Cunnan - User contributions [en]

Courtly love

2003-11-14T04:46:41Z

203.31.48.3:

An important concept in medieval romance, where you are in love with someone unreachable, where to actually sleep with them would invite disaster, so instead you pine after them, serve them loyally, write poems and songs in their honour etc.

Examples of the medieval romantic disasters from doing something with someone you shouldnt include Lancelot and Guinevere in the story of King Arthur, [[Abelard]] and Heloise, Henry VIII and a number of young ladies, and his daughter Elizabeth and a number of young men.

Remember, friends dont let friends sleep with Tudors.

Anton

Troubadour

2003-11-14T04:41:55Z

203.31.48.3:

=== History of the Troubadours ===

The nature and origins of the troubadour repertoire hold a remarkable place in the history of music. Its origins are remarkable because they seem to have burst forth as an already developed form with no antecedents. Its nature is remarkable because its fortunes are so closely linked to the fortunes of its homeland in the south of [[France]], known as [[Occitania]].

The man credited with the genesis of the troubadour tradition is [[Guilhem IX]], Count of Poitiers, one of the most powerful feudal lords of his day. He was the inspiration for most later poets who were to follow in the troubadour tradition.

The troubadours were by their nature itinerant performers. They could come from either noble families or common stock, but neither would have an effect on their reputation. There were even female troubadours, called trobaritz, though very little of their music remains to us.

The troubadour tradition was already waning by the time of the [[Albigensian Crusade]], but this turned out to be the death knell. Many of the nobles who had welcomed troubadours in the past were displaced. Some troubadours managed to find their way to the court of [[Alfonso X]], and the [[trouvere]]s and minnesangers who were both highly influenced by the troubadours continued on, but in Occitania at least the troubadours were a thing of the past.

=== Poetic Style ===

The poetry of the troubadour songs covered many topics, from the profound to the humorous and from war at home to [[The Crusades]]. However, the are best known for expounding on the theme of fin' amors, or [[courtly love]].

=== Musical Style ===

Our knowledge of troubadour music comes from the four or so chansonniers that contain music. They are not written in modern [[musical notation]], so much of their style must be inferred.

==== Melodic Style ====

Talk:Troubadour

2003-11-14T03:29:45Z

203.31.48.3:

Conrad,

Do we have any examples of actual troubadour stuff ?

Was it about courtly love, or what ?

Anton

Talk:Peter Abelard

2003-11-14T01:16:46Z

203.31.48.3:

Tobin,

The way you have changed it makes the story worse.

The most interesting thing about Abelard isnt his work on the Scholastic Method. It's the fact he is half of one of the great all-time tragic love stories.

Sex, violence, forbidden love - thats the part of it that the audience is interested in. Thats what keeps em reading to the end.

Think of it this way ... bunch of drunk fighter-types around a campfire at Festival.

We both tell the story of Peter Abelard.

You start with his important contribution to the Scholastic method.

I start with how his dick got him into deep, deep trouble.

Which of us is goanna get the audience going 'Geez, these medieval philosophers were cool. I should read a copy of that History of My Calamaties book'.

I write think stuff because I love this stuff, and there are some great stories in there.

I dont want to write the sort of dry, bloodless history that I can read in any second-rate encyclopedia.

I cant stop you amending my work, but I can ask you to stop making it worse.

Anton

----
Anton,

Fair enough, I moved it because it seemed quite relevant an I thought it was lost down near the bottom. Perhaps something about his relationships near the top with most of the detail (including the text from his autobiography) further down the article would be best.

[[User:Tobin|Tobin]]

Tobin,

That would be why I wrote it the way I did, right ?

And the chunk of the autobiography, and the way my text pushed the reader into reading it was very deliberate ; by getting people to, like, read actual primary sources, they get less scared of them (same thing with the Scholastics page ; you can talk about how cool they are, but that teby Aquinas on just war talksa to today, as well as to Lochac, and says in a page what Grotius takes chapters to do).

Anton

Talk:Peter Abelard

2003-11-14T00:49:58Z

203.31.48.3:

Peter Abelard

2003-11-14T00:41:08Z

203.31.48.3:

Born in 1079, died in 1142. '''Peter Abelard's''' finest achievement was probably developing the [[Scholastic]] method of putting the arguments for and against a proposition in the same document, where they could be analysed and the truth teased out of contradictory statements. However, the book he did this in, 'Sic et Non', got him into some trouble with the authorities, as it mixed orthodox and dodgy opinions without giving any judgement on them.

The work that really got him into trouble though was his book 'On The Trinity'. Bernard of Clairvaux (as in the later [[Saint Bernard]]) got really upset at it, and it was formally condemned at the Council of Soissons in [[1121]], and Peter Abelard was made to personally burn his copy. Fortunately R. Stolze, a [[19th century]] German guy, found a copy someone had made and stashed, and published it. Many negative things can (and have) been said about 19th Century historians, but they did save a lot of good material.

== His relationship with Heloise ==
Peter Abelard is notable for being one of the two best [[Scholastics]] never to get a Sainthood. In his case, it was because of his girlfriend Heloise, or more accurately what he got busted doing with his girlfriend Heloise.

This is what he said about her, in his autobiography, Historia Calamitatum
("The Story of My Misfortunes") ...

