The ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PEOPLE (
Latin : Historia
ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum), written by the
Venerable Bede in about
AD 731, is a history of the Christian Churches in
England , and of
England generally; its main focus is on the conflict between the
Roman Rite and
Celtic Christianity . It was originally
Latin , is considered to be one of the most important
original references on Anglo-Saxon history and has played a key role
in the development of an
English national identity . It is believed to
have been completed in 731 when
Bede was approximately 59 years old.
* 1 Overview
* 2 Scope
* 3 Sources
* 4 Contents
* 5 Models
* 6 Themes
* 7 Omissions and bias
* 9 Continuation of
* 10 Assessment and influence
* 11 Manuscript tradition
* 11.1 Relationships between the manuscripts
* 11.2 History of the manuscripts
* 12 Printing history
* 12.1 Editions
* 13 Translations
* 14 Literature
* 15 See also
* 16 Citations
* 17 Bibliography
* 18 External links
The Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, or An Ecclesiastical
History of the English People is Bede's best-known work, completed in
about 731. The first of the five books begins with some geographical
background and then sketches the history of England, beginning with
Caesar\'s invasion in 55 BC. A brief account of Christianity in Roman
Britain , including the martyrdom of St Alban , is followed by the
story of Augustine 's mission to
England in 597, which brought
Christianity to the Anglo-Saxons. The second book begins with the
Gregory the Great in 604, and follows the further progress of
Christianity in Kent and the first attempts to evangelise Northumbria.
These encountered a setback when Penda , the pagan king of Mercia,
killed the newly Christian
Edwin of Northumbria at the Battle of
Hatfield Chase in about 632. The setback was temporary, and the third
book recounts the growth of Christianity in
Northumbria under kings
Oswald and Oswy . The climax of the third book is the account of the
Council of Whitby
Council of Whitby , traditionally seen as a major turning point in
English history. The fourth book begins with the consecration of
Archbishop of Canterbury , and recounts
Wilfrid 's efforts
to bring Christianity to the kingdom of Sussex . The fifth book
brings the story up to Bede's day, and includes an account of
missionary work in Frisia, and of the conflict with the British church
over the correct dating of Easter.
Bede wrote a preface for the work,
in which he dedicates it to Ceolwulf , king of Northumbria. The
preface mentions that Ceolwulf received an earlier draft of the book;
presumably Ceolwulf knew enough
Latin to understand it, and he may
even have been able to read it. The preface makes it clear that
Ceolwulf had requested the earlier copy, and
Bede had asked for
Ceolwulf's approval; this correspondence with the king indicates that
Bede's monastery had excellent connections among the Northumbrian
Divided into five books (about 400 pages), the Historia covers the
history of England, ecclesiastical and political, from the time of
Julius Caesar to the date of its completion (731). The first
twenty-one chapters, covering the period before the mission of
Augustine , are compiled from earlier writers such as Orosius , Gildas
Prosper of Aquitaine , the letters of
Pope Gregory I , and others,
with the insertion of legends and traditions.
After AD 596, documentary sources that
Bede took pains to obtain
England and from
Rome are used, as well as oral testimony,
which he employed along with critical consideration of its
authenticity. This is impressive; nevertheless, the Historia, like
other historical writing from this period has a lower degree of
objectivity than modern historical writings. It seems to be a mixture
of fact, legend and literature. For example,
Bede quotes at length
some speeches by people who were not his contemporaries and whose
speeches do not appear in any other surviving source; it is doubtful
whether oral traditional history supported these ostensible
The monastery at Jarrow had an excellent library. Both Benedict
Ceolfrith had acquired books from the Continent, and in
Bede's day the monastery was a renowned centre of learning.
For the period prior to Augustine's arrival in 597,
Bede drew on
earlier writers, including Orosius , Eutropius , Pliny , and
He used Constantius 's Life of Germanus as a source for Germanus 's
visits to Britain. Bede's account of the invasion of the
Anglo-Saxons is drawn largely from
Gildas 's De Excidio et Conquestu
Bede would also have been familiar with more recent
accounts such as
Eddius Stephanus 's Life of
Wilfrid , and anonymous
Gregory the Great and Cuthbert. He also drew on
Antiquities , and the works of
Cassiodorus , and there was a copy of
Liber Pontificalis in Bede's monastery.
