In my stunted career as a scholar, I'd read promissory notes, papal bulls and guidelines for Inquisitorial interrogation. Dante, too. Boccaccio... But after 1400? Nihil.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It was in the Papal States that I studied the Roman Question. I traveled over every part of the country; I conversed with men of all opinions, examined things very closely, and collected my information on the spot.
I realised that today we are very much interested in reading about subjects that would have also interested people in the 1500s: ghosts, demons and things that go bump in the night.
I was brought up Catholic, and I felt the power of art from a very young age - seeing the brutality of all those images of flayed apostles and tortured saints was a pretty strong introduction.
My father was highbrow: writing long biographies of Dante and stuff like that. Ghostwriting sportsman memoirs? That was sort of the lowest of the low.
I value my Catholic background very much. It taught me not to be afraid of rigorous thought, for one thing.
I studied with the idea of becoming a Catholic priest.
In the long run of history, the censor and the inquisitor have always lost. The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas.
I was studying Francis of Assisi for quite some time, when Benedict was still the pope. And I was studying it for a song that I did for my last album, 'Banga.'
A little skill in antiquity inclines a man to Popery.
I can find my way from 500 A.D. through to 1066 pretty well as an amateur historian.
No opposing quotes found.