Nima uchun Fransiyaning Kapetiya qirollari Rim cherkovi bilan ziddiyatga kirishdi?

Nima uchun Fransiyaning Kapetiya qirollari Rim cherkovi bilan ziddiyatga kirishdi?


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

1250 yillardan boshlab, Frantsiya monarxlari asta -sekin Rim cherkovi bilan keskin ziddiyatga o'tdilar; Bu 1300 yilda Papa Boniface qirol Filipp tomonidan hibsga olinishi bilan yakunlandi.

Ammo Frantsiya katolik bo'lgan mamlakat edi, shuning uchun bu mojaro meni hayratda qoldirdi. Nima edi Frantsiya qirollari va Rim papalari o'rtasidagi ziddiyatning ildizi?


Qarama -qarshilikning ildizi frantsuz monarxlarining o'z hokimiyatlarini mustahkamlashi va Papaning frantsuz hokimiyatiga bo'lgan da'vosi bilan bog'liq edi.

Rim cherkovi Clovis, Pepin va Buyuk Karl bilan bo'lgan munosabatlaridan beri Frantsiyaga katta qiziqish bildirgan. Biroq, frantsuz monarxiyasi qat'iyatli bo'la boshlagach, papalik o'z hokimiyatini oshirishga intildi.

Filipp IV (1285-1314-yillar) Papa Bonifas VIII bilan qirol papaning roziligisiz ruhoniylarga soliq solishi mumkinligi haqida janjallashishni boshlaganda muqarrar ziddiyat avjiga chiqdi. Boniface bu masalada ingliz Edvard I ning qo'shimcha bosimi tufayli vaqtincha o'z fikridan qaytdi, ammo mojaroga nisbatan achchiqlik saqlanib qoldi.

Filipp va Bonifas, shuningdek, ruhoniylar oddiy sud sudlarida sudlanishi kerakmi yoki yo'qmi, deb bahslashdilar. Nihoyat, Filipp Bonifasni hibsga olib, mashhur "Bobil papaliklar asirligida" frantsuz qiroli qanchalik qudratli bo'lganini yaqqol namoyish etdi. Biroq, Rim cherkovi hali ham Frantsiyada muhim ijtimoiy mavqeini saqlab qolgan va katta ta'sir ko'rsatgan.


Kapetiya sulolasi

The Kapetiya sulolasi / k ə ˈ p iː ʃ ⁱ eng /, shuningdek Frantsiya uyi sifatida ham tanilgan, fransiyaliklar sulolasi, Xyu Kapet tomonidan asos solingan. Bu Xyu Kapetning nasl-nasabidan iborat Evropaning eng katta va eng qadimgi qirollik uylaridan biridir. U Frantsiyada 987 yilda Xyu Kapet ko'tarilishidan 1328 yilda Charlz IV vafotigacha Kapet uyi sifatida hukmronlik qilgan.

Bu sulola Frantsiya davlatining shakllanishida hal qiluvchi rol o'ynagan. Dastlab, faqat o'z ahvoliga bo'ysungan holda, Al-de-Frantsiya, kapet podshohlari asta-sekin, lekin asta-sekin o'z kuchlari va ta'sirini kuchaytirdilar, toki ular butun olamni qamrab oldi. Frantsiya qirol hokimiyatining o'sishi haqida batafsil ma'lumot olish uchun qarang Frantsiyaning tojli erlari.

Sulola a'zolari an'anaviy ravishda katolik edi. Dastlabki kapetliklar cherkov bilan ittifoq tuzishgan. Frantsuzlar, shuningdek, salibchilar yurishining eng faol ishtirokchilari edilar, natijada besh salibchilar qiroli - Lui VII, Filipp Avgust, Lui VIII, Sent -Luis va Filipp III bilan yakunlandi. Papalik papa ittifoqi Aragon salib yurishi halokatidan keyin qattiq zarba oldi. Filipp III ning o'g'li va vorisi Filipp IV papani kamsitdi va papalikni frantsuzlar nazoratiga o'tkazdi. Keyingi Valois, Frensis I dan boshlab, diniy tafovutlarga e'tibor bermadi va Muqaddas Rim imperiyasining kuchayib borayotgan kuchiga qarshi turish uchun Usmonli Sulton bilan ittifoq tuzdi. Genrix IV qo'shilgan paytda protestant edi, lekin to'rt yillik diniy urushdan keyin konvertatsiya qilish zarurligini tushundi.

Kapetiyaliklar odatda uyg'un oilaviy munosabatlarga ega edilar. An'anaga ko'ra, Frantsiya qirolining kichik o'g'illari va aka -ukalariga martabalarini saqlab qolish va frantsuz tojini da'vo qilishdan qaytarish uchun qo'shimchalar beriladi. Kapetlik kursantlar qirollikka intilishganida, ularning ambitsiyalari frantsuz taxtiga emas, balki chet ellik taxtlarga qaratilgan edi. Bu orqali kapetiyaliklar butun Evropaga tarqaldi.

Hozirgi vaqtda Ispaniya qiroli Filipp VI ham, Lyuksemburg Buyuk Gertsogi Anri ham bu oilaning a'zolari, ular ham sulolaning Burbon filiali orqali. Gabsburg uyi bilan bir qatorda, Evropaning qariyb besh asr davomida hukmronlik qilgan ikkita qudratli qit'a Evropa qirollik oilalaridan biri.


Yuqorida aytib o'tilganidek, Germaniya imperiyasi bir nechta qirolliklarni o'z ichiga olgan. Imperator unvonining yonidagi daraja bu shohliklarning shohlari edi. Bu shohlar imperator kabi huquqlarga ega edilar, lekin o'z shohliklarida. Ular faqat qirol imperatoriga javob berishlari kerak edi. Ularning oilalari ham qirollikdagi ikkinchi hokimiyat va hokimiyatga ega edilar.

Keyin o'z gersogliklarini boshqargan gertsoglar ham bor edi. Ular shohlarning maslahatchilariga o'xshar edilar va har bir qirollikning alohida gertsogi bor edi. Nemis feodalizmi tarixidagi eng mashhur gertsoglar Gessen-Darmshtadt gersogligi, Nassau gersogligi va boshqalar kabi katta nomlarni o'z ichiga oladi.


Nega Muqaddas Rim imperiyasi davlatlarning markazlashtirilmagan patchworkiga aylandi, Fransiya esa markazlashgan, birlashgan qirollikka aylandi?

Hozirgi davrning boshlarida Frantsiya (va Angliya va Ispaniya kabi) shtatlari markazlashgan, birlashgan qirolliklarga aylangan bu ikki sohada aynan nimalar sodir bo'ldi?

O'rta O'rta asrlarda ikkala olam ham bir -biriga o'xshash bo'lib tuyuldi, chunki ular markazlashtirish darajasi bir xil bo'lgan feodal ierarxiyasiga ega bo'lgan olamlar edi, lekin vaqt o'tishi bilan HRE tobora markazsizlashdi, Frantsiya esa aksincha. Oxir -oqibat, bu Frantsiyada absolyutizm bilan to'liq markazlashgan bo'lib, HRE oddiy odamga aylandi.

Bu xilma -xillikka aynan nima sabab bo'ldi?