Bede also had correspondents who supplied him with material. Albinus,
the abbot of the monastery in Canterbury, provided much information
about the church in Kent, and with the assistance of
Nothhelm , at
that time a priest in London, obtained copies of
Gregory the Great 's
Rome relating to Augustine's mission. Almost
all of Bede's information regarding Augustine is taken from these
letters, which includes the
Libellus responsionum , as chapter 27 of
book 1 is often known.
Bede acknowledged his correspondents in the
preface to the Historia Ecclesiastica; he was in contact with Daniel
, the Bishop of Winchester, for information about the history of the
church in Wessex, and also wrote to the monastery at
Cedd and Chad .
Bede also mentions an Abbot Esi as
a source for the affairs of the East Anglian church, and Bishop
Cynibert for information about Lindsey.
Walter Goffart argues that
Bede based the structure of
the Historia on three works, using them as the framework around which
the three main sections of the work were structured. For the early
part of the work, up until the Gregorian mission, Goffart asserts that
Gildas 's De excidio. The second section, detailing the
Gregorian mission of
Augustine of Canterbury was framed on the
anonymous Life of
Gregory the Great written at Whitby. The last
section, detailing events after the Gregorian mission, Goffart asserts
were modelled on Stephen of Ripon 's Life of Wilfrid. Most of Bede's
informants for information after Augustine's mission came from the
eastern part of Britain, leaving significant gaps in the knowledge of
the western areas, which were those areas likely to have a native
The History of the English Church and People has a clear polemical
and didactic purpose.
Bede sets out not just to tell the story of the
English, but to advance his views on politics and religion. In
political terms he is a partisan of his native
amplifying its role in English history over and above that of
its great southern rival. He takes greater pains in describing events
of the seventh century, when
Northumbria was the dominant Anglo-Saxon
power, than the eighth, when it was not. The only criticism he
ventures of his native
Northumbria comes in writing about the death of
King Ecgfrith in fighting the Picts at Nechtansmere in 685.
Bede attributes this defeat to God's vengeance for the Northumbrian
attack on the Irish in the previous year. For while
Bede is loyal to
Northumbria he shows an even greater attachment to the Irish and their
missionaries, whom he considers to be far more effective and dedicated
than their rather complacent English counterparts.
His final preoccupation is over the precise date of Easter , which he
writes about at length. It is here, and only here, that he ventures
some criticism of
St Cuthbert and the Irish missionaries, who
celebrated the event, according to Bede, at the wrong time. In the end
he is pleased to note that the Irish Church was saved from error by
accepting the correct date for Easter.
Bede's stylistic models included some of the same authors from whom
he drew the material for the earlier parts of his history. His
introduction imitates the work of Orosius, and his title is an echo
of Eusebius's Historia Ecclesiastica .
Bede also followed Eusebius in
Acts of the Apostles as the model for the overall work:
where Eusebius used the Acts as the theme for his description of the
development of the church,
Bede made it the model for his history of
the Anglo-Saxon church.
Bede quoted his sources at length in his
narrative, as Eusebius had done.
Bede also appears to have taken
quotes directly from his correspondents at times. For example, he
almost always uses the terms "Australes" and "Occidentales" for the
South and West Saxons respectively, but in a passage in the first book
he uses "Meridiani" and "Occidui" instead, as perhaps his informant
had done. At the end of the work,
Bede added a brief autobiographical
note; this was an idea taken from
Gregory of Tours ' earlier History
of the Franks.
Bede's work as hagiographer , and his detailed attention to dating,
were both useful preparations for the task of writing the Historia
Ecclesiastica. His interest in computus , the science of calculating
the date of Easter, was also useful in the account he gives of the
controversy between the British and Anglo-Saxon church over the
correct method of obtaining the Easter date.
One of the important themes of the Historia Ecclesiastica is that the
conversion of the British Isles to Christianity had all been the work
of Irish and Italian missionaries, with no efforts made by the native
Britons. This theme was developed from Gildas' work, which denounced
the sins of the native rulers during the invasions, with the
Bede that the invasion and settlement of the British
Isles by the Angles and Saxons was God's punishment for the lack of
missionary effort and the refusal to accept the Roman date for
celebrating Easter. Although
Bede discusses the history of
Christianity in Roman Britain, it is significant that he utterly
ignores the missionary work of
Saint Patrick . He writes approvingly
of Aidan and
Columba , who came from Ireland as missionaries to the
Picts and Northumbrians, but disapproved of the failure of the Welsh
to evangelize the invading Anglo-Saxons.
