I'm thinking of writting a book

A history book about all the things that we don't really know. Mostly it's because I've just read a book on the Picts and an now reading another by the same author on Aethelflaed, Lady of the Mercians, in both books there seem to be some rather large assumptons made unsupported by any evidence and lacking in any discussion about why the author has taken this position. I've come across this in a few books, it's somethng I'd expect more from much older books, but not from modern ones. I thought the days of being "told things" by historians was long gone, this particular author mentions all the advances made to the subjects he's writing about by geneticists and archaelogists how how they're changing our undstanding and then says he's not discussing them! 

There was another book by a different author, that seemed to ignore a whole swathe of material relevant to his subject matter, it had me shouting out loud, 'what about Freya?' and arguing with the book.

I think this will be a good excuse to expand my book collection and spend ridiculous amounts of money. I think I will buy myself a nice big and pretty note book for taking down notes and quotes, I think it's time I used my academic training for something, even if it will likely never be published and maybe not even finished, it will keep me amused and off the streets!

Parents
  • Brilliant! Go for it! It is difficult, as you know, to access academic literature unless you are currently studying at postgraduate level. Do you use SCOPUS, JSTOR or any other online platforms. I would love to do a PhD part time in archaeology but the cost is prohibitive. I am not in a position to take up any teaching duties so it would be unlikely to atteact funding.

  • I don't, I find J-Stor almost unusable, or it was when I last tried it, which was some years ago and I've never heard of SCOPUS so I will try and check it out.

    It will be hard with no access to academic websites, but then I have no attachment to getting it published or even a finishing date. I too would love to do a PhD, but very few universities cover my period anyway, so I will just keep going as best I can.

    I've already started, I bought myself a nice note book and have been writing down questions I want to cover as well as taking notes for the chapter on Aethelflaed, did she fight alongside her soldiers? Women weren't trained to fight in Christian Anglo-Saxon times, as far as we know, we don't know about the pre-Christian times as there are no sources, but there are rumours and niggles. It would have been highly unlikely that she would have been accepted as a leader if she couldn't fight and there are no mentions of any particular men associated with her as possible generals, just that she seems to have been on the fields of battle, she could have been directing things from a distance, but it seems unlikely. There is evidence of women fighters in war graves, especially one in Repton I think it was, I need to check, in a mass Viking grave, they would have been contemporary with Aethelflaed. In Ireland the laws of Adoman. AKA The Law of Innocents, an early Geneva convention on rules regarding non combatants specifically says that kings should not allow female warriors. Why include them as a specific catagory if they don't exist? It would a very unusual piece of legislation to include the inconcievable!

    Another chapter I want to write is about religion in post Roman Britain, far from being totally pagan and over run as soon as the legions left, large parts of Britain were held by the Romano British population who we're told were Christian, but made no attempt to convert their pagan neighbours. Nor do we know what variant of Christianity was practiced here, there appear to be no records, why? Could it be because they were lost? Could it be that they were written out of history by later writers because their variant of Christianity was frowned upon? The nearest thing to a source we have is Gildas, who's problematic for so many reasons, he castigates British Kings for poor Christianity, but never says that they were pagans.

    Another chapter will be on "The Othering of the North" and why Scandinavia is ignored in European history as a whole, only included as a discrete catagory, despite them having a huge impact on language, religion and it's practices. Even the Normans seem to suffer from this "othering", like they only matter when they become French.

  • I haven’t used JSTOR for a long time but it wasn’t great. It is very frustrating not to have access to the academic platforms. Your book chapters offer rather exciting themes and when you finish it, do keep an open mind about publishing it or submitting even a chapter to an academic journal for consideration. I know that isn’t your end goal though and clearly you are doing it for the love and passion of your subject, and that is a wonderful thing. Regarding ‘kings should not allow female warriors’, you are dead right about suggesting that women warriors existed, or at the very least, have requested or have shown inclination to fight. Much can be deduced from documents stating certain activities are forbidden. With regard to early Christianity in Britain, I know much has been dedicated to the subject, but perhaps the earliest period has been skimmed over because I believe that credible historical sources are scarce. Some of the sources are legends of the saints. It would be likely that following the introduction of Christianity by the Romans or by a person or persons who were in contact with the Romans, certain parts of Britain would have assimilated Celtic practices and other cultural traditions. Surely it is likely that the Christianity practiced in Early Britain would have incorporated at least the main elements of the early churches in Turkey, Lebanon, Jerusalem and Greece?  Perhaps the historical evidence for that, along with what you already know about Christianity in early Britain, would give you enough cumulative evidence to say “it is likely that …’”. 

Reply
  • I haven’t used JSTOR for a long time but it wasn’t great. It is very frustrating not to have access to the academic platforms. Your book chapters offer rather exciting themes and when you finish it, do keep an open mind about publishing it or submitting even a chapter to an academic journal for consideration. I know that isn’t your end goal though and clearly you are doing it for the love and passion of your subject, and that is a wonderful thing. Regarding ‘kings should not allow female warriors’, you are dead right about suggesting that women warriors existed, or at the very least, have requested or have shown inclination to fight. Much can be deduced from documents stating certain activities are forbidden. With regard to early Christianity in Britain, I know much has been dedicated to the subject, but perhaps the earliest period has been skimmed over because I believe that credible historical sources are scarce. Some of the sources are legends of the saints. It would be likely that following the introduction of Christianity by the Romans or by a person or persons who were in contact with the Romans, certain parts of Britain would have assimilated Celtic practices and other cultural traditions. Surely it is likely that the Christianity practiced in Early Britain would have incorporated at least the main elements of the early churches in Turkey, Lebanon, Jerusalem and Greece?  Perhaps the historical evidence for that, along with what you already know about Christianity in early Britain, would give you enough cumulative evidence to say “it is likely that …’”. 

Children
No Data