Bu tarixshunoslikda juda eski va o'ta munozarali savol, va hech qanday aniq javob yo'q. Garchi nemis tarixchilari bir qancha podshohlar va imperatorlarni yangi paydo bo'lgan nemis davlati uchun hamma narsani chalkashtirib yuboradigan "bitta" deb ko'rsatishga harakat qilgan bo'lsalar -da, hech kim bu ayblovlarni "qotib qo'yishga" muvaffaq bo'la olmadi. Bu savolga qanday javob berganingizga qaramay, Frantsiya va Muqaddas Rim imperiyasi siyosiy jihatdan o'ylaganchalik o'xshash emas edi. Bu savolga eng yaxshi javobni ko'rsatishi mumkin. Germaniya siyosiy jihatdan Frantsiya va Angliyadan sezilarli darajada farq qilar edi, shuning uchun ular xuddi shu vaqt jadvalida & quot; zamonaviy milliy davlat & quot; ni tashkil qilmagan. Biroq, O'rta asrlar davomida sodir bo'lgan barcha o'zgarishlarni hisobga olish juda qiyin. Quyida, asosan, podshohlarning siyosiy kuchiga qaratilgan urinish keltirilgan.

Yangi boshlanuvchilar uchun na Germaniya, na Frantsiya feodal ierarxiyasiga ega emas edi, chunki feodalizm haqiqiy siyosiy kuch emas edi. Yaqinda feodalizm muammolari haqida yaxshi munozara bo'lib o'tdi, agar siz bu bilan qiziqsangiz, o'qishni xohlaysiz.

Ikki qirollik o'rtasidagi farqni yaxshiroq tushuntirish ularning shohlarining siyosiy ahvolidan kelib chiqadi. Frantsuz qiroli boshlovchi sifatida ish boshladi. Carolingian imperiyasi qulaganidan so'ng, frantsuz zodagonlari 987 yilda Al-de-Fransiyadagi buyuk magnit Xyu Kapetni podshoh qilib sayladilar. Bu saylovda Kapetiya qirollari chizig'i boshlandi. Biroq, boshida kapetiyaliklar Aledan tashqarida haqiqiy kuchga ega emas edilar. Ular asosan boshliqlar edi. Bu asta-sekin o'zgara boshladi, Lui VI (1108-1137 yillarda hukmronlik qilgan), uning nazariy qirolligining qolgan qismida qirol hokimiyatini mustahkamlashga harakat qila boshladi. Bu jarayonni Filipp II (1180-1223) tezlashtirdi, u Normandiyani ingliz qirollaridan qaytarib oldi va boshqa yo'llar bilan qirollik davrini kengaytirdi.

Bu kengayishlar kuchli byurokratiyani amalga oshirishga olib keldi, chunki endi podshohlar soliq yig'ish kabi hukumatning asosiy vazifalarini bajarish uchun o'z vakillarini yuborishlari kerak edi. Kapetiyaliklar uchun hokimiyat o'rni hanuz Parijda bo'lganligi sababli, bu Frantsiya oxir -oqibat markazlashgan bo'lib, Parij diqqat markazida edi. Ikkilamchi, lekin muhim nuqta, kapetiyaliklar uzoq va juda muvaffaqiyatli sulola edi, undan keyin Valois ham kadetlarning filiali edi, u ham juda uzoq va juda muvaffaqiyatli bo'lgan. Bu shuni anglatadiki, minimal vorislik inqirozlari bo'lgan, qirol hokimiyati bir mintaqada birlashtirilgan, otalar va o'g'illar birgalikda harakat qilib, aniq siyosiy maqsadlarni amalga oshirishlari mumkin edi.

Endi Germaniyada hamma narsa xuddi Frantsiyaga qaraganda markazlashtirishga o'xshab boshlandi. Genri I, Fowler, 919 yilda qirol etib saylandi va u Ottonlar sulolasini (otasi Saksoniya gersogi Otto sharafiga nomlangan) qurdi. Ottonlar o'z kuchlarini asosan Saksoniyada birlashtirdilar, bu aslida Al-de-Fransiyadan kattaroq edi. Ular, shuningdek, shaxsiy hududidan tashqarida jiddiyroq ta'sir ko'rsatganga o'xshaydi. Ottoniyaliklar boshqa nemis zodagonlari yordamida bir necha bor urush olib borishgan va ular asosan nazorat uchun kurashmagan.

Biroq, Otto II (sulolaning uchinchi podshohi) to'satdan vafot etdi va Otto III hukmronligi shu tufayli barqaror emas edi. Otto III yosh va merosxo'rlarsiz vafot etdi va keyingi qirol aslida Bavariyadan bo'lgan amakivachchasi Genrix II edi. Genrix II ham farzandsiz edi. Bu shuni anglatadiki, Germaniya taxtining aniq vorisi yo'q edi. Yangi saylov o'tkazildi va Konrad I qirol etib saylandi, bu dastlab Fransiyada joylashgan Salianlar sulolasining boshlanishini ko'rsatdi. Bu sulolaviy siljishlar O'rta asrlar davomida davom etib, hokimiyat markazini Germaniya atrofida sodir bo'ldi. Qolaversa, qirol qayta saylanishi kerak edi, bu shuni anglatadiki, qirol Germaniyadagi boshqa buyuk magnitlarni begonalashtira olmaydi. Bularning barchasi Germaniyada Frantsiyaga qaraganda kamroq markazlashtirishga olib keldi.

Germaniya kam markazlashgani uchun markazlashgan hukumat tuzilmadi. Buning o'rniga, qirollar sayohat qilish orqali hukmronlik qilishdi, bu peripatetik qirollik (ingliz tilida ba'zan Qirollik taraqqiyoti deb ataladi) deb nomlanuvchi shohlik shakli. Garchi ular frantsuzlar singari byurokratlarga ega bo'lishsa -da, ularning hammasi bitta joyga to'planmagan. Buning o'rniga, shoh muammolar bor joyga bordi va uning byurokratlari uning oldiga kelishdi. Bu shuni anglatadiki, masalan, Angliyadagi xazina kabi markazlashgan hokimiyat institutlari rivojlanmagan. Bu, shuningdek, mahalliy hokimlar tomonidan ko'proq hokimiyat mahalliy darajada saqlanib qolganligini anglatardi.

Oxir -oqibat, HRE zamonaviy davrning boshida yagona siyosiy tizim sifatida parchalana boshlagach, markazlashgan hokimiyatni saqlab qolish mexanizmlari mavjud emas edi, chunki hech qachon markazlashgan kuch bo'lmagan.

Bryugge Galbert, Charlz Yaxshining o'ldirilishi, Flandriya grafligi, trans. Jeyms Bryus Ross (Rossning kirish qismi Flandriyadagi Lui VI haqida gapiradi)

Jon V Bernhardt, "Yana yo'lda" va "x27: Shohlar, O'rta O'rta asr Germaniyasida yo'l va turar joy" Har bir dyuymli shoh: Qadimgi va O'rta asrlarda podshohlar va podshohlik haqidagi qiyosiy tadqiqotlar ed Linet Mitchell va Charlz Melvill

Frensis Oukli, Gentilizmning bo'sh idishlari va O'tmishning ipotekasi

Jozef R. Strayer, Zamonaviy davlatning o'rta asrlarning kelib chiqishi haqida

Gerd Altof, Otto III va Oila, do'stlar va izdoshlar: O'rta asrlar Evropasidagi siyosiy va ijtimoiy aloqalar


Facebook

Uyg'onish davri va islohotchilar ' muqobil tarix:

Revizionistlar tarixi to'g'ri bajarilganda yaxshi narsa. Ammo ba'zi revizionistlar buni qilishni xohlamaydilar, bu nomdan ko'rinib turibdiki, hamma narsa tarixni qayta ko'rib chiqish va o'z hikoyalarini maqsadli auditoriyaga yanada jozibador qilishdir.

