How do Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express different understandings about religious theology? (Final Draft)

            The transformation from Romanesque architecture to Gothic architecture was significant to history. In the 12^th century, the evolution occurred. There were many changes to the architectural design in the churches and buildings. The fact that there were changes resulted in the differences between Romanesque and Gothic churches. Romanesque and Gothic churches express and represent different understandings about religious theology during the time that they were built. 

            Romanesque architecture in churches began in the ninth century. It is very similar to Roman architecture. Cathedrals with Romanesque architecture had round arches around their doors, small windows, and big, round columns. They are generally symmetrical. There were no windows on the first floor for safety from the outside world. St. Philibert’s Church, an abbey in France, is a great representation of Romanesque architecture. The interior of St. Philibert’s Church shows enormous columns along the walkway to the altar (see figure 1). It also shows round arches along the ceiling of the church. The way that buildings were made was very similar to the spiritual life that people had in this time period. In the Romanesque Cathedrals, people secured themselves for the coming of judgment and fortifying of their souls. The cathedrals were like a fortress for the town and soul. Another church in Romanesque architecture is the Schoengrabern church. The Schoengrabern church is round and has barely any windows (see figure 2). It shows how private the Romanesque churches seemed to be. It is very plain and hides the interior.

            The Gothic Cathedrals were made very different than the Romanesque Cathedrals. They have stained glass windows that let in a lot of light, thin walls, elegant and sophisticated pillars, and pointed arches. Flying buttresses were introduced during this time. Since the Vikings had stopped invading, the Gothic churches had become the most important places in the community. They went along with the government system. People spent a lot more money on these churches to make them attractive. An example of a Gothic Cathedral is the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, France (see figure 3). The Notre Dame Cathedral has pointy arches and big windows. The windows are in many different shapes. Gothic architecture in cathedrals express that people had a new idea of letting light in. The Sainte-Chapelle also interprets Gothic architecture (see figure 4). It resides in Paris, France. The Sainte-Chapelle has beautiful stained glass windows that take up most of the walls of the building. They represent the change of theology. Architects learned new methods and ultimately changed the perception of these churches. The windows are very thin and colorful.

            There were obviously many changes made during the transformation from the Romanesque Cathedrals to the Gothic Cathedrals. Ideas of theology had changed drastically. Saint Étienne Church is an exemplary model of a Romanesque Cathedral. It has two symmetrical towers in the front (see figure 5). It has round arches and small window, just like a regular Romanesque Cathedral. Romanesque Cathedrals and churches were a lot older, and Gothic Cathedrals and churches were more modern. Romanesque churches have flat buttresses, while Gothic Cathedrals have flying buttresses. The Salisbury Cathedral has flying buttresses (see figure 6). In between the windows, there are flying buttresses. The Salisbury Cathedral is in England and it is Gothic architecture.

            Romanesque and Gothic churches represent religious theology by their guise. The different structures built inside and outside of the churches show changes in the architecture that model the messages sent about the religion at that time. When Romanesque churches were first being built, Christianity appeared to be about fortifying the soul and securing for the coming of judgment. Gothic architecture was about letting the light shine. Catholicism had evolved into a more accepting and open religion, and it is shown in the appearance and mood of the architecture in the Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals and churches. 

Appendix:

Figure 1

Church of St. Philibert, interior, 11^th century,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tournus_43_.jpg, photograph taken in 2008.

Figure 2

Schoengrabern Church, façade, 13^th century,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Schoengrabern1a.JPG, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 3

Notre Dame de Paris, facade, 13th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NotreDameI.jpg, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 4

Sainte Chapelle, interior, 13th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sainte_chapelle_-_Upper_level.jpg, photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 5

Abbey Church of Saint-Etienne, façade, 11^th century,http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:France_Caen_Saint-Etienne_facade_c.JPG, photograph taken in 2005.

Figure 6

Salisbury Cathedral, façade, 13^th century,http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Salisbury_Cathedral_flying_buttresses.JPG, photograph taken in 2010.

How do Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express different understandings about religious theology? (Rough Draft)

            The transformation from Romanesque architecture to Gothic architecture was significant to history. In the 12^th century, the evolution occurred. There were many changes to churches and buildings. Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals express and represent different understandings about religious theology during the time that they were built. Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals do not mean anything about theology.

