Using Concepts in Medieval History:

Perspectives on Britain and Ireland,

1100–1500 Jackson W. Armstrong
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/using-concepts-in-medieval-history-perspectives-on-b
ritain-and-ireland-1100-1500-jackson-w-armstrong/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Portugal in a European context: essays on taxation and

fiscal policies in late medieval and early modern
Western Europe, 1100-1700 Rodrigo Da Costa Dominguez

https://ebookmass.com/product/portugal-in-a-european-context-
essays-on-taxation-and-fiscal-policies-in-late-medieval-and-
early-modern-western-europe-1100-1700-rodrigo-da-costa-dominguez/

Urban Panegyric and the Transformation of the Medieval

City, 1100-1300 Paul Oldfield

https://ebookmass.com/product/urban-panegyric-and-the-
transformation-of-the-medieval-city-1100-1300-paul-oldfield/

Medieval Welsh Pilgrimage, c.1100–1500 1st ed. Edition

Kathryn Hurlock

https://ebookmass.com/product/medieval-welsh-
pilgrimage-c-1100-1500-1st-ed-edition-kathryn-hurlock/

Waiting on Empire: A History of Indian Travelling Ayahs

in Britain Arunima Datta

https://ebookmass.com/product/waiting-on-empire-a-history-of-
indian-travelling-ayahs-in-britain-arunima-datta/
Social Policy in Capitalist History - Perspectives on
Poverty, Work and Society Ay■e Bu■ra

https://ebookmass.com/product/social-policy-in-capitalist-
history-perspectives-on-poverty-work-and-society-ayse-bugra/

Fictions of Migration in Contemporary Britain and

Ireland 1st ed. Edition Carmen Zamorano Llena

https://ebookmass.com/product/fictions-of-migration-in-
contemporary-britain-and-ireland-1st-ed-edition-carmen-zamorano-
llena/

Northern Ireland, the BBC, and Censorship in Thatcher's

Britain, 1979-1990 Robert J. Savage

https://ebookmass.com/product/northern-ireland-the-bbc-and-
censorship-in-thatchers-britain-1979-1990-robert-j-savage/

New Perspectives on Computer Concepts 2018 -

Introductory June Jamrich Parsons

https://ebookmass.com/product/new-perspectives-on-computer-
concepts-2018-introductory-june-jamrich-parsons/

Yesterday Is History Kosoko Jackson

https://ebookmass.com/product/yesterday-is-history-kosoko-
jackson/
Using Concepts
in Medieval History
Perspectives on Britain and Ireland, 1100–1500

Jackson W. Armstrong,
edited by
Peter Crooks & Andrea Ruddick
Using Concepts in Medieval History
 Jackson W. Armstrong · Peter Crooks ·
Andrea Ruddick
Editors

Using Concepts
in Medieval History
Perspectives on Britain and Ireland, 1100–1500
Editors
Jackson W. Armstrong Peter Crooks
Department of History Department of History
University of Aberdeen Trinity College Dublin
Aberdeen, Scotland, UK Dublin, Ireland

Andrea Ruddick
Faculty of History
St Paul’s School
London, UK

ISBN 978-3-030-77279-6 ISBN 978-3-030-77280-2 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77280-2

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher,
whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation,
reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any
other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation,
computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in
this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher
nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material
contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains
neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: Bartholomeus Anglicus, Livre des propriétés des choses, BnF, Français 134,
fol. 169r

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Preface

This book sprang from a series of conversations, first sparked in the summer
of 2014 immediately following the Harlaxton Medieval Symposium which
considered the ‘The Plantagenet Empire’ (and which later resulted in the
publication of that same name edited by Peter Crooks, David Green and the
late Mark Ormrod). An exchange of post-conference reflections that summer
and autumn between Peter Crooks and Jackson Armstrong identified a shared
curiosity about how historians in our field, and more generally, select, critique
and put concepts to use in their work. That exchange led to a joint interest in
facilitating an organised discussion which would invite late-medieval historians
of Britain and Ireland to reflect on and explore the raw conceptual work that
is so often an implicit, rather than explicit, part of their craft.
In May 2015, the Research Institute of Irish and Scottish Studies at the
University of Aberdeen funded a first scoping discussion led by Jackson and
Peter into the shape of the topic to be explored, and how this might be most
fruitfully achieved. That meeting involved the valuable input of Michael P.
Brown, Amy Hayes, Jeff Oliver, Ana Jorge, Andrew Simpson and Patience
Schell, whose expertise drew from the fields of History, Archaeology, Law and
Literature. In May 2016, funding from the Trinity Long Room Hub Research
Incentive Scheme, at Trinity College Dublin, enabled Peter and Jackson to
convene a workshop of historians entitled ‘Tyrannous Constructs’ or ‘Tools of the
Trade’? The Use and Abuse of Concepts in Medieval History, whose participants
included Andrea Ruddick, Ronan Mulhaire, Lynn Kilgallon, Chris Fletcher,
Sophie Page, Sparky Booker, Ali Cathcart and David Ditchburn. The meeting
was given a certain gravitas, and its naming was duly justified, in being joined
by Peggy Brown who offered concluding reflections on the discussion, and
who contributed a paper on ‘Feudalism and Periodisation’.
Following the Dublin meeting, which established a group of interested
discussants, Andrea Ruddick joined Peter and Jackson in an organising
capacity, and plans for a further meeting and potential publication began in

v
vi PREFACE

earnest. In September 2017, a follow-up workshop on ‘Tyrannous Constructs ’

met at Exeter College, Oxford, funded by a British Academy/Leverhulme
Small Research Grant led by Andrea. The participants included Andrea, Peter
and Jackson; and Ali Cathcart, Chris Fletcher and Sophie Page joined again,
with the addition of Ian Forrest, Eliza Hartich and Carl Watkins. John Watts
offered a summative round-up of the discussions, posing a number of helpful
questions about the aims of a possible publication.
We are grateful to all the various participants in this sequence of enriching
conversations, to those who are now included here as essay contributors and
to the editorial team at Palgrave and the anonymous reviewers of the proposal
and the complete volume. We also wish to thank Áine Foley for her efforts in
harmonising the footnotes. The editors would also like to acknowledge each
other for their shared support, encouragement and commitment to this project
over a number of years.

