The following was written for the AEthelmearc Gazette, 8/22/23

 Ask Another Laurel: The Renaissance?

Caleb Reynolds gets that thing off of the top shelf for you.

When did the Renaissance start?

This is a very good question because there is no definitive answer. Historians throw out a multitude of dates from 1350 to 1600 with no rhyme or reason. Historians agree that the Renaissance started at the end of the Medieval period but, again, no one can agree on a single date. Some use 1453 since it was the fall of Constantinople to the Muslims. 1400 is thrown around as the start date because that is when Europeans "rediscovered" ancient Greek and Roman texts. (Texts which were translated and copied in the 10th and 11th Centuries) Some use 1456 since it was around the year Gutenberg printed the bible on his movable type. Some use 1485 which was the end of the Plantagenet and the start of the Tudor dynasty. Some use 1492 when Columbus sailed the ocean blue. Some use 1517 since that was the year Martin Luther said that he had 95 problems but a Pope wasn't one. Some even use 1604 since that was the first recorded use of the "medieval" to describe the period between the death of the Roman empire and its "current" rebirth, or Renaissance. There is even a movement to rename parts of the middle ages as "Proto-Renaissance" because some do not feel that Medieval Europeans could possibly have developed humanism or mathematics, that it had to have been developed in a more enlightened time.

The problem is that there is no one singular year that we can say that Europe fundamentally changed like we can with 1066, the agreed upon start of the Middle Ages. In 1066, Harald Hardrada, King of Norway, invaded England with an estimated 10,000 Norwegian soldiers, 2,000 Scottish soldiers, and another 1,500 English exiles allied with Tostig Godwinson. Harald and the majority of his troops were killed by Harald Godwinson and his English forces. Of an initial 300 longships, it is written that only enough men survived to fill 20 or 25 ships to return home. This was a staggering loss for Norway and destabilized that part of the world for years as Harald's 16 year old son, Olaf, was crowned king. A few weeks later, Harald Godwinson and a good chunk of English nobility were killed by Duke William of Normandy, who at the same time he was a vassal of the King of France, became King of England, starting a political crisis that would directly lead to the Hundred Years War. William also started a huge castle building program to secure his hold on England, which also kicked off a massive ship building program to transport stone over the channel. This also sparked innovation in ship design as the traffic of people, building supplies, and goods across the Channel increased by an order of magnitude. Normans were also invading Sicily and Southern Italy, which was to change the religious and political dynamics there for the next 80 years. The Byzantine Empire was being threatened by the migration of Seljuk Turks and would soon call for the first of many Crusades. The Granada Massacre occurred in Spain, which rekindled the Reconquista and became another war zone for Normans to fight in. Plenty of minor wars in the German states as princes jockeyed for power in a civil war with the Holy Roman Emperor. And we can't forget the rise of the Benedictine order as a major political powerhouse, partially due to William's gifting of almost 1/5th of the land of England to the Church as a penance for his invasion, (which might have something to do with William's claim that the Pope personally blessed his invasion; a claim that there is no evidence of actually happening) which started a monastery building program that would last centuries. 

So many important things happened in 1066 that historians can clearly state that the political, military, social, and economic outlook of 1067 and later years were directly affected by major events in 1066. There is no similar year in the late Middle Ages where things changed so completely, other than in 1348, which was the start of the Black Death in Europe. But even with losing 50 to 60% of the population of the continent in a single decade, things carried on as best they could. People died but governments, churches, and guilds didn't really change. They adapted to the huge loss of life, but they didn't go away or change quickly or radically. Even the development of the printing press didn't change Europe overnight, it took decades for printed books to ingrain themselves into society. Some historians make the argument that the Middle Ages ended with the end of feudalism but the problem is that feudalism didn't end overnight all throughout Europe; the Black Death started the process but it took a half a century before anything major changed in that aspect of the social contract. Feudalism was going strong in Poland and Hungary well into the 16th Century and we can make a convincing argument that feudalism was still in practice in Russia up until the end of the 19th Century. 

Since movable type became a common place thing throughout all of Europe by 1500, we might as well use that as the date of the start of the Renaissance. The wide spread availability of not only knowledge of the ancient Greeks and Romans but of contemporary scholars is considered to be the hallmark of the Renaissance, even though the influence of Medieval European and Arabic scholars is ignored. It is estimated that in the 50 years from when Gutenberg developed his technology, some 1 million books were printed in Europe, in some 280 cities, by a 1,000 presses. 1500 is nice round number and easy to remember. And, it is as good a year as any.

Scroll Text - Duncan of Steltonwald - Silver Alce 2023

Kingdom of AEthelmearc - Martial Award

Hear these words, oh noble crowd, of Andreas and Kallista. We wish it to be known, to all people, that for the skill and deed of arms that We have witnessed, We have agreed with Our advisors and judges that those aforementioned skills and deeds are worthy of note and proclaim and that Our welbeloved Duncan of Steltonwald should be from this moment on be included into the Noble Order of the Silver Alce, done on the fields of Pennsic in the presence of the finest Knights, Gages, and Alces who shall bare witness to Our Will. Done by Our hands in the Year of the Society 58.

based, in part, on Coinage Agreement Between Hamburg and Lübeck, 1255.

Scroll Text - Adriane Brezel Neumann - Court Baroness 2023

Kingdom of AEthelmearc - Court Barony

In the Name of the Society, We Andreas and Kallista, King and Queen of the dwellers of AEthelmearc, acting in foresight for Ourselves in the future, and for Our Heirs, and for Their Heirs, have decided to give to her who gives all things to Our Kingdom and Our fellow Kingdoms, and, having received advice it seems good to Grant a Coronet to Adriane Brezel Neumann and make her a Baroness of Our Court and charge her with keeping these lands nearby the very well-known boundaries that are called "Interstate 79" and "State Route 422", as well as "Currie Road" and "Cooper Road" and all of the lakes, ponds, hills, trails, stores, camp grounds, bath houses, markets, and coffee shops to be found there in. We wish this gift of Ours to be steadfast in perpetuity so that neither We nor Our heirs should presume to diminish anything. If anything otherwise should be attempted by any person, let them know that they are transgressing under an interdict of anathema that would last until the sun burns out. In confirmation of this account We place our marks on this Warrant in the presence of the Landed Barony of AEthelmearc and the subjects there in, signed Andreas, King, and Kallista, Queen. Done at Pennsic 50, in glorious Cooper's Lake.

 

 S29 - A.D. 697 or 712 (July). Wihtred, king of Kent, to St Mary's Church, Lyminge; grant of 4 sulungs (aratra) at Pleghelmestun, Kent. Latin with bounds

Scroll Text - Marsaili Mac Lochlainn  - Sycamore 2023

Kingdom of AEthelmearc - A&S Award

Come hear the words of the King and Queen of AEthelmearc, right trusty and welbeloved. Forasmuch as We, of Our special grace, in consideration of the true and faithful service which Our welbeloved servant Marsaili Mac Lochlainn hath done unto Us and Our Kingdom, know that We have avowed and award unto her a place within our Noble Order of the Sycamore where We had noticed her absence before hand. We further give her leave to wear the badge of the Order as she sees fit for one of her station and further give unto her all said rights and duties of the Order and demand that the Order receive and admit the said Marsaili Mac Lochlainn without delay; and these Our Letters shall be your Warrant. Given under Our Seal at the fields of Pennsic, AS58 and signed with Our marks as: 

Andreas - King and Kallista - Queen.

Inspired by Signet Letter for the Issue of Letters under the Privy Seal only (20 Nov., 16 Edward IV)

 Scroll Text - Cassia Carataca - Sycamore 2023

Kingdom of AEthelmearc - A&S Award

Cassia Carataca, come hear the commands of Andreas and Kallista, King and Queen of AEthelmearc. It has been commented and conveyed to us about the cramped and compact capital letters that you have constructed and colored. So many comments have been communicated to us that We had to see with Our Own eyes your creative and coveted calligraphy that covers the confines of the minuscule card stock that you cover from corner to corner that We were so moved that We did Confer with the Noble Order of the Sycamore and charged them to make you comfortable within the Order where you may find camaraderie and confab with the council of the Order and achieve even smaller scrolls. And thus, like Caesar and his Consort, do We confidently confirm Our committal and make this consignment at Our Castle at the Pennsic Wars, AS 58.

You got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them....

What Happens When Your Argument Falls Apart

 

So, I was looking for topics for some micro-research and I was going through the origins of medieval games. I had written about the history of bowling and turned my sights towards horseshoes. Modern books about games universally state that the game horseshoes started n the middle ages but none of them give any details. I realized that this would be a perfect topic to research. I had, however, taken a skeptical view on the subject in light of the lack of any medieval details listed in books on games. The same books did list basic information about the origins of bocce, lawn bowling, and other games that were played in the middle ages. But, nothing was listed for horseshoes.

