part 2 question11

11) What are the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles? Explain their importance (Sandie,chloe)

From c890: Production of Anglo-Saxon Chronicles

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles was also most likely instigated by King Alfred. It survived in seven manuscript versions (A to G) and is a continuous record of annual events, starting with the 1st landing of Julius Ceasar (BC) and ending with the coronation of Henry II in 1154.
Early West Saxon is based on the Parker Manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, the two oldest manuscripts of Alfred’s translation of Gregory’s Cura Pastoralis and the Lauderdale MS of the OE translation of Orosium, all from the late 9th or early 10th century.

It is a collection of annals in OE narrating the history of the Anglo-Saxons. It is the single most important source for history of England in Anglo-Saxon times. Without the chronicles it would be impossible to write the history of the English from the Romans to the Norman Conquest. The chronicle is central to the mainstream of English historical tradition. Its importance is not limited to the historical information it provides but also as an important source for the early development of the English language.

A: The Winchester Chronicle
B: The Abingdon Chronicle I
C: The Abingdon Chronicle II
D: The Worcester Chronicle
E: The Peterborough Chronicle
F: The Canterbury Bilingual Epitome
G:

Amongst the important texts of the Alfredia era are the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles (or, rather, the Parker Chronicle). For the 1st time we have long continuous passages of Old English prose, which enables us to paint a reasonable picture of Old English syntax and prose style. However, it can be seen that the majority of these texts are translations from Latin. The Chronicles provide us now with invaluable accounts of those turbulent times.


The Cambridge History of the English Language, p.15
A history of English p.80-86
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Anglo-Saxon_Chronicle#cite_note-BlairAITASE_355-23 ...Peter Hunter Blair. (1960). An Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England, 3rd ed., (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 2003

11. What are the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles? Explain their importance.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is a collection of annals (a narrative of events written year by year) in Old English chronicling the history of the Anglo-Saxons. It is nothing less than a capsule history of the Anglo-Saxons beginning with the birth of Christ, and continuing in one vertion at least to the year 1154. The annals were initially created late in the 9th century, during the reign of Alfred the Great (King of Wessex from 871 to 899).g The chronicles were the most striking literary product credited to Alfred’s time, even though there is little doubt that it begun before him.

Nine manuscripts survive in whole or in part, though not all are of equal historical value and none of them are the original version. Of the nine surviving manuscripts, seven are written entirely in Old English (also known as Anglo-Saxon). We can by no means suppose that the entries were all written immediately after their years were past. Also, the entries of the chronicles are not uniform. Some are short and descriptive statements, some longer stories.
It is to the Chronicle that we awe our remarkably detailed knowledge of Anglo-Saxon history. Except for the Chronicle, no outstanding texts are ascribed to the period immediately after Alfred. It is invaluable source of information not only about Anglo-Saxon history, but also about the Old English language.

The 9 Chronicles ( There is a picture that I cannot post that classify the chronicles)

