“Sheep breeds are like vernacular buildings, each region has its own unique sheep with their own unique traits.” – Author Sally Coulthard discusses A Short History of the World According to Sheep

“I know shepherdesses who think nothing of throwing a ewe on its back and, like lightning, clipping it clean. It’s tough, dextrous work and I’d be curious to have a go.”

WHAT: “An addictively free-ranging survey of the huge impact that the domesticated ungulates of the genus Ovis have had on human history.”

WHO: After studying Archaeology & Anthropology at Oxford University, best-selling author and designer Sally Coulthard has spent the last twenty years designing, making and writing about homes, craft and outdoor spaces.  She sees no boundary between the rules that govern good interior design and those which are needed to craft a spectacular studio or glorious garden. 

Keen to make good design accessible, she’s written over twenty books about restoring houses, designing interiors and outdoor living.  From garden styles to craftsmanship, creating workspaces to building sheds, Sally’s books inspire, encourage and equip readers to take on projects of their own. 

Sally is a passionate advocate of rural living and regularly writes about nature and her experiences of smallholding deep in North Yorkshire countryside, including her ‘Good Life in Country’ column for ‘Country Living‘ magazine.”

MORE? Here!


Why sheep?

A while back, I read a fascinating article about how the Vikings would have never conquered huge swathes of the Western world without sheep. Not only did sheep provide food and clothing for the marauding hordes but, crucially, they provided the fleeces needed for their ships’ vast, woollen sails. And it got me thinking, what other cultural or historical events have been shaped by this unassuming creature?

As I started to poke around, I soon found at that many key aspects of human history have sheep at their centre – medieval wool wealth and wars, Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire, the success of the Romans, the Black Death, the Industrial Revolution – sheep have clothed us, made us rich, impoverished others, helped us colonise countries, decorated our homes, changed our rural landscape, altered our diets, helped scientific breakthroughs and much much more….

Sheep are obviously the plucky heroes of your narrative. Are humans the boo-hiss villains of the drama?

It depends on how you look at it I suppose. Sheep have been exploited by humans for over ten thousand years and we’ve changed their bodies, temperament and natural habitats to suit our needs. So yes, we’re the exploiters. And yet, sheep have benefited in a way. Human interference has meant that a wild creature, which had a limited range, now lives on every continent apart from Antarctica. The world has around a billion sheep, and over a thousand different breeds and cross-breeds. There’s no danger of sheep going extinct any time soon and so, in a way, they are winners at least in the evolutionary sense. Welfare wise, I’m not so sure.

Are sheep as unintelligent as we like to think?

Absolutely not. We underestimate sheep all the time. Far from being dim, sheep have been shown to be able to recognise at least fifty different faces, distinguish between facial expressions such as happy and sad, navigate through complex mazes and remember how they did it. One Cambridge University professor, who has spent years testing sheep with learning tasks, concluded that you’d struggle to tell the difference, in terms of intelligence, between a sheep and a monkey. And that, in many cases, sheep actually learn more quickly that their simian friends.

What’s your go-to mutton or lamb recipe? Is it an accident that there is no mention of rosemary in the book?

Ouch. Hard question on the back of an answer about sheep intelligence. Still, I have no problem with eating sheep, if they have had a high welfare life. We have a small flock here and, many times, we’ve eaten our own ‘lamb’. The Moroccans and Greeks are the masters of mutton and lamb recipes – often adding plenty of fragrant spice and sweet fruit, slow cooking, or chargrilling. There’s a fantastic recipe in Tessa Kiros’ ‘Falling Cloudberries‘ book, for Leg of Lamb with Oregano and Lemon. Hours of slow cooking leave you with a melting, lemony unctuous dish – perfect for a meal with friends.

Which item or artefact described would you most like to own in order to show off to dinner guests?

I’m slightly obsessed with scissors. I recently bought myself a pair of Viking scissors – just touching and holding them makes me think of whoever would have forged and treasured them a thousand years ago. And so, to answer your question, it’d probably be the bronze ancient Egyptian shears in Chapter 3 – such amazing craftsmanship and decoration, with so much of the symbolism lost in time. It’s interesting that scissors still hold such superstitions for people – such as never giving a pair to a friend or, if you do, the receiver has to ‘pay’ for the scissors with a small coin or token.

If you could totally, undisputedly, dude-she-really-knows-her-stuff-edly master one of the skills you chronicle which would it be?

I’ve never had a go at sheep-shearing. It looks really difficult. I know shepherdesses who think nothing of throwing a ewe on its back and, like lightning, clipping it clean. It’s tough, dextrous work and I’d be curious to have a go. Love a practical challenge. Failing that, my knitting skills could do with a polish.

Let’s say that you decide to create the shepherding equivalent of a mixtape, a mixed flock of the breeds that most speak to you. Which are you including and are you being practical or aesthetic?

Sheep breeds are like vernacular buildings, each region has its own unique sheep with their own unique traits; the pretty Herdwicks in the Lake District, for example, or the Hebridean sheep with their remarkable horns. I love that variety and long may it last. I’d create a flock that represented all the different counties – to show that variety and adaptability – real characters like a craggy, tough little Soay sheep, a Welsh badger face, a long-haired, lustrous Wensleydale, a crazy-horned Isle of Man Loaghtan and a teddybear-faced Southdown. Too many to choose from. One of each of the 50 or so native breeds, please.

The pastures green of the early chapters morph (almost overnight) into the dark, satanic mills of the early industrial revolution, so much of which was built with child labour. At the time there were those (such as William Pitt the Younger) who advocated in favour of child labour, justified it as an economic and even moral necessity. Were you ever (even a little bit) persuaded by their arguments and what do you think are the lessons modern society needs to learn from that problematic era?

The past is a different country and so it can be difficult to judge historic events through modern sensibilities. Taking child labour, for example, we need to see the context – at the time, most families wouldn’t have had a choice that a child had to be a productive member of the family if they lived in poverty (which most people did). That said, we can’t be value-less when we look back at history. Rather than blame the parents who had to send their children to work, for example, I think it is important to analyse the kind of society which put profit before human wellbeing and whether that’s who we want to be now. I think my politics sometimes creep through into my books – it’s hard not to get angry about people being thrown off their land to make way for sheep farming or to feel ashamed about Victorian attitudes towards poverty, welfare and social class. We enjoy plenty of modern privileges thanks to past injustices – what we shouldn’t do is to try justify it or celebrate it.

Sheep have a past. Do they have a future?

Hope so. It depresses me to see how large-scale, intensive sheep rearing is causing all kinds of ecological problems across the planet while, at the same time, small scale sheep farmers can’t sell their wool for more than it costs them to have the sheep sheared. It’s all part of a wider discussion about agriculture and mixed farming, and where food security and sustainability fits into all this. It’ll take a wiser person that me to come up with the answer.

What are you currently working on?

Lots of projects on the go – still writing my monthly column for ‘Country Living‘ magazine, about my adventures on our North Yorkshire smallholding, and have a new book about earthworms coming out in time for Christmas (it’s fascinating, I promise). In spring 2021, a new book about the history and folklore of flowers – called ‘Floriography’ – and then a big history book out later in 2021, called ‘The Barn‘, about farming and rural life over the past three hundred years.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“I don’t eat eel. That’s a principle. I don’t think you should hunt and eat endangered animals.” – Author Patrik Svensson discusses Ålevangeliet

“I found out that if you don’t just ask the question “What do we know about the eel?” but also “How do we know it?”, then you find all those great stories and interesting characters.”

WHAT: “Our Enduring Fascination with the Most Mysterious Creature.”

WHO: Patrik Svensson is an arts and culture journalist at Sydsvenskan newspaper. He lives with his family in Malmö, Sweden. Ålevangeliet (The Gospel of Eels) is his first book.

MORE? Here!


Why eels?

Because it’s a remarkable animal. Just think about the life cycle of an eel. They’re born in The Sargasso Sea, in the Western part of The Atlantic Ocean. They drift with the currents all the way to Europe. They go through metamorphoses, they become glass eels and then yellow eels. They find their place to live in freshwater and then they stay there. They live a lonely, quiet passive life at the same place for 20, 30 or 50 years. When suddenly they get this urge to return to the place they came from. They become silver eels. They stop eating and only now develop their sexual organs, and they swim all the way back to the Sargasso Sea, where they disappear down in the depths to breed and then die. That’s a remarkable story in itself. But the eel has also captured me because of the scientific history.

There are so many prominent scientists who have tried to understand the eel, and so many things we still don’t really know about it. I’m first of all interested in telling stories and I think that natural science is full of great stories if you just know where, and how, to look for them. And this is especially true about the eel. I found out that if you don’t just ask the question “What do we know about the eel?” but also “How do we know it?”, then you find all those great stories and interesting characters, from Aristotle to Sigmund Freud to Rachel Carson. In that way, the story of the eel is also the story of remarkable people making remarkable efforts in the name of science. It’s the story of one of human nature’s most enduring urges, the urge to understand life around us, to understand how things work, and in the end where we ourself belong in everything.

As well as being a natural history, Ålevangeliet, is a deeply personal narrative – a chronicle of your memories fishing for eels with your father and of that bond between you. When did you first think about writing this story, making this pilgrimage into your past, and when did you know for certain that you would complete it?

I wanted to write about my own experience of the eel from the beginning, mostly to try to come closer to the subject in a way. I fished for eels with my father during my whole childhood. Late summer nights down by the stream, under the shadows of the trees. And I have very strong and vivid memories from that place and from those nights. That was also where my father told me about all the mysteries surrounding the eel, and about the Sargasso sea where all the eels came from, this almost fairytale place far from anything I could even imagine.

A life long fascination started right there. And when later in life I learned that there actually is a term, “the eel question”, that’s been part of the scientific history for ages, it was as if my own story, and my own origin, connected to something much larger. That was also when the two separate stories in the book – the scientific history of the eel and my own story about my father and the place I came from – started to connect, they reflected each other in some way, and I understood that they both had to be part of the story.

There are several recipes for eel mentioned in the text. Which is your go-to family favourite and what’s the recipe?

