Medival Help

Anyone know stuff about the medieval ages?

- witch persecution took mainly place after the Middle Ages
- there was a bathing culture in medieval cities during a certain period, so not everybody was dirty in the Middle Ages
- nearly nobody believed that the earth was flat
- Charlemagne never claimed to be Roman Emperor
- there was actual intellectual life going on back then
- in many places, peasants and cities managed themselves without a monarch
- in some aspects the Middle Ages saw major technological breakthroughs
- Muslims, Jews and Christians didn't always fight against each other
 
I am open to answer any questions on it within my knowledge... However, it is too much to give a summary, the world in the Middle Ages was, like today, very complex and localized to particular areas.
 
- witch persecution took mainly place after the Middle Ages
- there was a bathing culture in medieval cities during a certain period, so not everybody was dirty in the Middle Ages
- nearly nobody believed that the earth was flat
- Charlemagne never claimed to be Roman Emperor
- there was actual intellectual life going on back then
- in many places, peasants and cities managed themselves without a monarch
- in some aspects the Middle Ages saw major technological breakthroughs
- Muslims, Jews and Christians didn't always fight against each other

The aspect of peasantry and cities is interesting. In the Middle Ages, we have examples of extreme state control (to the extent of essentially modern socialist levels of control) in Byzantium, to essentially anarchy in middle age Iceland or areas like Khursan and Afghanistan.
 
Yeah, I know a fuckton about the Dark Ages, from the Battle of Ronceveaux Pass to Offa of Mercia (or Merica) to the Kalbid dynasty of the Emirate of Sicily to ESPECIALLY THE CRUSADES to Roussel de Bailleul to Pisan ownership of the Balearic Islands to pretty much everything HRE (Kingdom of Arles, Rex Teutonicum, etc.) to the First Bulgarian Empire to Brian Boru's Ireland so yeah ask me a question and it'll get answered pretty much.
 
To essentially anarchy in middle age Iceland

Yet Iceland avoided a major civil disorder because people were willing to be law abiding in ways we would never think of.

Modern equivalent-- After due deliberation and prayers to Jesus, the Supreme Court ruled that the American population should convert to Hinduism provided that the Hindu party accepted the American custom of eating beef and private prayers to Jesus we're allowed to continue. The Southern Baptist Convention, while previously opposing the ruling said they would comply by converting their churches into temples.

That's just an illustration of how mindsets were different a 1000 years ago. The most important thing is to try to wrap your head around that.
 
Last edited:
(to the extent of essentially modern socialist levels of control)

I have to confess that I know little of Byzantium's social and economic history, but I doubt that a medieval state could have reached modern, let alone socialist, levels of control.

I'm quite interested in Roman history though, and I know that even the Dominate never achieved to be as powerful as the modern state. The Roman bureaucracy just hadn't the numbers and the technology to efficiently supervise its population. So how, and which areas of daily life, did Byzantium regulate as heavily as modern states?

to essentially anarchy in middle age Iceland

Iceland wasn't an anarchy but something I would call an oligarchy. While the poors had only little rights, the rich landowners participated in the people's assembly. IIRC, this was also the place were certain cases werde decided.

Sure the tradition of blood feud was strong, but it was a formalized and accepted custom - it didn't challenge the power of the state because public institutions never tried to stop it.

That's just an illustration of how mindsets were different a 1000 years ago. The most important thing is to try to wrap your head around that.

To be honest your scenario is more an illustration of the current (American) mindset. The country is so divided that nobody could hope for a constitutional amendment to be passed. So you have to use the SCOTUS which obviously is the last institution capable of acting.
 
I have to confess that I know little of Byzantium's social and economic history, but I doubt that a medieval state could have reached modern, let alone socialist, levels of control.

I'm quite interested in Roman history though, and I know that even the Dominate never achieved to be as powerful as the modern state. The Roman bureaucracy just hadn't the numbers and the technology to efficiently supervise its population. So how, and which areas of daily life, did Byzantium regulate as heavily as modern states?



Iceland wasn't an anarchy but something I would call an oligarchy. While the poors had only little rights, the rich landowners participated in the people's assembly. IIRC, this was also the place were certain cases werde decided.

Sure the tradition of blood feud was strong, but it was a formalized and accepted custom - it didn't challenge the power of the state because public institutions never tried to stop it.



To be honest your scenario is more an illustration of the current (American) mindset. The country is so divided that nobody could hope for a constitutional amendment to be passed. So you have to use the SCOTUS which obviously is the last institution capable of acting.

"Once again the bureaucracy was all powerful, operating on a scale unmatched anywhere else for several centuries; for it is to be remembered that the Byzantine Empire, absolute monarchy it may be, ran its economy on distinctly socialist lines. Capitalism while allowed, was rigidly controlled at every stage; production, labour, consumption, foreign trade, public welfare and even the movement of the population were firmly controlled by the central state."

-John Julius Norwich, "Byzantium The Apogee."

This was the state and back drop prior to the disaster of the battle of Manzikert and of the disintegration of true standard Roman armies. The central state had curtailed their power for decades in favor of mercenaries, who would loyally serve. It is the same that occurred within the Abbasid state.
 
Last edited:
- witch persecution took mainly place after the Middle Ages

This part isn't really true. Witch panics we're more of a feature of the Early Modern period. The Papacy openly preached against a belief in witches during the Middle Ages. It wasn't until the Protestant Reformation, and the resulting social stresses, that you saw people openly persecuting 'witches'.
 
Yeah, I know a fuckton about the Dark Ages, from the Battle of Ronceveaux Pass to Offa of Mercia (or Merica) to the Kalbid dynasty of the Emirate of Sicily to ESPECIALLY THE CRUSADES to Roussel de Bailleul to Pisan ownership of the Balearic Islands to pretty much everything HRE (Kingdom of Arles, Rex Teutonicum, etc.) to the First Bulgarian Empire to Brian Boru's Ireland so yeah ask me a question and it'll get answered pretty much.

What were the words that Odin whispered into Balder's ear on his pyre?

:p
 

Saphroneth

Banned
This part isn't really true. Witch panics we're more of a feature of the Early Modern period. The Papacy openly preached against a belief in witches during the Middle Ages. It wasn't until the Protestant Reformation, and the resulting social stresses, that you saw people openly persecuting 'witches'.
That's why he said it took place after.
 
This part isn't really true. Witch panics we're more of a feature of the Early Modern period. The Papacy openly preached against a belief in witches during the Middle Ages. It wasn't until the Protestant Reformation, and the resulting social stresses, that you saw people openly persecuting 'witches'.

Since I said mainly, my point still stands. Sure there were medieval persecution of witches, but they weren't as common as during the Age of Reformation.
 
Norman Cantor's "Civilization in the Middle Ages" is a great resource and very insightful into the development of European societies from the fall of Rome to the Renaissance. I read it a few years back and would recommend it to anyone with interest in the area.
 
To be honest your scenario is more an illustration of the current (American) mindset. The country is so divided that nobody could hope for a constitutional amendment to be passed. So you have to use the SCOTUS which obviously is the last institution capable of acting.

Actually, SCOTUS was the closest I could come to Lawspeaker and Laying out (Shamanic contemplation common in Norse Paganism) is the closest I could come to prayers to Jesus. I was not thinking of modern America and the parallels don't quite work IMHO.
 
I know a decent amount about Medieval Russia and by extension the Golden Horde, but you may want a more specific question
 
Top