On behalf of Sarah Ayers

In “The Complete English Tradesman,” novelist Daniel Defoe boasts about how wonderful his homeland is. According to him England is the greatest nation. There are many attributes that England has ranging from climate to trade to actual physical appearances that make England in Defoe’s mind so great. I sit on the fence so to speak. There are some points he make that I agree with but there are other points that I would have to say he is alone on.

“That our men are the stoutest and best because, strip them naked from the waist upwards, and give them no weapons at all but their hands and heels, and turn them into a room or stage, and lock them in with the like number of other men of any nation, man for man, and they shall beat the best men you shall find in the world.” Defoe claims that English men are physically stronger and better than any other man of a different nation. He also says that the climate itself puts England over the top.

Another point Defoe has is the trade in England. He feels it is what makes England so monumental. The important people in his country are tradesmen. Wealth is synonymous with trading. “…whose blood is the most untainted, as they call it, with the low mixtures of a mechanic race, are found in these; and, as is said before, they generally go beyond them in knowledge of the world, which is the best education.”

I agree that at the time England was a powerhouse. Of all the nations they certainly had the upper hand on many world affairs. However, I do not agree with Defoe’s actual beliefs as to why England was as great as it was. He says that just the physical appearance puts Englishmen above and beyond. As I recall, the Vikings were rather large men themselves and their bloodline was still alive at this time. Trade certainly was a plus for them but I do not agree that being a tradesman altered your genetic make-up. Money can certainly to wonders and that is why I think tradesmen were so “perfect”.

On Behalf of Sunny Naasiri

What does Rainborow want? Why does Ireton disagree with him?

Sunny Naasiri

HIST 100-033

03/14/2006

Colonel Rainborow of England held a debate with Commissary Ireton regarding the rights of Englishmen during the 1647. Rainborow wanted to distribute equal rights to citizens of all social status. Permanent residents should have the privilege to vote during an election because Rainborow stresses on the human natural rights. Freedom should be granted in order to make a nation truly understand the value of liberty amongst citizens. Rainborow also disagrees about the strict laws about class hierarchies that limit a person’s rights and enslaves them to be bound into its service. Tyrannical was the word the colonel describes it because from his perspective, it is mostly nobles and kings who wielded full authority against common folks.

Commissary Ireton on the contrary states that people should subdue themselves to law because too much liberty could cause chaos and disarray. From the general’s point of view, the law should be above an individual’s liberty. Foreigners who were not born in England should also not be given property rights to buy lands because they have not dedicated themselves to the kingdom of England. Hence, Ireton is a person who seems manipulative and cunning because men are required to perform services for a country’s personal gain. Ireton’s character clings onto his militaristic ways that a strict order should be established between classes and therefore he does not truly understand the value of an individual’s rights.

From my perspective regarding this issue, there is a fine balance between natural rights and the law. People should not be subjugated by tyranny because it may cause a rebellion, they should be allowed to act freely in their homeland. On the contrary, if we are dealing with criminals then there should be a strict law because too much freedom can be hazardous because hot-headed and violent people may cause chaos in the land. In this case, there should be more freedom and less authority because human nature does not like control. Take a caged animal for example, would they like being locked up? Same goes to this.

GMU History 100, Western Civ, Sect 033 (Tulchin)

GMU History 100, Western Civ, Sect 033 (Tulchin)

Martin Luther, and the Inner and Outer self

Martin Luther gives a detailed explanation about the inner and outer man. Luther explains that the outer man and the inner man are two almost separate entities, and that what the outer entity, the body, does has no affect on the soul which is the inner self. When He talks about Christianity, his main point is that the inner self being the soul has a greater impact on where a man ends up in the after life than the body does.

Luther talks about the things that really make a good Christian. He emphasizes that the true actions and morals of a man are found within his soul, his inner self. Although the outer self can physically perform all of the traditions of a “Christian,” for example going to church and reading the Bible, it is the inner self that keeps the person from becoming a hypocrite. According to Luther, without the morals, faith, and Christian foundation planted in the inner soul, all the good deeds performed by body are of no value.

Along with his strong beliefs about the inner soul, Luther criticizes the Catholic Church. Through his 95 thesis, he causes many people to begin to doubt their faith in the church authorities. Rather than strengthening people’s faith, he allowed them to dig deeper in their personal relationship with God and establish a more grounded faith with in their soul.

Luther’s main point was that the most important aspect of being a Christian is the moral value engrained in the soul.

GMU History 100, Western Civ, Sect 033 (Tulchin)

The Middle Ages 1000 to 1300 AD

The middle ages brought about a significant amount of change to Religion, literature, architecture, and education in Europe.
As Muslim populations began to develop and spread across Europe, the Christian movement also began to further develop and expand. When the Muslims and Hungarians began to burn churches, many architectural buildings which were in the Romanesque style were rebuilt in the gothic style. This architectural change also gave way for the change in atmosphere for many years to come. Another outcome of these church ruins is a growth in the Christian movement. Pilgrimages began to take place all over Europe to various holy locations; these paths generated a lot of interest in the Christian church and further expanded the religion.
Education was very primitive in those days. Cathedrals schools were almost solely for the training of future priests. In the 12th century, more and more people, young men, began to attend these schools to be educated. This sparked the founding of universities all across Europe. More and more people were learning to read and write. This grammatical advancement also prompted the diverse literature that came out of twelfth century Europe.
Before the twelfth century Europe was not very agricultural, but as the years passed and the middle ages began to take their full effect on Europe, agriculture became a more and more advanced. When farmers were able to produce more crops and food for people in less time, many citizens began to migrate to the city. The more the population grew in the cities the more trade and commerce became important in heavily populated cities.
The Middle ages changed a lot of aspects of European culture, it is no wonder that the twelfth century is very important in European history.

