Archive for category Italy
The last western Roman Emperor was deposed in 476. The Italian peninsula was in ruin – barbarian tribes were attacking what was left of the old imperial glory, and soon the knowledge and order of Rome gave way to the dark ages, as politics throughout Europe became exceedingly local, with custom and tradition defining social life. With the church embracing Augustine’s other-worldly theology (this world has no value, it can only tempt you – eschew the things of the world and focus on preparing for the afterlife), progress stopped.
Venice was different. As Rome fell, a group seeking safety decided that the sand dunes around what is now Venice could make it a defensible city, and keep out the barbarians. They took wood and piled it up in the lagoon, literally creating islands! Wood does not decay as quickly under water, and wood from that era was much stronger than today. Without so much carbon in the atmosphere the rings of trees are tighter – that wooden foundation still holds Venice up today.
Early on they fished and focused simply on creating a sustainable life style. They recognized the authority of the Byzantine Empire to the East. Rome had split into East and West, as Emperor Constantine created the city of Constantinople to rule the East. For a time it kept the Roman heritage alive, and could provide Venice protection. For the ensuing centuries Venice couldn’t really be called Italian – they focused on the East and stayed out of Italian political life.
Politically, the Venetians created one of the most successful Republics in history. In 697 they elected their first Doge, who would be the symbolic leader. The Venetian Republic would last 1100 years, and be dynamic for most of that time. It’s decline would start in the 1400s but even in decline Venice would remain stable and prosperous.
Their political system was complex. Up until 1297 nobility was something that came with wealth – if you were a successful merchant, you could be in the Venetian ruling class. The system had what we would call checks and balances to guard against any group getting too much power. The Doge was “first among equals” and had very limited power.
The rise of Venice as a true power started with the first crusade of 1095. Although we tend to see the crusades in primarily religious terms, and certainly religion was the rationale provided, it was also political. Europeans had been fighting the Vikings and other groups for centuries. By the eleventh century things had stabilized and they needed something for their warrior class to do – expansion to the east was natural. Venice would transport troops and material for the crusade, and bring back goods to sell. Quickly they became exceedingly wealthy and their influence grew.
The Serrata of 1297 altered the Republic by preventing anyone new from joining the Venetian Great Council. Nobility was now by birth, ending the centuries of having a ruling class that was chosen by a kind of entrepreneurial meritocracy. However, the nobility knew that they could not lose the loyalty of the rest of the merchant class, so they created the cittadini originari which gave those who might begrudge the new nobility certain rights and powers. Various workers had their own status, as well as political roles. It worked.
What Venice managed to do was to create a system with virtually no political dissent. They did this by institutionalizing decision making in a manner that kept everyone with the same goal: protect and enhance Venetian prosperity. Differences of opinion were worked out peacefully, almost invisibly.
This gave them the capacity to defeat Genoa in 1381, becoming for awhile the dominant force in European international trade. Venice was at the height of its power, but faced a new problem. The Byzantine empire, which was a buffer from the power of the Islamic world, was in rapid decline. The Ottoman Empire emerged as a real threat. At that point Venice truly became Italian, and in the 1400s built the Terrafirma empire which stretched almost to Milan.
Alas, this led to rivalry with other Italian powers, and in 1509 Venice was defeated at Agnadello. If not for the Pope, who wanted Venice to remain a buffer preventing the expansion of the Ottoman Empire to Italy, the city might have been taken and the Republic would have ended. As it was, it would last almost 300 more years.
Venetian power was in decline, however. Their defeat at Agnadello combined with the expansion of the Ottomans to eat away at Venice’s trade dominance. When Portugal managed to get around the cape of Africa, states on the Atlantic coast rose in trade power. It’s a credit to the Venetian Republican system that it could endure all that without creating bitter rivalries. Other cities like Genoa and Florence were weakened by internal power structures, Venice was not.
In some ways, Venetian history is more impressive than that of the Roman Empire. They remained a republic (albeit an oligarchic one), and except for the relatively small terrafirma, focused on making profit rather than expanding territory. Imperial Rome was constantly riveted by civil war and power struggles – Venice had a kind of unity of purpose that is rare.
