Academic Roundup

Two professors of philosophy being recruited by Kingston University, to join the Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy (ex-Middlesex). Details here (via Stella Sandford on PHILOS-L@liverpool.ac.uk).

Four posts in geography at the National University of Singapore. I spent a very happy three months at NUS on their visiting scholar programme. It’s a very good department and lovely place to live. Details here (via Tracey Skelton on CRIT-GEOG-FORUM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK).

Stefan Collin on the Browne Report in the London Review of Books here.

Posted in Universities | Leave a comment

Chapter Three

Chapter Three is the first of a number of chapters on the period known as the ‘Middle Ages’. I’m uneasy with that label, as are most of the people who work on the times between the sack of Rome in the fifth century and the fall of Constantinople/’discovery’ of the new world in the fifteenth. But the problem of naming obviously doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be discussed.

I’d made a decision early on with this book that I didn’t want to move from Aristotle to Descartes (which often happens in philosophy) or to Machiavelli or Hobbes (as often happens in political theory). There are nearly two millennia between the death of Aristotle and those figures. Chapter Two looks at Rome, so that covers some of that period, but there is much more to be said. Nor did I want to simply take Augustine and Aquinas as two representatives. In time I came to realise that the roots of much of so-called ‘modern’ thought can be traced back to this time. ‘We are much less Greek than we believe’, as Foucault suggested.

Chapter Three begins with Augustine, and in particular ‘The City of God’, and reads him, along with Jerome and Paulus Orosius, in the context of the barbarian invasions. It then moves to readings of Boethius and Isidore of Seville and what they tried to preserve of the classical inheritance. The work of Boethius translating Greek thought into Latin is particularly important. Because so few people after him in the Latin west could read Greek, those texts that were not translated were effectively, if not literally, lost. Aristotle’s political works – the Politics, Ethics and Rhetoric – were unknown for centuries. That gets picked up in Chapter Five.

The chapter also tries to understand the different histories of the Germanic tribes within Western Europe – making use of Gregory of Tours on the Franks; Bede on the English; Isidore on the Goths; but also Paul the Deacon, Saxo Grammaticus, Jordanes and some others. It moves to a discussion of the Beowulf poem, looking at its land politics, both in terms of the economics of exchange, gifting and inheritance, but also a more ‘geopolitical’ sense of conflict over land. This section draws heavily on a piece I published in Cultural Geographies last year, though that piece also discussed the other geographies of the poem.

The final part of the chapter – and the one that needed most work – was a discussion concerning property in land more generally. This touched on feudalism and the Domesday book. But I’ve decided to move that to Chapter Four, where it fits better thematically and chronologically. It also helps a bit with word count issues. It seems an obvious move now, but the division of material between these two chapters has caused me a lot of uncertainty. At one point they were a single chapter but even given the epic scale of this book and some of its chapters that was too much.

As with the previous chapters there were various stylistic things to resolve, some more recent references to add in – particularly Francis Oakley’s book Empty Bottles of Gentilism – and a need to tighten up the thematic links across chapters. This chapter has been sometime in the making too – I first drafted the material on Augustine in Tasmania in January 2006; the Beowulf discussion dates from early 2008; and much of the rest of the chapter was written later that year in Singapore.

The rearrangment of material makes for more work in Chapter Four, of course, and that was a chapter that already needed some new discussion around the Crusades. That’s for next week. I’m in Vancouver for the weekend.

Posted in Medieval Studies, The Birth of Territory | 1 Comment

Post-Continental Voices out; Hardt on Foucault; Gratton in RPR

At least, today is the official release date. See the Zero books site here, and Paul Ennis’s announcement here. I’ve yet to see a copy, but I’m hoping one will be waiting for me when I get back to the UK.

Clare at Foucault News points us to the report of Michael Hardt speaking at Yale about Foucault. If the report is true, then Hardt seems to have dodged a difficult question, whereas the students appear to have dodged any questions.

And finally, Peter Gratton has an interesting editorial in the new issue of Radical Philosophy Review, discussing the ongoing crisis in higher education. You find the editorial open access here, and his report on the issue as a whole here.

Posted in Michael Hardt, Michel Foucault, My Publications, Peter Gratton, Universities | Leave a comment

The purpose of Medieval torture

Interesting piece in Der Spiegel here (via Medieval News).

A German researcher has studied medieval criminal law and found that our image of the sadistic treatment of criminals in the Dark Ages is only partly true. Torture and gruesome executions were designed in part to ensure the salvation of the convicted person’s soul…

Although it will doubtless get interest for the gory details, the book looks interesting for its reading of medieval legal texts. Looks like it is only available in German. The title would translate as something like Torture, the Pillory and the Stake: Jurisprudence in the Middle Ages. Foucault would have had fun with this. Great closing line to the Der Spiegel piece too.

Schild’s book includes a number of medieval depictions of elaborately staged executions. Nevertheless, says the author, the work can certainly be enjoyed “with a glass of wine in the evening.”

One for the Christmas list then…

Posted in Medieval Studies, Michel Foucault | Leave a comment

SUNY and the situation in the US

Similar problems in the US, with the closures of language programmes at SUNY Albany.  For the background, see the campaign site here. Brian Leiter has opened a thread on this – how to make universities work as a whole, and how different departments and faculties can work together. The top comment – at the time of writing – points to the example of geography, and Alec Murphy’s analysis here.

Posted in Universities | Leave a comment

Opposition to Browne and the coalition

Letter to the Times Higher here. I can’t help but feel this is a missed opportunity – where are the social scientists, scientists, engineers and medics? While the cuts and changes to funding do look like they will impact most on the arts and humanities, a university is a community, universatis, and should be defended as such.

Posted in Universities | Leave a comment

Chapter Two

Chapter Two didn’t take all that much work to get to the stage I want it to be at for this draft. It’s not that long since I worked on it, and when I did I knew what I was trying to do in the book as a whole. So the structure, argument and hooks fit with the overall plan. That said the earliest elements of this chapter date back to April 2006. This time round there was mainly just work on some odd references and formatting issues.

The basic structure of the chapter is the following: a reading of Caesar and particularly the military-geography terms he uses; a discussion of Cicero in relation to the res publica; an account of the historians Sallust, Livy and Tacitus, particularly the latter; a discussion of the notion of the imperium in relation to Augustus; and then an analysis of the word, concept and practice of the limes. The last goes right up to Ammianus Marcellinus and the author of De rebus bellicus. Along the way there are readings of the civil war, land reform, the founding myth of Rome, the names of Octavian/Augustus – I added a bit more from Cassius Dio this time round – and the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum.

The last is the compendium of works of the Roman land surveyors, which as well as being interesting on practice, raises all sorts of textual issues. The discussion I had previously drafted was mainly on Frontinus, but the key thing I’ve added is an account of Siculus Flaccus, De condicionibus agrorum. Given the use he and Frontinus make of the word territorium it would be very useful if we were able to date their writings more precisely. The way they use the word is much closer to Ammianus Marcellinus , or at least jurists like Pomponius, than the more familiar classical writers who use the word – Cicero, Varro, Seneca, Pliny the Elder. Frontinus can be dated fairly exactly – he was born 17 years after Pliny the Elder and 16 before Tacitus – but did he write the text ascribed to him? Was it amended later? It’s possible that some of his most quoted comments are later glosses, rather than part of the original text. Equally it’s strange that Frontinus – who also wrote on military strategy – only uses this vocabulary in this one text. With Siculus Flaccus it’s even less certain: Oswald Dilke thinks his text dates from the 3rd century CE; Brian Campbell from the 2nd. It seems the question of dating is not going to be resolved. 

The other addition I made is a very brief discussion of the rape of the Sabine women at the founding of Rome. There are accounts in Livy and Cicero. Robin May Schott had encouraged me to include this, and her chapter in the recently published Birth, Death, and Femininity; Philosophies of Embodiment, was helpful. It led me to Melissa M. Matthes’s book The Rape of Lucretia and the Founding of Republics, which was also useful. (By a strange and unfortunate coincidence, Robin – whom I met in Copenhagen when I was talking there in May – was speaking at the University of Washington last Friday, at exactly the same time I was speaking here.)

Chapter Two was very long already, so I didn’t have room to add more. I’d already made a decision that the material on Roman cartography would appear elsewhere, and I’ve moved the few comments on Strabo there too. I did finally get to read James Romm, The Edges of the Earth in Ancient Thought. Annoyingly, there are a very few stray references that I can’t resolve here. The library doesn’t have, for instance, the Loeb bi-lingual edition of Cassius Dio’s Roman History. There is a new book by Richard Talbert entitled Rome’s World: The Peutinger Map Reconsidered which does appear to be out, but I’ve not yet found a copy. But aside from these, I think the chapter is pretty much done.

On to Chapter Three…

Posted in The Birth of Territory | 3 Comments

The stuff of academic life

What not to do on your sabbatical – and then how to get it together – here.

This cartoon (via Ben on FB) on getting a PhD in the humanities is amusing and disturbing in just about equal measure.

