Scan barcode
vivamonty's review against another edition
informative
lighthearted
relaxing
fast-paced
4.5
A pop history of the papacy, viewed mostly through a political lens. The subject could’ve lent itself to a tedious slog but Norwich’s prose and humor keeps the narrative humming along and makes the experience quite enjoyable. I learned a lot!
cdbaker's review against another edition
4.0
It's a long book and it took me quite awhile to finish it. But, as far as a pop history of ALL the popes goes, it was well written and easy to listen to. I thought it needed a bit more contextual background info on European history, but that would have just made it even longer. Overall, I learned a lot of things about popes.
styxx's review against another edition
3.0
This book traces the history of the Papacy from St Peter through to shortly into the reign of Pope Benedict XVI (and thus does not mention his resignation and the election of Pope Francis). With such a vast time period to deal with, it is perhaps not surprising that some popes receive more attention than others; the author has inevitably had to be a little selective or the book would have been even bigger than it is (and the paperback is over 500 pages long now). However, since a number of popes only reigned briefly, this is not a particular issue and the major points appear to be covered.
It is interesting to see the story of Europe being told from the point of view of the Papacy; often we see stories with particular monarchs or countries as the focus and popes making cameo appearances, this book reverses that trend with the monarchs making the cameo appearances where relevant. This reversal puts a different perspective on events.
It isn't necessary to be Catholic or even particularly religious to appreciate this history. The story of the popes is, first and foremost, a history of a temporal institution as much as a religious one. The majority of those who have worn the triple crown have been less than pious. Norwich does not gloss over the political infighting, the scandals and the battles with which their history is littered.
It is interesting to see the story of Europe being told from the point of view of the Papacy; often we see stories with particular monarchs or countries as the focus and popes making cameo appearances, this book reverses that trend with the monarchs making the cameo appearances where relevant. This reversal puts a different perspective on events.
It isn't necessary to be Catholic or even particularly religious to appreciate this history. The story of the popes is, first and foremost, a history of a temporal institution as much as a religious one. The majority of those who have worn the triple crown have been less than pious. Norwich does not gloss over the political infighting, the scandals and the battles with which their history is littered.
davehershey's review against another edition
3.0
So many popes, so few pages!
If you ever wanted to learn the history of the papacy, from Peter to Benedict XVI, this book is the place to go. Norwich begins at the beginning. He is not interested in arguing for the validity of the papacy, nor does he get into much theological discussion. This is a book of history. So if the idea of reading theology bores or frightens you, then you're in luck.
If the idea of hundreds of names and dates bores and frightens you, then you are out of luck. Every pope lived in a context filled with kings and bishops and dukes and all sorts of other people. I am not sure that this is a knock at the book as the names are essential to the history. You can't talk about Pope Leo without mentioning Attila the Hun any more than you can talk about Pius XII without mentioning Hitler. That said, the names became a blur to skim over.
After reading this book you realize there were lots of great popes who truly had strong faith and wanted to help people. There were just as many, perhaps more, who were complete jerks. They were either conniving power-hungry maniacs, or inept and pompous morons or just plain arrogant. There were also many who had mistresses and children, some who were gay, others who possibly did not believe in God and possibly one who was a woman. So yeah, pretty interesting.
If you ever wanted to learn the history of the papacy, from Peter to Benedict XVI, this book is the place to go. Norwich begins at the beginning. He is not interested in arguing for the validity of the papacy, nor does he get into much theological discussion. This is a book of history. So if the idea of reading theology bores or frightens you, then you're in luck.
If the idea of hundreds of names and dates bores and frightens you, then you are out of luck. Every pope lived in a context filled with kings and bishops and dukes and all sorts of other people. I am not sure that this is a knock at the book as the names are essential to the history. You can't talk about Pope Leo without mentioning Attila the Hun any more than you can talk about Pius XII without mentioning Hitler. That said, the names became a blur to skim over.
After reading this book you realize there were lots of great popes who truly had strong faith and wanted to help people. There were just as many, perhaps more, who were complete jerks. They were either conniving power-hungry maniacs, or inept and pompous morons or just plain arrogant. There were also many who had mistresses and children, some who were gay, others who possibly did not believe in God and possibly one who was a woman. So yeah, pretty interesting.
aaairm's review against another edition
2.0
Great as a research source, not as great as an layperson read due to the dry language and the massive breadth of characters over a millennium. It’s especially hard to keep track of all the “numbered” people (eg George III vs IV). Would have been more powerful and relatable if it focused more on the citizens’ perspectives than 100% from the politician’s perspective: I found it particularly hard to understand why Rome kept tossing out the Pope at the very beginning but stayed Catholic...
lit_chick's review against another edition
4.0
The NYTimes reviewed this book back in July so I ordered a copy from the library. I wasn't disappointed, Norwich's book is an intriguing survey of the Roman Catholic Church and her Popes.
I think Norwich had to make a lot of hard choices. Even in earlier historical times that weren't as obsessively chronicled as ours, there's still a wealth of information available. For instance, even though Michelangelo figures centrally in the tales of the Renaissance popes - he did work for several of them - Norwich neglects to mention that he was raised by the Medici's. A salient point, but one of many, I'm sure, that failed to make the cut.
Even still, Norwich is able to craft story arcs out of lives and periods, the many wars of the papacy and the theological arguments that split the church. We even see several over-arching themes, like the anti-Semitism that pervades the church and the relationship between the papacy and the arts. There's also the weakening of the papacy as the church loses money during reformations and as corruption is tackled by the cardinals (funny how people will listen to you when you have an army). We also see how the papacy changes from a central political office to the one we see today - the man who merely suggests things to the flock who ignores him - from the man who could make and break kings.
Sometimes the narrative is hard to follow, there were a few times I reached the end of a paragraph and had to wade back and fish out all the pronouns. Italian history, even at the author's own admission, can be difficult to untangle. Even still, I would highly recommend this to students of European or church history.
I think Norwich had to make a lot of hard choices. Even in earlier historical times that weren't as obsessively chronicled as ours, there's still a wealth of information available. For instance, even though Michelangelo figures centrally in the tales of the Renaissance popes - he did work for several of them - Norwich neglects to mention that he was raised by the Medici's. A salient point, but one of many, I'm sure, that failed to make the cut.
Even still, Norwich is able to craft story arcs out of lives and periods, the many wars of the papacy and the theological arguments that split the church. We even see several over-arching themes, like the anti-Semitism that pervades the church and the relationship between the papacy and the arts. There's also the weakening of the papacy as the church loses money during reformations and as corruption is tackled by the cardinals (funny how people will listen to you when you have an army). We also see how the papacy changes from a central political office to the one we see today - the man who merely suggests things to the flock who ignores him - from the man who could make and break kings.
Sometimes the narrative is hard to follow, there were a few times I reached the end of a paragraph and had to wade back and fish out all the pronouns. Italian history, even at the author's own admission, can be difficult to untangle. Even still, I would highly recommend this to students of European or church history.
siria's review against another edition
2.0
This is a very ambitious project—attempting to cover some 2000 years of history and more than 250 pontificates in less than 500 pages. While it's very readable, and Norwich did fill in some of the gaps in my knowledge (pretty much from the end of the Middle Ages to Vatican II), Absolute Monarchs isn't a successful book overall. Norwich writes well and with occasional bursts of the wry humour which made his history of Byzantium so enjoyable to read, but perhaps unsurprisingly given its scope, the book does drag at points and is very much confined to considering the papacy as a political institution.
That this isn't an area of Norwich's particular expertise is also evident just from looking at the bibliography, which relies heavily on older scholarship, largely English-language monographs. Why does Norwich use the Cambridge Medieval History (1911-36), one wonders, rather than the New Cambridge Medieval History (1995-2005), its updated successor, which would provide him with much more up-to-date scholarship upon which to draw? Why Kantorowicz on Frederick II, and not Abulafia? I was left with the impression that Norwich's research for Absolute Monarchs was confined to whichever books he had to hand in his own private collection and didn't stray very far from that. So a relatively quick read if you're interested in the history of the papacy over the longue durée, but not one which can be regarded as authoritative.
That this isn't an area of Norwich's particular expertise is also evident just from looking at the bibliography, which relies heavily on older scholarship, largely English-language monographs. Why does Norwich use the Cambridge Medieval History (1911-36), one wonders, rather than the New Cambridge Medieval History (1995-2005), its updated successor, which would provide him with much more up-to-date scholarship upon which to draw? Why Kantorowicz on Frederick II, and not Abulafia? I was left with the impression that Norwich's research for Absolute Monarchs was confined to whichever books he had to hand in his own private collection and didn't stray very far from that. So a relatively quick read if you're interested in the history of the papacy over the longue durée, but not one which can be regarded as authoritative.
bstephens's review against another edition
1.0
The last chapters dealing with the collaboration between the papacy and the Nazis and fascists in the 1930's and 1940 were very painful to read. Written as if there was an ethical conundrum associated with the decision about whether to support the murderous psychotic thugs in Germany and elsewhere, or that we should understand it was a different time, as if people did not really know what was happening or there were other pressures to weigh in the balance. Perhaps the writer failed to see the irony that an institution that has arrogated to itself the role, for hundreds of years, of lecturing the rest of humanity about morality failed to make the easiest moral call in history. We do not need any more apologists for this religion or any other - we need writers who can take on historical issues with moral clarity, which is certainly the least we owe the millions of victims of nazism and other fascist movements around the world.
The rest of the book makes it clear the papacy has been a rolling disaster for Italy and for the rest of humanity since its inception - the source of war, depravity, hideous repression and exploitation. But having reached what i can only describe as the whitewash at the end - the delicate balancing of this and that about the Holocaust of all things - I am left with the strong impression the actual history of the papacy is far worse than is described in this book.
The rest of the book makes it clear the papacy has been a rolling disaster for Italy and for the rest of humanity since its inception - the source of war, depravity, hideous repression and exploitation. But having reached what i can only describe as the whitewash at the end - the delicate balancing of this and that about the Holocaust of all things - I am left with the strong impression the actual history of the papacy is far worse than is described in this book.