Homework answers / question archive / Freedom and Liberty in Colonial North America For you first essay you will consider the topics of expansion, imperialism, and the relationship of world powers

Freedom and Liberty in Colonial North America For you first essay you will consider the topics of expansion, imperialism, and the relationship of world powers

Writing

Share With

Freedom and Liberty in Colonial North America

For you first essay you will consider the topics of expansion, imperialism, and the relationship of world powers. Based upon the course readings you will write a 4-page essay (in addition to a cover page and Works Cited page) that analyzes the relationships between European society and African, Asian, and American societies during the first age of imperialism and the limits of European expansion, particularly in Asia.

When thinking about how to write your essay remember that a well written paper includes:

- An introduction with a clear thesis statement (argument) that is underlined (see more on how to write a thesis statementand a conclusion summing up your findings and argument.

- Several body paragraphs that include quotations along with from the assigned readings only (no outside sources or research) to support your thesis statement and claims.

- Think about organizing your paper by continent (one section of you paper focuses on the Americas, another on Europe, etc.)

- Historical analysis (see more on what historical analysis looks like

- Analysis should always follow a quote or paraphrased piece from the assigned readings.

- You do not need a Works Cited page!!

When writing and editing your paper keep in mind that you we will be using Turnitin to check for plagiarism.

Assignment requirements

• 4 pages minimum
• an underlined thesis statement in your introduction
• typed, Times New Roman, 12 point font, double spaced
• 1 inch margins
• MLA style citations in the paper
• reference to assigned course readings

