Scan barcode
caidyn's review
informative
slow-paced
4.0
A very comprehensive read on the Reformations in the 15th-17th centuries. Not just Protestant, but also the Catholic response. I did enjoy it, although some topics interested me more than others!
abysaurusrex's review
I was assigned this book for a class and we had to read fairly weighty sections of it every week along with additional primary source documents. It honestly was a good book for students, but clearly written for people with an academic background in history (which is something most scholars mentioned in their reviews). I’m not sure if I would read it on my own, however I would like to check out other works by Eire, as he seems like a great writer.
moreteamorecats's review
3.0
Eire regularly teaches a course called "Reformation Europe", a term he defines and defends in that course's first lecture. It isn't "early modern Europe", for instance: You could teach a course with that title centered on economic history and never mention Luther at all. In the book that has come out of this teaching, Eire goes one step further. He wants to defend the Reformations as essential to early modernity and definitive for the modernity that follows, over against (especially) Marxian historiography.
A supple writer and decorated memoirist, Eire weaves this theoretical argument into a vast narrative. His preface admits that this is truly a multi-volume work. In truth, it might read better that way, emphasizing periods, modes, or results of the Reformations rather than implicitly attempting a monograph at quite this scale. As it stands, the sweep is so enormous that almost any non-specialist reader would learn a great deal from reading the whole thing, and the telling illuminated by sardonic humor and moral clarity.
In an early chapter, Eire tips his hand a bit when he expresses contempt for the humanist habit of classicizing last names (e.g. Schwarzerde -> Melanchthon). In effect, he accuses the humanists of thinking they are better than the world they grew up in, changing their names as a mark of their separation. This is not only a Protestant move, but it is predominantly Protestant. Let that be a keynote for Eire's moral emphasis: What he critiques, besides the obviously indefensible (e.g. the conquistadors), is usually what he takes to be elite self-regard. It is an odd note in what is largely an intellectual history, and often makes for sour reading.
A supple writer and decorated memoirist, Eire weaves this theoretical argument into a vast narrative. His preface admits that this is truly a multi-volume work. In truth, it might read better that way, emphasizing periods, modes, or results of the Reformations rather than implicitly attempting a monograph at quite this scale. As it stands, the sweep is so enormous that almost any non-specialist reader would learn a great deal from reading the whole thing, and the telling illuminated by sardonic humor and moral clarity.
In an early chapter, Eire tips his hand a bit when he expresses contempt for the humanist habit of classicizing last names (e.g. Schwarzerde -> Melanchthon). In effect, he accuses the humanists of thinking they are better than the world they grew up in, changing their names as a mark of their separation. This is not only a Protestant move, but it is predominantly Protestant. Let that be a keynote for Eire's moral emphasis: What he critiques, besides the obviously indefensible (e.g. the conquistadors), is usually what he takes to be elite self-regard. It is an odd note in what is largely an intellectual history, and often makes for sour reading.
babylon's review
3.0
Christianity, absolutely mind-boggling. Protestants, I see where you're coming from, the papacy is just awful. But, you're already doing idolatry by worshiping Jesus at all, the crucifix is an icon! You've already decided it's ok to worship the divine as manifest in the material realm, it seems arbitrary to says saints and rituals don't count now.
Martin Luther, this musty old bitch couldn't hermeneutic himself out a paper bag. Throwing your hands up and saying "well, humans are always going to be sinful, might as well do whatever, god probably doesn't even care if we try as long as he's got a special place in our hearts", well that makes things awful easy for you don't it! 'God will forgive whatever if you pray' is not a valid soteriological philosophy, just like farting at demons is not a valid method of exorcism. Take your flatulence and your Pauline civil obedience straight to hell, nerd.
Martin Luther, this musty old bitch couldn't hermeneutic himself out a paper bag. Throwing your hands up and saying "well, humans are always going to be sinful, might as well do whatever, god probably doesn't even care if we try as long as he's got a special place in our hearts", well that makes things awful easy for you don't it! 'God will forgive whatever if you pray' is not a valid soteriological philosophy, just like farting at demons is not a valid method of exorcism. Take your flatulence and your Pauline civil obedience straight to hell, nerd.
More...