An Ecclesiastical History

Bede’s Ecclesiastical History is our main source for early Christian Anglo-Saxon England, but how was it written? When? And why? Scholars have spent much of the last half century investigating the latter question – the ‘why’. This new study is the first to systematically consider the ‘how’ and the ‘when’. Richard Shaw shows that rather than producing the History at a single point in 731, Bede was working on it for as much as twenty years, from c. 715 to just before his death in 735. Unpacking and extending the period of composition of Bede’s best-known book makes sense of the complicated and contradictory evidence for its purposes. The work did not have one context, but several, each with its own distinct constructed audiences. Thus, the History was not written for a single purpose to the exclusion of all others. Nor was it simply written for a variety of reasons. It was written over time – quite a lot of time – and as the world changed during that time, so too did Bede’s reasons for writing, the intentions he sought to pursue – and the patrons he hoped to please or to placate.

A handsome, large-format paperback edition set in elegant type with generous margins. The venerable Bede (AD 672-735) was not the first historian of the British Isles, but he was the first to to list and master his documentary and oral sources. For a man who travelled little, he showed a great depth of understanding about the outside world, informing himself by commissioning others to copy documents in the Papal Regista and various episcopal and monastic archives.

The Venerable Bede's history of the Christian church in England, written in the early eighth century, still stands as a significant literary work. Translated from Latin into various other languages, Bede's fascinating history has long been widely studied. Thirteen centuries later, this thorough and reliable guide by J. Robert Wright enables today's readers to follow the major English translations of Bede's work and to understand exactly what Bede was saying, what he meant, and why his words and account remain so important. Wright'sCompanion to Bede provides the answers to most questions that careful, intelligent readers of Bede are apt to ask. Despite the countless numbers of books and articles about Bede, there is no other comprehensive companion to his text that can be read in tandem with the medieval author himself. A Giniger book

Bede's Ecclesiastical History is the most important single source for early medieval English history. Without it, we would be able to say very little about the conversion of the English to Christianity, or the nature of England before the Viking Age. Bede wrote for his contemporaries, not for a later audience, and it is only by an examination of the work itself that we can assess how best to approach it as a historical source. N.J. Higham shows, through a close reading of the text, what light the Ecclesiastical History throws on the history of the period and especially on those characters from seventh- and early eighth-century England whom Bede either heroized, such as his own bishop, Acca, and kings Oswald and Edwin, or villainized, most obviously the British king Cædwalla but also Oswiu, Oswald's brother. In (Re-)Reading Bede, N.J. Higham offers a fresh approach to how we should engage with this great work of history. He focuses particularly on Bede's purposes in writing it, its internal structure, the political and social context in which it was composed and the cultural values it betrays, remembering always that our own approach to Bede has been influenced to a very great extent by the various ways in which he has been both used, as a source, and commemorated, as man and saint, across the last 1,300 years.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the "public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.