (if she wasn't at war). As a result, more efficient ways of financing colonization evolved very quickly to meet the demands of early colonizers. Very early, therefore, the notion of the corporation or company was developed. Much like corporations today, and in fact, their forerunner, these corporations drew up agreements as to their purpose which was then granted to them by the crown in the form of a royal charter; advertised for venture capital (often, just average Joes with extra money to put into a scheme); sold stock in their company; and financed the outfitting, exploration, and sending of colonists abroad--hence the name, Joint Stock Company. For example, it cost about £12 10s or about $62 in gold per share to buy into the Virginia Company. The stockholders shared pro-rata, in any profits or losses of the company. Political control of the colony would rest in the board of directors of the company. Typically, English merchants would own a colony, which would be settled by their employees. Their elected spokesmen acted as the middle link between themselves and the board of directors. The second way to establish an overseas settlement was through the proprietorship. These proprietary charters, issued by the crown, normally granted huge tracts of land to an individual or group on terms resembling feudal tenure. In this, the proprietorship resembled the Spanish land grant. In these proprietorships, political control was theoretically in the hands of those who received the grant deed, but real power was actually delegated in part to representatives chosen by the colonists. The owners usually invested their personal fortunes in making a go of their colonies, and they encouraged their colonists to take small landholdings and pay rent to the grantholder. The most outstanding distinction between the two types of colonies was the large amount of self government the company colony had over the proprietary one. The qualified voters chose their own governor, governor's council, and a legis-lative assembly.
• C. The Weakness of Mercantilist Logic: By the 1750s mercantilism began to decline because it was a self-defeating system. First, since the colonies were designed solely as sources of raw materials and consumers of finished goods, the mother country never paid the market price for the raw materials. The income the colonies derived was not sufficienty to balance their purchases of finished products, and they could not indefinitely support the mother country at their own expense. Second, since the motive of mercantilism was the stockpiling of money, this ultimately produced an oversupply of money which contributed to skyrocketing inflation which discouraged production and personal savings. Third, whenever an economy is regulated (and especially to the extent that the mercantilists micro-managed their economy) an inevitable result is that there is an explosion in blackmarket trade and smuggling. One of the major banes of commercial activity in the colonial period was the competition afforded to the monopolies by blackmarketeers and smugglers of such contraband items as sugar, molasses, and tea. Fourth, once empire-builders like Britain have gobbled up all available foreign lands and converted them into colonies; once they've cornered the market on all the raw materials that interest them, and once they've stockpiled all the available precious metals, then what? Once you own it all, then what?? Nothing. The game is over. These goods are not fungible in and of themselves. Stockpiles of gold are nothing but stockpiles of gold. These items are only valuable because they're scarce and they've been kept away from the competition. Nothing happens with these items unless they themselves are traded, and once that happens, what happens to their worth?
  • 1. The Arguments of the Physiocrats: The Physiocrats were a group of French economists who argued that the only source of wealth for a country was its land and agricultural produce. They didn't advocate the destruction of industry and commerce, only that it was spurious in any calculations of a country's wealth and power. The most eloquent and original thinker of the physiocrat school was Adam Smith, who argued in The Wealth of Nations, that in order for an economy to be successful, it must be given completely free reign to regulate itself. This, he referred to as Laissez-faire. Smith believed that the laissez-faire economy would regulate itself through the mechanism of the "invisible hand," of individual self-interest. Each person, operating according to his own self-interest, would naturally choose what was best for himself. The economy would thus grow and evolve to cater to the desires of self-interested individuals. An economy or business that produced goods that no one was interested in would cease to exist in favor of one that did. Unlike the mercantilists (who did not consider trade in itself as being valuable, only what the trade brought in, which was gold and silver) Smith refocused importance on the trade. Smith argued that the strength of a country's trading impulse indicated the strength of the country itself. And, trade can be spiralling and ever-expanding. The only limitation to trade might be the availability of raw materials, but even then, trade can evolve into new areas that don't use up resources.