As a political scientist I ponder what they got right, and if there are lessons we can learn. More on that soon; those who may join us on the May term trip to Italy, think of the rich, wonderful history we’ll encounter. Venice is so much more than beautiful canals and narrow alleys.
Hadrian was Rome’s Emperor from 117-138. This was a fateful time for the Roman Empire. His predecessor Trajan ruled from 98-117, and was declared by the Roman Senate Optimus Princeps, the greatest leader of Roman history – even surpassing Augustus. Trajan had reformed the empire and brought it to near its apex of power, territory and prosperity. Hadrian would die despised by many, lacking his predecessor’s foresight and diplomacy.
What is fascinating about Hadrian’s rule is that the path Rome took early in that second Century helped program the future decline of what would become the western Empire, and set up the rise of Christianity. It is fair to say that civilization had a level of comfort and prosperity in second Century Rome that was not equaled until the 20th Century.
Hadrian’s foreign policy was a sign of the change. He built fortifications along the frontiers to protect the empire. This was a momentous pivot from ongoing offensive wars to expand the empire in favor of a clearly defensive approach. The empire was comfortable and content – why get involved in costly foreign wars?
Hadrian’s era also began an intensely spiritual part of Rome’s history. Christianity was spreading, especially among women who rebelled against some of Rome’s harsh sexism. Women would convert their husbands and family, and the once Jewish sect became a major force in the Roman world. Most Romans, however, would have probably found themselves more comfortable with the Stoic teacher Epictetus.
Epictetus was born a slave but was later freed. Like Jesus and Socrates before him, he (55-135) never wrote down his words, but simply taught. An example: “There is only one way to happiness and that is to cease worrying about things which are beyond the power of our will.” That’s the stoic philosophy. You control your mind and your actions – everything else is beyond your control. You can’t control the twists of fate, the choices of others or even the consequences of your actions. So to be happy you must accept whatever happens to you.
To the stoic, one becomes enslaved if they get enmeshed in trying for wealth or success, pining for a lost love, or even feeling sorrow at the death of a friend or family member. God controls those things, we control only our mind. Later Marcus Aurelius, a late Second Century Roman Emperor (ruling from 161 to 180) and stoic philosopher would say “Someone will irritate me today. I must not let it bother me.” To the stoic a human has the power not to let their happiness depend on anything anyone else does – or anything that happens. That is the will of God.
The stoic philosophy had a natural fit with Christian beliefs, especially with the Greek twist Augustine gave Christian theology in the Fourth Century. That helped assure that Rome would adopt Christianity as its official religion, which has shaped our world to this day.
This also was the start of a shift to a society that would lose itself to the pursuit of pleasure and comfort, no longer embodying the virtues of early Rome. Marcus Aurelius would be a virtuous leader and stoic philosopher who would spend much of this rule trying to defeat the Germans. However his son and successor Commodus would live purely for his own pleasure. Instead of tolerating the gladiatorial games, he embraced them and in fact participated, becoming a reasonably proficient gladiator himself. Most put the start of Rome’s decline with Commodus. And the war with the Germans? Commodus couldn’t be bothered, he signed a peace treaty which emboldened the Germans who saw that as weakness.
Ironically Rome’s success helped program its fall. Though there would be efforts to expand the empire after Hadrian, Rome was at its apex. The people were growing soft due to comfort, and resource use helped deplete Rome’s forests and force them to go to greater lengths to keep up their lifestyles. The Imperial form of government would leave Rome subject to poor rule by power hungry Emperors and increasing political intrigue – with poisonings and other types of assassination common.
Next May I co-lead a travel course to Italy. One focus will be “Rome of the Second Century,” with visits to some of Hadrian’s sites, and discussion of the Emperors of that era – from Trajan to Commodus. We’ll try to get a feel for what life in Rome was like – and how in some ways it wasn’t so unlike our own. In fact, we’d probably feel more comfortable in Second Century Rome than 17th Century Europe. Exploring Rome is always enjoyable. To learn about and experience it through the eyes of the past makes it even more powerful.
