Frances A. Yates (1899–1981)
Author of The Art of Memory
About the Author
Image credit: Warburg Institute
Series
Works by Frances A. Yates
Majesty and magic in Shakespeare's last plays : A new approach to Cymbeline, Henry VIII and the Tempest (1975) 58 copies, 2 reviews
Associated Works
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Canonical name
- Yates, Frances A.
- Legal name
- Yates, Frances Amelia
- Birthdate
- 1899-11-28
- Date of death
- 1981-09-29
- Burial location
- Claygate Churchyard, Claygate, Surrey, UK
- Gender
- female
- Nationality
- UK
- Birthplace
- Portsmouth, Hampshire, England, UK
- Place of death
- Claygate, Surrey, England, UK
- Places of residence
- London, England, UK
- Education
- University College London (BA | 1924 | MA | 1926 | D.Litt | 1965)
Warburg Institute - Occupations
- historian
editor
professor - Organizations
- Warburg Institute, University of London
- Awards and honors
- Dame Commander, Order of the British Empire (1977)
Fellow, British Academy (1967)
Wolfson History Award (1973)
Member, Order of the British Empire (1972)
Foreign Member, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (1980)
Mary Crawshaw Prize (1935) (show all 11)
Marion Reilly Award (1943)
Foreign Honorary Member, American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1975)
Premio Galilio Galilie (1978)
Fellow, Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford
Fellow, Warburg Institute - Short biography
- Frances A. Yates received a master's degree in French theatre from London University in 1926. She taught at North London Collegiate School until 1939. A small inheritance from her father gave her the freedom to conduct some independent study and at some point she discovered forgotten documents in the London Public Records Office about the late 16th-century linguist and translator John Florio. In 1934, she published her first book, John Florio: the Life of an Italian in Shakespeare's England, which laid the groundwork for the rest of her prize-winning career as a scholar of the Renaissance. She also taught at the Warburg Institute of the University of London for many years.
Members
Reviews
One thing that is impossible to fully grasp about the past is the fact that hundreds of years ago people had significantly different mental worlds to our own. Popular histories tend to entirely sidestep this in favour of drawing parallels and contrasts with current habits of life, while more academic history often struggles with the unwieldiness of explaining it. ‘The Art of Memory’ confronts the issue head on by telling the story of memory techniques used in classical, Medieval, and Renaissance times. The art of memory essentially consists of teaching systematic ways to improve the performance of recall. What makes this art so hard to grasp now is that memory was the main reference at the time. Before the printing press, books were scarcely available and contacting other people very time-consuming. As has been recognised since classical times, the performance of human memory is partially innate (some people have better memories ‘naturally’) and partially a matter of use and training. To veer into anecdata, the memorisation of phone numbers has become a lost art since the advent of mobile phones. If there is no active need to remember strings of eleven numbers, you’re unlikely to do so. Likewise, if you don’t need to remember entire areas of academic knowledge because you can refer to books, why would you? Academic learning in the 21st century is still about memorisation, yes, but also a substantial amount of recalling key names, locations, and signposts. You need to know where to find the details, rather than remembering them all.
By contrast, the classical art of memory involved the use of places (usually buildings) and ‘corporeal similitudes’ (imagined human figures) as shortcuts to the memorisation of knowledge in great detail. The basic idea was to slowly walk around an actual building, transpose it fully into your imagination, and populate this mental construct with a carefully sequenced series of images that were stimulating enough to remember and associate with specific pieces of information. Each image in the sequence could represent a concept or, incredibly, a single word. The latter approach is admittedly acknowledged to be much more difficult. What really amazes the (post?)modern reader, though, is to contemplate the scale of these memory places. They were apparently used by practitioners of the art to memorise speeches, books, legal cases, and the like. This blew my mind in particular because I have a very visual memory. I’ve instinctively used this basic technique of remembering items in a room when doing a memory experiment for someone’s research, and it works. However, all my life I’ve relied on books, and latterly the internet, to elaborate on and confirm what’s in my memory. Having a meticulously arranged library inside your brain seems like it would change your entire mode of thought, in ways I can only speculate on. At times when reading this book I wondered if I waste my visual memory by daydreaming beautiful mansions without making any effort to store information in them. Again, though, is there any need to? There are so many external forms of memory storage these days, both more and less fragile than our brains.
