Talk:High Middle Ages

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 April 2021 and 21 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Njtalaber.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

The end

Was not the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453 the traditional conclusion of the Dark Ages? --Anglius 20:33, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No, the Dark Ages are not the same as the Middle Ages. The Dark Ages is kind of an archaic term for the early Middle Ages. Adam Bishop 21:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Very well, Mr. Bishop. Was not the Turkish conquest of Constantinople the traditional conclusion of the Middle Ages? --Anglius 23:47, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, that's one of the traditional dates, yes (that and 1492, among others). Adam Bishop 00:19, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I thank you, Mr. Bishop, for agreeing. However, I must disagree with you regarding 1492 being its possible conclusion. The Renaissance had already begun by then, at least in most countries of western Europe. --Anglius 03:45, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sure, but it had already begun by 1453 too. Adam Bishop 05:15, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, arguably, but it was in not as many regions, Mr. Bishop, in 1492. Nonetheless, I would prefer not discuss this any further as of the present. --Anglius 16:54, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Note that I changed the verbiage of the introductory paragraph to say that the end of the Middle Ages occurred sometime before the end of the 15th century. Jacob

I thank you for your thoughtfulness, Mr. Buerk. --Anglius 2 July 2005 19:00 (UTC)

Why its own page?

Why does the High Middle Ages have its own page but the other two periods of the Middle ages are just sub-sections under Middle Ages? User:Kralahome 4:00, 15 June 2005 (UTC)

Because they haven't been COTW'ed yet. In other words, it's not that they're less deserving, if that's what you're asking. --Dmcdevit 05:08, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Introduction

I think that(partially thanks to me) the introduction is now too long, but I'm not sure by what margin, or how to make it a little smaller? Can someone help(given this is COTW)? Superm401 | Talk 21:47, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

• All featured articles have long introductions so why shorten it? Falphin 00:06, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Middle Ages Import

This is stuff I've copied from Middle Ages but have not yet integrated into the article. If you put something in before me, delete or strike it here. Superm401 | Talk 21:51, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC):

---

In central and northern Italy and in Flanders the rise of towns that were self-governing to some degree within their territories marked a beginning for re-urbanization in Western Europe.

In Spain, a slow reconquest of the urban and literate Muslim-ruled territories began. One consequence of this was that the Latin-literate world gained access to libraries that included classical literature and philosophy. Through translations these libraries gave rise to a vogue for the philosophy of Aristotle. Meanwhile, trade grew throughout Europe as the dangers of travel were reduced, and steady economic growth resumed. This period saw the formation of the Hanseatic league and other trading and banking institutions that operated across western Europe. The first universities were established in major European cities from 1080 onwards, largely to train the clergy. Literacy began to grow, and there were major advances in art, sculpture, music and architecture. Large cathedrals were built across Europe, first in the romanesque, and later in the more decorative gothic style.

The Crusades

See the more detailed discussion at Crusade.

Following the Great Schism, prime examples of the force of the divided cultural identities of Christendom can be found in the unfolding developments of the Crusades, during which Popes, kings, and emperors drew on the concept of Christian unity to inspire the population of Western Europe to unite and defend Christendom from the aggression of Islam, often at the expense of the Byzantine Empire. From the 7th century onward, Islam had been gaining ground along Europe's southern and eastern borders. Muslim armies conquered Egypt, the rest of North Africa, Jerusalem, Spain, Sicily, and most of Anatolia (in modern Turkey), although they were finally turned back in western Europe by Christian armies at the Battle of Tours in southern France. Political unanimity in Europe was less secure than it appeared, however, and the military support for most crusades was drawn from limited regions of Europe. Substantial areas of northern Europe also remained outside Christendom until the twelfth century or later; these areas also became crusading venues during the expansionist High Middle Ages.

Technology

See the more complete treatment at Medieval technology.

During the 12th and 13th century in Europe there was a radical change in the rate of new inventions, innovations in the ways of managing traditional means of production, and economic growth. In less than a century there were more inventions developed and applied usefully than in the previous thousand years of human history all over the globe. The period saw major technological advances, including the invention of printing, gunpowder, the astrolabe, spectacles, and greatly improved ships. They also improved upon the clock. The latter advances made possible the dawn of the Age of Exploration.

