Four Rivals of Late Antiquity Lecture
Lisa M. Lane 2010
The text and audio by Lisa M. Lane is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License.
>> Where are we? There we go. All right. Do we have time to get into the black background thing so you can see the picture? Because I thought it was a good idea, even if it didn't work on the website, it was still a damn good idea. All right. So the connection that I made as I was flipping through the textbook was that we actually have, at first I was going to call it four aspects of late antiquity, and then I realized they were all competing against each other at the same time. So I thought maybe it's more like rivalry. They're all in contact with each other, all four of them. So what are the four? Can you tell from the four pictures? These are the four areas you read about.
>> Eastern [inaudible]
>> OK, Eastern Grome or Byzantium is here, in the lower right-hand corner.
>> Western... Milan and western...
>> Well, western meaning what? Because all the... OK, that one up in the right-hand corner is the mosque at Cordoba in Spain. I took these out of your textbooks, at least the ideas of them, out of your textbooks. So what aspect would that represent? Islam, right. That would be Islam. So you've got Byzantium here, Islam there, what are the other two areas that are rivals here?
>> Like the barbarians.
>> The barbarians, I've got a little hut for them. And then...
>> The church.
>> Yeah, but do you know what church that is?
>> Um... that's um...
>> You have the inside in your book, I think.
>> Nope, it's not the dioceses.
>> That one that sort of...
>> Yeah, this one.
>> I think it's... how do you pronounce that? Oh, OK.
>> Yes. It's this one. The inside? That's the outside.
>> What is it called?
>> It's called Santa Maria Maggiore, and it's on... make sure... I keep going S, T, Saint, Santa. Santa Maria Maggiore, because this is Italian. OK. So this is the inside that you've got in your book, and that's the outside. So Roman, the Roman Christian world, you know, there's so many things you could call it. The textbook goes for Catholic, the reason I don't like the world Catholic is that they weren't using it yet. In fact, the word Catholic isn't used until people start coming up with alternatives. And then they started saying, 'No! Catholic!' which at this point in history really just means orthodox Roman Christian as opposed to orthodox Byzantine Christian, which is what we now mean by Orthodox. It's very confusing. So I prefer to use the word Roman so that you keep it in the West, Roman Christianity. Yes, Daniel.
>> Are we talking about the like focus on the different like groups of Christianity at this time, like how they didn't like each other, or are we just kind of...
>> We're going to get more to that later. There's three times in history where that becomes important, and this is not quite yet one of them. So no, not yet, but soon, but soon. Yes.
>> What did you call the Western Rome?
>> Roman Christian.
>> Oh, Roman Christian.
>> Yes. Try Roman Christian or the Roman Church will work. Stick it in Rome, because if you start using words like "orthodox," that won't work. Right next door to the school here is a Greek Orthodox church, and the word "orthodox" means, from the Greek, "Byzantine tradition." And yet when you read your textbook about the Roman Church, they're talking about "orthodoxy," which means "sticking to the rules." Small O. Big O, Orthodox, small O, orthodoxy, sticking to the rules. So I prefer Roman Church or Roman Christian, just to keep them geographically where they're supposed to be. Yeah.
>> We have the Germanic Goths, Roman Christians, Byzantium, and Islam?
>> And those are the four areas that your chapter was divided into, well, three of them and they left out the Germanic barbarians, right? So I'm putting them back in by giving you the first part of the next chapter. I was trying to put them back... and you wouldn't let me, but I tried to put them back in. And we'll talk about them a little bit here too. OK, but this is about these four.
>> It was cute. What was that?
>> Oh, OK.
[ Chatter ]
>> I'm doing my Germans now. Germanic culture, they're first. In here, they're first. Oh, I'm sorry you can't see the King, he's too dark. All right. The idea here is just to pick up on what I was talking about last time, before we had Lab Day, I was talking about the decline of Rome, and we were talking about these barbarians who had invaded... I prefer migrated... and had taken over the area. So these are some of the cultural traditions they brought in during this timeframe of late antiquity. The dwellings, of course, as we mentioned last time, were not necessarily that permanent, from the Roman perspective. They don't tend to be made of stone, they don't tend to have mosaic floors or marble or things like that. They're made out of natural materials, these are people who came originally from the forest and chopped it down to do their farming and their pastoral stuff with the animals. Their leadership, and he's supposed to be kind of a flowering king, he's hard to see, but the idea is they get to be king not like the Judeo-Claudian emperors got to be king. How did the Germanic barbarian king get to be king? Come on, some of you play video games, how does it work?
>> Kill the... kill the other king?
>> He wins the battle.
>> Yeah, he wins the battle. He kills the others. He kills his rivals. Sometimes those rivals are related to him. But war, conquest, military prowess, respect of the community, honor, courage, all those Homeric values that go all the way back, he's got to have all of those, and he only holds power so long as he has those. So you've got to be strong and have support. You've got to be able to engender loyalty. That's the leadership style. It's got nothing to do with being born into it unless your family has earned respect. Yes.
>> Did they ever step down, or was it always like [inaudible], was it like, the law...
>> Sometimes they stepped down if they were older or ill or...
>> Really? OK.
>> But usually they lose.
>> Usually it would be by dying, right?
