Researching at the British Library: Day 3

So far things are going as well as they can be at this point. I don't have enough info to start working on an argument yet, but maybe by this weekend I can start some writing. Until then, I will continue with some more observations about primary source research.

First: Beware the request limit! I understand the purpose of limiting the number of items that may be requested per day, but this is getting annoying! The British Library only allows 4 manuscripts per day which is fine in itself. That's about as much as I could reasonably get through in a day anyways. Here's the problem: this limit also applies for request for future visits. So, if I want to see 3 manuscripts today, I can only request 1 for tomorrow. I then have to order the other 2 I want to see tomorrow on actual tomorrow and possibly be stuck waiting for up to 70 minutes waiting for them. This is really irritating me because, while I fully understand the need to control the comings and goings of all the manuscripts and the need to keep patrons from hogging things too far in advance, it prevents me from having the assurance that I will get to see what I want to see when I want to see it. Grrr.

On the bright side, I'm getting more efficient at going through each manuscript. I'm getting a lot more detailed notes in the same amount of time as I was taking on Monday (today being Wednesday). I am also being pretty good about remembering to make sure my notes all legible. This can be a problem with manuscript research. Since I cannot easily go back to the source (the manuscript) to try and figure out what an abbreviation or unclear bit in the notes might refer to, I have to be careful about keeping track of information in  way that I will be able to decipher days-weeks-months from now. Since the BL does not allow personal photography even for scholarly purposes (angry fist shake at the sky!) The university manuscript libraries will let me do it (whine, pout).

I have also been good at making note of 'things to look up later' or 'go back to if time later allows'. For example, one of my poems appears in three manuscripts, all of which I looked at yesterday. Thanks to the previously mentioned request limit, I had two of them out together, then had to return them, and get the third. In the third manuscript, my debate poem appears to have been mistake for a poem by Chaucer on a similar theme, and conflated with Chaucer's 'Complaint to his Purse'. If I have time, I might go back to the first manuscript and see if it presents a similar situation. I noticed this possibly interesting question because manuscript 2 has 2-3 stanzas fewer than the others, meaning that only the one manuscript presents the debate poem as itself. I would also have to see if anyone else might have published on this already (I suspect they may have). However the background scholarship goes, the idea might be useful to me at some point, but because I have limited time in the collection, I have to put a note on it and keep going for now.

Lastly (for today), I have been reminded of yet another research cliche. In this case, the old "if you stare at something that makes no sense long enough, it will suddenly become clear" works. At least, it works when struggling to identify and-or read centuries old handwriting. There was a title heading today the first word of which I couldn't quite get. I eventually gave up on the word, got the rest of the title, went back to the first word, stared for another few minutes, and then suddenly I figured it out. this whole process took about five to six minutes. 

Now for a new feature: "Random Questions and Observations about people in the Manuscript Reading Room"

1) Why is the manuscript room nearly full by 11 on Monday, but only half full by this time (and remaining so) Tuesday and Wednesday? We'll have to see if this patter holds up next week as well.

2) Ratio of digital note-takers to pencil-paper users: 4-1. This somehow seems aesthetically wrong.

3) There are no pencil sharpeners to be seen in this building. I realize such devices tend to be noisy, but they are not worse than the sound of multiple keyboards being worked and the sharpener would not have to be in the actual reading rooms. Not to mention, if you forbid pens, what do you expect people who don't type quickly and accurately (both critical qualities in note-taking) to do if they don't carry multiple backups (and backups for the backups)? I decided to invest in a mechanical pencil here, but it's a pain to have to spend so much attention to pressure placed on paper.

And lastly, something that is vaguely funny but I'm not sure why:

 Yes, that is an airline carry-on size limiter. You can't bring any bag that does not fit in there into the building.

To be continued...