Burckhardt’s Evaluation of the Italian Renaissance
Burckhardt, in his The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, glorified the Italian Renaissance as a “rebirth,” a divergence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries from traditional medieval thought and action. He classified his description into six parts and considered himself the discoverer of this new age of antiquity and efflorescence. Yet, historians contradict him on even this point, as well as many others in his portrayal of the Renaissance. Categorizing this era into “The State as a Work of Art,” “The Development of the Individual,” “The Revival of Antiquity,” “The Discovery of the World of Man,” “Society and Festivals,” and finally “Morality and Religion,” Burckhardt attempted to make a distinct separation between the Middle Ages, which did not entirely happen.
Burckhardt, first of all, claimed that the Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and was confined to Italy and its city states. Historians of his own time, however, disagreed. Some believed that a Renaissance occurred as early as Emperor Charlemagne, while Charles Haskins offered that a similar renaissance occurred in the twelfth century. Also, it is known that the Renaissance was, in fact, not centered only on Italy. The Northern Renaissance is characterized by the same increase in artistic skill and focus on humanity and science. The impact of the Renaissance stretched to England, France, and Spain as well, hence refuting one of Burckhardt’s claims.
Still, Burckhardt’s first idea, “The State as a Work of Art” which describes the new forms of government throughout Italy and the emphasis on politics, purports to be true. This, however, may be do to the fact that argument leaves little room for dispute as Burckhardt bases it entirely in fact. In this section, the historian simply repeats facts. The city-state was the main political structure in Italy, and almost all were ruled by some form of an oligarchy. Yet, Burckhardt states that a person’s loyalty lied with his city, not his country. To some extent he was correct, but there were exceptions. While Francesco Petrarcha’s father remained completely involved in his city, Florence, right up until his exile, Petrarch himself considered all of Italy as his home, and France as well. Through his travels, he visited countless cities throughout Europe and participated some way in them all. In Avignon, he sought employment with the papacy, and at Bologna, he studied literature and writing. Yet, for the most part, citizens remained faithful to one city-state—the Medicis to Florence and the Sforzas to Milan.
Burckhardt called the second of his “discoveries,” in which he describes the release of the bondage of classes inherited from the Middle Ages, “The Revival of the Individual.” With this freedom, Burckhardt believed, a man could now be able to “remake the world.” Yet, according to some historians, a class struggle still existed. As Burckhardt states in “The State as a Work of Art,” rule was by the few, an oligarchy, not by the masses. In some states, such as Florence, only the wealthy merchants influenced or ran government. The common people were virtually unaffected by the Renaissance as a whole, and had little room for the pursuit of fame.
One area where Burckhardt’s statements hold nearly true is in “The Revival of Antiquity.” Humanism came directly from this idea as a way to use classical texts and knowledge to facilitate the learning of the day. In all aspects of Renaissance society came evidence of classical influence. Columns appeared in architecture, the human body in sculpture, and personal gain in politics—all ideas present since the Greco-Roman period. Yet, Burckhardt classified the Renaissance as pagan, which they were not. True, many moved toward secular existence, but citizens still included the Church in their daily lives. Michalangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and Leonard Da Vinci painted the Last Supper, both works used to educate others in religion and spirituality. Still, there was, as Burckhardt describes, an increased focus an anatomy and the human body, and generally secular subject matter.
“The World of Man” was most likely Burckhardt’s most credible observation of this period in time which he labeled the “Renaissance.” Science flourished as people began to look away from religious answers to explain phenomenon around them. Copernicus developed the heliocentric theory of the universe, contradicting the beliefs and doctrines of the Church. Religious dogma was replaced by reason. In art, painters included their patrons into their works, even those which were religious. Leonardo Da Vinci studied anatomy not only to further his knowledge of the body but more so to recreate it in art. Biography became an accepted and widely published form of literature, and historians began to appear, much as they had in Roman times. Individualism became an accepted philosophy, and nature began to capture the attention of prominent thinkers. This combination vigorously supports Burckhardt’s concept of the Renaissance, or at least this section of The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy.
The fifth section of the same historical work describes again the equalization of social ranks and the increase of courtly behavior. This, however, was not entirely true. The formalized customs Burckhardt speaks of and Castiglione describes in the Courtier really applied only to the upper crust of society, not the common people of the masses. Burckhardt also tells of the availability of cultural accomplishment, which for many did not exist. Most, in fact, did not have the opportunities that the aristocracy and the wealthy merchant class had. If anything, the gap between classes grew, as the cultured few grew away from the common many. His last point in this particular section states that women also had more opportunities and became equals to men. This too was not correct. The position of women in the Renaissance declined. While women were generally more educated, they were used mostly as pawns in marital arrangements between families, educated only to increase the warmth of the household. While some exceptions like Caterina Sforza did exist, the general place of women was subservient to men. While a man could indulge in sexual pleasures as often as he liked, a women was restricted to the bonds of marriage.