Note: the Astrolabe was not an invention of this time period, but its reintroduction was important. I don't know how to fit that in the above sentences. --Yannick 00:41, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Alfred Crosby described some of this technological revolution in The Measure of Reality : Quantification in Western Europe, 1250-1600 and other major historians of Technology have also noted it.

Mirrors

Mirrors of Wikipedia can be frustrating. When I search for High Middle Ages literature, two of the top three hits are Wikipedia mirrors of this article, which incidentally contains NO information on High Middle Ages literature. Of course that's why I'm searching for it! Superm401 | Talk 22:12, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

• • LOL. Mirrors are always frustrating especially when they have more hits than the actual wikipedia article. Falphin 00:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thoughts

I just did a rework of this article. I was pretty bold from a number-of-edits standpoint. A couple of thoughts:

• The bullet-pointed sections need to be in article form, similar to the above paragraph about technology imported from the Middle Ages article.
• The Scholasticism paragraph desperately needs to be cleaned up by someone who is more versed in this topic than I.
• I think the "Rise of Monastic Power and Influence" subsection should be deleted, pending integration of those names into their appropriate parts of the article.
• The "heretical movements" subsection could be transformed into a couple of sentences.
• Trade and Commerce and Technology sections need to be expanded.

Those are my thoughts. Jacob 00:46, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Art also needs a lot of work. Why did you remove the heading? NatusRoma 00:55, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You must have been reading my mind, check out your user talk page. :) Jacob 01:01, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OH GOD PLEASE SOMEBODY FIX GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.133.29 (talk) 17:05, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Anselm

There is a link to Anselm in the article. Is it Anselm of Laon or Anselm of Canterbury? Or both? ;-) — Sverdrup 15:40, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It was probably St. Anselm of Canterbury, Mr. Svedrup, since he was one of the leading mediaeval philosophers. However, it would be inaccurate to say that he was Scholasticism, for he had invented it. --Anglius 18:34, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

How do I get in on this discussion? My nick is TheBus. Please feel free to edit out this comment after telling me how to get in on this discussion. By the Way I think your high middle ages page needs some grammar work.

Well, you to participate in the discussion, click 'edit this page' or a section [edit] link, and insert a comment. To put your name after it type four tildes: ~~~~ — Sverdrup 19:35, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Main page banner

Near the pink/red box, the {{Main Page banner}} is included. Why? I think it's safe to remove this. — Sverdrup 19:37, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I got it - that box snippet was taken from the main page, and not properly cleaned up. Done, using the pretty Template:divbox. — Sverdrup 13:09, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Periodisation

I disagree with the periodisation of the article (1000-1300 AD); I don’t think this is the one commonly used. The High Middle Ages started with the establishment of strong nation states and the end of barbarian incursions in the mid-eleventh century, and it ended with the demographic and political crises of the mid-fourteenth. Major events were:

• The Christianisation of Norway (1033)
• The establishment of the Holy Roman Empire (1034)
• The union of Castile and Leon (1037) and consequent conquest of Toledo (1085)
• The Norman invasion of Sicily (1061)
• The Norman invasion of England (1066)

• The beginning of the Hundred Years’ War (1337)
• The Black Death (1348)

This gives the approximate dates 1050-1350 AD; the dates used by most historians. Dates of periodisation like these must necessarily be more or less arbitrary, but at least these dates have some relation to actual historical events, which I can’t see that those currently used do. I would like to change this, if nobody objects. Eixo 28 June 2005 15:05 (UTC)

Yes I object. Periodization issues are really cumbersome. Setting a hard date with actual events opens the doors to edit wars and/or original research as everyone has their favorite pet theories and tries to justify those dates in the article text. It is POV to wrap it around certain events. The dates 1000-1300 are a general guideline, have no underlying message or inflation of the importance of some events over others. 1000-1300 is very commonly and it is neutral that everyone can roughly agree on. Stbalbach 28 June 2005 16:33 (UTC)

Certainly I don't want to start an edit war, I just thought this periodisation was a better one. But of course I'll only change it if there seems to be general agreement about it. Eixo 28 June 2005 18:12 (UTC)

How do the dates you've listed support your argument? The High Middle Ages should start before 1033 and end before 1337. The crises of the 14th century are in the Late Middle Ages. 24.59.152.85 (talk) 02:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Improvement drive

Spice trade has been nominated to be improved by Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Come and support the article with your vote!--Fenice 06:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

What, no mention of Feudalism?!