Yates does not broach any of these issues, though, as the book was published in 1966 and concludes with Leibniz in the seventeenth century. It divides the art of memory into three broad eras, the classical, middle ages, and Renaissance. As I’m not at all familiar with the latter two periods, I found them more challenging and the concepts quite complex. Those chapters were richly rewarding, though, and Yates’ writing style is consistently clear and thoughtful. The Medieval and Renaissance manifestations of the memory arts were intertwined with religion and magic in ways subtle and obvious. The differences between the two are neatly summarised as follows:
Perhaps the most striking chapters in the book concern Giordino Bruno’s extremely complex occult-suffused memory systems, which bring this mystical Renaissance tendency to apotheosis. Bruno is described by Yates as ‘the Magus of Memory’ and was eventually burnt at the stake by the Inquisition. In his many books, memory systems are a form of magic. They include concentric wheels with 150 divisions, the full meaning of which Yates believes ‘we shall never understand in detail’. Think about the effort involved in memorising such a thing - not merely as a static view of 150 images, but such that the wheels could spin and allow myriad new combinations. Moreover, the images were not literal, they represented what Bruno believed to be the fundamental elements that reality was made of. About halfway through ‘The Art of Memory’, I put it aside for a few days to read a fantasy novel called [b:A Darker Shade of Magic|22055262|A Darker Shade of Magic (Shades of Magic, #1)|V.E. Schwab|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1400322851s/22055262.jpg|40098252]. The contrast definitely enhanced my enjoyment of the latter half of this book. Consider, if you will, holding in your memory a complete visual representation of the world’s constitutive parts, which you can rearrange and manipulate at will. Is that not magic? It certainly has a strong air of the fantastical. As Yates puts it:
This fascinating comparison brought to mind how Bruno’s systematisation of knowledge into interconnected categories prefigured the Enlightenment division of academic study into disciplines. These systems also seemed to invoke Borges - he was basically a Magus, so surely he must have been aware of them.
The final chapters then turn to the association between the art of memory and theatres, notably Shakespeare’s Globe. This is especially piquant to read if you’ve visited the rebuilt Globe, which is a beautiful and evocative place. Yates asks how books on memory can help with the reconstruction of the Globe and reviews the evidence of how it looked. As I recall, the layout in the rebuilt version is very close to that arrived at. Here the book intersects with architecture, but it is fundamentally interdisciplinary, as the conclusion emphasises. Theology, pedagogy, and literature are all critical, while psychology underpins it throughout. That is part of what makes the study so elusive yet fascinating, as we can only speculate about how these memory palaces were actually experienced by their builders.
I decided to read ‘The Art of Memory’ after finding an article about it online somewhere and, ironically, can’t remember where. The combination of detailed explanations and well-chosen illustrations makes for a deeply thought-provoking book, well worth lingering over.… (more)
By contrast, the classical art of memory involved the use of places (usually buildings) and ‘corporeal similitudes’ (imagined human figures) as shortcuts to the memorisation of knowledge in great detail. The basic idea was to slowly walk around an actual building, transpose it fully into your imagination, and populate this mental construct with a carefully sequenced series of images that were stimulating enough to remember and associate with specific pieces of information. Each image in the sequence could represent a concept or, incredibly, a single word. The latter approach is admittedly acknowledged to be much more difficult. What really amazes the (post?)modern reader, though, is to contemplate the scale of these memory places. They were apparently used by practitioners of the art to memorise speeches, books, legal cases, and the like. This blew my mind in particular because I have a very visual memory. I’ve instinctively used this basic technique of remembering items in a room when doing a memory experiment for someone’s research, and it works. However, all my life I’ve relied on books, and latterly the internet, to elaborate on and confirm what’s in my memory. Having a meticulously arranged library inside your brain seems like it would change your entire mode of thought, in ways I can only speculate on. At times when reading this book I wondered if I waste my visual memory by daydreaming beautiful mansions without making any effort to store information in them. Again, though, is there any need to? There are so many external forms of memory storage these days, both more and less fragile than our brains.
Yates does not broach any of these issues, though, as the book was published in 1966 and concludes with Leibniz in the seventeenth century. It divides the art of memory into three broad eras, the classical, middle ages, and Renaissance. As I’m not at all familiar with the latter two periods, I found them more challenging and the concepts quite complex. Those chapters were richly rewarding, though, and Yates’ writing style is consistently clear and thoughtful. The Medieval and Renaissance manifestations of the memory arts were intertwined with religion and magic in ways subtle and obvious. The differences between the two are neatly summarised as follows:
We come back here to that basic difference between the Middle Ages and Renaissance, the change in attitude to the imagination. From a lower power which may be used in memory as a concession to weak man who may use corporeal similitudes because only so can he retain his spiritual intentions to the corporeal world, it has become man’s highest power, by means of which he can grasp the intelligible world beyond appearances through laying hold of significant images.
Perhaps the most striking chapters in the book concern Giordino Bruno’s extremely complex occult-suffused memory systems, which bring this mystical Renaissance tendency to apotheosis. Bruno is described by Yates as ‘the Magus of Memory’ and was eventually burnt at the stake by the Inquisition. In his many books, memory systems are a form of magic. They include concentric wheels with 150 divisions, the full meaning of which Yates believes ‘we shall never understand in detail’. Think about the effort involved in memorising such a thing - not merely as a static view of 150 images, but such that the wheels could spin and allow myriad new combinations. Moreover, the images were not literal, they represented what Bruno believed to be the fundamental elements that reality was made of. About halfway through ‘The Art of Memory’, I put it aside for a few days to read a fantasy novel called [b:A Darker Shade of Magic|22055262|A Darker Shade of Magic (Shades of Magic, #1)|V.E. Schwab|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1400322851s/22055262.jpg|40098252]. The contrast definitely enhanced my enjoyment of the latter half of this book. Consider, if you will, holding in your memory a complete visual representation of the world’s constitutive parts, which you can rearrange and manipulate at will. Is that not magic? It certainly has a strong air of the fantastical. As Yates puts it:
Did [Bruno] intend that there would be formed in the memory using these ever-changing combinations of astral images some kind of alchemy of the imagination, a philosopher’s stone in the psyche through which every possible arrangement and combination of objects in the lower world - plants, animals, stones - would be perceived and remembered? And that, in accordance with the forming and reforming of the inventor’s images on the central wheel, the whole history of man would be remembered from above, as it were, all his discoveries, thoughts, philosophies, productions? Such a memory would be the memory of a divine man. [...]
Magic assumes laws and forces running through the universe which the operator can use, once he knows how to capture them. [...] The Renaissance conception of an animistic universe, operated by magic, prepared the way for the conception of a mechanistic universe, operated by mathematics.
This fascinating comparison brought to mind how Bruno’s systematisation of knowledge into interconnected categories prefigured the Enlightenment division of academic study into disciplines. These systems also seemed to invoke Borges - he was basically a Magus, so surely he must have been aware of them.
The final chapters then turn to the association between the art of memory and theatres, notably Shakespeare’s Globe. This is especially piquant to read if you’ve visited the rebuilt Globe, which is a beautiful and evocative place. Yates asks how books on memory can help with the reconstruction of the Globe and reviews the evidence of how it looked. As I recall, the layout in the rebuilt version is very close to that arrived at. Here the book intersects with architecture, but it is fundamentally interdisciplinary, as the conclusion emphasises. Theology, pedagogy, and literature are all critical, while psychology underpins it throughout. That is part of what makes the study so elusive yet fascinating, as we can only speculate about how these memory palaces were actually experienced by their builders.
I decided to read ‘The Art of Memory’ after finding an article about it online somewhere and, ironically, can’t remember where. The combination of detailed explanations and well-chosen illustrations makes for a deeply thought-provoking book, well worth lingering over.… (more)
16. Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition by Frances A. Yates
published: 1964
format: 461-page paperback
acquired: 2013
read: Dec 15, 2021 – Apr 19, 2022
time reading: 33:01, 4.3 mpp
rating: 5
locations: Bruno lived in Nola, Naples, Paris, London (with a stop in Oxford), Wittenberg, Prague, Helmstadt, Frankfurt, Padua, Venice (where we was arrested) and Rome (where he was imprisoned and executed), 1548-1600.
about the author: English Historian associated with the Warburg Institute, University of London: 1899 –1981
Giordano Bruno is famous for fully embracing Copernicus's uncentering of the earth and taking it one step beyond - arguing for infinite universe, the earth just one object in this vast space; and that there was no center. No one else was arguing this. He was arrested in 1592 in Venice, interrogated by the church for 8 years and on February 17, 1600, with his tongue physically muffled, he was hung upside and burned in Rome. Among the intellectually swirling early years of the 17th century and later enlightenment, he was viewed as a martyr to science and as an exemplum of the muffling by the church of free exploration.