Tudorlar va ularning zamondoshlari tarixni qayta yozish qobiliyatiga ega edilar -bu g'ayrioddiy narsa. G'ayrioddiy narsa shundaki, ular buni avvalgilaridan ko'ra ko'proq qilishgan. Ularga gumanistlar ta'sir ko'rsatdi, ular tarixni qayta yozishni birinchi bo'lib boshladilar, ular (o'rta darajada ajdodlari) ahamiyat bermaslikka harakat qilgan odamlar (istehzo bilan) ko'rmaganlar.
Gumanistlar intellektualizm hayotiga qaytishni xohlashdi. Yoki ular insoniylikning eng yuqori nuqtasi deb hisoblagan narsalar. O'rta asrlar birdaniga ahamiyatsiz bo'lib qoldi. Ular insoniyat tarixidagi dog 'edi. Klassik dunyoni xristianlashtirish har qachongidan ham eskisini quchoqlash va uni yangisi bilan aralashtirish zaruratiga aylandi.
O'rta asr ajdodlari G'arbning ko'p bilimlarini saqlagan, lekin ular ham ayrimlarini e'tiborsiz qoldirgan. Massalar lotin tilida edi va ba'zi matnlarning ruxsat etilgan tarjimalari bo'lsa -da, ularning aksariyati chetga surildi. Olimlarning yangi to'lqini aql -idrokka murojaat qilib, dunyoni o'qitishni, o'zlaridan oldingi xatolarni tuzatishni o'z vazifasi deb bildi. Afsuski, ular va ularning o'quvchilari shunday qildilarki, ularning ishiga putur etkazdi va ba'zi raqiblari ular qilayotgan ishini o'z manfaati uchun deb hisoblashdi. Ular o'z nomlarini qo'yishga va qutqarishga arzimaydigan cherkovni qutqarishga harakat qilishdi.
Ba'zilar o'rta yo'lni tanladilar. Ulardan biri Martin Lyuter edi. Ilgari aniqlanganidek, Martin Lyuter o't o'chiruvchi sifatida tanilishni xohlamagan. Uning katolik cherkovini beqarorlashtirish istagi yo'q edi, faqat uni isloh qilish. Ammo vaqt o'tishi bilan u cherkovniki bo'lgani kabi, o'z burchagiga itarib yuborildi va u bundan voz kechishdan boshqa chora ko'rmadi. U ergashganlar singari, u o'z cherkovini yaratdi, u "yangi" narsa emas, balki xristianlik har doimgidek eski uslubga qaytishini aytdi.
Siz xohlagan narsangizga ishonishni tanlashingiz mumkin. Bibliya turli yo'llar bilan talqin qilinishi mumkin. Bu har doim ham shunday bo'lgan va shunday bo'ladi, lekin o'sha paytda bu har kimning xayolida edi.
Davlat va cherkov o'rtasida bo'linish degan narsa yo'q edi. Bunday narsani taklif qilish kufr hisoblangan bo'lardi! Shuning uchun, odamlar bir -birlari bilan bahslashishdi, to'g'ri yondashuv nima edi?
Agar ota -bobolari o'rgatgan hamma narsa noto'g'ri bo'lsa, unda nimaga ishonish kerak? Gumanistlar javob klassiklar va ular bilan bo'ladi deb o'ylashdi. Ma'rifatli ongdan yuqori hokimiyat yo'q edi. Gumanistik tamoyillarni qabul qilgan islohotchilar, oldinga siljish kerak, deb o'ylardilar va hamma kuchli va qudratli bo'lishning o'rniga, ular nafaqat jamiyatning yuqori a'zolariga, balki ijtimoiy qatlamning quyi qismidagi odamlarga ham murojaat qilishlari kerak edi.
Biroq, ikkalasi ham klassik davrdan keyin va ularning davridan oldingi hamma narsa unchalik rivojlanmagan oraliq davr ekanligiga rozi bo'lishdi. Shunday qilib, o'rta asrlar qorong'u asrlarga aylandi.
Bu insoniyat uchun qorong'u vaqt edi. Ochlik, kasallik, jaholat keng tarqaldi. Bu hikoya etarlicha uzoq davom etdi. Ba'zi olimlar bu afsonani yo'q qilish uchun qo'lidan kelganini qildilar, lekin ko'pchilik hali ham uni sotib olishmoqda.
"Qorong'u asrlar" ko'pincha mashhur madaniyatda parodiya qilinadi. Bu unchalik yomon bo'lmasdi (men bu parodiyalarning ba'zilarini kulgili deb bilaman, aslida men yoqtirgan LEGO filmidagi film, ular o'rta asrlar fantaziya dunyosining qanchalik yomonligi haqida qisqacha ma'lumot beradi), agar biror tarix jiddiy qabul qilmagan bo'lsa. bufflar va tarixchilar ham bor.
O'sib ulg'ayganimda, men Uyg'onish davri va protestant islohotlarining buyuklikka tenglashishi g'alati tuyulganini eslayman. Mening kitoblarim o'rta asrlar haqidagi dahshatli narsalar haqida gapirar edi. Va meni xato qilmang. O'rta asrlarda juda ko'p yomon narsalar bor edi, lekin ular uchun boylik ham bor edi, ular e'tiborga olinmaydi.
Masalan, biz o'ylaymizki, o'rta asrlar ayollarni deyarli hamma narsa uchun yondirish yoki ta'qib qilish degan ma'noni anglatar edi, lekin aslida bu hodisalar biz tasavvur qilganimizdek ko'p bo'lmagan.
Bundan tashqari, ayollarning kuch -qudrati yo'qligiga ishonish ham shu bilan bog'liq. Ular asosan mulk edi. Shunga qaramay, bu ancha murakkab va barchasi qaysi sohaga e'tibor qaratmoqchi ekanligingizga bog'liq edi.
Aragonda ayollar dastlab mulkka ega bo'lishlari mumkin edi, bevalar esa ularning bir qismini o'g'illaridan yoki boshqa erkak qarindoshlaridan saqlashni talab qilishlari mumkin edi. Biroq, vaqt o'tishi bilan va geo-siyosiy iqlim sharoitida hamma narsa o'zgardi. Ammo Kastiliyada ayollar uchun ba'zi narsalar o'zgarmadi.
Angliyada boylik va imtiyozli hayotda tug'ilgan ayollar oddiy ayollarga qaraganda ko'proq huquqlarga ega edilar. Ularning qirollik nasl -nasabi tufayli, ularning ba'zilari yagona ayolga aylandilar (huquq egalari yoki er egalari). Ular orasida XV -XVI asr Tudor matriarxi Margaret Bofortdan boshqa hech kim yo'q, uning o'g'li bizning sevimli sulolaning birinchi monarxi bo'ldi. U nafaqat o'g'lining oldingi unvoni va daromadi bilan taqdirlandi, balki eri Derbi grafiga ko'tarilgach, u Derbi grafinasi bo'ldi va unga "Mening xonim, qirolning onasi" deb murojaat qilishdi.
Undan oldin Klerens gersogining qizi Filipp bor edi, u o'zi Olster grafinya bo'ldi. U Antverpen Lionelning qizi, Klarens 1 -gersogi, Edvard III va Xainault Filippining kenja o'g'li edi. U, shuningdek, Yorklarning avlodlari Genrix VII va Yelizaveta Yorklarning ajdodlari bo'lgan.
Va agar bu ayollar jamiyatning orqa tarafida emasligini isbotlash uchun etarli bo'lmasa, sizda patriarxiya g'oyasiga qarshi chiqqan ayollar bor edi, lekin siz hali ham uning ba'zi jihatlari bilan rozi bo'ldingiz. Ulardan eng e'tiborlisi Kristin de Pizan. Ko'pgina feministlar uni feminizmning dastlabki versiyasi deb atashadi va ular o'z davridan oldin tug'ilgan deb hayron bo'lishsa ham, ular hayratga sazovordir.
Kristin de Pizan, o'sha davrdagi ko'plab ayollar singari, uning jinsi haqidagi misoginistik tasavvurlarga qarshi turishni lozim topdi, chunki aks holda xristian jamiyati turg'un bo'lib qoladi. Agar xristian olami kuchli bo'ladigan bo'lsa, unda erkaklar va ayollar birgalikda ishlashlari kerak edi va buning uchun ayollarga ishonish kerak edi.
Mashhur "Xotin -qizlar shahri kitobi" kitobida Kristin o'z tengdoshlariga o'rnak bo'lish uchun bir -biriga yordam berish va bir -birlariga yordam berish bilan bir qatorda ayollarning birgalikda ishlashining ko'plab misollarini keltirdi.
U ayollarga ijtimoiy harakatlarning yuziga aylanish osonroq, deb hisoblardi, chunki ularning jinsi har doim yuqori darajaga ko'tarilgan. Garchi u ushbu standartga mos keladigan ba'zi muvaffaqiyatsizliklarni tanqid qilgan bo'lsa -da, u buni baraka deb bildi. Erkaklar qilishlari kerak bo'lgan narsa - orqaga chekinish, ayollarning aql -idrokini tan olish va etakchilik qila oladiganlarga etakchilik qilish.
Boshqa yozuvchilar, an'anaviy yondashuvga qaramay, isyon yo'llarini topdilar. Ulardan biri ingliz mistik yozuvchisi Margeri Kempe edi. Agar siz uning tarjimai holini o'qimagan bo'lsangiz, haqiqatan ham nimanidir sog'indingiz. G'ayritabiiy elementlarni unuting, XV asrga oid ko'plab ma'lumotlar mavjud, ular har qanday tarix muxlisi uchun bebahodir. Zodagonlar kiygan narsalardan, urf -odatlar, Lollard bid'ati va sizning ijtimoiy mavqeingizga qarab nima deyishingiz mumkin yoki nima aytilmasligi, yoki sizni muammoga yoki cherkov radariga olib kelishi mumkin bo'lgan narsalardan (Margeri ruhoniylar bilan qasam ichganida bo'lgani kabi) u o'sha paytda hayot qanday bo'lganligi haqida to'liq ma'lumot beradigan kitoblardan biridir.
Shohlar mutlaq hukmronlik qilishdi. Bu yana bir mashhur afsona. Ha, ba'zi joylarda hukmdorlar mutlaqo hukmronlik qilishgan, lekin ularning aksariyati taxtdan ag'darilgan yoki zolimga o'xshagan. Angliya zodagonlari birinchi Plantagenet Kingsga qarshi qurollanishdi, chunki ular juda uzoqqa ketmoqdalar. Ularning ko'pchiligi qonuniy qiroli Jonga (aka Jon Laklend) ularning talablarini qondirishdan bosh tortganida, isyon ko'tarishdi. Uning o'zidan oldingi otasi va akasi kabi haddan tashqari soliqqa tortilishi va haddan tashqari munosabati ularni shunchalik g'azablantirdiki, ular uni "Magna Karta" deb nomlangan hujjatni ratifikatsiya qilishga rozi bo'lishdi. Va kimdir aytishdan oldin, bu oddiy odamlarga huquq berishga yordam berdi, yo'q. Zodagonlar faqat o'zlari uchun edi. Ular ijarachilarining ahvoliga juda oz ahamiyat berishdi (agar bu ularning manfaatlariga xizmat qilmasa). Jon o'z va'dasidan qaytganida, ular yana isyon ko'tarishdi va u zarba berishidan oldin u vafot etdi va o'g'li Frantsiya shahzodasi Luisni hukmronlikka taklif qilgan dushmanlariga qarshi deyarli ojiz qoldi.
Va agar bu hali ham etarli bo'lmasa. Uilyam Marshall Genrix IIIga o'z taxtini saqlab qolishga yordam berganidan va shahzoda Lui Frantsiyaga qaytarilgandan so'ng, Genrix III xuddi shu xatolarni va yangilarini (va undan ham yomoni) xato qilib, otasining o'g'li ekanligini isbotladi. U buni anglamasdan, zodagonlar yana uni va o'g'lini asirlikda ushlab turgan boshqa birovning tarafini oldilar. (Yaxshiyamki, uning o'g'li, bo'lajak Edvard I, birinchi Norman shohi va birinchi Plantagenet shohlari kabi kuchli va qat'iyatli ekanini isbotladi. U toza havo olishni xohlayman, deb aldab, asirlaridan qutulib qoldi va bo'shab qolgach, orqasiga o'girildi. U "juda uzun so'rg'ichlar!" kabi so'zlarni aytdi -da, minib ketdi. U odamlar hurmat qilishi ham, qo'rqishi ham mumkin edi va u hech qachon xotinini aldamagan va birinchisi bilan mehrli munosabatda bo'lgan kam sonli shohlardan edi. Birinchisi, Kastiliya Eleonori, u hayotining past -balandlarida u bilan birga bo'lgan.)
Simon de Montford bu qo'zg'olonning orkestri edi va Genri qirollikka tartib o'rnatgandan so'ng, u bilan muomala qildi.
Genrix III ning nabirasi, Eduard II ishonchsiz saroy xizmatchilariga juda yoqadigan muhabbatini meros qilib oldi va u buning uchun katta narx to'ladi. Unga qarshi qo'zg'olon va muvaffaqiyatli bostirib kirishni boshqargan ayol edi. Uning xotini Izabella, u o'zini ota -onasining qizi sifatida ko'rsatdi. Uning ota -onasi Filipp IV Frantsiyaning "yarmarkasi" va Navarreli Joan Idan boshqa hech kim emas edi. Aragon Ferdinand II va Kastiliya Izabella Idan oldin Filipp va Joan Evropaning kuchli juftligi edi. Va ulardan oldin sizda Kastiliya Urraka I va uning ikkinchi eri (nikohlari bekor qilinishidan oldin), Alagonso Aragon va Navarre bo'lgan.
O'rta asrlarda, shuningdek, she'riyat, san'at va moddiy dunyo madaniy almashinuv va qiziqish tufayli qanday ishlaganligi haqida ko'proq ma'lumotga qiziqish kuchaygan.
Va bu qiziqishning ko'p qismi fojia bilan yonma -yon borgan zaruriyatdan tug'ildi. Biz hammamiz O'rta asr shaharlarini vayron qilgan dahshatli vabolarni o'qiymiz. Ishonchsiz olomon kutganidek, hech kim bunday inqirozga tayyor emas edi. Oddiy donolik muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchradi, shuning uchun qiziquvchanlik rag'batlantirila boshladi. Bu kasalliklarga nima sabab bo'lgan? Buning davosi bo'lishi mumkinmi yoki hech bo'lmaganda oldini olishning yo'li bormi? Bu inson tanasini sinchkovlik bilan tekshirishga olib keldi, yangi gipoteza paydo bo'ldi va shifokorlar hali ham "to'rtta hazil" ning eskirgan nazariyasiga tayangan holda, bunday kasalliklarning oldini olish bo'yicha yangi g'oyalar qabul qilindi.
Bu tartibsiz davrlar ham birinchi bid'atlarga yo'l berdi. Shimoliy Frantsiyada albarlar deb ham ataladigan katarlar bor edi. Ular oldingi o'tmishdoshlariga qaraganda ancha radikal edi va Belgiyadagi bid'atchilarga (asoschisi Jon Xus uchun Husiylar deb nomlanardi) o'xshab, ularga zo'ravonlik bilan zarba berildi. Angliyada, Jon Uiklifning ta'limotining izdoshlari bo'lgan Lollardlar bor edi, ular eski an'anaviy nasroniylik qadriyatlariga qaytishni, Eucharistni rad etishni, chunki u yangi vasiyatda yo'q edi va adolatli edi. teokratik hukumat shakli, bu erda odamlar Muqaddas Kitobda nima deyilganini ingliz tilida ingliz tilida gapirishlari mumkin edi, ular masihiy bo'lishlari mumkin edi. U shunchalik mashhur ediki, Eduard III va 039 -lardan biri cherkov har bir hamdardini ta'qib qila boshlagach, u ham orqasini o'girmaguncha, o'qishlarining ashaddiy muxlisiga aylandi.
Bu bid'atlarning ba'zilari yangi mashhur protestantlik harakatlariga singib ketishidan oldin Uyg'onish davriga to'g'ri keldi.