Western Civilization: A Concise History Chapter 11: The Enlightenment In 1784, a Prussian philosopher named Immanuel Kant published a short essay entitled What is Enlightenment? He was responding to nearly a century of philosophical, scientific, and technical advances in Central and Western Europe that, he felt, had culminated in his own lifetime in a more enlightened and just age. According to Kant, Enlightenment was all about the courage to think for one's self, to question the accepted notions of any field of human knowledge rather than relying on a belief imposed by an outside authority. Likewise, he wrote, ideas were now exchanged between thinkers in a network of learning that itself provided a kind of intellectual momentum. Kant's point was that, more than ever before, thinkers of various kinds were breaking new ground not only in using the scientific method to discover new things about the physical world, but in applying rational inquiry toward improving human life and the organization of human society. While Kant's essay probably overstated the Utopian qualities of the thought of his era, he was right that it did correspond to a major shift in how educated Europeans thought about the world and the human place in it. Following Kant, historians refer to the intellectual movement of the eighteenth century as the Enlightenment. Historians now tend to reject the idea that the Enlightenment was a single, self-conscious movement of thinkers, but they still (usually) accept that there were indeed innovative new themes of thought running through much of the philosophical, literary, and technical writing of the period. Likewise, new forms of media and new forums of discussion came of age in the eighteenth century, creating a larger and better-informed public than ever before in European history. The Enlightenment: Definitions The Enlightenment was a philosophical movement that lasted about one hundred years, neatly corresponding to most of the eighteenth century; convenient dates for it are from the Glorious Revolution in Britain to the beginning of the French Revolution: 1688 - 1789. The central concern of the Enlightenment was applying rational thought to almost every aspect of human existence: not just science, but philosophy, morality, and society. Along with those philosophical themes, central to the Enlightenment was the emergence of new forms of media 198 Western Civilization: A Concise History and new ways in which people exchanged information, along with new “sensibilities” regarding what was proper and desirable in social conduct and politics. We owe the Enlightenment fundamental modern beliefs. Enlightenment thinkers embraced the idea that scientific progress was limitless. They argued that all citizens should be equal before the law. They claimed that the best forms of government were those with rational laws oriented to serve the public interest. In a major break from the past, they increasingly claimed that there was a real, physical universe that could be understood using the methods of science, in contrast to the false, made-up universe of “magic” suitable only for myths and storytelling. In short, Enlightenment thinkers proposed ideas that were novel at the time, but were eventually accepted by almost everyone in Europe (and many other places, not least the inhabitants of the colonies of the Americas). The Enlightenment also introduced themes of thought that undermined traditional religious beliefs, at least in the long run. Perhaps the major theme of Enlightenment thought that ran contrary to almost every form of religious practice at the time was the rejection of “superstitions,” things that simply could not happen according to science (such a virgin giving birth to a child, or wine turning into blood during Communion). Most Enlightenment thinkers argued that the “real” natural universe was governed by natural laws, all watched over by a benevolent but completely remote “supreme being” - this was essentially the same as the Deism that had emerged from the Scientific Revolution. While few Enlightenment thinkers were outright atheists, almost all of them decried many church practices and what they perceived as the ignorance and injustice behind church (especially Catholic) laws. The Enlightenment was also against “tyranny,” which meant the arbitrary rule of a monarch indifferent to the welfare of his or her subjects. Almost no Enlightenment thinkers openly rejected monarchy as a form of government - indeed, some Enlightenment thinkers befriended powerful kings and queens - but they roundly condemned cruelty and selfishness among individual monarchs. The perfect state was, in the eyes of most Enlightenment thinkers, one with an “enlightened” monarch at its head, presiding over a set of reasonable laws. Many Enlightenment thinkers thus looked to Great Britain, since 1689 ruled by a monarch who agreed to its written constitution and worked closely with an elected parliament, as the best extant model of enlightened rule. Behind both the scientific worldview and the rejection of tyranny was a focus on the human mind’s capacity for reason. Reason is the mental faculty that takes sensory data and orders it into thoughts and ideas. The basic argument that underwrote the thought of the Enlightenment is that reason is universal and inherent to humans, and that if society could strip 199 Western Civilization: A Concise History away the pernicious patterns of tradition, superstition, and ignorance, humankind would arrive naturally at a harmonious society. Thus, almost all of the major thinkers of the Enlightenment tried to get to the bottom of just that task: what is standing in the way of reason, and how can humanity become more reasonable? Context and Causes One of the major causes of the Enlightenment was the Scientific Revolution. It cannot be overstated how important the work of scientists was to the thinkers of the Enlightenment, because works like Newton's Mathematical Principles demonstrated the existence of eternal, immutable laws of nature (ones that may or may not have anything to do with God) that were completely rational and understandable by humans. Indeed, in many ways the Enlightenment begins with Newton's publication of the Principles in 1687. Having thus established that the universe was rational, one of the major themes of the Enlightenment was the search for equally immutable and equally rational laws that applied to everything else in nature, most importantly human nature. How do humans learn? How might government be designed to ensure the most felicitous environment for learning and prosperity? If humans are capable of reason, why do they deviate from reasonable behavior so frequently? Among the other causes of the Enlightenment, perhaps the most important was the significant growth of the urban literate classes, most notably what was called in France the bourgeoisie: the mercantile middle class. Ever since the Renaissance era, elites increasingly acquired at least basic literacy, but by the eighteenth century even artisans and petty merchants in the cities of Central and Western Europe sent their children (especially boys) to schools for at least a few years. There was a real reading public by the eighteenth century that eagerly embraced the new ideas of the Enlightenment and provided a book market for both the official, copyrighted works of Enlightenment philosophy and pirated, illegal ones. That same reading public also eagerly embraced the quintessential new form of fiction of the eighteenth century: the novel, with the reading of novels becoming a major leisure activity of the period. Thus, the Enlightenment thought took place in the midst of what historians call the “growth of the public sphere.” Newspapers, periodicals, and cheap books became very common during the eighteenth century, which in turn helped the ongoing growth of literacy rates. Simultaneously, there was a full-scale shift away from the sacred languages to the vernaculars (i.e. from Latin to English, Spanish, French, etc.)., which in turn helped to start the spread of the modern state-sponsored vernaculars as spoken languages in regions far from royal capitals. For the first time, large numbers of people acquired at least a basic knowledge of 200 Western Civilization: A Concise History the official language of their state rather than using only their local dialect. Those official languages allowed the transmission of ideas across entire kingdoms. For example, by the time the French Revolution began in the late 1780s, an entire generation of men and women was capable of expressing shared ideas about justice and politics in the official French tongue. There were various social forums and spaces in which groups of self-styled "enlightened" men and women gathered to discuss the new ideas of the movement. The most significant of these were coffee houses in England and salons in France and Central Europe. Coffee houses, unlike their present-day analogs, charged an entry fee but then provided unlimited coffee to their patrons. Those patrons were from various social classes, and would gather together to discuss the latest ideas and read the periodicals provided by the coffee house (all while becoming increasingly caffeinated). Salons, which were common in the major cities of France and Germany, were more aristocratic gatherings in which major philosophers themselves would often read from their latest works, with the assembled group then engaging in debate and discussion. Salons were noteworthy for being led by women in most cases; educated women were thought to be the best moderators of learned discussion by most Enlightenment thinkers, men and women alike. Likewise, women writers were contributing members of salons, not just hostesses but participants in discussions and debates. One of the best-known salons, run by Marie Thérèse Rodet Geoffrin, seated on the right. All of the men pictured are their actual likelinesses. Two are of particular note: seated under the marble bust is Jean le Rond D’Alembert, noted below, and the bust is of Voltaire (also described below), whose work is being read to the gathering in the picture. 201 Western Civilization: A Concise History Outside of the gatherings at coffee houses and salons, the ideas and themes of the Enlightenment reached much of the reading public through the easy availability of cheap print, and it is also clear that even regular artisans were conversant in many Enlightenment ideas. To cite a single example, one French glassworker, Jacques-Louis Menetra, left a memoir in which he demonstrated his own command of the ideas of the period and even claimed to have chatted over drinks with the great Enlightenment philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The major thinkers of the Enlightenment considered themselves to be part of a “republic of letters,” similar to the "republic of science" that played such a role in the Scientific Revolution. They wrote voluminous correspondence and often sent one another unpublished manuscripts. Thus, from the thinkers themselves participating in the republic of letters down to artisans trading pirated copies of enlightenment works, the new ideas of the period permeated much of European society. Enlightenment Philosophes The term most often used for Enlightenment thinkers is philosophe, meaning simply "philosopher" in French. Many of the most famous and important philosophes were indeed French, but there were major English, Scottish, and Prussian figures as well. Some of the most noteworthy philosophes included the following. John Locke: 1637 – 1704 Locke was an Englishman who, along with Newton, was among the founding figures of the Enlightenment itself. Locke was a great political theorist of the period of the English Civil Wars and Glorious Revolution, arguing that sovereignty was granted by the people to a government but could be revoked if that government violated the laws and traditions of the country. He was also a major advocate for religious tolerance; he was even bold enough to note that people tended to be whatever religion was prevalent in their family and social context, so it was ridiculous for anyone to claim exclusive access to religious truth. Locke was also the founding figure of Enlightenment educational thought, arguing that all humans are born “blank slates” – Tabula Rasa in Latin – and hence access to the human faculty of reason had entirely to do with the proper education. Cruelty, selfishness, and destructive behavior were because of a lack of education and a poor environment, while the right education would lead anybody and everybody to become rational, reasonable individuals. 