Here's my Crusades THEME (not to be confused with the ESSAY[like I did and almost had a heart attack])

Constantinople was the jewel of the Byzantine Empire, and not only that but the capital of Byzantium. The capital city should not have felt any threat from the fourth crusaders since they were a Christian city and they were not the target of the crusade. Unfortunately, the fourth crusade marked the disintegration of not only the crusading ideals but the Byzantine Empire itself.

The Fourth Crusade ultimately began with the death of Saladin in 1193. Before his death, Richard the Lionhearted had made an agreement with him allowing Christian pilgrims to venture into Jerusalem. After his death, his empire began to dissolve and Pope Innocent III saw the opportunity in the weakness of Saladin’s former empire. He sent out the word that he was going to form a new crusade on August 15, 1198. This first call for a crusade was met with a flat response so he sent out a second message on December 31, 1199 and received a much better response. During that time the Muslims had control over Jerusalem and Pope Innocent III sought to change that. His message was mainly direct toward the nobility of Europe and he got an overwhelming response mainly from the nobility in France and the Netherlands. Not only that, but the Venetians agreed to help transport the crusaders. The transportation came at a price, though; the crusaders had to agree to attack a Christian city called Zara on the Dalmatian coast. The crusade, having failed to recruit anyone from Innocent III’s first attempt, seemed to keep falling flat from the start. While around 13 thousand crusaders met up at the port city of Venice, they still managed to fall short from the needed amount of money. This lead to the contract of attacking Zara and paying the money from the spoils of sacking the city. Strangely though, Pope Innocent III did not agree to the plan of attacking Zara, since it was papally protected and went so far as to threaten the crusaders with excommunication, which was the equivalent of a social outcast in that time. They set sail on October 1202 from Venice and would meet up with the other crusaders that chose not to go to Venice. Even with the threat of excommunication looming over their heads, the Venetian ships and others that joined up with them sacked Zara and it ended up that Innocent III did not follow up on his threat and temporarily agreed with their reasoning. So the crusaders continued their invasion of the Christian city. From that point, the Fourth Crusade went downhill, creating the reputation of the most diabolical crusade yet.

The crusaders then began intertwined in Byzantine politics and the power struggle for ruling the Byzantine Empire. The crusaders at this point were already known for being especially violent but the Fourth Crusade stands out as the most unnecessarily violent. The real ransacking of Constantinople began in the July of 1203 and began between fighting between the Venetians, the original crusaders and the Byzantines for who should rule the Byzantine Empire. Even though Constantinople was well fortified, it did nothing against the misguided determination of the crusaders. “Christian crusaders took gold, silver, jewelry, and precious furs while the Catholic clergy accompanying the crusaders stole as many relics as they could find” (Spielvogel. 261). Also, the buildings inside the city were made out of wood, reducing the city to a pile of fire fuel. The fighting continued through the following months and the ruined buildings were left as they were and consequently the citizens of the city rioted because of the lack of food and housing, resulting in even more fires and fighting. Another siege came upon what was left of Constantinople in April of 1204. This ransack would be the deciding factor for the city, though they might not have known it then, it is painfully obvious now. The worst of the ransacking came on during this wave of destruction. “As the crusaders laid wast to Constantinople, they set fires, pillage the churches and shops of the city, looted the riches of private and public buildings, and raped and assaulted countless members of the diverse population of Christian Europe's wealthiest and most sophisticated city” (ABC CLIO). Not only did they loot private and public buildings, and have the clergy men join them, they also looted Eastern Orthodox churches. Then, the Byzantine Empire completely dissolved as Constantinople fell into the hands of crusaders.

After the crusaders had finished looting Constantinople they managed to gain a shaky hold onto the Byzantine Empire. It had been divided into states and each ruled by different crusaders. The Venetians had managed to take control of Crete and the trading, and the chief state was headed by Count Baldwin of Flanders. The whole empire was re-birthed and renamed the new Latin Empire. It did not last long at all and the rulers of each state started bickering over power. Eventually, the Byzantine Empire was recaptured by Michael Paleologus but the crusaders had done their damage and it never returned to its former strength and power and was overthrown by the Ottoman Turks in 1453. As well as destroying the Byzantine Empire, Pope Innocent III’s grace ran out and he excommunicated the crusaders when word got back to him of the destruction caused by them. The crusaders also ransacked the Eastern Orthodox churches, starting a bitter rivalry between the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches and even eight hundred years later the heat of the rivalry continued, but only until eight centuries later in 2004 did the head of the Roman Catholic church apologize to the head of the Eastern Orthodox church and the rivalry ended. The following crusades also followed in the disastrous footsteps of the Fourth Crusade and fell miserably short in their goals. Though The Crusades in general had some positive effects, specifically the Fourth Crusade tore down the ideals and fell short in its objectives. It did not even make it to Jerusalem and did not overthrow Muslim rule and recapture Jerusalem. Though, not all of the effects of the Fourth Crusade were negative. It did help unite the Byzantine and Classical way of thinking and in general united the two cultures, though the process by which the uniting was achieved was rather unfortunate. Also, during the looting and burning of the city many works of literature were lost as well as other historical artifacts.

