Reconsidering our view of medieval Catholic Europe

[ITR_champion]

Many posters on this board and elsewhere appear to hold a certain impression about Catholic Europe in the middle ages. They assume that it was a time of ignorance and stagnation, with no progress in technology, learning, or standards of living between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance over a thousand years later. If there was any innovation in the time period, it occurred in other civilizations and gradually migrated to Europe.

I believe that this view has it completely backwards. Medieval Catholic Europe was actually a hotbed of invention and technological progress, which carried it from lagging behind other civilizations at the start of the middle ages to being the most advanced civilization in human history before the Renaissance started. There are two books that I’d recommend on the subject: The Medieval Machine, by Dr. Jean Gimpel, and The Victory of Reason, by Dr. Rodney Stark, which document some of the progress that occured in medieval western Europe.

Inventions that didn’t come from Asia. First of all, many people have been lead to believe that important inventions of the middle ages weren’t invented in Europe, but rather in China and then gradually made their way to Europe. However, a lot of these claims either aren’t true or don’t tell the whole story. For example:

Gunpowder. The Chinese were the first to invent gunpowder, but for centuries used it for fireworks. Medieval China had some cannons but not many. Recent research has shown that cannons were used widely throughout Europe by the early 1300’s, making it unlikely that Europe got gunpowder from China, and more likely that it was invented separately in Europe. Europeans were also much more innovative in inventing smaller, better cannons and eventually hand-held firearms.

The compass. Again the Chinese may have invented the compass but they didn’t make much use of it except for ceremonial purposes. The Europeans had the compass by the eleventh century, so they cannont have gotten it from China; they must have invented it separately. They also made better use of it, for instance using it to navigate at sea; the medieval Chinese, oddly enough, never did so.

Paper. Paper has been around since ancient times but in all ancient civilizations it was rare and expensive, because they did the work of pulping plant fiber to make paper by hand. Someone in the Middle Ages came up with the bright idea of using a water mill to pulp the fiber, and since that time paper has been cheap and plentiful. One reason why literacy was higher in late-medieval Europe than elsewhere in the world was simply that western Europe had more paper.

Stirrups. It’s much easier to stay on a horse if you have stirrups, particularly if you’re wearing heavy armor. They were invented separately in China and Europe as early as the seventh century.

More importantly, there were an enormous number of inventions that only occurred in western Europe, including most of the ones that allowed the emergence of modern society.

Innovations in agriculture. Roman ploughs only raked the soil. Sometime in the sixth or seventh century, someone in Europe invented the heavy, wheeled plough that actually turned over the soil, thus opening up a great deal more land to agriculture. Around the same time, they invented a superior horse collar that fit the horse’s shoulders rather than its neck. This allowed a single horse to pull the heavy ploughs, making the operation vastly more efficient. Medieval Eurpoeans invented crop rotation, fish farming, and many other improvements. They also experimented with cross-breeding animals and plants much more than the Romans did, devising better varieties. Because of this, the percentage of human labor that had to be dedicated to agriculture declined sharply in the middle ages, and folks had more time for everything else.

Innovations in the clothing industry. We don’t know exactly when or where, but the spinning wheel, the foot-powered loom, and the metal carding machine all emerged from medieval Europe. In addition, just as with paper, Europeans came up with the idea of ‘fulling’ (i.e. pounding) plant fibers by mills rather than by hand. This made the cloth-making process much cheaper and lead to higher-qaulity products. In fact, medieval Europe was probably the first society where virtually everyone could afford at least one set of clothes. New technology also allowed a much greater variety of styles, and new types of dyes provided additional colors.

Innovations in power. The Romans had water mills but built very few, partly because they had the inferior undershot variety. In the Middle Ages, Europeans invented superior overshot mills, and by the tenth century thousands were in business all across western Europe. Medieval Europeans also built much larger dams than had ever been built before, giving them much more water power and making it more reliable. They also used windmills much more often than anyone else ever had. Much of the modern-day Netherlands was underwater until it was drained by wind power.

