(Ebook) The Forge of Vision: A Visual History of Modern Christianity by Jesus Christ Morgan, David ISBN 9780520286955, 9780520961999, 0520286952, 0520961994 Download
(Ebook) The Forge of Vision: A Visual History of Modern Christianity by Jesus Christ Morgan, David ISBN 9780520286955, 9780520961999, 0520286952, 0520961994 Download
https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374
https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312
https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018
https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094
https://ebooknice.com/product/the-mind-of-christ-5284950
https://ebooknice.com/product/this-risen-existence-the-spirit-of-
easter-5287454
https://ebooknice.com/product/the-existential-jesus-5283670
THE FORGE OF VISION
A Visual History of Modern Christianity
David Morgan
David Morgan
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
List of Illustrations • ix
Acknowledgments • xiii
Introduction • 1
Notes 233
•
FIGURES
ix
13. “The Image of the Inside of a Sinner who is contrite, and sin begins to flee,” from
Johannes Gossner, Das Herz des Menschen, circa 1870 • 62
14. “Sweep the Heart,” from Alberto Ronco, Fortezza reale del cuore humano,
1628 • 63
15. Tsui Hung-I, The Nativity, 1938 • 65
16. Children’s Christmas pageant at St. Paul’s Church, Nanjing, 1938 • 66
17. Israhel van Meckenem, The Mass of Saint Gregory, 1490 • 77
18. Medal showing Sacred Heart of Mary, early twentieth century • 79
19. The Seven-Headed Papal Beast, circa 1530 • 81
20. The Sacred Heart of Jesus, mid-nineteenth century • 86
21. Sacred Heart of Jesus indulgence holy card, 1943 • 87
22. “Apocalyptick Scheme,” from Joseph Mede, Key of the Revelation, 1643 • 93
23. Alexander Anderson, cover of Anecdotes illustrating the Beneficial Effects of Religious
Tracts, circa 1826 • 97
24. “Burning of Bibles by Romish Priests, at Champlain, New York,” from John
Dowling, History of Romanism, 1853 • 99
25. Roadside billboard advertising Pentecostal gathering, Nigeria, 2012 • 103
26. “Exodus 14:14,” bumper sticker, Ghana, 2013 • 107
27. J. M. Bernigerroth, “In Your Light We See Light,” from Evangelische Deutsche
Original-Bibel, 1741 • 109
28. Postcard promoting King James Bible, mid-twentieth century • 111
29. Hans Sebald Beham, The Papal Throne Torn Down with Ropes by the Protestant
Corporations, circa 1544 • 115
30. Cover of Evangelical Magazine, 1805 • 120
31. Elisha Gallaudet, Rev. Mr. George Whitefield, 1774 • 125
32. “The Idol Aesculapius: Scene in a Chinese Temple,” cover of Missionary Sketches,
October 1852 • 130
33. Frontispiece and title page from John Bunyan, Pilgrim’s Progress, 1680 • 138
34. “Paint the Heart,” from Alberto Ronco, Fortezza reale del cuore humano,
1628 • 141
35. Cover illustration from Hannah More, The Shepherd of Salisbury Plain, 1795 • 144
36. Abraham Bosse, “Leviathan,” frontispiece from Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan,
1651 • 147
37. “Most Sacred Heart of Jesus with Gallia Penitent and Devoted,” from Messager du
Sacré-Coeur, 1881 • 151
x • ILLUSTRATIONS
38. “Great-Heart with Christiana and children,” from John Bunyan, Pilgrim’s Progress,
part 2, 1800 • 153
39. George Henry Boughton, Pilgrims Going to Church, 1867 • 155
40. “Pilgrims of Maryland,” from Address of the Editorial Committee of the Catholic
Tract Society of Baltimore, circa 1839 • 157
41. Frances Benjamin Johnston, Schoolchildren Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag, 1899 • 160
42. August Hoen, Der ewig stehende Fels der Römisch Katholischen Kirche, 1872 • 162
43. Father Raphael Pfisterer, Mary Immaculate, Patroness of North America,
1920 • 163
44. Warner Sallman, Head of Christ, 1940 • 169
45. True Portrait of Our Lord Jesus Christ, late nineteenth century • 170
46. Replica of Bertel Thorvaldsen’s Christus, 1821–33, in visitors center at Los Angeles
California LDS Temple • 173