By far, the cons outweigh the pros in the Fourth Crusade. Even from the beginning, with money shortages and threats, that were also followed up on, of excommunication, the Fourth Crusade appeared to be doomed from the very start. That is, the second start, since Pope Innocent III’s first call for a crusade fell flat and received a disappointing response. From there, they sacked Constantine, destroyed the Byzantine Empire and left behind the crusading ideals of renewing the Christian Empire. The crusaders also were excommunicated by Pope Innocent III and did not even make it to Jerusalem, much less recapture it. Originally intended to destroy the Muslims, the Fourth Crusade backfired terribly and resulted in the destruction of not the Muslims, but a powerful Christian empire.

A basic summary of The Crusades

The Crusading Ideal and Appeal

In the High Middle Ages, the people of Europe experienced a massive wave of religious enthusiasm. The outlet for this surge of religious enthusiasm ended up being a massive movement called “The Crusades.” Spielvogel describes the Crusades as “... a curious mix of God and warfare...” (Spielvogel. 257). The Crusades were essentially a war against the unbelievers in an attempt to convert them. Religious enthusiasm was not the only incentive behind The Crusades. If the people went and fought in The Crusades, they were granted forgiveness from all of their sins. The Crusades were and outlet for the surge of religious enthusiasm and changed the civilization of Western Europe and had far reaching effects that are visible even today.

The Crusade that started them off was the “Peasant’s Crusade” also known as the “Crusade of the Poor.” Pope Urban II’s speech started off this crusade, talking about the need to reclaim the Holy City and take revenge on the murderers of Christ, lighting a fire underneath the people. There was an overwhelming response, especially among the peasants earning the crusade its name. Essentially, the crusade was not a huge success and many of the peasants sacked houses, stealing whatever they could, and persecuted Jews because of their misguided interpretation of them being the murderers of Christ from what they heard in Pope Urban II’s speech. Though some of the motives behind the Peasant’s Crusade may have been misguided, it did help spark the other crusades. The First Crusade proved to be more successful and was compromised of knights recruited by Pope Urban II from the warrior class in western Europe and especially France. Pope Urban II placed his faith more in this crusade and believed that men who were trained in the art of war would be more successful. Many of the men recruited were motivated by religious enthusiasm and the potential of power. In 1097 the group of warriors headed out to Constantinople The Emperor Alexius did not trust the warriors or their motives so he gathered up his own band, not from mercenaries, but rather from western nobles with their own motives and he made the crusaders swear allegiance to him. After 1098 when they captured Antioch they moved down to the Holy City and massacred it and took control in 1099. After more success in the Palestinian lands, the allegiance to Alexius was forgotten and the land was divided into four states; Antioch, Edessa, Tripoli and were all under the rule of the kingdom of Jerusalem. Eventually the states started to fall apart and the Muslims took advantage of their weakness. Edessa, the first to fall, collapsed in 1144 and the Muslims reclaimed control over it. This led to the Second Crusade. St. Bernard of Clairvaux organized the Second Crusade and aimed his message towards the knights. St. Bernard managed to enlist the help of King Louis VII and Emperor Conrad III of Germany. Despite that, the Second Crusade was still poorly organized, did not have cooperation from the leader of Jerusalem and failed to get rid of the Muslims.

The rest of the crusades were not much more successful. Once the Holy City of Jerusalem fell in October of 1187, the religious enthusiasm was once again set on fire. Emperor Frederick Barbarossa of Germany, Richard I the Lionhearted of England and Philip II Augustus King of France took charged and organized the Third Crusade. Emperor Frederick had an overwhelming response in Asia Minor and he greatly contributed to the success of the crusade. He also contributed to its failure when he accidentally drowned while swimming in a river one day. After his death the Third Crusade was lacking a strong leader and even though they succeeded in the costal areas, they fell apart when they tried to move inland. The Fourth Crusade experienced a decline in the morals and the original cause of The Crusades. Pope Innocent III supported the Fourth Crusade and directed his message towards the nobles. Many nobles from the Netherlands and and France responded and joined the crusade. Unfortunately, the crusading morals greatly disintegrated during the Fourth Crusade. “Christian crusaders took gold, silver, jewelry, and precious furs while the Catholic accompanying the crusaders stole as many relics as they could find.” (Spielvogel pg. 261). They also sacked Constantinople and became twisted into the politics of the Byzantine empire and fell. The Crusades spiraled downward from that point on.

Even though the Crusades were not successful in their original movement, they did manage to impact the economy and the civilization as a whole. Economically, they helped the Italian port cities grow and overall enhanced the revival of trade. They also helped eliminate young warriors that would have ended up fighting each other. Unfortunately, they did massacre the Jewish people and failed in their original movement. Their short term effects were not as obvious or as great as the far-reaching effects of The Crusades. Architecturally, castles were built for fortification and many of them are still standing today, giving us insight to what life was like back then. Since The Crusades spread people to new areas, cultures, ideas and knowledge spread with them. Geographic knowledge was spread as well as medical knowledge and warfare skills.

The Crusades, though they did not succeed in their original goal, did help impact our society now. The Crusades provided an outlet for the religious movement and enthusiasm and helped spread the cultures and ideas through the Crusades. During that time, they did not appear to be a huge success but later on, and even today, it is evident that they impacted society. Originally, the motives were pure, though carried out in the wrong way, but over time the motives became corrupted and lead to the downfall and overall short term failure of The Crusades. Long term, however, The Crusades impacted the culture by the spread of it through the people and provided a release for the religious fervor that swept over Europe.

Love and Virtue; an explication of Love and Nobility

Here is my final draft for the poem explication. I forgot to post my rough draft, but that's okay because this one is better.

Guido Guinizelli, the author of the poem “Love and Nobility”, was born around 1230 to an Italian merchant family and died in 1276. Guido was the founder of the organization and poetry movement, the Dolce Stil Nuovo translated as the “sweet new style.” He was one of the first poets to speak of a woman in divine terms, breaking the tradition of the times and turning a new page in poetry. Dante being strongly influenced by Guido, called him his “literary father.” In “Love and Nobility”, Guido addresses love, nobility, virtue, and what the heart should possess in order to obtain a love worthy of the approval of Christ. Guido Guinizelli’s most famous poem, “Love and Nobility”, assesses love and what the heart must have to possess a true love. The literal meaning of the poem is not very obvious since it mostly deals with the philosophical side of love, quickly diving into the metaphorical meaning of the poem. In the last stanza, however, the narrator talks of a hypothetical situation of when he is being judged for his improper love for the woman and his defense. In this hypothetical scenario, the narrator is imagining himself in front of God on Judgement Day, and God is questioning him about his love for this woman, and the man is giving his defense. The narrator of “Love and Nobility” is a man talking about love to the woman he is in love with and what that kind of love should look like. The tone of the poem is didactic and it seems like he is teaching a class, and he even goes so far as to seem pedantic, going into every detail. The mood of the poem, especially in the last stanza in the hypothetical scenario, came off a defensive, like he was justifying his love for the woman.

“Love and Nobility” is a well structured, affecting the rhythm and flow of the poem. Each stanza is ten lines long but the line length varies from long to short, giving the poem rhythm when it is read. The stanzas are also well patterned, affecting the way the poem is read and giving it rhythm and flow when it is read. The second to last line in each stanza is shorter than all the rest and have a rhyming couplet at the end of each stanza. Also, in the first three stanzas, the second line contains a simile, but not in the fourth stanza, making the fourth stanza a transitioning point. The first three stanzas talk more about love and the last three stanzas talk more about nobility, reenforcing the fourth stanza transition. The first five stanzas seem like a lecture but the last stanza breaks the pattern and the narrator starts talking about a hypothetical situation, making it seem more casual and remorseful.

The hypothetical scene in the last stanza of the poem is unlike any of the others. The first five stanzas are talking about the ideals of a noble love, but then the narrator starts talking about being judged for his love of the woman. He knows that his love for the woman is wrong, but he has kept loving her anyway. This is the whole reason that the narrator is talking about love and nobility; because he wants to resolve and fix his love and make it acceptable in the sight of God. He knows that his former love is wrong and he started talking to the woman about changing it and making it acceptable. The last stanza is him talking to God about his love before he had the opportunity to change their love. His defense admits that before he thought abut changing his love, he thought that everything was okay. The last line of the poem says; “What harm occurred if my love in her was placed?” (line 60). This hypothetical scenario was taking place in his mind before his revelation about noble hearts and love, but then he realized the fault in his ways. The first five stanzas display his revelation about nobility and loving in a way that Christ would approve of.

Guido Guinizelli starts off his poem with the simile; “Love always repairs to the noble heart Like a bird winging back into its grove...” (lines 1-2). This first simile in the simile pattern means that love belongs in a noble heart. The second stanza focuses more on how the nobility and love gets inside of the heart. The imagery of the Sun and the newly introduced stars help the author portray the relationship between love and nobility. The Sun is not the objects that bestows the nobility into the heart, but rather what cleanses the heart of all it’s impurities, preparing the heart for nobility. The stars are the objects that bestow nobility into the heart, preparing it for love. “The value does not come down from the stars/ Until the Sun has blenched the stone all pure.”(lines 13-14). The connection between the Sun, the stars and the heart are similar to the relationships between the Father, the Son and humans. The Son came down and purified us from all of our sins, preparing us to be able to face the Father, similarly to the Sun in “Love and Nobility”. The Father is the stars in the poem that inject the heart with nobility. Then Guido compares the love between the Father and humans to the type of love that a woman and man should have. Connecting back the the Bible, the narrator is saying that we should love each other as we love Christ. The love between a man and a woman should mirror the love between the Father and humans. In line 22 Guido says; “...Like a waving flame atop a burning brand” (line 22), meaning that nobility not also belongs in a noble heart, but will stay in a noble heart. It could also convey that if love is used in the wrong way, could end up burning and harming someone in the process. Reenforcing this idea, he says; “Yet a nature which is still debased/ Greets love as water greets fire,/ With the cold hissing against the heat.”(lines 25-27). Like water and fire, love without nobility will never last. Guido also uses imagery to convey the meaning of his poem. In the fourth stanza he uses the images of the “Sun” and the “mud”;

“Sun beats against the mud the livelong day;/

Mud it remains; Sun does not lose its ray;/

The haughty one says: “I am noble by my tribe./”

He is the mud; Sun is the noble power.” (lines 31-34).

