That is the origin of this work, which serves of support for another of greater scope, centered on the concept of the "Second Thirty Years' War", which links the two world wars with the varied panorama of alterations that arose between them, studying together what happened in Europe between 1914 and 1945. And as previously indicated, part of the causes of contemporary ethnic hatred can be found in the social conflict that spread throughout the continent in the Late Middle Ages and culminated in the Hussite movement of Bohemia , which from a religious reformist origin served as a binder for numerous social, political and national conflicts.
The troubled 14th century
In the first centuries of the Late Middle Ages, a set of very favorable conditions came together for economic and demographic growth in Europe . The favorable climatic circumstances were joined by certain technical innovations to immediately result in a notable improvement in agricultural production, which in turn was the basis for the development of trade and the consequent rise of cities as centers of exchange and provision. of services. It was an authentic urban or bourgeois revolution, an alternative to the still prevailing rural and stately world, a new economy and urban societies, largely free from the feudal regime. The result of all this was a great demographic growth, which took the European population from 30 million in the year 1000 to 74 at the beginning of the 14th century[1]. In fact, there were more populated areas than they would be in the middle of the 19th century, when the supply possibilities would be much greater. Such boom allowed the German colonization of large spaces in the center of the continent, increasing the ethnic heterogeneity of an area already inhabited by peoples of very diverse origins due to the successive waves of invasion received over the centuries.
However, such a development had to coexist with a feudal regime based on the arbitrariness of taxation and the provision of personal services, the existence of a legal inequality that is not conducive to improving agricultural productivity and the omnipresence of some privileged groups (the nobility and the Church) who were gradually forgetting their duties but continued demanding their rights in the form of taxes and benefits[2]. The result was that the middle peasant could not dedicate himself completely to the exploitation of his holding, thus reducing the already too weak production capacities, for which he did not generate surpluses for sale and therefore could not acquire in the market what he that it did not produce by itself.
As a result of these imbalances, throughout the fourteenth century a large number of conflicts took place that put the medieval socio-political fabric at great risk of collapsing. Perhaps the key points to understand them are the succession of climatological disasters, with their corollary of bad harvests, and the extension of the Black Death (1348), which was aggravated by affecting a mass and undernourished population. The result was the decline of the European population to 52 million in 1400[3] and the inability of the feudal powers to face external dangers and attend to the needs of their subjects, thus aggravating the effects of other processes.
On the one hand, the Ottoman expansion in the Balkans throughout the century (culminating with the occupation of Serbia in 1389 and Bulgaria in 1393) and the Hundred Years' War between France and England (1337-1453) created a general warlike environment and the consequent need to collect new taxes . To this should be added the long crisis that the Church experienced, both due to the transfer of the Papacy to Avignon (1309-1377), with what it meant of subordination to temporal power, and due to the Schism that for almost forty years (1378-1417 ) divided Christianity at a time when the pope was still an important reference, not only spiritual but also political. And this despite the widespread corruption of the clergy, both economic and moral, which raised proposals for reform and intense internal struggles.
On the other hand, a large number of popular revolts took place , of very varied origin and development, but which had in common the criticism of the system of fiscal and personal impositions. The main cause was the development of feudal income in its pecuniary form and the strengthening of craft production, whose rise, although it served the feudal system to a certain extent, was at the same time an element foreign to it. The cities were placed next to the nobility; and the bourgeoisie and the peasantry claimed broader rights. Thus there were violent struggles of the serfs and the bourgeoisie against the lay feudal lords in Flanders (combats fought in the cities in 1302 and in the rural areas, especially in 1323), in France (the jacquerie) and the set of alterations that spread throughout Europe between 1378 and 1383:the revolt of the ciompi in Florence, the great uprising in England and the continuing conflicts in French cities. Let's briefly look at the characteristics of the main revolts.
The first was the maritime Flanders uprising between 1323 and 1328, when a cruel civil war devastated the region of Bruges and Ypres. Mainly peasant in origin, it began with riots in the villages and violence against the Castilians and the Count's officers. The revolt was preceded by a series of calamities for two consecutive years; summer droughts accompanied by storms, followed by rainy months alternated with a harsh winter. The riots began over the refusal to pay county tax and tithes. In the countryside, peasants of average condition launched themselves against everything that authority represented, giving rise to murders, fires and looting. However, there was no anarchy, as the rebel chiefs, most of whom were large landowners, assumed their responsibilities, replacing that of the count with a kind of parallel administration.
