If sodomy/homosexuality was 'unmentionable' in the Middle Ages, how can we write its history?
If sodomy/homosexuality was 'unmentionable' in the Middle Ages, how can we write its history? The study of gender, specifically homosexuality, is a relatively new invention. Tied up in the rise of feminism and the documentation of females in history, as a tributary of this, is the study of homosexuality through the ages. This essay is therefore part of an ongoing field of relatively new study. John Boswell, in my opinion clearly describes the difficulty of the study in such an "unexplored" area. Indeed, writers are often forced down "wrong paths" as well as "dead ends". However the comfort lies in the knowledge that we have "opened trails" and "posted landmarks" so others can "reach destinations beyond his furthest advance".1 In order to answer this question, one needs to ascertain, clearly, what this question is demanding. Within this essay I am going to clearly define "homosexuality" and "sodomy" within the boundaries of the Middle Ages. Whether, it was "unmentionable" and to what extent this contributes to our ability to record its history. Of the evidence available to us, we must also deem its effectiveness, in enabling us to accurately access homosexuality in the Middle Ages. In this essay, I am going to argue, that, through the study of primary sources relating to the existence of homosexuality, we can, indeed, write its history. However the evidence available to
Is History a Nightmare
'History' Stephen said, 'is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake' (James Joyce, Ulyssess). Is history a 'nightmare' and, if so, is it possible to awake? History has been represented by some as a triumphal march. As a progressive, unlinear, emancipating process. Fukyama, for instance, has heralded liberal democracy as the 'end of history'; while orthodox Marxism also posits a liberating 'end goal' in the form of 'communism'. History is understood as teleological and determined; a dream. It will be argued that history is more accurately understood as a 'nightmare'; as contingent and determined by conflict or struggle within specific networks of power-relations. In this respect, crude, reductive, teleological understandings of history are rejected, in favour of those that analyse history as based on contingent inter-relationships between structure, agency and discourse. Paradigms such as historical materialism, post-structuralism and critical-discourse analysis will be drawn on to show how relations of power and domination are constructed through conflict. It is these relationships which are the 'nightmare' of history; the nightmare of 'power' and the 'conflict' over it.1 Historical scholarship in historicising social relationships, de-naturalises relationships of power and showing the agency of historical actors can act as a critique to past and present
The Italian policies of Frederick Barbarossa
The Italian policies of Frederick Barbarossa, German king and Holy Roman Emperor had a huge impact on medieval Germany during the 12th century. The question of ecclesiastical versus secular power broke out during the emperor's reign at a time when Germany was considered to be the strongest monarchy, having authority in Italy and the rest of the Roman Empire. The time was right at Frederick Barbarossa's accession in 1152 to restore imperial authority in Italy which had been in demise since the Investiture contest. However this goal threw the Holy Roman emperor into a conflict with the papacy, an obstacle that would prove too hard to overcome in order to achieve all that which the emperor thought was denied to him. However the Papacy also paid a price for holding Frederick in opposition. The Italian policies were far too extent and were finished incomplete. The emperor's Italian policies at which he aimed to retrieve from the papacy what he thought he was entitled to, were controversial but innovative. Frederick aimed, with the help of Chancellor Rainald of Dassel to reconstruct the Holy Roman Empire to return it to the glory days of Rome and exercise the authority that the Ottonian emperors had done.1This battle for land was in essence a way to increase his revenues so he could keep what power he had in Germany over his most influential vassals, something his imperial court
Why did witch hunting become so intensive in late sixteenth century England?
Tessa Eaton Why did witch hunting become so intensive in late sixteenth century England? During the late sixteenth century much was blamed on magic, and those accused of it. In a biblically aware society thy believed evil had to be rooted out. "Do not allow a sorceress to live"1 Bad weather, the death of live-stock, a bad harvest or spoiled butter were many problems blamed on witches, and "cunning folk" or "wise women" were called upon to counter act such curses. There were two types of magic in these times: high magic (black magic) and low magic (white magic). Low magic was generally accepted, as it was used by the cunning folk; while high magic was a capital offence. Why then did the numbers of accused witches increase? Lotherington suggests that witch-hunts were due to the fear of women. He says witches tended to be women past childbearing2, so were of no benefit for their community, and around eighty-percent of those accused of witchcraft were women3. Paul Thomas4 agrees with Lotherington that it was mainly women who were persecuted; large numbers of women were hanged after being accused of maleficium (doing of harm to people or property) by their neighbours. Thomas says that the witch-craze was a "broyle against old women"5. Contemporary evidence supports this, for example George Gifford6, a Protestant priest from Essex, who wrote two books on witchcraft, in
How does a change in the mortality rate explain population growth in the early modern period?
Page 1 Sarah Humphreys How does a change in the mortality rate explain population growth in the early modern period? Throughout the early modern period the mortality rate varied a great deal, and was generally characterised by "dramatic short run fluctuations," low life expectancy, high infant mortality and increased quantities of deaths as a result of severe epidemic outbreaks.1 Throughout this era, Europe experienced numerous mortality crises in which the number of deaths vastly exceeded the average number of deaths. An example of this mortality crisis can be observed by looking at the parish of Os, Norway. 57 deaths was the average number of expected mortalities per non crisis year between 1669 and 1735. Os experienced 9 crises throughout this 60 year period in which the rate of deaths grew by 50%. 2 This pattern was common throughout Europe. There were three key factors that caused these great fluctuations in the amount of deaths between 1500 and 1789 and they were; epidemics, war and famine. Epidemics of the plague and diseases such as influenza, typhus, typhoid and smallpox were a principle reason behind the millions of deaths throughout Europe. Figures show the devastation caused by these epidemics; it has been claimed that during the period of 1557 to 1559 "a tenth of the English population died"3 as a result of influenza. The infamous plague ravaged
The development of scientific logic.
The Development of Scientific Logic The origins of science lie in the earliest civilizations, those of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India and Arabia. However, the school of thought which would undisputedly have the greatest influence on the development of modern science was that of Ancient Greece. The Greeks eventually broke with the mystical beliefs of their early development and came to focus on logic as the means of seeking truth. The theories of such great thinkers as Plato, Aristotle and Archimedes were to have enormous impact on the development of modern science. The earliest scientific theories were founded in philosophical and not empirical thought. In fact Plato, one of the most influential Greeks, asserted that the senses were deceitful and not to be trusted, and that only through pure reason could truths be uncovered. The modern scientific method was not to make its appearance for many centuries to come. The vast sources of Greek knowledge were preserved by the Romans when Greece fell to their rapidly expanding empire. Roman education was focused primarily on oratory, and politics, and less on the understanding of the natural world. Although the Romans made little contribution themselves, they produced Latin compilations of many Greek works, which the formed the sole source of knowledge for the scientists of the early Medieval Christian West. During the
