Lucien Febvre’s magisterial study of sixteenth century religious and intellectual history, published in 1942, is at long last available in English, in a translation that does it full justice. The book is a modern classic. Febvre, founder with Marc Bloch of the journal Annales, was one of France’s leading historians, a scholar whose field of expertise was the sixteenth century. This book, written late in his career, is regarded as his masterpiece. Despite the subtitle, it is not primarily a study of Rabelais; it is a study of the mental life, the mentalité, of a whole age.
Febvre worked on the book for ten years. His purpose at first was polemical: he set out to demolish the notion that Rabelais was a covert atheist, a freethinker ahead of his time. To expose the anachronism of that view, he proceeded to a close examination of the ideas, information, beliefs, and values of Rabelais and his contemporaries. He combed archives and local records, compendia of popular lore, the work of writers from Luther and Erasmus to Ronsard, the verses of obscure neo-Latin poets. Everything was grist for his mill: books about comets, medical texts, philological treatises, even music and architecture. The result is a work of extraordinary richness of texture, enlivened by a wealth of concrete details—a compelling intellectual portrait of the period by a historian of rare insight, great intelligence, and vast learning.
Febvre wrote with Gallic flair. His style is informal, often witty, at times combative, and colorful almost to a fault. His idiosyncrasies of syntax and vocabulary have defeated many who have tried to read, let alone translate, the French text. Beatrice Gottlieb has succeeded in rendering his prose accurately and readably, conveying a sense of Febvre’s strong, often argumentative personality as well as his brilliantly intuitive feeling for Renaissance France.
具体描述
读后感
没有和原书比对，也没有读过三联的译本，但感觉这本书译笔虽十分流畅，人名和细节翻译却有很多不知所云的错误。阿维森纳译为“阿维塞纳”，司各脱译为“司科特”（141-142页），这都还好理解。但是，维萨留斯为什么译成“维萨尔”（169页）？如果这能接受，那么托马斯·...
评分没有和原书比对，也没有读过三联的译本，但感觉这本书译笔虽十分流畅，人名和细节翻译却有很多不知所云的错误。阿维森纳译为“阿维塞纳”，司各脱译为“司科特”（141-142页），这都还好理解。但是，维萨留斯为什么译成“维萨尔”（169页）？如果这能接受，那么托马斯·...
评分没有和原书比对，也没有读过三联的译本，但感觉这本书译笔虽十分流畅，人名和细节翻译却有很多不知所云的错误。阿维森纳译为“阿维塞纳”，司各脱译为“司科特”（141-142页），这都还好理解。但是，维萨留斯为什么译成“维萨尔”（169页）？如果这能接受，那么托马斯·...
评分没有和原书比对，也没有读过三联的译本，但感觉这本书译笔虽十分流畅，人名和细节翻译却有很多不知所云的错误。阿维森纳译为“阿维塞纳”，司各脱译为“司科特”（141-142页），这都还好理解。但是，维萨留斯为什么译成“维萨尔”（169页）？如果这能接受，那么托马斯·...
评分没有和原书比对，也没有读过三联的译本，但感觉这本书译笔虽十分流畅，人名和细节翻译却有很多不知所云的错误。阿维森纳译为“阿维塞纳”，司各脱译为“司科特”（141-142页），这都还好理解。但是，维萨留斯为什么译成“维萨尔”（169页）？如果这能接受，那么托马斯·...
用户评价
A brilliant annales school work for 1944 when it was firstly published. It was significant for re-evaluating "secularization." I like its sophistication. But i cannot handle well the approach of "mentality" because I doubt it at the beginning, especially given it has been so widely applied today and has given rise to some unsatisfactory debates.
评分A brilliant annales school work for 1944 when it was firstly published. It was significant for re-evaluating "secularization." I like its sophistication. But i cannot handle well the approach of "mentality" because I doubt it at the beginning, especially given it has been so widely applied today and has given rise to some unsatisfactory debates.
评分A brilliant annales school work for 1944 when it was firstly published. It was significant for re-evaluating "secularization." I like its sophistication. But i cannot handle well the approach of "mentality" because I doubt it at the beginning, especially given it has been so widely applied today and has given rise to some unsatisfactory debates.
评分A brilliant annales school work for 1944 when it was firstly published. It was significant for re-evaluating "secularization." I like its sophistication. But i cannot handle well the approach of "mentality" because I doubt it at the beginning, especially given it has been so widely applied today and has given rise to some unsatisfactory debates.
评分A brilliant annales school work for 1944 when it was firstly published. It was significant for re-evaluating "secularization." I like its sophistication. But i cannot handle well the approach of "mentality" because I doubt it at the beginning, especially given it has been so widely applied today and has given rise to some unsatisfactory debates.
相关图书
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息，本站不存储任何数据与内容，任何内容与数据均与本站无关，如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有