The middle years of the century represented a period of calm in social turmoil, especially due to the incidence of the Black Death. But in 1358 a new peasant uprising of great importance took place, in this case in a France that had already been at war with England for almost twenty years. It was about the Jacquerie , who took his name from the name "Jacques Bonhomme", which the nobles gave, contemptuously, to their servants (see "Étienne Marcel and the Jacquerie" in Desperta Ferro Antigua y medieval #38). It had its origin in the imposition of increasing taxes on the peasantry, to meet the expenses of the war. In addition, at this time there were scattered groups of soldiers looting and plundering the lands of northern France, so many peasants questioned why they should work for nobles who could not protect their vassals. After destroying a large number of noble estates and castles, the rioters were defeated.
Twenty years later a wave of riots broke out that It lasted almost five years, from the spring of 1378 to the first months of 1383, and spread over much of Europe. Among them stood out the revolt that took place in Florence in 1378, carried out by the wool carders known as ciompi , a group of textile industry workers not represented by any union. They presented a series of petitions demanding greater fiscal equity and the right to unionize, coming to take power with the support of radical members of the minor unions. In a few weeks, the insecurity and resistance of the owners of the main workshops and businesses spread shortages and unemployment, and the conflicts of interest between the ciompi became evident. and minor guilds. Finally, the combined forces of the major and minor guilds defeated and dissolved the ciompi and the main protagonists of the revolt were executed or exiled.
The English “workers' uprising” had a much greater extension and complexity of 1381, since it was the only movement with an almost national character and it affected important regions of the kingdom and even the capital itself (see «When Adam plowed and Eve spun, where was the knight? The revolt of Wat Tyler» in Wake up Ferro Ancient and medieval #49). Although it was based in the countryside, it also won a large following in the cities, and for a few days the monarchy itself seemed to be in danger. In fact, the rioters proved to have an organization far superior to that of the rest of the analogous phenomena and even an outline of a political "program", which allowed the rebel leaders to present a true list of demands to the king. Ultimately, the revolt was defeated and suppressed. Once again, the cause had been in the establishment of a tax destined to finance the war in France, which was added to the bad moment of England in the conflict and the hardening of the situation of the peasantry and the workers of the cities.
To correctly understand the extent of the revolt, one must take into account the fiery preaching of a clergyman, John Ball, whose biblically based egalitarianism was said to be inspired by the doctrines of the reformer John Wyclif (c. 1324-1384). Although he had not participated in the revolt and openly disavowed it, the use of his ideas was a demonstration of the scope that they had reached. Over the previous twenty years, this priest and Oxford professor had stood out for his criticism of pontifical power, since he believed that ecclesiastical discipline was of a spiritual nature, devoid of temporal effects, so that the ecclesiastical hierarchy would be necessary for the administration of the sacraments, but it would not have authority by virtue of being a hierarchy, nor by itself the right to temporal property. In this way, not only was the power of the Pontificate called into question, but the interference of the civil power in strictly ecclesiastical affairs was opened up at a time of intense conflict between the Papacy and the kings who were establishing their power. in all Europe. Although in his early writings he was respectful of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Schism and the scandalous situations it generated led Wyclif to positions that were increasingly critical and irreconcilable with orthodoxy, denying the legitimacy of the episcopal hierarchy and affirming that the pontificate was a harmful institution for the life of the Church. Gradually, such ideas were considered heretical and his followers were condemned.
Parallel to the Florentine and English alterations, others developed in Flanders and, above all, in France:Puy revolt and agitation in Nimes (1378), uprisings in Montpellier, Aubenas and Aies (1379), the university agitation in Paris and the revolts against taxes in Saint Quentin, Compiegne and Laon (1380), and the repeated conflicts in Rouen and Paris, in addition to the agitation in Amiens and Normandy (1382)[4 ]. We see that in some cases it was a rural subsistence crisis, in others labor claims in an urban environment, but in all of them a common phenomenon could be observed, criticism of the Church, especially for its temporary role, along the lines of what exposed by Wycliff:
Another element common to all types of conflict was the relative permeability of support from social groups . In almost all the kingdoms, the growing institutionalization of a "proto-state" around the figure of the king had been creating a bureaucracy based on some nobles together with members of the bourgeoisie. As a consequence, the nobility was divided both economically and politically:on the one hand, the high nobility, great lords who aspired to power and disputed the first positions of the kingdom with the kings; on the other, the petty nobility, who did not give up their political ambitions, but who found their own path in their link to the king and participation in the administration of the court and the royal council. To this was added that the nobility saw with envy the continuous growth of ecclesiastical assets and tried to snatch good pieces from the "dead hands" or, at least, obtain a part of the benefits of the prelates through the "protection" of the priests. ecclesiastical assets. In any case, the main source of income for the nobility continued to be the collection of tributes to their vassals, both in money and in services; In addition, they did not hesitate to raise their amounts when they considered it convenient, worsening the living conditions of the peasants.