  • 2. The Labor theory of Value: Smith also argued that any finished goods that are produced by an economy are not valuable because they are exchangeable for gold and silver but because they are valuable in and of themselves. Goods gain this intrinsic value because of the labor, talent, technology, and resources that went into their production. So, for Smith, the volume of trade of intrinsically valuable goods became the reason for trade. Trade wasn't a means to an end, they were the end itself. Indeed, the same can be said for the gold and silver. They aren't valuable as stockpiles, but only as a means of acquiring other goods.

Lecture 10:  State Formation in Early Modern Europe.

• A. The Fragmented Areas of Europe: While other areas in Europe were in the process of creating nation-states, together with absolute monarchies; Italy, Germany, and the Holy Roman Empire were the exceptions to this process. These areas remained politically fragmented and proved, for the most part, unable to deal effectively with strong centralized monarchies like France.
  • 1. Italy--Chaotic: In Italy, for example, Pope Julius II (the Warrior Pope) was able to consolidate the papal states in central Italy, but the other Italian states were more the object of action rather than actors themselves in European affairs. Beginning with the period of the Renaissance and especially through the Reformation, Italy became the playground of budding monarchical absolutists. France's invasion of Italy in 1494 marked the beginning of the Italian Wars which were to last until 1559. During the course of these wars, Spain and, in turn, the Holy Roman Empire became involved until, by the 17th century, most of Italy was under foreign rule of one kind or another and the situation for average Italians bordered on the chaotic. It was in this period that men like Machiavelli came to believe that only with unification under a strong central ruler that Italy would ultimately be saved.
  • 2. Germany--Fragmented: The situation in Germany, of course, was that it was the most extreme example of political fragmentation in Europe: there was a veritable explosion of principalities which ultimately totalled around 300. The nominal control of these principalities fell to the German King who also was the Holy Roman Emperor, whose position was an elective one. While the Holy Roman Emperor was accorded rank above national monarchs; in reality, his position was not as powerful since his "empire" was more feudal in nature and he had to rely on feudal levies of soldiers. As we've seen, when the princes didn't wish to cooperate, as they were wont to do with Martin Luther, they simply didn't. This situation left the Holy Roman Emperor with very few real civil powers after the end of the 30 Years' War. When the Hapsburg Emperors turned their attentions toward the consolidation of Austrian realms, the princes of Germany gradually coalesced under the leadership of the margraves of Hohenzollern, who were the rulers of Brandenburg-Prussia. Since Prussia's margrave was a member of the council of electors responsible for the appointment of the Holy Roman Emperor (and yet, his domains were partly outside of the Holy Roman Empire, in Poland), the Hohenzollerns had a degree of independence from the Emperor's control. As a result, the Hohenzollern elector Frederick III possessed enough military and civil power to have himself crowned King of Prussia in 1701. By 1867, Otto von Bismarck was able, through the Austro-Prussian War, to elminate Austrian control over any part of Germany. And, by 1871, Wilhelm I of Prussia was crowned emperor over a unified Germany.
  • 3. Hapsburg Realms--Psychotic: Throughout the 16th century, German, Holy Roman, and Hapsburg Austrian affairs were practically identical under the rulership of Charles V and Ferdinand I. After the treaty of Westphalia ending the 30 Years' War, though, the princes gained such tremendous religious and political autonomy that the Holy Roman Empire was then virtually dissolved. That, together with the decline of Hapsburg Spain in the 17th century, saw the Austrian Hapsburgs begin increasingly to concentrate on their own dominions and allowed the concept of the Holy Roman Empire to recede into the background. Austria, Bohemia, Hungary, and Croatia began to coalesce into the Hapsburg Empire while the title of "Holy Roman Emperor" itself became largely an honorific one. The Austrian Hapsburgsbegan looking southeastward to the Ottoman threat and created a fortified military frontier (militärgrenze ) in the east to stave off repeated Turkish offenses at Vienna. Unfortunately, the Hapsburgs' unification of the national crowns of Austria, Bohemia, and Hungary into one resulted in a polyglot and multiethnic empire which was, itself, as weak and unstable as the Holy Roman Confederation had been.
