Examination of the striking new style of writing history in the twelfth century, by men such as Gaimar, Wace and Ambroise.

The first comprehensive study of the European book in the historical period known as the 'long twelfth century' (1075-1225).

This book shows how depictions of etymology were used by twelfth-century poets, translators, bureaucrats and historians to portray Britain's past.

This volume is an attempt to discuss the ways in which themes of authority and gender can be traced in the writing of chronicles and chronicle-like writings from the early Middle Ages to the Renaissance. With major contributions by fourteen authors, each of them specialists in the field, this study spans full across the compass of medieval and early modern Europe, from England and Scandinavia, to Byzantium and the Crusader Kingdoms; embraces a variety of media and methods; and touches evidence from diverse branches of learning such as language and literature, history and art, to name just a few. This is an important collection which will be of the highest utility for students and scholars of language, literature, and history for many years to come.

M. Fabius Quintilianus was a prominent orator, declaimer, and teacher of eloquence in the first century CE. After his retirement, he wrote the Institutio oratoria, a unique treatise in antiquity because it is both a handbook of rhetoric and an educational treatise. Quintilian's fame and influence are not only based on the Institutio, but also on the two collections of Declamations which were later attributed to him. The Oxford Handbook of Quintilian aims to present Quintilian's Institutio as a key treatise in the history of Greco-Roman rhetoric and to trace its influence on the theory and practice of rhetoric and education up to the present day. Topics include Quintilian's educational programme, his concepts and classifications of rhetoric, his discussion of the five canons of rhetoric, his style, his views on literary criticism, declamation, and the relationship between rhetoric and law, and the importance of the visual and performing arts in his work. His legacy is presented in successive chapters devoted to Quintilian in late antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Italian Renaissance, Northern Europe during the Renaissance, Europe from the eighteenth to the twentieth century, and the United States of America. Other chapters examine the biographical tradition, the history of printed editions, and modern assessments of Quintilian. The contributors represent a wide range of expertise and scholarly traditions, offering a unique, multidisciplinary perspective.

The Historians of Angevin England is a study of the explosion of creativity in historical writing in England in the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, and what this tells us about the writing of history in the middle ages. Many of those who wrote history under the Angevin kings of England chose as their subject the events of their own time, and explained that they did so simply because their own times were so interesting and eventful. This was the age of Henry II and Thomas Becket, Eleanor of Aquitaine and Richard the Lionheart, the invasion of Ireland and the Third Crusade, and our knowledge and impression of the period is to a great extent based on these contemporary histories. The writers in question - Roger of Howden, Ralph of Diceto, William of Newburgh, Gerald of Wales, and Gervase of Canterbury, to name a few - wrote history that is not quite like anything written in England before. Remarkable for its variety, its historical and literary quality, its use of evidence and its narrative power, this has been called a 'golden age' of historical writing in England. The Historians of Angevin England, the first volume to address the subject, sets out to illustrate the historiographical achievements of this period, and to provide a sense of how these writers wrote, and their idea of history. But it is also about how medieval intellectuals thought and wrote about a range of topics: the rise and fall of kings, victory and defeat in battle, church and government, and attitudes to women, heretics, and foreigners.

This volume contains work by scholars actively publishing on origin legends across early medieval western Europe, from the fall of Rome to the high Middle Ages. Its thematic structure creates dialogue between texts and regions traditionally studied in isolation.

Writing History for the King is at once a reassessment of the reign of Henry II of England (1133–1189) and an original contribution to our understanding of the rise of vernacular historiography in the high Middle Ages. Charity Urbanski focuses on two dynastic histories commissioned by Henry: Wace’s Roman de Rou (c. 1160–1174) and Benoît de Sainte-Maure’s Chronique des ducs de Normandie (c. 1174–1189). In both cases, Henry adopted the new genre of vernacular historical writing in Old French verse in an effort to disseminate a royalist version of the past that would help secure a grip on power for himself and his children. Wace was the first to be commissioned, but in 1174 the king abruptly fired him, turning the task over to Benoît de Sainte-Maure. Urbanski examines these histories as part of a single enterprise intended to cement the king’s authority by enhancing the prestige of Henry II’s dynasty. In a close reading of Wace’s Rou, she shows that it presented a less than flattering picture of Henry’s predecessors, in effect challenging his policies and casting a shadow over the legitimacy of his rule. Benoît de Sainte-Maure’s Chronique, in contrast, mounted a staunchly royalist defense of Anglo-Norman kingship. Urbanski reads both works in the context of Henry’s reign, arguing that as part of his drive to curb baronial power he sought a history that would memorialize his dynasty and solidify its claim to England and Normandy.

This book argues that abbatial authority was fundamental to monastic historical writing in the period c.500-1500. Writing history was a collaborative enterprise integral to the life and identity of medieval monastic communities, but it was not an activity for which time and resources were set aside routinely. Each act of historiographical production constituted an extraordinary event, one for which singular provision had to be made, workers and materials assigned, time carved out from the monastic routine, and licence granted. This allocation of human and material resources was the responsibility and prerogative of the monastic superior. Drawing on a wide and diverse range of primary evidence gathered from across the medieval Latin West, this book is the first to investigate systematically how and why abbots and abbesses exercised their official authority and resources to lay the foundations on which their communities' historiographical traditions were built by themselves and others. It showcases them as prolific authors, patrons, commissioners, project managers, and facilitators of historical narratives who not only regularly put pen to parchment personally, but also, and perhaps more importantly, enabled others inside and outside their communities by granting them the resources and licence to write. Revealing the intrinsic relationship between abbatial authority and the writing of history in the Middle Ages with unprecedented clarity, Benjamin Pohl urges us to revisit and revise our understanding of monastic historiography, its processes, and its protagonists in ways that require some radical rethinking of the medieval historian's craft in communal and institutional contexts.

Geoffrey of Monmouth’s immensely popular Latin prose Historia regum Britanniae (c. 1138), followed by French verse translations – Wace’s Roman de Brut (1155) and anonymous versions including the Royal Brut, the Munich, Harley, and Egerton Bruts (12th -14th c.), initiated Arthurian narratives of many genres throughout the ages, alongside Welsh, English, and other traditions. Arthur, Origins, Identities and the Legendary History of Britain addresses how Arthurian histories incorporating the British foundation myth responded to images of individual or collective identity and how those narratives contributed to those identities. What cultural, political or psychic needs did these Arthurian narratives meet and what might have been the origins of those needs? And how did each text contribute to a “larger picture” of Arthur, to the construction of a myth that still remains so compelling today?