DOCSLIB.ORG

A Reply to 'The Ruin of Britannia') Author(S): E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Reply to 'The Ruin of Britannia') Author(S): E The Ruin of History (A Reply to 'The Ruin of Britannia') Author(s): E. W. B. Nicholson Source: The Celtic Review, Vol. 2, No. 8 (Apr., 1906), pp. 369-380 Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30069879 Accessed: 03-06-2016 15:54 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Celtic Review This content downloaded from 192.122.237.41 on Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:54:56 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE RUIN OF HISTORY 369 THE RUIN OF HISTORY (A reply to 'The Ruin of Britannia') IN The Celtic Review for July and October 1905 Mr. A. W. Wade-Evans aims at showing that the De excidio et conquestn Britanniae which bears the name of Gildas 'was composed about 700,' and that the invective by which it is followed is alone the composition of Gildas, and was written by him 'before 502.' And as part of his argument he seeks to prove that Vortigern invited the Saxons in 428. I shall here show that the 428 date hopelessly breaks down, and that each of Mr. Wade-Evans's preliminary contentions also collapses. He begins with the Annales Cambrice, 'and the important event from which the Annales Cambrice compute appears to be St. Germanus's 2nd Advent to Britannia, which it fixes in the year which would be in our reckoning A D. 445 . .Annus I is 445 . Annus CCCLXIII is 807, and so on.' Now (1) the Annales do not give the number 445 at all, while both Mommsen and Mr. Phillimore, their latest editor, reckon their Annus I. as 444; and (2) they do not mention Germanus at all. It is merely Mr. Wade- Evans's assumption that they date from the 2nd Advent of Germanus, and, to those who abide by Bede's dating, it is manifest that they begin with the supposed year either of Vortigern's accession or of the Saxon landing. Finally, the Dictionary of Christian Antiquities and the Dictionary of National Biography both place Germanus's 2nd Advent in 447. He proceeds to say that the compiler of the Annales had before him several chronicles computing from different eras, and jumbled up their entries without reducing their dates to a common era. He gives 'three examples out of the many': (1) 'It is universally admitted that St. Patrick died in 461. ... Now the Annales Cambrice place it'-his death-' opposite Annus xIIi., which in the era of 445 gives a wrong date, viz., 445 + 12 = 457 ; but which in the era of 449 gives the right date, viz., 449 + 12 = 461. Therefore this event was extracted from a chronicle which computed from 449." Patrick's death was an Irish event, and is dated 488 by the Annals of Innisfallen, 489 by the Chronicon Scotorum, 492 by the Annals of Ulster, and 493 by the Four Masters. Here are four divergent dates within a period of 1 It was doubtless stated by tradition or in some early chronicle that Patrick died 58 years after coming to Ireland, and this was misinterpreted as referring to his mission to Ireland (about 432), instead of his captivity (about 403). I find that Prof. Bury has the same explanation. 457 was given for the death of Sen Patraic (Bury, p. 284), and was the year of Patrick's retirement (ib., p. 206). This content downloaded from 192.122.237.41 on Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:54:56 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 370 THE CELTIC REVIEW six years; does Mr. Wade-Evans really suppose this arises from four different eras having been adopted within that period I A glance over Dr. Whitley Stokes's edition of Tigernach in the Revue Celtique would have shown him that similar divergences among the Irish chronicles are incessant. To account for these it is not necessary to pos- tulate the concurrent use of a number of eras, varying only a year or two from each other, and none of them known ever to have been used at all. It is enough to seek their origin in well-known causes. One of these may have been the different dates at which the Roman consular and the Christian ecclesiastical year began. Another very common one was the omission or miscopying of numerals. In a number such as CCCLXXVIII., for instance, it was quite easy to drop or repeat a [, an x, or an I. Where ink was faint or corroded, or vellum dirty, it was easy to read c as L, X as V, L as I, U as II. If Mr. Wade-Evans will look at p. 145 of Mommsen's edition of the Historia Brittonum, he will find in the various readings of the MSS. a series of such mistakes, where there can be no allegation of the use of different eras. The number of years between Adam and the Babylonian transmigra- tion according to Jerome's translation of Eusebius's Chronicle-which can hardly fail to have been the ultimate basis of computation-should be IIIIDCLXX, yet every MS. on this page gives IIIIDCCcLXXVIIII, or adds another x. Some scribe had let his eye slip to adjacent numbers, from which he had inserted additional figures; thus the superfluous viii is the end of the number before that which he was copying. (2) The Annales place the death of Cadwaladr opposite Annus ccxxxvIrf, i.e. according to Mr. Wade-Evans, 238+444=682; according to Mr. Phillimore, 238+443=681. Mr. Wade-Evans quotes the authors of The Welsh People (p. 127) as saying, 'If, from the few data we have to rely on, the matter is traced out, there can be no doubt that the year 681 is too late, and that in all probability it was in or very near to 664 Cadwaladr died.' 