202 Western Civilization: A Concise History This idea was hugely inspiring to other Enlightenment thinkers, because it implied that society could be perfected if education was somehow improved and rationalized. Voltaire: 1694 – 1778 The pen name of François-Marie Arouet, Voltaire was arguably the single most influential figure of the Enlightenment. The greatest novelist, poet, and philosopher of France during the height of the Enlightenment period, Voltaire became famous across Europe for his wit, intelligence, and moral battles against what he perceived as injustice and superstition. In addition to writing hilarious novellas lambasting everything from Prussia's obsession with militarism to the idiotic fanaticism of the Spanish Inquisition, Voltaire was well known for publicly intervening against injustice. He wrote essays and articles decrying the unjust punishment of innocents and personally convinced the French king Louis XV to commute the sentences of certain individuals unjustly convicted of crimes. He was also an amateur scientist and philosopher - he wrote many of the most important articles in the "official" handbook of the Enlightenment, the Encyclopedia (described below). Voltaire While he was a tireless advocate of reason and justice, It is also important to note the ambiguities of Voltaire's philosophy. He was a deep skeptic about human nature, despite believing in the existence and desirability of reason. He acknowledged the power of ignorance and outmoded traditions to govern human behavior, and he expressed considerable skepticism 203 Western Civilization: A Concise History that society could ever be significantly improved. For example, despite his personal disdain for Christian (especially Catholic) institutions, he noted that “if God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him,” because without a religious structure shoring up their morality, the ignorant masses would descend into violence and barbarism. Emilie de Châtelet: 1706 - 1749 A major scientist and philosopher of the period, Châtelet published works on subjects as diverse as physics, mathematics, the Bible, and the very nature of happiness. Perhaps her best-known work during her lifetime was an annotated translation of Newton’s Mathematical Principles which explained the Newtonian concepts to her (French) readers. Despite the gendered biases of most of her scientific contemporaries, she was accepted as an equal member of the “republic of science.” In Châtelet the link between the legacy of the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment is clearest: while her companion (and lover) Voltaire was keenly interested in science and engaged in modest efforts at his own experiments, Châtelet was a full-fledged physicist and mathematician. The Encyclopedia of Diderot and D’Alembert (1751) The brainchild of two major French philosophes, the Encyclopedia was a full-scale attempt to catalog, categorize, and explain all of human knowledge. While its co-inventors, Jean le Rond D’Alembert and Denis Diderot, themselves wrote many of the articles, the majority were written by other philosophes, including (as noted above) Voltaire. The first volume was published in 1751, with other volumes following. In the end the Encyclopedia consisted of 28 volumes containing 60,000 articles with 2,885 illustrations. While its volumes were far too expensive for most of the reading public to access directly, pirated chapters ensured that its ideas reached a much broader audience. 204 Western Civilization: A Concise History One of the illustrations from the Encyclopedia, in this case diagrams of (at the time, state of the art) agricultural equipment. The Encyclopedia was explicitly organized to refute traditional knowledge, namely that provided by the church and (to a lesser extent) the state. The claim was that the application of reason to any problem could result in its solution. It also attempted to be a technical resource for would-be scientists and inventors, not only describing aspects of science but including detailed technical diagrams of everything from windmills to mines. In short, the Encyclopedia was intended to be a kind of guide to the entire realm of human thought and technique - a cutting-edge description of all of the knowledge a typical philosophe might think necessary to improve the world. 205 Western Civilization: A Concise History David Hume: 1711 – 1776 Hume was the major philosopher associated with the Scottish Enlightenment, an outpost of the movement centered in the Scottish capital of Edinburgh. Hume was one of the most powerful critics of all forms of organized religion, which he argued smacked of superstition. To him, any religion based on "miracles" was automatically invalid, since miracles do not happen in an orderly universe knowable through science. In fact, Hume went so far as to suggest that belief in a God who resembled a kind of omnipotent version of a human being, with a personality, intentions, and emotions, was simply an expression of primitive ignorance and fear early in human history, as people sought an explanation for a bewildering universe. Hume also expressed enormous contempt for the common people, who were ignorant and susceptible to superstition. Hume is important to consider because he embodied one of the characteristics of the Enlightenment that often seems the most surprising from a contemporary perspective, namely the fact that it did not champion the rights, let alone anything like the right to political expression, of regular people. To a philosopher like Hume, the average commoner (whether a peasant or a member of the poor urban classes) was so mired in ignorance, superstition, and credulity that he or she should be held in check and ruled by his or her betters. Adam Smith: 1723 - 1790 Smith was another Scotsman who did his work in Edinburgh. He is generally credited with being the first real economist: a social scientist devoted to analyzing how markets function. In his most famous work, The Wealth of Nations, Smith argued that a (mostly) free market, one that operated without undue interference of the state, would naturally result in never-ending economic growth and nearly universal prosperity. His targets were the monopolies and protectionist taxes and tariffs that limited trade between nations; he argued that if states dropped those kind of burdensome practices, the market itself would increase wealth as if the general prosperity of the nation was lifted by an "invisible hand." Smith's importance, besides founding the discipline of economics itself, was that he applied precisely the same kind of Enlightenment ideas and ideals to market exchange as did the other philosophes to morality, science, and so on. Smith, too, insisted that something in human affairs - economics - operated according to rational and knowable laws that could be discovered and explained. His ideas, along with those of David Ricardo, an English economist a generation younger than Smith, are normally considered the founding concepts of “classical” economics. 206 Western Civilization: A Concise History Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 - 1778) Rousseau was the great contrarian philosophe of the Enlightenment. He rose to prominence by winning an essay contest in 1749, penning a scathing critique of his contemporary French society and claiming that its so-called “civilization” was a corrupt facade that undermined humankind’s natural moral character. He went on to write both novels and essays that attracted enormous attention both in France and abroad, claiming among other things that children should learn from nature by experiencing the world, allowing their natural goodness and character to develop. He also championed the idea that political sovereignty arose from the “general will” of the people in a society, and that citizens in a just society had to be fanatically devoted to both that general will and to their own moral standards (Rousseau claimed, in a grossly inaccurate and anachronistic argument, that ancient Sparta was an excellent model for a truly enlightened and moral polity). Rousseau’s concept of a moralistic, fanatical government justified by a “general will” of the people would go on to become of the ideological bases of the French Revolution that began just a decade after his death. Politics and Society The political implications of the Enlightenment were surprisingly muted at the time. Almost every society in Europe exercised official censorship, and many philosophes had to publish their more provocative works using pseudonyms, sometimes resorting to illegal publishing operations and book smugglers in order to evade that censorship (not to mention their own potential arrest). Likewise, one of the important functions of the salons mentioned above was in providing safe spaces for Enlightenment ideas, and many of the women who ran salons supported (sometimes financially) controversial projects like the Encyclopedia in its early stages. In general, philosophes tended to openly attack the most egregious injustices they perceived in royal governments and the organized churches, but at the same time their skepticism about the intellectual abilities of the common people was such that almost none of them advocated a political system besides a better, more rational version of monarchy. Likewise, philosophes were quick to salute (to the point of being sycophantic at times) monarchs who they thought were living up to their hopes for the ideal of rational monarchy. In turn, various monarchs and nobles were attracted to Enlightenment thought. They came to believe in many cases in the essential justice of the arguments of the philosophes and did not see anything contradictory between the exercise of their power and enlightenment ideas. 207 Western Civilization: A Concise History That said, monarchs tended to see “enlightened reforms” in terms of making their governments more efficient. They certainly did not renounce any of their actual power, although some did at least ease the burdens on the serfs who toiled on royal lands. One major impact that Enlightenment thought unquestionably had on European (and, we should note, early American) politics was in the realm of justice. A noble from Milan, Cesare Bonesana, wrote a brief work entitled On Crimes and Punishment in 1764 arguing that the state’s essential duty was the protection of the life and dignity of its citizens, which to him included those accused of crimes. Among other things, he argued that rich and poor should be held accountable before the same laws, that the aim of the justice system should be as much to prevent future crimes as to punish past ones, and that torture was both barbarous and counter-productive. Several monarchs in the latter part of the eighteenth century did, in fact, ban torture in their realms, and "rationalized" justice systems slowly evolved in many kingdoms during the period. Perhaps the most notable “enlightened monarch” was Frederick II (the Great) of Prussia (r. 1740 – 1786). A great lover of French literature and philosophy, he insisted only on speaking French whenever possible (he once said that German was a language only useful for talking to one's horse), and he redecorated the Prussian royal palace in the French style, in which he avidly hosted Enlightenment salons. Frederick so impressed the French philosophes that Voltaire came to live at his palace for two years until the two of them had a falling out. Inspired by Enlightenment ideas, he freed the serfs on royal lands and banned the more onerous feudal duties owed by serfs owned by his nobles. He also rationalized the royal bureaucracy, making all applicants pass a formal exam, which provided a limited path of social mobility for non-nobles. Another ruler inspired by Enlightenment ideas was the Tsarina Catherine the Great (r. 1762 - 1796) of Russia. Catherine was a correspondent of French philosophes and actively cultivated Enlightenment-inspired art and learning in Russia. Hoping to increase the efficiency of the Russian state, she expanded the bureaucracy, reorganized the Russian Empire’s administrative divisions, and introduced a more rigorous and broad education for future officers of the military. She also created the first educational institution for girls in Russia, the Smolny Institute, admitting the daughters of nobles and, eventually, well-off commoners (ironically, given her own power, the Institute trained noble girls to be dutiful, compliant wives rather than would-be leaders). Catherine was not just an admirer of Enlightenment philosophy, but an active member of the “Republic of Letters,” writing a series of plays, memoirs, and operas meant to celebrate 208 Western Civilization: A Concise History Russian culture (not least against accusations of Russian backwardness by writers in the West), as well as her own success as a ruler. Her enthusiasm for the Enlightenment dampened considerably, however, as the French Revolution began in 1789, and while Russian nobles found their own privileges expanded, the vast majority of Russian subjects remained serfs. Like Frederick of Prussia, Catherine’s appreciation for “reason” had nothing to do with democratic impulses. One major political theme to emerge from the Enlightenment that did not require the goodwill of monarchs was the idea of human rights (or “the rights of man” as they were generally known at the time). Emerging from a combination of rationalistic philosophy and what historians describe as new “sensibilities” - above all the recognition of the shared humanity of different categories of people - concepts of human rights spread rapidly in the second half of the eighteenth century. In turn, they fueled both demands for political reform and helped to inspire the vigorous abolitionist (anti-slavery) movement that flourished in Britain in particular. Just as torture came to be seen by almost all Enlightenment thinkers as not just cruel, but archaic and irrational, so slavery went from an unquestionable economic necessity to a loathsome form of ongoing injustice. Just as the idea of human rights would soon inspire both the American and French Revolutions in the closing decades of the eighteenth century, the antislavery movements of the time would see many of their objectives achieved in the first few decades of the nineteenth (Britain would ban the slave trade in 1807 and slavery itself in 1833, although it would take the American Civil War in the 1860s to end slavery in the United States). That concern for rights did not, with a few noteworthy exceptions, extend to women. Just as the Scientific Revolution had abandoned actual empirical methods entirely in merely endorsing ancient stereotypes about female inferiority, the vast majority of male philosophes either ignored women in their writing entirely or argued that women had to be kept in a subservient social position. The same philosophes who eagerly attended women-run salons often wrote against educated women relating to men as peers. The great works of early feminism that emerged in the late Enlightenment, such as the English writer Mary Wollstencraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1791, were viciously attacked and then largely ignored until the modern feminist movement forced the issue the better part of a century later. 