JGA Pocock's Barbarism and Religion

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

JGA Pocock's Barbarism and Religion erudition and the republic of letters 2 (2017) 431-458 brill.com/erl J.G.A. Pocock’s Barbarism and Religion B.W. Young Christ Church, Oxford brian.young@chch.ox.ac.uk Abstract There are no parallels to the career of J.G.A. Pocock in Anglophone scholarship; the singularity of his intellectual trajectory is traced here through constant appeal to his enquiry into the intellectual environments in which Gibbon conceived and wrote his Decline and Fall; the present essay is an attempt at applying much the same interpretative principles at work in the six volumes of Barbarism and Religion both to Pocock and to this culminating study, interpreted as a summa of his practice as an intellectual histori- an. Pocock is an historian, not a philosopher, and this affects his conception of Enlight- enment, which he treats critically as an historian rather than reifying it in the manner of many philosophers. Pocock’s project is to undo the very idea of an ‘Enlightenment Project.’ Barbarism and Religion is not only a study of eighteenth-century conceptions of erudition and the Republic of Letters; it is a contemporary contribution to both. Keywords J.G.A. Pocock – Gibbon – Hobbes – Venturi – Oakeshott – historiography – historical theology – contextual scholarship … He was, we may suspect, a historian first and a philosopher second.1 ∵ 1 J.G.A. Pocock, Barbarism and Religion, 6 vols. (Cambridge, 1999–2016), 6: 132: hereinafter cited in the body of the text as br followed by volume and page number. An earlier version of this © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2017 | doi 10.1163/24055069-00204003Downloaded from Brill.com09/23/2021 05:50:17PM via free access <UN> 432 Young Few if any historians at work today can begin to match J.G.A. Pocock for sheer intellectual fertility; his contributions to the field of intellectual history are especially rich, encompassing many of its many subdivisions in a manner that renders such division redundant. Fundamentally, Pocock’s unique mastery of the history of historiography and the history of political thought has con- tinually demonstrated that any imagined boundaries supposedly subsisting between the two fields are entirely artificial, much more the product of specif- ic institutional contexts than of any purely scholarly demarcation.2 If Pocock belongs to a ‘Cambridge School’, it is one that unites the insights regarding the history of historiography pioneered by Herbert Butterfield (1900–79), his erst- while graduate supervisor, with the firmly historicised conception of political thought promoted in his turn by Peter Laslett (1915–2001), a research fellow of St John’s College, Cambridge slightly ahead of Pocock’s time there: in short, Pocock was the beneficiary of an immediate pre-history of such a Cambridge school of interpretation, identified by him as the ‘Laslettian moment.’3 And Pocock has proceeded well beyond the scholarship of both of his mentors, emphasising the role of religion in the evolution of political thought in a way that parallels the approach previously integrated in the history of historiogra- phy by Butterfield, and similarly tracing its direct impact on political thought in a manner that deepens that originally discerned not only by Laslett (the secular son of a Baptist minister), but earlier in the twentieth century by J.N. Figgis (1866–1919), an Anglo-Catholic clergyman who was to exchange—in 1907—a fellowship at St Catharine’s College, Cambridge for membership of the Community of the Resurrection at Mirfield in the West Riding of Yorkshire, the corner of the county in which Butterfield was born and still being educated as a young boy when Figgis moved away from Cambridge.4 In common with Laslett, Pocock surveys this history of the early modern European intellect from the perspective of an unbeliever, the son of a veteran of the First World War whose military experience had effectively (and perhaps essay was given as a paper at a ‘Conceptions of Enlightenment’ colloquium sponsored by the Voltaire Foundation and The Oxford Research Centre in the Humanities in September 2016, and subsequently to the J.R. Green Society at Jesus College, Oxford. I am grateful to my audiences on both occasions for asking stimulating questions of me. I am similarly in- debted to Noël Sugimura and Mishtooni Bose, who have commented critically on the essay. 2 Pocock, Political Thought and History: essays on theory and method (Cambridge, 2009). 3 Pocock, ‘A discourse on sovereignty: observations on the work in progress in Nicholas Phillipson and Quentin Skinner eds., Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain (Cambridge, 1993), 377–428, at 381. 4 See also to essays by Mark Goldie: ‘J.N. Figgis and the history of political thought in Cam- bridge’, in Richard Mason ed., Cambridge Minds (Cambridge, 1994), 177–92, and ‘The cont ext of The Foundations’ in Brett and Tully, Rethinking the Foundations of Political Thought, 3–19. erudition and the republic ofDownloaded letters from 2 Brill.com09/23/2021 (2017) 431-458 05:50:17PM via free access <UN> J.G.A. Pocock’s Barbarism and Religion 433 understandably) rendered him an atheist in the H G Wells mode; not for Pocock the exercises in more or less explicit Christian apologetic that marked the contributions of Figgis and of Butterfield, both legatees of eighteenth- century sectarianism, the former as a refugee from the Countess of Huntingdon’s Con- nexion, in which his father was a minister, the latter as a devout Methodist lay preacher. His own honestly avowed, but subtle, scepticism serves to make Pocock’s rehabilitation of theology as a vital and literally fundamental compo- nent of early modern intellectual history all the more powerful; his profound expository gift is a scholarly heuristic, not a historically-attentive mode of religiously-inflected exegesis. As he put it, responding to contributors to his own festschrift: The great discovery which we constantly make and remake as histori- ans is that English political debate is recurrently subordinate to English political theology; and few of us know one-tenth of the theology available to competently trained divines and laymen among our predecessors.5 In making that statement, Pocock also displayed an intellectual modesty that determined him on securing a deeper knowledge of the theology known to such far from orthodox figures as Thomas Hobbes and Edward Gibbon, both of whom disparaged the orthodoxy of an Oxford in which they had been imperfectly educated, and an environment—between the periods of their own studies—in which, by contrast, John Locke had initially flourished before acquiring his own taste for heterodoxy. These are religiously musical elements that Pocock has learned to modulate in his turn in recreating the various climates in which that work makes the most sense, if paradoxically sometimes more to their successors than to their own contemporaries. Pocock is always duly attentive to paradox; not for him the interpretative urge to refine away difficulties when making coherent systems of thought that had rightly resisted the imposition of such coherence in order to flourish when orthodoxy would otherwise have rooted them out. Not for nothing has he proved the sharpest student of William Warburton, who sought to define and maintain orthodoxy by constant appeals to paradox. Ever attentive to argumentative style, Pocock noted that the greatest scholar of the early eighteenth century, Richard Bentley (as much as Warburton the most eccentric of the mid-eighteenth century), revelled seriously in paradox. (br, 1: 149–50). 5 Pocock, ‘Foundations and moments’ in Annabel Brett, James Tully, and Holly Hamilton- Bleakley eds., Rethinking the Foundations of Modern Political Thought (Cambridge, 2006), 37–49. See further, ‘Quentin Skinner: the history of politics and the politics of history’, in Political Thought and History, 123–42. erudition and the republic of letters 2 (2017) 431-458Downloaded from Brill.com09/23/2021 05:50:17PM via free access <UN> 434 Young But it is not a paradox that the sharpest eye for religious meaning in texts produced in both the early and the high Enlightenment belongs to a modern secular reader. Religious readers are often too interested in such texts to be entirely trusted as interpreters. The ‘religious turn’ is not without its more than merely intellectual dangers. Similarly, it has been a great achievement on Pocock’s part to remind modern, programmatically secular interpreters of intellectual history how peculiar are their own biases, considered histori- cally; no less securely, however, he has pointed to the many peculiarities of Christian theology, both in its ancient and in its modern varieties. Pocock is a historian, not a theologian manqué; as he cautioned in the ‘Advice to Read- ers’ in the fifth volume of Barbarism and Religion, which is directly concerned with seventeenth- and eighteenth-century appraisals of the history of the early Church: Readers, Christian or non-believing, who may find themselves in analyses of thought they considered obsolete or false, are asked to remember that they are studying the history of a time when such thinking was offered and read seriously. In our time, when theism and atheism are again in direct collision, this warning seems necessary. (br, 5: xviii) This was indeed necessary in a book published in 2010 in a way that few would have suspected when the first volume of the project had appeared as recently as in 1999. As he sadly observed later in volume five when writing of Gibbon’s revisionist account of early Christian martyrdom in chapter sixteen of the Decline and Fall, at the beginning of the twenty-first century ‘martyrdom itself has become a choice, and therefore a problem.’ (br, 5: 85) Pocock does not, however, believe that secular readers need ‘trigger- warnings’ as such; rather he is concerned as an intellectual historian to take seriously all the beliefs that have informed the minds of human beings, and in this he reminds us that the Enlightened thinker is not necessarily as enlightened as he has the potential to be, even in an era of recrudescent bigot- ry, both religious and irreligious.