Bede was a partisan of Rome,
regarding Gregory the Great, rather than Augustine, as the true
apostle of the English. Likewise, in his treatment of the conversion
of the invaders, any native involvement is minimized, such as when
Chad of Mercia
Chad of Mercia 's first consecration, when
that two British bishops took part in the consecration, thus
invalidating it. No information is presented on who these two bishops
were or where they came from. Also important is Bede's view of the
conversion process as an upper-class phenomenon, with little
discussion of any missionary efforts among the non-noble or royal
Another view, taken by historian D. H. Farmer, is that the theme of
the work is "the progression from diversity to unity". According to
Bede took this idea from Gregory the Great, and illustrates it
in his work by showing how Christianity brought together the native
and invading races into one church. Farmer cites Bede's intense
interest in the schism over the correct date for Easter as support for
this argument, and also cites the lengthy description of the Synod of
Whitby, which Farmer regards as "the dramatic centre-piece of the
whole work." The historian Alan Thacker wrote in 1983 that Bede's
works should be seen as advocating a monastic rather than secular
ministry, and Thacker argues that Bede's treatment of
St Cuthbert is
meant to make Cuthbert a role-model for the role of the clergy
advocated by Gregory the Great.
Walter Goffart says of the Historia that many modern
historians find it a "tale of origins framed dynamically as the
Providence-guided advance of a people from heathendom to Christianity;
a cast of saints rather than rude warriors; a mastery of historical
technique incomparable for its time; beauty of form and diction; and,
not least, an author whose qualities of life and spirit set a model of
dedicated scholarship." Goffart also feels that a major theme of the
Historia is local, Northumbrian concerns, and that
Northumbria as secondary to his main concern with
northern history. Goffart sees the writing of the Historia as
motivated by a political struggle in
Northumbria between a party
devoted to Wilfrid, and those opposed to Wilfrid's policies.
Much of the "current" history in the Historia is concerned with
Wilfrid , who was a bishop in
Northumbria and whose stormy career is
documented not only in Bede's works, but in a Life of Wilfrid. A theme
in Bede's treatment of
Wilfrid is the need to minimize the conflict
Theodore of Tarsus , the Archbishop of Canterbury
, who was involved in many of Wilfrid's difficulties.
The Historia Ecclesiastica includes many accounts of miracles and
visions. These were de rigueur in medieval religious narrative, but
Bede appears to have avoided relating the more extraordinary tales;
and, remarkably, he makes almost no claims for miraculous events at
his own monastery. There is no doubt that
Bede did believe in
miracles, but the ones he does include are often stories of healing,
or of events that could plausibly be explained naturally. The
miracles served the purpose of setting an example to the reader, and
Bede explicitly states that his goal is to teach morality through
history, saying "If history records good things of good men, the
thoughtful reader is encouraged to imitate what is good; if it records
evil of wicked men, the devout reader is encouraged to avoid all that
is sinful and perverse."
OMISSIONS AND BIAS
Bede apparently had no informant at any of the main Mercian religious
houses. His information about
Mercia came from
Lastingham , in
Northumbria, and from Lindsey, a province on the borders of
Northumbria and Mercia. As a result, there are noticeable gaps in his
coverage of Mercian church history, such as his omission of the
division of the huge Mercian diocese by Theodore in the late 7th
century. Bede's regional bias is apparent.
There were clearly gaps in Bede's knowledge, but
Bede also says
little on some topics that he must have been familiar with. For
Bede recounts Wilfrid's missionary activities, he
does not give a full account of his conflict with Archbishop Theodore
of Canterbury , or his ambition and aristocratic lifestyle. Only the
existence of other sources such as the Life of
Wilfrid make it clear
Bede discreetly avoids saying. The omissions are not restricted
Bede makes no mention at all of
Boniface , though it is
unlikely he knew little of him; and the final book contains less
information about the church in his own day than could be expected. A
possible explanation for Bede's discretion may be found in his comment
that one should not make public accusations against church figures, no
matter what their sins;
Bede may have found little good to say about
the church in his day and hence preferred to keep silent. It is clear
that he did have fault to find; his letter to Ecgberht contains
several criticisms of the church.
