The Renaissance: A Short History

by Paul Johnson

The Renaissance holds an undying place in our imagination, its great heroes still our own, from Michelangelo and Leonardo to Dante and Chaucer. This period of profound evolution in European thought is credited with transforming the West from medieval to modern and producing the most astonishing outpouring of artistic creation the world has ever known. But what was it? In this masterly work, the incomparable Paul Johnson tells us. He explains the economic, technological, and social developments that provide a backdrop to the age’s achievements and focuses closely on the lives and works of its most important figures. A commanding short narrative of this vital period, The Renaissance is also a universally profound meditation on the wellsprings of innovation.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Art, Renaissance, European History, Italy, World History

208 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

About the author

Paul Johnson works as a historian, journalist and author. He was educated at Stonyhurst School in Clitheroe, Lancashire and Magdalen College, Oxford, and first came to prominence in the 1950s as a journalist writing for, and later editing, the New Statesman magazine. He has also written for leading newspapers and magazines in Britain, the US and Europe.

Paul Johnson has published over 40 books including A History of Christianity (1979), A History of the English People (1987), Intellectuals (1988), The Birth of the Modern: World Society, 1815—1830 (1991), Modern Times: A History of the World from the 1920s to the Year 2000 (1999), A History of the American People (2000), A History of the Jews (2001) and Art: A New History (2003) as well as biographies of Elizabeth I (1974), Napoleon (2002), George Washington (2005) and Pope John Paul II (1982).

Reviews

[Edaaa · Rating 1 out of 5]

// spoilers for the Renaissance if you haven’t caught up don’t read this

It reads like he took a bulleted list and added a few transitional words here and there to turn it into a book

Whenever the author had someone they were interested in pages were dedicated to them but some people got a single paragraph written about them??

I really wish we could add photos to goodreads (edit: we can but I don't want to) because there’s an entire page (80) I’d love to show but I don’t want to type out. Author man really said (about Michelangelo’s Battle of the Centaurs) “It’s an exciting work, done with great faculty and striking economy, the nude male figures exhibiting extraordinary energy in punching the narrative home to the viewer.”

Why isn’t there a photo to accompany this?? I’d love to see the nude male figures that you so praise (despite denying that Michelangelo was gay hmmm)

Also this is the one book I’d argue requires pictures of the work IT SO PAINSTAKINGLY DESCRIBES but noooo we gotta keep the Forbes review of “This wee book packs more information, insight, and historical perspective than do most volumes many times its length.” MAYBE BECAUSE THEY HAVE PICTURES??? GIVE ME SOME MICHELANGELO DRAWINGS BRO I WANT THAT WEE (plus it just makes sense, this book being a history of the RENAISSANCE, which was an ARTISITIC period)

Mr Author’s a fan of Michelangelo if the cover’s also a statue (plus his wee’s out!! you can still keep the Forbes title of wee book!! ADD PICTURES 😡😡)

Here’s a nice quote 😩😩
“Did Michelangelo suffer from some sort of sickness to the soul? He was quarrelsome and often angry with himself and others” (pg 82).

Like bro?? Let the man be sad without criticizing him, I though this was a history of the Renaissance, not “I’m going to shade Michelangelo because he has emotions” like bro no way Michelangelo's mental health's being discussed here let him breathe, people these days 😭😭

This book had so much potential, we were robbed of photos of Michelangelo statues (and I guess the opportunity to call this book not-wee)

[David · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this overview of that most fascinating historical periods. It might also be subtitled "How 15th Century Italy Woke Up the World." Johnson (whose "History of Christianity" I read decades ago) gives a basic overview of the period, including technological and economic conditions. Then he addresses the "awakening" in four separate sections: literature, sculpture, architecture, and painting. Since it's a "short history" I was often left wanting more; but I enjoyed his overview of the relationships between people and events, and how the Renaissance unfolded and expanded. He talks about the Renaissance being "primarily a human event" and introduces the lives of the great men who were a part of it. It got to be annoying in the audiobook that every character's name was followed by the years of his birth and death. Oh, and it's hard to listen to this kind of book without pictures! I tried to imagine the buildings and works of art in my mind, but there were many where I really wanted to be looking at a photo while the item was described. Nevertheless, a worthwhile book as an introduction or review.

[Skrivena stranica · Rating 3 out of 5]

Uvijek me izluđuje ovo što je sada Goodreads ograničio dodavanje knjiga i sada ja nikada ne mogu naći hrvatski prijevod knjiga koje čitam.
Tako da, bilješka sebi: Renesansa: kratka povijest, Alfa, Zagreb, 2008

[Veva Jack · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this way more than I thought I would! Mr. Banks is a wonderful teacher!!

