Reformations: The Early Modern World, 1450-1650

by Carlos M.N. Eire

A lively, expansive history of the Protestant and Catholic Reformations and the momentous changes they set in motion

This fast-paced survey of Western civilization’s transition from the Middle Ages to modernity brings that tumultuous period vividly to life. Carlos Eire, popular professor and gifted writer, chronicles the two-hundred-year era of the Renaissance and Reformation with particular attention to issues that persist as concerns in the present day. Eire connects the Protestant and Catholic Reformations in new and profound ways, and he demonstrates convincingly that this crucial turning point in history not only affected people long gone, but continues to shape our world and define who we are today.
 
The book focuses on the vast changes that took place in Western civilization between 1450 and 1650, from Gutenberg’s printing press and the subsequent revolution in the spread of ideas to the close of the Thirty Years’ War. Eire devotes equal attention to the various Protestant traditions and churches as well as to Catholicism, skepticism, and secularism, and he takes into account the expansion of European culture and religion into other lands, particularly the Americas and Asia. He also underscores how changes in religion transformed the Western secular world. A book created with students and nonspecialists in mind, Reformations is an inspiring, provocative volume for any reader who is curious about the role of ideas and beliefs in history.

Genres: History, Religion, Nonfiction, European History, Christianity, Audiobook, Church History

920 pages, Paperback

First published September 28, 2016

About the author

Author also writes under Carlos Eire


A scholar of the social, intellectual, religious, and cultural history of late medieval and early modern Europe, Carlos Eire is the T. Lawrason Riggs Professor of History & Religious Studies at Yale University. He received his PhD from Yale in 1979, and taught at St. John’s University in Minnesota and the University of Virginia before joining the Yale faculty in 1996.

Reviews

[Dionysius the Areopagite · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thank you for the reccomendation, PARTHAN. I'm going to see if I can have it lent to me via Inter-library Loan in the next week or two. This looks like a great read and I'd never heard of it nor the author - thanks again!

*

Another welcome addition to my personal library. The next time anyone fanatically religious or fanatically atheist gets into the crux of where the Western World dwelleth today, do present them with this book; in the worst case scenario you shall come to reminisce over the guillotine, and in the best you'll never hear from them again. Fanatics of the Left, Right, and of any religion or lack thereof deserve nothing less. Reformations will give you 1450 - 1650 and even pedestrians with minimal religious, historical knowledge will find Eire's accessibility and lack of constant citation akin to eating mushrooms and gaining extra lives in a video game. The best part is a complete lack of bias, nor much mention of any of the lesser religions in the times chronicled, save the occasional, necessary process of converting pagans and infidels. One would have to be either blind or a severely lesser being to not benefit from this great, refreshing book. For professionals it is like finding cash on the ground; you may not need it, but it's nice nonetheless.

[John Sinclair · Rating 4 out of 5]

This took me a long while, but it was really worth the effort. I’ve read several tomes on “the Reformation” in the past few years. What differentiates this from them is a focus on plural Reformations, the Protestant and the Catholic (without succumbing to confessional bias). Most Reformation histories that I have read do not trace the history of the changes in the Catholic tradition other than to label it as Counter-Reformation (solely in response to the Protestant Reformation, as a foil (what was rejected) or a footnote (oh, yes, there was also a Council in Trent.). This book talked about it all, which I found profoundly interesting. It is not the first book I have read on this topic, neither will it be the last. But I have appreciated its “roundedness”.

[Tomas Riklius · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simply magnificent account of reformations across the European continent from as early as the mid XV century. The author scopes various processes and assesses reformations as interconnected occurrences that sometimes might have an independent character. It is a monumental account of religious and philosophical reforms in the Early modern world.

[Jacob Hammill · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have a lot of sympathy for people that turn into Dawkins atheists, never lifting their minds above the level of funko pops and porn. If you live in America and are presented with Christianity, you’re likely to encounter an overwhelming and incomprehensible number of denominations, each professing a doctrine quite different from the last. If one of those internet skeptics, in the earnest interest of exploring the Faith, asks three random Christians about vital concepts like soteriology, eschatology, and even how the Trinity works, they’ll get three different answers. How could you not lose faith and interest after that?
How did the Catholic Church, a term originally used by the church fathers to describe their universal and uniform belief across all dioceses, fracture into thousands of varied independent systems? I wanted to know, and holy shit, did this book really enlightened me. I’ve found from reading that the Reformation Period is quite possibly one of the most evil and vicious periods Europe has ever had to endure. I wouldn’t feel bad saying that if some of these figures from this period were placed into the 20th century with its state controlled industries and mass media, they’d commit way worse horrors than Stalin or Hitler could ever be capable of.

In Reformations, Carlos Eire addresses the Era as a whole. Religion of course takes the focal point, but the economic, social, societal, geographical, and other periphery topics aren’t lax, they get their due respect with page after page of inspection that parallels what even the largest figures like Calvin and Luther get. By addressing the Era in its totality, Eire allows the reader to really get an idea of how the reformers came to have their ideas shaped. For example, topics like the increasing bureaucratization of Germany which instigated anti-Latin sentiment among the commoners are discussed, along with all of the political intrigue which contributed so much to the era.
Being roughly 700 pages excluding the notes, it seemed like a feat when starting. I’d imagined that I’d reach a point where reading this would begin to feel like a slog and I’d be forced to finish it out of hardheadedness. Not at fu***** all dude. Within every 5 pages, especially in the first 3/4s, I was blown away by some revelation or new understanding of the past. Did you know that the western world had come to believe that Heaven was a physical place and Galileo’s revolution completely destroyed that bedrock understanding of the universe? They believed heaven was an actual physical place above the stars called Empyrean, adopted from the west’s scholastic/apologetic infatuation with classical philosophers like Aristotle.
Are you aware of how much the black legend still affects your understanding of the reformation era today? Like for example: that for about the past forty years, academics have understood that only 2% of those tried by the Spanish Inquisition were set for execution, with many escaping, and that their main punishment they'd dish out was the literal wearing of a dunce cap and being put on a bad star board in your local church (as long as you said sorry)? Or how about the fact that the shocktroops of the catholic church, the Jesuits, did all of the most unthinkable personal commands of the pope, like the building of hundreds of humanist universities across Europe where they’d develop the arts and sciences in amazing and brilliant ways, openly inviting protestants to debate with them, or maybe the command of the pope to convert natives in the new world, which Jesuits saw more success in by peacefully converting and building model cities than any secular ruler did by conquest, secular rulers, whom would become so jealous, they’d burn these model cities down?