Burckhardt’s final section, “Morality and Religion,” again described the decline of religion in the Italian Renaissance. To some extent, this view was valid. After events like the Black Death and the Great Schism, the Church lost much of its hold in society. He described the Renaissance as pagan, mostly because of the study of classical texts. However, as described before, some religious influence did remain—more than Burckhardt realized. Such generalizations are what led to the falsity of many of Burckhardt’s theories.
Burckhardt’s example shows the bias historians can posses and the downfalls of secondary sources. By generalizing too quickly, Burckhardt made critical mistakes when formulating his ideas about the Italian Renaissance. From its location to its religion, this historian erred. Luckily, other historians work to disprove such statements so that one may gain an accurate understanding of the past, uninfluenced by one man’s judgment and over-simplification.
Main: History
2nd: Italian Renaissance
3rd: Burckhardt
Burckhardt’s Evaluation of the Italian Renaissance
Burckhardt, in his The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, glorified the Italian Renaissance as a “rebirth,” a divergence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries from traditional medieval thought and action. He classified his description into six parts and considered himself the discoverer of this new age of antiquity and efflorescence. Yet, historians contradict him on even this point, as well as many others in his portrayal of the Renaissance. Categorizing this era into “The State as a Work of Art,” “The Development of the Individual,” “The Revival of Antiquity,” “The Discovery of the World of Man,” “Society and Festivals,” and finally “Morality and Religion,” Burckhardt attempted to make a distinct separation between the Middle Ages, which did not entirely happen.
Burckhardt, first of all, claimed that the Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and was confined to Italy and its city states. Historians of his own time, however, disagreed. Some believed that a Renaissance occurred as early as Emperor Charlemagne, while Charles Haskins offered that a similar renaissance occurred in the twelfth century. Also, it is known that the Renaissance was, in fact, not centered only on Italy. The Northern Renaissance is characterized by the same increase in artistic skill and focus on humanity and science. The impact of the Renaissance stretched to England, France, and Spain as well, hence refuting one of Burckhardt’s claims.
Still, Burckhardt’s first idea, “The State as a Work of Art” which describes the new forms of government throughout Italy and the emphasis on politics, purports to be true. This, however, may be do to the fact that argument leaves little room for dispute as Burckhardt bases it entirely in fact. In this section, the historian simply repeats facts. The city-state was the main political structure in Italy, and almost all were ruled by some form of an oligarchy. Yet, Burckhardt states that a person’s loyalty lied with his city, not his country. To some extent he was correct, but there were exceptions. While Francesco Petrarcha’s father remained completely involved in his city, Florence, right up until his exile, Petrarch himself considered all of Italy as his home, and France as well. Through his travels, he visited countless cities throughout Europe and participated some way in them all. In Avignon, he sought employment with the papacy, and at Bologna, he studied literature and writing. Yet, for the most part, citizens remained faithful to one city-state—the Medicis to Florence and the Sforzas to Milan.
Burckhardt called the second of his “discoveries,” in which he describes the release of the bondage of classes inherited from the Middle Ages, “The Revival of the Individual.” With this freedom, Burckhardt believed, a man could now be able to “remake the world.” Yet, according to some historians, a class struggle still existed. As Burckhardt states in “The State as a Work of Art,” rule was by the few, an oligarchy, not by the masses. In some states, such as Florence, only the wealthy merchants influenced or ran government. The common people were virtually unaffected by the Renaissance as a whole, and had little room for the pursuit of fame.
One area where Burckhardt’s statements hold nearly true is in “The Revival of Antiquity.” Humanism came directly from this idea as a way to use classical texts and knowledge to facilitate the learning of the day. In all aspects of Renaissance society came evidence of classical influence. Columns appeared in architecture, the human body in sculpture, and personal gain in politics—all ideas present since the Greco-Roman period. Yet, Burckhardt classified the Renaissance as pagan, which they were not. True, many moved toward secular existence, but citizens still included the Church in their daily lives. Michalangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and Leonard Da Vinci painted the Last Supper, both works used to educate others in religion and spirituality. Still, there was, as Burckhardt describes, an increased focus an anatomy and the human body, and generally secular subject matter.
