Democracy; free thought and expression; religious tolerance; individual liberty; political self-determination of peoples; sexual and racial equality--these values have firmly entered the mainstream in the decades since they were enshrined in the 1948 U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. But if these ideals no longer seem radical today; their origin was very radical indeed--far more so than most historians have been willing to recognize. In A Revolution of the Mind; Jonathan Israel; one of the world's leading historians of the Enlightenment; traces the philosophical roots of these ideas to what were the least respectable strata of Enlightenment thought--what he calls the Radical Enlightenment. Originating as a clandestine movement of ideas that was almost entirely hidden from public view during its earliest phase; the Radical Enlightenment matured in opposition to the moderate mainstream Enlightenment dominant in Europe and America in the eighteenth century. During the revolutionary decades of the 1770s; 1780s; and 1790s; the Radical Enlightenment burst into the open; only to provoke a long and bitter backlash. A Revolution of the Mind shows that this vigorous opposition was mainly due to the powerful impulses in society to defend the principles of monarchy; aristocracy; empire; and racial hierarchy--principles linked to the upholding of censorship; church authority; social inequality; racial segregation; religious discrimination; and far-reaching privilege for ruling groups. In telling this fascinating history; A Revolution of the Mind reveals the surprising origin of our most cherished values--and helps explain why in certain circles they are frequently disapproved of and attacked even today.
#369661 in Books imusti 2016-04-12Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.40 x 1.90 x 6.20l; .0 #File Name: 0691143781600 pagesUniversity Press Group Ltd
Review
82 of 87 people found the following review helpful. A useful addition to the literature; but not a lot of fun to readBy Aaron C. BrownThe publisher sent me a copy of this book for review.There are so many books covering the history of money that it helps to begin by categorizing them by the authors' fields of interests and political views.For example; one of the best is David Graeber's Debt. The author is an anthropologist and anarchist who argues money is debt; and debt leads to war; slavery; political repression and other violence. History: The Human Gamble is Reuven Brenner's metaphysical account of financial history; leading to a libertarian view. Another excellent entry is Niall Ferguson's The Ascent of Money; written by a historian and champion of the liberating and progressive effects of finance. In Money; Felix Martin considers money from a political view and argues for a center-left/Democratic socialist/Keynesian-economy-managed-by-professional-economists world. Franklin Allen and Glenn Yago use linguistic evidence and an evolutionary perspective in Financing the Future. They would like to see a lot of financial innovations. There are plenty of others; treating most of the same evidence and events; but from perspectives as different as the blind men and the elephants; and coming to radically different conclusions.Money Changes Everything is archaeological at its core. The main attention is on physical money and documents. This will not surprise readers familiar with his earlier book; The Origins of Value; which is an anthology distinguished by gorgeous photographs of monetary artifacts. It is narrower than the other books; nearly all the attention is on ancient Mesopotamia; Greece; Rome and China; and medieval to early modern Europe. The focus is clearly related to the amount of surviving physical evidence for exchange systems. The book is the least political of the monetary histories I am familiar with; it seems to have a mild center-right perspective generally supportive of the force of finance; but sympathetic to light regulation.I think this book is most useful as a counterweight to all the enthusiastic theorizing and argument in the field. Many of the documents and artifacts described don't fit neatly into anyone's theories. Any reasonably clever writer can cherrypick historical evidence and employ rhetorical sleight of hand to promote persuasive theories. But as John Adams put it; "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes; our inclinations; or the dictates of our passions; they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." That's not to say that the books above are wrong; just that considering their arguments in light of the evidence in this book can lead to more nuanced; and likely more accurate; views.On the negative side; facts are duller than speculation; and this book is particularly dry. The author's passion is clearly to handle the physical remnants of history; which is less exciting than proposing bold hypotheses about the sweep of human events. He graciously praises every single researcher cited; in the text; not footnotes. That's really nice; but it starts wearing thin for readers.I recommend this book highly for anyone seriously interested in the history of money and finance. I can't promise you a good time or deep insights; but I think it will challenge your views and make them better. Without the serious interest in the field; I don't think you'll make it far into this long; dense; plodding (but useful) book.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. BETTER THAN MOST BOOKS ON WORLD HISTORYBy The CurmudgeonThis book shows that some of the best books on world history approach the subject indirectly. This book is about the history of finance but that approach gives you a better picture of world history than most books which deal with the subject directly.The basic point here is that finance is a type of technology which allows a civilization to expand. The needs of an expanding civilization create a need for expanding financial methods which then enable the civilization to keep expanding and thus generate new financing methods in a perpetual cycle. The basic definition of finance is that it enables people to move money through time. The most basic financial tool is the loan which was invented in Mesopotamia 5;000 years ago. A loan allows the borrower to receive present income to be paid with future income; while the lender gives up present income to receive future income.As Western Civilization (broadly defined) went from ancient Mesopotamia to ancient Greece; Rome; the medieval Italian city-states; Holland; Britain and finally America; financial products became more complex. But one constant in the West was that most of the financing was done by private parties. Governments; for example; would borrow private funds by issuing bonds. Meanwhile; China took a different path by always having a strong central government with a vast bureaucracy. There it was more common for the government to lend money to private parties.Goetzmann believes the West developed a decentralized financial system because it was politically decentralized to begin with. The West suffered two great collapses; the Bronze Age collapse and that of the Roman Empire; which never happened in China. The decentralized aspect of the West allowed for more financial experimentation than the centrally controlled culture of China. This made no difference globally until Western explorers began reaching China around the 16th century and then conquering it in the 19th century. China suddenly realized it was not the center of the world and the 2;000 year old imperial system collapsed in 1912.Chaotic conditions followed in China until about 1978 when China felt confident enough to rejoin the international community and adopt Western technology; free market enterprise; modern financing; and some of the culture that went with those. But China has remained authoritarian politically with a strong central government. Only time will tell how the two different systems will perform in the future.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. History and Understanding of FinanceBy jcnA very interesting and informative book. This book details the development of the modern financial system starting with archeological evidence as far back as 5;000 years. I imagine there were many developments before that time; but our knowledge of these is very limited. This book uses the invention of writing as the first evidence of finance. The authors believes the first recorded human information was accounting materials from Middle East. Historical and Archeological continues through Greek; Roman; Middle Ages; Industrial Revolution until today. Several chapters address the advances in China and their similarities and differences with Europe. The history of modern finance from 1720 to the present in Europe is helpful in understanding markets; stocks; bonds; and economic cycles.My only qualms are the authors feeling that finance was the cause of much of culture and history. I think it is more likely that some other factors were the main drivers at times. I would also preferred a more critical analysis of finance in the 20th and 21th century. The treatment of time since WWII was rather overly positive and insufficiently critical. Economics is not so highly developed that human faults are sufficiently ameliorated at present. These are small complaints about a very good book.