If you were aware of those things (I sure as hell wasn’t), are you aware of the fact that the head of the infamously censorious and maligned Spanish Inquisition, Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros, was the first to print a polyglot version of the Bible featuring the Aramaic, Greek, Hebrew, and Vulgate, being inspired by the reformation principle of Ad Fontes, or that he himself founded an abundance of Humanist Universities in Spain that would seek genuine reform of the church? Did you know the reason that Luther and the protestant reformation was able to spread in the first place was because the Catholic Church had no real worldly power to force their will outside of the Papal State; they had to rely on secular rulers to firstly care enough, secondly agree, and thirdly oblige them?
These Revelations (which come page after page) are besides the incredibly complex narratives Eire explores like the schizophrenic puppy defenestrating life of Luther, the SS level of Totalitarianism of Calvin and Zwingli, or the horrors of the 40 years war, The Peasant Revolt, and The Munster rebellion. Topics too which precede the reformation, like the chaos of the Western Schism, are also told in their full glory and keep nothing hidden. Not to mention the covering of the successful communist societies of the Anabaptists which enraged all the infighting Protestant spheres, or the genocidal hellscape that took hold in Ireland and England under Oliver Cromwell. Through these revelations and narratives, one learns how the church broke apart into so many pieces under the flame of hubris and bloodshed.

When what remains of the Church in America (which is normally all that’s presented to the average man) are the decaying and largely apathetic ruins of an ancient tradition which have been filtered through such a feverish era and through the minds of genuine lunatics and schizophrenic manipulators, you can hardly blame the majority for rejecting it all outright and who learn to keep their eyes solely on earthly materialism. Yet even though you can’t blame them, the sum of the rejection of Christ has caused problems in our world that can’t be ignored in the same way one ignores irl soyjacks. Despite how overwhelming this death knell is of a common transcendent mind, Eire’s work in a way provides a little light to those wanting to find truth and turn the tide. With a new awareness of history’s realities and a gained appreciation of the Ad-Fontes principle, I would hope that many readers (including myself), take the lessons learned and use it to better navigate history, to genuinely keep going deeper and in effect, help shed the corruption that plagues so many churches reinforced with anachronisms, innovations, and cults of personalities. By doing so, I hope that we can begin to recover what was lost in our world and reignite the faith with new integrity.

[Joseph Sverker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very impressive book that covers a lot of topics over the reformation era. Particularly interesting are the sections on the prereformation trends and the relation between renaissance and reformation. Also section on anabaptism is detailed and is paid due attention. Also, very good on the relation between Catholic Church and colonialism.

[Jerrod · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars (when will Goodreads instituting a sliding scale rather than the star system)

This is a broad sweep across Europe and it's colonies pre-, post-, and during the events immediately following Luther's distribution of his 95 theses. Eire does a fantastic job of organizing the events, though with some tedium to be expected from a 900 page book. And you get the obligatory "oh, dates aren't exact and labeling events as Reformation and Counter-Reformation puts history into arbitrary boxes, etc., etc., etc." (I swear... when am I going to read something from a historian that doesn't include this inane disclaimer and hand-wringing?). While his coverage of the pre-Reformation era was thorough and interesting, most of the value for me was in the Reformation and counter-Reformation sections. Suffice it to say, Luther and his reforming zeal did not arise ex nihilo, and there was a tradition, however small, of reform in the church. Eire seems to have had some exposure (direct or indirect) to economics of religion as evidenced by his reference to religious orders acting as franchises (reminiscent of Tollison's observation that religious orders are precursors to modern corporations).

Things of note:
- I was surprised at the relative ease of movement reformers had in crossing boundaries and setting up in various cities.
- Luther is one of the least impressive theologians of the Reformation.
- Luther attributed a lot of power to flatulence in driving away demons (Luther states he chases "him away with a fart.")
- the contrast of Protestants (at least in the magisterial tradition) centralizing charitable activities and Catholics to maintaining decentralized charitable activities is quite interesting (though with how intertwined the state and the Catholic church were I wouldn't push this distinction too far)
- the Jesuits were an impressive bunch and it seems that in the New World they faced more than a bit of animosity from the European settlers due to the economic success of their activities with the native population.
- the most intriguing thing about England's Reformation was the Catholic attempt at taking it back (there were various English seminaries set up on the continent to train priest for that purpose)
- As a sign of how we incorrectly perceive the Inquisition to be the worst sort of process to go through, their were cases in which prisoners under civil jurisdiction tried to get transferred to the Inquisition, including blaspheming and shouting heresies.

Below are notes I made for myself:

In a debate between Luther and Johann Eck, Luther brought with him a few professors and 200 axe-wielding students, while the Leipzig city council assigned 76 armed guards to protect Eck.

The satirical images of around 1520 are brutal. One image depicts the devil defecating in Catholic theologian Johann Cochlaeus's mouth and, in the same image, Cochlaeus defecates onto the empty pages of a book, which gives you an idea of what the author of the image thought of Cochlaeus' work.

In his battles with the devil, when all else fails, Luther states he chases "him away with a fart."

The reformation Protestants were nowhere near a monolithic whole.

When Zwingli was invited to be a preacher at the main church in Zurich (still Catholic at the time), detractors decried him for having broken his vow of celibacy. Unfortunately for the detractors, their candidate had six children and a concubine. Zwingli was awarded the position.

In a debate between Luther and Zwingli, Zwingli tells Luther, "This passage [John 6:60] is going to break your neck."

In Switzerland, after the confiscation of Catholic Church property, some nunneries and monasteries became hospitals administered by the civil authorities, and charity was subsumed by governmental bodies in order to distribute charity to the "deserving poor" and outlaw begging.

