Ok, no time like the present to talk abt the term "Anglo-Saxon" more seriously w/ some resources. These ppl here in this clip are exactly the types we are often confronted w/ saying the term describes 'heritage' & is attached to whiteness. They are wrong. 1/17 #medievaltwitter https://twitter.com/EdClowes/status/1271803946122821633
As has been discussed by a number of scholars, the term is wrapped up in racist rhetoric not just now but has been embedded and tied to white supremacy for centuries. See here: 2/17 https://twitter.com/erik_kaars/status/1171730118429073409?s=20
"Race" too is complicated. It is a socio-political category with a historical context. It was created to refer specifically to non-white people & ppl use this to reinforce white supremacy. Racists love to use the term "A-S" as a race. They are wrong. 3/17 https://twitter.com/erik_kaars/status/1188408954717646848?s=20
So we know this term wasn't used during the period (in written records apart from 3 sources). Latin texts had variations & ofc how continental Europeans used the term was dependent on their 'othering.' 5/17 https://twitter.com/erik_kaars/status/1196460902649860096?s=20
Popularization of the term in the modern era is wedded with nationalist notions in the English speaking world. Here's a good rundown of its use. Keep in mind that the term wasn't commonly used in the period for ppl to describe themselves in England. 6/17 https://twitter.com/erik_kaars/status/1198161949428781056?s=20
The term was used infrequently (3x) in written records & those were all royal papals. The term came back into use in the 16th c. after centuries of hiatus for nationalist/racist agendas. It has been tied to wyteness which is why whyte nationalists identify themselves as such. 7/
No one has banned the term. No one has said that previous scholarship is irrelevant where the term was used, but moving forward we can use terms (plural) that better reflect the ppl & period (which is large) w/o relying on racist terms. Terms in academia/research change. 8/17
And also, let's not forget that the field itself has held the notion either implicitly or explicity that it is for wyte people. This is not new to me, but it was to many of you. 9/17 https://twitter.com/ISASaxonists/status/1185042400785383424?s=20
See also here: 10/17 https://twitter.com/ISASaxonists/status/1222811709741637633?s=20
Now we also have to discuss "ethics" in this b/c it was pointed out very early on that there was an ethical dilemma b/c us sweary young scholars were rude. Well here's the ethical question we should be asking: 11/17 https://twitter.com/DrSueOosthuizen/status/1268170643767508992?s=20
Now do we have a fixed term in lieu of "Anglo-Saxon"? No. Do we need ONE term? What should the term reflect and why? Can we use multiple terms based on context? Are we just used to lazy short-hand of AS? Questions to discuss amongst yourselves. 12/17
To conclude, all those angry white thugs in London and all over Britain wetting themselves over a false history often target ppl like me who they believe are distorting "their" history. The fact is they have been taught a whitewashed history & it is on us to correct them. 16/17
Will post a resource for you all to use shortly! Stay tuned. /end
Ok, one last thing. We have LOTS of amazing scholars talking abt this topic &putting in the work. I missed @b_hawk's recent &important thread which adds to how, as scholars, we can change the way the term is used in our own scholarship. #medievaltwitter https://twitter.com/b_hawk/status/1271900434727346183?s=20
You can follow @ISASaxonists.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.