Yup, I knew that. The question is continuity. Did Celtic post-Roman
Britain still have pubs, how about the AS, and did the conquest, if
the institution survived, change their form?
Surely there's a king of cups out there?
At 02:41 PM 12/4/2008, you wrote:
>Well, the Romans had inns on their main English roads around 200AD
>usually with their own
>breweries attached (they were seemingly prone to burning down when
>the brewing got out of hand!!
>so the breweries were usually set back away from the road by a
>goodly distance.) Before this
>there weren't many proper roads so it is likely that earlier
>establishments were purely local
>and not proper inns.
>
>Roger Collett
>Arrowhead Press
>http://www.arrowheadpress.co.uk/
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality."
>Jules de Gaultier
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 7:23 PM
>Subject: Re: yogh alliteration in BEOWULF
>
>
>>Which leads to a serious question. Is there any record of when the
>>English pub came to be? As
>>opposed to stopping at a farmhouse by the road and asking for
>>hospitality and a pint. It would
>>be amusing to think they predate the conquest.
>>
>>Mark
>>
>>At 01:46 PM 12/4/2008, you wrote:
>>>I don't know "Blickling", his work, etc. Nor Google I not.
>>>I just like the sound of "Blickling"!
>>>Back in seasons of Beowulf, there must have been "Blickings", as well.
>>>When together in Tavern or Inn, often, by their sounds, they were known,
>>>I would bet, as a "Blickering Lot", indeed more well known for "blickering"
>>>than not. Lucky to have been spared by Grendel and such!
>>>
>>>Adios,
>>>
>>>Stephen V
>>>http://stephenvincent.net/blog/
>>>
>>>
>>>--- On Thu, 12/4/08, Christopher Walker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>From: Christopher Walker <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Subject: Re: yogh alliteration in BEOWULF
>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>Date: Thursday, December 4, 2008, 8:05 AM
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>KIERNAN DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR THE FACT THAT THE SCRIBE
>>>DID NOT UNDERSTAND ARCHAIC BITS OF WHAT HE COPIED.
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>Actually two scribes.
>>>
>>>Kiernan, I think, wants to see Beowulf as part of the Blickling Codex.
>>>Beowulf's second scribe, who continued the transcription (from a bit
>>>beyond the halfway point) may have belonged to the Blickling scriptorium.
>>>There are also parallels between the description of Grendel's lair in
>>>Beowulf and a description of Hell in one of the Blickling Homilies. (The
>>>likely source is common. But was this a _direct and independent_ source for
>>>each? Did Beowulf influence the Homily? Did the Homily influence Beowulf? Or
>>>what?)
>>>
>>>Kiernan places much less weight on the linguistic discrepancies within the
>>>text, arguing (to put it very crudely) that the *author* (hah!) is both
>>>quite late and a sort of OE Ossian or Rowley, consciously achaicising during
>>>the composition.
>>>
>>>CW
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>
>>>Dozens have gone missing, the decision taken is Elsewhere.
>>>but yes, yes we remain as poetry, pure immateriality.
>>>in the name of the 'current state of things' they murmur to us:
>>>"we went for a stroll, now it's a question of marching!" But this
>>>stroll of ours has brought us a long way off, and now
>>>the horizon is behind us.
>>>
>>>(from *Materiali*, Indiani Metropolitani 1977)
|