the city of london
Content
Title: The City of London Source: http://www.elizabethan.org/compendium/27.html Authors: Anthony Burgess, 1978; a Venetian envoy, 1500
This article compares two description of Elizabethan England written in two distinct periods of times. The first account is a description of England written in 1978 by Anthony Burgess. This piece rather gives a gross, perhaps honest but repulsive account of London. London is portrayed as stinking, full of criminals and gross crime scenes. The article even goes to the extent of saying that all Londoners were drunkards, brawny and loud. The city according to Burgess was not sober at all poor drunkards high on Ale would cry and fight all day long, while a few rich drunkards would drink wine, and fight with swords. The other piece of description written by a Venetian ambassador around 1500s gives a very opposite description of London. He found the city beautiful, extremely rich and the people noble and gentle. He describes London as richer than any other Italian cities by comparison. According to the ambassador, London had a brilliant artistic circle, with artisans from Flanders( the Netherlands) and other parts of Europe. When we look at this disparate description of England, we have take into account the socio-cultural background of the people who described it. Burgess who wrote in twentieth century was naturally shocked by public execution going around in London that is why he called London not sober and almost savage. I however think he should have considered the time he was describing about. In that period hanging people in the bridge common and was not considered barbaric not just in London but all over Europe, including Italy. That is why the ambassador from Italy did not consider the scene he saw around in London as savage. Perhaps being the
ambassador, it was not considered professional to write negatively about some foreign country. Maybe that’s why he only wrote positive things about London. This article is of extreme use to the Renaissance scholar, because reading two excerpts about London gives us a comprehensive view of London in the 16th century. Now we are able to see not just the bright side of the moon, but the dark side as well, and able to have a complete map of the life in London. Since the article comes from a renown Renaissance website, and the article are the original manuscripts of the descriptions, the article is very credible in studying the Renaissance London.
This article compares two description of Elizabethan England written in two distinct periods of times. The first account is a description of England written in 1978 by Anthony Burgess. This piece rather gives a gross, perhaps honest but repulsive account of London. London is portrayed as stinking, full of criminals and gross crime scenes. The article even goes to the extent of saying that all Londoners were drunkards, brawny and loud. The city according to Burgess was not sober at all poor drunkards high on Ale would cry and fight all day long, while a few rich drunkards would drink wine, and fight with swords. The other piece of description written by a Venetian ambassador around 1500s gives a very opposite description of London. He found the city beautiful, extremely rich and the people noble and gentle. He describes London as richer than any other Italian cities by comparison. According to the ambassador, London had a brilliant artistic circle, with artisans from Flanders( the Netherlands) and other parts of Europe. When we look at this disparate description of England, we have take into account the socio-cultural background of the people who described it. Burgess who wrote in twentieth century was naturally shocked by public execution going around in London that is why he called London not sober and almost savage. I however think he should have considered the time he was describing about. In that period hanging people in the bridge common and was not considered barbaric not just in London but all over Europe, including Italy. That is why the ambassador from Italy did not consider the scene he saw around in London as savage. Perhaps being the
ambassador, it was not considered professional to write negatively about some foreign country. Maybe that’s why he only wrote positive things about London. This article is of extreme use to the Renaissance scholar, because reading two excerpts about London gives us a comprehensive view of London in the 16th century. Now we are able to see not just the bright side of the moon, but the dark side as well, and able to have a complete map of the life in London. Since the article comes from a renown Renaissance website, and the article are the original manuscripts of the descriptions, the article is very credible in studying the Renaissance London.
