I enjoyed delving into all the layers within Heng’s articles. While it took a lot of re-reading and annotating, I found her organization to be helpful when considering the role of race in the Middle Ages. Heng walks readers through the ways in which race in the Middle Ages has been portrayed while simultaneously identifying the buried truth. Heng’s analysis calls out the pattern within Medievalist studies that actively ignores the period as a racial time, and demands an awareness of reality. The definition of race she presents, which seems to be a working one, names race as a construct that serves to ensure differences and power dynamics. While this discussion of race somewhat differs from how we talk about race in America in terms of phenotypes, I do not think the definitions that Heng approaches are that different. Dismissing the Middle Ages as a time where race was not a thought or consequence is utterly irresponsible. Heng makes an essential point about the timing of racial theory, as well. The concept of modernity is measured by the West as a fundamental arrival as if that is the turning point for all of humanity. I am interested in carrying on our conversation on how ignoring race also neglects analysis of hierarchy, power, and management.
Really well put! And I'm interested to hear what you're thinking of in terms of hierarchy, power, and management. I was really interested in that portion of our discussion on Wednesday, as I think it's a key point. Luckily the Horse and His Boy (and Said!) give us PLENTY to work with on that front.