Question 10

I did learn a lot in this class. I learned a lot of historical information and things that were important in history. I liked when we did interactive projects like the Renaissance fair because I felt that I learned more from the hands on experience. It was also very fun! I also learned how to use the internet to find great information by only using good and reliable resources. It is important to use good ones or you will have the wrong information. Another great thing I learned was how to right academic essays and APA format. Overall, this was a great class and I enjoyed it greatly. Thanks for a great class Mr. Wojo!!

Question 9

A Renaissance Man is a man who portrays the evidence from the renaissance as the re-birth and had many different works that influenced the time period. Michaelangelo proudly created the new art form of having perspective in his art. This was new to the time period. Also, he did some very significant pieces. The statue of David was completely made out of marble and it showed the human body as a beautiful thing. This was very popular during the Renaissance (Figure 1). The next important thing he did was the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel which still exists today and is very beautiful (fig. 2).  The third important thing he did was the pieta (fig. 3).

Figure 1

http://wheretwilightdwells.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/statuedavid.jpg

Firgure 2:

http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sistine/0B-Ceiling.jpg

Figure 3:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Michelangelo%27s_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned_edit.jpg/300px-Michelangelo%27s_Pieta_5450_cropncleaned_edit.jpg

Question 8

Romanesque vs Gothic
Gothic: The buildings had more design put into them. They had thinner walls and big beautiful windows. They had stained glass too. They wanted to have big windows to let in the light of God.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2a/Saints-Michel-et-Gudule_Luc_Viatour.jpg/387px-Saints-Michel-et-Gudule_Luc_Viatour.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Bruxelles_Notre-Dame_du_Sablon.jpg/449px-Bruxelles_Notre-Dame_du_Sablon.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e4/Saint_Vitus_Cathedral_in_Prague.jpg/450px-Saint_Vitus_Cathedral_in_Prague.jpg

Romanesque:

These buildings were very strong and fortified for protection against barbarians. They had little windows and few entrances.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/F09.Anzy-le-Duc.0214.JPG/800px-F09.Anzy-le-Duc.0214.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/F06.Talmont.2312.JPG/400px-F06.Talmont.2312.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Bamberg_Dom_au%C3%9Fen_detail.jpg/450px-Bamberg_Dom_au%C3%9Fen_detail.jpg

Question 7

1. The Black Death started in the spring when there were many dead bodies then the disease spread from them to the West. Its spread meant that the Gods wanted this for retribution .

2. The black death looks very gross. People bleed from their nose and huge tumors near their groin or armpits are formed and then they spread through the body. Black dots form on their bodies. Because the disease was very contagious it was hard to treat.

3. If a disease on the scale of the Black Death were to occur now in the United States, we would have a much firmer grasp on what to treat. Today, there is so much technology and studies that we can figure stuff out pretty quickly. I think they would develop some type of medicine or vaccine to stop the disease and they would have to keep the infected people separate from others so it doesn't spread.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/boccacio2.html

Question 6

https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=dfbxt8x4_43c2cxgcft

Dear Readers,

       These Crusades were are fighting in are not right. I feel that because I have won this area, I fought for this land, and I have conquered it, I deserve the land and can share it with among who I wish. These wars are unjustified and Richard the Lionhearted is killing some of my people in trying to get the holy land. I feel that if I can have the power, I will share generously with the people who want to obey me. If Richard the Lionhearted would like to surrender to me and give up in fighting for the holy land, I will be willing to share Jerusalem and let his people freely come to visit. 

       All of the fighting is making the holy land a place of harm and killing when it is a holy land of peace. All of our saviors have come here and we need to embrace it instead of fighting over it. It would be best if you just let me own this land  and we can all work together in keeping it safe. I will keep the land harm free when people surrender to me and come to visit happily.

Sincerely, 

Saladin

Question 5

“Is it fair to say the United States is the modern day equivalent of the Roman Empire?”


The United States today is not the equivalent of the Roman Empire today for a variety of reasons. The United States is more civilized, the laws are more serious, and the government is different. The Roman Empire was still very strong, but in the end it did collapse and it did not have the civilization and knowledge we have today. Today, the government has a firmer grasp on people and anything going crazy. The United States republic is a very smart way to have a leader instead of one emperor. Even though the Roman Empire was something great, the United States have built off of their ideas to an even better government.