[Maggie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reall enjoyed this brief, but detailed and informative, history of Renaissance. The book is clearly categorized into the history of literature, sculptures, architecture, art and concludes with the transmission of Renaissance through Europe and its decline in Italy. One thing I noticed a bit (maybe too often) was how much of his own personal opinion the author mixed with the facts. Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci seemed to sometimes be quite criticized for what the author thought of them as people, and less on their work - their art - while other artists were highlighted because the author seemed to appreciate them more as people. But then again, I didn't expect this work to be 100% objective, and so far as one can recognize opinions as such and not clear facts, I don't have too many problems with it. Even though Michelangelo and Leonardo are (one of) my favourite artists from the era. 3.5

[Shawn Thrasher · Rating 2 out of 5]

Johnson says it's nonsense to write that Michelangelo was gay - and it may well be nonsense. He also emphatically states, among other things, that Chaucer never read The Decameron. I'm not exactly sure how he knows both of these things for certain; actually, I'm certain that these are his opinions. This is a "short history" with the Johnson's occasional opinions. I'm not so foolish to think that historians don't inject their opinions into what they write; quite frankly, that is what makes history so interesting to read. But I think that Johnson's opinions aren't every really qualified with any facts to back them up. He wants certain things to be true, and thinks by writing them, they will be. Bleah. This is lazy writing at worst, and almost completely unimaginative at best. If you want some meaty, opinionated but also beautiful prose on this subject, try the longer but much richer The Renaissance: A History of Civilization in Italy from 1304 1576 Ad .

[Trevor · Rating 3 out of 5]

The main problem with this book was that it presents the Renaissance less as a historic period (whatever a historic period might be) and more as a series of great men mostly in the arts doing rather impressive arty things.

That is, the Renaissance didn’t end up quite as I would have expected it to.

Now, my view of history is a bit more like James Burke’s in Connections – where history is the creation of jigsaw pieces and great ‘men’ (and I guess in the Renaissance ‘men’ it had to mostly be) are those who get all the credit once they are the first to put all the pieces together.

The myth that is presented here is that if a great artist in particular did not exist then the world would be down one great artist. One gaping hole would open up in the aesthetic fabric of the cosmos. There is no Zero-Sum game quite like it. Sure, Galileo was pretty smart, but people would have eventually looked through a telescope to see the moons of Jupiter and even figured out that odd little fact about falling bodies of different weights. He was a genius only by being first, but by necessity his discoveries would have been discovered again. Not so a Titian or a Michelangelo. Artists are of a completely different substance than we mere mortals and they are much like gasps of fresh air when trapped in the septic tank of history. It is all a bit hard to take after a while. Burke’s criticism – that these artists would have been nothing without the technological advances that gave them oil paints and printing and engraving, I think still holds. Anyway, I’m not completely convinced that if there had never been a Titian necessarily means there would not have been someone else. Every successful artist takes away a sequence of opportunities that someone else may have had. If there was no Shakespeare there would have been no Hamlet, I can see that, but there would possibly have still been a theatre on the dangerous side of the river and it would still have needed plays…

I don’t want to take away anything from the greatness of these artists, but over inflating them might only make them into grotesques, rather than the remarkable humans they actually were.

But I digress. What I actually wanted to say was that I didn’t read this book, but listened to it as a talking book and it reminded me of what it would be like if I was watching a really interesting art program on television and suddenly the picture tube on the TV went and all I could get was the sound. It was a real problem as I really have no idea what any of the works discussed in any of these churches look like. I mean, there is not a single image in my head of any of the pictures that adorn the walls of the Our Lady of the Thank You church. So while he was gushing, I was spending my time thinking about the type of language one ends up using when gushing over works of art. I had to do this, as there is only so long that I could say to myself – god, McCandless, you really should find out more about art.

There were some incredibly interesting things said in this book. The most interesting was that artists started creating images of individuals at about the same time as artists started being individuals themselves. That is, when artists started signing their names to their paintings, they also started painting people who were less ‘symbols’ or archetypes and more real people.

Like I said, this would have made a really good documentary with lots of sweeping visuals of canvases and buildings and gardens while this guy gushed. But as a text it left much to be desired – quite literally.

I never thought of the problems associated with making sculptures in bronze (in times of war some idiot will turn your statue into a canon) or in gold (in hard times some once-rich-person will decide they could do with the ready money rather than a figurine). How much priceless art was turned back into base metal is probably best not thought about.

I would have preferred a book that gave a bit more detail on the lives of some of the political figures of the period. I would have liked to come away with a better understanding of the interaction between secular and religious political leadership and the consequences this had on all aspects of life in the Renaissance. But except for quite a short bit on Machiavelli and Dante there was virtually no discussion of politics at all. He did say something very interesting about the fact that the Church was so powerful that it felt unassailable and therefore allowed lots of paintings of pagan things – you know, Greek gods raping women disguised as clouds and such – that would not be allowed during the reformation or counter-reformation – but I would have liked more on this. I would also have liked more on the philosophy of the period – I mean, Aristotle was rediscovered and was making quite a splash – so…

I think I will eventually need to read more about the Renaissance, obviously, the book I will read will need to have lots of pictures. I had hoped this book would have been a bit more informative. I think I would have liked it more if it did history with a bit more – this happened, but over here there was this and this. Who would have thought that this and that would mean the Pope would need to build a tower that would block the line of sight between … and so on. Like I said, something more like James Burke would have done.

