#simon iv de montfort

[roehenstart]

Simon IV de Montfort (c. 1160/1165-1218) was Lord of Montfort-l'Amaury, fifth Count of Leicester, Count of Toulouse, Viscount of Béziers and Viscount of Carcassonne, he was the main protagonist of the Albigensian Crusade.

#royaume de france #maison de montfort #toulouse #crusades #crusader #simon iv de montfort #count of leicester #comte de toulouse #house of montfort #cigarette cards

[histoireettralala]

Blanche, Marguerite, and Queenship

Blanche's actions as queen dowager amount to no more than those of her grandmother and great-grandmother. A wise and experienced mother of a king was expected to advise him. She would intercede with him, and would thus be a natural focus of diplomatic activity. Popes, great Churchmen and great laymen would expect to influence the king or gain favour with him through her; thus popes like Gregory IX and Innocent IV, and great princes like Raymond VII of Toulouse, addressed themselves to Blanche. She would be expected to mediate at court. She had the royal authority to intervene in crises to maintain the governance of the realm, as Blanche did during Louis's near-fatal illness in 1244-5, and as Eleanor did in England in 1192.

In short, Blanche's activities after Louis's minority were no more and no less "co-rule" than those of other queen dowagers. No king could rule on his own. All kings- even Philip Augustus- relied heavily on those they trusted for advice, and often for executive action. William the Breton described Brother Guérin as "quasi secundus a rege"- "as if second to the king": indeed, Jacques Krynen characterised Philip and his administrators as almost co-governors. The vastness of their realms forced the Angevin kings to rely even more on the governance of others, including their mothers and their wives. Blanche's prominent role depended on the consent of her son. Louis trusted her judgement. He may also have found many of the demands of ruling uncongenial. Blanche certainly had her detractors at court, but she was probably criticsed, not for playing a role in the execution of government, but for influencing her son in one direction by those who hoped to influence him in another.

The death of a king meant that there was often more than one queen. Blanche herself did not have to deal with an active dowager queen: Ingeborg lived on the edges of court and political life; besides, she was not Louis VIII's mother. Eleanor of Aquitaine did not have to deal with a forceful young queen: Berengaria of Navarre, like Ingeborg, was retiring; Isabella of Angoulême was still a child. But the potential problem of two crowned, anointed and politically engaged queens is made manifest in the relationship between Blanche and St Louis's queen, Margaret of Provence.

At her marriage in 1234 Margaret of Provence was too young to play an active role as queen. The household accounts of 1239 still distinguish between the queen, by which they mean Blanche, and the young queen — Margaret. By 1241 Margaret had decided that she should play the role expected of a reigning queen. She was almost certainly engaging in diplomacy over the continental Angevin territories with her sister, Queen Eleanor of England. Churchmen loyal to Blanche, presumably at the older queen’s behest, put a stop to that. It was Blanche rather than Margaret who took the initiative in the crisis of 1245. Although Margaret accompanied the court on the great expedition to Saumur for the knighting of Alphonse in 1241, it was Blanche who headed the queen’s table, as if she, not Margaret, were queen consort. In the Sainte-Chapelle, Blanche of Castile’s queenship is signified by a blatant scattering of the castles of Castile: the pales of Provence are absent.

Margaret was courageous and spirited. When Louis was captured on Crusade, she kept her nerve and steadied that of the demoralised Crusaders, organised the payment of his ransom and the defence of Damietta, in spite of the fact that she had given birth to a son a few days previously. She reacted with quick-witted bravery when fire engulfed her cabin, and she accepted the dangers and discomforts of the Crusade with grace and good humour. But her attempt to work towards peace between her husband and her brother-in-law, Henry III, in 1241 lost her the trust of Louis and his close advisers — Blanche, of course, was the closest of them all - and that trust was never regained. That distrust was apparent in 1261, when Louis reorganised the household. There were draconian checks on Margaret's expenditure and almsgiving. She was not to receive gifts, nor to give orders to royal baillis or prévôts, or to undertake building works without the permission of the king. Her choice of members of her household was also subject to his agreement.