>> Yeah. Somebody dies or they lose or they're killed or a power rises against them. Other aspects of their culture that are important, and this is kind of similar to the Hellenistic stuff, are the way that their women were seen within their society is they were seen as being also strong.
[ Cough ]
>> Excuse me, I think my voice is [inaudible] today. Happens only on Mondays, that's why I lecture on Mondays. The women, while the men were away at war, which was frequently, had to take care of everything else. So they are running the land, they are making decisions, and they are in charge frequently. Not just the private life, but in public relationships if the guys are off doing battle. They are respected for their strength, producing strong babies, and taking care of the sources of wealth, property, managing property. So the respect for them in this culture is much closer to the Hellenistic way of doing things than it is the Greek or the Roman, who prefer their women to be only in charge of the domestic sphere. So I put up a warrior, warrior woman.
[ Cough ]
>> The other two aspects, I know we don't have trial by ordeal now, although there's times I wish we did. Anybody know what that is, how that works?
>> The punishment [inaudible]
>> The punishment is determined by this, by this trial by ordeal. You're accused of something... Yes, Dan?
>> Doesn't something happen, like [inaudible] if you like, like blister, you're guilty, if you're not blistering, you're innocent or something?
>> Yeah. It's a calling upon a supernatural knowledge to determine the outcome of a case. This particular one is over hot coals, but there's also water, ordeal by water, and all these other things where you test a body part, usually a hand, by doing something damaging to it, like burning it. And you wrap it up, and you sort of let nature decide, is it going to heal, is it going to fester. Whichever way it does, depending on the court, declares that you're guilty or not guilty. That's trial by ordeal. Now, ordeal can also be battle. It doesn't have to be hot coals or being dumped in water. Trial by ordeal can be battle. You accuse somebody of stealing something, they say they didn't do it, there's not enough evidence to decide the case in court, and so it's determined that the two will go at it and whoever wins must be right. So it's sort of this idea that the fates, if you like to use the Greek term, decide the case. Mm-hmm.
>> [inaudible] Holy Grail, remember that movie, [inaudible]
[ Coughs ]
>> Yeah, they were going to throw her into the pond, right? Yeah. Then if she sinks, the water... The water is holy, and she thinks, then the water has accepted her, and they drudge her out, and she coughs up a bunch of water and she's OK, whereas if she floats, the holy water has rejected her body, and she is evil, and then she's a witch.
>> How would they float?
>> I'm sorry?
>> How would they float?
>> You know, some people just float. You know, scientifically speaking, I'm not one of them, but I hear people do. I sink like a stone. Witnessing is really, this is like our whole system. When people get married now, they have to appear before either a religious leader or before a civil court, but at the same time, even though you're going like into the courthouse to get married, there have to be two witnesses, and they have to sign. It's odd because we don't need that anymore, because we have writing now. The idea of witnessing was really important in Germanic culture because they didn't have writing, so you needed people who would see an event happen. This particular event is an exchange of property, and this habit, this little ceremony of exchanging lands by literally taking a clod of dirt and putting it in the new owner's hands, has to be witnessed. This is a land transfer. This is a deed, this is a contract for the transfer of land, and it has to be witnessed by people. Your older people are really important, then, because they're the ones that would remember witnessing something a long time ago if the issue comes up again. "That's my land," "No, that's my land," "That was my grandfather's land," "No, that was my grandfather's land." "Let's bring in this grandfather who remembers what happened." So older people are your source of knowledge and are your living history, and witnessing, actually seeing something, you want as many people there as possible to see something. So if it's a marriage, which ties two families together and all their property, you want a bunch of people there. The whole idea of a wedding reception, having people get married and then witness the marriage, come from a long way away, the least you can do is feed them. That whole idea is Germanic. Our entire legal system. Witnesses appear in a court, right, and they swear. They swear that they'll tell the truth and they're a witness for the prosecution or a witness for the defense. They have to get up on the stand. They can make a deposition, they can write down, "I saw this happen. I saw this person kill this person," but they still have to come to court, right? They have to appear. Why? They wrote it down. They signed it and said, "I saw this."
>> It's tradition. They have to appear. It's like it's not real unless you're there.
>> It's also because the defense can challenge them, too.
>> It does, it gives them the chance to be challenged and to have their testimony challenged by other witnesses as well as by whoever is covering each side of the case. So you want your witnesses all together, and that whole thing is very dramatic and barbarianish. It's, you know, you've got to get everybody together and work it out right there with everybody present. I still see vestiges of that working here, you know, people like to have meetings and they want the meetings to be in person, and I say, you know, "Skype me in," or, "I'm right here at my desk. I don't want to go up to Oceanside Campus. It'll be fine," and, "No, no, no. You must be physically present." It's like, so not only isn't it good enough to write a deposition and not show up in court, you know, it's not good enough to actually be there on webcam talking and seeing what's going on either. We still have this feeling that if it's real, everybody's got to be in the room. There have to be witnesses coming in with information and together in the same spot. So very important. And obviously, in our legal system as well. So these are Germanic traditions that still affect the way we run things even though the reason for them was that the culture was preliterate. It became literate during the era that you read about over time and started writing things down, but at first it was a preliterate culture. Preliterate cultures also have incredible memories. If you have a vision of these old people being dragged into court and not remembering because they're old, no. They remember everything. When you start writing things down, you start forgetting. Ever hang out with little kids who don't read yet? They cram the reading into them so early now it's hard to find a little kid who doesn't read, but if you can find a preliterate child, they remember everything. And you can tell them like the folk stories, and they'll tell it back to you practically word for word, because before you start writing things down, your memory is set. And that holds for individual people, and it also holds for cultures. Preliterate cultures have extraordinary oral histories and memories. That's how come we could do the thing with Homer. We could actually read something that was not written down for hundreds of years after it was told because when it was told, it was told to generation after generation after generation of preliterate people who could remember the whole story, sometimes word-for-word. And so even though it seems like hey, you know, they're writing this story down 500 years later after it was first told, how can it be accurate? Well, probably pretty much. It's going to have some things added into it that the current culture wanted added in, we'll see that with Beowulf, which has all this Christian stuff added in even though the story is pre-Christian, but basically the storyline and what the characters said and how important they were and their relationships to each other, it really goes down very nicely as long as everybody's preliterate. Yeah.