47. James Tissot, The Holy Face, 1886–94 • 174
48. Crucifixion of Jesus, Psalm 69, Chludov Psalter, ninth century • 176
49. Giotto di Bondone, Saint Francis of Assisi Receiving the Stigmata, circa
1295–1300 • 178
50. Tsui Hung-I, Christ the Good Shepherd, before 1939 • 180
51. Léon Lhermitte, The Friend of the Humble, 1892 • 185
52. James Tissot, Jesus Teaches in the Synagogues, 1886–96 • 189
53. Janet McKenzie, Jesus of the People, 1999 • 193
54. Johann Friedrich Overbeck, Christ in the House of Martha and Mary, 1815 • 207
55. Eugene Delacroix, Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, 1826 • 208
56. William Henry Simmons, engraving after William Holman Hunt, The Light of the
World, 1853 • 209
57. Paul Gauguin, Christ in the Garden of Olives, 1889 • 213
58. Barnett Newman, Stations of the Cross, 1958–66 • 216
P L AT E S
1. Jan Gossaert, Saint Luke Drawing the Virgin and Child, 1520–25
2. El Greco, Burial of Count Orgaz, 1586–88
3. Nathaniel Currier, Pray “God Bless Papa and Mama,” circa 1838–56
ILLUSTRATIONS • xi
4. Master Bertram, Sacrifice of Isaac, 1379–1383
5. The Pilgrim’s Progress, Or Christians journey from the City of Destruction in this evil
World to the Celestial City in the World that is to Come, 1813
6. Jean Périssin, Sermon in the Reformed Church in Lyon, called “The Paradise,” 1564
7. William Blake, “His Spectre driv’n . . . ” from Jerusalem, 1804–22
8. Jon McNaughton, One Nation under God, 2009
9. Rembrandt van Rijn, Head of Christ, circa 1648–52
10. Caspar David Friedrich, Cross in the Mountains, 1807–8
11. Wassily Kandinsky, Improvisation 26 (Rowing), 1912
12. Bill Viola, Ocean without a Shore, 2007
xii • ILLUSTRATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to several colleagues who answered queries, recom-
mended literature, provided imagery, and occasionally read drafts of this book. These
include Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, Jeff Korum, Julie Byrne, Erika Doss, Jane Garnett,
Shalom Goldman, Marc Brettler, Richard Howells, Sandy Brewer, Asonzeh Ukah, and
Stephen Pattison. My thanks to research assistants Jamie Brummitt and Brenna Keegan
for reading the entire manuscript and providing greatly appreciated assistance in copy-
editing, tracking down citations, hunting information on images, and reading entire
drafts of the manuscript. Special thanks go to Stephen Pattison and Edmond Tang of the
University of Birmingham for inviting me to deliver the 2012 Cadbury Lectures, which
were the origin of this book, and for hosting me and my wife so cordially while we were
in Birmingham. Stephen read drafts and generously commented on them and has con-
tinually proven to be a wonderful friend and colleague.
In addition to the Cadbury Lectures, several other venues were very helpful in allow-
ing me to develop my ideas. A portion of chapter 4 was presented in a seminar hosted
by the faculty of theology at Cambridge University several years ago. Chapter 6 was pre-
sented in various forms in the department of art history at Columbia University and at
the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Chapter 2 was the basis of a lecture in the department
of art history at the University of Chicago, and chapter 3 at Heidelberg University. I thank
each institution, the colleagues who invited me, and the audiences assembled for their
instructive comments and suggestions.
xiii
Small bits and pieces scattered throughout this book have been drawn from essays
previously published. A short portion of chapter 2 appeared in American Art Journal and
part of chapter 4 in the journal Culture and Religion. A few paragraphs in chapter 5
appeared as part of an essay in the online forum Religion and Politics. A paragraph or two
of chapter 6 appeared in an essay published in the exhibition catalogue, James Tissot: The
Life of Christ, which accompanied an exhibition on Tissot at the Brooklyn Museum.
Finally, it is my pleasure to dedicate this book to my wife, Larissa Carneiro, whose
patience and support made writing it a possibility.
The Edward Cadbury Lectureship was established in 1941 by Edward Cadbury Esquire,
LL.D. for the furtherance of the study of Theology in the University of Birmingham,
according to the Regulations there shall be an annual course of Lectures, usually eight
in number, to be delivered in either the Autumn or Spring Term. The theme of the Lec-
tures shall be concerned with some aspect of the Christian faith, the original intention
of the Founder being that it should be concerned with the relations past, present and
future, of Christianity or civilisation and culture.
xiv • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
INTRODUCTION
In the 1559 Latin edition of his monumental Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin
excoriated humanity’s inclination to substitute its conceptions of deity for the true God.
Human ingenuity, he said, was a “perpetual forge of idols” (idolorum fabricam).1 The
phrase recalls the biblical tradition of denouncing the production of idols from wood and
metal. Whatever else one may think of it, Calvin’s critique of the imagination or the visual
operation of cognition surely gets one thing right: human beings manufacture their
worlds with the images they craft. Even if they are not worshipped, images exert powerful
effects over those who use them. We believe them, cherish them, hoard them, exchange
them, remember by means of them, and use them to protect ourselves, to glorify our-
selves, to recreate ourselves. Imagination is how we put images to work inside and outside
our minds in order to accomplish all these things.
I M A G I N AT I O N
I have called this book The Forge of Vision not because I wish to endorse Calvin’s views on
idolatry, but because I like very much that he recognizes the cultural work seeing performs,
even if he regards it in a very negative light. Moreover, the phrase acknowledges that vision
is a cultural operation. The forge of vision is the cultural formation of seeing at any number
of levels. Human beings are in the business of fashioning imagery that acts as their under-
standing of the world. Modernity has facilitated this brain function with conceptual
innovations and a steady stream of new techniques in science, technology, education,
1
commerce, art—and in religion. Each of these areas of modern culture has generated
images, visual practices, and image-making devices that serve as instruments for shaping
imagination and grasping the world around us.
Yet perhaps because of the power and scope of such visual technologies, seeing has
come under considerable suspicion in the modern era, much of it charged with an antag-
onism comparable to Calvin’s epistemological critique. Vision is often conceived as a
distant, disembodied sense, and vision as contemplation or philosophical reflection in
particular has been criticized as taking the shape of a remote and magisterial gaze that
reduces everything it sees to its object.2 At first glance, seeing might appear a spectral,
immaterial event, consisting of nothing more than light and thought. But for those who
attend to vision as a social, embodied, material range of practices, vision is forged from
objects and places, bodies and desire, ruler and compass, frescoed walls and engraved
pages. To see is to enter into a host of relationships that stretch across time and space.
In this regard, seeing is not different from any of the other senses. Sensation in all its
forms is a robust engagement of the body with the world around it. Thomas Hobbes put
the matter very succinctly at the outset of his masterpiece, Leviathan (1651), where he
defined sensation in aptly physical terms: “The cause of sense is the external body, or
object, which presseth the organ proper to each sense, either immediately, as in the taste
and touch, or mediately, as in seeing, hearing, and smelling; which pressure, by the
mediation of nerves and other strings and membranes of the body, continued inwards to
the brain and heart, causeth there a resistance, or counter-pressure, or endeavor of the
heart to deliver itself; which endeavor, because outward, seemeth to be some matter
without. And this seeming, or fancy, is that which men call sense.”3 With this and other
such mechanical explanations of human interiority, modernity took shape and the forge
of vision began to emerge as an engine of cultural construction.
But fancy continued to bear the stigma of deception and the marginal status of con-
trivance as the faculty of seeming. The tradition of Enlightenment thought came to rec-
ognize the power of imagination for its constructive activity in conception, but also
expressed wariness regarding its results. In setting out his guidelines for the proper
interpretation of nature in 1620, Francis Bacon warned readers of the “specious medita-
tions, speculations, and theories of mankind” that skewed genuine understanding.4
Human conception should submit itself, Bacon contended, to the great subtlety of nature
rather than to the mind’s predisposition for useless abstractions and axiomatic thinking,
which is unreliable because it begins with received doctrines. Moreover, human under-
standing “admits a tincture of the will and passions, which generate their own system
accordingly; for man always believes more readily that which he prefers.”5 Experimental
method was the indispensable means for avoiding this error. “There is no small differ-
ence between the idols of the human mind, and the ideas of the divine mind; that is to
say, between certain idle dogmas, and the real stamp and impression of created objects,
as they are found in nature.”6 The best way to read the mind of God was to adhere to the
physical evidence of nature.
