The Fredegar Chronicles Roger Collins 1 Table of Contents Abbreviations Bibliography Introduction: One Work or Two? Part One – The Fredegar Compilation. century that he was so called, though Fredegar is an authentic. Prankish name. He left behind him what, in a word, may be called a chronicle; and it is because. The fourth book of the Chronicle of Fredegar: with its continuations / translated from the Latin with introduction and notes by J. M. Wallace-Hadrill.
|Published (Last):||23 July 2017|
|PDF File Size:||5.69 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.19 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Chronicle of Fredegar
However, the Arnulfing and Austrasian sympathies of Fredegar can be exaggerated. Nov 22, Miriam rated it it was amazing Shelves: A third, further cyronicle version appeared in ; cchronicle the Bibliography, above p. His Spanish accounts tend, not very surprisingly, to be concerned with royal successions; though Fredegar could pick up interesting incidental details, such as the advanced age of king Chindasuinthwho was said to be ninety at the time of his death.
Indeed, there is no evidence to suggest he was even aware of the manuscript itself let alone of this note. To download campus access dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your NU ID and password.
The Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar: With Its Continuations. by J.M. Wallace-Hadrill
Sharon rated it it was amazing Mar 28, However, small as the sample may be, it can be said that in the spellings of names and most other points of comparison, the Basel fragments consistently follow the practice of the St. That Fredegar was actively interested in collecting and adding further lists to those he found in his copy of the Liber Generationis, even when this already contained equivalent materials, can be seen from the way he included several such items between the conclusion of the latter and the start of the Eusebius- 97 Fredegar, ed.
By this view the short final section that covers the years from toshould rightly be seen as a continuation; the only one to be associated with this work.
However, I will assert that is up to Wallace-Hadrill’s usual standard of excellence, a clear and readable translation with useful and thorough notes, of an interesting and lively historical document. Each folio appears to have been ruled individually. Appendix item sive liber XI fredwgar et decem annorum historiam continens alio quodam autore quorum gratia totum opus recudimus. For one od, in the listing of authorities in that prologue Isidore is placed between the ‘certain wise man’ and Gregory of Tours, whereas in the Paris manuscript his work comes at the very end, even after Fredegar’s own section dealing with the years up to ; a date nearly three decades later than that of the the last item contained in Isidore’s chronicle.
XIIpp. The author is unknown and the attribution to Fredegar dates only from the 16th century. Other than for the dismounting of the Physiologus folios, the MS is in a good state of preservation, though there are some flaws in the vellum.
In other words, our perception of Fredegar is chroniclee very different one from our scholarly predecessors of the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries. As previously stated there is no clarity or consistency in the designation of the components of the compilation in this manuscript.
Gallen and the other at Reichenau. The codex is currently in a 17th century clasped binding. The problem posed by the presence of Isidore’s chronicle in the Paris manuscript must thus be resolved by agreeing that this was indeed an independent component and was not included by the scribe as part of the exemplar from which he drew his Fredegar material, but this goes nowhere towards explaining why Fredegar mentioned a debt to Isidore in the preface referring to chronicles he had used.
This is significant if it be accepted that he is to be identified with a certain ‘Jonatus’ who became abbot of Marchiennes, near Saint- Katalog vol.
If so, it may not have been as complete as the one preserved in MS Phillippsor he may have not have bothered with some of its contents. It is known from its preface that Jonas wrote his account of Columbanus d. Finally, on folio v, there comes the un-interpolated text of the first version of the chronicle of Isidore of Seville, under the heading: A Bibliographical HistoryLeiden: Adela added it Jan 14, Because this material has in itself little value for the subjects it relates to, Fredegar’s use of the Liber Generationis and his adding to it of further lists he took from other sources has aroused limited scholarly interest, and one modern edition has omitted all of this section of his work.
Conober, rendered as Coneber in the other MSS of the class: Skip to main content. As just mentioned his penchant for inserting small items of new or supplementary information into the texts, as well as abridging them is one of his most distinctive features as an author or editor. Fredegar did not share the kind of concerns expressed by Bede in the preface to his Historia Ecclesiastica about the need to guarantee the authenticity of his narrative.
Typically, Fredegar has interpolated a short section of Gregory of Tours’ Historiae into the middle of them, to facilitate the transition from the material relating to Theoderic to that concerned chroniclle the age of Justinian. Likewise, amongst other sources for this event, neither Jordanes nor Procopius, both writing in the mid-sixth century, mention Barcelona.
I don’t have the entirety of this work, only the Continuations, which begin on page 80 with Clovis’ marriage to Baldechildis. From the same period comes frredegar heading in Caroline minuscule written continuously across the top of folios 1 v and 2r: To make this possible and to facilitate a better understanding of this important text more generally, it may be necessary fredegqr take the radical step of regarding what is normally treated as a single work, to which has been added some later phases of continuation, as actually being two quite separate texts, albeit containing several items in common in their contents.
In general the evidence seems to suggest that Fredegar himself intended a dividing up of the contents of the compilation into four or more likely five books, but this was never completed.
Grimoald, who had been executed shortly before the compilation was being put together and whose career was potentially fatal to his family’s political rise, has been seen as an unlikely subject for praise if Fredegar was not in favour of the Arnulfing dynasty as a whole.
Gallen and Reichenau manuscripts, and to a geographical home, if not as closely defined, then within the same general region. Thus, for example, if it is believed that the work was written by a single frwdegar aroundhow far can any reliance be placed on his account of the events of the s, long before it could be based on his first-hand knowledge? Similarly, the cchronicle section of the compilation, covering the period from the completion of Gregory’s sixth book in up to the events of is generally regarded as representing Fredegar’s own work and his personal contribution to the collection of historical materials that he had assembled.
While Bruno Krusch doubted that Isidore’s chronicle ever formed a distinct component of Fredgar’s compilation, other scholars remained convinced that it was indeed an integral part of it. In the number of years it assigns to each pope, Fredegar’s papal list is close to the Liber Pontificalis, but there are some variations and omissions.
So, while there is definite evidence of a proposed five book organisation of the contents, the archetype of these manuscripts must have been even less clear than MS Paris BN lat. It is not possible to know what first inspired Fredegar to put together the collection of texts and new materials from which his chronicle was made.
“THE “HISTORIA EPITOMATA” (THIRD BOOK) OF THE “CHRONICLE” OF FREDEGAR: ” by JANE ELLEN WOODRUFF
The last part of the work, covering the years from to is almost entirely made up of new material not to be found in any other context, and some or most of this is normally thought of as representing the compiler or compilers’ own original composition. Also containing within itself 3 Roger Collins, ‘Deception and misrepresentation in early eighth-century Frankish historiography: The final folio of the MS is free standing.
The text itself presents an obvious chronological structuring by the regnal years of a number of named Merovingian kings.
But this issue was addressed in an article by Alvar Erikson, published in Sweden inand which effectively undermined Hellmann’s philological arguments. As Guntramn ruled from tothe years from to could perfectly sensibly be seen as the final or declining period of his reign, without having any implications for the future of his kingdom. Abdelkoudous Fayez is currently reading it Sep 19, Not until Chlotar’s death in does Fredegar begin dating by the regnal years of Dagobert, which, however he counts from the king’s installation in Austrasia in