>> Was Beowulf written at this time or afterward?
>> No, it's kind of at the... It's after this time, it's part of the invasions of the 9th-century cultures, so we think maybe the story came around earliest at the 8th century. Yeah. But this is the right culture, I mean, it's the larger... the Anglo-Saxons and the Northern people become more important in the 9th century, but in many ways, they're related to these, so, yeah. Other questions about my barbarians before I reluctantly leave them for other people?
[ Pause ] Theodore is looking a little blotchy. As you know from your reading, the Roman Empire divides. This is why questions about Rome falling are deceptive. In fact, I had a final examination when I was an undergraduate where the only question on the test was, "Why did Rome fall?" That was the final for this class. And that was the question. And of course, Rome didn't fall, it moved east, in a lot of ways. It doesn't really fall. If it did, completely, we wouldn't be talking about it, because there would be no cultural memory of it except for, "Wow, what's that big building over there?" or, "Look at that road! Isn't it great?" The reason we have cultural memory about Rome is because the Roman culture, in many ways, moved to what's called Byzantium. And Byzantium was a city, a Greek city originally, and I don't know if you're going to be able to see this map very well...
>> Is that what you put on your final?
>> No. I gave all the reasons that they had told me that Western Rome had fallen, because I knew that's what they meant. They weren't interested at all in Byzantium, in fact, that course, nobody was interested in anything east of Italy, really. So I didn't touch it. Because it's school, you have to do what's expected. And I didn't feel my instructor would be very sympathetic if I did. Yes.
>> I have a question. Why [inaudible]
>> Because we're going to get into that with the rest of the Early Middle Ages. I wanted that together with the rest of the Early Middle Ages. I want to make sure you got Islam. OK?
>> Oh, because that's in here, too. You had the Roman Empire in the East was in Chapter 7. There was a whole section on it. So that's what I'm covering. OK? And they start with the whole patriarchy idea, where the Roman Empire divides. And here's, in the two colors, you can see. And I deliberately chose this map because it divides the East and the West into diocese. What is a diocese?
>> A religion?
>> It has to do with religion. Who's in charge of a diocese?
>> A church.
>> A bishop.
>> A bishop. Yes. Now, you've got two different churches evolving here, right? You've got the one we're going to talk about in a minute, the Roman Christian Church, which is off in the West. But in the East you also have diocese, because in the East, the Emperor, once he moves over there, is even closer to the Church than is going to happen in the West, because he's safer over there. The East is not being attacked by very many barbarians. You are not getting that kind of pressure in the East. Rather, you're getting a Greek culture that sort of lives under Roman occupation for a while, while still retaining a lot of its Greekness. And it adapts into a forward-thinking Roman state under an Emperor. So their culture is quite different, and the reason it's significant for Western civilization to look at Byzantium is that it's there that they preserve all the stuff from Rome that later becomes important. And the number one thing is law. While the Germanic barbarians are handing each other clods of dirt and swearing as witnesses, in the East, Justinian is ordering his scholars to take Roman written law, find it, synthesize it, put it all together, and create a real Roman code of law. Justinian's code is kind of like Hammurabi's code in that both of them were collecting laws and putting them together, not writing new laws. But the fact that they put them together made them available to everybody, and Hammurabi's Babylonia, that was on big stone stele everywhere. Here in Byzantium, they start marking it down, writing it out, Justinian code, sometimes on tablets, sometimes on papyrus, but they're writing it down. That will come back into the Western Empire later on, mixed with Germanic traditions, and provide our current foundation for law.
[ Silence ] The other cool thing that happens in the East more so even than in the West is the development of religion is so tied into the state that it becomes a highly spiritual religious, I don't want to call it an advancement exactly, but easily communicated from person to person. The missionary activity in Byzantium for Christianity is much stronger and more coherent than it is in the West. The missionaries from the Byzantine church are going to be so good at what they do that they're going to be able to move up into Russia and convert Pagans there to their form, their Byzantium form, of Christianity, so that even today, the Russian Orthodox Church is much closer to the Greek Orthodox Church in how it thinks than it is to the Roman Catholic Church, even to the point where if you look at the Russian alphabet, the Cyrillic alphabet, it really looks like Greek. Because in bringing Christianity northward, the Byzantine monks also brought written language with their letters, which were Greek letters. Very active job. And one way they helped convert people, so many people, was through pictures. Iconography. Icons like that one, some of them very small and very portable, often painted on wood, carried with the missionary so that as they told their stories from the Bible and their stories about the life of Jesus, they could do it with pictures. And those little pictures fetch a fortune now on the antiques market, all those Greek icons that traveled all around the Eastern part of the Empire and up into Russia. Teaching through pictures.
