This post is the second of three posts to address the question: What is the “value” (or intellectual worth) of the books that Lewis read? Please note: this post has only to do with the 5,000 to 6,000 books that Lewis read in doing his research for the book English Literature in the Sixteenth Century. It is not about the other 15,000 books that he read.
Most of us are aware of this book, and many of us have a copy on our bookshelves. But I suspect few of us have read it. I have not, nor do I anticipate reading it any time soon. And yet what I have to say about this unread book is (IMHO) one of the most compelling pieces of evidence in support of my premise that C.S. Lewis was the “most erudite person in history”.
The ideas I hope to convey in this post are difficult to express, and thus may be a tad arduous to read. As Lewis might have said: “I am doing the best I can.”
Several posts back, I did a projection of the number of books that C.S. Lewis read over the course of his life. One of five periods of his life that I speculated upon was the 15 years he spent fulfilling his commitment to Oxford University Press on what was to become English Literature in the Sixteenth Century.
In that earlier post, I approached the analysis strictly from the point of view of “quantity” of reading. To be sure, the 5,000 to 6,000 books that Lewis read for this research added 25% or more to his total of 20,000 books read (speculated). I now address not the “quantity,” but the “quality” of the books Lewis read. And by “quality” I do not mean how well-written these books were, but how worthy the knowledge the author intended to convey to the reader was.
(I am standing on “thin ice” of subjective opinion here.)
It is one thing to read 20,000 books when they are comprised primarily of detective stories, romance novels, sports stories, or business books. But good literature is a different thing. I think most readers agree.
The notion of “erudition” would seem to have embedded within it a stipulation that the knowledge transferred from author to reader has intellectual value. Perhaps this means the potential to contribute to the well-being of another person, or the betterment of society.
Allow me to reiterate two points made in that earlier post about the quantity of Lewis’ reading from the 16th century:
- Lewis himself said that he read EVERY book published during the 16th century in doing his research for this book.
- It is reported that Lewis read every single 16th century book in Duke Humfrey’s Library, the oldest part of The Bodleian Library.
How many books is that? The staff of The Bodleian Library told me that there are 6,745 books from the 16th century housed within the Duke Humfrey’s Library, most of which were there during Lewis’ time in Oxford.
So, as amazing as it seems, if Lewis really did read EVERY book from the 16th century, or even just EVERY book from the 16th century housed in the Duke Humfrey’s Library, then C.S. Lewis read somewhere around 5,000 to 6,000 books for that OHEL commitment.
There can be little doubt that C.S. Lewis undertook a research project unlike anything anyone else has ever done before or since. I cannot imagine that anyone has ever read the entire works of the 18th century or the 20th century in the manner that C.S. Lewis did with the 16th century. By any measure, what Lewis did is utterly astounding.
Why Is the 16th Century So Important?
You may wonder, why am I mentioning the 16th, 18th and 20th centuries? I do so because these are the three most important centuries in human history, at least as relates to Western Civilization.
Some historians believe the 18th century belongs on the short list of most important centuries. This is due to the dawning of the Age of Enlightenment. I think Lewis would concur. For as Lewis once said, the “Great Divide” in human history was not the Renaissance, but the Enlightenment. He knew full well its importance to human philosophical, religious and cultural development.
A case can be made that the 18th century brought on the “rise” in the intellectual maturation of Western Civilization. Immanuel Kant summed up the basic idea thusly: “Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity.” Yet, many view the 18th century as bringing on the “demise” in intellectual maturation. Edmund Burke denunciated what he saw as the hubris of reason leading to the horror of the Terror during the French revolution.
Of course, good people can hold conflicting views of the Enlightenment and assess the value of the change in thought it unleashed quite differently. I think Lewis did not much admire the Enlightenment, but I would look to Michael Ward for a more informed view on that.
Other historians believe the 20th century was the most important century of them all. This can be traced to four events: (a) the advent of extraordinary technological and medical innovations (b) the ascendance of secularism to be the dominant worldview (c) the horrific tragedies of the two world wars that dwarf all earlier human conflict and (d) the emergence of Marxism as a major global political and economic ideology. A case can be made that the 20th century was the pinnacle of Western Civilization. Yet, many view the 20th century as the “Fall of the West”.
Nearly all historians put the 16th century at or near the top of the list, and with good reason. It was the high point of the Renaissance, and thus is regarded as the century in which the “great rise of the West” took root. The 16th century is widely considered to be a time when humanity witnessed the most significant developments in the history of the world.
Consider the following events which occurred during the 16th century:
- High point of the Renaissance
- Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation
- Counter-Reformation
- Scientific Revolution
- Age of Discovery/Exploration
- Explosion of the printing press
- Rapid rise of universities
- Development of the arts
- Humanism becomes dominant intellectual movement
- Maturing of capitalism
- Dawn of “protoindustrialization”
- Era of the Inquisition
- Movement of people from rural areas to towns
- Return of population growth to Europe after 2 centuries of decline
- British East India Company, a turning point in global economics
Why Is Lewis’ Research on the 16th Century So Important?
There are two key points to be made about Lewis’ massive research on the 16th century:
- C.S. Lewis knew virtually everything about what is (arguably) the most important century in human history. I think it is reasonable to believe that that no other person has ever had a greater grasp of the events, and the significance of those events, that occurred during the 16thcentury. This alone is a really big thing.
- Lewis’ complete and total research on the 16th century gives us a clear indication of what his level of commitment to do similar research on other interests or time periods must have been. This includes Antiquity, the Middle Era, the early Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the first half of the 20th century.
To be sure, the first point above–that Lewis had a near perfect understanding of the events and significance of the 16th century–is a prime factor supporting his credentials as the “most erudite person in history.” Moreover, I believe his deep understanding of the 16th century informed his perspective on the 18thcentury, and all that followed. What better way to understand the context of The Age of Enlightenment than to understand fully The Renaissance?
However, it is the second point listed above that is the primary differentiator between Lewis and other candidates for “most erudite.” How so?
I believe Lewis was exceedingly well-read on all preceding and subsequent centuries, especially the 18th and the Middle Era, and also the first half of the 20th. Did Lewis read EVERY book published during the 18th century or 20th century as he apparently did with the 16th century? There is no evidence of that. But I do believe it is likely that he read ALL the worthy books from those centuries including those from the fields of Literature, Religion, Philosophy, and Linguistics, with some History books thrown in for good measure. Math books not so much.
I ask you:
- Does anyone doubt that Lewis would have pursued his faith journey through alternative worldviews (materialism, pantheism, idealism) with comparable vigor? His autobiography Surprised by Joy suggests that he did.
- Does anyone doubt that Lewis would have expended similar energy doing research on philosophy, even for just that one year he taught the subject at University College? His great theodicy, The Problem of Pain, and his epistemological masterwork, The Abolition of Man, suggests that he did.
- Does anyone doubt that Lewis would have undertaken similar levels of research on Medieval literature to fulfill his teaching responsibilities? His book The Discarded Image and hundreds of essayssuggests that he did.
Lewis probably knew more about the 16th century than anyone. But he read broadly across the centuries. If you were to look at a list of his favorite books by other authors, most of them are from the Modern era and relatively few are from the 16th century.
More on this in the next post.
Page 13 | Part 14 | Part 15
Erudition Series Index
