Week 3 – Reading Notes
Cohen, Adam Max. Technology and the Early Modern Self. Palgrave Macmillan: New York, 2009.
1. Author’s Credentials: Ph.D. in English Literature from University of Virginia; Associate
Professor at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
2. Research Questions:
a. What was the relationship between technological transformations during the Renaissance
and the development of the self?
b. Do technological innovations reinforce personality traits, or do they create new
personalities?
3. Methodology: This work looks at the history of technology in a unique way. It looks at the ways
in which technology families correspond with particular personality traits.
4. Key Conclusions:
a. Revolutions in technology did not change human nature or radically change ideas
regarding self in the early modern period, but they may have encouraged, enabled, or
facilitated certain personality traits.
b. Technology led to an increase in seeing the world in a mechanized way, this extended to
the human body
c. The proliferation of clocks in the period corresponds to discipline – time management
d. The rise of print technology led to a rise of ambition – people wanted to be published
e. Military technology related to versatility as a necessary personality trait
f. Changes in optical technology corresponded to ideas regarding perspective and the ways
in which people saw the world and the universe
5. Evidence:
a. Leon Battista Alberti, The Ten Books of Architecture
b. Francis Bacon, The Advancement of Learning
c. St. Augustine, City of God
d. Robert Boyle, The Christian Virtuoso
e. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan
f. John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
g. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Literary Works of Machiavelli
h. Alexander Pope, An Essay on Man
(This is a small sampling of the 10-page bibliography provided)
6. How does this book or article differ from established interpretations or how does the author bring
new ways of understanding the topic?
a. Deviates from the norm in that it uses technology to examine the rise of individualism in
the early modern period
b. Recognizes that many of the cultural shifts of the Renaissance were enabled by
technological change
c. He highlights the relationships between individuals and the tools on which they relied
d. Leans on the object studies of Margreta de Grazia, Maureen Quilligan, and Peter
Stallybrass
Essary, Kirk. “Enduring Erasmus.” Church History and Religious Culture, Vol. 97, No. ¾ (Special Issue:
Reformation, 2017): 322-333
1. Author’s Credentials: PhD in Religion from Florida State; MA in Religions of Western
Antiquity from Florida State; MA in Classics from Texas Tech; BA in Philosophy from
Oklahoma State; Senior Lecturer in Medieval and Early Modern History at University of Western
Australia; specializes in Christian humanism, reception history, the Protestant Reformation and
the history of emotions
2. Research Questions:
a. What is the future of Erasmus studies in relation to sixteenth century religious change?
b. What is the future of scholarship in the area of Christian humanism in the context of the
Renaissance and Reformation?
3. Methodology: This is a historiographical essay that explores the questions that historians still
need to ask and answer in regards to Erasmus and Christian humanism.
4. Key Conclusions:
a. The influence of Erasmus and his Novum instrumentum is “not fully understood or
appreciated” (323)
b. Scholars have failed to do adequate work in the area of Christian humanism in relation to
the reformations of the sixteenth century
c. He argues for two approaches that are useful for further scholarship
i. Reception history – How was the work of Erasmus utilized by scholars of the
sixteenth century? How did he influence the Reformers, positively and
negatively? Which of Erasmus texts were used? Who used them? How did they
use them? How often were they used?
ii. The history of emotions – What role did emotions play in social institutions and
religious communities? How did emotions relate to reason?
d. Key questions still need to be asked and answered, such as “How and where do we
situate Erasmus in Reformation history, and how does his brand of Christian humanism
relate to broader trends of religious reform and scholarship in Europe in the sixteenth
century?” (324)
e. Christian humanists found influence in a variety of traditions and they used those
traditions in a variety of ways and to their own purposes.