:'''OF HOW, BROUGHT LOW BY HIS LOVE FOR HELOISE, HE WAS WOUNDED IN BODY AND SOUL'''

:NOW there dwelt in that same city of Paris a certain young girl named Heloise, the neice of a canon who was called Fulbert. Her uncle's love for her was equalled only by his desire that she should have the best education which he could possibly procure for her. Of no mean beauty, she stood out above all by reason of her abundant knowledge of letters. Now this virtue is rare among women, and for that very reason it doubly graced the maiden, and made her the most worthy of renown in the entire kingdom. It was this young girl whom I, after carefully considering all those qualities which are wont to attract lovers, determined to unite with myself in the bonds of love, and indeed the thing seemed to me very easy to be done. So distinguished was my name, and I possessed such advantages of youth and comeliness, that no matter what woman I might favour with my love, I dreaded rejection of none. Then, too, I believed that I could win the maiden's consent all the more easily by reason of her knowledge of letters and her zeal therefor; so, even if we were parted, we might yet be together in thought with the aid of written messages. Perchance, too, we might be able to write more boldly than we could speak, and thus at all times could we live in joyous intimacy.

:Thus, utterly aflame with my passion for this maiden, I sought to discover means whereby I might have daily and familiar speech with her, thereby the more easily to win her consent. For this purpose I persuaded the girl's uncle, with the aid of some of his friends to take me into his household--for he dwelt hard by my school--in return for the payment of a small sum. My pretext for this was that the care of my own household was a serious handicap to my studies, and likewise burdened me with an expense far greater than I could afford. Now he was a man keen in avarice and likewise he was most desirous for his niece that her study of letters should ever go forward, so, for these two reasons I easily won his consent to the fulfillment of my wish, for he was fairly agape for my money, and at the same time believed that his niece would vastly benefit by my teaching. More even than this, by his own earnest entreaties he fell in with my desires beyond anything I had dared to hope, opening the way for my love; for he entrusted her wholly to my guidance, begging me to give her instruction whensoever I might be free from the duties of my school, no matter whether by day or by night, and to punish her sternly if ever I should find her negligent of her tasks. In all this the man's simplicity was nothing short of astounding to me; I should not have been more smitten with wonder if he had entrusted a tender lamb to the care of a ravenous wolf. When he had thus given her into my charge, not alone to be taught but even to be disciplined, what had he done save to give free scope to my desires, and to offer me every opportunity, even if I had not sought it, to bend her to my will with threats and blows if I failed to do so with caresses? There were, however, two things which particularly served to allay any foul suspicion: his own love for his niece, and my former reputation for continence.

:Why should I say more? We were united first in the dwelling that sheltered our love, and then in the hearts that burned with it. Under the pretext of study we spent our hours in the happiness of love, and learning held out to us the secret opportunities that our passion craved. Our speech was more of love than of the books which lay open before us; our kisses far outnumbered our reasoned words. Our hands sought less the book than each other's bosoms -- love drew our eyes together far more than the lesson drew them to the pages of our text. In order that there might be no suspicion, there were, indeed, sometimes blows, but love gave them, not anger; they were the marks, not of wrath, but of a tenderness surpassing the most fragrant balm in sweetness. What followed? No degree in love's progress was left untried by our passion, and if love itself could imagine any wonder as yet unknown, we discovered it. And our inexperience of such delights made us all the more ardent in our pursuit of them, so that our thirst for one another was still unquenched.

:In measure as this passionate rapture absorbed me more and more, I devoted ever less time to philosophy and to the work of the school. Indeed it became loathsome to me to go to the school or to linger there; the labour, moreover, was very burdensome, since my nights were vigils of love and my days of study. My lecturing became utterly careless and lukewarm; I did nothing because of inspiration, but everything merely as a matter of habit. I had become nothing more than a reciter of my former discoveries, and though I still wrote poems, they dealt with love, not with the secrets of philosophy. Of these songs you yourself well know how some have become widely known and have been sung in many lands, chiefly, methinks, by those who delighted in the things of this world. As for the sorrow, the groans, the lamentations of my students when they perceived the preoccupation, nay, rather the chaos, of my mind, it is hard even to imagine them.

Their relationship had issues ; read his Historia Calamatium for the details, but lets just say "upset uncle, fruit knife".

Dealing with his, like, work rather than his personal life, it was about as stormy.

== External Links ==
* [http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/abelard-histcal.html Peter Abelard's autobiography].
* [http://www.aug.edu/langlitcom/humanitiesHBK/handbook_htm/heloise&abelard.htmThe love letters between Abelard and Heloise].

== Attribution ==
This article is based on an original article by [[Anton de Stoc]], you can find a copy of the [http://www.sca.org.au/cunnan/wiki.phtml?title=Peter_Abelard&oldid=2430 original in the article's history].

User talk:Anton

2003-11-14T00:39:26Z

203.31.48.3:

Hello Anton,

Please do not add "Anton notes:" to articles started by other users. Doing so suggests that the "notes" added are yours alone and can't be changed by other users (which goes against the wiki idea in the extreme). If you feel that what you write must be kept separate then put your comments on new pages (eg. [[Anton's views on Religion in the Renaissance]], [[Anton's views on Popes]], [[Anton's views on Universities]], [[Anton's views on Italian wars]], etc). Wiki articles are not ongoing discussions between users. The idea of a wiki is a set of community edited articles not a set of different users opinions stuck together. If you wish to discuss something in an article then please do so on the article's talk page.

I will begin to separate your opinions into new pages when I have time.

The wiki is not a soapbox.

[[User:Tobin|Tobin]]

----

Hey Anton,

If you don't think the core studies of the Humanists caused people to question papal authority then provide some concrete examples. Sure, Wyclif and his crew did so too, but then so did many others, and many of those were Humanists. I'll give you the point about Italy. Not sure I agree with you about John of Paris (again, provide reasons) or the Imperialist/Papacy thing -- why did the emperors remain Catholic?

Calvin may not have been a champion of free thought, but neither was John XXXIII if you're going to raise the subject of burning at the stake. Check your foot, I think you just shot it.

Perhaps we need pages on "the reformation from a papist point of view" and "the reformation from a humanist/calvinist/lutheran point of view". You can't just go on quoting Thomas More like he wrote the book on it.

Hey Tobin,

The reformation was a soapbox. As was the renaissance, to a certain extent. Although I'll give you the one about the talk pages. Anton's a scholastic, I'm a humanist. Deal with it.

(Actually, I'm a Jew, so this whole thing is really meta- to me, but I'm coping).

[[User:Del|Del]]

----

While we're at it, Anton.

When did the reformation start?

Wrong answer: 1517.

Another wrong answer: immediately after the renaissance ended.

Correct answer: about 1347. The same time as the renaissance started. If the Decameron wasn't a reformist document, then I don't know what is.

That's it from me for tonight, I'm going to bed.

Oh, and Tobin, keep up the good work but I think you still have to deal with the academics.

[[User:Del|Del]] 00:25, 11 Nov 2003 (EST)

----
Ok, points taken. But I am very worried that a large number of articles will soon have: "''personXYZ's'' notes:" added to them and the wiki will degenerate into a set of unchangeable personal snippets and will no longer be a community effort.

I understand the importance of accountability. I just feel that the mechanisms the wiki has in place to deal with it are sufficient and we don't need to go around maintaining a second set of edit records (though articles previously published elsewhere should, as you've pointed out, have this fact mentioned)

I also very much like your idea of writing the same article from multiple points of view (though we could do the same thing in one article under different headings) - [[User:Tobin|Tobin]]

----

Del,

No bloody way in hell for the Decameron being a core document for the Reformation. I see 'The Reformation' as just one more round in the Church/State conflict that started with Otto III marching on Rome and replacing the Pope in the 800s, and continued with Henry IV, Freddie I, Freddie II, Boniface vs the French and so on.

The Wyclif movement was an early - and almost successful - attempt to decapitate the Church and put it under the complete control of the Crown ; it was the prototype for the State Protestantism adopted by England, Sweden, Denmark etc.

Erasmus-style critiques of church corruption had been around for a long time ; I'll dig up some medieval examples.

I'd propose John of Paris' 1302 'On Royal and Papal Power' as a core document, in that it provided the intellectual firepower for the idea of Church as seperate from State. It was written to support French claims against Boniface, in the period before the the Avignon Captivity.

For me, the Conciliar movement of the 14th C was probably the key - they proposed solving the problem of the 3 Popes by having them all resign, and sorting it out at a Church Council. To paraphrase another quote, this is when people saw Popes could be unmade other than at Rome.

As to the end of the Reformation, it hasnt quite ended yet, although with Vatican II all of what I see as the Big Issues of the Reform have been resolved (it's notable for those pro-Conciliarists that it was the Council of Trent that reformed multiple benefices, selling indulgences and so on - the rightful core objections of the Reformers).

By the way, have a look at John of Salisbury's stuff here

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/salisbury-poli4.html

Reads rather 15th C, doesnt it ... and he was in the room when Thomas A'Beckett of Canterbury got whacked.

In the Metalogicus - his book on how to learn philosophy - he's also citing St Bernard on teaching students rheotric and poetry, and his letters quote Cicero, Ovid, Juvenal, Petronius and every other darn Classical author he can get his hands on (oh yeah, and he also had some Greek).

Unless you use Humanist to mean 'Scholar with an interest in Classical authors other than Aristotle', you need to adjust the time period :)

Anton

----

Anton,

Point taken re Otto III. I'm just not up on history that far back, unless it's much further back.

I disagree with you re the Decameron though. It may not have been the earliest reformation document, but it was one. I'll dig you out specific stories if you like.

Re: the [[scholastics]] page. Very funny. Well done.

[[User:Del|Del]]

-------

Del,

Whining about corruption in the Church was a favorite habit of just about every writer.

Heck, I bet I can find letters from Popes complaining about abuses and corruption in the Church.

But that doesnt mean they want to destroy the Church and re-form it, which was what the Reformation was about.

Anton

----

Anton,

Just a comment about attributions. You have asked Tobin to stop removing your name from articles. You have stated that you want your name there to prove that you stand by what you wrote. That is a noble and right way when dealing with an article that is to be published in a static environment.

However, the environment of a wiki is different. It is not static. People can change your work. At that point, it becomes a different writing that what you put your name to originally. Is it fair to you as the original author to have your name on something that is no longer what your orginally intended? Is it fair to the person who made a contribution to have that ignorned by having someone elses name on the article?

I'm sure you answer will be to say to get everyone to put their name on an article they contribute to, but that really isn't part of the wiki philosphy. It becomes messy and about who has their name on the most articles.

Wikis are an open format, you have to get used to people changing things, including deleting things. That is just how they work.

[[User:Jos|Jane of Stockton]] 11:18, Nov 14, 2003 (EST)

Jane,

Attribution of authors really is a die in a ditch issue for me.

I do not believe that the 'this isnt a static envirnoment' argument is valid. No work has ever been written in a static environment ; every author is a dwarf, standing on the shoulders of giants, and by doing so providing a platform for others. On a wiki, publishing is faster, but at the end of the day, it is no different to Abelard standing up on a lectern in Paris, making his argument, then writing it out longhand and sending it to other disputants.

As far as my major contributions, eg Scholasticism, the history of Church and State that is mis-titled Reformation, attribution is not negotiable.

I wrote it ; I want to be responsible for it ; I want to be remembered for it.