Aberdeen, UK Jackson W. Armstrong

Dublin, Ireland Peter Crooks
London, UK Andrea Ruddick
 Contents

Part I Introductions
1 ‘Tyrannous Constructs’ or Tools of the Trade? the Use
and Abuse of Concepts in Medieval History 3
Jackson W. Armstrong, Peter Crooks, and Andrea Ruddick
2 Feudalism: Reflections on a Tyrannical Construct’s Fate 15
Elizabeth A. R. Brown

Part II Concepts in Use

3 Colony 51
Peter Crooks
4 Crisis 73
Carl Watkins
5 Frontier 89
Jackson W. Armstrong
6 Identity 107
Andrea Ruddick
7 Magic 125
Sophie Page
8 Networks 143
Eliza Hartrich
9 Politics 163
Christopher Fletcher

vii
viii CONTENTS

Part III Afterword

10 Reflections on Using Concepts 189
John Watts

Index 197
 Notes on Contributors

Jackson W. Armstrong is Senior Lecturer in History at the University of

Aberdeen. He is the author of England’s Northern Frontier: Conflict and
local society in the fifteenth-century Scottish marches (Cambridge, 2020) and
the co-editor of Cultures of Law in Urban Northern Europe Scotland and its
Neighbours c.1350–c.1650 (Routledge, 2021).
Elizabeth A. R. Brown is Professor Emerita of History at Brooklyn College,
City University of New York. She is the author of ‘Feudalism: The Tyranny of
a Construct’ (American Historical Review, lxix [1974]) as well as numerous
seminal works on the Capetian dynasty.
Peter Crooks is Senior Lecturer in Medieval History at Trinity College
Dublin, the University of Dublin. He is the editor of (with Timothy H.
Parsons), Empires and Bureaucracy in World History: From Late Antiquity to
the Twentieth Century (Cambridge University Press); (with David Green and
W. Mark Ormrod) The Plantagenet Empire (Tyas).
Christopher Fletcher is Chargé de recherche (Assistant Research Professor) at
the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), France, affiliated
with the University of Lille. He specializes in late medieval political culture
and the history of masculinity. He has published Richard II: Manhood, youth
and politics, 1377–99 (2008), Government and Political Life in England and
France, c. 1300–c. 1500 with Jean-Philippe Genet and John Watts (2015),
The Palgrave Handbook of Masculinity and Political Culture in Europe with
Sean Brady, Rachel E. Moss and Lucy Riall (2018) and most recently Everyday
Political Objects: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day (2021).
Eliza Hartrich is Lecturer in Late Medieval History at the University of East
Anglia. Her work explores political, economic, social and cultural relationships
between townspeople in late medieval England, Ireland, Wales and France.

ix
x NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Her first book, Politics and the Urban Sector in Fifteenth-Century England,
1413–1471, was published by Oxford University Press (2019).
Sophie Page is Professor of late Medieval History at University College
London. She is the author of Magic in the Cloister: Pious Motives, Illicit
Interests, and Occult Approaches to the Medieval Universe (Pennsylvania State
Press).
Andrea Ruddick is a History teacher at St Paul’s School, London. She previ-
ously worked as a lecturer and research fellow at the University of Cambridge
and the University of Oxford. She is the author of English Identity and Political
Culture in the Fourteenth Century (Cambridge University Press).
Carl Watkins is Reader in Central Medieval History and Fellow of Magda-
lene College, University of Cambridge. He is the author of History and the
Supernatural in Medieval England (Cambridge University Press) and King
Stephen (Penguin).
John Watts is Professor of Medieval History and Fellow of Corpus Christi
College, University of Oxford. He is the author of Henry VI: The Poli-
tics of Kingship and The Making of Polities: Europe, 1300–1500 (Cambridge
University Press).
 Part I

Introductions
 CHAPTER 1

‘Tyrannous Constructs’ or Tools of the Trade?

the Use and Abuse of Concepts in Medieval
History

Jackson W. Armstrong, Peter Crooks, and Andrea Ruddick

Die ich rief, die Geister, (From the spirits that I called
Werd’ ich nun nicht los. Sir, deliver me!])
—Goethe, Der Zauberlehrling (‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice’).

Concepts are indispensable. They are ‘the building blocks of thought’.1 It

is through concepts that humans seek intellectually to control and under-
stand the disposition of the world they experience.2 The etymology of the
term—from the Latin conceptum, ‘that which is conceived’—helps us under-
stand the work that concepts perform: concepts enable us to conceive of the
1 Quotation from Eric Margolis and Stephen Laurence, ‘Concepts’, in Edward N.
Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 edn.), https://
plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/concepts/.
2 By way of introduction, John Wilson, Thinking with Concepts (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1963), remains useful.

J. W. Armstrong
Department of History, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
P. Crooks (B)
Department of History, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
A. Ruddick
St Paul’s School, London, UK

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 3

Switzerland AG 2022
J. W. Armstrong, P. Crooks and A. Ruddick (eds), Using Concepts in Medieval
History, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77280-2_1
4 J. W. ARMSTRONG, P. CROOKS AND A. RUDDICK

world in our minds; to apprehend external realities, past and present.3 As Iain
MacKenzie has put it: ‘to think at all is to think conceptually’.4 Consequently,
concepts are fundamental to humanistic research, both as an aspect of research
methodology and as a subject of historical investigation in their own right.
But conceptual history and conceptual analysis—as we shall see, the two
need not necessarily refer to the same programme of research—also pose chal-
lenges and have their attendant risks. Concepts conjured up in an effort to
bring order to the infinite complexity of the past have a bad habit of taking
on a life of their own. Rather as the apprentice sorcerer discovered—and as
Peggy Brown and Susan Reynolds famously demonstrated in the case of that
tyrannous construct, ‘feudalism’—a tool of the historian’s trade can easily turn
tyrant.5 The aim of this volume is not so much to slay the tyrant as to explore
both the pitfalls and the pay-offs of working with concepts. In other words,
our shared goal is to offer a series of worked examples for a fresh generation
of medievalists—case studies that demonstrate how an alertness to concepts
can be used to enrich historical interpretation.

Tyrannous Constructs
A useful starting point here is the growing literature on tyrannous constructs in
medieval history. ‘Feudalism’ is only one of three master nouns in the profes-
sional vocabulary of medievalists that has been described as tyrannous within
the past two decades. In 1998, Tim Reuter picked up Peggy Brown’s conceit
and applied it to a concept that was, if anything, even more fundamental to the
identity of medievalists as medievalists—namely the construct of ‘The Middle
Ages’ (and its adjectival running mate, ‘medieval’). In setting up his argument,
Reuter offered a précis of what he understood to be the Brown–Reynolds
approach:

On the one hand, there is the issue of, if you like, ‘classification’: is it helpful
to see these phenomena, whatever their surface difference, as being linked by
significant common characteristics? On the other hand, there is the issue of

3 See Étienne Balibar, ‘Concept’, in Political Concepts, Issue 4: The Balibar Edition
(2018) http://www.politicalconcepts.org/concept-etienne-balibar/. The question ‘What
is a concept?’ is addressed directly and creatively in Adi Ophir, ‘Concept’, in J.M. Bern-
stein, Adi Ophir and Ann Laura Stoler (eds), Political Concepts: A Critical Lexicon (New
York: Fordham University Press, 2018), 59–86: ‘A concept is neither given nor created
but, rather, performed or played in the act of conceptualization. This play both invents
and discovers the concept, both lets it appear and gives it existence, and in doing this it
also blurs the distinction between what is given and revealed, and what is invented and
created’ (59).
4 Iain MacKenzie (ed.), Political Concepts: A Reader and Guide (Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press, 2005), 1.
5
E.A.R. Brown, ‘The Tyranny of a Construct: Feudalism and the Historians of Medieval
Europe’, American Historical Review, 79 (1974)‚ 1063–88; Susan Reynolds, Fiefs and
Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).
 1 ‘TYRANNOUS CONSTRUCTS’ OR TOOLS OF THE TRADE? … 5

‘reification’: do those of us who use the world feudal … run the risk of turning
feudalism, a classificatory construct by origin, into a thing which takes on its
own explanatory and predictive power?6

Of these two issues—classification and reification—it is the latter that is clearly

the more pernicious; and from both classification and reification springs a
third issue, namely contamination—the importing into medieval history of
post-medieval terms and their associated concepts that have a distorting effect
on historical interpretations. Contamination formed at least part of the argu-
ment developed in 2002–2003 by R.R. Davies in his critical historiographical
conspectus, ‘The Medieval State: The Tyranny of a Concept?’ In this essay,
Davies noted mordantly that medieval historians appeared to be ‘falling in
love with the word “state”’, a development he found worrying because (as he
expressed it in an email to Susan Reynolds, published as part of the latter’s
rejoinder): ‘“a common vocabulary can lead to an unthinking assumption
about concepts and phenomena” so that historians “unthinkingly equate the
state with the modern state”’.7 In Davies’s view, a solution was to return to the
language of the sources. The term that recommended itself to Davies because
it was in contemporary usage was ‘lordship’ (L. dominium, F. seigneurie, G.
Herrschaft ): ‘If there is a “master noun” in the medieval lexicon of power, it
is surely this one’, he wrote.8
The question mark included in Davies’s title signalled his desire to query
and to probe, rather than to legislate the medieval state out of existence. He
was, above all, seeking to describe what he called the historian’s ‘recurrent
dilemma’ in choosing a vocabulary:

How can [the historian] write about a past society using its language and
concepts without becoming incomprehensible to his [sic] current audience; but
equally how can he employ current concepts and vocabulary, with all their atten-
dant encrustations of meaning and their part in present-day conceptual schemes,
without distorting and skewing the past?9

6 Timothy Reuter, ‘Medieval: Another Tyrannous Construct?’, in Janet L. Nelson (ed.),

Medieval Polities and Modern Mentalities (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006),
19–37, at 20.
7 R.R. Davies, ‘The State: The Tyranny of a Concept?’, Journal of Historical Sociology,
15 (2002), 71–73, extended in R.R. Davies, ‘The Medieval State: The Tyranny of a
Concept?’, Journal of Historical Sociology, 16 (2003), 280–300. See also M. Clanchy,
‘Does Writing Construct the State?’, Journal of Historical Sociology, 15 (2002), 68–70; J.P.
Genet, La genèse de l’État moderne: Culture et société politique en Angleterre (Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France, 2003), 13; S. Hindle, ‘When and What was the State? Some
Introductory Comments’, Journal of Historical Sociology, 15 (2002), 63–65; S. Reynolds,
‘The Historiography of the Medieval State’, in M. Bentley (ed.), Companion to Historiog-
raphy (London: Routledge, 1997), 117–38; S. Reynolds, ‘There were States in Medieval
Europe: A Response to Rees Davies’, Journal of Historical Sociology, 16 (2003), 550–55.
8 Davies, ‘The Medieval State’, 295.
9 Davies, ‘The Medieval State’, 293.
6 J. W. ARMSTRONG, P. CROOKS AND A. RUDDICK

Ultimately, as Davies readily acknowledged, terminological choices are in large

part determined by a historian’s nose—that is to say, by a mixture of personal
preference and intuition informed by experience of the evidence. But these
choices may prove to be significant outside of the original academic context in
which they are deployed.
In this respect, it is not unfair to note that the term Davies elected to lead
historians out of the conceptual quagmire—lordship—was not an altogether
felicitous choice. Although dominium is a term with a sound medieval pedi-
gree, it is not free from ‘encrustations of meaning’. Not only is dominium
one of the most frequently occurring and vexing terms in the medieval source
material,10 the term also has an extensive post-medieval history and carries
differing valences within different scholarly traditions. This is perhaps most
obvious in the sociology of Max Weber (d.1920), where Herrschaft serves
as a structuring concept running through the argument of Wirtschaft und
Gesellschaft (‘Economy and Society’) concerning the development of legiti-
mate forms of authority in the context of the state. Weber’s Herrschaft is a very
different beast from the concept of Herrschaft (‘lordship’) as employed by, say,
the medievalist Otto Brunner in his foundational interpretation of power in
late-medieval Austria: Land und Herrschaft (partially translated as ‘Land and
Lordship’).11 Indeed, the ideas underlying Weber’s Herrschaft are, if anything,
even more difficult to render in translation.12 Among leading Weber scholars
in the Anglophone world, Talcott Parsons (d.1979) favoured ‘authority’, while
Reinhard Bendix (d.1991) was inclined to use ‘domination’. Sam Whimster,
the current editor of Max Weber Studies prefers ‘rulership’, especially in pre-
modern contexts, because he believes that ‘domination’ reflects the exigencies

10 J.H. Burns, Lordship, Kingship, and Empire: The Idea of Monarchy, 1400–1525
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).
11 Otto Brunner, ‘Land’ and Lordship: Structures of Governance in Medieval Austria,
trans. Howard Kaminsky and James van Horn Melton (Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1992); first published as Land und Herrschaft : Grundfragen der
territorialen Verfassungsgeschichte Südostdeutschlands im Mittelalter (Baden bei Wien:
Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Geschichtsforschung und Archivwissenschaft in Wiem,
1939).
12 For further reflections on the challenges of translation issues in conceptual history, see
Martin J. Burke and Melvin Richter (eds), Why Concepts Matter: Translating Social and
Political Thought (Leiden: Brill, 2012), esp. Melvin Richter, ‘Introduction: Translation,
the History of Concepts and the History of Political Thought’, 1–40; Margrit Pernau and
Dominic Sachsenmaier (eds), Global Conceptual History: A Reader (Bloomsbury: London,
2016), Part III (‘Translations of concepts’), esp. Kari Palonen, ‘Translation, Politics and
Conceptual Change’, 171–90; Willibald Steinmetz and Michael Freeden, Introduction.
‘Conceptual History: Challenges, Conundrums, Complexities’, in Willibald Steinmetz,
Michael Freeden and Javier Fernández-Sebastián (eds), Conceptual History in the European
Space (New York and Oxford: Berghahn, 2017), 1–46, at 16–17.
 1 ‘TYRANNOUS CONSTRUCTS’ OR TOOLS OF THE TRADE? … 7

of power while ‘authority’ is best suited to legitimate power. The one transla-
tion no one has suggested as appropriate in this context is ‘lordship’. And so
we are brought full circle.13

Looking Under the Bonnet

The dilemma that Davies identified but did not resolve—the historian’s need
to choose between using potentially confusing medieval language and poten-
tially contaminated modern conceptual terms—is precisely the one which we
wish to explore. This is not a new endeavour. Conceptual history is a vibrant
field of research being cultivated by at least two new online journals (Political
Concepts: A Critical Lexicon; and Contributions to the History of Concepts ),
as well as a number of established organs of scholarship.14 Within the histo-
riography of what we call the late-medieval British–Irish isles, conceptual
analysis of various kinds has long been central to research: witness the host of
works on power, statehood, nationhood, ethnicity, race, identity, colonialism,
imperialism, empire, gender, masculinity and so on. Some of the most method-
ologically sophisticated of such works, it is only fair to point out, have been
written by contributors to this volume.15

13 Melvin Richter, The History of Political and Social Concepts: A Critical Introduction
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), ch. 3 (‘The history of the concept of Herrschaft
in the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe’); Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Orga-
nization, ed. and trans. A. M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons (1st edn., London: Hodge,
1947; 2nd edn., New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1965); Max Weber, Economy and
Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology, ed. and trans. Guenther Roth and Claus
Wittich, 2 vols (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978); Hans Henrik Bruun and
Sam Whimster (eds), Max Weber: Collected Methodological Writings (London: Routledge,
2012), xii.
14 http://www.politicalconcepts.org/; http://www.historyofconcepts.org/About.
15 For example, Christine Carpenter, ‘Introduction: Political Culture, Politics, and
Cultural History’, in C. Carpenter and L. Clark (eds), Political Culture in Late Medieval
Britain (The Fifteenth Century, IV) (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, 2004), 1–19; Chris-
tine Carpenter, ‘Gentry and Community in Medieval England’, Journal of British Studies,
33 (1994), 340–80; Jan Dunmolyn, ‘Political Communication and Political Power in
the Middle Ages: A Conceptual Journey’, Edad Media, 13 (2012), 33–55; Christopher
Fletcher, Richard II: Manhood, Youth, and Politics, 1377–99 (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2008); Ian Forrest, Trustworthy Men: How Inequality and Faith Made the Medieval
Church (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018); W. Mark Ormrod, ‘“Common
Profit” and “The Profit of the King and Kingdom”: Parliament and the Development of
Political Language in England, 1250–1450’, Viator, 46 (2015); Andrea Ruddick, English
Identity and Political Culture in the Fourteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, 2013); Simon Walker, Political Culture in Later Medieval England, ed. M.J.
Braddick (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006); John Watts, ‘“Commonweal”
and “Commonwealth”: England’s Monarchical Republic in the Making, c.1450–c.1530’,
in A. Gamberini, J.-P. Genet and A. Zorzi (eds), The Languages of Political Society (Rome:
Viella, 2011), 147–63; and for the early modern period see Alison Cathcart, Plantations
by Land and Sea: North Channel Communities of the Atlantic Archipelago c.1550–1625
(Oxford: Peter Lang, 2021); Alexandra Walsham, ‘The Dangers of Ritual’, Past & Present,
180 (2003), 277–87.
8 J. W. ARMSTRONG, P. CROOKS AND A. RUDDICK

For the most part, however, the methodological problems posed by concep-
tual history have remained hidden under the bonnet. Given how turgid
and indigestible ‘conceptual theory’ can be in the hands of social scientists,
this is hardly surprising.16 But it is important to note that some of the
most commonsensical advice on how to use concepts originated with the
medievalist, Susan Reynolds, who exhorted scholars to distinguish carefully
between words, concepts and phenomena—that is, the words we employ, the
concepts or ideas that lie behind those words and the historical phenomena to
which those words and concepts are taken to apply.17
For the purposes of this volume, it may be helpful to take another step
at this point and to sub-divide the category of ‘concepts’ once more. This
is intended to clarify the important distinction between terms and concepts
that were in use in the past (that is, the terms and their underlying ideas
as expressed in primary sources), and the terms and concepts that historians
bring to the past as tools of analysis. For convenience we might describe this
as a difference between historical ideas and analytical categories.18 A particular
concern of the present collection is to identify and consider the problems that
arise when these two types of concepts become confused or conflated by histo-
rians. While the analytical category and historical idea are often related, they
are not commensurate with each other. This approach gains theoretical ballast
from the distinction made between etics and emics (or external or internal
perspectives) in other disciplines that engage in cross-cultural analysis, notably
linguistics and anthropology. The two approaches are complementary; neither
can claim precedence over the other.19
For the study of historical ideas, there is already a range of sophisti-
cated methodologies available. Perhaps the most rigorous and impressive such
enterprise—or, at any rate, the most discussed—is the German approach to
conceptual history (G. Begriffsgeschichte), mostly famously the Geschichtliche
Grundbegriffe project associated with Otto Brunner and, above all, the early

16
Birger Hjørland, ‘Concept Theory’, Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 60:8 (2009), 1519–36.
17 Susan Reynolds, Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1994), esp. 12–13. Reynolds formulated her approach indepen-
dently of the French school of semioticians, but it is compatible with the distinctions
drawn by Saussure between the ‘sign’, the ‘signifier’ and the ‘signified’.
18 The phrase ‘historical ideas’ is used here to describe the language of the sources
in preference to, say, ‘historical terminology’ because we are particularly interested in
the concepts or ideas that underlie the words used in the primary sources—that is, the
(often quite varied) uses to which particular terms are put by historical actors in particular
contexts.
19 For discussion, see J.W. Berry, ‘Emics and Etics: A Symbiotic Conception’, Culture
and Psychology‚ 5:2 (1999), 165–71; Thomas N. Headland, Kenneth L. Pike and Marvin
Harris, Emics and Etics: The Insider/Outsider Debate (London: Sage Publications, 1990).
The value of the distinction is brought out by Sophie Page, Chapter 7 below.
 1 ‘TYRANNOUS CONSTRUCTS’ OR TOOLS OF THE TRADE? … 9

modernist, Reinhard Koselleck.20 Koselleck’s particular concern was to map

conceptual change and variation as a means of achieving a ‘deeper under-
standing of the social world in its historical formation’.21 In doing so, his
editorial team alternated between ‘semasiology’ (the study of conceptual
variation or differences in meaning for a given word); and ‘onomasiology’
(the study of all the names or terms in a given language for the same
concept).22 A separate historical enterprise, but one whose approach is in
certain respects compatible with Begriffsgeschichte, was the approach to the
history of ideas developed by the so-called Cambridge School of J.G.A. Pocock
and Quentin Skinner.23 Both these enterprises share the understanding that
concepts acquire meanings from the uses to which they are put, and that a
close contextualised reading is required in order to recover or understand
the concepts as used in the past. In the case of the Cambridge school, this
approach can be traced back to the linguistic philosophy of the later Wittgen-
stein. Wittgenstein insisted that (to quote from Skinner’s formulation of his
ideas) ‘we ought not to think in isolation about “the meanings of words”.
We ought rather to focus on their use in specific language-games and, more
generally, within particular forms of life’.24
Less celebrated and perhaps less rigorous, but in certain respects more
stimulating in its approach, is the work of Raymond Williams (d. 1988)
on Keywords (1976, 1983).25 Williams sought to document the changes in
meaning in a selection of certain ‘strong, difficult and persuasive words in
everyday usage’ in English. His particular concern was not so much the
‘original’, ‘true’ or technical meaning of such words but with the fact that:

20 O. Brunner, W. Conze and R. Koselleck (eds), Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe (Stuttgart:

E. Klett, 1972–1989). On Koselleck’s methodology, see Reinhard Koselleck, Futures Past:
On the Semantics of Historical Time, trans. Keith Tribe (Columbia: Columbia University
Press, 2004). For a discussion by a medieval intellectual historian of Begriffsgeschichte in
practice, see Janet Coleman, ‘The Practical Use of Begriffsgeschichte by an Historian of
European Pre-modern Political Thought: Some Problems’, Finnish Yearbook of Political
Thought, 2 (1999), 28–40.
21 Keith Tribe, ‘The Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe Project: From History of Ideas to
Conceptual History’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 31:1 (1989), 181.
22 The most useful introduction is probably Richter, History of Political and Social
Concepts, esp. 47–48. See also Martin J. Burke, ‘Margins, methods and the historiog-
raphy of concepts’, in Translatio Studiorum: Ancient, Medieval and Modern Bearers of
Intellectual History, ed. Marco Sgarbi (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 237–51.
23 The methodological writings of both Skinner and Pocock are usefully collected in
volumes published by Cambridge University Press: Skinner, Visions of Politics I: Regarding
Method (Cambridge, 2002); Pocock, Political Thought and History: Essays on Theory and
Method (Cambridge, 2009).
24 Skinner, ‘Interpretation and the Understanding of Speech Acts’, Visions of Politics I ,
ch. 6 (quotation at 103).
25 Raymond Williams, Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (1976; 2nd ed.,
Fontana, 1983).
10 J. W. ARMSTRONG, P. CROOKS AND A. RUDDICK

beginning in particular specialized contexts, [these keywords] have become quite

common in descriptions of wider areas of thought and experience. This, signifi-
cantly, is the vocabulary we share with others, often imperfectly, when we wish
to discuss many of the central processes of our common life.26