“The World of Man” was most likely Burckhardt’s most credible observation of this period in time which he labeled the “Renaissance.” Science flourished as people began to look away from religious answers to explain phenomenon around them. Copernicus developed the heliocentric theory of the universe, contradicting the beliefs and doctrines of the Church. Religious dogma was replaced by reason. In art, painters included their patrons into their works, even those which were religious. Leonardo Da Vinci studied anatomy not only to further his knowledge of the body but more so to recreate it in art. Biography became an accepted and widely published form of literature, and historians began to appear, much as they had in Roman times. Individualism became an accepted philosophy, and nature began to capture the attention of prominent thinkers. This combination vigorously supports Burckhardt’s concept of the Renaissance, or at least this section of The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy.
The fifth section of the same historical work describes again the equalization of social ranks and the increase of courtly behavior. This, however, was not entirely true. The formalized customs Burckhardt speaks of and Castiglione describes in the Courtier really applied only to the upper crust of society, not the common people of the masses. Burckhardt also tells of the availability of cultural accomplishment, which for many did not exist. Most, in fact, did not have the opportunities that the aristocracy and the wealthy merchant class had. If anything, the gap between classes grew, as the cultured few grew away from the common many. His last point in this particular section states that women also had more opportunities and became equals to men. This too was not correct. The position of women in the Renaissance declined. While women were generally more educated, they were used mostly as pawns in marital arrangements between families, educated only to increase the warmth of the household. While some exceptions like Caterina Sforza did exist, the general place of women was subservient to men. While a man could indulge in sexual pleasures as often as he liked, a women was restricted to the bonds of marriage.
Burckhardt’s final section, “Morality and Religion,” again described the decline of religion in the Italian Renaissance. To some extent, this view was valid. After events like the Black Death and the Great Schism, the Church lost much of its hold in society. He described the Renaissance as pagan, mostly because of the study of classical texts. However, as described before, some religious influence did remain—more than Burckhardt realized. Such generalizations are what led to the falsity of many of Burckhardt’s theories.
Burckhardt’s example shows the bias historians can posses and the downfalls of secondary sources. By generalizing too quickly, Burckhardt made critical mistakes when formulating his ideas about the Italian Renaissance. From its location to its religion, this historian erred. Luckily, other historians work to disprove such statements so that one may gain an accurate understanding of the past, uninfluenced by one man’s judgment and over-simplification.
Main: History
2nd: Italian Renaissance
3rd: Burckhardt
Burckhardt’s Evaluation of the Italian Renaissance
Burckhardt, in his The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, glorified the Italian Renaissance as a “rebirth,” a divergence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries from traditional medieval thought and action. He classified his description into six parts and considered himself the discoverer of this new age of antiquity and efflorescence. Yet, historians contradict him on even this point, as well as many others in his portrayal of the Renaissance. Categorizing this era into “The State as a Work of Art,” “The Development of the Individual,” “The Revival of Antiquity,” “The Discovery of the World of Man,” “Society and Festivals,” and finally “Morality and Religion,” Burckhardt attempted to make a distinct separation between the Middle Ages, which did not entirely happen.
Burckhardt, first of all, claimed that the Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and was confined to Italy and its city states. Historians of his own time, however, disagreed. Some believed that a Renaissance occurred as early as Emperor Charlemagne, while Charles Haskins offered that a similar renaissance occurred in the twelfth century. Also, it is known that the Renaissance was, in fact, not centered only on Italy. The Northern Renaissance is characterized by the same increase in artistic skill and focus on humanity and science. The impact of the Renaissance stretched to England, France, and Spain as well, hence refuting one of Burckhardt’s claims.
Still, Burckhardt’s first idea, “The State as a Work of Art” which describes the new forms of government throughout Italy and the emphasis on politics, purports to be true. This, however, may be do to the fact that argument leaves little room for dispute as Burckhardt bases it entirely in fact. In this section, the historian simply repeats facts. The city-state was the main political structure in Italy, and almost all were ruled by some form of an oligarchy. Yet, Burckhardt states that a person’s loyalty lied with his city, not his country. To some extent he was correct, but there were exceptions. While Francesco Petrarcha’s father remained completely involved in his city, Florence, right up until his exile, Petrarch himself considered all of Italy as his home, and France as well. Through his travels, he visited countless cities throughout Europe and participated some way in them all. In Avignon, he sought employment with the papacy, and at Bologna, he studied literature and writing. Yet, for the most part, citizens remained faithful to one city-state—the Medicis to Florence and the Sforzas to Milan.