Amendment, I dont mind. Reworking, go for it. Correction of facts and grammar, please.

But remember me for what I did.

Anton

Talk:Burned at the stake

2003-11-14T00:22:26Z

203.31.48.3:

Del,

I'm gonna have to disagree with the statement. While this may be true in certain geographic areas (eg England and the New World) it is not true of other areas where the witchcraft craze took place. I will be adding to this page at a later date. [[User:Jos|Jane of Stockton]] 10:23, Nov 13, 2003 (EST)

----

Yup, go for it, but provide some real evidence that isn't post-Crowleyist.

Germany and Scotland were amongst the few places in period when people were burned at the stake for alleged(*) witchcraft. In nearly all of the rest of Europe, those burned at the stake were those accused of heresy. Even the Malleus Maleficarum only prescribes burning at the stake of witches who were convicted of heresy (i.e. those who professed to be christians but were not).

(*) alleged, only. There were almost certainly very few real witches in period, and those accused of witchcraft were mostly just cranky old ladies with a bad widows hump and a pet cat. The Malleus Maleficarum was written by a couple of badly delusional paranoid misogynists, and can't be accepted as fact.

[[User:Del|Del]] 15:06, 13 Nov 2003 (EST)

-----

Cant remember the exact journal article - I think it was the Sixteenth Century Journal --- but it was arguing that far more of those killed in Germany during the Great Witchcraft Craze were men than has been commonly thought.

The bibliography in the article might be worth a look for the rewrite, to see what the state of the art is for historical work on the topic.

Anton

----

Del,

Regarding the Malleus Maleficarum ... that is one really great example of the depths to which late Scholastic work sank.

It's tendentiuous, it's got logical holes, it uses rhetoric rather than clear language and it basically stinks.

Lets take Malleus Maleficarum Part 1 Question XVIII "Here follows the Method of Preaching against and Controverting Five Arguments of Laymen and Lewd Folk, which seem to be Variously Approved, that God does not Allow so Great Power to the Devil and Witches as is involved in the Performance of such Mighty Works of Witchcraft."

Argument 5 " Lastly, they argue that preachers and judges have preached and practised against witches in such a way that, if there were witches, their lives would never be safe from them on account of the great hatred that witches would have for them."

Reply to Argument 5 "Thirdly, it is said that they cannot injure Inquisitors and other officials, because they dispense public justice. Many examples could be adduced to prove this, but time does not permit it. "

Sorry, guys. Bzzzzt. That is what you call 'Controverting' ? I dont think so ...

Anton

----

Something we agree on Anton? Surely not! :)

Anyway, like I said, show me some real evidence.

[[User:Del|Del]]

(hurriedly burying two or three post-reformation texts on witchcraft for exhibiting the same flaws in logic as the MM did).

---

Del,

On further review of the work, given a correctly stacked tribunual, and I think I can have the authors of the MM nailed for advocacy of sorcery themselves. Some of their 'defensive procedures' stray quite badly from orthodoxy, I feel.

Anton

----

Anton and Del,

It's true about the numbers regarding men. The most recent academic scholarship on this offers the interesting observation that as one moves further away from Western Europe, the numbers regarding men and women tend to invert. The numbers from Russia indicating that accusations against men outnumber those against women.

And Del, not everyone who is interested in this period relies on dodgy fluffy bunny Wiccan books for their information.

[[User:Jos|Jane of Stockton]] 11:08, Nov 14, 2003 (EST)

-----

Jane,

Go for it ... I'd love to read a summary of the recent scholarship on witchcraft in Europe :)

I'm vaguely tempted to write up some sort of Scholastic defence of Lochac's wussy position towards heresy and so on ... you can actually put together a pretty liberal policy, if you use people like John of Paris rather than my old mate Thomas (who is hardcore on this).

Of course, given that there has been no open advocation of heretical opinions in Lochac, no publication of heretical works and so on, I think Their Magesties of Lochac are probably right in keeping a light hand on the tiller, as it were.

Anton

Talk:Burned at the stake

2003-11-14T00:00:13Z

203.31.48.3:

Peter Abelard

2003-11-13T23:25:08Z

203.31.48.3:

Born 1079, died 1142.

Notable for being one of the 2 best [[Scholastics]] never to get a Sainthood.

In his case, it was because of his girlfriend Heloise, or more accurately what he got busted doing with his girlfriend Heloise.

This is what he said about her, in his autobiography, Historia Calamitatum
("The Story of My Misfortunes") ...

OF HOW, BROUGHT LOW BY HIS LOVE FOR HELOISE, HE WAS WOUNDED IN BODY AND SOUL

NOW there dwelt in that same city of Paris a certain young girl named Heloise, the neice of a canon who was called Fulbert. Her uncle's love for her was equalled only by his desire that she should have the best education which he could possibly procure for her. Of no mean beauty, she stood out above all by reason of her abundant knowledge of letters. Now this virtue is rare among women, and for that very reason it doubly graced the maiden, and made her the most worthy of renown in the entire kingdom. It was this young girl whom I, after carefully considering all those qualities which are wont to attract lovers, determined to unite with myself in the bonds of love, and indeed the thing seemed to me very easy to be done. So distinguished was my name, and I possessed such advantages of youth and comeliness, that no matter what woman I might favour with my love, I dreaded rejection of none. Then, too, I believed that I could win the maiden's consent all the more easily by reason of her knowledge of letters and her zeal therefor; so, even if we were parted, we might yet be together in thought with the aid of written messages. Perchance, too, we might be able to write more boldly than we could speak, and thus at all times could we live in joyous intimacy.

