A medieval peasant child could detect symbolic language in a fairy tale communicating eternal meta patterns in life that today most adults can't comprehend.
When modern man hears "myth" he thinks untrue, when myth is more than true, it's giving you a glimpse into the future if you recognize the patterns.
From a Christian perspective, I'm reading "Through New Eyes" by James B Jordan, and "A House for My Name" by Leithart, these get into what Jonathan Pageau's "Symbolic World" does for the Biblical symbolic worldview most modern Christians in the West have forgotten since the "Enlightenment," and for that reason often miss out on the enchanted worldview where the ancients were looking to the stars and realizing they were seeing a microcosm pattern of heaven, man being the microcosmic fulcrum where God united the heavens (intellectual) and the earth (body).
C.S. Lewis, Chesterton, and Tolkien were all trying to bring back this higher medieval understanding:
Lewis and Tolkien: G.K. Chesterton, Myth, and the Imagination - Ryan Reeves
Glad to meet another Theopolls institute, Chesterton, and Dante lover.
Have you read Sayers' "Letters to a Diminished Church?" Her understanding of symbolism and allegory, not only in terms of their use in literature, but in their patterned recurrence in history, is simply amazing.
I studied under Leland Ryken at Wheaton, but the Theopoilis crew have exponentially expanded on the foundation he gave me. It's amazing how many people completely misinterpret Revelation, which is heavily symbolic, but more importantly a compilation of allusions to the Law and Prophets. Like so much of Jesus' teaching, compressed citations and allusions serve as synecdoche, so that you can't really understand what is going on without understanding the passage(s) being alluded to.
Well Dan - those beliefs of the medieval peasants were based on the limited information that the people of those times had available to them – an era when factual information was difficult to come by because books were few, very expensive, and almost inaccessible to most people - even if they were literate. One cannot blame them for coming up with the wrong scientific conclusions.
On the other hand, compare our medieval ancestors with so many ‘educated’ people today – who, with almost instantaneous access to the world’s knowledge available on their ‘smart’ phones - choose to believe memes such as the assertion that men can become women and give birth - or that human life is facing extinction because of a purported man-made ‘Climate Crisis’ – mainly because all the talking heads reading off their teleprompters on the nightly fake ‘News’ and the equally fake ‘experts’ they cite are telling them that they must believe that.
On that basis I give more credit to the intelligence of the medieval peasantry. At least they managed to survive in conditions of great hardship and pass their genetic inheritance on to posterity - which is more that can be said for today’s ‘educated’ generations, who with their minuscule birth rates, have become victim to the extraordinary fantasies and gullibilities preached by the wankers who run modern universities.
I'd be careful to dismiss those ideas, of devils and the earth being the center of all things, as foolish. While they may not be literally true, both things you said have a very important element of truth to them that we'd be wise to remember: the earth IS the center of our own experiences, and therefore the center of our universes, and there are malicious entities, human and otherwise, circling us everywhere we go, which we'd be wise to pay heed to.
I don’t think modern education is at all concerned with teaching facts. The opposite is the case, knowledge is eschewed in favour of skills and strategies. Progressive constructivist teaching tries to train people how to think, but the ‘what’ comes before the ‘how’. You can’t think critically when you have no domain knowledge.
Modern education was founded by pragmatist philosophers who believe the truth is literally determined by what is convenient to humans. It’s a totally insane ideology and the reason for some many problems vs the medieval universities were about studying the natures of the things
As someone with over 30 years in public education you could not be more right. Reforms to celebrate "critical thinking" are instruments to destroy it by demeaning the very foundation it could be built on.
I teach a small group of 8th graders for Sunday School. It was chaotic most of the time. Then I admitted that I was guilty of something we all were doing - listening with the intent to respond, not to understand.
Things settled down at a surprisingly quick rate. We’re covering more information, and more importantly, we’re understanding more.