The United States is a relatively civilized country. Over the years, it has gotten even better because the government has better control of whats right and wrong. The United States deals with situations in a pretty good way. "Law Arrests 70 at Wakarusa" said a title of an article in the Times Record newspaper (Micham Raache). This article shows how the United States can deal with the problem by just arresting and speaking to the people who committed the crime. In the Roman Empire, they would have probably killed or exiled the guilty members of the incident. This all has to to with the civilization of the country. 

Not only is the country more civilized, but also had better laws. The Roman Empire probably had few laws that they really enforced. "April 8 Incident Brings DUI Charge for Trooper," says the Anchorage Daily News (Casey Grove).This is showing that there are laws that you cannot drink and drive because its unsafe. In the Roman Empire, they probably did not care about drinking habits and everyone could have drink unsafely. The laws are here to keep the people safe.


The final main difference is that the United States and the Roman Empire had different government types. The United States had a republic which helps keep everything equal and everybody to have freedom. The Roman Empire's emperor created havoc because too many people would want to be in rule and the classes. "Boren Won't Seek Re-Election in 2012," says Peter Urban from Time Record (Peter Urban). This shows the different types of elections and if someone is not doing a good job, they will not be elected. In the Roman Empire, people would fight for power and it caused trouble. In the U.S. you cannot fight or you simply will not be chosen.


The United States has many great qualities in its government that over power the Roman Empire's government. Even though the Roman Empire was very strong, it did have its flaws and the United States tried to correct those in their government. Today, the United States has a very strong government and it has succeeded in keeping it powerful.














Urban, Peter. (2011, June 8). Boren Won't Seek Re-Election in 2012. Times Record. front cover.

Grove, Casey. (2011, June 8). April 8 Incident Brings DUI Charge for Trooper. Anchorage Daily News. front cover

Raache, Micham. (2011, June 8). Law Arrests 70 at Wakarusa.Times Record. front cover

Question 4

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/06/01/is-ubs-headed-downtown/?ref=sept112001

This article is one that would represent Thucydides historical views because he wrote a lot about a very specific topic. This article has some opinion in it, which Thucydides had to have done too because he knew so much about one idea. The article above is showing a good amount of information on the one topic just like Thucydides would have done.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/nyregion/conde-nast-publications.html?ref=sept112001

This article represents one that Herodotus would do because it is a lot of general information. This contains many facts about the topic instead of writing a detailed paragraph or review on the topic. Herodotus wrote a lot of general information about many different topics. It isn't always the best information because it is very general.

Question 3

The Egyptian and Greek ways of death were very different. The Egyptians were very into the afterlife and the soul continuing to live, whereas the Greeks were very interested in the burial of the body, having a very nice funeral or ceremony, and having an important grave stone. Also, the Greeks believed that the afterlife was a very bad place in the underworld protected by Hedes.

The Egyptians made a very big deal out of the death. They would take the body and mummify it by wrapping it many garments of cloth and then put it in a tomb. The organs were put in jars because thats where the soul was and it would rise to the afterlife where it was tested. The God Horus would weigh your soul against a feather and if it was lighter, it could move on to the afterlife where they would happily move on http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/ebod/).

The Greeks would have a huge ceremony for a death. The funerals were very extravagant and they made nice gravestones. They believed that the afterlife was a bad thing because they would go to the underworld with Hedes. People would rather stay and live a poor unhappy life then go to the underworld.http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/dbag/hd_dbag.htm

Question 2

The Agricultural Revolution was very important for many different reasons. It allowed the cities to grow, more technology to be made, domestication of animals, easier for trade, and cultures began to become more developed in their ways of life. Without the agricultural revolution, the world may not have been as developed today.
     History world says, "But between about 8000 and 350 B.C., increasing numbers of humans shifted to dependence on cultivated crops and domesticated animals for their subsistence. By about 7000 B.C., their

tools and skills had advanced sufficiently for cultivating peoples to support towns with over one thousand people, such as Jericho in the valley of the Jordan River and Catal Huyuk in present-day Turkey" (http://history-world.org/neolithic.htm). Once animals were domesticated, they could be used for many different ways instead of people having to do as much. Now that there were settled down communities, people could trade their goods to others who don't have them and for what they need. This could make people want to live near each other to trade quicker creating developed cities. Now they can create many tools and equipment for the animals to help do their work too.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&ll=32.62087,27.158203&spn=40.112049,79.013672&t=h&z=4&msid=206207503437094631209.0004a5349bfc78fac7669

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl

(Im not sure which link above will work^^)

A society in the future where agricultural has collapsed would be very bad. It would affect the world negatively in a few ways. Human health, the uses of natural resources, trade, and animal domestication could all change in a bad way. It was the agricultural revolution that started all of these things and a agricultural downfall that could ruin or get rid of all of these things.

A world in the future may be much more diverse in mechanical technologies, so they would not have much use for animals. Also, the people may not eat farm grown food as much and just go to processed stuff because its easier and they have access to it. This could make people get fatter. With all of the mechanical things being used, natural resources like coal and oil will get used up very quickly. The U.S. needs to see whats going on and prevent an agricultural decline or we will be in trouble.

Question 1

http://todaysmeet.com/westcivexam1

Middle Ages Art V.S. Renaissance Art

The art from the middle ages seemed to be more of a scene portraying events.

http://www.stjohns-chs.org/general_studies/philosophy/sophieimages/middleages.jpg

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS5V8m8Gd7olmYg7UDD4KGFP1X7xtokBwt_uzwpdoCK06Kw17UatA&t=1

The art from the Renaissance was different because it was not as religious and there were more self-portraits. Also, there was more detail in the picture  by making it more of a 3-D look. There was better backgrounds and shading. 

http://teachers.saschina.org/dbister/files/2011/05/italian_renaissance_art1.jpg

http://www.renaissance-spell.com/Images/Renaissance-Artists/Renaissance-Artists-Ben.jpg

The Worst Job in History

     All of the horrible historical jobs that we saw were very awful, but I think being the barber/surgeon would have been the worst. This person had to perform many tasks that not only were crazy and may not have worked, but also just downright disgusting. As the barber, they used very sharp knives to cut the hair because they didn't have scissors and if they cut someone that would have been really gross. Also, they had to sometimes do amputations and other surgeries on people who are wide awake because they didn't have medicine to put people asleep. Another gross thing is how they had to give them medicine. Sometimes, if the person was very sick and couldn't take medicine through there mouth, they had to take it at the other end with a metal funnel that they stuck inside a person about 6 inches. There is no way on earth I would be able to handle doing any of this
   
     The second job I think was really gross was the wise woman. She also had to do many tasks that were very weird because of what they believed in. If someone had a very sore throat, they would tie worms on a string around your neck until the worms died and once they died, you throat should have been healed. If a person had warts, she would have to cut a live eel's head off and rub the blood all over the wart then bury the eel's head and eventually the wart would go away. Also, there was a stew she made to cure people. This was made with worms, bread, and another ingredient all chopped, mushed, and stirred up then cooked over a fire. I cannot believe people would actually drink this because I do not even like touching worms.

         All of the jobs were horrible and I am very happy I live in my time period now where there are computers and good useful medicines without disgusting procedures.

The History of Sophie's Freshmen Year

       Sophie Centi came to the John Carroll school not knowing what was going to happen. The year began off when she played varsity soccer. She had a lot of fun and learned more as the season went on. Soccer is her favorite sport so it was good to start the year off with. Her most embarrassing memory was from soccer where the seniors made the new players were hideous bathing suits on the beach and boardwalk on the New Jersey trip. It was basically humiliating, but also fun because she was doing it with the other new people on the team and getting a good laugh. During this time, she was obviously also learning a lot in school. Sophie always had to look at her schedule because she couldn't remember what class came next and the confusing mod system. Eventually, she got it under control and only had to check her schedule sometimes. Sophie was also battling her brother's embarrassing attacks in the hall ways. It was funny, but quite unexpected. The first quarter went by fast and soccer was soon over. She then tried out for the basketball team! Sophie played junior varsity basketball and she had a great time! The coach and teammates were very fun. Before many games, she and her friends would take a cold walk to Italian Sensation's and stop by Smoothie King for the way back. Before she knew it, exams were here!! Studying like crazy, Sophie wanted to get really good grades on the tests. Unfortunately, her grades were not as good as she wanted, but they did not diminish her overall grade so she was not too terribly upset. Once basketball season ended, lacrosse was here! Sophie played junior varsity lacrosse and enjoyed the season, but was also very focused on her club and state soccer teams. Lacrosse season sadly only lasted about two months. Sophie had a great time with her friends and all of the fun games they played at practice. Once lacrosse ended, Sophie had more time to relax, but still focused on soccer. The year is almost over now and exams are coming soon. She will be studying very hard because she wants to do better this time.
       Overall, my freshmen year was pretty good! Although I had to battle the "freshman duties" for sports and jokes from her brother, it really was not as bad as some people make it sound. Sophie was very happy to receive first honors the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd quarters and hopefully she can pull of the 4th quarter too. Even though she did have a good year, she is done with school and can not wait until summer! She had so much planned and does not want it to go by too fast. Sophie had a great freshmen year and met tons of knew people!

