I freely admit that part of the reason why I love this book is that it is based in precisely the type of history-writing I adore. I don't want to read about farmers and fishermen. I want kings and queens, dynasty politics, religious intrigue, great thinkers and stories. There are limits to the stories you can tell about the farmers and fishermen. And, perhaps more importantly, it is all about the pleasure of recognition. Part of the appeal is the connection made between two parts of history which I have always approached separately.
I guess... it might be more entertaining to read those types of histories, but they give a myopic view of the time imo. The lives and accounts of the farmers and fishermen give a better picture of what things were like.
Of course it is, and if I were studying the period academically, I would not limit myself to the cool stuff. But work and toil and malnutrition and marrying young and dying early really isn't what I read for entertainment. The story of "real people" tends to devolve into statistics, and at that point there is little storytelling left.
True, true. I studied Roman history/literature for a bit and most of the extant material deals with the things you refer to (authority figures, important battles, etc.). However, there just isn't all that much to tell us about what it was actually like to live then. We have things like poems and plays that occasionally give us clues about what ordinary people had on their minds, but it's not much. We have personal letters from people like Cicero, but he was hardly an unbiased observer.
European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... European history... I suppose that makes me a geek.
mmm, I like what you've done there.
At this point in time, European history is also American history.
Ahh, Freemasonry. Alright. Though I'm no expert of American history either
It could be that her way of writing appeals to me so much because it is reminiscent of literary interpretation. In fact, much of it is literary interpretation. She traces references to Spenser (after grounding him in the Order of St. George), and this mix of literature and history not only triggers a number of my intellectual pleasure points, it paints a delicious swirl of colour around what is too often presented as a black and white, dreary story of Progress of Mind, bringing Kepler, Newton, Descartes and the like down to history from the rarefied heights of scientific development.
Hmm, perhaps an example would have been good. I'm not entirely sure what you mean.
Spenser wrote The Faery Queene. In the first book, the main knight is the Red Crosse Knight. This is a reference to St. George, and may also allude to the Order of the garter (with an image of St. George), which becomes important in the area around the Palatinate as King James bestows it on certain key figures. It may have begun the idea of an order.
Thanks. That makes more sense to me now with the explanation.
Regarding the scientists, Kepler and Tycho Brahe were astronomers (at a point in time when it was fairly indistinguishable from astrology), and were very much involved with the Bohemian branch of the mysticism which is at the heart of the Rosicrucian manifestoes. Descartes went out searching for the Rosicrucian Order (or Brotherhood), had his famous revelation in their alleged heartland, and had to deal with the Rosicrucian scare (a variant of the witch scares) later on.
So that's how it all comes together... interesting.
All the while tracing the development of the story of the Rosicrucian Order (or the Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross) in its changing manifestations.
I really don't know anything about this order (as you might have guessed from my lack of European history knowledge).
This is not just European history. It is at the centre of the Freemason idea, and very much influences the United States.
True, many of the important figures were masons.
I love it.
I might have to take a look at it in a library. I don't know much EU history (aside from science) so it might not be for me.
Don't confuse EU and Europe.
Wouldn't dream of it. I was just too lazy to type out 'ropean'
The Rosicrucian Enlightenment by Frances Yates
- 04/11/2010 03:22:41 PM
1693 Views
I too have long been fascinated by Rosicrucianism and all its constituents.
- 04/11/2010 07:23:13 PM
849 Views
Re: I too have long been fascinated by Rosicrucianism and all its constituents.
- 05/11/2010 01:05:47 PM
873 Views
Nice review
- 05/11/2010 09:42:27 PM
1251 Views
Re: Nice review
- 05/11/2010 09:56:52 PM
888 Views
Re: Nice review
- 05/11/2010 10:42:26 PM
1108 Views