[Karime Cury · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente libro para explicar la historia del Renacimiento, desde sus antecedentes y orígenes, su evolución en cada disciplina, etc. Me pareció un libro muy completo.

[Kourtni Hansen · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very, very shortened version of the Italian Renaissance. It does well to express each section of the period (economics, literature, sculpture, architecture, paintings, and the decline) in a way that's concise. I will say, though, that sometimes Johnson's opinion regarding certain artists and pieces was very obvious and honestly not appreciated. I also found it a tad annoying that equally important artists were given very little discussion compared to other artists (think 2 paragraphs vs 8 pages).

Quotes:

"[Charlemagne’s] clerks developed what became known as the Carolingian minuscule, a clear and beautiful script that became standard in the early Middle Ages."

"Vespasian, emperor A.D. 69–79, was even said to have opposed the extension of waterpower because it would throw men out of work.”

"There seems to have been little commercial conflict between the scriptoria and the new presses, the scriptoria concentrating on luxury books of ever-increasing complexity and beauty, often illustrated by leading artists, the printers on quantity and cheapness. Thus, the first best-seller in the new world of print was Thomas à Kempis’s De imitatione Christi, which went through ninety-nine editions in the thirty years from 1471 to 1500."

"From 1490 [Nicolas Jensen’s] presses were rivaled in Venice by those of Aldus Manutius, who not only designed a serviceable Greek type for printing ancient texts in the original, but also designed and popularized a type based on the cursive handwriting used in the fifteenth-century papal chancery."

"Li Livres dou trésor, written in French because Italian was not yet regarded as a suitable tongue for a serious work"

"Virgil appears as his guide through Hell and Purgatory, though Dante is sufficiently orthodox a Christian to exclude him from Paradise, allowing the Latin poet to sink into Limbo instead."

"Indeed, Italians of the twenty-first century, and foreigners who have some grasp of Italian, can read most of The Divine Comedy without difficulty. No other writer has ever had such a decisive impact on a modern language."

"The church and the stiffer element of society did not like [The Decameron], for it represents the more liberal approach to lifestyles and opinion of the younger generation, contrasted to the formalities and stuffiness of the past. The rest liked it for precisely this reason."

"[Students at Accademia Romana] not only studied ancient history but on occasions wore Roman dress, held Roman feasts, collected inscriptions and staged discussions alla romagna"

"Lorenzo commissioned works from most of the great painters and sculptors of his day—Verrocchio, Ghirlandaio, the [Antonio del] Pollaiuoli, and Botticelli"

"[Isabella d'Este’s] studiolo—a combination of study and collector’s cabinet of curiosities—became one of the finest in Italy, was decorated by Andrea Mantegna, Pietro Perugino, Correggio and other major artists, and became so crowded with books and objets d’art—jewels, medals, small bronzes and marbles, pieces of amber, a “unicorn’s horn” and other natural curiosities—that she added onto it a “grotto,” one of the earliest instances of what remained a fey but often charming art form of the rich for the next three hundred years. She owned a Michelangelo and a Jan van Eyck, and the inventory compiled after her death lists more than sixteen hundred items, from medals to stone vases."

"Genius suddenly comes to life, and speaks out of a vacuum. Then it is silent, equally mysteriously."

"Medieval certitude—or credulity, depending on one’s viewpoint—was now faced with Renaissance scrutiny or skepticism."

"The story of Renaissance sculpture begins with Nicola Pisano, who lived approximately between 1220 and 1284"

"one of the functions of the painters was to record in exact and realistic detail the jewels worn by their sitters, male and female—the brilliant depiction of jewelry was a skill that any Renaissance portrait painter had to possess."

"They advertised the contest all over Italy, and masters or would-be masters arrived from the entire peninsula. The field was narrowed down to seven, including three of the greatest artists of the entire period: Filippo Brunelleschi (1377–1446), Jacopo della Quercia (1374–1438) and Lorenzo Ghiberti (1378–1455)."

"So he spent virtually his entire working life, more than half a century, on these Florentine doors. He had many gifted assistants, including Donatello (1386–1466), Benozzo Gozzoli (c. 1420–97), Paolo Uccello (1397–1475), and Antonio del Pollaiuolo (1431–98) and perhaps Luca Della Robbia (c. 1399–1482)"

"Donatello was so consistently and shockingly original that, after him, all the limits seemed to have disappeared, so that an artist was constrained only by his powers."

"In the 1430s [Luca Della Robbia] invented a tin-based glaze for terra-cotta, one of the great artistic discoveries of the period, indeed of all time."