Innovations in transportation. The Romans had carts, but driving them could be a harrowing experience. For starters, they had no brakes; those were invented in the middle ages. Carts couldn’t even turn until the invention of the swivel system in the middle ages. Lastly, the Romans could only hook up a few animals abreast, while medievals figured out how to hook up scores of them in single- or double-file. For ancient monuments such as the Pyramids, stone was moved by human power. In medieval Europe, stone for castles and cathedrals and other buildings was moved by animal power instead. The middle ages saw equally many innovations in sea travel, most importantly the replacement of flat-bottomed ships with round-bottomed ships. Lastly, in Roman times ships were loaded and unloaded by hand. The middle ages saw the introduction of larger, more mobile crains and hoists.

Other innovations. Medieval Europeans also broke new ground in mining, refining of metals, lens-making, clock-making, and many other areas.

So, as I see it, we should not look down on Catholic medieval Europeans for being backwards and ignorant, but rather praise them for a period of innovation the likes of which had never been seen before in human history.

[Captain_Amazing]

@ITR_champion

Gunpowder. The Chinese were the first to invent gunpowder, but for centuries used it for fireworks. Medieval China had some cannons but not many. Recent research has shown that cannons were used widely throughout Europe by the early 1300’s, making it unlikely that Europe got gunpowder from China, and more likely that it was invented separately in Europe. Europeans were also much more innovative in inventing smaller, better cannons and eventually hand-held firearms.

I thought the two most common theories were that gunpowder either came west on the Silk Road or was brought to Europe in the 13th century by the Mongols.

[wevets]

@ITR_champion

Recent research has shown that cannons were used widely throughout Europe by the early 1300’s, making it unlikely that Europe got gunpowder from China, and more likely that it was invented separately in Europe. Europeans were also much more innovative in inventing smaller, better cannons and eventually hand-held firearms.

Since the Islamic world and India have gunpowder recipes from the 1240-1280 time period, why do you think that Europe having gunpowder in the 1300s means they invented it independently?

[Simplicio]

@Captain_Amazing

I thought the two most common theories were that gunpowder either came west on the Silk Road or was brought to Europe in the 13th century by the Mongols.

Those are the most common theories. Likewise the most common theory for paper was that in came to Europe from China via arab-held areas of Spain. And the stirrups were brought to Europe via Turkish invaders.

The OP is overstating his case. Europe did make technological advances during the high Middle-Ages (which I think most people are pretty much aware of), but by trying to claim that basically every new technology 7th-13th century as European, he’s just making a silly caricature of that idea.

Plus to believe in the OP’s theories, you kind of have to think Europeans were a weird kind of retarded, ignoring technologies used by their neighbors for a few decades despite those technologies usefulness, just so they could invent them “independently”.

[ITR_champion]

The argument, as I understand it, is that historians now have evidence of gunpowder being used in remote parts of Europe such as northern Germany and Poland in the aerly 1300’s, whereas history books a couple generations back would say that most western Europeans weren’t using gunpowder until the 1400’s. This would supposedly make it unlikely that gunpowder came to Europe from Asia and the Middle East, as if so Italian traders would presumably have been the first to bring it to western Europe and it would have spread gradually to other places.

[fumster]

I like the idea that moving from using gunpowder for fireworks to using it for cannons is an example of how European culture was superior.

[Tamerlane]

Others have addressed gunpowder, which seems unlikely to have been an independent European development. But another potential bone of contention is…

@ITR_champion

Stirrups. It’s much easier to stay on a horse if you have stirrups, particularly if you’re wearing heavy armor. They were invented separately in China and Europe as early as the seventh century.

Stirrups are useful, but probably less of a profound invention than was once argued. They did not, for example, usher in the age of the heavily armored knight. The Persians and others were using heavy shock cavalry long before paired, hard stirrups were in use.