'We know from Nennius,'1 says Mr. Wade-Evans, 'that he died in a pestilence . between 642 and 670, and also that a great pestilence commenced in 664 . Now Annus ccxxxviII in the true era of the Invitation is 428+237 = A.D. 665.' Now the entry of the plague is in all three of the MSS. included in the Rolls edition of the Annales, but the death of Cadwaladr is only in A, the other two (B and C) having instead varying forms of a statement that he fled to Brittany-a statement taken from Geoffrey of Monmouth. And, although these other two MSS. are of the late thirteenth century, and are only partially transcripts of the Annales, 'they are both largely based . on a MS. (or MSS.) of those Annales that is now lost, and was in places a 1 He should have said ' the Historia Brittonum,' which is earlier; Nennius omits all this matter. I have in Keltic Researches similarly confused the Nennian redaction with the earlier form, and abase myself accordingly but nothing has turned on the point. This content downloaded from 192.122.237.41 on Fri, 03 Jun 2016 15:54:56 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE RUIN OF HISTORY 371 more correct transcript than the now unique existing one' (Mr. Phillimore in Y Cymmrodor, xi. p. 139). I suggest that the original text of the Annales had only the entry of the plague, and that a later scribe, saying to himself, 'This must have been the plague in which Cadwaladr died,' added the statement of his death. (3) 'Opposite Annus CLxxxvi the Annales place this dark entry-' Guidgar comes and returns not,' which Annus makes 445 + 185 = 630. It obviously refers to some early well-known settlement whose best remembered leader was 'Guidgar.' The only known settlement of the kind of which we are reminded is that of Wihtgar and Stuf in the Isle of Wight in 514.' And he proceeds to explain by what com- bination of errors an event which took place in 514 was ascribed to 630. It is really enough to point out that the Annales have not mentioned any other Anglo-Saxon settlement, that the elements of the name Guidgar (i.e. wood-lover) appear in Welsh pedigrees in Guid-cun, Guid-gen, Cyn-gar, and that 'comes and does not return' is far more likely to refer to a Cumbrian or Breton paying a visit to Wales and stopping there than to a Jute invading the Isle of Wight. On these considerations alone Mr. Wade- Evans's case ought to be ruled out of court. But his explanation of how the dislocation of 116 years was brought about is far too instructive to be missed : 'Two mistakes were made. A scribe had before him the date 'A.D. DCXIV,' i.e. 514. The first mistake was to read Dc as 600 instead of 500 (that being once a common way of writing 500). Having thus obtained the number 614, he proceeded to compute in the era of St. Germanus's 1st Advent, viz. 429. In other words, if 429 is made the Annus I, then 614 will be 614 - 428, which is Annus CLXXXVI as above.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE KINGS and QUEENS of BRITAIN, PART I (From Geoffrey of Monmouth’S Historia Regum Britanniae, Tr
    THE KINGS AND QUEENS OF BRITAIN, PART I (from Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia Regum Britanniae, tr. Lewis Thorpe) See also Bill Cooper’s extended version (incorporating details given by Nennius’s history and old Welsh texts, and adding hypothesised dates for each monarch, as explained here). See also the various parallel versions of the Arthurian section. Aeneas │ Ascanius │ Silvius = Lavinia’s niece │ Corineus (in Cornwall) Brutus = Ignoge, dtr of Pandrasus │ ┌─────────────┴─┬───────────────┐ Gwendolen = Locrinus Kamber (in Wales) Albanactus (in Scotland) │ └Habren, by Estrildis Maddan ┌──┴──┐ Mempricius Malin │ Ebraucus │ 30 dtrs and 20 sons incl. Brutus Greenshield └Leil └Rud Hud Hudibras └Bladud │ Leir ┌────────────────┴┬──────────────┐ Goneril Regan Cordelia = Maglaurus of Albany = Henwinus of Cornwall = Aganippus of the Franks │ │ Marganus Cunedagius │ Rivallo ┌──┴──┐ Gurgustius (anon) │ │ Sisillius Jago │ Kimarcus │ Gorboduc = Judon ┌──┴──┐ Ferrex Porrex Cloten of Cornwall┐ Dunvallo Molmutius = Tonuuenna ┌──┴──┐ Belinus Brennius = dtr of Elsingius of Norway Gurguit Barbtruc┘ = dtr of Segnius of the Allobroges └Guithelin = Marcia Sisillius┘ ┌┴────┐ Kinarius Danius = Tanguesteaia Morvidus┘ ┌──────┬────┴─┬──────┬──────┐ Gorbonianus Archgallo Elidurus Ingenius Peredurus │ ┌──┴──┐ │ │ │ (anon) Marganus Enniaunus │ Idvallo Runo Gerennus Catellus┘ Millus┘ Porrex┘ Cherin┘ ┌─────┴─┬───────┐ Fulgenius Edadus Andragius Eliud┘ Cledaucus┘ Clotenus┘ Gurgintius┘ Merianus┘ Bledudo┘ Cap┘ Oenus┘ Sisillius┘ ┌──┴──┐ Bledgabred Archmail └Redon └Redechius
    [Show full text]
  • Geoffrey of Monmouth and the English Past
