I have been re-reading Breisach and just like we observed in class, that Roman Historians chose to write about the progressive moral issues that helped cause social distortion in Rome, he describes 15th and16th century historians as trying to “reestablish the ‘pure’ Roman laws.” (Breisach pg 172) Like Roman Historians the Italian Historians Breisach is describing are worried about the morality of civil code and less about the morality of going against church dogma and the idea of the carnal sin. But at the same time we can see the connection between these historians discourse over the centuries and how that plays out in other literature. For example, for my Literature Course I am taking we are reading Dante’s Inferno, a sample of church doctrine within the social sphere of literature in the 14th century, and within the poem there are many hints to the corruptibility of men and even publicly calling out certain officials within the government. Any ways the point I am making is it is interesting that Breisach illustrates the historians perspectives on morality and purity of civil and social law and then reading other forms of literature from the century and seeing a small trace of that supposed non-fiction come through in my English class’s fiction. Also the fact that morality seems to be always part of the message or lesson that Roman and Christian and now Renaissance historians are trying to tell. I hope that message comes out clearer in my midterm paper then here.