The Medieval History Journal

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Soergel, P. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Medieval History Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1-2, 303-326 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/097194580701000211
© 2007 SAGE Publications

Historiographies and Memories

Portents, Disaster, and Adaptation in Sixteenth Century Germany

Philip M. Soergel

Philip M. Soergel is in Department of History, University of Maryland. E-mail: psoergel{at}umd.edu

Historians have long noted an upswell in early-modern Germany in portents, signs worked in nature that pointed to future ills, and have interpreted this increase as an indicator of rising anxiety and fears, fears that were the result, either of a new ‘guilt culture’, or which were conditioned by the generally dismal relationship that sixteenth- and seventeenth-century people had to their environment. This article argues for a new interpretation. It relies on recent studies in the psychology of well-being which have shown that natural disasters and a dismal environment do not condition human beings to long-term fear and anxiety. Instead, the mind's ability to adapt to such trials is evidence of an evolutionary process of ‘hedonic adaptation’. The subsequent investigation draws upon the works of Martin Luther, one sixteenth-century moralist generally judged to be among the bleakest critics of the time, to show that his attitude towards the environment was complex and multifaceted, and was not characterised by an unrelieved pessimism towards nature. The conclusions thus call upon scholars of natural disaster to distinguish carefully between long-standing theological commonplaces concerning sin and its effects upon nature and the genuine reactions of human beings to historical disasters.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?