HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE MIDDLE AGES - Julian Emperor
Share Embed Flag
Download ePaper

HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE MIDDLE AGES - Julian Emperor

HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE MIDDLE AGES - Julian Emperor HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE MIDDLE AGES - Julian Emperor

juliano.multiculturas.com
from juliano.multiculturas.com More from this publisher
21.07.2015 Views

INTRODUCTIONDeborah Mauskopf Deliyannis. . . medieval historiography, by all critical odds, is inauthentic, unscientific, unreliable,ahistorical, irrational, borderline illiterate, and, worse yet, unprofessional. 1In recent years, much has been written about the ‘memory’ of thepast in the Middle Ages. 2 Taken broadly, this includes a considerationof any sort of memorialization of events or persons of the past,from the recitation of the names of the dead at funerary masses, tothe production of images and monuments, to the creation of publicceremonies and rituals, to the recitation of narratives, to the writingof texts. All of these represent strategies by which people, sometimespublicly, sometimes more privately, appropriate the past for theirown purposes.Of these strategies, the one that most explicitly claims to be performingthis function is the writing of historical texts. Historia was atype of writing that had a long tradition in classical antiquity.Moreover, the Jewish and Christian religions were both by definitionhistorical, in that they were based, at least in part, on historical andbiographical texts. Medieval authors inherited both these traditions.There was thus no question, in the Middle Ages, that history shouldbe written, as one suitable strategy for remembering a particular setof events or people. However, history was not recognized as an independentbranch of study; it was usually classified as a branch ofgrammar or rhetoric. Historians came from many different backgroundsand wrote for many different purposes. New forms, andnew ideas of what the content should be, were introduced at variouspoints. Sometimes medieval authors consciously imitated classicalor biblical models, but most authors were more interested inimitating each other.1Spiegel (1983), 43–44.2See Geary (1994); Coleman (1992); Wickham and Fentress (1992); Clanchy(1993).

2 DEBORAH MAUSKOPF DELIYANNISMuch of our knowledge of ‘what happened’ in the Middle Agesis based on these historical texts. Whether or not we admit it, theway a society is presented by a historian or historians often colorsour interpretation of that society: sixth-century Francia from Gregoryof Tours, for example, or fourteenth-century France and Englandfrom Froissart. Scholars have long realized that all such texts areconstructed, even (especially) if they seem to be transparent narrationsof events, and that it is important to understand the author’s sourcesand literary models, the contexts in which he wrote, his purposesfor writing and his presumed audience, before evaluating the informationcontained in the text. Historical texts can thus be approachedas objects created by the efforts of individuals, and/or as productsof collective memory, reflections of contemporary mentalités.Naturally, each historical text has its own history, sometimes avery complex one. In this volume, we ask whether it is possible togeneralize about the way history was written, given a very disparatebody of historical texts from the Middle Ages. In order to providea summary and synthesis of medieval historiography, we must considerthe ways in which historical texts can or should be meaningfullycategorized, subdivided, and discussed. There are two ways topose this question: how do we categorize these texts, and how werethey categorized when they were written? Both ways of looking atthe material are useful. By looking at the entire body of medievalhistoriography, we are able to see patterns, paths of influence andsimilarities that allow us to draw conclusions about the function andmeaning of the texts. The question is, did medieval authors themselvesnotice such similarities; did they categorize the products oftheir scholarship in the same ways?Medieval Understanding of HistoriographyIn the Middle Ages, the use of the word ‘historia’ was not restrictedto historiography. 3 Historia literally means ‘story’. In the Middle Agesit could refer to narrative works of art, saints’ lives, parts of theBible, the literal sense of scriptural texts, liturgical offices, epic poems,3See especially Knape (1984).

2 DEBORAH MAUSKOPF DELIYANNISMuch of our knowledge of ‘what happened’ in the Middle Agesis based on these historical texts. Whether or not we admit it, theway a society is presented by a historian or historians often colorsour interpretation of that society: sixth-century Francia from Gregoryof Tours, for example, or fourteenth-century France and Englandfrom Froissart. Scholars have long realized that all such texts areconstructed, even (especially) if they seem to be transparent narrationsof events, and that it is important to understand the author’s sourcesand literary models, the contexts in which he wrote, his purposesfor writing and his presumed audience, before evaluating the informationcontained in the text. Historical texts can thus be approachedas objects created by the efforts of individuals, and/or as productsof collective memory, reflections of contemporary mentalités.Naturally, each historical text has its own history, sometimes avery complex one. In this volume, we ask whether it is possible togeneralize about the way history was written, given a very disparatebody of historical texts from the Middle Ages. In order to providea summary and synthesis of medieval historiography, we must considerthe ways in which historical texts can or should be meaningfullycategorized, subdivided, and discussed. There are two ways topose this question: how do we categorize these texts, and how werethey categorized when they were written? Both ways of looking atthe material are useful. By looking at the entire body of medievalhistoriography, we are able to see patterns, paths of influence andsimilarities that allow us to draw conclusions about the function andmeaning of the texts. The question is, did medieval authors themselvesnotice such similarities; did they categorize the products oftheir scholarship in the same ways?Medieval Understanding of HistoriographyIn the Middle Ages, the use of the word ‘historia’ was not restrictedto historiography. 3 Historia literally means ‘story’. In the Middle Agesit could refer to narrative works of art, saints’ lives, parts of theBible, the literal sense of scriptural texts, liturgical offices, epic poems,3See especially Knape (1984).

logo

products

Resources

Company

Terms of service
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Cookie settings
Imprint
Change language
Made with love in Switzerland
© 2024 Yumpu.com all rights reserved

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!