Rant on research; was, Re: [Sca-cooks] Re: Coffyns

[Lonnie D. Harvel]

Jadwiga Zajaczkowa / Jenne Heise wrote:

>Thus putting the information we need in that form
>dreaded by all right-minded SCAdians, the Great Evil, the Eternal
>Abombination, The SECONDARY SOURCE!
>  
>
Amen, Sister!

I am a researcher by profession, on the faculty at Georgia Tech. (I also 
have degrees, minors, certificates and what-not in theater, music, 
history, classical literature, religion, and even a minor in dance.) In 
my 24 years in the Society, I have been dumbfounded by the strange and 
unique prejudice against secondary sources. In research circles, the 
real dread is the massively time consuming "literary search". That is, 
knowing what all those secondary sources have to say about what you are 
studying. I am sorry, but ignoring (or rejecting outright without 
discernment) the body of secondary sources is arrogant and presumptuous 
on the part of some folks in the SCA. It also wastes a lot of time. It 
is also a mistake to assume that a "primary" source is either primary or 
accurate just because it is old.

Primary sources are always important; and it is certainly true that 
secondary sources are sometimes no more than flights of fancy created by 
their authors. But the skill of the true scholar is the ability to judge 
the value of a reference, to incorporate the good, reject the bad, and 
explore the contradictory. The reason I am on this list is that in the 
discipline of medieval cooking, I do not yet possess that ability to 
judge between sources. If I did, my time would be far better spent in a 
good library (though not nearly as entertaining). I am grateful to those 
gentles on this list that provide quality information, that usually does 
include both primary and secondary sources, as well as personal 
interpretations and experience.

So... What are your favorite SECONDARY sources?

Pax,
Aoghann