With its tenth volume recently added to the UC Berkeley Library, the Atlante Linguistico Italiano is a unique piece of the Library’s map collections. Each entry in the atlas begins with a single concept, notion or phrase in standard Italian such as cuore, heart. Accompanying this is a map of the Italian peninsula (along with Sicily and Sardinia) that contains the equivalent term, rendered in IPA, as heard in communes all across the country. The lexical and phonetic variations of a single word play out in gradients across the landscape with small changes from one commune to the next that give way to seismic ones from one region to another. The result is a condensed roadmap of the immense linguistic diversity of Italy.
Entry for the world “bambino”, showing variants across Tuscany, Emilia-Romagna and Liguria.
As of now, the ten available volumes cover lexical items in the following spheres: the human body, clothing, the home, food, family, and society, with many other spheres such as fauna, commerce, and agriculture yet to be published. While this work is comprehensive in its treatment of geographic variants, it says unfortunately very little about diastratic variation or the relative social capital of the varieties it contains. With its data now over 30 years old, and many of its constituent dialects likely under the threat of extinction, the Atlante may soon start to take on historic and diachronic intrigue as well.
Entry for the word “oggi” showing showing variants Lombardy, Liguria, Piedmont, and the Aosta Valley.
And if you’re thinking of taking these volumes home with you, think twice. They won’t fit in your backpack. They are big and heavy, measuring 49 x 71 centimeters each, and best consulted in the comfort of the Main Stacks.
Pellis, Ugo, and L. (Lorenzo) Massobrio. Atlante linguistico italiano / materiali raccolti da U. Pellis [and others] ; redatto da L. Massobrio [and others]. Roma: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, Libreria dello Stato, 1995.
Main (Gardner) Stacks fff PC1711 .A89 1995 v.1-10
Carmen del Camino Martínez
(Universidad de Sevilla)
Tan nocivos como el fuego y otros desastres naturales pueden resultar para el conocimiento de los textos antiguos los cambios de denominación de los manuscritos. La confusión que produce un nuevo nombre o signatura en un testimonio puede obstaculizar, o incluso impedir, el avance de la investigación, por lo que a filólogos e historiadores se nos impone, como primer paso para el estudio de una tradición manuscrita, la aclaración de las concordancias entre las denominaciones de cada pieza, mutantes a lo largo del tiempo. Descifrar esos códigos puede ser una tarea más o menos exigente en función de la edad de los manuscritos: cuanto más antiguo es un testimonio, mayor cantidad de mudanzas ha podido sufrir de una biblioteca a otra, y más cambios posibles de signaturas. Si además tratamos con tradiciones complejas, compuestas de abundantes testimonios, la dificultad se multiplica.
El caso de la tradición manuscrita del Fuero Juzgo reúne todas las características que lo hacen complejo en cuanto a las denominaciones de los testimonios: está constituida por un número elevado de testimonios (50), de los cuales 36 (más 3 fragmentos) son medievales, que han cambiado de poseedores y que se han editado y estudiado haciendo uso de designaciones que ya no corresponden a las de hoy. En consecuencia, muchas preguntas importantes han estado en el aire durante décadas, incluso durante siglos, sobre la tradición manuscrita y las ediciones existentes del Fuero Juzgo: ¿qué manuscrito editó Villadiego en 1600? ¿A qué manuscritos corresponden exactamente las denominaciones que utilizó la RAE en su edición de 1815? ¿Están en el aparato de la edición académica de 1815 los manuscritos que editaron Mencé (1996) u Orazi (1997)? Por muy sorprendente que pueda parecer, nadie hasta la fecha ha intentado establecer una lista completa de correspondencias entre las denominaciones antiguas y las signaturas modernas de los testimonios del Fuero juzgo, como tampoco se ha identificado el manuscrito editado por Villadiego en 1600, y ni siquiera en las ediciones de Mencé y de Orazi se llega a indicar a qué denominaciones académicas (RAE 1815) correspondían los manuscritos escurialenses editados por ambas autoras (Z-III-21 y Z-III-6 respectivamente).
Hasta el momento de publicarse esta entrada, en PhiloBiblon solo se presentaban tres concordancias entre denominaciones antiguas y signaturas modernas, extraídas del catálogo de Zarco Cuevas (1924, 1926, 1929). A estas referencias se limitaba casi el estado de la cuestión, al que debemos añadir otras tres informaciones. En el caso de los otros dos códices estudiados por Orazi (escurialenses P-II-17 y M-II-18), esta autora sí consignó la correspondencia con la denominación académica (Orazi 1997: 40 y 41). A su vez, en su estudio sobre Dialectalismos leoneses de un códice del Fuero Juzgo, García Blanco (1927: 7) identificó el manuscrito que estudió –BNE 5814– con el número 16 de los citados en la edición de la RAE 1815, es decir, con Biblioteca Real 2. Por lo tanto, antes de nuestras investigaciones podríamos contabilizar en total seis concordancias publicadas, de las cuales una, como veremos más adelante, es incorrecta.