    Chapter 3 Geoffrey of Monmouth and the English Past Rebecca Thomas Geoffrey does not grant much space to the English in the De gestis Britonum. In one respect, this is unsurprising: Geoffrey’s history extends back to the origins of the Britons in Troy, spending a significant amount of time in pre-Roman Britain, and as such the English enter the narrative rather late in the day. Even after their arrival, however, the English do not appear in the way which we might expect. The traditional narrative of the development of the English kingdoms, pioneered by sources such as Bede’s Ecclesiastical History and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and accepted and reproduced by many of Geoffrey’s contemporary Anglo-Norman historians, has no place in the DGB. With his strikingly different version of events, Geoffrey certainly cannot be accused of lacking originality in his treatment of English history. The way in which he approached this subject is highly significant not only for our understanding of his attitude toward the English, but also for the composition of the DGB more generally. There was no shortage of contemporary historians writing of the English past, such as Henry of Huntingdon, the first version of whose History of the English, with which Geoffrey was most likely familiar, was completed by 1130. Henry presents us with a conventional account of English history, drawing heavily on Bede and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.1 Hengist and Horsa arrive in Britain in 449, and after recounting their dealings with the Britons, Henry pro- ceeds through the various other Saxon settlers of the 5th and 6th centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction: the Legend of King Arthur
    Department of History University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire “HIC FACET ARTHURUS, REX QUONDAM, REXQUE FUTURUS” THE ANALYSIS OF ORIGINAL MEDIEVAL SOURCES IN THE SEARCH FOR THE HISTORICAL KING ARTHUR Final Paper History 489: Research Seminar Professor Thomas Miller Cooperating Professor: Professor Matthew Waters By Erin Pevan November 21, 2006 1 Copyright for this work is owned by the author. This digital version is published by McIntyre Library, University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire with the consent of the author. 2 Department of History University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire Abstract of: “HIC FACET ARTHURUS, REX QUONDAM, REXQUE FUTURUS” THE ANALYSIS OF ORIGINAL MEDIEVAL SOURCES IN THE SEARCH FOR THE HISTORICAL KING ARTHUR Final Paper History 489: Research Seminar Professor Thomas Miller Cooperating Professor: Matthew Waters By Erin Pevan November 21, 2006 The stories of Arthurian literary tradition have provided our modern age with gripping tales of chivalry, adventure, and betrayal. King Arthur remains a hero of legend in the annals of the British Isles. However, one question remains: did King Arthur actually exist? Early medieval historical sources provide clues that have identified various figures that may have been the template for King Arthur. Such candidates such as the second century Roman general Lucius Artorius Castus, the fifth century Breton leader Riothamus, and the sixth century British leader Ambrosius Aurelianus hold high esteem as possible candidates for the historical King Arthur. Through the analysis of original sources and authors such as the Easter Annals, Nennius, Bede, Gildas, and the Annales Cambriae, parallels can be established which connect these historical figures to aspects of the Arthur of literary tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Dumnonia
    ancient Dumnonia. BT THE REV. W. GRESWELL. he question of the geographical limits of Ancient T Dumnonia lies at the bottom of many problems of Somerset archaeology, not the least being the question of the western boundaries of the County itself. Dcmnonia, Dumnonia and Dz^mnonia are variations of the original name, about which we learn much from Professor Rhys.^ Camden, in his Britannia (vol. i), adopts the form Danmonia apparently to suit a derivation of his own from “ Duns,” a hill, “ moina ” or “mwyn,” a mine, w’hich is surely fanciful, and, therefore, to be rejected. This much seems certain that Dumnonia is the original form of Duffneint, the modern Devonia. This is, of course, an extremely respectable pedigree for the Western County, which seems to be unique in perpetuating in its name, and, to a certain extent, in its history, an ancient Celtic king- dom. Such old kingdoms as “ Demetia,” in South Wales, and “Venedocia” (albeit recognisable in Gwynneth), high up the Severn Valley, about which we read in our earliest records, have gone, but “Dumnonia” lives on in beautiful Devon. It also lives on in West Somerset in history, if not in name, if we mistake not. Historically speaking, we may ask where was Dumnonia ? and who were the Dumnonii ? Professor Rhys reminds us (1). Celtic Britain, by G. Rhys, pp. 290-291. — 176 Papers, §*c. that there were two peoples so called, the one in the South West of the Island and the other in the North, ^ resembling one another in one very important particular, vizo, in living in districts adjoining the seas, and, therefore, in being maritime.