"When [Andrea del Verrocchio] was senior enough to run a workshop of his own, which was also a retail shop where clients could come to buy, order copies or commission works of their choosing, he and his assistants worked in virtually all media and materials, from jewelry to massive bronzes and marbles, as well as monumental paintings."

"Knowledge of the Verrocchio studio takes us behind the scenes of Renaissance art and shows how its high standards were based on intense discipline, careful preparation and a ruthless use of every mechanical aid that human ingenuity could devise."

"design or disegno, choice of subject and materials, the actual carving, the finish, the balance between the parts and the whole, above all in developing a sense of monumentality, of grandeur, what the Italians call terribilità, the ability of art to inspire sheer awe."

"It is by any standards a mature and majestic work, combining strength (the Virgin) and pathos (the Christ), nobility and tenderness, a consciousness of human fragility and a countervailing human endurance, which fill those who study it with a powerful mixture of emotions. It is the ideal religious work, inducing reverence, gratitude, sorrow and prayer. The standard of carving, of both the flesh and the draperies, is without precedent in human history, and it is not hard to imagine the astonishment and respect it produced among both cognoscenti and ordinary men and women alike."

"[Benventuo Cellini] was guilty of at least two killings, being pardoned by virtue of his artistic services—a typical Renaissance touch. He was twice accused of sodomy, the second time after the genesis of Perseus, causing him to flee to Venice, where he met the architect Sansovino and Titian. He was nonetheless convicted, sentenced to four years in prison, and actually endured a long house arrest, which he used to write his autobiography."

"The dome he designed, and carried to completion in 1436, rests on eight major ribs that continue the work of the piers beneath, assisted by sixteen minor ones, all being bound by horizontal strainer arches and reinforced by metal tension chains. The angle of the dome was made as steep as its form allowed, so that its construction was self-supporting, center-work being dispensed with. To make the weight carried lighter, Brunelleschi hit upon the device of outer and inner skins, an invention of his own. Hence, although the Pantheon dome was his inspiration, it was not his engineering model, since it had been built by the usual Roman frontal-assault method of brute strength."

"It follows strictly the Vitruvian rules of proportion, the measurements of the elevations and units being multiples of the diameter of the columns, which is the modal norm."

"So, who built St. Peter’s? The answer is that God and time built St. Peter’s, but insofar as any one man did it, it was Bramante."

"All these works and others, some of which survive only in designs and plans, complete the vernacular of Michelangelo’s architecture, a rich vocabulary of lion’s heads, eggs-and-darts, dentils and acanthus leaves, coats of arms and crenellations pulled from the Middle Ages, grinning masks and triglyphs, and all the orders of antiquity, plus composites of his own invention, broken pediments, sphinxes supporting closed ones, swags, receding and overlapping planes, echoes of Doric, Corinthian and Ionic capitals flaunted as decorative features and his characteristic inversions—façades introduced as profiles and vice versa. The fertility is awe-inspiring and at times overwhelming, also pathetic and moving, considering that some of these explosions of the imagination occurred when the old man was in his eighties, an immense age for those days. They swirled away into history to become the stock-in-trade of professional mediocrities for hundreds of years"

"And it must be built with agricultural aspects in mind—however noble and imposing, the farm must be catered for in the structure."

"But all these works and others, on close inspection, are seen to embody Palladio’s principles: attention to climate and setting; serving to impress from afar and offer service and comfort within; radiating order and economy as well as utility; and making the most intelligent possible use of sun and shade, varying materials, angles, different façades and surrounding gardens and plantations."

"The combination of beauty and functionalism, of grandeur and utility, explains why Palladio was so much in demand by rich men (and their wives) who loved display but took a practical approach to estate management and farming, had to indeed to be able to afford what the master provided for them."

"[Andrea Palladio] was the only one of the Renaissance architects to give his name to a style that has endured. He was also the last of the true Renaissance architects—that is, men inspired by a love and knowledge of the antique, especially Roman, past, who wanted to re-create its best features, suitably modified, in the sunny cities and countryside of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Italy."

"The Romans smoothed the wall surface and then applied a preliminary layer of lime-and-sand plaster called (using later Italian painters’ terminology) an arriccio. If they wished they could then sketch in the outlines of the work (sinopia), followed by the application of several layers of lime and powdered marble to give a final smooth surface, or intonaco. The paint, a mixture of earth colors with egg yolk, or tempera, was then applied while the plaster was still wet (a fresco). The paint was then bonded to the wall by the carbonization of the calcium hydroxide in the plaster as it dried."

"Rinuccini’s dedication seems to have been written after he read Alberti’s Della pittura. Therein, Alberti stated flatly that his earlier belief that humanity was in decline and could no longer produce giants like the ancient masters had been completely dispelled when he returned to Florence and saw the work of Masaccio, Brunelleschi, Donatello, Ghiberti and Della Robbia."

"Behind the new Renaissance sophistication, there is often a hint of medieval childishness."