Yates book is a _targeted correction of the myth. Bruno was no scientist. He was deeply religious and his entire outlook was spiritual. The infinite universe was, to him, kind of a reflection of the infinite thinking-space in our own minds, one which he made an active effort to cram, in memory, everything important (in order to better link in with god). But Yates goes one step further herself, arguing that Giordano Bruno was pursuing a Hermitic religion - that is he took the so called Hermetic writings, roughly discovered by Europe in the mid 15th century, as an ancient source of truth, more ancient than Christianity or its Judaic parent or any known ancient religion. These are very spiritual writings with a striking creation story, and full gnostic ideas related to Egyptian mythology, and full of magic, even providing instructions on how to create magical talismans and statues.
While I can't speak for how original her idea was in 1964, I think she could make her case in a short scholarly article. It's not doubtful. So while this book is thematically all about this argument, it's also a whole lot more: a background, biography and exploration of who Bruno was and what his influence was. The first half is an explanation of these Hermetic writings and what they were. The second half is the life of Bruno and an overview of his constant ferocious writing he continually published until his arrest. Then she ends with a look at how European scientific thought developed after Bruno. The scientific perspective began to dominate the intellectual world a few decades after Bruno's execution, led especially by Rene Descartes. The age of enlightenment did not look back on Bruno's ideas, but marched ahead as if it was always there. And Yates asks, what changed? What allowed the intellectual community to make the shift from religion, and spiritual ideas, and magic and alchemy, to, as Yates put it, "mechanical" sciences? And why is Bruno hanging out in between these two states of mind?
------
The writings of Hermes Trismegistus are a collection of Egyptian-influence Greek religious texts from the 2nd century. They are attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, but the true authors are unknown. In the 1460's they were translated from Greek into Latin by Marsilo Ficino for the Cosimo de' Medici. For roughly 150 years Ficino's Hermetica would heavily influence European religious and intellectual thought. They were considered nearly the oldest and most sacred texts available. They were seen to predict Christianity, and were also used to develop practical magic. Shortly after translation Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola merged the ideas in them with Hebrew Jewish Cabalism creating a religious magic philosophy - something not really at all Christian. But still Pope Alexander VI, of the Borgia family, blessed this work as if it were Christian. And this blessing allowed scholars throughout the western Christian world to openly study it. The text (mixed with some other key texts) formed the foundation of respectable occult thinking in Europe. This lasted until Isaac Casaubon, a scholar of Greek with a chip on his shoulder, attacked its age. The language of the work was not an ancient Greek, but a Greek from early Christian era. He published his attack in 1614, after Bruno's execution, effectively closing the Hermetic tradition (although the ideas would linger).
----
Giordano Bruno was a rejected Domincan. Born in Nola, near Naples, he was very religious but kicked out of his Dominican order. He left Italy looking for an audience for his ideas and some sponsorship. He went to Paris where he got some support from King Henry III, then to England where he lived with the French ambassador in London. He famously travelled to Oxford to lecture in what became a something of fantastic argument. Documents of the time point to English scholars slowly picking up on the Hermetic aspects of his Copernican ideas. (Apparently, they brought out their own copies of Ficino). Oddly Bruno was viewed as a papist by protestant Oxford. From England Bruno continued to wander - back to Paris, to Martin Luther's Wittenberg (where he was welcomed warmly), to Prague, Helmstadt, Frankfort, Switzerland, and fatefully to Venice. He had in mind a Giordanic religion. He was no charlatan. He was a sincere magus. Brunos ideas were all in the mind. He elaborated on the medieval memory systems, developing his own style with the goal that he could memorize all the occult information, hundreds and hundreds of facts, complete texts, and that if he could hold it all in his mind at once, he sort of become one with the universe, an all-knowing master. As Yates put it, "The possessor of this system {memorizing eveything} thus rose above time and reflected the whole universe of nature and of man in his mind." Or, as Bruno put it, "Unless you make yourself equal to God, you cannot understand God…If you embrace in your thought all things at once, times, places, substances, qualities, quantities, you may understand God." It's pretty cool stuff. It's also not Christian. Bruno was fearless. Other hermetic scholars tied the hermetica into Christianty. Bruno saw, correctly, they were independent (they are 2nd-century Egyptian gnostic ideas) and dove in. He always saw himself as Christian, but his ideas were truly heretical. This was why he was executed, not because of his patently non-scientific infinite universe.
In the odd swings of history, the documents from Bruno's trial were later carried to Paris and destroyed. But documents from his interrogation exist. And it seems Bruno stuck to his ideas faithfully to the bitter end.