Recommended publications
  • The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition Pdf
    FREE THE MACHIAVELLIAN MOMENT: FLORENTINE POLITICAL THOUGHT AND THE ATLANTIC REPUBLICAN TRADITION PDF John Greville Agard Pocock | 640 pages | 16 Feb 2003 | Princeton University Press | 9780691114729 | English | New Jersey, United States The Atlantic Republican Tradition: The Republic of the Seven Provinces Skip to search form Skip to main content You are currently offline. Some features of the site may not work correctly. DOI: Mansfield and J. MansfieldJ. Pocock suggests that Machiavelli's prime emphasis was on the moment in which the republic confronts the problem of its own instability in time, and which he calls the "Machiavellian moment. View PDF. Save to Library. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition Alert. Launch Research Feed. Share This Paper. Rosemarie Zagarri Fortescue and the Political Theory of dominium. Burns Ashley Citation Type. Has PDF. Publication Type. More Filters. Morals, Manners, and the Republican Mother. Research Feed. Open Access. British Politics and the Demise of the Roman Republic: — Machiavelli Against Republicanism. The Cambridge history of political thought, References Publications referenced by this paper. History and the concept of time. History and Ideology in the English Revolution. Related Papers. Abstract 1, Citations 2 References Related Papers. By clicking accept or continuing to use the site, you agree to the terms outlined in our Privacy PolicyTerms of Serviceand Dataset License. | The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican The conference avoided sterile disputations, but—as is common and indeed healthy on such occasions—the subject with which it had dealt was rather discovered in retrospect than agreed upon in advance.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Political Philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli Filippo Del Lucchese Table of Contents Preface Part I
    The Political Philosophy of Niccolò Machiavelli Filippo Del Lucchese Table of Contents Preface Part I: The Red Dawn of Modernity 1: The Storm Part II: A Political Philosophy 2: The philosopher 3: The Discourses on Livy 4: The Prince 5: History as Politics 6: War as an art Part III: Legacy, Reception, and Influence 7: Authority, conflict, and the origin of the State (sixteenth-eighteenth centuries) 1 8: Nationalism and class conflict (nineteenth-twentieth centuries) Chronology Notes References Index 2 Preface Novel 84 of the Novellino, the most important collection of short stories before Boccaccio’s Decameron, narrates the encounter between the condottiere Ezzelino III da Romano and the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II: It is recorded how one day being with the Emperor on horseback with all their followers, the two of them made a challenge which had the finer sword. The Emperor drew his sword from its sheath, and it was magnificently ornamented with gold and precious stones. Then said Messer Azzolino: it is very fine, but mine is finer by far. And he drew it forth. Then six hundred knights who were with him all drew forth theirs. When the Emperor saw the swords, he said that Azzolino’s was the finer.1 In the harsh conflict opposing the Guelphs and Ghibellines – a conflict of utter importance for the late medieval and early modern history of Italy and Europe – the feudal lord Ezzelino sends the Emperor a clear message: honours, reputation, nobility, beauty, ultimately rest on force. Gold is not important, good soldiers are, because good soldiers will find gold, not the contrary.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Guide to Secondary Literature on Medieval
    THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY HIEU 390 Constantin Fasolt Fall 1999 TU TH 11:00-12:15 POLITICS, SOCIETY, AND SOCIAL THOUGHT IN EUROPE I: 400-1300 A GUIDE TO READING This guide is designed to explain my choice of readings for this course and to lead you to further readings appropriate for you, depending on how much or how little you already know about European history in general and the history of European political thought in particular. It is divided into three parts. The first part deals with general works, background information, and introductory readings of various sorts. The second part is arranged, roughly speaking, according to the topics that will be addressed in the course. The third part is a reference section, in which I simply list the most important books and articles and offer a few comments on some of them. I wrote this guide mostly for beginners. I have therefore placed special emphasis on introductory works and have tried to limit myself to works in English. But where it seemed useful or necessary I have not hesitated to mention works written in other languages. I have also made a special effort to single out books and articles that have struck me as especially telling or informative, never mind how difficult or advanced they may be. I hope that this procedure will make it easy for you to start reading where it will be most profitable for you, and to keep reading for a long time to come once your interest has been awakened. Table of Contents Part one: General works __________________________________________________ 3 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Principle and Politics in the New History of Originalism
    Digital Commons @ Georgia Law Scholarly Works Faculty Scholarship 1-1-2017 Principle and Politics in the New History of Originalism Logan E. Sawyer III Associate Professor of Law University of Georgia, lesawyer@uga.edu University of Georgia School of Law Research Paper Series Paper No. 2017-18 Repository Citation Logan E. Sawyer III, Principle and Politics in the New History of Originalism , 57 Am. J. Legal Hist. 198 (2017), Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/1326 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Works by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Georgia Law. Please share how you have benefited from this access For more information, please contact tstriepe@uga.edu. UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA SCHOOL OF LAW RESEARCH PAPER SERIES Paper No. 2017-18 May 2017 PRINCIPLE AND POLITICS IN THE NEW HISTORY OF ORIGINALISM AM. J. LEGAL. HIST. (forthcoming). LOGAN E. SAWYER III Associate Professor of Law University of Georgia School of Law lesawyer@uga.edu This paper can be downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network electronic library at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2933746 Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2933746 PRINCIPLE AND POLITICS in The New History of Originalism The emergence of a new form of originalism has sparked an interest in the theory’s past that is particularly welcome as developments on the Supreme Court and in the Republican Party unsettle the theory’s place in American law and politics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conceptualization of Time and Space in the Memory Theatre of G Camillo
    Nordisk Museologi 2003 • 1, s. 51–70 The conceptualization of time 51 and space in the memory theatre of giulio camillo (1480?–1544)1 Anne Aurasmaa In the 17th century collections became ideally more or less the presence of all things material. Interest leaned towards the mundane and the common and collecting became a gathering of everything. This trend can already be seen to some extent in the natural history collections of the 16th century. As a counterbalance to this I would like to put forward in this paper the idea that the 16th century collections pictured the whole universe as a construction combining time and space. It was not the intention just to fill rooms with collected material examples but to present the phenomena by showing their boundaries and to help the spectator to understand the building blocks of the universal hierarchy. The theatrum mundi – or curiosity cabinet, as 16th century collections are more commonly referred to – was conceived as a presence of all that existed in one place. Instead of collecting everything, and claiming that such a collection would represent the world as it is (or as it can be perceived by the senses), rhetorical themes, abstract ideas and universal structures were visualized by means of displaying the strangest objects from the most faraway places. The function of such displays was to bridge the gap between the universal logos2 and the human logos. Logos meaning reason and structure is the opposite of myth and personal sensory experience and as such includes thinking, speech, relations and regularities. The concept can be used both in reference to universal order and to the faculties of the human mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Further Particulars
    CHRIST’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE JH PLUMB COLLEGE LECTURESHIP AND FELLOWSHIP IN HISTORY FURTHER PARTICULARS Teaching at Cambridge University is provided by the University and also by the Colleges. The majority of College Fellows are holders of University posts, taking on additional College responsibilities for which they usually receive extra remuneration. However, from time to time, Cambridge Colleges make appointments to College Lectureships. When appointed, College Lecturers not only provide core teaching for the College (or sometimes for other Colleges under swap arrangements) but may also be asked to act as Directors of Studies or take on other College offices or duties as appropriate. These Fellows may, if the opportunity arises, also teach for the University on occasional lecture courses, for extra remuneration. College Lectureships at Christ’s College are intended to provide an opportunity to an individual at the beginning of his or her academic career to develop teaching skills, a publication record and other academic activity with a view to obtaining a University appointment in Cambridge or elsewhere. They are offered for a fixed term of four years, which will not be renewed or extended. College Teaching College teaching takes the form of small group teaching (referred to as supervisions) each week, usually in groups of one or two. There are two Terms of eight weeks (Michaelmas and Lent); the third Term (Easter Term) has four weeks of teaching and three weeks set aside for University examinations. The successful candidate would be expected to supervise at least 120 hours per year for the College, equivalent to an average of six hours per week in Full Term.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Argument and Practice Bibliography for Lectures 2019-20
    HISTORICAL ARGUMENT AND PRACTICE BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR LECTURES 2019-20 Useful Websites http://www.besthistorysites.net http://tigger.uic.edu/~rjensen/index.html http://www.jstor.org [e-journal articles] http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/ejournals_list/ [all e-journals can be accessed from here] http://www.historyandpolicy.org General Reading Ernst Breisach, Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983) R. G. Collingwood, The Idea of History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1946) Donald R. Kelley, Faces of History: Historical Inquiry from Herodotus to Herder (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998) Donald R. Kelley, Fortunes of History: Historical Inquiry from Herder to Huizinga (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003) R. J. Evans, In Defence of History (2nd edn., London, 2001). E. H. Carr, What is History? (40th anniversary edn., London, 2001). Forum on Transnational History, American Historical Review, December 2006, pp1443-164. G.R. Elton, The Practice of History (2nd edn., Oxford, 2002). K. Jenkins, Rethinking History (London, 1991). C. Geertz, Local Knowledge (New York, 1983) M. Collis and S. Lukes, eds., Rationality and Relativism (London, 1982) D. Papineau, For Science in the Social Sciences (London, 1978) U. Rublack ed., A Concise Companion to History (Oxford, 2011) Q.R.D. Skinner, Visions of Politics Vol. 1: Regarding Method (Cambridge, 2002) David Cannadine, What is History Now, ed. (Basingstoke, 2000). -----------------------INTRODUCTION TO HISTORIOGRAPHY---------------------- Thu. 10 Oct. Who does history? Prof John Arnold J. H. Arnold, History: A Very Short Introduction (2000), particularly chapters 2 and 3 S. Berger, H. Feldner & K. Passmore, eds, Writing History: Theory & Practice (2003) P.
    [Show full text]
  • Crisis of Rhetoric Launch Event: Committee Room G, House of Lords, 15Th October 2019
    Crisis of Rhetoric Launch Event: Committee Room G, House of Lords, 15th October 2019 Event Transcript Speaker names and abbreviations: Dr Henriette van der Blom (HvdB), Prof. Alan Finlayson (AF), Phil Collins (PC), Prof. Mary Beard (MB), John Vice (JV). [??? Indicates indecipherable speech on the recording]. HvdB: Welcome, everybody, we should probably get started. Thank you so much to all of you for coming through all the security, all the barricades at Parliament, we are very pleased to see you here. My name is Henriette van der Blom, I’m a Senior Lecturer in Ancient History at the University of Birmingham and I am the principal investigator of the Crisis of Rhetoric research project sponsored by the Arts and Humanities Research Council, together with my colleague Professor Alan Finlayson, Professor of Politics at the University of East Anglia. We’ve been conducting this project for a couple of years now and this is the finale that you’ve been invited to come and share in, where we are launching the findings that you have all received on your seat. I should also say that this booklet is available in PDF on the project website, which you will see on the inside cover, page 3 – one of the text boxes. So, if you want it in PDF, you can go and download it for free, share it with friends, colleagues as you wish. Now we are very pleased to be here because the whole idea of this project was to find out what’s going on with political speech today and to join up two groups who perhaps don’t speak often enough with each other; that is, our own world of academia with practitioners: speakers, orators, speech writers and everybody who help the speakers prepare and deliver the speeches in as effectful and thoughtful manners as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobbes and Republican Liberty Quentin Skinner Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-88676-5 - Hobbes and Republican Liberty Quentin Skinner Frontmatter More information Hobbes and Republican Liberty Quentin Skinner is one of the foremost historians in the world, and in Hobbes and Republican Liberty he offers a dazzling comparison of two rival theories about the nature of human liberty. The first originated in classical antiquity, and lay at the heart of the Roman republican tradition of public life. It flowered in the city-republics of Renaissance Italy, and has been central to much recent discussion of republicanism among contemporary political theorists. Thomas Hobbes was the most formidable enemy of this pattern of thought, and his attempt to discredit it constitutes a truly epochal moment in the history of Anglophone political thought. Professor Skinner shows how Hobbes’s successive efforts to grapple with the question of human liberty were deeply affected by the claims put forward by the radical and parliamentarian writers in the course of the English civil wars, and by Hobbes’s sense of the urgent need to counter them in the name of peace. Skinner approaches Hobbes’s political theory not simply as a general system of ideas but as a polemical intervention in the conflicts of his time, and he shows that Leviathan, the greatest work of political philosophy ever written in English, reflects a substantial change in the character of Hobbes’s moral thought, responding very specifically to the political needs of the moment. As Professor Skinner says, seething polemics always underlie the deceptively smooth surface of Hobbes’s argument. Hobbes and Republican Liberty is an extended essay that develops several of the themes announced by Quentin Skinner in his famous inaugural lecture on Liberty before Liberalism of 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Memory in Early Modern England
    Part II Special Subject C Memory in Early Modern England Prof. Alex Walsham (amw23@cam.ac.uk) Overview Without memory, we could not write History. But memory itself has a history. This Special Subject investigates one segment of that history in the context of sixteenth- and seventeenth- century England. By contrast with medievalists and modernists, early modernists have been slow to investigate how the arts of remembering and forgetting were implicated in and affected by the profound religious, political, intellectual, cultural, and social upheavals of the period. However, there is now a growing surge of exciting and stimulating research on this topic. Its relevance and centrality to key historiographical debates and its capacity to shed fresh light on classic questions regarding one of the most tumultuous eras in English history are increasingly being recognised. Set against the backdrop of the profound ruptures of the Reformation, Civil Wars, and the constitutional revolution of 1688, this Paper seeks to explore how individuals and communities understood and practised memory alongside the ways in which it was exploited and harnessed, divided and fractured, by the unsettling developments through which contemporaries lived and in which they actively participated. It assesses the role played by amnesia and oblivion, nostalgia and commemoration, in facilitating change and in negotiating the legacies it left. Students will be exposed to a wide range of primary sources – from chronicles, diaries, histories, memoirs and compilations of folklore to legal depositions, pictures, maps, buildings, funeral monuments and material objects – that afford insight into the culture and transmutations of early modern memory. Sessions in the Michaelmas Term will explore contemporary perceptions and practices of memory.
    [Show full text]
  • Acknowledgements
    acknowledGemenTs in THeory, the pool of intellectual debt ought to shrink with each new book, as one grows older and more independent. In my experience, the opposite has been the case. As you get older, you get less shy about asking for help and you venture further into terrain where you depend on the guidance of oth‑ ers. This book could not have been written without the en‑ couragement, conversation, and advice of many friends and colleagues. Special thanks go to the following, who read all or part of the manuscript and offered detailed comments and stimulating suggestions: Deborah Baker, David Barclay, Peter Burke, Marcus Colla, Amitav Ghosh, Oliver Haardt, Charlotte Johann, Duncan Kelly, Jürgen Luh, Annika Seemann, John Thompson, Adam Tooze, Alexandra Walsham, and Waseem Yaqoob. As then‑anonymous reviewers for Princeton Univer‑ sity Press, François Hartog, Jürgen Osterhammel, and Andy Rabinbach made enormously helpful comments on the man‑ uscript. Nora Berend, Francisco de Bethencourt, Tim Blan‑ ning, Annabel Brett, Matthew Champion, Kate Clark, Allegra Fryxell, Alexander Geppert, Beatrice de Graaf, Paul Hartle, Ulrich Herbert, Shruti Kapila, Hans‑Christof Kraus, Jona‑ than Lamb, Rose Melikan, Bridget Orr, Anna Ross, Kevin Rudd, Magnus Ryan, Martin Sabrow, and Quentin Skinner all offered precious advice on specific issues or passages of text. Nina Lübbren’s writing and thinking about time and nar‑ rative in art have shaped the book in many ways. Josef and Alexander, once happy distractions from the work of writing, have grown into thoughtful conversation partners whose in‑ sights nudged me through various bottlenecks. Kristina Spohr [ ix ] [ x ] acknowledGemenTs read and commented on the text at many stages in its evo‑ lution and sustained its author with criticism, advice, and companionship.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 26 Jonathan Israel, Radical Enlightenment
    H-France Review Volume 2 (2002) Page 105 H-France Review Vol. 2 (February, 2002), No. 26 Jonathan Israel, Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650-1750. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. xxii + 810 pp. Maps, tables, plates, notes, bibliography, and index. $45.00 US (cl). ISBN 0-19-820608-9. Review by J.B. Shank, University of Minnesota. Was ist Aufklärung? Robert Darnton recently began a lecture on this topic by asking his audience to repeat the question, only this time with feeling. Jonathan Israel would not have been amused. He finds nothing tired or stale about this classic question of European intellectual history, nor does he see any problem with the classic "men and ideas" approach to it that Darnton has built a career critiquing. Radical Enlightenment, Israel's magisterial history of the emergence of Enlightenment thought in Europe, is nothing if not a throwback to a bygone era when, to borrow from Darnton again, intellectual historians were scholars who took dusty philosophical tomes off library shelves and taught readers how to link them together. Yet despite its frustrating traditionalism and maddening dismissal of an entire generation of newer Enlightenment scholarship, Radical Enlightenment is an important book. It especially offers an important chronological and geographical reconceptualization of the origins of the Enlightenment that scholars, whatever their historiographical stripe, will ignore only at their peril. But will anyone actually read the book? And can the honest reviewer actually recommend that one do so? It is not that Israel is a bad writer. Quite the contrary, he proves to be a very engaging guide to the many topics he presents.
    [Show full text]