
Henry of Huntingdon (''c''. 1080–1160) was an English historians in the Middle Ages and archdeacon of Huntingdon. Most well known for his ''Historia Anglorum'' (''History of the English'') covering the period from the Roman invasion in 43 BC to the accession of Henry II of England in 1154. It has been estimated that about seventy-five percent derives directly from others' work through direct quotation, translation or summarization, of which about forty percent comes from Bede's ''Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum'' for the earlier period. It is 'original' for the years 1126–1154, some of the events of which he was often a personal witness, including the reigns of Henry I and Henry I, and The Anarchy of Stephen of England. His history is full of dramatic stories and was extremely popular and influential with other historians. Yet his work's popularity should not diminish the sense of the Historia as rigorous history, nor of its careful crafting as a contribution to ongoing political debates about ethnicity, nationality, and the justification of rule over England and Wales. Henry segmented English history according to the five great invasions by the Romans, Picts and Scots, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, and Normans. The Historia was organized, in its 1135 version, into seven books entitled: #The Rule of the Romans in Britain #The Coming of the English #The Conversion of the English #The Rule of the English #The Danish Wars #The Coming of the Normans #The Rule of the Normans Later versions of the Historia included up to 3 additional books, on saints' lives and other miracles (including a spectacularly gory description of the rotting of Henry I's corpse), and a summary of portions of Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae. Henry coined the periodization term Heptarchy. ==Sources== * Diana Greenway (translator), ''Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon: Historia Anglorum - The History of the English People 1000-1154 (Oxford World's Classics) '', Oxford University Press, 2002, ISBN 0192840754. * Thomas Forester (translator), ''The Chronicle of Henry of Huntingdon'', London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853; George Bell and Sons, 1876. * [http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/henry-hunt1.html ''The Chronicle of Henry of Huntingdon''], online excerpts. ==External links== * [http://www.bartleby.com/211/0907.html Latin Chroniclers from the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Centuries: Henry of Huntingdon] from ''The Cambridge History of English and American Literature'', Volume I, 1907–1921. Medieval historians Medieval literature
:contribution to ongoing political debates about ethnicity, nationality, and the justification of rule over England and Wales. Not sure I understand what this means, nations did not yet exist, ethnicity in terms of the 11th century? --User:Stbalbach 16:53, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC) -'natio' is a term that does exixt by the 12th century of Henry's writing, although certainly not in modern nation-state conceptions. But my point is that Henry picks up Bede's pro-English/anti-British (welsh) agenda, and adapts it to a post-Conquest model valourising the Normans. That is, he writes a history with the Conquests as a teleological, historical inevitability. But this inter-ethnic debate (English/Welsh/Norman) is also a continual point of reference, discussion, anxiety, and ideological agenda for William of Malmesbury, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Gerald of Wales, basically _everyone_ writing history at the time. Something along those lines is what I'm trying to communicate. --User:Lutefish (or, sig-less me...) Yeah, i understand what your saying, there was a big resurgence in interest in (re)discovering Englands past after the Norman Conquest. 19th century historians (such as Stubbs) believed it was a nationalistic/ethnic reasons such as you have described here (19th century was big on viewing the middle ages as the creation of national ethnicity). There are more recent views, I wrote a quick blurb about it in English historians in the Middle Ages: :After the Norman Conquest there was an explosion of interest in English history. It has been theorized this was due in part to the native English desire to reclaim their cultural identity from the debacle of 1066. As well the new Norman rulers were interested in discovering who it was they had reigned over, which fueled demand for legends of Englands early Kings, such as Geoffrey’s King Arthur. (this is sourced from Robert Bartletts ''England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings'' (2000) and I could probably dig up more expansion on it). I tend to like this explanation better as it speaks more to the people of the time, then to our own nationalistic interpretations, the concept of a nation did not emerge until the 14th-16th centuries and national ethnicity much later still. --User:Stbalbach 04:07, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC) Bartlett is usually exceptionally good, but I have to say the quote/summary your provide there (and the book, generally) is disappointing. The book, I feel, at once shows of Bartlett's vast knowledge of the field, and his ability to analyse details and tease out connections brilliantly, yet still disappoints in what I feel are its rather banal conclusions. For the summary you offer, Geoffrey's Arthur doesn't hit the historiographical battlefield as an English king until the end of the 13th C; the transgressive aspect of Geoffrey's HRB is precisely the assertion of Welsh historical legitimacy and sovereignty. As far as the 'rediscovery' of the English past post-Conquest, I tend to steer away from such explanations. 1066 may have been traumatic, but was hardly sufficient to force a 'reclamation' of a cultural identity ('Englishness') that never disappeared; the question, as I see it, was how hybridity, multilingualism, and multiple ethnic identities (especially those intersecting the lines of power in State and Church) could be performed and played out. I'm happy to ditch 'nationality' if you feel (probably rightly) the term is far too overdetermined and fraught to convey the fairly straightforward sense in which I'm trying to use it, but I do think ethnicity is a key concept here. --[User: Lutefish|Lutefish]] 08:53, 28 Feb 2005 (EST)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Henry_of_Huntingdon:
Henry_of_Huntingdon
Henry_of_Huntingdon
Henry of Huntingdon