The Historia Ecclesiastica has more to say about episcopal events
than it does about the monasteries of England.
Bede does shed some
light on monastic affairs; in particular he comments in book V that
many Northumbrians are laying aside their arms and entering
monasteries "rather than study the arts of war. What the result of
this will be the future will show." This veiled comment, another
example of Bede's discretion in commenting on current affairs, could
be interpreted as ominous given Bede's more specific criticism of
quasi-monasteries in his letter to Ecgberht, written three years
Bede's account of life at the court of the Anglo-Saxon kings includes
little of the violence that
Gregory of Tours mentions as a frequent
occurrence at the Frankish court. It is possible that the courts were
as different as their descriptions makes them appear but it is more
Bede omitted some of the violent reality.
that he wrote the work as an instruction for rulers, in order that
"the thoughtful listener is spurred on to imitate the good". It also
was no part of Bede's purpose to describe the kings who did not
convert to Christianity in the Historia.
The Reckoning of Time (De Temporum Ratione), using
something similar to the anno Domini era (BC/AD dating system) created
by the monk
Dionysius Exiguus in 525, continuing to use it throughout
Historia Ecclesiastica (731), becoming very influential in causing
that era to be adopted thereafter in Western Europe. Specifically, he
used anno ab incarnatione Domini (in the year from the incarnation of
the Lord) or anno incarnationis dominicae (in the year of the
incarnation of the Lord). He never abbreviated the term like the
Bede counted anno Domini from Christ's birth, not from
Christ's conception . :778 Within this work, he was also the first
writer to use a term similar to the English before Christ. In book I
chapter 2 he used ante incarnationis dominicae tempus (before the time
of the incarnation of the Lord). However, the latter was not very
influential—only this isolated use was repeated by other writers
during the rest of the
Middle Ages . The first extensive use of "BC"
(hundreds of times) occurred in Fasciculus Temporum by Werner
Rolevinck in 1474, alongside years of the world (anno mundi).
CONTINUATION OF BEDE
Some early manuscripts contain additional annalistic entries that
extend past the date of completion of the Historia Ecclesiastica, with
the latest entry dated 766. No manuscripts earlier than the twelfth
century contain these entries, except for the entries for 731 through
734, which do occur in earlier manuscripts. Much of the material
replicates what is found in
Simeon of Durham 's chronicle; the
remaining material is thought to derive from northern chronicles from
the eighth century.
The Historia was translated into
Old English sometime between the end
of the ninth century and about 930; although the surviving
manuscripts are predominantly in the
West Saxon dialect , it is clear
that the original contained Anglian features and so was presumably by
a scholar from or trained in
Mercia . The translation was once held
to have been done by King Alfred of
England , but this attribution is
no longer accepted, and debate centres on how far it owes its origins
to the patronage of Alfred and/or his associates.
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle , the earliest tranche of which was
composed/compiled around the same time as the translation was may,
drew heavily on the Historia, which formed the chronological framework
of the early parts of the Chronicle.
ASSESSMENT AND INFLUENCE
The Historia Ecclesiastica was copied often in the Middle Ages, and
about 160 manuscripts containing it survive. About half of those are
located on the European continent, rather than on the British Isles.
Most of the 8th- and 9th-century texts of Bede's Historia come from
the northern parts of the Carolingian Empire. This total does not
include manuscripts with only a part of the work, of which another 100
or so survive. It was printed for the first time between 1474 and
1482, probably at
Strasbourg, France . Modern historians have studied
the Historia extensively, and a number of editions have been produced.
For many years, early Anglo-Saxon history was essentially a retelling
of the Historia, but recent scholarship has focused as much on what
Bede did not write as what he did. The belief that the Historia was
the culmination of Bede's works, the aim of all his scholarship, a
belief common among historians in the past, is no longer accepted by
The Historia Ecclesiastica has given
Bede a high reputation, but his
concerns were different from those of a modern writer of history. His
focus on the history of the organization of the English church, and on
heresies and the efforts made to root them out, led him to exclude the
secular history of kings and kingdoms except where a moral lesson
could be drawn or where they illuminated events in the church. In the
early Middle Ages, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,
Historia Brittonum , and
Alcuin\'s Versus de patribus, regibus et sanctis Eboracensis ecclesiae
all drew heavily on the text. Likewise, the later medieval writers
William of Malmesbury ,
Henry of Huntingdon , and Geoffrey of Monmouth
used his works as sources and inspirations. Early modern writers,
Polydore Virgil and
Matthew Parker , the Elizabethan
Archbishop of Canterbury, also utilized the Historia, and his works
were used by both Protestant and Catholic sides in the Wars of
Some historians have questioned the reliability of some of Bede's
accounts. One historian, Charlotte Behr, asserts that the Historia's
account of the arrival of the Germanic invaders in Kent should be
considered as current myth, not history.
