Misplaced Pages

Draco Normannicus: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:01, 30 March 2015 editFuture Perfect at Sunrise (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators87,210 edits some more fixes← Previous edit Revision as of 22:50, 30 March 2015 edit undoDarkness Shines (talk | contribs)31,762 edits Reverted to revision 654075076 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk): Source says otherwise. (TW)Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{cleanup|reason=logical coherence, grammar and typography|date=March 2015}} {{cleanup|reason=logical coherence, grammar and typography|date=March 2015}}
The '''''Draco Normannicus''''' is a ] written circa 1167-1169 by ] (Etienne de Rouen), a Norman ] monk from ].{{sfn|Echard|1998|p=85}} The ''Draco'' (considered an ] by some critics, such as Irene Harris and Elizabeth Kuhl) was based largely on the work of ] and ] '']''. {{sfn|Tatlock|1993|pp=2-3}} The poem itself is unfinished, and also adapts parts of the '']'' by ].{{sfn|Bates|2013|p=180}} Considered Stephen's principle work it survives in the ]. In the manuscript the poem runs to nearly 4,400 lines, though it has lost at least two passages, estimated at around one hundred verses each. The manuscript was initially anonymous, however it has been accepted for over one hundred years that Stephen is the undisputed author.{{sfn|Tatlock|1993|p=2}} The '''''Draco Normannicus''''' is a ] written circa 1167-1169 by ] (Etienne de Rouen), a Norman ] monk from ].{{sfn|Echard|1998|p=85}} The ''Draco'' (considered an ] by some critics, such as Irene Harris and Elizabeth Kuhl) was based largely on the work of ] and ] '']''. {{sfn|Tatlock|1993|pp=2-3}} The poem itself is unfinished, and also adapts parts of the '']'' by ].{{sfn|Bates|2013|p=180}} Considered Stephen`s principle work it survives in the ]. In the manuscript the poem runs to nearly forty-four hundred lines, though it has lost at least two passages, estimated at around one hundred verses each. The manuscript was initially anonymous, however it has been accepted for over one hundred years that Stephen is the undisputed author.{{sfn|Tatlock|1993|p=2}}


The conventional modern form of the title, ''Draco Normannicus'', was coined by Richard Howlett in his edition published in 1885. In the manuscript it occurs only in a different word order, as ''Normannicus Draco''. Howlett also translated the title as "the Norman Standard", rather than literally as "Norman Dragon",{{sfn|Leake Day|2005|p=48}} as the ''Draco'' is named for the dragon shaped banners which the ] followed into battle.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=421}} It is a chronicle of the Normans' history, from their arrival in the former kingdom of ],{{sfn|Harris|1994|p=112}} and the founding of Normandy up to the events which occurred during Stephen's life. There is an emphasise on the territorial conflicts which occurred between ] and ].{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=422}} The correct{{failed verification|date=March 2015}} wording of the title is ''Normannicus Draco'' (The Norman Dragon), Richard Howlett titled the manuscript ''Draco Normannicus'' though that order of words is not in the manuscript, Howlett also translated the title to ''"The Norman Standard"''. Although the manuscript in the Vatican gives the correct title, Howlett`s word order has now become the commonly used title for the poem.{{sfn|Leake Day|2005|p=48}} The ''Draco'' is named for the dragon shaped banners which the ] followed into battle.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=421}} It is a chronicle of the Normans history, from their arrival in the former kingdom of ],{{sfn|Harris|1994|p=112}} and the founding of Normandy up to the events which occurred during Stephen`s life. There is an emphasise on the territorial conflicts which occurred between ] and ].{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=422}}


== Historical characters mentioned == == Historical characters mentioned ==


], daughter to ], later to become the Empress Matilda after her marriage to ], becomes a central point during the narrative, as well as Stephen's vision of the dynasty and historical identity of the Norman people.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=421}} The work gives a detailed account on the funeral rites of Matilda, carried out by the archbishop of Rouen, ]. ], daughter to ], later to become the Empress Matilda after her marriage to ] becomes a central point during the narrative, as well as Stephen's vision of the dynasty and historical identity of the Norman people.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=421}} The work gives a detailed account on the funeral rites of Matilda, carried out by the archbishop of Rouen, ]. Two lines from the epitaph became particularly notable.{{sfn|Chibnall|2004|p=1}}
<blockquote>
Ortu magna, viro major, sed maxima partu, Hic jacet Henrici filia, sponsa, parens.{{efn|"Great by birth, greater by marriage, greatest in her offspring, here lies the daughter, wife, and mother of Henry"{{sfn|Chibnall|2004|p=1}} }}</blockquote>