    [Show full text]
  • A Welsh Classical Dictionary
    A WELSH CLASSICAL DICTIONARY DACHUN, saint of Bodmin. See s.n. Credan. He has been wrongly identified with an Irish saint Dagan in LBS II.281, 285. G.H.Doble seems to have been misled in the same way (The Saints of Cornwall, IV. 156). DAGAN or DANOG, abbot of Llancarfan. He appears as Danoc in one of the ‘Llancarfan Charters’ appended to the Life of St.Cadog (§62 in VSB p.130). Here he is a clerical witness with Sulien (presumably abbot) and king Morgan [ab Athrwys]. He appears as abbot of Llancarfan in five charters in the Book of Llandaf, where he is called Danoc abbas Carbani Uallis (BLD 179c), and Dagan(us) abbas Carbani Uallis (BLD 158, 175, 186b, 195). In these five charters he is contemporary with bishop Berthwyn and Ithel ap Morgan, king of Glywysing. He succeeded Sulien as abbot and was succeeded by Paul. See Trans.Cym., 1948 pp.291-2, (but ignore the dates), and compare Wendy Davies, LlCh p.55 where Danog and Dagan are distinguished. Wendy Davies dates the BLD charters c.A.D.722 to 740 (ibid., pp.102 - 114). DALLDAF ail CUNIN COF. (Legendary). He is included in the tale of ‘Culhwch and Olwen’ as one of the warriors of Arthur's Court: Dalldaf eil Kimin Cof (WM 460, RM 106). In a triad (TYP no.73) he is called Dalldaf eil Cunyn Cof, one of the ‘Three Peers’ of Arthur's Court. In another triad (TYP no.41) we are told that Fferlas (Grey Fetlock), the horse of Dalldaf eil Cunin Cof, was one of the ‘Three Lovers' Horses’ (or perhaps ‘Beloved Horses’).
    [Show full text]
  • MANY MOTIVES: GEOFFREY of MONMOUTH and the REASONS for HIS FALSIFICATION of HISTORY John J. Berthold History 489 April 23, 2012
    MANY MOTIVES: GEOFFREY OF MONMOUTH AND THE REASONS FOR HIS FALSIFICATION OF HISTORY John J. Berthold History 489 April 23, 2012 i ABSTRACT This paper examines The History of the Kings of Britain by Geoffrey of Monmouth, with the aim of understanding his motivations for writing a false history and presenting it as genuine. It includes a brief overview of the political context of the book at the time during which it was first introduced to the public, in order to help readers unfamiliar with the era to understand how the book fit into the world of twelfth century England, and why it had the impact that it did. Following that is a brief summary of the book itself, and finally a summary of the secondary literature as it pertains to Geoffrey’s motivations. It concludes with the claim that all proposed motives are plausible, and may all have been true at various points in Geoffrey’s career, as the changing times may have forced him to promote the book for different reasons, and under different circumstances than he may have originally intended. Copyright for this work is owned by the author. This digital version is published by McIntyre Library, University of Wisconsin Eau Claire with the consent of the author. ii CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 Who was Geoffrey of Monmouth? 3 Historical Context 4 The Book 6 Motivations 11 CONCLUSION 18 WORKS CITED 20 WORKS CONSULTED 22 1 Introduction Sometime between late 1135 and early 1139 Geoffrey of Monmouth released his greatest work, Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain in modern English).
