The Latin Reception of the De gestis Britonum

Siân Echard
{"title":"The Latin Reception of the De gestis Britonum","authors":"Siân Echard","doi":"10.1163/9789004410398_009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Gerald of Wales famously skewered the veracity of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s history in his story of Meilyr, an illiterate man who could spot falsehood, thanks to devils dancing on the offending tongues or pages. Meilyr’s tormentors could be driven away by the Gospel of John, but when a copy of the De gestis Britonum was placed on his lap, the devils returned in ever greater numbers. Gerald’s anecdote, written in his Itinerary Through Wales in the 1190s, is a witness to the incredible popularity of the DGB less than 50 years after Geoffrey’s death, and that popularity would only grow, as the story was taken up in the vernacular translations discussed in Chapter Eight. Gerald’s skepticism is of a piece with the reactions from other Latin authors dealt with in Chapter Six, but as the present chapter will show, the rise of Arthurian literature as a vernacular phenomenon, and the dismissal of Geoffrey’s work (and Arthur’s historicity) by some Anglo-Latin historians, give a potentially misleading impression about the importance that the DGB continued to have in the Latin tradition, well into the early modern period. First, while the centrality of the Arthuriad to the DGB cannot be overstated, Geoffrey is also responsible for promulgating several other highly popular and influential myths, of interest to both Latinate and vernacular readers in the Middle Ages and beyond; that is, Geoffrey’s importance reaches beyond the Arthurian tradition. And second, while some Latin writers may have reacted negatively to Geoffrey’s work, others set about commenting on it, supplementing it, and even writing their own Latin Arthurian narratives. This chapter will explore the many ways that the Latin tradition, both medieval and early modern, interacted with Geoffrey’s myth-making through commentary, continuation, and outright creation.","PeriodicalId":206404,"journal":{"name":"A Companion to Geoffrey of Monmouth","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"A Companion to Geoffrey of Monmouth","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004410398_009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Gerald of Wales famously skewered the veracity of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s history in his story of Meilyr, an illiterate man who could spot falsehood, thanks to devils dancing on the offending tongues or pages. Meilyr’s tormentors could be driven away by the Gospel of John, but when a copy of the De gestis Britonum was placed on his lap, the devils returned in ever greater numbers. Gerald’s anecdote, written in his Itinerary Through Wales in the 1190s, is a witness to the incredible popularity of the DGB less than 50 years after Geoffrey’s death, and that popularity would only grow, as the story was taken up in the vernacular translations discussed in Chapter Eight. Gerald’s skepticism is of a piece with the reactions from other Latin authors dealt with in Chapter Six, but as the present chapter will show, the rise of Arthurian literature as a vernacular phenomenon, and the dismissal of Geoffrey’s work (and Arthur’s historicity) by some Anglo-Latin historians, give a potentially misleading impression about the importance that the DGB continued to have in the Latin tradition, well into the early modern period. First, while the centrality of the Arthuriad to the DGB cannot be overstated, Geoffrey is also responsible for promulgating several other highly popular and influential myths, of interest to both Latinate and vernacular readers in the Middle Ages and beyond; that is, Geoffrey’s importance reaches beyond the Arthurian tradition. And second, while some Latin writers may have reacted negatively to Geoffrey’s work, others set about commenting on it, supplementing it, and even writing their own Latin Arthurian narratives. This chapter will explore the many ways that the Latin tradition, both medieval and early modern, interacted with Geoffrey’s myth-making through commentary, continuation, and outright creation.
《不列颠女神》的拉丁文接受
威尔士的杰拉尔德(Gerald of Wales)在他的故事中驳斥了蒙茅斯的杰弗里(Geoffrey of Monmouth)所写历史的真实性。梅尔是一个不识字的人,他能识破谎言,多亏了魔鬼在令人讨厌的舌头或书页上跳舞。《约翰福音》可以赶走折磨梅尔的人,但当一本《不列颠之神》放在他腿上时,恶魔们又回来了,数量越来越多。杰拉德的轶事,写在他19世纪90年代的《威尔士游记》中,是杰弗里死后不到50年DGB令人难以置信的受欢迎程度的见证,而且随着这个故事在第八章讨论的白话翻译中被采用,这种受欢迎程度只会越来越高。杰拉德的怀疑与第六章中其他拉丁作家的反应是一致的,但正如本章将展示的那样,亚瑟王文学作为一种方言现象的兴起,以及一些盎格鲁-拉丁历史学家对杰弗里的作品(和亚瑟王的历史性)的不屑一顾,给人一种潜在的误导性印象,即DGB在拉丁传统中持续存在的重要性,一直到现代早期。首先,虽然亚瑟王在DGB中的中心地位不能被夸大,但杰弗里还负责传播其他几个非常流行和有影响力的神话,这些神话对中世纪及以后的拉丁语和方言读者都很感兴趣;也就是说,杰弗里的重要性超越了亚瑟王的传统。其次,虽然一些拉丁作家可能对杰弗里的作品持否定态度,但其他人开始评论,补充,甚至写自己的拉丁亚瑟王叙事。本章将探讨拉丁传统,包括中世纪和早期现代,通过评论,延续和直接创造与杰弗里的神话制作互动的许多方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信