Margaret survived her husband by some thirty years, so that she herself was queen mother, to Philip III, and was still a presence ar court during the reign of her grandson Philip IV. But Louis did not make her regent on his second, and fatal, Crusade in 1270. In the early 12605 Margarer tried to persuade her young son, the future Philip III, to agree to obey her until he was thirty. When Philip told his father, Louis was horrified. In a strange echo of the events of 1241, he forced Philip to resile from his oath to his mother, and forced Margaret to agree never again to attempt such a move. Margaret had overplayed her hand. It meant that she was specifically prevented from acting with those full and legitimate powers of a crowned queen after the death of her husband that Blanche, like Eleanor of Aquitaine, had been able to deploy for the good of the realm.

Why was Margaret treated so differently from Blanche? Were attitudes to the power of women changing? Not yet. In 1294 Philip IV was prepared to name his queen, Joanna of Champagne-Navarre, as sole regent with full regal powers in the event of his son's succession as a minor. She conducted diplomatic negotiations for him. He often associated her with his kingship in his acts. And Philip IV wanted Joanna buried among the kings of France at Saint-Denis - though she herself chose burial with the Paris Franciscans. The effectiveness and evident importance to their husbands of Eleanor of Provence and Eleanor of Castile in England led David Carpenter to characterise late thirteenth-century England as a period of ‘resurgence in queenship’.

The problem for Margaret was personal, rather than institutional. Blanche had had her detractors at court. It is not clear who they were. There were always factions at courts, not least one that centred around Margaret, and anyone who had influence over a king would have detractors. They might have been clerks with misgivings about women in general, and powerful women in particular, and there may have been others who believed that the power of a queen should be curtailed, No one did curtail Blanche's — far from it. By the late chirteenth century the Capetian family were commissioning and promoting accounts of Louis IX that praise not just her firm and just rule as regent, but also her role as adviser and counsellor — her continuing influence — during his personal rule. As William of Saint-Pathus put it, because she was such a ‘sage et preude femme’, Louis always wanted ‘sa presence et son conseil’. But where Blanche was seen as the wisest and best provider of good advice that a king could have, a queen whose advice would always be for the good of the king and his realm, Margaret was seen by Louis as a queen at the centre of intrigue, whose advice would not be disinterested. Surprisingly, such formidable policical players at the English court as Simon de Montfort and her nephew, the future Edward I, felt that it was worthwhile to do diplomatic business through Margaret. Initially, Henry III and Simon de Montfort chose Margaret, not Louis, to arbitrate between them. She was a more active diplomat than Joinville and the Lives of Louis suggest, and probably, where her aims coincided with her husband’s, quite effective.

To an extent the difference between Blanche’s and Margaret’s position and influence simply reflected political reality. Blanche was accused of sending rich gifts to her family in Spain, and advancing them within the court. But there was no danger that her cultivation of Castilian family connections could damage the interests of the Capetian realm. Margaret’s Provençal connections could. Her sister Eleanor was married to Henry III of England. Margaret and Eleanor undoubtedly attempted to bring about a rapprochement between the two kings. This was helpful once Louis himself had decided to come to an agreement with Henry in the late 1250s, but was perceived as meddlesome plotting in the 1240s. Moreover, Margaret’s sister Sanchia was married to Henry's younger brother, Richard of Cornwall, who claimed the county of Poitou, and her youngest sister, Beatrice, countess of Provence, was married to Charles of Anjou. Sanchia’s interests were in direct conflict with those of Alphonse of Poitiers; and Margaret herself felt that she had dowry claims in Provence, and alienated Charles by attempting to pursue them. Indeed, her ill-fated attempt to tie her son Philip to her included clauses that he would not ally himself with Charles of Anjou against her.

Lindy Grant- Blanche of Castile, Queen of France

#xiii #lindy grant #blanche of castile queen of france #blanche de castille #grégoire ix #innocent iv #raymond vii de toulouse #aliénor d'aquitaine #louis ix #philippe ii #guérin #louis viii #marguerite de provence #aliénor de provence #alphonse de poitiers #henry iii of england #philippe iii #jeanne i de navarre #philippe iv #simon de montfort #edward i of england #jean de joinville #sancia de provence #béatrice de provence #charles i d'anjou

[une-sanz-pluis]

As senior prince of the blood and potentially the greatest landowner in England since the Norman Conquest, Henry was uniquely qualified to lead a movement of restoration and reform. He may well have had a genuine commitment to the principles involved. His political stance apparently caused Gaunt great concern on several occasions. Henry was a man of intellect and substance, and probably identified with the political tradition associated with Thomas of Lancaster and his wife's Bohun ancestors. It is perhaps significant that in 1388, when the triumph over the court party prompted new talk about the canonization of Thomas of Lancaster, he named his second son Thomas. After his accession he gave vestments depicting the life and martyrdom of Thomas of Lancaster to St George's Chapel at Windsor. In 1399 Henry certainly set great store by the office of steward of England, an office previously held by Simon de Montfort and Thomas of Lancaster. Henry laid claim to the stewardship while still in exile, and after his landing at Ravenspur styled himself steward of England in official documents. According to the 'baronial' tradition, it was the steward's role to take over the reins of government in times of danger, and to convene and preside over parliament in the king's absence. * Children usually took the name of a godparent, and Henry's son was perhaps the godson of Thomas of Woodstock: ... The choice of name may nonetheless be significant. Interestingly, none of Henry's four sons was named Richard.

— Michael Bennett, "Henry of Bolingbroke and the Revolution of 1399", Henry IV: The Establishment of the Regime, 1399-1406

#henry iv #thomas earl of lancaster #john of gaunt #thomas duke of clarence #historian: michael bennett #richard ii #the appellant crisis #the deposition of richard ii

[brookstonalmanac]

Events 5.14

1027 – Robert II of France names his son Henry I as junior King of the Franks. 1097 – The Siege of Nicaea begins during the First Crusade. 1264 – Battle of Lewes: Henry III of England is captured and forced to sign the Mise of Lewes, making Simon de Montfort the effective ruler of England. 1509 – Battle of Agnadello: In northern Italy, French forces defeat the Republic of Venice. 1607 – English colonists establish "James Fort," which would become Jamestown, Virginia, the earliest permanent English settlement in the Americas. 1608 – The Protestant Union, a coalition of Protestant German states, is founded to defend the rights, land and safety of each member against the Catholic Church and Catholic German states. 1610 – Henry IV of France is assassinated by Catholic zealot François Ravaillac, and Louis XIII ascends the throne. 1643 – Four-year-old Louis XIV becomes King of France upon the death of his father, Louis XIII. 1747 – War of the Austrian Succession: A British fleet under Admiral George Anson defeats the French at the First Battle of Cape Finisterre. 1796 – Edward Jenner administers the first smallpox inoculation. 1800 – The 6th United States Congress recesses, and the process of moving the Federal government of the United States from Philadelphia to Washington, D.C., begins the following day. 1804 – William Clark and 42 men depart from Camp Dubois to join Meriwether Lewis at St Charles, Missouri, marking the beginning of the Lewis and Clark Expedition's historic journey up the Missouri River. 1811 – Paraguay: Pedro Juan Caballero, Fulgencio Yegros and José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia start actions to depose the Spanish governor. 1836 – The Treaties of Velasco are signed in Velasco, Texas. 1857 – Mindon Min was crowned as King of Burma in Mandalay, Burma. 1863 – American Civil War: The Battle of Jackson takes place. 1868 – Boshin War: The Battle of Utsunomiya Castle ends as former Tokugawa shogunate forces withdraw northward. 1870 – The first game of rugby in New Zealand is played in Nelson between Nelson College and the Nelson Rugby Football Club. 1878 – The last witchcraft trial held in the United States begins in Salem, Massachusetts, after Lucretia Brown, an adherent of Christian Science, accused Daniel Spofford of attempting to harm her through his mental powers. 1879 – The first group of 463 Indian indentured laborers arrives in Fiji aboard the Leonidas. 1900 – Opening of World Amateur championship at the Paris Exposition Universelle, also known as Olympic Games. 1913 – Governor of New York William Sulzer approves the charter for the Rockefeller Foundation, which begins operations with a $100 million donation from John D. Rockefeller. 1915 – The May 14 Revolt takes place in Lisbon, Portugal. 1918 – Cape Town Mayor, Sir Harry Hands, inaugurates the Two-minute silence. 1931 – Five unarmed civilians are killed in the Ådalen shootings, as the Swedish military is called in to deal with protesting workers. 1935 – The Constitution of the Philippines is ratified by a popular vote. 1939 – Lina Medina becomes the youngest confirmed mother in medical history at the age of five. 1940 – World War II: Rotterdam, Netherlands is bombed by the Luftwaffe of Nazi Germany despite a ceasefire, killing about 900 people and destroying the historic city center. 1943 – World War II: A Japanese submarine sinks AHS Centaur off the coast of Queensland. 1948 – Israel is declared to be an independent state and a provisional government is established. Immediately after the declaration, Israel is attacked by the neighboring Arab states, triggering the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. 1951 – Trains run on the Talyllyn Railway in Wales for the first time since preservation, making it the first railway in the world to be operated by volunteers. 1953 – Approximately 7,100 brewery workers in Milwaukee perform a walkout, marking the start of the 1953 Milwaukee brewery strike. 1955 – Cold War: Eight Communist bloc countries, including the Soviet Union, sign a mutual defense treaty called the Warsaw Pact. 1961 – Civil rights movement: A white mob twice attacks a Freedom Riders bus near Anniston, Alabama, before fire-bombing the bus and attacking the civil rights protesters who flee the burning vehicle. 1970 – Andreas Baader is freed from custody by Ulrike Meinhof, Gudrun Ensslin and others, a pivotal moment in the formation of the Red Army Faction. 1973 – Skylab, the United States' first space station, is launched. 1977 – A Dan-Air Boeing 707 leased to IAS Cargo Airlines crashes on approach to Lusaka International Airport in Lusaka, Zambia, killing six people. 1980 – Salvadoran Civil War: the Sumpul River massacre occurs in Chalatenango, El Salvador. 1987 – Fijian Prime Minister Timoci Bavadra is ousted from power in a coup d'état led by Lieutenant colonel Sitiveni Rabuka. 1988 – Carrollton bus collision: A drunk driver traveling the wrong way on Interstate 71 near Carrollton, Kentucky hits a converted school bus carrying a church youth group. Twenty-seven die in the crash and ensuing fire. 2004 – The Constitutional Court of South Korea overturns the impeachment of President Roh Moo-hyun. 2004 – Rico Linhas Aéreas Flight 4815 crashes into the Amazon rainforest during approach to Eduardo Gomes International Airport in Manaus, Brazil, killing 33 people. 2008 – Battle of Piccadilly Gardens in Manchester city centre between Zenit supporters and Rangers supporters and the Greater Manchester Police, 39 policemen injured, one police-dog injured and 39 arrested. 2010 – Space Shuttle Atlantis launches on the STS-132 mission to deliver the first shuttle-launched Russian ISS component — Rassvet. This was originally slated to be the final launch of Atlantis, before Congress approved STS-135. 2012 – Agni Air Flight CHT crashes in Nepal after a failed go-around, killing 15 people. 2022 – Ten people are killed in a mass shooting in Buffalo, New York.