            Romanesque architecture in churches began in the ninth century. It is very similar to Roman architecture. Cathedrals with Romanesque architecture had round arches around their doors, small windows, and big, round columns. They are generally symmetrical. There were no windows on the bottom/first floor for safety from the outside world. St. Philibert’s Church, an abbey in France, is a great representation of Romanesque architecture. The interior of St. Philibert’s Church shows enormous columns along the walkway to the altar (see figure 1). It also shows round arches along the ceiling of the church. The way that buildings were made was very similar to the spiritual life that people had in this time period. In the Romanesque Cathedrals, people secured themselves for the coming of judgment and fortifying of their souls. The cathedrals were like a fortress for the town and soul. Another church in Romanesque architecture is the Schoengrabern church. The Schoengrabern church is round and has barely any windows (see figure 2). It shows how private the Romanesque churches seemed to be. It is very plain and hides the interior.

            The Gothic Cathedrals were made very different than the Romanesque Cathedrals. They have stained glass windows that let in a lot of light, thin walls, elegant and sophisticated pillars, and pointed arches. Flying buttresses were introduced during this time. Since the Vikings had stopped invading, the Gothic churches had become the most important places in the community. They went along with the government system. People spent a lot more money on these churches to make them attractive. An example of a Gothic Cathedral is the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, France (see figure 3). The Notre Dame Cathedral has pointy arches and big windows. The windows are in many different shapes. Gothic architecture in cathedrals express that people had a new idea of letting light in. The Sainte-Chapelle also interprets Gothic architecture (see figure 4). It resides in Paris, France. The Sainte-Chapelle has beautiful stained glass windows that take up most of the walls of the building. They represent the change of theology. Architects learned new methods and ultimately changed the perception of these churches. The windows are very thin and colorful.

            There were obviously many changes made during the transformation from the Romanesque Cathedrals to the Gothic Cathedrals. Ideas of theology had changed drastically. Saint Étienne Church is an exemplary model of a Romanesque Cathedral. It has two symmetrical towers in the front (see figure 5). It has round arches and small window, just like a regular Romanesque Cathedral. Romanesque Cathedrals and churches were a lot older, and Gothic Cathedrals and churches were more modern. Romanesque churches have flat buttresses, while Gothic Cathedrals have flying buttresses. The Salisbury Cathedral has flying buttresses (see figure 6). In between the windows, there are flying buttresses. The Salisbury Cathedral is in England and it is Gothic architecture.

           There are many differences between Romanesque and Gothic Cathedrals. When Romanesque churches were first being built, Christianity was about fortifying the soul and securing for the coming of judgment. Gothic architecture was about letting the light shine. Catholicism had changed to a more accepting and open religion.

             

            

Figure 1

Church of St. Philibert, interior, 11^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tournus_43_.jpg, photograph taken in 2008.

Figure 2

Schoengrabern Church, façade, 13^th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Schoengrabern1a.JPG, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 3

Notre Dame de Paris, facade, 13th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NotreDameI.jpg, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 4

Sainte Chapelle, interior, 13th century, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sainte_chapelle_-_Upper_level.jpg, photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 5

Abbey Church of Saint-Etienne, façade, 11^th century, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:France_Caen_Saint-Etienne_facade_c.JPG, photograph taken in 2005.

Figure 6

Salisbury Cathedral, façade, 13^th century, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Salisbury_Cathedral_flying_buttresses.JPG, photograph taken in 2010.

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

           The end of the Roman Empire is a major event in human history. There is a lot of dispute on the cause and the time when the empire ended. The exact end to the empire is still a mystery today. The Roman Empire fell due to the combination of many bad things happening. The Roman Empire did not evolve; the Barbarians, Christianity, and Rome’s government are the causes of the ultimate collapse of what had once been the greatest empire in the world.

            Christianity was a major key to the decline of the Roman Empire. Christianity and religion affect civilization. The Roman Empire changed its name to the Byzantine Empire because of Christians. As Christianity rose, the empire sunk (Toynbee). “Religious precepts are easily obeyed, which indulge and sanctify the natural inclinations of their votaries; but the pure and genuine influence of Christianity may be traced in its beneficial, though imperfect, effects on the Barbarian proselytes of the North,” (Gibbon). Christianity, not only affected the empire, but also affected the Barbarians that helped destroy it. This religion was very influential to Romans and the Barbarians that converted to Christianity (History-world.org). Many people, even famous emperors like Constantine, converted to Christianity. Christianity was legal and outlawed at different times. It caused many changes throughout the years in the empire.

The Barbarians were successful in taking over the empire. The first of the Barbarians to conquer Rome were the Visigoths on the West side (History-world.org). The East side survived while the West side had gotten destroyed. Gibbon stated, “The endless column of Barbarians pressed on the Roman Empire with accumulated weight; and, if the foremost were destroyed, the vacant space was instantly replenished by new assailants.” The Barbarians easily defeated the armies of the Romans because the Romans were unaware of their danger and their number of enemies (Gibbon). The Barbarians did not give up and kept fighting the Romans. The Romans could not defend themselves, and the destruction of the empire took place.

            The decline and downfall of the Roman Empire was partly because Rome had a disorganized and weak government. The Romans could not raise enough money for taxes, so they stopped paying and lost complete power (Heather). The English historian Edward Gibbon wrote, “The decay of Rome has been frequently ascribed to the translation of the seat of empire; but this history has already shown that the powers of government were divided rather than removed.” The empire did not get rid of the government, but when it divided, it became less powerful. Rome had split in two sides: the East and the West. On the West side, there were numerous emperors that divided the empire, which caused chaos to the empire. The Roman Empire formed an oppressive government system with weak rulers that had gotten worse over time. Eventually, the empire was no longer in the west.

There may have not been one reason, but there was a gradual process that led the empire to fall. The end of the empire is still argued today because no one knows when it truly happened. People should be proud that the empire lasted for as long as it did, though. Barbarianism and Christianity had succeeded after all. The Barbarians, government, and the ability of the Roman Empire to fall under the influence of Christianity led it to decline. The Roman Empire collapsed due to a combination of many things.

Works Cited:

Gibbon, E. (n.d.). General observations on the fall of the roman empire in the west. Retrieved       from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html.

Heather, P. (2011). The fall of rome. Retrieved from             http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/fallofrome_article_01.shtml

History-world.org. Goths. Retrieved from http://history-world.org/goths.htm.

Toynbee, Arnold. (1948). Christianity and civilization. Retrievied from             http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/toynbee.html.

Did the Roman Empire 'decline and fall' or did it evolve into something new?

The end of the Roman Empire is a major event in human history. What was the cause of it and when did it happen? The exact end to the empire is still a mystery today. The Roman Empire fell due to the combination of many bad things happening. The Roman Empire evolved into something new.

            The Romans collapsed because migrants stripped them of their tax base. According to Heather, “A two-stage process occurred between the battle of Hadrianople in 378 AD, when the emperor Valens and two-thirds of his army (upwards of 10,000 men) fell in a single afternoon at the hands of an army of Gothic migrants, to the deposition of Romulus Augustulus nearly a century later.” 

The people of Rome did not know what they were doing. According to Shenkman,"Rome fell, to be sure. It just didn't fall when it was supposed to. All the reference books say it fell in A.D. 476. But Romans didn't know this, and kept the empire going for another two centuries or so." Historians decided to say it would be easiest for the Roman Empire to end in the year 476 AD because it was the last year for the last emperor to rule.

            The Romans were destroyed by the Barbarians. Gibbon states, “the endless column of Barbarians pressed on the Roman empire with accumulated weight; and, if the foremost were destroyed, the vacant space was instantly replenished by new assailants.” Gibbon also said, “The empire of Rome was firmly established by the singular and perfect coalition of its members. The subject nations, resigning the hope, and even the wish, of independence, embraced the character of Roman citizens; and the provinces of the West were reluctantly torn by the Barbarians from the bosom of their mother-country.” The Romans were unaware of their danger and the number of their enemies (Gibbon).

            The Romans had, after all, a collapsed empire. The end of the empire is still argued today because no one knows when it truly happened. The barbarians, immigrants, and the destruction of the Roman Empire led it to fall.

           

Works Cited:

Heather, P. (2011). The fall of rome. Retrieved from             http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/fallofrome_article_01.shtml

Gibbon, E. (n.d.). General observations on the fall of the roman empire in the west. Retrieved       from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/gibbon-fall.html

Shenkman, R. (1993). Legends, lies & cherished myths of world history. Retrieved from             http://www.tamos.net/~rhay/romefall.html

Stoicism and Seneca Final Draft

Most people share their emotions with others. They act out according to how they feel. Sometimes, there are people that remain stoic, and they do not appear to show emotion. Stoicism is the belief that one controls his emotions, while confronted with hardships; the events of the death of Seneca are a perfect illustration of stoicism.

Seneca was a friend of the Roman Emperor Nero until Nero accused him of plotting against him, so Nero planned to kill Seneca (Tacitus). Seneca showed and appeared emotionless upon his knowing of his death. According to Tacitus, “upon this the tribune asserted that he saw no signs of fear, and perceived no sadness in his words or in his looks.” He stayed strong throughout the rest of his life. He knew what was going to happen and he accepted it. Seneca held back how he truly felt.

