The Renaissance: A Rebirth or a continuation of the Late Medieval Era
In the 19th century, after a REVIVAL OF MEDIEVAL HISTORY, Burkhardt wrote a neo-classical perspective of history. Instead of identifying the wholesome values of Medieval thought as the Romantics did in the early 19th century, Burkardt challenged the basic foundations of interpretation of history. Instead of seeing a pattern of history, he saw a rebirth of Western Europe (almost a resurrection of culture).
The basis of this thesis was that Western Civilization was born during the Classical Era (Greeks and Romans) and was corrupted (or killed) by the Medieval Era (Middle Ages). Instead of seeing any continuation, Burkhardt called the Middle Ages the "Dark Ages," placing special value on the Renaissance.
With this, the Modern World war born.
By the reading above, what bias did Burkhardt illustrate in his historical perspective? (Think about the era he wrote under)
How is this thesis true? How is if wrong?
3 Comments:
Do we do the entire page for homework? Or just the section entitled "Meaning and Characteristics of the CCRenaissance"?
pages 1 and 2: i think i was very specific. There are two sections you are responsible for.
He was a neo-classical "philosopher" if you will. HE HATED the medieval ages and shows individualism and secularism. His bias was that he hated Italian romanticism and wanted to crush it. In a way this thesis was true. The Medieval Ages shows an account of attempts to dwindle intellectual thinking. To hold back reasoning and other theologies. Stumped the spread of Greco-roman learning through religious(Church/Pope) control(Burkhardts perspective. It's also wrong because the MA was not just caused by thwarts through the church but also the lack of cultural growth because of ignorance on the other side of the "WALL". Hence nobody had the courage to change or control anything due to barbarians and serfdom.***Please correct me if I am wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home