1. To what extent is the term “Renaissance” a valid concept for a distinct period in early modern European history? (1985) (Mc 13, P 2)
"The Renaissance was a true rebirth in art, politics, and thought". That is how the Renaissance is usually how the renaissance is described, as the rebirth of modern thinking. Was the Renaissance truly a rebirth in literature, art, and politics, or was it a continuation of the Medieval Times? There are not only two different thoughts to how the Renaissance came about and what it meant to during the times between the 14th and 17th century, many different thoughts and ideas about the Renaissance are still argued today.
In Birdsall S. Viault's book, Modern European History it states," there is the idea that, sometime around 1350, a sudden rebirth of literature, art and scholarship began in Italy". In that line from the book it is commenting on how people think that a drastic change in the way Europeans lived happened over night. That statement is also making a slight fun of the people who think of the Renaissance was a rebirth. The way the Renaissance may not be considered the rebirth is the thought that it was just the continuation of the growing medieval European civilization. During the Medieval Times, Romanesque and Gothic architecture began to form, the first universities were established and scholastic philosophy began to develop. It is sometimes considered that the "rebirth" was more of a continuation of what was already happening for hundreds of years.
In the, A History of Western Society by Buckler, Hill, and McKay it states that, "The fourteenth century witnessed the beginnings of remarkable changes in many aspects of Italian society...these cultural changes haven collectively labeled the "Renaissance." It is agreeing with the opinion that the Renaissance was a rebirth in economic and political ways, but also just the matter of the times becoming more modern. The Renaissance went through many individuals that...