I started out with a mention of the Annales Cambriae (AC), and I want to Elaborate further on them.
The AC is a rough time line of the history of the welsh territory (Cambria is the latin name for Wales). This connects it with Arthur in a way I haven't mentioned before: The first stories containing him are of welsh origin, as are a lot of other parts that have been among the most consistently appearing characters and events.
The AC is a rough time line of the history of the welsh territory (Cambria is the latin name for Wales). This connects it with Arthur in a way I haven't mentioned before: The first stories containing him are of welsh origin, as are a lot of other parts that have been among the most consistently appearing characters and events.
 |
| A page from an original manuscript of the Annales Cambriae |
Presumably they give us at least a time frame, a reference Point for when Arthur probably lived. Except that they might not. The AC are known to us only through copies, and these copies sometimes omit great lengths of time and even so contradict each other frequently.
There are five known manuscripts that all in all add up to four Independent sources.
The first one, A, is found in a larger work, the Historia Britonum. Since texts then were written by Hand (manuscript is Latin and literally translates to "written by hand") we are able to deduce it's Age by comparing it to other works that are more certainly dated. It is not present in all Versions of the Historia Britonum. That Version of the AC is inserted without title or note that it's an excerpt from another text, and roughly chronicles the latter half of the first millennium. Matters are further complicated because Events are frequently recounted without Dates, leaving the work to us by comparing their General shape to, again, other known occurrences. It was probably written some time between 110 AD and 1300 AD. This is important for later.
Sources B and C actually have the same title (well almost), respectively Annales ab orbe condito adusque A. D. mcclxxxvi and Annales ab orbe condito adusque A. D. mcclxxviii. Those of you knowing their math can see that one recounts two years more, namely until 1288 (the last digit is VIII) instead of 1286 (here it is VI). B starts roughly 60 years before the birth of christ, while C starts at 610 before the birth of Christ as stated by it's author, but the year 671 is more likely. Their title roughly translates to "History from the beginning of the earth to the year xxx" and the name is pretty much a spoiler. They are interesting in that they both are prefaced by the reprinted introduction to the history of the world by one Isidore of Seville. Both texts roughly match A, although C starts to diverge more strongly from B when A ends, less emphasising the events in Wales and focusing more on Great Britain in general. To me C feels like more encompassing, and somehow more global. B is brought to us by Bede's work "minor history", while C was found as part of manuscript from the abbey of Neath, and both were written sometime at the tail end of the 13th century, thus separating them considerably from some of their source material.
Crucial to us because it concerns the subject at hand is a slight difference that B and C share, but which separates them from A.
A: Year 93 (c. 537) The Strife of Camlann in which Arthur and Mordred fell and there was death in Britain and in Ireland.
B/C: Year 93 (c. 537) The Strife of Camlann in which Arthur and Mordred fell
It's not much, but since A is younger than B/C, it's possible that A added a completely fabricated story, and B/C couldn't find evidence for the second part, so they dropped it. After all, you would expect to find some evidence at least for the dying part.
D and E are found in the same manuscript, thus constituting one source between them, but they aren't of particular interest to us, seeing as they only the 12th and and 13th century respectively, and there are no clues for us there. But it's interesting to note that Arthur, fictional or not, was consistently placed in the 6th century, at least by scholars known to us, seeing as he was by and large considered contemporary and well documented throughout the middle ages.
We will examine further sources, among the already mentioned Bede (well, actually the venerable Bede), but don't expect to much. Evidence for Arthur's life is hard to come by, and from here on out the accounts become largely fictional, old welsh texts. After that there follows an account of Geoffrey of Monmouth, and he really is a big one among the various writers. Supposedly he thought he was writing down history, but we will see that here at the latest the fictionalisation begins in earnest.
I'm sorry for the gap between entries, but I really have to do the research from now on, otherwise I might get the facts muddled. I already noticed some of the weak links in my blog when talking to people about it, and I don't want many more mistakes of that kind.
In other news, you guys, how cool is it that we're able to read books old a thousand years and more practically for free? Just cool or extremely cool? You decide! That might sound nerdy, but the point is: A lot of research and work has been done for us, and everyone developing something today is standing on the shoulder of giants.
Think about that...see ya soon!
Sources B and C actually have the same title (well almost), respectively Annales ab orbe condito adusque A. D. mcclxxxvi and Annales ab orbe condito adusque A. D. mcclxxviii. Those of you knowing their math can see that one recounts two years more, namely until 1288 (the last digit is VIII) instead of 1286 (here it is VI). B starts roughly 60 years before the birth of christ, while C starts at 610 before the birth of Christ as stated by it's author, but the year 671 is more likely. Their title roughly translates to "History from the beginning of the earth to the year xxx" and the name is pretty much a spoiler. They are interesting in that they both are prefaced by the reprinted introduction to the history of the world by one Isidore of Seville. Both texts roughly match A, although C starts to diverge more strongly from B when A ends, less emphasising the events in Wales and focusing more on Great Britain in general. To me C feels like more encompassing, and somehow more global. B is brought to us by Bede's work "minor history", while C was found as part of manuscript from the abbey of Neath, and both were written sometime at the tail end of the 13th century, thus separating them considerably from some of their source material.
Crucial to us because it concerns the subject at hand is a slight difference that B and C share, but which separates them from A.
A: Year 93 (c. 537) The Strife of Camlann in which Arthur and Mordred fell and there was death in Britain and in Ireland.
B/C: Year 93 (c. 537) The Strife of Camlann in which Arthur and Mordred fell
It's not much, but since A is younger than B/C, it's possible that A added a completely fabricated story, and B/C couldn't find evidence for the second part, so they dropped it. After all, you would expect to find some evidence at least for the dying part.
D and E are found in the same manuscript, thus constituting one source between them, but they aren't of particular interest to us, seeing as they only the 12th and and 13th century respectively, and there are no clues for us there. But it's interesting to note that Arthur, fictional or not, was consistently placed in the 6th century, at least by scholars known to us, seeing as he was by and large considered contemporary and well documented throughout the middle ages.
We will examine further sources, among the already mentioned Bede (well, actually the venerable Bede), but don't expect to much. Evidence for Arthur's life is hard to come by, and from here on out the accounts become largely fictional, old welsh texts. After that there follows an account of Geoffrey of Monmouth, and he really is a big one among the various writers. Supposedly he thought he was writing down history, but we will see that here at the latest the fictionalisation begins in earnest.
I'm sorry for the gap between entries, but I really have to do the research from now on, otherwise I might get the facts muddled. I already noticed some of the weak links in my blog when talking to people about it, and I don't want many more mistakes of that kind.
In other news, you guys, how cool is it that we're able to read books old a thousand years and more practically for free? Just cool or extremely cool? You decide! That might sound nerdy, but the point is: A lot of research and work has been done for us, and everyone developing something today is standing on the shoulder of giants.
Think about that...see ya soon!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Everyone can comment, although I trust all of you to keep it civil. Since this is my playground, the final decision about everything written, including comments, lies with me. Have fun!