I don’t eat eel. That’s a principle. I don’t think you should hunt and eat endangered animals.

European eels, Anguilla Anguilla, are listed as critically endangered. Does this mean we should all stop catching and eating them? What’s the best ethical substitute for eel meat?

Yes, we should all stop eating eel. The fishing is probably actually not the biggest problem for the eel. They are threatened by a lot of different factors, from toxins to climate change to power plants. But as I said, I don’t think you should eat endangered species.

There are some big-name scientists featured in the book, Aristotle, Freud (who spent a surprising amount of his early life dissecting male eels in the hope of finding their testes), Darwin, and Rachel Carson. If you could ask any of them any one thing, what would it be?

I’m very inspired by Rachel Carson. Her ability to write about nature and animals in a very scientific way, based on deep knowledge and understanding, but also with a sense of wonder for natures creations, and with the language of a poet almost. I don’t know what I would ask her, I would just love to hear her talk. I think she was a kind of voice that we really could need today.

Ålevangeliet has been translated into 33 languages and counting. What is your advice to an author whose work is about to be translated? Get involved or leave it be? Are there particular passages you always want to be treated with particular care?

I think it’s very good if you can have a dialogue with the translator. There’s always lots of references, meanings, metaphors, that can easily get lost in translation. But in the end, you also have to let go, especially of course if it’s a language you don’t understand. All the translators I have met have been extremely professional and devoted. At some point, you just have to put your trust in them.

How has the book and its message been received in those countries most resistant to sustainable fishing quotas and practices?

I have only met readers who have shown a great understanding of how serious the situation is for the eel. The official assessment from IUCN and others is that the population of the European eel has gone down more than 95 per cent since the 1970’s and it’s now listed as critically endangered. That’s really all that has to be said to understand that we can’t continue to threat the eel, and the ocean, the way we have. I also use to talk a lot about the bigger issue here, the mass extinction of species, scientists who believe that the number of species on earth could be halved in only a hundred years. That’s a dramatic and extremely urgent problem that I think people only now are starting to fully understand.

Would you want to be reincarnated as an eel? Which part of the lifecycle would you most enjoy?

No, I would not. But if I had to I guess I would be very curious about the migration of the silver eel. The travel back to the Sargasso Sea, disappearing in the depth where they supposedly breed and die. No man has ever seen eels breed, no one has even seen an eel in the Sargasso Sea, neither living or dead. That’s one of the mysteries that still remains of the eel.

The book has been an incredible success. When Netflix comes calling which actor will you want to play your father?

Haha, well isn’t the more interesting question who would play the eel? But you know what, the perfect actor for my father would actually be Stellan Skarsgård. He’s from the same area of Sweden as me, and he was also my father’s favourite actor.

What are you currently working on?

When it comes to that question I’m afraid I’m as secretive as an eel.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

Has the body of Richard III been found? “Not proven.” – Author Michael Hicks discusses Richard III, The Self-Made King

“All depended in the last resort on Richard’s success in maintaining his reign and to defeat his enemies which disastrously failed to achieve.”

WHAT: “The definitive biography and assessment of the wily and formidable prince who unexpectedly became monarch—the most infamous king in British history.”

WHO: Professor Michael Hicks, historian of Late medieval England, especially the nobility and the Wars of the Roses, who has written about all the Yorkist kings.

MORE? Here!


Why Richard III?

Richard III’s was one of briefest of English kings and was thoroughly defeated, destroyed himself and left almost no achievements to his credit. His significance is negative and inadvertent. He did mean to destroy its dynasty, to restart the Wars of the Roses, or advance the Tudor dynasty, but that what he did.`

Richard was king for barely 26 months. Was that time enough to build a lasting administrative legacy beyond the black legend?

No.

There was not time to assess whether his initiatives were successful or (eg) financially sustainable. The Tudor regime did not generally continue Richard’s regime and indeed often deliberately dismantled them. All depended in the last resort on Richard’s success in maintaining his reign and to defeat his enemies which disastrously failed to achieve.

Did Richard’s time on the throne offer any clues as to what he might have done had he not died at Bosworth?

Yes.

Richard certainly sought centralised control (eg constableship and northern borders), sought to rationalise administration (eg the heralds) and reform his finances, and to was always proactive, trampling over the legitimate aspiration of his principal supporters. How successful his initiatives were to be and financially sustainable they were is uncertain.

Richard was 32 when he died. Edward IV was 42. Their brother George, Duke of Clarence was 28. These were very young men to be at the centre of things. Is this relevant to an assessment of their decisions, successes, and failures?

Edward IV began to a victorious general, but did assert himself as ruler until 1467. Clarence and Gloucester were not really competent in their teens. They did mature, but both were exceptionally assertive. The errors in young Edward and of Clarence continued to dog their footsteps.

Can you personally sit through a production of Shakespeare’s History plays without tutting?

Yes.

Apart from the brilliance of the drama, Shakespeare consistently proclaims in Tudor interpretation that has dominated to five hundred years. Regrettably, we lack a contemporary Ricardian counterpart.

A minor medieval lord like Richard seems like a strange focus for such devotion. Why are Ricardians so …err… motivated and passionate?

The Ricardians rightly see the Tudor interpretation as overdrawn – nobody could be so wicked – and were free to fill the gaps that the earliest historians thought self-evident. Richard’s cause has been splendidly promoted, publicised and proclaimed by events as the Quincentenary and reburial of the bones. Public debates since 1980 have consistently found Richard more sinned against than sinning. If the Tudor tradition so rejected wholesale, as Ricardians have always argued, there were enormous to opportunities to re-interpret and to question such orthodoxies at the deaths of the princes.

The whole topic of duke and king has been enormously enlarged. The belief that Richard was misjudged, the apparent mysteries of his life, and defence of the underdog have been combined with some inflated estimates of Richard’s achievement and hero worship. Richard’s defeat has allowed scope for speculation to what might be been.

Has the body of Richard III been found?

Not proven.

There are strong reason to identify the supposed bones of Richard III were found in the right place, with right injuries, and with same distorted spine as Richard’s, but the DNA is not right and there are discrepancies with what else is known, Perhaps will be explained, bu tit has not been is yet. Actually, to my surprise, the precise identity of the remains was not material.

Richard’s wars with Scotland included a brief occupation of Edinburgh. How long was he in the city for? Where did he reside? Did he capture the castle?

Not more to week. Edinburgh was not sacked and the city council left not operational, so it may not surmised that Richard encamped outside, He did not capture the castle.

If you could ask Richard one question what would it be? 

Did Richard really believe that Edward’s precontract made the rightful king?

Would you trust his answer?

Probably not. But Richard was certainly capable of convincing himself.

What are you currently working on?

I am editing Richard’s inquisitions post mortem {with Dr Gordon McKelvie).

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“There’s really no way in which an ancient society – possibly *especially* a very odd ancient Greek society such as Sparta’s – can teach us directly anything.” – Author Paul Cartledge discusses Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World

“Sadly, a number of (right-wing) US gun clubs have taken the slogan ‘Molon labe’ (come and get ’em – allegedly Leonidas to Xerxes) as their motto.”

WHAT: “In 480 B.C., the mighty Persian king Xerxes led a massive force to the narrow mountain pass called Thermopylae, anticipating no significant resistance in his bid to conquer Greece. But the Greeks, led by Leonidas and a small army of Spartan warriors, took the battle to the Persians and nearly halted their advance.

Paul Cartledge’s riveting, authoritative account of King Leonidas and the legendary 300 illuminates this valiant endeavour that changed the way future generations would think about combat, courage, and death.”

WHO: Professor Paul Cartledge, A.G. Leventis Senior Research Fellow, Clare College, Cambridge & Emeritus A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture

MORE? Here!


Why Thermopylae?

I hate the word, usually, but it conveys the point I wish to make: ‘Thermopylae’ – just that one name – is one of the ‘iconic’ battles in world history: i.e., if you consult one of those ‘Greatest World Battles’ compilations, it invariably is featured. This is partly because it really was in its own immediate circumstances – August 480 BCE, a narrow pass in north-central Greece, at the start of a potentially world-shattering amphibious invasion of mainland Greece by the forces of the mighty Persian Empire under Great King/Emperor Xerxes – an important (but far from decisive) military confrontation), but *mainly* because of what has been made of the battle/made out of the battle subsequently – at first by the Spartans (then leading the rather shaky and feeble Greek Resistance to Persia) and then by any number of historians and/or moralists preoccupied with ‘last stand’ heroics or nostalgia therefor, and, more recently, by filmmakers (“The Three Hundred Spartans” (1962); “300”, (2006).

Sadly, a number of (right-wing) US gun clubs have taken the slogan ‘Molon labe’ (come and get ’em – allegedly Leonidas to Xerxes) as their motto.

Was there any way in which the forces led by King Leonidas might have won (militarily speaking) the battle?

Absolutely no way whatsoever. The points of sending *any* sort of Resistance force to Greece south of the kingdom of Macedonia (already a vassal province of Persia) and the region of Thessaly (where the four main cities had ‘medized’, i.e., decided they’d be better off submitting to Persia than resisting) were i. to delay the Persian advance on its main immediate target (the city of Athens) ii. to liaise with the Greek Resistance fleet based at the northern tip of the island of Euboea and iii. ‘show the flag’, i.e. demonstrate to both allies in the Resistance and to those Greeks who were wavering over whether to resist or not that it was both possible and worthwhile to resist.

The Resistance intially sent a force north of Thermopylae as far as the vale of Tempe but quickly discovered that that line of defence could easily be turned, hence the decision to focus on the Thermopylae pass (c. 1 km W-E, already fortified for earlier, local reasons). It was unfortunate for the Resistance that Thermopylae coincided with major Greek religious festivals – one of them all-Greek (the Olympics), the others local – since that reduced the numbers of available troops; although not even a 10-fold increase (from the actual 6-7,000 troops under Leonidas) would have enabled the Resistance to resist successfully! Xerxes had anything from 80-200,000 land troops (a motley crew admittedly – Herodotus our main source includes a sort of Catalogue of Xerxes’ muti-ethnic forces; we can’t be certain of ANY numbers for Persian forces on land or sea) at his disposal, so it was only a matter of time before he forced his way through. It took him 3 days.