Va tez-tez (hozirgacha Vikinglar, Oxirgi Qirollik va Naytfall kabi mashhur tarixiy dramalar tufayli) Angliyadagi Anglo-Sakson qirollari, Frantsiyadagi Keroling va Kapetiya qirollari e'tibordan chetda qoladilar, ular o'zlarining dramasi, fitnasi bilan munosib ulushga ega edilar. va qattiq tirnoqli shohlar va malikalar.
Anne Boleyn raqibini zaharlashda yoki o'gay qiziga qarshi fitna uyushtirishda ayblanmasidan oldin va boshqa har qanday yovuz fitnaning markazida Anglo-Sakson malikasi Elfrida bor edi, u ham tarix va eng sevimli yaramas odamga aylandi. O'sha paytda odamlar monastirlarni isloh qilish kerakmi yoki yo'qmi, deb bahslashayotgan edi. Ba'zilar bunga ishonishdi, boshqalari esa hamma narsa ular kabi yaxshi deb o'ylashdi. O'zgarish kerak deb hisoblaganlar orasida Elfrida ham bor edi. Te & quotmonastik islohot & quot deb nomlangan narsaga eski tuzum a'zolari qarshilik ko'rsatdilar, chunki ular bu islohotlarning amalga oshirilishi status -kvoga to'g'ridan -to'g'ri qiyinchilik tug'diradi va a'zolarni o'z jamoasidan uzoqlashtiradi deb o'yladilar.
Bu islohotlar va#039 bosh homiylari ayollar edi. Elfridadan boshqa hech kim ularni qo'llab -quvvatlamadi.
Elfrida rasman toj kiygan birinchi xristian malikasi edi. U, shuningdek, munozarali, qo'rqmas va diniy islohotchi edi, u yomon o'gay ona sifatida tarixga kirdi.
Keyin sizda Norman va Plantagenet malikalari ancha keyin paydo bo'lgan. Ularning barchasi o'z -o'zidan kuchlar edi. Erlari yo'q bo'lganda, qo'mondonlik jilovini o'z qo'llariga olishlari va o'z qo'shinlarini erlari yoki o'g'illari nomiga va farzand asrab oluvchi mamlakatlarini himoya qilishlari kerak edi. Genrix II va#039 ning onasi imperator Mat, Angliyaning qonuniy hukmdori edi. Genrix VIII va 039 ning qizlari, Meri I va Yelizaveta I Angliyaning birinchi rasmiy qirolichasi edilar, lekin deyarli besh asr oldin, ularning ajdodlari Matilda toj kiyish huquqi uchun kurashgan, chunki u ham xuddi shunday taqishga haqli edi. qildi. Afsuski, xotinlar erlari nomidan katta rol o'ynaganiga qaramay, Angliya ayolga faqat erkak rolini bajarishga tayyor emas edi. U o'g'li yoki boshqa erkak qarindoshi nomi bilan jang qilishi mumkin edi, lekin boshqa hech narsa yo'q. Demak, nega amakivachchalar o'rtasidagi urush davom etib, tugadi va Maud o'z huquqidan voz kechib, uni to'ng'ich o'g'li, Genri, Normand gertsogi, keyinchalik uning ashaddiy raqibi Stiven vafotidan keyin Angliya Genrix II ga topshirdi.
Maud o'z tojini Stivendan qaytarib olish uchun kurashgan paytda, uning eng katta raqibi uning amakivachchasi emas, balki uning rafiqasi bo'lgani bejiz emas. Shuningdek, Matilda deb nomlangan, Bulonlik Matilda eri yo'qligida hukumat boshqaruvini o'z qo'liga oldi. Uning yordami bilan Empress Maudga to'sqinlik qilindi va Stiven boshqa kun yashab, hukmronlik qila oldi. Uning yo'qolishi va o'g'li Eustas uni Modning o'g'lini merosxo'r deb tan olishga undadi.
Genrix II o'zini yaxshi qirol sifatida ko'rsatdi. Go'zal ayolga uylangan, u madaniy boylik keltirgan, kelgusi oltin tuyuldi, lekin uning onasi Akvitaniya gersoginyasi Eleonorga o'xshab, ayol ham osonlikcha unutmagan. U va uning o'g'illari unga qarshi isyon ko'tarishdi va shu tufayli Sarum minorasida uzoq vaqt qamoqda qolishdi. Genrix II vafot etib, uning o'rnini uchinchi o'g'li Richard egallaganida, u yana siyosatga aralashdi. Richard unga hamma odamlardan ko'ra ko'proq ishondi va Muqaddas Erda shon -shuhrat izlab ketayotganda, uni o'z regenti sifatida qoldirdi.
Bu kabi yana o'nlab misollar bor. Hatto hukumatda faol qatnashmagan ayollar ham o'zlarini boshqa yo'llar bilan eshitish yo'lini topdilar.
Kastiliya Eleanori Angliyadagi sevgi sudlarini qayta tikladi va o'zining tug'ilgan Kastiliyasini ko'rishni xohladi, yangi qal'alarga zamonaviy bog'lar qo'shildi va uning eri (Edvard I) qurgan qal'alar qayta tiklandi. Va ilgari aytilganidek, u va uning eri baxtli nikohda edilar. Garchi Edvard I Angliyaga ko'proq merosxo'rlarni olib kelish va Frantsiya bilan mustahkam ittifoq tuzish uchun qayta turmush qurish zarurligini tan olgan bo'lsa -da, u uni hech qachon unutmagan va chuqur motam tutgan.
Angliya-sakson malikalariga qaytib, Normandiya Emmasi haqida o'qishni xohlashingiz mumkin. Agar siz Kiti Xovard munozarali deb o'ylagan bo'lsangiz yoki Anne Boleyn uni dushmanlari aytganidek, xristian olamining & quotscandalidir deb o'ylagan bo'lsangiz, siz Emmani o'qimagansiz. Uning hayoti - bu afsonalar va agar ular u haqida film suratga olsalar, uni trilogiyaga aylantirishlari kerak, chunki u boshidan oxirigacha notinch edi.

