| Title | : | The Civilization of the Middle Ages |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0060925531 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780060925536 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 624 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 1963 |
The Civilization of the Middle Ages Reviews
-
While most readers simultaneously love-hate Norman Cantor, even among his bitter critics he is considered a master in the field. In delineating the time frame of the middle ages, Cantor doesn't buck the standard trend that the Middle Ages began in the Barbarian invasions of Rome and ended in 1500. At the same time, though, he pleads for a hearing of other scholars' time lines (usally ending somewhere between 1200 and 1300).
It is difficult to analyze a standard survey work; most cover the same time periods d the same events. Cantor, however, focuses on a number of loci: the interplay between Roman and German law; the nuances of theology upon life, and the changes thereof; and many fascinating connections between medieval life and today.
For Cantor there is a subtle interplay between Latin law/culture and German law/culture (146ff). While much of this narrative is more pertinent to the ideology behind the Inquisition, what it meant for early Middle Ages was the centrality of govt against village-oriented govt. Strong central governments, while providing security and cohesion, often came at the price of corruption. Conversely, a weak govt meant greater freedom but more open to hostile neighbors (e.g., Germany until Bismark). The ancient Germanic principle was that law belongs to the community (316).
For Cantor the defining moment of the Middle Ages is the Gregorian Revolution (247). In his words it was a proto-Puritanical reformation of Catholic morality, but in a way cracked the olde Medieval moment. A form of this, though very indirect, is seen in the Norman conquest of England. (And I am not suggesting a 1:1 correlation between Gregory and Norman England). While strengthing the English "state," it did so by abandoning ancient principles of kingship (277ff).
Surprisingly, Cantor gives very competent discussions of medieval theology (Most people who write on this have no clue what they are discussing). While I cringed at a few generalities, I was impressed particularly (no pun intended) with his section on universals and the nominalism debate (334ff).
There are a few drawbacks to this book, though none that are particularly Cantor's fault. While the early sections of the book (and also on the Crusades), Cantor fully develops early Byzantine history into his narrative, the book is more of a History of Western Middle Ages; the Byzantist will be disappointed.
The strengths of the book more than cover the faults. -
Dr. Cantor was the chairman of my doctoral committee at SUNY Binghamton in the mid 70s. I took a number of his seminars over the course of two years. I had read portions of his textbook, but this is the first time I have read it cover to cover. It was written in the early 60s as a college textbook. It is comprehensive and his scholarship, although now somewhat dated, was prodigious. His writing style improved over his career but one can see the brilliance behind the words on the page even at this early stage. He was combative and cantankerous and he did not suffer fools easily. One sees that even in a dry textbook. He turned his graduate students into tigers. We fought and argued and thought twice before saying anything. But he could smell fear and went after the weak like a lion goes after a wildebeest. He was constantly trying to dig deeper into the primary sources than anyone else in the field. That is what made him such an amazing professor. Sometimes I believe he went farther than the sources led and it shows in this volume. Most of the time he was way out on an academic limb, but that is where he was most comfortable. He did not give a damn for colleagues or administrators or acknowledged authorities. In those seminars it was like watching a performer on the high wire without a net. I ended up in Law after the MA because of family issues. But I will never regret the years and blood and sweat that I expended in that place with those scholars. I hunted with eagles for a while.
-
Compelling reading and first class treatment of medieval civilization, the author painstakingly address every possible angle in the study of medievalism, from the influence of Greek, Judeo-Christian until Islam's culture that has formed and reformed the multiple faces of middle ages. Also he discuss the crusade factor in political middle ages and the contour of scholasticism that later gave birth to european enlightenment.
This book is simply a must , I wouldn't classify myself as cultured man until the day I finish the last page of this book. -
-
-
I rather enjoy the college reading atmosphere as well as Cantor`s exhaustive research. I hit some hidden sand bars as I was sailing along over his deep historic seas. The first was when he hinted broadly at Jesus Christ treating prostitutes as his equals as signs that he had been intimate with them (her). Sorry, but a john doesn't treat a prostitute as an equal, and really, this is the Savior of the world we're talking about here, so thanks, Cantor, for the cheap swipe. The second was when Cantor complained for several paragraphs about the uselessness of Anglo Saxon law as compared to those really refined absolute rulers and their glossy empires. Then as an afterthought he tosses out a "oh, the Anglo Saxons did give us a form of rule by the people, but that`s about it". Really? Seriously?