In this stanza, the Sun represents nobility in its purest form and the mud represents a man who claims to be noble, but in his heart, he is not sincerely noble. Even though the Sun beat down upon the mud, the mud did not change at all and never became noble, so the mud will never understand or have noble love. In the fifth stanza, Guido returns to talking about how the love between a man and woman should reflect the love of Christ in lines 47 through 49; “In the same way, in all truth, the beautiful lady/ Should behave, for in her eyes reflects the desire/ Of a noble man” (lines 47-49). When he says in the same way, he is referring back to earlier in the stanza when he was talking about God. Reflecting Christian morals, the narrator talks about how the love of a man and woman needs love, virtue and nobility.

In 1 Corinthians 13, known as the “Love Chapter”, talks about love and what virtues should accompany love, like patience and protection. Similarly, “Love and Nobility” talks about the virtues and nobility that should go with love to make it acceptable to Christ. “Love nestles deep inside nobility...For without virtue, heart has no noble worth.” (lines 8 and 38). So, love must have nobility, and nobility must have virtue, so love must also have virtue. In those two lines, Guido sums up the meaning of his poem. Christian virtues and nobility are the two necessities that a heart must have to possess a love that is acceptable to God.

The love in Love and Nobility by Guido Guinizelli portrays what true love should look like and how, in order to have a love approved by God, there must first be a noble heart. Not only that, but the nobility requires virtue. So, the love that is portrayed in Love and Nobility closely mirrors the love that is spoken of in the Bible and how the love requires virtue. Love must dwell in a noble heart, and a noble heart must have virtue, so to have a love that is true and approved by God, the love must be rooted in virtue.

Works Cited

1. “Love and Nobility.” The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces. Ed. Sarah Lawall and Maynard Mack. 7th ed. Vol. 1. New York, NY: W. W. Norton &, 1999. 1215-1216. Print.
2. Guido Guinicelli. Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. 6th ed. Columbia University Press. 2011.

Ebola Haemorrhagic Fever Biology Report

Ebola Haemorrahagic Fever Pathogen Project
The Ebola Haemorrahagic Fever, or Ebola for short, was first recognized as a virus in 1967. The first breakout that caused the Ebola virus to be recognized was in Zaire with 318 people infected and 280 killed. There are five subtypes of the Ebola virus, but only four of them affect humans. There are the Ebola-Zaire, Ebola-Sudan, Ebola-Ivory Coast and the Ebola-Bundibugyo. The fifth one, the Ebola-Reston, only affects nonhuman primates. The Ebola-Zaire was recognized on August 26, 1976 with a 44 year old schoolteacher as the first reported case. The Ebola-Sudan virus was also recognized in 1976 and was thought to be that same as Ebola-Zaire and it is thought to have broken out in a cotton factory in the Sudan. The Ebola-Ivory Coast was first discovered in 1994 in chimpanzees in the Tia Forest in Africa. On November 24, 2007, the Ebola-Bundibugyo branch was discovered with an approximate total of 116 people infected in the first outbreak and 39 deaths. The Ebola-Reston is the only one of the five subtypes to not affect humans, only nonhuman primates. It first broke out in Reston, Virginia in 1989 among crab eating macaques.
The Ebola virus is also a part of the Filoviridae family, along with Marburg, and contains a lipid envelope and has a single RNA strand. Ebolavirons are approximately 80 nanometers in width and vary in length. They also contain seven structural proteins that are surrounded by the lipid envelope that has an attached glycoprotein. During replication, it goes through translation but during transcription it stops after one or two genes so that on the 3 prime end it is completely transcribed but the 5 prime end is not transcribed and does not possess a 5-cap.
The Ebola-Zaire branch was the first to be recognized and has the highest death rate of 89 percent. The Ebola-Sudan subtype has a death rate of 53 percent, and the Ebola Haemorrhagic Fever virus as a whole having a 68 percent death rate. Since the Ebola virus has not been recognized for a long time, it cannot be said for sure how it is transmitted though it is believed to be zoonotic, meaning that it is transmitted by animals and from contact with the virus, making it spread quickly through family and friends. It also transmits itself nosocomially, where it can transmit quickly through a health care environment, like a hospital. This is especially dangerous in places like Africa, where the Ebola patients are treated without the proper gloves, masks and other protective gear and the needles are sometimes reused without being cleansed from the virus, spreading it quickly. Along with the easy which the Ebola virus spreads, the symptoms that go along with the virus make it difficult for doctors to treat and diagnose.
The symptoms of Ebola are a fever, headache, joint and muscle aches, vomiting, stomach pain, sore throat, diarrhea, weakness and occasionally read eyes, rashes, hiccups, and internal and external bleeding and since these symptoms are not specific to Ebola, it is difficult to clinically diagnose and can often be confused with other viruses. The ELISA testing, short for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and virus isolation are a couple of examples of the types of laboratory testing that can be done to diagnose and Ebola patient. Because of how easily it can be transmitted, it is extremely difficult to treat and there is no approved, official treatment. As of now, there is not standard treatment but usually the patients are given fluids and oxygen, have their blood pressure monitored and other necessary treatment. To prevent transmission and spreading the virus, the doctors use extreme caution and wear head to toe protective gear and isolate the patient. Even though the Ebola virus is common in Africa, there has been no known outbreak in the United States. Another difficulty facing scientists and the treatment for Ebola is that the natural reservoir for the virus unknown. The natural reservoir of a virus is it’s long term host of the virus. Another interesting fact about the Ebola virus is that it does not have a carrier state, which is where the virus is present in the body, but displays no symptoms but can still be spread. The Ebola virus’ incubation period, where the symptoms first start appearing, is not immediate but ranging from 2 to 21 days, making it even more difficult for doctors to successfully diagnose an Ebola patient.
Though there is no official vaccine for the Ebola virus, but US scientists have successfully developed a vaccine that worked on monkeys. They first injected eight monkeys with the vaccine and then later injected them with the Ebola virus. It protected all eight monkeys from Ebola and they remained completely healthy. The scientists are hoping that they will soon be able to make a vaccine that can work on humans.
The Ebola virus is an extremely deadly virus found in poorer countries, such as Africa, that can have up to a 90 percent death rate. Ebola-Zaire was he first of the five branches to be discovered on August 26, 1967 and is the most deadly. Since it was only discovered in 1976, scientists have not developed a complete understanding of the virus, such as it’s natural reservoir. The non-specific symptoms make it difficult to clinically diagnose, though there are laboratory tests that can be done to help diagnose patients. Ebola Haemorrhagic Fever also spreads quickly and easily, especially in hospitals where the proper safety precautions are not taken. Thankfully, scientists and doctors have made a successful vaccination that worked on monkeys and are working on one that will work on humans, hopefully helping decrease the dangerously high death rate and help save many people that may one day become infected.
Works Cited

