On another occasion I have argued that many supposed departures from medievalism, particularly those often classified as “neomedievalism” or “pseudomedievalism,” do not, in fact, escape conventional definitions of our field. Though they may be conveyed by comparatively new media, such as computers, or may incorporate overt fantasy, such as dragons and trolls, they almost always descend at least in part from the historical Middle Ages. That is to say, they almost always fall within what Leslie Workman has described as “the post-medieval idea and study of the Middle Ages and the influence, both scholarly and popular, of this study on Western society after 1500.”

Yet hardly a month goes by that Studies in Medievalism, which was founded by Leslie and which features his definition on its title page, does not have its boundaries tested. The most common parameter with which potential contributors play is the year 1500. Some authors observe the letter but not the spirit of that threshold, as they discuss post-fifteenth-century works from regions for which 1500 clearly does not mark the end of the Middle Ages, such as parts of Poland and of the Balkans. Other authors observe the spirit but not the letter of Leslie's definition, as they concentrate on echoes of the Middle Ages in works that are widely perceived as post-medieval yet pre-date the sixteenth century, such as late-fourteenth- and fifteenth-century Italian poetry. And still other authors dance back and forth across the borders of Leslie's definition, as they address works that come from approximately 1500 or are part of an oeuvre that partly pre-dates that year, such as Albrecht Dürer's engravings.