Vortigern : diforc'h etre ar stummoù
Endalc’h diverket Danvez ouzhpennet
Linenn 9:
Er pennad 23 e skriv penaos e reas "an holl guzulierien, a-gevret gant ''an tirant lorc'hus-se'' [''omnes consiliarii una cum superbo tyranno''] ur fazi bras o pediñ "ar Saozon kriz ha difeiz " da chom en Enez Vreizh.
Hervez Gweltaz e teuas ur strolladig anezho da gentañ, da ziazezañ "e reter an enez, pedet gant an tirant gwallchañsus [''infaustus'']". Hag ar re-se a bedas muioc'h a genvroiz c'hoazh, ma kreskas o zrevadenn. Goude e c'houlennas ar Saozon ma vije kresket o
N'eo ket sklaer hag-eñ e voe meneget anv Vortigern gant Gweltaz. En embannadurioù [[saoznek]] zo ne vez ket meneget e anv. Koulskoude eo roet gant daou zornskrid. E ''Codex Abrincencsis'', anavezet ivez evel ''Mommsen's MS. A'' (
Hervez an toulladig munudoù roet gant Gweltaz e c'haller soñjal en dije klevet an istor (pe eñ pe marteze e gelaouer) gant Saozon.
Linenn 18:
Kement-se n'hall ket bezañ bet lavaret nag ijinet gant ur [[Roman]] pe ur [[Brezhon]].
Gwech ebet ne lavar Gweltaz e oa ur roue eus Vortigern. Un tirant eo (tyrannus), emezañ, met n'eo ket eñ an hini zo pennkaoz d'ar bedadenn graet d'ar Saozon. Er c'hontrol: ur c'huzul zo en-dro dezhañ, hag a c'hallfe bout ur gouarnamant gant dileuridi eus ar c'heodedoù (''civitates'') , pe rannvroioù. Ne lavar ket Gweltaz e oa fall, met gwallchañsus (''infaustus''), dic'houest da varn, pezha c'haller kompren, pa ziskouezas ar c'hoprsoudarded-se bout tud disleal.
<!--
{{otheruses}}
'''Vortigern''' ({{pronEng|ˈvɔrtɨɡɝːn}}; {{lang-cy|Gwrtheyrn}}; {{lang-ang|Wyrtgeorne}}; {{lang-br|Guorthigern}}; {{lang-gle|Foirtchern}}), also spelled '''Vortiger''' and '''Vortigen''',
Modern scholars have debated the various details of Gildas' story, and attempted to pry open his language after more information. One point of discussion has been over the words Gildas uses to describe the Saxon's subsidies (''annonas'', ''epimenia''), and whether they are legal terms used in a treaty of ''[[foederati]]'', a late [[Roman Empire|Roman]] political practice of settling allied barbarian peoples within the boundaries of the Empire to furnish troops to aid in the defence of the Empire. Further, it is not known if private individuals imitated this practice. Another point of debate has been exactly where in Britain Gildas meant with his words "on the eastern side of the island": could it be [[Kent]], [[East Anglia]], or the coast of [[Northumbria]]? Or were they simply spread over 'the eastern side'? But Gildas also describes that their raids took them "sea to sea, heaped up by the eastern band of impious men; and as it devastated all the neighbouring cities and lands, did not cease after it had been kindled, until it burnt nearly the whole surface of the island, and licked the western ocean with its red and savage tongue" (chapter 24).
The only certainty one gets, after reading much of the secondary literature, is that even the writers close to Gildas in time struggled with the gaps in his account, which they filled with either their own research, or imagination.
-->
===Bede===▼
Kentañ hini a zalc'haskonteus skrid Gweltaz eo [[Bede]], a vez istimet bras gant an istorourien a vremañ dre ma oa desket ha gouest da varn.
▲===Bede===
▲The first to consider Gildas's account was [[Bede]], who is highly praised by modern scholars for his scholarship and analysis. This, however, has hardly any bearing on his description of the 5th and 6th centuries, because Bede, writing in the early- to mid-8th century, mostly paraphrases Gildas's writings in his ''[[Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum]]'' and ''[[De temporum ratione|De Temporum Ratione]]''. Bede only adds several details, perhaps most importantly the name of this "proud tyrant", Vortigern ([[Latin]] ''Uurtigernus''/''Uuertigernus''/''Vertigernus'', from the [[Old Welsh]] ''Gwrtheyrn''. The [[Old English language|Old English]] version was ''Wyrtgeorn''). Since Bede leaned heavily on Gildas, this may simply be a confirmation that Gildas indeed used the name of Vortigern, too. Another significant detail which Bede added to Gildas' account is to call Vortigern the [[King of the Britons|king of the British people]].
Bede also supplies a date (which has been traditionally accepted, but has been considered suspect since the late 20th century) of AD 446, "[[Marcian]] being made emperor with [[Valentinian III|Valentinian]], and the forty-sixth from [[Caesar Augustus|Augustus]], ruled the empire seven years." However, he also provides dates such as 449-455 and 446-447, which does not add to his credibility. It will be obvious that these dates do not represent a single source, but are the result of calculated approximations, and therefore useless as hard facts. Bede seems to have used a period of 40 years, which he added to the end of Roman Britain, which he reasonably calculated at AD 409 or 406, when the first usurper may have attempted to rise against the regular Roman government. Where this vague period of 40 years originated is unknown to us, other than that the Historia Brittonum mentions a similar period, which its author uses for a calculation of a similar period, which he placed between the death of the usurper Magnus Maximus (388) and the adventus (428).
| |||