----
I bought this in 2013 in an occult science phase (inspired a bit by Club Read's Poquette). I started it in December and finished last night. Pages of Hermetic magic, of Latin untranslated, and the writings G Bruno (in Italian and Latin), plus the French commentary, made for very slow reading. But after taking this all in, there is really a rich world to think about. And there is that science thing. The link between the drives of the metaphysical perspectives - those of religion, magic, and science - include a method of structured thinking, but also may be in their origins. Each demands a kind of enlightenment moment to start things off. Even science needs an inspiration. And here at that point of inspiration, Bruno fits all three ideas and makes a nice 3-point intersection. Recommended to anyone excited by these ideas.
2022
https://www.librarything.com/topic/341027#7820245… (more)
published: 1964
format: 461-page paperback
acquired: 2013
read: Dec 15, 2021 – Apr 19, 2022
time reading: 33:01, 4.3 mpp
rating: 5
locations: Bruno lived in Nola, Naples, Paris, London (with a stop in Oxford), Wittenberg, Prague, Helmstadt, Frankfurt, Padua, Venice (where we was arrested) and Rome (where he was imprisoned and executed), 1548-1600.
about the author: English Historian associated with the Warburg Institute, University of London: 1899 –1981
Giordano Bruno is famous for fully embracing Copernicus's uncentering of the earth and taking it one step beyond - arguing for infinite universe, the earth just one object in this vast space; and that there was no center. No one else was arguing this. He was arrested in 1592 in Venice, interrogated by the church for 8 years and on February 17, 1600, with his tongue physically muffled, he was hung upside and burned in Rome. Among the intellectually swirling early years of the 17th century and later enlightenment, he was viewed as a martyr to science and as an exemplum of the muffling by the church of free exploration.
Yates book is a _targeted correction of the myth. Bruno was no scientist. He was deeply religious and his entire outlook was spiritual. The infinite universe was, to him, kind of a reflection of the infinite thinking-space in our own minds, one which he made an active effort to cram, in memory, everything important (in order to better link in with god). But Yates goes one step further herself, arguing that Giordano Bruno was pursuing a Hermitic religion - that is he took the so called Hermetic writings, roughly discovered by Europe in the mid 15th century, as an ancient source of truth, more ancient than Christianity or its Judaic parent or any known ancient religion. These are very spiritual writings with a striking creation story, and full gnostic ideas related to Egyptian mythology, and full of magic, even providing instructions on how to create magical talismans and statues.
While I can't speak for how original her idea was in 1964, I think she could make her case in a short scholarly article. It's not doubtful. So while this book is thematically all about this argument, it's also a whole lot more: a background, biography and exploration of who Bruno was and what his influence was. The first half is an explanation of these Hermetic writings and what they were. The second half is the life of Bruno and an overview of his constant ferocious writing he continually published until his arrest. Then she ends with a look at how European scientific thought developed after Bruno. The scientific perspective began to dominate the intellectual world a few decades after Bruno's execution, led especially by Rene Descartes. The age of enlightenment did not look back on Bruno's ideas, but marched ahead as if it was always there. And Yates asks, what changed? What allowed the intellectual community to make the shift from religion, and spiritual ideas, and magic and alchemy, to, as Yates put it, "mechanical" sciences? And why is Bruno hanging out in between these two states of mind?
------
The writings of Hermes Trismegistus are a collection of Egyptian-influence Greek religious texts from the 2nd century. They are attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, but the true authors are unknown. In the 1460's they were translated from Greek into Latin by Marsilo Ficino for the Cosimo de' Medici. For roughly 150 years Ficino's Hermetica would heavily influence European religious and intellectual thought. They were considered nearly the oldest and most sacred texts available. They were seen to predict Christianity, and were also used to develop practical magic. Shortly after translation Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola merged the ideas in them with Hebrew Jewish Cabalism creating a religious magic philosophy - something not really at all Christian. But still Pope Alexander VI, of the Borgia family, blessed this work as if it were Christian. And this blessing allowed scholars throughout the western Christian world to openly study it. The text (mixed with some other key texts) formed the foundation of respectable occult thinking in Europe. This lasted until Isaac Casaubon, a scholar of Greek with a chip on his shoulder, attacked its age. The language of the work was not an ancient Greek, but a Greek from early Christian era. He published his attack in 1614, after Bruno's execution, effectively closing the Hermetic tradition (although the ideas would linger).