#Events

[martinwilliammichael]

[funight]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

[highslis]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

[tturkishcoffe]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

[lifestylehotels]

The Dominicans or Black Friars

The thirteenth century saw the romantic rise, the marvellous growth, and then the inevitable decay of the Friars, the two orders whose careers form one of the most fascinating and impressive stories in modern history. The Franciscans, or Grey Friars, founded in 1212, the Dominicans, or Black Friars, founded in 1216, by the middle of the century had infused new life throughout the Catholic world. By the end of the century their power was spent, and they had begun to be absorbed in the general life of the Church. It was one of the great rallies of the Papal Church, perhaps of all the rallies the most important, certainly the most brilliant, most pathetic, most fascinating, the most rich in poetry, in art, in devotion. For the mediaeval Church of Rome, like the Empire of the Caesars at Rome, like the Eastern Empire of Constantinople, like the Empire of the Khalifs, which succeeded that, seems to subsist for centuries after its epoch of zenith by a long series of rallies, revivals, and new births out of almost hopeless disorganisation and decay sofia city tour.

But the thirteenth century is not less memorable for its political than for its spiritual history. And in this field the history is that of new organisations, not the dissolution of the old. The thirteenth century gave Europe the nations as we now know them. France, England, Spain, large parts of North and South Germany, became nations, where they were previously counties, duchies, and fiefs. Compare the’ map of Europe at the end of the twelfth century, when Philip Augustus was struggling with Richard 1., when the King of England was a more powerful ruler in France than the so-called King of France in Paris, when Spain was held by various groups of petty kinglets facing the solid power of the Moors, compare this with the map of Europe at the end of the thirteenth century, with Spain constituted a kingdom under Ferdinand in. and Alfonso x., France under Philip the Fair, and England under Edward I.

