Great video. I am in the middle of trying to cross reference these sources myself. In Gildas, he says that the battle of Badon was 44 years and 1 month after the arrival of the Saxons. He had previously explained how the Saxons had been invited by Vortigern. I am paraphrasing here because I don't have the text to hand, but wouldn't this suggest an earlier chronology for Arthur than what you have suggested? I'm sure that you have addressed this already, but interested in your thoughts as it is fresh in the mind.
@@orgolwg It is Bede who gives that interpretation of the 44 years. In Gildas’ own text, it is ambiguous and famously difficult to interpret. One common interpretation (which I agree with) is that he was saying that it was 44 years ago, before he was writing, which was when he was born.
@calebhowells1116 I'm looking at the JA Giles edition of the text of De Excidio, it seems pretty clear that Badon was 44 years and a month after the landing of the Saxons (section 26). It may not be the best edition though, I'm going to check a few.
@ Yes, that’s what that translation says, but that translation is not the best. There are some more modern versions available, but like I said, there’s still some controversy about the correct reading. I don’t have access to it, but I hear that Winterbottom’s translation is supposed to be very good.
I thought that this would only be about St Samson as he can roughly be dated to the Third Church Council held in Paris around 557AD (other dates maybe available) under king Childebert. ‘Samson peccator episcopus’ who in 557 (or 555) signed the decrees of the council of Paris, I assume this is a claim and that the actual signed paperwork no longer exists?
Great video. I am in the middle of trying to cross reference these sources myself. In Gildas, he says that the battle of Badon was 44 years and 1 month after the arrival of the Saxons. He had previously explained how the Saxons had been invited by Vortigern. I am paraphrasing here because I don't have the text to hand, but wouldn't this suggest an earlier chronology for Arthur than what you have suggested? I'm sure that you have addressed this already, but interested in your thoughts as it is fresh in the mind.
@@orgolwg It is Bede who gives that interpretation of the 44 years. In Gildas’ own text, it is ambiguous and famously difficult to interpret. One common interpretation (which I agree with) is that he was saying that it was 44 years ago, before he was writing, which was when he was born.
@calebhowells1116 I'm looking at the JA Giles edition of the text of De Excidio, it seems pretty clear that Badon was 44 years and a month after the landing of the Saxons (section 26). It may not be the best edition though, I'm going to check a few.
@ Yes, that’s what that translation says, but that translation is not the best. There are some more modern versions available, but like I said, there’s still some controversy about the correct reading.
I don’t have access to it, but I hear that Winterbottom’s translation is supposed to be very good.
@@calebhowells1116 The bit about the Saxons arriving 44 years and a month before Badon isn't in the Winterbottom edition.
@@orgolwg That's interesting to know. What's the wording that he uses?
I thought that this would only be about St Samson as he can roughly be dated to the Third Church Council held in Paris around 557AD (other dates maybe available) under king Childebert. ‘Samson peccator episcopus’ who in 557 (or 555) signed the decrees of the council of Paris, I assume this is a claim and that the actual signed paperwork no longer exists?