CFP for Monstrous Monarch/Royal Monsters at MAP 2018 in Las Vegas, NV April 12-15.
Organised by Medieval Association of the Pacific, the Rocky Mountain Medieval and the Renaissance Association
Medieval and early modern societies defined monstrosity in a multitude of ways, assigning the term to figures representing the supernatural “other” and to those representing human alterities. Monsters filled the national consciousness of societies throughout the medieval and early modern worlds. Indeed, the monster became an allegory for a society’s relativisms and fears. So, what happens when the monster is the monarch him or herself—or when the monster is a member of the royal family? How might the term be defined differently or specifically for the sake of this unique person? What special circumstances might be attached to the term and its parameters when the monarch and his or her relationship to the State and its people is concerned? Monarchs of the medieval and early modern periods were deeply concerned about their legacies, and prioritized the public memory of their reigns and dynasties very highly. Similarly, literary and artistic representations of royalty and monarchs often showcase the concerns of dynasty, heredity, and reputation. How is public memory affected when the monarch, or a member of a royal dynasty, is remembered as monstrous for posterity? Moreover, how is royal legacy affected when the term “monster” becomes attached to the monarch while he or she is still living?
MEARCSTAPA invites proposals in all disciplines of the humanities and for all nations, regions, language groups, and cultures of the medieval and early modern periods globally. Please send proposals of 250 words maximum to Asa Mittman firstname.lastname@example.org, Thea Tomaini email@example.com, and Ilan Mitchell-Smith Ilan.firstname.lastname@example.org by 14 November 2017.
Archaeological Review from Cambridge Department of Archaeology.
‘The Others’ — Deviants, Outcasts and Outsiders in Archaeology
Volume 33.2 November 2018
Theme editors: Leah Damman and Samantha Leggett
Throughout human history, groups have met and interacted; this has a tendency to give rise to othering behaviours, ethnic discourses and a myriad of identity related issues. But what is the archaeological signature of ‘the Others’? Archaeological literature is full of examples of ‘deviant’ practices, and modern constructs? This volume seeks submissions that discuss these ideas and explore concept of identity, otherness, deviancy, ethnicity and exclusion in archaeology.
How we define nations and nth-oral groups, and what is designated as outside of or ‘Other’ is important to consider now more than ever; especially considering recent global political events. The increasing study of identity and archaeology in recent decades is predominantly concerned with labels and traditional discourses. How we define. protect and preserve the cultural heritage of non-Western and marginalized cultural groups should also be considered. The aim of this volume is to give a voice to the ‘Others’ of the past but also to be critical of our own theory and practice when it comes to socio.cultural definitions and studying identity in the past.
Volume 33.2 of the Archaeological Review from Cambridge provides a forum to facilitate discussion surrounding the unusual treatment of selected persons in the past, understanding that this could provide and concepts of eschatological fate. This volume seeks submissions that discuss these ideas and explore concepts of identity, otherness, deviancy, ethnicity and exclusion in archaeology. Papers integrating archaeology with other subjects such as history anthropology, ethnography or sociology are thus also encouraged. Contributions might explore, although are not limited to, the following topics:
▪ Theories and identification of Otherness, deviancy and alterity
▪ Deviant burial customs and mortuary practices Performing ethnicity and forming identities
▪ Minority group archaeology
▪ Outsiders and the other in cultural heritage
▪ Colonial and post-colonial perspectives
Papers of no more than 4000 words should be submitted to Leah Damman (email@example.com), and Samantha Leggett (firstname.lastname@example.org), any time before 1 March 2018, for publication in November 2018. Potential contributors are encouraged to register interest early by either submitting an abstract of up to 250 words or contacting the editors to further discuss their ideas.
More information about the Archaeological Review from Cambridge, including back issues and submission guidelines on the review website.
Theme: Law and (Dis)OrderThe Forty-Fourth Annual Sewanee Medieval Colloquium April 13-14, 2018 – The University of the South, Sewanee, TN.
The Sewanee Medieval Colloquium invites papers exploring aspects of law, order, disorder and resistance in all aspects of medieval cultures. This includes legal codes, social order, orthodoxy and heterodoxy, poetic or artistic form, gender construction, racial divisions, scientific and philosophical order, the history of popular rebellion, and other ways of conceptualizing our theme.
Papers should be twenty minutes in length, and commentary is traditionally provided for each paper presented. We invite papers from all disciplines, and encourage contributions from medievalists working on any geographic area. A seminar will also seek contributions; please look for its separate CFP soon. Participants in the Colloquium are generally limited to holders of a Ph.D. and those currently in a Ph.D. program.