King Xerxes I of Persia notoriously misunderstood the Spartans grooming ritual – not understanding that the warriors combed their long hair out before the battle as their way of preparing to fight to the death. What was the biggest misconception about the Persians held by the Greeks?

See above on uncertainty over the numbers on Xerxes’ side. Greeks were generally not good on big numbers at the best of times – they used the same word for ‘10,000’ to mean ‘millions’ or ‘countless’! – but Herodotus will not have been alone in thinking Xerxes had over 5 million (sic) men under him on land – so many that they drank whole rivers dry etc. They were of course therefore pretty worried about facing his troops in open pitched battle, though the victory of the Athenians (and Plataeans) at Marathon ten years earlier (490) will have been a considerable encouragement. Historians today reduce Herodotus’s figure even as low as 80,000 (George Cawkwell) but most of us would say 100,000 plus.

You shut your eyes and you picture the face of Leonidas. What springs to mind, the statue unearthed in 1926 on the Spartan Acropolis, pictured above, or the face of Gerard Butler?

Good question! For me, the former every time, but then I’m a historian and archaeologist who’s lived in (modern) Sparta for over a year and spent many many hours in the Sparta Museum, where ‘Leonidas’ normally resides!
Actually, ‘Leonidas’ (unearthed at the foot of the Acropolis, amid theatre debris, though originally he’d been on what passes for an acropolis in Sparta) cannot be an image of the real king Leonidas (reigned c. 490-480), for several reasons: i. on style he belongs in the 480s, before the battle, and Spartans didn’t then commission ‘portrait’ statues of living kings ii. he wasn’t originally a free-standing, isolated sculpture but part of a sculptural group affixed probably to the pediment of some sort of religious structure, probably a temple, and he probably represented some sort of (mythical) figure or ‘hero’.

The nicest story I know of Butler’s Leonidas comes after a recent final of the NY tennis Open won by Novak Djokavic, a friend of GB, when GB joined him in a unison cry (from the movie) of ‘This is Sparta’. Sadly, it’s on
youtube:

You illustrate how the Spartan form of education influenced the British public school from Thomas Arnold to Kurt Hahn. Is there another aspect of Spartan civilization you’d like to see given a dust off and resurrected into modern civic life?

There’s really no way in which an ancient society – possibly *especially* a very odd ancient Greek society such as Sparta’s – can teach us directly anything. I suppose one possible but by no means novel lesson would be the value, the overriding value in the time of COVID-19, of community. The Spartans, of course, took to an extreme the general ancient Greek notion that the community was far more important than any individual member (they didn’t even have a word for ‘individual’), so that they even treated individuals as dispensable in a way that we today find morally indefensible. But it’s hard to believe that without the Spartans’ taking the lead there would have been much of a defence put up against the Persians in 480, and especially not at Thermopylae. And it took a special sort of communitarian courage to take the lead in the way the Spartans did.

The modern city of Sparta has been described as the most conservative city in Greece. It’s never had a left-wing mayor and it was one of the few cities that voted in 1974 to retain the monarchy. Laconia was the region with the highest proportion of “yes” votes in the 2015 bailout referendum. Is that a coincidence?

Yes, when I was first working in Sparta in 1970, which wasn’t all that long after the end of the Civil War (1946-9) in which most – but not all (see American archaeologist-historian Kevin Andrews’s brilliant memoir, ‘The Flight of Ikaros’) – Spartans and Laconians had fought on the royalist side, my much more liberal Greek friends referred to Lakonia (the region) as ‘Vlachonia’ meaning something like ‘stupid Lakonia’ (the Vlach- bit refers to the Vlachs, or Wallachians, a non-Greekspeaking transhumant pastoralist people from NW Greece – see JK Campbell Honour Family and Patronage on the related Sarakatsani people, 1964). But there were also Spartan anti-Nazis (a friend of mine’s brother was killed resisting their occupation), and there were Spartan/Laconian Communist partisans 1946-9. And in the 2000s at last Sparta had its first woman bank manager (I think partly German-educated. The ancient Spartans were paradoxically rather more liberated on the ‘woman question’.) The current and recently elected Mayor of Sparta, Petros Doukas, is not especially rightwing but most Spartans and Laconians probably are, and sadly that includes members of the Extreme Far Right ‘Golden Dawn’ party, now thankfully in eclipse.

Why are Laconians so prone to be rightwing? Until the recent transformation of communications (when I first went 50 years ago, it took 6 hours to reach Sparta by road from Athens – now it’s 2 hours) Sparta was very cut off from ‘metropolitan’ Greece. And within Laconia itself there were some sharp divisions – e.g. the Taygetos and Parnon mountain areas vs the plains, and the whole Mani district, the central-southern prong of the Peloponnese with its separate identity and history and self-identification – none of which tended in a liberal direction. ‘King’ Constantine self-exiled and then after the overthrow of the Colonels (1967-74) was refused re-entry to Greece, which only increased the monarchist-royalist fervour of the ‘Restore Constantine and the monarchy’ lobby that had its base in … Laconia (at Gytheion in the Mani).

What’s the one thing that we don’t know about the battle that you wish we did?

Why the Phocian detachment which Leonidas had purposely placed in the Anopaea flanking back pass failed to realise they were being bypassed by a crack force of elite Persian ‘Immortals’, and so failed to alert Leonidas that he was about to be pincered? And/or why Leonidas posted this clearly incompetent detachment of locals and did not put a Spartan in command of them?

If you could possess one object associated with your narrative what would it be?

A shield – either of a Spartan or of a Perioecus. Other items of offensive or defensive equipment were worn for individual reasons, but the shield (hoplon) – as an apophthegm (witty saying) preserved by Plutarch tells us – was worn for the line as whole.

Does the battle of Thermopylae still matter?

It couldn’t matter more. Not, obviously, because it was a defeat but i. because of the sort of (heroic) defeat it was and could later be made out to be for propaganda purposes and ii. because of the context – in the Graeco-Persian Wars, which was a battle of civilisations as well as a geopolitical conflict. What if … the Persians had won either the Battle of Salamis (480) or Plataea (479)??

What are you currently working on?

Having just finished the last-minute corrections to my forthcoming (May 28) ‘Thebes’ book, I am putting the final touches to a book I am co-editing with a former PhD student, Dr Carol Atack: it is the first, ‘Antiquity’ (c.1000 BCE to 550 CE), volume in a 6-volume Cultural History of Democracy (part of a Bloomsbury series). My main (pre)occupation, as it has been since the end of 2014, is co-directing and co-editing with Prof Paul Christesen (Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, USA) ‘The Oxford History of the Archaic Greek World’. ‘Oxford’ = O.U.P. (New York), ‘Archaic = c. 800 BCE-c.500/450 BCE. ‘Greek’ = Hellas, the Greek world of the Med and Black Seas. ‘History’ = archaeo-history, i.e. the c. 35 ‘essays’ are mainly written by archaeologists, using mainly archaeological data. Submission date, for the in toto c. 1.25 million words, is the end of 2020, publication 2021/2, at first in hard copy (6 volumes?), then online.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“I’ve had a lot of unpleasant substances thrown at me in public for undermining the Bible.” – Author Irving Finkel discusses The Ark Before Noah

“I was in the situation that having made what was really quite a serious discovery in the whole mass of the biblical world and Assyriological world. I had to hold people down, slap them on both cheeks and say “This is important because…”

WHAT: “In ‘The Ark Before Noah‘, British Museum expert Dr Irving Finkel reveals how decoding the symbols on a 4,000-year-old piece of clay enable a radical new interpretation of the Noah’s Ark myth. A world authority on the period, Dr Finkel’s enthralling real-life detective story began with a most remarkable event at the British Museum – the arrival one day in 2008 of a single, modest-sized Babylonian cuneiform tablet – the palm-sized clay rectangles on which our ancestors created the first documents. It had been brought in by a member of the public and this particular tablet proved to be of quite extraordinary importance. Not only does it date from about 1850 BC, but it is a copy of the Babylonian Story of the Flood, a myth from ancient Mesopotamia revealing among other things, instructions for building a large boat to survive a flood. But Dr Finkel’s pioneering work didn’t stop there. Through another series of enthralling discoveries he has been able to decode the story of the Flood in ways which offer unanticipated revelations to readers of ‘The Ark Before Noah‘.”

WHO: Irving Finkel is a British philologist and Assyriologist. He is currently the Assistant Keeper of Ancient Mesopotamian script, languages and cultures in the Department of the Middle East in the British Museum, where he specialises in cuneiform inscriptions on tablets of clay from ancient Mesopotamia.

MORE? Here!


Why Noah?

Well, in this case there was no possible alternative because the subject matter of this book concerns the literary narrative which existed and must have existed prior to the biblical narrative that everybody knows by heart and everybody takes for granted with Noah in the lead role.

But also if you want to give a lecture or write a book or command attention, it is always beneficial to start from a point that people know about. So, if we’d called it ‘The Ark of Utnapushtim’, no-one would have had any idea who that was and sales might have been even more modest than they are at the moment. So it wasn’t a commercial reason but simply a logical reason whereas I was taught many centuries ago that the sensible approach is to take one point and make it three times in different ways and hope that somewhere it will sink into people’s minds, so anybody who saw the cover was urged or prompted to pick it up, would know that it was something to do with Noah which isn’t a bad start.

There is a description of your illustrious Victorian predecessor at the British Museum, George Smith, discovering the first Ark tablet and going momentarily mad with excitement, stripping off his clothes and charging around the room. What would make you pull a George Smith? What discovery could you imagine would have you leaping around in your underpants?

Well I’ve made a few discoveries since I got here but this tablet with its specific – Ark Before Noah tablet – with its contents was after Smith’s accomplishment, in some ways a close second because you had the situation everybody knows, the biblical story, and there have been all sorts of theories about every single aspect of the bible and lots of discussions about what the Ark was like, whether it was like it was described in the Hebrew text, whether it was this, whether it was that but nobody to my knowledge has ever articulated the possibility that it was a circular craft like a coracle. So that was a pretty sort of head-smacking staggering discovery, it really shocked me and agitated me to the point that I loosened my tie and I rather think I might have taken my jacket off, I left it at that, you know you don’t want to excite too much attention among the younger women in the department, I always try to behave in a gentlemanly fashion.