His research is exhaustive; his deeply prejudiced assumptions are exhausting. Maybe I'll get back to this later, when I feel like writing more notes in the margins of a book.
I'm coming back to amend this. I reread the passages about Christ and I see things more clearly this time around. I read this, initially, after plowing through another history on the Middle Ages that was very much caught up in the sexual details and sin of many Catholic leaders of the time. It seemed to have a chip on its shoulder about trying to discredit Christianity entirely because of the sins of some powerful leaders. I say seems because I get a chip on my shoulder, too. I've had professors and read authors who wanted to take Christ down a peg or two. I went into Cantor's passages with all that in mind. I can still see where I could get a bit worried because of the way this is brought up, but for complete accuracy and for my own future reference, I'm posting an entire paragraph here:
"Ambrose also had a great influence on the attitude of the Christian church toward love and sexuality. This was an important, difficult question, and the early church waited a long time to take a stand on it. The earliest Christians were often accused of holding "love feasts" (although that may have been a slander), and certainly Jesus himself was free and open with women, particularly with "fallen women". He treated prostitutes as his equals- most uncommon in the Roman world- and some of his most devoted disciples were women of the streets. A censorious attitude toward women entered the Christian world of thought with St. Paul, who favored celibacy despite his admission that it is better to marry than to burn. Was sexual love a Christian experience, the fulfillment of the human personality and an expression of divine love, or an instrument of the devil? The church did not really make up its mind until the fourth century, when Ambrose (and Augustine) threw their weight on the side of Paul."
He goes on for a few paragraphs exploring this. He does mention that the early Catholic church had to fight hard against the hypersexualized Roman world. I think some of my resistance to reading this passage as clearly as I could have is related to the same kind of issue in the culture around me now. It is hypersexualized and often nearly rabidly anti-Christian at times. I think I may have been defensive and over reacting because I expected the same treatment that I have encountered before. But because someone discusses a topic does not mean they are on the offense. It can be difficult to tell at times.
So while Cantor does not advocate outright the idea that the Savior had illicit relations, he does examine it. And to my reading, I often wonder why people bring it up. Yes, it's one thing to discuss sexuality and the role of women within a historical period. It's another to continually return to the slander and risk giving it the patina of real belief. You know the saying: repeat something often enough and people will begin to believe it. I've come across that particular mistaken notion far too often in historical books, and I think I started to have a kneejerk reaction to it.
Many times when I read about the horrors of the Catholic church in its earliest history, I forget that this is, in my belief system, a very fallen Christianity. In our religion (the LDS church) we call it the Apostasy. This time period is also known as the Dark Ages. They had lost true priesthood, changed most doctrines, and lost their way even from their own beliefs as they moved from difficult century to difficult century.
Over all, looking over the entire paragraph, I can see how a reader like I was at the time could read it and become defensive. I also read it differently now and see it within the context of about two or three pages with a more fully developed thought process. And I want to stand for truth no matter what, even if I am the one who got confused. -
The book listed here is an update to the one I actually read, which is probably the book's first edition, purchased and first read in 1965. The reason I reread it is twofold; one I have been reading mostly mind candy thrillers and, two, I have always considered this one of my favorite books. It still is. Cantor was one of the pioneers of bringing the middle ages out of the dark ages. It's amazing the number of cultural foundations we take for granted that were begun in the middle ages - the university system, law, most of religion - the list goes on. Life was hard and cruel, but it was a period of deep religious faith. Cantor makes it all very interesting.
It was good to read something substantial. I needed that before tackling The Lost Symbol, which tries to convince us that the ancients knew secrets we are not capable of handling. I wonder what Cantor would have thought of such a ridiculous idea! -
A great introduction to the period. He's a cranky, cantankerous guy, and he doesn't hesitate to take swipes at other historians, but it's part of the entertainment. You'll get a thorough grounding in the all aspects of the time, both the traditional concerns of history, like wars and economics, but also lifestyles and particularly internal church history. Maybe not to everyone's taste, but if you like this sort of thing, well, you'll like it.