Middle Ages: Final Draft

Importance of the Middle Ages

            The Middle Ages was a time period that lasted from about the 5^th to the 15^th century. During this time, the people had to be more protective because of all of the barbaric attacks thus being more sophisticated. Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and Peter Abelard were all men who were great philosophers and theologians. If one was to understand the Middle Ages, they would know the philosophical impacts of Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and Peter Abelard.  These three men and their philosophy had nothing to do with the Middle Ages.

            Thomas Aquinas, a philosopher and a theologian, was considered one of the best of all times. He was also a fantastic priest. “As a theologian he was responsible in his two masterpieces, the Summa theologiae and the Summa contra gentiles, for the classical systematization of Latin theology; and as a poet he wrote some of the most gravely beautiful Eucharistic hymns in the church's liturgy” (St. Thomas Aquinas). Saint Thomas Aquinas was a man who is still brought up today because of his impressive acts during the Middle Ages. He used his knowledge to learn more and to teach others. At this time period, the church was very important to all people. Saint Thomas Aquinas’s books were read and the things he taught were learned by many. Thomas Aquinas shows his importance because he is still brought up today in the church and liturgy.

            Peter Abelard was also a notable philosopher and theologian. On top of that, he was a logician too. “Peter Abelard (1079-1142) was one of the great intellectuals of the 12th century, with especial importance in the field of logic” (Bellows). As a young kid, Peter was constantly being encouraged to learn more from his father. He continuously debated and learned more about different topics. During his teenager years, he called him a peripatetic because he wandered throughout France learning from numerous amounts of people. Because he was so knowledgeable, people would gather around him to hear him lecture about the many topics he knew. The people were even more interested in his speeches when he brought in a deeper religious side of his thoughts because of his previous time in a monastery. Peter Abelard made a huge impact on the people during the Middle Ages

Even though all three of these men are important, Saint Augustine set the ground work for Saint Thomas Aquinas and Peter Abelard. Saint Augustine influenced the world with a strong religious standpoint that still exists today. “Augustine gradually became acquainted with Christian doctrine, and in his mind the fusion of Platonic philosophy with revealed dogmas was taking place” (Portalié, E.). Saint Augustine’s magnificent work in the ancient times led a beginning to a continuation of philosophical teachings in the Middle Ages. After he converted to Christianity, he started getting into academic topics because he was debating other people. This directed Saint Augustine in a path of writing many influential books including, the Confessions, De Civitate Dei (On the City of God), On Christian Doctrine, and, On the Trinity. The majority of his teachings were very religious. Saint Augustine did not directly affect the Middle Ages, but without his earlier work, Thomas Aquinas and Peter Abelard would have been less knowledgeable.

The Middle Ages was a time period of much philosophy and thought. Saint Augustine, Peter Abelard, and Saint Thomas Aquinas are all characters that affected this era in a positive way. Without the understanding of some of the huge accomplishments from these men, one cannot fully see the importance of some of the modern philosophies that originated from the Middle Ages. Not only did the Middle Ages consist of a strong interest in philosophy, theology, and logics, but people were also deeply into Christianity. Saint Augustine, Peter Abelard, and Saint Thomas Aquinas all portrayed excellent thoughts about both topics.

·         St. Thomas Aquinas. (2011). Biography.com. Retrieved 10:18, May 3 2011 from http://www.biography.com/articles/St-Thomas-Aquinas-9187231

·         Thomas. (n.d.). Thomas Aquinas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved May 3, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas

·         Bellows, H. A. (n.d.). Medieval Sourcebook: Peter Abelard: Historia Calamitatum [Full Text]. FORDHAM.EDU. Retrieved May 3, 2011, from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/abelard-histcal.html

·         Portalié, E. (1907). Life of St. Augustine of Hippo. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved May 4, 2011 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02084a.htm

Middle Ages; Rough Draft

Importance of the Middle Ages

            The Middle Ages was a time period that lasted from about the 5^th to the 15^th century. During this time, the people had to be more protective because of all of the barbaric attacks thus being more sophisticated. Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and Peter Abelard were all men who were great philosophers and theologians. If one was to understand the Middle Ages, they would know the philosophical impacts of Saint Augustine, Saint Thomas Aquinas, and Peter Abelard.  These three men and their philosophy had nothing to do with the Middle Ages.