In the poem, Stephen names ] definitively as the sister of Arthur, and ruler of the isle of ]. He also makes mention that Morgan is immortal,{{efn|nympha perennis (eternal nymph){{sfn|Hebert|2013|p=31}} }} and has the ability to grant immortality to Arthur with the aid of the herbs found on the isle.{{sfn|Hebert|2013|pp=31-32}} In previous epics Morgan had not been named as sister to Arthur. Only in in ] poem '']'' was Morgan transformed from sorceress to sister, and this innovation was followed by Stephen in the ''Draco''.{{sfn|Farina|2010|p=96}} In the poem, Stephen names ] definitively as the sister of Arthur, and ruler of the isle of ]. He also makes mention that Morgan is immortal,{{efn|nympha perennis (eternal nymph){{sfn|Hebert|2013|p=31}} }} and has the ability to grant immortality to Arthur with the aid of the herbs found on the isle.{{sfn|Hebert|2013|pp=31-32}} In previous epics Morgan had not been named as sister to arthur, however in ] poem '']'' Morgan is transformed from sorceress to sister, this innovation was followed by Stephen in the ''Draco''.{{sfn|Farina|2010|p=96}}


== Reception == == Reception ==


According to Martin Aurell, Stephen is the only author of the Arthurian legends known to have had a direct relationship with Henry II. Aurell believes that Stephen, growing up at a time when the Normans were committed to gaining independence from France, was completely devoted to the cause of Henry II and that this ideology is clearly visible in the ''Draco''. Aurell states the poem has "the character of a piece of propaganda totally committed to the cause of Henry II" and that it includes a "violent diatribe against ]", which Stephen wrote shortly before Becket was murdered in ]. There are extensive passages devoted to the funeral rites of Matilda, who lived out her last twenty years at the priory of ], on the outskirts of Rouen.{{sfn|Aurell|2007|p=380}} According to Martin Aurell, Stephen is the only author of the Arthurian legends which is known to have had a direct relationship with Henry II. Growing up at a time when the Normans were committed to gaining independence from France, Aurell believes that Stephen was completely devoted to the cause of Henry II and that this ideology is clearly visible in the ''Draco''. Aurell states the poem has "the character of a piece of propaganda totally committed to the cause of Henry II" and that it includes a "violent diatribe against ]", which Stephen wrote shortly before Becket was murdered in ]. There are extensive passages devoted to the funeral rites of Matilda, who lived out her last twenty years at the priory of ], on the outskirts of Rouen.{{sfn|Aurell|2007|p=380}}


Elizabeth Kuhl believes that as there are only one extant copy of the work remaining, it shows that the poem received little interest at the time it was written. However she states that assumptions on the meanings of how writing on historical matters should be presented led to the ''Draco'' being evaluated negatively, but in more recent times it is now accepted that "all historical writing arranges and makes sense out of its past and present in ways that are not inherent to events themselves". Initially the ''Draco'' and received no attention from scholars as under what was once assumed how history ought to be written, it was deemed a failure, but when viewed from the latter perspective it is, according the Kuhl, an excellent example.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=422}} Kuhl also states that another copy, which has since been lost was known to have been made.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|pp=422-433}} Elizabeth Kuhl believes that as there are only one extant copy of the work remaining, it shows that the poem received little interest at the time it was written. However she states that assumptions on the meanings of how writing on historical matters should be presented led to the ''Draco'' being evaluated negatively, but in more recent times it is now accepted that "all historical writing arranges and makes sense out of its past and present in ways that are not inherent to events themselves". Initially the ''Draco'' and received no attention from scholars as under what was once assumed how history ought to be written, it was deemed a failure, but when viewed from the latter perspective it is, according the Kuhl, an excellent example.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|p=422}} Kuhl also states that another copy, which has since been lost was known to have been made.{{sfn|Kuhl|2014|pp=422-433}}

Revision as of 22:50, 30 March 2015

This article may require cleanup to meet Misplaced Pages's quality standards. The specific problem is: logical coherence, grammar and typography. Please help improve this article if you can. (March 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The Draco Normannicus is a chronicle written circa 1167-1169 by Stephen of Rouen (Etienne de Rouen), a Norman Benedictine monk from Bec-Hellouin. The Draco (considered an epic by some critics, such as Irene Harris and Elizabeth Kuhl) was based largely on the work of Robert of Torigni and William of Jumièges Gesta Normannorum Ducum. The poem itself is unfinished, and also adapts parts of the Roman de Brut by Wace. Considered Stephen`s principle work it survives in the Vatican Library. In the manuscript the poem runs to nearly forty-four hundred lines, though it has lost at least two passages, estimated at around one hundred verses each. The manuscript was initially anonymous, however it has been accepted for over one hundred years that Stephen is the undisputed author.