-
I'm re-reading this book because my own personal interest in Medieval Europe, since I'll be studying for my doctorate in the subject. Anyway, it's a solid, well-written, overview of Medieval Europe (one reviewer remarked that it's eurocentric, apparently oblivious to the fact that the book is specifically about European civilization). I'm still partial to Durant and primary source material, but this is a solid work packed with information. The dates for the Middle Ages vary, since certain countries underwent their respective Renaissance at different times. Cantor uses generalized dates.
As with any book on history, it's always smart to read as much primary source material as possible. While Cantor's bibliography is extensive, I don't see any primary source material (ie. Medieval documents, Church documents). Normally, this raises a red flag when I read a book on history. But, in this case, Cantor hits the usual suspects in his overview of Medieval civilization, which doesn't necessitate any deeper evaluation of early documents or writings.
Again, as far as an overview of his subject, Cantor's work is worth reading. It's ideal as an undergraduate survey textbook to introduce students to the important themes of the epoch. It's also worthwhile to the casual reader interested in European history. I like that Cantor includes reading lists for those who seek more information and different perspectives. -
I'm finished. I'm embarrassed that there is such a big gap in my knowledge about this period. What should have been obvious to me is that there can be no understanding of the Middle Ages, at least in Europe, without knowing the evolution of the Catholic Church post-Constantine.
One small complaint: why is the type so tiny! That's why more and more I'm buying books on Kindle. I love holding a book but I hate squinting for hours at a time. And yes I do wear reading glasses and had my eyes checked recently. I ended up reading The Brothers Kamarazov on a Kindle for the same reason. -
"Medieval History: The Life and Death of a Civilization" is a good, well written, popular history of Medieval Europe later expanded and updated as "The Civilization of the Middle Ages". The text would be suitable for an introductory undergraduate course.
-
When I was a boy, my first impression of "the Middle Ages" was a combination of the "Dark Ages," Arthur of Camelot, and heavily armored knights clashing on horseback.
And then there was the indirect influence of Mr. Gibbon's monumental work on the "fall" of the Roman Empire, after which -- lights out for centuries!
Well, long before I approached this long, and information-packed, book on the Middle Ages by Mr. Cantor, I had learned how woefully misinformed my earlier impressions had been. The Roman Empire in the West did go out of existence -- more a slow fading away than a "fall" -- but much of the culture of what had constituted its empire remained, continuing to both evolve and intermix with the growing ecclesiastical presence of the Catholic Church as well as with the Goths, Franks, and Germanic peoples who largely replaced Rome's rule with their own authority.
This book begins with an admirable introduction to the "Heritage of the Ancient World" -- the period of the Roman Empire, yes, but also of the civilizational heritage of those who had preceded the Romans, including the ancient Greeks, for all of these things flowed into those years that more recent historians have designed the "Middle Ages." (It is a useful reminder that, for most of the people who lived during that thousand year period we call "the Middle Ages" -- 500 to 1500 -- they only knew that they were living in "their" time which, for many people, was often though to be either clearly a continuation of what had gone before or even "modern.")
Cantor's writing is fluid and informative, and it is never boring. Many fascinating men and women come "alive" again -- if only for the short time that we are reading about them -- in their words and in their thoughts While we have the luxury of hindsight -- being able to see WHEN big changes happened, or at least began, and also to pick out of the welter of happenings those key ideas or events that would change the unfolding of history -- most people living through these times of course had no such idea of these changes.
While it is true that for the average person little in their day-to-day lives changed from year to year, there continued to be political, intellectual, and cultural break-throughs that slowly expanded to impact a majority of those alive at the time, but so gradually that, again, felt change was rare.
One of the stereotypes that I had as a boy -- that these long centuries were, for the average man and woman, truly "tough times" -- has proven to be largely true. With the decline of a powerful central authority, such as the Roman Empire at its height had provided, people became more subject to the local rulers -- and their mercurial passions -- than before, and -- due to the proliferating number of small duchies -- more greatly exposed to the ravages of skirmishes and small wars. Food supplies were often iffy, either because fields were destroyed through invasion and war or because crop failures and damage from insects made for scarce harvests. What passed for cities in much of Europe were filled with the working poor whose health was precarious because of open sewers and infrequent bathing.
The records that do exist -- and, in many cases, these are prolific, indeed -- are, not surprisingly, from the small literate class. Throughout the early Middle Ages these were usually churchmen, literacy having declined severely after the disappearance of Rome's authority. It was until the coming of the High Middle Ages (around 1000 and after) that a growing number of lay scholars also began to contribute to the written record, a record laboriously compiled, in any case, since this was before the age of the printing press.
But since the book covers the "human story" in the broadest possible sense, while also focusing on key individuals along the way, I enjoyed journeying through it to encounter fascinating persons, challenging problems, and intriguing possibilities.
Written for the general reader and not for scholars, this book is, nonetheless, really not something that the average reader would likely pick up for a quick "weekend read." It is nearly 600 pages in length and it requires attentive reading if one is to gain all that is offered within.
It is a wonderful and humbling read, though, for it reminds us of the shoulders upon whom we stand and, without whom, we would have had to begin from scratch. -
Great, fairly recently updated (1994) general history of the culture of the Middle Ages. Cantor starts with the classical Roman world to show how it is the basis for later Medieval culture and moves through the early middle ages, the key moments in the development and history of Europe and eventually concludes with the overlap of Renaissance Culture and the end of the Medieval world. It is fascinating, well researched and generally even handed. This is a general work of popular history by Medieval scholar. He makes conclusions, often of a sweeping nature, about every era and aspect of Medieval world including Arab, Muslim, Orthodox, African as well as European history. Of course no one can know this much information, but Cantor is transparent in basing his conclusion on what he considers the best scholarship available to him. In this way he is translating the discussion of scholars to the general audience.
-
A superbly researched book, that tackles much past research to set straight the academia of this vast subject. However, I felt the narrative waned and lacked the character that biography or a writer like Will Durant brings out in expense of the current research. I enjoyed his list of the top 10 movies at the end of the book.
-
I purchased "The Civilization of the Middle Ages" back when I was in high school from a long defunct mall Waldenbooks. I vaguely remember reading it then, but not having the adequate knowledge base for much of what it discusses to truly sink in. Recently, since I have all the time in the world now in which to read (and not much money for the purchasing of new books), I decided to give it a second go-round.
Cantor's style is very interesting, sort of a combination between history written for a popular audience, and history written for an academic audience. For an educated well-read person who is not a specialist on the area, it is engaging, interesting and filled with color commentary from the author. Unlike most popular histories, it also dives deep into the intricacies of certain areas, all while maintaining the sort of general history overview one would expect from a book published for the popular market. It is interesting that Cantor has such an uneven reputation for his scholarship amongst medievalists, while at the same time being required reading for so many undergraduate classes on the subject. Interesting, but completely understandable. He has many strong opinions on most areas of the subject, and certainly doesn't express them in a manner congenial to modern academia of the histories.
While the book is an overview, one quickly realizes that Cantor's primary forte is the history and development of governmental, financial and ecclesiastic institutions and practices, the codification of secular and canon law, with a secondary emphasis on the development (or often in this case, rediscovery) of classical philosophy, learning and statecraft. As such, some areas get the short shrift. Military history is glossed over fairly quickly, outside of how it related to political and religious developments, and one gets the distinct notion that Cantor finds war craft and those that practice it somewhat distasteful. In the same way, the arts are given a short shrift compared to the long discussions of how legal institutions were developed and taxes collected. The coverage of literature is adequate, if somewhat idiosyncratically commented on, while the material arts only get a short section on architecture and some notes on the Renaissance. Popular religious devotion gets short and passing theoretical coverage, despite it being so key to tenor of the times, and music gets one short paragraph, despite the time period being essential in the origins of modern music theory.
It is perhaps best that he didn't speak at length too much outside his academic wheelhouse, because I found two glaring errors when he briefly mentioned the development of food and drink, which is something that I do know well. He asserts that medieval beer was higher in alcohol than modern beer, when the opposite was true. He also asserts, quite oddly, that the basic principles of French and Italian cuisine were in place by the late Middle Ages. How he misses that the Columbian agricultural package utterly transformed how and what people ate, is beyond me. Likely there are other such flaws when he discusses things far outside his specialties, but in the grand scheme of things, it's all small beer, relatively speaking.