Bu, bu olimlar oldingi davrda bo'lgani kabi, Uyg'onish davri va protestant islohotlarini e'tiborsiz qoldirmaslik uchun emas, balki ko'zoynakdan ko'rish va bu mutafakkirlar nega ko'p vaqtlarini salbiy narsalar yozishga sarflashlarini so'rash kerak. o'rta asrlar davri.
Metaxas o'zining tarixining eng mashhur islohotchisi haqidagi so'nggi tarjimai holida ta'kidlaganidek, hatto Lyuter ham, o'tmishdoshlari bo'lmaganida, insonparvarlik va islohotlar hech qachon sodir bo'lmaganligini tan oldi.
Bu yozuvchilarning ko'pchiligiga jamiyat boradigan yo'l yoqmadi. Islohotchilar "haqiqiy" nasroniylikka qaytishni xohlashdi, aksil-islohotchi gumanistlar esa, o'z jamiyatining haddan tashqari erkin bo'lishini oldini olish uchun, yunon va rim mutafakkirlarining eski davrlari yana kerak deb hisoblardilar. Muxtasar qilib aytganda, sevgi sudlari, hammomlar, an'anaviy me'yorlarga qarshi chiqish, urushayotgan ayollar, qonuniy podshohlariga qarshi qo'zg'olon ko'targan dehqonlar va pastdagilar hisobidan ortiqcha haddan ziyod aristokratiyani to'xtatish kerak edi. Gumanizm va islohotlar urf -odatlarga urg'u berib, "yaxshi eski kunlarga" qaytishni taklif qildi.

