One problem is that your perspective is blind to comparative history, uninterested in European kinship patterns compared to those of elsewhere. That's the core of this paper. You have said nothing about it. Michael Mitterauer was aware of it.
-
-
Replying to @whyvert
The paper is very Eurocentric. My focus is medieval European history, I am not an expert on outside of Europe. The article however ignores not only the Early Church in the ME and North Africa but completely flattens the experience of medieval Europe very badly.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @whyvert
It assumes certain things through the context of medieval Christianity poorly. How can they possibly make comparisons when they don’t have an understanding of the period? They cannot even have accurate data sets.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdmiralHip
So Michael Mitterauer didn't understand medieval Europe?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @whyvert
I don't actually know who that is. I am responding to the science article here. Not to whoever you are speaking about. I'm not familiar with every historian out there. But he wasn't cited in the paper either. Not sure what you are getting at here.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @whyvert
I looked up his publication. I've never come across it, but if they were basing their research off of his premise then I'm surprised it's not referenced at all. I haven't read the book, but being a historian does not make one right. I'd have to read the book though.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip
If Mitterauer, an historian, had a reasonable interpretation of European medieval history, then so do these authors. Their basic arguments re importance of kinship are the same.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @whyvert @AdmiralHip
It’s the data of the paper at hand that is at stake here. The argument that is built on it stands or falls on the data, and historians have pointed out so many holes and flaws in the data that the argument is untrustworthy. Mitterauer is a non sequitur.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @katherineschof8 @AdmiralHip
Instead of asserting dogmatically that the data says x, it's a scholars responsibility to try to demonstrate it, by laying out that data. No historian has done that.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @whyvert @AdmiralHip
They have done it over and over in their published books and papers, which I would advise you to go away and read. It just suits your worldview not to believe the actual experts on the medieval data. But anyway:pic.twitter.com/GIbjyd0tZd
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like
These fools don’t care what we have to say, evidently.
-
-
Replying to @AdmiralHip @whyvert
Because it’s all about owning the libs. Even when it really, really isn’t.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Replying to @AdmiralHip @katherineschof8
And now you resort to insults.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.