Post #4 - William of Malmesbury and the Historian's Burden

[Chris B.]

 

While reading Malmesbury, I was pleasantly surprised to find how conscious William was of a danger particular relevant to the historian. In all actuality, all academia should be cognizant of this particular fault in much scholarship - and their are many who are - but I have run across few scholars who confront the danger as openly as William. What is this danger you ask? The danger of the historian making his subject intolerably boring. On numerous occasions William states things much like, while copying from source material, "A right-thinking person will rather forgive the necessities placed upon a historian" (Res Pontificum 30), and later "I myself have inserted [apostolic letters] here, no inappropriately, provided the reader has not been bored stiff" (Res Pontificum 43) and "I will just pick out the main points, in my concern to avoid boring my readers" (Res Pontificum 74). William recognizes he is walking a fine line: he wants to include all the relevant information, like charters establishing the primacy of Canterbury, and yet does not want to "[bore] the reader stiff."

 

The particular pitfall that William takes such great pains to navigate often seems like the proverbial elephant in the room amongst historians. We enjoy our own subjects so much that we can often forget - or neglect to recognize - that others might not. But here's the interesting thing I believe about history: I never let anyone tell me they do not like history without challenging them on it; we all love history, but it has to be on the right subject. Even my dad and brother, who are as far removed from academia as one can get, their eyes light up if I start talking about the history of Harley-Davidson or the motorcycle in general, or the history of farming, or the history of the Seven Devils mountain range. If I can find the right thing that interests them and engage them, then I've got them. No other academic discipline that I know of has this kind of appeal. It is laughable to watch my brother's stare grow blank if I even mention things like Pauline theology or the problem of evil.

 

I as a historian have a tendency to get caught up in what I find fascinating - minutiae about personalities and battles and conjectures - that I often forget to keep the narrative moving. It is a gift that I find William - and Bede before him - pulling off quite well. It is one of the reasons I appreciate the writings of Liddel-Hart (if you have not read Scipio Africanus - Greater than Napolean, it comes highly recommended.) We have all gotten bogged down in writing that just is not that interesting - think "cliometrics" or many survey texts - and that is a danger that all historians must be cognizant of.  

[Abby Thornton]

Chris,

 

I loved this post! I really appreciate your passion for history and what you find interesting. That's kind of how I am with words and Latin - I could talk about it all day long, literally. Can't wait to meet you on Monday!

 

 

~~ Abby

[Cara Bergeron]

Chris,

Your post reminded me of several that Neville Morley makes in Writing Ancient History, which we read last semester. I know that historians are passionate about the written word, and, as Christians, the Word should always be forefront in our arsenal of tools. But there are other media, additional to the written or oral narrative, available to the historian not willing to bore his audience. This is true especially when a historian is willing to discipline himself/herself to learn a new skill. Poetry, fine art, design, literature, and theater are all powerful means of conveying historical material, if only we can find serious historians who are willing to step far enough onto an unexplored historiographical limb. Thus far, historians have not taken these media seriously, because the designer (or poet, or moviemaker, or printmaker) hasn't known enough of the history, hasn't doubted the historical myth enough, to present history significantly. The visual or auditory candy is there, but the considered perspective is often not complementary. This is where I think that the liberal arts can be so key to bringing about a fusion of disciplines which will save us all from WM's fear that we will be "bored to death."

[Chris Schlect]

Cara,

Remember Galinsky's thorough use of material culture back in the Rome class? Actually, material culture like what you mention is utilized far more robustly by the last generation of historians than previously. (Earlier, historians camped out on documents.)

CRS

[Joe Rigney]

It also seems that one of William's burdens as a historian is driven by the gap in the historical record. He is not interested in replicating or replacing Bede; he wants to fill in the gaps left by the slothful, so that posterity would not be deprived of the knowledge of some crucial information (GP Book 1, Ch. 42). Thus, part of what drives William is lacunae, missing pieces in the record of God's actions in England.

Joe Rigney

612.455.3420

joe.r...@gmail.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HIST 504: Medieval History and Historiography" group.
To post to this group, send email to hist...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hist-504+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/hist-504/-/S3oTYkz9ynIJ.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.