06-15-2009, 03:19 PM
Quote:Faction .... plesase :roll:
That implies that there's some element of fact involved. Some of the stuff I've read over the years on the subject doesn't fall into that category. :wink:
Quote:Faction .... plesase :roll:
Quote:ps. The old farts (Victorians) have been overly discredited, but when you read 19th century references such as "Illtyd appears to be a German" or Ashe saying, "A curious thing is said about Daniel [son of Riothamus], that he was a King of the Alamanni," then perhaps our cold-hard 21st century evaluations might need "down-dating."
Quote: By this means of cross-referencing, we can discover plausible historicity. When you add it all up, you begin to form a picture (depending upon your perception, and mine is rather romantic). These nuptials indicate alliences betrween the southern dynasties; and Theodoric's family marries into Andrew's twice, his sister to John (Riothamus?) and his grand-niece to John's grandson. I don't think this part of the genealogies is fictional. And I have no reason to believe that "Ringulida" could have been dreamed up by medieval scribes who had no clue that she was actually Germanic, that her mother's name was Germanilla, and that her father was the probable Fraomarius (as in Fraomarius Rusticus) the King of the Alamanni mentioned by Ammianus as seated by Valentinian and arriving in Britain in 372. Little links, viewed carefully, can shed bright light.
Quote:When we discover that Aldrian/Andrew ap Saloman (father of John and Illtyd) married a certain "Ringulida," it seems unimportant at first. Then we discover that her real name was "Rhineguilda" and she was the daughter of Rusticus (Praefect of Gaul). Her brother was Saint Germanus; and this shows laterally in Germanus' benificence toward Illtyd and the founding of Llanwit Major. In turn, Illtyd was recorded in Welsh tradition as one of "Arthur's" greatest knights. Now this may be legendary, but it places correctly when we move to the "Lifer St. Illtutus," where we hear much the same thing. The tale has all the characteristics of the later "Grail Knight," and it also places Illtyd as a proto-Lancelot... even the fact/legend that he came from France.
Quote:I know Stuart Laycock has done a lot of work to try and substantiate this theory and it's all well written stuff but I'm not sold on his idea of trying to equate Britannia in the 5th century with the Balkans in the 20th.Well, personally I don't think that Stuart is wrong with that Balkans image (I like the model of the Soviet Union and their Asian republics better), but he did not compare it close enough: Yugoslavia did settle scores of their fathers and grandfathers, not of grudges and sentiments from pre-Turkish Illyria. Which is what he proposes happened in Britain, that they fell back on 350-year old models which supposedly were held 'in limbo' during the Roman period. And that I still cannot seee any evidence for. But I'm awaiting his latest book. :wink:
Quote:I think we can have a very different view from Britain looking at different regions...
I support Laycock's views on post-roman Britain. It's not for him a question of culture - be it either celtic british, roman or germanic - but a question of regional identities which didn't "re-emerged" but still existed under roman rule.
For the chariot thing, Im quite suspicious. Snyder mentions in An Age of Tyrants some finds that belonged to a chariot in Dinas Emrys, maybe someone got the excavation report to bring some light on this?
A few of Breton genealogies can be guessed to be taken from older sources. That was at least stated by Léon Fleuriot about a name such as "Outham Senis", beeing a very old version of Eudaf Hen. Hagiographic sources are also complicated to use, but some can be used with care, essentially the Vita Samsoni of Life of St Samson, of 7th or 8th century date and the Vita Pauli Aureliani of 9th century date but with some interesting material. A lot of progress have been done in the study of those sources in the last decades by people such as André-Yves Bourgès or Bernard Merdrignac.
Quote:It seems just about everybody has a leaning toward some favorite scenario (all except Robert, who is the quinticential pragmatist):mrgreen:
Quote: Good to know that there is a realistic sub-base to the Breton genealogies. Thanks for that.WHOA! That's not what Agraes said. he said:
Quote:A few of Breton genealogies can be guessed to be taken from older sources. That was at least stated by Léon FleuriotOnly a small part of the Breton genealogiocal materaial MAY contain material from older sources, instead of being collected and produced later on. And indeed, the only way to find those scraps of original info is to look at names which are older or in archaic form. For instance, for Vortigern that would mean that the form Guorthigirn is likely to be 9th century, whilst when you come across the (near-)contemporary Uertigern you can break out the champagne.
Quote:But what are we to think of such corrupted wording as "John Lex"? The pedigrees are puzzling. If they were reworked in the medieval period, as Vortigern Studies notes (with good reason), then what accounts for the nuptial links that point to the collusion of dynasties? This is not a perceived "Germanic" or other ethnic link, but appears as a wedding of families into a larger whole. Why would the medieval scribes create these bondings? :?The usual reason is to create an ideqa of 'anciennity'. Genealogies were for the most acreated to prop up legal claims. Old names under charters would serve to enhance the status of the foundation of your convent, bishopric or the like. The older the founder, the higher the esteeem for your establishment.
Quote:Am I barking up a wrong tree here but don't the names give an indication of a continued use of an old hierarchy? Vortigern/Riothamus/Vortiporix .... very reminiscent of Vorcingetorix Not very Romano titles.Indeed, which is why their names gave rise to 19th c. ideas about 'Celtic' parties versus 'Imperial' parties, based on names alone. Vortigern the Celt against Ambrosius the Defender of Rome. Without much evidence, of course.
Vortiporix is considered possibly Irish in form and belonging to a British residing Irish dynasty allowed to stay as a client kingdom during Roman (occupation?)times.