the exemplar of gildas' de excidio

8/19/2019 The Exemplar of Gildas' De Excidio

1/98

The Exemplar of Gildas’ De Excidio By S. H. Rosenbaum

here are certain noticeable discrepancies in the text of the De Excidio et

Conquestu Britanniae, exemplified by the location of the controversial passage known as the “Gemitus Britannorum”, which engender perpetual

debate. Internal evidence suggests a radically different reason for its seemingly

random placement than mere authorial ignorance or source misinterpretation.1

This paper advocates a far superior premise; I postulate that at the very head of the

manuscript stemma, Gildas’ exemplar suffered from disfoliation prior to initial

copying. The resulting errors, both primary (due to loose pages) and secondary

(scribal attempts at emendation) have been perpetuated in all descendants of the

text. From a bibliographical standpoint, this suggestion of manuscript degradation

and subsequent contamination is perfectly logical. Especially in this instance,

where no archetype in Gildas’ own hand exists, and our prime textual witness dates

only to the mid-10th century, assuming that copies of copies (upon which we base

our historical paradigms) actually represent an untouched original, is sadly

misleading.2 Textual criticism requires us to doubt these assumptions and

continuously seek the closest approximation to Gildas’ exemplar. While the mere

mention of trying to restore this famous text might be met with incredulity, with

close observation of the hidden nature of his compact and self-contained sentences,

(which render potential disjunct almost invisible) and an awareness of the guiding

principles behind the actions of those who compounded the disturbance, a

reconstruction may be approached with some degree of precision.

1 To list all instances of this sentiment would be tedious, so here are a few to prove my

point: D. J. V. Fisher; The Anglo-Saxon Age c.400-1042, (Routledge: London 2014 ) pp. 17-18

M. Todd; A Companion to Roman Britain, (Wiley & Sons: Hoboken 2008) p.437P. Sims-Williams; Anglo-Saxon England vol.12, ed. by P. Clemoes, S. Keynes, M. Lapidge,

(Cambridge Univ. Press 1983) pp.13-4

H. Goetz, J. Jarnut, W. Pohl; Regna and Gentes: The Relationship Between Late Antique and Early Medieval Kingdoms etc., (Brill: Boston 2003) p. 353

M. Lapidge, D. Dumville; Gildas: New Approaches, (Boydell Press: Cambridge 1984) p.20

M. Winterbottom; Gildas, The Ruin of Britain and Other Works, (Phillimore & Co.: London1978) intro. p. 3 and note 20.1, p. 1492 A contradiction exists between what is known archaeologically, and what our current

narrative of post Roman-Britain states. If we assume that our hypothesis (based largely on the

De Excidio) is valid, and in consequence encounter contradiction, can it remain immutable?

T


2/98

Methodology

The process of solving this puzzle and uncovering the f orm of Gildas’ exemplar

begins with a detailed examination of the so-called Gemitus Britannorum. While

many scholars have already proposed that these lines belong elsewhere, theinformation afforded by this suggestion has never been expanded upon. If it is

indeed a misplaced page or pages, the internal details of the text itself should

provide the necessary data concerning the format of the exemplar. The limited

number of line-per-page versus letter size combinations that are possible with this

section of text ensures that when the right formula is encountered, it will be

recognized by its applicability. In other words, its veracity can be proven by the

systematic application of the layout throughout the text. The process is anything

but arbitrary, and must operate within the parameters of several logical

considerations. An awareness of apocryphal punctuation and chapter divisions

indicates that sentence structure as we know it must be treated as a guide and not a

rule.3 Capitulum, or enlarged initials have been factored in, but the extensive

abbreviation, the contractions and suspensions found in our prime witness have

been excluded.4 Please bear in mind that the following suppositions are

preliminary; while the above mentioned features loom large in the equation, subtle

variations and their effect on exact textual line order do not.

The prime details with which we must work are the forty six words of the GemitusBritannorum proper, (from “Igitur rursum miserae” to “continue rebellabant”)

the adjacent material concerning a hitherto unmentioned period of famine, and the

twenty line-per-page format of our prime witness. These words can easily be

arranged into a single sided page or a single page with lines on both sides. But this

result is hardly satisfactory, and does not take into account the subtle break in the

narrative between the letter to Aetius and the famine. Something appears to be

absent. As it stands, the theme of the famine is not developed, nor is the outcome

of the failed embassy. If material is indeed missing, this would indicate a text with

smaller internal divisions, and not just a single loose page. Intensive

experimentation with letter size, font, and line-per-page combinations, applied to

the entire text, ultimately revealed the original format.

3 For the sake of convenience, periodic use will be made of these traditional divisions.

4 Special thanks go to Mr. Andrew Gough and Mrs. C. Wotherspoon (Manuscript reference

specialist at the British Library) for their professionalism and high resolution copies.


3/98

The Original Format

The text falls naturally into only one format: an exemplar which was ruled for 10

lines, with a rough average of 20 words in a single column, per page.5 Only with

this layout do Gildas’ sentences remain intact, with two per page. This formulaseems wasteful at first, unless we are indeed working with small pages; something

which in fact, Gildas himself seems to indicate. His comment “quibus ueluti

pulchro tegmine opusculi nostri molimen” (chap. 37) makes one immediately think

of something resembling the Cuthbert Gospel.6 It is entirely plausible that Gildas

appropriated a small blank devotional book for his personal writings.

What we are dealing with in these four distinct groupings of 23, 23, 20, and

22 words respectively, is bibliographic evidence of a bifolium, likely the innermost

of the quire. It is out of place because at some time in the distant past it cameloose, and was placed between pages some distance from its original location. The

“Gemitus bifolium” as it shall be called (being what it is) shows us that we must

proceed carefully; for if an entire bifolium had come loose, we must then expect

loose and misplaced folia, and sadly, missing material altogether. Follow along, if

possible, with a copy of the text of the De Excidio as we replace the “Gemitus

bifolium” to its original location.7

The Gemitus Britannorum

There are several words in the above-mentioned fragment that help to place it, such

as miserae reliquiae , famis, montibus, speluncis, saltibus, etc. Reviewing the text,

one comes to the foederate rebellion and its aftermath, where the words montibus,

miserarum reliquiarum, etc. are also encountered. The similarity of wording is no

coincidence, but where exactly does the bifolium go? If we look closely, there is a

section beginning with “Ita enim degenerauerat” and ending with “in aeuum

seruituri” which seems to intrude rather abruptly into the narrative. This passage,

comprised of two distinct sections of 24 and 19 words respectively, indicates that

one has encountered a loose page.

5 Some pages have as little as 16 words; others towards the end of the work seem to have

as many as 27 words per page. The average still worked out to around 20 words per page.6 It is perhaps no coincidence that this layout strongly r esembles some of Aldhelm’s

averages as found in various pocket-sized copies of De LaudeVirginitatis. 7 First person perspective is used deliberately to discuss these steps in the research process.


4/98

How do we know that it was a loose folium? While the lines surely belong

within the “Gemitus bifolium” contextually, the fragment was between two other

pages when initial copying occurred, but reversed with the gutter margin out. In

other words, the verso side was copied first, then the recto. Switch it around and it

fits into the bifolium perfectly. The famine is now elaborated, as is theconsequences of the failed embassy (note that it begins with “Itaque nonnulli”).

However, if one tallies the words before and after the center “Fame folium”

you will notice that the text bisects a complete page: “Si tamen multae” through

“Si tamen non continuo” etc. (24 words total). What best explains the process by

which a recto side was copied separately from its verso side? The loose “Fame

folium” itself constitutes the primary error. In this case, we have either a scribe

attempting to make a seamless narrative or, equally plausible, an example of

homeoteleuton, or eye-skip. Note the similarity between the two lines beginning

with “si tamen”. This section strongly illustrates the sequential nature of the

errors that have crept into the text of the De Excidio; disfoliation occurred prior to

initial copying, the mistakes being then compounded by scribal slips and perhaps

intentional emendation. I have no doubt that a close examination of sentence

structure and word distribution, combined with a re-evaluation of the restored

cursus, will vindicate these corrections.

Additional issues revealed

After re-establishing the “Gemitus bifolium” to its proper place, as well as the

center “Fame folium”, I realized that if one mistake had occurred, there may have

been others. Returning to the vicinity where the Appeal to Aetius made its home

for the last 1500 years, evidence for a broken narrative was sought. This passage,

which follows the withdrawal of Imperial forces, is fortunate to have numerous

collaborative retellings that survive in various sources which will help us find and

fix possible errors. Some background information needs to be provided, for

someday, a thorough comprehension of the event this section describes will be theessential starting point for any study of Later Roman Britain. Although this is not

the venue for a full telling, a rough outline must be offered for comparison.8

8 S. H. Rosenbaum; Insights into the Writer Vegetius and Identifying the Disaster Behind

the Epitoma Rei Militaris (unfinished) the former available at Academia.edu.


5/98

The Clades Caeliana

Decades after all regular milites are presumed to have been withdrawn, an army of

Romano-Britons were lured out from their garrison posts only to perish in a

doomed punitive campaign at the hands of the Picts and Scots. This expeditionaryforce, which combined sedentary limitanei, innumerable recruits freshly levied,

Germanic foederates of dubious loyalty, and a horde of camp followers, marched

into and remained stationary in Ayrshire, Scotland. Camped ad hoc, this multitude

quickly polluted its own water supply, exhausted its provisions, and with the onset

of winter, withered away from disease, deprivation, and desertion. Plagued by

indecision at all levels of command, the army neither advanced nor retreated. The

foederates grew restless as the countryside was stripped bare of food, fodder, and

firewood. Eventually, the stativa castra was attacked front and rear in a famous

night assault and the auxiliares, who had previously urged retreat, bolted. The

Britons had no choice but to follow, and the disorderly withdrawal became a rout.

I need not speak of the following events, enshrined in Ayrshire legend, being as

they were a repetition of folly and slaughter.

The Account by Gildas

Despite the affair being dismissed as folklore, diligent independent study

revealed that reminisces can be found in many places.9 Armed with all this new

information, we can compare Gildas’ version of this forgotten event and check it

for accuracy. One immediately notices that the lines beginning with “Ut

commoratio” and ending with “artis solacio” (18 and 21 words respectively)

appear out of sequence. The period of deprivation preceded the flight of the

auxiliares and final massacre; one source even tells of the army eating the horses,

wild mushrooms, and eventually each other before the rout and final battle.10 This

passage does not fit where it stands; it is in fact related contextually to that

beginning with “Hoc scilicet eis”. What we are dealing with is another loose

page, the centermost of the quire, just like the previous one encountered.

9 References appear in the Gesta Danorum, De Rebus Bellicis, De Munitionem Castrorum

and form the basis of many lessons in the Epitoma Rei Militari. A version appears in the Vita

Sancti Germani as the “Alleluia victory” but with every single detail reversed. See for yourself.10

Gesta Danorum, I.8.7.


6/98

How do we know this? First; the lines are found tucked between blocks of

text adjacent to the “Gemitus bifolium”, the first loose and misplaced portion of

text to be conclusively identified. Second; we know it was a loose leaf because it

has been copied in reverse, just like the “Fame folium”. The unbound page clearly

fits after “cito exitu deuitabant” because “domesticis motibus” refers to thedissatisfaction rampant among the mutinous auxiliares, the cause of the anger and

discontent being clearly stated. Disease and death being so prevalent in camp,

supplicants could not pay the costs of a proper funeral; such impiety was the great

fear within the superstitious pagan mind and undoubtedly augmented the general

feeling of impending doom.11

Restoring the “Domesticis folium” to its proper place introduces another

problem. When we inventory the lines beginning with “Quid plura?” the word

count according to our proposed layout comes up short. The missing 14 words can

be found in the line beginning with “Interea non cessant”; when rejoined, it

completes the page with exactly 23 words per side. Pardon my audacity, but

concerning this corrupt passage I will offer up certain emendations for

approbation; “de muris tractis sola alii debantur” and “ Relictis cives talibus

muniis celso” are perfectly logical corrections,12 considering common issues with a

likely textual intermediary in an insular script.13 That said, what best explains the

broken nature of the lines? This symptom also occurred around the “Fame

f olium”, a condition which tells us that secondary scribal meddling has beenencountered here as well. As restored, the material accurately portrays the Clades

Caeliana as known from the various sources.14 The rhythmic cadence and flow of

this forgotten historical narrative are now matched accordingly.

11 The story is complete with omens and voices warning of the impending disaster. It is a

fascinating study of historical divergence, and sadly, of scholarly neglect.12

D. Dumville; The Chronology of the De Excidio Britanniae, Book I , in: M. Lapidge and

D. Dumville; Gildas: New Approaches, (Boydell press: Cambridge 1984) pp. 66-7. Dumville

questions the word civitatibus and rightly so.13

While the dramatic image of men pulled from Hadrian’s Wall with hooks certainly

appealed to the imagination (as perpetuated by Bede’s version), the sources cannot corroborate.

The mention of tela however, recalls well the desultory rain of enemy arrows upon the campfrom higher ground; cf. Vegetius: Epitoma Bk. I. 22, Bk. III. 8, De Munitionibus Castrorumchap. 57.14

Gildas even confirms certain suspected details, such as the presence of auxiliares and

their mutinous conduct.


7/98

Quire Composition

Much information can be gained from this section; near verbatim use of this once

faulty passage by the Venerable Bede indicates that these errors predate the eighth

century, confirming the disfoliate condition of the archetype. Also, with the centerof this quire established, and the center of the Gemitus quire identified, we can

carry our deductions even further.

Counting center to center, the text falls naturally into approximately 27

pages; 25 pages if the single folia are excluded. This is an odd number, which

indicates the existence of another quire (with a single folium) between the two.

Incidentally, this reveals the number of sheets per gathering. There may well be a

religious significance lurking in the fact that six, when folded, make twelve. These

twelve pages, like the apostles, accompany an individual who located in the centerof the group. This in turn reinforces the notion that Gildas was using a small,

blank gospel or psalm book, as suggested before.

British Political Circumstances

We now move on to take a closer look at this middle portion, fully armed with all

that has been learned so far, to see if anything is amiss. Gildas concludes his rather

accurate retelling of the Clades Caeliana, and mentions only in passing the

Alleluia victory of St. Germanus.

15

He knows the story well (with the Britonstrusting in God not in man) but strangely does not elaborate. Perhaps success did

not fit well within his overall theme of disaster. Gildas even gives a short

explanation of the causes of the war, the perfidy of the Britons who attempted in

vain to create discord between the Picts and Scots.16 After this passage he reverses

the narrative in order to give an exposé of the concurrent political situation. He

tells of rulers appointed and removed capriciously, at the whim of someone

powerful who was initially welcomed as a political savior.

15 The mission to Britain by St. Germanus, which culminated in the dramatic “Alleluia

victory”, is firmly fixed in the year 429, and was motivated in full by the widespread political,military, and spiritual upheaval immediately following the Clades Caeliana. It allows one to date

the disaster closely, to the winter of 428-9.16

Boece; Historia Gentis Scotorum, Bk. I. 27-8. Most of the work should be considered

spurious, but this information matches perfectly.


8/98

This character (the subject of an unfinished paper) was completely

dominated by his innumerable and infamous personal flaws.17 Gildas lists them

all: envy, indiscretion, alcoholism, greed, perjury, and blind ambition. Who was

this man who had nothing but contempt for his principes officiorum? This tyrant

left behind ample traces of his identity and actions, if one knows where to look.18

Pestifera “In Toto Orbe Diffusa”

Immediately noticeable, is that these sections which deal with affairs of state (and

are linked by the theme of odia and animositatum) are interrupted by a large

passage beginning with “Et omnia quae displicuerunt” and ending with “omni

plebi debuerint”. It is well known that the source of most these lines can be found

in Isaiah, 1:4-6, but if we look closely, they concern an entirely different topic.

The context of the quotation, with its festering boils not soothed with oil, can only be identified with disease. This entire section refers to sickness and death, grief

and lamentation, and is unrelated to the political matter which surrounds it.

Addition details can be discerned which reinforce this conclusion. For

instance, consider the word pendebantur , which is used by Gildas in the sense of a

final judgment. Note that the poet Lucretius uses it in his “De rerum natura”: “nec

iam religio diuum nec numina magni pendebantur enim...” (6.1276-7). While the

exact usage differs from Gildas, look at the context; it speaks of the breakdown of

civil society during the Athenian plague, cf. Thucydides (“History of the

Peloponesian War”, II. 53). Gildas uses pendebantur to describe God’s final

judgment upon all the desperate and irrational acts that took place during a plague,

and not the procedure for the appointment and removal of rulers. This tells us

strongly that this portion of text originally came after the outbreak of the plague, as

does a few other words. Medico and medicinae refers to a powerful Christian

panacea; one that, if used correctly, would cure believers and spare them from the

deadly infection. Gildas is also quite consistent with naming his sources, but in

this case he simply uses the words “illud propheticum” as if Isaiah had already been mentioned. In the original order, he was.

17 S. H. Rosenbaum, The Political Disintegration of the Late Roman West (forthcoming)

18 As this information will only be given once before the publication of the above

mentioned paper, record the following and compare the details at leisure: Cod. Theod. I.10.8,

Nov. Val. I. 2, and De Rebus Bellicis, chap. III, IV. If one looks closely, a common thread is

distinguished.


