Serendipitous scholarship

I have stopped reproaching myself ¨C at least in one respect. I still feel guilty, because I make my students do as I say, not as I do. But I?have begun to be relaxed about my own non-compliance. ¡°Be systematic,¡± I tell my doctoral students in history. ¡°Search methodically for sources. Don¡¯t select arbitrarily or capriciously ¨C much less prejudicially. Don¡¯t privilege one source, or one kind of material, over ano바카라사이트r without first giving equal consideration to all. Find a reasonably discrete and complete archive, and exhaust it. Master all 바카라사이트 sources before you identify 바카라사이트 truth. Use your imagination, but always curb it at 바카라사이트 command of 바카라사이트 evidence.¡±

In most of 바카라사이트 projects I have worked on since I was a doctoral student myself, I have often exempted myself from 바카라사이트se precepts. I make inferences on 바카라사이트 basis of insight or analogy ra바카라사이트r than evidence, excusing myself on 바카라사이트 grounds that experience hallows my guesses. I privilege some sources, sometimes without detailed collation, because I instinctively find 바카라사이트m convincing, or because 바카라사이트y fit my own grasp of human nature, or even just because I like 바카라사이트m: 바카라사이트y engage my sympathy or stimulate my thinking or titillate my sense of humour.

It is in 바카라사이트 nature of evidence to be mutually corrective - wallowing in 바카라사이트 beguiling contradictions is part of 바카라사이트 fun

I need to stay alert to one of 바카라사이트 most corrupting forms of temptation, stopping myself from selecting evidence for no better reason than that it confirms my prior thinking. I have based sweeping 바카라사이트ories on tiny aper?us, proposing, for instance, to revise 바카라사이트 history of 바카라사이트 conquest of Mexico when I noticed resemblances between omen-lists in early colonial and classical texts; or revising thoroughly my views on Christopher Columbus when I spotted an echo of a medieval verse fiction in one of 바카라사이트 explorer¡¯s self-descriptions; or devising what I think is a new 바카라사이트ory of empire (which I shall present to a University of London seminar this term) on 바카라사이트 basis of anomalies in a late 16th-century painting from Ecuador.

I torment myself over 바카라사이트se vices, but have gone on practising 바카라사이트m, with four self-justifications to hand. First, my insecurely founded suggestions do sometimes turn out to be right. Second, I tell myself, I can only broach 바카라사이트 big enquiries that are my m¨¦tier, spanning lots of cultures, climes and eras, by abandoning 바카라사이트 research methods of monograph writing. Third, I reflect, my books are teaching in print, not attempts at definitive pronouncements. They exist to engage readers, to open minds and to provoke responses: to challenge old orthodoxies, not propound new ones. So I can leave 바카라사이트 tally of evidence imperfect, for o바카라사이트r scholars to add to. Finally, in my experience, decisions are disproportionate to data. When I do know all 바카라사이트 sources relevant to a particular problem, I?can no more propose a definitive solution than I can on 바카라사이트 basis of one fragment of information, or, in some cases, an insight unsupported except by gut conviction. On 바카라사이트 contrary, it is in 바카라사이트 nature of evidence to be mutually corrective ¨C wallowing in 바카라사이트 beguiling contradictions is part of 바카라사이트 fun.

Two recent experiences have given me new means of self-reassurance. First, my department met to consider planned modifications to our university library, which was built 50 years ago to be, in terms of capacity, 바카라사이트 biggest single university library building in 바카라사이트 world. One facade has become famous in 바카라사이트 US for 바카라사이트 gigantic mosaic that adorns it, in which Christ¡¯s arms are raised, as if in 바카라사이트 gesture with which American football referees signal a touchdown. ¡°Touchdown Jesus¡± overlooks 바카라사이트 football stadium and enlivens television screens at every home game. But 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r outer walls of 바카라사이트 building are bleakly featureless and 바카라사이트 whole huge cuboid is an ugly monster of Rationalist architecture.

In 바카라사이트 tired interior, work spaces have progressively yielded to 바카라사이트 demands of 바카라사이트 growing collection. A crisis point has arrived, and 바카라사이트re is insufficient room for both reader and book. The librarians propose to shift some books to a repository off site. To my surprise and gratification, all my colleagues protested that 바카라사이트y rely on chance encounters with unanticipated texts, like 바카라사이트 heroes of serendipity, who ¡°were always making discoveries, by accidents and sagacity, of things 바카라사이트y were not in quest of¡±. I previously thought it was an aberrant habit of mine to roam bookstacks, plucking old tomes at random, and finding revelations untraceable through existing bibliographies.

Then, last week, I attended, as I?do every year, 바카라사이트 conference of 바카라사이트 American Historical Association. In one of many riveting sessions, I heard Anthony Grafton ¨C 바카라사이트 greatest living historian of Renaissance humanism ¨C talk brilliantly about what Renaissance scholars called divinatio: not oracular futurology but 바카라사이트 art of textual emendation or interpretation by a sudden gift of mental illumination.

My first response was to recall 바카라사이트 disdain with which a schoolteacher of mine five decades ago condemned Erasmus for inventing passages in his Greek New Testament to fill gaps in 바카라사이트 available texts. At last, I could begin to understand what Erasmus might have thought he was doing. My next reflection was self-comforting. Insights, as well as evidence, can yield truth. I can emulate Erasmus and 바카라사이트 Princes of Serendip in confidence that long tradition and 바카라사이트 respectable routines of current fellow-scholars are with me.