"As in all Mantegna’s work, one learns a great deal because, though a master of illusionistic devices, he always tells the truth."

"Leonardo also did all four hands, the two left hands, which are identical, being drawn from studio casts (the right hands are a bit suspicious too) [Tobias and the Angel by Verrocchio]"

"It says a lot for Raphael’s aesthetic and emotional integrity and cool, calm taste that he avoided all Perugino’s faults while absorbing his undoubted strengths and building on them."

"The “divine trio” of the High Renaissance, Leonardo, Raphael and Michelangelo, though of different ages, were all alive and working at the same time, and there must have been interactions among their powerful artistic personalities, though this is largely conjecture. The impact of Leonardo can be clearly traced in many of Raphael’s superb drawings. He adopted red chalk and replaced the boy or male models he used for female figures (a practice also followed by Michelangelo) by women models, and the results are spectacular. They ravished young artists at the time, for Raphael was generous and open in showing work in progress to his colleagues, and they have inspired emulation in the greatest figure painters ever since. Raphael’s relationship with Michelangelo, on the other hand, was different. They were both working in Rome together. There is no evidence that Raphael was ever jealous of a fellow artist—quite the contrary—but Michelangelo was introspective and secretive and could be mean-minded. His friend Sebastiano del Piombo (1485–1547), also in Rome from 1511 and a considerable painter in his own right, used to feed Michelangelo with anti-Raphael anecdotes, presumably because the master wished to hear them."

"But it is open to abuse, and as he became an old man, Titian abused it. He stopped using underdrawing at all and laid down layers of paint on which to build his structures. His brush strokes became thicker and cruder, and he used his fingers as well as his brushes. Sometimes the effects he thus achieved were sensational, but more often they make you long to get back to the time of Giorgione."

"[Albrecht Dürer’s] view of Arco, painted on his return journey, is the first European landscape masterpiece done in watercolor"

[Brett · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was helpful for someone that doesn't know much about the Renaissance. Nothing special.

[Mark · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is real value in this little book. And while I wouldn't call it "exciting", if you like a splash of opinion in your reading then this rises above the average academic text.

This well-organized "Short History" does a fine job of outlining the major times, people, and places where the great wheel of the Renaissance turned. I like the attempt to divide the arts into writing, sculpture, architecture, and painting. I found that by not mixing artistic genres in discussion, it was easier to absorb who influenced whom, and when.

So why do I only give three stars? Two reasons. First, the opnions mixed in with facts bother me. What the author knows about an artist should be kept clearly separate from what the author thinks of an artist. For example, Masaccio gets a pass on being "sloppy", preoccupied, or difficult mostly because he died at age 27 and is poorly documented. Michalangelo and Leonardo are both singled out for opinionated criticism based on their personages, not their art.

The second reason this book loses a star might have more to do with the publisher than the author. Pictures. I fail to see why pictures of the wonderful artwork and buildings being described could not be inserted freely into the book. If Palladio never built two structures the same, then why not show side by side pictures of two of his surviving structures in Venice to show his flair for originality?

So, as a summary of the Renaissance this isn't bad. But it isn't great either. Soak in the history, ignore the opinions.

[Ellen · Rating 2 out of 5]

If ever there was a book that needed pictures, it was this one. For every detailed description of a piece of Renaissance art or architecture, there was no picture. I think that would have helped convey the message a great deal. Otherwise, this book was a bit dry, though its insights on how the printing press evolved and shaped society were really informative and interesting. I feel like the author was quite heavy on opinion (also how did he know Michelangelo only cared about prayer and not anything else? Was he there??) The artists spotlighted were handpicked and while I did learn about some new artists, I would have liked to know more about some familiar ones. I also found that music got crammed in the final chapter, but really could have stood apart as its own. This book attempted a solid structure and the first chapter was great for that. But then it kind of sought to focus on Florence or Italy, but kind of not. It was a bit like someone just wrote randomly and in a semi-organized way about things that interested them about the Renaissance. And the criticism of the artists seemed vaguely personal.

[Rw · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a wonderful little book. It makes me feel like writing down all of the artwork I have not seen in Europe and planning a trip just to follow Johnson's development of the Renaissance.So much better than any Art History course I have ever taken. This is the third book I have read by the author and I find his books to be a source of intelligence and readable. Never the boring, cumbersome reading of so many academics. Like the Renaissance, Mr. Johnson has opened the readers eyes to new ideas and different ways of looking at things. Did the Times change the people, or did the people change the Times? Loved the book, now I want to find something in more depth to complement this work.

[David Lafferty · Rating 3 out of 5]

I like Paul Johnson. His Art history book is terrific. This book was a bit dry for me. Having visited Florence for the first time this year, I was hoping for more. It's a decent book, nothing earth shattering. Incidently, I've started an Italy group here on GR if you're interested in connecting with other Italophiles like me.