Radical Reformation (rejection of relying on the state) vs. Magisterial Reformation (utilizing the state to enforce doctrine)

Calvin (at 18 years old) originally had 2 clerical posts even though he was not ordained and paid a priest to perform the duties associated with these posts (a model of why the church needed reform

Calvin's Geneva:
- a parishioner was jailed not just for leaving church during a sermon but also for not doing so quietly.
- the consistory (disciplinary council) was often lenient with first-time offenders and sometimes recommended divorce
- after gaining control of the city council in 1555, everyday life was micromanaged including fashion (no codpieces for men, no open-toed shoes for women), certain kinds of bows and fabric, certain hairstyles were deemed un-Christian, and lavish parties were banned

Calvin forbade Nicodemism and required his followers to live openly, even in hostile regimes

There were seminaries set up on the continent to train English Catholics during Elizabeth's reign

Luther's popularity came from his appeal to the common man, and the Catholic Church initially responded by writing learned treatises.

While reform of the Catholic Church may have appeared to come from a centralized institution (e.g. Council of Trent), most of the (successful) effort was bottom-up rather than top-down

Catholics were able to provide a unified experience, whether in the Netherlands or Germany or Spain (much like McDonald's)

Hagiography increased substantially after Luther (but so did many other types of religious literature)

Holy House of Loreto: supposedly the house in which the Virgin Mary was born and in which Jesus was reared that was transported from Nazareth to Loreto by angels and became a pilgrimage site

Protestants tended to disband confraternities and place the welfare infrastructure into the hands of the civil authorities.

Catholic devotional texts were published to distill monastic piety for the laity

There were more religious orders established between 1500 and 1699 (more than 30 orders) than in the period 0-1499

Some orders, such as the Visitandines and Jesuits eschewed the extremes of self-denial (e.g. fasting, self-mortification, etc.), allowing their membership to be opened to the elderly, handicapped, and poor.

Some confraternities became international (rather than just local) in their membership, e.g. the Brothers Hospitallers.

Charity (for Catholics) was a means of salvation

There is an example of child sexual abuse and cover-up going back to a Naples school in 1646.

Founding a religious order aided canonization to the fact that they were a going concern and could keep the campaign for canonization for canonization going.

Ignatius was brought before the Spanish inquisition several times for giving spiritual exercises and teaching, which gained him followers

Jesuits set up schools, which even attracted non-Catholics

Jesuits encouraged white lies if it served the greater good, such as dissembling when under threat of persecution

Catholics did not permit natives of the New World to become clerics

The encomienda system forbade the outright enslavement of Native Americans (restriction the Portuguese did not place on themselves) and debates over the nature of the natives humanity were significant steps in developing human rights theory.

Jesuits set up remote outpost to protect Native Americans, which sometimes became economically successful, leading to the ire of colonists and eventual violence

"Even at their kindest, [Catholic missions] always remained unapologetically condescending to the natives."

In missionary efforts, there was great debate on how much to accommodate local tastes and tradition in the Christian message, with the gavel coming down in favor of non-accommodating stances (European Christianity or bust)

In the fracturing of French power in the mid-1500s, Protestantism was able to survive

I'm still not convinced on the connection between the rise in skepticism, rationalism, etc., and the fracturing of religion per se (seems like it is the inability of a central power to regulate and persecute that increases the voices of dissent)

On the value of doing good scholarly work: "In 1567, Pope Pius V issued a bull condemning more than six dozen statements made by Baius [who cast doubt on those who put too much confidence in free will], but since the Louvain professor had taken great care to ground his arguments in the teachings of st. Augustine, the condemnation was too carefully worded to be effective, and it left many theologians arguing over the meaning of its sentences."

Spur in the publication of catechisms by Protestants encouraged an increase in the number of Catholic catechisms.

For Protestants, civil authorities were given responsibility over religious education, whereas Catholics left religious education in the hands of regular clergy.

Preaching began to draw overflow crowds, and in Spain, people would line up overnight.

Luther's judgment of the common man's view of religion: "The peasants learn nothing, know nothing, do nothing but abuse their liberty... As they once used to ignore popery, they now turn us away with contempt."

The Spanish Inquisition was self-funded through its property seizures.

Decrease in extramarital sex (as measured by illegitimate births and children conceived prior to marriage) decreased for both Lutheran and Catholic communities.

During the Spanish Inquisition, non-prominent individuals (or those charged with minor crimes) were subjected to trials called autos particulares. Guilty parties were made to wear dunce caps and yellow tunics for a certain amount of time, after which their tunics were hung in their parish churches with their names clearly visible.

The distinctions made between 4 different types of superstition (while incomprehensible to the laity) mattered to those who meted out punishments, underscoring the importance of studying elites in history.

Reading the signs in nature ("the Wonders") tended to be more of a preoccupation in Protestant rather than Catholic circles. While this shows that Protestant did not completely give up the magical mindset and did not disenchant the world, they discarded many superstitions and thoroughly unmodern ways of thinking.

Regarding witches and the devil: Women were assumed to have a greater sex drive than men and were thus easier for the devil to lure in due to their "insatiable lust".

The appearance of Protestants led to a lull in witch hunts and publication of witchcraft texts, as the Catholics focused their energy on directly addressing the Protestant threat.

"Witches" were persecuted with equal ferocity by Catholics and Protestants.

Mass witch hunts with large body counts tended to be set in motion from above by elites, whereas the steady, prolonged witch hunts (with low per year mortality) tended to be driven from below by the laity and focused on individuals.

Some theologians held "witches" suffered from mental disease rather than being instruments of the devil.

"In many cases witch trials were pragmatic solutions to everyday problems, approached according to an understanding of the world and premises and assumption that not only made sense, but also were considered rational even by the most learned savants."

Martin Luther on devils: "I f they can't overwhelm my heart, they grab my head and plague me there, and when that proves useless, I show them my ass, for that's where they belong."

An estimated 250,000 of "devil books", telling about encounters with Satan were in circulation by the 1590s.

By 1614, exorcisms had become one of the strongest proofs the Catholic Church had to offer of its authenticity and its superiority to all Protestant churches [dimensions of competition].

Martin Luther, discussing torments from the devil: But all these sins are no longer mine, instead they've been taken by Christ.... If this isn't enough for you, devil, I just happened to shit and piss in my pants: wipe your mouth with that and bite hard on it!"

Descartes dispensed with revelation in religion and raised human judgment as the ultimate arbiter.

Apparently John Calvin was no big fan of Copernicus' heliocentric theory and panned it in a sermon.

Rationalists could be just as bombastic and utilize equally less-than-rational rhetoric as the religious writers.