Thus, utterly aflame with my passion for this maiden, I sought to discover means whereby I might have daily and familiar speech with her, thereby the more easily to win her consent. For this purpose I persuaded the girl's uncle, with the aid of some of his friends to take me into his household--for he dwelt hard by my school--in return for the payment of a small sum. My pretext for this was that the care of my own household was a serious handicap to my studies, and likewise burdened me with an expense far greater than I could afford. Now he was a man keen in avarice and likewise he was most desirous for his niece that her study of letters should ever go forward, so, for these two reasons I easily won his consent to the fulfillment of my wish, for he was fairly agape for my money, and at the same time believed that his niece would vastly benefit by my teaching. More even than this, by his own earnest entreaties he fell in with my desires beyond anything I had dared to hope, opening the way for my love; for he entrusted her wholly to my guidance, begging me to give her instruction whensoever I might be free from the duties of my school, no matter whether by day or by night, and to punish her sternly if ever I should find her negligent of her tasks. In all this the man's simplicity was nothing short of astounding to me; I should not have been more smitten with wonder if he had entrusted a tender lamb to the care of a ravenous wolf. When he had thus given her into my charge, not alone to be taught but even to be disciplined, what had he done save to give free scope to my desires, and to offer me every opportunity, even if I had not sought it, to bend her to my will with threats and blows if I failed to do so with caresses? There were, however, two things which particularly served to allay any foul suspicion: his own love for his niece, and my former reputation for continence.

Why should I say more? We were united first in the dwelling that sheltered our love, and then in the hearts that burned with it. Under the pretext of study we spent our hours in the happiness of love, and learning held out to us the secret opportunities that our passion craved. Our speech was more of love than of the books which lay open before us; our kisses far outnumbered our reasoned words. Our hands sought less the book than each other's bosoms -- love drew our eyes together far more than the lesson drew them to the pages of our text. In order that there might be no suspicion, there were, indeed, sometimes blows, but love gave them, not anger; they were the marks, not of wrath, but of a tenderness surpassing the most fragrant balm in sweetness. What followed? No degree in love's progress was left untried by our passion, and if love itself could imagine any wonder as yet unknown, we discovered it. And our inexperience of such delights made us all the more ardent in our pursuit of them, so that our thirst for one another was still unquenched.

In measure as this passionate rapture absorbed me more and more, I devoted ever less time to philosophy and to the work of the school. Indeed it became loathsome to me to go to the school or to linger there; the labour, moreover, was very burdensome, since my nights were vigils of love and my days of study. My lecturing became utterly careless and lukewarm; I did nothing because of inspiration, but everything merely as a matter of habit. I had become nothing more than a reciter of my former discoveries, and though I still wrote poems, they dealt with love, not with the secrets of philosophy. Of these songs you yourself well know how some have become widely known and have been sung in many lands, chiefly, methinks, by those who delighted in the things of this world. As for the sorrow, the groans, the lamentations of my students when they perceived the preoccupation, nay, rather the chaos, of my mind, it is hard even to imagine them.

Actually, go read his autobiography. It's here http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/abelard-histcal.html .

The love letters between Abelard and Heloise are incredibly wonderful ... they are here http://www.aug.edu/langlitcom/humanitiesHBK/handbook_htm/heloise&abelard.htm

Their relationship had issues ; read his Historia Calamatium for the details, but lets just say "upset uncle, fruit knife".

Dealing with his, like, work rather than his personal life, it was about as stormy.

His finest achievement was probably developing the Scholastic method of putting the arguments for and against a proposition in the same document, where they could be analysed and the truth teased out of contradictory statements. Howver, the book he did this in - 'Sic et Non' - got him into some trouble with the authorities, as it mixed orthodox and dodgy opinions without giving any judgement on them.

The work that really got him into trouble though was his book 'On The Trinity' ... Bernard of Clairvaux (as in the later Saint Bernard) got really upset at it, it got formally condemned at the Council of Soissons in 1121, and he had to personally burn his copy. The good news is R. Stolze, a [[nineteenth century]] German guy, found a copy someone had made and stashed ... I say a lot of mean things about 19th C historians, but you guys saved a lot of good stuff. Thank you.

OK, so thats the short version of the history of Scholasticism's Stormy Petrel.

Now, go read his autobiography.

Anton de Stoc
At Politocopolis
14 Novembre

Feel free to edit, update and so on

Peter Abelard

2003-11-13T23:20:27Z

203.31.48.3:

Born 1079, died 1142.

Notable for being one of the 2 best [[Scholastics]] never to get a Sainthood.

In his case, it was because of his girlfriend Heloise, or more accurately what he got busted doing with his girlfriend Heloise.

This is what he said about her, in his autobiography, Historia Calamitatum
("The Story of My Misfortunes") ...

OF HOW, BROUGHT LOW BY HIS LOVE FOR HELOISE, HE WAS WOUNDED IN BODY AND SOUL

NOW there dwelt in that same city of Paris a certain young girl named Heloise, the neice of a canon who was called Fulbert. Her uncle's love for her was equalled only by his desire that she should have the best education which he could possibly procure for her. Of no mean beauty, she stood out above all by reason of her abundant knowledge of letters. Now this virtue is rare among women, and for that very reason it doubly graced the maiden, and made her the most worthy of renown in the entire kingdom. It was this young girl whom I, after carefully considering all those qualities which are wont to attract lovers, determined to unite with myself in the bonds of love, and indeed the thing seemed to me very easy to be done. So distinguished was my name, and I possessed such advantages of youth and comeliness, that no matter what woman I might favour with my love, I dreaded rejection of none. Then, too, I believed that I could win the maiden's consent all the more easily by reason of her knowledge of letters and her zeal therefor; so, even if we were parted, we might yet be together in thought with the aid of written messages. Perchance, too, we might be able to write more boldly than we could speak, and thus at all times could we live in joyous intimacy.