f. There needs to be some attempt at consensus of what a biblical humanist looked like
what the theology might be
g. “Erasmus himself stands at a nexus of intellectual transformation in northern Europe”
providing key insights that could better connect the Renaissance to the Reformation (330)
h. By studying the works of Erasmus, how they were received and the emotional
appropriation and modification of the sixteenth century, historians could find lines of
both continuity and change between the Renaissance and Reformation
5. Evidence:
a. Since this article is historiographical, it utilizes secondary source material. This is a
sampling:
b. David Whitford, “Erasmus Openeth Up the Way Before Luther: Revisiting Humanism’s
Influence on the Ninety-Five Theses and the Early Luther,” Church History and Religious
Culture 96:4 (2016).
c. Gregory Dodds, Exploiting Erasmus: The Erasmian Legacy and Religious Change in
Early Modern England (Toronto, 2013).
d. Riemer Faber, “The Influence of Erasmus’ Annotationes on Calvin’s Galatians
Commentary,” Dutch Review of Church History 84 (2004): 268-283.
e. Karl A.E. Enenkel (ed.), The Reception of Erasmus in the Early Modern Period (Leiden,
2013).
f. Manfred Hoffman, Rhetoric and Theology: The Hermeneutic of Erasmus (Toronto, 1994)
6. How does this book or article differ from established interpretations or how does the author bring
new ways of understanding the topic?
a. This article suggests a multi-disciplinary approach to the study of Christian humanism,
especially Erasmus to better understand his influence on the period. It poses questions
that should be addressed by theologians and historians.
b. The author makes Erasmus a central figure in understanding the religious developments
of the sixteenth century
c. The author explains that it is necessary to understand how the works of Erasmus were
utilized by his contemporaries and by those who followed and how his rhetorical and
emotional use of language affected religious developments in the sixteenth century
Strathern, Paul. The Medici: Power, Money, and Ambition in the Italian Renaissance. New York: Pegasus
Books, 2016.
1. Author’s Credentials: Educated at Trinity College, Dublin; he has published 5 novels as well as
scholarly books on history, literature, science, and philosophy
2. Research Questions:
a. What were the events that led to both the rise and fall of the Medici family in Florence?
b. How did the Medici family contribute to the process of humanism and the culture of the
Renaissance?
c. What is the lasting legacy of the Medici family on culture and history?
3. Methodology: This is a work of popular history that provides a narrative of the Medici family
from its rise with Giovanni di Bicci in the 14th century to its fall the 18th century. Woven into the
narrative are examinations of politics, culture, society, religion, finance, and war.
4. Key Conclusions:
a. For nearly four centuries, the Medici family shaped the political landscape of Florence,
serving effectively as princes, or perhaps godfathers of the republican city-state
b. The Medici family were key participants in the advancement of humanist ideas through
their establishment of libraries, schools, and intellectual societies
c. The Medici family, through their patronage, were the godfathers of Renaissance art,
leaving behind many of the masterpieces that are still admired
d. Lessons taught by the earliest of the Medici patriarchs regarding unobtrusive leadership
were largely forgotten by the third and fourth generations. As the heirs to the Medici
fortune became increasingly political ambitious they unwittingly destroyed the Florentine
republic and, as a result, the business on which their fortunes were built.
e. The Medici family played a key role in this history of Europe, not only in Florence, but in
the Catholic Church (two Medici were named pope) and through Catherine de Medici in
France
5. Evidence:
a. Niccolo Machiavelli, The History of Florence
b. Libro Segreto (Secret Book) of the Medici Bank. State Archives of Florence
c. Papers, journals, and letters of the Medici family
d. Several works of secondary history
6. How does this book or article differ from established interpretations or how does the author bring
new ways of understanding the topic?
a. This is a work of popular history that illuminates the developments in Florence through
the history of the Medici family. Its approach makes many ideas and events accessible for
a wide variety of readers.
b. Some of the implications regarding the sexual orientation of historical figures, and the
influences on these predispositions, may be exaggerated
Tollebeek, Jo. “’Renaissance’ and ‘Fossilization’: Michelet, Burckhardt, and Huizinga.” Renaissance
Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3 (September 2001): 354-366.