Manbalar:
1. Jasper Ridli tomonidan Tudor davri
2. Plantagenets: Angliyani yaratgan qirollar va malika/ Atirgullar urushi: Plantagenetsning qulashi va Tudorlarning ko'tarilishi/ Dan Jons tomonidan yozning qoni
3. Qon opa -singillar/ malikalar o'yini Sara Gristvud
4. Queen 's Consort - Liza Xilton
5. Atirgullar urushi/ Fath malikalari malikasi Alison Veyr
6. She-Wolves: Elizabethdan oldin Angliyani boshqargan ayollar/ Joan of Arc: Xelen Kastor tarixi
7. Joan of Arc: Ketrin Lanskiy tomonidan o'zgartirilgan hayot
8. Kastiliya Isabella: Evropaning birinchi buyuk malikasi Giles Tremlett
9. Izabella: Jangchi malikasi Kirstin Dauni
10. Akvitaniya Eleanori va To'rt Shoh Emi Kelli
11. Uilyam Marshall, Jorj S. Dubi
12. Xonimlar shahri kitobi Kristin de Pizan
13. Margeri Kempe avtobiografiyasi
14. Buyuk va dahshatli qirol: Eduard I va Britaniyaning shakllanishi Mark Morris
15. Eng muqaddas urush: Albigensiya salib yurishi Mark Gregori Pegg
16. Uilyam Manchester tomonidan faqat olov yoqilgan dunyo
17. Elfrida Elizabet Norton
18. Kastiliya Eleanori: Sara Kokerilning soyali malikasi
19. O'rta asrlar tsivilizatsiyasi Norman F. Kantor
20. Anglo-Sakson Angliya Frank M. Stenton, Oksford uchinchi nashri.
21. Qirolicha Emma va vikinglar Xarriet O ' Brien


Kapetianlar sulolasining asoschisi Xyu Kapetni nima muvaffaqiyat qozondi?

Xyu Kapet - Karolinglar sulolasidan keyin birinchi Franklar qiroli (Rex Francorum) saylangan zodagon. Uning chizig'i keyingi 400 yil davomida Frantsiyaga aylanadigan hududni boshqarishni davom ettirdi va uning uyining kadet filiallari Valois va Burbon Frantsiyani inqilobgacha boshqargan.

Uning o'ziga xosligi va merosi shunchalik mustahkam bo'lganiga nima sabab bo'ldi?

Xyu Kapet hayotida muvaffaqiyat qozonmagan, lekin hech qanday aybsiz. Uning manevr qilish xonasi shaxsiy kuchining etishmasligi va bo'ysunmagan vassallari tufayli juda cheklangan edi. Uning mashhur bo'lishining bir qancha sabablari bor:

Parijga ko'ra, qirollik demesne [qirollik erlari] uning hayoti davomida Parij atrofida markazlashgan. This area, known as the Ille-de-France, remained the center of French royal power during the rest of the medieval ages and it later became the capital, the cultural center, and the economic center of the country. The Kingdom of France was initially very weak [some of the later Carolingian kings of "France" had a royal demesne limited to a single castle] and even more decentralized than the Holy Roman Empire, so Hugh Capet is important in that he gave his successors a firm base to work and expand from.

He was the first king in a long line of very successful monarchs that eventually came to be the most powerful rulers in Europe. The fact that he was the first of the Capetian kings makes him notable. France initially was basically an elective monarchy, and the Capetians were able to make it primogeniture [oldest son inherits].

In short, Hugh Capet is famous not for his accomplishments but for the accomplishments of his successors. The Capetians were able to turn a very decentralized monarchy [even by the standards of the time, the French kings had very little power] into arguably the most centralized monarchy in Europe by the Renaissance period.


Facebook

The Renaissance & Reformers' Alternative History:

Revisionist history is a good thing when done right. But some revisionists have no intention of doing that, as the name suggests, it is all about revising history and making their narrative more appealing to their target audience.

