ДЖОФФРИ КИТИНГ И ПРЕДСТАВЛЕНИЯ ОБ ИСТОРИИ “ГОСУДАРСТВА” - ТРАДИЦИОННЫЕ ФОРМЫ И НОВЫЕ КОНТЕКСТЫ
The author analyses the historical narrative, Foras Feasa ar Éirinn, written by Geoffrey Keating (1580–1644), as reflection on British composite project in Ireland. The article explores the image of authority which was constructed not only on the basis of copied or retold material from the medieval Irish sources, but also on the basis of perceptions of the period Keating lived in. Therefore, Keating's narrative comprised concepts of authority, which the author acquired from preceding Irish tradition and which he left intact, and anachronisms, the elements of the reality surrounding the Irish history-writer, which were projected on the Irish past.
The early Modern time was the period of serious cataclysms and transformations. Various groups of population reacted to events in different ways. One of the instruments of the new territorial legitimacy, which was required by the epoch, were historical narratives. They were used as arguments in the polemic about the past of Ireland. English historians and writers followed Gerald of Wales and treated the Irish pre-Anglo-Norman past critically regarding the native population as barbarians. To counter their arguments Gaelic and Old English intellectuals tried to justify civility of the Irish. ‘Foras Feasa ar Éirinn’ by Geoffrey Keating (1570–1644), a Catholic priest of Old-English descent, was such a narrative, in which the history of Ireland from the first settlers to the Anglo-Norman Invasion is described. The basis of his narrative is ‘Lebor Gabála Érenn’ (‘The Book of Invasions’), the medieval source of the peopling of Ireland.
As far as Keating is concerned, it is worth to distinquish between a tradition (where he rigorously follows his predecessors in the field of Irish history-writing) and an innovation (where he re-transmits, modifies and comments on historical data). The article sheds light on what Keating shares with tradition and where he breaks with it.
The author concludes that Keating’s work heralded the transitional period in Irish history-writing. On the one hand, it fitted into the context of preceding tradition, which supplied Keating with frame stories and conceptual schemes he reproduced. On the other hand, his text was defined by the demands of his time and in this perspective it conformed to the standards of Antiquarian and Erudite history-writing with its integral engagement of the author in the described events. That is why, “Foras Feasa ar Éirinn” was definitely individual.
A piece of G. Keating's "Foras Feasa ar Éirinn" on Labraid commented and translated into Russian
The present volume is aimed at collecting and systematizing the unique experience of Ireland in an attempt to explain the phenomenon of the "Celtic Tiger", an exemplary illustration of the role of soft power as the leading power in the modern world.
This article reviews the prevailing tendencies in the interpretation of the works by the figures of the Irish Enlightenment: Geoffrey Keating, John Lynch, Charles O’Conor, Sylvester O’Halloran, and Charles Vallancey. The researchers of the works of the aforementioned authors can be divided into two groups depending on the angle of their approach to the issues: those who looked into ethnic discourses (first approach) and those who looked into ethnic groups (second approach) in the XVII—XVIII centuries. As a result of the review of contemporary historiography, Ireland is represented as a network of various discourses which are still to be reconsidered in their full diversity.
The paper examines the main features of Roman-Irish relationship through the prism of military conflicts. Latin sources of the second half of the 4th century mention two groups of Irish raiders: skotti and attacotti. Both groups are difficult to identify, however it is proposed, based on the account of Ammianus Marcellinus, to distinguish them by the logic of forming (respectively, social and clan-based) and goals of military actvity (plundering and serch for new territory to settle). This assumtion is confirmed by later accounts of the sources.