El caso del Fuero Juzgo sale bastante mal parado en comparación con otra tradición manuscrita muy próxima: la de las Siete Partidas, que cuenta asimismo con un juego de denominaciones académicas, el empleado en la edición de la RAH de 1807, muy necesitado de correspondencias con las signaturas actuales. Para las Partidas, García y García (1985: 255-257 apud Fradejas Rueda 2021: 23) compuso hace ya cuatro décadas una tabla de correspondencias entre las designaciones de la RAH y las signaturas actuales (véase la tabla adaptada en Fradejas Rueda 2021: 23).
En vista del vacío de conocimiento, y al hilo de nuestras investigaciones sobre el Fuero Juzgo, nos hemos dedicado en los últimos años a identificar los manuscritos que se esconden tras denominaciones distintas y también hemos localizado, mediante una serie de cotejos textuales, el manuscrito que editó Villadiego en 1600. Hemos dado cuenta del juego completo de concordancias en dos conferencias (Castillo Lluch/Mabille 2022 y Castillo Lluch 2023), cuyas versiones escritas se hallan en prensa en este momento (Castillo Lluch/Mabille y Castillo Lluch/García López). En ambas publicaciones se hace mención a la aportación común de Castillo Lluch y Camino Martínez a esa lista de correspondencias mediante intercambios al respecto producidos entre 2021 y 2023.
Listado del conjunto de mss. del Fuero Juzgo con las correspondencias a las denominaciones de la RAE en los testimonios precedidos de asterisco (Castillo Lluch, conferencia en Yale University, abril 2023)
En este post presentamos los resultados de nuestra investigación, con los que nos complace contribuir a la mejora de los registros de PhiloBiblon. Empezaremos analizando las tres referencias que debemos a Zarco, ofreceremos después el listado de correspondencias de denominaciones antiguas y signaturas modernas que hemos conseguido establecer y, para terminar, nos referiremos a la edición de Villadiego (1600), preguntándonos por el manuscrito que copió.
Zarco Cuevas (1924, 1926, 1929) cataloga el conjunto de manuscritos del Fuero Juzgo custodiados en la Real Biblioteca de El Escorial, y para todo ese conjunto (v. p. 116 del vol. 1 de su catálogo, donde, en la ficha dedicada a d-III-18, menciona la existencia de M-II-18, M-III-5, P-II-17, Z-II-9, Z-III-6, Z-III-18 y Z-III-21), consigue ofrecer tres correspondencias con las denominaciones de la edición académica:
d-III-18 = ‟Escurialense 3º” en la edición de la RAE (Zarco Cuevas 1924: I, 116).
M-II-18 = ‟Escurialense 3º” en la edición de la Academia (Zarco Cuevas 1926: II, 284).
Z-III-18 = ‟Escurialense 2º” en la edición de la ‟Academia de la Historia” (sic, léase RAE) (Zarco Cuevas 1929: III, 149).
La concordancia de ‟Escurialense 3º” con dos manuscritos es, evidentemente, errónea, pues a cada uno de esos dos debería corresponderle una denominación distinta en la edición académica. Zarco se equivocó con M-II-18, que en realidad es el designado como ‟Escorial 5º” en el aparato de variantes de la RAE, si bien la descripción inicial que los académicos ofrecen de ese manuscrito escurialense 5º (RAE 1815: prólogo, 5-6) corresponde a Z-II-9. Se suman aquí, por tanto, dos fallos: uno de la RAE al describir Z-II-9 en el prólogo a su edición dándole por nombre Escorial 5º, pero después no incluyéndolo en su aparato, y en su lugar introduciendo las variantes de M-II-18; y el de Zarco Cuevas, que asimila M-II-18 a Escurialense 3º.
Otro detalle que debe tenerse en cuenta es que el número de testimonios medievales que tuvo la Academia para su edición de 1815 fue de 21; pero, en la práctica, se ofrece el texto de Murcia en el cuerpo de la página y en el aparato crítico recoge las variantes de 16 códices (omite las de BR4, BR5, BR6 y las de Z-II-9, que había descrito en el prólogo por error como Esc 5, pues, como se acaba de ver, en el aparato Esc 5 es M-II-18).
Ofrecemos a continuación el listado de los manuscritos del Fuero Juzgo que manejaron los académicos para su edición de 1815, y también la que usó algunas décadas más atrás Andrés Marcos Burriel (1755), primer editor del manuscrito de Murcia y precursor de la edición académica, por haber elegido ese códice como manuscrito óptimo y porque incluye variantes de otros dos manuscritos romances que desconoció la Academia (actuales T 43-9 y T 43-10). Incorporamos también la información relativa a la edición de Rafael Floranes (1780), basada en el códice RAE 54, que cotejó con RAE 53, con otro de su propiedad que no tuvo la RAE para su edición (RAE 293), y también con el texto editado por Villadiego (Camino Martínez 2021 y 2022). Entre paréntesis se indican los manuscritos que la Academia tuvo a la vista, pero que no incluyó en su aparato crítico. La última columna de la tabla contiene la identificación a partir de las signaturas actuales de los manuscritos que fueron editados sin indicar, por desconocimiento, a qué denominación de la RAE correspondían (obviamente esto no hace para las ediciones de Villadiego, Burriel o Floranes, anteriores a la edición académica).