----
Giordano Bruno was a rejected Domincan. Born in Nola, near Naples, he was very religious but kicked out of his Dominican order. He left Italy looking for an audience for his ideas and some sponsorship. He went to Paris where he got some support from King Henry III, then to England where he lived with the French ambassador in London. He famously travelled to Oxford to lecture in what became a something of fantastic argument. Documents of the time point to English scholars slowly picking up on the Hermetic aspects of his Copernican ideas. (Apparently, they brought out their own copies of Ficino). Oddly Bruno was viewed as a papist by protestant Oxford. From England Bruno continued to wander - back to Paris, to Martin Luther's Wittenberg (where he was welcomed warmly), to Prague, Helmstadt, Frankfort, Switzerland, and fatefully to Venice. He had in mind a Giordanic religion. He was no charlatan. He was a sincere magus. Brunos ideas were all in the mind. He elaborated on the medieval memory systems, developing his own style with the goal that he could memorize all the occult information, hundreds and hundreds of facts, complete texts, and that if he could hold it all in his mind at once, he sort of become one with the universe, an all-knowing master. As Yates put it, "The possessor of this system {memorizing eveything} thus rose above time and reflected the whole universe of nature and of man in his mind." Or, as Bruno put it, "Unless you make yourself equal to God, you cannot understand God…If you embrace in your thought all things at once, times, places, substances, qualities, quantities, you may understand God." It's pretty cool stuff. It's also not Christian. Bruno was fearless. Other hermetic scholars tied the hermetica into Christianty. Bruno saw, correctly, they were independent (they are 2nd-century Egyptian gnostic ideas) and dove in. He always saw himself as Christian, but his ideas were truly heretical. This was why he was executed, not because of his patently non-scientific infinite universe.
In the odd swings of history, the documents from Bruno's trial were later carried to Paris and destroyed. But documents from his interrogation exist. And it seems Bruno stuck to his ideas faithfully to the bitter end.
----
I bought this in 2013 in an occult science phase (inspired a bit by Club Read's Poquette). I started it in December and finished last night. Pages of Hermetic magic, of Latin untranslated, and the writings G Bruno (in Italian and Latin), plus the French commentary, made for very slow reading. But after taking this all in, there is really a rich world to think about. And there is that science thing. The link between the drives of the metaphysical perspectives - those of religion, magic, and science - include a method of structured thinking, but also may be in their origins. Each demands a kind of enlightenment moment to start things off. Even science needs an inspiration. And here at that point of inspiration, Bruno fits all three ideas and makes a nice 3-point intersection. Recommended to anyone excited by these ideas.
2022
https://www.librarything.com/topic/341027#7820245… (more)
Lists
Awards
You May Also Like
Associated Authors
Statistics
- Works
- 24
- Also by
- 1
- Members
- 4,222
- Popularity
- #5,951
- Rating
- 4.2
- Reviews
- 55
- ISBNs
- 162
- Languages
- 13
- Favorited
- 20
From its semi-legendary origins with Simonides of Ceos, a poet who flourished around 500 BCE, its adaption by Cicero and the anonymous author of Ad Herennium (long thought to be by Cicero) through its scholastic adaptation by Thomas Aquinas (and subsequent literary use by Dante in his Inferno), I was surprised by the art’s pervasive presence, extending even to Shakespeare.
Yates was treading a new path for much of her reconstruction; many of her sources were only available in manuscripts. One reason this history has been marginalized is that many of its chief proponents, from Metrodorus of Scepsis in ancient times to Giordano Bruno in the Renaissance, were condemned for the occult aspects of their work. This may be one reason why no one noticed that an accurate contemporary depiction of the Globe Theater was hidden in plain sight in a book by Robert Fludd.
Through her long work at the Warburg Institute, with its emphasis on iconology, she was well-suited for this research. She coined the term “Warburgian history” for a pan-European and interdisciplinary approach to historiography.
Yates’s sober approach was a plus. She is transparent in her skepticism of the value of the art of memory, with its laborious use of places and images, but believes that “the rational reader, if he is interested in the history of ideas, must be willing to hear about all ideas which in their time have been potent to move men.”
This is a valuable and informative book, but I found it a slow read, particularly in the second half. This despite Yates’s clear, well-reasoned style (unlike much academic writing). She is open about her unanswered questions and generous in her suggestions for profitable future research. Her prose is laid out as if she were presenting a lecture to an audience of interested lay people, regularly summarizing her conclusions. Perhaps the problem is that so much of it was new to me. But I’m glad I persevered to the end.
It turns out that I’m reading her three major works in reverse order. I enjoyed her Rosicrucian Enlightenment many years ago, and I’ve added her biography of Bruno to my long TBR list. If you’re new to her work, you might have an easier time of it if you read them in the order they were written.… (more)