• B. The Unified States of Europe: The concept of "empire," in European politics, as in the Holy Roman Empire, were completely replaced by the concept of the nation-state by the mid-17th century. The strong, centralized monarchies of Europe, such as France, England, Holland, Switzerland, and the countries of Scandinavia and Eastern Europe fared much better politically after the end of the 30 Years' War. Because they were unified states with a single-ethnic majority, speaking a national language, they were better able to solve religious, social, and economic problems throughout the 17th century. Of course, some of these unified states were in better shape than others:
  • 1. Spain and Portugal--Unified but Declining: Spain, for example, was slowly being strangled to death by its own colonial empire abroad. Although Spain had amassed great wealth which resulted in a "golden age" for Spanish culture and the arts under Philip II (r. 1556-98), much of that fortune was squandered on luxuries, the ill-conceived Armada, and the purchase of prestige to the point that the Spanish economy began to deteriorate by 1600. The Portuguese throne, which was empty following the death of its monarch in 1580, was claimed by Philip II and thus began the "Spanish Captivity." Spain's declining fortunes sucked Portugal down with it as the former's wars against the English, Dutch, and 30 Years' War resulted in the capture of Portuguese colonial possessions abroad. Portugal had been compelled to pay (literally) for Spain's mistakes. Although the Portuguese threw off the Spanish yoke in 1640, it permanently lost its Asian empire and was never again a great power. Indeed, it was forced, increasingly, to ally with England just to remain politically viable.
  • 2. France--Unified and Rising: The Catholic-Huguenot civil wars in France (1560-98) resulted in the development of a third "party" called the Politiques, who weren't concerned with the religious issue at all. They put nationalism and centralization of political power ahead of all other considerations.
    • a. Henry IV (1589-1610): The Protestant Henry Bourbon of Navarre, as we've mentioned, put an end to the strife upon his coronation by issuing the Edict of Nantes. He and his chief minister Sully (1600-1610) were responsible for reconstructing and making France prosperous again: Brigandage was suppressed, renegade army units were disbanded, noble privileges were curbed, and the new bourgeoisie (town-dwelling) middle class was incorporated into the administration. Indeed, these people became the new hereditary "service" nobility, the noblesse de la robe, who owed their position to the king. Henry also reformed the tax system with the creation of the taille which was a low property tax on non-nobles. Unfortunately, Henry IV was assassinated in 1610 and the throne went to Louis XIII.
    • b. Louis XIII (1610-43): With the religious issue resolved for the time being (at least until the revocation of the Edict in 1685) Louis XIII and the Politiques were able to concentrate on the creation of the absolutist state. In this effort, Louis (who was somewhat irresponsible and wasteful) had the help of the ultimate Politique himself--Cardinal Richelieu and his handpicked successor, Cardinal Mazarin. Richelieu was ambitious, educated, iron-willed, and politically, both realistic and astute. The more ungenerous would describe him as vain, greedy, conniving, and manipulative. But, every one of Richelieu's measures were purposefully designed to maintain French prestige abroad and Bourbon absolutism at home. For example, Richelieu refused to convene the Estates-General, which last met in 1614, and would not meet again until 1789. This act was to prevent that body from interfering in the accumulation of royal power and prerogatives. He also destroyed the military--but not the spiritual--power of the Huguenots by forcing their surrender of their fortified towns. When Richelieu died in 1642, he was replaced by Mazarin, an Italian by birth and detested by Frenchmen; however, this chief minister was responsible for continuing Richelieu's work and ushered in the Age of Louis XIV.