What is far more important is that he covers important areas people usually give very little thought to. How property disputes were handled and taxes gathered are of far greater importance to historical development than idealistic post hoc impositions of knights errant and dirty superstitious serfs. In this book we are given a clear picture of how and why the Western Roman Empire collapsed, how society slowly recovered, flourished, and developed into the cradle that became our modern world, right up to the epochal turning that was the discovery of the New World and the Protestant Reformation. That alone is worth the cost of admission.
Perhaps for the academically minded, his wide all-encompassing spread, his endless bon mots at the cost of professional tone, his cantankerous asides on modernity and other scholar's writings, his armchair psychologizing of historical figures, and his partial adherence to the out of style "great man" theory of history is too disconcerting and old school to be dismissed. As for myself, I found it charming, entertaining, and a good antidote to the dry, laser-focused and overly-citationed academic style that's lately been infecting popular history books as well. You don't have to write like a robot in order to be illuminating. That said, one should not solely rely on this book as a guide to the times, however, it should be on the short list of essential reads.
4.5 out of 5 stars. -
I read this in my 62nd year of life; I wish I read it much earlier during my academic years. Especially while at Catholic University. Though my field of study was not the middle ages, I would have been well served to understand some of the leading men and women of that period as well as how they thought.
-
Let me start by saying that this book was a bit daunting. At 566 pages, it's not the longest book I've ever tackled by far, but it may be one of the densest. Every page was literally crammed with information.
I'm a big fan of the one-volume history. I like to know a little bit about everything, but I don't like to get too intensive about much. I also don't enjoy the overly scholarly. Cantor's *Civilization* is a pretty perfect fit for these criteria: his prose is very "readable" for someone basically unfamiliar with his subject matter, he's obviously knowledgeable, and he gives an overview of more than 1,000 years of Western Civilization in 566 pages.
The thing is, despite my earlier statement, my complaint about the book is that there's just SO MUCH in it that it became very difficult to retain much of what I was reading. It took me quite a while to finish the thing, first of all, because its density of information makes it slow reading. The effect was that I actually forgot or confused a goodly portion of what I read, say, a given 150 pages ago. This was problematic because history, of course, is built in layers, and so what happened 150 pages before is crucial to understanding what happens 75 pages later.
The solution, I think, might actually have been two or three books by Norman Cantor, say, "The Catholic Church in the Middle Ages" accompanied by "State, Nation, and Monarchy in the Middle Ages." I would have read both of these books, and they might have allowed for a clearer, more exclusive focus on each subject while still permitting glances at the obvious interweaving of each.
That having been said, the prose was, as I said, very enjoyable for a history, and the subject matter was intensely interesting, despite the way its mass was difficult to contain in its volume. I would recommend this book to someone who already knows they like reading about history and are willing to concentrate on a hefty book, but not to say, a first-time history reader. -
This book has a rather strained beginning, with Cantor reaching back to ancient times to find the roots of the social structures that came to define the medieval era. The connection is forced and the ensuing generalities create a lack of confidence in the reader right at the beginning of the book. Thankfully, though, this doesn't last for too many pages, and when Cantor hits his stride he proves very capable of encapsulating the complexity of social, religious, and intellectual movements in the Middle Ages, despite having to cover a lot of time in relatively few pages. It's not structured as a strictly sequential narrative history - a point in it's favor, as such a work would have had to be much longer and more tedious - but is organized around important social movements. Because of this, there is some repeated descriptions of specific events throughout the book as those events figure into different aspects of medieval life. This repetition is never dull as it helps the reader see the same event from different perspectives and has the added virtue of cementing circumstances in one's memory by way of familiarity. The book ends with list of seven paradoxes (some of which are not, strictly speaking, paradoxes) that the author sees as being inherent in the Middle Ages, as well as a few instructive generalities. This part might have been better placed at the beginning of the book with references to it at the appropriate sections throughout. Such an organization would have better illustrated for the reader Cantor's conception of the history of the Middle Ages. This book is a fast read and would be well-suited to a college class covering it's scope of time.