Manuscripts of the Historia Ecclesiastica fall generally into two
groups, known to historians as the "c-type" and the "m-type". Charles
Plummer , in his 1896 edition of Bede, identified six characteristic
differences between the two manuscript types. For example, the c-type
manuscripts omit one of the miracles attributed to St Oswald in book
IV, chapter 14, and the c-type also includes the years 733 and 734 in
the chronological summary at the end of the work, whereas the m-type
manuscripts stop with the year 731. Plummer thought that this meant
the m-type was definitely earlier than the c-type, but this has been
Bertram Colgrave in his 1969 edition of the text.
Colgrave points out that the addition of a couple of annals is a
simple alteration for a copyist to make at any point in the manuscript
history; he also notes that the omission of one of Oswald's miracles
is not the mistake of a copyist, and strongly implies that the m-type
is a later revision.
Some genealogical relationships can be discerned among the numerous
manuscripts that have survived. The earliest manuscripts used to
establish the c-text and m-text are as follows. The letters under the
"Version" column are identifying letters used by historians to refer
to these manuscripts.
Kassel , Landesbibliothek
4° MS. theol. 2
Cotton Tiberius C. II
Hatton 43 (4106)
Zürich , Zentralbibliothek
Cambridge , University Library
Kk. 5. 16
Saint Petersburg ,
National Library of Russia
National Library of Russia
Lat. Q. v. I. 18
Wolfenbüttel , Herzog-August Bibliothek
Würzburg , Universitätsbibliothek
M. p. th. f. 118
Namur , Public Library
Fonds de la ville 11
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE MANUSCRIPTS
The relationships between some of the early manuscripts of the
With few exceptions, Continental copies of the Historia Ecclesiastica
are of the m-type, while English copies are of the c-type. Among the
c-texts, manuscript K includes only books IV and V, but C and O are
complete. O is a later text than C but is independent of it and so the
two are a valuable check on correctness. They are thought to have both
derived from an earlier manuscript, marked "c2" in the diagram, which
does not survive. A comparison of K and c2 yields an accurate
understanding of the original c-text, but for the first three books,
which are not in K, it is sometimes impossible to know if a variant
reading in C and O represents the original state of the c-text, or is
a variation only found in c2. One long chapter, book I chapter 27, is
also found in another manuscript, Rh. 95 at the Zürich
Zentralbibliothek; this is another witness to the c-text and appears
to be independent of c2, and so is useful as a further cross-check on
The m-text depends largely on manuscripts M and L, which are very
early copies, made not long after Bede's death. Both seem likely to
have been taken from the original, though this is not certain. Three
further manuscripts, U, E and N, are all apparently the descendants of
a Northumbrian manuscript that does not survive but which went to the
continent in the late-8th century. These three are all early
manuscripts, but are less useful than might be thought, since L and M
are themselves so close to the original.
The text of both the m-type and c-type seems to have been extremely
accurately copied. Taking a consensus text from the earliest
Bertram Colgrave counted 32 places where there was an
apparent error of some kind. However, 26 of these are to be found
within a transcription from an earlier source, and it is apparent by
checking independent copies of those sources that in such cases Bede
copied the mistake faithfully into his own text.
HISTORY OF THE MANUSCRIPTS
* K appears to have been written in
Northumbria in the late 8th
century. Only books IV and V survive; the others were probably lost
during the Middle Ages. The manuscript bears a 15th-century pressmark
of the Abbey of Fulda.
* C, also known as the
Tiberius Bede , was written in the south of
England in the second half of the 8th century. Plummer argued that it
was from Durham, but this is dismissed by Colgrave. The manuscript
contains glosses in
Old English that were added in the south during
the 9th century.
* O dates to the early 11th century, and has subsequent corrections
many of which are from the 12th century.