    • c. Louis XIV "The Sun King" (1643-1715): When Louis XIV became king, it was actually Cardinal Mazarin who was the power behind the throne. The nobility's dislike of Mazarin and the growing power of the monarchy resulted in two rebellions known as the Frondes (1648-53) which succeeded in driving Mazarin and Louis from power briefly. However, they soon returned, and Mazarin ruled France until 1661, when, upon his death, Louis actually took power himself. From this time until his death in 1715, Louis did not share power with any other Cardinal/ministers, there were no restrictions on royal authority such as the Magna Carta, there were no law courts which could guarantee the rights of people against the state, and, the king himself was above the law. This last point was embodied in the political principle of "the divine right of kings." After 1661, Louis did allow his chief finance minister, Jean Baptiste Colbert (1619-83) to make decisions regarding the nation's finances, and he owed his wealth to Colbert's activities. Colbert was responsible for building up France's mercantilist position. He protected industries with subsidies and tariffs, regulated prices, built a modern transportation network of roads and canals, developed the navy, and encouraged colonization. He earned the name of the "Complete Mercantilist." The most important innovation in the consolidation of royal power involved Louis' new palace at Versailles. Louis used it as the center of all royal activities: all positions, all patronage, all offices were handed out by Louis personally to those who attended him at Versailles. While the nobility had continued exemption from taxes, Louis forced them into financial dependence on the crown by engaging them in very intricate and ludicrous court ceremony (thereby forcing them to spend their own money on it which kept them perpetually broke). Louis' constant attendance and close supervision of courtiers at Versailles virtually eliminated intrigue and revolt; and, a man who wanted advancement could not afford to stay away from court for very long. In other words, Versailles was both the governmental center of France and the "prison" of the nobility. Unfortunately, Louis managed to squander the fortune and power bequeathed to him by his predecessors when he engaged in four costly, and unneccessary, wars. In addition, while he was originally tolerant religiously, his consolidation of power caused him to attempt to impose religious uniformity, which he did by revoking, in 1685, the Edict of Nantes. As a result, there was a major flight of of some 500,000 Huguenots out of France. With them went the middle-class money making machine of the French economy.
  • 3. England--Unified and Skirting Absolutism: The history of the English monarchy in the 16th and 17th centuries ended up being very different from that of France and Spain.
    • a. The Strong Tudor Trend: For about 150 years, from 1485 to 1640, it looked like England would also go the way of the other European countries and become an absolutist monarchy with the rise of the strong Tudor monarchs Henry VII, Henry VIII, and Elizabeth I. Every indication pointed that way with the reduction of the nobility to obedience to the crown, the monarch's assumption of religious primacy, and the reorganization of the governmental machinery itself.
    • b. The Stuart Reverses: However, with the death of Elizabeth in 1603, the Scottish Stuart kings James I (who insisted that he was king by divine right; that he might listen to parliament but was not compelled to, etc.,) and Charles I tried to carry on with the consolidation of royal power. The king could, if he needed to, consult with parliament for finances; however, as the problem of state revenues became more serious in the 17th century, the king was forced to resort more and more to parliament, which would give him aid only if he surrendered more and more of his powers. James, and particularly Charles, would consent to parliamentary prerogatives and then interfere in its sessions (during the so-called "Long Parliament") so much that it caused a civil war to break out in 1649.
    • c. Cromwell, Commonwealth, & Constitutionalism: This permanently short-circuited the trend in England toward absolutism. On one side were the Cavaliers, who supported the king; on the other side were the Roundheads, who were Puritan followers of the parliamentary leader, Oliver Cromwell. Charles' faction lost the war, he was executed--illegally--and was succeeded by Cromwell who ruled (1649-58) more dictatorially than Charles ever had. He was titled "Lord Protector" of the "Commonwealth of England" which replaced the monarchy, he dismissed one parliament after another, and tried to enforce his own Puritanical beliefs on the whole nation. After Cromwell's death in 1558, the remnants of the Long Parliament reconvened and invited Charles II back from France in 1660 on the condition that he observed the Magna Carta. Charles managed to maintain a respectful relationship with parliament, but with his death in 1685, his brother, James II lasted only three years before the Glorious Revolution of 1688 drove him out. Parliament then invited the King of Holland, William of Orange (a son of Charles II's sister) to marry Mary II (daughter of James II), who then became the co-regents William and Mary (1689-1702). However, the Bill of Rights imposed on them in 1689 permanently limited the power of the monarchy.