9/98

The Center Bifolium

These lines constitute another loose and misplaced bifolium, one which was

originally located between the words “ut olim amorrhaeorum complerentur” and

“Initur namque consilium”. But, like the previous fragments, subtle textualdisjunct indicates secondary errors due to emendation. Observe that the Isaiah

quotation is a coherent unity; our rule of thumb recommends that it cannot be

broken up. In other words, as it stands, its consistent lines (which are quoted

whole) must not be interrupted by a center folium. At this point we must fall back

on Latin prosody to guide us. It would appear that the line “Ac si nihil mundo

medicinae a uero omnium medico largiretur” goes at the head of the lines

beginning with “et omnia que displicuerunt”; this is based partly on word endings

(mundo, uero, medico, and deo) and on how well “Ac si nihil” and “si non

gratiora” complement each other. “Sicque agebant cuncta quae saluti contraria

fuerint” goes at the head of the page followed by “et non solum etc.” judging by

fuerint and debuerint . As restored, the lines fit perfectly; they now comprise four

pages of 27 ( Ac si nihil ) 26 (Sicque agebant ) 26 ( Ita ut merito patriae) and 23

words respectively (Quid adhuc percutiemini).

I cannot adequately explain the process by which a verso page was copied

separately from its recto side, with a full page copied in-between. Obvious

evidence for eye-skip is lacking; logically we may suspect secondarycontamination representative of a scribe trying to make sense of a broken narrative

through intentional emendation.

The Center Leaf

If we have identified the “Dereliquistis bifolium” as the center folding of the quire,

where is the center leaf? Just like the other fragments with which we have been

dealing, it can be found several pages from its original location. Several clues help

identify the loose page from the surrounding textual mess. The most obvious are

the lines “et tanta malorum labe infectam” which refer to a period in time after the

plague has already emerged. In fact these lines, which consist of 25 and 21 words

respectively, preserve our missing page. Unlike the “Fame folium” and

“Domesticis folium”, this page was copied correctly, and fits exactly as it should

within the “Dereliquistis bifolium”.


10/98

Britanniae in Dicionem Saxonum Rediguntur

Additional information can be gleaned by the restoration of this page to its proper

context. The “return of old enemies” (adventus ueterum uolentium) has nothing to

do with the Picts and Scots, and everything to do with “adhuc percutiemini”.These lines, which are now found in correct proximity, have been reused by Gildas

from previous text (chap. 7) to describe the actions of the Roman praepositos.

Who were these men that returned to Britain with avaricious intent? They are not

barbarians, but professional bureaucrats. Several pages later Gildas calls them

plainly: “orientali manu”.19 Distrustful of native battalions and completely reliant

upon hired thugs, they are the ones directly responsible for the ruin of Britain.

A Bevy of Errors

Returning to our task, but one hurdle remains. The positioning of the “Aduentus

folium” between unrelated pages provided ample opportunity for secondary scribal

havoc. Like the other loose folia, it seems to bisect the text. However, in this case,

someone has divided the whole page and not just one side. The top portion

consists of “Sed comparati etc.” (recto) and “Per latum diversorum etc.” (verso).

The matching bottom section is found to have been copied first: “Ita ut perspicue

etc.” (recto) followed by “Seduci uanis eorum etc.” (verso). These disparate

passages only make sense when rejoined. Note the complementary effect of seduci

and ducentem. Despite the success of this reunion, stubborn discrepancies

remained in the form of a lackluster word count among the proceeding pages.

Although I eventually recognized that “Appropinquabat siquidem tempus quo eius

iniquitates, ut olim amorrhaeorum20 , complerentur” actually belongs after “sed ne

hac quidem emendantur” based on prosody (siquidem, quidem, etc.), there is only

15 words in total. Sadly, like the low word count for the page beginning with

“Dum ergo”, we may be looking at lost lines.

19 Gildas is not speaking of Saxons at this point; he uses the term orientali only for Greeks,or men from the eastern half of the empire, cf. chap. 4: “porphyrius rabidus orientalis”. These

greedy opportunistic parasites, led by their supreme chieftain, hid beneath a veneer of

Christianity their true beliefs. The Anglo-Saxons remembered them with the name Glommas.20

Note that Gildas uses the Amorites to describe the proud tyrant and his ilk. They were

known for their idolatrous, pagan ways and customs; they were not just deviants, but arrogant,

overfed, unconcerned, inhospitable, greedy oppressors who offended God at every turn. Their

riches, luxury and fornication became a by-word for all Canaanites.


11/98

As previously mentioned, a close examination of the internal layout,

sentence structure, word count and line distribution, will undoubtedly prove that

the rhythmic cursus, once broken, has been mostly restored in these three quires.

This is emerging work, the conclusions of which must not be thought of as final,

but preliminary.

Recapitulation

Let us review what has been learned so far. Gildas wrote his treatise on something

small, a psalm book or pocket gospel of octavo size or even less. It was likely

scribed for ten lines on each page, and was constructed of gatherings of six sheets

with one individual leaf in the middle of each quire. With this layout established,

some interesting patterns emerge.21 Lines begin with matching letters and similar

words are located above and below each other. We can actually see Gildas in theact of composition, looking at the finished lines above as he carefully picked his

words. The result was a beautiful prosimetric text, which combined ambitious

prose narrative interspersed with morsels of inspired Latin verse. This closely

resembles another text I study, an unidentified Anglo-Latin masterpiece which

post-dates Gildas by a century.

At some point after composition,22 a succession of folia and bifolia separated

from the binding and were, with the exception of the “Domesticis folium”23

consistently placed one or more pages to the left of where they originated. We

may surmise several logical reasons for this occurrence. Either these sections

suffered from some physical strain on the binding or they were removed

deliberately. Without a clear motive the latter is unlikely, thus unintentional action

should be suspected for causing the damage.

