Brilliant, thank you so much! I've been staring at this for so long but now I can see it. The scribe was obviously having an off day...I sympathize
31.07.2025 11:58
π 1
π 0
π¬ 0
π 0
Brilliant, thank you so much! I've been staring at this for so long but now I can see it. The scribe was obviously having an off day...I sympathize
Can anyone help with a passage from this will of 1450? Reading from "Et sinon..." in the top right corner.
I'm getting stuck with
"bonorum meorum in consilium? et p[ro?]vebil[?]"
and then
"post decessum predicte Margarete mancione mea nemi[?]detur?"
Any suggestions very welcome!
Fantastic! Many congratulations!
haha I actually already dug up the thread you did on where to eat in Leeds from a few years ago on Twitter - off to Bundobust right now!
incredibly, this is not even top five in the dumbest things I have done
live footage of me realizing that Leeds IMC is in fact, next week
reading the 1732 parliamentary report on the Cotton library fire, and I know it was a monumental loss to scholarship and tragedy for human knowledge etc etc but this is just objectively funny
Thank you! So pleased you liked it.
This is a wonderful piece of writing
βππ³πͺπ΄π¦, ππ―π¨ππ’π―π₯, with its orotund comma, has been carefully designed to compete for the attention of uncles who like history.β
@tomlukejohnson.bsky.social on popular history and its peccadilloes.
www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v4...
Sonja! Much appreciated π
Thanks so much Emily! Are you at QM on Thurs? Maybe see you there!
Thank you!
Thanks Sonja! I so enjoyed thinking it through with you. Can't wait to work on our Doodles Are Important article again at some point... π
And special thanks to @greenleejw.bsky.social for doing such a great job with the images
- I wrote the first draft of this in 2021 π
- It was rejected by two journals ππ
- Many people read it and made it better: @erinmaglaque.bsky.social; @emilybaughan.bsky.social; @samwetherell.bsky.social; @sonjadrimmer.bsky.social; Chris Millard, Alexis Becker, and others
This is probably the strangest (and also the fiercest) article I've ever written, out now in History Workshop Journal.
And it's available open access!
academic.oup.com/hwj/advance-...
I wrote about s-x and G-d in the gorgeous Spring Books Issue of @nybooks.com.
In which i ask: it is possible to write a s-xy history of s-x?β¦and then have a go at writing one.
Itβs kinda f!lthy, hopefully very fun, enjoy: www.nybooks.com/articles/202...
if you were listening to Stravinsky last night on Radio 3 then you might have landed abruptly into me discussing placentas, diazepam, and the labour of neonatal care www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/...
pfft, this so-called artisan bakery doesn't even keep the assize of bread
[heckling from the back] Do Whigs and Hunters!
Papa L Bad Gi
he can't pronounce th so "the" is rendered as Le in speech, and just "L" in writing
not sure whether to be proud in the Anglo Norman or sad in the Middle English
Fancy a real paleography challenge? Try the deranged hieroglyphs of a para-literate 4yo
ok maybe this was too niche
tonight Ru i'll be serving up some of that Greg Anderson realness, sashaying the radical alterity of the ontologies of past life-worlds
glad we're finally going to cancel culture. long time coming.
You seem committed to misreading this in a particular way, so I'm going to sign off at this point. Have a good weekend!
I mean it sounds like we agree in broad outline, but to quibble a little (since I was quite deliberate about this!): I didn't actually club Ambler's book with the others. The next sentence says, "And this is before we get to the cottage industry..."; i.e., that that is a distinct phenomenon...
I don't know or care to know whether or not the authors are themselves hypocrites. But I think it's indicative of the implicit politics of this kind of popular history-writing that it accommodates such a contradiction
That's a mischaracterization of what I wrote, which is that their "aim as high you can" sentiment sits uneasily with their interest in (and implicit endorsement of) hereditary privilege