1. Author’s Credentials: Ph.D. from Flanders; full professor at University of Leuven; publishes on
the history of historiography, the history of universities and science, and historical culture in the
19th and 20th centuries
2. Research Questions:
a. How did the conceptualization of the Renaissance as a turning point in history affect
ideas regarding periodization in the study of history?
b. How did Michelet, Burckhardt, and Huizinga’s conceptualizations of “Renaissance” in
contrast with “fossilization” create issues for historians of the period?
3. Methodology: The article is both historical and historiographical. It examines both the ideas of
historians regarding periodization and the ideals on which they based their assumptions.
4. Key Conclusions:
a. By strongly associating the Renaissance with the arrival of modernity, historians created
the need for a conceptual counterpart to apply to the earlier period.
b. In the works of Michelet, Burckhardt, and Huizinga, the Middle Ages began to be
conceptualized as a period of “fossilization and the Renaissance as a period of
“progress.”
c. The result was an “antagonistic relationship between the Renaissance and the Middle
Ages.” (356)
d. Placing the Renaissance and the Middle Ages in this dichotomy created issues of their
own for historians.
i. How did a period of renewal emerge from a period of decline and decay?
ii. What was the force for change?
iii. Were these concepts themselves appropriate?
e. Michelet saw the Renaissance as emerging from “a Babel of lies” and from “a fertile
nothing.” (366)
f. Burckhardt saw the Renaissance as period of “the discovery of the world and of
mankind” but characterized it within a concept of the world in which he lived. (366)
g. Huizinga warned against drawing the lines too sharply, but eventually placed the
Renaissance in the “long Middle Ages.” (366)
h. The conceptualizations of these three historians created traps for present historians of the
period.
5. Evidence:
a. Jules Michelet, Renaissance (1855)
b. Jacob Burckhardt, Der Cicerone (1855)
c. Jacob Burckhardt, Die Kulter der Renaissance in Italien (1860)
d. Johan Huizinga, The Autumn of the Middle Ages (1919)
e. Lectures, journals and notes by all three authors
6. How does this book or article differ from established interpretations or how does the author bring
new ways of understanding the topic?
a. The article is historiographical but provides a caution to historians regarding strict
periodization and conceptual development
b. The article emphasizes the issues historians have experienced in seeing continuity and
change across periods
1. Citation: Machiavelli, Niccolo. The History of Florence.
2. Key Conclusions: Pope Leo X commissioned Machiavelli to write the history of Florence in
1520. His history is comprised of eight volumes that details the history of the city from its origins
to 1492. Some of his source material is questionable, and because of his close association with
the Medici family, they are painted in a favorable light. It is a political history, with barely any
mention of the culture or society of the period.
3. Primary sources: Despite its bias, The History of Florence provides crucial information regarding
the political developments for the city of Florence to 1492. It contains information regarding
military actions and conflicts on the Italian peninsula during the period.
1. Citation: Libro Segreto (Secret Book) of the Medici Bank. State Archives of Florence.
2. Key Conclusions: The private records of the Medici Bank giving details regarding account
information in the various branches of the bank throughout the city-states of Italy.
3. Primary sources: The records of the Medici Bank provide a view into the financial lives of many
of the most prominent families in late medieval and Renaissance Italy. It also provides a record of
the finances of many of the popes of the period and the Catholic Church in Rome under their
leadership.
Replies:
Scot Cates – Abigail Runk
I’m glad to see that my fellow classmates are also reading the Strathern book on the Medici. I’ve had a
fascination with that family since I first visited the Smithsonian’s National Gallery of Art and noticed
how many portraits and sculptures in the collection were either of them or commissioned by them. I
quickly started making connections between the money and power they wielded in Florence and the
progression of the Renaissance, which is what I think is the subtext of Strathern’s work.
Although Strathern does not emphasize the Renaissance as a true historical period, he does point out that
the Medici family was vital to the cultural and intellectual changes taking place at the time. Giovanni di
Bicci de Medici supported Masaccio and Brunelleschi, Cosimo the Elder provided patronage to Donatello
and Fra Angelico, and Lorenzo the Magnificent fostered the talents of Michelangelo and Leonardo da
Vinci. As the family commissioned these artists to create pieces for both public and private spaces, other
notable families were inspired to do the same in order to show themselves just as culturally significant at
the Medici. Then, as now, wealth was a means to shape society, politics, and culture. My view on
Strathern’s work in this respect is much like the advice given to young Giovanni di Bicci to exert
influence but do it without too much visibility. He uses the Medici family to provide commentary on the
changes happening during the Renaissance and the ways in which people responded to them.
