Late Antiquity +/vs Medieval

[hildewijch]

Khairein, salve, etc. fellow pre-modernly-inclined historians

I have a fairly mixed background in both History and Religions Studies, and am currently getting a masters in Religious Studies. I will have done about two years of Hebrew, Latin, and Greek each by the time I finish my MA, though I am looking to perhaps build on my language skills a bit more before going on to a Ph.D, including doing a second MA.

That said, I am somewhat torn between Late Antiquity and Medieval History as subfields...it seems to me that a great deal of scholars of Late Antiquity are interested in it as the end or "last gasp" of antiquity and the classical world. I am not so interested in classics as the connections between Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, especially how certain ideas from the Patristics period - such as Jewish-Christian relations and the split between Christian East and West - carried over from Late Antiquity into the medieval world.

I understand why the divide exists, especially with the knowledge necessary for both fields and languages being so high, but would you recommend any programs that allow students to do justice to both, or straddle these subfields? I have looked at programs such as UCLA, UC Berkely, Princeton, IU Bloomington for starters...

That aside, does anyone have a genearal feeling about employabilty in Late Antiquity vs. Medieval History?

Thanks!

[Gelpfrat the Bold]

There seem to be a few different definitions of exactly what constitutes Late Antiquity. Where do you see the divide? When stuck between ancient and medieval history, I think someone interested in Late Antiquity would be better served in the medieval field, as there are lots of [early] medievalists with very early medieval training (particularly in the UK) but not so many ancient historians with early medieval training.

[Gelpfrat the Bold]

Pardon my ignorance, but is Late Antiquity actually classified as its own subfield anywhere? Like, can you get a degree in Late Antique History the way you can in Ancient, Medieval or Modern?

[hildewijch]

Pardon my ignorance, but is Late Antiquity actually classified as its own subfield anywhere? Like, can you get a degree in Late Antique History the way you can in Ancient, Medieval or Modern?

I think the issue is more that some places lump 'Late Antiquity' - which can seem to include everything from the beginning of Christianity and rabbinic Judaism up to around 750 - in with Ancient History (which I am not interested in focusing on) while others place it in the medieval category, or don't have it all....or put it with Byzantine, separate from medieval, etc (see U of Chicago or UC Berkeley for example)

[CageFree]

Hi

My undergraduate area of interest (and topic of my honors thesis) was Late Antiquity; I am now looking to go back for a MA 12 years after the BA, and spoke a while back to my old thesis advisor. She told me that finding jobs in LA is extremely difficult here in the US and that I should be prepared for that; tenure track, in particular, will be very difficult.

If your thing really is Late Antiquity, you might want to look into Princeton (Peter Brown), University of Michigan (Raymond Van Dam) in addition to the ones you looked at.

As far as UCLA... Claudia Rapp is now teaching at the University of Vienna... permanently. She was the heart of Late Antiquity at UCLA. I don't know if there's anyone left, certainly not anyone of her caliber.

Edited July 25, 2011 by Teacher4MA

[maeisenb]

It completely depends on how who you ask as to what the chronological definitions of Late Antiquity are, but as for PhD programs it's much more about the person you want to work with and how they see the divide. If you don't want to do ancient history, then certainly don't apply to classics programs although some people there are Late Antique historians (e.g. Noel Lenski at Colorado).

That being said, you need to slot yourself with the person who's geographic and thematic issue makes the most sense I would think. It sounds like you are more into religious history foremost and then geographical more Mediterranean based history than say France, England or somewhere like that. Thus, you don't want to necessarily work with someone at Princeton, since Peter Brown has just retired and the only person left doing that period is John Haldon who is an economic/political historian. I would suggest looking at Notre Dame with Tom Noble as a possibility (although he tends to run a little later and western). Yale has a guy who does Late Antique Egyptian stuff as well, but I can't remember his name offhand. Also, have you looked into Jewish history programs? There tend to be a lot more of those and I'm sure some of them have early historians with whom you might find a good fit.

[CageFree]

There was a guy at UCI who did more Mediterranean, Thomas Sizgorich, but he passed away early this year

[Sparky]

I am a diehard late medievalist so don't take this as gospel truth, but: it seems to me that early medievalists have pretty much appropriated Late Antiquity. The whole 'legacy of Rome blending with "Germanic" culture/s' trope is the dominant theme in the recent sweeping early medieval histories--think Chris Wickham's The Inheritance of Rome: Illuminating the Dark Ages, etc.

My general impression is that most text-based work on the early Middle Ages is coming out of England right now. I can think of a few Celtic Studies people in the U.S., as well as some material culture/archaeology-centric ones, but even those tend more towards the Carolingian era (Michael McCormick at Harvard, Bonnie Effros at Florida, Lisa Bitel at USC). IIRC, Rutgers combines ancient and medieval Europe under one subdiscipline, and I know some early medievalists who have come out of that program (and are not yet tenured/able to accept grad students, unfortunately). So they might have one or two faculty as possibilities. And as someone upthread mentioned, Tom Noble at Notre Dame, who has at this point done just about everything early medieval at one time or another, right?

Again, take all of that with truckloads of salt, please.

[kuniklos]

I always took this the same way with the term "Renaissance," it depends on the geographic region you are referring to. But I have noticed in texts, at conferences, in class descriptions...that Late Antiquity seems to be roughly 9th-14th centuries and Medieval being 15th-16th centuries if you are talking Western Europe. Although the 14th century bit can be debatable. I almost always see Late Antiquity attributed with the Mediterranean and Byzantium. But that could very well just a a trend in what people like to study in that time frame.

[maeisenb]

I am a diehard late medievalist so don't take this as gospel truth, but: it seems to me that early medievalists have pretty much appropriated Late Antiquity. The whole 'legacy of Rome blending with "Germanic" culture/s' trope is the dominant theme in the recent sweeping early medieval histories--think Chris Wickham's The Inheritance of Rome: Illuminating the Dark Ages, etc.

My general impression is that most text-based work on the early Middle Ages is coming out of England right now. I can think of a few Celtic Studies people in the U.S., as well as some material culture/archaeology-centric ones, but even those tend more towards the Carolingian era (Michael McCormick at Harvard, Bonnie Effros at Florida, Lisa Bitel at USC). IIRC, Rutgers combines ancient and medieval Europe under one subdiscipline, and I know some early medievalists who have come out of that program (and are not yet tenured/able to accept grad students, unfortunately). So they might have one or two faculty as possibilities. And as someone upthread mentioned, Tom Noble at Notre Dame, who has at this point done just about everything early medieval at one time or another, right?

Again, take all of that with truckloads of salt, please.

I definitely agree with this point for sure, although I go back to my original point which is if you want to do more religious or cultural history than you will be looking for different people. Michael McCormick would not be an ideal fit for those interests, since he does more grand sweeping economic histories.

Do you have an idea of your particular interests within Late Antiquity?