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):||17 March 2011|
|PDF File Size:||13.5 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.38 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
As one of these Class Three manuscripts would in turn be used to provide the Fredegar components of the Historia vel Gesta Francorum, this must almost certainly have happened before It also seems clear lf some of the headings and related divisions of the text must be non-authorial.
While the Chronicle is firmly focused on the doings of the high and mighty in continental Europe, you can pick up all kinds of tidbits. Si quis ei abstulerit, maledictus sit ex Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto.
The main divisions seem to be represented by the items given above, which suggest that each section of the work had its own heading, which was in most cases followed by a prologue or preface and a list of its contents.
At the end, f.
“THE “HISTORIA EPITOMATA” (THIRD BOOK) OF THE “CHRONICLE” OF FREDEGAR: ” by JANE ELLEN WOODRUFF
Bischoffno. For the suggestion that this manuscript was in Heidelberg frdeegar the early 17th century see below p. In both codices the text of Fredegar ends at precisely the same point and in mid sentence. These were not known to or used by any of the modern editors of Fredegar. Empire and Society Manchester,pp.
It has to be wondered if the lack of a section of oc covering the years from to c. Indeed, the probable implication is that he was writing in the kingdom of Neustria and Burgundy, rather than in Austrasia.
The Fourth Book of the Chronicle of Fredegar: With Its Continuations. by J.M. Wallace-Hadrill
Levillain also pointed out that Fauchet never called Fredegar an archdeacon, and thus he probably did not take his information from the Saint-Omer manuscript.
Bongarsii also on f.
In the compilation as we have it these two texts stand side by side, with no trace of an Isidoran section between them. That the writer of the note thought the author’s name was Fredegar because he had read Fauchet seems, therefore, to be more probable than that Fauchet relied on the note in the Saint-Omer manuscript. A series of up to five separate sections were thought to have been detected.
Codices Reginenses Latini 2 vols Vatican, and No further detailed studies or arguments have been published, and the single author thesis must be thought now to be the dominant one.
Particularly notable in the final section of his compilation are the numerous reports of events that occurred beyond the frontiers of Francia.
However, as just noted, it is this section that contains the unacknowledged borrowing from the Vita Columbani.
As in the case of the Liber Generationis, it is probably Fredegar who drew up chronicld initial table of chapters and has extended it beyond the original source, in this case Eusebius- Jerome. It also contains information relating to Spain, Italy, the northern Slavs and the Byzantine Empire in the chrojicle sixth and first half of the seventh century that is not to be found elsewhere. This was not a status that long survived.
It will be recalled that the order of authorities in the list given in the prologue is as follows: As can be seen from the headings preserved in the more or less complete codices, in all cases a five book structure is implied. As he had been installed as king in Austrasia in during his father’s lifetime his regnal years are deemed to start at that point, and thus they do not synchronise with those of Clovis II.
Institution National Library of France. Treating the two works as if they were one has created particular difficulties for all of the editors of the Fredegar chronicle. CXIIpp. A number of the confusions and difficulties, especially on the editorial side, can best be resolved by adopting such an approach. The manuscript consists of twelve quires of 92 folios of x mm, with a written area of x mm, with 24 or 35 long lines to the page. IV Historical Tracts London,pp. I don’t have the entirety of this work, only the Continuations, which begin on page 80 with Clovis’ marriage to Baldechildis.
It could be that such additions reflect no more than a story teller’s wish to add verisimilitude to his narrative, but they may represent a wider process of the accumulation of oral traditions, not necessarily of any real historical value, around Gregory’s text in the decades following his death; in the same way as his genealogy of Clovis became transformed.
The Chronicle of Fredegar
Both of these contain marginal notes by the Benedictine scholar Dom de Witte, one of which is explicitly dated to the year As previously stated there is no clarity or consistency in the designation of the components of the compilation in this manuscript. For the appearance of Ercanbert in MS St. The significance of all this would seem to be that the collection of texts from which this was formed had itself been left in a rather chaotic and unfinished state, with its own structuring and contents either not fully worked out or left incomplete; a view already supported by other features in the contents previously discussed.
The similarities and the differences in the headings and the structure they imply between on the one hand the Paris codex, the only complete manuscript of what Krusch designated as Class One, and on the other hand the five extant manuscripts that belong to his Classes Two and Three, might lead to the following conclusions.
Toggle navigation World Digital Library. So, the undigested and repetitive nature of some of the components of the first section of his work is out of keeping with his normal practice. As with all primary sources you have to be cautious in using Fredegar.
It is possible that several of these legendary pieces came from a single source, the contents of which were then inserted by Fredegar into different sections of his work in more or less the appropriate chronological location.
I Dijon, From the initial heading this therefore seems to be a second ‘Book Four’. On the manuscript see below p. His verdict on Erchinoald was given in the past tense and was thus most probably written after the latter’s death, which occured some time between and Abdelkoudous Fayez is currently reading it Sep 19, No quire marks or numbers are visible.
None of these elements contradicts the longer but less specific accounts of the Visigothic and Frankish hagiographic texts, but instead complements them, and thus testifies both to Fredegar’s independence as a source and the likely reliability of some of his information.