2 • INTRODUCTION
Bacon’s empiricism exerted enormous influence. When it came to the imagination’s
influence on religious sentiment, David Hume could portray the imagination as bearing
responsibility for human self-deception. In his Natural History of Religion (1757), Hume
explained the origin of religion as a kind of inexorable epistemological mistake. Unable
to resolve by abstraction the “unknown causes” behind natural events, human beings
objectify their fears and anxieties, and rely fundamentally upon imagination to do so: “By
degrees, the active imagination of men, uneasy in this abstract conception of objects,
about which it is incessantly employed, begins to render them more particular, and to
clothe them in shapes more suitable to its natural comprehension. It represents them to
be sensible, intelligent beings, like mankind; actuated by love and hatred, and flexible by
gifts and entreaties, by prayers and sacrifices. Hence the origin of religion: And hence
the origin of idolatry or polytheism.”7 For all of his free-thinking, Hume continued to
entertain a view of human nature that was remarkably similar to Calvin’s: “The feeble
apprehensions of men cannot be satisfied with conceiving their deity as a pure spirit and
perfect intelligence.”8 To Hume, the mind was a forge of idols, and that was, simply put,
the origin of religion: the production of false images of God. Both concluded that the only
way to discipline this unruly human nature was to submit it to texts—the Bible for
Calvin, and history and philosophy for Hume: “The frail memories of men, their love of
exaggeration, their supine carelessness; these principles, if not corrected by books and
writing, soon pervert the account of historical events, where argument or reasoning has
little or no place, nor can ever recall the truth, which has once escaped those narrations.”9
Clearly, Protestantism and the European Enlightenment shared some very deep under-
standings about human nature, reason, and the power of print.
But there were countervailing views of imagination with roots in classical antiquity.
Aristotle had contended in De Anima that “when the mind is actively aware of anything
it is necessarily aware of it along with an image.”10 Luther echoed this view in his argu-
ment with those who stormed churches in the 1520s to remove or destroy imagery: “It is
impossible for me to hear and bear in mind [the Passion of Christ] without forming
mental images of it in my heart.”11 Renaissance Hermetic thinkers such as Marsilio
Ficino and, later, Giordano Bruno celebrated other ancient sources of thought on image,
memory, and imagination. Influenced by ancient works attributed to Hermes Trismag-
istus, Ficino and Bruno among many others believed that archetypal images were the
privileged medium for organizing memory to reflect the structure of the universe.
Frances Yates has characterized Hermeticism’s project of imagistic reflection as “organ-
ized through the art of memory into a magico-religious technique for grasping and uni-
fying the world of appearances through arrangements of significant images.”12 The Neo-
platonic tradition in late antiquity also argued against the empiricist notion that
imagination is limited to what it gathers from sensation, insisting that the mind knows
certain things innately, such as the laws of numbers and geometrical forms. This view
was endorsed for the Christian tradition by an authority no less than Augustine.13 It
allowed Augustine to affirm the view that Plotinus had taken earlier, correcting Plato’s
INTRODUCTION • 3
dismissal of the art of painting as lowly and imitative. “For the beautiful objects designed
by artists’ souls and realized by skilled hands,” Augustine wrote, “come from that beauty
which is higher than souls.”14
In the eighteenth century, Neoplatonism also informed the writings of the Third Earl
of Shaftesbury, Anthony Ashley Cooper, who took quite a different view than Hume
regarding the relationship of religion and imagination. For him, God was an artist who
impressed ideas on matter. Like Plotinus, Shaftesbury interpreted Plato against himself,
contending that artists do much more than superficially copy: they conceive and under-
stand what they create because their creative activity, like God’s creation of the cosmos,
draws on the principles that inform material things. Aesthetic taste and judgment were
therefore central to Shaftesbury’s philosophy. In particular, the sublime was the felt rev-
elation of the infinite. In 1714, Shaftesbury wrote a rhapsodic account of his mystical
experience of the sublimity of nature, a Neoplatonic paean to divinity, which discloses
itself to the imagination even as this faculty fails to encompass the grandeur of divine
creative power:
O glorious nature! supremely fair, and sovereignly good! All-loving and all-lovely, all-divine!