[ Silence ] Fourth... I'm sorry, third. The Roman Christian experience. Now, here's where we need to look at our documents, so if you've got your documents book, we've got to get into these guys. There was a heart of the Roman Christian Experience. Saint Augustine is one of the founders, Church Fathers, they call them, going back to, as you can see, the 4th century. So let us take a look. In fact, all of our documents are from this slide, right? Yep, all of them. Two Augustines, a Benedict, and Gregory, of course, who really belongs in the next step. OK. The Confession, what did you think? Does anybody understand what he was talking about? Oh, somebody must know, just percentage-wise.
>> Isn't it, [inaudible] Saint Augustine and it was like about his, it was like a young guy who grew up in the time and basically like had a lot of trouble with society at first, and then it like was his conversion to Christianity, and like [inaudible] he convirts to Christianity.
>> Yeah. He's talking about how he got to that point.
>> Yeah. OK.
>> And isn't it like as well known as the first like autobiography kind of in Western...
>> OK. But what makes you say he had trouble in life before that time?
>> All the [inaudible] incidents he had, like stuff of...
[ Pause ] He talks about, um...
[ Pause ] That he'd like [inaudible] like troubles of youth. So, kind of hard to understand him.
>> [inaudible] I'm just curious about what kind of trouble he had exactly, because remember, he's writing this from the perspective of somebody who's converted and therefore sees all his previous life as being a problem. Yes.
>> He talks about all like how before he was [inaudible]
>> OK, what would those be?
>> Sex. Sex would be a major one for him. You have to take my word on that one.
>> Crime also?
>> Crime also. Thinking he knows better than other people what's good for him, right? He gives that up later on and said, 'I didn't really know what was good for me.' Yes. How do we know it was back to... where's sex? I'm not finding it. How do we know that's what it was?
>> "The dark concupiscence of the flesh."
>> Yeah, there we go. It's all over the place. "Unholy desires," "unchaste desires," "gulf of infamy."
>> Yeah. A lot of those are, yeah, some of them are sexual encounters. I would assume that some of them are. I mean, what other vices would there be that he would want to reject?
>> Drinking, probably. Yeah, that's a pretty common one. Hedonism. You remember us talking about these in terms of Hellenistic philosophy and Epicureanism and Stoicism and, you talking about the idea that going completely overboard with eating, drinking, sex, partying, just the sorts of things that make life enjoyable, he now sees differently as unchaste, unholy, as things that were bringing him further from God. There's a little bit of Stoicism in there, isn't there? Remember, Stoics believed that a human being had a soul, and then there was the earthly world, and then there was sort of this heavenly order, and that the idea to advance the self was to connect the soul directly to the heavenly order and bypass that which was earthly, the earthly things were not real, they're an illusion, and that the main purpose is to get your soul connected with the beyond. Is that what Augustine is doing? And if so, how is he doing it? Through what path? What tool is he using to make that connection?
>> That's a big part of it, right? He's sacrificing all the things in here. Not only is he sacrificing, not only is he giving them up, but he's seeing them differently, right? He's seeing them as being earthly and evil and horrible and stuff he shouldn't have done. What's out here now, in the Christian world? What's here? Because Stoicism's pre-Christian. What is this for a Christian? Even now, what is this for a Christian?
>> Is it the afterlife?
>> Heaven, yeah.
>> Or Hell.
>> God's here, right? Jesus Christ is here, right?
>> Yes. So that's the connection here, is you are, he talks about love, and he doesn't mean earthly love when he talks about love. He wouldn't be talking about earthly love because he's rejected that. He's talking about Jesus Christ said love, or Jesus Christ as love. So he is it. And all the stuff inbetween, he's seeing as being bad now that he's converted. So it's like, now you get this idea of sin, that you sin, the confessions are confessions of his sins. He has gone through what's now from his perspective a bad time because he was sinning, whereas an Epicurean would consider it to be a good time. He's saying, 'No, this was a bad time. I sinned, now I'm forgiven, I go back and I confess my sins, these are all the things I have done in my life. And now I get Paradise because I have rejected those things and become a holy person.' Mm-hmm?
>> One of the first few lines, even recounting them in his head was a sin, he was even apologizing for like thinking about it [inaudible]
>> Yeah. Exactly. 'I'm sorry I have to even talk about this.' Yeah. 'But I have to confess,' because confession is one of the seven sacraments of the Roman Christian Church. You have to confess, along with marriage and baptism and all the other sacraments, one of the most important things you have to do in what becomes Catholicism, in Roman Christianity, is to confess your sins. That's what he's doing, and he goes on and on about them because he's got a lot of them. He's like psychologically purging this stuff, right, to get to the place that he wants to be. So that's what I meant by in what context is he putting these things he did when he was young. He's putting them in the context of a devout and recent Christian and then is looking back at his previous deeds. Now, make that bigger with the City of God. Take it from a single person making a confession to a whole society. Two cities have been formed here, the earthly city by the love of self, the heavenly, by God, the contempt of self. Where are these cities? What are they?
