Actually, the way that medieval historians and archaeologists have discussed "race" basically has defined it as if they ignored a century of historiography in social sciences on the term and especially the last 50 years. So no, medieval historians and archaeologists did 1/2
-
-
not discuss "race" before 2010 in the way that actually attends to the definition that is not a white supremacist, pre-Civil Rights definition. If you wish to read more about that, you can wait for the AHR article that they have asked me for that I expect will be out in 2020.
3 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
I would be VERY intrigued to see what Iberia folks say, especially the folks who told me that we’ve already been doing this for like half a century. Or that “this” is an English dept problem and that our world is different and can’t/ shouldn’t be shoehorned. Hmmmm
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's always interesting when ppl just don't want to give Gerry Heng her due or decide she's in hegemonic English even though she speaks & works in many languages & is a postcolonial subject of the English empire. And thus, so far from English hegemony. You have to wonder 1/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @dorothyk98 @ChadLeahy1 and
how much of these things are about not wanting to give a racialized subject of the postcolonial empire her due for figuring out a major thing in the field. So is she a minoritized gendered voice, a subaltern, or is she the hegemony? You can't have it both ways. 2/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @dorothyk98 @ChadLeahy1 and
I am pretty sure she speaks & works in several more languages than most European medievalists who are not concentrating on English. But also, what discussion in the Spanish/Portuguese empire from those minoritized/racialized bodies have discussed race for a long time. 3/
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @dorothyk98 @ChadLeahy1 and
I see people in fields related to the Caribbean, the Americas, Africa, Mediterranean, etc. discussing race in relation to that empire, so maybe you all want to figure out what that discussion has been. But as for general social science historiography, being frozen in the 50s 4/
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
in other news: an observation from earlier today: not much Iberia going on at the next installment of raceb4race. I can think of several ways to read that, but it’s an interesting thing to note.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
But that is about firmly centering BIPOC scholars. And also it is about the Folger and the topic. You do realize the first one was about those who got shut out at Kzoo & then extending that convo to Early Modern. There are 8 more
#RaceB4Race things planned for the next 4 years.2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
I confess I hadnt realized that, Dorothy. Had some conversations earlier today about this that I see now were def misguided. Thanks for setting me straight.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
RaceB4Race began b/c MOCs got shut out of Kzoo19. Everyone who spoke at the first one who was pre1500 was scheduled to do stuff on race at Kzoo19. But they shut us out. ACMRS invited us to do this to address the shut out.
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.