I have to admit that my train of thinking was originally similar to that of the Western historians, who the author claims “think of chronology as [nothing] more than a rudimentary form of historiography.” Thus, it was interesting to see the author’s deliberate emphasis on the importance of lines and chronology.

The example of Annals of St. Gall depict the variance that can occur in even the most basic forms of documentation. I appreciated that they highlighted how the form “closely calibrated to both the interests and the vision of their users,” or in other words, how the form of the annals revealed the “forces of disorder” mindset during that time.

Another interesting idea mentioned in the reading was the inherent connection between time and space (which is then extrapolated to the line). It makes me wonder, is it even possible to separate the two concepts in our minds? I’m not sure if it is if we continue to regard time in a linear frame of mind.