As to them being “invented” in Europe, that’s highly arguable. The earliest European archaeological finds are from 7th century Avar sites, but there were probably not invented in situ. The earliest paired metal stirrups seem to come from 4th century China ( however they may not have invented them either ).

In general I agree the phrase the “Dark Ages” for early medieval Europe in particular is a bit obsolete. But I’d be wary of straying too far in the other direction as well - I don’t think medieval European innovation can be accurately assessed as “the likes of which has never been seen before in human history.”

[Simplicio]

@ITR_champion

The argument, as I understand it, is that historians now have evidence of gunpowder being used in remote parts of Europe such as northern Germany and Poland in the aerly 1300’s, whereas history books a couple generations back would say that most western Europeans weren’t using gunpowder until the 1400’s. This would supposedly make it unlikely that gunpowder came to Europe from Asia and the Middle East, as if so Italian traders would presumably have been the first to bring it to western Europe and it would have spread gradually to other places.

I don’t think any history book claims Europeans didn’t have gunpowder till the 1400’s. Roger Bacon wrote down a receipie for it in the 13th century in one of his books, and he also was friends with the French ambassador to China.

And of course, the Arabs not only had gunpowder by the 13th century, but they were using it to kill Europeans.

@sh1bu1

I like the idea that moving from using gunpowder for fireworks to using it for cannons is an example of how European culture was superior.

China used gunpowder for military operations.

[John_Mace]

@sh1bu1

I like the idea that moving from using gunpowder for fireworks to using it for cannons is an example of how European culture was superior.

Eh. I don’t agree with the OP completely, but he did say “technology” in his first paragraph. Did you miss that?

Yeah, the idea that they were “Dark Ages” where nothing much happened except plagues and death seems to be a common misconception. However, that is not to say that the civilizations in the East did not have their time of ascendancy either.

The OP would be better served if he cited some of his claims. They look more like wishful thinking than actual facts.

[ITR_champion]

@Simplicio

The OP is overstating his case. Europe did make technological advances during the high Middle-Ages (which I think most people are pretty much aware of), but by trying to claim that basically every new technology 7th-13th century as European, he’s just making a silly caricature of that idea.

The main thing that motivated this thread was quotes like this one, from this thread:

The daily life of your 99th percentile human from the time of the earliest civilizations and up until the 19th century was one of rigorous, daily toil. If you were in the elite, then your life was better, but still the quality of life was largely consistent from the nobles of ancient Egypt and the Monarchs of 13th century Europe.

There was some minor advancement in construction techniques, some advancement in metallurgy, etc. But even still, by and large, the quality life was largely consistent.

That seems to be the attitude taken by most Straight Dope users and most other people, though certainly not by everyone. It matches up pretty well with what i was taught when I was in school. And that’s the particular instance of misinformation that I’m trying to address with this thread.

@Simplicio

Plus to believe in the OP’s theories, you kind of have to think Europeans were a weird kind of retarded, ignoring technologies used by their neighbors for a few decades despite those technologies usefulness, just so they could invent them “independently”.

Well, ‘neighbors’ is a bit of a stretch, I think. While it would be wrong to think of people in the middle ages as completely insular and carefully walling themselves off from outside ideas, it would be equally wrong to overstate the amount of interaction between western Europe and the Byzantine and Islamic empires. On the particular issues of gunpowder and stirrups I’ll agree there may be some plausbile theories for them spreading from Asia rather than originating Europe. The point is not that only Europeans could invent things, but rather that they were on the whole much more able to innovate. As for paper, I’m not arguing that Europeans invented it; they didn’t. I’m just saying that they invented the paper mill that greatly eased production of paper. Mostly, though, I’m looking at inventions that emerged solely in Europe.