As regards Strathern’s sources and his work as one of popular history. Many of his sources are cited
within the work itself. He takes great pains to mention within the body of the text his source material, and
even acknowledges several times that Machiavelli’s History of Florence might not be entirely accurate as
he was constantly trying to ingratiate himself with the family. I think one of the most valuable things
about Strathern’s work is that it makes the history of the period accessible. For historians, it allows
another perspective on the period and leads to questions that may or may not have been answered. I know
that as I’ve worked through the book, I’ve made notes on things that I want to understand more.
I’ve used art in the courses I teach at the high school and college levels for years. Art is subjective, that is
true, but it does have value as a primary source in many ways. It does help to understand the symbolism
of any particular period, but that is pretty easy to learn. One of the things that I point out to students about
art is how much we can learn about the context of any particular work. There are often signals within a
work of art that can illustrate the message the artist wanted to send with the piece. I’m an American
historian, and I use the paintings in the Capitol Rotunda as an example of this. Many of those paintings
were rendered to send a message about people and events in American history. They were meant to
communicate ideas regarding American heroism, piety, or unity. As regards the Renaissance, there is
quite a bit to learn just from the content of some images. For example, The Ambassadors by Hans
Holbein the Younger contains not only the portraits of two men, but it also contains multiple still life
objects that give some indications regarding what was happening in the world at that time. Art is an
excellent way for students and historians to find meaning in their study of the past and engage higher
order thinking.
Reply to Todd Conn:
I think one of the most valuable things we can learn from our study of history is that strict periodization is
not really possible. Yes, it makes it simpler for us to divide history into unique “sections” as we try to
understand and communicate it to students and to the world at large. The problem with this, however, is
that history is a continuum. I illustrate it to my students with a crude cartoon. A man stands on a road that
winds into the distance. On one side of the road is a sign that reads, “You are now leaving the Middle
Ages” while on the other is another reading, “Welcome to the Renaissance.” In the near distance, you can
see another that says, “Welcome to the Reformation,” and further “Welcome to the Enlightenment.” I
show this (admittedly bad, I’m no artist) drawing as I begin to lecture about the continuities and
discontinuities that can be found between most historical eras. Across time, people draw from the ideas
and perceptions of the past, filter them through contemporary events and knowledge, and come to
conclusions that create something new.
Knowledge is built, and society, culture, politics, and economics all shift and change based on that
knowledge. For us to attempt to compartmentalize ideas into a historical period is to create a set of
problems that could have been easily avoided. I think that is one of the key points that Tollebeek made in
the article. In their haste to set the Renaissance apart, Michelet, Burckhardt, and Huizinga established a
false dichotomy that left them struggling to explain the origins of the Renaissance. This was a point that
was made more evident to me as I considered Strathern’s work on the Medici family. While the rise of the
family and their bank occurred in what could be termed the late medieval period, the progress was so
constant that it is difficult to delineate to which period which early Medici patriarch belonged. The
Renaissance, as we know it, seemed to emerge naturally in a slow progression, rather than all at once in a
sudden sea change.
Cohen’s work, though it was a bit reductionist, set my mind thinking about how technology in any age
engenders change in all aspects of life. The section on the proliferation of clocks and its connection to
discipline captured my attention and set me thinking about how this advance also changed the way in
which people began to perceive time and its importance. It also begs the question, was this perception
shared across socio-economic levels, or was it limited to the upper echelons of society who could afford
this new technology? More questions came to mind as I was reading through this work, too numerous to
list here, but I couldn’t help but make some connections to the modern world. I think about how
technology has advanced in my own lifetime and how it has both made our lives richer but has brought its
own problems. It seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