209 Western Civilization: A Concise History The Radical Enlightenment and The Underground While the mainstream Enlightenment was definitely an elite affair conducted in public, there were other elements to it. The so-called Radical Enlightenment (the term was invented by historians, not people involved in it) had to do with the ideas too scandalous for mainstream philosophes to support, like outright atheism. One example of this phenomenon was the emergence of Freemasonry, "secret," although not difficult to find for most male European elites, groups of like-minded Enlightenment thinkers who gathered in "lodges" to discuss philosophy, make political connections, and socialize. Some Masonic lodges were associated with a much more widespread part of the "radical" Enlightenment: the vast underground world of illegal publishers and smugglers. In areas with relatively relaxed censorship like the Netherlands and Switzerland, numerous small printing presses operated throughout the eighteenth century, cranking out illegal literature. Some of this literature consisted of the banned works of major philosophes themselves, but much of it was simply pirated and "dumbed-down" versions of things like the Encyclopedia. This illegal industry supplied the reading public, especially the reading public with little money to spend on books, with their essential access to Enlightenment thought. For example, as noted above, an actual volume (let alone the entire multi-volume set) of the Encyclopedia was much too expensive for a common artisan or merchant to afford. Such a person could, however, afford a pamphlet-sized, pirated copy of several of the articles from the Encyclopedia that might interest her. Likewise, many works that were clearly outside of the acceptable bounds of legal publishing at the time (including both outright attacks on Christianity as a fraud as well as a shocking amount of pornography) were published and smuggled into places like France, England, and Prussia from the underground publishing houses. Perhaps the greatest impact of the Radical Enlightenment at the time is that it made mainstream Enlightenment ideas - however poorly summarized they might have been in pirated works more accessible to far more of European society as a whole than they would have been otherwise. 210 Western Civilization: A Concise History Conclusion: Implications of the Enlightenment The noteworthy philosophes of the Enlightenment rarely attacked outright the social hierarchy that they were part of. The abuses of the church, the ignorance of the nobility, even the injustices of kings might be fair game for criticism, but none of the better-known philosophes called for the equivalent of a political revolution. Only Rousseau was bold enough to advocate a republican form of government as a viable alternative to monarchy, and his political ideas were far less well-known during his lifetime than were his ruminations on education, nature, and morality. Even Kant’s essay celebrated what he described as the “public use of reason,” namely intellectuals exchanging ideas, while defending the authoritarian power of the (Prussian, in his case) king to demand that his subjects “obey!” The problem was that even though most of the major figures of the Enlightenment were themselves social elites, their thought was ultimately disruptive to the Christian society of orders. Almost all of the philosophes claimed that the legitimacy of a monarch was based on their rule coinciding with the prosperity of the nation and the absence of cruelty and injustice in the laws of the land. The implication was that people have the right to judge the monarch in terms of his or her competence and rationality. Likewise, one major political and social structure that philosophes did attack was the fact that nobles enjoyed vast legal privileges but had generally done nothing to deserve those privileges besides being born a member of a noble family. In contrast, philosophes were quick to point out that many members of the middle classes were far more intelligent and competent than was the average nobleman. In addition, despite the inherent difficulty of publishing against the backdrop of censorship, philosophes did much to see that organized religion itself was undermined. The one stance all of the major Enlightenment thinkers agreed on regarding religion was that “revealed” religion - religion whose authority was based on miracles - was nonsense. According to the philosophes, the history of miracles could be disproved, and contemporary miracles were usually experienced by lunatics, women, and the poor (and were thus automatically suspect from their elite, male perspective). Miracles, by their very nature, purported to violate natural law, and according to the very core principles of Enlightenment thought, that simply was not possible. Thus, the Enlightenment did more to disrupt the social and political order by the late eighteenth century than most of its members ever intended. The most obvious and spectacular expression of that disruption took place in a pair of political revolutions: first in the American colonies of Great Britain in the 1770s, then in France starting in the 1780s. In both of those 211 Western Civilization: A Concise History revolutions, ideas that had remained in the abstract during the Enlightenment were made manifest in the form of new constitutions, laws, and principles of government, and in both cases, one of the byproducts was violent upheaval. Image Citations (Wikimedia Commons): Salon of Mme. Geoffrin - Public Domain Encyclopedia Illustration - Public Domain 212 Western Civilization: A Concise History “Equality” Of the three elements of the Revolutionary motto, “equality” was in some ways the most fraught with implications. All of the members of the National Assembly were men. Almost all were Catholic - a few were Protestants, but none were Jews. All were white as well, despite the existence of a large population of free blacks and mixed-race inhabitants of the French colonies (especially in the Caribbean). The initial claim that all citizens ought to be equal before the law seemed straightforward enough until the Assembly had to decide if that equality extended to those besides the people who had held a monopoly on political representation of any kind in most of French history: property-owning male Catholics. The eminent historian of France, Lynn Hunt, in her The Invention of Human Rights, traces some of the ways in which the promise of “equality” brought about changes that the members of the Assembly had never anticipated early on - some of her arguments are presented below. While some of the early Revolutionaries had spoken in favor of the extension of rights to Protestants before the Revolution, fewer had spoken on behalf of France’s Jewish minority. Despite misgivings from Catholic conservatives in the Assembly, Protestants saw their rights recognized by the end of 1789 thanks in part to the fact that Protestants already exercised political rights in parts of southern France. In turn, while the idea of legal equality for Jews was practically unthinkable before the Revolution, the logic of equality seemed to acquire its own momentum over the course of 1789 - 1791, with French Jews winning their rights as French citizens in September of 1791. For both Protestants and Jews, the members of the Assembly concluded that religious faith was essentially a private matter that did not directly impact one’s ability to exercise political rights. Having already broken with the Catholic church - and seized much of its property - the Assembly now created a momentus precedent for religious tolerance. Religion was now officially stripped of its political valence for the first time in European history. This was more than a “separation of church and state”: it suggested that religious belief was in fact irrelevant to political loyalty and public conduct. Clearly, much had changed in the centuries since the Protestant Reformation unleashed its firestorm of controversy and bloodshed. In the case of the blacks and mixed-race peoples of the French colonies, however, the Assembly at first showed little interest in extending any form of political rights. Several 233 Western Civilization: A Concise History members of the Assembly argued that slavery should be abolished, but they were in the minority. France’s Caribbean colonies, above all its sugar-producing plantation colony of St. Domingue (present-day Haiti), produced enormous wealth for the French state and for numerous slave-based plantation owners and their French business partners. Thus, even those in favor of major reforms in France itself often balked at the idea of meddling with the wealth of the slave economies of the Caribbean. Once again, however, the logic of equality worked inexorably to upset centuries-old political hierarchies. Free blacks and mixed-race inhabitants of the colonies, once learning of the events in France, swiftly petitioned to have their own rights recognized. Much more alarmingly to the members of the Assembly, the slaves of St. Domingue (who comprised approximately 90% of its population) also learned of the Revolution and of its egalitarian promise. The Assembly took steps to recognize the rights of free people of color only slowly at first. In the summer of 1791, however, a slave uprising in St. Domingue forced the issue. The Assembly desperately scrambled to maintain control of the situation, hoping in part to win over the free people of color in the colony to fight alongside white plantation owners to maintain control. Over the course of the following years, the rebellion in St. Domingue saw French authority destroyed, plantations overrun, and hundreds of thousands of slaves seizing their freedom. Having already lost control, the Assembly finally voted to abolish slavery entirely in February of 1794. Thus, unlike the cases of Protestant and Jewish enfranchisement, racial equality was only “granted” by the Assembly because it could not be maintained by force. The slave rebellion in St. Domingue, soon to be the nation of Haiti, was led by Toussaint L’Ouverture, a former slave himself. 234 Western Civilization: A Concise History In the rhetoric of the Assembly, missing from the emancipatory logic entirely however, were women. There were no debates on the floor of the Assembly having to do with women’s rights, in stark contrast to the lengthy arguments over religious minorities and the black inhabitants of the colonies. French men, radicals very much included, simply took it for granted that women were incapable of exercising political independence. As a matter of fact, however, women exercised political independence at several key moments in the revolution, drawing up grievances to be submitted to the king at the Estates General, participating in the storming of the Bastille, and forcibly removing the royal family from Versailles to Paris (it was a group of armed women who carried out that particular change of address for the king, queen, and heir to the throne). Some women both in France and abroad forcefully drove home the implication of the Revolution’s promise of “equality,” with the playwright Olympe de Gouges issuing a Declaration of the Rights of Woman in 1791 in parallel to the Assembly’s 1789 Rights of Man and Citizen. In England, the writer Mary Wollstonecraft wrote one of the founding texts of modern feminism, Vindication of the Rights of Woman, in 1792, that made a straightforward claim: the liberation of women would play a key role in the disintegration of unwarranted social and political hierarchy for all. Both highlighted the obvious connection between the liberal promise of equality driving the revolution forward and an even more far-reaching project of human emancipation. Neither work, however, inspired sympathy among the vast majority of the male population of France (or Britain), and as the revolution grew more radical (see below), the members of the Assembly grew ever-more hostile to the demand for rights for women. De Gouges was eventually executed on orders from the Assembly as a “counter-revolutionary,” and the political clubs of women that had sprung up since 1789 were shut down. It would take the better part of a century for women to force the issue and begin the long, arduous process of seizing political rights. The Radical Phase and the Terror Until June of 1791, the National Assembly tried to build a constitutional monarchy, even as it faced increasing hostility among the great powers of Europe, all of which were monarchies, along with problems with inflation and hunger in the countryside. In June of 1791, the king and his family fled Paris, but were caught on the border (supposedly by a postal worker who recognized the king from his portrait on coins). It was soon discovered that the royal family had 235 Western Civilization: A Concise History The Ottoman Empire and Safavid Persia The single most powerful state of the early modern period in the region of Western Civilization was not based in Europe, but the Middle East: the Ottoman Empire. As an aside, In many Western Civilization texts, the Ottomans are given a cursory treatment, treated as a kind of faceless threat to European states rather than being described in adequate detail. That is both ironic and unfortunate, since the Ottoman Empire was the very model of a successful early-modern state, politically centralized, economically prosperous, and engaged in not just warfare but an enormous amount of commerce with other states, very much including the states of Europe. The Ottoman Empire originated in various small Turkic kingdoms that were left in the wake of the devastating Mongol invasions of the thirteenth century. The Turks are an interrelated group of peoples originating in Central Asia; they spoke various related dialects and share a common ethnic origin. Traditionally, along with the Mongol people further to their east, the Turks were among the most fierce steppe nomads, living by herding animals and raiding the “civilized” lands to their south and west. The Turks began the transition