War, Bloodshed, and the Emergence of Enlightenment in Europe
By: Kevin Shau
Tags: Society, Enlightenment, Culture, Politics, History

Peace talks culminated in the Peace of Westphalia (1648). This laid the groundwork for modern international relations, the Age of Enlightenment, and ended the devastating Thirty Years’ War. This peace refers to a series of treaties between the major powers involved. Over 100 delegations met at different locations and different times in two major cities: Münster and Osnabrück. Within the Empire, the princes were given the right to choose the religion of their respective state, the right of people to practice their faith in private was to be respected, Dutch and Swiss independence were formally recognized, and various specific boundary issues were addressed.

Enlightenment — The Potential of Rationality and Its Limits

With the worst warfare over and the reality/necessity of toleration having emerged from a violent acting out revealing the excesses of rejecting that principle, the potential of reason came to the fore among the educated of Europe. The latter half of the seventeenth century saw important scientific breakthroughs associated with a group of English scholars. Upon the restoration of the English monarchy in 1660, the Royal Society was founded. This was a society in which metaphysical questions were left at the door and men of science free to discuss their experiments. Men like Isaac Newton, Edmund Halley, Robert Boyle, and Robert Hooke made some of the most important scientific observations of their time (or any, for that matter). The Royal Society was built upon the legacy of that great English Renaissance polymath Francis Bacon. Bacon pioneered the scientific method and the philosophic outlook which came to be known as empiricism — placing an emphasis on observation rather than received wisdom.

The ways of thinking explored by scientific minds quickly influenced other areas of study. The seventeenth century did not suffer from the severe compartmentalization of knowledge which plagues so many academic departments nowadays. Additionally, the polymaths of the Enlightenment were much more practically-minded. Indeed, one could say that the academics of today have more in common with medieval scholastic theologians interested in debating how many angels could dance on the end of a pin than on anything practical — think of the absurdities of postmodernism. In the realm of politics, John Locke wrote several treatises on politics, emphasizing the importance of the individual and ‘the right to life, liberty, and property.’ Locke’s philosophy constitutes the foundation of classical liberal political thought — that which puts the individual at the center and seeks to remove unnecessary government constraints.

Just as the Enlightenment on the continent was born out of warfare, so too was that of the English Enlightenment. The seventeenth century saw the execution of Charles I in 1649 after years of civil war, a Puritanical republic which lasted just over a decade, and the restoration of the monarchy. Further political advances were made in the 1680s with the Glorious Revolution, limiting the monarch’s power, enhancing that of Parliament, and setting religious issues related to the royal succession.

The potential and limits of rationality were explored. While blind support of rationality and notions of inevitable progress may have influenced people during the French Revolution, throughout much of Europe the limits of reason were better understood. The Enlightenment was not a movement blind to realities associated with human nature. This can, perhaps, best be appreciated in the Anglo-American world. The founding fathers of the United States constructed a government based, not on the notion of ideal men wielding power justly all the time, but upon the reality of imperfect people, tempted by power, governing. Hence, the importance of separation of powers and federalism. James Madison read widely. Among the most important of those who influenced him was the ancient Roman statesman Cicero, who argued for preservation of the Roman Republic by using the best of the three systems (rule by one, rule by some, and rule by many) to overcome the worst of each of the three systems.