One of the interesting comparative points about shall we say the number one big discovery George Smith, and number two, much less significant but in the same bag following 100 and so years later by me, is that when Smith discovered the flood tablet everybody knew their bible inside out, especially the beginning chapters but I mean everybody read the bible, it underpinned literature, political reference, it was just on everybody’s lips all the novels in the world refer to the bible. That was a scenario in which the discovery was of volcanic significance and when Smith made the discovery he was encouraged, or whatever, to make a public statement in front of a whole committee of worthies including the Archbishop of Canterbury who are not generally renowned for their interests in Assyriology, I think the Prime Minister was also there which is even less than easy to parallel from modern times but the fact is, it made a fantastic impact on the world.

It made a fantastic impact on Smith, who I think had an epileptic fit because the description that he jumped out, dropped the tablet on the table and held his hands and made funny noises and in fact started to disrobe himself, these separate features of behaviour are extremes of epileptic reaction, not necessarily all in a bunch, but I have a feeling that when he actually sat there reading this clay tablet, discovering what was practically speaking holy writ, appear on the surface of a piece of Weetabix, it set off in his bosom and uncontrollable explosion. So the thing is, to answer your question specifically, I thought finding this round thing was a pretty amazing discovery and went about saying you’ll never guess what I found out, but the milieu in which I operate the algae-ridden swimming pool in which one attempts to do breaststroke, is a whole different situation because familiarity with the Bible is minimal to the point that people under a certain age, I would randomly say 30, have a deep-seated and eradicable confusion between things which are in the Bible and things which come from Hollywood, they simply don’t know the difference and lots of people are not sure whether the Noah story isn’t the creation of Walt Disney and so forth and so forth.

So I was in the situation that having made what was really quite a serious discovery in the whole mass of the biblical world and Assyriological world. I had to hold people down, slap them on both cheeks and say “This is important because…” And then they would wake up and say “Oh yes, that sounds quite interesting”. So that is a major, major contrast and it underpins all Assyriology because you could find an inscription with a completely new tablet, a new king, a new this, a new date, a new word for chariot pommel or something but it doesn’t shake the world and there are relatively few things that you can find within the Assyriological world which should command a wider response but the one with this had to be coaxed and publicised and lots of interviews and lots of newspaper things and eventually people say, “Oh how marvellous, how interesting, how wonderful…” and some of them bought the book but it didn’t have a matching effect reverberating throughout the world except this modest paperback available from all good book stores is actually being translated into other languages including French and American and Russian and Polish and Japanese and Armenian and Chinese is nearly done. So the anti-gospel according to me is being disseminated on a wider scale than it might otherwise have been entirely in the English version.

Is that how you see it, the ‘anti-gospel’?

Not at all, it’s a kind of joke. I mean I’ve had a lot of unpleasant substances thrown at me in public for undermining the Bible and this kind of nonsense but my argument is that it’s nothing to do with that whatsoever because the flood story clearly originated in Mesopotamia because of the landscape, the geology the geography, the history, the riverine nature of their landscape. There is no question that it comes out of that part of the world. There’s no question that the literary structure, the literary creation went from the Babylonian forerunner into the biblical narrative in the Book of Genesis. There seems to be no doubt about it, but it’s not pinching words from God or undercutting the clergy, the simple response to people who in fact have threatened me with tar and feathers and what have you is this, have you ever tried to write a detective story? Have you ever tried to write a piece of fiction? Have you ever tried to invent a plot that no-one has invented before? It is practically speaking impossible and all literature is derivative in some measure or other and the question is whether it’s derivative in the modern world, whether it’s derivative surreptitiously, accidentally or unwittingly but it’s true, you cannot create from nothing a whole new thing and the same applies to the narratives in the bible, they were borrowed from here and there and the crucial point, intellectually and from a religious point of view is that they were used to tell different messages.

So, if you hear a really good story about a chap who has a week to save the world and the clock’s going tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, this is a deep-seated irresistible format which Hollywood has embraced like with its teeth and ever since and the Babylonian story that one bloke wakes up one morning with the responsibility for the world, what the hell are they going to do to save all the world, is a brilliant story because everybody thinks, Thank God it wasn’t me. This is it and then the philosophical writers who produce the text of Genesis took the bones of the narrative and used it for a totally different theological philosophical principle. So that obviates the charge of me underpinning the bible, it’s just a recycling of literary ideas which of course there is a finite number.

You talk in the book about how the day to day work of an Assyriologist is the mundane existence of life and getting along in the world. You’re probably the nearest thing to somebody who has actually walked the streets of ancient Babylon and encountered the people. Were they like us? Did they think like us? Could we relate to them, could they relate to us? Do we share something universal or are they – without having green heads with things sticking out of them – alien to us?

Well, this is a really deep and significant question. In fact, I’ve come to conclude at my stage of stuff, without sounding pompous, this is really one of the most important questions and it’s my conviction that the human race has never altered from the time when it really emerged and classifiable as homo sapiens that the components are there and that in the whole history of the evolution of our society, the changes, which are wrought, are so-called civilising if you like, but they are cosmetic and the entity which is the human being is unchanged. So, to be specific, the writing looks like from another planet and so when you first encounter this stuff you reinforce the idea that these people are remote from us in every single possible way, they are so far back you can’t even see them with a telescope and they are therefore behind us in evolution.

Now, the danger of this argument is the built-in conception that there is improvement as part of evolution which governs the convictions for the people who think they lead the world, that we are at the apogee of the human race, that we are more intelligent, more educated, more practical, more wise than anybody who came before. In fact, all the evidence that I can see would suggest just the opposite, that that is by no means the truth and the people in Babylonia in the second millennium were, in my estimation, the sort of thing is, a Babylonian comes in the room now wearing Babylonian clothes and probably smelling of what they had for breakfast and I don’t know what, sits down in the chair and you think – God, what zoo did this person comes from. Or maybe it was a sophisticated merchant expensive clothes and a hooker under his belt and what have you, you think, Oh how am I going to talk to this person?

A what under their belt?

A hooker, you know a sort of…

…Shisha pipe.

Yes, not a young woman. So the thing is, the person inside…

Did they have hookers?

Well actually they didn’t, it’s a good point, it’s an acronisym but for poetic purposes. They could have had hookers. But the point is if you read their literature and you read their letters and you read their so-called real documents, you find that the person, the individuals who write these tablets are familiar to us because they tell the truth and they lie and they wheedle and they’re hypocritical and they’re convinced and they’re faithful and they’re adulterers and they’re fearful and they’re brave and they’re, I don’t know, they drink, they don’t drink, they have all the contrasts which make up the complexity of a normal human being in their lies, so they are frightened of disease, they’re frightened of sterility, they’re frightened of dying, they worry about the Gods like hell when they’re ill, when they’re dying but otherwise they don’t think about them more than is absolutely necessary, they do offerings in the cult.

You know, sometimes people have a deeply religious experience, some people think this is a waste of time but I’ve got to do it. Some people do it because their fathers did it. It’s all the same in my opinion. And if you can zoom in into their houses, these things would be all the same and we can see them showing off, we can see them being clever. There are two things that make me feel this most particularly. One is sarcasm in letters, “Am I your brother or am I not your brother?” Another are all these kind of Italianate gangster sayings in letters, “I sent the material already where’s the gold, where’s the gold?” Or “Dear so and so, bless your footprints and your grandmother’s footprints too. Funny that you should have written because it was only yesterday that the messenger went off with your bag of gold so you should get it.” So, in other words, the cheque-in-the-post phenomenon that underpins industry and business in this world is not a novel thing either.

And there are many, many, many subtle points which on their own if you take one, a person might say, “yeah well you never know, it’s an accident text, you never know what they’re really thinking, you never know what they’re really thinking but when you have them all together mixed up in your mind, you kind of do know what they’re really thinking.”

I think what combats this understanding, or at least my understanding, in this direction is a conviction that we are the apogee and then before us were the Victorians who primarily thought about sexual intercourse, and then before the Victorians were the Romans who primarily thought about underfloor heating and toilets, and before them are gorillas. But you know the Victorians were like us in every way, they were stilted about this and this and this but you know in a household how they were, and it doesn’t change because there is no moment when all of a sudden all people evolve, they don’t. Now I think from a political point of view you could argue that we’re going backwards.

How are the studies of cuneiform and the ancient literature of the region being shaped in the post-Saddam era?

Well, the post-Saddam era is something whose full nature it won’t be possible to understand until more time has gone by. There was massive destruction archaeologically then Sadam Hussein, theoretically so to speak, modelled himself on the great kings of Assyria. There are posters of him in his chariot like Nebuchadnezzar or Ashurbanipal hunting lions or shooting arrows at the enemy. And he, on placards and other media, tried to give the impression in this childlike way that he stepped into or out of their own great history and stood on the shoulders of giants.

So the massive destruction and cruelty and waste to which Iraq has been subjected is obviously common knowledge. In terms of cuneiform studies, cuneiform research, the first thing is that although we have a very large collection of tablets in the British museum from the 19th century and there are many other collections like the Louvre and the Met and Berlin where there are holdings of these resources even if you put all those together, the material which is in the museums of Iraq, but more importantly still under the ground in Iraq, is of uncountable volume because when you have an ancient culture which lasted for about 3,000 years with the literature written on clay, it’s not that one city here and one city over there had a bit of writing, literacy was universal and there must be tablets under the ground everywhere in the country by their millions.

So when you take a long term view, that resource is yet to be rescued or rather excavated long before there is any question of how to deal with it. So within Iraq now the antiquities departments in universities are climbing to their feet, students are doing research learning to read, learning archaeology, we have a programme here where Iraqis come twice a year. Groups of them for the latest up-to-date training in scientific techniques of excavation and so forth. So we do what we can to nurture this but there is an upcoming number of young persons including people who can read cuneiform script who will, in due course, have their own students and hopefully when things become more peaceful, the harvesting can begin of this unimaginable richness.