    • d. England's Example: With the election of William and Mary, England didn't become a constitutional monarchy overnight. It was still ruled by a small group of landowning aristocrats who had their representatives in parliament. Although the electoral system was completely unrepresentative until it was drastically reformed in the 19th century, the Glorious Revolution did serve as the model for other, later revolutions, such as the American and French Revolutions.

Lecture 16: Theories of Revolution and Evolution.

• A. Social Criticism of the Industrial Revolution: The shift from an agricultural and commercial economy to an industrial one brought with it great social, political, and economic problems that were hitherto unknown to an agricultural economy. The factory system, with its concentration of labor caused a population shift to new and booming towns. People who had hitherto been able to grow their own food and were thus independent now found themselves factory workers who depended on others for their food. Many workers found themselves caught in a never-ending cycle of dispair brought on by barely-above-starvation wages which kept them chained to their factory jobs. The average workday was 14 hours, with 1/2 day off on Sunday, for church. Wages were so low for working men that they were often forced to send their wives and children as young as 5-6 years old out to work, as well. They put in the same 14 hour day, but were paid about 1/2 to 1/10 what the men got. It wasn't uncommon for women and children to actually be chained to their machines and corporal punishment was used to keep them awake and productive. Frequent business downturns meant layoffs and unemployment, which in turn, meant hunger. The living conditions in the big cities was barbaric, at best, with overcrowding, disease and epidemics, crime, and prostitution. Many thinkers, particularly in the middle classes, began to investigate and question the costs of industrialism. Indeed, as the iniquities and despair of the lower classes grew, the great cities became the breeding grounds for the development of new political ideologies and new "isms" that had hitherto been unkown, and which promised panacaeas to the poor.
  • 1. The "Classical" Economists' Answer: The cornerstone of economic theory was Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, which laid out certain natural laws: that of supply and demand, the law of diminishing returns, and the law of economies of scale. Smith argued that the unimpeded working of these laws (laissez faire ) would result in the economic advancement of society as a whole. But by the early decades of the 19th century, it was evident that this "general prosperity" was just not happening, and thus other thinkers and economists arose to explain why. Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) conducted experiments on a society of rats in a closed environment. Their diet was sufficient to cause a population explosion among them, whereupon, they began to turn on, and eat, each other, until their population was back under control. Malthus applied this to society at large by saying that the masses were poor because the human population had increased beyond the capacity of nature to support them. He argued that unless mankind curbed his lusts and passions, war, famine, disease, and poverty would be his eternal lot in life. David Ricardo (1772-1823) combined Malthus' experiments with Adam Smith's work and thus developed Classical Economics. Ricardo argued for the "Iron Law of Wages," which says that a worker will get paid just enough to sustain him (the natural wage). If there are too few workers on the market, then he will get paid more than the natural wage (the market wage) which will cause him to prosper and procreate which will create more workers. When the supply of workers rises, their wages will fall, and the workers will starve and die off until the supply meets the demand. The classical economists didn't seem to have any qualms of conscience concerning this barbaric situation: it was just the way things were. To others, this was unacceptible and they came to be known as the socialists. Their philosophy ranged from the muddled good intentions of the Humanitarians to the outright communism of the radical socialists.
  • 2. Humanitarianism: The Humanitarians were the "action" wing of the Romantic Movement of the first half of the 19th century. The Romantics were spurred on by reaction against the cold, scientific rationalism of the Enlightenment and the materialism and monaterism of the Industrial Revolution. The Humanitarians, who were mostly from the middle class, determined in "a cry of the heart" that, in the general politico-economic climate of laissez-faireism, "something needed to be done" for the sufferings of the working poor and were thus morally galvanized to action. Many took up the cause of reform through voluntarism. They dedicated themselves to organizing assistance programs, "aid" societies (such as aid to widows, orphans, the elderly, and handicapped), charity and social work in inner-city slums, fundraising, benefits, and food drives, etc. The Salvation Army was an outgrowth of this voluntarist/reformist bent. Most of these early humanitarians were motivated by warm, fuzzy, sentimental desires to "do good" and be "their brother's keeper" in keeping with Christianly virtues. Some, however, were more coldly realistic in their assessment that if the lot of the poor were not improved, they would grow to constitute a discontented, disruptive, and potentially revolutionary segment of society who would threaten the position and privileges of the middle classes. Giving form and substance to the otherwise inchoate emotionalism of the Humanitarians were a number of writers such as Charles Dickens, Honoré de Balzac, Victor Hugo, the Brontë sisters, Thomas Carlyle, and Harriet Beecher Stowe; and journalists like William Lloyd Garrison and Ida Tarbell. All of these writers were concerned with human dignity, individualism, and reform in an increasingly remote, impersonal, and entropic industrial society.