The particular question of why Europeans invented so much, I think it’s basically a question of a different social system. Stark actually documents instances where clockmaking and more efficiently metallurgy emerged in medieval China, and then for some reason the Chinese Emperors decided that these things were a threat and needed to be destroyed. Europeans had both the intellectual freedom to innovate and the guaranteed property rights which let them keep profits from their enterprises. (Though for both these things, there was variation in how strong these rights were at various places in Europe.) Lastly, while all ancient civilizations were slaves civilizations, western Europe was not. It was legal to keep non-Christian prisoners of war as slaves but in practice this didn’t occur widely. In a slave civilization, the fastest way to do any task is to just have slaves do it. But when you have to hire laborers and negotiate their wages, suddenly there’s a financial motivation to do things as efficiently as possible and to invent machines that minimze labor.

[Kobal2]

@ITR_champion

The argument, as I understand it, is that historians now have evidence of gunpowder being used in remote parts of Europe such as northern Germany and Poland in the aerly 1300’s, whereas history books a couple generations back would say that most western Europeans weren’t using gunpowder until the 1400’s. This would supposedly make it unlikely that gunpowder came to Europe from Asia and the Middle East, as if so Italian traders would presumably have been the first to bring it to western Europe and it would have spread gradually to other places.

Crusaders could have brought it back from the Levant, no ? The Reconquista and Crusades were good melting pots for Christian and Muslim cultures, whenever the butchery was put on hold for a while.

It is also possible the Poles and Lithuanians got it from the Rus and Khazars who themselves would have gotten it from the Mongols. The Golden Horde got around a bit.

[Simplicio]

@ITR_champion

The main thing that motivated this thread was quotes like this one, from this thread

The blurb you quoted doesn’t seem to have much to do with the Medieval world in particular, as opposed to all pre-modern civilizations. And I think its accurate, most people in the pre-modern world spent most of their time laboring in farms, whether in China, Mesoamerica or Europe.

The point is not that only Europeans could invent things, but rather that they were on the whole much more able to innovate. As for paper, I’m not arguing that Europeans invented it; they didn’t. I’m just saying that they invented the paper mill that greatly eased production of paper. Mostly, though, I’m looking at inventions that emerged solely in Europe.

Paper mills in China and the Islamic world pre-date those in Europe.

Lastly, while all ancient civilizations were slaves civilizations, western Europe was not…

Yes it was

[woodstockbirdybird]

I couldn’t care less about what the Catholic Church was like 800 years ago. I’m more concerned with them spreading ignorance and covering up for child rapists today.

[Strassia]

@ITR_champion

The main thing that motivated this thread was quotes like this one, from this thread:

That doesn’t seem to address your point at all. That quote is talking about the quality of life and none of the innovations you mention really do much for quality of life. They make for more powerful armies or better ways to make money, but they really don’t help many people live longer or better lives. If the paper mill actually lead directly to increased literacy and more books and learning, that could have been in your favor, but it seems to me that it took the printing press to really bring that about.

That seems to be the attitude taken by most Straight Dope users and most other people, though certainly not by everyone. It matches up pretty well with what i was taught when I was in school. And that’s the particular instance of misinformation that I’m trying to address with this thread.
Well, ‘neighbors’ is a bit of a stretch, I think. While it would be wrong to think of people in the middle ages as completely insular and carefully walling themselves off from outside ideas, it would be equally wrong to overstate the amount of interaction between western Europe and the Byzantine and Islamic empires. On the particular issues of gunpowder and stirrups I’ll agree there may be some plausbile theories for them spreading from Asia rather than originating Europe. The point is not that only Europeans could invent things, but rather that they were on the whole much more able to innovate. As for paper, I’m not arguing that Europeans invented it; they didn’t. I’m just saying that they invented the paper mill that greatly eased production of paper. Mostly, though, I’m looking at inventions that emerged solely in Europe.

