Re: Why have a Holy Roman Empire?
- From: "Michael Kuettner" <Michael.Kuettner@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:10:57 +0200
"Weland" schrieb :
OK, I'll try again.
Well, at least you recognize the need for emendation! But moving the goalposts on this issue to the "BT" rather than just "Anglo-Saxon" illustrates a rather significant problem: the concept of "feudalism" as a system not only originated outside of A-S historiography, but the system as system was thought to have developed in France and the HRE and exported to other places through economic, religious, political means and intermarriage.
In short, to criticize Reynolds for addressing "feudalism" as understood in "BT" historiography is more or less to criticize the scholar of earliest Christianity for concentrating too much on Jesus and Roman Judea and Galilee instead of Persia and India.
Let me state it again : I am not and never was criticizing Reynolds.
I completely agree with her work.
Second, Curt has the right idea: if you want to look at what Reynolds is criticizing in Le Goff for example a good place to start would be Reynolds herself followed by looking at the work by Le Goff (and others) that she actually cites and the page numbers she cites rather than a book Le Goff edited twenty years after the book cited.I know what she is criticizing; and rightly so.
BTW, Le Goff is a student of Bloch's. While Le Goff's thought and interests have continued to evolve over the course of his long career, his La Civilisation was published in 1965, early in Le Goff's career and still heavily influenced by his teacher's thought and positions, and Le Goff's volume was quite influential. Many an early medieval historiographer had to read it whether in England, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Hungary, Finland, Norway.....I could go on.
His influence doesn't seem to have reached mainstream German speaking
historiography. Feudalismus isn't used by Borst, Heer, Sprandel or Prinz, to name
just a few.
That was my point : Feudalismus just isn't used in main-stream German speaking
historiography. Not because the historians are better, but propably because
one gets a major headache if one tries to fit the realities of the HRE in that