The correct wording of the title is Normannicus Draco (The Norman Dragon), Richard Howlett titled the manuscript Draco Normannicus though that order of words is not in the manuscript, Howlett also translated the title to "The Norman Standard". Although the manuscript in the Vatican gives the correct title, Howlett`s word order has now become the commonly used title for the poem. The Draco is named for the dragon shaped banners which the Normans followed into battle. It is a chronicle of the Normans history, from their arrival in the former kingdom of Neustria, and the founding of Normandy up to the events which occurred during Stephen`s life. There is an emphasise on the territorial conflicts which occurred between Henry II and Louis VII.

Historical characters mentioned

Matilda of England, daughter to King Henry I of England, later to become the Empress Matilda after her marriage to Henry V becomes a central point during the narrative, as well as Stephen's vision of the dynasty and historical identity of the Norman people. The work gives a detailed account on the funeral rites of Matilda, carried out by the archbishop of Rouen, Rotrou. Two lines from the epitaph became particularly notable.

Ortu magna, viro major, sed maxima partu, Hic jacet Henrici filia, sponsa, parens.

In the poem, Stephen names Morgan Le Fay definitively as the sister of Arthur, and ruler of the isle of Avalon. He also makes mention that Morgan is immortal, and has the ability to grant immortality to Arthur with the aid of the herbs found on the isle. In previous epics Morgan had not been named as sister to arthur, however in Chrétien de Troyes poem Erec and Enide Morgan is transformed from sorceress to sister, this innovation was followed by Stephen in the Draco.

Reception

According to Martin Aurell, Stephen is the only author of the Arthurian legends which is known to have had a direct relationship with Henry II. Growing up at a time when the Normans were committed to gaining independence from France, Aurell believes that Stephen was completely devoted to the cause of Henry II and that this ideology is clearly visible in the Draco. Aurell states the poem has "the character of a piece of propaganda totally committed to the cause of Henry II" and that it includes a "violent diatribe against Thomas Becket", which Stephen wrote shortly before Becket was murdered in Canterbury Cathedral. There are extensive passages devoted to the funeral rites of Matilda, who lived out her last twenty years at the priory of Notre-Dame-du-Pré, on the outskirts of Rouen.

Elizabeth Kuhl believes that as there are only one extant copy of the work remaining, it shows that the poem received little interest at the time it was written. However she states that assumptions on the meanings of how writing on historical matters should be presented led to the Draco being evaluated negatively, but in more recent times it is now accepted that "all historical writing arranges and makes sense out of its past and present in ways that are not inherent to events themselves". Initially the Draco and received no attention from scholars as under what was once assumed how history ought to be written, it was deemed a failure, but when viewed from the latter perspective it is, according the Kuhl, an excellent example. Kuhl also states that another copy, which has since been lost was known to have been made.

Footnotes

  1. "Great by birth, greater by marriage, greatest in her offspring, here lies the daughter, wife, and mother of Henry"
  2. nympha perennis (eternal nymph)

References

  1. Echard 1998, p. 85.
  2. Tatlock 1993, pp. 2–3.
  3. Bates 2013, p. 180.
  4. Tatlock 1993, p. 2.
  5. Leake Day 2005, p. 48.
  6. ^ Kuhl 2014, p. 421.
  7. Harris 1994, p. 112.
  8. ^ Kuhl 2014, p. 422.
  9. ^ Chibnall 2004, p. 1.
  10. Hebert 2013, p. 31.
  11. Hebert 2013, pp. 31–32.
  12. Farina 2010, p. 96.
  13. Aurell 2007, p. 380.
  14. Kuhl 2014, pp. 422–433.

External links

  • Stephen of Rouen: "Draco Normannicus". Ed. Richard Howlett. In: Chronicles of the reigns of Stephen, Henry II., and Richard I, Vol. II. London: Longman, 1885. p. 589–786. (Full text archived at archive.org )

Bibliography

Categories:
Draco Normannicus: Difference between revisions Add topic