medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
I am cross-posting this to MEDIEV-L and M-R, as it seems relevant to both.
Back in June, when we were discussing "Inventing the Middle Ages",
Richard Kay wrote:
>
> His career as a serious scholar was ended in 1959 by a devastating
> review of his book *Church, Kingship, and Lay Investiture in England*
> by Christopher Cheney (Speculum 34:653).
Needless to say, I can't find a copy of the review online, and don't
have access to a library that might hold it. But I have managed to get
hold of a copy of "Church, Kingship, and Lay Investiture in England",
and it seems to me to hold up rather well. Why should Cheney's review
have had such an effect? Is the book really that bad, and in what way?
I would have thought that it was a laudable attempt to link events in
England with the wider picture of the Gregorian Reforms. There are
quibbles, inevitably (he takes the traditional view that the Third
recension of the English Coronation Ordo reflects Anselm's theology,
whereas I think it must have been compiled by Lanfranc; he cites what
appears to be a non-existent book by Walter Frere in his bibliography.)
But it seems to me to be rather an impressive debut, being a lightly
revised version of his PhD thesis. He announced his intention of
following it up with studies of Lanfranc and Paschal II - which, of
course, never happened. What did we lose?
--
John Briggs
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|