Please submit an abstract (approx. 250 words) and brief c.v., via our website (http://medievalcolloquium.sewanee.edu), no later than 26 October 2017. If you wish to propose a session, please submit abstracts and vitae for all participants in the session. Completed papers, including notes, will be due no later than 13 March 2018.
Prospective participants are invited to apply to propose complete panels of two or three papers, apply to the general call, or apply to panel sub-themes, which appear below. Papers not taken by sub-themes will be considered for the general call.
Sensory Orders: Detecting Difference in the Middle Ages
Appeals to smell, taste, see, hear, and touch go a long way to define medieval senses of self and other. In the Middle English Siege of Jerusalem (ca. 1370-1380), for instance, the stench of Jewish corpses “choke” ditches to the horror of Jewish survivors and to the delight of Christian spectators. The sound of the blacksmith’s hammer striking an anvil, as imagined in “Complaint Against The Blacksmiths” (ca. 1275-1300), somehow transmits the color of his blackened skin and the nuisance of his socioeconomic status across great distances. What do we do with works, such as the Siege of Jerusalem and the “Complaint Against The Blacksmiths,” that negatively consume its sensing figures and, by extension, its readers? What is gained in and through these literary assaults on the senses? What are the ends of medieval sensation? How are medieval and modern readers taught to perceive differences of race, religion, gender, sexuality, and/or ability?
Sensory studies often make positive use of the senses, in so far as the senses enable modern audiences to have deeper and more significant encounters with past cultures, histories, and literatures. For all the positive sensations we recognize, medieval senses were just as often engaged in and by art and literature to inculcate difference, justify brutality, and/or cultivate sympathy. “Detecting Difference” invites participants to examine the various formations and capacities of the medieval sensorium to encode and enforce social (dis)orders, paying special attention to techniques for detecting differences of race, religion, gender, sexuality, and/or ability. The panel will build on recent work in the sensory, disability, and race studies—from Mark Smith’s How Race Was Made: Slavery, Segregation, and the Senses (2006) to the special issue of postmedieval, edited by Lara Farina and Holly Dugan on “The Intimate Senses” (2012)—to explore how medieval perceptions of difference speak to present-day conversations about difference, about cultures of surveillance, about the policing of bodies, behaviors, and ideas.
Comment: Lara Farina, West Virginia University
CALL FOR PAPERS – Violence and the Mind
Fifteenth annual McGill-queens graduate conference in history, to be held at McGill University in Montréal, Québec, Canada, 1-3 March 2018
The foundational role played by violence in forging and re-shaping human society can be readily discerned within the study of slavery, colonialism, gender & sexuality, economics, revolution and military history. Indeed, questions regarding violence, whether they be immediate or latent, manifest across the many subfields of historical inquiry. And yet, to think about violence historically is a daunting task, requiring study across an immense spectrum of geographic and temporal horizons. Scholars who make such an attempt often find themselves further challenged in defining the conceptual parameters of violence itself. Studies of epochal and generational violence often turn to the question of embodiment, while studies of trauma or structural violence may choose to leave the body behind entirely. The theme of the 2018 McGill-Queen’s Graduate Conference in History, « Violence and the Mind », provides a platform for graduate students to situate these problems as they continue to explore violence historically by foregrounding the interior lives of historical subjects. We welcome emerging scholars from across the disciplines to present research that questions how violence is produced, elaborated, interpreted and experienced by the mind. We encourage proposals that present historiographical, theoretical, and comparative approaches to such forms of violence across a variety of regions and time periods. Hopeful participants should propose 15-20 minute presentations that speak to the following questions and themes: How are the interior lives of human beings shaped, historically, by violence? What distinguishes violence committed against bodies from violence committed against mi.? How can historians study the relationship between violence and subjective experience? Who is distinct (and what is similar) about violence produced or directed towards the mental realm? To what extent can the various subfields of history, which explicitly study violence, be approached together when inner experiences are taken as the point of departure? How can the notion of structural violence contend with individual psychologies?
Potential areas of enquiry may include (but are not limited to):
• The history of ideology.
• The history of psychoanalysis
• The history of medicine, including psychology and psychiatry.
• Racism and Critical Race Theory
• Military history, including trauma
• Queer theory and the history of sexuality and gender
• Philosophy of Mind
• Disability Studies
• History of emotions
• Indigenous studies, reconciliation and settler colonialism.
Please submit an abstract of no more than 400 words as well as a brief academic biography in Word or PDF format to email@example.com by 8 december 2017.