One of the joys of teaching at UMF is the ability to offer travel courses, usually in May term, winter term or February break. My first one was back in 2000/01 over winter break with 20 students to Italy. That was back when the US economy looked super strong so the Euro cost only 78 cents. The Italians still used the lire, but already the European currencies were locked in the Euro rate, with Euro coins and notes taking over in 2002. The dollar was so strong almost everyone on the trip bought leather jackets in Florence, ate out a lot, and had a small trip fee (for hotel, flight, and train) of $1250.
In the winter of 2003/04 I lead 18 students to Germany, going to Weimar, Berlin, Koeln and Koblenz. At that time UMF had only one other professor offering travel courses, so this was new territory. Now there are probably ten or so a year, and the university is trying to expand them.
In May 2005 I joined three other professors – Steve Pane from Music History, Sarah Maline from Art History and Luann Yetter in Literature – to offer a multifaceted course to Italy, visiting Venice, Florence and Rome. We had nearly 40 students, and the trip was amazing. We reprised that trip in January 2006/07, February break 2008 and 2009, May 2011 and May 2013. In February 2009 and May 2013 only two faculty members could go since we didn’t have so many students (Sarah and I in 2009, Steve and I in 2013). We’re hoping to have enough for all four of us to go again in 2015.
Steve, Sarah and I did a Vienna-Munich-Berlin trip in 2010, and I lead a solo trip to Berlin, Bonn and Munich in 2012. So this Monday when I lead a solo course to Berlin, Munich and Vienna, it’ll be my 11th travel course. They are a lot of work – organizing the itinerary, booking hotels, airfare, trains, etc. Even on trips led by a number of us, I am the logistics/budget coordinator. That doesn’t mean I do more work — the others have unenviable jobs of dealing with sick students (sometimes taking them to the ER), handling lost passports, or various tasks. But the work is worth it, in some ways I enjoy traveling while teaching more than I would enjoy leisure travel.
It is extremely rewarding to be able to watch students learn another culture, to share what I’ve learned about Germany or Italy with them. To learn about art and music from my colleagues on the multi-faculty trips, expanding my knowledge, with all of us seeing connections between the disciplines that we hadn’t before.
I think the second trip to Italy we were heading out for a walk after checking in to the Venice hotel. We make sure the students stay up until at least 10:00 the day we arrive so they can get their body clocks adjusted to European time. We were heading out and then I heard a commotion, “look at that!” I looked – but saw nothing out of the ordinary. The students zoomed by with cameras and started taking pictures of the canals. Then I realized – I had been to Venice enough that the canals seemed ordinary to me, but through the students I could see them again as if for the first time. That keeps the experiences fresh – though it is cool to know that I am quite familiar with how to navigate Venice, Florence and Rome!
Above – 42 students and 4 faculty made our 2011 trip the largest!
Some students have never been out of the country; we’ve had at least one who had never been on an airplane before. Some have traveled before. But we always develop group bonds, traveling together and sharing two weeks. When it ends people vow to keep in touch and not lose that connection. Alas, people do go their separate ways, but there is always talk of alumni trips or people coming back to travel again. For many these travel courses are a life changing experience.
So Monday I leave with 13 students for Berlin, flying Aer Lingus via Dublin. The course is “German Political History,” and we’ll include Austria with the Vienna visit. Everything is arranged, the weather looks fantastic, and all I have to do is pack and hope that everyone makes it to the airport without a hitch. Hopefully I’ll find some time to blog during the next two weeks (during the 2011 Italy trip I kept a pretty extensive blog).
So now I have to get in my grades by Sunday, pack and be ready! I will try to blog while underway!
In the early 1990s the Italian political system underwent a complete collapse. Every party disintegrated or was renamed. Former Prime Minister Bettino Craxi, once considered the most powerful man in Italy, died in exile in Tunisia. The cause of the collapse was the Mani Pulite or “clean hands” investigation started by Milan magistrates, which led to the discovery of massive and pervasive corruption callend “tangentopoli” or bribery city.