[ Silence ]
>> One of them's Heaven? Is that what... Good.
>> Oh, that's interesting too, yeah. I mean, remember, this guy is writing, if you look at the dates here, 410, which is when they're thinking this was written... Yeah, Rome was sacked then. It was completely run over by barbarians, mostly from the South.
>> Could that be purging?
>> The Goths. Yeah, there could be a whole purging idea there too that maybe, maybe the Roman city was the City of Man too. I mean, maybe there's a religious connotation to this that Rome, you certainly, I mean, if you're looking for something earthly, you know, look at those last days of the Roman Empire. And that city is being destroyed. If that's the City of Man, if it's Rome, I'm not sure that Constantinople is the option, because he wouldn't have known that much about... He knows a little, because he's got Eastern experience, he's from an Eastern city, but I'm not sure he wants to leave Rome and go to Constantinople. I think he might want to leave Rome and go here, whatever you want to call this. Something like that, either God or spiritual nature. Rome is being destroyed, something that was important that was supposed to last thousands of years is being destroyed as he stands there. OK, the place is falling apart. Where can you go? The City of God, yeah. So spirituality, then, is a way out of all the bad things that are happening, so it has a larger social context, too. If you don't separate the two, then with Rome falls Christianity, right? I mean, think about it for a minute. Christianity, which, of course, began in Palestine, was solidified as a religion in Rome. You could see it if you were a Christian as a Christian city, as a place where Christianity originated, and barbarians, Pagan barbarians are coming and taking it over. Could the fall of Rome mean the fall of Christianity if you're trying to save Christianity while the barbarians attack. That's how this document has been seen, it's been seen as that why he became a saint, it wasn't because he confesed that he'd slept with lots of people. He became a saint because he's seen as saving Christianity during the time that Rome was falling because the fear is that Christianity would've fallen with it, it would've just disappeared as a religion, taken over by Pagans. Yes, you can start.
>> In the reading, they just hit on it briefly in the book, but didn't it, it said that the barbarians took away the Arianism doctrine of Christianity.
>> Yeah. They didn't take it away. They tended to practice it, and it became a heresy because they did.
>> Which is why they call them barbarians to begin with.
>> But so, and the view of the Germanic culture, did they have a religion such as Arianism, or did they practice anything like that? Was it pretty much Pagan?
>> What happened, we think, is that before the Christian Church was truly organized, there were already missionaries. There were already people who had belief in Christianity in its earlier forms who went out into those Pagan areas and converted Pagan tribes to Christianity, and those Pagan tribes converted to the Christian form that they understood based on the missionary who brought it to them, and often that was in Arian form. So what begins to happen is that as the central Roman Church becomes more powerful, they see that Arianism as being a heresy rather than a path into Christianity, and they go after it. And the next set of missionaries tries to convince the Pagan tribes of the error of their ways. So Arianism is not Paganism, it's a heresy of Christianity. Yeah.
>> I understand that, but...
>> But that they became Arian, if you will...
>> The Church itself?
>> Well, the Germanics.
>> Yeah. No, they did. And in a lot of places, they have trouble getting them to convert to orthodoxy. It's one of the biggest struggles of the early church.
>> Straight through, I'd say, the 10th century, they're going to have trouble with these tribes insisting that Arianism is the way to go, and insisting that they are Christians because they believe that. Unfortunately, we don't have a whole lot of written evidence because they didn't tend to write. We've only got the other side, the Orthodox side. So yeah, it was a major problem for hundreds of years. Mm-hmm.
>> But then why do you say that Rome was sacked by Pagans if they were Arian Christians?
>> Some of them were Arian Christians, some of them were not. And some of them were destroying... None of them, to my knowledge, was destroying Rome because it was Christian. This is like, Augustine's take on this doesn't seem to actually relate to the facts. They want to hit the center to stop being bothered by the Roman army, and they want to take the goods that Rome has at its center, the extraordinary wealth, particularly the stockpile of the Emperor's. They want the goods, they want the stuff. So their religious predilection, tribe for tribe, one tribe would be Pagan, one tribe might be Arian, isn't really relevant to the sacking of Rome, at least to the people who were subjected to it. So you've really got a mix there. You've got a mix there. And they would see, the Roman Church, would see them as Pagans no matter what, because the Arianism was seen already by 410 as a heresy. So either way, they're out of God's protection zone, yeah. And that's probably more to the anger of [inaudible]. Augustine doesn't really express this anger. He had said that, 'Look, here's an alternative to all this furor going on right now: escape.' Escape the earthly world and come to the City of God. And that's his way out. Did it preserve the Christian Church? I don't know, but it certainly helped, because that's a concept that people can relate to. And remember, they're picking up from Judaism here with the idea that the religion travels with the person. Remember that from Judaism, the cohesion without a particular place, that God is inside, that he travels with you and your group? So now, Rome can fall and Christianity can survive because it will reside within the individuals. It doesn't reside within the state. Whereas in the Eastern Roman Empire, in Byzantium, to a very great extent, Christianity's survival is dependent on the Emperor, because over there, it is connected with the state. Yes, [inaudible]
>> So I'm a little confused. I'm a Christian, but I'm also Catholic. Where did the Roman Catholic name come in?