* L, also known as the
St Petersburg Bede
St Petersburg Bede , was copied by four
scribes no later than 747. The scribes were probably at either
Wearmouth or Jarrow Abbey.
* M, also known as the
Moore Bede , was written in
737 or shortly thereafter. The manuscript was owned at one time by
John Moore , the Bishop of Ely, and as a result it is known as the
Moore MS. Moore's collection was purchased by King George I and given
Cambridge University in 1715, where it still resides.
* U dates to the late 8th century, and is thought to be a copy, made
on the continent, of an earlier Northumbrian manuscript ("c2" in the
diagram above). It has been at Weissenburg since the end of the Middle
* E dates from the middle third of the 9th century. In 800, a list
was made of books at
Würzburg cathedral; the list includes one
Historia Anglorum and E may be a copy of that manuscript. Subsequently
E is known to have been in the possession of
Ebrach Abbey .
* N was copied in the 9th century by several scribes; at one point
it was owned by St Hubert in the
Manuscripts written before AD 900 include:
* Corbie MS, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris
* St. Gall Monastery Library
Copies are sparse throughout the 10th century and for much of the
11th century. The greatest number of copies of Bede's work was made in
the 12th century, but there was a significant revival of interest in
the 14th and 15th centuries. Many of the copies are of English
provenance, but also surprisingly many are Continental.
The first printed copy of the Historia Ecclesiastica appeared from
the press of
Heinrich Eggestein in
Strasbourg , probably between 1475
and 1480. A defect in the text allows the identification of the
manuscript Eggestein used; it subsequently appeared in a catalogue of
the Vienna Dominicans of 1513. Eggestein had also printed an edition
of Rufinus 's translation of Eusebius 's Ecclesiastical History , and
the two works were reprinted, bound as a single volume, on 14 March
1500 by Georg Husner , also of Strasbourg. Another reprint appeared on
7 December 1506, from
Heinrich Gran and S. Ryman at
A Paris edition appeared in 1544, and in 1550 John de Grave produced
an edition at
Antwerp . Two reprints of this edition appeared, in 1566
and 1601. In 1563, Johann Herwagen included it in volume III of his
eight-volume Opera Omnia, and this was in turn reprinted in 1612 and
1688. Michael Sonnius produced an edition in Paris in 1587, including
the Historia Ecclesiastica in a collection of other historical works;
and in 1587 Johann Commelin included it in a similar compilation,
Heidelberg . In 1643,
Abraham Whelock produced at Cambridge
an edition with the
Old English text and the
Latin text in parallel
columns, the first in England.
All of the above editions were based on the C-text. The first edition
to use the m-type manuscripts was printed by Pierre Chifflet in 1681,
using a descendant of the Moore MS. For the 1722 edition, John Smith
obtained the Moore MS., and also having access to two copies in the
Cotton Library was able to print a very high quality edition. Smith
undertook his edition under the influence of
Thomas Gale , encouraged
Ralph Thoresby , and with assistance of
Humfrey Wanley on Old
English . He spent the majority of his time residing in Cambridge,
and working on it, but did not live to complete the preparation. His
son George brought out in 1722 the Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ Gentis
Anglorum Libri Quinque, auctore Venerabili Bæda … cura et studio
Johannis Smith, S. T. P.,
Cambridge University Press. It contains
also the preface to
The Reckoning of Time , and a world-chronicle. It
also had the
Old English version of the Historia ecclesiastica.
Smith's edition is described by
David C. Douglas as "an enormous
advance" on previous ones, adding that textual criticism of Bede
hardly then changed until 1896, when the Plummer edition appeared.
Subsequently the most notable edition was that of
Charles Plummer ,
whose 1896 Venerabilis Bedae Opera Historica, with a full commentary,
has been a foundation-stone for all subsequent scholarship.
Heinrich Eggestein , Strasbourg
* 1550: John de Grave, Antwerp
* 1587: Michael Sonnius, Paris
Abraham Whelock , Cambridge
* 1722: John Smith , Cambridge
* 1861: Migne,
Patrologia Latina (vol. 95), reprint of Smith's
Charles Plummer (ed.), Venerabilis Baedae Historiam
ecclesiasticam gentis Anglorum, Historiam abbatum, Epistolam ad
Ecgberctum una cum Historia abbatum auctore anonymo, 2 vols (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1896).
