And that argument is silly because it assumes that we don’t already make changes or advocate for changes in scholarship. When I was in my undergrad my archaeology textbooks became incorrect the year I purchased them
-
-
Replying to @AdmiralHip @stmarnock69 and
Because the Neanderthal genome sequencing was released 6 months after I purchased that textbook, which said that we have no relation to Neanderthals. Also, people were saying Anglo-Saxon England. Removing “Anglo-Saxon” and replacing it with “Early Medieval”
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @stmarnock69 and
Is in fact more inclusive of the multitudes of identities at the time.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @DollyJorgensen and
My way of thinking is that tying a period to a contemporary geographical area has greater utility than calling a period “Anglo-Saxon”. No Jutes? No Irish? No Ramano-Britons? England has always been a place of many peoples. IMHO if we wish to label that period, geographical
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @stmarnock69 @AdmiralHip and
designation has greater utility than a fictive imagined community which Anglo-Saxon clearly denotes.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @stmarnock69 @AdmiralHip and
I’ll only add to all this that I acknowledge the problem - but I disagree w proposed solution. I’m inspired by work of Sara Bond who has countered appropriation of white classical statues w writing on polychromy & racial diversity in Rome. To me it’s better approach.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DollyJorgensen @AdmiralHip and
It is an interesting and important conversation to have. I’m an admirer of
@SarahEBond work and I think classicists have much to say about how language is deployed. I am not a historian so can’t speak from a knowledge base. I’m also a white person who has come to this discussion2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @stmarnock69 @DollyJorgensen and
via the interventions of people of colour, such as
@ISASaxonists There is history of racism which, in my unlearned opinion, infuses the term. As a non-historian, my encounters with the term are always defined by an identitarian element. One which very few people in Early1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @stmarnock69 @DollyJorgensen and
Mediaeval England claimed, but very, very many people in the 18th-21st Century Anglophone world do. I don’t believe that the term has no utility nor that all those who defend its retention are racist. I think that the harm in terms of people of colour who have an interest in the
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @stmarnock69 @DollyJorgensen and
field should not be disregarded because of innate academic conservatism regarding descriptors.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Dr C. M. Bromstick 🧹, Dublin Retweeted Erik "Mr. Bloodaxe" Wade
Indeed! Also this thread is very apt.https://twitter.com/erik_kaars/status/1193539823748993025?s=21 …
Dr C. M. Bromstick 🧹, Dublin added,
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.