By 1994 Italy was said to be entering its “second republic.” From the end of World War II to the 90s the Christian Democratic party dominated Italian politics. While the country had over 40 governments, making it appear to be in constant crisis and unstable, the problem was the opposite: Italy was too stable. The insiders shifted coalitions and positions, but the same people dominated, becoming more and more corrupt over time. Italians knew what was happening – there was real scorn for “la classa politica” – but seemed powerless to stop it.
The system broke down just as other single party systems fell part – Communism, the LDP in Japan, and the PRI in Mexico. With the internationalization of global capital, countries had to shed their isolated corruption to be relevant in the world economy. Yet hope for a new system in Italy faded; while many of the old guard left, the new leaders were still of the old thinking. Silvio Berlusconi dominated Italian politics and did not institute real change. Even reformers like Romano Prodi found it hard to take on a system that had been built on kickbacks and inside deals. By 2009 the glaring deficiencies of the Italian system came into full view as Italy fell into a crisis that threatened its ability to maintain membership in the Eurozone.
In 2013, as the country struggled to implement needed reforms, Enrico Letta became Prime Minister, leading a large coalition. The idea was that together the parties could do what was necessary to get on track. Yet progress was slow, people were losing patience, and under pressure Letta resigned in February 2014, allowing the young Matteo Renzi to be named Prime Minister.
Italy has a multi-party system, and Renzi’s left of center Democratic party controls 293 of 630 seats in the national assembly, and 108 of 320 in the Senat. In order to govern it has formed a coalition with seven other parties. Renzi’s task is to implement reform while keeping that coalition together.
Renzi has argued that Italy needs generational change – that the old system will never truly be open and transparent if the old guard remains in power. His cabinet has an average age of 47, younger than any in Italian history. He already has forced the resignations of leaders of the largest state owned companies, replacing them with women. That alone is a culture shift – women never ran any of those companies before, and Italian business has been male dominated.
His ideology is said to be close to Tony Blair’s “third way” – center-left, with an emphasis on the center. His first three year budget has controversial provisions, but is designed to create long term growth potential. Italy’s economy is not exactly healthy. In 2013 its economy contracted by 1%, with unemployment over 12%. It had a budget deficit of minus 3.3%, with total government debt at 133% of GDP. To succeed Renzi has to get the deficit below 3%, grow the economy, and lower unemployment.
To do all that he must not only craft a solid economic plan, but more importantly remake “la classa politica.” For generations the political class has been corrupt. That has to end. A new generation has to make links with the other European economies and build a new civil society. Faced with corrupt leaders, citizens had no qualms about tax evasion, cheating the government, or trying to get for themselves whatever they could. Civil society was weak.
None of that can be changed overnight. Renzi offers a breath of fresh air and a sense that a mixture of crisis and impatience may be enough for Italians to now build a true modern democracy based on rule of law and accountability rather than inside deals and kickbacks.
No spoilers about story or plot in this entry!
On May 14th I was among the first to purchase Dan Brown’s new book, Inferno. By the next day I had finished all 463 pages, it is perhaps the best in the Robert Langdon series, including the earlier books Angels and Demons, The DaVinci Code and The Lost Symbol.
The reason I devoured the book is because almost of all the action takes place in either Florence or Venice; the lion’s share in Florence. On Monday I take off with students on a travel course to Italy, visiting Venice, Florence and Rome. This book whetted my appetite for Italy with brilliantly descriptive images of Florence, mixing tidbits of history with a story line that honored perhaps the greatest and most influential author of history, Dante Alighieri.
Dante’s book The Divine Comedy included The Inferno, which was Dante’s description of hell. Brown notes that most of our images of a dark underworld of torture, demons and suffering come from Dante’s imagery. Yet Dante wasn’t simply trying to depict a religious vision of hell – quite the contrary. His book was sarcastic social commentary – a kind of satire – in which famous politicians, church leaders and other elite of his day found themselves suffering somewhere in the inferno, with the punishment always fitting the sin.