This interview is being published in several parts. In the coming parts Dr Finkel will be talking about the sheer volume of ancient material written thousands of years ago in cuneiform on clay tablets still to be translated; His period as President of The Coracle Society; The time he built a half-sized replica of the Ark described in his discovery; The best source for the best bitumen; and Whether Noah had a beard.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“The absolutely primal nature of this religious idea was something I wanted to include at the very start of the saga, and have it endure all the way up to the dawn of Christianity, when Constantine decides that all amulets should be outlawed.” – Author Steven Saylor discusses his Roma trilogy

“I must confess, military history bores me.”

WHAT: “”Roma” is the story of the ancient city of Rome, from its mythic beginnings as a campsite along a trade route to its emergence as the centre of the most extensive, powerful empire in the ancient world. Beginning with the prehistory days when Roma was a way station among seven hills for traders and merchants and the founding of the city itself by Romulus and Remus, critically acclaimed historical novelist Steven Saylor tells the epic saga of a city and its people, its rise to prominence among the city-states of the area, and, ultimately, dominance over the entire ancient Western world. From the tragedy of Coriolanus, to the Punic Wars and the invasion by Hannibal, the triumph and murder of Julius Caesar, and the rise and decline of the Roman Republic and the beginnings of Imperial Rome, Saylor’s breathtaking novel brings to vivid life the most famous city of the ancient world. “Roma” is Saylor’s finest achievement, an epic in the truest sense of the word.

…AND…

In the international bestseller “Roma“, Steven Saylor told the story of the first thousand years of Rome by following the descendants of a single bloodline. Now, in “Empire”, Saylor charts the destinies of five more generations of the Pinarius family, from the reign of the first emperor, Augustus, to the glorious height of Rome’s empire under Hadrian. Through the eyes of the Pinarii, we witness the machinations of Tiberius, the madness of Caligula, the cruel escapades of Nero, and the chaos of the Year of Four Emperors in 69 A.D. The deadly paranoia of Domitian is followed by the Golden Age of Trajan and Hadrianobut even the most enlightened emperors wield the power to inflict death and destruction on a whim. “Empire” is strewn with spectacular scenes, including the Great Fire of 64 A.D. that ravaged the city, Nero’s terrifying persecution of the Christians, and the mind-blowing opening games of the Colosseum. But at the novel’s heart are the wrenching choices and seductive temptations faced by each new generation of the Pinarii. One unwittingly becomes the sexual plaything of the notorious Messalina. One enters into a clandestine affair with a Vestal virgin. One falls under the charismatic spell of Nero, while another is drawn into the strange new cult of those who deny the gods and call themselves Christians. However diverse their destinies and desires, all the Pinarii are united by one thing: the mysterious golden talisman called the fascinum handed down from a time before Rome existed. As it passes from generation to generation, the fascinum seems to exercise a power not only over those who wear it, but over the very fate of the empire.”

WHO: Steven Saylor is an American author of historical novels. He is a graduate of the University of Texas at Austin, where he studied history and classics.

Saylor’s best-known work is his ‘Roma Sub Rosa’ historical mystery series, set in ancient Rome. The novels’ hero is a detective named Gordianus the Finder, active during the time of Sulla, Cicero, Julius Caesar, and Cleopatra. Outside this crime novel series, Saylor has also written two epic-length historical novels about the city of Rome, ‘Roma‘ and ‘Empire’. His work has been published in 21 languages..

MORE? Here!


Why Roma & Empire?

The late Nick Robinson was one of the last independent publishers of the old school. He founded Robinson Books in the 1980s (which later bought Constable and then was bought by Little, Brown/Hachette). Once he brought me to London on book tour and invited me to his Mayfair flat, where I had been told by my breathless editor, “Nick has an exciting proposal for you!” Over cocktails, he said, “Steven, we’ve done quite well with your Roman mystery series, but I think it’s time for you to step it up a notch. I want you to write…a big book.” And that was it. A big book! But that no-frills invitation did call to mind an idea I’d been mulling for a while, namely one of those epic family sagas where a place is the title and also the main character, like James Michener’s Texas or Edward Rutherfurd’s London. No one had done that with Rome. Nick and also my US publisher said, “Do it!”, so I was off.

I first thought I could pack everything from Romulus and Remus to Fellini in a single volume, but there’s just too much Roman history and too many great stories. So for Roma I settled on the first thousand years, from Iron Age trading post to burgeoning world capitol under Julius Caesar. The sequel, Empire, bit off a shorter time period, because I had to fit in all those crazy emperors between Augustus and Hadrian, which brought us to the very height of Rome’s empire.

Your narratives take place entirely within the locale of the 7 hills. How easy was it to run and rerun the course of honour without recourse to a military career or three?

My first rule was that Rome would be not just the main location of the novel, but the only location. We never leave Rome. All the battles take place off-stage, as they do in a Greek drama.

I must confess, military history bores me. My friend Lindsay Powell writes biography of Roman generals and he can cite every detail about every legion and its insignia and so forth over dinner, bless him, but I start fiddling with my napkin and daydreaming about sex and politics. It’s the sex and politics that grab me, and you never have to leave Rome to find that.

But the books do have plenty of blood and gore—riots in the Forum, gladiator games, Nero burning Christians. My US editor had me trim a few passages from Empire for fear the reader would experience what he called “cruelty overload.” The Romans had an enormous appetite for violence. As do we, only ours is mostly indulged in movies and TV and sports, where people don’t actually die.

Central to each narrative is an amulet. When and where did you first encounter that device?

The great T.P. Wiseman in ‘Remus: A Roman Mythpostulates that a reported sighting of a phallus floating in a hearthfire may be the first purely Roman myth. That eerie phallus was a god named Fascinus. Little replicas of Fascinus became everyday talismans, each called a fascinum. The Vestal virgins, ironically, were in charge of a big fascinum, which they had the sacred duty to load out of sight under the chariot of a triumphing general, where it protected him from the Evil Eye of the envious. Mothers would likewise put a fascinum in baby’s cradle, to ward off the envious gaze of barren women. The absolutely primal nature of this religious idea was something I wanted to include at the very start of the saga, and have it endure all the way up to the dawn of Christianity, when Constantine decides that all amulets should be outlawed.

Can we expect a third volume without recourse to the arm twisting and threats of violence that compelled Conan Doyle to resurrect Sherlock Holmes?

Yes! The third novel will be out in 2021. It follows my fictional family from Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic emperor, to Constantine the Great, the first Christian emperor. It’s a critical period of world history, as paganism dies and the Christians triumph.

Along the way we meet Elagabalus, the drag-queen emperor (not around long), Zenobia of Palmyra, a real queen who challenged Rome, and many other little-known but fascinating figures including (you can’t make this up) a certain Senator Messius Extricatus.

The third volume has taken so long to write because the research was endless, and arduous. Also, as I’ve gotten older, I’ve begun to savour what I call “slow writing.” Rather like slow cooking. It will taste even better when it’s finally done.

Was Gibbon right about life under the Antonines being as good as it gets, or would you opt to live elsewhen in your story arc?

Gibbon got that idea from an ancient author named Aelius Aristides, who wrote a long oration praising the Roman empire of his time. If you had money and citizenship, life under the Antonines could be mighty sweet. If you were a slave in the mines, not so good. Every era can be the best or worst of times, depending on your circumstances. But overall, yes, to be young and healthy and reasonably wealthy in the time of Hadrian would offer about the best chance of happiness in the history of ancient Rome. They had peace and prosperity and a vibrant literary scene. Authors could do quite well.

Other than the amulet, what’s the one item you’d want to personally own from the stories?

I’d love to lay hands on an item from the forthcoming third volume: the scepter of the emperor Maxentius, a gilded staff topped by a glass ball, which was discovered in Rome only a few years ago. Archaeologists think it was hidden by his supporters on the very day of the battle of the Milvian Bridge, when Maxentius drowned in the Tiber and Constantine rode into Rome as a conqueror. That was a decisive moment in world history. That scepter is a one-of-a kind symbol of lost causes. If any pagan magic survives from ancient Rome, it would be in the scepter of Maxentius.

When you aren’t writing about Rome and the Romans, which other authors are you reading?

Lately I’ve been reading everything by Deryn Lake (who also writes as Dinah Lampitt). Her ‘Sutton Place Trilogy‘ is a remarkable feat of historical fiction, with just a touch of the supernatural. I just finished reading her latest, a ripping yarn about Bonnie Prince Charlie called ‘The Prince’s Women‘.

Who’s the one historical character you wish you could have included who didn’t make the final cut?

Not a historical character, but a fictional one: I’d love to have slipped a sly cameo into the last chapter of Roma for my sleuth of ancient Rome, Gordianus, who has 16 books of his own. But ultimately it just didn’t feel right to include a nudge and wink of that sort in Roma. The two series—Gordianus on one hand, the family saga on the other—are completely separate in my mind. It’s almost as if they take place in two different universes, both called ancient Rome.

You’ve got a solo return ticket for either a year on campaign with Julius Caesar; a fortnight with Hadrian and his entourage at Tivoli; or a day in the Library of Alexandria. Which do you choose?

I would eschew the chance to experience the endless horrors of Julius Caesar’s military campaigns—too many war crimes. A day at the Library of Alexandria would be much too short a stay, unless I could check out a boatload of books and bring them back with me. (Would I have to pay the overdue fines?) So I choose to hang with Hadrian and his circle for two glorious weeks. Talk about living like the 1%! The libraries, the art galleries, the fine dining, seeing Suetonius read from his Caligula bio and then take Q&A, Hadrian getting drunk and babbling on and on about his lost love, Antinous—well, maybe not that last part. We could put Hadrian to bed early, and then have a really good orgy.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“The world-historical significance of Martin Luther simply cannot be gainsaid.” – Author Richard Rex discusses The Making of Martin Luther

“Luther may have been kicking the scholastics in the teeth, but he was standing on their shoulders to do it.”

WHAT: “A major new account of the most intensely creative years of Luther’s career The Making of Martin Luther takes a provocative look at the intellectual emergence of one of the most original and influential minds of the sixteenth century. Richard Rex traces how, in a concentrated burst of creative energy in the few years surrounding his excommunication by Pope Leo X in 1521, this lecturer at an obscure German university developed a startling new interpretation of the Christian faith that brought to an end the dominance of the Catholic Church in Europe. Luther’s personal psychology and cultural context played their parts in the whirlwind of change he unleashed. But for the man himself, it was always about the ideas, the truth, and the Gospel.

Focusing on the most intensely important years of Luther’s career, Rex teases out the threads of his often paradoxical and counterintuitive ideas from the tangled thickets of his writings, explaining their significance, their interconnections, and the astonishing appeal they so rapidly developed. Yet Rex also sets these ideas firmly in the context of Luther’s personal life, the cultural landscape that shaped him, and the traditions of medieval Catholic thought from which his ideas burst forth. Lucidly argued and elegantly written, The Making of Martin Luther is a splendid work of intellectual history that renders Luther’s earthshaking yet sometimes challenging ideas accessible to a new generation of readers.”

WHO: Richard Rex is a historian. He is the Professor of Reformation History at the Faculty of Divinity of the University of Cambridge. He is also the Polkinghorne Fellow in Theology and Religious Studies at Queens’ College, Cambridge, where he is Director of Studies in Theological and Religious Studies, Tutor for graduate students, and Deputy Senior Tutor. Although not a frequent performer in the travelling circus of modern academia, he nevertheless makes occasional guest appearances at the Academia Moriae, Amaurote, as well as at universities and schools closer to home.

Richard’s other titles include: ‘The Theology of John Fisher’ (1991); ‘Henry VIII and the English Reformation’ (1993); ‘The Lollards’ (2002); Lady Margaret Beaufort and her Professors of Divinity at Cambridge 1502-1649′ (2003); ‘A Reformation rhetoric Thomas Swynnerton’s The tropes and figures of scripture’ (2004); ‘The Tudors’ (2006); as well as ‘The Making of Martin Luther’ (2017).

MORE? Here!


Why Martin Luther?

The world-historical significance of Martin Luther simply cannot be gainsaid. The Reformation, that shattering of the Latin Christendom of centuries in two or three decades, was not all about Martin Luther. But Luther himself saw truly enough that the throng of other ‘reformers’ who followed after him all poured through the breach he had made in the walls. They would have known nothing, he said, if he had not written first. So no Luther, no Reformation. That’s ‘why Martin Luther’.

Yours is the story of a mind and world view developing and maturing yet we tend to think of Luther as a fixed figure in the intellectual firmament. So as well as WHY Martin Luther, WHEN was Martin Luther?

Martin Luther ‘happened’ in 1518. It was in 1518 that the ‘Ninety-Five Theses’ (originally dated 31 October 1517) actually burst onto the public stage and made him famous in weeks. And it was in 1518, probably in Lent (and certainly by Easter), that he first attained his most fundamental and revolutionary theological insight, namely that the true Christian should believe with absolute certainty that he or she definitely enjoyed the grace of God and was therefore forgiven their sins. This mental state of certainty, summed up as ‘justification by faith alone’, was a new demand, or perhaps better a new offer, in Christian theology, and it was the principle from which all else in his thinking stemmed. In the seven years that followed, Luther worked out the full implications of his insight. His notorious appearance before the Reichstag at Worms in April 1521 marked his definitive break with the Roman Catholic Church. And his outspoken polemic, ‘The Slave Will’ (1525), written against Erasmus’s ‘Free Will’ (1524), marked the final stage in the evolution of his views. His last two decades were characterised by consolidation rather than by the fierce creativity of those seven years. But it began in 1518.

Luther ended his life believing that the Papacy was THE enemy. Did he ever suggest that the Papacy could be defeated by the forces of Reformation? What did he imagine victory might look like?

Luther’s theology was deeply sceptical of the value of human effort. Nobody could do anything to save themselves or to merit their own salvation. He certainly did not expect the papacy to be overthrown by any human power, because he saw it as the temporal embodiment, almost literally the incarnation, of ‘Antichrist’. Even more than most zealous Christians, he seriously felt that he was living in the last days. To reverse the modern cliché, it was the end of the world – if not that minute or that year, then within a century or so. It was precisely his perception of the papacy as the Antichrist enthroned in the temple that convinced him that the end was nigh. So it would not be ‘the forces of Reformation’, but the second coming of the Lord that would settle accounts with the papacy. The only ‘victory’ he expected was the vindication of the elect on the last day.

Keynes described Newton as the last of the magicians rather than the first of the scientists. Was Luther’s a medieval or a modern mind?

The dichotomy is of course too simplistic, and must at some level be resisted. Yet it is structured into our thought, and we cannot resist collaborating with it. The analogy with the Keynesian diagnosis of Newton is strangely apt. One might say, in imitation, that Luther was the ‘last of the scholastics’. Certainly, Erasmus, the stand-out humanist of that generation, thought Luther had more in common with the scholastics than with the more flexible and dialogical approach cultivated by himself and his followers. And Luther’s theology is almost unimaginable without the backdrop of the medieval scholasticism he was confronting. Luther may have been kicking the scholastics in the teeth, but he was standing on their shoulders to do it. The answers he gave were often radically new, and he developed a new vocabulary in which to give them, but the questions that he asked were either traditional scholastic questions or at least near variants upon them. Thus, the question of whether a Christian could be certain (without a special direct revelation from God) that they were in a ‘state of grace’ had been asked for centuries. Luther was simply the first theologian to answer ‘yes’.

Luther had a lot to say about Jews and Judaism. Is there any evidence that he ever actually talked with Jewish scholars or experts?

Not as such. He probably had tuition in Hebrew from Matthias Adrian, a converted Jew who taught the language for a while at Wittenberg. And he had some acquaintance with the tradition of rabbinical exegesis, and very occasional written contact with Jews. But there was no Jewish community at Wittenberg in his time, nor at Erfurt (where he had himself been to university), so he had little opportunity. And his profound hostility towards Jews would not have inclined him to take up any such opportunity had it been presented to him.

How did Luther square his bibliocentric vision with his intense belief in the relatively non-canonical antichrist?

Luther’s unquestioning acceptance of the ‘Antichrist’ myth is one of the most ‘medieval’ aspects of his mindset. Another, of course, was his acceptance of the inspiration and inerrancy of scripture. Though he was capable of acidic and acerbic scepticism at times, he was not by nature a doubter. Doubt was not his default position. Nor was doubt a methodology for him, as it was to be for Descartes. ‘Antichrist’ was too familiar a figure, and played too central a role in his theology, for him to bring to that myth the mindset he brought to indulgences, purgatory, or the sacraments. He did not need to square any circles here, because he saw no difficulty in accepting the biblical foundation of ‘the Antichrist’ – even though he did, characteristically, reshape the doctrine of Antichrist to fit better into his doctrinal perspective.

How did one be (not become) a famous author in the time of Luther? Did he receive income from his writings? Were there book launches, appearances and signings?

The modern rigmarole of authorial book-peddling was undreamt of in Luther’s time. There were no liturgical assemblies of devotees in bookshops or literary festivals to celebrate the cult of the author with handshakes, selfies, and signed copies. For most authors, the tangible rewards from publishing were indirect rather than direct. Publishing a book which sold well brought an author reputation, and this could be traded into lucrative office in church or state. One of Luther’s busiest opponents, Johannes Cochlaeus, was as tireless an author as he, but far less popular – and far less gifted! He often had to pay printers to produce his books, and they were far harder to sell than Luther’s, and far less often reprinted. But the judicious distribution of free copies, or better still of dedication copies, to powerful patrons could pay handsome dividends in cash or office. Duke George of Saxony eventually made Cochlaeus his secretary, and various church authorities bestowed benefices upon him in recognition of his efforts. Another German opponent of Luther’s, Dr Johann Eck, dedicated his widely read refutation of Luther to Henry VIII and came to England to present a copy in person: he left with £25 in his purse – equivalent today to a whole year’s salary, and a very good salary at that.

The direct profits in the publishing industry went to printers, not to authors, and printers throughout Germany rapidly cottoned onto Luther’s commercial value. Yet although Luther’s sales were in the millions, which would have made him a wealthy man today, even he made nothing directly from them. He owed his financial security to the Electors of Saxony – whose university in Wittenberg he had singlehandedly made one of the most famous in Europe. The students who flooded in brought wealth to the city, as did the huge output of his books from its burgeoning printing industry, which he had in effect created. As Andrew Pettegree has shown in his Brand Luther, Wittenberg developed a cutting-edge printing industry on the back of Luther, producing vast numbers of his works in high-quality editions that were distinctively authorised with the ‘Luther seal’ that he devised.

In return, his prince granted him the Augustinian friary as his family home, along with a good salary as the leading professor of theology in the university itself.

Could Luther ever have been neutered or muted with promotion to high ecclesiastical office?

No. He was on the fast track to leadership in his own religious order anyway when he began to develop his new approach to Christianity, and he was not in the least deterred by the obvious damage he was doing to his career prospects. And while he might have risen to be ‘Provincial’ (head of a province), or even perhaps more, in the Order of the Hermits of St Augustine, it is unlikely that his abrasive character would have equipped him for high office in the wider world, so that at a deeper level the question does not arise. Nobody could ever have seen him as, administratively, a ‘safe pair of hands’. The practical details of organising everyday life in the emerging Evangelical Churches of the German Princes were sorted out not by Luther but by his acolytes – Johannes Brenz, Johannes Bugenhagen, and the rest.

Luther was never in any sense ‘an organisation man’. While he was undoubtedly a ‘charismatic leader’, and the experience of being the focus of a personality cult was evidently one he relished, he was not driven by any of the obvious kinds of ambition or careerism. Making him a bishop would simply have given him a bigger pulpit, literally and metaphorically, from which to preach.

You describe how a personal cult began to burgeon around Luther in his own lifetime. Had his worldview admitted of sainthood, and were you the curator of his leading pilgrimage site, what would be the top relics you would want to possess?

History answers that question. For his worldview, and that of his followers, did not manage to exclude the trappings of sainthood quite as cleanly as might be imagined from the theological emphasis on Christ as the unique mediator and on the immediate experience of ‘justification by faith alone’. In a world in which literacy was slowly but steadily increasing, and in which, perhaps thanks to print, respect for books and writing was higher than ever before, later Lutherans particularly valued things he had written – actual letters, ‘autographs’ (in our sense – examples of his actual signature), books he had published (especially early copies of his translation of the Bible) and, in particular, copies of books in which he had personally written.

So if I were running a Luther shrine, I would want it to focus on things he had physically written. There are interesting parallels here, by the way, with the early miracles reported of the founder of the Jesuits, St Ignatius Loyola. The miracles credited to Ignatius are often associated with examples of his autograph signature. But buildings with which Luther had been associated also came to be highly prized in later Lutheran tradition, in particular two houses in Eisleben: the one in which he had been born, and the other, in which he had died. It would be fanciful to detect here an echo of the Holy House of Loreto, the shrine in northern Italy believed by some to have been the actual Nazareth home of Jesus, miraculously transported to its new location by angels. Yet while Luther’s houses had stronger historical claims, there is a common factor: both traditions embodied in their own ways a new sense of the centrality of the ‘nuclear’ family in western Christianity.

What are you currently working on?

An edition of an exchange of letters between Luther and Henry VIII in 1525-26, an episode hardly ever noticed in biographies of either man. Accompanied by an introduction setting this storm in a teacup within the broader perspective of their interactions over some twenty-five years, this edition will be published by Boydell and Brewer. And a Short History of the Tudors for Bloomsbury Continuum. Maybe one day I’ll get to write a ‘big book’.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“The best advice I got (and ignored) is grow garlic that’s suited to your climate.” – Author Robin Cherry discusses Garlic, an Edible Biography

“Humans have been eating garlic for least 5,000 years. Three of the world’s oldest known recipes, written in cuneiform (wedge-shaped marks) on clay tablets, include garlic.”

WHAT: Garlic is the Lord Byron of produce, a lusty rogue that charms and seduces you but runs off before dawn, leaving a bad taste in your mouth. Called everything from rustic cure-all to Russian penicillin, Bronx vanilla and Italian perfume, garlic has been loved, worshipped, and despised throughout history. No writer has quite captured the epic, roving story of garlic—until now.

While this book does not claim that garlic saved civilization (though it might cure whatever ails you), it does take us on a grand tour of its fascinating role in history, medicine, literature, and art; its controversial role in bigotry, mythology, and superstition; and its indispensable contribution to the great cuisines of the world. And just to make sure your appetite isn’t slighted, Garlic offers over 100 recipes featuring the beloved ingredient.

WHO: Robin Cherry is a Cleveland-raised, Hudson Valley-based writer with a passion for Eastern Europe, undiscovered wine regions, and garlic. She has written for many publications including National Geographic Traveler, Afar, The Atlantic,and Wine Enthusiast. She is the author of Catalog: The History of Mail Order Shopping and Garlic: An Edible Biography: The History, Politics, and Mythology behind the World’s Most Pungent Food. After majoring in Russian history at Carleton College, she almost joined the CIA but she can’t keep a secret.

MORE? Here!


Why garlic?

Initially, I was intrigued by how pervasive garlic was throughout history then I became fascinated by the dark side of garlic — how it was used to discriminate against Jews, Italians, and Koreans. My father was Jewish and the fact that Nazis issued buttons with pictures of garlic bulbs so wearers could broadcast their antisemitism staggered me. I was also intrigued by how many dictators liked garlic (largely because of where they grew up) — Stalin, Mussolini, and Slobodan Milosevic all loved garlic. When Milosevic was in prison, he felt a pain in his chest and asked his fellow inmate for a head of garlic as garlic is regarded as a natural healer in Serbia. Somewhat improbably, the inmate got the garlic but to no avail. Milosevic died the next morning.

How long have humans been eating garlic?

Humans have been eating garlic for least 5,000 years. Three of the world’s oldest known recipes, written in cuneiform (wedge-shaped marks) on clay tablets, include garlic.

Do any animals eat garlic?

I’ve read different things on this so I can’t answer definitively. Most people say garlic is toxic for dogs and cats; some say it isn’t. Most animals don’t seem to appreciate garlic’s many positive properties — leaving more for us.

Have you ever grown your own garlic? What are your top tips?

I have. The best advice I got (and ignored) is grow garlic that’s suited to your climate. I tried to grow a Creole variety in upstate New York and it was too cold. Since you grow garlic from individual cloves, pick the biggest, fattest ones you have. Buy good quality organic garlic from a professional grower; don’t try to grow grocery store garlic as it has often been treated to prevent sprouting. Plant garlic in the fall so the roots can form before the ground freezes and if growing hardneck garlic, cut off the scapes after they reach about ten inches long so the plant’s energy will go to increasing the size of the bulb. (Garlic scapes make a great, mild pesto). Most importantly, don’t be intimidated. Garlic is pretty forgiving and easy to grow.

There are many heirloom varieties of garlic. Which are your top 3?

I love hot food so I go for spicy varieties like Georgian Fire, and Pennsylvania Dutch (plus my grandmother was Pennsylvania Dutch). I also like Music — probably the most popular variety as it has good flavor, keeps well and its cloves are large and easy to peel. (Music isn’t named for its beauty — it’s named for Al Music, a Canadian garlic grower.)

You’ve ended up running the kitchen of an especially bad-tempered, omnipotent, but garlic-loving autocrat. They’ve ordered you to cook them garlic for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. What’s on each menu?

Great question. For breakfast, I’d prepare garlic bread avocado toast topped with a fried egg and garlic tea with honey and lemon.

For lunch, I’d make a steak sandwich with arugula, provolone cheese, and a garlic aioli served with curly garlic fries and garlic lemonade.

For dinner, I’d prepare Stalin’s favorite dish, Chicken Satsivi — chicken in a rich walnut-garlic sauce from his native Georgia and a strong martini garnished with garlic-stuffed olives so he’d nod off and I could get some rest.

What’s the one garlic accessory that no kitchen should be without?

A chef’s knife and/or a microplane rasp. You don’t need any fancy gadgets and most chefs hate garlic presses as they say they bruise the garlic and make it bitter. Anthony Bourdain even said, “I don’t know what that junk is that squeezes out the end of those things, but it ain’t garlic.”

What’s the biggest thing happening in garlic right now?

I think the biggest thing happening in garlic right now is Fermented Garlic Honey which is quite popular. To make it, pour raw honey over lightly crushed garlic cloves in a jar — crushing the garlic will create allicin which helps in the fermentation. Seal the jar and leave it at room temperature for three days. After that, remove the lid and stir the garlic and let it ferment for at least a week (stirring every other day). The mixture can ferment for a month or longer and will become sweeter and mellower over time. Fermented Garlic Honey can be used in marinades, vinaigrettes, and sauces — and some swear that it’s great on pizza — or as an immunity booster during cold and flu season.

What variety of garlic do you think makes the best black garlic?

It doesn’t matter as they all taste the same — delicious — after they’ve been cooked at a low temperature for two to three weeks.

What are you currently working on?

A children’s travel book series that features my young niece, Eden. I’ve been lucky to travel to over 100 countries and the series will feature the places I’ve visited as if seen through her eyes. I’m still trying to come up with a new micro history idea so any suggestions are welcome!

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“Adolf Hitler is not dead. Echoes of his racism, anti-Semitism, and blinding nationalism are everywhere.” – Author James Longo discusses Hitler and the Habsburgs: The Fuhrer’s Vendetta Against the Austrian Royals

“Franz Ferdinand was a firm believer in peace, religious tolerance, and European unity.”

WHAT: A stunning work of narrative history revealing how and why Adolf Hitler targeted the children of the assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, making the Archduke’s sons the first two Austrians deported to the Dachau concentration camp, and how the family fought back.

Five youthful years in Vienna. It was then and there that Adolf Hitler’s obsession with the Habsburg Imperial family became the catalyst for his vendetta against a vanished empire, a dead archduke, and his royal orphans. That hatred drove Hitler’s rise to power and led directly to the tragedy of the Second World War and the Holocaust.

The royal orphans of Archduke Franz Ferdinand-offspring of an upstairs-downstairs marriage that scandalized the tradition-bound Habsburg Empire-came to personify to Adolf Hitler, and others, all that was wrong about modernity, the twentieth century, and the Habsburg’s multi-ethnic, multi-cultural Austro-Hungarian Empire. They were outsiders in the greatest family of royal insiders in Europe, which put them on a collision course with Adolf Hitler.

As he rose to power Hitler’s hatred toward the Habsburgs and their diverse empire fixated on Franz Ferdinand’s sons, who became outspoken critics and opponents of the Nazi party and its racist ideology. When Germany seized Austria in 1938, they were the first two Austrians arrested by the Gestapo, deported to Germany, and sent to Dachau. Within hours they went from palace to prison. The women in the family, including the Archduke’s only daughter Princess Sophie Hohenberg, declared their own war on Hitler. Their tenacity and personal courage in the face of betrayal, treachery, torture, and starvation sustained the family during the war and in the traumatic years that followed.

Through a decade of research and interviews with the descendants of the royal Habsburgs, scholar James Longo explores the roots of Hitler’s determination to destroy the family of the dead Archduke. And he uncovers the family members’ courageous fight against the Führer.

WHO: James McMurtry Longo is a native of St. Louis, where he was educated and taught in public schools for over a decade. He graduated from the University of Missouri – St. Louis, then earned his Master’s degree from Webster University and his doctorate from Harvard University. He is an award-winning professor and chair of the Department of Education at Washington & Jefferson College in Washington, Pennsylvania.

As a Fulbright Scholar, James served as the Distinguished Chair of the University Centre for Women’s Studies and Gender Studies at Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt in Austria. He has taught in Austria, Brazil, and Costa Rica, and lectured at Harvard, Oxford, Napier University in Edinburgh, Zlin University in the Czech Republic, and throughout the United States.