The particular question of why Europeans invented so much, I think it’s basically a question of a different social system. Stark actually documents instances where clockmaking and more efficiently metallurgy emerged in medieval China, and then for some reason the Chinese Emperors decided that these things were a threat and needed to be destroyed. Europeans had both the intellectual freedom to innovate and the guaranteed property rights which let them keep profits from their enterprises. (Though for both these things, there was variation in how strong these rights were at various places in Europe.) Lastly, while all ancient civilizations were slaves civilizations, western Europe was not. It was legal to keep non-Christian prisoners of war as slaves but in practice this didn’t occur widely. In a slave civilization, the fastest way to do any task is to just have slaves do it. But when you have to hire laborers and negotiate their wages, suddenly there’s a financial motivation to do things as efficiently as possible and to invent machines that minimze labor.

I think you are overstating the whole human rights aspect. I think it would be more accurate to say that the lack of a central European authority had more to do with it. The Chinese emperor could ban a technology and both make it stick and not lose his empire to the neighbor who embraced it. In Europe that was never the case. Who could enforce a ban?

[Simplicio]

I’m flipping through wikipedia, and they support very few of your claims for Medieval European inventions. The romans had crop rotations and the heavy wheeled plow. The spinning wheel was around in China and the Islamic world before Europe. Fulling mills were apparently invented and persia and brought back to Europe by the Crusaders.

Thats about as far as I got when I got bored.

Which isn’t to say the Europeans didn’t invent anything during the period, or improve on others inventions. But the conventional wisdom that most technology transfer went East to West seems pretty solid, at least going by wikipedia.

[villa]

@ITR_champion

The particular question of why Europeans invented so much, I think it’s basically a question of a different social system. Stark actually documents instances where clockmaking and more efficiently metallurgy emerged in medieval China, and then for some reason the Chinese Emperors decided that these things were a threat and needed to be destroyed. Europeans had both the intellectual freedom to innovate and the guaranteed property rights which let them keep profits from their enterprises. (Though for both these things, there was variation in how strong these rights were at various places in Europe.) Lastly, while all ancient civilizations were slaves civilizations, western Europe was not. It was legal to keep non-Christian prisoners of war as slaves but in practice this didn’t occur widely. In a slave civilization, the fastest way to do any task is to just have slaves do it. But when you have to hire laborers and negotiate their wages, suddenly there’s a financial motivation to do things as efficiently as possible and to invent machines that minimze labor.

You are aware of the structure of feudalism, aren’t you? Where serfs were tied to the local barons by law, and were required to provide him with military and work service?

And if the Catholic Church was such a spur to innovation, why did the huge industrial advances later come in Protestant countries?

[Captain_Amazing]

@villa

You are aware of the structure of feudalism, aren’t you? Where serfs were tied to the local barons by law, and were required to provide him with military and work service?

To nitpick, that’s manorialism, not feudalism.

[villa]

Wouldn’t it be considered a part of the feudal system? I haven’t heard of manorialism specifically…

[ITR_champion]

@Simplicio

The blurb you quoted doesn’t seem to have much to do with the Medieval world in particular, as opposed to all pre-modern civilizations. And I think its accurate, most people in the pre-modern world spent most of their time laboring in farms, whether in China, Mesoamerica or Europe.

The only point of that quote was that the person who made it must have been unaware of innovations that occurred in the middle ages.

Paper mills in China and the Islamic world pre-date those in Europe.

Hand-powered paper mills do. Water-powered ones originated in Europe, as I said.

[Captain_Amazing]

@villa

Wouldn’t it be considered a part of the feudal system? I haven’t heard of manorialism specifically…

They’re related, but you can have one without the other. Feudalism is the relationship between landowners. I have land, you want land, so I give you some of my land, and in exchange you take an oath to support me in legal disputes, be loyal to me, and fight for me if I ever need you to, and that system developed in Europe a few hundred years after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.

Manorialism deals with the legal rights the owner of the land has over the people on the land, and the relationships between the person who owns the land and the people who work the land. That includes things like serfdom, and what rights the landowner has over the serfs, and so on. That developed before the fall of the Roman Empire, as the old Roman villas, due in part to high taxes on commercial activity, started to become selfsufficient.