write a short note on chronicles of medieval period
Answers
Answered by
22
Hi,
Your answer :
Medieval historiography is crystallized in agreed genres, annals, universal chronicles, local chronicles. In this tradition, faith seems to be the first criterion of acceptance of the sources of history, and Christian narratives constitute an unassailable base of historical narrative. First of all, the Old and New Testaments, then the texts of the ecclesial tradition, and finally the lives of saints constitute irrefutable sources for which the method exists as a marginal commentary and not as a critical evaluation. The American historian Patrick Geary explains how, shortly before the year one thousand, monasteries, clerics have invented an ideal past that touches the myth by finding, selecting, interpreting accessible documents and supplementing them with fakes. It was a matter of reforming the past according to the needs of the present, that is to say, to establish the authority and the legitimacy of power. But Geary also nuances the picture of a medieval historiography devoid of any critical sense. Gradually, the writings become the product of real collective enterprises within the monastic scriptorium. The monks of Reims, Fleury (St. Benedict-sur-Loire), Saint-Denis archive, copy, classify. This documentary effort has sometimes left traces such as the notes of William de Malmesbury (De Gestis regum Anglorum) who visits the British monasteries (1115-1135), or the memory of the mission entrusted to Nicolas de Senlis (1202-1203) for search in all the "good" abbeys of France the texts on Charlemagne. Thus, the chronicles are largely written from the documents and archives kept in the great abbeys, which are then the sources of the historiographical tradition. The same goes for the chronicles of Saint-Denis, which became the Grandes Croniques de France (1274) in the service of the Capetian monarchy: they rely largely on documents archived within the abbey.
___________________
___Hope this help_____
Good bye ;)
Your answer :
Medieval historiography is crystallized in agreed genres, annals, universal chronicles, local chronicles. In this tradition, faith seems to be the first criterion of acceptance of the sources of history, and Christian narratives constitute an unassailable base of historical narrative. First of all, the Old and New Testaments, then the texts of the ecclesial tradition, and finally the lives of saints constitute irrefutable sources for which the method exists as a marginal commentary and not as a critical evaluation. The American historian Patrick Geary explains how, shortly before the year one thousand, monasteries, clerics have invented an ideal past that touches the myth by finding, selecting, interpreting accessible documents and supplementing them with fakes. It was a matter of reforming the past according to the needs of the present, that is to say, to establish the authority and the legitimacy of power. But Geary also nuances the picture of a medieval historiography devoid of any critical sense. Gradually, the writings become the product of real collective enterprises within the monastic scriptorium. The monks of Reims, Fleury (St. Benedict-sur-Loire), Saint-Denis archive, copy, classify. This documentary effort has sometimes left traces such as the notes of William de Malmesbury (De Gestis regum Anglorum) who visits the British monasteries (1115-1135), or the memory of the mission entrusted to Nicolas de Senlis (1202-1203) for search in all the "good" abbeys of France the texts on Charlemagne. Thus, the chronicles are largely written from the documents and archives kept in the great abbeys, which are then the sources of the historiographical tradition. The same goes for the chronicles of Saint-Denis, which became the Grandes Croniques de France (1274) in the service of the Capetian monarchy: they rely largely on documents archived within the abbey.
___________________
___Hope this help_____
Good bye ;)
Answered by
3
Answer:
Explanation:dv how much I you so much
Similar questions