> “Here we have a late-12th-century sermon deploying a meme from the hit romantic story of the day,” Seb Falk, a historian at the University of Cambridge, says in a statement. “This is very early evidence of a preacher weaving pop culture into a sermon to keep his audience hooked.”
One of the oldest pieces of writing I have from my ancestors is a dedication in a family bible, to my great-grandfather from his parents. It quotes a popular hymn. But when I looked it up, that was a quite recently written text at the time they quoted it, and it wasn't technically even a hymn, but a song from a play (Christian Richardt's version of the fairy tale sleeping beauty). Looks at first glance like they're quoting an old hymn, but it's more like me quoting a Disney film from 20 years ago.
So, that scribble that looks approximately like "ẏlueſ" is interpreted, variously as "ylves" which is identified as elves; or as a clumsy rendering of "ƿlues" which uses an archaic character (that's not a "p") that corresponds to something like "wlues" or "wlves" (wolves). (??)
The Smithsonian article doesn't actually say why Falk and Wade believe the relevant words are a scribal error. It just says the scribe had an "unsteady calligraphy", though looking at the manuscript I disagree with that assessment (the hand is steady and clear). And in any case, Falk and Wade don't argue that the issue is a sloppy hand, but rather that the scribe was unfamiliar with non-Latin letterforms, namely wyn and thorne. They identify two errors the scribe made, and also support their new reading by looking more thoroughly at the surrounding sermon (e.g., it talks about wolves and sets up a comparison just before the quote from Wade).
Off-detail/on-topic: After 10 months of reading Pratchett's Discworld novels, I'm now reading the Cantebury Tales. And by golly, the tales are surprisingly accessible, entertaining and fun to read.
> “Here we have a late-12th-century sermon deploying a meme from the hit romantic story of the day,” Seb Falk, a historian at the University of Cambridge, says in a statement. “This is very early evidence of a preacher weaving pop culture into a sermon to keep his audience hooked.”
One of the oldest pieces of writing I have from my ancestors is a dedication in a family bible, to my great-grandfather from his parents. It quotes a popular hymn. But when I looked it up, that was a quite recently written text at the time they quoted it, and it wasn't technically even a hymn, but a song from a play (Christian Richardt's version of the fairy tale sleeping beauty). Looks at first glance like they're quoting an old hymn, but it's more like me quoting a Disney film from 20 years ago.
I’m sure that there’s a ton of things out there that look like biblical references but are actually just quoting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction :-)
>quoting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction :-)
SAY WHAT AGAIN MOTHER F**er - Hezakiah, 15:8
The paper is very approachable too: https://academic.oup.com/res/article/76/326/339/8198901
Includes mention of M.R.James whom I know mostly as an author of ghost stories!
So, that scribble that looks approximately like "ẏlueſ" is interpreted, variously as "ylves" which is identified as elves; or as a clumsy rendering of "ƿlues" which uses an archaic character (that's not a "p") that corresponds to something like "wlues" or "wlves" (wolves). (??)
The Smithsonian article doesn't actually say why Falk and Wade believe the relevant words are a scribal error. It just says the scribe had an "unsteady calligraphy", though looking at the manuscript I disagree with that assessment (the hand is steady and clear). And in any case, Falk and Wade don't argue that the issue is a sloppy hand, but rather that the scribe was unfamiliar with non-Latin letterforms, namely wyn and thorne. They identify two errors the scribe made, and also support their new reading by looking more thoroughly at the surrounding sermon (e.g., it talks about wolves and sets up a comparison just before the quote from Wade).
The guy’s name is Wade and he’s studying the ancient Song of Wade closely
Nominative determinism at work
Off-detail/on-topic: After 10 months of reading Pratchett's Discworld novels, I'm now reading the Cantebury Tales. And by golly, the tales are surprisingly accessible, entertaining and fun to read.
Do you find that reading Pratchett made the Canterbury Tales more accessible, or changed how you perceive them, or otherwise affected your reading?
Searching "song of the wade" and trying to find a resource thay isn't dated less than a month ago is surprisingly frustrating
Wouldn't it technically be a scribal error since it predates typesetting?
A scribo, then?