| Abstract: | The aims of the first VISCOM conference were to compare different methods employed in the study of community to address new methodological perspectives for the analysis of categories of identification and belonging, the conditions and processes of the making of communities across large cultural and geo-political fields. At the same time, this exchange was meant to provide thorough reflections on the process of comparative research itself. This contribution sets out to discuss the diversity and creative tension of these methodological approaches before proceeding to outline how they may contribute to future collaboration both within the VISCOM project and beyond in interdisciplinary and, eventually, in transdisciplinary collaboration between historians and socio-anthropologists. The text thus focuses on the methodological tools and the very practical research processes addressed at the conference and in the case studies brought together in this thematic issue. It will specifically address the challenge to develop comparable, but contextually differentiated approaches to different types and amounts of medieval source material across time and space, viewing the methodological and conceptual framework of the project and the contributions of this issue as a toolbox. I will thus take up the claims of several contributors to more thoroughly contextualise the very conceptual notions underlying our research (such as identity, ethnicity and community) and argue in favour of a less “loaded” and more flexible conceptual vocabulary developed in close relation with the source material to cope with the high diversity of sources and methodological approaches. |
