The Ruin of Britain | Hacker News Reader

The Ruin of Britain

blogs.bl.uk

Matter of Britain/Arthurian mythos nerd here.

It's amazing how much of the Arthurian mythologies have been derived from varius vague allusions in this book. Probably lots of people know about the theory of Ambrosius Aurelianus as a possible candidate for historical King Arthur because of his role in the battle at Mount Badon, but what's even more interesting is that in the book Gildas refers to a leader only by their sobriquet of "the bear", which was rendered as ursus in Latin, but in Brythonic, it would've been arth.

Also another fun fact, Gildas never refers to Dumnonia by name, instead calls it "Damnonia" presumably to reflect his condemnation.

The article touches on how later Anglo Saxons identified with Gildas, especially in their own resistance to Danish invasion. I think that's largely why the myth of Arthur became so entrenched. It resonated with later English readers, with the trials of Arthur paralleling the struggle of Alfred against the Danes.

I can't help suspect that Arthurian scholars and fans that want to place Camelot in south-central England are drawn by the ghost of the kingdom of Wessex.

I once read that King Arthur is one of the crowning (pun probably intended) counterexamples of "history is written by the victors": if the Anglo-Saxons really did write the history of the Sub-Roman Britain period, we would have heard more about the Völkerwanderung and less about Arthur and Badon. But maybe what you said is more correct, that history was adapted by the victors (who then became the losers).

There are times when the victors win by allowing the losers to write 90% of the story. Thus, the Catholic saints. Many of the saints were previously pagan gods, and the Catholic Church decided that, rather than fight about it, it was easiest to just accept the old gods as saints, which made victory much easier.

http://biblelight.net/verita.htm

http://www.articleseen.com/Article_pagan-gods-and-goddesses-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_saints_and...

‘There was a historian in the time of the Britons, Gildas, who wrote about their misdeeds, how they exasperated God with their sins so much that He finally allowed the English army to conquer their land … Let us take warning from this: it is true what I say, we know of worse deeds among the English than we have heard of among the Britons.’

Note the use of "English" to equal Anglo-Saxons, and "Britons", the original inhabitants, at a time when they were arch-enemies.

I thought this would be about Brexit.

The Ruin of Britain 2.0

Arguable Britain's been ruined several times over in the last century.

Ruin being a word up for perspective and opinion, in my lifetime as well as my parents we've had two upheavals since the 70's and Brexit (again a matter of perspective) will bring about The Ruin of Britain 4.0. A shameful time to a Briton in the UK.

- An ex-Pat

Ok. Point taken.

The Ruin of Britain - The Next Chapter

Five kings criticized but only four mentioned? “Three centuries years later...”? Is this person a Guardian intern in their free time?

Erm, I count five?

"Constantine, king of Dumnonia (the area around modern Cornwall and Devon); Aurelius Caninus; grey-haired Vortipor of the Demetae (in what is now Pembrokeshire); Cuneglas, who probably ruled the area around the Dinarth Rhos peninsula; and Maelgwn of Gwynedd"

Constantine; Aurelius Caninus; Vortipor; Cuneglas and Maelgwn of Gwynedd.

Oh ok, I read that semicolon as a comma for some reason and thought Vortipor was a title of Caninus

Reply on news.ycombinator.com