At the end of the fourteenth century, the cities , as centers of craft production and local and international markets, had more and more weight in everyday life. However, the population of the cities lacked social unity, since there were almost as many differences as in the rural environment, which offered a social and political panorama of great complexity. At the top was the urban patriciate, which based its power on movable and real estate and was supported by the privileges granted by the king to his commercial businesses; the patricians constituted a thin social layer that did not stop approaching the nobility and whose members strove to ennoble themselves. Below were the bourgeois, artisans and professionals, who constituted the main element of the functioning of the city, but who could not access the most influential citizen positions. However, between both groups there was a constant upward and downward movement, making it very difficult to unravel their mutual relations, both in particular incidents and in changes in the urban administration, where the positions were highly disputed. In the last urban social echelon there was a large mass of unskilled workers, without the right to join unions or directly indigent, who had to be the first sufferers in case of supply problems and the protagonists of altercations that in some cases were outsiders.
But, without a doubt, those who most suffered from the characteristics of feudalism were the peasants , which were subject to very different forms of vassalage according to the different countries. They bore the weight of the new taxes, canons and obligations imposed by the nobles and the Church, to which benefits in kind were added, less frequent than in previous centuries but which had not disappeared. In addition, the amount and form of payment were subject to the arbitrariness of the lord, who could modify them according to his needs. Not surprisingly, this oppression was pushed back, either by complaints to the king, or in litigation, or in the form of local or regional revolts.
The Hussite movement
The reforming and revolutionary movement that emerged in Bohemia at the beginning of the 15th century is known by the term Hussite Church. The name comes from the theologian Jan Hus (1369-1415), who was condemned and executed in the Council of Constance for maintaining a very critical position against the ecclesiastical power. His terrible death aggravated religious, social and national tensions until it led to the revolutionary outbreak of July 30, 1419, when the mob stormed the Prague Town Hall, deposed the municipal authorities, released several prisoners accused of being Hussites and took the power in the city. The death of King Wenceslas, on August 16 of that same year, and the claim of the Czech throne by his brother Sigismund further complicated the political panorama, since he was supported by the high nobility while the petty, the bourgeoisie and the disadvantaged social sectors were opposed. to their claims.
The Hussites formed a heterogeneous movement divided by deep social, political and even dogmatic differences . Basically two groups could be distinguished:the Prague moderates and the radical Taborists (from the city of Tábor in South Bohemia). Sigismund decided to use force against them, but only succeeded in uniting the movement around a single program, the Four Articles of Prague :preaching in Czech; communion under both species for all the faithful; disappearance of the distinction between clerics and laity and of ecclesiastical property; and punishment of public sins by temporal authorities[6]. With this religious program, to which was added the pretense of carrying out numerous social and political transformations, reaching communitarianism, the Taborists rose up causing the “Hussite wars” (1419-1436) , in which they managed to defeat the successive crusades sent to defeat the movement considered heretical. However, internal divisions continued to spread among the Hussites, to the point that the Taborists were defeated at Lipany in 1434 by the moderates, who were thus able to negotiate with the Catholics. After the Basel Council and the Prague talks, a peace agreement was reached by which the Vatican allowed the Hussites communion under both kinds and recognized the confiscation of Church property, the basis for the enrichment of the nobility Czech and cities. The "democratic" demands of the less favored layers of the people were, in general, disregarded. Later there were outbreaks such as the one carried out by the Hussite Jorge de Podiebrad, who had himself crowned King of the Czechs, giving rise to a crusade that dethroned him.
To understand the duration and importance of this movement, it is necessary to take into account that in the second half of the fourteenth century Bohemia was one of the most powerful kingdoms in Europe, with rich mines of silver, flourishing cities, an important agricultural production and an advantageous location, in the vicinity of the main continental trade routes. At the time of King Charles IV (1346-1378), the House of Luxembourg united under its scepter not only Bohemia and Moravia, but also most of Silesia, Lusatia, and fiefdoms to the west of Bohemia. Like the family estates in Luxembourg, the Kingdom of Bohemia constituted a powerful political unit whose natural center was Prague. In addition, Prague became the capital of the Holy Roman Empire, creating an imperial court that attracted merchants and craftsmen. In addition, in 1348, what was the first University of central Europe was founded there.