Teach your kids to listen 𝙩𝙤 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙙, not to simply reply in a funny or clever way.
When I read a book from the 18th century and then suddenly switch to any modern social media, it's like entering a mental asylum.
And it's even funnier when that asylum is trying to convince me that we are now at the peak of intelligence and knowledge because we know how to scroll TikTok videos on our smartphones.
You also have to consider that, theoretically, only the cream of the crop of 18th-century thought has trickled down to us -- whereas today you get a smattering of trillions of algorithmitized ramblings on social media. So, it's a bit of apples-to-oranges comparison.
Only certain people could read and write back then, even less had access to reproducing their work. Now, everyone is able to voice their opinion and get followers without merit.
There are two kinds of people: Those whose pride in their smartphone implies they believe they could have certainly invented it if it hadn't been placed between their forepaws, and those who hope they would be able to come up with fire.
You’re forgetting the third type of person: the type of person who’s mainly focused on getting better at racing sailboats. Smart phones don’t help one racing sailboats and a fire on a sailboat is always a bad day.
Revisionist history and Tartaria bullshit. You all should be ashamed.
The medieval monks did not figure out "the very foundation of physics and chemistry" - no. You're taking a Nostradamus-esque vague statement and projecting onto it.
"the historian Gascoigne writes that there were 30,000 students at the University of Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century." - per year? Obviously, blatantly false. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2337921?seq=5 reports about 50 graduates per year in the 1500s; you imagine it dropped by 95% or more?
You say that because somebody said it in Latin, it has to be true? This isn't even worth retorting; no point helping you become better at lying.
Hey Alex, you strike me as an arrogant confrontational jerk stain. Do you have no idea how to address a woman and a scholar? Who raised you? I agree that the numbers of students at the Universities of Paris, Oxford and Bologna were probably inflated - medieval writers often inflated the numbers of combatants in an army or battle and too, they were known to inflate the numbers of people living in a given city or town, so yes; 30,000 students living in Oxford and attending the university is most likely a stretch.
On the other hand medieval clerks and scribes could be painstakingly exact about the number of nails needed to construct a new roof, or the number of els of cloth of gold necessary for a bridal dress, or the number of oxen, sheep, lambs, goats, chickens and geese + barrels of wine and loaves of bread necessary to provision an army en route to a siege, so you know what? If you’re a scholar of the period you roll with it.
What’s your fucking damage, smarty pants? Are you a medieval scholar? There’s no suggestion that you hold an advanced degree in anything on your home page. And if you’re going to make a bogus reference to Nostradamus (now there’s a respected source! You’re about 3 centuries late with that, numb nuts) could you give a proper citation like any professional historian?
You owe our charming author an apology for your boorish, insulting, and small dicked attack on her piece. Someone needs to put up or shut up. I think, in your case, shutting the fuck up s a great idea.
History is interesting. It is likely that attendance did drop a large degree.
England went through a time of great difficulty in the 14th century. The population dropped by more than 60%. At the start of the century England had around 5.5 million people and by the end of it was down to ~2.5 million.
Population levels didn't recover until the 16th century.
You can go to the university yourself and see the old buildings. They built them with the capacity to teach in the low thousands.
I don't know whether Gascoigne's statement is true, but after reading Alex's comment, literally the first two things I thought of were "what about the Black Death?" and "did everyone complete the graduation process if it required the trivium and the quadrivium?" Looks like you did the same.
Someone who tosses out sources in the 'acktschually' fashion, without bothering to spend the slightest effort interpreting what is in them, is the very epitome of the degraded intellectual state that the author is criticizing. Behold the modern mind, stuffed like a glutton's gut with information, utterly incapable of processing any of it.
As someone else pointed out, the point the author was making about Latin was that the precision of the number can't be doubted because of the language, not that it being in Latin makes it automatically true. Your reading comprehension needs some work.