[Victoria · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was one of the most delightful surprises of the past year. 185 pages, but brings you in and guides you through the history of Renaissance brilliantly. Not for visual types, no illustrations. For this see a beautifully illustrated and much more detailed "History of Italian Renaissance Art"

[Margaret · Rating 4 out of 5]

My interest in the Renaissance was piqued after a trip to Italy. It made me want to fill in the gaps in my knowledge about painting, architecture, literature, and sculpture of that period of time. If only I could retain the wealth of information contained in this brief history!

[booklady · Rating 2 out of 5]

A quick intro to the time period--not the best, nor his best. Nevertheless, the most accessible and synoptic piece I had encountered on the Renaissance to date.

Read from 27 Dec 01 to 3 Jan 02

[Rachel · Rating 1 out of 5]

Full of so much information that you'll forget 10 minutes later.

[Fred Cheyunski · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good Concise Reference on Renaissance Impetus, High Points, and Decline - Reading works by Parag Khanna (see my review of “Connectography”) suggesting that our age parallels the Mediaeval 14th century transitioning to an emerging global civilization and potential next renaissance inspired me to get more information on these topics. Among the books that looked most promising was this one by Paul Johnson, a short history indeed, but as others indicate in less than 200 pages, he provides a fundamental understanding of the Renaissance, its impetus and decline at the close of the 16th century.

The book consists of 6 parts: (1) The Historical and Economic Background, (2) The Renaissance in Literature and Scholarship, (3) The Anatomy of Renaissance Sculpture, (4) The Buildings of the Renaissance, (5) The Apostolic Successions of Renaissance Painting, and (6) The Spread and Decline of the Renaissance. There is also a Chronology at the beginning (that I appreciated after reading) and a Bibliography at the end.

From the beginning, there are comments (pages 4-5) on how the term was first introduced by Jacob Burckhardt during 1860 in his “The Civilization of the Italian Renaissance” and the ways its chronology varied in the that and the other different European countries. As Johnson summarizes (on page 21), “. . . the background to what we call the Renaissance was a cumulative growth and spread of wealth never before experienced . . . and the rise of . . . technology . . . as the norm . . . starting a revolution in the way words were published and distributed.” Moreover, he indicates “. . . it must be grasped that the Renaissance was a human event, propelled by a number of individuals with outstanding talent, which in some cases amounted to genius.” The transition to vernacular language, neoclassical forms, domes, vanishing points, more of a modern mindset and nation states moved society forward.

Numerous significant persons are presented regarding their contributions in literature, sculpture, building, and painting. Petrarch (1304 - 1374), Boccaccio (1331 - 1375) and Dante (1422 -1491) are among my favorite literary figures with their emphasis on the “humanities” particularly grammar and rhetoric. It was interesting to learn that initially the humanists were outsiders and non-academics, who became entrenched through their ability to infiltrate the courts and influential families such as the Medici of Florence resulting in works such as those by Castiglione (1478 - 1529) and Machiavelli (1469 - 1527). Sculptor Verrocchio (1435 - 1488) and his workshop exemplified the utilization of drawings, models, re-use of castings from ancient sculptures and the incorporation of apprentices to forge new creations. Architects such as Brunelleschi (1377 - 1446), Alberti (1404 - 1472), and later Palladio (1508 - 1580) contributed to a new type of building that continues to influence our approaches today. With regard to painting, there was the movement from frescos to canvas, tempera to oil based paints, use of perspective and broadening from religious subject matter to the secular and portraiture (see my review of “Secret Knowledge”). Many painters such as Cimabue (1240 - 1302) and Masaccio (1401-1428) along with the better-known ones such as Giotto (1267 -1337) to Botticelli (1445 - 1510), contributed to this progression. Many artists also considered themselves to be scientists as well incorporating mathematics and learning about nature. Major developments included a sense of artistic progress and an ability to build on the works of the ancient masters and advance with new and original innovations. Artists such as the Dutch Jan van Eyck (1390–1441) and German Albrecht Durer (1471-1528) were among those outside Italy who helped with contributions and dissemination of the Renaissance. However, it seems printing and gunpowder fueled incursions in Italy and elsewhere probably did more than anything else to spread new thinking and practices, e.g. such as with William Caxton (1422 - 1491) printing fables and other works in England (see my review of “Fabulation and Metafiction”).

Other books that may help in understanding lead up conditions and this period are “A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century” (1987) by Barbara W. Tuchman and “The Swerve: How the World Became Modern” (2012) by Stephen Greenblatt as well as “Renaissances: The One or the Many?” (2009) by Jack Goody that looks at such developments in other cultures.

[Alejandro Sanoja · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great book for anyone who is curious about the Renaissance but doesn't want to read a 600+ page book.

As I've said before, Paul Johnson's books are a great way to get started with reading about history. He keeps it short and sweet.

Flow: 5/5
Actionability: 3/5
Mindset: 5/5

Some of My Highlights:

"Needless to say, it is not those who actually live through the period who coin the term, but later, often much later, writers."