I started researching and found no manuscript images of people playing horseshoes, nor any laws prohibiting the game. In my mind, I was convinced that the game did not exist in the middle ages and started looking for reasons to backup my belief. I started with the cost of a horseshoe: 3 to 5 pennies each in 15th century England. Not outrageous, but a day's wages for the common laborer. Modern rules have standardized on two shoes per player. So, almost a week's wages for just the shoes. Presumably used shoes would be cheaper, but harder to throw as they might not have been worn down evenly.

I next looked at the history of horseshoes. The ancient Romans had horseshoes, but they were nothing more than a metal plate sewed to the bottom of a leather bag that was tied around the feet of the horse. Not exactly throwing material. Yes, I realize that the metal can be removed from the bag, but I was building up an argument. Early medieval horseshoes were also metal plates, roundish pieces of flat metal with a half-moon notch at the rear so that the metal won't rub against the heal bulb. In my mind, this style of shoe couldn't be used to play horseshoes. The next development in horseshoe technology was in the early 15th century when we start to see the familiar horseshoe shape in manuscript images and in surviving shoes. These certainly could be used to play horseshoes but I was still unable to find any reference to horseshoes being used in a game. I had built up an idea in my head that even worn shoes were still too valuable to, forgive the pun, throw away. The iron would be heated and beaten into a new shoe or into something else.

I did a deep dive into the history of the game of horseshoes and managed to trace the game back to the Napoleonic war. Wellington had ordered up literally tons of horseshoes for his campaign and had them stockpiled in Portugal while his troops were massing and training. Bored British soldiers created a game they called ringers. Soldiers were pitching horseshoes at a bayonet stuck upright, into the ground. The rules they came up with were basically the same as modern, regulation horseshoes.

So. In my mind, I made a case that horseshoes, or ringers, wasn't a medieval game, but one from the 19th century. I thought that I had an air-tight case: the cost of the horseshoes; the lack of any manuscript images; the development of the "proper" shape to play the game; and the clear birth in the 19th century. Except all I had done was show that the game called ringers was invented in the 19th century, I had not shown that no one played a game involving horseshoes prior to then. The lack of evidence does not mean that the evidence was never there. I was working under the false pretense that the game had to have been played as it is now, with a metal upright that one would throw a curved horseshoe against.

What killed my argument was my discovery of a game played in Scotland that was documented to the late 12th Century. Flat stones, much like skipping stones, were thrown under hand at a large rock. The goal was to come closest to the rock without hitting it. Each player had two stones to pitch, one after the other. The references I found did not give this game a name, so I'm going to call it *bonk*, because if you hit the rock with your stone, it will make a "bonk" noise. If *bonk* can be played with flat stones, it can be played with flat horseshoes. In fact, it would be a better game since the iron shoes would make a "clang" noise if they hit the rock. I'm going to call this version of the game *clang*.

Imagine, if you would, a blacksmith and a farrier waiting for the apprentice to build up the fire so that they can start their day, just killing time playing *clang* with worn out shoes. There is no reason to think that if the game of horseshoes did exist in one form or another, that it was a wide spread game. It might have been only played by blacksmiths and farriers who would have had an almost unlimited supply of horseshoes as well as downtime in which to play. Now, this is speculation, since there are no manuscript images of anyone pitching horseshoes, but plenty of images of blacksmiths making them. But, it does show that it might have been possible that this was a medieval game that was invented in the early middle ages in Scotland, refined and played by blacksmiths as a private game, and eventually, taught to British soldiers during the Napoleonic war. The game became popular in England after the war and was eventually introduced to America.

All of this meant that I had to abandon my theory that horseshoes was a modern game that was incorrectly attributed to the middle ages. While I was unable to find any evidence that it was played, I couldn't maintain an argument that it could not have been played. I was able to poke a hole in each one of my points. In the end, I had to give up and switch over to another topic to research. Even though I wasn't able to write an article on my theory, I was able to use my notes and conclusions for this post detailing my failure. There are far too many books and magazine articles that draw conclusions from incomplete or erroneous information; we have to learn to identify when we are wrong about something and to cease looking for facts that support our pre-arrived conclusions. If you are making the argument that no one in the middle ages painted their armor, if you find a single, surviving example of painted armor, then you have to abandon your argument. Or at the very least, change it: "Due to this one sumptuary law, no one under the rank of knight painted their armor, in this one place." This is just an example; I haven't done any research into painted armor.

Ask Another Laurel: The Humoral Theory

 The following was written for the AEthelmearc Gazette, 7/18/23

Ask Another Laurel

Caleb Reynolds answers questions no one asks.

Isn't the humoral theory of disease just horse-hockey and should be ridiculed? 