            Thomas Aquinas, a philosopher and a theologian, was considered one of the best of all times. He was also a fantastic priest. “As a theologian he was responsible in his two masterpieces, the Summa theologiae and the Summa contra gentiles, for the classical systematization of Latin theology; and as a poet he wrote some of the most gravely beautiful Eucharistic hymns in the church's liturgy” (St. Thomas Aquinas). Saint Thomas Aquinas was a man who is still brought up today because of his impressive acts during the Middle Ages. He used his knowledge to learn more and to teach others. At this time period, the church was very important to all people. Saint Thomas Aquinas’s books were read and the things he taught were learned by many. Thomas Aquinas shows his importance because he is still brought up today in the church and liturgy.

            Peter Abelard was also a notable philosopher and theologian. On top of that, he was a logician too. “Peter Abelard (1079-1142) was one of the great intellectuals of the 12th century, with especial importance in the field of logic” (Bellows). As a young kid, Peter was constantly being encouraged to learn more from his father. He continuously debated and learned more about different topics. During his teenager years, he called him a peripatetic because he wandered throughout France learning from numerous amounts of people. Because he was so knowledgeable, people would gather around him to hear him lecture about the many topics he knew. The people were even more interested in his speeches when he brought in a deeper religious side of his thoughts because of his previous time in a monastery. Peter Abelard made a huge impact on the people during the Middle Ages

Even though all three of these men are important, Saint Augustine set the ground work for Saint Thomas Aquinas and Peter Abelard. Saint Augustine influenced the world with a strong religious standpoint that still exists today. “Augustine gradually became acquainted with Christian doctrine, and in his mind the fusion of Platonic philosophy with revealed dogmas was taking place” (Portalié, E.). Saint Augustine’s magnificent work in the ancient times led a beginning to a continuation of philosophical teachings in the Middle Ages. After he converted to Christianity, he started getting into academic topics because he was debating other people. This directed Saint Augustine in a path of writing many influential books including, the Confessions, De Civitate Dei (On the City of God), On Christian Doctrine, and, On the Trinity. The majority of his teachings were very religious. Saint Augustine did not directly affect the Middle Ages, but without his earlier work, Thomas Aquinas and Peter Abelard would have been less knowledgeable.

The Middle Ages was a time period of much philosophy and thought. Saint Augustine, Peter Abelard, and Saint Thomas Aquinas are all characters that affected this era in a positive way. Without the understanding of some of the huge accomplishments from these men, one cannot fully see the importance of some of the modern philosophies that originated from the Middle Ages. Not only did the Middle Ages consist of a strong interest in philosophy, theology, and logics, but people were also deeply into Christianity. Saint Augustine, Peter Abelard, and Saint Thomas Aquinas all portrayed excellent thoughts about both topics.

·         St. Thomas Aquinas. (2011). Biography.com. Retrieved 10:18, May 3 2011 from http://www.biography.com/articles/St-Thomas-Aquinas-9187231

·         Thomas. (n.d.). Thomas Aquinas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved May 3, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas

·         Bellows, H. A. (n.d.). Medieval Sourcebook: Peter Abelard: Historia Calamitatum [Full Text]. FORDHAM.EDU. Retrieved May 3, 2011, from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/abelard-histcal.html

·         Portalié, E. (1907). Life of St. Augustine of Hippo. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved May 4, 2011 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02084a.htm

Architecture Final Draft

Romanesque and Gothic Architecture

The churches in each society were the best way to see a great example of Romanesque or Gothic design. They were the most important building in the area because Christianity had really taken over. The theology of the centuries that each style was in had a great impact on the final results and the making of the buildings. The churches changed tremendously from the Romanesque buildings in the 9^th, 10^th, and 11^th centuries to the Gothic churches in the 12^th, 13^th, and 14^th centuries. The Romanesque buildings were very fortified and dark for protection, whereas the Gothic buildings were open to the light and intricately designed to feel the power of God.

