Chasing the ghost of von Ranke

So I'm writing a Leeds paper about a ghost. It's the ghost of "everybody says" or "people used to say" or "common knowledge." It's a paper that came out of a few conversations, conversations where people said, "But X couldn't do Y," or,"But that wasn't supposed to happen," or, "but you can't trust this source because it: isn't what you think it is; is possibly (or is) a forgery; is not the original, but a 12th C recreation; probably didn't have that witness list (which by the way might not really be a witness list) attached to the original, etc."

So I thought, "let's try to figure out what it is we know, and what it is we don't, and who told us this stuff that is common knowledge." I thought I needed to know this because not to know it, and more importantly, not to discuss the historiography and the arguments scholars have had before sticking in my own oar, seemed shoddy work.

Then I talked to a colleague who said, "if it's old and obviously wrong, I just ignore it! Why document that someone else argued against what you are now going to demonstrate?" Well, that's a good question. I think that we need to trace the arguments a bit, if only because people like me, who are to some extent self-taught, would like a bit of help.

But the more I look at things, including articles by a single scholar that say one thing 20 years ago, then suddenly don't, and perhaps mention the reason for their change of heart in a very small footnote, the more I wonder if I have to worry quite as much.

So my paper will be methodological, and will likely focus on the evidence for what seems to have been true.

And the conclusion? History is complicated. Carolingian history is packed with people who say one thing and do another. Theory is fine, but practice often diverges from it. Basically, if you are a historian who does the job at all well, you'll use the evidence honestly, draw your conclusions, and point out where we have to use the sources with big chunks of salt, and why.

It's not going to be wie es eigentlich gewesen. But I think (or at least this is how I am justifying it to myself) that sometimes, the best we can do is present the evidence, explain why we think it means what it does and how it fits in, and admit there are big holes that other people may interpret differently. Sometimes, it's not about knowing the answers, I think. Sometimes, good history is about pointing out where and why there are questions we might not be able to answer. Or so I hope.

Let the panic begin

Well, I leave for London in two days. I have promised to finish my admin stuff Real Soon Now -- and that really means by the end of next week. I also promised a group of fairly intimidating women scholars that I would submit my paper from Berks to an Actual Journal by the end of next week. In the meanwhile, I am beginning to panic about my Leeds paper and why the hell I thought it would be a good idea. Just kill me now.

At least I will be in the place of peace that is the BL by Tuesday...

In the meantime, I am trying to get together my life, my house, and denying it all by watching Season One of Being Human.

this confuses me

This confuses me

SO I'm in the British Library, more falling asleep than working (I only got here yesterday morning, and had only three hours' sleep Tuesday night), and read something I've read over and over for years... basically, an author states that lay elites and ecclesiastical elites had similar interests. In this case, we're talking about charters. But really, is this supposed to be a surprise? Because I thought it was pretty clear by now that we are talking about the same people, by and large. Yes, ecclesiastics do have additional interests, because their allegiance is, or should be, somewhat divided.* But hasn't there been enough work done, at least for the Franks, that we can now assume that the two groups are generally related to each other by kinship, and that, especially in the cases of proprietary churches and monasteries (or royal ones), the holders of ecclesiastical office are doing it precisely because they are connected by blood to the lay elites?

Or am I missing something important?



*should be in the sense that they are supposed to be looking out for the church's property and interests, whoever their relatives.

Blogger Meet-up!

Blogger Meet-up!

Met up last night with Matt Gabriele and Jonathan Jarrett and a senior colleague for a drink and dinner, and as usual felt pretty outclassed -- golly those guys are smart! It was far too short a get-together, though, even though it was long enough to convince me I should go to Haskins this year, if only to schmooze!

Anyway, it was a jump-around conversation that has started lots of things in my head -- if I can only find the time to write them. I have to say, it's hard to explain to the family that, after a day of reading and trying to write academic things, I still want to come home and write. To them, I'm on holiday. To me, I'm on a work schedule, and am trying to squeeze days of holi in amongst the work. Speaking of which, I've got two days of time booked with LDvery muchW this weekend. And a trip to see a colleague in Oxford on Wednesday, w00t!

A suggestion to the British Library

A suggestion to the British Library

Dear BL,

In addition to all those other restrictions (with which I agree), perhaps it might also be a good thing to remind users that the heavy use of scents, perfumes, etc., can make working in the BL very uncomfortable for one's neighbors -- especially those for whom scents can trigger migraines.

Cheers,

ADM


PS -- maybe the whole world would like to think about this? I love perfume, myself. I try to make sure when I wear it that a person has to get really up close and personal to smell it, though.

First weekend in London

First Weekend in London

Friday was all BL, except for lunch at my favourite nearby pub with a friend now famous for the picture of him dancing at Kazoo.

Saturday, after the kids went to Kung Fu and I went and worked in the BL for a bit, we went bowling. In Finchley. Bowling over here is nothing like bowling in the US. First, way more kids than adults. Second, most of the lanes had bumpers up to prevent gutter balls -- trying to convince my niece that it was really not acceptable to use the bumpers for bank shots was a non-starter. Mostly, though, the difference was that there was no bowling etiquette in evidence. It was really kind of weird for me, rules-oriented person that I am. And, as usual, I was rubbish.

After that, we went for a walk in Golders Hill park, and had an ice cream. It was a really nice walk, and the family bought a membership for the tennis courts. We went and looked at the animals -- there were lots of empty cages, which I think was good, since they were rather small, mean places not really suited to wild animals -- and then came home and had a lovely dinner after I demonstrated my rubbish talents at Halo 3.

Yesterday, the weather was not wonderful, so we stayed in for the most part. I went grocery shopping, during which time the weather held (yay). Then there were alternating bouts of Halo and Wimbledon. I tried to read blogs and catch up on the news, but to no avail.

Now I'm in avoidance mode, because I've just picked up my first load of books, and realised I've picked up the wrong edition of the [book whose new reprint edition with introduction and electronic index I am working on] (wrong in the sense that I need to read the preface to the reprint edition and I got the original, which I can still use for some things), and two volumes of [dinky local journal about my favourite monastery], entitled, "Lots of long German words on which manuscripts can be attributed to said monastery"

Thank goodness I can make more cuts on the pedagogical article today and hide from the evil German stuff.

I Can Haz Kontrack

I Can Haz Kontrack!

Got an e-mail as I was leaving, which basically said that, under German law, the emails already exchanged on my book-length project were enough documentation to show a legal contract. This scares me a little, and makes me happy I was very careful to mention and make a correction on subvention amounts, but I am also relieved! I have a contract! I must now finish the bastard thing.

Fortunately, I am right this minute sitting in the British Library, having arrived this morning at 7:00 (to the country, not the BL). I can do work here! After I finish my article revisions. And concurrently with writing a very overdue review.

My Dean will now be both pleased and annoyed. Contract = good, but the timing means that this project probably won't count towards my next promotion. Me, I'm fine, because I think it will seal the deal on this promotion and the security of my position at SLAC. And, because one does not stop looking at ads if one hopes one day for the Dream Job, I hope it will make me look just that little bit better on paper.