from steppe nomads to the rulers of settled kingdoms by the tenth century, culminating with the Seljuk invasion of the eleventh century. The Turks were driven by two motivations: the tradition of warfare against non-Muslims, and the straightforward interest in looting defeated enemies. They made frequent war against Byzantium, the Arab Muslim states, and, as often, against each other. While organized initially along tribal and clan lines, they took pains to imitate the more settled Islamic empires that had come before them by practicing Islamic (shariah) law and sponsoring Islamic scholarship. In the early fourteenth century, a Seljuk lord named Osman captured a significant chunk of territory from the Byzantines in Anatolia, and he founded a dynasty named after his clan, anglicized to “Ottoman.” The Ottomans went on to conquer vast territories, including both the lands of the earlier Caliphates and, for the first time, parts of Europe that had never before been held by Islamic rulers, including the islands of the eastern Mediterranean, Greece, and the Balkans. In 1453, the Ottoman Sultan (king) Mehmet II succeeded in conquering Constantinople and, with it, the remnants of Byzantium itself. He moved the capital of his empire to Constantinople and restored it to its former glory. By his death in 1481, it was once again one of the great cities of Europe, and by 1600 its population had reached 700,000, making it the largest city in Europe or the Middle East. The capture of Constantinople inaugurated a new phase of Ottoman history, 93 Western Civilization: A Concise History one in which the Ottomans saw themselves as the inheritors not only of the earlier Islamic states, but of the Roman Empire as well. The sixteenth century was the high point of Ottoman power, influence, prosperity, and prestige. Under Sultan Selim I (“The Grim,” r. 1512 - 1520), Ottoman forces conquered Egypt from the Mameluke Turks and took over rulership and oversight of the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina, hitherto under Mameluke control. Selim was equal parts ambitious and pragmatic and proved himself a skilled politician and effective military commander. He also continued the traditional Ottoman practice of raising his sons away from the capital, having each trained in politics and war to ensure that each was well prepared to take the throne. The ruthless corollary expectation was that, when the sultan died, his sons would compete to win over the court and military command, the winner then having his brothers murdered to eliminate his rivals and to consolidate power. Selim set the stage for his son, Suleiman the Magnificent (r. 1520 - 1566) to preside over the golden age of Ottoman power in precisely this manner Suleiman outmaneuvered his brothers when Selim died and promptly had his brothers killed. Suleiman supervised a deliberate, focused campaign to enrich, extend, and glorify the empire. He conquered territories in southeastern Europe including all of Hungary, and ultimately besieged the Habsburg capital of Vienna in 1529. Although the siege failed, the empire now occupied an enormous stretch of Europe. Ottoman forces also conquered Mesopotamia from the Safavids of Persia (dealing the nascent dynasty a serious blow in the process). Next to China under the Ming dynasty, the Ottoman Empire was now the largest in the world. Suleiman was not just a conqueror, however. He oversaw vast building campaigns, funding the construction of mosques, madrasas (schools of Islamic scholarship), caravanserais (waystations for trade), and other public buildings that served both practical purposes and amplified the sultan’s power and influence. He strongly supported the orthodox Sunni ulama (clergy), insisting on strict religious observance, but he also insisted on the sultan’s prerogative to rule without interference from the religious authorities. He increasingly staffed the highest ranks of both the military and the state bureaucracy with Janissaries, boys taken from Christian lands who were raised to be elite soldiers and officials. The Janissaries, while technically slaves, actually enjoyed more power and influence than any free Ottoman elite besides the sultan himself. During his lifetime, the Janissaries were loyal and effective in both war and governance. Although he had no way of realizing it, however, some of Suleiman’s policies would prove destructive in the long run. First, the Janissaries slowly devolved from elite soldiers and 94 Western Civilization: A Concise History bureaucrats to parasites, living in lavish “barracks” in Constantinople, manipulating weak sultans, and spending more time enriching themselves in commerce than serving the state. Also, late in life Suleiman retired to the inner chambers of the palace to live out his days as a reclusive mystic, setting a disastrous precedent that left governance in the hands of advisers. Rather than having his sons raised far from the capital, trained as future rulers (albeit rivals who would attempt to murder one another when they came of age), Suleiman had his children raised in the inner palace. From then on, rivalry and murder remained an essential part of royal intrigue, but now it was carried out by assassins and the royal pretenders being killed were unlikely to be effective even if they survived. Of course, at the time, few would have realized that the empire faced long-term decline. The seventeenth century did not see territorial expansion to speak of, but neither did it succumb to invasion. Even decades-long periods of infighting and incompetence at the top levels of Ottoman governance did not seriously disrupt the prosperity and power of the empire as a whole. Instead, what is clear in historical hindsight is that the early centuries of Ottoman rule had been so successful in creating a political culture centered on Constantinople that the empire remained intact regardless of what was happening in Constantinople - trade flowed, local elites prospered, and there were few signs of dissent across the vast breadth of Ottoman territory. It was not until European powers began to chip away at Ottoman sovereignty (a process that began in earnest with an enormous Habsburg victory in 1699) that the true decline of the empire became visible. The Ottoman Empire at the start of the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent. 95 Western Civilization: A Concise History Even though there was unquestionably a religious component to Ottoman conquests, the empire itself was comparatively tolerant, something that helps to explain its longevity. Regional governors were dismissed if they were so heavy-handed or intolerant that their subjects rose up in rebellion. Non-Muslims were officially tolerated as dhimmis, protected peoples, who had to pay a special tax but were not compelled to convert to Islam. Both the Christian patriarch of the Orthodox Church and the head of the Jewish congregation of Constantinople (as well as the Armenian Christian patriarch) were official members of the Sultan’s court, with each religious leader carrying both the privilege and the responsibility of representing their respective religious communities to the Ottoman government. They ran their own distinct educational systems and were responsible for tax collection among their communities, referred to as millets. To be clear, non-Muslims were held in a socially and legally secondary position within Ottoman society, but they still enjoyed vastly better status and treatment than did religious minorities in Christian kingdoms in Europe at the time. Safavid Persia One other Renaissance-era society deserves consideration: that of Persia. Persian (Iranian) political and intellectual traditions were, by the time of the Turkic migrations, the better part of two thousand years old, tracing their origins all the way back to the Achaemenid Empire founded by Cyrus the Great in 550 BCE. As noted in a previous chapter, when Persia came under Turkic rule starting in the tenth century it was only through Persian administration that a modicum of stability was ever realized by various dynasties. Even then, the Mongol invasions, the subsequent invasion by the Central Asian warlord Temur, and the constant infighting among Turkic tribes meant that Persia was rarely united as a state for more than a few decades at a time (although, importantly, both Islamic and secular scholarship prospered despite the political instability). The Mongol invasions had been devastating, Mongol rule cruel and extractive, and the Timurid period that followed was no better, collectively leading to a marked decline in the prosperity of Persia as a whole. Tribal confederations revolved around the military prowess and charismatic qualities of individual leaders, so even with Persian bureaucracy they rarely held together for long. An outstanding exception to the state of semi-anarchy came about because of an individual whose personal qualities appealed to the Qizilbash Turks who dominated Persia at the time: Shah Ismail, the founder of the Safavid dynasty. The Safavids were a clan of Sufi (Islamic mystics) pirs, masters or spiritual leaders, who also happened to be capable military 96 Western Civilization: A Concise History and political organizers. In 1501 Ismail conquered the city of Tabriz in northwestern Persia, proclaiming his own identity as the bearer of religious truth in the period leading up to the end of the world. Importantly, Ismail and his followers were Shia Muslims, the branch of Islam that had long held a strong presence in Persia, and Ismail could claim that he represented the true interpretation of Islam against the corruption of the (Sunni) rulers in neighboring lands. The appeal to a mystical, millenarian identity helped unite the fractious Turkic tribes and Ismail was able to bring all of Persia under his rule in a short amount of time. He named his kingdom Iran, following the precedent established by the last pre-Islamic Persian dynasty, the Sasanians. Ismail fused three distinct identities in promoting his rule: he was a Turkic warlord, a Shia Sufi pir, and (he claimed) the inheritor of the pre-Islamic political tradition of Persia. Among his other titles he claimed to be the rightful shah (king) and to be a latter-day Alexander the Great (known as Iskandar in Persian). His meteoric rise to power was cut short, however, when he led his forces against the Ottomans in 1514 and suffered a crushing defeat, shattering his carefully-cultivated aura of divine power. In the aftermath the Ottomans seized Safavid territory and forced Ismail to retreat to the Iranian plateau. For the next seventy years Ismail and his descendents lost control of the Turkic tribal confederacy he had briefly united, to the point that the Safavid shahs were nothing but figureheads controlled by Turkic warlords until late in the century. Despite the return to the nearly anarchic conditions of tribal rule, the one area in which the Safavids proved successful was in supporting the growth of the Shia ulama, or Muslim clergy, supporting pilgrimages to Shia holy sites, funding madarasas and mosques, and encouraging the expansion of Shia Islam at the expense of the remaining Sunnis. This was perhaps the most significant historical legacy of the Safavids: their dynasty cemented the identity of Iran as a Shia state, something with significant political consequences down to the present. Safavid rule was revived by Shah Abbas I (r. 1587 - 1629). Placed on the throne as a puppet by his Turkic warlord “protector” in 1587, Abbas went on to seize real power and use it to restore Iranian military, commercial, and political strength. He built up an imperial monopoly on silk production that served as a vital source of revenue for the state and did everything in his power to protect the interests of merchants (including non-Muslims: both Christians from Georgia and Armenia and Hindus from India were welcome as long as they contributed to Iran’s economy). He moved away from the reliance on tribal warriors in war to the use of slave soldiers armed with firearms, a practice that the Ottomans had already used to great effect in their conquests to the west. He patronized the Shia ulama but based his own authority on 97 Western Civilization: A Concise History pre-Islamic kingship traditions, just as Ismail had. By the end of his rule Iran’s borders coincided with the heartland of the ancient Persian dynasties (which nearly match those of the present-day Islamic Republic of Iran). Abbas presided over what is remembered in Iranian history as a true golden age, one that flourished simultaneously with golden ages in the Ottoman Empire and, to the east, the Muslim-ruled Mughal Empire of India. In 1600 these three empires were among the largest and wealthiest in the world, exceeded only by China under the Ming dynasty. It was a period in which trade and scholarship flowed from India to Europe via Iranian and Ottoman trade routes, enriching all three empires enormously. Iran under Abbas enjoyed its greatest period of political coherence and military might until the twentieth century, and it established the precedent of an Iranian state that traced its lineage back to Shia Islam and pre-Islamic monarchy in equal measure. Unfortunately for the regime (and for the Iranian economy), the shahs that followed Abbas I were a litany of incompetence. Between Abbas’ death in 1629 until the dynasty itself came to an end in 1722 Iran suffered from ineffective leadership and a reversion to the semi-anarchy of tribal rule. The imperial silk monopoly collapsed and, in contrast to Abbas’ pragmatic tolerance of religious minorities, the state (encouraged by conservative Shia clerics) launched waves of persecution against Sunnis, Christians, Jews, and Hindus. Those groups had been at the heart of Iranian commerce, and thus the brief golden age brought about by Abbas came to an end almost as soon as it had begun. The significance of the Safavids, despite the fact that only Ismail and Abbas I were especially effective