The Tudors and their contemporaries had a knack for rewriting history -something that is not unusual. What is unusual is that they did it more than their predecessors. They were influenced by the Humanists who were the first to start a major rewrite of history not seen by (ironically) the people they were trying to downplay, their medieval forefathers.
The Humanists wanted to return to a life of intellectualism. Or what they considered the high point of humanity. The middle ages suddenly became irrelevant. They were a stain on the human record. Embracing the old and mixing it with the new more than ever it became imperative to Christianize the classical world.
The medieval forefathers had SAVED a lot of Western knowledge, but they had also neglected some. Masses were in Latin, and although there were authorized translations of certain texts, most of these were brushed aside. A new wave of scholars saw it as their mission to educate the world, correct the wrongs from their predecessors by appealing to reason. Unfortunately, they and their pupils did it in such a way that undermined them and some of their rivals believed that what they were doing was self-serving. They were trying to make a name for themselves and save a church that wasn’t worth saving.
Some however chose a middle path. One of them was Martin Luther. As it’s been previously established, Martin Luther didn’t want to be known as a firebrand. He had no desire to destabilize the Catholic Church, merely to reform it. But as time went by, he was pushed into a corner, much of his own making as it was the Church’s and he saw no other choice but to break away from it. Like those that followed, he created his own church which he maintained was not something ‘new’ but rather a return to the old ways what Christianity was always meant to be.
You can choose to believe whatever you’d like. The bible can be interpreted in different ways. That’s the way it’s always been and the way it always will be but back then, this was on everyone’s mind.
There was no such thing as separation between church and state. To suggest such a thing would have been considered blasphemous! Therefore, people argued among themselves, what was the correct approach?
If everything their ancestors had been taught was wrong, then what should they believe in? Humanists thought the answer lay with the classics and with them. There were no higher authorities than educated minds. Reformists who also adopted Humanist principles thought that they should go further and instead of being all high-and-mighty, they should not only appeal to the highest members of society but those on the lower end of the social strata as well.
Both however agreed that everything after the classical period and before their times was an intermediate period that had seen little progress. Thus, the middle ages became the dark ages.
It was a dark time for mankind. Famine, disease, ignorance, ran rampant. This narrative has gone on long enough. Some scholars have done their best to dispel this myth, but many still buy into it.
“The Dark ages” is often parodied in popular culture. This wouldn’t be so bad (I find some of these parodies funny actually my favorite is the one in the LEGO movie where they make a quick overview of how bad a medieval fantasy world is) if it wasn’t taken seriously by some history buffs and historians as well.
Growing up, I remember finding it odd how the Renaissance and the Protestant Reformation equaled greatness. My books would talk about all the terrible things about the middle ages. And do not get me wrong. The middle ages had PLENTY of bad things going for them, but there was also a richness to them that’s so easily (and conveniently) ignored.
For example, we tend to think that the middle ages meant that women were being burned or persecuted for just about everything when in reality, while these things did occur, they did not occur in big numbers as we often imagine.
Also, tied to this is the belief that women had no power. They were basically property. Again, it is far more complicated than that and it all depended on which area you choose to focus on.
In Aragon, women initially could hold property, and widows could demand some of it be kept from their sons or other male relatives. However, as time progressed and given the geo-political climate, things changed. In Castile however, some things remained the same for women.
In England, women born into a life of wealth and privilege had more rights than common women. Thanks to their royal lineage, some of them became femme sole (title holders or landowners in their own right). Among them are none other than Margaret Beaufort, fifteenth and sixteenth century Tudor matriarch, whose son became the first monarch of our favorite dynasty. Not only was she awarded her son’s previous title and income, she also became Countess of Derby when her husband was elevated to Earl of Derby, and was addressed as “My lady, the King’s Mother”.
Before her there was Philippa, daughter of the Duke of Clarence, who became Countess of Ulster in her own right. She was the daughter of Lionel of Antwerp, 1st Duke of Clarence, a younger son of Edward III and Philippa of Hainault. She was also an ancestor to the Yorks and by extension, Henry VII and Elizabeth of York’s offspring.
And if that is not proof enough that women were not at the backend of society, you had women who were challenging the idea of the patriarchy, while still agreeing with some aspects of it. The most notable of them is Christine de Pizan. Many feminists call her an early version of feminism who was ahead of her times and while they are right to claim she is worthy of admiration they are wrong to say she was born ahead of her times.
Christine de Pizan, like so many women in the era, found it necessary to challenge misogynistic notions regarding her gender because otherwise, Christian society would become stagnant. If Christendom was to remain strong, it needed men and women to work together and for that, women had to be trusted.
In her famous book “The Book of the City of the ladies”, Christine put forward many examples of women working together, helping each other as well as chiding one another (when needed), to set an example for their peers.
She believed that it was far easier for women to become the face of social movements because their gender had always been held to a higher standard. And although she criticized some of the setbacks that came with living up to this standard, she also considered it a blessing. All men had to do was to take a step back, acknowledged women’s intellect and let those that were capable of leading, lead.
Other writers, despite taking a stricter traditional approach, still found ways to rebel. One of them was English mystic writer Margery Kempe. If you have not read her autobiography, you are really missing out on something. Forget the supernatural elements, there is a plethora of information regarding the fifteenth century that will be invaluable to any history buff. From what nobles wore, customs, the Lollard heresy, and what you could or not say depending on your social status, or what could get you in trouble or under the church’s radar (as it happened to Margery when she made an oath that had priests thinking she was one), etc. It’s one of those books that provides a complete look at what life was like in those times.
Kings ruled absolutely. This is another popular myth. Yes, in some places rulers did rule absolutely but most of them were deposed or looked as tyrants. England’s nobles rose up in arms against the first Plantagenet Kings because they thought they were going too far. A whole bunch of them rebelled against their rightful King, John (aka John Lackland) when he refused to meet their demands. His over-taxation and overbearing attitude like his father and brother before him angered them so much that they made him agree to ratify a document they created known as the “Magna Carta”. And before some say this helped grant rights to some common folk, no. The nobles were only in it for themselves. They cared very little about the plight of their tenants (unless it served their interests). When John went back on his promise, they rebelled again and before he could strike back, he died, leaving his son nearly powerless against his enemies who had invited the French Prince Louis to rule.
And if that is still not enough. After William Marshall helped Henry III retain his throne and Prince Louis was sent back to France, Henry III proved to be very much his father’s son by doing some of the same mistakes and newer (and worse) ones. Before he realized it, nobles sided yet again with someone else who held him and his son captive. (Thankfully his son, future Edward I, proved to be as strong and determined as the first Norman King and first Plantagenet Kings. He escaped his captors by fooling them that he wanted to get some fresh air and as he got free, he turned around and said something along the lines like ‘so long suckers!’ and rode off. He was a man whom people could both respect and fear. And he was among the few kings who never cheated on his wife and had a loving relationship with his first one, Eleanor of Castile, who was with him through the ups and downs of his life.)
Simon de Montford was the orchestrator behind this rebellion and after Henry restored order to the kingdom, he dealt with him.
Henry III’s grandson, Edward II inherited his love of being too favorable to untrustworthy courtiers and he paid a high price for it. The person who led a rebellion and successful invasion against him, was a woman. His wife Isabella, who proved to be very much her parents’ daughter. Her parents were none other than Philip IV “the fair” of France and Joan I of Navarre. Before Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, Philip and Joan were Europe’s power couple. And before them you had Urraca I of Castile and her second husband (before their marriage was annulled), Alfonso I of Aragon and Navarre.
The middle ages also saw the rise of poetry, art, and an interest in finding more about how the material world worked born out of cultural exchange and curiosity.
And a lot of this curiosity was born out of necessity that went hand in hand with tragedy. We've all read the terrible plagues that hit and decimated medieval towns. As can be expected by an unsuspecting crowd, no one was prepared for this type of crisis. Conventional wisdom failed so curiosity began to be encouraged. What was causing these diseases? Could there be a cure or at the very least a way to prevent it? This led to closer examination of the human body, new hypothesis came about, and while doctors still relied on the outdated theory of the "four humors", new ideas of how to prevent such illnesses were being embraced.
These chaotic periods also gave way to the first heresies. In Northern France there were the Cathars, also known as the Albigensians. They were far more radical than any of its later predecessors and like the heretics in Belgium (known as the Husites for its founder John Hus) they were stamped out violently. In England, there were the Lollards who were the followers of the teachings of John Wycliffe who advocated for a return to old traditional Christian values, a rejection of the Eucharist -since it was nowhere to be found in the new testament- and a more equitable form of theocratic government where people would be free to learn about what the bible had to say with Masses and other religious services being spoken in English so they could be better Christians. He was so popular that one of Edward III's became an avid fan of his readings before he too turned his back on them when the church began going after every one of his sympathizers.
Some of these heresies lasted well into the renaissance before they absorbed by the new popular Protestant movements.

