På dette site bruger vi cookies til at levere vores ydelser, forbedre performance, til analyseformål, og (hvis brugeren ikke er logget ind) til reklamer. Ved at bruge LibraryThing anerkender du at have læst og forstået vores vilkår og betingelser inklusive vores politik for håndtering af brugeroplysninger. Din brug af dette site og dets ydelser er underlagt disse vilkår og betingelser.
The weapon of pedants, the scourge of undergraduates, the bête noire of the "new" liberated scholar: the lowly footnote, long the refuge of the minor and the marginal, emerges in this book as a singular resource, with a surprising history that says volumes about the evolution of modern scholarship. In Anthony Grafton's engrossing account, footnotes to history give way to footnotes as history, recounting in their subtle way the curious story of the progress of knowledge in written form.Grafton treats the development of the footnote--the one form of proof normally supplied by historians in support of their assertions--as writers on science have long treated the development of laboratory equipment, statistical arguments, and reports on experiments: as a complex story, rich in human interest, that sheds light on the status of history as art, as science, and as an institution. The book starts in the Berlin of the brilliant nineteenth-century historian Leopold von Ranke, who is often credited with inventing documented history in its modern form. Casting back to antiquity and forward to the twentieth century, Grafton's investigation exposes Ranke's position as a far more ambiguous one and offers us a rich vision of the true origins and gradual triumph of the footnote.Among the protagonists of this story are Athanasius Kircher, who built numerous documents into his spectacularly speculative treatises on ancient Egypt and China; Pierre Bayle, who made the footnote a powerful tool in philosophical and historical polemics; and Edward Gibbon, who transformed it into a high form of literary artistry. Proceeding with the spirit of an intellectual mystery and peppered with intriguing and revealing remarks by those who "made" this history, The Footnote brings what is so often relegated to afterthought and marginalia to its rightful place in the center of the literary life of the mind.… (mere)
Though I do not generally read history, I apparently like to read historiography, and though my graduate work is long behind me, I still enjoy reading about the culture and quirks of academia. I also love using footnotes. So after I finished Academia Obscura, I hunted down this book, which was mentioned in passing.
It is a scholarly work, and often assumes a depth of knowledge about the study of history that I do not have. A good third of most pages is made up, indeed, of footnotes, often giving a referenced passage in its original French, Latin, or German. I found myself learning more about Leopold von Ranke than I ever wanted to know, since he apparently is given credit by many for originating the "double narrative" of historical writing where the argument is made in the main text while the substantiation and counter-arguments are made at the dense, small-font bottom of the page, since "Each serious work of history must now travel on an impregnably armored bottom, rather like a tank." (56)
What kept me laboring along? First, historians avoid merely being story-tellers and attempt to establish the veracity of their assertions by reference to primary sources. Second, historians writing about other historians often produce marvelous nuggets of prose like the one at the end of the previous paragraph. Third, historians are quirky, argumentative, whimsical lunatics like anyone in any other profession.* And fourth, as I suspected, part of why footnotes became so popular in the practice of history was that they were already very popular in fiction and commentary, being used for sarcastic commentary and personal attack as well as for simple comic effect.
It's only three stars because I can't really recommend it to anyone else despite its rigor and reference to original material. It's hard to follow and the second half of the book is less coherent and pithy than the first half. But I have marked many passages and will save them to trot out later when attempting to impress others with my erudition.
*Gottlieb Wilhelm Rabener published a dissertation consisting only of footnotes, for instance (120). ( )
Not so much a history of the footnote as a THING, but a history of the CITATION as a practice among scholars. So, no illustrations or history of manicules, postils, margin notes, footnotes, endnotes, asterisks, superscript numerals, or Kate Turabian. Instead, a dissertation on the practice of citing sources, pushing the standard story back past Gibbon and Ranke to the classicists, humanists, and antiquarians of the Renaissance and Early Modern eras. Quite dull in places, in others, rather dull. There are glimmers of interesting facts here and there. But this is definitely the stuff of pedants and graduate students in history, not a narrative history for the masses. Now, I am a pedantic holder of a Ph.D. in history, but this was not a fun read. It would have worked well in a graduate-level historiography/theory & methods class. ( )
An unusual history of the footnote (well, maybe any history of the footnote is unusual, eh?). Much more concerned with the history of the content of the footnote rather than so much the mechanics of the footnote. ( )
Oplysninger fra den engelske Almen VidenRedigér teksten, så den bliver dansk.
In the eighteenth century, the historical footnote was a high form of literary art.
Citater
Oplysninger fra den engelske Almen VidenRedigér teksten, så den bliver dansk.
Footnotes guarantee nothing, in themselves. The enemies of truth - and truth has enemies - can use them to deny the same facts that honest historians use them to assert.
Sidste ord
Oplysninger fra den engelske Almen VidenRedigér teksten, så den bliver dansk.
Yet footnotes form an indispensable if messy part of that indispensable, messay mixture of art and science: modern history.
The weapon of pedants, the scourge of undergraduates, the bête noire of the "new" liberated scholar: the lowly footnote, long the refuge of the minor and the marginal, emerges in this book as a singular resource, with a surprising history that says volumes about the evolution of modern scholarship. In Anthony Grafton's engrossing account, footnotes to history give way to footnotes as history, recounting in their subtle way the curious story of the progress of knowledge in written form.Grafton treats the development of the footnote--the one form of proof normally supplied by historians in support of their assertions--as writers on science have long treated the development of laboratory equipment, statistical arguments, and reports on experiments: as a complex story, rich in human interest, that sheds light on the status of history as art, as science, and as an institution. The book starts in the Berlin of the brilliant nineteenth-century historian Leopold von Ranke, who is often credited with inventing documented history in its modern form. Casting back to antiquity and forward to the twentieth century, Grafton's investigation exposes Ranke's position as a far more ambiguous one and offers us a rich vision of the true origins and gradual triumph of the footnote.Among the protagonists of this story are Athanasius Kircher, who built numerous documents into his spectacularly speculative treatises on ancient Egypt and China; Pierre Bayle, who made the footnote a powerful tool in philosophical and historical polemics; and Edward Gibbon, who transformed it into a high form of literary artistry. Proceeding with the spirit of an intellectual mystery and peppered with intriguing and revealing remarks by those who "made" this history, The Footnote brings what is so often relegated to afterthought and marginalia to its rightful place in the center of the literary life of the mind.
▾Biblioteksbeskrivelser af bogens indhold
No library descriptions found.
▾LibraryThingmedlemmers beskrivelse af bogens indhold
)
)
)
Google Books — Indlæser...
(3.59)
4
It is a scholarly work, and often assumes a depth of knowledge about the study of history that I do not have. A good third of most pages is made up, indeed, of footnotes, often giving a referenced passage in its original French, Latin, or German. I found myself learning more about Leopold von Ranke than I ever wanted to know, since he apparently is given credit by many for originating the "double narrative" of historical writing where the argument is made in the main text while the substantiation and counter-arguments are made at the dense, small-font bottom of the page, since "Each serious work of history must now travel on an impregnably armored bottom, rather like a tank." (56)
What kept me laboring along? First, historians avoid merely being story-tellers and attempt to establish the veracity of their assertions by reference to primary sources. Second, historians writing about other historians often produce marvelous nuggets of prose like the one at the end of the previous paragraph. Third, historians are quirky, argumentative, whimsical lunatics like anyone in any other profession.* And fourth, as I suspected, part of why footnotes became so popular in the practice of history was that they were already very popular in fiction and commentary, being used for sarcastic commentary and personal attack as well as for simple comic effect.
It's only three stars because I can't really recommend it to anyone else despite its rigor and reference to original material. It's hard to follow and the second half of the book is less coherent and pithy than the first half. But I have marked many passages and will save them to trot out later when attempting to impress others with my erudition.
*Gottlieb Wilhelm Rabener published a dissertation consisting only of footnotes, for instance (120). (