"The usage stuck because it turned out to be a convenient way of describing the period of transition between the medieval epoch, when Europe was 'Christendom,' and the beginning of the modern age."

"If the term has any useful meaning at all, it signifies the rediscovery and utilization of ancient virtues, skills, knowledge and culture, which had been lost in the barbarous centuries following the collapse of the Roman Empire in the West, usually dated from the fifth century A.D."

"The new universities were the core of what we now call the twelfth-century renaissance, and it is particularly significant that an arts faculty existed in Oxford as early as the 1120s because such courses provided the foundation for the true Renaissance more than two hundred years later."

"The early church fathers regarded Aristotle with suspicion, ranking him as a materialist, in contrast to Plato, whom they saw as a more spiritual thinker and a genuine precursor of Christian ideas."

"The Ethics became available in Latin translation about 1200 and the Politics half a century later..."

"The Roman Empire was a monumental physical, legal, and military fact, gathering and spending vast sums of money, from which the arts and literature incidentally benefited."

"The Romans knew about the water-powered mill, and they made some large specimens. But they were slow to build mills, preferring slaves, donkeys and horses to supply power; Vespasian, emperor A.D. 69-76, was even said to have opposed the extension of waterpower because it would throw men out of work."

"Thus in the later Middle Ages, wealth was being produced in greater quantities than ever before in history, and was often concentrated in cities specializing in the new occupations of large-scale commerce and banking, like Venice and Florence."

"But wealth alone would not have produced the phenomenon we call the Renaissance."

"There was one respect in which the growth of intermediate technology had a direct, explosive effect on this cultural spread. Indeed, it was the most important cultural event by far of the entire period. This was the invention, followed by the extraordinarily rapid diffusion, of printing."

"Efficiently produced, paper was cheaper than any other writing material by far."

"The key novelty, however, was the invention of movable type for letterpress, which has three advantages: it could be used repeatedly until worn out; it could be easily renewed, being cast from a mold; and it introduced strict uniformity of lettering."

"In 1450 Gutenberg began work on a printed Bible, known as the Gutenberg Bible or the Forty-two Line Bible (from the number of lines on a page), which was completed in 1455 and is the world's first printed book."

"But France could produce no Dante, which was probably decisive in the battle of tongues."

"Painters, sculptors and architects were encouraged to compete among themselves for contracts, and still more for glory."

[John Reis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Johnson’s account of the Renaissance begins in the late Middle Ages. He makes the case that large-scale, technological and economic changes had to take place before the Renaissance could begin. The invention of movable type led to the Gutenberg Bible. It also led to an eruption of printing not just of religious books but also the printing of classical texts. Soon books were being printed in the vernacular.

Chapter 2 begins with the assertion that the Renaissance was the work of individuals. He also says that it was about individualism. His look at the literature of the time begins with Dante. Dante was a man of the Middle Ages but he was critical of the church, making him a man of the Renaissance. He then looks at Boccaccio and Petrarch, whom he calls the first humanist. He moves on to Castiglione and Machiavelli, Rabelais and Montaigne. He discusses Geoffrey Chaucer and Lorenzo Valla. The chapter ends with a discussion of Erasmus.

Chapter 3 is about developments in sculpture and the artists who brought them about: Brunelleschi, Donatello, Ghiberti and Michelangelo.

Chapter 4 moves on to architecture where Brunelleschi and Palladio play significant roles.

Chapter 5 is the longest as it covers Renaissance painting. It begins with Cimabue. Johnson covers the invention of foreshortening and perspective. The Italians did not invent everything. Oil painting came from the Low Countries. There is also an interesting discussion of progress and competition, a marked change from Roman and medieval times.

Giotto, the Bellinis and Botticelli are given attention. The various workshops are discussed and then John son moves onto Leonardo Da Vinci, who was so busy he often did not finish projects, but we do have the Mona Lisa and the Last Supper. He also talks about Raphael, Correggio Titian and Tintoretto.

Chapter 6 covers the spread of the Renaissance and its eventual decline. He discusses the role Albrecht Durer played in bringing Renaissance ideas and techniques to Germany. King Charles VII of France moved an army into Italy in 1494 to take Naples. The Medici fled Florence.

And then there is the Protestant Reformation. While the Catholic Church had a religious monopoly, uniformity and obedience was the order of the day, but in practice, it was not always the case. Various popes patronized Renaissance artists whose subjects included Roman and Greek pagan figures and myths. Comes the Reformation, obedience, simplicity and plainness becomes the order of the day.

He finishes with a discussion of music and how innovation came from Northern Europe.

This is a wonderful little book. Johnson loves his subject and knows a lot about it.

There is a price to be paid in complaints about something missed if a book is short, but then there is also a price to be paid if a book is long: readers who give up.

