Royal Responsibility in Anglo-Norman Historical Writing

Nonfiction, History, Reference, Historiography, British
Cover of the book Royal Responsibility in Anglo-Norman Historical Writing by Emily A. Winkler, OUP Oxford
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Emily A. Winkler ISBN: 9780192540430
Publisher: OUP Oxford Publication: October 20, 2017
Imprint: OUP Oxford Language: English
Author: Emily A. Winkler
ISBN: 9780192540430
Publisher: OUP Oxford
Publication: October 20, 2017
Imprint: OUP Oxford
Language: English

It has long been established that the crisis of 1066 generated a florescence of historical writing in the first half of the twelfth century. Emily A. Winkler presents a new perspective on previously unqueried matters, investigating how historians' individual motivations and assumptions produced changes in the kind of history written across the Conquest. She argues that responses to the Danish Conquest of 1016 and the Norman Conquest of 1066 changed dramatically within two generations of the latter conquest. Repeated conquest could signal repeated failures and sin across the orders of society, yet early twelfth-century historians in England not only extract English kings and people from a history of failure, but also establish English kingship as a worthy office on a European scale. Royal Responsibility in Anglo-Norman Historical Writing illuminates the consistent historical agendas of four historians: William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon, John of Worcester, and Geffrei Gaimar. In their narratives of England's eleventh-century history, these twelfth-century historians expanded their approach to historical explanation to include individual responsibility and accountability within a framework of providential history. In this regard, they made substantial departures from their sources. These historians share a view of royal responsibility independent both of their sources (primarily the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) and of any political agenda that placed English and Norman allegiances in opposition. Although the accounts diverge widely in the interpretation of character, all four are concerned more with the effectiveness of England's kings than with the legitimacy of their origins. Their new, shared view of royal responsibility represents a distinct phenomenon in England's twelfth-century historiography.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

It has long been established that the crisis of 1066 generated a florescence of historical writing in the first half of the twelfth century. Emily A. Winkler presents a new perspective on previously unqueried matters, investigating how historians' individual motivations and assumptions produced changes in the kind of history written across the Conquest. She argues that responses to the Danish Conquest of 1016 and the Norman Conquest of 1066 changed dramatically within two generations of the latter conquest. Repeated conquest could signal repeated failures and sin across the orders of society, yet early twelfth-century historians in England not only extract English kings and people from a history of failure, but also establish English kingship as a worthy office on a European scale. Royal Responsibility in Anglo-Norman Historical Writing illuminates the consistent historical agendas of four historians: William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon, John of Worcester, and Geffrei Gaimar. In their narratives of England's eleventh-century history, these twelfth-century historians expanded their approach to historical explanation to include individual responsibility and accountability within a framework of providential history. In this regard, they made substantial departures from their sources. These historians share a view of royal responsibility independent both of their sources (primarily the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) and of any political agenda that placed English and Norman allegiances in opposition. Although the accounts diverge widely in the interpretation of character, all four are concerned more with the effectiveness of England's kings than with the legitimacy of their origins. Their new, shared view of royal responsibility represents a distinct phenomenon in England's twelfth-century historiography.

More books from OUP Oxford

Cover of the book The T�in: From the Irish epic T�in B� Cuailnge by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book The Affluent Society Revisited by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Social and Cultural Anthropology: A Very Short Introduction by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Traces of Vermeer by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Plant-Animal Communication by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Basic Sciences for Obstetrics and Gynaecology: Core Materials for MRCOG Part 1 by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book The Oxford Handbook of Nineteenth-Century Christian Thought by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book The Poetry Handbook by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Forensic Psychiatry by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Law for Social Workers by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Free-Ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Happiness Quantified by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book The Evolution of Sex Determination by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book The Prime Ministers' Craft by Emily A. Winkler
Cover of the book Sharing the Costs and Benefits of Energy and Resource Activity by Emily A. Winkler
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy