Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Groans of the Britons
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="FitzNigel, post: 2489288, member: 74712"]Oh boy [USER=73473]@Magnus Maximus[/USER] - you asked for it! Here's a bit from a lecture I put together on King Arthur, preparing my students to study some of the primary sources over the course of a few weeks and argue the position of whether Arthur was real or not (please forgive spelling or grammar errors - while it can be read as a narrative it was really a guideline for me - I keep it this detailed to make sure I don't go on too many tangents!)</p><p><br /></p><p>Adventus Saxonum (The coming of the Saxons)</p><p>[ATTACH=full]526595[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>How and why Britain is invaded is unknown to us. </p><p> - The Historian Bede, writing some 200 years after the event, tells us that one of the forming Briton Kingdoms invited a band of Saxon warriors over to act as mercenaries, since they were defenseless without the Romans</p><p> - These Saxons then saw just how helpless the Britons were, and decided they would take the Island for themselves. Inviting over more Saxons, plus other Germanic peoples such as the Angles and the Jutes</p><p> The Saxons and other Germans then went about conquering the Island, pushing the Britons towards the edges, into the hilly areas of Modern Wales and Scotland</p><p><br /></p><p>That is the story Bede tells us. There may be some reality to it, as Bede tends to be a reliable source, but he is not a contemporary source. So there are still many questions and problems.</p><p><br /></p><p>Firstly, while there is no contemporary source, it is clear that the Romans military and civil authority had waned between 410 and 450 and was being replaced by a network of states ruled by local kings who retained some form of the Roman institutions, but otherwise reverted to their pre-roman Celtic and tribal patterns</p><p><br /></p><p>Britain, under the Romans did have to contend with Saxon raiders, and there was a garrison in South-East Britain meant to protect the island from these raiders</p><p> - Surely, as Rome withdrew, the Saxon raiders would have had more opportunities for plunder, and it seems they began to settle on the island after a time, rather than just taking booty back to their homes in Saxony</p><p><br /></p><p>The Saxons and other Germans would then start setting up their own kingdoms in the south and east of the Island</p><p> - In the early Sixth Century, these Germans begin to push further towards the west, and by the Mid-Sixth Century, the whole of the East and center portions of modern England would be under Germanic rule.</p><p> - The West Saxons had also reached as far as the Bristol Channel, cutting off Devon and Cornwall from their Celtic neighbors to the North.</p><p> - By the end of the century, the Britons held only the west coast, and a large number of them had crossed the channel into North-Western France (hence, why it’s called “Brittany” or Britain the lesser, and the Isle of Britain is known as Great Britain (or Greater Brittany))</p><p><br /></p><p>The Earliest Sources</p><p>[ATTACH=full]526598[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>The story of how Britain was invaded by these German tribes could only be reconstructed with the smallest amount of evidence. The difficulty of then figuring out who Arthur was during these events is even more difficult, and darn-near impossible</p><p> - The few texts the exist lend us to believe that Arthur was a Briton, or at least fought with the Britons, against the invading Saxons</p><p><br /></p><p>The Historical sources left by the Saxons, as the victors in this struggle with the Britons, leaves no mention of Arthur (and why should they? They are interested in their own victories)</p><p> - The Britons, as one could imagine, were probably disinclined to record a record of their own defeats, but also had little tradition of a written history</p><p><br /></p><p>The written records of the Welsh, as we would come to call the native Britons, do not begin until the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Any texts supposedly from the 8th century or earlier are only known from manuscripts dating to the thirteenth or fourteenth centuries</p><p> - Meaning that they could be authentic primary sources, but we have no way of knowing for certain</p><p><br /></p><p>The Earliest possible source for an historical Arthur is left by a monk and saint named Gildas. </p><p> - Gildas was a Briton, and he tells us that he was born during the year of the battle of Mount Badon (of which Arthur was supposedly involved), but he does not say what year this battle took place, nor does any other source sufficiently identify the year. However, if this information were true, we can say that Gildas was a near-contemporary of Arthur</p><p> - Gildas was primarily concerned with writing a text on the religious evils of the kings of his day, and is very sparse with specific information.</p><p><br /></p><p>Our next source relevant to an Historical Arthur is again Bede, in his work The Ecclesiastical History of the English People, written in the mid-Eighth Century, or two hundred years after Arthur may have lived</p><p> - Bede was an Angle writing at the Monasteries of Monkwearmouth and Jarrow in Northern England (near the Tyne River)</p><p> - Bede tells us little more than what Gildas provides, but Bede was a much better and more careful compiler of information than Gildas. Bede may have simply used Gildas as his source, but if he obtained the same information elsewhere, then he corroborates what Gildas tells us.</p><p><br /></p><p>Writing around the same time as Bede is the so-called Nennius; a name attributed to an anonymous work entitled Historia Brittonum, or The History of the Britons</p><p> - The Historia Brittonum provides some actual details on Arthur as a war leader, and lists the battles he was engaged in – including the Battle of Badon.