At the very opening of the thirteenth century John did England the inestimable service of losing her French possessions. At the close of the century the greatest of the Plantagenets finally annexed Wales to England and began the incorporation of Scotland and Ireland. Of the creators of England as a sovereign power in the world, from Alfred to Chatham, between the names of the Conqueror and Cromwell, assuredly that of Edward I. is the most important. As to France, the petty counties which Philip Augustus inherited in 1180 had become, in the days of Philip the Pair (1286-1314), the most powerful nation in Europe. As a great European force, the French nation dates from the age of Philip Augustus, Blanche of Castile, her son Louis ix. (the Saint), and the two Philips (ill. and iv.), the son and grandson of St. Louis. The monarchy of France was indeed created in the thirteenth century. All that went before was preparation: all that came afterwards was development. Almost as much may be said for England and for Spain.

Hundred years of European history

It was an age of great rulers. Indeed, we may doubt if any hundred years of European history has been so crowded with great statesmen and kings. In England, Stephen Langton and the authors of our Great Charter in 1215; William, Earl Mareschal, Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, and above all Edward 1:, great as soldier, as ruler, as legislator — as great when he yielded as when he compelled. In France, Philip Augustus, a king curiously like our Edward 1. in his virtues as in his faults, though earlier by three generations; Blanche, his son’s wife, Regent of France; St. Louis, her son; and St. Louis’ grandson, the terrible, fierce, subtle, and adroit Philip the Fair.

Then on the throne of the Empire, from 1220 to 1250, Frederick II., ‘the world’s wonder,’ one of the most brilliant characters of the Middle Ages, whose life is a long romance, whose many-sided endowments seemed to promise everything but real greatness and abiding results. Next, after a generation, his successor, less brilliant but far more truly great, Rudolph of Hapsburg, emperor from 1273 to 1291, the founder of the Austrian dynasty, the ancestor of its sovereigns, the parallel, I had almost said the equal, of our own Edward 1. In Spain, Ferdinand 111. and his son, Alfonso x., whose reigns united gave Spain peace and prosperity for fifty-four years (1230-1284).

#The Dominicans or Black Friars

[lifestival]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

[pubmusiclife]

The Dominicans or Black Friars

The thirteenth century saw the romantic rise, the marvellous growth, and then the inevitable decay of the Friars, the two orders whose careers form one of the most fascinating and impressive stories in modern history. The Franciscans, or Grey Friars, founded in 1212, the Dominicans, or Black Friars, founded in 1216, by the middle of the century had infused new life throughout the Catholic world. By the end of the century their power was spent, and they had begun to be absorbed in the general life of the Church. It was one of the great rallies of the Papal Church, perhaps of all the rallies the most important, certainly the most brilliant, most pathetic, most fascinating, the most rich in poetry, in art, in devotion. For the mediaeval Church of Rome, like the Empire of the Caesars at Rome, like the Eastern Empire of Constantinople, like the Empire of the Khalifs, which succeeded that, seems to subsist for centuries after its epoch of zenith by a long series of rallies, revivals, and new births out of almost hopeless disorganisation and decay sofia city tour.

But the thirteenth century is not less memorable for its political than for its spiritual history. And in this field the history is that of new organisations, not the dissolution of the old. The thirteenth century gave Europe the nations as we now know them. France, England, Spain, large parts of North and South Germany, became nations, where they were previously counties, duchies, and fiefs. Compare the’ map of Europe at the end of the twelfth century, when Philip Augustus was struggling with Richard 1., when the King of England was a more powerful ruler in France than the so-called King of France in Paris, when Spain was held by various groups of petty kinglets facing the solid power of the Moors, compare this with the map of Europe at the end of the thirteenth century, with Spain constituted a kingdom under Ferdinand in. and Alfonso x., France under Philip the Fair, and England under Edward I.

