The Past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography

Parallax: Re-visions of Culture and Society

by Gabrielle M. Spiegel

This study of familiar medieval histories and chronicles argues that the historian should be aware of the discursive nature, literary modes, and ideological investments of such texts as well as the social circumstances to which they were applied and by which they were generated. Postmodernism has challenged historians to look at historical texts in a new way and to be skeptical of the claim that one can confidently retrieve "fact" from historical writings. In The Past as Text historian Gabrielle M. Spiegel sets out to read medieval histories and chronicles in light of the critical-theoretical problems raised by postmodernism. At the same time she urges a method of analysis that enables the reader to recognize these texts simultaneously as artifice and as works deeply embedded in a historically determinate, knowable social world. Beginning with a theoretical basis for the study of medieval historiography, Spiegel demonstrates her theory in practice, offering readings of medieval histories and chronicles as literary, social, and political constructions. The study insightfully concludes that historians should be equally aware of the discursive nature, literary modes, and ideological investments of such texts and the social circumstances to which they were applied and by which they were generated. Arguing for the "social logic of the text," Spiegel provides historians with a way to retrieve the social significance and conceptual claims produced by these medieval or any historical writings.

Genres: History, Nonfiction

320 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1997

Reviews

[Judyta Szacillo · Rating 2 out of 5]

To say it gently, I’m not a big fan of the Derrida-Foucault clan. To say it more honestly, I see those famous postmodernists as big phoneys. In their logorrheic opera, they pretend to demonstrate new approaches, but all they do is either reduce all analysis to complete nonsense, or repeat exactly what has been said earlier by academics associated with the Annales school and alike, but in so many big words as to twist it nearly beyond recognition. That’s what I see also in this book, so I can’t with clear conscience recommend it. The case studies are not bad, but the theoretical introduction is a textbook example of the abovementioned postmodernist sham: it claims that the following studies are something else than they actually are.

[Steph · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just overall obsessed and LOVED the section of genealogy

[Eric Pecile · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent book outlining the problems that postmodern theory has caused for historians and how to reconcile those issues with the practice of writing history in the medieval period. Very effectively addresses the need to historicize medieval authors and account for the purposes of their writing. Provides an easy to understand general theory of medieval historical analysis and applies to some case studies concisely and precisely.

[Mwanafunzi · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a stimulating book. The “unimpressed” reviews by others strike me as either not fully attentive to Spiegel’s considerable efforts to lay out her position, or otherwise the result of very selective reading… This latter suspicion arises from the fact that Spiegel explicitly disavows features of postmodernism that she sees as unproductive, unconvincing, or existentially threatening to the practice of History. The theoretical chapters are dedicated to making these points clear, while the chapters on method & interpretation directly invoke said theoretical groundwork. She cogently and convincingly argues that while postmodernism’s influence on various disciplines led to some groundbreaking work and to important challenges for historians, we nevertheless need a theoretical and methodological “middle ground” in History somewhere between the far reaches of postmodernism on the one hand and of positivism on the other. Critiques or extensions of the specific features of the “middle ground” for which she argues, or of her advancement of “the social logic of the text,” may be warranted and necessary. Flippant mischaracterizations of her work are not. There are other merits of this book worth discussing, especially the penultimate chapter on social change and literary language in 13th-century France, but I wanted to emphasize my reaction to earlier reviews lest others are unduly put off by unfair assessments of this generative collection of essays.

[cee · Rating 4 out of 5]

it was good but i'm not sure how much of it i 100% understood

[Victoria · Rating 2 out of 5]

Utterly enraging. First part discusses the application of postmodern theory to the practice of medieval history, functioning partly as a critique of medievalists generally for their reluctance to engage with critical theory, and partly as a critique of (North) American medievalists specifically for being monoglot, backward, and disrespectful of the middle ages as a European field. Second part discusses the historiography of Old French chronicles, which attempts to inscribe (aristocratic) cultural meaning on these texts as constructs, despite only poor grounding in the social context. Not impressed.