Lindsay Dean Breach, Doctoral Candidate, University of Canterbury

Australian & New Zealand Association for Medieval & Early Modern Studies (ANZAMEMS) did a amazing job with the 10th Biennial Conference. It is prudent to begin with thanks to those organisers behind the scenes. As Chris Jones said in his address: When things run smoothly; it’s easy to forget to say thank you. The University of Queensland was also a terrific venue. I speak from a New Zealand perspective when I say the weather was ‘fantastic’. However, comments about the weather speak to the international element of the conference. It is a testament to the esteem of ANZAMEMS that an Australasian event can attract so many international peers from as far away as Russia. Particularly because we often consider ourselves geographically isolated.

This was my first conference. My foremost concern is that the bar has been set very high. For me personally, this will be the conference against which I will judge future events. The conference boasted many wonderful papers and it was difficult to choose which to attend. The papers I did settle on were splendid. Each conveyed the labour of love of the presenter. It is important to me personally that the audience asks respectful questions and treats the presenter with the dignity they deserve. I was warned that similar academic events (clearly not ANZAMEMS events!) are often treated as opportunities to display arrogant ‘one-up-manship.’ Or worse still, professors attempting to assert their dominance over postgraduates (apparently such poor conduct happens!) to satisfy their egos. I am very happy to report this was not the case here. I did not witness a single example of undignified posturing by any member of ANZAMEMS.The conference was a friendly and safe environment of the kind that promotes learned discourse. To sum up briefly, the atmosphere was positive and audience participation was constructive.

I had the pleasure to attend papers on various subjects on medieval and early modern history. I learned a lot. To name a few, I attended a paper describing how modern conceptions of Frederick the Great as a ‘dandy’ did not impact upon his status as a King (Dr Bodie Ashton, University of Adelaide). Dr Michael Ostling (University of Queensland) expertly covered the de-mythologising of fairies and magic in an age of rationalism. Another paper described the passage of death as a pilgrimage and how the poems of Sir Walter Raleigh present this image (Cyril Caspar, University of Zurich). One paper, as part of a History of Emotions, described the impact of disfigurement on conveying emotions and pre-modern physiological understanding of the face (Dr Emily Cock, University of Adelaide). Finally, Erica Steiner (Independent Scholar) furnished an excellent paper on a ship called the hulc, which could be described as the workhorse of the British Isles. I attended many other worthy papers that I do not have space here to mention.

My own paper concerned the use, or early trust, in medieval English law. It stands as a challenge to the ‘accepted truth’ today, attributed to Pollock and Maitland, which holds the use as having emerged in response to England’s involvement in the crusades. My own panel concerned law and politics. There were numerous others panels that covered a variety of subjects such as theology, musicology, and politics. I initially approached the conference with some trepidation because I had the perceptible misfortune of being the first paper on the first day of the conference. As this was my first conference, it was an entirely new experience and I did not know what to expect. I admit to being nervous. However, I am glad to say that any thoughts of misfortune quickly evaporated. My chair did a wonderful job and I got excellent feedback. Next time, I know I can depend on the positive and supportive disposition of the ANZAMEMS membership.

The conference provided an amazing opportunity to meet experts in their field. It provided ample opportunity to exchange ideas in general discourse or in direct response to questions. Moreover, I arranged to co-publish an article with one member who I met at the conference. Therefore, the ability to exchange ideas is fundamental to the experience. ANZAMEMS facilitated the networking aspect of the conference with ample social gatherings. These proved to furnish closer relationships with existing colleagues and create new bonds with others. I am happy to say that I made a number of positive contacts and formed a number of friendships with people who I am keeping in contact with after the conference. I had no negative interactions.

Nothing ever runs perfectly and ANZAMEMS would do well to take the lessons it learned here and apply them to the next event in Wellington. I have no negative criticisms. The only room for improvement lies in the observance of the 20 minutes allocated to the papers. It is understandable when you get so many academics together that their passions shine through their papers. This is great but can mean papers may run over time. Even 10 minutes over time! The ability of chairs to control the exuberance of the speakers greatly varied. Part of the problem regarded perceptions of seniority. While not overtly an issue, it is clear that some chairs (namely postgraduates) were reluctant to stop their superiors (e.g. their supervisors). The clear lesson is that chairs should be of equal or of higher seniority to speakers.

In conclusion, the conference was one of the most positive experiences of my life. It is something I will never forget. It proved to be a superb academic experience and a wonderful opportunity to connect with others. Unfortunately for ANZAMEMS, the bar is now very high. Future organisers are faced with the expectations of a similar event. With that said: I look forward to see if the next ANZAMEMS conference in Wellington in 2017 can meet the standard now set.