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Biography of St Gildas, Known As the Wise by Master Hrolf Herjolfssen
    A short biography of St Gildas, known as The Wise by Master Hrolf Herjolfssen Who was St Gildas? He was probably born about 517 AD, but we do not even know for sure where he was born. Various ecclesiastic authorities give the North of England or Wales. The North of England is the more likely. This is one of the things connecting him with the "real" Arthur, who was probably also based in this area. He was also sometimes known as Badonicus - as he was born in the year of Arthur's victory in a battle of that name against the Saxons. Gildas thus spent his childhood during the time when the Saxons were kept quiet by this defeat. We know his father's name was Cau (or Nau) and that he came from noble lineage. He probably had several brothers. It is likely that one of these, Cuil (or Hueil), was killed by Arthur (who died in 537 AD). It also appears that he may have forgiven Arthur for this. He lived in a time when the glory of Rome was faded from Britain. The permanent legions had been withdrawn by Maximus, who used them to sack Rome itself and make himself Emperor. Despite several expeditions to the island to drive off Saxons, Picts and Scots (most notably under the great general Stilicho), the Britons had generally been left to their own devices and were made responsible for their own defence. Most of the landed Romans (as all Britons had Roman citizenship) left for the more defensible lands of Brittany.
    [Show full text]
  • The Project Gutenberg Ebook of Y Gododin, by Aneurin Copyright
    The Project Gutenberg EBook of Y Gododin, by Aneurin Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook. This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project Gutenberg file. Please do not remove it. Do not change or edit the header without written permission. Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file. Included is important information about your specific rights and restrictions in how the file may be used. You can also find out about how to make a donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved. **Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** **eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** *****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!***** Title: Y Gododin Author: Aneurin Release Date: February, 2006 [EBook #9842] [This file was first posted on October 23, 2003] Edition: 10 Language: English Character set encoding: US-ASCII *** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK, Y GODODIN *** Transcribed by David Price, email [email protected] Y GODODIN PREFACE Aneurin, the author of this poem, was the son of Caw, lord of Cwm Cawlwyd, or Cowllwg, a region in the North, which, as we learn from a Life of Gildas in the monastery of Fleury published by Johannes a Bosco, comprehended Arecluta or Strath Clyde. {0a} Several of his brothers seem to have emigrated from Prydyn in company with their father before the battle of Cattraeth, and, under the royal protection of Maelgwn Gwynedd, to have settled in Wales, where they professed religious lives, and became founders of churches.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 J. S. Mackley Abstract When Geoffrey of Monmouth Wrote The
    English Foundation Myths as Political Empowerment J. S. Mackley University of Northampton, UK Abstract When Geoffrey of Monmouth wrote the History of the Kings of Britain in Latin around 1135-8, he claimed that he was translating an earlier source in the “British Language” and presenting a “truthful account” of British History. Geoffrey’s claims around this book gave his writing more authority, and, while this particular book has never been uncovered, he was drawing on other sources, such as Gildas, Bede and Nennius. In particular, Geoffrey elaborated a legend from Nennius that described how the first settlers of Britain were descended from Æneas and other survivors from the Trojan War. Thus, Geoffrey’s purpose was to provide a plausible ancestry for the current kings of England—Norman who had invaded only seventy years before—and to establish the nation's authority on the world stage. Keywords: Geoffrey of Monmouth; History of the Kings of Britain; English foundation mythology; Trojans; Æneas; Brutus; Corineus; Nennius; Gildas; Albion; Goemagot 1 ENGLISH FOUNDATION MYTHS AS POLITICAL EMPOWERMENT Introduction Geoffrey of Monmouth, a twelfth-century monk and teacher, is perhaps best known for being one of the earliest authors of a coherent written narrative of King Arthur and for his work on the prophecies of Merlin. His principal and innovative work, the Historia regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), presents an overview of the lives and deeds of 99 British monarchs, covering nearly 2000 years, beginning with the first settlers of the land, until the death of the last British king in 689 AD.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Alban, Built "When Peaceable Christian Times Were Restored" (Possibly the 4Th Century) and Still in Use in Bede's Time
    Welcome to OUR 18th VIRTUAL GSP class! Britain’s first martyr ST.ALBAN: WHY DO WE HONOR HIM? Presented by Charles E.Dickson,Ph.D. COLLECT FOR ALBAN, FIRST MARTYR OF BRITAIN 22 JUNE Almighty God, by whose grace and power thy holy martyr Alban triumphed over suffering and was faithful even unto death: Grant to us, who now remember him with thanksgiving, to be so faithful in our witness to thee in this world, that we may receive with him the crown of life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen. ANGLICANISM’S TUDOR BEGINNINGS The Church of England (and therefore the Episcopal Church) traces its specifically Anglican identity with its links to the State back to the Reformation. Henry VIII started the process of creating the Church of England after his split with Rome in the 1530s as he ended his marriage with Catherine of Aragon and moved on to Anne Boleyn. The first Act of Supremacy, passed by Parliament in 1534, granted Henry and subsequent monarchs Royal Supremacy, such that they were declared the Supreme Head of the Church of England. ANGLICANISM’S ANGLO-SAXON BEGINNINGS The Church of England often dates its formal foundation to St.Augustine of Canterbury’s Gregorian Mission to England in 597. Like Henry VIII this "Apostle to the English" can be considered a founder of the English Church. Augustine was the 1st and the Most Rev. Justin Welby is the 105th Archbishop of Canterbury. ANGLICANISM’S ANCIENT BEGINNINGS Actually the Church of England’s roots go back to the early church.