Not necessary, would be the quick answer. 

In reality, the humoral theory was the predominate medical theory and practice used in medieval Europe. The theory divides human health into four humors, which corresponded to the four elements. Blood was hot and wet like air (the theory originated in Ancient Greece). Phlegm was cold and wet like water. Yellow bile was hot and dry like fire, and black bile was cold and dry like earth. One was healthy when these four humors were balanced in all things, including diet and temperament. Pain and disease are caused by an imbalance of the humors; there was an increase in disease in the hot summers and cold winters because of the imbalance of nature: hot summers bring heat stroke, hay favor and malaria; cold winters bring frost bite, flu and pneumonia. 

To our minds, living in the 21st Century, it sounds like a joke; crack-pot ideas masquerading as medicine. If you were walk into my office and I were to tell you, "You are too sanguine. All of that beef is heating your blood, boiling your yellow bile, and throwing off your humors. You need to cool your blood with fish, which are cool and wet and will bank the fire inside of you. Also, avoid red wine, it is adding too much heat to your blood, I can see the fire of your blood in your face." You would call me a quack and walk out. 

But if I were to tell you, "You have to cut down on the red meat, it's driving your blood pressure and your cholesterol up through the roof. Cut down on fatty meat and eat more fish, and not fried fish. And all that wine you've been drinking? It's making it worse: you can have one, small glass of wine at dinner. We need to get your blood pressure under control before you have a stroke or a heart attack." You might not like the advice, but you would accept it as proper medical advice. 

People make fun of the humoral theory because it doesn't use modern medical language, but, people of the classical and medieval world didn't have the medical language that we have today, and they certainly didn't have the tools and techniques that we have today. Most people today have little knowledge of what the numbers in one's blood pressure actually mean, but we all learn something about fluid dynamics in high school, so we understand the concept that there is a certain amount of fluid pressure exerted on the vascular system whenever the heart beats. If you would bring a sphygmomanometer and stethoscope back in time and show it to Galen of Alexandria, you would have to bring a couple of physics and medical textbooks along just to explain to him how the things actually work and how they can be used to treat a patient.

For centuries, doctors used the humoral theory to treat their patients in the best way possible. Since this theory was formulated by Hippocrates and Empedocles in the 5th Century BCE, and refined in the 2nd Century AD by Galen for a more practical medical audience, most medieval doctors were using the same written works describing the theory. This meant that most doctors were making very similar decisions on how to treat patients based on balancing the humors. While we must admit that some of the decisions, and the treatments, were wrong and probably caused more harm then good, the doctors, the ones that were actually trying to help their patients, were using this theory to the best of their ability and they used language that their patients would understand. 

Looking at a some of the treatments for diseases that we can recognize as gout, hypertension, diabetes, or acid reflux, sound like very reasonable treatments that don't require modern medication. The use of small doses of arsenic to treat stomach ulcers, gangrene, and leprosy, or the use of belladonna to treat asthma and hand tremors, or wormwood to remove intestinal parasites, tell us that medieval doctors understood the cause and effect nature of medication, even if they used a more simple vocabulary and didn't adhere to modern scientific methods. 

We can also state with certainty that many medieval doctors confused causation and correlation in a lot of their writing and practice. We must also acknowledge that many of the "cures" were nonsense that were passed down from doctor to apprentice over generations. There is a certain recipe for the removal of warts that can be found in medical manuscripts for a solid 500 years that involves mashing up worms and making a thick soup out of it. Now, it is possible that the original cure called for a particular species of worm that contained purpuric or salicylic acid in it's digestive system, both of which are used today to remove warts topically. However, if the recipe started out as an external poultice, it appears to have migrated into a soup that could be tailor made for an individual; adding white wine if the patient was too phlegmy, or beef broth if there was too much black bile. 

Then we have to contend with the fact that before proper identification and certification, anyone could call themselves a doctor and treat any person by whatever means. Literary and musical sources are filled with families paying loads of money to doctors only to receive little to no actual medical help; just empty words and empty pockets. Having a patient make and drink worm soup to remove a wart on their foot just sounds like the doctor isn't even trying to give good value for the shilling. 

So, on the one hand, quacks and pretend doctors certainly used the humoral theory to bilk their patients out of their money (the humoral theory was still being used in various forms well into the 19th Century in Europe and the Americas); but on the other hand, it was used by doctors who might not have understood the underlining principles of how the human body and diseases work, and were going solely off of what they learned by rote; and on a third hand it was used as a common medical language by doctors to describe problems and create solutions for their patients.