ZOMG. This turnaround time is nothing short of amazing! Now I feel like I should send you a book every day. :P
Looks like this book was a good find, then!
Not a fan of Mussolini, thank God.
Makes a nice change from some of our 1930s authors and their opinions.
"the most interesting of Italian history? whatever did he think of all those Roman Republic and Roman Empire centuries?
Okay, so this is maybe where Germans do things differently than Anglophones. Because I, as an American who's studied history, would raise both eyebrows if you referred to the Roman Republic and Empire as part of "Italian history." And after reading the sentence a couple times, I'd say to myself, "Well, I guess you could call it that...technically..." and move on but be lowkey bothered for probably the rest of the chapter.
So I can almost guarantee you he's excluding Roman history, which precedes Italian history in my worldview and probably his. Without being a specialist and without claiming to speak for Italian historians, my sense of when "Italian" history begins is that Theodoric is fuzzy but probably Roman, and the Lombard invasion is about when I start thinking of the peninsula as "Italian".
As for the rest of it, well. Yes, you have excellent points. When did historians start to really push back on the "Dark Ages" vs. "Renaissance" model? He might be operating inside that framework.
And how is Florence more typical of the Renaissance than, say, Venice? Or Rome?
If by typical he means "most average", then I got nothing. If he means "stored in my, the author's, head as best embodying Renaissance principles," then I can see where he got that, speaking not so much historicaly as historiographically. Because when my high school class covered the Italian Renaissance very very superficially, the model we got was "Venice = trade, Florence = art/architecture/literature/humanism, Rome = Counter-Reformation." And that model probably came out of some school of thought that predated the 1990s.
(I'm currently biased by having studied the Florentine Renaissance due to absolutely falling in love with the city during a visit, and not having studied the others more than in passing. So most of the things I know are about Florence, which may or may not reflect its actual importance.)
Louis XVI: The only woman I ever had sex with in my entire life was my wife. After seven years of trying in vain. And no, I did not have sex with a man, either. You have to go back to the middle ages to find a French King with my fidelity among earlier dynasties.
Philip V: But I, first Bourbon king of Spain, and contemporary of most of these Medici Acton is writing about, was totally faithful to both my wives, no known mistresses or male favorites! If I got a reputation for being sexually dependent on them, well, remember that it's a tough life thinking you're dead or possibly a frog, and I needed moral support. Wife = nurse! I too take umbrage at being blamed for Medici decadence.
Now Cosimo would turn into an ultra pious bigot. Francesco Maria would be a partying playboy who ate, drank and fucked his way to an early death. Give you three guesses which was was made a Cardinal of the Church. (Because second sons, hey.)
LOL forever. So typical.
She wanted to return to France with the same singlemindedness and fervor SD wanted to marry Fritz and Wilhelmine to their Hannover cousins.
As soon as I read this, I sat up straight and knew nothing good was coming.
Wooooow. That poor woman. And good for her for keeping up the fight, I guess? But bad that that involved making everyone else miserable. That really sucks all around. TAKE NOTE, FW.
Marguerite Louise then hit on a really good (for her) idea, which was telling Cosimo, by then the Duke, that since she hadn't wanted to marry him and had been forced to, clearly their marriage was null and void, which meant they were living in shameless unholy concubinage. Cue much self flagelation on Cosimo's part and ponderings whether she was right.
That is a good idea! I'm just surprised it didn't come sooner.
This write-up definitely had all the gossipy sensationalism I was hoping for! Another gem from our royal reader!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Harold Acton: Last of the Medici I: How to make really bad marriages
Date: 2021-06-17 01:13 am (UTC)Looks like this book was a good find, then!
Not a fan of Mussolini, thank God.
Makes a nice change from some of our 1930s authors and their opinions.
"the most interesting of Italian history? whatever did he think of all those Roman Republic and Roman Empire centuries?
Okay, so this is maybe where Germans do things differently than Anglophones. Because I, as an American who's studied history, would raise both eyebrows if you referred to the Roman Republic and Empire as part of "Italian history." And after reading the sentence a couple times, I'd say to myself, "Well, I guess you could call it that...technically..." and move on but be lowkey bothered for probably the rest of the chapter.
So I can almost guarantee you he's excluding Roman history, which precedes Italian history in my worldview and probably his. Without being a specialist and without claiming to speak for Italian historians, my sense of when "Italian" history begins is that Theodoric is fuzzy but probably Roman, and the Lombard invasion is about when I start thinking of the peninsula as "Italian".
As for the rest of it, well. Yes, you have excellent points. When did historians start to really push back on the "Dark Ages" vs. "Renaissance" model? He might be operating inside that framework.
And how is Florence more typical of the Renaissance than, say, Venice? Or Rome?
If by typical he means "most average", then I got nothing. If he means "stored in my, the author's, head as best embodying Renaissance principles," then I can see where he got that, speaking not so much historicaly as historiographically. Because when my high school class covered the Italian Renaissance very very superficially, the model we got was "Venice = trade, Florence = art/architecture/literature/humanism, Rome = Counter-Reformation." And that model probably came out of some school of thought that predated the 1990s.
(I'm currently biased by having studied the Florentine Renaissance due to absolutely falling in love with the city during a visit, and not having studied the others more than in passing. So most of the things I know are about Florence, which may or may not reflect its actual importance.)
Louis XVI: The only woman I ever had sex with in my entire life was my wife. After seven years of trying in vain. And no, I did not have sex with a man, either. You have to go back to the middle ages to find a French King with my fidelity among earlier dynasties.
Philip V: But I, first Bourbon king of Spain, and contemporary of most of these Medici Acton is writing about, was totally faithful to both my wives, no known mistresses or male favorites! If I got a reputation for being sexually dependent on them, well, remember that it's a tough life thinking you're dead or possibly a frog, and I needed moral support. Wife = nurse! I too take umbrage at being blamed for Medici decadence.
Now Cosimo would turn into an ultra pious bigot. Francesco Maria would be a partying playboy who ate, drank and fucked his way to an early death. Give you three guesses which was was made a Cardinal of the Church. (Because second sons, hey.)
LOL forever. So typical.
She wanted to return to France with the same singlemindedness and fervor SD wanted to marry Fritz and Wilhelmine to their Hannover cousins.
As soon as I read this, I sat up straight and knew nothing good was coming.
Wooooow. That poor woman. And good for her for keeping up the fight, I guess? But bad that that involved making everyone else miserable. That really sucks all around. TAKE NOTE, FW.
Marguerite Louise then hit on a really good (for her) idea, which was telling Cosimo, by then the Duke, that since she hadn't wanted to marry him and had been forced to, clearly their marriage was null and void, which meant they were living in shameless unholy concubinage. Cue much self flagelation on Cosimo's part and ponderings whether she was right.
That is a good idea! I'm just surprised it didn't come sooner.
This write-up definitely had all the gossipy sensationalism I was hoping for! Another gem from our royal reader!