-
I enjoyed reading this book but would only recommend it to people who have a serious interest in knowing about the Middle Ages and/or history nerds. (I sometimes can’t believe I was that person who hated history in high school and college since I love it now.)
Reading this behemoth of a book sucked up almost a month of my time and the pages are filled with notes, various scribblings and underlines. I am very glad I will not be tested on the subject as sadly I already know I am not going to retain even half of it. Glad I have read it but it was a ton of work. What an excellent fascinating read. I felt like I took a survey course on the Middle Ages and I hope I will remember some of the wonderful information contained in this book. It took me a while to complete this massive book and I was elated when I finished it but I consider it time well spent. 4 stars and going on my best reads pile. -
I just finished "The Civilization of the Middle Ages" by Norman F. Cantor and it was pretty good. It is concise and to the point. It mentioned everything I wanted to know. I am not always sure if I was getting everything I needed to know but it was good nevertheless.
The author comes to conclusions rather than simply reciting facts. He called King Philip the IV of France simple-minded and that would explain many of the things he did during his reign.... like killing Pope Boniface VIII for example or burning the Grand Knight Templar at the stake, or condemning two of his daughters to life in prison.... stuff like that. He also mentioned how the Jews were faring during this time which is an interest of mine since I'm Jewish.
I bought the book so that I could look things up but a straight through reading went very well. I was actually afraid it would be boring reading it that way but my fears were unfounded.
That's it. It had a reasonable tune and I could dance to it. :-) -
I had never really enjoyed learning about this period in history, but when I picked up this book, it pulled me into the vast, complex story that is Europe's foundation. It makes our own recent history so much more understandable. The book was well written and I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys broadening their knowledge of history.
-
Detailed and thorough exposition of the Middle Ages from the fall of Rome to the renaissance.
-
Every page is interesting (if you're interested in this kind of thing).
-
Delightful read--Cantor has a historians wit (as the good ones do).
-
An engrossing general history, written with an all-but-vanished classical sensibility. Cantor does not share the twenty-first century insistence that civilization and barbarism are nothing more than arbitrary categories reflecting cultural prejudices. He believes in civilization as a cultural achievement; he believes that the Roman achievement was clouded by barbarism after the fall of the Western Roman Empire; and he believes that Medieval Europeans built a new civilization, with the intellectual and artistic achievements that the title entails, which reached its apogee after the eleventh century and declined through the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Suffice it to say, he does not shy away from the harsh judgments that most present-day historians avoid.
The Frankish Merovingian dynasty, for example, atomized and disappeared not because of any broad socio-political forces, but quite simply because the Merovingian kings were corrupt and stupid. Richard the Lionheart, perhaps the most famous of the Crusaders, was an "overgrown and spoiled child" who needlessly antagonized the other rulers of western Europe.
This is not to say that Cantor focuses solely on character to the detriment of broader trends. He artfully shows that the Germanic invaders who caused the Imperial collapse of the fifth century were not trying to destroy the imperial system, but instead to take advantage of its benefits. When the Empire disappeared, it was not the Italians who had lived in the heartland of the Roman Empire who stepped into restore order and create the foundations of medieval civilization. It was instead the Anglo-Saxon and other Germanic peoples who had lived on the periphery of the Empire, and felt most acutely the collapse of Imperial order. Churchmen from England, Germany, the Low Countries, and the north of France established the Imperial-Ecclesiastical regime that achieved its fullest prominence in the eleventh century with the Papacy of Gregory VII.
