Een onopgelost dossier

Goffe Jensma, An unsolved case In order to account for the composition of his dissertation, which Te Velde raised as a point for discussion, Jensma notes that from a methodological point of view the pivotal distinction in cases of forgery is between solved and unsolved cases. Where solved cases comp...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: G.Th. Jensma
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Open Journals 2006-01-01
Series:BMGN: Low Countries Historical Review
Subjects:
Online Access:https://bmgn-lchr.nl/article/view/4881
id doaj-a2d64ffc7486436fbea14975eea0202a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a2d64ffc7486436fbea14975eea0202a2021-10-02T15:44:48ZengOpen JournalsBMGN: Low Countries Historical Review0165-05052211-28982006-01-011213Een onopgelost dossierG.Th. JensmaGoffe Jensma, An unsolved case In order to account for the composition of his dissertation, which Te Velde raised as a point for discussion, Jensma notes that from a methodological point of view the pivotal distinction in cases of forgery is between solved and unsolved cases. Where solved cases comply with the balanced rhetoric of historiography, unsolved cases, such as this one have, in practice, to be described using more rigid terms derived from pseudo-legal debates. It is of paramount importance to this debate that the interpretations are complete; there may be no shred of doubt left about the solution that is presented. This, scholarly speaking, absurd requirement explains why Jensma chose the ‘thick description’ method to do literary justice to the Oera Linda book affair. Jensma further rejects, at least as a compelling interpretation, Te Velde’s suggestion to consider the case of the Oera Linda Book specifically within the context of the Dutch playful liberal debating-culture of the 1860s and 1870s. The key to understanding the Oera Linda book affair does not lie in the sophisticated irony with which this ‘joke’ was played, but rather in the tragic misunderstanding that was accidentally caused by this serious and deliberate hoax. This response is part of the discussion forum 'De gemaskerde God' (G.T. Jensma).https://bmgn-lchr.nl/article/view/4881ego documentshistoriographyFrancois HaverSchmidt
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author G.Th. Jensma
spellingShingle G.Th. Jensma
Een onopgelost dossier
BMGN: Low Countries Historical Review
ego documents
historiography
Francois HaverSchmidt
author_facet G.Th. Jensma
author_sort G.Th. Jensma
title Een onopgelost dossier
title_short Een onopgelost dossier
title_full Een onopgelost dossier
title_fullStr Een onopgelost dossier
title_full_unstemmed Een onopgelost dossier
title_sort een onopgelost dossier
publisher Open Journals
series BMGN: Low Countries Historical Review
issn 0165-0505
2211-2898
publishDate 2006-01-01
description Goffe Jensma, An unsolved case In order to account for the composition of his dissertation, which Te Velde raised as a point for discussion, Jensma notes that from a methodological point of view the pivotal distinction in cases of forgery is between solved and unsolved cases. Where solved cases comply with the balanced rhetoric of historiography, unsolved cases, such as this one have, in practice, to be described using more rigid terms derived from pseudo-legal debates. It is of paramount importance to this debate that the interpretations are complete; there may be no shred of doubt left about the solution that is presented. This, scholarly speaking, absurd requirement explains why Jensma chose the ‘thick description’ method to do literary justice to the Oera Linda book affair. Jensma further rejects, at least as a compelling interpretation, Te Velde’s suggestion to consider the case of the Oera Linda Book specifically within the context of the Dutch playful liberal debating-culture of the 1860s and 1870s. The key to understanding the Oera Linda book affair does not lie in the sophisticated irony with which this ‘joke’ was played, but rather in the tragic misunderstanding that was accidentally caused by this serious and deliberate hoax. This response is part of the discussion forum 'De gemaskerde God' (G.T. Jensma).
topic ego documents
historiography
Francois HaverSchmidt
url https://bmgn-lchr.nl/article/view/4881
work_keys_str_mv AT gthjensma eenonopgelostdossier
_version_ 1716853204013023232