At the very opening of the thirteenth century John did England the inestimable service of losing her French possessions. At the close of the century the greatest of the Plantagenets finally annexed Wales to England and began the incorporation of Scotland and Ireland. Of the creators of England as a sovereign power in the world, from Alfred to Chatham, between the names of the Conqueror and Cromwell, assuredly that of Edward I. is the most important. As to France, the petty counties which Philip Augustus inherited in 1180 had become, in the days of Philip the Pair (1286-1314), the most powerful nation in Europe. As a great European force, the French nation dates from the age of Philip Augustus, Blanche of Castile, her son Louis ix. (the Saint), and the two Philips (ill. and iv.), the son and grandson of St. Louis. The monarchy of France was indeed created in the thirteenth century. All that went before was preparation: all that came afterwards was development. Almost as much may be said for England and for Spain.

Hundred years of European history

It was an age of great rulers. Indeed, we may doubt if any hundred years of European history has been so crowded with great statesmen and kings. In England, Stephen Langton and the authors of our Great Charter in 1215; William, Earl Mareschal, Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, and above all Edward 1:, great as soldier, as ruler, as legislator — as great when he yielded as when he compelled. In France, Philip Augustus, a king curiously like our Edward 1. in his virtues as in his faults, though earlier by three generations; Blanche, his son’s wife, Regent of France; St. Louis, her son; and St. Louis’ grandson, the terrible, fierce, subtle, and adroit Philip the Fair.

Then on the throne of the Empire, from 1220 to 1250, Frederick II., ‘the world’s wonder,’ one of the most brilliant characters of the Middle Ages, whose life is a long romance, whose many-sided endowments seemed to promise everything but real greatness and abiding results. Next, after a generation, his successor, less brilliant but far more truly great, Rudolph of Hapsburg, emperor from 1273 to 1291, the founder of the Austrian dynasty, the ancestor of its sovereigns, the parallel, I had almost said the equal, of our own Edward 1. In Spain, Ferdinand 111. and his son, Alfonso x., whose reigns united gave Spain peace and prosperity for fifty-four years (1230-1284).

#The Dominicans or Black Friars

[dreamfoodbg]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

[c4p]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

[hairfashionstyle]

The Dominicans or Black Friars

The thirteenth century saw the romantic rise, the marvellous growth, and then the inevitable decay of the Friars, the two orders whose careers form one of the most fascinating and impressive stories in modern history. The Franciscans, or Grey Friars, founded in 1212, the Dominicans, or Black Friars, founded in 1216, by the middle of the century had infused new life throughout the Catholic world. By the end of the century their power was spent, and they had begun to be absorbed in the general life of the Church. It was one of the great rallies of the Papal Church, perhaps of all the rallies the most important, certainly the most brilliant, most pathetic, most fascinating, the most rich in poetry, in art, in devotion. For the mediaeval Church of Rome, like the Empire of the Caesars at Rome, like the Eastern Empire of Constantinople, like the Empire of the Khalifs, which succeeded that, seems to subsist for centuries after its epoch of zenith by a long series of rallies, revivals, and new births out of almost hopeless disorganisation and decay sofia city tour.

But the thirteenth century is not less memorable for its political than for its spiritual history. And in this field the history is that of new organisations, not the dissolution of the old. The thirteenth century gave Europe the nations as we now know them. France, England, Spain, large parts of North and South Germany, became nations, where they were previously counties, duchies, and fiefs. Compare the’ map of Europe at the end of the twelfth century, when Philip Augustus was struggling with Richard 1., when the King of England was a more powerful ruler in France than the so-called King of France in Paris, when Spain was held by various groups of petty kinglets facing the solid power of the Moors, compare this with the map of Europe at the end of the thirteenth century, with Spain constituted a kingdom under Ferdinand in. and Alfonso x., France under Philip the Fair, and England under Edward I.

At the very opening of the thirteenth century John did England the inestimable service of losing her French possessions. At the close of the century the greatest of the Plantagenets finally annexed Wales to England and began the incorporation of Scotland and Ireland. Of the creators of England as a sovereign power in the world, from Alfred to Chatham, between the names of the Conqueror and Cromwell, assuredly that of Edward I. is the most important. As to France, the petty counties which Philip Augustus inherited in 1180 had become, in the days of Philip the Pair (1286-1314), the most powerful nation in Europe. As a great European force, the French nation dates from the age of Philip Augustus, Blanche of Castile, her son Louis ix. (the Saint), and the two Philips (ill. and iv.), the son and grandson of St. Louis. The monarchy of France was indeed created in the thirteenth century. All that went before was preparation: all that came afterwards was development. Almost as much may be said for England and for Spain.