rulers, is that they presided over a period in which Persian identity fused together its most important constituent elements: a ruling dynasty that saw itself as the inheritors of all of the dynasties of the past (be they Persian, Macedonian, or Turkic) and, even more critically, the establishment of the Shia ulama as the official religious authorities of the empire. Simply put, from the Safavid period on, Persia was the heart of Shia Islam. Middle Eastern Economics Like settled societies everywhere in the pre-modern era, the Ottoman Empire and Safavid Persia were dependent on agriculture. Most people were farmers and most wealth was derived from taxes and fees associated with farming. That being noted, what set the economic systems of the Middle East apart from many other societies (such as Europe at the time, with the exception of Renaissance Italy) was the care taken by rulers to cultivate trade. Empires like those of the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals all saw focused campaigns to build and protect 98 Western Civilization: A Concise History roads, caravanserais, and markets. Unlike in most European societies, merchants were treated with respect and honor. Special political and economic status was given to merchants, something that was most evident in the legal protections extended to non-Muslims who were economically useful. As noted above, Hindus and Christians played key economic roles in Safavid Persia, just as Jews and Christians were a major part of the Ottoman economy. Until the eighteenth century, the Ottoman state benefited from treating Jews and Christians as distinct legal entities, allowing them a high degree of legal autonomy and self-rule (while still answering to the central government). Those arrangements were the origin of the “capitulation agreements” that would prove a major weakness to the Ottoman state in the long run, but originally they were in place to encourage economic dynamism among the religious minority communities. The Middle Eastern economy during the fifteenth through seventeenth centuries was part of a genuinely global trade network. As they always had, Europeans desperately wanted luxury goods from the east, including spices, silks, and porcelain. Once the Spanish discovered the vast silver deposits of South and Central America in the early sixteenth century, gigantic quantities of silver bullion flowed from Europe into the Ottoman and Safavid economies, most of it en route to India and points farther east. The one Persian industry that generated wealth independently from the east-west trade was silk: under Shah Abbas I the state established a royal silk monopoly that produced the lion’s share of tax revenue for the state, and when that monopoly fell apart because of the incompetence of his descendents the state struggled to stay afloat financially. The Ottoman state was not nearly as dependent on a single source of revenue. It enjoyed highly productive agricultural lands in various parts of the vast breadth of the empire and it also generated significant tax revenue from the jizya, the tax on non-Muslims (who represented a sizable part of the population). As the gatekeepers of the east-west trade, the Ottomans were able to tax both exports and imports to Europe, and during the major period of Ottoman imperialism conquered territories provided lucrative plunder as well. Unfortunately for the Ottomans, the conquest of both Safavid and Habsburg territories in the first decades of the sixteenth century cost more to defend and maintain than they brought in with tax revenue, bringing about a brake on Ottoman imperialism itself. 99 Western Civilization: A Concise History Conclusion All of the large-scale patterns described above took a long time to develop; it was not as if there were small medieval kingdoms one year and major, centralized states the next. Likewise, many historians totally reject the idea of the gunpowder "revolution" because it took well over a century from the fifteenth well into the sixteenth centuries to really come to fruition. Instead, what is evident in hindsight is that centralized states with legal control and the right to raise taxes over their entire territories began in earnest during this period, introducing new legal and political patterns that would only expand in the centuries that followed. Likewise, while gunpowder may have taken a long time to fully transform warfare and state finances, there can be no question that it did so in the long run. Image Citations (Creative Commons): Siege of Orleans: public domain Habsburg lands: public domain Ottoman Empire - Esemono, public domain 100 Outline America prior to 1500 I. I. II. Types of Native Societies Native Cultures II. European colonization of the Americas I. Geography II. Economics III. Religion IV. Race and Ethnicity The “New” World, America ? Population estimates 70-100 million people in the Americas *Not a unified group* Different tribes varied in: ? Dress ? Food ? Settlement Population Estimates and Diversity: • 5-10 million in North America • 60-90 million in Latin America • 300-400 different languages spoken across the continents © Encyclopedia Britannica Types of Indigenous Civilizations Nomadic Sedentary or non-nomadic ? Hunter-gatherers, little to no ? Agricultural societies, crop cultivation ? Move semi-annually following food supplies cultivated the land ? Moved infrequently dependent on safety or environmental conditions Nomadic-Lakota "There were 50 tents made of tanned hides, very bright red and white in color and bell-shaped, with flaps and openings, and built as skillfully as those of Italy, and so large that in the most ordinary ones four different mattresses and beds were easily accommodated. The Indians . . . are as well sheltered in their tents as they could be in any house." "The tanning is so fine that although it should rain bucketfuls, it will not pass through nor stiffen the hide, but rather upon drying it remains as soft and pliable as before.“ From Don Juan de Oñate’s account of a 1599 Great Plains expedition --How can we tell the tent above was made in post-Columbian America? --Does de Oñate seem impressed? Condescending? SedentaryAztec The basis of Aztec success was their remarkable system of agriculture, which featured intensive cultivation and reclamation of swampland. The Mexica capital city of Tenochtitlán, founded around 1325 CE Tenochtitlán was an impressive city which included wetland gardens and used raised causeways to separate the gardens and move around the city ? Roughly 200,000 people lived within Tenochtitlan and another 10 million were part of the broader Aztec Empire. ? Conquering the Aztecs ? In August 1519, Cortés marched to Tenochtitlan. ? Over the next two years, the Spanish forged alliances with other indigenous groups. ? In 1521, Tenochtitlan was sacked, and its monuments destroyed. ? The Tlaxcalans were instrumental in helping the Spanish conquer the Aztecs. ? With the leadership dismantled, the Spanish easily conquered the remain Aztec peoples. Sedentary-Inca ? At its height, Inca empire consisted of 10-12 million inhabitants and included 100 different ethnic groups ? Encompassed large scale agricultural networks and roads as well as a cohesive language and faith throughout their expansive empire Conquering the Inca ? In the 1530s, Atahualpa controlled an army that was 80,000 strong. Pizzaro had under 300 men at his disposal. ? On the initial day of attack, Pizzaro’s men ambushed the Inca killing 7,000 Incas were and sustaining zero Spanish losses. →Pizzaro kidnapped and held Atahualpa before executing him and taking the capital city. →Ultimately, the Spanish capitalized on internal fractions and built alliances with Native Americans who resented the Inca. Native Economies ? Gender divisions of tasks ? Self sufficiency among tribes ? Vast communication and luxury trade networks ? Public/communal property Native Attitudes towards Slavery Different in North American than in Mesoamerica and South America ? Slavery was a often product of war or debt ? In North America, captives could become full members of society ? In Meso and South America slaves were at times used as part of religious offerings ? Was not race based, but often tribal or ethnically based ? Slavery was NOT hereditary! Religions ? Very diverse ? Common factors: ? Link between spiritual and natural world (Animism) ? Spiritual world was part of daily life: ? ? Crop ceremonies Shamen (revered members of society not witches) ? Religious Cross Fertilization ? Willingness to experiment with new ideas ? Few attempts at conversion The Columbian Exchange Biological consequences of contact Importance of Geography in Colonization ? The relative isolation of the Americas and connectivity of the Eurasian and African continents was an important factor which enabled European conquest. ? European access to agricultural and technological advancements from Asia, and even diseases, ultimately provided an advantage against indigenous Americans. Virginia Soil Epidemic “the populations at risk have had no previous contact with the diseases that strike them and are therefore immunologically almost defenseless” Population of Mexico 1400 5 Million 1800 600,000 Some modern estimates believe that nearly 90% of the native population was wiped out due to diseases. c. 1600 c. 1700 Economics ? Recall, economic motivations were crucial to exploration. ? To exploit the New World, European colonizers: ? Implemented mercantilist policies ? Expanded agricultural pursuits ? Extracted natural resources Mercantilism ? Mercantilism→ belief that in order to build economic strength a Nation had to export more than it imported ? Could use colonies to increase exports and decrease imports ? Quinto real (royal fifth) tax a mercantilist policy which greatly enriched Spain’s monarchs ? The 17th century Navigation Acts were an example of British mercantilist policies. Agriculture in Latin America Spanish territory ? The Hacienda (plantation) ? Grow primarily foodstuffs: Wheat, grapes, meat ? Encomienda system of utilizing native labor force (essentially indentured servants without an end) ? Due to uprisings, ultimately replaced by debt peonage (similar to share cropping) Portuguese territory ? Primarily used enslaved Africans ? Grow Sugar cane ? Large-scale importing of slaves began in 1580s ? Working conditions poor: 5– 10% died annually ? Approximately one human life per ton of sugar Extraction of Resources in North America English French ? Use a combination of ? Focus on fur as opposed to indentured servants (typically of European descent) and African enslaved laborers ? Southern colonies grow crops (tobacco, indigo, rice) ? Mid-Atlantic colonies grow tobacco and diversified grains ? Northern colonies subsistence farming (fewer slaves) agriculture “Company of New France” ? Limit immigration through late 17th century to limit competition Hunt for gold and silver Conquistadores looted Aztec, Inca treasures and melted them down for their value as raw precious metals Extensive use of natives in mining → Potosí, Bolivia ? American silver and gold became an important part of Asian trade in the 16th17th centuries The Rise of Spain’s Golden Empire •The Spanish Requerimiento, 1512: •Included explanation of Christianity •An order to accept Christ •Statement provided Spanish ability to wage war upon refusal of Requerimiento Due to conquest and plague, many natives felt gods had abandoned; converted to Catholicism Often retained elements of pagan religion Conversion attempts in New France A French Jesuit missionary, 1642: To make a Christian out of a Barbarian is not the work of a day. . . . A great step is gained when one has learned to know those with whom he has to deal; has penetrated their thoughts; has adapted himself to their language, their customs, and their manner of living; and when necessary, has been a Barbarian with them, in order to win them over to Jesus Christ. Mestizo Society ? Over 85% of Spanish and Portuguese migrants were male. → results in a mestizo or mixed society → Europeans marrying indigenous women was common in Latin America Los cuadros del mestizaje del Virrey Amat c. 1770 Indigenous people were still held to a lower social status and used as enslaved laborers and indentured servants. Enslaved Africans ? In addition to enslaving Native Americans, Europeans came to increasingly rely on enslaved Africans. ? To maintain enslaved laborers, race became an increasingly important factor in determining social status in the Americas. Map showing geographic points of origin (Africa) and destination (the Americas) for enslaved people in the transatlantic slave trade. French and Indians ? Trade with Natives ? Live among natives→ do not disrupt Native lifestyles ? Learn Native languages ? Intermingle and intermarry ? Marriage between French and Natives was encouraged and accepted “Our young men will marry your daughters, and we shall be one people.” -Champlain The Transformation of Early Modern Europe Roots of Reform-Protestant Reformation ? Technological advancement: ? Gutenberg’s printing press, circa 1450 ? ? Catholic Church corruption: ? Allows for faster reproduction of texts (including the bible and pamphlets) ? Politics ? Blurred lines between clergy and wealthy families ? Church involved in political issues not just theological Economics ? Inside view of the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica Selling indulgences increased to fund the construction of St. Peter’s Basilica (construction started c. 1500) Jan Hus ? Czech reformer who lectured at the University of Prague ? Asserted that one should not kill for their faith and that sins were forgiven for repentance not through donation$ ? Hus was burned at the stake in 1415 for his unorthodox views. →Roots of reform simmered for nearly 100 years before… Martin Luther ? ? 