HomeGroupsTalkMoreZeitgeist
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

Art Of Illuminated Manuscripts: Illustrated…
Loading...

Art Of Illuminated Manuscripts: Illustrated Sacred Writings (original 1843; edition 1988)

by J. O. Westwood (Author)

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations
1132249,619 (2.88)None
Even the greatest need to retire someday.

This is a book that was excellent in its day -- but that day the better part of two centuries ago. At the time, there was no way to reproduce a photograph, and a "facsimile" was a hand redrawing. The manuscript facsimiles in this book are laboriously careful. That is not the same as being accurate. (I've seen the pages they're reproducing!) Worse, because they are so laborious, they are dull and dead in a way that an actual manuscript truly is not. The manuscript may have "mistakes" and "imperfections" which these facsimiles do not. But the originals were created -- not reproduced, created -- by human hands, and are the more beautiful for it.

And we have learned very much about old manuscripts since this book's time, and have discovered thousands of additional Biblical manuscripts. Few of them are as beautiful as those shown here, but they have deeply changed our understanding of manuscript production.

Even the terminology has changed. For example, there is a section here on the "Theotisc" version of the Bible, which is called "valuable." These days, if this version is referred to at all, it's called the Old German -- and it's not referred to very often, because it's not valuable in any way, except as a linguistic monument (it's useful to Germanic scholars). But it's a translation from the Latin, not the Greek, and of no help reconstructing the Bible.

This is not to denigrate the noble effort that went into making this book. But, these days, you can find actual photographs of most of these manuscripts on the web, as well as newer information. Far better to consult those sources than to try to contend with this ponderous (both in size and in style of writing) tome. When it was published, it was at least a four star book. Now, I'd give it less than half that. ( )
1 vote waltzmn | Aug 27, 2019 |
Showing 2 of 2
Even the greatest need to retire someday.

This is a book that was excellent in its day -- but that day the better part of two centuries ago. At the time, there was no way to reproduce a photograph, and a "facsimile" was a hand redrawing. The manuscript facsimiles in this book are laboriously careful. That is not the same as being accurate. (I've seen the pages they're reproducing!) Worse, because they are so laborious, they are dull and dead in a way that an actual manuscript truly is not. The manuscript may have "mistakes" and "imperfections" which these facsimiles do not. But the originals were created -- not reproduced, created -- by human hands, and are the more beautiful for it.

And we have learned very much about old manuscripts since this book's time, and have discovered thousands of additional Biblical manuscripts. Few of them are as beautiful as those shown here, but they have deeply changed our understanding of manuscript production.

Even the terminology has changed. For example, there is a section here on the "Theotisc" version of the Bible, which is called "valuable." These days, if this version is referred to at all, it's called the Old German -- and it's not referred to very often, because it's not valuable in any way, except as a linguistic monument (it's useful to Germanic scholars). But it's a translation from the Latin, not the Greek, and of no help reconstructing the Bible.

This is not to denigrate the noble effort that went into making this book. But, these days, you can find actual photographs of most of these manuscripts on the web, as well as newer information. Far better to consult those sources than to try to contend with this ponderous (both in size and in style of writing) tome. When it was published, it was at least a four star book. Now, I'd give it less than half that. ( )
1 vote waltzmn | Aug 27, 2019 |
The factual info is alright, but I was disappointed in the graphics themselves. None are originals. All of them are hand drawn copies... and not very good copies at that. ( )
  Duranfan | May 24, 2007 |
Showing 2 of 2

Current Discussions

None

Popular covers

Quick Links

Rating

Average: (2.88)
0.5
1
1.5 1
2 1
2.5
3
3.5
4 2
4.5
5

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 211,950,903 books! | Top bar: Always visible