Thus, utterly aflame with my passion for this maiden, I sought to discover means whereby I might have daily and familiar speech with her, thereby the more easily to win her consent. For this purpose I persuaded the girl's uncle, with the aid of some of his friends to take me into his household--for he dwelt hard by my school--in return for the payment of a small sum. My pretext for this was that the care of my own household was a serious handicap to my studies, and likewise burdened me with an expense far greater than I could afford. Now he was a man keen in avarice and likewise he was most desirous for his niece that her study of letters should ever go forward, so, for these two reasons I easily won his consent to the fulfillment of my wish, for he was fairly agape for my money, and at the same time believed that his niece would vastly benefit by my teaching. More even than this, by his own earnest entreaties he fell in with my desires beyond anything I had dared to hope, opening the way for my love; for he entrusted her wholly to my guidance, begging me to give her instruction whensoever I might be free from the duties of my school, no matter whether by day or by night, and to punish her sternly if ever I should find her negligent of her tasks. In all this the man's simplicity was nothing short of astounding to me; I should not have been more smitten with wonder if he had entrusted a tender lamb to the care of a ravenous wolf. When he had thus given her into my charge, not alone to be taught but even to be disciplined, what had he done save to give free scope to my desires, and to offer me every opportunity, even if I had not sought it, to bend her to my will with threats and blows if I failed to do so with caresses? There were, however, two things which particularly served to allay any foul suspicion: his own love for his niece, and my former reputation for continence.

Why should I say more? We were united first in the dwelling that sheltered our love, and then in the hearts that burned with it. Under the pretext of study we spent our hours in the happiness of love, and learning held out to us the secret opportunities that our passion craved. Our speech was more of love than of the books which lay open before us; our kisses far outnumbered our reasoned words. Our hands sought less the book than each other's bosoms -- love drew our eyes together far more than the lesson drew them to the pages of our text. In order that there might be no suspicion, there were, indeed, sometimes blows, but love gave them, not anger; they were the marks, not of wrath, but of a tenderness surpassing the most fragrant balm in sweetness. What followed? No degree in love's progress was left untried by our passion, and if love itself could imagine any wonder as yet unknown, we discovered it. And our inexperience of such delights made us all the more ardent in our pursuit of them, so that our thirst for one another was still unquenched.

In measure as this passionate rapture absorbed me more and more, I devoted ever less time to philosophy and to the work of the school. Indeed it became loathsome to me to go to the school or to linger there; the labour, moreover, was very burdensome, since my nights were vigils of love and my days of study. My lecturing became utterly careless and lukewarm; I did nothing because of inspiration, but everything merely as a matter of habit. I had become nothing more than a reciter of my former discoveries, and though I still wrote poems, they dealt with love, not with the secrets of philosophy. Of these songs you yourself well know how some have become widely known and have been sung in many lands, chiefly, methinks, by those who delighted in the things of this world. As for the sorrow, the groans, the lamentations of my students when they perceived the preoccupation, nay, rather the chaos, of my mind, it is hard even to imagine them.

Actually, go read his autobiography. It's here http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/abelard-histcal.html .

The love letters between Abelard and Heloise are incredibly wonderful ... they are here http://www.aug.edu/langlitcom/humanitiesHBK/handbook_htm/heloise&abelard.htm

Their relationship had issues ; read his Historia Calamatium for the details, but lets just say "upset uncle, fruit knife".

Dealing with his, like, work rather than his personal life, it was about as stormy.

His finest achievement was probably developing the Scholastic method of putting the arguments for and against a proposition in the same document, where they could be analysed and the truth teased out of contradictory statements. Howver, the book he did this in - 'Sic et Non' - got him into some trouble with the authorities, as it mixed orthodox and dodgy opinions without giving any judgement on them.

The work that really got him into trouble though was his book 'On The Trinity' ... Bernard of Clairvaux (as in the later Saint Bernard) got really upset at it, it got formally condemned at the Council of Soissons in 1121, and he had to personally burn a copy. The good news is some [[nineteenth century]] German guys found a copy someone had made and stashed ...

OK, so thats the short version of the history of Scholasticism's Stormy Petrel.

Go read his autobiography.

Anton de Stoc
At Politocopolis
14 Novembre

Feel free to edit, update and so on

Peter Abelard

2003-11-13T23:15:42Z

203.31.48.3:

Born 1079, died 1142.

Notable for being one of the 2 best [[Scholastics]] never to get a Sainthood.

In his case, it was because of his girlfriend Heloise, or more accurately what he got busted doing with his girlfriend Heloise.

This is what he said about her, in his autobiography, Historia Calamitatum
("The Story of My Misfortunes") ...

OF HOW, BROUGHT LOW BY HIS LOVE FOR HELOISE, HE WAS WOUNDED IN BODY AND SOUL

NOW there dwelt in that same city of Paris a certain young girl named Heloise, the neice of a canon who was called Fulbert. Her uncle's love for her was equalled only by his desire that she should have the best education which he could possibly procure for her. Of no mean beauty, she stood out above all by reason of her abundant knowledge of letters. Now this virtue is rare among women, and for that very reason it doubly graced the maiden, and made her the most worthy of renown in the entire kingdom. It was this young girl whom I, after carefully considering all those qualities which are wont to attract lovers, determined to unite with myself in the bonds of love, and indeed the thing seemed to me very easy to be done. So distinguished was my name, and I possessed such advantages of youth and comeliness, that no matter what woman I might favour with my love, I dreaded rejection of none. Then, too, I believed that I could win the maiden's consent all the more easily by reason of her knowledge of letters and her zeal therefor; so, even if we were parted, we might yet be together in thought with the aid of written messages. Perchance, too, we might be able to write more boldly than we could speak, and thus at all times could we live in joyous intimacy.