Cantor also succeeds in conveying, within relatively short chapters, the full historical and intellectual flavor of the Middle Ages: a valuable corrective for a popular misunderstanding of the period as a time of uninterrupted cultural stasis and backwardness. We're introduced to the Carolingian Renaissance, the rise of the Cluniac tradition, the formation of the Holy Roman Empire, the Crusades, the rediscovery of Justinian's Law Code and the curious ways in which it intermixed with local legal customs, the fantastically-consequential debate between realists and nominalists in the twelfth century, the "Gregorian World Revolution" of the eleventh century, the "New Piety" that emerged when Christian norms finally penetrated the popular consciousness and unleashed a wave of popular devotion and sacred kingship that put the Catholic Church back on its heels, the emergence of the Burgher class, the forerunners of the capitalist bourgeoisie, the urban upheavals of the fourteenth century, and numerous other topics. -
The Civilization of the Middle Ages: A Completely Revised and Expanded Edition of Medieval History
I learned too much to write about in detail from this sweeping book of Western European history from the Roman Empire to the Renaissance. It's a 5-star book. It begins with a brief look at the development of the Roman Empire, and how Romans adopted previous Mediterranean ideas. Cantor repeatedly returns to Greek and Roman works on philosophy and political science and their importance in the development of Western European institutions, both from the beginning and later when they were "rediscovered" and translated into Latin during the Rennaisance and had to be reconciled with theology by people like Thomas Aquinas. Platonism vs. Stoicism vs. Aristotelianism. Platonism was hugely important in the development of Western thought.
Cantor also briefly examines the development of Judaism to understand roots of Christianity.
Judaism differed from Platonism in that Judaism made no differentiation between body and spirit. (This has important implications for Christians who embrace covenant theology.)
The book often reads a lot like the History of the Christian Church Podcast on iTunes. You can't understand the development of Western civilization and government without understanding the development of the Church. Cantor includes brief summaries of the early theological schisms and the development of the Pope as the leading political force in the declining Roman Empire. Christians today may not appreciate the importance of people like Boniface, who evangelized the Germans and established important monastaries, and Patrick who evangelized the Celts. Monastaries in early medieval times preserved Greek and Latin literature, and contributed economically to their societies. (For more on this I recommend Rodney Stark's Victory of Reason). However, in later medieval ages (and today?) monks forsook labor and commerce, as well as literature and study. Once secular universities were developed, monasteries no longer provided any role as far as the preservation and development of knowledge. Eventually, universities formed outside of the traditional monastic system of education. Monastaries no longer served the purpose of education and preserving culture, so there was a shift into becoming orders of soldiers fighting the Crusades on behalf of the Church-- the Knights Templar, the Hospitaliers, etc.
Of course, there is the recurring topic of the importance of Augustine in medieval thought. Cantor seems to understand many of the philosophical and some of the theological debates rather well. As some commenters point out, he errs in some details but the breadth of topics covered is such that it can be forgiven.
Cantor purports that the Byzantine Empire gave civilization "nothing" outside of some architecture. However, he lauds Justinian's efforts and legal code; perhaps he is referring to Byzantium before and after Justinian.
From the book, I learned about the history (what little is known of it) of the Goths. Ostrogoths had no codified legal system, pantheistic superstition determined guilty and innocent. I also learned about the Carolingian dynasty and its importance in the development of later France.
I found the reform movements within the Catholic church interesting, particularly Pope Gregory XII's reforms. Highly critical of kings and lords, he pushed for one of the first social justice movements and centralized power with the papacy while also undermining it. But what was being handed down by the Popes had to be understood within the Italian context-- which was one of weak kings and very little respect for them. Therefore the comments would not be received well by clergy and laity in Germany and England with strong kings (Henry, William the Conquerer, etc.). William the Conquerer's reforms and contribution are also covered along with the English vestiture and the ramifications of the Norman conquest .
The Crusades might have been successful at defending Jerusalem as a Latin state had it garnered the full resources and attention of European monarchs, but it did not.Cantor makes the Crusades seem more as a minor sideshow than any major world-changing event.
Throughout the 1100s there was no uniform or formal legal system, every region had a mixture of feudal tradition mixed with Roman law and other forms. As trade and cooperation developed, and currency, greater formality in the legal codes had to be developed. When the Justinian Code was "rediscovered," it grew great interest and helped the development of western European judicial code.
One interesting point that I was unaware of is interesting is the development of thought after works of Plato and Aristotle were "rediscovered" and translated into Latin, which didn't occur widely until the 11th century. The Church then had to (re-)address Aristotelian philosophy as Muslims and Jews had already been doing for centuries. Cantor explores the development of philosophy in Europe and its contribution to religious thought, including the Cult of Mary that sprung up in the 11th century and maintains a strong hold on areas of Europe today.