Regarding the university numbers, a quick Google search shows that the average student body at Oxford in the 14th century was likely around 300 students per year. So not 30,000, but considering the low population of Englad at the time, not an insubstantial amount either (and that doesn't even factor all the students at the various other schools in the various cathedrals around the country at the time, either).
Lastly, you denigrate the idea that medieval scholars established the foundations of the modern sciences, but you don't provide any evidence at all that this is not the case. In reality, most scientific disciplines were greatly advanced during the medieval era. Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics, may have lived in the 19th century, however he was a Catholic monk who was himself following in the footsteps of his medieval forebears.
You are absolutely correct, ma’am. Smarter, wiser, able to see things and understand things that we cannot. They would recognize the demons among us. Americans worship them. As a matter of fact, American cultural imperialism is a big reason the world is stupid. Your wonderful essay reminds us of a better time, and a sense of spirit and place we can reach again.
Interesting, thanks. I had never seen those university numbers before. But in addition to them, many larger churches had a bunch of clerics in minor orders who would likewise get an education for as long as they stayed. Add to that the boy altar servers (the size of medieval church chancels bears testimony to their numbers) and you have a situation where the majority of men had an education.
This was an amazing piece. I'm about to attend the Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio. I'm fortunate that I was given a scholarship, but my goal with my degree is to evangelize and work in apologetics, I hope you don't mind me referencing your article here at some point in the future. Also, where could one find works by Gascoigne and other historians you've mentioned - sort of a stupid man's beginners guide to learning about these amazing people. Thank you, once I start school I plan to subscribe. God Bless- In Christ <3
This was a fascinating read. I’m really interested in the Christian origins of these (once) great institutions that we’ve inherited. Have you or will you write about hospitals and their origin?
A well-written, illuminating article. I did, however, come across one mistake that you may wish to revise:
"Anyone who has even briefly studies physics and chemistry will recognize this electric sentence immediately."
I know it's small but as an English teacher I couldn't help myself. Keep doing what you're doing, of course; almost all that you write is a joy to read.
Always delighted to see a shout out to Albertus Magnus!
While what you say had much weight and truth I maintain hope. I come to know much of what I know through a deep love of reading but also University Education. So I have much hope, I know many brilliant educators and teachers who believe in the virtues of a classic education and hold value for history.
Though many of these modern teachers I admit are also members of the clergy. I suppose that comes with Seminary and studying History though. The rest of this world studies the grift and grind, there’s been an appalling shift away from a value for classical and liberal arts education for almost two decades now.
The modern context is upsetting. I feel many people do value these ideas and would study them more deeply if they had the time. Who has time when it’s all hustle harder, hustle and grind…and to dust you shall return.
I’m glad to see parallel education methods are on the rise. My own children have attended public school but I am very blessed to have been able to give them much schooling at home as well.
Keep raising this alarm. Your post does speak to so many facets of what ails us socially from toxic masculinity, to modern arrogance, to mental health crisis and beyond.
Universities are pretty corrupted, and much of what they teach would better be taught online, unless hands on are needed. I think mentoring is a better way as well. with nursing or medical stuff.
Wow. What an amazing summary of the university! So many wonderful lines and thoughts and reminders of the richness of our holy Church. Thank you for such a beautiful teaching!
A medieval peasant child could detect symbolic language in a fairy tale communicating eternal meta patterns in life that today most adults can't comprehend.
Rapunzel - The Double Symbology of Hair - Pageau
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdLAuZGmUSI
When modern man hears "myth" he thinks untrue, when myth is more than true, it's giving you a glimpse into the future if you recognize the patterns.
From a Christian perspective, I'm reading "Through New Eyes" by James B Jordan, and "A House for My Name" by Leithart, these get into what Jonathan Pageau's "Symbolic World" does for the Biblical symbolic worldview most modern Christians in the West have forgotten since the "Enlightenment," and for that reason often miss out on the enchanted worldview where the ancients were looking to the stars and realizing they were seeing a microcosm pattern of heaven, man being the microcosmic fulcrum where God united the heavens (intellectual) and the earth (body).