21 Some of the word groupings on certain pages appear to resemble large capital letters. Or

have I been staring at the text for too long?22

The date should have never been in doubt. Based on the context of “apostolicis

sanctionibus” (chap. 65, 5.) cf. Codex Canonum Ecclesiasticarum by Dionysius Exiguus, and

the mention of unresolved “scismatis” (chap. 69,1.) one may accurately place the writing of the

“sermons vs. kings and priests”. Based on the short reign traditionally given to Constantine in

Welsh sources, the “history” was written interregnum approximately three years prior to the

sermons.23

This page was moved one page to the right.


12/98

The passages with which we have been dealing may well have been very

popular with Gildas’ brethren who had access to the work; the scope of events is

wide, the pace brisk and the language colorful. Frequent handling of these specific

pages would adequately explain broken bindings.

One additional possibility is apparent. If one tallies the quire which

follows the “Appeal to Aetius” gathering, it stops at just three pages and switches

suddenly to the second half of the work, sometimes called the “denunciation of the

princes”. Perhaps it is no coincidence that certain recensions of this text also end

at this point.24

This is not the venue to debate the authorship of parts II and III, (I have no

doubt that Gildas wrote them) so I will leave it to other scholars to apply the

formula outlined in this paper to these latter chapters.25

Either the lines will fit the previous layout, indicating more loose and misplaced leaves from the same book,

or the observation outlined above will show that the admonition of the kings

formed a separate and significant manuscript which was inserted between the

pages at a date after the composition of the De Excidio. Such an inclusion would

certainly have stretched and ultimately broken the back of a small book. By my

count, approximately nine pages or more of the original work remain unaccounted

for.26

At some point, perhaps soon after the death of Gildas, his little book became

a haphazard collection of discontinuous material.27 That the text was allowed to

fall apart in the first place should come as no surprise to us; despite his reputation

as a church leader, the recipient of deferential letters, his personal works likely

endured a cycle of pertinence and irrelevance. After all, no nation enjoys being

reminded of its mistakes in such vehement fashion.

24 T. D. O’Sullivan; The De Excidio of Gildas: Its Authenticity and Date, (Brill: Leiden1978) intro. 3.25

I did apply it to the catalogue of topics in the preface; based on a count of words, certain

items in the listings, de fame, de epistolis etc. appear to be spurious additions.26

That is, not assigned to the Historia. Portions of the transition between the general

denunciation of princes and the diatribe against priests may be suspected.27

One cannot imagine that an author such as Gildas would have let his woks fall into this

state. He of all people would have known where one of his loose pages belonged.


13/98

Eventually, the debilitated condition of the manuscript necessitated

preservation. We may observe that the scribes tasked with this initial copying

effort undertook their work mechanically. No effort was made to actually

comprehend the text. No one knew the original order, nor cared. Nobody tried to

reorder or rebind the obviously loose and misplaced pages. It was copied page for page exactly as the scribe (possibly illiterate) found them. The resulting text, much

compressed, would have effectively erased the original format as well as all

evidence of disfoliation.

Until the rise of Northumbria ended any lingering British notions of political

preeminence, the warnings in the De Excidio were not wanted or needed. The text

only emerged from this period of neglect after the growth of Gildas’ reputation as a

prophet.28 Realizing that everything he predicted had come to pass, scholarly

interest in the work was rekindled. At some point during this time, the lone copy

of his jumbled archetype passed through the hands of someone with a proficient

command of Latin. We may accuse this anonymous writer for the secondary layer

of contamination. Confronted with a narrative that may not have made sense, no

knowledge of the exemplar or its condition, no surviving historical narratives to

guide him, and no ethical standards preventing emendation during copying, certain

changes were freely made. With some skill, he boldly shuffled whole lines and

paragraphs around in a successful attempt to create seeming coherence. This text,

(B) then became the sole progenitor.29

28 Wulfstan; Anglo-Saxon Homilies

29 “B” representing the hypothetical archetype of Mommsen’s “C”; we know it had reached

this stage by the time of the Venerable Bede.


14/98

Concluding Remarks

I find it necessary to remind readers of this paper that all therein represents

emerging work. As such, it should be subject to the strictest scrutiny. While the

basic premise will be stoutly defended, overlooked points of interest and items ofvalid dissent are most welcome. Arguments are not won by words alone; physical

proof can be equally persuasive. With that in mind, I have provided an imperfect

example of the restored text, slightly more than the three quires discussed in this

paper. If printed double-sided, it can be reassembled with the help of adhesives

into its original gatherings. For many people, this will be like reading a new text

for the first time.30 Folia and bifolia in red indicate the loose and misplaced pages.

To get a feel for the original format and then experience first-hand the process of

disfoliation, they can be returned to where they were found in MS. Cotton Vitellius

A.VI. It is greatly hoped that fellow scholars will apply the outlined format to

other sections of the De Excidio, in that a complete reconstruction of the archetype

was never my intention and is beyond the scope of this work.

We scholars owe Gildas an apology. It is the height of arrogance to assume,

1500 years later, a greater knowledge of fifth and sixth century British events than

he. For far too long we have concluded that he was misinformed, ignorant of

events, or reliant upon faulty oral tradition, never once suspecting that unfortunate

circumstances of transmission were actually to blame.

31

Gildas knew exactly whathe was talking about; his details are accurate overall, and if his comments appear

guarded, there must have been reasons. It is up to us to quit looking at this subject

through the narrow lens of Bede and all later writers. Only by comparing Gildas’

information with other cognate material, even if this material seems at first obtuse,

we can begin to understand his works.

Please pardon the many obscure references found throughout this paper.

They are certainly not meant to confound, but enlighten the reader by stimulating

his or her personal curiosity. Great unexplored avenues of study await those whohave a sincere and determined desire for fresh historical knowledge.