  • 3. Socialism: At the root of the humanitarians' volunteristic spirit was their Rousseauean conviction that human nature was basically good, and that all that the poor needed were good role models, a temporary helping hand up, and a change of attitude, and--Presto!--the lot of the poor would be alleviated. In reality, what the fuzzy-thinking humanitarians found was that the ills of working-class society couldn't be cured with a temporary stint as a volunteer in a tenement slum. The problems were simply too complex: they couldn't cure problem "A" without addressing problem "B," first. As a result, the vast majority of humanitarian volunteers simply grew tired, overwhelmed, and disillusioned. They gave up quickly and went home. (Many social workers who start out idealistically end up this way). Those that were left eventually formed the nucleus of a hardened, pessimistic, cynical cadre of radicalized "workers" who believed that only through sweeping social and political change could these problems be "cured," and were dedicated to bringing about socialism.
• B. Forms of Socialism: There are, broadly speaking, three forms of socialist thought. The most moderate is Christian; the next, more radical is Utopian; and finally, the most extreme socialism is Marxist Communism.
  • 1. Christian Socialism: The Christian socialists tended to look for inspiration in their philosophy in the Gospels, which preached "share and share alike," and "The Golden Rule," and so forth. They believed that every man was his brother's keeper; and, that Christian love were preferable to competition and exploitation. People could be counted on to do their part to alleviate one another's poverty and misery through concerted social effort, particularly through the institution of the church. They counted on the continued participation of new waves of humanitarian volunteers, the Salvation Army workers, and charity contributions. The Christian socialists split from their more radical cohorts because the latter based much of their philosophy upon the manipulation of class envy and natural human greed, both of which are heavily proscribed in the Bible. Later, as government came to be seen as having a role in maintaining social welfare, the Christian socialists later came to be called Fabian Socialists (1883, named for Roman general Quintus Fabius who, with "Fabian Tactics," fought against Hannibal by wearing him down) in England, and often organized political parties which embodied their moderate welfarist ideals. They believed that they could advance the socialist cause through the existing governmental framework.
  • 2. Utopian Socialism: The Utopian socialists were so-called because their opponents, the "True" Socialists were skeptical of the practicality of their theories. The most famous of these individuals were Henri de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier, and Robert Owen. The Utopians were, generally speaking, dedicated to the establishment of idealistically organized, separatist communities of workers, who would live in proximity to the factories and mills at which they worked. Saint-Simon, for example, advocated not just communitites, but a planned economy with the government promoting the welfare of society as a whole. He coined the phrase "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." At any rate, Charles Fourier organized his workers to live communally in large dormitories where they could be guided by their "passionate attractions" to sex, companionship, food, etc., and thus satisfy their needs for these drives (he even abolished marriage, but this tended to give his community a bad reputation because people identified his experiment with free love); and, working conditions were made as pleasant as possible with the playing of pleasant music and the offering of wine and pastry upon demand. And, in many cases, the owners of these communes introduced profit-sharing, and added incentives and bonuses for doing the more unattractive jobs. Fourier even believed that the more dirty and degrading labor would be done by hordes of communally-kept children who would kill vermin, repair roads and carry away garbage and sewage; they would work in the slaughterhouses, and attend the animals. Apparently the exploitation of defenseless children was only a capitalist phenomenon. Robert Owen, a Scottish industrialist, took his millions and attempted to build a model industrial community in New Lanark, Scotland, and another at New Harmony, Indiana. However, both of these experiments ultimately failed.
  • 3. Marxist Communism: Both of the foregoing groups believed in the gradual, peaceful, evolutionary process of socialization; that is, using existing political processes to introduce incremental changes. The Communists, however, were influenced by the writings of Karl Marx (1818-1883) and were much more radical in their views. Marx formulated the Communist Manifesto in 1848, which laid the groundwork for communist beliefs; and, wrote Das Kapital in 1867. In the latter work, Marx adopted the dialectical philosophy of George Hegel who argued that every age in history is comprised of its own ideal (the thesis), which immediately engenders its opposing ideal (the antithesis); and, the outcome of the struggle of these is the synthesis, which becomes the new thesis for yet another cycle of struggle that constitutes human progress.
    • a. Dialectical Materialism: This was too temporal and abstract for Marx, however, so he formulated the idea of "dialectical materialism," which was comprised of two parts. First, the dialectic part involved class struggle between the exploiters (the thesis, i.e., the Patricians, the feudal nobility, the capitalist bourgeoisie) and the exploited (the antithesis, i.e., the Plebians, the serfs, the proletarian workers and peasants), which led to a synthesis in which the struggle between Patrician and Plebian gave way to feudalism, etc. In each synthetic stage, however, the dialectic remained imperfect and unfinished and thus laid the groundwork for the next thesis cycle. Second, the materialist part argued that the driving force of history is not philosophical idealism, but rather man's material environment. The way in which humans earn their living determines the shape and content of their society. Marx, then, was an economic determinist, who argued that the course of human history is determined by the economic development of society. In yet other terms, economic forces are the chief determinants of social institutions.
    • b. Class Struggle and Revolution: Marx saw a dialectical historical pattern that would be repeated over and over again until the establishment of the perfect society. The culmination of the modern struggle between the capitalists and the proletariat will overturn the capitalist system and produce socialism. All history, then, is the history of class struggle of the have-nots against the haves. The result is always economic hardship and depression; and, when the process reaches its peak, the capitalist system will be overthrown by violent and inevitable revolution. Capitalism, for Marx, must inevitably collapse under the weight of its own internal contradictions. Marxists, therefore, shouldn't attempt to reform capitalist society from within. They should just educate the working classes to the reality of their situation and wait for the inevitable, whose vanguard they will be.
    • c. Socialism and then Communism: The more desperate the proletariat's situation, the sooner the revolution will come. Once capitalism collapses, it will be replaced by a transitional period of socialism known as "the dictatorship of the proletariat." The proletariat will seize control of the state and crush all capitalist class opposition and nationalize the economy. Once that has been accomplished, then "true communism" will naturally follow because there will be no need for further dictatorship since there would no longer be any opposition classes. True communism is a society in which there is only one class and no state (because the state is a servant of the dominant class and works to keep that class in power). All private property will cease to exist, thus there will be no economic exploitation, crime, vice, or social injustices. Consequently, there will be no need for police forces, courts, armies, or governments. Each community will administer its own affairs democratically and thus Utopia will have been achieved.
    • d. Critique of Marx: a) Marx criticized the capitalism that existed in the mid-19th century. His dialectics proved inadequate for foretelling the evolution of 20th century capitalism, which was willing to make concessions, such as the advent of the welfare state (or welfare capitalism). This destroyed the incentive for revolution by alleviating the misery of the working classes and giving them a decent standard of living. Thus much of Marxist theory has been rendered irrelevant. b) Marx assumed that once true communism was achieved, the process of dialectical materialism would cease and history would come to an end. The internal contradiction of Marxism is that dialectical materialism never ends and is thus negated by his own laws of history. c) Marx also assumed that the communist state would be benevolent and good and that it would be classless. d) Marx's greatest error was in not recognizing that you can't change human nature: material rewards must be given for initiative and that incentives will spur greater effort. e) And finally, it's clear that what Marx formulated was not so much an economic philosophy, but rather a new, secular religion. It has its cyclical elements (the dialectic, which corresponds to the prophets and God's periodic wrath); a linear view of the progression of history (the establishment of true communism, which corresponds with the Judgement Day--for both, it's the day on which history comes to an end); and, it has a god (the proletariat whose infallible and omnipotent collective voice is the Communist Party).
