Podstrony

• Index
• Charles M. Robinson III The Diaries of John Gregory Bourke. Volume 4, July 3, 1880 May 22,1881 (2009)
• Jeffrey Schultz Critical Companion To John Steinbeck, A Literary Reference To His Life And Work (2005)
• Marsden John Kroniki Ellie 01 Wojna się skończyła, walka wcišż trwa
• John Leguizamo Pimps, Hos, Playa Hatas, and All the Rest of My Hollywood Friends (2006)
• Fred Bergsten, John Williamson Dollar Overvaluation and the World Economy (2003)
• Kos Kala, Selby John Moc aloha i wiedza huny (2)
• Kryptografia
• Katie Brazelton Character Makeover
• Balch James F Super antyoksydanty
• Makuszynski Kornel Dusze z papieru (SCAN dal 1022)
• zanotowane.pl
• doc.pisz.pl
• pdf.pisz.pl
• radioaktywni.htw.pl

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Evroul, and there he spent his life.The atmosphere inmonastery was to study.It had an extensive library, andOrderic had at his command good sources of information, though hehimself took no part in the events he describes.He paid some visits toEngland in which he obtained information, and as he always looked uponhimself as an Englishman, his history naturally includes England as well asNormandy.He began to write about I 123, and from that date on he maybe regarded as a contemporary authority, but from the Conquest the bookhas in many places the value of an original account.It is an exasperatingbook to use because of the extreme in which the facts are arranged,or left without arrangement, the account of a single incident being often intwo widely separated places.But the book rises much above the level ofmere annals, and while perhaps not reaching that of the philosophical his-torian, gives the reader more of the feeling that a living man is writing aboutliving men than is usual in medieval books.It reveals in the writer alively imagination, which, while it does not affect the value of thenarrative, gives it a pictorial setting.interest in the de-tails of life and in the personality of the men of his time imparts a stronghuman element to the book; nor is the least useful feature of the work thewriter s critical judgment on men and events, generally on moral grounds,but often assisting our knowledge of character and the causes of events.Rolls Series, becomes original, to our present knowledge at least, withthe closing of the manuscript of the Saxon chronicle which he had beenfollowing, probably in and his narrative is contemporary from theyears of that decade to the coronation of Henry II.He adds, however,surprisingly little to our knowledge of the twenty-five years during which hewas writing the history of his own time.He had an active imaginationand loved to embellish the facts which he had learned with little detailsthat he thought likely to be true.The main value of the original portionof his history lies in its confirmation of what we learn from other sources.The chronicle of FLORENCE OF W ORCESTER (B.Thorpe,is continued by John of Worcester as a source of primaryimportance to and by others afterwards.Florence himself died inbut at what point before this his own work breaks off it does notseem possible to determine.There is at no point any real change in thecharacter of the chronicle.The continental chronicle which Florence hadbeen using as the groundwork of his account, that of Marianusends with but his manuscript of the Saxon chronicle probably wenton for some distance further, and about the time of Florence s death muchuse is made of Eadmer.The account is annalistic throughout, even in thefull treatment of Stephen s reign; but in its original portions, or whatseem to us original, it has the value of a contemporary record, giving usfurther insight into the feelings of the English in William s reign and thefeelings and sufferings of the people of the south-west in Stephen s time.An interesting chronicle of Stephen s reign is that by an unknown authorknown as the (R.Howlett, Rolls Series, ofand iii, which existed at the begin-ning of the seventeenth century in a single manuscript since lost.It hasbeen conjectured with some probability that it was written by a chaplain ofthe king s brother, Henry, Bishop of Winchester.Certainly the authorhad very good sources of information, writes often from personal know-ledge, and though a strong partisan of Stephen s, is not blind to hisweaknesses and faults.While the first part of the narrative was notwritten precisely at the date, the work has all the value of a contemporaryaccount from and from to 1147 it is almost our only authority.The manuscript from which it was first printed in had been injured,and the book as it now exists breaks off in the middle of a sentence in OF (R.Rolls Series.ofetc., iv, spent his life as a monk in Normandy! in the abbey ofI and afterwards as abbot of the monastery of Mont-Saint-Michel.Hemade apparently but two to England, of which we know no particu-lars, but as a monk of Normandy, living in two of most famous monas-teries, he was interested in the doings of the English kings, particularly intheir continental policy, and more especially in deeds of the two greatHenries.He began to write as a young man, and by about thehe reached the age of thirty, he seems to have completed his account ofreign of Henry I, which he wrote as an additional, an eighth? book theof of William of His more extendedchronicle he had begun before leaving and he carried the work withhim to Mont-Saint-Michel.Down to I this is the chronicle of Sigebertof with additions, and it becomes a wholly original chronicleonly with I Though of great value for the knowledge of espe-cially between I and I the chronicle never rises above the characterof annals and was carelessly constructed, especially as to chronology; itwas perhaps worked up by monks of his house from a somewhat roughfirst draft of memoranda by the abbot.The book closes at the end ofI shortly before the death of Robert.The writer of the twelfth century who comes nearest to looking uponthe task of the historian as a modern writer would is WILLIAM OF(R.Rolls Series, of etc., and ii,His purpose is not merely to record what happened, arather clear conception of the duty of the historian to be accurate and touse the best sources, but to make a selection of the facts, using the moreimportant and those that will show the drift and meaning of the age, andcombining them into something like an explanatory account of the periodand this he does with constant critical judgment of men and measures andgreat breadth of historical view.His whichmay be said to begin with the reign of Stephen, after a brief introductionon the three preceding reigns, appears to have been composed as a wholewithin two or three years at the close of the twelfth century.The proba-bility is that no part of it is original, in the sense that it was written solelyfirst-hand knowledge but the sources from which he derived his ma-terial for the period from 1154 to 1173, and at later dates, have not comedown to us, and he must have drawn from some personal knowledge inthe last portion of his work.It is throughout, however, a critical com-mentary of great value on the history, and an interpretation of it by a manof clear, impartial, and broad judgment, and one not too far removed fromthe time of which he wrote to be out of sympathy with it.For the last half of the reign of Henry II we have the advantage of avaluable and in some respects very interesting and attractive chronicle.This is the associated with the name of BENE-DICT OF PETERBOROUGH (Rolls Series, 2 Benedict, however, wasnot the author, and no certain evidence as to who he was can be derived fromany source, nor does the chronicle itself supply many of those incidentalAPPENDIX453cations from which it is often possible to learn much regarding the authorof an anonymous book.The tentative suggestion of Bishop Stubbs thatit may have been written by Richard Neal, the author of theis now generally regarded as inadmissible.The work beginsin I 170, and from a date a year or two later is evidently contemporaneousto its close in with perhaps a slight interruption at 1177 [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]