Talk:Lebor Gabála Érenn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is it possible that Fir Bolg = Men of the Bags refers to BAG PIPES?? Alternatively, Fir (Celtic) = Vir (Latin) = Wer (Germanic) = Man, and Bolg (Celtic) = Vulgus (Latin) = Folk (Germanic) = People, so that Fir Bolg = Men Folk.
Also, the Pretanic Invasion of c. 600 BCE seems to be associated with the large Celtic outpourings of men into Italy of Bellovesus in the early 6th century BCE.
Also, the Laginian invasion of c. 300 BCE seems to be associated with the large Celtic outpourings of men into Greece and Asia Minor in c. 278-75 BCE...
While the Goidelic invasion of c. 100 BCE seems to be associated with the large Celto-Germanic outpourings of men into Gaul, Spain, and Italy of the Cimbri and Teutones (who were defeated by Marius in 101 BCE at Vercellae.
[edit] NPOV
This isn't a subject I claim to know much about, but I'm wondering what other users think of the NPOV in the article? I'm particularly worried about this sentence:
- An important record of the folkloric history of Ireland, it was compiled and edited by an anonymous scholar in the 11th century, and might be described without exaggeration as a mélange of mythology, legend, history, folklore, Christian historiography, political propaganda and barefaced lies.
Is there another way of saying this? "might be described without exaggeration", "political propaganda" and "barefaced lies" seem against the spirit of WP:NPOV. Kaid100 19:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure I have a solution. I happen to agree with you but feel that its probably a fairly accurate description. If I knew more about the subject I would get more involved. Frelke 21:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I think barefaced lies could be replaced with some more neutral wording such as "embellishments" or "pure invention". Arniep 00:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- I've changed the passage to-
- I think barefaced lies could be replaced with some more neutral wording such as "embellishments" or "pure invention". Arniep 00:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- and might be described as a mélange of mythology, legend, history, folklore, Christian historiography, politically inspired embellishment and some pure invention.
-
-
-
-
- ..but I'm happy to discuss it further.Kaid100 23:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me. Arniep 22:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- ..but I'm happy to discuss it further.Kaid100 23:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
-
The author of this article is most certainly bias. While embellishment is evident, the events and people have archealogical and anthropological vindication. by crossing the description of battles, migrations, people, kingships, etc. with other sources which are contemporary and compairing burial sites and dwelling remains, the jist of the book is reliable. i.e. whether or not Cu Chullain actually beheaded hundreds of mercinaries, single handedly and with multiple wounds, is up for debate. But, even though it sounds larger than life, it is still possible and there really is no way to prove it did not happen. It is a blurred truth from which we can still benefit.GomerianGod 19:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suggested page move
From the article:
- "It is usually known in English as The Book of Invasions [...]
Need I say more? Alai 05:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Date of Compilation Error
Na Lebor Gabala Erenn (a.k.a. The Book of invasions of Ireland, Leabhor Gabhala Eirinn) was the 17th century reprise of the preexisting Lebor Na Huidhre (a.k.a. Book of the Dun Cow, Leabhor Na Huidhre). The reprise was the work of Michael O' Cleirigh at the request of Brian Maguire and was completed in 1631. The Lebor Na Huidre was a compilation of five books that existed in Ireland. This original compilation was made in 1106AD by Mael Muire Mac Célechair (Galleghar) at Clonmacnoise. It was written in Gaelic using the Romanized Irish Alphabet.[Royal Irish Academy: Manuscript Records]GomerianGod 19:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- You're confused. The earliest surviving version of Lebor Gabála appears in the Book of Leinster (ca. 1160). It's a compilation of poems, some of which may be as early as the 6th century) with a prose chronological framework/explanation which dates to the 12th. The Lebor na hUidre is a complilation of prose texts which, as you say, dates to ca. 1106 although most of the contents are older than that. It does not include the Lebor Gabála or anything that could be considered a precursor to it. Michael O'Clery, of Annals of the Four Masters fame, did write a version of the Lebor Gabála in the 17th century, which is mentioned in the article under "Textual variants", but he didn't create it and he didn't base it on Lebor na hUidre. --Nicknack009 23:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'm not confused. If there were something not right about the information I posted, it would not be my error for I recieved it from the Royal Irish Academy (the school has possession of the book). I do know that both Leabhor Gabhala Eirinn and Leabhor Na Huidhre are almost the same book, because I've personally read through both. Neither one are autographs, they are both just compilations, one a revision of the other, both edited by the Catholic church, which caused more escewment in the information. There are many poems, some which most likely even predate Christ, but there are also many naratives.GomerianGod 16:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

