Category Archives: Uncategorized

Day by Day Nationalism

Posted on by

“Nationalism has become general; it grows daily and it has already grown strong enough to keep all parts of Italy united despite the differences that distinguish them.”

-Count Cavour (Camillo Benso)

While this quote from Benso, who would become Prime Minister of Piedmont-Sardinia, applies to Italy it could be applied to many different countries in Europe at the time.  Nationalism is no longer a fad at this time, it is assumed now.  Unity is now a key word in the development of new countries.  Giuseppe Mazzini wrote “unity is a necessity in the world.”  As Count Cavour wrote unity has become strong in Italy but it is needed everywhere.  Unity comes with nationalism and the two words are very important together. Count Cavour touches on it briefly and the important part of his quote is that nationalism is continuing to grow.  It is growing on a daily basis, the people are becoming more unified.  Mazzini also wrote “The question of Nationalities, rightly understood, is the Alliance of Peoples”.  This quote is the basis for what Cavour is seeing put into action.  Cavour says nationalism has become general but he is thinking too general.  While he is looking just at Italy, many other places in Europe are becoming more unified.  This is not a separated occurrence in Italy, many people are taking Mazzini’s words to heart.  Count Cavour did not know it but his writing was a base point of what nationalism is.  Italy is just one of the many in Europe who were “unified despite the differences that distinguish them.”

Spirit of Unity

Posted on by

“It was not for a material interest that the people of Vienna fought in 1848; in weakening the empire they could only lose power.” -From Giuseppe Mazzini’s “On Nationality”

This quote, I believe, has the greatest influence in his argument for the unification of the various European states. He aims to inspire unification because it would give the people a greater sense of community by being able to call themselves “German” or “French”, to commonly identify with one another. It also demonstrates what lengths people will go to in order to officially conceive a country. “In weakening the empire they could only lose power.” So, then, why did they fight? They wanted a self-defined nationality, not one given at the discretion of some emperor. This logic applies to Mazzini’s theory. He knew that many states had much to gain if they fought to create a national identity. By sacrificing and  settling for a lower standard of living that comes with living in a revolutionary state, the population would ultimately benefit from having a nationality and a government that supported the preservation of the state. The alternative is driven by egotistical self-interest; a monarch or emperor’s ultimate goal is to keep what they have and to try to gain more by doing so. While they certainly wanted to give their subjects a decent standard of living, they still sought power for themselves. If a nation were established, the focus would become serving the people. This held true, at least, for the French. They wished to eliminate an oppressive nobility because their interests were self-serving, not for the good of the state. Upon eliminating the monarchy, the French were able to create a nation with a body of law drafted with the common man in mind and a government which did just what they set out to do: served, and continues to serve, the people.

Mazzini on Social Change

Posted on by

Writing in 1852, Mazzini served as a national figure, advocating for the nationalism of Italian democracy. He saw Europe not as a unified whole, but a fractured state full of violence and crises. For Mazzini, they key to peace was unity. In his eyes, Europe was taking two two forms: social and nationalities. “I say, which all have agreed to call social, because, generally speaking, every great revolution is so far social, that it cannot be accomplished either in the religious, political, or any other sphere, without affecting social relations […]” Mazzini notes that no tangible change can be made in society without, first, a social change. While other philosophers we’ve read have offered ideas of non-violent changes and revolutions, Mazzini insinuates a more palpable declaration of this notion. He states; “The question there is now, above all, to establish better relations between labour and capital, between production and consumption, between the workman and the employer.” Mazzini proposes social changes that will directly affect they way people live, cooperate with one another, and the ways in which society conducts itself. He offers social changes that would not only be felt on a national level, but also on an intimate and personal level.

Giuseppe Mazzini: On Nationality

Posted on by

Giuseppe Mazzini wrote about what the essential characteristics of nationality are and what that means. He reasoned that nationality is more than just common ideas, beliefs and history. “The question there is now, above all, to establish better relations between labour and capital, between production and consumption, between workman and the employer” (Mazzini, 1). He believes that labor is assigned by god for the people to share. It is this labor that gives man the rights he has as a member of society. If nationality is to work, it must be regarded as holy or scared by the people. The people have to see nationality as a task that needs to be worked on continuously, this way the philosophies of a country can grow progressively. To achieve this, the people have to be at the root of nationality, driving it and making it their mission to show this growth and beauty to nations surrounding. The people must embrace their evolution and must maintain their novelty even as they coincide  with the progress of mankind.

The idea that “the map of Europe has to be remade” and that the public law had to be changed was a big step toward getting a country together and making nationality a priority. The fact that nationality depends on its sacredness within and beyond its borders is still true today. What would a nation be if the people didn’t consider it sacrosanct?

Condorcet’s Perfection

Posted on by

In his Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind, Condorcet expounds on mankind’s struggle for perfection. Although Condorcet determines the quest to be “indefinite”, he also acknowledges its irreversibility “as long as the earth occupies its present place in the system of the universe, and as long as the general laws of the system produce neither a general cataclysm nor such changes as will deprive the human race of its present faculties and its present resources…” During the European enlightenment, mankind was just beginning to identify the unalienable rights possessed by all humans. Condorcet recognized that mankind was on the right track to attaining “perfection” but still had a long way to go. The elimination of prejudice and injustice is paramount to the progression of the human race.

Much progress has been made in the area of human rights since 1795, but we are still striving for the “perfection” Condorcet alluded to. Condorcet was ahead of his time in recognizing the rights of all humans and in advocating for tolerance and acceptance. Mankind must refer to back to Condorcet’s principles to finally realize the perfection that has eluded us. Provided we do not regress into the ideology of those who cam before us, the human race will continue to push forward in its quest for perfection.

