Marco Barchfeld deciphers historical sources with students in a paleography seminar

Old manuscripts, twelve difficulty levels, and a seminar intentionally not taught as a lecture: Marco Barchfeld has received the Teaching Award for Innovative Teaching Concepts from the Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences, and Theology for the practical course “Reading and Interpreting Sources: Introduction to Paleography and Source Work”. At the Chair of Early Modern History at Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), he combines “Kurrent” script with source work and research.

Mr. Barchfeld, demand for the seminar was higher than expected. What surprised you about that in particular?

To be honest, I didn’t expect the demand to be so high. That made me very happy, especially since paleography courses at universities are becoming increasingly rare. The fact that nearly 20 people were on the waiting list showed me that students see a real need for this. Some, for example, wanted to be able to decipher letters from their grandparents. Over the course of the seminar, students also learned to write “Kurrentschrift” themselves to gain a better understanding of the script. This was enthusiastically received.

What is “Kurrentschrift”?

“Kurrentschrift” is the historical handwriting from the 17th and 18th centuries, which the seminar primarily focused on. The term derives from the Latin “currere”, meaning “to run”, because it could be written quickly. And a script known as “Frakturschrift” was the printed script used since the invention of printing. Since the writing style and grammar differ from modern German, we first addressed the peculiarities of Early New High German, which makes it easier to decipher manuscripts afterwards.

What makes working with historical manuscripts so exciting for you personally that you want to pass this enthusiasm on to your students?

What fascinates me about historical manuscripts is that the script and materiality contain information that cannot be conveyed in a printed edition. An apparently insignificant note in the margin, a stain on the paper, crossed-out letters or words, ornate initials, or the position of the signature – all these aspects carry information that can only be accessed by examining the manuscript itself. At the same time, one must actively decipher the script: Letters look different, words are written in unfamiliar ways, and there are scribbles and elaborate calligraphy. It was precisely this hands-on experimentation that I wanted to pass on.

In the seminar, you didn’t just include factual sources like chancery letters but also unusual documents such as village myths. How did that come about?

It was important to me that students not only work with particularly neatly written scripts. That’s why we examined not only official diplomatic sources but also documents created far from courtly contexts and written by non-professional scribes. For example, people from a village in Brandenburg complained about frogs that were croaking too loudly. Or we looked at a letter in which one pastor complained about another.

Will there be a follow-up practical course, “Reading and Interpreting Sources 2.0”?

The high demand clearly speaks in favor of continuing and further developing the course. That’s why I plan to offer the practical course on a regular basis. However, the basic structure will remain largely the same. As a new addition, I’m considering a visit to an archive so participants can actually hold and experience historical sources firsthand.

Contact