The point about keywords is that they are as slippery in meaning as they are
indispensable because of their general significance in contemporary culture
and society. Historical, scholarly and popular usages endow such words with
discrepant meanings that can make them difficult to employ as analytical
categories. But keywords are too useful to be dispensed with because (to para-
phrase Williams) the problem of their meanings is inextricably bound up with
the problem that the words themselves are used to discuss.27 Clearly, this
is a form of conceptual history, which proves to be especially fruitful when
concepts are understood as ‘bundles of linked keywords’.28 Despite its short-
comings, the open-endedness of Williams’ approach—notably his concern to
document meanings rather than to establish the meaning—attracts ongoing
interest.29
A similar point has been made, much more recently, by Roberto Benigno in
Words in Time, who argues that many of the concepts deployed by scholars in
the social sciences and humanities overlap with everyday ‘street talk’. Scholarly
discourses have an influence in the public sphere whenever historians engage
with the public, speak to the media or stand up in the lecture hall or class-
room. Benigno calls for a ‘reflexive and critical history [of concepts] which is
able to take into account its own performative aspect, that is, the effects which
its discourses have in the public sphere’.30 In other words, thinking rigorously
about our use of concepts in our own research will also spill over into wider

26 Williams, Keywords, 2nd edn., 14.

27 Ibid., esp. 15.
28For an exploration of ‘keywords’ and concepts in an early modern context, see Mark
Knights, ‘Towards a Social and Cultural History of Keywords and Concepts by the Early
Modern Research Group’, History of Political Thought, 31:3 (2010), 427–48 esp. 441–42.
29 The continuing interest in Williams’ approach is signalled by the recent appearance
of Keywords for Today: A 21st Century Vocabulary, ed. Colin MacCabe and Holly Yanacek
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018). The original edition of Keywords (1976) was
the subject of a critical essay by Quentin Skinner, now republished as Skinner, ‘The Idea
of a Cultural Lexicon’, in Visions of Politics, I, (as cited above in note 23) ch. 9. Skinner
makes a crucial distinction here between words and concepts, noting that an individual may
possess a concept but have no single term in their lexicon to refer to that concept; and,
indeed, a community of language users may all use a word and communicate successfully,
even though ‘there is no concept that answers to any of their agreed usages’ (159–60).
The debate is summarised in Fred Inglis, Raymond Williams (London: Routledge, 1995),
246–48.
30 Benigno, Words in Time, 7, 13. This is a point picked up by Watkins in the present
volume, citing Davies on the use of accessible language.
 1 ‘TYRANNOUS CONSTRUCTS’ OR TOOLS OF THE TRADE? … 11

arenas of thought far from our control.31 The simple problem of lexical selec-
tion—of choosing the right term—may be central to the role that historians,
and their interpretations, play beyond the community of scholars. As Mieke
Bal has put it in arguing for the ‘centrality of conceptual reflection’: ‘Precisely
because they travel between ordinary words and condensed theories, concepts
can trigger and facilitate reflection and debate on all levels of methodology in
the humanities’.32
A distinct but related set of problems confronts us when we employ terms
and underlying concepts as categories of analysis. Such terms are brought
to the past by historians accompanied by an extensive train of theoretical
baggage from the social sciences. Here, again, it is useful to begin with a
frank acknowledgement that the classical idea of a concept with a fixed defini-
tion is a will-o’-the-wisp.33 Moreover, modern analytical categories themselves
quickly become historical terms with a history of their own. Consequently, it
is not necessarily helpful to provide an analytic definition of a given term,
one that lays down the necessary and sufficient conditions for its applica-
tion as a concept. Such prescriptivism is self-defeating because it forecloses
on any real exchange of ideas. Instead, scholars end up in stand-offs over clas-
sification or in shoot-outs over definitions. On the other hand, the use of
holistic concepts—terms to describe ‘social wholes’ or collective entities such
as ‘The British Empire’ or ‘The Renaissance’—has been staunchly defended
by Robert C. Stalnaker, who argues that ‘No effective precision is lost by this
use of proper names, and a great deal of flexibility is gained’. Stalnaker does,
however, offer one crucial caveat: ‘What is illegitimate’, he writes, ‘and some-
times pernicious, are dummy terms which have infinite flexibility; they have
no descriptive content or reference, are useless, even in heuristic terms, and
function only as pseudo-explanations’.34 What this suggests is that it is neces-
sary to move beyond high-minded calls for ‘all terms to be defined’. Clarity
is of course crucial to conceptual analysis, but it is necessary to tread care-
fully between over-prescription and over-extension of concepts, especially if

31 The intersection of academic and public perceptions of the Middle Ages is explored
throughout the recent collection Andrew Albin, Marcy C. Erler, Thomas O’Donnell,
Nicholas L. Paul and Nina Rowe (eds), Whose Middle Ages? Teachable Moments for an
Ill-Used Past (New York: Fordham University Press, 2019), but see especially Part III,
‘#Hashtags’.
32 Mieke Bal, Travelling Concepts in the Humanities: A Rough Guide (Toronto, Buffalo,
London: University of Toronto Press, 2002), 28–29.
33 Gregory L. Murphy, The Big Book of Concepts (Cambridge, MA; London:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, 2002), 2: ‘The psychology of concepts is
like other areas of psychology, in which a phenomenologically simple cognitive process …
turns out to be maddeningly complex’.
34 Robert C. Stalnaker, ‘Events, Periods, and Institutions in Historians’ Language’,
History and Theory, 6:2 (1967), 159–79, at 179.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Täsch Alp, 104.
Täschhorn, 52.
Tête Noire, 63, 85.
Tête Rousses, 89.
Tongue, Injury to, 25.
Trees, 5, 154.
Triftjoch, 14, 79.
Truffer, Joseph, 23.
Tschingellochtighorn, 2.
Turc, Joseph, 33.
Tyndall, 102.
Tyndallgrat, 12.

V
Val d’Aosta, 54, 99.
Val d’Anniviers, 44.
Valtournanche, 54, 99.
Vallot’s observatory, 57.
Viper, 3, 21.
Visp, 72, 114.
Vizille, 25.
Vomiting, 72.