>> The separation, when we start referring to the Roman Christian Church as the Roman Catholic Church, traditionally what historians do is they start doing that in the 16th century, right before the end of our class this semester, when the Protestants break away and you must identify the group they're breaking away from. And they claim to be the true Christians. And by that point, they say the Roman Church is corrupt. So at that point we get the separation between the two. That is light years ahead of where we are here. That's why I keep using the term Roman Christian. And it's still, that is still a big argument between Protestants and Catholics, because there are Protestant groups who say Catholics aren't Christian, and that's, you know, designed to start a fight, they think.
>> So this document [inaudible] it's OK for Rome to fall because...
>> Yeah, it makes perfect sense, as awful as it is.
>> So he's kind of like, 'OK, [inaudible] believe in God, so the physical part of Rome can fall, but we still have...
>> It is. That's a good way of putting it. The physical part of Rome can fall. It's going to happen, it's not like he can do anything, it's not like he can stop it. The physical part of Rome can fall and it's OK. He's not seeing it, incidentally, as a moral lesson yet, that's going to happen later. There'll be historians who will look back and say, "Rome fell because it was un-Christian." He's not doing that, but he is saying, yeah, it is OK for the physical Rome to disappear because the spiritual Rome can remain. That is what he's identifying as the City of God, and that's how theologians have interpreted it for a really long time. Now, this aspect of the actual Church, to really understand what's happening with monasteries, and we'll get into this more, you have to understand a little bit about the heirarchy, the way the Church worked. There were four bishops, originally. In the early, early Christian Church, there were four bishops. Three of them were in the Eastern Empire, that is, Byzantium. They will come under the control of the Emperor. Only one of them was in the West. And that was in Rome itself. What do we call the Bishop of Rome today?
>> [All together] The Pope.
>> The Pope. And this is why they have it, because he's the only one left. Now, in a time of decentralization, I mean, that's, people say barbarian invasion, I prefer to call it decentralization. Instead of having everything run from the city of Rome, that entire huge empire, now you've got barbarian kingdom-forming, and each one of them is kind of running themselves. You've got decentralized power. There's no such thing, then, as the Western Roman Empire the cohesive political unit, which makes this guy the only person who is in any sort of political position to say, "I'm in charge." I'm in charge of the West. The West is his area, as part of the Church, it's what he's supposed to be running. Later on, that's going to give him justification to have more political power. For now, he has many diocese and bishops under him, and they have priests under them, and that's how the Church is physically structured. However, this hierarchy has to be with administration. It's administrating areas. These people are managers. Bishops manage large areas, priests manage small areas, parrishes, small territories. It's based on land, in other words. And there were people who said, 'Well, this isn't the structure we want to be part of, we want to be over here.' We don't care about the earthly running of the Church, we want to be in a community with likeminded people creating what we think God wants us to do. So monasteries, you kind of have to put them over here. They're not really in the hierarchy. A bishop can say, "OK, you can build one in my area," but it's usually a group of monks who create one outside the structure, run directly by the Church, and ultimately, a lot of monasteries will simply report directly to the head of the Church and won't have much to do with [inaudible] bishops at all. So these communities form. Now, looking at their documents... Yes, I'm sorry.
>> So with the Pope, during the time period where you're in right now in the chapter, the Pope, he'll have all the power? Or is that later?
>> That's later. The Pope doesn't have all the power. You know how the Pope gets all the power? There's two ways. One way is Charlemagne, actually, in terms of politics. Charlemagne, and here's a date you can actually remember that you can put somewhere and store, because it's so easy. 800. How's that? That's an easy one. 800. Remember 800, because that's the year Charlemagne was crowned as Emperor of the Franks, that was his people, the Franks, the foundation of modern France and Germany is Charlemagne. Charlemagne was one of these Germanic leaders, but he was Orthodox Christian, Roman Christian, not Arian. And the Franks had all become Orthodox Christians, so he developed a scheme whereby he would have the Bishop of Rome crown him Emperor. This gave both parties more power, why would that be the case?
>> Because the Bishop of Rome had a direct line to that Emperor that he named Emperor.
>> He made him. Yeah. That implies that he has the right to make Emperors.
>> That he has that power.
>> Right. That implies... This was Charlemagne's idea, I thought it was awfully clever. The idea is to go ask to be crowned by the Church, and that increases the Bishop's power because then he can say, "Well, obviously I have the right to crown emperors, one just came to me and asked me." And at the same time, how does it increase Charlemagne's power?
>> Because people follow God, and he's...
>> That's right. If the Bishop is representing God through the Church, and then obviously Charlemagne's whole empire is blessed, and so is his leadership. It's a good deal. 800. Good year for both Church and for central Europe being unified under this guy who came up with this. Yeah.
>> Do all kings after that [inaudible]?
>> Well, then emperors start to, yeah, get in line. And the difficulty here is that some of them don't want that, because they don't want to be part of Orthodox Christianity. Some of them don't want to do it because they don't want to acknowledge the power of the Bishop of Rome, or they're countering Charlemagne and trying to take big chunks of his empire, which they succeed in doing later on. But what you're talking about, then, is by 800, you're starting to get this guy being more powerful. Before that, he's just kind of saying, 'I'm in charge,' but he's not really very much in charge. OK, the purpose of the monasteries. What did these guys want to be doing, the Benadictines? What did they want to do? They want to get together, they want to pray a lot. What else do they want to do?