The Winchester Chronicle
The Winchester, or Parker, Chronicle, is the oldest manuscript of the Chronicle that survives. It was begun at Old Minster, Winchester, towards the end of Alfred's reign. The manuscript begins with a genealogy of Alfred, and the first chronicle entry is for the year 60 BC. The first scribe stopped with the year 891, and the following entries were made at intervals throughout the 10th century by several scribes. The manuscript becomes independent of the other recensions after the entry for 975.
The Abingdon Chronicle I
It was written by a single scribe in the second half of the 10th century. It begins with an entry for 60 BC and ends with the entry for 977. A manuscript that is now separate was originally the introduction to this chronicle; it contains a genealogy, as does [A], but extends it to the late 10th century. It is known that [B] was at Abingdon in the mid-11th century, because it was used in the composition of [C]. Shortly after this it went to Canterbury, where interpolations and corrections were made. As with [A], it ends with a list of popes and the archbishops of Canterbury to whom they sent the pallium.
[B] The Abingdon Chronicle I
[B] was written by a single scribe in the second half of the 10th century. It begins with an entry for 60 BC and ends with the entry for 977. A manuscript that is now separate (British Library MS. Cotton Tiberius Aiii, f. 178) was originally the introduction to this chronicle; it contains a genealogy, as does [A], but extends it to the late 10th century. It is known that [B] was at Abingdon in the mid-11th century, because it was used in the composition of [C]. Shortly after this it went to Canterbury, where interpolations and corrections were made. As with [A], it ends with a list of popes and the archbishops of Canterbury to whom they sent the pallium.[4]
[C] The Abingdon Chronicle II
A page from the [C] text of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. This entry is for 871, a year of battles between Wessex and the Vikings.
[C] includes additional material from local annals at Abingdon, where it was composed. It also includes an Old English translation of Orosius's world history, followed by a menologium and some verses of the laws of the natural world and of humanity. There follows a copy of the chronicle, beginning with 60 BC; the first scribe copied up to the entry for 490, and a second scribe took over up to the entry for 1048. [B] and [C] are identical between 491 and 652, but differences thereafter make it clear that the second scribe was also using another copy of the Chronicle. This scribe also inserted, after the annal for 915, the Mercian Register, which covers the years 902–924, and which focuses on Aethelflaed. The manuscript continues to 1066 and stops in the middle of the description of the Battle of Stamford Bridge. In the 12th century a few lines were added to complete the account.[4]
[D] The Worcester Chronicle
[D] appears to have been written in the middle of the 11th century. After 1033 it includes some records from Worcester, so it is generally thought to have been composed there. Five different scribes can be identified for the entries up to 1054, after which it appears to have been worked on at intervals. The text includes material from Bede's Ecclesiastical History and from a set of 8th-century Northumbrian annals. It is thought that some of the entries may have been composed by Archbishop Wulfstan. [D] contains more information than other manuscripts on northern and Scottish affairs, and it has been speculated that it was a copy intended for the Anglicised Scottish court. From 972 to 1016 the sees of York and Worcester were both held by the same person—Oswald from 972, Ealdwulf from 992, and Wulfstan from 1003, and this may explain why a northern recension was to be found at Worcester. By the 16th century, parts of the manuscript were lost; eighteen pages were inserted containing substitute entries from other sources.
[E] The Peterborough Chronicle
In 1116 a fire at the monastery at Peterborough destroyed most of the buildings. The copy of the Chronicle kept there may have been lost at that time or later, but in either case shortly thereafter a fresh copy was made, apparently copied from a Kentish version—most likely to have been from Canterbury. The manuscript was written at one time and by a single scribe, down to the annal for 1121. The scribe added material relating to Peterborough Abbey which is not in other versions. The Canterbury original which he copied was similar, but not identical, to [D]: the Mercian Register does not appear, and a poem about the Battle of Brunanburh in 937, which appears in most of the other surviving copies of the Chronicle, is not recorded. The same scribe then continued the annals through to 1131; these entries were made at intervals, and thus are presumably contemporary records. Finally, a second scribe, in 1154, wrote an account of the years 1132–1154; but his dating is known to be unreliable. This last entry is in Middle English, rather than Old English. [E] was once owned by William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury 1633–1654, so is also known as the Laud Chronicle.[4]
[F] The Canterbury Bilingual Epitome
At about 1100 a copy of the Chronicle was written at Christ Church, Canterbury, probably by one of the scribes who made notes in [A]. This version is written in both Old English and Latin; each entry in Old English was followed by the Latin version. The version the scribe copied is similar to the version used by the scribe in Peterborough who wrote [E], though it seems to have been abridged. It includes the same introductory material as [D] and, along with [E], is one of the two chronicles that does not include the "Battle of Brunanburh" poem. The manuscript has many annotations and interlineations, some made by the original scribe and some by later scribes.[4]
[A2]/[G] Copy of the Winchester Chronicle
[A2] was copied from [A] at Winchester. The last annal copied was 1001, so the copy was made no earlier than that; and an episcopal list appended to [A2] suggests that the copy was made by 1013. This manuscript was almost completely destroyed in a fire at Ashburnham House in 1731, where the Cotton Library was housed. A few leaves remain. However, a transcript had been made by Laurence Nowell, a 16th century antiquary, which was used by Abraham Wheloc in an edition of the Chronicle printed in 1643. Because of this, it is also sometimes known as [W], after Wheloc.[4]
[H] Cottonian Fragment
[H] consists of a single leaf, containing annals for 1113 and 1114. In the entry for 1113 it includes the phrase "he came to Winchester"; hence it is thought likely that the manuscript was written at Winchester. There is not enough of this manuscript for reliable relationships to other manuscripts to be established.[4]
[I] Easter Table Chronicle
Part of [I] was written by a scribe soon after 1073. After 1085, the annals are in various hands and appear to have been written at Christ Church, Canterbury. At one point this manuscript was at St Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury.[4][10]



Robinson, Orrin, W. Old English and its Closest Relatives : A Survey of the Earliest Germanic Languages. Stanford University Press. 1992. Print.
Millward. C.M. A Biography of the English Language. Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 1996. Print.