1. Ebola virus disease. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_disease#Virology.
2. Fast Acting Ebola Vaccine Protects Monkeys. Science Daily (August 7, 2007). http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/08/030807075759.htm
3. Questions and Answers about Ebola Haemorrhagic Fever. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/mnpages/dispages/ebola/qa.htm
4. Ebola Virus. John W. King. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/216288-overview

The Great Divide; Constantine's influence on the church

Here is my FINAL draft (aka my hard copy) of my theme. At first, I thought I would not enjoy this theme at all, but it was actually surprisingly interesting, so don't be turned away by the title!

Constantine was the first Roman Emperor who declared himself to be a Christian, and therefore gave himself a unique position in the history books. Following his declaration of becoming a follower of Christ, he proceeded to involve himself heavily in the church. Constantine, though he had some positive effects on the church, also brought along many negative affects, such as false followers in the church, division, and heavy political involvement in the church.

Though Constantine did in fact make Christianity, along with other religions, tolerated and therefore eliminated persecution, his political involvement in the church was not a positive development. One article about Constantine says: “By granting toleration to the Christians, Constantine hoped to incorporate the bishops and priests into the imperial administration, thereby increasing his political power” (Jeffrey). Though Constantine expanded the church with bishops, he also secured his hold on his political status and gained the support of the Christians. He may have been a true Christian, and there is no real way to know if he was or wasn’t. Constantine was a politician first, figuring out ways to win over people and gain their support, and a Christian second. Also, when many people started to come into the church after the Edict of Milan, the church started to lose some of its identity. Constantine’s reaction was to assemble a group of people to fix the situation. The assembled group of people, known as the Council of Nicaea, helped form The Nicene Creed. “The resulting Nicene Creed, heavily influenced by Constantine, was on of the first definitions of Christian theology”(Jeffrey). Every Sunday, churches around the world still say the Nicene Creed; an amazing definition of Christianity and what it means. Why did the church need a Roman Emperor to tell them who they were? The following article says; “While it did not quell debate on the nature of Christianity, the Nicene Creed did illustrate the Roman Emperor’s control of the evolving church”(Jeffrey). If anyone was ever in doubt of Constantine’s hold on the church, the Nicene Creed was, and still is, the ultimate example. Not only had Constantine gotten a hold of the church but had now engraved himself into the church, making him invaluable to the church. He helped define the church starting with the Edict of Milan.

Before Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, Christians were ruthlessly persecuted and rejected, having gone through many trials. Many Christians buckled under the pressure, committed heresy and rejected Christ. Many died in martyrdom for their beliefs. It makes you wonder, what happened to the rest of them? The rest of the Christians that lived through all of that persecution became stronger in their faith and continued to remain in church, passing on their stories. Some may have left but many of them grew in their faith. When Constantine started favoring the Christian church, many people decided to make a wise, personal political choice; they flocked to the church. Except there was one problem, it was just that; a political move. Many of the people did not go to the church because they felt drawn to it; they went because their emperor favored the church and they wanted to be on his good side. “For them, the fact that the emperors declared themselves Christian, and that for this reason people were flocking to the church, was not a blessing, but rather a great apostasy”(González). Indeed it was a great apostasy because one of the benefits of Christianity was its small, close knit community, bound together by their faith. With all of these “believers” flocking to the church undoubtedly the communities were no longer as close knit as they were before. In this article, the author talks about the affects of people coming into the church after the Edict of Milan; “...people were flocking into the church in such numbers that there was little time to prepare them for baptism, and even less to guide them in the Christian life once they had been baptized” (26. González). Before, there were few people who would choose a life of persecution. Before the Edict of Milan that is exactly what Christians were choosing; a life of persecution, so they had other people to personally guide them. Even today, we are faced, especially in America, with the same problems. In 1701, a man named Thomas Bray helped found the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Though the name of the society is deceiving, the goal was not attract more people to Christianity, but train them for the mission field and to become ministers and, in general, to educate new members of the church on how to become a strong Christian. Thomas Bray helped start the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel because he noticed that the American faith was not as strong as it should be. (Society for the Propagation of the Gospel.). Many American Christians in modern day claim to be Christians only because it is the “national religion”, not because they actually have a passion for Christ. Similar to the American faith, Roman Christianity was also not as strong as it had been, and should have been. So, in response to this lack of faith and later division of the church, the Nicaean Council was called together to form a solution.

The division of the church was closely followed by the Nicene Creed, which was a failed attempt to patch together the church and unify it again. There was a group of people at that time called the Arians, who did not agree with certain aspects of the Catholic Church, and specifically the Catholic view on the Trinity. They broke apart from the Roman Catholic Church. To put it bluntly and simply; “Arianism divided the Catholic Church” (Arianism.). After this, the Nicaean Council gathered together; “The Nicaean Council, which upheld the Catholic view of the essential unity of the godhead, embodied the summary of the Catholic faith that formed the basis of the Nicene Creed, but the controversy continued for the next several decades”(Arianism.). The Nicaean Council held up the Catholic view of the church, but the whole reason Arianism formed was because they didn’t agree with the Catholic view of the church, and specifically the Trinity. The purpose of the Nicene Creed was to unify the church under one definition, but as stated in the previous article “...the controversy continued for the next several decades”(Arianism.). Things were never fully resolved and the church, even now, is still split up into different branches and into two differing groups; “Catholicism” and “Protestantism.” “Others with a negative reaction to the new state of affairs felt that the best course was simply to break communion with the church at large, ...which was to be considered sinful and apostate” (González). This “new state of affairs” would be Constantine’s influence on the church and his political hold on it and the “Others” would be the soon-to-be Arians, breaking away from the church. Not only did they break apart from the church, they committed a heresy by breaking away from it. For the Roman Catholic church, this meant complete rejection. Even if Constantine had not gotten ahold of the church, it would have probably divided eventually, but Constantine helped the division happen sooner. Then, by trying to fix it with the Nicaean Council, he just kept it apart. He tried to put everything together the Catholic way in the Nicene Creed, but that was the problem to begin with; the Arians did not agree with the Catholics. The Arians ended up creating their own “Creed” by taking certain aspects and phrases from the Nicene Creed and forming their Apostles Creed. In modern Christian Churches, most Protestants use the Apostles Creed and Catholics use the Nicene Creed. Even today, Protestants and Catholics are still separated by their beliefs as evident in the saying of their separate “Creeds”.

Though Constantine may have had good intentions, many of the influences he had over the church ended badly. The division of the church, though not entirely his fault, was brought on faster by him. The bringing of false followers into the church were brought into the church by him and his heavy political involvement. All three of these aspects degraded the church. Even today, we are still suffering from the effects the Constantine bought into the church.

Works Cited

1. "Arianism." World History: Ancient and Medieval Eras. ABC-CLIO, 2011. Web. 30 Oct. 2011

2. J.F., Matthews, and Nicol Donald MacGillivray. "Constantine I." Britannica Biographies (2010): 1. History Reference Center. EBSCO. Web. 30 Oct. 2011.

3. Bowman, Jeffrey. “CONSTANTINE I, THE GREAT.” Constantine I, The Great (2009). 1-3. History Reference Center. EBSCO. Web. 22 Oct. 2011

4. "Society for the Propagation of the Gospel." World History: The Modern Era. ABC-CLIO, 2011. Web. 30 Oct. 2011.

Constantine's influence on the church

This is my Rough Draft for my second theme, this time in history. Note the word ROUGH in Rough Draft.

Constantine was the first Roman Emperor who declared himself to be a Christian, and therefore gave himself a unique position in the history books. Following his declaration, in the form of The Edict of Milan, which ended Christian persecution, he proceeded to involve himself heavily in the church. Constantine, though he had some positive affects on the church, also brought along many negative affects, such as bringing on false followers, division among the church and heavy political involvement.

Though Constantine did in fact make Christianity, along with other religions, tolerated and therefore eliminated persecution, his political involvement in the church was not a positive development. In one article about Constantine, it says ; “By granting toleration to the Christians, Constantine hoped to incorporate the bishops and priests into the imperial administration, thereby increasing his political power” (Constantine I, The Great. Bowman, Jeffrey) Though Constantine expanded the church with bishops he also increased his hold and support on his political status. He may have been a true Christian, and there is no real way to know if he was or wasn’t, but he was a political person first. Before he became a Christian, he was a politician, figuring out ways to win the people’s support. Constantine was a politician first and a Christian second. Also, when many people started to come into the church after the Edict of Milan, the church started to lose some of it’s identity. Constantine’s reaction was to assemble a group of people to fix the situation. “The resulting Nicene Creed, heavily influenced by Constantine, was on of the first definitions of Christian theology”(Constantine I, The Great. Bowman, Jeffrey). Every Sunday, churches around the world still say the Nicene Creed, an amazing definition of Christianity and what it means, but why did the church need a Roman Emperor to tell them who they were? The following sentence in that article says; “While it did not quell debate on the nature of Christianity, the Nicene Creed did illustrate the Roman Emperor’s control of the evolving church”(Constantine I, The Great. Bowman, Jeffrey). If anyone was ever in doubt of Constantine’s hold on the church, the Nicene Creed is the ultimate example. Not only had Constantine gotten a hold of the church but had now engraved himself into it, making him invaluable to the church. He defined the church, slowly sunk into the church, and started with the Edict of Milan.