The Romanesque buildings had a different motive than the Gothic buildings which creates a huge distinction between the two. Romanesque churches had small windows for their fortification (see figure 2). Because the buildings wanted to be so protected, they had a minimum amount of windows. Also, they were small and sometimes had bars in front of them. Not only were there few windows, but there was not many entrances either. The people did whatever they could to defend themselves from any barbarians planning an attack. Gothic windows were large and sophisticated to let plenty of light in (see figure 5). This building has almost all the walls covered in stained glass. The theology was that the church needed to have big windows to let in all the light from God. Everything revolved around having the presence of God’s light to guide them. The stained-glass was colorful and had pictures of important people or just designs in general. The Gothic windows were much more attractive.

Romanesque and Gothic buildings differed in their internal style too. The Romanesque churches were not very elegant, just strong and sturdy (see figure 3). Huge columns supported the building, but they were mostly plain. Because the church had to be so sturdy, they could not put as much design into them. Arches were located all through-out the building in areas such as windows, above doors, or between arches. All of the arches were curved or rounded at the top. The Gothic churches had designs and art everywhere (see figure 6). The columns, walls, and ceilings all had carved pictures or art. The stained- glass windows added elegance because they were so delicately made with numerous colors. A distinct difference from the Romanesque buildings was that the Gothic buildings had a pointed arch at the top instead of the rounded Romanesque ones. Romanesque buildings wanted protection whereas Gothic buildings wanted beauty.

The most important difference between the two different styles was the make-up of the building. Romanesque churches were built with very thick and strong materials (see figure 1).  They had huge, bulky columns and the walls were made from heavy materials. Also, there were large towers used for lookout or to ring a bell for everybody to hear. The Romanesque buildings were built like this for a very specific reason. Their theology was that they needed to be protected from all barbarians if there was going to be an attack. Because the church was the center of the peoples’ lives, it was the place they could go for protection during this period. Gothic buildings were very opposite. The walls were thin and the church itself was not as wide (see figure 4). The walls had intricate designs and everything was elegant. The people believed the building should look sophisticated because they wanted to attract the light of God. There was huge stained-glass windows with beautiful art painted into them. During this time, protection was not what they wanted, but a great admirable building was chosen.

Even though both Romanesque and Gothic buildings were designed very differently, both were developed from their theology from the time period. The people believed something and that is how they created their buildings. Romanesque churches may not have been as attractive, but they were thick and sturdy to keep out any barbarians. Gothic buildings were not about fortification, but elegance and letting in all of God’s light with the artistic stained-glass windows. The theology of each style was almost opposite, but it is what affected the style of the center of their lives, the church.

Figure 1:

Abazia di San Vittore (Genga), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abaziasanvittorefrasassi.jpg, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 2:

English:Castle Rising Castle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Castle-rising-castle.JPG, photograph taken in 2008.

Figure 3:

Side aisle and gallery of the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, Spain, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SantCompostela21.jpg, photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 4:

Cathedral of Reims, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reims_Kathedrale.jpg, photograph taken in 2006

Figure 5:

Sainte Chapelle - Upper Chapel, Paris, France, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sainte_chapelle_-_Upper_level.jpg photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 6:

King's College Chapel, Cambridge, England, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%A4chergew%C3%B6lbe_KingsCollege.jpg, photograph taken in 2007

Architecture Rough Draft

Romanesque and Gothic Architecture

The churches in each society were the best way to see a great example of Romanesque or Gothic design. They were the most important building in the area because Christianity had really taken over. The Romanesque buildings were very fortified and dark, whereas the Gothic buildings were open to the light and much thinner walled. This is what the people believed was needed for the churches.  Even though Romanesque and Gothic churches were very different, they had one huge similarity. Both architectural designs were based off of the theology at the time period. The Romanesque and Gothic architecture had nothing to do with the theology of the time period or what people thought was right for the buildings.

The Romanesque buildings had a different motive than the Gothic buildings which creates a huge distinction between the two. Romanesque churches had small windows for their fortification (see figure 2). Because the buildings wanted to be so protected, they had a minimum amount of windows. Also, they were small and sometimes had bars in front of them. Not only were there few windows, but there weren’t many entrances either. The people did whatever they could to defend themselves from any barbarians planning an attack. Gothic windows were large and sophisticated to let plenty of light (see figure 5). This building has almost all the walls covered in stained glass. The theology was that the church needed to have big windows to let in all the light from God. Everything revolved around having the presence of God’s light to guide them. The stained-glass was colorful and had pictures of important people or just designs in general. The Gothic windows were much more attractive.

