| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
 |
|
Wiki offers quite a choice of Aelfrics:
Ælfric Cild, the late 10th century Anglo-Saxon Ealdorman from Northamptonshire and Huntingdonshire
Ælfric of Abingdon (died 1005) was a late 10th century Anglo-Saxon Archbishop of Canterbury.
Ælfric of Eynsham (c.955-c.1010), the late 10th century Anglo-Saxon abbot and writer
Ælfric of Hampshire, the late 10th century Anglo-Saxon Ealdorman of Hampshire
Ælfric of Kent, the possible late 8th century Anglo-Saxon King of Kent
Ælfric Puttoc (died 1051), the mid 10th century Anglo-Saxon Archbishop of York
Ælfric of Crediton, the mid 10th century Anglo-Saxon bishop of Crediton
Aelfric, mid 10th century Anglo-Saxon bishop of Hereford
Æelfric I (d. c. 973) Bishop of Elmham
Ælfric II (d. 1038) Bishop of Elmham
Ælfric III (d. c. 1042) Bishop of Elmham
If you go for Aelfric of Eynsham you'll be informed that, despite his impeccable credentials as a churchman
| Ælfric denied the immaculate birth of the Virgin (Homilies, ed. Thorpe, ii.466), and his teaching on the Eucharist in the Canons and in the Sermo de sacrificio in die pascae (ibid. ii.262 seq.) was appealed to by the Protestant Reformation writers as a proof that the early English church did not hold the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation. |
He's described as a "conscientious monk" and "probably the grammarian" (Latin Grammar and Glossary was one among several works ascribed to him).
He's often confused with Aelfric of Abingdon, Archbishop of Canterbury; there's also an element of doubt over another Aelfric, said to be a pupil:
It is safe to assume that the original draft of this, afterwards enlarged by his pupil, Ælfric Bata, was by Ælfric (the draft refers to the Colloquium, a manual of Latin conversation). The Colloquy, attributed to Aelfric on account of a "note", was written in Latin with an Old English gloss supplied by an anonymous contributor. The authorship is proved by a note in one of the MSS.: Hanc sententiam latini sermonis olim Aelfricus Abbas composuit, qui meus fuit magister, sed tamen ego Aelfricus Bata multas postea huic addidi appendices. The colloquy has an Old English gloss, which is certainly not the work of Aelfric.
We've been taught to believe that the Anglo-Saxon church embarked on a mission to bring Charlemagne and the Franks into the Christian fold; was a Celtic brand of Christianity being promulgated?
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Ælfric denied the immaculate birth of the Virgin (Homilies, ed. Thorpe, ii.466), and his teaching on the Eucharist in the Canons and in the Sermo de sacrificio in die pascae (ibid. ii.262 seq.) was appealed to by the Protestant Reformation writers as a proof that the early English church did not hold the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation. |
I just do not believe in this "early English church". Yes, it's true that the Anglo-Saxons latterly became quite a bunch of intellectuals and may, at a pinch, have been capable of this level of religious abstrusivity, but I simply do not believe that the A/S's would go so far out on a limb. Goddammit, they already lived out on a limb. Unless of course the whole of the Latin Church was denying the Immaculate Birth and transubstantiation at this time.
PS Has a post of mine disappeared? It wasn't very important but 'twas...sniff...mine own.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
It doesn't make sense for Anglo-Saxon churchmen with their seemingly shaky grasp of Roman dogma to act as the missionaries of the HRE; what was the Pope thinking of?
| PS Has a post of mine disappeared? It wasn't very important but 'twas...sniff...mine own. |
On a couple of occasions I've had to try to remember what I wrote when posts weren't sent; now, all of a sudden, there seems to be a time limit; if surpassed, the post gets "sent to hell" and has to be copied and then pasted.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I know about the 'sent to hell' development and would complain to Keimpe except he has been camping on the Alpe d'Huez for the last three months (he was determined to get a good spot this year). But how do you copy-and-paste after it has been sent to hell? Mine seem to disappear for ever.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
After "sent to hell" appears, use the 'back' button and then highlight the contents of the post, next you click on 'copy' and then the 'back' button; you can then use 'Post reply' and 'paste'.
It's laborious and over-complicated, must be a better way (I can only assume it's a protective device, otherwise I'd have muttered darkly long ago). I expect cyclists voice similar complaints.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
Click your back button.
Click inside the text box.
Copy All Text.
Repost.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| Hatty wrote: | | It's laborious and over-complicated, must be a better way (I can only assume it's a protective device, otherwise I'd have muttered darkly long ago). I expect cyclists voice similar complaints. |
It's part of my war against SPAM.