Vindication

Posted on by

In Mary Wollstonecraft’s The Vindication of the Rights of Women, she postulates that women are seen as being “under men” as they have been viewed as less important since the dawn of time. While I understand what she is saying and completely agree that women need to have more rights (especially in this day and age), women in general have let this “discrimination” happen to them over the course of history. What we think of as the classic housewife was what a woman strived to be for the majority of human history – a baby factory that would take care of the kids, clean the house and prepare the meals. It was only until the Age of Enlightenment where women became outspoken about their position in the social sector, and it wasn’t until much later (early 1900’s) where they began to make some serious progress in terms of being able to vote and garnering basic rights. This is obviously a topic that needs time to transform into a stronger entity before it can really push for more equality, but we are already starting to see some of the effects. There are more women CEO’s and managers of American business, and women salaries are as high as they have ever been. This is a process that will continue to evolve throughout time, but we can say without a doubt that the women of the world are finally getting recognized as “true members” of society (which is funny, because they outnumber the men).

Minstrels in Rus’

Posted on by

Due to the destruction caused by the Mongols during their invasion of Rus’, the culture of the time is not as well known as it is in other times. The Mongols obviously had significant impact on the culture of Rus’, but they also left large amounts of destruction in their wake, meaning that culture came second to other activities (namely: survival).

Painting, literature, and other forms of the performing arts were not as prevalent in this time, but we know that one thing that was very prevalent was wandering minstrels. These minstrels would go town to town performing their various arts or crafts for the people.

They were popular among the general populace (mainly in villages), but not as commonly seen in larger cities. This is primarily due to the Church warring against, and banning in some cases, the traveling minstrels due to their activities and methods. The Church was still trying to eliminate traces of paganism and they were very clearly carrying on the traditions of paganism.

Culture in Post-Keivan Rus

Posted on by

Due to several factors, most of which were a result of the Mongol invasion, there is very little evidence detailing the day-to-day culture which existed in Post-Keivan Rus. What we do have, however, does provide interesting clues about literacy, the arts, and entertainment of the day.

One source is a doodle by a boy distracted in the middle of practicing his alphabet. The boy, Onfim, provides a drawing of an unidentified man atop a horse stabbing another unidentified man lying upon the ground. One of the reasons that this is interesting is its implications about education and literacy of the time. It’s likely that this student was being formally educated from the nature of his work. Because literacy was rare amongst the common people we can assume that he was not being taught in a school-like setting, so he may have been working with a tutor of some sort. Onfim’s education may indicate that literacy was more important to the culture than previously believed, if his parents were concerned enough to start his learning at a young age.

A popular but controversial form of entertainment for the common people was the minstrels, or the skomorokhi. The skomorokhi did a variety of things for the entertainment of others, including animal training, acting, juggling, playing music, and dancing. They were easily identifiable by the bright colors of the costumes that they wore. Though loved by the common people, they were not so popular in the church. In a collection of sermons called the Zlatoust they are condemned for “preparing the road to perdition for themselves and their followers”. Even after being put down by the church their popularity rose still in spite of it. It’s interesting that the people seemed to care more about the entertainment the minstrels provided than the opinion of the church on that form of entertainment, judging from  the fact that the people were still listened to the group that the church looked down on. It’s also interesting that the people who made up the skomorokhi held positions all along the social hierarchy, some being  well off, others being poor.

The abolishment of feminine characteristics

Posted on by

In the article ” A Vindication of the Rights of Women”, Mary Wollstonecraft mentions a fact that women have been regarded as lower status than men. Based on this fact, she referred how this kind of idea was produced by men. After that, she suggests the ideal situation that women should possess to improve their social status. In particular, she especially mentions the reinforcement of mental and physical power as her solution.

I especially focus on a sentence ” I wish to persuade women to endeavor to acquire strength, both of mind and body, and to convince them that the soft phrase….”  In this sentence, she mentions that women should get mental and physical strength and abolish feminine characteristics such as delicacy of sentiment . I am really confused by this sentence because I do not understand the reason to give up famine characteristics.  How does this process contribute to the realization of the improvement of women status? I understand that the feminine characteristics is a central cause that women has been scorned. However, I think the abolishment of feminine characteristics does not help the improvement of women status. This is because women has to keep their lives with suppressing essential feeling  or idea. Even if women come to avoid the scorn from men throughout the abolishment of feminine characteristics, I do not think it is an improvement of woman status. I think the true improvement of women status can be achieved when women come to have equal right with men without any suppression in terms of their feminine characteristics.

 

 

Literacy in Post-Kievan Rus’

Posted on by

The readings, focused on culture during the fourteenth and fifteenth century, shed light on literacy rates and leisure. Birchbark charters show evidence of literacy among children, while artifacts (instruments, masks and manuscript initials) are indicative of traveling minstrels. Despite the information provided, however, the author and compiler speaks of many things we don’t know or have evidence of (possibly due to the Mongol occupation). Art and architecture are almost absent, prior to what Sakharov notes as a ‘cultural renewal.’

The birchbarks were particularly interesting, providing some evidence to the notion that literacy was spreading. The picture, drawn by Onfim, displayed a drawing of a boy (or man) riding a horse and slaying some type of villain. While at first the age of the creator could be drawn into question (how can the age of Onfim be established?), there are several key aspects that point towards what the author suggested. While style can’t really be taken into account (the shaky lettering would suggest someone new at penmanship), the proportions of the drawing seem more child-like. As children grow and develop, their perception changes. The length of the arms and and legs in relation to the torso could support this theory.

While the birchbark charters do display evidence that literacy was increasing, how widespread was it? In previous readings in lectures, it’s been noted that Novgorod was particularly special, due to its relationship and interaction with other nations. What does the author define as ‘formal instruction’?