            Seneca felt able to sacrifice himself.  He was sacrificing his life as a sign for the public. He inscribed his will like he was ready to die. He even told his friends to toughen up. Seneca wanted the best for other people. A passage from Tacitus states:    

Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will, and, on the centurion's refusal, turned to his friends, protesting that as he was forbidden to requite them, he bequeathed to them the only, but still the noblest possession yet remaining to him, the pattern of his life, which, if they remembered, they would win a name for moral worth and steadfast friendship. At the same time he called them back from their tears to manly resolution, now with friendly talk, and now with the sterner language of rebuke.

Seneca was very brave; even when he did not know what was going to happen next. “Even at the last moment his eloquence failed him not; he summoned his secretaries, and dictated much to them which, as it has been published for all readers in his own words, I forbear to paraphrase,” (Tacitus). He even took charge when he discovered his painful fate. He must have controlled and held back so many feelings to be able to handle himself. He had a sense of duty.

Throughout the many hardships that Seneca faced, he definitely remained stoic during all of them. He held back the tears and anger. Many people should admire him for the stoicism that he maintained.  He had a sense of duty, and he was very brave. Seneca is a perfect example of stoicism.

Works Cited:

Tacitus. (109 ACE). The Death of Seneca, 65 CE. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus-ann15a.html.

News Flash!

Starting April 7th, we will stop doing dailies. Instead, we will be concentrating on the weekly essays. This week's rough draft we are finishing in class. From then on, every Wednesday you will have a rough draft due for Peer review (you'll receive participation credit: P/F for having the draft ready). On your rough draft, please underline the thesis statement and in a different color prove it is an opinion by writing the opposite side; underline one quote properly cited with in-text citations for each body paragraph; make bold your four-sentence analysis of each quote; analysis should explain how the quote serves to support your thesis. After peer review, a final draft will be due on Fri by Midnight.

Eleven-Point Critique (for peer reviews and grading of final drafts)

1. 5 paragraphs -- 5 to 7 sentences per paragraph.

2 Clear, coherent thesis statement expressing an opinion to be argued in the paper.

3. One quote or piece of sourcable evidence properly cited in APA format per body paragraph / proper in-text citation format

(author, date). APA format bibliography at end of paper. Use top-notch sources (BBC, Met Museum, Nat Geo, Internet History

Sourcebook, school-library based databases, etc.)

4. Four sentences per body paragraph analysis. This is your own analysis demonstrating how the evidence supports your thesis.

5. Solid conclusion demonstrating the validity of the argument.

6. Emphasis: Put strongest evidence in the fourth paragraph.

7. No 1st or 2nd person personal pronouns (I, we, us, me, my, myself, you, etc.)

8. Academic Tone: No slang, no contractions, make it coherent and readable.

9. Avoid generalizations -- give specific information; I'm not looking for you to write an "encyclopedia" article. I'm looking for

your ability to construct an academic argument.

10. Avoid unnecessary information: "more" quotes doesn't mean a "better" paper.

11. Original and honest writing voice and a creative and remarkable take on the subject.

Week #6- Daily #3- How does Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represent both a continuation of and a break from the past? Look up the Fayum Portraits and the Ravenna Portrait of Justinian as a starting point for your thinking.

Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represents a continuation and break from the past. The art is a continuation because it portrays an event that has happened by showing a scene. It represents life from the past and things that were in the past. The Ravenna Portrait of Justinian is of a real person in history. Justinian was an important figure of Late Antiquity. He was illustrated as what he would look like in his time period. This art was also a break from the art because of artists’ creativity in their work. They use different resources to make their art, too. The Fayum Portraits are sometimes accompanied with contemporary and modern mummy overings and masks, jewelry, and funerary stelae. The artists focused more on the details of the faces in the portraits rather than an actual scene for the picture. There was a lot more detail in Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture than there was in the past. Many things led Christian and Byzantine portraiture to either continue or change from the past. 

Stoicism and Seneca Rough Draft

Most people share their emotions with others and share their feelings. They act out according to how they feel. Sometimes, there are people that remain stoic, and they do not appear to show emotion. Stoicism is the belief that one controls his emotions, while confronted with hardships; the events of the death of Seneca are a perfect illustration of stoicism. Seneca showed no signs of stoicism during the events of his death.

Seneca was a friend of the Roman Emperor Nero until Nero accused him of plotting against him, so Nero planned to kill Seneca (Tacitus). Seneca showed and appeared emotionless upon his knowing of his death. According to Tacitus, “upon this the tribune asserted that he saw no signs of fear, and perceived no sadness in his words or in his looks.” He stayed strong throughout the rest of his life. He knew what was going to happen and he accepted it. Seneca held back how he truly felt.

