Post #4- William of Malmesbury

[Abby Thornton]

What problems or challenges is William aware of? How does he deal with them? What is the historian’s goal and purpose? By what standards or criteria does William assess a piece of historical writing?

As a historian, William of Malmesbury recognized that he faced various challenges and difficulties, so he strove to overcome those hurdles. He understood that he needed to write in an interesting manner in order to truly be informative. He disliked boring, “ugly” writing and wrote for all people (present and future) so they would understand the past and be instructed for the future.  He was also careful when writing about recent events saying “that in works of this character truth is often disastrous and falsehood profitable, for in writing of contemporaries it is dangerous to criticize, while praise is sure of a welcome “(Gesta Regum Anglorum, preface). William wrote of current actions in a way that neither deserved praise, nor criticism.

There are three purposes that are unique to William’s works:  The first was his informational purpose - his desire “to fill up the chasm of 223 years” between Bede and Eadmer (known for his brilliant biography of St. Anselm). The second was William’s stylistic purpose - his work is dotted with sophisticated phrasing and beautiful stories. The third was his pastoral purpose – the significance of reading and studying history for the lessons that it gives and teaches us.

William’s aim was always for truth and knowledge; he was very particular when it came to assessing manuscripts and writing. He based the validity of manuscripts on how well they collaborated with others, whether or not the manuscript was reliable and consistent in other accounts, and on the reputation and trustworthiness of the manuscript’s source. William was so determined in the search for truth that he would consult a source’s source, even if universally considered “sound.”

William, despite his unimpressive education, was, and continues to be, one of the finest historians of all time. He imparts to his readers a rare historical context and purpose. William of Malmesbury stands on an academic and historical pedestal, passionate for truth and knowledge, and revered for his outstanding articulation.

[Jasmine]

Your last paragraph is very nice articulated. I am liking William just as much as Bede! 

[Laura King]

Very good response, Abby. I really enjoyed the way you framed your three points, particularly the pastoral aspect of William's work. However I think I would disagree with your comment that William's education was unimpressive, the man travelled all over England gathering information for his work and, as you said, he was filling a historical gap in English history. That's pretty impressive to me. Oh and he then wrote the entire work in Latin - pretty amazing! Thanks

Laura

[Chris Schlect]

Abby,

Well done here.

You make a remark about the credibility of William's sources. George noticed this also. As you press ahead in the readings, can you discern what constitutes an authoritative, reliable source for William? Can you tease out any criteria he measures his sources against as a test of veracity or believability?

This is pretty much the same question I pasted to George's thread. Anyone is welcome to take it up.

CRS

[Chris B.]

Great response, Abby! I'm really excited to sit in a class with you and discuss your love for William. I personally was pleasantly surprised by the quality of his work, as I had not been exposed to it much of it before. I agree that William was more aware of what you call "stylistic writing" than perhaps are some historians, and this is in-part why his history is so palatable. He goes out of his way to avoid boring the reader while still including what he considered relevant material. His method does bring up a tantalizing question, however: how much "history" ended up on the cutting room floor? Was there anything you'd like to know about that didn't make it past Williams close editing eye?

See you all in a few days! TO THE RIVER!!

CB