James has written eight books. When not teaching or writing, he would rather be in a canoe than any other place on earth. He lives in Washington, Pennsylvania, and spends his summers in Suttons Bay, Michigan.

MORE? Here!


Why Hitler and the Hapsburgs?

Adolf Hitler had an enemies list of over 7,000 names he wanted arrested when the German army entered Austria in March of 1938. At the top of that list were the two sons of Archduke Franz Ferdinand whose 1914 assassination triggered the First World War. The Archduke’s sons were the first two Austrians arrested by the Gestapo, imprisoned in Vienna, and deported to Dachau. Why? Hitler’s hatred of them, and what the Habsburgs represented to him fueled the escalating events that led to the Second World War, the Holocaust, and the death of millions. Hitler and the Habsburgs is one of the great untold stories of the twentieth century. It tells the story of Hitler’s obsession with one remarkable family and their struggle to survive.

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria gets a very positive press in your narrative. Was he anything more than another uniformed aristo in a feathery hat?

Franz Ferdinand is one of the most misunderstood, maligned, underrated men in history. Despite the Archduke’ prickly personality, Hungarian Bishop Joseph Lanyi described him as “the indispensable man, the catalyst for European peace and unity.” The remarkable group of diverse advisors and peace advocates he gathered around him as his advisors agreed.

So too did the English Duke of Portland who wrote of Franz Ferdinand’s assassination on the eve of the Second World War, “It was criminal and tragic in its senselessness. How desperately sad it is that England would never witness the ascension to the throne of this great Habsburg prince. Would it not have been an immense advantage today of there was an entire strong and peaceful power in the Danubian basin? This noble prince was also a true European and what we see now when it is too late – he saw at the time. In justice to his memory – one must admit how much would have been different had he lived.” Winston Churchill agreed. So too did Adolf Hitler. He saw the Archduke and the multi-cultural Habsburg empire he represented as the major roadblock to “Rassenkrieg” the apocalyptic race war pitting ethnic groups against each other he planned.

Would a great European and world conflict have happened had Franz Ferdinand lived?

Many historians today believe had Franz Ferdinand lived a great European and world conflict, especially in 1914, would never have happened. The Habsburg Emperor Franz Joseph did not want war. His heir Franz Ferdinand, was even more determined to prevent war declaring, “External peace for us…that is my profession of faith, for which I will work and struggle as long as I live!” One court observer wrote at the time of his assassination, “Hardly was he in his coffin before all his protégés, all his creatures, friends, and officials were swept out of posts and office. The court cliques and military lords who had been continuously harassed by the Heir to the Throne saw to this being a clean sweep.” The death of the Archduke crushed the peace party. Austria’s war hawks wasted no time in using his assassination as an excuse to fight the war he spent his entire adult life trying to prevent.

You’ve got a time machine and a licence to alter one event in the period you cover. What are you changing and why?

If I could have altered one event in the historic period covered by my book it would have allowed Franz Ferdinand to succeed to the Habsburg throne. He was a firm believer in peace, religious tolerance, and European unity. Winston Churchill wrote the First World War and the fall of the Habsburg empire, “gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer onto the vacant thrones.”

What surprised you most during your research?

The biggest surprise in my research was the obsessive hatred Adolf Hitler had toward the Habsburgs and the nearly invisible, vital role the women in Franz Ferdinand’s family played in saving their husbands, brothers, and children. Their courage, resilience, religious faith, and remarkable sense of humor was inspiring.

Did you have any support or input from Franz Ferdinand’s family and descendants?

Franz Ferdinand’s great-granddaughters, great-grandson, and two of his grandsons generously spent many hours with me, sharing stories, family photos, and reminiscences most of which had never been shared with other authors. This was invaluable to me in my research and writing.

If you could ask Franz Ferdinand one question, what would it be?

If I could ask Franz Ferdinand one question it would his private thoughts about the mysterious death of his cousin Crown Prince Rudolph. But of course, the reticent Archduke wouldn’t discuss such thoughts with me, or anyone else.

Ignorant people like me are only familiar with Stefan Zweig from Wes Anderson’s ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel’ (2014). Where should we go next to learn more about his life and literary legacy?

I was happy Wes Anderson saluted Stefan Zweig in his movie ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel.’ Zweig was Austria’s most famous, best-selling novelist in the first part of the twentieth century, and as such was a contemporary of Franz Ferdinand and his family. His writing was popular throughout Central Europe, the United States, and South America. He was an astute observer of the imperial Habsburg capital of Vienna, and the unique role the Austro-Hungarian empire played in European society and culture. Zweig’s books provide a genuine sense of a vanished time and place and are worth a read. The World of Yesterday finished two days before his suicide, was written when Adolf Hitler’s power was at its zenith. It is a haunting testimony to Zweig’s life and legacy.

Historians are reluctant to draw overly close parallels between then and now, but what is the most important lesson you hope readers will take from your book?

Adolf Hitler is not dead. Echoes of his racism, anti-Semitism, and blinding nationalism are everywhere. Stefan Zweig’s prophetic words from The World of Yesterday are worth repeating. “Its red hue was really the firelight of the approaching conflagration.” We all have a responsibility to recognize the danger of extremism and speak out against it. As Sue Woolmans co-author of ‘The Assassination of the Archduke, Sarajevo 1914 and the Murder That Changed the World’ wrote of Hitler and the Habsburgs, “We need books like this one to remind us of the black hole of terror into which we can so easily plunge.”

What are you currently working on?

I am currently working on a memoir of a remarkable woman peacemaker.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!

“I liked the man.” – Author Niccolo Capponi discusses An Unlikely Prince: The Life and Times of Niccolo Machiavelli

“…there is always the suspicion that Machiavelli is seldom completely serious when he writes – the Florentine jocular, caustic, irreverent spirit too strong in him.”

WHAT: Acclaimed scholar Niccolo Capponi – a direct descendant of Machiavelli – analyses the famous political theorist in the context of his own times, revealing the many sides of the man behind the political genius and explaining his inability to capitalise on his own theories. In his compelling new biography – the first comprehensive one in English in more than forty years – historian Niccolo Capponi frees Machiavelli (1469-1527) from centuries of misinterpretation.

Exploring the Renaissance city of Florence where Machiavelli lived, Capponi reveals the man behind the legends, and a complex portrait of Machiavelli emerges – he was at once a brilliantly skillful diplomat and woefully inept liar; a sharp thinker and an impractical dreamer; a hard-nosed power broker and a risk-taking gambler; a calculating propagandist and an imprudent jokester. Capponi’s intimate portrait of Machiavelli shows how Machiavelli’s behavior was utterly un-Machiavellian, and how his vision of the world was limited by his very provincial outlook. In the end, frustrated by his own political failures and always writing with Florence in mind and for a Florentine audience, Machiavelli was baffled by the international success of “The Prince”.

WHO: Niccolò Capponi is the author of the highly acclaimed “Victory of the West” and a former fellow of the Medici Project. A direct descendant of Machiavelli, he lives in Florence, Italy.

MORE? Here!


Why Nicolo Machiavelli?

I liked the man, I liked the subject. Obliquely, it was also a way of getting even with Ol’ Nick, after being forced to go through his impenetrable prose.

Perhaps the biggest surprise about the real-life Machiavelli is how poorly he navigated the currents and slipstreams of his own political landscape. Why was Machiavelli so bad a being a politician?

Machiavelli was a theorist, and had never had a chance – unlike some of his contemporaries – to experience a hands-on approach to politics before he entered the Florentine Chancery. Like most theorists, he ended up losing himself up his own posterior orifice – something that his friend Francesco Guicciardini underscored more than once.

You say that Machiavelli’s most significant literary achievements were his plays. What did it mean to be a playwright in Machiavelli’s Florence? Were there permanent theatres, companies, well-known actors and authors? Where did Machiavelli fit into that picture?

Machiavelli wrote his plays for his own benefit or for that of a specific actress if she happened to be his girlfriend at the time. In early 16th century Florence, there was no such thing as a ”playwright” in the modern sense; simply, some literati who enjoyed writing plays. Not being any permanent theatre at the time, plays were set up ad hoc: gardens, private houses, churches… However, theatrical companies did exist and some leading performers justly famous.

Have you ever seen one of Machiavelli’s plays performed live? Are they any good?

Machiavelli’s plays are good, and La Mandragola an absolute masterpiece. I’ve seen it performed various times – the Clizia once – and thoroughly enjoyed the experience.

If you could ask Machiavelli one question what would it be, but also when in his career would you ask it?

I would ask him late in his life, how was it that his vaunted militia, that he believed filled with the virtues of the ancients, took to its heels at Prato when pitted against professional soldiers – the mercenaries Niccolò so despised (that would be a good example of Florentine malice, on my part).

If you could own one object associated with Machiavelli what would it be?

I think the now believed-to-be-lost play Le Maschere.

Were the women in Machiavelli’s life anything more than dalliances and distractions? Did they impact his work?

Some were dalliances, some were serious. Certainly, his relationship with La Barbera (Barbara Raffacani Salutati), a renowned actress and singer, did impact his work, since he wrote La Clizia with her in mind.

You argue that the archetypical cold fish, buttoned-lipped reptilian Machiavelli is a modern myth not born out by the exuberant, salacious, occasionally coarse personality that emerges from his private papers. So which actor would you get to play him?

Jeremy Irons; at least as the older Machiavelli

Did Machiavelli really sit there of a night, wearing his robes of state, having imaginary conversations with the great and the good of times past – a kind of crankish thing to do? Or was he pulling our leg with a wry smile?

Knowing Ol’ Nick one can well believe that he sought the company of his intellectual equals – even if deceased. On the other hand, there is always the suspicion that Machiavelli is seldom completely serious when he writes – the Florentine jocular, caustic, irreverent spirit too strong in him.

What are you currently working on?

I’ve got a number of projects, mostly non-fiction. A book on the Battle of Castagnaro, written with Kelly DeVries, is coming out this July. Maybe I tackle Galileo next, just to ruffle a few more feathers.

LIKE WHAT YOU JUST READ? FOLLOW US ON TWITTER! FIND US ON FACEBOOK! OR SIGN UP TO OUR MAILING LIST!