95 Theses, 1517 ? Attacks selling of indulgences to gain salvation ? Attacks notion that only clergy should be able to read the Bible and interpret God’s word Results in the Protestant Reformation Offshoots of Protestant Reformation Calvinism English Reformation • Establishes the doctrine of predestination • Political and religious motivations • Centered in Switzerland • Establishes the Anglican church as the official church of England → transfers property from Catholic Church to nationstate Catholic Reformation • Catholic Church implemented reforms following schism • Increased support for the Society of Jesuits • Primarily missionaries • Viewed as less corrupt than the main branch of Catholicism Religious Wars Protestant and Catholic leaders vied for political power through supporting established religions and demonizing the “other” ? In 1572, in France the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre spread and over a onemonth period nearly 25,000 French Huguenots (Protestants) were killed. ? Between 1550s and 1650s, religious wars were common throughout Europe Most significant of these wars is the Thirty Years’ War The Thirty Years’ War 1618-1648 ? Attempt by the Holy Roman Emperor to force Bohemians (CZ) back under the Catholic church ? Ultimately all of Europe is involved in the conflict ? Approximately ¼-1/3 of the central European population is annihilated as a result of the Thirty Years’ War (8 million fatalities) ? Some areas, like northern Germany experienced over a 50% population loss. The conflict changed the geopolitical face of Europe and the role of both religion and nation-states in society. Peace of Westphalia, 1648 ? Ended the Thirty Years’ War ? Ended the Holy Roman Empire ? Recognized sovereignty and equality of European of nation-states ? Protected domestic and religious decisions from foreign intervention No longer an imperial authority to mediate intra European disputes Nation-State Building The Rise of Homogeneous States European States System Modern Europe ? No European imperial authority (all sovereign and equal following 1648) ? Balance of power was tenuous, warfare continued across the globe and in Europe ? Rapid innovation in military technology due to concerns over neighbors/“enemies” and wanting to expand overseas empires Constitutional states Two systems of states arise ? Generally shared power between monarch and representative assembly. ? Theoretically more tolerant of religious and political dissenters. Absolutist states ? Monarchs claimed “absolute” power and authority over matters of the state. ? Typically intolerant of religious or political dissenters. Constitutional States Netherlands ? Religious conflict between Calvinists in the Netherlands and (Catholic) King Phillip II of Spain ? Fighting Spanish for self-government in 80 Years’ War, begins in 1581 ? Republic government formed in 1588 ? Based on representative parliamentary system England ? Constitutional Monarchy after Glorious Revolution of 1688 ? Bloodless coup ? William and Mary agree to shared governance between crown and parliament codification of laws applicable to the entire realm, Absolutism Absolute Monarchies France ? King Louis XIII, 1624-1642 ? Attacked aristocratic conspiracies ? Destroyed castles of competing nobility Russia ? In an effort to consolidate power ? King Louis XIV, 1643-1715 ? Built Versailles, required nobility to live at Versailles to minimize uprisings ? “The Sun King” evocative of divine right to rule → heavenly body ? Reinstituted intolerance of protestants ? Peter I, 1682-1725 ? Imposed new taxes on the peasants, which paid for the military ? Challenged the Russian Orthodox Church ? Sought to model Russia on western Europe nations (like France) ? Built new capital at St. Petersburg. Catherine II, 1762-1796 ? Reforms education and legal systems in Russia ? Ends reformation and liberalization policies following a peasant rebellion in 1773-1774 Controlling Populations: The birth of the nation-state 01 02 03 04 Increasing taxes Building standing armies Building infrastructure Suppressing nonconformists Suppressing Non-Conformists Spanish Inquisition Witch Hunts ? Founded by Ferdinand and Isabella, 1478 ? Late 1400s development in the belief of the devil and human assistants ? Sought to eliminate practitioners of Judaism or Islam and later Protestants ? ? Imprisoned or executed non-Catholics 16-17th century approximately 100,000 people put on trial of which more than 40,000 were put to death → Aimed at establishing homogenous citizenry ? Mostly widowed women were targeted ? Held accountable for bad luck/health ? Mostly occurred in areas battling between Protestantism and Catholicism Reforms and Revolts The Scientific Revolution ? One of the biggest reform movements of 16th and 17th centuries ? The Copernican Universe challenged Christian doctrine with the notion of the earth moving—not the sun. Galileo Galilei later provided evidence of the heliocentric universe. ? Rigorous challenges to church, emphasized reason over faith. The Scientific Method The philosophy of using an inductive approach to study nature (i.e. to abandon assumption and to observe with an open mind) was a fundamental part of Scientific Method and required a planned procedure in pursuits of answering scientific questions. German Peasants’ War, 1524-1525 ? Influenced by Martin Luther’s 95 Theses ? Was an uprising by serfs desiring additional rights and resentful of nobility and fees demanded by Catholic Church ? Large scale movement (largest political uprising in Europe until French Revolution), over 300,000 participants (100,000 of whom lost their lives) → German Peasants' War led to an overall reduction of rights and freedoms of the peasant class Between 1500 and 1750 the population of Europe doubled from about 65 million to around 127.5 million. Increased nutrition due to Columbian Exchange Reliance on potatoes Reliance on maize (corn) Urbanization As populations expanded, urban areas increased Urbanization and Population Growth The Rise of a Capitalist Economy ? Banks and stock exchanges pop up in Western Europe ? Joint Stock Companies evolve and assist in empire building and wealth accumulation for those who could afford to invest ? Social changes due to establishment of capitalism: ? Rise in crime due to increasing poverty and increasing wealth inequality ? Increasingly racialized society because of transatlantic slave trade investment opportunities THIS TUMULTUOUS PERIOD BROKE DOWN PREVIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND BUILT THE FOUNDATION OF MODERN EUROPE. FROM RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL TRANSFORMATIONS TO SOCIAL AND SCIENTIFIC MOVEMENTS, EUROPE LOOKED VERY DIFFERENT AT THE DAWN OF THE 1800S THAN IT HAD IN 1500. The Atlantic Revolutions The Enlightenment and Revolutionary Age Between 1775 and 1825 the Atlantic world changed at an exceptionally fast past. Influenced by evolving concepts of sovereignty and application of natural law towards society, social and political revolutions challenged long held views about social stratification. In addition to revolutions, the political map of the Americas changed dramatically as colonized territories fought for independence. An outcome of the Scientific Revolution: ? Sought to apply the scientific method and rational inquiry to improve human life and society The Enlightenment Europe was the center of the Enlightenment, with France the epicenter Marked a trend away from church doctrine: ? Most philosophes (French for philosopher) were deists ? Believed in existence of a god; denied supernatural teachings of Christianity ? Opposed the Church for privileged position of clergy and accumulation of wealth 3 Voltaire (1694–1778) ? Attacked French monarchy and Roman Catholic church ? Called for religious toleration and freedom ? Held church responsible for fanaticism, intolerance, human suffering ? Écrasez l’infame, “crush the damned thing” 4 The rise of Popular Sovereignty Popular Sovereignty Divine Right ? John Locke (1632–1704) ? Ancient and medieval notions of kingship: ? Second Treatise of Civil Government (1690) ? Argued that rulers derive power from consent of ruled ? Individuals retain personal rights, give political rights to rulers ? “mandate of heaven” ? “divine right of kings” Monarchs given power/authority to govern from God/heavens Impact of Enlightenment ideas → Kings to be made subject to populations they governed 5 Freedom and Political and Legal Equality ? Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) ? Argued for equality of all individuals, regardless of class, before the law ? In The Social Contract (1762), argued collectively society (the “governed”) was the sovereign (an important concept for John Locke as well). 6 Women often ran salons, but many male Enlightenment thinkers remained conservative regarding women’s rights. ? Rousseau argued women should receive education to prepare for lives as wives and mothers, not politically active citizens Enlightenment Ideals and Women Women philosophes ? Mary Astell (England, 1666–1731) argued women essentially born into slavery because of a patriarchal society ? Olympe de Gouges (French, (1748-1793) ? Wrote Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen (1791) ? Mary Wollstonecraft (England, 1759–1797) ? Published A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) 7 Change in the Atlantic World ? American Revolution/American War for Independence ? French Revolution ? Haitian Revolution ? Latin American Independence movements The Atlantic World in transition Revolutions Independence movements ? Primary driver of conflict was to alter the established form of government and change status quo ? Primary driver of conflict was to achieve independence and overthrow colonialism/mercantilism ? Rooted in the Enlightenment ? Rooted in nationalism The American Revolution ? Little indication of forthcoming revolution in mid-eighteenth century ? Colonists regarded themselves as British subjects ? Long cultural and personal connections with England ? Mutually profitable military and economic relationship The American Revolution ? Expensive French and Indian War (1754–1763) overlapped with Seven Years’ War (1756– 1763) ? Conflict in Europe, India ? British victory ensured global dominance, North American prosperity but also created a massive debt. 11 Bills came due from wars (French and Indian War/Seven Years’ War) Tax burden increased in the British colonies in North America ? Sugar Act (1764) ? Stamp Act (1765) ? Quartering Act (1765) (housing of British troops) ? Tea Act (1773) Tightened British Control of the Colonies → Enforcing mercantilism Americans boycotted British products and staged protests ? Boston Tea Party (1773) ? “No taxation without representation” Continental Congress formed, ultimately issuing the Declaration of Independence. 12 The Declaration of Independence ? July 4, 1776, Declaration of Independence adopted ? Influence of Locke: ? --retention of individual rights ? --sovereignty based on consent of the governed 13 ? British forces surrounded at Yorktown, Virginia in October 1781 Building an Independent Nation State ? With the signing of the 1783 Treaty of Paris, British recognize United States independence. ? 1787 Constitution of the United States ? Political and legal equality for men of property, defining citizenship and voting rights left to states ? Bill of Rights (1790) identifies rights retained by the people and by the states to limit central government 14 The French Revolution 1789-1799 ? Serious fiscal problems in France ? War debts, 1780s ? 50% of tax revenues went to pay off war debts ? 25% of tax revenues to military Financial woes → King needs approval for new taxes, calls on Estates General 16 The Estates General ? Estates General, founded 1303, had not met since 1614 ? Three estates: ? First estate: 100,000 Roman Catholic clergy ? Second estate: 400,000 nobles ? Third estate: everyone else ? 24 million serfs, free peasants, urban residents ? One vote per estate 17 1789 ? Protest of nobility forced King Louis to call Estates General for new taxes, May 1789 ? Demand from third estate for greater social change ? June, secession of third estate from Estates General ? Renamed “National Assembly” ? July, mob attacked Bastille; bloody battle won by mob (Bastille Day: July 14) 18 ? August 1789 ? American influence Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen ? Equality of French men ? Women not included; unsuccessful attempt at redress made by Olympe de Gouges’s Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen ? Sovereignty resides in the people ? Individual rights are protected 19 ? Stated goals of National Assembly Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity ? Old social order abolished ? Church lands seized; clergy redefined as civilians ? New constitution retained king, but subject to legislative authority ? Convention: elected by universal male suffrage ? Levée en masse: conscription for war ? 1793: King Louis and Queen Marie Antoinette found guilty of treason and sent to guillotine 20 ? “The Incorruptible,” led Committee of Public Safety; leader of Jacobin party Maximilien Robespierre (1758–1794) ? Dominated Convention, 1793–1794 ? Churches closed; priests forced to marry ? Promoted “cult of reason” as secular alternative to Christianity ? Calendar reorganized: ten-day weeks; Year I proclaimed ? Executed 40,000; imprisoned 300,000 during the Reign of Terror 21 The Directory (1795–1799) ? 