>> Are they following Saint Augustine's path? Are they getting out here? They say they are.
>> Is it more of an individual, like, their own realm?
>> Yeah, they could build their own little City of God. "Here's our little City of God."
>> Yeah. [inaudible]
>> Monasticism, this is monasticism. This is the founding Benedictines, the Benedictines are considered to be one of the early founders. Now, there's previous groups that claim that as well, going all the way back to the Essenes in the Bible. And there are other groups that got together for spiritual purposes and went off and lived by themselves. This was the first big movement inside the Roman Christian Church, where they say they're Orthodox, but they're creating their own [inaudible]. So they want obedience, right, what's the document say they're trying to do? This is kind of their plan. The Rule of Saint Benedict, they call it, is sort of their list of what they're into. What are those things? We have obedience. What else?
>> In the face of what? What are they trying to be humble about?
[ Pause ]
>> No matter who you [inaudible], or who you are, who you have been. If you just be humble and join our group, then...
>> Join our group.
>> Then you'll [inaudible]
>> Check your previous life at the door and face that you're just like everybody else. So if you were rich before, it's OK. If you were a criminal before, it's OK. You check that stuff at the door when you become a monk, and you become humble in the Church. Do they own anything?
>> [All together] No.
>> They have to give up all their worldly goods. You can't bring your stuff!
>> That would [inaudible]
>> Right. You wouldn't be humble anymore if you had identifying markers of stuff. So you've got to leave that all behind. The monastery, interestingly enough, can own whatever it wants. The individual monks can't own anything. Then monasteries become filthy rich because what they've got going here, if you take a look at it closely, look at 48, what are they supposed to do all day, just sit around and pray?
>> [All together] No.
>> They're supposed to work. Now, if you get a group of focused people together who pray a bunch of times a day and the rest of the time are working, what's going to happen, say, economically?
[ Several students answer at once ]
>> Yeah, the monastery itself is going to become extremely wealthy.
>> They're disciplined.
>> They're disciplined.
>> They're not going to argue.
>> They're orderly. They're not going to argue. They're totally obedient. Whatever the head of the monastic house says goes. "We're going to clear that field and plant grapes, boys! Let's go!"
>> Absolutely, there's no taxes involved, they're in the church.
>> Well, not yet.
>> Well, there will be. And they won't have to worry about that. And they can do whatever they want. They can grow the grapes, make the wine, sell the wine, make a fortune. They do. Yeah.
>> [inaudible] military structure.
>> [inaudible] when I was reading, I thought it was just [inaudible]
>> Real small scale.
>> Yeah. And a lot of [inaudible] like take orders, put your head down and do work.
>> Yeah. And they get to expand that way as well. They're not called to rescue anybody else like the military, but they can expand their own little empire, because people who want to get in good with God who have a lot of money who aren't being so humble, you know, who are still living in the City of Man because they own 5000 acres, when they die, they will leave those 5000 acres to the Benedictine Monastery hoping that it will help them get into Heaven given the live they've led, and the monastery expands even more and becomes even wealthier. This is why you see in the book the cycle of monasteries. First we start with the Benedictines and then a group branches off and does this and another group branches off... They're branching off because the monastery itself is becoming too worldly. As they become wealthy, some of the monks start to feel this is not exactly the escape from earthly stuff I had anticipated. And they go off and found another order, trying to get away from the money. And then as we saw, yeah, they argue that the Church should be exempt from taxes, that their real loyalty and order is to the Church itself, not to the local ruler, so they shouldn't have to pay taxes. They get exempt from that. Not only do they get exempted for that, but later on, they claim 10% of the tithes from everybody to get a donation to the Church. It's a sweet deal. Takes a couple hundred years, but it's a deal. All right, ready for the fourth? [inaudible] Yeah, it's on. Oh, you can't see the mosque, even though I put it on black. Well, you saw it on the front page. Islam is arriving at the same time, 7th century. Yes.
>> That mosque is now a Catholic church, correct?
>> This one?
>> Yeah. [inaudible]
>> And there's a whole bunch of buildings in Spain that, although they have been, well they, the architecture itself is particular to Spanish Islamic architecture, and a lot of the buildings, even the ones that are no longer practicing, are still retaining the style.
[ Pause ]
>> I wanted you to see that, I don't know if you can see the map up there. Arabia was seriously connected to everybody else. If you think about it, it's kind of central, and very close to Byzantium, renamed Constantinople, and now what's the name of that city? It's Istanbul now. So it was Byzantium, then it was Constantinople, then it was Istanbul, and there's still people, particularly people descended from Latin people who will not call it Istanbul even today, they'll call it Constantinople. You have to be careful where you say you want a water taxi to over there. They are connected not only with those areas up north, like Constantinople and Palestine, but water rigs across the Mediterranean, and northern rigs as well. Mecca and Medina were both big trading cities, trading goods between East and West and making a lot of money doing it. Muhammad himself was from a trading family, the Quraysh tribe. And as they expand, you can see by 750, OK, so this is the same late antiquity period as everything else we've been talking about, by 750, they have converted large areas to Islam, which means basically the leaders have converted to Islam, in order to join, in many cases, the trading network, because the opportunities for wealth were extraordinary, but the Muslims only traded with Muslims. So it was a fantastic incentive to convert to Islam. I'm not sure which questions you have about Islam given this context. So, yeah.
