Historiographic Essay help?

[Fake Boris]

Well, I could see a TA advising me not to portray Wittgenstein as a German idealist…

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Ninot
im posting here way too much, and writing my essay way too little

Set a link to this thread in your essay.

Nah.....

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by BeBro
What makes you believe that Alfred had an idea of a nation (as said above, opposed to kingdom, rule etc.), and why do you think only his thoughts (and maybe those of "intellectuals") do matter here?

As my wiki quote demonstrated that even in the 900s, the idea of a nation was formulated. And the intellectuals and rulers thoughts matter because they are ones who formulate these classfications. The hoi polloi didn't come up with a nation-state, but the diplomats and learned men did.

[BeBMan]

But we can't be sure at all how "nationality" is used there. The guy probably talked in medieval Latin, we don't even know what meaning he intended, since the Latin "natio" can mean a lot of things: birth, origin, people, class, clan (not sure if those are 100% correctly translated into English from the German meanings of "natio") and other things. If he uses it in another meaning as we do then an essay using "nation" would at least require IMO a clarification in what sense it uses the term.

And the intellectuals and rulers thoughts matter because they are ones who formulate these classfications. The hoi polloi didn't come up with a nation-state, but the diplomats and learned men did.

If those classifications do not lead to an identity shared by more than a handful of people it is not justified to speak of a nation as de facto existent (see LOTMs point), at least not in the modern sense, certainly not a nation-state.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by BeBro
But we can't be sure at all how "nationality" is used there. The guy probably talked in medieval Latin, we don't even know what meaning he intended, since the Latin "natio" can mean a lot of things: birth, origin, people, class, clan (not sure if those are 100% correctly translated into English from the German meanings of "natio") and other things. If he uses it in another meaning as we do then an essay using "nation" would at least require IMO a clarification in what sense it uses the term.



If those classifications do not lead to an identity shared by more than a handful of people it is not justified to speak of a nation as de facto existent (see LOTMs point), at least not in the modern sense, certainly not a nation-state.

You're absolutely right. When looking at ancient/medieval cultures one should always look at how the world was perceived by the people concerned.
On the other hand, we transpose our own views to medieval/ancient situations all the time anyway, so this is nitt-picking!!

I wouldn't call them nations either tho

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by BeBro


What makes you believe that Alfred had an idea of a nation (as said above, opposed to kingdom, rule etc.), ?

Because the Anglo-Saxon heptarchy of kingdoms had been shattered by the invasions of the Norsemen.

Wessex (the kingdom of the West Saxons) was last man standing- so Alfred, its ruler, took on the title of the 'rex Anglorum Saxonum or rex Angul-Saxonum'- which monkish chroniclers took to refer to the state, not just the peoples of England.

The problem with any early form of nationalism or conception of nationhood is that it is invariably tinged by the prejudices and propaganda of the ages following- so that Hanoverian and Victorian Britain had flourishing Alfred cults- hardly a surprise given the Germanic origins and culture of the dynasties.

Alfred was also fortunate in having a biographer, Asser, who erred on the side of hagiography, but that isn't too much of a shock given the state of affairs that Alfred delivered the nation from.

But Alfred was also a learned man in his own right, one of the few royals before modern times to write a book- he could read and write in Old English and read and write Latin too.

He established an educational system to provide a cultural backbone for the new united Danish-English nation that followed on from his defeat of the Danish armies. He ensured that his new state was ably defended, both at sea and on land, by the creation of fortified 'burhs' (strongholds) and a national navy of longships of a design which improved upon that previously used by the Danes.

But equally importantly for political 'national' unity, he sought the eradication of the petty differences between the old Saxon kingdoms by creating a single code of law and introducing the equivalent of county boundaries.

What should be stressed is that the idea of a nation (rather than just a particular Anglo-Saxon kingdom or dynasty) survived not just because of opposition to the threat from the Danes (and the West Britons of Kernow, the Welsh and the Scots) but also because of the successful marriage of the Danes and Anglo-Saxons into a new unified hybrid nation with superior trading links across the North Sea and Channel.

It even survived the extinction of the royal line of Harold Godwinsson, as rebellions and opposition to the Normans following the defeat at Hastings showed.