Perhaps the cure is worse than the disease.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Sorry to go on but now I know it's not just my machine (salvaged from Bletchley) we might as well get this right. When the dread message comes up and I press the back thingy, I am faced with a blank square. No amount of random button pressing gets the original back.
PS Using 'preview' eradicates the problem but who ever bothers with preview?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
|
Try highlighting your post and using 'copy' before pressing "Submit", that way you'll have a back-up to use, I imagine the MOD has a similar procedure in view of their fast-disappearing laptops; Bletchley, on the other hand, made sure all their machines were destroyed, apart from the one behind the radiator.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Has anyone heard of the Mayan Codices? They consist of the Madrid Codex, the Paris Codex, and the Dresden Codex. They are pre-conquest documents which the clergy brought back to Europe with them. Each one was found in the city after which it was named in 1860, 1832/1859, and 1739 respectively.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ishmael
In: Toronto
|
|
|
|
| EndlesslyRocking wrote: | | Has anyone heard of the Mayan Codices? |
I have now!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look what they dug up: a theatre called The Theatre. How do they know this is The Theatre and not That Other Theatre?
| Archaeologists in London have unearthed the remains, of what is believed to be one of the earliest playhouses in the city and the first to present a Shakespeare play, Agence France-Presse has reported. The open-air theater in Shoreditch, in East London, was once known as the Theater and was where Shakespeare appeared as an actor with the troupe Lord Chamberlain's Men. It is also believed to be where his plays were first presented. The discovery was made by archaeologists for the Museum of London, which says it has found the site of the theater, which opened in 1576. Jo Lyon, a senior archaeologist at the museum, said in a statement, 'We can now start to work on the detail of what the building here might have looked like and expand our knowledge of the playhouses of Elizabethan London.' Previous excavations by the museum have taken place at the sites of the Rose, Globe and Hope Theaters. | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the Wulfilas-Bible a fake too?
| One third of the words in Beowulf do not appear in any other document, they might simply have been invented.Who was able to invent this language? It could have only been Franciscus Junius (1589-1677) who was the first to publish a grammar and dictionary of the Old English language, and it was he too, who in 1665 gave his authority to the authenticity of the Wulfilas-Bible, which is a fake as well (see Topper 1998). Moreover, twice in his life Junius had access to the codex Vitellinus A. XV in which Beowulf was found after Junius' death. It had not been in it when its contents were listed earlier. |
http://www.ilya.it/chrono/pages/beowulfen.htm
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
|
This would appear to be a case of The Smoking Gun Found. When is someone going to make a name for himself by making a telly programme on this? (Don't bother with books, that route doesn't work.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hatty
Site Admin
In: Berkshire
|
|
|
|
| Of course, Junius did not dare to publish his epic right away but had to leave this to a future generation. |
Doesn't make sense. Is it common for a forger not to see the reception his work gets, out of curiosity if nothing else?
| It was the Danish scholar Thorkelin who was given insight into the ms. and who - after hesitating 25 years - finally published it in 1815. |
He "hesitated" for the very understandable reason that there was a war on. The translation had to be redone as his home, containing the MS, was burned down in a bombardment.
| As the contents have nothing to do with England but are Scandinavian throughout, this might seem a fair procedure, but on the other hand: would the English discoverers of the ms. not have been proud to be the first to publish this most ancient text of their language if they had thought it to be genuine? They, too, did not dare to do so, I suppose, because in those times learning was at a very high level, and the fake could easily be recognized. |
Yes, it was a surprise to me too to find that the earliest translation of B was done by a Dane. He was, however, an Old Scandinavian scholar, not a breed that abounds in the UK.
| First doubts arose when 19th century philologists found a great number of anachronisms in the text, but those could easily be attributed to the scribes of the 11th century who supposedly copied the text, thus saving the epic as an entity. |
I didn't know there were "doubts" in the 19th century...whatever happened to the doubters? What does "anachronism" mean in this context?
| There remains the question why Junius went through this enormous labour? One of the important points are the quotations from Pope Gregory I, thus giving more support to the historicity of this invented figure. And the reconstruction of a medieval Christianity in England or Denmark was another important object of the "great action" (as Kammeier called it) of the church. |
Junius' dates are significant, coinciding with the upheaval of the Civil War; if he was the forger then it may well have been politic to wait and see which side came out on top. The usurpers of royal power would be only too happy presumably to emphasise England's Englishness in contrast to the Stuart line with their Frencified ways.
His valediction of the Wulfilas-Bible can be taken two ways; either he was genuinely duped or he wanted to prove he was a bona fide Catholic in the post-Restoration era. Must go and look this Junius up.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