Bertram Colgrave and R. A. B. Mynors (eds), Bede’s
Ecclesiastical History of the English People
Ecclesiastical History of the English People (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
Michael Lapidge (ed), Pierre Monat and Philippe Robin
(trans.), Bède le Vénérable, Histoire ecclésiastique du peuple
anglais = Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, Sources
chrétiennes, 489–91, 3 vols (Paris: Cerf, 2005).
* Late ninth century: an anonymous, abbreviated translation into Old
English by an anonymous scholar, possibly at the suggestion of Alfred
the Great .
* 1565: Thomas Stapleton ,
Antwerp (Imprinted at Antwerp: By Iohn
Laet, at the signe of the Rape)
John Allen Giles
John Allen Giles , London.
* 1866: (in German) M. M. Wilden, Schaffhausen.
* 1903: L. C. Jane, Temple Classics.
* 1907: A. M. Sellar, London, George Bell & Sons.
* 1955: Leo Sherley-Price, Penguin, reprinted with revisions 1965,
revised 1968, revised 1990.
Bertram Colgrave and R. A. B. Mynors, Oxford, Clarendon
Press, reprint with corrections 1992.
* 1982: (in German) Günter Spitzbart, Darmstadt.
* 1989: (in Chinese) Chen Wei-zhen New York:
* List of manuscripts of Bede\'s Historia Ecclesiastica
* ^ A B Farmer 1978 , p. 21
* ^ A B Farmer 1978 , p. 22
* ^ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Campbell "Bede"
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography
* ^ A B Farmer 1978 , p. 31
* ^ Farmer 1978 , pp. 31–32
* ^ Abels 1983 , pp. 1–2
* ^ A B Farmer 1978 , p. 32
* ^ Bede, "Preface", Historia Ecclesiastica, p. 41.
* ^ Cramp, "Monkwearmouth (or Wearmouth) and Jarrow", pp.
* ^ A B C D Farmer 1978 , p. 25
* ^ Lapidge, "Gildas", p. 204.
* ^ Meyvaert "Bede" Speculum p. 831
* ^ Meyvaert "Bede" Speculum p. 843
* ^ Keynes, "Nothhelm", pp. 335 336.
* ^ Wallace-Hadrill Bede's Ecclesiastical History pp. 37-38
* ^ A B C Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica, Preface, p. 42.
* ^ Goffart Narrators pp. 296-307
* ^ A B Brooks "From British to English Christianity" Conversion
and Colonization pp. 7-10
* ^ Brooks "From British to English Christianity" Conversion and
Colonization pp. 12-14
* ^ Ray 2001 , pp. 57–59
* ^ Farmer 1978 , p. 26
* ^ A B Farmer 1978 , p. 27
* ^ Brooks "From British to English Christianity" Conversion and
Colonization pp. 4-7
* ^ Farmer 1978 , p. 30
* ^ Farmer 1978 , pp. 30–31
* ^ Higham 2006 , p. 54
* ^ Goffart Narrators p. 235
* ^ Goffart Narrators p. 240
* ^ Goffart Narrators p. 326
* ^ Chadwick "Theodore" Archbishop Theodore pp. 92-93
* ^ Farmer 1978 , pp. 26–27
* ^ Farmer 1978 , pp. 25–26
* ^ A B C Yorke, Kings and Kingdoms, p. 100.
* ^ Farmer 1978 , pp. 29–30
* ^ A B Farmer 1978 , p. 23
* ^ Thacker 1998 , pp. 474–476
* ^ Bede, HE, V.23
* ^ Quoted in Brown 1999 , p. 20
* ^ Tyler 2007 , p. 148
* ^ Blair 1990 , p. 269
* ^ Blackburn, Bonnie; Holford-Strevens, Leofranc (1999). The
Oxford companion to the Year: An exploration of calendar customs and
Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-214231-3 .
...if Dionysius, whose calendrical rules or argumenta make September,
not January, the beginning of the year, treated incarnation as
synonymous with birth (as his early followers, including Bede, do)
(first published 1999)
* ^ A B C Whitelock, English Historical Documents, p. 259–260.
* ^ The
Old English Version of Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the
English People, ed. by Thomas Miller, Early English Text Society, o.
s. 95, 96, 110, 111 (London: Trübner, 1890-98).