Burckhardt called the second of his “discoveries,” in which he describes the release of the bondage of classes inherited from the Middle Ages, “The Revival of the Individual.” With this freedom, Burckhardt believed, a man could now be able to “remake the world.” Yet, according to some historians, a class struggle still existed. As Burckhardt states in “The State as a Work of Art,” rule was by the few, an oligarchy, not by the masses. In some states, such as Florence, only the wealthy merchants influenced or ran government. The common people were virtually unaffected by the Renaissance as a whole, and had little room for the pursuit of fame.
One area where Burckhardt’s statements hold nearly true is in “The Revival of Antiquity.” Humanism came directly from this idea as a way to use classical texts and knowledge to facilitate the learning of the day. In all aspects of Renaissance society came evidence of classical influence. Columns appeared in architecture, the human body in sculpture, and personal gain in politics—all ideas present since the Greco-Roman period. Yet, Burckhardt classified the Renaissance as pagan, which they were not. True, many moved toward secular existence, but citizens still included the Church in their daily lives. Michalangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and Leonard Da Vinci painted the Last Supper, both works used to educate others in religion and spirituality. Still, there was, as Burckhardt describes, an increased focus an anatomy and the human body, and generally secular subject matter.
“The World of Man” was most likely Burckhardt’s most credible observation of this period in time which he labeled the “Renaissance.” Science flourished as people began to look away from religious answers to explain phenomenon around them. Copernicus developed the heliocentric theory of the universe, contradicting the beliefs and doctrines of the Church. Religious dogma was replaced by reason. In art, painters included their patrons into their works, even those which were religious. Leonardo Da Vinci studied anatomy not only to further his knowledge of the body but more so to recreate it in art. Biography became an accepted and widely published form of literature, and historians began to appear, much as they had in Roman times. Individualism became an accepted philosophy, and nature began to capture the attention of prominent thinkers. This combination vigorously supports Burckhardt’s concept of the Renaissance, or at least this section of The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy.
The fifth section of the same historical work describes again the equalization of social ranks and the increase of courtly behavior. This, however, was not entirely true. The formalized customs Burckhardt speaks of and Castiglione describes in the Courtier really applied only to the upper crust of society, not the common people of the masses. Burckhardt also tells of the availability of cultural accomplishment, which for many did not exist. Most, in fact, did not have the opportunities that the aristocracy and the wealthy merchant class had. If anything, the gap between classes grew, as the cultured few grew away from the common many. His last point in this particular section states that women also had more opportunities and became equals to men. This too was not correct. The position of women in the Renaissance declined. While women were generally more educated, they were used mostly as pawns in marital arrangements between families, educated only to increase the warmth of the household. While some exceptions like Caterina Sforza did exist, the general place of women was subservient to men. While a man could indulge in sexual pleasures as often as he liked, a women was restricted to the bonds of marriage.
Burckhardt’s final section, “Morality and Religion,” again described the decline of religion in the Italian Renaissance. To some extent, this view was valid. After events like the Black Death and the Great Schism, the Church lost much of its hold in society. He described the Renaissance as pagan, mostly because of the study of classical texts. However, as described before, some religious influence did remain—more than Burckhardt realized. Such generalizations are what led to the falsity of many of Burckhardt’s theories.
Burckhardt’s example shows the bias historians can posses and the downfalls of secondary sources. By generalizing too quickly, Burckhardt made critical mistakes when formulating his ideas about the Italian Renaissance. From its location to its religion, this historian erred. Luckily, other historians work to disprove such statements so that one may gain an accurate understanding of the past, uninfluenced by one man’s judgment and over-simplification.
Main: History
2nd: Italian Renaissance
3rd: Burckhardt
Burckhardt’s Evaluation of the Italian Renaissance
Burckhardt, in his The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, glorified the Italian Renaissance as a “rebirth,” a divergence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries from traditional medieval thought and action. He classified his description into six parts and considered himself the discoverer of this new age of antiquity and efflorescence. Yet, historians contradict him on even this point, as well as many others in his portrayal of the Renaissance. Categorizing this era into “The State as a Work of Art,” “The Development of the Individual,” “The Revival of Antiquity,” “The Discovery of the World of Man,” “Society and Festivals,” and finally “Morality and Religion,” Burckhardt attempted to make a distinct separation between the Middle Ages, which did not entirely happen.
Burckhardt, first of all, claimed that the Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and was confined to Italy and its city states. Historians of his own time, however, disagreed. Some believed that a Renaissance occurred as early as Emperor Charlemagne, while Charles Haskins offered that a similar renaissance occurred in the twelfth century. Also, it is known that the Renaissance was, in fact, not centered only on Italy. The Northern Renaissance is characterized by the same increase in artistic skill and focus on humanity and science. The impact of the Renaissance stretched to England, France, and Spain as well, hence refuting one of Burckhardt’s claims.
Still, Burckhardt’s first idea, “The State as a Work of Art” which describes the new forms of government throughout Italy and the emphasis on politics, purports to be true. This, however, may be do to the fact that argument leaves little room for dispute as Burckhardt bases it entirely in fact. In this section, the historian simply repeats facts. The city-state was the main political structure in Italy, and almost all were ruled by some form of an oligarchy. Yet, Burckhardt states that a person’s loyalty lied with his city, not his country. To some extent he was correct, but there were exceptions. While Francesco Petrarcha’s father remained completely involved in his city, Florence, right up until his exile, Petrarch himself considered all of Italy as his home, and France as well. Through his travels, he visited countless cities throughout Europe and participated some way in them all. In Avignon, he sought employment with the papacy, and at Bologna, he studied literature and writing. Yet, for the most part, citizens remained faithful to one city-state—the Medicis to Florence and the Sforzas to Milan.
Burckhardt called the second of his “discoveries,” in which he describes the release of the bondage of classes inherited from the Middle Ages, “The Revival of the Individual.” With this freedom, Burckhardt believed, a man could now be able to “remake the world.” Yet, according to some historians, a class struggle still existed. As Burckhardt states in “The State as a Work of Art,” rule was by the few, an oligarchy, not by the masses. In some states, such as Florence, only the wealthy merchants influenced or ran government. The common people were virtually unaffected by the Renaissance as a whole, and had little room for the pursuit of fame.
One area where Burckhardt’s statements hold nearly true is in “The Revival of Antiquity.” Humanism came directly from this idea as a way to use classical texts and knowledge to facilitate the learning of the day. In all aspects of Renaissance society came evidence of classical influence. Columns appeared in architecture, the human body in sculpture, and personal gain in politics—all ideas present since the Greco-Roman period. Yet, Burckhardt classified the Renaissance as pagan, which they were not. True, many moved toward secular existence, but citizens still included the Church in their daily lives. Michalangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, and Leonard Da Vinci painted the Last Supper, both works used to educate others in religion and spirituality. Still, there was, as Burckhardt describes, an increased focus an anatomy and the human body, and generally secular subject matter.
“The World of Man” was most likely Burckhardt’s most credible observation of this period in time which he labeled the “Renaissance.” Science flourished as people began to look away from religious answers to explain phenomenon around them. Copernicus developed the heliocentric theory of the universe, contradicting the beliefs and doctrines of the Church. Religious dogma was replaced by reason. In art, painters included their patrons into their works, even those which were religious. Leonardo Da Vinci studied anatomy not only to further his knowledge of the body but more so to recreate it in art. Biography became an accepted and widely published form of literature, and historians began to appear, much as they had in Roman times. Individualism became an accepted philosophy, and nature began to capture the attention of prominent thinkers. This combination vigorously supports Burckhardt’s concept of the Renaissance, or at least this section of The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy.
The fifth section of the same historical work describes again the equalization of social ranks and the increase of courtly behavior. This, however, was not entirely true. The formalized customs Burckhardt speaks of and Castiglione describes in the Courtier really applied only to the upper crust of society, not the common people of the masses. Burckhardt also tells of the availability of cultural accomplishment, which for many did not exist. Most, in fact, did not have the opportunities that the aristocracy and the wealthy merchant class had. If anything, the gap between classes grew, as the cultured few grew away from the common many. His last point in this particular section states that women also had more opportunities and became equals to men. This too was not correct. The position of women in the Renaissance declined. While women were generally more educated, they were used mostly as pawns in marital arrangements between families, educated only to increase the warmth of the household. While some exceptions like Caterina Sforza did exist, the general place of women was subservient to men. While a man could indulge in sexual pleasures as often as he liked, a women was restricted to the bonds of marriage.
Burckhardt’s final section, “Morality and Religion,” again described the decline of religion in the Italian Renaissance. To some extent, this view was valid. After events like the Black Death and the Great Schism, the Church lost much of its hold in society. He described the Renaissance as pagan, mostly because of the study of classical texts. However, as described before, some religious influence did remain—more than Burckhardt realized. Such generalizations are what led to the falsity of many of Burckhardt’s theories.
Burckhardt’s example shows the bias historians can posses and the downfalls of secondary sources. By generalizing too quickly, Burckhardt made critical mistakes when formulating his ideas about the Italian Renaissance. From its location to its religion, this historian erred. Luckily, other historians work to disprove such statements so that one may gain an accurate understanding of the past, uninfluenced by one man’s judgment and over-simplification.