S. H. Rosenbaum, Forkhorn Hall Publications 2016®

30 Not since the lifetime of Gildas himself have these lines been adjoined.

31 Exemplified by M. Winterbottom; Gildas, The Ruin of Britain and other Works,

(Phillimore &Co.: London 1978) intro. p. 3


15/98

Tantum talemque exercitum,

terra ac mari fatigari,

sed ut potius sola

consuescendoarmis ac uiriliter

dimicando

terram substantiolam

coniuges liberos et,

quod hismaius est,


16/98

Libertatem uitamque

totis uiribus

uindicaret,

et gentibus nequaquamsibi fortioribus,

nisi segnitia

et torpore dissolueretur,

inermes

uinculis uinciendasnullo modo,


17/98

Sed instructas

peltis ensibus hastis

et ad caedam promptas

protenderet manus,suadentes,

quia et hoc

putabant aliquid

derelinquendo

populo commodiadcrescere,


18/98

Murum

non ut alterum,

sumptu publico

priuatoqueadiunctis secum

miserabilibus indigenis,

solito structurae more,

tramite a mari

usque ad mareinter urber, (burgi?)


19/98

Quae ibidem

forte ob metum hostium

collocatae fuerant,

directo librant;foria formidoloso

populo monita

tradunt,

exemplaria

instituendorumarmorum relinquunt.


20/98

In litore quoque oceani

ad meridianam plagam,

quo naues eorum

habebantur,quia et inde

barbaricae ferae

bestiae timebantur,

turres per interualla

ad prospectummaris collocant,


21/98

Et ualedicunt

tamquam ultra

non reuersuri.

Itaque illisad sua remeantibus

emergunt certatim

de curucis,

quibus sunt

trans tithicamuallem euecti,


22/98

Quasi in alti titane

incalescenteque caumate

de arissimis

formanium couerniculisfusci uermiculorum

cunei,

tetri scottorum

pictorumque gentes,

moribus ex partedissidentes,


23/98

Sed una eademque

sanguinis fundendi

auiditate concordes

furci ferosquemagis uultus

pilis

quam corporum

pudenda pudendisque

proxma uestibustegentes,


24/98

Cognitaque

condebitorum

reuersione et reditus

denegationesolito confidentiores

omnem aquilonalem

extremamque terrae

partem pro

indigenis murotenus capessunt.


25/98

Statuitur ad haec

in edito arcis acies,

segnis ad pugnam,

inhabilis ad fugam,trememntibus

praecordiis inepta,

quae diebus

ac noctibus

stupido sedilimarcebat.


26/98

Hoc scilicet

eis proficiebatimmaturae mortis

supplicium quitali

funere rapiebantur,

quo fratrum

pignorumque suorummiserandas imminentes

poenas cito

exitu deuitabant.


27/98

Et augebantur

externae cladesdomesticis motibus,

quod huiuscemodi

tam crebis direptionibus

uacuaretur omnis

regio totiuscibi baculo,

excepto uenatoriae

artis solacio.


28/98

Ut commoratio

eorum ferarumassimilaretur

agrestium

nam et ipsos mutuo,

perexigui uictus

breui sustentaculomiserrimorum ciuium,

latrocinando

temperabant:


29/98

Interea

non cessant uncinatanudorum tela.

quibus miserrimi ciues

de muris tractis

sola alii debantur.

quid plura?relictis ciues talibus

muniis celso

iterum ciuibus fugae,


30/98

Iterum dispersiones

solito desperabiliores,iterum ab hoste

insectationes,

iterum strages

accelerantur crudeliores;

et sicut agni a lanionibus,ita deflendi ciues

ab inimicies

discerpuntur.


31/98

Et tum

primum inimicis

per multos annos

praedasin terra agentibus

strages dabant

non fidentes

in homine,

sedin deo.


32/98

Secundum illud

Philonis:

‘Necesse est

edesse diuinum,ubi humanum

cessat auxilium.’

Quieuit parumper

inimicorum audacia

nec tamennostrorum malitia.


33/98

Recesserunt

hostes a ciuibus

nec ciues

a suis sceleribus.moris namque

continui erat genti,

sicut et nunc est,

ut infirma esset

ad retundendahostium tela,


34/98

Et fortis esset

ad ciuilia bella

et peccatorum onera

sustinenda,infirma, inquam,

ad exequanda pacis

ac ueritatis insignia

Et fortis

ad sceleraet mendacia.


35/98

Reuertuntur

ergo impudentes

grassatores

hiberni domos,post

non longum temporis

reuersuri.

Picti in extrema

parte insulaetunc primum


36/98

Et deinceps

requieuerunt,

praedas

et contritionesnonumquam facientes.

In talibus

itaque indutiis

desolato populo

saeua cicatricobducitur.


37/98

Fame alia uirulentiore

tacitus pullulante.

quiescente

autem uastitatetantis

abundantiarum copiis

insula affluebat

ut nulla habere

tales retro aetasmeminisset.


38/98

Cum quibus omnimodis

et luxuria crescit.

creuit etenim

germine praepollenti,ita ut competentur

eodem tempore

diceretur:

‘Omnino talis

auditor fornicatio qualisnec inter g entes.’


39/98

Non solum uer hoc uitium,

set et omnia quae

humanae naturae

accidere solent,et praecipue,

quod et nunc

quoque in ea totius

boni euertit statum,

odium ueritatis

cum assertoribus


40/98

Amorque mendacii

cum suis fabricatoribus,

susceptio mali

pro bono,ueneratio nequitiae

pro benignitate,

cupido tenebrarum

pro sole

exceptio satanaepro angelo lucis.


41/98

Ungebantur reges

non per deum

sed qui ceteris

crudeliores exstarent,et paulo post

ab unctioribus

non pro ueri

examinatione

trucidabantur aliiselectis trucioribus.


42/98

Si quis uero

eorum mitior

et ueritati

aliquatenus propioruideretur,

in hunc quasi

britanniae subuersorem

omnia odia telaque

sine respectucontorquebantur.