            Seneca was ready to die.  He was sacrificing his life as a sign for the public. He inscribed his will like he was ready to die. He even told his friends to toughen up. Seneca wanted the best for other people. A passage from Tacitus states:  

Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will, and, on the centurion's refusal, turned to his friends, protesting that as he was forbidden to requite them, he bequeathed to them the only, but still the noblest possession yet remaining to him, the pattern of his life, which, if they remembered, they would win a name for moral worth and steadfast friendship. At the same time he called them back from their tears to manly resolution, now with friendly talk, and now with the sterner language of rebuke.

Seneca was very brave; even when he did not know what was going to happen next. “Even at the last moment his eloquence failed him not; he summoned his secretaries, and dictated much to them which, as it has been published for all readers in his own words, I forbear to paraphrase,” (Tacitus). He even took charge when he discovered his painful fate. He must have controlled and held back so many feelings to be able to handle himself. He had a sense of duty.

Throughout the many hardships that Seneca faced, he definitely remained stoic during all of them. He held back the tears and anger. Many people should admire him for the stoicism that he maintained.  He had a sense of duty, and he was very brave. Seneca is a perfect example of stoicism.

Works Cited:

Tacitus. (109 ACE). The Death of Seneca, 65 CE. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus-ann15a.html.

Week #6- Daily #6- Who was Augustine of Hippo?

         Augustine of Hippo was very important in the development of Western Christianity. He is a saint and pre-eminent Doctor of the Church in the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion. He is the patron saint of brewers, printers, sore eyes, theologians, and many cities and dioceses, and he is also the patron of the Augustinian religious order. Saint Augustine was a Roman African born in 354 AD in Tagaste, and he died in 430 AD. At an early age, he and his lover had a son named Adeodatus. After reading a passage about the life of Saint Anthony of the Desert in 386 AD, Augustine converted to Christianity. When he became a priest, he sold his possessions and donated money to the poor. He transformed his family house into a monastic foundation after the death of his mother and son. He was the bishop of Hippo Regius, and he was a Latin-speaking philosopher and theologian. His writings helped form the idea of just war. He was one of the most prolific Latin authors. He was influenced by Stoicism, Platonism and Neo-platonism. One of his miracles was healing a sick man by laying his hands on him. Augustine spent his final days of life in prayer and repentance. When the Western Roman Empire was beginning to collapse, Saint Augustine of Hippo developed the concept of the Church as a spiritual City of God. He is known as a theological father of Reformation. His feast day is celebrated on August 28, which is the day of his death. Saint Augustine of Hippo has been a major influence in the growth of Christianity in Western civilization.

Source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo#Priesthood

Week #6- Daily #1- Read Tacitus' description of the Death of Seneca and Book One of M. Aurelius' Meditations. Find quotes within those two texts that help explain what Stoicism is all about. How did the Roman Empire change after the Era of the Soldier Emperors.

Tacitus' description of the Death of Seneca:

“Upon this the tribune asserted that he saw no signs of fear, and perceived no sadness in his words or in his looks.”
This quote states that Seneca remained emotionless upon the knowing of his death.

“Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will, and, on the centurion's refusal, turned to his friends, protesting that as he was forbidden to requite them, he bequeathed to them the only, but still the noblest possession yet remaining to him, the pattern of his life, which, if they remembered, they would win a name for moral worth and steadfast friendship. At the same time he called them back from their tears to manly resolution, now with friendly talk, and now with the sterner language of rebuke.”

Seneca was prepared to die, and he told his friends to stay strong because he wanted the best for them.

“Even at the last moment his eloquence failed him not; he summoned his secretaries, and dictated much to them which, as it has been published for all readers in his own words, I forbear to paraphrase.”

Seneca had a sense of duty, and he even took charge when he discovered his painful fate.

Book One of M. Aurelius' Meditations:

“FROM my grandfather Verus I learned good morals and the government of my temper.”

“I learned endurance of labour, and to want little, and to work with my own hands, and not to meddle with other people's affairs, and not to be ready to listen to slander.”

“I learned freedom of will and undeviating steadiness of purpose; and to look to nothing else, not even for a moment, except to reason…”

“I learned self-government, and not to be led aside by anything; and cheerfulness in all circumstances, as well as in illness; and a just admixture in the moral character of sweetness and dignity, and to do what was set before me without complaining.”

“I observed that everybody believed that he thought as he spoke, and that in all that he did he never had any bad intention; and he never showed amazement and surprise, and was never in a hurry, and never put off doing a thing, nor was perplexed nor dejected, nor did he ever laugh to disguise his vexation, nor, on the other hand, was he ever passionate or suspicious.”

“I observed mildness of temper, and unchangeable resolution in the things which he had determined after due deliberation…”