Exiled from his city of Florence in 1301 due to political rivalries, Dante (1265-1321) wrote The Divine Comedy as a kind of literary revenge, skewering leaders and the politics of the day, while honoring his muse Beatrice, a woman he had barely met but with whom he had fallen in love. She died at 24, but remained a muse for the poet until his death. Dante wrote The Divine Comedy before the printing press, but in the vernacular. In fact, modern Italian is traced back to Dante, so great was his influence.
Dante was one of the first humanists, moving away from a focus on the divine to a perspective embracing the world as it was. While in exile he would meet Giotto, whose Scrovegni Chapel in Padova broke with past practices to offer a true humanist perspective. The life of Christ is told with emotion and realistic detail. Humanism would change European thought forever, and make the enlightenment possible.
While most of that is away from Brown’s story line, which looks more towards the future than the past, his embrace of Dante adds an historical poignancy and meaning which puts Inferno a step ahead of his previous efforts. For anyone who loves Florence, the book is a must read; he captures the spirit of the city while describing some of its most compelling locations.
Angels and Demons was my favorite before now. I not only liked the story line – mixing the CERN Large Hadron Collider with a Papal Conclave – but it has delightful images of some of my favorite places in Rome. I make sure to do an “Angels and Demons walking tour” when I take students to Italy. Not only do those who have read the book identify with the places we see, but Brown does an excellent job in choosing interesting and relevant locales.
In the future I will add “Inferno” walking tours to both Venice and Florence. I may even try this year, though since the book just came out I doubt too many students will have read it.
I heartily recommend this book to anyone who likes a fast paced plot with twists, turns, compelling characters and a few dramatic surprises. It is a must read for those who love Italy, especially Florence and Venice.
So I’m ready to head to Italy next week, starting in Venice and then going on to Florence and Rome. It was a pleasant surprise that Brown’s latest novel would be released just in time for me to re-immerse myself into Florentine history and images from both Florence and Venice.
Next week I start blogging from Italy. My co-instructor in this endeavor is Dr. Steven Pane, who teaches Music History. He also is fascinated by the study of sound, and plans a sound seminar for our first day in Venice to help students learn to appreciate the different sounds of various cities and locations. I sent him this snippet from Inferno (p. 313), set at the piazza San Marco. Steve said this could be an introduction to his seminar:
“It was not until this moment, as he entered the sheltered square, that Langdon could fully appreciate this city’s most unique offering.
With virtually no cars or motorized vehicles of any kind, Venice enjoyed a blissful absence of the usual civic traffic, subways, and sirens, leaving sonic space for the distantly unmechanical tapestry of human voices, cooing pigeons, and lilting violins serenading patrons at the outdoor cafes. Venice sounded like no other metropolitan center in the world.”
Next week, blogging from Italy!
Mario Monti announced he was resigning from the office of Prime Minister of Italy despite a heroic year in which the Italians did what most people thought couldn’t be done. He stabilized their finances and help brighten the outlook for the EU and Euro in the on going financial crisis caused by southern European lacking fiscal discipline.
Monti’s resignation, which will become official after the 2013 budget is passed, came as a surprise, sending shock waves through financial markets and the Italian political system. This sets the stage for a critical election in February.
When Monti came into office interest rates for Italian bonds were above 7%, and Italy’s budget deficit was growing quickly. Monti has managed to lower rates to 4.4% (meaning borrowing money is cheaper), though on news of his resignation it shot up to 4.8% Total debt has stabilized at 125% of GDP. Monti’s reforms included budget cuts, reform of the labor market and other policies not always popular with the public. As it became clear that Italians had the political will to deal directly with their problems, confidence in both the Italian economy and the Eurozone grew.
So why is Monti resigning? Monti’s government is a ‘government of experts’ designed to make pragmatic decisions with as little politicization as possible. Back in November 2011 Silvio Berlusconi resigned as Prime Minister after losing his majority, with international markets showing no confidence in Italy’s policies or leadership. Monti was chosen as a technocratic leader both left and right could agree on, but one without a political mandate.