[ . . . ] O mighty nature! Wise substitute of providence! Impowered creatress! O thou
impowering divinity, supreme creator! Thee I invoke, and thee alone adore. To thee this
solitude, this place, these rural meditations are sacred [ . . . ] Thy being is boundless,
unsearchable, impenetrable. In thy immensity all thought is lost; fancy gives over its flight:
and wearied imagination spends itself in vain; finding no coast nor limit of this ocean, nor,
in the widest tract through which it soars, one point yet nearer the circumference than the
first center whence it parted. Thus having oft essayed, thus sallied forth into the wide
expanse, when I return again within myself, struck with the sense of this so narrow being,
of the fullness of that immense one; I dare no more behold the amazing depths, nor sound
the abyss of Deity.15
It was the aesthetic of the sublime that boosted the place of imagination in European
philosophical and artistic thought in the course of the eighteenth century, leading to the
heady spirituality of Romanticism. The sublime was a critical development in modern
aesthetics because it became a way of understanding how the arts, creativity, and imagi-
nation shaped the human subject. Since antiquity, beauty had been considered a moral
agent influencing character and improving behavior. The sublime appealed because it
modulated and gave language to power in the immediate formation of the moral and
spiritual self. The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries witnessed the ascent of the sub-
lime, gendered male and hailed as dramatic, uplifting, and spiritually irresistible. Kant
regarded the sublime as the version of the beautiful that transcended reason in its oper-
ation in the imagination. The sublime was the aesthetic lens under which the malleabil-
ity of the soul became most evident and the modern subject emerged, formed by taste
and refined feeling as much as by reason. Taking its place within what Michel Foucault
4 • INTRODUCTION
outlined as “the genealogy of the modern subject,” the aesthetic sensibility of the sublime
represented a significant development of the modern subject taking shape in and gener-
ating the imagined communities of sentiment, race, gender, religion, and nationhood.16
This is not an operation of domination in which human selves are stamped by an indus-
trial process over which they have no control. The allure of the sublime was precisely the
self-culture it promised. The power of imagination was something that the modern citi-
zen-subject could engage for himself (and the modern citizen-subject was normatively a
“him”). In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the forge of vision called the sublime
was the self-crafting vision of the modern (male) subject.
As a way of stoking the coals of imagination, the sublime was an aesthetic that took
many forms in artistic practice. A distinctive version of it is found in an early nineteenth
century poem-painting by the visionary poet and artist William Blake. A detail from it
appears on the cover of this book (see plate 7 for its original setting on the page). Blake’s
forge is virtually the opposite of Calvin’s, yet both hammer out fundamentally modern
conceptions of the human being. In Blake’s poem and image, the character of Los is
accosted by Spectre, the power of reason, one of four aspects of human nature—reason,
imagination/emotion, desire, and the personality—that came asunder in their fall from
primordial unity in the figure of Albion, dissolving when Albion fell asleep. Dedicated to
recovering the lost union, Los acts as the power of inspiration, which is affixed to imagi-
nation and emotion. Reason, grown cold from the fall, is the driving force behind thought
without passion, Blake’s diagnosis of religious dogma and orthodoxy. One might say that
Spectre is among the “mind-forg’d manacles” that Blake laments in Songs of Experience
(see “London”) as one of the forces concocted by humans that oppress humankind.
The rivalry of reason and imagination is rooted in the cultural history of modernity.