Hundred years of European history

It was an age of great rulers. Indeed, we may doubt if any hundred years of European history has been so crowded with great statesmen and kings. In England, Stephen Langton and the authors of our Great Charter in 1215; William, Earl Mareschal, Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, and above all Edward 1:, great as soldier, as ruler, as legislator — as great when he yielded as when he compelled. In France, Philip Augustus, a king curiously like our Edward 1. in his virtues as in his faults, though earlier by three generations; Blanche, his son’s wife, Regent of France; St. Louis, her son; and St. Louis’ grandson, the terrible, fierce, subtle, and adroit Philip the Fair.

Then on the throne of the Empire, from 1220 to 1250, Frederick II., ‘the world’s wonder,’ one of the most brilliant characters of the Middle Ages, whose life is a long romance, whose many-sided endowments seemed to promise everything but real greatness and abiding results. Next, after a generation, his successor, less brilliant but far more truly great, Rudolph of Hapsburg, emperor from 1273 to 1291, the founder of the Austrian dynasty, the ancestor of its sovereigns, the parallel, I had almost said the equal, of our own Edward 1. In Spain, Ferdinand 111. and his son, Alfonso x., whose reigns united gave Spain peace and prosperity for fifty-four years (1230-1284).

#The Dominicans or Black Friars

[brookstonalmanac]

Events 5.14 (before 1940)

1027 – Robert II of France names his son Henry I as junior King of the Franks. 1097 – The Siege of Nicaea begins during the First Crusade. 1264 – Battle of Lewes: Henry III of England is captured and forced to sign the Mise of Lewes, making Simon de Montfort the effective ruler of England. 1509 – Battle of Agnadello: In northern Italy, French forces defeat the Republic of Venice. 1607 – English colonists establish "James Fort," which would become Jamestown, Virginia, the earliest permanent English settlement in the Americas. 1608 – The Protestant Union, a coalition of Protestant German states, is founded to defend the rights, land and safety of each member against the Catholic Church and Catholic German states. 1610 – Henry IV of France is assassinated by Catholic zealot François Ravaillac, and Louis XIII ascends the throne. 1643 – Four-year-old Louis XIV becomes King of France upon the death of his father, Louis XIII. 1747 – War of the Austrian Succession: A British fleet under Admiral George Anson defeats the French at the First Battle of Cape Finisterre. 1796 – Edward Jenner administers the first smallpox inoculation. 1800 – The 6th United States Congress recesses, and the process of moving the Federal government of the United States from Philadelphia to Washington, D.C., begins the following day. 1804 – William Clark and 42 men depart from Camp Dubois to join Meriwether Lewis at St Charles, Missouri, marking the beginning of the Lewis and Clark Expedition's historic journey up the Missouri River. 1811 – Paraguay: Pedro Juan Caballero, Fulgencio Yegros and José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia start actions to depose the Spanish governor. 1836 – The Treaties of Velasco are signed in Velasco, Texas. 1857 – Mindon Min was crowned as King of Burma in Mandalay, Burma. 1863 – American Civil War: The Battle of Jackson takes place. 1868 – Boshin War: The Battle of Utsunomiya Castle ends as former Tokugawa shogunate forces withdraw northward. 1870 – The first game of rugby in New Zealand is played in Nelson between Nelson College and the Nelson Rugby Football Club. 1878 – The last witchcraft trial held in the United States begins in Salem, Massachusetts, after Lucretia Brown, an adherent of Christian Science, accused Daniel Spofford of attempting to harm her through his mental powers. 1879 – The first group of 463 Indian indentured laborers arrives in Fiji aboard the Leonidas. 1900 – Opening of World Amateur championship at the Paris Exposition Universelle, also known as Olympic Games. 1913 – Governor of New York William Sulzer approves the charter for the Rockefeller Foundation, which begins operations with a $100 million donation from John D. Rockefeller. 1915 – The May 14 Revolt takes place in Lisbon, Portugal. 1918 – Cape Town Mayor, Sir Harry Hands, inaugurates the Two-minute silence. 1931 – Five unarmed civilians are killed in the Ådalen shootings, as the Swedish military is called in to deal with protesting workers. 1935 – The Constitution of the Philippines is ratified by a popular vote. 1939 – Lina Medina becomes the youngest confirmed mother in medical history at the age of five.

#Events

[foodbulgaria]

Catholic Church in the Middle Ages

It is not necessary to enter on one of the most difficult problems in history to decide how far the development and organisation of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages were worth the price that civilisation paid in moral, intellectual, and in material loss. Still less can we attempt to justify such Crusades as that which established the Latin kingdom in Constantinople, or the Crusade to crush the revolt of the Albigensian heretics, and all the enormous assumptions of Innocent in things temporal and things spiritual. But before we decide that in the thirteenth century civilisation would have been the gainer, if there had been no central Church at all, let us count up all the great brains of the time, with Aquinas and Dante at their head, all the great statesmen, St. Louis, Blanche of Castile, in France; Simon de Montfort and Edward i., in England, and Ferdinand HI., in Spain; Frederick n. and Rudolph of Hapsburg, in the Empire,—who might in affairs of state often oppose Churchmen, but who felt that society itself reposed on a well-ordered Church.

Temporary expedient

If the great attempt failed in the hands of Innocent III, surely one of the finest brains and noblest natures that Rome ever sent forth — and fail it did on the whole, except as a temporary expedient — it could not succeed with smaller men, when every generation made the conditions of success more hopeless. The superhuman pride of Gregory IX., the venerable pontiff who for fourteen years defied the whole strength of the Emperor Frederick IL, seems to us to-day sofia city tour, in spite of his lofty spirit, but to parody that of Hildebrand, of Alexander HI., and Innocent HI. And when we come to Innocent iv. (1243-1264), the disturber of the peace of the Empire, he is almost a forecast of Boniface. And Boniface himself (1294-1303), though his words were more haughty than those of the mightiest of his predecessors, though insatiable ambition and audacious intrigue gave him some moments of triumph, ended after nine years of desperate struggle in what the poet calls ‘the mockery, the vinegar, the gall of a new crucifixion of the Vicar of Christ.’ Read Dante, and see all that a great spirit in the Middle Ages could still hope from the Church and its chiefs — all that made such dreams a mockery and a delusion.

When Dante wrote, the Popes were already settled at Avignon and the Church had entered upon one of its worst eras. And as we follow his scathing indignation, in the nineteenth canto of the Inferno, or in the twenty-seventh of the Pamdiso, we feel how utterly the vision of Peter had failed to be realised on earth.

But for one hundred years before, all through the thirteenth century, the writing on the wall may now be read, in letters of fire. When Saladin forced the allied kings of Europe to abandon the conquest of the Holy Sepulchre, and Lion-hearted Richard turned back in despair (1192), the Crusades, as military movements, ended. The later Crusades of the thirteenth century were splendid acts of folly, of anachronism, even crime. They were ‘magnificent, but not war’ — in any rational sense. It was Europe that had to be protected against the Moslem — not Asia or Africa that was to be conquered. All through the thirteenth century European civilisation was enjoying the vast material and intellectual results of the Crusades of the twelfth century. But to sail for Jerusalem, Egypt, or Tunis, had then become, as the wise Joinville told St. Louis, a cruel neglect of duty at home.

It was not merely in the exhaustion of the Crusading zeal that the waning of the Catholic fervour was shown. In the twelfth century there had been learned or ingenious heretics. But the mark of the thirteenth century is the rise of heretic sects, schismatic churches, religious reformations, spreading deep down amongst the roots of the people. We have the three distinct religious movements which began to sap the orthodox citadel, and which afterwards took such vast proportions — Puritanism, Mysticism, Scepticism. All of them take form in the thirteenth century — Waldenses, Albigenses, Petrobussians, Poor Men, Anti-Ritualists, Anti-Sacerdotalists, Manichaeans, Gospel Christians, Quietists, Flagellants, Pastoureaux, fanatics of all orders. All through the thirteenth century we have an intense ferment of the religious exaltation, culminating in the orthodox mysticism, the rivalries, the missions, the revivalism, of the new allies of the Church, the Franciscans and Dominicans, the Friars or Mendicant Orders.

#Catholic Church in the Middle Ages