The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, C.1400-C.1580

Rating:
Summary: YAWN!!
Review: This was a required text for a English Reformation that I am taking. This book was a compleate drag to read. Duffy presents a great picture of a catholic from the middle ages, but compleatly fails to analyize his evidence properly. Some of his claims are outrageous, such as his claim of common people teaching themselves to read by attending church, and many more. I like his evidence, hate the thesis. If you want a better reformation book about England try something by A.G. Dickens someone with a buyable argument.

Rating:
Summary: Well researched, but poorly reasoned
Review: Though I understand the reasons for the great outpouring of admiration for this work, I must respectfully dissent from the general stance of previous reviewers. Duffy's evidence, though carefully and thoroughly done, only serves to outline the inherent paradox in the study of the English Reformation. His thesis fails however, to fit with historical realities. If he is correct concerning the power, character and nature of 16th century religious devotions and practices, then why was there not significant dissent? Duffy singularly fails to address this issue. For the first 370-odd pages, he presents the reader with a mountain of evidence, but only gets around to analyzing it in the last 100 or so pages, and does not take into account any of a number of other factors involved in the development of the English Reformation. This work is an object lesson in two of the great pitfalls of modern scholarship, overzealous revisionism and excessive focus on a single theme. In trying to create a Catholic counterbalance to a largely Protestant historiography, Duffy goes overboard in his conclusions to an unnecessary degree. In focusing solely upon the effects of his evidence of popular religious culture, Duffy ignores the changes in the social, political and economic landscape occuring simultaniously with the death-throes of the feudal system, an increasing shift in wealth generation from the country to the cities, the increasing centralization of government in the Crown and London to the chagrin of especially of the local authorities in the West Country, Wales and the North, and the rise in power of the Crown and the House of Commons at the expense of the magnates and local authorities. Even some of his evidence is misleading. For example, changes in the common law of property regarding transfers in will and estate in this period made personal drafting of wills unlikely; legal expertice was a necessity. Therefore, Duffy's reading of wills as evidence of religious intent does not square with the legal reality that the testator likely needed a lawyer to write the will for them. Generally speaking, though Duffy's research is invaluable, his analysis of the information leaves a great deal to be desired. Though his thesis fits with the evidence he chooses to provide, it fails to do so when squared with the entire body of evidence on the English Reformation. This is a classic case of one shaping one's evidence to fit a pre-concieved result rather than a study of the evidence to obtain a result. If one wants to find a balanced, reasoned view of the success of Reformation in the face of potential popular religious orthodoxy, one would be better served by reading either Christopher Haigh's study of the English Reformation, or that of J.J. Scarisbrick. The Stripping of the Altars is simply bad history.