Thus, utterly aflame with my passion for this maiden, I sought to discover means whereby I might have daily and familiar speech with her, thereby the more easily to win her consent. For this purpose I persuaded the girl's uncle, with the aid of some of his friends to take me into his household--for he dwelt hard by my school--in return for the payment of a small sum. My pretext for this was that the care of my own household was a serious handicap to my studies, and likewise burdened me with an expense far greater than I could afford. Now he was a man keen in avarice and likewise he was most desirous for his niece that her study of letters should ever go forward, so, for these two reasons I easily won his consent to the fulfillment of my wish, for he was fairly agape for my money, and at the same time believed that his niece would vastly benefit by my teaching. More even than this, by his own earnest entreaties he fell in with my desires beyond anything I had dared to hope, opening the way for my love; for he entrusted her wholly to my guidance, begging me to give her instruction whensoever I might be free from the duties of my school, no matter whether by day or by night, and to punish her sternly if ever I should find her negligent of her tasks. In all this the man's simplicity was nothing short of astounding to me; I should not have been more smitten with wonder if he had entrusted a tender lamb to the care of a ravenous wolf. When he had thus given her into my charge, not alone to be taught but even to be disciplined, what had he done save to give free scope to my desires, and to offer me every opportunity, even if I had not sought it, to bend her to my will with threats and blows if I failed to do so with caresses? There were, however, two things which particularly served to allay any foul suspicion: his own love for his niece, and my former reputation for continence.

Why should I say more? We were united first in the dwelling that sheltered our love, and then in the hearts that burned with it. Under the pretext of study we spent our hours in the happiness of love, and learning held out to us the secret opportunities that our passion craved. Our speech was more of love than of the books which lay open before us; our kisses far outnumbered our reasoned words. Our hands sought less the book than each other's bosoms -- love drew our eyes together far more than the lesson drew them to the pages of our text. In order that there might be no suspicion, there were, indeed, sometimes blows, but love gave them, not anger; they were the marks, not of wrath, but of a tenderness surpassing the most fragrant balm in sweetness. What followed? No degree in love's progress was left untried by our passion, and if love itself could imagine any wonder as yet unknown, we discovered it. And our inexperience of such delights made us all the more ardent in our pursuit of them, so that our thirst for one another was still unquenched.

In measure as this passionate rapture absorbed me more and more, I devoted ever less time to philosophy and to the work of the school. Indeed it became loathsome to me to go to the school or to linger there; the labour, moreover, was very burdensome, since my nights were vigils of love and my days of study. My lecturing became utterly careless and lukewarm; I did nothing because of inspiration, but everything merely as a matter of habit. I had become nothing more than a reciter of my former discoveries, and though I still wrote poems, they dealt with love, not with the secrets of philosophy. Of these songs you yourself well know how some have become widely known and have been sung in many lands, chiefly, methinks, by those who delighted in the things of this world. As for the sorrow, the groans, the lamentations of my students when they perceived the preoccupation, nay, rather the chaos, of my mind, it is hard even to imagine them.

Actually, go read his autobiography. It's here http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/abelard-histcal.html .

The love letters between Abelard and Heloise are incredibly wonderful ... they are here http://www.aug.edu/langlitcom/humanitiesHBK/handbook_htm/heloise&abelard.htm

It ended badly. Read his Historia Calamatium for the details, but lets just say "upset uncle, fruit knife".

Dealing with his, like, work rather than his personal life, it was about as stormy.

His finest achievement was probably developing the Scholastic method of putting the arguments for and against a proposition in the same document, where they could be analysed and the truth teased out of contradictory statements. Howver, the book he did this in - 'Sic et Non' - got him into some trouble with the authorities, as it mixed orthodox and dodgy opinions without giving any judgement on them.

The work that really got him into trouble though was his book 'On The Trinity' ... Bernard of Clairvaux (as in the later Saint Bernard) got really upset at it, it got formally condemned at the Council of Soissons in 1121, and he had to personally burn a copy. The good news is some [[nineteenth century]] German guys found a copy someone had made and stashed ...

OK, so thats the short version of the history of Scholasticism's Stormy Petrel.

Go read his autobiography.

Anton de Stoc
At Politocopolis
14 Novembre

Feel free to edit, update and so on

Scholasticism

2003-11-13T22:30:13Z

203.31.48.3:

Talk:Burned at the stake

2003-11-13T13:33:57Z

203.31.48.3:

Humanists

2003-11-13T11:38:16Z

203.31.48.3:

'''Humanists''' -- followers of [[Humanism]].

See also: [[Renaissance]].