Lista de concordancias entre las denominaciones de los testimonios en las ediciones antiguas del Fuero Juzgo (RAE 1815, Burriel 1755 y Floranes 1780) y sus signaturas actuales.
Por último, expondremos cuál era el estado de la cuestión con respecto al manuscrito editado por Villadiego en 1600 y el procedimiento que hemos seguido para identificarlo. En las ‟Advertencias necesarias a la claridad desta obra” que preceden a su edición, Villadiego (1600: 7) se limitaba a informar de que el códice del que copiaba procedía de ‟vna libreria muy antigua, escrito de mano, y en pergamino” y que Antonio de Covarrubias lo estudió y comentó entre 1596 y 1598. Entre los preliminares de ese impreso de Villadiego, se encuentra un ‟Testimonio de la libreria de la santa Iglesia de Toledo” en el que se confirma que concordaba el texto del original de imprenta de Villadiego con el ‟Fuero Iuzgo que tiene esta santa Iglesia mayor en su libreria”. Siglo y medio más tarde, Burriel (1754: 270-271) también indicaba que esa edición se basaba en un ‟tomo manuscrito de la Iglesia de Toledo”. Ahora bien, en un estudio reciente (cf. Castillo Lluch y Mabille 2021: 80, n. 11), tras haber examinado algunos pasajes del texto de la edición de 1600, hemos podido probar que el testimonio que copia Alonso Villadiego no es el de ninguno de los toledanos que manejó Burriel (T4, T5, T6) ni tampoco es T 15-37. Dado que hoy no se conserva ningún manuscrito antiguo en Toledo que no sean T5 (T 43-9), T6 (T 43-10) y T 15-37, y que T4 (hoy BNE Vitr. 17-10) tampoco es el modelo, ¿se trataría de un manuscrito que se conservaba en Toledo antes del siglo xvii y después se desplazó a otro lugar? Ignoramos muchos detalles de la conservación de los distintos manuscritos en diversos repositorios, pero en el caso de algunos, como, por ejemplo, RAE 54, hemos inferido, a partir de unas anotaciones en el recto del primer folio que había quedado en blanco, que ‟en el último cuarto del siglo xiv debía encontrarse en Toledo” (Camino Martínez 2018: 74).
Imagen 3: Fragmento de la ley 8.2.1 en el ms. BNE 5814, f. 132r y en la ed. de Villadiego, f. 379v. Se aprecia que la edición sigue el manuscrito.
Mediante un cotejo de un fragmento de 8.2.1 de la edición de Villadiego con, además de los cuatro toledanos ya mencionados, 24 manuscritos antiguos a nuestra disposición (escurialenses Z.III.21, P.II.17, M.II.18, M.III.5, d.III.18, Z.III.6, Z.III.18, académicos 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 293, el BNF 256, el Hisp. 6 de la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, el IL 111 de Lisboa, el de Estocolmo, el de la Biblioteca Real de Copenhague, el de Oxford, los de las fundaciones Lázaro Galdiano y Bartolomé March y los de la BNE 5774, 5814 y 244), hemos logrado identificar ese testimonio occidental que edita Villadiego en 1600 como BNE 5814 (véanse imágenes 3 y 4).
Imagen 4: Ley 10.1.14 en el ms. BNE 5814, f. 157v y en la ed. de Villadiego, f. 419r. En lugar de la unidad de medida espacial arpendes, en ambos textos se lee la lección deturpada años, criticada en la edición académica (RAE 1815: XXXVIII) y, como se ve, introducida por mano posterior a la del copista de BNE 5814.
Imagen 5: Folios 171v y 172r del ms. BNE 5814 con la rúbrica en el margen inferior de Ambrosio Mexia, escribano público, que comprobó la concordancia entre el original de imprenta de Villadiego y el manuscrito que en aquel momento se encontraba en la librería de la catedral de Toledo.
La identificación de este manuscrito permite ahora a los investigadores al menos dos cosas: controlar la calidad de la edición de Villadiego, tan a menudo criticada por editores posteriores, y valorar la decisión del siguiente editor del Fuero Juzgo en el tiempo: Andrés Marcos Burriel (1755), que prefirió editar el manuscrito de Murcia. La lista completa de concordancias entre denominaciones antiguas y signaturas actuales de los testimonios que nos han transmitido el Fuero Juzgo aclarará a toda persona interesada por este texto a qué manuscritos exactamente han hecho referencia desde hace décadas estudiosos que nos han dejado lecciones importantes sobre la ley visigótica en romance utilizando la nomenclatura de la edición de la RAE (pensamos en Yolanda García López 1996 y en José Manuel Pérez Prendes 1957) o la de Floranes (Mª Luz Alonso Martín 1983 y 1985). La incorporación a PhiloBiblon de nuestras concordancias garantiza que esta información esté a partir de ahora fácilmente accesible para toda la comunidad científica.
Obras citadas
– Alonso Martín, Mª Luz (1983), ‟Nuevos datos sobre el Fuero o Libro castellano: Notas para su estudio”, Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español LIII, 423-445.
– Alonso Martín, Mª Luz (1985), ‟Observaciones sobre el Fuero de los Castellanos y las leyes de Nuño González”, Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español LV, 773-781.
– Burriel, Andrés Marcos (1755), Fuero Juzgo ò Codigo de las leyes que los reyes godos promulgaron en España. Traducido del original latino en lenguage castellano antiguo por mandado del Santo Rey D.n Fernando III.º, copiado de un exemplar autentico del Archivo de la Ciudad de Murcia, y de otros tres mss. antiquisimos de la libreria de la S.ta Iglesia de Toledo, ajustado al original latino, ilustrado, y corregido por el P.e Andrès Marcos Burriel de la Comp. de Jesus, Manuscrito BNE 683.
– Camino Martínez, Carmen del (2018), ‟Notarios, escritura y libros jurídicos. Algunas consideraciones”, en Miguel Calleja-Puerta y María Luisa Domínguez-Guerrero (eds.), Escritura, notariado y espacio urbano en la Corona de Castilla y Portugal(siglos xii-xvii), Gijón, Trea, 63-79.
– Camino Martínez, Carmen del (2021), ‟En torno al Libro de Nuño González y algunos manuscritos toledanos del Fuero Juzgo”, en Juan Carlos Galende Díaz (dir.) y Nicolás Ávila Seoane (coord.), Libro homenaje al profesor don Ángel Riesco Terrero, Madrid, ANABAD Federación y Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 65-74.
– Camino Martínez, Carmen del (2022), ‟El erudito, el calígrafo y dos ejemplares dieciochescos del Fuero Juzgo”, comunicación presentada en el coloquio Los manuscritos del Fuero Juzgo: abordaje interdisciplinar, Université de Lausanne, 11-12 de noviembre de 2022.
– Castillo Lluch, Mónica (2022), ‟La tradición manuscrita del Fuero Juzgo: una visión de conjunto”, comunicación presentada con Charles Mabille en el XII Congreso Internacional de Historia de la Lengua Española, Universidad de León, 16 de mayo de 2022.
– Castillo Lluch, Mónica (2023), ‟The Visigothic Code and the Fuero Juzgo: The Transmission and Translation of Law from Latin to Romance”, conferencia pronunciada en Yale University, 28 de abril de 2023.
– Castillo Lluch, Mónica y Mabille, Charles (2021), ‟El Fuero Juzgo en el ms. BNE 683 (1755) de Andrés Marcos Burriel”, Scriptum digital 10, 75-107.
– Castillo Lluch, Mónica y Mabille, Charles (en prensa), ‟Hacia un stemma codicum del Fuero Juzgo desde el Humanismo hasta hoy”, en Actas del XII Congreso Internacional de Historia de la Lengua Española.
– Castillo Lluch, Mónica y García López, Yolanda (en prensa), ‟The Visigothic Code and the Fuero Juzgo: The Transmission and Translation of Law from Latin to Romance”, en Noel Lenski y Damián Fernández (eds.), Lex Visigothorum, Cambridge University Press.
– Floranes, Rafael (1780) Fuero Juzgo. Manuscrito cotejado con varios exemplares, Manuscrito BNE 10344.
– Fradejas Rueda, José Manuel (2021), ‟Los testimonios castellanos de las Siete Partidas”, en José Manuel Fradejas Rueda, Enrique Jerez Cabrero, y Ricardo Pichel (eds.), Las Siete Partidas del Rey Sabio: una aproximación desde la filología digital y material, Madrid/Frankfurt, Iberoamericana/Vervuert, 21-35.
– García Blanco, Manuel (1927), Dialectalismos leoneses de un Códice del Fuero Juzgo, Salamanca, Imp. Silvestre Ferreira.
– García López, Yolanda (1996), Estudios críticos y literarios de la ‟Lex Wisigothorum”, Alcalá de Henares, Servicio de publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá.
– Mencé, Corinne (1996), Fuero juzgo(Manuscrit Z.iii.6 de la Bibliothèque de San Lorenzo de El Escorial), 3 vols., Lille, ANRT.
– Orazi, Verónica (1997), El dialecto leonés antiguo (edición, estudio lingüístico y glosario del Fuero Juzgo según el ms. Escurialense Z.iii.21), Madrid, Universidad Europea-CEES Ediciones.
– Pérez-Prendes Muñoz de Arraco, José Manuel (1957), La versión romanceada del Liber Iudiciorum. Algunos datos sobre sus variantes y peculiaridades, Tesis doctoral inédita dirigida por Manuel Torres López, Madrid, Universidad Complutense.
– Real Academia Española (ed.) (2015 [1815]), Fuero Juzgo en latín y castellano, cotejado con los más antiguos y preciosos códices, con estudio preliminar de Santos M. Coronas González, Madrid, Agencia Oficial Boletín Oficial del Estado.
– Villadiego Vascuñana y Montoya, Alonso (1600), Forus antiquus gothorum regnum Hispaniae, olim Liber Iudicum hodie Fuero Iuzgo nuncupatus, Madrid, Pedro Madrigal.