One of Luther's remedies to drive away the devil: have (or think of having) sex with his wife."The best fights that I've had with the devil have taken place in my bed, side by side with my Kate."

The disappearance of all postmortem rituals (to get the departed souls out of purgatory) was an economic boon.

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Half a millennium after a lone monk began a theological dispute that eventually tore Western Christendom asunder both religiously and politically, does the event known as the Reformation still matter? In his book Reformations: The Early Modern World, 1450-1650, Carlos M.N. Eire determined to examine the entire period leading up to and through the epoch of the Reformation. An all-encompassing study for beginners and experts looks to answer that question.

Eire divided his large tome into four parts: On the Edge, Protestants, Catholics, and Consequences. This division helps gives the book both focusing allowing the reader to see the big picture at the same time. The 50-60 years covered in “On the Edge” has Eire go over the strands of theological, political, and culture thoughts and developments that led to Luther’s 95 theses. “Protestants” goes over the Martin Luther’s life then his theological challenge to the Church and then the various versions of Protestantism as well as the political changes that were the result. “Catholics” focused on the Roman Church’s response to the theological challenges laid down by Protestants and how the answers made at the Council of Trent laid the foundations of the modern Catholicism that lasted until the early 1960s. “Consequences” focused on the clashes between the dual Christian theologies in religious, political, and military spheres and how this clash created a divide that other ideas began to challenge Christianity in European thought.

Over the course of almost 760 out of the 920 pages, Eire covers two centuries worth of history in a variety of ways to give the reader a whole picture of this period of history. The final approximately 160 pages are of footnotes, bibliography, and index is for more scholarly readers while not overwhelming beginner readers. This decision along with the division of the text was meant mostly for casual history readers who overcome the prospect of such a huge, heavy book.

Reformations: The Early Modern World, 1450-1650 sees Europe’s culture change from its millennium-long medieval identity drastically over the course of two centuries even as Europe starts to affect the rest of the globe. Carlos N.M. Eire authors a magnificently written book that gives anyone who wonders if the Reformation still matters, a very good answer of if they ask the question then yes it still does. So if you’re interested to know why the Reformation matters, this is the book for you.

[Hugh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good attempt at synthesising recent work on the reformation for a (reasonably) popular audience.
Unfortunately I could tell the confessional commitments of the author. He wrote with clear love for 17th century Catholic missionaries and mystics, but when he turns to the reformed tradition I get the sense that he was bored.

I like that he had a chapter on 17th century philosophy in the context of the long reformation but he did an appalling job on getting the details right. His description of Descartes could not have been worse.

[Matthew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Carlos Eire (my history professor's former instructor at Yale) brilliantly and thoroughly (~770 pages) details the early modern/Reformation era--from 1450 to the 1600s.

His analysis of Renaissance Humanism, Catholic counter-reforms/missions, the rise of empirical science (rationalism/secularism), and the Radical Reformation were all super fascinating.

By providing an honest and nuanced telling of history, Eire helps the reader understand that the *Protestant Reformation was, in many ways, a result of the changes occurring in Europe at the turn of the 16th century. In doing so, however, he does not discredit the impact and importance of individual reformers.

The epilogue succinctly summarizes the "reconfigurations of reality" that the Reformation era brought about in Western civilization: how matter relates to spirit, how the natural relates to the supernatural, and how the living relate to the dead.

Amazing book!! You should totally read it if Reformation history is of any interest.

[Wilhelm Weber · Rating 5 out of 5]

For someone, who is familiar with the Lutheran Reformation, this book adds definite value and scope by going way beyond Wittenberg and even the protestant reformations by illustrating the catholic ones in Spain, Italy, the French and British Reformations, but also those in reforma movements affecting missions in the new worlds discovered in the East and in the West and even describing the alternative reformations of the radicals and enthusiasts i.e. the forebears of today's spiritual and religious movements in the US etc.
Eire restricts himself to 200 years to be investigated in this mammoth work, but there's lots of fascinating details. For me it was an eye opener to read about the constructive reforms effected before the time of Luther and actually preparing his way in just so many ways, but also to see, how the so-called "counter-reformation" by the catholics actually took up many of the Lutheran/protestant impulses and integrated them into a truly catholic and "roman" paradigm.
Another fascinosum is the assumed proximity of so-called strict "Lutherans" to "Calvinist" and "Zwinglian" thinking. I think, it goes a long way to prove some sort of crypto-Calvinism very active in today's churches. This sweeping statement needs some more reflection and also serious follow-up, but I'm very interested in doing some more research on this premonition and first hunch.
The mission efforts in the new world - both East and West - are definitely also worth a closer look at, especially if one looks at Africa, which has not been really touched on in this book at all. It probably only featured later. Still the mission practices of those early days seem to have been very influential for those consequential movements into this continent.
Finally I really do want to read up more on the idea, that the reformation, which was aimed at getting a better and clearer view of Christianity and a more faithful and authentic community of holy saints here on earth also had the negative consequence of a clearer view of the opposite side - speak the devil and his ilk, the damned non-conforerms and enemies of the true church i.e. a more polarized society in this world. In a somewhat bold connection, I also see the Islam revolutions in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey somewhat prefigured in the European reformations of the 16th and 17th centuries. This gives me some hope as I look on those desperate struggles going on there, but recounting that the Europeans also took decades and centuries to play out, we've probably got to learn patience and not loose hope prematurely.
In this year 2017, when a lot of my attention was focused on Martin Luther and his reformational input, this book gave a broader perspective and raised some very interesting issues, which I will like to pursue in the coming weeks. No doubt exists in my mind, that to understand our situation today, it is vital to see that there were a whole lot of reformations going on and achieving the diverse picture facing us today. Eire's book is a good starting point and gives a good overview of a very complex and fascinating period in our long history and Europes cultures, which have influenced the world more and more since then.

[Marks54 · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book presents an historical survey of what many refer to as “The Protestant Reformation” or more simply “The Reformation”. The author is a distinguished historian of religion at Yale who appears to have read everything on the subject (along with a great deal more). Professor Eire quickly lets the reader know that it is not really appropriate to refer to the Reformation as a single act - although it is commonly done. There were lots of separate movements to break with and reform the Church and these efforts differ widely from each other. Even within a line of Protestantism, such as that based on Luther, there is incredible diversity if doctrine, logic, governmental action, and the like. This gets more complicated still as one realizes that “Reformation” also includes changes made within the Roman Catholic Church in response to the crises brought on by Luther, Calvin, and others, such that Reformation also includes “Counter-Reformation”.