Before Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, Christians were ruthlessly persecuted and rejected and went through many trials. Many Christians buckled under the pressure and committed heresy and rejected Christ. Many died in martyrdom for their beliefs. It makes you wonder, what happened to the rest of them? The rest of the Christians that lived through all of that persecution became stronger in their faith and continued the church. Some may have left but many of them grew in their faith. So, when Constantine started favoring the Christian church, many people decided to make a wise, personal political choice; they flocked to the church. Except there was one problem; it was just that; a political move. Many of them did not go to the church because they felt drawn to it, they went because their emperor favored the church and they wanted to be on his good side. “For them, the fact that the emperors declared themselves Christian, and that for this reason people were flocking to the church, was not a blessing, but rather a great apostasy”(The Impact of Constantine. Justo L. González). Indeed it was a great apostasy because one of the benefits of Christianity was it’s small, close knit community, bound together by their faith. With all of these “believers” flocking to the church undoubtedly the communities were no longer as close knit as they were before. In this article, the author talks about how the faith degraded after the swarm of people coming into the church after the Edict of Milan; “... people were flocking into the church in such numbers that there was little time to prepare them for baptism, and even less to guide them in the Christian life once they had been baptized” (The Impact of Constantine. pg. 26 Justo L. González). Before, there were few people who chose a life of persecution, for before the Edict of Milan that is exactly what Christians were choosing, so they had other people to personally guide them. Even today, we are faced, especially in America, with the same problems. In 1701, a man named Thomas Bray helped found the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Though the name of the society is deceiving, the goal was not attract more people to Christianity, but train them for the mission field and to become ministers and in general, to educate Christians in how to become a strong Christian. The reason for this was because Thomas Bray noticed that American faith was not as strong as it should be. (Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. ABC-CLIO.) Many Americans Christians nowadays claim to be Christians because it is the “national religion” not because they actually have a passion for Christ. Similarly, Roman Christianity also started to become less faithful. So, in response, there was a group of people who decided to seek out their faith apart from the Catholic church, dividing it.

The division of the church was closely followed by the Nicene Creed, which was a failed attempt to patch together the church and unify it again. There was a group of people at that time called the Arians, who did not agree with certain aspects of the Catholic Church, and specifically the Catholic view on the Trinity. Because of this, they broke apart from the Roman Catholic Church. To put it bluntly and simply; “Arianism divided the Catholic Church” (Arianism. ABC-CLIO). After this, the Nicaean Council gathered together; “The Nicaean Council, which upheld the Catholic view of the essential unity of the godhead, embodied the summary of the Catholic faith that formed the basis of the Nicene Creed, but the controversy continued for the next several decades”(Arianism. ABC-CLIO). The Nicaean Council held up the Catholic view of the church, but the whole reason Arianism formed was because they didn’t agree with the Catholic view of the church, and specifically the Trinity. The purpose of the Nicene Creed was to unify the church under one definition, but as stated in the previous article “...the controversy continued for the next several decades”(Arianism. ABC-CLIO). Things were never fully resolved and the church, even now, is still split up into different branches and into two differing groups; “Catholicism” and “Protestantism.” “Others with a negative reaction to the new state of affairs felt that the best course was simply to break communion with the church at large, now become the imperial church, which was to be considered sinful and apostate” (The Impact of Constantine. Justo L. González). This “new state of affairs” would be Constantine’s influence on the church and his political hold on it. Not only did they break apart from the church, at that time it was considered heretical. For the Roman Catholic church, this meant completely rejection. Even if Constantine had not gotten ahold of the church, the church would have divided eventually, but Constantine helped it along. Then, by trying to fix it, he just kept it apart. He tried to put everything together the Catholic way, but that was the problem to begin with; the Arians did not agree with the Catholics, so by creating it, he kept it apart. Certain aspect of the Nicene Creed were taken and put together to create The Apostles Creed, which is what the Protestant’s use now and the Catholics use the Nicene Creed. Even today, we are still separated.

Though Constantine may have had good intentions, many of the influences he had over the church ended badly. The division of the church, though not entirely his fault, was helped along by him. The bringing of false followers into the church were brought in indirectly by him and his heavy political involvement degraded the church. Even now, some of his influences are prominent in today’s church. Constantine did have some positive influences, but the negative affects far outweighed the positive influences.

Change in the Metamorphoses

Now that school has started up I actually have my first paper to post.