* ^ A B Sharon M. Rowley, The
Old English Version of Bede's
Historia ecclesiastica, Anglo-Saxon Studies, 16 (Cambridge: D.S.
Brewer, 2011), pp. 36-46.
* ^ Higham 2006 , p. 24
* ^ Higham 2006 , p. 25
* ^ A B Wright Companion to
Bede pp. 4-5
* ^ Higham 2006 , p. 21
* ^ Goffart Narrators p. 236
* ^ Goffart Narrators pp. 238-9
* ^ De pontificibus et sanctis Ecclesiae Eboracensis, The Bishops,
Kings, and Saints of York, ed. and trans. by Peter Godman (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1982).
* ^ Higham 2006 , p. 27
* ^ Higham 2006 , p. 33
* ^ Behr "Origins of Kingship" Early Medieval Europe pp. 25-52
* ^ A B C D E F Colgrave & Mynors, Bede's Ecclesiastical History,
* ^ A B C D E F G H I J K Colgrave & Mynors, Bede's Ecclesiastical
History, pp. xli–xlv.
* ^ Colgrave & Mynors, Bede's Ecclesiastical History, pp.
* ^ Laistner, M. L. W. (with H. H. King), A Hand-List of Bede
Manuscripts, Ithaca NY: Cornell U. P. (1943).
* ^ A B C Colgrave Colgrave comments that he himself has not seen
this edition. See Colgrave & Mynors, Bede's Ecclesiastical History, p.
lxxi, n. 1.
* ^ N.J. Higham (22 November 2006). (Re-)Reading Bede: The
Ecclesiastical History in Context. Routledge. p. 30. ISBN
* ^ Bennett J. A. W.; Jack Arthur Walter Bennett; Piero Boitani.
The Humane Medievalist and other Essays in English Literature and
Learning from Chaucer to Eliot. Ed. di Storia e Letteratura. pp.
* ^ Saint
Bede (the Venerable) (1 January 1999). Bede, The
Reckoning of Time. Liverpool University Press. p. xcvii. ISBN
* ^ Sharon M. Rowley (2011). The
Old English Version of Bede\'s
Historia Ecclesiastica. Boydell & Brewer Ltd. p. 26. ISBN
David C. Douglas (1943). English Scholars. Jonathan Cape. p.
* ^ Colgrave comments that his omission of manuscript L "does not
impair the value of his text, which can fairly be described as final.
The width of his interests and the accuracy of his learning must be
the envy of any successor". D. H. Farmer, in the Penguin Bede, says
that "like all previous editions of Bede's Ecclesiastical History this
one depends on the pioneer work of Charles Plummer". See Colgrave
Baedae Historia Ecclesiastica a gloriosissimo veterum Anglo-Saxonum
rege Aluredo Saxonice reddita, cura et studio Johannis Smith ,
Cantabrigiae, 1722; The
Old English Version of Bede's Ecclesiastical
History of the English People, ed. by Thomas Miller, Early English
Text Society, o. s. 95, 96, 110, 111 (London: Trübner, 1890-98).
* Abels, Richard (1983). "The Council of Whitby: A Study in Early
Journal of British Studies . 23 (1): 1–25.
doi :10.1086/385808 .
* Blair, Peter Hunter (1990). The World of
Bede (Reprint of 1970
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-39819-3 .
* Brown, George Hardin (1999). "Royal and Ecclesiastical rivalries
in Bede's History". Renascence. 51 (1): 19–33.
* Farmer, David Hugh (1978). The
Oxford Dictionary of Saints.
Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19282-038-9 .
* Higham, N. J (2006). (Re-)Reading Bede: The Historia Ecclesiastica
in Context. Routledge. ISBN 978-0415353687 .
* Lapidge, Michael (2014). "Bede, OE". In Lapidge, Michael; Blair,
John; Keynes, Simon; Scragg, Donald. The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia
England (2nd ed.). Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell. p.
62. ISBN 978-0-631-22492-1 .
* Ray, Roger (2001). "Bede". In Lapidge, Michael; et al. Blackwell
Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England. Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp.
57–59. ISBN 978-0-631-22492-1 .
* Thacker, Alan (1998). "Memorializing Gregory the Great: The Origin
and Transmission of a Papal Cult in the 7th and early 8th centuries".
Early Medieval Europe. 7 (1): 59–84. doi :10.1111/1468-0