>> [inaudible] Christianity and the trade networks, they had more [inaudible]
>> Christianity also spread because of trade networks. Remember I told you about those Byzantine monks cutting north into Russia? Yeah, that was partly inspired by love of God, it was also partly inspired by the desire to open up trade routes along the Russian rivers. And there were conversions... You know, you think of or look at conversion and because of our own particularly individualistic way of looking at religion, we tend to think of it as a personal decision. And that's just the Judeo-Christian tradition come through 18th-century individualism. But in these times, religion was not necessarily a personal issue. It was for certain groups of Jews and certain groups of Christians, but overall, when you get these mass conversions, do you actually think these missionaries are sitting down with a tribe of 4000 people and convincing everybody that Jesus Christ is Lord? No. The head of the tribe, the ruler of the kingdom, is deciding, either for personal reasons of his own, as representative of his people, he's making a religious decision, or he's making an economic decision. So not just Islam, but also Christianity spread wildly. The reason they can paint whole areas one color on a map and say, "This is the Christian area," or, "This is Islam," is because of that. Now, I don't want you thinking that every single person in that zone is Muslim. I don't want you thinking that every single person in a map of Christian Europe is Christian. We've got Jews, we've got Pagans, we've got Arians, depending on how you feel about them, and all of those people in here too. But the area has gone predominantly Muslim, meaning the leadership has said, 'This is now a Muslim state.' And that usually means Muslim law and control, and worship, of course. But from a historical perspective, this is more political and economic than it is based on individual spiritual feelings. This is kind of, are you sensing a kind of a tussle here between spiritual goals in all of these places and the real world or the earthly world where your goal is to make a lot of money for your clan, control a lot of land for your tribe, or have a lot of goods to trade? Those are earthly values. And we're seeing a tussle here in all of these cultures between those earthly goals and the idea for something bigger, for something more spiritual that connects you more beyond those earthly things. Islam has that just as much as Roman Christianity has it, their, this idea of religion is somehow searching for something bigger than the self, while at the same time, all the political and economic expansion are enriching in a more earthly way, if that makes sense. Other questions on Islam? Because I'm not giving you an actual history of Islam very much here.
>> Are we going to go into the origin?
>> Only to say that the origin is in Muhammad thinking he's gone crazy because he's hearing an angel tell him to recite something and he doesn't know what to recite. And he thinks he's going nuts, and he tells his wife that he's going crazy because this angel is yelling at him to recite. And he has an idea of some things he'd like to say, but he thinks he's losing it. And she says, 'You're a prophet in the tradition of the previous prophets,' in the tradition of Judaism, in the early tradition of Christianity. You're a prophet, and therefore what you're supposed to recite is what you are told by God. And he starts doing that and collects followers. But what we're talking about is 622. We're talking about AD 622. If the life of Jesus were, say, around AD 1, given our timeline, and you're talking about Judaism going back several thousand years before that, then by the time you get to Muhammad, he's kind of a latecomer. And what he's absorbed is both Judaism and Christianity, and has decided that there are principles in both of them, there were messages that were sent to people in both of them that people aren't receiving. And so Muhammad's referred to as the final prophet, the final messenger, God's last effort to contact us and say, 'Get it together morally, please!' He tried with Judaism, didn't work. He tried with Jesus, the second prophet in Islam, didn't work. People are still doing bad things. So you needed Muhammad to get the message directly from God in God's own words through the angel to give people one final message before it's too late. That's why he's the last. 622. So that's, that's important to know.
>> At what point does Islam separate into Shi'ite and Sunni?
>> The 12th...
>> Is that earlier or later?
>> Yeah, it's later. You go down generations, because some people looked at Muhammad. Muhammad said, 'I'm not Jesus. Don't treat me like Jesus, I don't want any icons of me.' In fact, after the first few years, he said, 'Nobody's allowed to draw me anymore. I don't want to be passed down that way. I'm just a mouthpiece is all I am.' But what some people say, 'No, no! In the old traditions of the sense, the ruler of all Islam has to be descended from Muhammad.' For the first few, they were, when they split and sort of the argument of merit supports one person and the line of descent supports another, that's when you get the split. There are four or five generations, but yeah.
>> Which one believes in the descendant, the Shi'ites or Sunnis?
>> Believes in which? The descent? The Shi'ites, it has to be descended from Muhammad, it's about blood. Which makes perfect sense. All of these people were tribal peoples in Arabia, where everything was based on blood. I mean, it shouldn't be mysterious why that would happen. But it's the Shi'ites who believe that the 12th Imam, they started tracking the descendants from Muhammad, and they got down to 12 and they lost track. They couldn't find this person, it was somebody who was born, maybe didn't have any children or whatever. They believe the 12th Imam is going to come back at some point and the line will reemerge. And the Sunnis say, 'No, no, no, this is all based on merit, and whoever was chosen by the Muslims to be the leader is the legitimate leader.' So in that sense, the Sunnis are more democratic than the Shi'ites.
>> Yeah, and we've still got this, yeah, still got this conflict. Yes.