humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare

On Mar 13, 1:23 am, Elizabeth wrote:

Replacement links for a comparison of the Italian
Renaissance v. the English 'Renaissance.'







The only English 'Renaissance' was in literature.

The miracle is that England produced 'Francisco'
Lord Verulam. A genius of that magnitude is normally
only produced at a crossroads of culture. In the 16th
century Italy, due to its ideal location on the Mediterr-
anean, was the very epitome of culture, it produced
geniuses by the dozens.

England produced only the one and I can't explain
it other than the 'total immersion' program on the
Geneva Bible in the households of the 'illustrious
Cooke sisters.' That and an extraordinary brain
(high ratio of grey matter to white matter) in an
oversized cranium.

England's only other genius, Roger Bacon, is a
separate case because the Roman Catholic
monastic system maintained an extremely high
level of literacy and culture.

There was constant traffic between Rome and
other Catholic countries including Ireland. Between
Bacon and Bacon, England produced no geniuses
(and I include Shacksper and Oxford).

I don't know what Looney was thinking. Oxford
was virtually ignored in his lifetime (other than
his feudal acting out) and no scholar thought
that Oxford was Shakespeare.

I can only believe that we've had our Renaissance
and are now sinking into Mannerism.