– Zarco Cuevas, Julián (1924, 1926, 1929, 3 vols.), Catálogo de los manuscritos castellanos de la Real Biblioteca de El Escorial dedicado a S.M. el rey don Alfonso XIII, Madrid, Imprenta Helénica (vols 1 y 2) y San Lorenzo de El Escorial, Imprenta del Real Monasterio de El Escorial (vol. 3).
By Timothy Kim, Undergraduate Library Research Fellow, 2023-2024
As my time as an Undergraduate Library Fellow (ULF) at the UC Berkeley library comes to a close, I look back with gratitude to the lessons I’ve learned over the past two years. This role has not only shaped my understanding of academic research, but I’ve also gained invaluable skills of empathy, teaching, and most importantly learning.
As an inexperienced ULF, I had a lot of ideas about what solutions to try and what projects to take on but not a strong understanding of the role of an ULF. This spark of interest is what helped the undergraduate research fellows work on and develop the Bancroft Library User Experience project and Wayfinding project among many others, as we developed ways to improve how library services were utilized. Having the inexperience is what allowed us fellows to draw up creative ideas and try to find pain points and inefficiencies in how students and researchers used the library.
Simultaneously, as the other research fellows and I gained experience, we also learned the ropes of teaching in front of classes of our fellow peers on how to conduct Research 101 basics. Through carefully observing the students taking the class, I learned where to anticipate potential problems people might have, as well as those who wouldn’t necessarily bring up their obstacles in the first place.
As I gained more experience through my second year, I eventually transitioned to conducting more one-on-one peer advising. Armed with a deeper understanding of how people learn, I approached teaching with a renewed perspective and confidence. This year was about action—applying theories and techniques I had learned in real-world scenarios and refining them through experience. Every visiting student came with unique challenges and learning styles. This experience taught me the importance of adaptability and empathy in educational settings. It was through these personal interactions that I rediscovered the joy of learning and the satisfaction of helping others achieve their academic goals.
The skills I’ve acquired extend far beyond the walls of Doe library. Learning to teach and communicate effectively are abilities that I anticipate will influence various aspects of my life, from my future academic pursuits to professional endeavors. The ability to facilitate learning and foster understanding is an invaluable tool I will always carry with me.
As I reflect on my time as a ULF, I cannot help but be extremely grateful to the program and its coordinators for its success in not only providing a service to the student body but also in educating me and the other fellows in mentorship and teaching. I believe through the program’s unique and diverse projects I’ve emerged as a more competent and confident individual.
By Sydney Hardister, Undergraduate Library Making Fellow, 2023-2024
Reflecting on my journey as a library fellow, I’m struck by how my experience has mirrored my own personal desire to reignite my passion for creating. Initially drawn to the Makerspace with little knowledge of what it entailed, I embarked on this journey with a simple intention: to rediscover the joy of making. Little did I know that this decision would lead me down a path of self-discovery, friendship, and skill development.
In the vibrant atmosphere of the Makerspace, I found not only a place for experimentation but also a community of like-minded individuals who shared my enthusiasm for creativity. Here, making mistakes wasn’t just accepted; it was celebrated as a natural part of the learning process. Through countless hours of crocheting, knitting, and exploring various crafts, I learned the invaluable lesson that failure is not an endpoint but rather a stepping stone toward growth.
Perhaps the most unexpected aspect of my fellowship was the opportunity to share my newfound skills with others through leading workshops. Teaching became a means of deepening my own understanding of the art forms I had embraced, while simultaneously fostering connections with fellow makers. These interactions underscored the importance of community and collaboration in the creative process, reminding me of the joy that comes from both sharing knowledge and learning from others.
With each new craft I embraced in the Makerspace, I could feel myself falling deeper and deeper in love with creating. From crocheting to stamp making, each project served as a catalyst for my creative journey, inspiring a cascade of new ideas and endeavors. Before long, I found myself immersed in a whirlwind of projects, each one fueling my enthusiasm and drive to create. This steady flow of creativity became a source of calm and contentment in my life, offering a sense of fulfillment that I had long yearned for. Beyond simply acquiring new skills, my time in the Makerspace served to center me both as an individual and as a creative, reaffirming the profound love that comes from bringing imagination to life through craft and creation.
Ultimately, my time as a library fellow has been a testament to the transformative power of creativity and community. Through the ups and downs of this journey, I’ve learned to trust myself, follow my passions, and embrace the joy of making. As I look back on my time here, I am filled with gratitude for the friendships formed, the skills acquired, and the endless possibilities that lie ahead in my creative endeavors.
By Sofia Hernandez, Undergraduate Library Research Fellow, 2023-2024
I joined the ULF program three years ago as an emerging sophomore, eager to enter the world of university libraries. I am now entering the final stretch of my undergraduate career, time flies when you’re having fun! Throughout these last three years, I’ve had the pleasure of working alongside like-minded Fellows and passionate librarians to bridge the gap between the undergraduate population at Cal and research.
In the past year, the Research fellows began our in-person Research Appointments to aid other undergraduates in getting started with navigating university resources to conduct research, an entry point that is often inaccessible to the larger undergraduate population. Rather than meeting with faculty members, students at the library had the option of connecting with a peer (AKA us!) for support in their assignments. In connecting with other undergraduates through the Fellow’s Research Appointments, I learned how to adapt to various learning styles and adjust my support/advice on a case-by-case basis.