On Thursday December 6 Berlusconi withdrew his party’s support from Monti’s government. Monti had always said that without broad political support a technocratic government was untenable. But this sets up a potential showdown.
In my opinion, Berlusconi has been a disaster for Italy. First elected Prime Minister in 1994 in the wake of the collapse of the Italian first Republic and the party system that defined it, Berlusconi promised to chart a new course for the country. He said his party Forza Italia (forward, Italy!) would make Italy a modern well governed state, absent the corruption and undisciplined economic policies of the old system. Despite being Prime Minister three times — from 1994 – 1995, 2001 -06, and 2008-11, he has not followed through.
In fact, Italy’s performed best when Berlusconi was not in office, including the job Romano Prodi did on economic policy in the late 90s to get Italy into the Eurozone. As Prime Minister Berlusconi mirrored the corruption of the first republic (he was convicted of fraud in October — he’s out free as he appeals, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg of his questionable and likely illegal actions), and the Italian budget mushroomed.
Unfortunately the Italians may vote him back into office. He claims he wants to stand again, and as media mogul he has the capacity to shape the narrative of the short election campaign. Despite his faults, his personality and appeal to conservatives means he’ll win a lot of votes.
Ironically global markets would be happier if a former Communist, Pier Luigi Bersani, were to defeat Berlusconi. Bersani’s center-left coalition has pledged support for Italy’s commitments and vowed not to go back to the kind of politics and spending of recent years. Berlusconi, however, has been skeptical of Italy’s commitments and has hinted that he wants to increase spending and undermine the work done last year by Monti.
Of course, Monti might himself run. He could hope to get support from centrists and moderates who want to transcend the polarized politics of the left vs. right, and reward Monti for the work he’s done the last year. Monti would not have the backing of a major party organization, but Italian campaigns are short, intense, and not that expensive.
A Monti victory would not only keep him in office, but give him something he now lacks – a political mandate. A technocratic party is supposed to avoid political controversy. When Monti pushed through labor law reforms, he met considerable opposition from Italy’s strong labor unions. Rather than picking a fight he negotiated with them and a compromise set of laws passed. With a political mandate, Monti’s hand in such negotiations would be stronger, though it’s unlikely he’d seek political confrontation.
This election is important for both Italy and the EU. If Monti were to win, there would be an enthusiastic response from markets and renewed optimism that the worst of the Euro crisis is passed. If Berlusconi were to return, Italian bond yields would rise and both Italy and the EU could be thrown back into a deep crisis. Moreover, Italy’s path out of a flawed and corrupt system of governance would be halted; Berlusconi represents precisely what Italians must reject.
Signs are good that Berlusconi’s shine has worn off. He’s down in the polls, and even he wanted more time to prepare for the next election. His fraud conviction and his record as Prime Minister overshadows his media appeal and charisma. By hanging on he deprives Italian conservatives of a viable alternative. When markets prefer a former Communist to a successful capitalist businessman, that says something!
Still, Berlusconi has had a remarkable capacity to come back and no one should underestimate his Machiavellian political skills. His return to power would be a disaster for Europe and Italy.
The assignment closing out the first unit of my honors first year seminar was straight forward: imagine a conversation between Augustine, Petrarch and Machiavelli. Have them talk about the issues that dominated their lives, react to each other, and bring up others we read or talked about (Aquinas, Dante, Giotto and Boccaccio). The results were spectacular.
I gave students freedom to tackle the assignment however they wanted. One took the voice of Machiavelli, describing the conversations and his internal thoughts — polite to Augustine in conversation while ridiculing him in his head. Another had them all in purgatory, some had them in heaven, one had them in a rather rowdy bar (Augustine sipping fruit juice), while one had them in the equivalent of zoo, having been snatched from earth and brought somewhere outside space/time. One put herself in the role as translator of the conversation, giving her reflections on what they said, which worked really well.
Augustine (354-430) developed the spiritual philosophy and theology that would define the medieval world view – this world is an illusion, designed to tempt and test, but exists only as symbols of a deeper reality. Do not pursue worldly delights or ambitions, those only lead you away from Christ. With that view dominating, it’s not surprising that the Europeans spent nearly a thousand years with little progress!
Petrarch is often called the “father of humanism.” Humanism means taking the human experience seriously. Petrarch, along with others such as Giotto, Boccaccio and Dante, were rediscovering the classics from Rome and Greece, and thereby opening the door to a past that Europe had long forgotten. They were enthralled by the classics, a world where human emotion and practical knowledge mattered — where life wasn’t only about preparation for the after life.
Art became more realistic, human emotion invaded literature and poetry, and the material world started to matter again. This led to the renaissance and an expansion of knowledge and wealth. It also meant growing corruption in the Church as the spiritual became secondary to the practical. Niccolo Machiavelli (1649 – 1527) took that humanism to its pragmatic ends justify the means conclusion with his book The Prince.
What’s most impressive is that the students captured the essence of what these three people symbolize. Augustine is the other-worldly mystic who warns about the corruption of the flesh and power of a love for God. Petrarch has his feet in both the Augustinian world and the new world of humanism. He writes stirring emotional poetry to a woman, but one he loves from afar. One student has the two of them reflecting on their similar experiences. Augustine’s most powerful moment was when opened the Bible at random and was touched by something written by Paul. Petrarch had done the same with Augustine’s Confessions atop Mt. Ventoux.
Machiavelli is the anti-Augustine. He is a humanist and a realist. Of course the Church and God is important, but one has to live in this world with humans who are, as all three agree, base in their nature. Humans are wicked, sinful and unclean.
Augustine’s solution is to go to the mountains and live separate from the depravity and ruin, in monasteries where life is devoted solely to the spiritual. Petrarch admired Augustine but fantasized about living in classical times. He would carry on conversations with Cicero and others from the past, wishing he could be in a world where knowledge and culture were advanced and developed. Machiavelli compartmentalized the spiritual in order to focus on the practical.
What impressed me is how the students got into the mindset of the era, be it the dilemmas of humanism, the impact of Aquinas and Aristotle, or the inherent tension in the methods of the Scholastics. They managed to mentally put themselves into that time frame just before the reformation.
That’s important. It is so easy to think “oh, they didn’t have science yet, they were backward…the Church is controlling everything, that’s wrong.” That’s a view of someone in the present imagining those structures of thought imposed on the here and now.
If we judge history through a modern lens we fail to understand the fundamental questions and dilemmas that the people at the time grappled with. We wouldn’t appreciate how their dilemmas were similar to issues we face now; these were intelligent people whose thinking was not so unlike our own. Moreover, once we endeavor to understand the past in context, it’s easier to see the imperfections of our own reality.
When we get to the end of the course students have an assignment to write about the present the way an Honors class 400 years from now might see it. What do we do that will be seen later as barbaric and ignorant? War? Chemicals in food? Eating meat?
How will religion and science change? Is the history of western civilization — and all other cultures — starting to merge into a global discourse? Might the intellectual history of the West be bracketed — ending at some year when cultural merging makes such cultural distinctions impossible to maintain?
The goal of the course is for students to see their academic journey and their place in the world as part of an unfolding story. How we think is shaped by our cultural past. Even an atheist has views and understandings that can be traced back to thinkers like Augustine, Aquinas and Luther. Instead of being in the present looking at a past whose sole purpose was to create this moment, we are part of an exciting unfolding of history, connected to the past and part of a future yet undiscovered.
And if one sees life that way, learning is not a chore, it’s fun. Learning does not end when college ends, but one is motivated to continue exploring and understanding the exciting and riveting history unfolding. Traveling to a city like Rome is not just visiting another place, but traveling through time as we connect with history. We are not in a world of stress, distractions and emptiness, but are part of the most exciting story ever told — being told by voices across time and space, each voice as loud and important as our own.
That sense of wonder has shaped how I look at life and my place in it. It provides a sense of wonder and awe that transcends daily routines. As a teacher, my goal is to provide opportunities for students to make that same discovery. These papers show evidence that these honors students are doing just that.