Romanesque and Gothic buildings differed in their internal style too. The Romanesque churches were not very elegant, just strong and sturdy (see figure 3). The columns were thick to support the building, but they were mostly plain. Because the church had to be so sturdy, they could not put as much design into them. Arches were located all through-out the building in areas such as windows, above doors, or between arches. All of the arches were curved or rounded at the top. The Gothic churches had designs and art everywhere (see figure 6). The columns, walls, and ceilings all had carved pictures or art. The stained- glass windows added elegance because they were so delicately made with numerous colors. A distinct difference from the Romanesque buildings was that the Gothic buildings had a pointed arch at the top instead of the rounded Romanesque ones. Romanesque buildings wanted protection whereas Gothic buildings wanted beauty.

The most important difference between the two different styles was the make-up of the building. Romanesque churches were built with very thick and strong materials (see figure 1).  They had huge, bulky columns and the walls were made from heavy materials. Also, there were large towers used for lookout or to ring a bell for everybody to hear. The Romanesque buildings were built like this for a very specific reason. Their theology was that they needed to be protected from all barbarians if there was going to be an attack. Because the church was the center of the peoples’ lives, it was the place they could go for protection during this period. Gothic buildings were very opposite. The walls were thin and the church itself was not as wide (see figure 4). The walls had intricate designs and everything was elegant. The people believed the building should look sophisticated because they wanted to attract the light of God. There was huge stained-glass windows with beautiful art painted into them. During this time, protection was not what they wanted, but a great admirable building was chosen.

Even though both Romanesque and Gothic buildings were designed very differently, both were developed from their theology from the time period. The people believed something and that’s how they created their buildings and churches. Romanesque buildings may not have been as attractive, but they were thick and sturdy to keep out any barbarians. Gothic buildings were not about fortification, but elegance and letting in all of God’s light with the artistic stained-glass windows. The theology of each style was almost opposite, but it is what affected the style of the center of their lives, the church.

Figure 1:

Abazia di San Vittore (Genga), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abaziasanvittorefrasassi.jpg, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 2:

English:Castle Rising Castle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Castle-rising-castle.JPG, photograph taken in 2008.

Figure 3:

Side aisle and gallery of the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, Spain, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SantCompostela21.jpg, photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 4:

Cathedral of Reims, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reims_Kathedrale.jpg, photograph taken in 2006

Figure 5:

Sainte Chapelle - Upper Chapel, Paris, France, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sainte_chapelle_-_Upper_level.jpg photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 6:

King's College Chapel, Cambridge, England, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%A4chergew%C3%B6lbe_KingsCollege.jpg, photograph taken in 2007

Roman Empire: Final Draft

The Roman Empire

                At one point, the Roman Empire was very powerful. It was leading the whole western part of the world and had such a strong government. As soon as there was just a few bad people in office, things started going down-hill. The Era of the Soldiers was one of the worst times for the Roman Empire because of the selfish people. Also, barbaric attacks could not be stopped by Constantine, and the empire had separated. Sometimes, when something gets too strong, it can take a nose dive and be gone in a flash. There were many events that affected Rome in a negative way; eventually they all built up to the decline of the Roman Empire.

                Rome diminished itself with all of the internal problems it had. There were too many people fighting for power on one side, and then the other side was the plebeians fighting for more equality. The plebeians always thought that they were not being treated fairly and this caused an uprising. The patricians had the ability to make more decisions, have a bigger say in the empire, and easily over power the plebeians. BBC History said, “The system was weighted to give more influence to the votes of the wealthy” (Beard). Patricians always had the better end of situations in the empire and the plebeians were easily outspoken. This created much controversy among the people and did not help the Roman Empire at all. The people in the empire were fighting a lot of the time.

The Roman Empire was so strong for such a long time because they had smart people in power. In the last few hundred years of rulers, there were some crazy people in office. Two brothers, named Caracalla and Gaeta, were amongst the worst, especially because they are what led the Roman Empire into a disastrous age of rulers called the Era of the Soldiers. This was 100 years of horrible leaders all fighting for power. Christopher Lightfoot said, “Almost all, having taking power upon the murder of the preceding emperor, came to a premature and violent end” (Lightfoot). There were 37 different people in power and out of this number, 25 of them were assassinated.  Because everyone was fighting for power, they were removed very quickly. This all weakened the Roman Empire even more.