Interesting analysis of what is happening in British Higher Education here, along with a comparison to the US system.

And then just in case it was all getting a bit serious, at Foucault News, Clare points us to the Philosophy is Dangerous range of t-shirts and mugs. She’s right about the Foucault one – a quote would have been better – but some of the others are very funny. Rorty, Erasmus and More are good – but can you imagine walking down the street in the Nietzsche one?

Posted in Medieval Studies, Michel Foucault, Universities | Leave a comment

Critchley on Tragedy

Tilburg Philosophy Summer School – ‘On the Tragic and its Limits’

A Seminar with Simon Critchley | July 12-21, 2011

Is the tragic an adequate category for thinking about the nature of contemporary conflicts, and their cycles of revenge, violence and claims to justice and state legitimacy? Was 9/11 a tragedy? Is the Israel/Palestine conflict tragic? Iraq? Afghanistan? The list goes on.

What is the nature of the tragic and what is questionable in its constant invocation in the contemporary world? What is the availability of the tragic for us, as an aesthetic genre, a mode of experience and a critique of the present? Are we perhaps approaching the limits of the tragic?

These are some of the general questions that will guide this second Tilburg Summer School. Based in a close, constant, but critical attention to the texts of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, we will examine philosophical appropriations and misappropriations of the tragic in Plato and Aristotle. We will also consider the function of the tragic in a number of modern thinkers, such as Rousseau, Hoelderlin, Hegel, Schelling, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Benjamin and Schmitt. Attention will also be paid to the nature of modern tragedy in Shakespeare, Ibsen and Beckett.

A persistent and common concern will be the question of violence in relation to the constitution of the state and legality and the stakes of a critique of violence in relation to the possibility of a provisional anarchism.

Update: further details here; original source here.

Posted in Conferences, Simon Critchley | 1 Comment

Pocock, Barbarism and Religion

Update 2015: all six volumes have now been published; volumes 1-5 in paperback; 6 earlier this year in hardback.

This is a  work of jaw-dropping ambition and erudition. J.G.A. Pocock, Barbarism and Religion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Four Volumes to date, 1999-2005.

I was aware of this before, but only today did I take it off the shelf. Given what I said about my intent to write a book about a book – in my case Foucault’s History of Sexuality – Pocock’s project is a cautionary tale. I don’t mean it shouldn’t be done, but that if it is to be done, this is the standard by which things might be judged, though I can’t even begin to see it as something to aspire to. It is an intellectual history of Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Pocock says that “Barbarism and Religion is not a contribution to the historiography of the Roman empire, but to that of European culture in the eighteenth century” (Vol I, p. 1).

What’s remarkable about it, from my initial look, is that Pocock doesn’t actually begin reading Gibbon’s book until Vol III, p. 419. He begins that volume as far back as Tacitus, outlining the centuries of intellectual context that allow us to make sense of Gibbon. Along the way there are discussions of Appian, Orosius, Augustine, Otto of Freising, Machiavelli, Lipsius, Montesquieu, Hume and many others. And that’s just the third volume. Volume I is a history of the first thirty years of Gibbon’s life, setting out the path and context to make sense of his first prospectus for his book, especially in terms of the Enlightenment. Volume II is a series of accounts of other authors who wrote grand scale histories in this period before Gibbon – including Voltaire, Hume, Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson. The aim is to see how Gibbon continues or differs from their practices. Vol IV offers a monumental analysis of how barbarism was conceived at the time, to make sense of what Gibbon does with the category. Volume V is forthcoming later this year, and is intended to do the same for religion; Vol VI for Europe will follow.

From some of Pocock’s comments it’s clear that he doesn’t know how many volumes there will be in total. He says at the end of Volume IV that he will provisionally end his study in 1781, when Gibbon completed his third volume. Gibbon took a year off before continuing, completing the sixth volume in 1787. For Pocock 1781 is thus “a moment at which to pause and consider his achievement”, but while “the reader need not feel obliged to look further… the author does not rule out a continuation of the journey” (p. 342). Pocock was already in his mid 70s when the first volume came out, over a decade ago.

I’ve long realised that what little use I make of Gibbon in my work on territory will be as a secondary source on some of the events I do discuss, since Gibbon tells us so much about his own time and its preoccupations that to do it justice would require reading it as a text of the eighteenth century. Obviously that’s what Pocock does; but it’s outside the temporal limits of my book. But I can’t help wondering if Pocock’s account will come to be looked at as telling us as much about twentieth and twenty-first century practices in the history of ideas as it tells us about its ostensible subject.

Posted in Edward Gibbon, J.G.A. Pocock | 1 Comment