    [Show full text]
  • THE GROANS of the Britons IOWARD the BRITISH Civirares PERIOD, CIRCA 406-455 C.E
    THE GROANS OF THE BRIToNs IOWARD THE BRITISH CivirArEs PERIOD, CIRCA 406-455 C.E. I<CVIO IVlfmn1C)’ IsI;allnorfcillow t1icvuitings c idivcoclsoJinyou’n cotnitiv, vhich (ifrhcrccvcrw’crccur’of thcni) hctvc Iccii consumcd by thcrircs ofthe encmv, orhvc cconijicuucd my cxilcd coun— ttvmcn into distant kmds..i Since the time of Gilcias, the first great chronicler of the British, the problem of reliable sources, or any sources, has been lamented. Over the centuries, myth, pseudo-history, and educated guesswork have rushed in to fill the void.2 The last thirty years have seen a revival of interest in the fifth and sixth centuries, and a great deal of work has been clone on the historical and archaeological records. Ironically, the increased focus on the period has cast a doubt on almost every important assumption that has been macic about early Britain. Ian Wood has noted that between the usurpation of Constantine III in 407 and the death of the Roman consul Aetius in 455 there are a handful of dateable events associated with the British Isles.3 Yet even these are the subject of intense debate. Primary narrative sources, especially the chronicles, have come under fire. Many have been abandoned altogether, especially by archaeologists and histori ans favoring an archaeological approach to the period. With more questions than answers, historians are presented with tnatiy challenges, not the least of which is ‘hat to call this period and over what period of time that identification might be valid. “The End of Roman Britain,” “Post Roman Britain,” “Dark Age Britain,” and “Arthur’s Britain” have been used in the past.
    [Show full text]
  • Geoffrey of Monmouth's Welsh Sources
    Chapter 1 Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Welsh Sources Ben Guy Introduction: Britons, Bretons, and the Unworthy Welsh It has long been recognized that Geoffrey of Monmouth drew on sources origi- nating from the Brittonic-speaking world. This fact is frequently mentioned in scholarly literature, though it is rarely accompanied by detailed supporting evidence. It was, after all, with the Britons, both contemporary and ancient, that Geoffrey was primarily concerned, and it was to the Britons that he looked for source material concerning the history of Britannia.1 One might legitimately ask whether it is possible, or even necessary, to dis- tinguish between sources that originated from different Brittonic-speaking re- gions. It would appear that the three surviving Brittonic languages had not yet become mutually unintelligible by the 12th century. Gerald of Wales comment- ed on this matter in the first recension of his Description of Wales, completed around 1194, some 60 years after the propagation of the De gestis Britonum: Indeed, Cornwall and Brittany use almost the same language, which is, nevertheless, still intelligible to the Welsh in many and almost in all cases, on account of their original relationship. Inasmuch as it is less re- fined and rougher, it is closer to the ancient British language, or so I think myself.2 1 To avoid confusion, I shall continue to employ the adjective “Brittonic” rather than “British” when referring to the medieval and ancient Britons. I avoid the term “Celtic”, which is mean- ingless in this context. 2 Gerald of Wales, The Description of Wales i.6, ed.
    [Show full text]