Once Constantine became emperor, things began to get better for a while. During his reign, there began to be a change. He named the city Constantinople after himself, and it was the new center of the empire. Rome was fading away and changing into Eastern and Western Europe. Constantine was struggling to hold it all together because barbarians had started to continuously attack and it kept on getting worse. “What began as a controlled resettlement of barbarians within the empire’s borders ended as an invasion” (Lightfoot). Different cultures were bombarding the empire from all directions. The Western part of the empire had been taken over. Constantine was able to hold on to the Eastern side, but it evolved into what was called the Byzantine Empire. Because the city of Rome was actually located in Western Europe, it had definitely fallen.

                In the last years of Rome’s Empire, there was way too much turbulence to keep things stable. The main thing that caused Rome’s decline was the struggle and fighting for the correct and intelligible person to lead the whole empire. The Era of the Soldiers was such a long period of negative incidents that it was too hard to fix and led to more disaster. Even some of the best emperors, such as Constantine, could not sustain the barbarian’s threats and the empire could not stay in sync. The Roman Empire had truly fallen once it split into Eastern and Western Europe, then the Western fraction had been clearly taken over by someone else.

Works Cited:

·         Beard, Mary. "BBC - History - The Fall of the Roman Republic." BBC - Homepage. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2011. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/

·         Lightfoot, Christopher. "The Roman Empire (27 B.C.–393 A.D.) | Thematic Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History | The Metropolitan Museum of Art." The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York: metmuseum.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2011. <http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/roem/hd_roem.htm>

Rough Draft: April 12

The Roman Empire

                At one point, the Roman Empire was very powerful. It was leading the whole western part of the world and had such a strong government. As soon as there was just a few bad people in office, things started going down-hill. The Era of the Soldiers was one of the worst times for the Roman Empire. Sometimes, when something gets too strong, it can take a nose dive and ruin it all. There were many events that affected Rome in a negative way, eventually, they all built up to the decline of the Roman Empire. Rome didn't fall, it just changed into something different.

                When Caracalla and Geta, sons of Septimius Severus, were in power, things were very bad. The two brothers had a strong dislike for each other and their rule consisted of many fights between the brothers. Caracalla had ordered a “damnatio memoriae” on Geta. This meant everything with Geta’s name, face, or anything representing him was erased. After that, Caracalla got Geta assassinated, which led to his own assassination. This stirred up the Romans and there were many disputes among the people. When the leaders of the country are causing more trouble in the people, there is going to be a big problem.

                Once the two brothers were out of office, there was no one else to take over. This is what led to the Era of the Soldiers, a 100 year time period of horrible leaders all fighting for power. During this time period, there were 37 different people in power. Out of this number, 25 of them were assassinated. Some people served in office for as little as three weeks! Knowing this, the people in office were not smart, powerful, or well-liked among the people which caused the short ruling period. This also didn’t help Rome at all. Rome was just becoming less and less powerful during all of this commotion and the people doubted their own empire on a greater scale.

                After the Era of the Soldiers, Diocletian came into leading Rome. He actually had some good plans, but they didn’t work out properly. Diocletian developed the tetrarchy. This was a system of four leaders. There were two people that were the highest in power, and then the other two were below them, but still in office. This is similar to a president and vice president role. This did not follow through because there were too many people fighting for the highest rank in power. Soon after that, Diocletian was not in power any more, but Constantine was. After winning a huge battle, he freely accepted Christianity in Rome. Constantine also founded the city called Constantinople. This ended up being the new center of the “Roman” empire. This is when Rome started really fading away because now the Roman Empire was divided into Eastern Europe, also known as Byzantine, and Western Europe. Rome was still there, but the Roman Empire was not. Rome was now just a place in Italy. It wasn’t ruling the whole Mediterranean Sea and it wasn’t the most powerful.

                In the last years of Rome’s Empire, there was way too much turbulence to even keep things going. The main thing that caused Rome’s decline was the struggle and fighting for the correct and intelligible person to lead the whole empire. The Era of the Soldiers was such a long period of negative incidents that it was too hard to fix. In the long run, it was probably a good thing that the Roman Empire fell so the rest of the world could expand and widen the many cultures.

Bibliography:

·         "Rome.info > Fall of the Roman Empire, decline of ancient Rome." Rome.info > Rome tourist information, Ancient Rome travel guide. Version 2003-2009. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <http://www.rome.info/history/e

·         century, the late 3rd, and the city of Rome. "Decline of the Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De