43/98

Ebrietate quam plurimi

quasi uino madidi

torpebant resoluti et

animositatum tumore,iurgiorum

contentione,

inuidiae rapacibus ungulis,

indiscreto

boni maliqueiudicio carpebantur,


44/98

Sed comparati

iumentis insipientibus

strictis, ut dicitur,

morsibus rationisfrenum offirmantes.

Ita ut perspicue,

sicut et nunc est,

effundi uideretur

contemptiosuper principes,


45/98

Per latum diuersorum

uitiorum morti

procliue ducentem,

relicto salutarilicet arto itinere,

discurrebant uiam.

Seduci uanis

eorum et errare

in inuioet non in uia.


46/98

Dum ergo,

ut salomon ait,

‘seruus durus

non emendaturuerbis’,

Flagellatur

stultus

et non sentit,

Lacuna?


47/98

Pestifera namque

lues feraliter

insipienti populo

incumbit,quae in breui tantam

eius multitudinem

remote mucrone

sternit,

quantam ne possintuiui humare.


48/98

Sed

ne hac quidem

emendantur.

Appropinquabatsiquidem

tempus quo eius

iniquitates,

ut olim

amorrhaeorum,complerentur.


49/98

Ut illud

esaiae prophetae

in eo quoque

implereturdicentis:

‘Et uocauit deus

ad planctum

et ad caluitium

et ad cingulumsacci:


50/98

Ecce!

uitulos occidere

et iugulare

arietes,Ecce!

manducare et bibere

et dicere

manducemus et bibamus

cras enimmoriamur’.


51/98

Ac si nihil mundo medicinae

a uero omnium medico

largeretur

Et omnia quaedisplicuerunt deo

et quae placuaerunt

aequali saltem

lance pendebantur,

si non gratiorafuissent displicentia.


52/98

Sicque agebant

cuncta quae saluticontraria fuerint.

Et non solumhaec saeculares uiri,

sed et ipse grex domini

eiusque pastores

qui exemplo esse

omni plebi debuerint.


53/98

Interea uolente deo

purgare familiam suam

et tanta malorum

labe infectam

auditu tantum

ribulationis emendare,non ignoti rumoris

penniger ceu uolatus

arrectas omnium

penetrat aures.


54/98

Iamiamque

aduentus

ueterum uolentium

penitusdelere et inhabitare

solito more

a fine usque

ad terminum regionem.

nequaquam tamenob hoc proficiunt,


55/98

Ita ut merito patriae

illud propheticum,

quod ueterno

illi populo denuntiatum est,potuit aptari.

‘filii’ inquiens

‘sine lege,

dereliquistis deum,

et ad iracundiamprouocastis sanctum israel.


56/98

Quid adhuc

percutiemini apponentes

iniquitatem?

omne caputlanguidum

et omne cor

maerens:

a planta pedis

usque ad uerticemnon est in eo sanitas.’


57/98

Initur namque consilium

quid optimumquidue saluberrimum

ad repellendastam ferales

et tam crebras

supra dictarum

gentium irruptiones

praedasquedecerni deberet.


58/98

Cum omnes consiliarii

una cum superbo

tyranno caecantur,

adinuenintestale praesidium,

immo excidium patriae

ut ferocissimi

illi nefandi

nominis saxonesdeo hominibusque inuisi,


59/98

Quasi in caulas lupi,

in insulam

ad retundendas

aquilonales gentesintromitterentur.

Quo utique

nihil ei usquam

perniciosius

nihilque armariusfactum est.


60/98

O’ altissimam

sensus calignem!

O’ desperabilem

crudemquementis

hebetudinem!

Quos propensius

morte,

cum abessent,tremebant,


61/98

Sponte,

ut ita dicam,

sub unius tecti

culmini inuitabant.‘Stulti principes’,

ut dictum est,

‘taneos

dantes pharaoni

consiliuminsipiens’.


62/98

Tum erumpens

grex catulorum

de cubili

laeanae barbarae,tribus, ut lingua eius

exprimitur, cyulis,

nostra longis nauibus,

secundis uelis

omine auguriis que, quibusuaticinabatur,


63/98

Certo apud

eum praesagio,

quod ter centum

annis patriam,cui proras

librabat,

insideret,

centum uero

qunquaginta,saepius uastaret.


64/98

Euectus, primum

in orientali parte

insulae iubente

infausto tyrannoterribiles

infixit ungues,

quasi pro patria

pugnaturus,

sed eam certiusimpugnaturus.


65/98

Cui supradicta

genetrix, comperiens

primo agmini

fuisse prosperatum,item mitit satellitum

canumque prolixiorem

catastam,

quae ratibus

aduecta adunaturcum manipularibus spuriis.


66/98

Inde germen

iniquitatis,

radix amritudinis,

uirulenta plantatio nostriscondigna meritis,

in nostro cespite,

ferocibus palmitibus

pampinisque pullulat.

igitur intromissiin insulam barbari,


67/98

Ueluti militibus

et magna, ut mentiebantur,

discrimina pro bonis

hospitibus subituris,impetrant sibi

annonas dari:

quae multo tempore

impertitae clauserunt,

ut dicitur,canis faucem.


68/98

Item queruntur

non affluenter

sibi epimenia contribui,

occasiones de industriacolorantes,

et ni profusior

eis munificentia cumularetur,

testantur se cuncta

insulae rupto foederedepopulaturos.


69/98

Nec mora, minas

effectibus prosequuntur.

confouebatur namque

ulitionis iustaepraecedentium scelerum

causa de mari

usque ad mare

ignis orientali

sacrilegorummanu exaggeratus,


70/98

Et finitimas quasque

ciuitates agrosque

populans non quieuit

accensus doneccunctam paene

exurens insulae

superficiem rubra

occidentalem trucique

oceanum linguadelamberet.


71/98

In hoc ergo

impetu assyrio

olim in iudaeam

comparandocompletur

quoque in nobis

secundum historiam

quod propheta

deploransait:


72/98

‘Incenderunt igni

sanctuarium tuum’

‘in terra,

polluerunt tabernaculumnominis tui’,

‘deus,

uenerunt gentes

in heredi tatem tuam;

coinquinarunt templumsanctum tuum’,


73/98

Ita ut cunctae coloniae

crebris arietibus

omnesque colonis

cum praepositis ecclesiae,cum sacer dotibus

ac populo, mucronibus

undique micantibus

ac flammis crepitantibus,

simul solosternerentur,


74/98

Et miserabili

uisu in medio

platearum ima

turrium editocardine euulsarum

murorumque celsorum

saxa, sacra altaria,

cadauerum frustra,

crustis ac si gelantibuspurpurei cruoris tecta,


75/98

Uelut in quodam

horrendo torculari

mixta uiderentur,

et nulla essetomnimodis praeter

domorum ruinas,

bestiarum uolucrumque

uentres in medio sepultura,

salua sanctarumanimarum reuerentia,


76/98

Si tamen

multae inuentae

sint quae arduis

caeli id temporisa sanctis angelis

ueherentur.

Si tamen non continuo

trucidarentur,

quod altissimae gratiaestabat loco:


77/98

Igitur rursum miserae

mittentes epistolas reliquiae

ad agitium romanae

potestatis uirum,

hoc modo loquentes:

‘Agitio ter consuli

gemitus britannorum;’

et post paucaquerentes:


78/98

‘Repellunt barbari

ad mare,

repellit mare

ad barbaros;inter haec duo

genera funerum

aut iugulamur

aut mergimur;’

Nec pro eis quicquam

adiutorii habent.


79/98

Itaque nonnulli

miserarum reliquiarum

in montibus

deprehensiaceruatim

iugulabantur:

alii fame confecti

accedentes manus

hostibus dabantin aeuum seruituri,


80/98

Ita enim degenerauerat

tunc uinea

illa olim bona

in amaritudinem uti raro,secundum prophetam,

uideretur quasi

post tergum

uindemiatorum

aut messorumracems uel spica.


81/98

Interea

famis dira

ac famosissima

uagis ac nutantdibushaeret,

quae multos

eorum cruentis

compulit praedonibus

sine dilatione uictusdare manus,


82/98

Ut pauxillum

ad refocillandam

animam cibi caperent.

Alios uero nusquam:quin potius

de ipsis montibus,

speluncis ac saltibus,

dumis consertis

continuerebellabant.


83/98

Alii transmarinas

petebant regiones

cum ululatu magno

ceu celeumatis uicehoc modo sub uelorum

sinibus cantantes:

‘dedisti nos

tamquam oues escarum

et in gentibusdisperisti nos’:


84/98

Alii mantanis

collibus minacibus

praeruptis uallatis

et densissimissaltibus marinisque

rupibus uitam

suspecta semper

mente credentes,

in patria licettrepidi persabant.


85/98

Tempore igitur

interueniente aliquanto,

cum recessissent

domum crudelissimipraedones,

roborante deo reliquiae,

quibus confugiunt

undique

de diuersis locismiserrimi ciues,


86/98

Tam audie

quam apes alueariprocella imminente,

simul deprecanteseum tot corde

et, ut dicitur,

innumeris ‘onerantes

aethera uotis’,

ne ad internicionemusque delerentur,


87/98

Uictores prouocantes

ad proelium:

quis uictoria domino

annuente cessit duceambrosio aureliano

uiro modesto,

qui solus forte

romanae gentis

tantae tempestatiscollisione occisis


88/98

In eadem

parentibus purpura

nimirum indutis

superfuerat,Cuius

nunc temporibus

nostris suboles

magnopere auita

bonitate degenerauit,uires capessunt,


89/98

Ex eo tempore

nunc ciues,

nunc hostes,

uincebant,

ut in ista gente

experietur dominussolito more

praesentem israelem,utrum diligat eum an non:


90/98

Usque ad annum obsessionis

badonici montis,

nouissimaeque ferme

de furciferisnon minimae stragis,

quique quadragesimus

quartus (ut noui)

orditur annus mense

iam uno emnso,qui et meae natiuitatis est.


91/98

Sed ne nunc quidem,

ut antea,

ciuitates patriae

inhabitantur;sed desertae dirutaeque

hactenus squalent,

cessantibus licet

externis bellis,

sed non ciuilibus.


92/98

Haesit etenim tam desperati

insulae excidii

insperatique mentio auxilii

memoriae eorumqui utriusque miraculi

testes extitere:

Et ob hoc reges, publici,

priuati, sacerdotes, ecclesiastici,

suum quiqueordinem seruarunt.


93/98

At illis decedentibus

cum successiset

aetas tempestatis

illius nescia et praesentistantum serenitatis

experta,

ita cuncta ueritais

ac iustitiae

moderamina concussaac subuersa sunt


94/98

Ut earum

non dicam uestigium

sed ne monimentum

quidem in supra dictispropemodum

ordinibus appareat,

exceptis paucis

et ualde paucis

qui ob amissionemtantae multitudinis,


95/98

Quae cotidie prona

ruit ad tartara,

tam breuis

numerus habenturut eos quodammodo

uenerabilis mater ecclesia

in suo sinu recumbentes

non uideat,

quos solos uerosfilios habet.


96/98

Quorum ne quis me

agregiam uitam omnibus

admirabilem deoque

amabilem carpere putet,quibus nostra infirmitas

in sacris orationibus

ut non penitus conlabatur

quasi columnis

quibusdam ac fulcrissaluberrimus sustentatur,


97/98

Si qua liberius

de his,

immo lugubrius,

cumulo malorumconpulsus,

qui seruiunt

non solum uentri

sed diabolo

potius quamchristo,


98/98

Qui est benedictus

in saecula deus,

non tam discptauero

quam defleuero.quippe quid celabunt

ciues quam

non solum norunt

sed exprobrant

the exemplar of gildas' de excidio

Documents