== Your [[SCA]] [[Persona]] Is A Humanist ==

* You almost certainly live in the [[Renaissance]] (although I'm going to go out on a ''huge'' limb here and call [[Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor]] an early humanist). If you are in [[Italy]] then you may live in the very late [[14th century]] or more likely the [[15th century]], or anywhere else in [[Europe]] you would most probably live in the [[16th century]].
* You have a slightly superior attitude to life. You are well educated and probably profess to know a whole lot more about the meaning of life than you really do.
* You think that [[scholastics]] are very old-fashioned and out-dated. You have met the odd one (or, more likely, read a work or two) but are very unimpressed.
* You have a very material attitude to life. You are not a great [[spritualist]] but believe in living in the here and now, with a nod to the [[afterlife]]. You probably dress as well as you can afford, and it would not be uncommon for you to dress a little better than you can afford.
* You are moderately but not excessively [[religious]]. You believe in [[God]] but also believe that man can better himself on this earth without the guiding divine hand, mostly by the study of the [[classics]] and skills such as the [[trivium]] and [[quadrivium]].
* You can quote several [[Greek]] texts and take delight in doing so. You know the works of a few [[ancient]] [[Greek]] writers and the names of a lot more of them, which you are happy to name-drop and wave in the faces of those around you.
* You aspire to having a [[university]] education, but you may or may not have one.
* If you have even a modest [[university]] qualification, you are want to be greeted with the title [[doctor]], even if you have no understanding of [[medicine]].
* You are well versed in the [[arts]], possibly including [[poetry]], [[painting]] (which you may know a bit about but not know how to do), [[music]], [[dance]], and perhaps [[drama]].
* You have many more opinions relating to the martial arts than you have skills in that area. You can talk for some time about battle strategies, duelling, honorable combat, etc, but you may or may not be a great swordsman. In fact you may never have wielded a sword in anger.
* Specific names to drop could be

- oratory (ie making speeches) ; Cicero ... 'Even Cicero could not have improved that speech'
- poetry ; refer to someone as 'a second Ovid', or 'our Dante'
- geometry ; emphasise how impressive modern, Italian style fortifications are, with their precise geometry, ravelins, counterscarps and so on
- philosophy ; emphasise you arent one of Aristotle's Monkeys (like a [[scholastic]], but that Plato is far superior to him

Talk:Italian Renaissance

2003-11-13T11:26:39Z

203.31.48.3:

This probably needs to be edited, I've put the warning about neutrality at the top for now (it can be taken out once someone with more knowledge on the topic has a change to look at it). - [[User:Tobin|Tobin]]

----

heheh.

Of course I'll dispute the statement that says:

''the Humanists concentrated on winning the argument rather than having their facts and logic straight''

... until the cows come home, but it was written by an avowed scholastic.

I'll re-write this article at some point but be aware I'm a humanist. I'll try to keep it neutral, though. I will concede the point that Italian princes blew huge chunks of cash on stuff, but then again the renaissance was the first time that they had huge chunks of cash to blow.

[[User:Del|Del]]

----

Del,

I'd disagree with 'the renaissence was the first time that they had huge chunks of cash to blow'. One of the reasons for the level of consipicous consumption during the Quattracentro was that the Med was going through a commercial recession - before that, you dumped spare money into making more money. During the recession, you could either lose it trying to trade goods or invest, or you could blow it on a nice palazzo or some paintings ...

Anton

----

Anton,

Go do some reading on 14th C economics and then tell me that the quattrocento was a commercial recession. Holmes et al are very critical. Sure, the merchant princes were chasing trade and investments back in the 13th C but by the quattrocento they hadn't had things so good in "living memory".

I think you have your "recession" about 100 years too late. 1360 was very bad. 1480 was much better.

Anyway, it wasn't just the princes spending cash on palazzi. Look at what some of the Borgia popes blew their wads on, and it wasn't just their younger "sisters" or "nieces".

[[User:Del|Del]]

Del,

We are talking about the same period right ?

The 14th C depression and famines that led to/made the Black Plague worse ?

I'll hit de Roover and the Cambridge Ec Hist Eur next time in in Chifley ...

Anton

Poetic meter

2003-11-11T23:24:07Z

203.31.48.3:

Poetic meter

2003-11-11T23:22:56Z

203.31.48.3:

Poetic meter

2003-11-11T23:07:53Z

203.31.48.3:

Talk:Learning in the Renaissance

2003-11-11T01:50:44Z

203.31.48.3:

Del,

No, No, No and No.

You have the whole University thing completely ass-backwards.

Scholastics were all Scholars based in Universities - thats why they're called Scholastics, dammit ...

For example,

Aquinas - Paris 
Albertus Magnus - Paris then Cologne (OK, so he worked as Bishop of Ratisbon) 
John of Paris - Paris 

and so on.

Now, on the other hand, Humanists werent in Universities eg

Erasmus - studied in Paris, then quit academe to be an author 
Petrach - studied in Colgne, then worked as a diplomat (etc) 
Ronsard - hnot at Uni, Court Poet 
Machiavelli - civil servant and involuntary retiree 
Guiccardini - diplomat 

You can mount a much, much better argument that the Humanist movement was Court-centered rather than University centered.

See, Del, the thing I hate about the Humanists is their collective unwillingness to let either facts or logic get in the way of a good story ... you guys have a complete lack of scholarly rigour.

Anton

Talk:Learning in the Renaissance

2003-11-11T01:49:20Z

203.31.48.3:

Del,

No, No, No and No.

You have the whole University thing completely ass-backwards.

Scholastics were all Scholars based in Universities - thats why they're called Scholastics, dammit ...

For example,

Aquinas - Paris
Albertus Magnus - Paris then Cologne (OK, so he worked as Bishop of Ratisbon)
John of Paris - Paris

and so on.

Now, on the other hand, Humanists werent in Universities eg

Erasmus - studied in Paris, then quit academe to be an author
Petrach - studied in Colgne, then worked as a diplomat (etc)
Ronsard - hnot at Uni, Court Poet
Machiavelli - civil servant and involuntary retiree
Guiccardini - diplomat

See, Del, the thing I hate about the Humanists is their unwillingness to let either facts or logic get in the way of a good story ... you guys have a complete lack of scholarly rigour.

Anton

User talk:Anton

2003-11-11T01:15:56Z

203.31.48.3: