It turns out that the myth of widespread medieval belief in a "flat earth" was propagated by two contemporaries, a Frenchman and an American (though no connection has otherwise been established between them). the Frenchman is the antireligious Antoine-Jean Letronne (1787-1848), and the American is the storyteller, Washington Irving (1783-1859). Both of their fictionalized accounts of history have misled many modern scholars and continue to mislead contemporaries.
I grew up believing the Washington Irving myth-- in Irving's fictionalized account of Columbus as the "simple mariner," appearing before a dark crowd of benighted inquisitors and hooded theologians at a council of Salamanca, all of whom believed, according to Irving, that the earth was flat like a plate. But then I came across the following passage in my study of the thirteenth-century theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas' SUMMA THEOLOGIAE (in the opening article of the very first question, reply to objection #2):
Sciences are differentiated according to the various means through which knowledge is obtained. For the astronomer and the physicist both may prove the same conclusion--that the earth, for instance, is round: the astronomer by means of mathematics(i.e., abstracting from matter), but the physicist by means of matter itself. (emphasis added)Ever since, I have found myself increasingly skeptical of contemporary assumptions about the past. In fact, I have thought about compiling a list of "modern myths" that continue to be widely held in our own times. These might include the pervasive acceptance, still, of (1) Darwinian macro-evolution, (2) belief in global warming, (3) moral relativism, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment