Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
But Vico was not widely read, even by 18th Centrry standards, as you note. Perhaps Voltaire read him. And Vico wrote much more about how to write history than actually writing history. Wiki only lists four works: "On Humanistic Education,"  "On the Study Methods of Our Time," "Universal right" and "The New Science", the latter of which was probably his most widely read work.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri May 17th, 2013 at 11:41:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But Vico was not widely read, even by 18th Centrry standards, as you note.

Exactly! Can you say the same of the 19th history historians? Totally different ballgame. Or paradigma.

And you said best historian pre 1800, bot best popular historian.

by IM on Fri May 17th, 2013 at 12:56:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I would still go with Voltaire. He and Vico are roughly comparable on the subject of critical historiography but Voltaire produced a healthy shelf of actual histories which were, by 18th century standards, widely read. His were the best works available at the time on the history of the Holy Roman Empire, Russia under Peter I and contemporary French History. Vico, though important, (he was discussed in some of my university courses), did not produce a comparable body of works of history. Of course in those days most educated people were more generalists in nature, but of all of Voltaire's literary accomplishments, wiki lists his histories first, and not without reason.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri May 17th, 2013 at 03:21:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series