C.S. Lewis, Chesterton, and Tolkien were all trying to bring back this higher medieval understanding:
Lewis and Tolkien: G.K. Chesterton, Myth, and the Imagination - Ryan Reeves
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McnaNqj_vA4
This on Dante's Paradiso brings to light the medieval enchanted cosmology:
Dante's Paradiso & The 9 Levels of Heaven Explained - Windigoon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b__PdJegZTA
Yes!! Pageau all the way.
Glad to meet another Theopolls institute, Chesterton, and Dante lover.
Have you read Sayers' "Letters to a Diminished Church?" Her understanding of symbolism and allegory, not only in terms of their use in literature, but in their patterned recurrence in history, is simply amazing.
I studied under Leland Ryken at Wheaton, but the Theopoilis crew have exponentially expanded on the foundation he gave me. It's amazing how many people completely misinterpret Revelation, which is heavily symbolic, but more importantly a compilation of allusions to the Law and Prophets. Like so much of Jesus' teaching, compressed citations and allusions serve as synecdoche, so that you can't really understand what is going on without understanding the passage(s) being alluded to.
Thanks for these links.
Yes, but they also believed that devils were flying in the air around them, and that their earth was the center of the universe.
Well Dan - those beliefs of the medieval peasants were based on the limited information that the people of those times had available to them – an era when factual information was difficult to come by because books were few, very expensive, and almost inaccessible to most people - even if they were literate. One cannot blame them for coming up with the wrong scientific conclusions.
On the other hand, compare our medieval ancestors with so many ‘educated’ people today – who, with almost instantaneous access to the world’s knowledge available on their ‘smart’ phones - choose to believe memes such as the assertion that men can become women and give birth - or that human life is facing extinction because of a purported man-made ‘Climate Crisis’ – mainly because all the talking heads reading off their teleprompters on the nightly fake ‘News’ and the equally fake ‘experts’ they cite are telling them that they must believe that.
On that basis I give more credit to the intelligence of the medieval peasantry. At least they managed to survive in conditions of great hardship and pass their genetic inheritance on to posterity - which is more that can be said for today’s ‘educated’ generations, who with their minuscule birth rates, have become victim to the extraordinary fantasies and gullibilities preached by the wankers who run modern universities.
I'd be careful to dismiss those ideas, of devils and the earth being the center of all things, as foolish. While they may not be literally true, both things you said have a very important element of truth to them that we'd be wise to remember: the earth IS the center of our own experiences, and therefore the center of our universes, and there are malicious entities, human and otherwise, circling us everywhere we go, which we'd be wise to pay heed to.
After the Atrocities of 2020, do you _not_ believe demons stalk the earth?
I don’t think modern education is at all concerned with teaching facts. The opposite is the case, knowledge is eschewed in favour of skills and strategies. Progressive constructivist teaching tries to train people how to think, but the ‘what’ comes before the ‘how’. You can’t think critically when you have no domain knowledge.
Modern education was founded by pragmatist philosophers who believe the truth is literally determined by what is convenient to humans. It’s a totally insane ideology and the reason for some many problems vs the medieval universities were about studying the natures of the things
As someone with over 30 years in public education you could not be more right. Reforms to celebrate "critical thinking" are instruments to destroy it by demeaning the very foundation it could be built on.
I teach a small group of 8th graders for Sunday School. It was chaotic most of the time. Then I admitted that I was guilty of something we all were doing - listening with the intent to respond, not to understand.
Things settled down at a surprisingly quick rate. We’re covering more information, and more importantly, we’re understanding more.
Teach your kids to listen 𝙩𝙤 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙙, not to simply reply in a funny or clever way.
When I read a book from the 18th century and then suddenly switch to any modern social media, it's like entering a mental asylum.