Posting on behalf of Sarah Ayers

When a servant of God, Paul, started spreading his beliefs and the words and ways of God it seemed to come at a crucial time. People were unsure how to practice their faith. In one community he had started, he felt that the people were being influenced by others. Other beliefs he did not agree with were destroying what he had tried to build up. He came back to a faith divided among many different viewpoints. He tried refocusing their attention to what he wanted them to believe. Paul admonishes the followers in the Lord’s Supper for being divided. God wants all of his people to be together as one and not as separate. He gave them his opinions on all aspects of life including the law, children, marriage and social life. He was an incredibly passionate person who just wanted everyone to see the world the way he did. He seems to think marriage is not a great intuition rather it prevents one from fully believing in one’s own faith. He says that a husband would be more worried about pleasing his wife than the Lord Jesus. The Lord should be everyone’s main priority.
Paul wants all of his followers to know that everyone; man, woman and child are all equal. They all have a chance to experience God’s way and his love. He does not even talk about class order. Not only the white man or woman, who for this time was unheard of, was just much God’s child than Greeks or Jews. The only person God would not love, according to Paul, is one who is bad. A drunkard, a glutton, a thief or a liar are all people whom cannot be pure and true and all of God’s people are pure and true.
Many of his followers had lost their ways while being separated from Paul. He tried turning that around. Many people had separated from Christianity and wanted to divide themselves up. Paul’s main concern was for them to know what everyone should unite and be together for everyone is the same.

The Christian Movement during the time of St. Paul was a strict movement. St Paul preached the gospel of Christ to all the people he could reach. This gospel was of love and kindness, and the goal was to become children of God through Jesus Christ. The only way to attain eternal life in Paradise was by following a strict and disciplined behavioral pattern and by loving one another through Christ. Love and faith in Christ is key, St. Paul says “For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor un-circumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love.” (Corinthians) This teaching also goes along with the notion that all Christians should be “one in Christ Jesus.” St. Paul talks about certain aspects of life that a Christian should abide by. He talks about marriage and how it is important that every man and woman fulfill their roles within marriage the way God has created marriage to be. He also talks about how important it is to wait for the second coming of Christ, and how Christians should be prepared for His coming in order to attain eternal life in Paradise.
This Christian movement during the time of St. Paul was open to anyone who was willing to believe in the words of St. Paul which were the teachings of Christ. He spoke to all peoples of all social classes and genders about the love of God and the necessary actions that will lead to an afterlife in heaven. He discusses the book of the law and how important it is to abide by its laws until the coming of Christ.
It would seem to me that more men and middle or lower class society would accept this religious belief and join the Christian movement because St. Paul’s message about Christ brought hope to those people. At the same time, it could have been intimidating and less appealing to the higher class of society who were already set and well knowledgeable of the Jewish teachings and religion. But there seems to be a large amount of people who joined the Christian movement during the time of St. Paul because he wrote so many letters to many congregations and peoples around Europe and Asia.

Tacitus: Germany Vs Rome

It is clear to see in the writing of Tacitus about the Germans that he finds a lot of their characteristics admirable. Although I think he believes the Romans are still more superior (at least in their way of living) he sees traits in the German society that he wishes the Romans could adopt. The one aspect of German society he talks about the most is the way they fight battles. He seems to see this nobility in the way they fight, and how they defend their chief that is lacking in the Romans. Although both societies were warlike societies, Tacitus saw something in the battles of the Germans that the Romans just didn’t have.
The German society was also something that Tacitus really admired. I think more than anything he wished that the Roman society could be as “pure” and “distinct” as the German society. The German society rarely if ever married outside their ethnic group, which meant that their particular culture’s features remained the same: blue eyes and red hair. Another distinction that Tacitus makes between the Germans and the Romans is that the Germans didn’t rely so much on their servants. They did have servants but only used them for minor errands whereas the Romans relied on their slaves for almost everything including raising their children.
The final aspect of German society that Tacitus touched on that I am going to talk about is the idea of just punishment. He greatly admired that the Germans had a system of just punishments where the punishment always fit the greatness of the crime. At the same time, all crime had its punishment even the little things that little penalties. The Romans were very materialistic, and Tacitus didn’t like that. He admired how the Germans never really cared much for Gold or Silver, in fact they barely knew what it was before the Romans introduced it to them.
Tacitus admired that the Germans were simple moral and noble people. He knew that the Romans were more superior and much richer than the Germans, but that may not have impressed him very much. He was more intrigued by the German’s pure race that wasn’t mingled with other outside cultures and ethnicities; he was also interested in their way of battle. Tacitus loved the Romans but wished they could learn the good from the Germans.