Western Civilization- HIST 100-014
Taimur A. Bajwa
Professor Butler first described the downfall of the Roman Empire in the west. He then went into explaining the origins of Christianity. He described how Jesus and his followers believed in one god, righteousness, and mercy. Professor Butler explained the appeal of Christianity about the promise of immortality, a sense of community, and a new heaven on Earth. He also explained how Christianity spread throughout the Holy Land and beyond. He talked about how the Christians were persecuted in the Roman Empire for practicing their beliefs. He then talked about the Byzantine Empire. He talked about how after the Roman Empire in the west was destroyed the Empire in the east survived and became known as the Byzantine Empire. Professor Butler then goes on to say how Emperor Constantine built his new capital city, Constantinople (current day Istanbul). He said how the Byzantine ...view middle of the document...
He is angry over the indulgence sales going on in Europe. He makes his complaints in the 95 theses (points) and posts them in the university where he taught at. Reformation has effect of renewing faith in the church. Protestant Reformation not only divides the church but divides Europe itself. Martin Luther leads the way for such reformers such as John Calvin and King Henry VIII of England. After the Protestant Reformation civil and internationals wars occur between Protestants and Catholics. Professor Holt also discusses Niccolò Machiavelli and how his political ideas change the face of politics throughout the world. Also he discusses the reign of Charles I in England and Oliver Cromwell. Lastly he discusses how the Jewish people get kicked out of their holy land by the Muslim Turks. Professor Holt used mainly pictures to emphasize his points. On the other hand Professor Butler used images, paintings, maps, and graphs so that the viewer could get a better understanding of what he was saying. Professor Holt’s visual images sometimes had little to do with the subject material and did not help in the understanding of the subject. Professor Butler had precise graphs with added information, good pictures that related to the subject material, and overall better visual demonstrations than Professor Holt. I think that the lecture given by Professor Butler was more effective than the lecture given by Professor Holt. I think this because of a couple of factors. Firstly Professor Butler seemed to know more about the material that he was teaching than Professor Holt. Also the subject of the material that Professor Butler was teaching was more appealing to me than the material that Professor Holt was presenting. Professor Butler was more involved in his lecture and seemed to be better prepared than Professor Holt. Also the visuals demonstrations presented by Professor Butler were very eye catching and gave useful information about the subject topic he was discussing. Unlike Professor Holt, he used many different types of images rather than just showing pictures the whole lecture. I think that both professors did good jobs trying to teach their own material, but when it comes down to it I believe that Professor Butler was a more effective lecturer.