</p><p> - However, it also includes some clear myths concerning Arthur, bringing into question some of the legitimacy of the rest of the work</p><p><br /></p><p>Next, the Annales Cambriae or Welsh Annales provides some dates for Arthur’s battles of Badon and the Battle of Camlann where Arthur died. The date of this source is the mid tenth century, or 400 years after Arthur likely lived</p><p><br /></p><p>The Anglo-Norman Historian William of Malmesbury is the next to provide us with some details in his Gesta Regum Anglorum (or Deeds of the Kings of England) where he briefly mentions Arthur and Mount Badon, and how the Bretons (those living in Brittany) speak of Arthur commonly and that he is a well known figure from history.</p><p> - William of Malmesbury’s book was written around the year 1125</p><p><br /></p><p>Geoffrey of Monmouth</p><p>[ATTACH=full]526599[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>It is at this point that the source material for Arthur becomes prolific, but how factual it is, is difficult to say.</p><p><br /></p><p>We clearly know who is responsible for the popularity of the story of King Arthur, and that is Geoffrey of Monmouth – a 12th century Bishop, and supposed Historian.</p><p><br /></p><p>Geoffrey’s most popular work was the Historia Regum Britanniae or The History of the Kings of Britain, written sometime in the 1130s.</p><p> - Geoffrey was likely a descendent of the Bretons who were given lordship over the region of Monmouth with the Norman Conquest (while the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain in the sixth century, the Normans (from Northern France) would invade themselves in the eleventh century).</p><p> - Now, the Bretons were descendants of those Celtic people who had inhabited Brittany in Northern France. So it is likely Geoffrey has some interest in Wales where his ancestors may have come from</p><p><br /></p><p>Geoffrey claims that his book was a translation from an ancient Welsh history. </p><p> - We have no way to prove or disprove his claim, however some linguists say that Geoffrey’s command of Welsh is so poor, that he could not possibly have translated such a work into Latin. </p><p> - Also, Geoffrey comes under criticism for including contemporary events in what was suppose to be a translation.</p><p> - That has been used as more evidence that his “history” is a fake, but it is not unusual for Medieval authors to elaborate on works that they are copying or translating</p><p><br /></p><p>End this portion of the lecture.</p><p><br /></p><p>One of the interesting tidbits Geoffrey of Monmouth provides is the story of Arthur's conception and birth. He says the the magician Merlin enabled the Briton King Vortigern to lay with the princess Igrain, disguised as her husband. Arthur was then born nine months later at Tintagel in Cornwall. I was just at Tinyagel in my recent trip to the UK:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]526607[/ATTACH] </p><p>(Foundations of small buildings at Tintagel, dating to about the 6th century, if memory serves correctly...)</p><p><br /></p><p>Even more interesting though, is that while I was there, Archaeologists were uncovering a palace at Tintagel that dates from the period...</p><p><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/king-arthur-castle-cornwall-tintagel-dark-ages-palace-camelot-a7168761.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/king-arthur-castle-cornwall-tintagel-dark-ages-palace-camelot-a7168761.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/king-arthur-castle-cornwall-tintagel-dark-ages-palace-camelot-a7168761.html</a>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="FitzNigel, post: 2489288, member: 74712"]Oh boy [USER=73473]@Magnus Maximus[/USER] - you asked for it! Here's a bit from a lecture I put together on King Arthur, preparing my students to study some of the primary sources over the course of a few weeks and argue the position of whether Arthur was real or not (please forgive spelling or grammar errors - while it can be read as a narrative it was really a guideline for me - I keep it this detailed to make sure I don't go on too many tangents!) Adventus Saxonum (The coming of the Saxons) [ATTACH=full]526595[/ATTACH] How and why Britain is invaded is unknown to us. - The Historian Bede, writing some 200 years after the event, tells us that one of the forming Briton Kingdoms invited a band of Saxon warriors over to act as mercenaries, since they were defenseless without the Romans - These Saxons then saw just how helpless the Britons were, and decided they would take the Island for themselves. Inviting over more Saxons, plus other Germanic peoples such as the Angles and the Jutes The Saxons and other Germans then went about conquering the Island, pushing the Britons towards the edges, into the hilly areas of Modern Wales and Scotland That is the story Bede tells us. There may be some reality to it, as Bede tends to be a reliable source, but he is not a contemporary source. So there are still many questions and problems. Firstly, while there is no contemporary source, it is clear that the Romans military and civil authority had waned between 410 and 450 and was being replaced by a network of states ruled by local kings who retained some form of the Roman institutions, but otherwise reverted to their pre-roman Celtic and tribal patterns Britain, under the Romans did have to contend with Saxon raiders, and there was a garrison in South-East Britain meant to protect the island from these raiders - Surely, as Rome withdrew, the Saxon raiders would have had more opportunities for plunder, and it seems they began to settle on the island after a time, rather than just taking booty back to their homes in Saxony The Saxons and other Germans would then start setting up their own kingdoms in the south and east of the Island - In the early Sixth Century, these Germans begin to push further towards the west, and by the Mid-Sixth Century, the whole of the East and center portions of modern England would be under Germanic rule. - The West Saxons had also reached as far as the Bristol Channel, cutting off Devon and Cornwall from their Celtic neighbors to the North. - By the end of the century, the Britons held only the west coast, and a large number of them had crossed the channel into North-Western France (hence, why it’s called “Brittany” or Britain the lesser, and the Isle of Britain is known as Great Britain (or Greater Brittany)) The Earliest Sources [ATTACH=full]526598[/ATTACH] The story of how Britain was invaded by these German tribes could only be reconstructed with the smallest amount of evidence. The difficulty of then figuring out who Arthur was during these events is even more difficult, and darn-near impossible - The few texts the exist lend us to believe that Arthur was a Briton, or at least fought with the Britons, against the invading Saxons The Historical sources left by the Saxons, as the victors in this struggle with the Britons, leaves no mention of Arthur (and why should they? They are interested in their own victories) - The Britons, as one could imagine, were probably disinclined to record a record of their own defeats, but also had little tradition of a written history The written records of the Welsh, as we would come to call the native Britons, do not begin until the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Any texts supposedly from the 8th century or earlier are only known from manuscripts dating to the thirteenth or fourteenth centuries - Meaning that they could be authentic primary sources, but we have no way of knowing for certain The Earliest possible source for an historical Arthur is left by a monk and saint named Gildas. - Gildas was a Briton, and he tells us that he was born during the year of the battle of Mount Badon (of which Arthur was supposedly involved), but he does not say what year this battle took place, nor does any other source sufficiently identify the year. However, if this information were true, we can say that Gildas was a near-contemporary of Arthur - Gildas was primarily concerned with writing a text on the religious evils of the kings of his day, and is very sparse with specific information. Our next source relevant to an Historical Arthur is again Bede, in his work The Ecclesiastical History of the English People, written in the mid-Eighth Century, or two hundred years after Arthur may have lived - Bede was an Angle writing at the Monasteries of Monkwearmouth and Jarrow in Northern England (near the Tyne River) - Bede tells us little more than what Gildas provides, but Bede was a much better and more careful compiler of information than Gildas. Bede may have simply used Gildas as his source, but if he obtained the same information elsewhere, then he corroborates what Gildas tells us. Writing around the same time as Bede is the so-called Nennius; a name attributed to an anonymous work entitled Historia Brittonum, or The History of the Britons - The Historia Brittonum provides some actual details on Arthur as a war leader, and lists the battles he was engaged in – including the Battle of Badon. - However, it also includes some clear myths concerning Arthur, bringing into question some of the legitimacy of the rest of the work Next, the Annales Cambriae or Welsh Annales provides some dates for Arthur’s battles of Badon and the Battle of Camlann where Arthur died. The date of this source is the mid tenth century, or 400 years after Arthur likely lived The Anglo-Norman Historian William of Malmesbury is the next to provide us with some details in his Gesta Regum Anglorum (or Deeds of the Kings of England) where he briefly mentions Arthur and Mount Badon, and how the Bretons (those living in Brittany) speak of Arthur commonly and that he is a well known figure from history. - William of Malmesbury’s book was written around the year 1125 Geoffrey of Monmouth [ATTACH=full]526599[/ATTACH] It is at this point that the source material for Arthur becomes prolific, but how factual it is, is difficult to say. We clearly know who is responsible for the popularity of the story of King Arthur, and that is Geoffrey of Monmouth – a 12th century Bishop, and supposed Historian. Geoffrey’s most popular work was the Historia Regum Britanniae or The History of the Kings of Britain, written sometime in the 1130s. - Geoffrey was likely a descendent of the Bretons who were given lordship over the region of Monmouth with the Norman Conquest (while the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain in the sixth century, the Normans (from Northern France) would invade themselves in the eleventh century). - Now, the Bretons were descendants of those Celtic people who had inhabited Brittany in Northern France. So it is likely Geoffrey has some interest in Wales where his ancestors may have come from Geoffrey claims that his book was a translation from an ancient Welsh history. - We have no way to prove or disprove his claim, however some linguists say that Geoffrey’s command of Welsh is so poor, that he could not possibly have translated such a work into Latin. - Also, Geoffrey comes under criticism for including contemporary events in what was suppose to be a translation. - That has been used as more evidence that his “history” is a fake, but it is not unusual for Medieval authors to elaborate on works that they are copying or translating End this portion of the lecture. One of the interesting tidbits Geoffrey of Monmouth provides is the story of Arthur's conception and birth. He says the the magician Merlin enabled the Briton King Vortigern to lay with the princess Igrain, disguised as her husband. Arthur was then born nine months later at Tintagel in Cornwall. I was just at Tinyagel in my recent trip to the UK: [ATTACH=full]526607[/ATTACH] (Foundations of small buildings at Tintagel, dating to about the 6th century, if memory serves correctly...) Even more interesting though, is that while I was there, Archaeologists were uncovering a palace at Tintagel that dates from the period... [url]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/king-arthur-castle-cornwall-tintagel-dark-ages-palace-camelot-a7168761.html[/url][/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
The Groans of the Britons
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...