And then there is the often (until now thanks to popular historical dramas like the Vikings, The Last Kingdom, & Knightfall) neglected Anglo-Saxon kings in England, Carolingian,and Capetian kings in France, who had their fair share of drama, intrigue, and tough-as-nails kings and queens.
Before Anne Boleyn was accused of poisoning her rival or conspiring against her stepdaughter, and being at the heart of every other evil conspiracy there was the Anglo-Saxon queen Elfrida who also became history's favorite villain. At the time, people were debating whether or not the monasteries should be reformed. Some believed they should while others thought that things were fine as they were. Among those that believed that change was needed was Elfrida. What became known as te "monastic reform" was opposed by members of older orders who thought that the implementations of these reforms were a direct challenge to the status quo and would draw members away from their congregation.
These reforms' top sponsors were women. No other woman supported these more than Elfrida.
Elfrida was the first Christian Queen to be officially crowned. She was also a controversial, fearless and a religious reformer who went down in history as the wicked stepmother.
Then you have the Norman and Plantagenet queen consorts that came much later. All of them were powerhouses in their own right. When their husbands were away, it was up to them to take up the reins of command and direct their armies in their husbands or sons' name to defend their adoptive country. Empress Maud, Henry II's mother was the rightful ruler of England. Henry VIII's daughters, Mary I and Elizabeth I were England's first two official queen regnants, but almost five centuries before, their ancestor Matilda was fighting for her right to wear the crown because she had as much right to wear it as they did. Unfortunately, in spite of wives taking a strong role on behalf of their husbands, England was not ready for a woman to take the role that was seen as exclusively male. She could fight in her son or other male relative's name, but nothing else. Hence, why the war between cousins dragged on and ended with Maud having to give up her right and pass it on to her eldest son, Henry, Duke of Normandy who later became Henry II of England once her bitter rival, Stephen passed away.
During the time that Maud fought to regain her crown from Stephen, it is worth nothing that the greatest rival she faced was not her cousin but his wife. Also named Matilda, Matilda of Boulogne, took on the reins of government while her husband was away. Thanks to her, Empress Maud was thwarted and Stephen was able to live and rule another day. Her loss followed by their son Eustace prompted him to acknowledge Maud's son as his heir.
Henry II proved to be a good King. Married to a beautiful woman who was suo jure/femme sole, who brought cultural enrichment, the future seemed golden but like his mother, Eleanor, Duchess of Aquitaine, was not a woman to forget a slight so easily. She and her sons staged a rebellion against him and she was locked up in the tower of Sarum for a long time because of it. When Henry II died and he was succeeded by their third son, Richard, she became once again involved in politics. Richard trusted her more than any man and left her as his regent while he went away seeking glory in the Holy Land.
There are dozens of more examples like this. Even women who did not take an active part in government, found a way make themselves heard through other means.
Eleanor of Castile revived the courts of love in England and wishing to see something of her native Castile, stylish gardens were added to the new castles and refortified fortresses that her husband (Edward I) built. And as it's previously stated, she and her husband enjoyed a happy marriage. Although Edward I recognized the necessity to remarry in order to bring more heirs to England and secure a lasting alliance with France, he never forgot her and mourned her deeply.
Going back to the Anglo-Saxon queens, you might want to read about Emma of Normandy. If you thought that Kitty Howard was controversial or Anne Boleyn was as her enemies called her, the "scandal of Christendom", you haven't read on Emma. Her life is the stuff of legends and if they would ever make a movie about her, they'd have to make it a trilogy because it was turbulent from start to finish!

This is not to overlook the Renaissance and the Protestant Reformation that came with it like these scholars did of their preceding era but it is important to see through the looking glass and ask why these thinkers would spend so much of their time writing negative things of the medieval period.
As Metaxas noted in his latest biography on history’s most famous reformer, even Luther acknowledged that without their predecessors, Humanism and the Reformation would have never happened.
Most of these writers disliked the route society was heading towards to. Reformers wanted a return to what they considered ‘true’ Christianity, while Counter-Reformists Humanists believed that the old days of the Greek and Roman thinkers were needed again to prevent their society from becoming too libertine. In short, courts of love, public baths, challenging traditional norms, warring women, peasants rising in revolt against their lawful king, and the aristocracy indulging in excess at the expense of those at the bottom, needed to be stopped. Humanism and the Reformation with their emphasis on tradition, a return to the ‘good old days’ offered the solution.

Manbalar:
1. The Tudor Age by Jasper Ridley
2. The Plantagenets: The Kings and Queens who made England/ Wars of the Roses: Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors/ Summer of Blood by Dan Jones
3. Blood Sisters/ Game of Queens by Sarah Gristwood
4. Queen's Consort by Lisa Hilton
5. Wars of the Roses/ Queens of the Conquest by Alison Weir
6. She-Wolves: the women who ruled England before Elizabeth/ Joan of Arc: A History by Helen Castor
7. Joan of Arc: A Life Transfigured by Kathryn Lansky
8. Isabella of Castile: Europe's First Great Queen by Giles Tremlett
9. Isabella: Warrior Queen by Kirstin Downey
10. Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings by Amy Kelly
11. William Marshall by George S. Duby
12. The Book of the City of the Ladies by Christine de Pizan
13. The autobiography of Margery Kempe by Margery Kempe
14. A Great and Terrible King: Edward I and the Forging of Britain by Marc Morris
15. A Most Holy War: The Albigensian Crusade by Mark Gregory Pegg
16. A World lit only by fire by William Manchester
17. Elfrida by Elizabeth Norton
18. Eleanor of Castile: The Shadow Queen by Sara Cockerill
19. The Civilization of the Middle Ages by Norman F. Cantor
20. Anglo-Saxon England by Frank M. Stenton, Oxford third edition.
21. Queen Emma and the Vikings by Harriet O' Brien


Videoni tomosha qiling: Sanjay Jaxongir Otajonov, Yulduz Usmonova, Davron K haqida. Ozbdagi noxaqlik haqida. intervyu


Izohlar:

  1. Pelltun

    Men siz haq emasligingizni tushunaman. Ishonchim komil. Men sizni muhokama qilishga taklif qilaman. PM da yozing, biz bog'lanamiz.

  2. Maladal

    Yo'q, aksincha.

  3. Joff

    Albatta. Men yuqorida aytilganlarga qo'shildim. Biz ushbu mavzu bo'yicha aloqa qilishimiz mumkin.

  4. Willamar

    Men siz bilan gaplashmoqchi edim, nima deyish kerak.

  5. Majdy

    iltimos, perifraz qiling



Xabar yozing