This academic year, the Research Fellows were given the opportunity to lead between 3-4 “Research 101” workshops per semester in addition to hosting Research Appointments. Before our first workshop, I remember feeling incredibly nervous at the thought of presenting to a room full of students. However, the nerves quickly settled as I began to teach at the front of the class. Hosting Research 101 is similar to our Research Appointments; both provide a safe space for undergraduates to ask questions about the library and their writing without the fear of being judged by an adult figure of authority. Leading Research 101’s quickly became my favorite part of the fellowship. After a workshop, I’d often say to Avery (my most frequent Research 101 partner) that the front of the Doe 223 classroom often felt like a stage and we were the performers–that’s how much fun I had talking to folks! With each workshop, we’d continuously try to improve upon and even experiment with the flow of the presentations. We’d make adjustments to the order of slides, experiment with switching speaking roles, and most importantly, connect with our attendees at the end similarly to our one-on-one Research Appointments.
As I approach my upcoming graduation, I’ve had time to reflect on my participation on campus and can confidently say that I have left my mark at the Berkeley library. This upcoming fall, I will continue to foster my passion for librarianship as a MLIS graduate student. Though my time working at Berkeley’s libraries is coming to an end, I will continue to remain committed to the mission of providing equitable and transformative support for library patrons and students, one library at a time!
By Avery Klauke, Undergraduate Library Research Fellow, 2023-2024
With my time as a Berkeley student winding down, I wanted to reflect on the past year and my undergraduate experience.
Throughout the past year, the overarching theme for the research fellows was to take initiative in the projects that interested us. For me, co-teaching Research 101 workshops was high on my priority list, as I saw this as one of the best opportunities to engage with as many students as possible. I recognized that the importance of these workshops lay in their ability to provide insight into the library system while also providing students with an open forum to ask questions. Additionally, the research fellows met with various librarians to provide a student perspective on library spaces to make them more welcoming and accessible. In essence, my goal for this year was to contribute, in any capacity, to the libraries and the general Berkeley community.
While writing these reflections, I often focus on what we research fellows have contributed, but I also wanted to highlight how Berkeley (and by extension this position) has given back to me.
My experience started the same as everyone else’s, as my freshman year at Berkeley was akin to throwing me into flaming chaos. General confusion mixed with lots of looming pandemic anxiety is how I would describe it. People always say college is the best time of your life or it’s where you ‘find yourself,’ (however you choose to take that) but unsurprisingly, no one tells you where to start. And as someone who thrives off consistency, finding my “niche” here was important.
Becoming a research fellow gave me consistency that I had never experienced before. It was similar to an extended group project, but unlike some randomized assignments in those required lower-level classes, everyone contributed consistently. Where I would draw a blank after a student’s question, the other fellows could offer their insight; likewise, I stepped up in their moments of need. To be expected, being a research fellow helped me hone my ability to work with and for others (something I’ve learned is a skill not everyone possesses). But it also taught me little lessons like how to improvise, adapt, and not focus on something so much that I lose sight of the big picture. I anticipate using these skills frequently as I leave the past 18 years of schooling behind.
By Ava Gessl, Undergraduate LibraryMaking Fellow, 2023-2024
A large part of my Berkeley experience has revolved around lectures, exams, and assignments. However, the Makerspace has become a creative outlet for me and many other undergraduates. This year, I have had the opportunity to help plan and execute workshops, including learning to crochet in order to teach others. I think that for anyone who wants to find a creative outlet at Berkeley, the Makerspace is an amazing place to explore and learn new skills, and I am happy that I have had the opportunity to be a part of it for another year. What I’ve come to appreciate most about teaching sewing, crochet, and every other craft offered at the Makerspace is the gratification it brings to students. I think the Makerspace is an important part of student life at Berkeley. It is the perfect place whether someone wants to learn a new skill or have a space to pursue a craft they already know. By sharing my passion for crafting and providing a supportive learning environment, I hope to inspire other students to unleash their creativity and pursue their projects with confidence.
As a library fellow, I have had the opportunity to share my passion based on over a decade of sewing experience, and use my learning process in crochet to help others. Learning crochet for the Granny Square Workshop was challenging but fun. It is always good to put yourself into the shoes of someone learning a new skill to remember what it’s like. I was able to apply the mistakes and tricks I learned to help new crocheters in the Granny Square and Crochet Rose workshops. It was exciting to work with students new to crochet and see them use what I learned to transform yarn into something beautiful. This felt different than teaching sewing in the T-shirt Tote Bag or providing one-on-one sewing help because of my years of sewing experience. My prior experience has helped me assist with a wide range of problems and projects. However it has also made it harder for me to remember what it was like to be a beginner. Threading a sewing machine is now a trivial step for me, but I must always remember to go slow, explain all my steps, and why when introducing someone to a sewing machine. I love both teaching experiences and how they each inform each other about what is the best way to teach a new skill and provide the most helpful advice and support. I hope to be able to provide a mixture of guidance that comes from mastering a craft with the perspective of someone who just started in order to give tips that are not obvious but extremely helpful to a beginner.