W
Weisshorn, 51.
White, Gilbert, 4.
 Whymper, 16, 73.
Wills, Mr. Justice, 155.
Wind, 58, 65, 69.

X
Xaver Imseng, 113.

Y
Ystradgynlais, 152.

Z
Zermatt, 104.
Zinal, 44, 79.
Zmutt Valley, 78.

GLASGOW: PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS BY ROBERT

MACLEHOSE AND CO.
 Macmillan and Bowes, Cambridge.

CLARK, J. W. THE BOOK OF OBSERVANCES OF

AN ENGLISH HOUSE OF AUSTIN CANONS,
written about A.D. 1296. Edited, with an English
Translation, Introduction, Plan of an Augustinian
House, and Notes.
Printed on Dutch hand-made paper, the edition limited to 300 copies,
of which 120 are already ordered. Price to Subscribers 12s. 6d.
Nearly ready.
A detailed prospectus may be had on application.

AN ILLUSTRATED CATALOGUE OF THE LOAN

COLLECTION OF PLATE EXHIBITED IN THE
FITZWILLIAM MUSEUM MAY 1895. By J. E.
Foster, and T. D. Atkinson.
Demy 4to. with 16 Photogravures illustrating 50 objects, and 15
illustrations in the text, bound in buckram with gilt top 21s. net
(limited to 250 copies for sale). Also printed entirely on
Japanese paper bound in half vellum with gilt top 52s. 6d. net
(limited to 35 copies for sale). The volume contains a general
Index with all makers’ marks and the names of donors, owners,
etc., also a chronological list of all the pieces exhibited.
GLASGOW HERALD.—“The illustrations are extremely good, delicate, and yet
exquisitely clear, and amply deserve the editors’ praise.”
THE SCOTSMAN.—“The Collection was peculiarly rich in old College plate, and
many of these founders’ cups and other articles are, apart from the interest
attaching to their age and history, noble specimens of old silver work.”
 THE TIMES.—“A very beautifully illustrated Catalogue of the Fitzwilliam
Exhibition.... Among especially beautiful plates we may mention that of the
‘Founders’ Cup’ of Emmanuel College (34), the ewer and salver belonging to
Sidney College (37), the ‘Poison Cup’ of Clare, and Archbishop Parker’s ewer and
salver belonging to Corpus College.... Lord Carysfort contributed two wonderful
pieces, an incense ship and a censer, among the earliest known work of an
English silversmith, which, having belonged to Ramsey Abbey, were found in
Whittlesea Mere in 1850.”
PALL MALL GAZETTE.—“It is a work of great beauty, and contains sixteen full-
page plates, besides many illustrations in the text. The book should be prized, not
by collectors alone, but by all interested in old plate, and by those who hope for
more grace in modern design.”
PUBLISHED JOINTLY WITH MESSRS DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO.
FOR THE CAMBRIDGE ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY.

ALPINE NOTES AND THE CLIMBING FOOT. By

George Wherry, M.A., M.C. Cantab.; Member
of the Alpine Club. Crown 8vo. With Map and 21
illustrations. 5s. net. Just ready.
Contents: An Alpine Letter 1895, Mountaineering in Dauphiné 1894,
Switzerland and Savoy in 1893, An Alpine Letter 1892, A Month upon the
Mountains 1891, On the Climbing Foot, On Accidents, Index.

PAPERS BY DECIMUS (Written 1881-1894). Being a

Gathering of scattered Thoughts on Matters
touching the Welfare of our Nation in Society
and Politics. 16mo. printed on hand-made paper,
bound in parchment. 2s. net.

MILES, E. H., HOW TO ANSWER GRAMMAR AND

PHILOLOGY QUESTIONS. With hints and
 specimens and full answers to two Examination
Papers and full Index. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net.

HORTON-SMITH, LIONEL, ARS TRAGICA

SOPHOCLEA COMPARATA. An Essay on the
Tragic Art of Sophocles and Shakspere. To
which was awarded the Members’ Prize for Latin
Essay in the University of Cambridge 1894. 8vo.
Cloth.

CLARK, J. W., LIBRARIES IN THE MEDIEVAL AND

RENAISSANCE PERIODS. The Rede Lecture
1894. With Illustrations. Crown 8vo. Cloth. 2s.
6d. net.

HOW THE CODEX WAS FOUND. A Narrative of

Two visits to Sinai, from Mrs Lewis’s Journals,
1892-1893. By Margaret Dunlop Gibson.
With Two Illustrations. Crown 8vo. Price 3s. 6d.
net.
Contents: First Visit to Sinai—Identification of the Codex—A Greek Description
of Sinai (from Perikles Gregoriados)—St Sylvia of Aquitaine—Second Visit to
Sinai. Illustrations: Facsimile Page of the Codex (Luke vii. 39-viii. 2)—St
Catharine’s Convent, Mount Sinai.
ROYAL ASIATIC SOCIETY’S JOURNAL.—“This interesting little work gives an
account, much fuller, of course, than appears in our present issue, of the discovery
of the palimpsest MS., of which Mrs Lewis exhibited the photographs at our May
meeting.... The whole is a very charming narrative of an important literary
discovery, which is of especial interest as being due to the self-sacrificing zeal of
two lady scholars.”
TIMES.—“An unpretending but vivid record of the successful pilgrimage of two
ladies to Mount Sinai, and their discovery of an early and important codex of
ancient Syriac Gospels, as well as of three other valuable codices of later date.”

ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE GREEK PLAYS

performed at Cambridge, Drawn and
Etched by Robert Farren.
1894. THE IPHIGENIA IN TAURIS OF EURIPIDES.
One hundred copies 4to. in paper covers, 7s. 6d. net; cloth, 10s. 6d.
net.
Fifty copies proofs in paper covers, 15s. net; cloth, 21s. net.
1887. THE OEDIPUS TYRANNUS OF SOPHOCLES.
Paper covers, 7s. 6d. net; cloth, 10s. 6d. net.
Proofs. Paper covers, 15s. net; cloth, 21s. net.
1885. THE EUMENIDES OF AESCHYLUS.
Paper covers, 7s. 6d. net; cloth, 10s. 6d. net.
Proofs. Paper covers, 15s. net; cloth, 21s. net.
1883. THE BIRDS OF ARISTOPHANES.
Paper covers, 10s. net; cloth, 13s. net.
Proofs. Paper covers, 42s. net; cloth, 47s. net.

THE OEDIPUS TYRANNUS; A RECORD BY L.

SPEED AND F. R. PRYOR of the Performance
in November 1887. The text with illustrations on
each page, and a heliogravure by Dujardin, after
a water colour by J. O’CONNOR. Paper covers,
9s. 6d. net; cloth, 12s. 6d. net.
BOWES, ROBERT, A CATALOGUE OF BOOKS
PRINTED AT OR RELATING TO THE
UNIVERSITY, TOWN AND COUNTY OF
CAMBRIDGE, FROM 1521 TO 1893. With
Bibliographical and Biographical Notes, and 98
illustrations. With Index 2 Vols. 18s. net, Dutch
paper 24s. net.

PLAYTIME WITH A PEN. A Dramatic idyll, a Tragic

Fragment, and other pieces in Prose and Verse.
By G. H. Powell. 8vo. pp. 32. 1891. 1s. 6d.
OXFORD MAGAZINE.—“Any one who is prepared to part with what Mr Tigg
once called ‘the ridiculously small amount of eighteenpence’ will be well advised to
expend that sum in purchasing this little book.”
 WORKS BY THE LATE Mr J. K.
STEPHEN.
Complete collected edition.

LAPSUS CALAMI AND OTHER VERSES. By the

late J. K. Stephen. With a Biographical
Introduction and Photogravure Portrait after a
Chalk drawing of Mr F. Miller. Foolscap 8vo.
Cloth. 5s. net. Just ready.
The editor says of this volume: “I have made this edition practically complete,
omitting only a few short pieces for more or less special reasons.” Besides the
contents of the third edition of Lapsus Calami and the whole of Quo Musa Tendis?
it has several pieces from the first and second editions of Lapsus Calami that were
omitted from the third, and two pieces not before printed.

QUO MUSA TENDIS? Foolscap 8vo. 3s. 6d. net;

also 150 Copies on large paper, Dutch hand-
made. 12s. 6d. net.
TIMES.—“His verse is musical and various, and his themes are touched with a
happy knack of originality.”
SCOTSMAN.—“Poetry or not, his verse is of the kind that invariably inspires a
friendly feeling to the writer; and every one who reads either this book or Lapsus
Calami will keep a kindly eye open for Mr Stephen’s next appearance, and share
the pleasures of its success.”
DAILY CHRONICLE.—“The whole of the Lapsus Ultimi are very clever, and
show keen analysis of character as well as effective dramatic handling.”
 CAMBRIDGE REVIEW.—“Mr J. K. Stephen’s new book, Quo Musa Tendis? fully
maintains the reputation which its predecessor earned, and will be warmly
welcomed by Mr Stephen’s numerous admirers.”
FREEMAN’S JOURNAL.—“On the whole the neat little volume is full of genuine
and original merit, thoughts and fancies brightly expressed, and bearing evidences
of the refined culture one associates with the best traditions of University life. We
can only trust that ‘J. K. S.’s’ prose will not be unworthy of the promise of the muse
of his student days.”

LAPSUS CALAMI. Fifth Edition (Fourth Thousand).

With considerable omissions and additions.
Foolscap 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. Also 150 on large
paper, Dutch hand-made.
SPECTATOR.—“Parodies of moderate merit are so easy, that we seldom enjoy
parodies, but J. K. S.’s parodies are of more than moderate merit. They do not
merely make one smile, and then regret that one has smiled from the sense of
emptiness which follows; they make one almost think that the parody must have
been written by the poet parodied in a moment of amused self-ridicule.... Take it all
in all, the Lapsus Calami will be a favourite wherever it is read.”
HERALD (Boston U.S.).—“Lapsus Calami was first published in the April of
1891. In May a second edition was called for, and in June a third was issued, an
edition with various omissions and additions. I am glad that the stanzas I am about
to copy were not omitted, for I think them delightfully wicked.... If the Boston
Browning Club were not so grave and serious a body, I should like to read The
Last Ride together to them when I come home.” Louise Chandler Moulton.

THE LIVING LANGUAGES. A Defence of the

Compulsory Study of Greek at Cambridge.
Crown 8vo. 1s.
CAMBRIDGE REVIEW.—“The pamphlet before us can be enjoyed, whatever
our opinions may be, and deserves to be read and considered whether we are
convinced by it or no.”
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ALPINE NOTES
AND THE CLIMBING FOOT ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions

will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright
in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and
distribute it in the United States without permission and without
paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General
Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if
you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the
trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the
Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such
as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and
printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in
the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright
law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially
commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the

free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this
work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase
“Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of
the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or
online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand,
agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual
property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to
abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using
and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for
obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms
of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only

be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by
people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.
There are a few things that you can do with most Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the
full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There
are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™
electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and
help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright
law in the United States and you are located in the United
States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will
support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this
agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms
of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with
its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it
without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside
the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to
the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying,
displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works
based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The
Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright
status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project

Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project
Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United

States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it
away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg
License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United
States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to
anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges.
If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of
paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use
of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth
in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is

posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and
distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder.
Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™
License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright
holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files
containing a part of this work or any other work associated with
Project Gutenberg™.
 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute
this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1
with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the
Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if
you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project
Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or
other format used in the official version posted on the official
Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at
no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a
means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project
Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™
works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or

providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
 about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project

Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different
terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain
permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™
trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on,
transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright
law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite
these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the
medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,”
such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt
data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other
medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -

Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU
AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE,
STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR
ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF
THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If

you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of
receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you
paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you
received the work from. If you received the work on a physical
medium, you must return the medium with your written
explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu
of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or
entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.
If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund
in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set

forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’,
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and