Megan Cassidy-Welch came out from Melbourne University to talk about “Mead and moats” – actually, to talk about the fact that there is more to medieval England than those two things. She did a bit of a general intro/overview and then talked about new and interesting things happening in the field. One of the really interesting things for me was that at least some of this stuff has relatively recently been discussed at In the Middle

*Medieval?
— Not in the middle of anything, really; is a Renaissance invention, taken on by Enlightenment (such an arrogant term to give one’s self) scholars also. It is perjorative.
— Vague, nebulous; cross-regional. Can’t really say “the medieval [world view, insert other topic you’d like to generalise]” with any real meaning.
— Roughly from the fifth century and the end of the Roman empire in the West, on for another millenium. Or so.

*Medieval England?
— Issues of national identity: what do we mean by ‘England’? And what did people in the Middle Ages mean by it?
— Issues of medieval ethnicity, cultural narrations, and the creation of the past.
— National identity: varying ideas about it, then and now
– it always existed and just had to be named? (this is an old theory)
– when the Romans leave (who did have an idea of ‘Rome’ and some sort of collective), there is no idea of a ‘country’ called ‘England’.
– from Bede, in th seventh century,^ comes the idea that the Ango-Saxons can be lumped together at least to some extent. People south of the Humber River.
– from Alfred the Great comes the idea of ‘England’ – when the people start to think of themselves as a collective?
– the twelfth century is now seeming to be a more likely place for national thoughts. Henry Huntingdon and Walter Map talk about ‘England’. There is then an issue of the distinction between England and Britain. At this time, it seems they were co-terminous; in Geoffrey of Monmouth, they are completely conflated.
– idea that the identity of England is constructed deliberately in relation to a traumatic event – the Norman Conquest.
– the means of constructing the identity, imagining/inventing England: creating the ‘Other’, and history/myth making.
— Creating the Other: this was a persecuting society (cf Robert Moore, in the 1980s). The developing of Christendom happened with the marginalisation of heretics, Jews, prostitutes, homosexuals and lepers, all of which were seen as ‘diseases’ needing to be cut out of the Christian body. Shore up the boundaries of Christian states. Conspiracy theories about what those groups would do. Need to create community by creating difference.
— Norman invasion:
—> castles as visual reminders
—> cultural changes – Latin and French introduced as the languages of importance, English (Anglo-Saxon really) relegated to the language of peasants. Class and, possibly, ethnic differences were huge. Women lost lots of rights, especially re: property. More perjorative language towards “the Celtic fringe”. This type of language was long used, and previously applied, to other, bordering peoples.
— NB role of memory in forging idas, through creating history.
— “Nationalism” seems to start – Normans inserted in as saviours of England. Written by Anglo-Normans. The issue of legitimacy was a big one – so genealogies were important.
— Effects of the trauma (the invasion):
— First generation: little written by the Anglo-Saxons, because so shocked.
— Second generation: Anglo-Normans=English; make links between Anglo-Normans and Anglo-Saxons, especially spiritual links – God inflicts the Normans onto the Anglo-Saxons for some reason. Second generation Normans condemn the savagery of the conquest.
— Third generation: under Henry I and Stephen. The trauma is not discussed; individuals are talked about instead, perhaps reflecting patronage of the time.
— Fourth generation, 1150-75: renewed interest in 1066. Reinvigorate the ideas of pre-Conquest Anglo-Saxons, including the canonisation of Edward. Normans do oral history – of ancestors who were present at the Battle of Hastings, for example.
*What do we do with traumatic events? How do we talk about them, record them?

As I said, I loved this talk. For some of my colleagues, it was probably all a bit too much for 2.30-3.30 on a Friday afternoon….

^ Whose grave I am very hopeful of seeing

Middle Years, Thinking Curriculum, and VELS^

*Using a picture book can be a great springboard. The woman leading the seminar had a book called Photographs in the Mud, from the Aust War Memorial, about the Kokoda Trail – a Japanese and Australian soldier dying together, sharing photos of their loved ones (very sad, very touching – seriously).

*Got some good hand-outs… one interesing idea for thinking about objects is SCUMPS:
Size – what size is the object now, what size could it be?
Colour – what is it now, could be?
Uses – could be used for?
Material – what is it now, was it appropriate then and is it still?
Parts – can anything be changed?
Shape – appropriate then and/or now?

I also liked BAR:
Bigger }
Added } Then vs now
Replaced }

*A unit’s activities can (should?) be divided into:
Tuning in –> Finding out –> Sorting out –> Assessment (self, peer, teacher).

*Thinkers’ Keys are cool too… I’m guessing it might be breaching copyright to talk about all of them, since they come from a book and all, but I especially like the one where you say the answer is “William the Conqueror” – what are the questions? (Who won at Hastings, who Scourged the North, who built the Tower of London… whose son mortgaged his inheritance to go crusading… who was a bastard…).

Seminar 2 was a waste of an hour. Wasn’t made obvious at all that what the seminar was, was a dude basically spruiking for his medieval incursion business.

^VELS=Victorian Essential Learning Standards. Blech, yadda yadda, etc.