Christianity Islam DBQ

By the 1200s and 1300s, the views of both Islam and Christianity started to become more moderate, as illustrated in Documents 4 and 5. Document 4 implies an increased acceptance of merchants in Christianity, while Document 5 reflects the increased dissatisfaction of trade among Muslims. In Document 4, for example, the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, the Christian community show a greater acceptance of trade: “it is sinful to deceive one’s neighbor in order to sell so as to injure him.” By simply writing about sins occurring during trade, St. Thomas Aquinas acknowledges the presence of widespread trade in the Christian community. Thus, as more Christians accepted the merchant lifestyle, Church teaching towards trade and merchants must have shifted, as people do not simply go against the established teachings of their religion. The writings of St. Thomas Aquinas represent an official viewpoint of the Church as he has been canonized, and the Church wouldn’t canonize a heretic. The Summa Theologica, since it is one of the greatest Christian writings of history, represents an accurate description of activity during the 1200s, thus reflecting the growing merchant activity within the Christian Church. Contrasting with the more accepting trend of the Christians, the Islamic view towards merchants becomes more negative, but still accepting merchants as an acceptable livelihood. As seen in Document 5, Muslim scholars viewed “the manners of tradesmen inferior, removed from manliness and uprightness” but however, they still accepted merchants and their trade: “religious Law allows the use of such methods.” Muslims scholars, aware of the many unjust Islamic traders, now decreed that the entire livelihood of merchants is immoral and leads to a “weakening in virtue.” However, because merchants were so key to the foundations of Islamic civilization, Muslims were allowed to retain their profession, only beseeched to act fairly and justly. The viewpoint of Ibn Khaldun reflects the viewpoint of the wider scholarly community, a widely respected, and leading scholar’s viewpoint must reflect the true status and activities of merchants at that time. By logically defining commerce and connecting the merchants’ activities to that definition, Khaldun demonstrates his logical soundness, an attribute that allows trust in the author’s work, thus the source of the official, scholarly Muslim community. However, by themselves these documents by St. Thomas Aquinas and Khaldun cannot accurately represent the activities of merchants at this period of time. In order to accurately demonstrate the corruptness of merchants, it would be interesting to see a document written directly to a merchant during this time period, along with the merchant’s response. Would the document written to the merchant express disgust, corruptness, or satisfaction? Would the merchant’s response indicate corruptness, greed, or fairness? The letter to the merchant and the merchant’s response would exemplify if the official writings of theologians and scholars accurately described the merchants of this time period.

Finally, during the end of the Post Classical period, around the 1500s and slightly afterwards, Christianity demonstrates the greatest shift towards its attitude of merchants and trade, while Islam simply upholds its position that trade good except with corrupt merchants as demonstrated in Documents 6 and 7. Document 6 demonstrates ostensibly Christian merchants trading with God’s blessings, a complete reversal of the position of the early Church. Document 7 illustrates the Islamic courts decision against greedy and corrupt merchants, precisely what Mohammed cautioned against. In Document 6, for example the merchants trade “with God always before us.” By mixing God with trade, the Italian merchants reverse the previously held belief that trade and God were incompatible with each other. Because the merchants traded in the name of God, the Church must have decreed a proclamation allowing merchants to trade in the name of God, unless the merchants just completely went against their faith. Because the merchants traded in the name of God, they must have grown up with similar customs, or else they would have renounced their faith, something that most practitioners of any religion just simply don’t do. Thus, the viewpoint of merchants represents the complete shift from the original viewpoint of the Christian church. The letters of Document 6 illustrate the point of view of the merchants, the other side of all of the previous documents, that they obviously viewed merchanting with a favorable attitude simply because that was their profession and they were also Christian; therefore, they obviously believed that merchanting, trade, and Christianity could mix. However, in Document 7, the Islamic court decision condemns unjust Muslim merchants: “The aforementioned acted contrary to the old custom; we do not agree to this.” This shows that many of the trade practices of Muslim merchants went against the practices established by Mohammed. Thus, many of the Islamic merchants, by this time, had become corrupt and unjust. That the document is from the viewpoint, the paradigm of an Islamic court signifies an official decision, one denouncing merchants would accurately describe merchant practices and would be widely respected throughout Islamic society. Being from a judicial standpoint, the document’s paradigm signifies an objective decision, since the courts are not involved in trade. By themselves, these documents are not enough to explain why Christianity accepted trade so radically. To help prove this point, a document from the Vatican decreeing that merchants, trade, and God can coexist in order to explain why such a radical paradigm shift occurred within the Christian religion in accepting merchants and trade. Would the Vatican approve of the coexistence of merchants with God? Would the Vatican stay resolute in their anti – merchant viewpoint? Knowing the Vatican, the official head of the Church’s response to the increased trade by Christian merchants, would help to explain why this radical transformation occurred and if it was even accepted by the Christian Church.

Ultimately, during the development of civilization during the Post – Classical Period, from Christianity and Islam’s origins to the 1500s, the major defining characteristic was the rapid extensification of trade and commerce. Christianity, when viewed through these documents, initially started out very anti – merchant, against trade, but gradually accepted merchants and trade as a vital part of culture, accepted by the Catholic Church. Islam, in contrast, initially, through Mohammed, regarded merchants very highly. This regard lessened throughout the Post – Classical Period as merchants became greedy, corrupt, and unjust. This contrast between the changing attitudes of Christians and Muslims towards merchants and trade reflects the ways in which each society had to deal with the worldly, money and wealth, against the spiritual, God and Heaven.