However, Czech society carried within the same elements of imbalance and tension as the rest of the continent, which is why it entered the same economic and social crisis . To this must be added certain divergences of a national nature, since the Czech people lived in remarkable homogeneity in the territory of Bohemia and Moravia and were united under a centralized monarchy, but did not have equal political rights with respect to their German neighbors. This made the Czech bourgeoisie in the cities claim broader rights while the nobility protested against the influence of foreigners in the administration of the country and the clergy viewed with indignation the appropriation of succulent perquisites by foreign prelates. The growing importance of Czech nationality was also reflected in the increasing number of documents written in Czech coming out of the royal chancery. The Czech people moved away from territorial patriotism and expressed their national sentiments in language; the language became the main symbol that distinguished the Czechs from foreigners and from the German population settled in Bohemia and Moravia. Closely linked to the social crisis and the reform movement, the nationality conflicts between Czechs and Germans became more acute. This does not mean that, in any case, nationality disputes were relegated to the background in the face of social and religious differences.
In fact, the origin of the Hussite movement must be sought in the moral crisis that affected the Church and raised voices calling for its reform through a return to biblical principles. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, the Inquisition had sent fourteen heretics to the stake in Bohemia, but it was unable to stop the spread of critical views and in 1338 preparations were even made for a crusade against the Waldensians, who proclaimed the cult of the poverty and aversion to a rich Church. In these groups “small peasants and indigents predominated. The social crisis was closely related to the ecclesiastical crisis and religious protest took the form of popular insurrection»[7].
The concern for the moral decadence of ecclesiastical institutions and the dangers of social collapse that it would entail made some prelates and priests consider the need to reform the Church, from the hierarchy, well from the base. One of the first representatives of the reform movement was the German Conrad Waldhauser, who began to preach in Prague in 1360 and sought to achieve the revival of the Church from below, based on the reform of the hearts and spirits of believers. Along the same lines were the activities of Juan Milic, who in 1363 began to act as a poor preacher, exalting the evangelical ideal of the priest announcing divine law. In this way, the pulpit became the place from which the ideas of the scholars in favor of the reforms were propagated and around which the cultured people reached larger layers of the population. Milic's primary objective was the reform of the Church and of Christian customs, creating in Prague an association of laymen called "new Jerusalem", in which its members dedicated themselves to the preaching of the Gospel and to a virtuous life.
One of the most interesting reforming groups was formed around the archbishopric of Prague, under whose patronage a group of nobles founded the Bethlehem chapel in 1391, intended to bring together preachers who constituted the seed of the intended reform. These used Czech as a means to achieve greater proximity to the people of the truths of faith and also as an expression of undeniable nationalism. They defended a thorough reform of the Church, demanding a return to the primitive Church and pointing to the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the possession of property as responsible for the bad situation. As we can see, it was the same line of thought that Wyclif had developed, which achieved quite a lot of prestige in that propitious environment. His ideas were studied and interpreted by a young Czech student who was to change the course of his country's history, John Hus. When on March 14, 1402, he ascended the pulpit for the first time in the chapel of Bethlehem, he did not limit himself to speaking on matters of faith, but added his own comments on the situation of the Church and his political opinions, in particular on of the rights of the kingdom of Bohemia, with which he won the sympathy of the listeners. Through Hus, the scholarly reform movement, based at the University, began to engage with the emerging popular opposition to the abuses of the Church. From that moment on, the message of religious reform associated with the need for social and political changes spread. Within a few years, almost all of Bohemia was following the directions of Hus, who was seen as a danger by a Church that at that time was closing the crisis of the Schism.
The third element to consider in the Hussite movement, along with the social and religious, was the national one mentioned above. The last years of the 14th century had seen numerous incidents at the University of Prague between Czech students and the German hierarchy. Hence, the study of Wyclif's theses aroused heated debates largely mediated by the national question:the Czechs were passionate about their moral demands, while the Germans remained faithful to nominalism. The University was organized into four nations, which grouped students and professors by origin. The Germans dominated three of them (Bavarian, Saxon and Polish), so although the Czech nation was more numerous than the other three combined, the election of positions and decision-making by nations always gave control of the University to the non-Czech minority. When the archbishopric asked the University to study Wyclif's ideas in order to extract the statements contrary to the faith that they might contain, it was a German teacher, Juan Hübner, who was in charge of carrying out said analysis. At his suggestion, in May 1403, the three German nations at the University of Prague condemned 45 heretical propositions and decided to ban all of Wyclif's works. The voting system by nations meant that the decision prevailed over the majority opinion of the Czechs, who unanimously defended the orthodoxy of the work of the English thinker.