Why is that? FilipeS (talk) 16:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Mistake?

Sorry, I don't think this makes sense:

"The High Middle Ages was the period of European history in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries (AD 1000–1450)."

Why 13th century-1450? What about the Late Middle Ages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.148.110.232 (talk) 15:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Why High? And where are Low?

Why High Middle Ages? And where are the Low Middle Ages? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Probably because it is the "height" of medieval culture, or at least when people think of something "medieval" they are probably thinking about this time period. A more neutral term is Central Middle Ages, which redirects here. There are no "low" Middle Ages since that is not the intended meaning of "high". Adam Bishop (talk) 06:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Consider a hill in the passage of time, if you're already considering time as a line. The middle is the high ground, the apex. What goes up must come down. The Low Ages are all around it. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:32, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

"Was" or "Were"?

"The High Middle Ages was the period of European history in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries (AD 1000–1300). The High Middle Ages were preceded by the Early Middle Ages and followed by the Late Middle Ages, which by convention end around 1500." JKeck (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC).

Verification issues

I'm amazed to note the dearth of verifying inline citations in this article--and the questionable nature of the single one provided—a somewhat sectarian polemical article in Quadrant, a low-circulation Australian literary magazine. (The writer is a mathematician with an ambitious publishing career in Catholic politics and philosophical apologia.) The other 'references' (though deceptively numbered 1 to 4) are not inline citations. I urge contributors to provide adequate verification. The article Middle Ages goes some way to demonstrating what is needed to avoid charges of excessive original research. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 02:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

from article

placing this here so not to lose it.

Detail of a portrait of Hugh de Provence, painted by Tomasso da Modena in 1352

--J. D. Redding 04:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Transwiki:High Middle Ages to Remembering the Templars

This page was recently transwikied to Wikibooks as the starting template on a project focusing on the Templars. Everyone is welcomed to participate. --79.168.11.181 (talk) 20:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Heresies and St. Francis

Not sure why it's included in heresies, other than it being a movement that wasn't in lockstep with current practice, but St. Francis does not properly belong in a paragraph covering heresies. That said, I'm struggling with how to deal with that. Perhaps changing the title to be more inclusive of non-heretical movements like the Franciscans. Caisson 06 (talk) 18:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on High Middle Ages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051122123242/http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/WestCiv/MedievalMusic.Chron.html to http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/WestCiv/MedievalMusic.Chron.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:56, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Importance of Investiture Controversy

The intro of Investiture Controversy currently reads:

According to historian Norman Cantor, the Investiture Controversy was "the turning-point in medieval civilization", marking the end of the Early Middle Ages with the Germanic peoples' "final and decisive" acceptance of Christianity. More importantly, it set the stage for the religious and political system of the High Middle Ages.

But the Investiture Controversy isn't even mentioned in this article, nor on Early Middle Ages. Is this an oversight, or is the controversy simply not that important? If the latter, we could add something like "Most historians do no ascribe the same importance to the controversy as Cantor, and use other events to divide the two periods." -- Beland (talk) 15:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

The Investiture Controversy is absolutely critical to the Middle Ages, at least in terms of politics, religion, international relations, and the evolution of the state, governance, and society. It had great bearing on the life and death of Thomas Becket, one of the most notable figures of the age. The Problem of Two Emperors was also central ideologically, and anything that omits these subjects is certainly not properly covering the middle ages properly. GPinkerton (talk) 20:19, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Chart

The chart is confusing and wrong. Middle Ages is a period which describes the history of Christian-Occident Europe. It is known as a period of Western world. In the chart there are states listed that do not belong in the list. Historical incorrectness. Needs to be corrected.--88.71.228.145 (talk) 11:23, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about. It's just identifying everything that's on the chart (which was chosen for its aesthetic), not claiming that they were all part of the High Middle Ages. And besides, knowing what the surrounding states were at the time is relevant and useful information.24.59.152.85 (talk) 02:49, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• France 1154 Eng.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

"Relgion in the High Middle Ages" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Relgion in the High Middle Ages has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 5 § Relgion in the High Middle Ages until a consensus is reached. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 20:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)