And it's even funnier when that asylum is trying to convince me that we are now at the peak of intelligence and knowledge because we know how to scroll TikTok videos on our smartphones.
You also have to consider that, theoretically, only the cream of the crop of 18th-century thought has trickled down to us -- whereas today you get a smattering of trillions of algorithmitized ramblings on social media. So, it's a bit of apples-to-oranges comparison.
Can you give me a list of 5 if your most recommended from that era in your reading experience.
I have only read many a book that was aged less than 100 years. So my scope is very limited 😂
Only certain people could read and write back then, even less had access to reproducing their work. Now, everyone is able to voice their opinion and get followers without merit.
There are two kinds of people: Those whose pride in their smartphone implies they believe they could have certainly invented it if it hadn't been placed between their forepaws, and those who hope they would be able to come up with fire.
You’re forgetting the third type of person: the type of person who’s mainly focused on getting better at racing sailboats. Smart phones don’t help one racing sailboats and a fire on a sailboat is always a bad day.
You got a point, there.
Revisionist history and Tartaria bullshit. You all should be ashamed.
The medieval monks did not figure out "the very foundation of physics and chemistry" - no. You're taking a Nostradamus-esque vague statement and projecting onto it.
"the historian Gascoigne writes that there were 30,000 students at the University of Oxford at the end of the thirteenth century." - per year? Obviously, blatantly false. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2337921?seq=5 reports about 50 graduates per year in the 1500s; you imagine it dropped by 95% or more?
You say that because somebody said it in Latin, it has to be true? This isn't even worth retorting; no point helping you become better at lying.
Hey Alex, you strike me as an arrogant confrontational jerk stain. Do you have no idea how to address a woman and a scholar? Who raised you? I agree that the numbers of students at the Universities of Paris, Oxford and Bologna were probably inflated - medieval writers often inflated the numbers of combatants in an army or battle and too, they were known to inflate the numbers of people living in a given city or town, so yes; 30,000 students living in Oxford and attending the university is most likely a stretch.
On the other hand medieval clerks and scribes could be painstakingly exact about the number of nails needed to construct a new roof, or the number of els of cloth of gold necessary for a bridal dress, or the number of oxen, sheep, lambs, goats, chickens and geese + barrels of wine and loaves of bread necessary to provision an army en route to a siege, so you know what? If you’re a scholar of the period you roll with it.
What’s your fucking damage, smarty pants? Are you a medieval scholar? There’s no suggestion that you hold an advanced degree in anything on your home page. And if you’re going to make a bogus reference to Nostradamus (now there’s a respected source! You’re about 3 centuries late with that, numb nuts) could you give a proper citation like any professional historian?
You owe our charming author an apology for your boorish, insulting, and small dicked attack on her piece. Someone needs to put up or shut up. I think, in your case, shutting the fuck up s a great idea.
Gallant, but no less boorish and uncouth. If you’re trying to uplift the notion of a “civil tongue,” you’ve not done a very good job. 🤷♂️
What does her being a woman have to do with anything?
I thought the point about Latin was because Latin has clear numbers, unlike for example Greek or Hebrew. But I’m sure you’ll tell me if I’m wrong
History is interesting. It is likely that attendance did drop a large degree.
England went through a time of great difficulty in the 14th century. The population dropped by more than 60%. At the start of the century England had around 5.5 million people and by the end of it was down to ~2.5 million.
Population levels didn't recover until the 16th century.
You can go to the university yourself and see the old buildings. They built them with the capacity to teach in the low thousands.
In addition we know that multiples more students studied at Oxford without completing a full degree or going through the examination process.
It is only in the last few hundred years that having a piece of paper became so important.
I don't know whether Gascoigne's statement is true, but after reading Alex's comment, literally the first two things I thought of were "what about the Black Death?" and "did everyone complete the graduation process if it required the trivium and the quadrivium?" Looks like you did the same.
Someone who tosses out sources in the 'acktschually' fashion, without bothering to spend the slightest effort interpreting what is in them, is the very epitome of the degraded intellectual state that the author is criticizing. Behold the modern mind, stuffed like a glutton's gut with information, utterly incapable of processing any of it.
As someone else pointed out, the point the author was making about Latin was that the precision of the number can't be doubted because of the language, not that it being in Latin makes it automatically true. Your reading comprehension needs some work.
Regarding the university numbers, a quick Google search shows that the average student body at Oxford in the 14th century was likely around 300 students per year. So not 30,000, but considering the low population of Englad at the time, not an insubstantial amount either (and that doesn't even factor all the students at the various other schools in the various cathedrals around the country at the time, either).
Lastly, you denigrate the idea that medieval scholars established the foundations of the modern sciences, but you don't provide any evidence at all that this is not the case. In reality, most scientific disciplines were greatly advanced during the medieval era. Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics, may have lived in the 19th century, however he was a Catholic monk who was himself following in the footsteps of his medieval forebears.
You are absolutely correct, ma’am. Smarter, wiser, able to see things and understand things that we cannot. They would recognize the demons among us. Americans worship them. As a matter of fact, American cultural imperialism is a big reason the world is stupid. Your wonderful essay reminds us of a better time, and a sense of spirit and place we can reach again.
Interesting, thanks. I had never seen those university numbers before. But in addition to them, many larger churches had a bunch of clerics in minor orders who would likewise get an education for as long as they stayed. Add to that the boy altar servers (the size of medieval church chancels bears testimony to their numbers) and you have a situation where the majority of men had an education.
This was an amazing piece. I'm about to attend the Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio. I'm fortunate that I was given a scholarship, but my goal with my degree is to evangelize and work in apologetics, I hope you don't mind me referencing your article here at some point in the future. Also, where could one find works by Gascoigne and other historians you've mentioned - sort of a stupid man's beginners guide to learning about these amazing people. Thank you, once I start school I plan to subscribe. God Bless- In Christ <3
This was a fascinating read. I’m really interested in the Christian origins of these (once) great institutions that we’ve inherited. Have you or will you write about hospitals and their origin?
I love this!
That title got my attention and a laugh. But I thought hey - maybe they were! Let’s read it. And glad I did. Now I look forward to the next one.
A well-written, illuminating article. I did, however, come across one mistake that you may wish to revise:
"Anyone who has even briefly studies physics and chemistry will recognize this electric sentence immediately."
I know it's small but as an English teacher I couldn't help myself. Keep doing what you're doing, of course; almost all that you write is a joy to read.
An inspired revisiting of an exciting time in the history of the West. More please!
Always delighted to see a shout out to Albertus Magnus!
While what you say had much weight and truth I maintain hope. I come to know much of what I know through a deep love of reading but also University Education. So I have much hope, I know many brilliant educators and teachers who believe in the virtues of a classic education and hold value for history.
Though many of these modern teachers I admit are also members of the clergy. I suppose that comes with Seminary and studying History though. The rest of this world studies the grift and grind, there’s been an appalling shift away from a value for classical and liberal arts education for almost two decades now.
The modern context is upsetting. I feel many people do value these ideas and would study them more deeply if they had the time. Who has time when it’s all hustle harder, hustle and grind…and to dust you shall return.
I’m glad to see parallel education methods are on the rise. My own children have attended public school but I am very blessed to have been able to give them much schooling at home as well.
Keep raising this alarm. Your post does speak to so many facets of what ails us socially from toxic masculinity, to modern arrogance, to mental health crisis and beyond.
Universities are pretty corrupted, and much of what they teach would better be taught online, unless hands on are needed. I think mentoring is a better way as well. with nursing or medical stuff.
Wow. What an amazing summary of the university! So many wonderful lines and thoughts and reminders of the richness of our holy Church. Thank you for such a beautiful teaching!