Years later, King Wenceslas he wanted to endorse his candidacy for the Empire, so he decided to take sides in the Schism, which was experiencing its moment of maximum confusion. For this reason he supported the celebration of the Council of Pisa, but when he tried to obtain the support of the University of Prague for his position, he met with the rejection of the Bavarian, Saxon and Polish communities; only the Czechs seconded the wishes of the monarch. To avoid new problems, probably inspired by Hus, Wenceslaus decided to resolve the situation, essentially altering the weight of each nation in the government of the University. Through the Kutná Hora decree of 1409, he ordered that the Czech nation have three votes while the other three together have only one. Almost immediately Juan Hus became rector of the University. This decision implied the departure of a thousand German teachers and students, giving the University a nationalistic character that it did not have until then.
But the Germans were not only expelled from academia. As a result of the monetary situation and the loss of the imperial crown of Wenceslas (1400), Prague had lost part of its commercial importance, so the patricians, mostly of German nationality, encountered increasing difficulties. Their domination over the Czech bourgeoisie, which materialized both politically (they held the highest positions in the mayor's offices) and economically (controlling the business of raw materials and merchandise, dictating prices and abusing usury) was crumbling. as his unpopularity grew. For this reason, the beginning of the Hussite revolution in 1420 caused the immediate expulsion of thousands of Germans.
Conclusion
The description and analysis of the numerous social conflicts that dotted the fourteenth century was not the object of this work. But the outline of their number and causes has allowed us to see how the socio-political scheme on which the European population had settled for centuries was being transformed. After the economic and demographic boom of the previous centuries, the XIV was a century full of negative incidents, ranging from inclement weather to epidemics through political, territorial and religious conflicts.
The search for the causes of such social upheaval has given rise to a profound debate among historians, essentially between non-Marxists and Marxists. For the former, the disturbances were mainly a result of the recession, as the growth of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries would have led to overpopulation that exceeded the technical possibilities of agricultural production. Hence the famines that multiplied at the beginning of the 14th century and the terrible impact of epidemics and plagues on an undernourished population. Todo ello habría terminado por comprometer a Europa occidental y central en un proceso de recesión que duró más de un siglo. El factor demográfico es pues, a los ojos de estos historiadores, la variable esencial; los disturbios resultaron de las desdichas de la época, teniendo un carácter accidental. Ese no es el punto de vista de los marxistas, para quienes las relaciones de producción se organizaron de tal manera en el seno de la sociedad feudal que habrían provocado una verdadera «lucha de clases » que no esperó a la recesión para manifestarse. La recesión habría sido incluso el resultado de su exasperación, pues su causa habría sido principalmente social, ligada a la «crisis del feudalismo», que se resolvería por el tránsito progresivo al capitalismo. Por tanto, el debate está entre la consideración de la crisis como coyuntural o estructural, como “crítica” u “orgánica” si seguimos la terminología empleada por Fourquin[8].
En cualquier caso, en la Bohemia de 1400 se unieron todos los elementos de crisis social, económica y política con unos deseos de reforma religiosa que se materializaron en la revolución husita, que alargó sus consecuencias hasta mediados del siglo XV y dejó profundas huellas en toda Europa Central. No es de extrañar que fuera en ese mismo territorio donde estallara la Guerra de los Treinta Años, ya en el siglo XVII, haciendo renacer las diferencias larvadas desde doscientos años antes.
Bibliography
- ÁLVAREZ PALENZUELA, Vicente Ángel (2004). “Wyclif y Hus:La reforma heterodoxa”. Clío &Crimen , núm. 1, pp. 241-259.
- CARBONELL, Charles-Olivier et al. (2000). Una historia europea de Europa. Mitos y fundamentos (de los orígenes al siglo XV) . Barcelona, Idea Books.
- FOURQUIN, Guy (1973). Los levantamientos populares en la Edad Media. Madrid, Castellote Editor.
- MACEK, Joseph (1967). ¿Herejía o revolución? El movimiento husita. Madrid, Ed. Ciencia Nueva.
- MACEK, Joseph (1975). La revolución husita. Orígenes, desarrollo y consecuencias . Madrid, Siglo XXI de España Editores.
- MOLLAT, Michel y WOLFF, Philippe (1976). Uñas azules, Jacques y Ciompi. Las revoluciones populares en Europa en los siglos XIV y XV . Madrid, Siglo XXI de España Editores.
Notas
[1] CARBONELL (2001), p. 198.
[2] Véase el análisis de “las sociedades de órdenes” en FOURQUIN (1973), pp. 67-83.
[3] CARBONELL (2001), p. 198.
[4] MOLLAT y WOLFF (1976), pp. 121-122.
[5] MACEK (1975), p. 24.
[6] ÁLVAREZ PALENZUELA (2004), p. 256.
[7] MACEK (1975), p. 9.
[8] FOURQUIN (1973), pp. 265-266.