This year my making journey has focused more on learning new skills, both crafting and organizing. This process has been dynamic and not without bumps, but I think that it helped me be a more effective library fellow. I found a way to master the vinyl cutter, or specifically its unwillingness to connect to my computer. I am happy with how learning crochet has opened a door for me to help students learn a skill that is on the rise with undergraduates. Taking a more active role in designing and working with my library fellows in workshops has been a rewarding process of logistics, effective communication, and troubleshooting unexpected student hurdles. Working in a workshop environment with time constraints has forced me to streamline my teaching process and ability to quickly move between students at different levels of experience. In the Crochet Rose Workshop I worked with students who had never crocheted before and their enthusiasm for creating a chain with even stitches was another reminder that every step in a creative process is important and worth celebrating. As a library fellow, I’ve had to be patient and supportive, guiding students through the process step by step, encouraging them to persevere, and quickly troubleshoot unexpected problems. It has been a practice in tailoring my teaching approach to meet the diverse learning styles and skill levels of the students. Overall, working in the Makerspace and helping students learn has been an incredibly fulfilling experience. It’s not just about teaching a crafting skill, it’s about fostering creativity and community. I look forward to continuing to share my passion for sewing and learning alongside the students in the Makerspace.
By Adelaide Phillips, Undergraduate Library Making Fellow, 2023-2024
I started working in the Makerspace in Fall 2022 during my junior year at Cal. I’m graduating this Spring as an architecture major meaning most of my education was design and model making. The Makerspace has provided me with so many resources and learning opportunities like leading workshops, utilizing new tools, and providing peer-to-peer design tips these past two years. I’m truly going to miss this space when I leave Berkeley.
During my time as a library fellow, I’ve learned how to operate various equipment like 3D printers, vinyl cutters, button makers, sewing machines, and more! This work would not be possible without guidance from dedicated Makerspace staff. Whether assisting fellow makers with their projects or navigating the challenges of a physical move and leadership transitions, the Makerspace has been a constant source of inspiration and learning. This space would not be what it is without the people and the students who make wonderful projects here every week. I always enjoy bringing friends to the Makerspace and seeing them get so excited about all the cool equipment and supplies we have to offer! Helping out my friends 3D print tiny stairs or do some last-minute pieces for their architectural models is so rewarding. I love seeing the look on their faces when they see the 3D printers zooming away.
The Makerspace has also been a great place for my personal projects. Whether it’s 3D printing pieces for an architecture model, hemming my graduation dress on the sewing machines, or crocheting a new pillow while learning to make granny squares; the Makerspace has provided me with all the resources I need and more! The craft guides I and the other Making fellows have compiled over the past couple of years have been a great resource for me and my peers. Additionally, learning how to lead workshops, like our Crochet Rose and Grad Cap Decorating workshops, has been a wonderful opportunity to develop my leadership and teaching skills.
Another one of my favorite things about working in the Makerspace is getting to help so many people on so many different projects. I’ve been able to hone my problem-solving skills and think on my feet. Finding solutions where there seems to be none; and never saying no to any idea! Like I said, I’m truly going to miss the Makerspace after I graduate but I will take with me the lessons it has taught me as I embark on my professional career.
In April 2024, the Japanese American Intergenerational Narratives project team at The Oral History Center—Roger Eardley-Pryor, Shanna Farrell, and Amanda Tewes—had the opportunity to present about our project at the National Council on Public History conference in Salt Lake City. Since our presentation, we’ve gotten a number of questions about the literature we read related to trauma-informed interviewing, intergenerational trauma, and memory. Below is the bibliography we used, as well as some recent works. We hope this provides some guidance for your own work, and we’d love to hear from you if there are any articles or resources that have been helpful to you!
General
Cathy Caruth, Unclaimed Experience: Trauma, Narrative, and History (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996).
Mary Marshall Clark, “The September 11, 2001 Oral History Narrative and Memory Project: A First Report,” The Journal of American History 89:2 (September 2002): 569-579.
Mary Marshall Clark, “Resisting Attrition in Stories of Trauma,” Narrative 13:3 (October 2005): 294-298.
Lily Dayton. 2019 “Keep These Seven Lessons in Mind When Interviewing Trauma Survivors.” Center for Health Journalism. April 17, 2020. https://centerforhealthjournalism.org/our-work/insights/keep-these-seven-lessons-mind-when-interviewing-trauma-survivors
Andrea Eidinger, “Trauma and Orality: New Publications on Mass Violence and Oral History,” Social History 49:98 (May 2016): 187-196.
Steven High, Oral History at the Crossroads: Sharing Life Stories of Survival and Displacement (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2014).
Marianne Hirsch, “Family Pictures: Maus, Mourning, and Post-Memory,” Discourse 15:2, Special Issue: The Emotions, Gender, and the Politics of Subjectivity (Winter 1992-93): 3-29.
Marianne Hirsch, The Generation of Postmemory: Writing and Visual Culture After the Holocaust (Columbia University Press, 2012).
Mark Klempner, “Navigating Life Review Interviews with Survivors of Trauma,” Oral History Review 27:2 (Summer/Fall 2000): 67-83.