Change in the Metamorphoses

In the Metamorphoses, by Ovid, the poems are all connected by a metamorphosis, or a change, in one or more of the characters. Dictionary.com defines change as “to make the form, nature, content, future course, ... different from what it is or from what it would have been if left alone” (dictionary.com) In contrast, the definition of transformation is “change in form, appearance, nature or character” (dictionary.com) There is one noticeable difference, that being the change of future course. In Ovid’s story “Ceres and Proserpina”, the changes the gods imposed on the humans are not only physical, but the future course of that person is drastically changed as well, revealing the god’s rash, chaotic and indifferent nature.

The god’s indifferent nature is displayed in “Ceres and Proserpina” by Ceres, Proserpina’s mother. Shortly after her daughter, Proserpina, was taken by Pluto, the god of the underworld, she went to an old ladies house to get a drink. While she was drinking “...a boy came up to her; and scornful, rude, he laughed and said she drank to greedily. Offended, Ceres... threw the brew... full in his face... the goddess shrank him... a starry newt” (pg. 915, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). After Ceres lost her own daughter, she still feels like she can go and turn a boy into a newt, a boy that was someone’s son. Though, without even a second thought, even though her own daughter was taken from her, Ceres still takes the boy away from his family. She did not kill the boy, she turned him into a newt but he would never be able to return to them. Another example of the god’s indifference to humans is when Venus and Cupid plot to strike Pluto with one of Cupid’s arrows. Though at first it may seem like they were plotting against the gods, in fact their original plan was to strike against Proserpina. Venus says to her son Cupid: “ Do you not see how both Athena and the hunting goddess, Diana, would defy me?” (pg. 913, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). Since both Athena and Diana are maiden goddesses and pledged to never marry, Venus did not like them because they were out of her “domain”. She noticed that Proserpina “like them: she is so bent on chastity. But for the sake of all I share with you, please join that goddess-girl, Proserpina, to her great uncle Pluto” (pg. 913, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). Venus wanted to destroy Proserpina, without a thought as to how it would affect Proserpina or her mother. In both of these cases, the gods were indifferent to the people around them and their feelings. Along with their actions being indifferent they also had chaotic consequences.

The dictionary definition of “chaos” is “a state of utter confusion or disorder...” (dictionary.com). The way the story of Ceres and Proserpina starts is when Venus sees Pluto above the ground and hatches her scheme with Cupid. This in itself does not seem that strange except for one thing. Pluto was the god of the underworld and was rarely above the ground. So, why was he above ground in the first place? In the story it says that Sicily was mounted atop the giant Tophoeus. On this particular day, Tophoeus was stirring and it was disrupting Sicily. “The earth quakes. As it trembles, even he who rules the kingdom of the silent dead is anxious, for the crust of Sicily may split and a wide crack reveal things secret...his fear...led that the lord of darkness to leave his sunless kingdom” (pg. 912, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). The very start of this story is grounded on the chaos happening in Sicily. From the foundation of chaos only comes more chaos in this story. When Ceres found out that her daughter had been abducted she was indescribably saddened and since she is the goddess of grain and harvest the ground suffered. “Now Sicily’s fertility - renowned throughout the world - appears to be a lie: as soon as the grass is in the blade, it dies, undone by too much rain or too much sun...the crop is blocked by chokeweeds, tares, and thorns” (pg. 916, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). Unfortunately for Sicily in this story, the chaos that brought Pluto up to the ground continued on into Ceres’ grief and Sicily unjustly suffered. Chaos is carried out throughout the story and the chaos bleeds through into future events.

Along with many of the characters the future events also are changed in one way or another. Many myths like Ceres and Proserpina are told to explain why something happens

the way it does. The reason for this particular story is an explanation for the changing of the seasons. While Proserpina was in the Underworld, she ate food from the Underworld and when one eats food from the Underworld, that person is forever bound to the Underworld and is not allowed to leave. Despite this rule, Jupiter, Pluto, and Ceres strike up a deal with Pluto where “... he divides the turning year into two equal portions. Proserpina is shared by the two kingdoms: ... six months beside her husband and six months beside her mother...” (pg. 919, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). Her time with her mother above the ground is characterized by summer and her time in the underworld is winter. If this had never happened, there would never had been a need for winter and it would have been forever summer. When Proserpina was in the Underworld, she ate seven pomegranate seeds and Ascalaphus saw her. Because of this, Proserpina “...changed that witness. He was made a bird of evil omen... He has become the bird that men detest - that would announce calamities...bringer of bitter auguries...” (pg. 918, Ovid, Ceres and Proserpina). This innocent witness was changed for merely being in the wrong place at the wrong time, showing the rashness of Proserpina’s actions. Along with showing the rash character display, it also changed his future, and others. He became something that every man, woman, and child would detest and he was the mark of evil omen and disaster. In one fell swoop he goes from an innocent witness to a detestable creature. The changes in Ceres and Proserpina change the whole world’s future along with the individuals’ in the stories future.

In Ceres and Proserpina the changes in the story affected the world, with the creation of winter, and the individuals’ futures, like Ascalaphus turning into a hated omen. The story started in chaos and the chaos ran through to the end and the god’s indifference towards others merely spurred the story on to an ending that was not so “happily-ever-after”. The god’s chaotic and indifferent nature was displayed clearly in Ceres and Proserpina and those actions the future was drastically altered.