Most Helpful Customer Reviews
22 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
An Excuse for a History Lesson, October 2, 2005
The Goldstone's last collaboration, Out of the Flames, is a great book. It concerns sixteenth century scholar Michael Servetus and his book Christianismi Restituto in which Servetus recounts his discovery of pulmonary circulation well before Harvey, the man usually credited with the discovery. In The Friar and the Cipher the Goldstone's attempt a similar look at history through the lens of important books with Roger Bacon and a book known as the Voynich manuscript. The Voynich manuscript is a mystery. Discovered in 1912, this book has remained unfathomable for nearly a century. Not only is it a strange concoction of drawings and diagrams but it is also written in a code that has remained unbroken since its discovery despite the efforts of some of the greatest code-breakers of the twentieth century. In fact, no one is even sure who the author of the manuscript is, though one of the likeliest of authors is thirteenth century proto-scientist Roger Bacon. This gives the authors an opportunity to test the claim by going through a history of thirteenth century scholarship. Roger Bacon, the friar of the title, is ostensibly the main subject but the Goldstone's are going for much more. We learn about the revival of Aristotle and Plato in Western Europe during the Middle Ages. We learn about the rise of the universities the new religious orders like the Dominicans and Franciscans. And we learn about many of the other great thinkers of the age like Thomas Aquinas and Albertus Magnus as well as a host of lesser known names, if no less influential thinkers. It is a wonderful history and fun to read but somewhat less satisfying than Out of the Flames, mainly because there is an uncertainty here that wasn't in the previous book. With Christianismi Restituto, the provenance of the remaining three manuscripts and the fact that Servetus was the author is not in doubt. Out of the Flames traced a known history and revived the reputation of a man whose name is unjustly forgotten. Roger Bacon may be no less deserving of having his name polished for modern readers; however, bringing Bacon to life through this manuscript is less convincing. As the authors allow, there is no proof that Bacon is the author of this manuscript. In fact, it may have been written centuries after him. And since no one knows what this book is actually about, there is no proof that the author was some sort of genius. He may have simply been very clever at creating codes and ciphers, which comes across as rather pointless if no one can even decipher the code. Ultimately, this book is a good one with a lot of interesting history and some information about a literary mystery that still remains unsolved. That alone makes it worth reading. And if it's not the Goldstone's best, it is still excellent. And it leaves one wondering what the Goldstones are going to tackle next.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
The good, the bad and the misleading, February 18, 2007
Without a doubt, this book is the most difficult to rate of any I have reviewed so far. The book is advertised as a tale of Roger Bacon and the Voynich Manuscript, both fascinating topics. But as previous reviewers have noted, the authors frequently go off on tangents, presumably in an effort to provide added context. Some of these digressions are riveting; some are distracting. I skipped several pages and even a whole chapter without losing any of the storyline. More than once I found myself asking, "How does this relate to Roger Bacon or the Voynich Manuscript?" The authors do eventually tie everything back to one of those subjects, but seldom with an economy of words. I appreciated the conversational style the authors used in telling the story. Their flippant tone, on the other hand, made me wince. Think Thomas Cahill-type narrative without the pleasant aftertaste. Ulimately, what soured me on this book was the apparent ax the authors have to grind with the Catholic Church and the degree to which it infected their writing. On page 42, they write that scholasticism "matured into the most powerful tool for maintaining and perpetuating doctrine that the Church had ever seen." The scholastics "remained uninterested in uncovering new knowledge, only in cementing the unlikely but now solid bond between Aristotle's logic and the Bible's revelation." That's pure, unvarnished B.S. Please compare those statements with the following: "It is difficult to arrive at a satisfactory definition of Scholasticism that would apply to all the thinkers to whom the label has been affixed. ... The Scholastics, by and large, were committed to the use of reason as an indispensable tool in theological and philosophical study, and to dialectic ... as the method of pursuing issues of intellectual interest." (Thomas E. Woods Jr., "How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization, p. 58) "What made it possible for Western civilization to develop science and the social sciences in a way that no other civilization had ever done before? The answer, I am convinced, lies in a pervasive and deep-seated inquiry that was a natural consequence of the emphasis on reason that began in the Middle Ages. ... It was quite natural for scholars ... to probe into subject areas that had not been explored before, as well as to discuss possibilities that had not previously been entertained." (Edward Grant, "God and Reason in the Middle Ages" p. 356) The Goldstones argue passionately that Roger Bacon got hosed and history never gave him his due. That's probably true. But their cri de coeur glosses over the fact that, slight or no slight, Roger Bacon was a monk and therefore a committed adherent to Catholicism. Also noteworthy is that Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II is glorified in this book, which stands in stark contrast to his portrayal by at least one modern biographer. In short, if you'd like an at-times-gripping detective story/biography and an introduction to a plethora of historical luminaries, cherry pick from this book. If you are committed to learning the truth, get both sides and take "The Friar and The Cipher" with a bushel of salt.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
15 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A mysterious founder of modern science, April 18, 2005
A terrific read. The authors are bibliophiles rather than cryptographers, but darn good biographers too. The subject of this book is a mysterious manuscript supposedly written in a cipher that has eluded all attempts at complete decoding. However, there is a strong belief that it is the product of the 13th century scholar Roger (not Francis) Bacon. He is what this book is really about. After briefly describing what's known of the book's provenance, now at Yale's library, the authors wonderfully weave what is known of Roger Bacon's life into the context of his time, which occupies the central focus of the book. This is followed by sketches of a variety of interesting characters who were influenced by Roger Bacon or the book. They include the Elizabethans, John Dee, Sir Francis Walsingham, and Francis Bacon, and Rudolf II of Bohemia. Capping these characters are the more modern professional and amateur cryptographers who have tried to decipher the book. Throughout, the style is refreshing, literate, and compelling. While the mystery is largely unsolved regarding the manuscript, the authors make it clear that Roger Bacon deserves more regard and examination as a founder of the modern scientific method.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