Selma Leydesdorff, “Oral History, Trauma, and September 11, Comparative Oral History,” in edited volume September 11th-12th: The Individual and the State Faced with Terrorism (2013).
Carmen Nobel. 2018. “10 Rules for Reporting on War Trauma Survivors.” Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy. April 17, 2020. https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/10-rules-interviewing-trauma-survivors/
Emma L. Vickers, “Unexpected Trauma in Oral Interviewing,” Oral History Review 46:1 (Winter/Spring 2019): 134-141.
Specific to Japanese American History
Jeffery F. Burton and Mary M. Farrell, “The Power of Place: James Hatsuaki Wakasa and the Persistence of Memory,” Discover Nikkei (June 13, 2021): http://www.discovernikkei.org/en/journal/2021/6/13/wakasa-1/
Jeffery F. Burton, Mary M. Farrell, Florence B. Lord, and Richard W. Lord, Confinement and Ethnicity: An Overview of World War II Japanese American Relocation Sites (Tucson, AZ: Western Archeological and Conservation Center, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Publications in Anthropology 74, 1999).
Connie Y. Chiang, Nature Behind Barbed Wire: An Environmental History of the Japanese American Incarceration (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018).
Roger Daniels, “Words Do Matter: A Note on Inappropriate Terminology and the Incarceration of Japanese Americans,” in Louis Fiset and Gail Nomura, eds. Nikkei in the Pacific Northwest: Japanese Americans and Japanese Canadians in the Twentieth Century (Seattle, Washington: University of Washington Press, 2005).
Roger Daniels, Sandra Taylor, and Harry L. Kitano, eds., Japanese Americans: From Relocation to Redress, Revised Edition (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1986).
Art Hansen, Barbed Voices: Oral History, Resistance, and the World War II Japanese American Social Disaster (Denver: University of Colorado Press, 2018).
William M. Hohri, Repairing America: An Account of the Movement for Japanese American Redress (Pullman, Washington: Washington State University Press, 1988).
Cathy Park Hong, Minor Feelings: An Asian American Reckoning (New York: One World, 2020).
Stephen Holsapple, dir., produced by Satsuki Ina, Children of the Camps (Los Angeles, CA: AsianCrush, now Cineverse Corp., 1999).
Satsuki Ina, The Poet and the Silk Girl: A Memoir of Love, Imprisonment, and Protest (Berkeley, California: Heyday Books, 2024).
Donna K. Nagata, “Intergenerational Effects of the Japanese American Internment,” International Handbook of Multigenerational Legacies of Trauma, edited by Yael Danieli (New York: Plenum Press, 1998), p 125-139.
Donna K. Nagata and Wendy J. Y. Cheng, “Intergenerational Communication of Race-Related Trauma by Japanese American Former Internees,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 73:3 (2003): 266-278.
Donna K. Nagata, Jacqueline H. J. Kim, and Kaidi Wu, “The Japanese American Wartime Incarceration: Examining the Scope of Racial Trauma,” American Psychology 74:1 (Jan. 2019): 36-48.
Donna K. Nagata, Jackie H. J. Kim, Teresa U. Nguyen, “Processing Cultural Trauma, Intergenerational Effects of the Japanese American Incarceration,” Journal of Social Issues 71 (2015): 356-370.
Lisa Nakamura “Seeking Meaning from the Past: Psychological Effects of Tule Lake Pilgrimage on Japanese American Former Internees and Their Descendants” (PsyD diss., Wright Institute Graduate School of Psychology, 2008).
Raymond Okamura. “The American Concentration Camps: A Cover-Up through Euphemistic Terminology,” Journal of Ethnic Studies 10:3 (1982).
Emiko Omori, dir., produced by Emiko and Chizu Omori, Rabbit in the Moon: A Documentary/Memoir about the World War II Japanese Internment Camps (Mill Valley, California, 1999).
Brandon Shimoda, The Afterlife Is Letting Go (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 2024).
Karen L. Suyemoto, “Ethnic and Racial Identity in Multiracial Sansei: Intergenerational Effects of the World War II Mass Incarceration of Japanese Americans,” Genealogy 2:26 (2018).
Stephanie Takaragawa, “Not for Sale: How WWII Artifacts Mobilized Japanese Americans Online,” Anthropology Now, 7:3 (2015): 94-105,
The Gale digital archive Decolonization: Politics and Independence in Former Colonial and Commonwealth Territories includes primary sources related to the complex process of decolonization across 60 former colonial territories and Commonwealth nations in the 20th century. The core content consists of over 250,000 pages of rare pamphlets, newsletters, correspondence, posters, and other ephemera produced by political parties, pressure groups, trade unions, and grassroots movements. This includes the Political Pamphlets collection from the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, African Trade Union pamphlets from Nuffield College at Oxford, and the Marjorie Nicholson Papers on international trade unionism.
This archive is structured into thematic sections that address different facets of decolonization. These sections cover topics such as the rise of nationalist movements, key figures who led their nations to independence, and the residual impacts of colonial rule including economic dependencies and the development of new national identities. Additionally, it explores the involvement of international bodies like the United Nations in supporting decolonization efforts.
The Gale digital archive