• C. Other Views of Society:
  • 1. Anarchism: Anarchism emerged at about the same time as socialism--the early 19th century--and was actually strain of Utopianism. The anarchists, led by early thinkers such as William Godwin and Pierre Proudhon, argued that all forms of government were oppressive and that the best form of social organization was one in which state authority and private property didn't exist. Proudhon believed that this situation could be attained through enlightened individualism, i.e., education. However, the anarchists weren't satisfied with the Marxist promise that the state would eventually disappear. And, after the unsuccessful 1848 revolutions across Europe, the anarchists' leading figure, a Russian by the name of Mikhail Bakunin, argued that violent, terroristic activities were neccessary to jump-start the people to revolt against their oppressors. They wanted to achieve the demise of government at once, and resorted to the assassination of many public figures, a policy that achieved nothing.
  • 2. Syndicalism: The Syndicalists believed that state power should be concentrated in the hands of small, locally-based, organized labor unions which would be directed in their efforts by a single, national-level supra-union that would function in the capacity of a "government."

Lecture 18: The Rise of Russia--The First Developing Country, 1400-1800.

• A. Forced Westernization Under Peter I: In the sixteenth century when when the manorial social and economic order was on the decline in the West European countryside, it was only beginning to expand in Russia. In the years between 1200 and 1700, Russia did not experience the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Scientific Revolution. In fact, in the 14th and 15th centuries, Russia was cut off from contacts with the west by the domination of the Mongols. However, when we left the Russians, Ivan the Terrible had died, plunging the country into a period of chaos called the "Time of Troubles," which finally ended with the election of the first Romanov tsar, Michael I. Between 1695 and 1725 Russia was dragged kicking and screaming into the western world by Tsar Peter I, "The Great" (1682-1725). He forced through modernization and westernization of the army, government, and the nobility; created a Russian navy, controlled the church and eliminated all opponents to his reforms. He conducted wars against the Ottoman Empire, Persia, and Sweden to expand Russia south and west.
  • 1. The Founding of St. Petersburg: The transfer of the capital form Moscow to St. Petersburg was as momentus an event as the founding of Constantinople as new capital of the Roman Empire 1400 years earlier. St. Petersburg was a symbol of Russia's becoming an international power that would play an important role in European affairs. It was also a symbol of Russia's cultural reorientation toward the west; indeed, it was called "The Window on the West," and its archetecture reflected western, not oriental, themes. There were government buildings in stone (not wood), lots of ornamental carvings and facades, wide boulevards, and plenty of fountains and bronze statues. Russia was the first "non-western" country to begin a process of westernization or modernization, thus Russia could be called the first "developing country".
  • 2. The problems of Modernization and Westernization: This move toward the west on the part of Russia's rulers in the 18th century changed the structure of Russian government, along with aspects of its aristocratic society and culture, but it did not immediately affect the lives, status, and attitudes of the bulk of the tsars' subjects. This led to tensions between the westernizing and traditional elements in Russian state, society and culture, which had both positive and negative consequences.
  • 3. State: The reforms of Peter and succeeding tsars and tsarinas created a government with a "modern European" facade with some of the forms of other European states, but maintaining essentially an oriental despotism with no qualifications or limitations on the monarch's authority until the 1905 revolution. The imperial period of Russian history, which coincides with Saint Petersburg's role as capital likewise saw the development of Russia into an multinational empire straddling Europe and Asia. We are only seeing the dissolution of that empire in our own day.
  • 4. Society: The westernization of the economy and society, initiated by Peter and managed by his successors from the new capital, for many years masked a backward agrarian society and economy based upon feudal and manorial relationships which had all but disappeared in Western Europe. Although considered a maj