GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1999-10 > 0939471023


From: Adrian Channing <>
Subject: Re: Ives de Criel
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 08:10:23 -0400


>
> OK - my mistake. Wish I had a copy of Wace tho- took mine back to the
library.
> I seem to remember Nigel called by name. He was 'mentioned in dispatches'
for
> bravery. Cross coerrellating with other old chronicles & sources is
useful for
> lots of names in Wace. Lets see 117 - 73 = hmmm. Lots more than the dozen
> 'accepted' as being at Hastingsby the nay sayers. That was my point at
the
> beginning of thread. Besides Wace is a good read. Almost as good as Ord.
> Vitalis.
>
> Cheers
> StNeel
>

But this is only part of the argument for not relying on Wace, Anthony
Camp's booklet also stated it was found to been grossly inaccurate. Camp's
booklet cites Wace as naming Roger de Montgomery and Roger de Beaumont -
"although we know on the best authority, that both these great barons
stayed behind in Normandy" - unfortunately the best authority is not given
here. If Wace errs when dealing with "great barons" what reliance can be
given to the rest of his work.


Adrian (Surrey, UK)

This thread: