tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post3811990885323555954..comments2023-10-12T02:21:40.102-07:00Comments on English Historical Fiction Authors: Battles and Bias in Bede’s BritainDebra Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03256313302199653185noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-87013843801357245062016-12-07T03:14:17.126-08:002016-12-07T03:14:17.126-08:00Interesting and thought-provoking points, MJ. I th...Interesting and thought-provoking points, MJ. I think perhaps we disagree on the role of the fiction writer. I don't think a novelist has a duty to be truthful to reality, only truthful to their story and themselves. The reader must surely know that they are reading fiction and therefore, if they choose to decide to believe what a novel contains is historical "truth", that is their concern and not that of the author.Matthew Harffyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12994917417232123639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-63028826849513375092016-12-03T07:34:09.208-08:002016-12-03T07:34:09.208-08:00Have not started it yet, but hope to soon! Might h...Have not started it yet, but hope to soon! Might have to borrow 'The Serpent Sword' from the library first. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-8464222066818399692016-12-03T07:31:52.252-08:002016-12-03T07:31:52.252-08:00Have not started it yet, but I hope to soon. Have not started it yet, but I hope to soon. English Ladyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17806974885775295349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-20332548142282014792016-12-03T01:27:45.061-08:002016-12-03T01:27:45.061-08:00Good post, Matthew. I find it interesting that the...Good post, Matthew. I find it interesting that there exists an underlying assumption that modern historians (used in its broadest sense of people who record and interpret history) are less biased and hence more reliable than ancient writers. What do folk think?<br /><br />As for Bede, he is a good collator of information. But his intent is clear: political motives of kings are secondary; the story of the sprouting and blossoming of Christianity among the 'gens anglorum' (an interestingly biased construction, we might say) is his chief concern, and I would argue that Bede's readers were meant to feel the same. So the glorious Oswald becomes the Anglo-Saxon version of the Old Testament Joshua or Abraham, the Lord's army fighting against a bigger army and defeating it in the name of Yahweh! <br /><br />If it's not creating Old Testament style narratives, then it's writing an account to rival anything in the Acts of the Apostles. For example, Bede's account of the arrival of the Gregorian mission to Kent and the conversion of King Ethellbert would sit rather well in the New Testament, I think.Monk's Modern Medieval Cuisinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09981404599559242828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-72703049374621482572016-12-03T01:26:57.671-08:002016-12-03T01:26:57.671-08:00Good post, Matthew. I find it interesting that the...Good post, Matthew. I find it interesting that there exists an underlying assumption that modern historians (used in its broadest sense of people who record and interpret history) are less biased and hence more reliable than ancient writers. What do folk think?<br /><br />As for Bede, he is a good collator of information. But his intent is clear: political motives of kings are secondary; the story of the sprouting and blossoming of Christianity among the 'gens anglorum' (an interestingly biased construction, we might say) is his chief concern, and I would argue that Bede's readers were meant to feel the same. So the glorious Oswald becomes the Anglo-Saxon version of the Old Testament Joshua or Abraham, the Lord's army fighting against a bigger army and defeating it in the name of Yahweh! <br /><br />If it's not creating Old Testament style narratives, then it's writing an account to rival anything in the Acts of the Apostles. For example, Bede's account of the arrival of the Gregorian mission to Kent and the conversion of King Ethellbert would sit rather well in the New Testament, I think.Monk's Modern Medieval Cuisinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09981404599559242828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-67885820803691001242016-12-02T12:09:14.845-08:002016-12-02T12:09:14.845-08:00There can never be a 'truth' about events ...There can never be a 'truth' about events that happened in seventh century England. It is, however, vital to understand the sources that people 'build' their interpretation of the past on. As such, bias is an important factor, but more so is an understanding of the time and space that have elapsed between the 'written' account of the event, and the event itself, and perhaps more importantly, the reason that the source has survived to the modern day. For instance, whether you believe in the existence of a now lost Mercian Chronicle or not, it's important to consider why it might not have survived i.e. Vikings burnt all of Mercia and if there had been a Mercian Chronicle - what would they have said about Edwin, Oswald and Oswiu? Why did Bede's words survive? Where did it survive? Do all editions mention the same details? Was it used to write the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle? How many editions have survived? <br />Also, it's very important that the historian and the fiction writer 'step away' from the causality of events - look at them from the viewpoints of the people involved. They didn't know when men were going to die? When battles would ultimately be met? <br />To be an excellent historian it's imperative that every single fact is questioned - even the fact that Bede gives Penda three great battles must be queried because there was power in the number three - look at the Welsh Triads. To be a good writer, it's necessary to play with the haziness of events, but without first being a historian, any fiction will fall short and readers will be pulled even deeper into the 'haze' of history, where 'truth' no longer exists - for they will 'understand' the story as presented by the fiction writer, not the historian! Fiction writers are, after all, merely continuing Bede's very long legacy, and even their motives must be questioned for bias. M J Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02542978339713221358noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-53335040779167611542016-12-02T02:03:27.410-08:002016-12-02T02:03:27.410-08:00Bede was a pretty unreliable source for why anythi...Bede was a pretty unreliable source for why anything happened because - as you say - he had his own agenda. Ironically, the biggest tragedy about the scarcity of written sources in the early English period is not what they leave out but the emphasis historians have put on what they actually do say.<br />Derek Birkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07707897736595813602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-85174288172056735092016-12-02T00:57:26.461-08:002016-12-02T00:57:26.461-08:00That's great! I hope you enjoyed it and I look...That's great! I hope you enjoyed it and I look forward to reading your review. :-)Matthew Harffyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12994917417232123639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2456802468539868519.post-69918314114093635982016-12-02T00:39:39.764-08:002016-12-02T00:39:39.764-08:00I requested Blood and Blade on Netgalley. I saw Ed...I requested Blood and Blade on Netgalley. I saw Edoardo Albert recommending it, and he usually has good taste- and frankly, I just love all things seventh century. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com