This allows Cantor to pivot into Jewish life in the Middle Ages, including their role as lenders. Cantor examines Jewish religious though at this time, including Maimonedes' scholarship.
One weakness of the book is the lack of insight into the daily life of a peasant in the Middle Ages. Their home, work, agriculture, tools/technology, and culture. It is a broader view particularly looking at what we know from written records of the educated class and macro-view historical development. Venice is about as far east as the detailed part of the history gets, no attention is paid to Central and Eastern Europe. Cantor also does not give much information about what exactly various clergy critical of the Vatican and advocating for reforms were exactly preaching, such that they were able to gain large groups of followers. Likewise for some of the heresies that were deemed dangerous enough to be rooted out violently. That would have been helpful to understand. Cantor does outline the doctrinal disputes of the Cathar heresies and the persecution contributed to some fervor of the Inquisition.
Interestingly, pre-reformation church leaders like St. Francis pushed for a Gospel that could be related to the masses rather than the Latin-educated literate or clergy. The "bourgeois" classes wanted a religion that was practical to their everyday life and rather inspiring rather than purely liturgical. Hence the writings and teachings on Jesus transformed into much of the form that we might see today-- one of a more loving and interpersonal self-sacrificing savior than just an icon on the wall that might be revered and doctrine recited about.
Cantor pays much attention to the importance and controversial nature of Aquinas' contributions.
Eventually, the book covers the divergence in the governance and ideas in the various West European countries and societies, and it becomes a little more difficult to follow. The advancement of various political reforms in their national contexts is highlighted; the importance of the Magna Carta really comes into view when you look at the great sweep of history leading up to it. Cantor closes with a look at "Renaissance culture."
Oddly, he closes the book with a list of modern films that he thinks covers the spirit of the Middle Ages well. It is ironic because a few of them are not set in Europe. I've seen Alexander Nevsky, which is on his list, but that movie is very Russian and Russia gets no mention in the book.
I give this book 5 stars and recommend it. Worth your time and attention. I recommend reading Justinian's Flea and The Victory of Reason as supplements. -
Didn't think this book would ever end. What a slog. It didn't help that I was listening to the audiobook version read by the irritating Frederick Davidson who sounds like a snobby British butler. Imagine having a snobby British butler read a 700 page textbook to you.
As to the actual book, there were some interesting parts. The 3 co-existing popes was explained well, and Cantor was at times extraordinarily fair to the papacy, often crediting it with saving civilization. Whereas I've read plenty of modern historians who take every opportunity to dunk on the medieval church and treat it like it existed in the cultural context of modern Brooklyn and not in a primitive world surrounded by barbarians and incompetent, tyrannical minded kings. And learning the general timeline was helpful.
But this book suffers greatly from trying to be a summary of such an enormous time period. I guess I was thinking he'd cover the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries but he went from the 4th century to the 16th. So we were flying! And all over the place chronologically. For instance, Joan of Arc gets about a paragraph. Had you never heard of her, you might not have even noticed how casually he mentions that a peasant girl won a war that had been going on for 100 years. "The French eventually won when a Joan of Arc, a peasant, took control of the army and defeated the British. She was burned for heresy. Over in Spain..." WHAAAAAAAAATTTTTT?!?!?! That's how ridiculously brief a lot of it is.
And very simplistic. Aquinas=brain over heart (ignore the part about him having an ecstatic vision and declaring his works were but straw). Bonaventure=heart not head (ignore the fact that he wrote treatises). And then he randomly throws in misleading comments like saying The Imitation of Christ undermined the sacraments?!?!
But my favorite was the neck snapping whip around he pulled when saying how devoted and pious the lay people were (in contrast to many of the church leaders) to the teachings of the church, then five pages later those same lay people are apparently practicing mass infanticide because they didn't care what the church said about murder. And he doesn't provide any evidence, just states that it was a widely used method of regulating family sizes. So I'm supposed to just accept that the same lady who is so concerned about the state of her immortal soul that she's buying indulgences and sending her husband on crusades is also murdering her own children to keep her household from getting too big.
I'd stay away from this books unless you want to hate the subject.
