The High Middle Ages – Bernard of Clairvaux and Thomas Aquinas

Author(s):  
Philip Jenkins

One way to appreciate the potential role of climate in human affairs is to observe what happens when—at least from a human-centric perspective—matters are going very well and the heavens appear to be smiling. Despite the occasional emphasis on eras of climate-driven disaster and deprivation, some historical epochs were wonderfully benevolent, times when the Sun’s warmth evidently manifested God’s bounty. One such era was the High Middle Ages, which coincided with a period of warming over large parts of the globe. Trade and commerce flourished, abundant harvests produced generous food supplies, and prosperity was conspicuously manifested in religious experiment and innovation. Such eras are often recalled through legendary and even exalted figures, such as St. Francis or Thomas Aquinas in the medieval European context. Whatever we term them, cultural golden ages have existed, and they have their foundations in climate conditions.


1949 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josef Pieper

The second partof the Summa Theologica of the “Universal Doctor,” Thomas Aquinas, begins with the following sentence: Because man has been created in God's image, now after having spoken of God, the archetype, we must still deal with His image which is man. (Summa Theologica I, II, Prologus.) There is something peculiar about this sentence; its meaning must not be misunderstood. It is stated as a matter of fact but its meaning is not to be taken for granted. This first sentence of Moral Theology expresses a fact which has almost entirely disappeared from the knowledge of Christians of today; namely, die fact that moral doctrine is primarily and above all a doctrine about man; that moral doctrine must plainly reveal the conception of man, and that, therefore, the doctrine of Christian morals must concern the Christian model of man. This fact was a matter of course in' the Christianity of the high Middle Ages. This fundamental conception—which, to be sure, was not definitely taken for granted as the polemical wording shows—compelled Eckhart to say two generations after St. Thomas: people should not think about what they ought to do, they should rather think about what they ought to be.


Lumen et Vita ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Austin Holmes

This essay attempts to give the Scholastic Theology of the High Middle Ages due praise by inhabiting its beautiful intellectual architecture. Among the core features observed are Scholasticism’s methodological vitality explained as an exegetical-humility with patristic roots, the animating principle of desire for union with God, and a conception of Christian doctrine as fundamental to the divine work of human salvation. Rather than engage directly with Scholasticism’s fashionable modern enemies, the essay proceeds in successive steps as a lectio magistrorum (“reading of the masters”). Anslem of Canterbury, Hugh of St. Victor, Peter Abelard, Bonaventure, and Thomas Aquinas represent the primary sources of interest. The goal is simply to generate reconsideration of medieval theology through an introduction to atypically studied aspects of a few figures.


Author(s):  
G.E.M. Lippiatt

Historians of political development in the High Middle Ages often focus on the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries as the generations in which monarchy finally triumphed over aristocracy to create a monopoly on governing institutions in Western Europe. However, it was precisely in this period that Simon of Montfort emerged from his modest forest lordship in France to conquer a principality stretching from the Pyrenees to the Rhône. A remarkable ascendancy in any period, it is perhaps especially so in its contrast with the accepted historiographical narrative. Despite the supposed triumph of monarchy during his lifetime, Simon’s meteoric career took place largely outside of royal auspices. Simon’s experience provides a challenge to an uncomplicated or teleological understanding of contemporary politics as effectively national affairs directed by kings.


Author(s):  
G.E.M. Lippiatt

Dissenter from the Fourth Crusade, disseised earl of Leicester, leader of the Albigensian Crusade, prince of southern France: Simon of Montfort led a remarkable career of ascent from mid-level French baron to semi-independent count before his violent death before the walls of Toulouse in 1218. Through the vehicle of the crusade, Simon cultivated autonomous power in the liminal space between competing royal lordships in southern France in order to build his own principality. This first English biographical study of his life examines the ways in which Simon succeeded and failed in developing this independence in France, England, the Midi, and on campaign to Jerusalem. Simon’s familial, social, and intellectual connexions shaped his conceptions of political order, which he then implemented in his conquests. By analysing contemporary narrative, scholastic, and documentary evidence—including a wealth of archival material—this book argues that Simon’s career demonstrates the vitality of baronial independence in the High Middle Ages, despite the emergence of centralised royal bureaucracies. More importantly, Simon’s experience shows that barons themselves adopted methods of government that reflected a concern for accountability, public order, and contemporary reform ideals. This study therefore marks an important entry in the debate about baronial responsibility in medieval political development, as well as providing the most complete modern account of the life of this important but oft-overlooked crusader.


Author(s):  
Hans Hummer

What meaning did human kinship possess in a world regulated by biblical time, committed to the primacy of spiritual relationships, and bound by the sinews of divine love? In the process of exploring that question, this book offers a searching re-examination of kinship in Europe between late Roman times and the high Middle Ages, the period bridging Europe’s primitive past and its modern present. It critiques the modernist and Western bio-genealogical and functionalist assumptions that have shaped kinship studies since their inception in the nineteenth century, when biblical time collapsed and kinship became a signifier of the essential secularity of history and a method for conceptualizing a deeper prehistory guided by autogenous human impulses. It argues that this understanding of kinship is fundamentally antagonistic to medieval sentiments and is responsible for the frustrations researchers have encountered as they have tried to identify the famously elusive kin groups of medieval Europe. It delineates an alternative ethnographic approach inspired by recent anthropological work that privileges indigenous expressions of kinship and the interpretive potential of native ontologies. The book reveals that kinship in the Middle Ages was not biological, primitive, or a regulator of social mechanisms; nor is it traceable by bio-genealogical connections. In the Middle Ages kinship signified a sociality that flowed from convictions about the divine source of all things and wove together families, institutions, and divinities into an expansive eschatological vision animated by “the most righteous principle of love.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document