[Dwayne Hicks · Rating 3 out of 5]

Johnson has focused on short, digestible books in his twilight years - a far cry from his former epics such as Birth of the Modern and Modern Times. By his own admission, this is in large part a response to the death of that middle-ground of historical writing that was once occupied by serious-yet-popular histories. These newer, slimmer volumes are Johnson's attempt to appeal to audiences that lack the interest to tackle a mighty tome, but his sweeping scope is a poor fit.

There are still flashes of Johnson. His joyous agility with archaic jargon (the background factors of the Renaissance show here and there "like palimpsests"), the thunderbolts that illuminate his positions and opinions, etc.

But it's not up to his former standard. For Johnson fans only. Prospective fans should start with his longer works.

[Chase Parsley · Rating 2 out of 5]

I love the Modern Library Chronicles series, but was really disappointed with this one. It was as dry as a bone, and the title is misleading. It was almost all about the Italian art Renaissance, without the benefit of any illustrations or photos, and long chapters about sculpture, architecture, and painting comprise most of the book. I was hoping for more politics, religion, exploration, and bigger picture of the period. A far, far better book is “A World Lit Only By Fire” by William Manchester.

Finally, the language Johnson uses is flowery and eloquent to a fault, and he assumes the reader already has a deep pool of knowledge about the subject. It comes off as snobbish. There are some kernels of wisdom though, and an art and/or art history buff would enjoy this book more than I did.

I’ve read lots of books from this series, and so far my top three are the ones about Communism, the Catholic Church, and The Feminist Promise.

[James Varney · Rating 3 out of 5]

Paul Johnson's books are always so good I wanted to love this one, too. But it's too much. I suppose people who have more familiarity than I do with the Italian artists - in all fields - will get more out of it, but my head was spinning halfway through (and it's short) with names. I had to constantly check the chronology, which is extremely helpful and at the beginning of the book. Literature is my favorite art and the one with which I'm most familiar so the opening chapters, featuring Dante and Boccacio, were fine but once we got into doorways and cathedrals and sculpture and fountains (all kind of connected) I was having a tough time keeping it straight. Still, the book definitely provides a concise overview and (like most books) would reward multiple readings.

[Daniel Kukwa · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's very easy to read, and as a one-stop-shop for the Renaissance, it's a useful research tool. However, I am put off by two issues: (1) once the book reaches architecture and art, it transforms from a history book into an art history book...and I would have preferred a bit more balance, especially as the level of detail starts to delve into what could be best described as minutiae; (2) there are strange moments of what I can only describe as prudery; the author suddenly damping down any hints of people be homosexuals, or decrying that Michelangelo's paintings feature too many muscular figures. Some odd, discordant tones to an otherwise straightforward work.

[Allen Garvin · Rating 3 out of 5]

I bought it based on reading the introduction (which was excerpted in the NY Times)--a brief, excellent reading on why the Middle Ages did not deserve the appellation "the dark ages" which were often applied to them in earlier discussions of "The Renaissance". It covered economics, social, and technical advances, post-Roman empire. So, I thought this was going to be a good brief revisionist overview book on Early Modern Europe. It is not. 90% of the book is about art, sculpture, and literature of Italy, with a few digressions to the rest of Europe on the same. Most of the content would be perfectly at home in any Renaissance history written a hundred years ago. Very disappointing.

[John Naylor · Rating 3 out of 5]

A book that is probably near enough impossible to read in one interrupted sitting. Not due to the fact that it is overcomplicated or boring but due to the need to look at the buildings and art mentioned. I feel that having a longer volume if this with pictures and illustrations would make it a lot better read.

I did learn quite a bit from it and it has helped my to discover 'new' artists albeit ones that passed away over half a millennium ago. It is far from a comprehensive guide but has enough information to be a starting point for further research.

[Crissy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book has been on my bookshelf for many years and when I decided to read it I was not overly fussed. However I must admit that I did enjoy this short history. It was informative and well written. As a short book it could never cover all aspects and all countries during this very productive period in history but the author was successful in keeping my interest, which included 'googling' many of the works of art referred to. I do not intend to increase my knowledge of this subject but I am very satisfied with this read.

[Don · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good, short summary of the period and particularly of the cultural aspects. My only criticism is that, in his sections on sculpture, architecture and painting, Johnson ends up with long lists of artists; the effect is numbing. Unfortunately, there are no photos of at least some of the works he describes. In some cases, I looked up paintings he writes about on the Internet, but that becomes a time-consuming enterprise.

I've been to Rome and Florence twice each, but Johnson's book made me want to return, book in hand, to view so many of the works he writes about.

[Devin · Rating 3 out of 5]

I expected to read this quickly, skimming through the technical artistic jargon, but found myself enjoying it a lot more than I expected; Johnson kept my interest throughout the entire book. I took a star off because there are no pictures (it would have been amazing if it came in the same format as his book on the papacy or ancient Egypt). I took off another star because he doesn't talk about musical development until the end of the book (only 4 pages!).