...but wait! There is more. Luther and his contemporaries were not the first to note or attempt reform of the Church’s excesses and inadequacies. Both within and outside the Church, there were predecessors to 1517. There are also national differences that muddy the waters further (England). And finally, there is how all of this sorted out to introduce the modern era (30 years war, the Enlightenment, and the rise of science).

So while this massive book is framed as a history of some distinct events (reformations), it is really more of a social, cultural, and political history of Western Europe from the late Middle Ages and the ?Renaissance up through the Enlightenment.

Overall, I liked this book a lot. It is well written, fairly easy to follow (although there are lots of names and dates) and tells a fairly compelling story. The overall story is a bit clunky at times, in that the author spends lots of time taking issue with particular interpretations to show how they are incomplete or inaccurate. This is showing what “The Reformations” are not. I was also wondering what the answer would be to the question of what “The Reformations” are - how to summarize how these religious-political events changed the world and what that all means. Professor Eire finally gets around to this in his concluding chapters by arguing that while religion is still around, it functions quite differently in a more secular world and a world in which people holding vastly differently confessional orientations have to get along with each other. I am very sympathetic to where this broad and impressive survey ends up. The book helps fill in the cracks on a vast set of topics that do not readily come to one’s attention these days, for example, the role of the radical reformation and how its adherents have continued up to the present. I was also impressed by Professor Eire’s attention to more technical issues of interpretation that arise in presenting the state of the art history of 500 year old events to a contemporary audience.

Overall, I ended up comparing this book to Charles Taylor’s excellent “A Secular Age”. I liked Taylor’s overall approach more than I did Eire’s approach in this book. That may well be a function of the different disciplinary focus of the two books, both of which are superb.

[Justin Evans · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is solid, but with so many options out there, I have high standards for general histories of the reformation(s). Eire's is good, particularly in setting the scene, and on Catholicism during the period. The chapters on the various Reformation churches were weaker, I thought, and the final section was somewhere in between. Eire occasionally flashes a very tedious contrarian streak (i.e., if you dare to explain things, particularly if you try to explain things rather than just assuming that they are exactly how they present themselves, you are damned). But he writes well, and his book is admirably wide-ranging in terms of its foci. On the whole, though, Chadwick's telling is briefer, and MacCulloch's more compelling.

[Steve Herreid · Rating 5 out of 5]

Comprehensive, magisterial work which discusses and assesses the Reformation(s) (author's take) from multiple perspectives. I thought this book was awesome. Very clear, cogent and readable by the layperson. As a Protestant I have read much more about the Reformation from that viewpoint. This work includes several interesting chapters addressing the ways in which the Roman Catholic church also reformed during this time period.

[Andrea Hickman Walker · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this. It's not a period that I know a great deal about, so it was quite interesting to get such a wide perspective of this period.

[Moses · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm tempted to give this five stars, because some parts were truly excellent. As a "historian" (I add the quotes because although I have a MSc, I'm pretty rusty), I appreciate Eire's attention to detail.

Most weighty historical books written for a large audience will start with a length preface, introduction, or prologue laying out the historian's general philosophy. It will usually explain for a lay audience some of the historical theory that goes into writing history (historiography) and why historians generally shy away from making blanket observations, value judgments, or direct lines of causality about the people and events of the past. This, of course, makes history less "satisfying" on one level, in the sense that we can't say with certainty that any particular historical event led to another, e.g. that various phenomena such as democracy and the free market developed later and in different ways in the German-speaking lands than in the rest of Europe led irrevocably to the rise of the Third Reich. This would be the tempting, easy, satisfying thing to say, and yet historians generally shy away from it (although explaining the rise of the Third Reich is an area where they are often tempted to fudge their own rules).

Eire's preface is up there with the greats, explaining that there are many questions that the discipline of history cannot answer, etc. He then proceeds to give an extremely fluent summary of the Reformation(s) in various places, beginning with a cogent sketch of medieval European Catholicism and movements like Conciliarism and Humanism that led directly or indirectly to the Reformation.

He gives Luther and Zwingli the pride of place they deserve - indeed, I almost wish he had given more space to Cajetan and the popes who opposed them - but there is certainly also a wealth of information on the Catholic or Counter-Reformation, broadly speaking, including the Council of Trent, and the rise of the post-Luther Catholic religious orders such as the Jesuits.

It is after this point, when the core of the Reformation has been discussed, that Eire's book begins to lose the thread a little. His lengthy discussion of missionary efforts in the New World, for example, is certainly informative, but he does not do a good job tying it to the Reformation, properly so called. I realize this is Eire's entire thesis - that there was not just one Reformation - and I follow him up to a point. But he does not provide any evidence that Jesuit missionary efforts in Brazil, for example, were meaningfully or directly influenced by any of the European reformations. By the time of his lengthy treatment of Bartolomé de las Casas, who is a fascinating figure but not to my mind a "Reformation" one, I thought Eire had lost the plot.

They say historians are divided into "lumpers" and "splitters" - the former lump all historical events in a given period into a few small buckets for ease of explanation, the latter dissecting each phenomenon and looking for e.g. a feminist Reformation. Eire is certainly a lumper, to a fault.

By the time he implies that the Enlightenment was a "Reformation" (and gives it a strong but much too brief treatment), I am wondering what the point of it all is. If the Enlightenment is a Reformation, why can't we call the Reformation one of the Enlightenments, and thus call the book Enlightenments? Words and historical terms have meanings, and Eire has stretched the term "Reformation" to the breaking point.

Moreover, while attempting to avoid causal judgments, Eire repeats over and over again the idea that the Reformation(s) led to secularization. It is confusing, because he is smart enough to avoid the smears of polemical Roman Catholic writers like Brad Gregory, who blame the Protestant Reformers for the rise of everything they hate about the modern world, but he does not to my mind tell a sophisticated enough story to tie the Protestant or Catholic Reformations to the later rise of Enlightenment thought.