Each faculty has been hailed at various times as the basis for freedom from external
authority. The more liberty was associated with individual freedom and privacy, the more
subjectivity was hailed as the basis of the person, the more imagination was celebrated
as its proper domain and instrumentation. For Calvin, the mind was a forge of self-
deception; reading scripture and thinking clearly about its revealed truths was the proper
task of Christians. Blake’s image, on the other hand, is a characteristically modern and
very Romantic conception of the imagination, an engine or faculty long regarded by
Protestantism as suspect, as Calvin’s characterization of the mental forge indicates. But
Blake was a fervent artist and seer for whom the creative faculty of imagination was the
medium of revelation. For many of his contemporaries, such as Kant, imagination had
become a faculty of cognition, one of the mind’s sovereign capacities for making sense
of the world in terms that could not be reduced to those of reason.
The idea of the imagination as an internal faculty that processes sensation was of
course ancient. But in the modern era debates over its scope and reliability, its visual
characteristics, and its relation to ideas and words came to occupy increasing attention
with regard to the nature of art, cognition, and religious experience, particularly as each
of these related to the vexing problem of religious authority in an age when its traditional
INTRODUCTION • 5
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
CHAPTER XXVIII.
FREEDOM AT LAST ASSURED.
IMAGES
ISAAC W. HAYNE,
WM. H. SEWARD,
HENRY CLAY,
JEFFERSON DAVIS,
DANIEL WEBSTER,
STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS,
THOMAS JEFFERSON,
ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
JOHN C. CALHOUN,
J. J. CRITTENDEN
LOUIS T. WIGFALL
DAVID HUNTER
PATRICK HENRY
EDWARD D. BAKER
JOHN C. FREMONT
SIMON CAMERON
H. W. HALLECK
BENJ. F. BUTLER
LYMAN TRUMBULL
BENJ. F. WADE
GEO. B. MCCLELLAN
THAD. STEVENS
J. C. BRECKINRIDGE
PERSONAL MEMOIRS OF U. S.
GRANT
by Ulysses S. Grant
PREFACE.
"Man proposes and God disposes." There are but few important
events in the affairs of men brought about by their own choice.
Although frequently urged by friends to write my memoirs I had
determined never to do so, nor to write anything for publication. At
the age of nearly sixty-two I received an injury from a fall, which
confined me closely to the house while it did not apparently affect
my general health. This made study a pleasant pastime. Shortly
after, the rascality of a business partner developed itself by the
announcement of a failure. This was followed soon after by universal
depression of all securities, which seemed to threaten the extinction
of a good part of the income still retained, and for which I am
indebted to the kindly act of friends. At this juncture the editor of
the Century Magazine asked me to write a few articles for him. I
consented for the money it gave me; for at that moment I was living
upon borrowed money. The work I found congenial, and I
determined to continue it. The event is an important one for me, for
good or evil; I hope for the former.
In preparing these volumes for the public, I have entered upon
the task with the sincere desire to avoid doing injustice to any one,
whether on the National or Confederate side, other than the
unavoidable injustice of not making mention often where special
mention is due. There must be many errors of omission in this work,
because the subject is too large to be treated of in two volumes in
such way as to do justice to all the officers and men engaged. There
were thousands of instances, during the rebellion, of individual,
company, regimental and brigade deeds of heroism which deserve
special mention and are not here alluded to. The troops engaged in
them will have to look to the detailed reports of their individual
commanders for the full history of those deeds.
The first volume, as well as a portion of the second, was written
before I had reason to suppose I was in a critical condition of health.
Later I was reduced almost to the point of death, and it became
impossible for me to attend to anything for weeks. I have, however,
somewhat regained my strength, and am able, often, to devote as
many hours a day as a person should devote to such work. I would
have more hope of satisfying the expectation of the public if I could
have allowed myself more time. I have used my best efforts, with
the aid of my eldest son, F. D. Grant, assisted by his brothers, to
verify from the records every statement of fact given. The comments
are my own, and show how I saw the matters treated of whether
others saw them in the same light or not.
With these remarks I present these volumes to the public, asking
no favor but hoping they will meet the approval of the reader.
U. S. GRANT.
MOUNT MACGREGOR, NEW YORK, July 1, 1885.
CONTENTS
VOLUME I.
CHAPTER I. ANCESTRY—BIRTH—BOYHOOD.
VOLUME II.
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
ebooknice.com