Henry of Huntingdon (''c''. 1080–1160) was an English historians in the Middle Ages and archdeacon of Huntingdon. Most well known for his ''Historia Anglorum'' (''History of the English'') covering the period from the Roman invasion in 43 BC to the accession of Henry II of England in 1154. It has been estimated that about seventy-five percent derives directly from others' work through direct quotation, translation or summarization, of which about forty percent comes from Bede's ''Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum'' for the earlier period. It is 'original' for the years 1126–1154, some of the events of which he was often a personal witness, including the reigns of Henry I and Henry I, and The Anarchy of Stephen of England. His history is full of dramatic stories and was extremely popular and influential with other historians. Yet his work's popularity should not diminish the sense of the Historia as rigorous history, nor of its careful crafting as a contribution to ongoing political debates about ethnicity, nationality, and the justification of rule over England and Wales. Henry segmented English history according to the five great invasions by the Romans, Picts and Scots, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, and Normans. The Historia was organized, in its 1135 version, into seven books entitled: #The Rule of the Romans in Britain #The Coming of the English #The Conversion of the English #The Rule of the English #The Danish Wars #The Coming of the Normans #The Rule of the Normans Later versions of the Historia included up to 3 additional books, on saints' lives and other miracles (including a spectacularly gory description of the rotting of Henry I's corpse), and a summary of portions of Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae. Henry coined the periodization term Heptarchy. ==Sources== * Diana Greenway (translator), ''Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon: Historia Anglorum - The History of the English People 1000-1154 (Oxford World's Classics) '', Oxford University Press, 2002, ISBN 0192840754. * Thomas Forester (translator), ''The Chronicle of Henry of Huntingdon'', London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853; George Bell and Sons, 1876. * [http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/henry-hunt1.html ''The Chronicle of Henry of Huntingdon''], online excerpts. ==External links== * [http://www.bartleby.com/211/0907.html Latin Chroniclers from the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Centuries: Henry of Huntingdon] from ''The Cambridge History of English and American Literature'', Volume I, 1907–1921. Medieval historians Medieval literature
Henry of Huntingdon
:contribution to ongoing political debates about ethnicity, nationality, and the justification of rule over England and Wales. Not sure I understand what this means, nations did not yet exist, ethnicity in terms of the 11th century? --User:Stbalbach 16:53, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC) -'natio' is a term that does exixt by the 12th century of Henry's writing, although certainly not in modern nation-state conceptions. But my point is that Henry picks up Bede's pro-English/anti-British (welsh) agenda, and adapts it to a post-Conquest model valourising the Normans. That is, he writes a history with the Conquests as a teleological, historical inevitability. But this inter-ethnic debate (English/Welsh/Norman) is also a continual point of reference, discussion, anxiety, and ideological agenda for William of Malmesbury, Geoffrey of Monmouth, Gerald of Wales, basically _everyone_ writing history at the time. Something along those lines is what I'm trying to communicate. --User:Lutefish (or, sig-less me...) Yeah, i understand what your saying, there was a big resurgence in interest in (re)discovering Englands past after the Norman Conquest. 19th century historians (such as Stubbs) believed it was a nationalistic/ethnic reasons such as you have described here (19th century was big on viewing the middle ages as the creation of national ethnicity). There are more recent views, I wrote a quick blurb about it in English historians in the Middle Ages: :After the Norman Conquest there was an explosion of interest in English history. It has been theorized this was due in part to the native English desire to reclaim their cultural identity from the debacle of 1066. As well the new Norman rulers were interested in discovering who it was they had reigned over, which fueled demand for legends of Englands early Kings, such as Geoffrey’s King Arthur. (this is sourced from Robert Bartletts ''England Under the Norman and Angevin Kings'' (2000) and I could probably dig up more expansion on it). I tend to like this explanation better as it speaks more to the people of the time, then to our own nationalistic interpretations, the concept of a nation did not emerge until the 14th-16th centuries and national ethnicity much later still. --User:Stbalbach 04:07, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC) Bartlett is usually exceptionally good, but I have to say the quote/summary your provide there (and the book, generally) is disappointing. The book, I feel, at once shows of Bartlett's vast knowledge of the field, and his ability to analyse details and tease out connections brilliantly, yet still disappoints in what I feel are its rather banal conclusions. For the summary you offer, Geoffrey's Arthur doesn't hit the historiographical battlefield as an English king until the end of the 13th C; the transgressive aspect of Geoffrey's HRB is precisely the assertion of Welsh historical legitimacy and sovereignty. As far as the 'rediscovery' of the English past post-Conquest, I tend to steer away from such explanations. 1066 may have been traumatic, but was hardly sufficient to force a 'reclamation' of a cultural identity ('Englishness') that never disappeared; the question, as I see it, was how hybridity, multilingualism, and multiple ethnic identities (especially those intersecting the lines of power in State and Church) could be performed and played out. I'm happy to ditch 'nationality' if you feel (probably rightly) the term is far too overdetermined and fraught to convey the fairly straightforward sense in which I'm trying to use it, but I do think ethnicity is a key concept here. --[User: Lutefish|Lutefish]] 08:53, 28 Feb 2005 (EST)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
H
HA | HB | HC | HD | HE | HF | HG | HI | HJ | HK | HL | HM | HN | HO | HP | HR | HS | HT | HU | HW | HX | HY | HZ |Words begining with Henry_of_Huntingdon:
Henry_of_Huntingdon
Henry_of_Huntingdon
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