For example, while he points to some verifiable facts, such as that the so-called "wars of religion" were followed by uneasy but real religious toleration, and toleration per se was a driver in early modern states becoming less strongly confessional (e.g. the Netherlands being a Calvinist state which tolerated Catholics, Anabaptists, Jews, etc.). Another verifiable fact is that the end of bequests for masses for the dead reduced clerical power and did a lot to lessen the special intercessory role of the clergy in the lands of the Protestant Reformation. These factors were indubitably factors in the rise of what we call disenchantment or secularization, but I would argue that religious developments per se cannot be directly linked to secularization.

Two glaring absences from Eire's account of secularization are economic factors, such as the rise of the market economy, and that while Eire speaks of the reduced power of religion after the Enlightenment, this can only be conceivably applied to the wealthy and literate minority who were exposed to these ideas. For the common man, religion was likely to play just as strong a role in the age of Hume and Voltaire as it had in the age of Luther. 1789, not 1650, would the earliest we can date a lessening in the importance of religion for the common people.

In the end, Eire simply tries to do to much. He gives himself plenty of pages, says many illuminating things, writes a great history of the Reformation, but then keeps going out of an abundance of enthusiasm and writes a middling history of the origin of global missions and a tendentious and rushed history of the Enlightenment. The threads simply don't come together to form a beautiful woven garment.

For all the book's strengths, I believe I will have to continue recommending Diarmaid MacCulloch's Reformation: A History as the single best book to learn more about the Reformation(s).

[Jay Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up this tome in the aftermath of a painful breakup, and how appropriately so. Christendom split after centuries of rising tension, only for the resulting parties to find their distinctive identities, at least partially, in reaction to the other. Eire is always very thorough. It takes time. It takes time.

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

Took a long time. Dipped in and out. Very good on looking beyond the Protestant Reformation. Great chapters on the Jesuits and the Devil in Catholic and Protestant worldview and practice. Probably too long to actually enjoy.

[C. A. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very long but easy read. I think this is an important history of the Reformation era, as it is balanced and shows both sides, Protestant and Roman.

[eva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read a lot of this for a class and it was super thorough but easy to read. Overall it’s a great book for anyone interested in this time period whether or not you have any existing knowledge.

[Hannah · Rating 5 out of 5]

literally fascinating. amazing engaging writing style for such a detailed history book

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.

[Jon Doran · Rating 5 out of 5]

Summary
Reformations: The Early Modern World 1450 - 1650 by Carlos Eire explores the build up to, the events of, the main thinkers and the outcomes of the The Reformation, ultimately showing how this transformative time is key in forming the Modern West. The book is split into four parts, On the Edge, Protestants, Catholics and Consequences.

‘On the Edge’, explores the cultural milieu that facilitated the dramatic events to come. This included a growingly illustrious Catholic Church that was imbedded into culture, politics and the everyday experience of ordinary people through daily prayers, paying indulgences and celebrating feast days. The rise of Italian Humanism that encouraged education, individual reason and the of rediscovery of ancient sources (Ad Fontes). The technological revolution of the printing press that meant that information and opinion was suddenly easily widely disseminated. The reformers were preceded by other dissenting voices that called for reform, such as the Waldenians and Cathars.

‘Protestants’ begins with the life of Martin Luther, his conversion and subsequent scrupulosity, his study of Paul, followed by his infamous treaty and the drama that unfolded as a result. Next is the Swiss reformation led by Ulrich Zwingli who emphasised a more radical split from Catholicism, and then the radical reformers, such as Thomas Munzter, who called for a much larger societal reform and had significant influence leading the peasants to revolt, the Anabaptists, who called for rebaptism and lastly Jean Calvin, both his life and theology and influence. Eire then explores the influences of these thinkers geographically across France, Spain and particularly England with the establishment of the Anglican Church.

‘Catholics’ is an overview of the Catholic response to the reformations, which often consisted in intellectual argument that didn’t connect with the populous. The Catholics also emphasised the supernatural, such as the life of the Saints, which contradicted the protestant rejection of the perfectibility of humanity, the mystical unions with God, the miraculous and things such as exorcisms. Numerous Catholic orders were set up at this time, and Eire spends time looking at many of them, with a particular focus on the Jesuits, who emphasised education, mission and charity works. The Jesuits had a significance influence both because of their education and missional works. The Council of Trent, was also done in response to reformation where many catholic beliefs were more clearly articulated, plus the mass was made universal and was to be spoken in the same language across the world. Key thinkers of the time include Blaise Pascal.

‘Consequences’, explores the general cultural outcomes of events, such as the religious wars that ensued, the age of orthodoxy, where everyone was then arguing about what correct belief is, this then subsequently lead to the birth of rational scepticism and the age of doubt. Particular areas of the belief systems of the time are explored such as the widespread fear of witchcraft and belief in the demonic.

Reflection
Particular points of interest for me include the following.

It is interesting to see the seeds of protestant Christianity that now animate many of us today, particularly the Anabaptist and the radical reformed movements. Friends and family of mine have a theology, which is very similar to the Anabaptists, and we evangelicals take much more inspiration from Calvin and Zwingli, and not as much from Luther. However what differentiates many of my friends with these people is the intense fervour that animated those of the past, not to mention the awful violence. They were so strong in the belief that they were totally ready to fight over it. It makes me wonder, how did they all have such faith in their interpretative powers, particularly since they were contradicting the heritage of interpretation they had received? Zwingli had a particularly hubris quote basically saying that all of the previous theologians had it wrong until him. This faith in ones own interpretation being correct, over that of everyone else seems not that great to me. Obviously where the Catholic church had over stepped the mark, there was need for reformation, but it seems that breaking up unity really wasn’t necessary. Eire says that the inquisition wasn’t as bad as Protestants made it out to be. It was a corrective, and a force to be reckoned with, but the amount of people who were actually killed by it was quite low. More surprisingly, Calvin’s violence in the Geneva was very intense. His killing of the Anabaptists was very dramatic. Plus, Luther’s foaming at the mouth call to violence against the peasants was also dramatic. Zwingli, died in war against the peasants. Basically, every side was violent. Apart from some pacifist movements, like the Mennonites, and they got severely persecuted. It is dismaying how after the wars of the 1700’s and all the arguing over orthodoxy, you then have the scepticism about religion in general happening.