1794: Robespierre arrested, sent to guillotine ? Men of property took power in the form of the Directory ? A more conservative approach to reshaping society, however, the 1795 Constitution did outlaw slavery in France 22 Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821) ? Army officer under King Louis XIV, general at age 24 ? Brilliant military strategist ? Overthrew Directory in 1799 ? Established new government, the Consulate ? Crowned himself emperor in 1802 23 Napoleon’s Empire in 1812 ? Expanded to control most of mainland Europe from the Iberian peninsula to forced alliances with Austria and Prussia. ? Attempted to take Russia as well. 24 Napoleon forced to abdicate, 1814, by British, Austrian, Prussian, and Russian armies Napoleon’s Empire ? Exiled to island of Elba, escaped to take power again for 100 days ? Defeated by British at Waterloo, exiled to St. Helena; died 1821 25 The Haitian Revolution ? Only successful slave revolt, most radical of the Atlantic Revolutions The Haitian Revolution ? Took place on the island of Hispaniola ? Spanish colony Santo Domingo in east (now Dominican Republic) ? French colony of Saint-Domingue in west (now Haiti) ? Rich Caribbean colony ? Sugar, coffee, cotton ? Almost one-third of France’s foreign trade profits 27 40,000 white French settlers Dominated social structure 28,000 gens de couleur (free people of color, i.e. mixed-race, freed slaves) Holders of small plots SaintDomingue Society 500,000 slaves High mortality rate; many fled to mountains “Maroons”: escaped slaves 28 ? Inspired by American and French revolutions ? 500 gens de couleur sent to fight British in American War of Independence ? 1789: white settlers demanded self-rule, but with no equality for gens de couleur ? 1791: civil war broke out The Revolt ? Slaves revolted ? French, British, Spanish forces attempted to intervene and suppress Haitian uprising Upon assuming power, Napoleon tried to reassert French control and enslaved status for Haitians. 29 Toussaint L’ouverture ? Toussaint L’ouverture (1744–1803) ? Military leader of the Haitian Revolution that orchestrated opposition to the French and Spanish ? Born a slave, freed in 1776 ? 1801: promulgated constitution of equality ? 1802: arrested by Napoleon’s forces, died in jail 30 The Haitian Revolution succeeds ? →French troops were driven out and Haitian independence declared, 1804. ? ? Haitian Constitution put an end to its slavery-based economic and social systems. ? →Established equality regardless of race. Haitian flag from 1803-1804 “Liberty or Death” ? → Outlawed slavery. Continued change The Atlantic Revolutions inspired a series of independence movements throughout Latin America and a transformation of government policies around the globe. Volume 2. From Absolutism to Napoleon, 1648-1815 Ottoman Sultan Mahmud IV’s Declaration of War on Emperor Leopold I, signed at Adrianople [Edirne] (February 20, 1683) This ominous statement accompanied the resurgence of war between the Ottoman Empire and Habsburg Austria. The sultan’s threat-laden declaration shows that religious and political questions were inseparable in the Turkish-Austrian rivalry. The Great Turks Declaration of War against the Emperour of Germany (At his Pallace at Adrinople, February 20, 1683) Mahomet Son of Emperours, Son to the famous and glorious God, Emperour of the Turks, King of Graecia, Macedonia, Samaria, and the Holy-land, King of Great and Lesser Egypt, King of all the Inhabitants of the Earth, and of the Earthly Paradise, Obedient Prince and Son of Mahomet, Preserver of the Towns of Hungaria, Possessour of the Sepulcher of your God, Lord of all the Emperours of the World, from the rising of the Sun to the going down thereof, King of all Kings, Lord of the Tree of Life, Conquerour of Melonjen, Itegly, and the City Prolenix, Great Pursuer of the Christians, Joy of the flourishing World, Commander and Guardian of the Crucified God, Lord of the Multitude of Heathens. We Command you to greet the Emperour Leopold (in case he desire it) and you are our Friends, and a Friend to our Majesty, whose Power we will extend very far.) Thus, You have for some time past acted to our prejudice, and violated our Frendship, although we have not offended you, neither by War, or any otherwise; but you have taken private advice with other Kings, and your Council’s how to take off your Yoke, in which you have acted very Indiscreetly, and thereby have exposed your People to fear and danger, having nothing to expect but Death, which you have brought upon your selves. For I declare unto you, I will make my self your Master, pursue you from East to West, and extend my Majesty to the end of the Earth; in all which you shall find my Power to your great prejudice. I assure you that you shall feel the weight of my Power; and for that you have put your hope and expectation in the strength of some Towns and Castles, I have given command to overthrow them, and to trample under feet with my Horses, all that is acceptable and pleasant in your Eyes, leaving nothing hereafter by which you shall make a friendship with me, or any fortified places to put your trust in: For I have resolved without retarding of time, to ruin both you and your People, to take the 1 German Empire according to my pleasure, and to leave in the Empire a Commemoration of my dreadful Sword, that it may appear to all, it will be a pleasure to me, to give a publick establishment of my Religion, and to pursue your Crucified God, whose Wrath I fear not, nor his coming to your Assistance, to deliver you out of my hands. I will according to my pleasure put your Sacred Priests to the Plough, and expose the Brests of your Matrons to be Suckt by Dogs and other Beasts. You will therefore do well to forsake your Religion, or else I will give Order to Consume you with Fire. This is enough said unto you, and to give you to understand what I would have, in case you have a mind to know it. Source of English text: “The Great Turks Declaration of War against the Emperour of Germany (At his Pallace at Adrinople, February 20, 1683).” London: Printed by G. C. for John Mumford, 1683. Reprinted in C.A. Macartney, ed., The Habsburg and Hohenzollern Dynasties in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, in Documentary History of Western Civilization. New York, Evanston, and London: Harper & Row, 1970, pp. 57-58. Introduction, editorial notes, chronology, translations by the editor; and compilation copyright © 1970 by C.A. Macartney. Used by permission of HarperCollins Publishers. 2 Ghiselin de Busbecq’s Musings on the Ottoman Empire Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq was a diplomatic representative of Habsburg King Ferdinand (r. 15561564). He traveled to Istanbul in 1555 in an effort to negotiate a border dispute between Suleyman the Magnificent and the Austrian Habsburgs. These are excerpts from Busbecq’s observations about Ottoman society and Suleyman the Magnificent. The Sultan was seated on a very low ottoman, not more than a foot from the ground, which was covered with a quantity of costly rugs and cushions of exquisite workmanship; near him lay his bow and arrows… The Sultan then listened to what I had to say; but the language I used was not at all to his taste, for the demands of his Majesty breathed a spirit of independence and dignity, which was by no means acceptable to one who deemed that his wish was law; and so he made no answer beyond saying in an impatient way, “Giusel, giusel,” that is “well, well.” After this we were dismissed to our quarters. The Sultan’s hall was crowded with people, among whom were several officers of high rank. Besides these, there were the troopers of the Imperial guard, and a large force of Janissaries, but there was not in all that great assembly a single man who owed his position to anything save his valor and his merit. No distinction is attached to birth among the Turks; the respect to be paid to a man is measured by the position he holds in the public service. There is no fighting for precedence, a man’s place is marked out by the duties he discharge…; It is by merit that men rise in the service, a system which ensures that posts should only be assigned to the competent. Each man in Turkey carries his own hand his ancestry and his position in life, which he may make or mar as he will. Those who receive the highest offices from the Sultan are for the most part sons of shepherds or herdsmen, and so far from being ashamed of their parentage, they actually glory in it, and consider it a matter of boasting that they owe nothing to the accident of birth; for they do not believe that high qualities are either natural or hereditary, nor do they think that they can be handed down from father to son, but that they are partly the gift of God, and partly the result of good training, great industry, and unwearied zeal; arguing that high qualities do not descend from a father to his son or heir, any more than a talent for music, mathematics, or the like…. Among the Turks, therefore, honors, high posts, and judgeships are the rewards of great ability and good service. If a man is dishonest, or lazy, or careless, he remains at the bottom of the ladder, an object of contempt; for such qualities there are no honors in Turkey! This is the reason that they are successful in their undertakings, that they lord it over others, and are daily extending the bounds of their empire. These are nor our ideals, with us there is no opening left for merit; birth is the standard for everything; the prestige of birth is the sole key to advancement in public service. It makes me shudder to think of what the result of a struggle between such different systems must be; one of us must prevail and the other be destroyed, at any rate we cannot both exist in safety. On their side is the vast wealth of their empire, unimpaired resources, experience and practice in arms, a veteran soldiery, ships, union, order, discipline, thrift, and watchfulness. On ours are found an empty exchequer, luxurious habits, exhausted resources, broken spirits, a raw and insubordinate soldiery, and greedy generals; there is no regard for discipline, license runs riot, the men indulge in drunkenness and debauchery, and worst of all, the enemy are accustomed to victory, we, to defeat. Can we doubt what the result must be? Translation from: Foster, C.T. and F.H. Blackburne Daniell. “Suleyman ‘the Lawgiver.’” In The Life and Letters of Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq. Vol. 1. London: Hakluyt Society, 1881. pg. 152156. Luther’s Final Denunciation of the Peasants’ Rebellion Martin Luther (1483–1546) was the Catholic priest, monk, theologian, and reformer who shattered the unity of the Catholic Church in the sixteenth century by launching the Protestant Reformation. Luther’s teachings on the “priesthood of all believers” and worthiness of all trades and professions inspired millions of ordinary people to question the rigid social hierarchies of the time. Movements aimed at devolving authority—both political and ecclesiastical—to the local level emerged and swelled over the next several years. In 1524, massive peasant rebellions in the German lands broke out in opposition to high taxes and oppression and raged into 1525. ____________ In my preceding pamphlet [on the “Twelve Articles”] I had no occasion to condemn the peasants, because they promised to yield to law and better instruction, as Christ also demands (Matt. vii. 1). But before I can turn around, they go out and appeal to force, in spite of their promises, and rob and pillage and act like mad dogs. From this it is quite apparent what they had in their false minds, and that what they put forth under the name of the gospel in the “Twelve Articles” was all vain pretense. In short, they practice mere devil’s work, and it is the arch-devil himself16 who reigns at Mühlhausen, indulging in nothing but robbery, murder, and bloodshed; as Christ says of the devil in John viii. 44, “he was a murderer from the beginning.” Since, therefore, those peasants and miserable wretches allow themselves to be led astray and act differently from what they declared, I likewise must write differently concerning them; and first bring their sins before their eyes, as God commands (Isa. lviii. 1; Ezek. ii. 7), whether perchance some of them may come to their senses; and, further, I would instruct those in authority how to conduct themselves in this matter. With threefold horrible sins against God and men have these peasants loaded themselves, for which they have deserved a manifold death of body and soul. First, they have sworn to their true and gracious rulers to be submissive and obedient, in accord with God’s command (Matt. xxii. 21), “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s,” and (Rom. xiii. 1), “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.” But since they have deliberately and sacrilegiously abandoned their obedience, and in addition have dared to oppose their lords, they have thereby forfeited body and soul, as perfidious, perjured, lying, disobedient wretches and scoundrels are wont to do. Wherefore St. Paul judges them, saying (Rom. xiii. 2), “And they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.” The peasants will incur this sentence, sooner or later; for God wills that fidelity and allegiance shall be sacredly kept. Second, they cause uproar and sacrilegiously rob and pillage monasteries and castles that do not belong to them, cannot be for which, like public highwaymen and murderers, they deserve the twofold death of body and soul. It is right and lawful to slay at the first opportunity a rebellious person, who is known as such, for he is already under God’s and the emperor’s ban. Every man is at once judge and executioner of a public rebel; just as, when a fire starts, he who can extinguish it first is the best fellow. Rebellion is not simply vile murder, but is like a great fire that kindles and devastates a country; it fills the land with murder and bloodshed, makes widows and orphans, and destroys everything, like the greatest calamity. Therefore, whosoever can, should smite, strangle, and stab, secretly or publicly, and should 16 Thomas Müntzer (ca. 1488–1525) was a radical Anabaptist theologian and one of the leaders of the peasant rebellions. 7 remember that there is nothing more poisonous, pernicious, and devilish than a rebellious man. Just as one must slay a mad dog, so, if you do not fight the rebels, they will fight you, and the whole country with you. Third, they cloak their frightful and revolting sins with the gospel, call themselves Christian brethren, swear allegiance, and compel people to join them in such abominations. Thereby they become the ...