The question of religious epistemology arises; we believe what we believe because we consult others who we trust. However for many of the reformers, they weren’t consulting trusted sources, they were looking to their own interpretation. It makes me realise that much of what I believe as Christian, is basically because others who I trust, tell me that it’s true. They have come to that conclusion by reading others who have studied it and come to conclusions of their own, however if I were a catholic, those sources would also be referring to people who they trust, right the way back to the apostles, and then Christ. It’s like when do you ever trust your own novel interpretation, if it is at the expense of the that which has been passed down to you? Especially if the fruit is the disintegration of unity. The constant feverish breaking out of iconoclasm is also sociologically very interesting, the intense need to destroy imagery or art work that is of particular meaning. What is it that so disturbs people to feel the need to destroy religious imagery?

The last chapter on the desacralisation of Protestantism was particular poignant to me, and you can see how it was the beginning of the modern way of viewing reality. One that attempts to do away with superstition and magic, however it is slightly contradictory since the protestants also believed passionately in the devil. The main thrust of Protestantism is a view that the physical and spiritual are not intrinsically linked, but rather a neoplatonic view that the heavens and earth are separate. Eire refers to this paradigm shift as the desacralisation of the world. Zwingli “whatever binds the senses diminished the spirit” and ““the physical distracts from the spiritual” is contrasted to the Catholic view, which is more sacrament in seeing physical and spiritual intrinsically linked. In response to reformers the Catholics, sought to prove themselves as the true church by highlighting the supernatural events that went on with them. Such as the lives of the saints, exorcism and miracles. Eire mentions that their were lots of miracles, and canonizations. I wonder, if that was man made, of if there genuinely was a spiritual move happening at the time. The Mass exorcism in Aix en Provence certainly sounds very dramatic!

[Lauren Stotts · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's disappointing to admit to yourself that halfway through a 900+ page book that, yeah, this book is pretty bad, and you still have the second half to get through. Eire has this way of sucking absolutely all emotional depth out of stories that really should be exciting. For example, read an account by any other author about what the Duke of Alba did in the Netherlands. Eire's version of that little historical episode is so boring that he committed his own war crime in recounting it that poorly.

It also goes without saying that Eire's version of what Catholic missionaries did in the New World is racist and ahistorical. He's the first person I've ever read who tries to sell the story, with a straight face, that Catholic missionaries were just men of the people trying to protect the Indians from the other, meaner Spaniards who wanted to kill and enslave them. If you believe that, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

If there is one bright lining, Erie has convinced me that Bloody Mary was basically as bad as Elizabeth I.

[Trevin Sandlin · Rating 3 out of 5]

An admirable accomplishment to drill down 200 years of European history into a single volume, but it is betrayed by focusing almost entirely on men and ignoring women - moreover, ignoring Eastern Europe, the Balkans, Ireland and Scandinavia (the later might be the most criminal, since the role of Sweden in European affairs in the 17th century was enormous). It does have some great points - it rightfully points out that Elizabeth was undoubtedly the more "bloody" than her sister Mary, but winners write the history. However, after spending page after page on monastic orders, Eire spends scant pages on the Thirty Years War, focusing far more on France and far far more on England. Little attention is paid to why the Reformation(s) failed to take hold in Italy and Spain is spent.

It isn't a bad history, but I'm not certain Eire accomplished what he set out to do. There are some good and fascinating portions (the exploration of witchcraft was very good), but in the end, it became a slog. There are better explorations of The Reformation out there.

[Todd Putney · Rating 5 out of 5]

Carlos Eire can write. Think you don't like church history, try this book. In fact, the future of the church would look brighter if more of us did.

[Thomas J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thank God for the printing press!

[Jon Doran · Rating 5 out of 5]

Summary
Reformations: The Early Modern World 1450 - 1650 by Carlos Eire explores the build up to, the events of, the main thinkers and the outcomes of the The Reformation, ultimately showing how this transformative time is key in forming the Modern West. The book is split into four parts, On the Edge, Protestants, Catholics and Consequences.

‘On the Edge’, explores the cultural milieu that facilitated the dramatic events to come. This included a growingly illustrious Catholic Church that was imbedded into culture, politics and the everyday experience of ordinary people through daily prayers, paying indulgences and celebrating feast days. The rise of Italian Humanism that encouraged education, individual reason and the of rediscovery of ancient sources (Ad Fontes). The technological revolution of the printing press that meant that information and opinion was suddenly easily widely disseminated. The reformers were preceded by other dissenting voices that called for reform, such as the Waldenians and Cathars.

‘Protestants’ begins with the life of Martin Luther, his conversion and subsequent scrupulosity, his study of Paul, followed by his infamous treaty and the drama that unfolded as a result. Next is the Swiss reformation led by Ulrich Zwingli who emphasised a more radical split from Catholicism, and then the radical reformers, such as Thomas Munzter, who called for a much larger societal reform and had significant influence leading the peasants to revolt, the Anabaptists, who called for rebaptism and lastly Jean Calvin, both his life and theology and influence. Eire then explores the influences of these thinkers geographically across France, Spain and particularly England with the establishment of the Anglican Church.

‘Catholics’ is an overview of the Catholic response to the reformations, which often consisted in intellectual argument that didn’t connect with the populous. The Catholics also emphasised the supernatural, such as the life of the Saints, which contradicted the protestant rejection of the perfectibility of humanity, the mystical unions with God, the miraculous and things such as exorcisms. Numerous Catholic orders were set up at this time, and Eire spends time looking at many of them, with a particular focus on the Jesuits, who emphasised education, mission and charity works. The Jesuits had a significance influence both because of their education and missional works. The Council of Trent, was also done in response to reformation where many catholic beliefs were more clearly articulated, plus the mass was made universal and was to be spoken in the same language across the world. Key thinkers of the time include Blaise Pascal.

‘Consequences’, explores the general cultural outcomes of events, such as the religious wars that ensued, the age of orthodoxy, where everyone was then arguing about what correct belief is, this then subsequently lead to the birth of rational scepticism and the age of doubt. Particular areas of the belief systems of the time are explored such as the widespread fear of witchcraft and belief in the demonic.

Reflection
Particular points of interest for me include the following.

It is interesting to see the seeds of protestant Christianity that now animate many of us today, particularly the Anabaptist and the radical reformed movements. Friends and family of mine have a theology, which is very similar to the Anabaptists, and we evangelicals take much more inspiration from Calvin and Zwingli, and not as much from Luther. However what differentiates many of my friends with these people is the intense fervour that animated those of the past, not to mention the awful violence. They were so strong in the belief that they were totally ready to fight over it. It makes me wonder, how did they all have such faith in their interpretative powers, particularly since they were contradicting the heritage of interpretation they had received? Zwingli had a particularly hubris quote basically saying that all of the previous theologians had it wrong until him. This faith in ones own interpretation being correct, over that of everyone else seems not that great to me. Obviously where the Catholic church had over stepped the mark, there was need for reformation, but it seems that breaking up unity really wasn’t necessary. Eire says that the inquisition wasn’t as bad as Protestants made it out to be. It was a corrective, and a force to be reckoned with, but the amount of people who were actually killed by it was quite low. More surprisingly, Calvin’s violence in the Geneva was very intense. His killing of the Anabaptists was very dramatic. Plus, Luther’s foaming at the mouth call to violence against the peasants was also dramatic. Zwingli, died in war against the peasants. Basically, every side was violent. Apart from some pacifist movements, like the Mennonites, and they got severely persecuted. It is dismaying how after the wars of the 1700’s and all the arguing over orthodoxy, you then have the scepticism about religion in general happening.

The question of religious epistemology arises; we believe what we believe because we consult others who we trust. However for many of the reformers, they weren’t consulting trusted sources, they were looking to their own interpretation. It makes me realise that much of what I believe as Christian, is basically because others who I trust, tell me that it’s true. They have come to that conclusion by reading others who have studied it and come to conclusions of their own, however if I were a catholic, those sources would also be referring to people who they trust, right the way back to the apostles, and then Christ. It’s like when do you ever trust your own novel interpretation, if it is at the expense of the that which has been passed down to you? Especially if the fruit is the disintegration of unity. The constant feverish breaking out of iconoclasm is also sociologically very interesting, the intense need to destroy imagery or art work that is of particular meaning. What is it that so disturbs people to feel the need to destroy religious imagery?

The last chapter on the desacralisation of Protestantism was particular poignant to me, and you can see how it was the beginning of the modern way of viewing reality. One that attempts to do away with superstition and magic, however it is slightly contradictory since the protestants also believed passionately in the devil. The main thrust of Protestantism is a view that the physical and spiritual are not intrinsically linked, but rather a neoplatonic view that the heavens and earth are separate. Eire refers to this paradigm shift as the desacralisation of the world. Zwingli “whatever binds the senses diminished the spirit” and ““the physical distracts from the spiritual” is contrasted to the Catholic view, which is more sacrament in seeing physical and spiritual intrinsically linked. In response to reformers the Catholics, sought to prove themselves as the true church by highlighting the supernatural events that went on with them. Such as the lives of the saints, exorcism and miracles. Eire mentions that their were lots of miracles, and canonizations. I wonder, if that was man made, of if there genuinely was a spiritual move happening at the time. The Mass exorcism in Aix en Provence certainly sounds very dramatic!

[Adam Marischuk · Rating 4 out of 5]

This tome was simultaneously light and heavy.

The writing style was light, engaging and easy to read. Meanwhile, the length of the book and the density of information contained within pushes the boundaries of modern codex. In fact, if I were to accidentally drop the book of of my balcony, it were to hit someone they would be in trouble.

As for bias, if there is any that falls within the realm of the criticizable, the only real problem with the book is that Professor Eire tends to favour the reformers (be they Catholic or Protestant) and favour the reforms. For Eire, the reforms were almost always attempts to improve or correct abuses in society, which assumes that the reformers (both Catholic and Protestant) had good intentions with good aims. A slightly more nuanced approach would be that the reformers (Catholic and Protestants) were acting out an ideological revolution which might contain some aspects of modernity, but also contained aspects of fanaticism. Essentially, the biggest unifying feature of reformers (Catholic and Protestant) was that the Catholic Church and the Western world were simply not "Christian" enough and were not taking it seriously enough. This is only a problem if you assume that the world/Church would be better if it were more fanatical (more serious about the Bible for the Protestants, more devout for the Catholics).

The focus on the reformers could be criticized as too "top-down" an approach, but at 900 pages (with end notes), trying to include more "bottom-up" history while also giving enough space to the leading thinkers is impossible without making this a multi-volume work. If there is a lack of female reformers, you can't really blame Eire for that. He does discuss female reformers wherever they appear, which is almost exclusively as Catholic saints.

[Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author of this amazing book about all the different Protestant and Catholic reformations that took place between 1450-1650 and reverberate down to our day, suggested at the beginning that it isn’t as detailed as it could be. I’m not a historian or a student of that particular time period, so it was plenty detailed enough for me… plenty.

This book looks not at one great “Reformation” but the many that took place between Martin Luther’s challenge to the Catholic Church and onward to the aftermath of the wars of religion that racked that period. He sets things up by taking us through some of the precursors to the Protestant reformations and attempts to reform the Medieval Catholic Church in the centuries before and then goes through the many changes that this brought about afterward to Europe and the entire world.

The “Protestant Reformation,” was a massively complex tangle of events filled with a vast list of reformers both inside and outside the Catholic Church itself. It’s quite an amazing and fascinating list of characters both inspiring and strange. In this book, we meet many of them and chart their courses as they work to impose their versions on the world.

There’s a lot to this book, more than I could ever give justice to in a review. If you love history and want to understand the immense panorama of human experience across the ages and how it all echoes into our present day, you’ll enjoy this one as much as I did. Sure, it dragged in places, but it filled a lot of gaps in my understanding of the past, and sometimes you need to get a little nitpicky and detail-oriented to understand things better.

Another chapter in the human adventure.

[Richard · Rating 4 out of 5]

The very word “Reformation” is a product of the English-speaking world’s Protestant orientation, which saw Luther’s 1517 announcement as a “reform” of something, but of course his Catholic counterparts saw him more as a rebel. Seeing history more broadly, as this book does, helps recognize that, in fact, there were multiple such “reformations”, all triggered by events of the 1400s, including the invention of the printing press, discovery of the New World, long-running changes in the relationship between monarchs and the nobility, etc. etc.

Unlike other accounts, which focus just on the historical events, the author offers extensive commentary on the act of history writing itself, and how views shift over time. The last two chapters (“Consequences” and “Epilogue”) are an especially good summary from this perspective and are worth reading alone if you already are familiar with the history itself.