hellog〜英語史ブログ     ChangeLog 最新    

domesday_book - hellog〜英語史ブログ

最終更新時間: 2024-07-23 10:17

2023-08-24 Thu

#5232. 人名・地名の原資料としての Domesday Book [domesday_book][oe][norman_conquest][manuscript][onomastics][name_project][personal_name][toponymy]

 「#5227. 古英語の名前研究のための原資料」 ([2023-08-19-1]) で触れたとおり,Domesday Book は古英語の名前研究の一級の資料である.
 Domesday Book とは何か.一言でいえば,William I が1086年に作らせた,イングランドのほぼ全域を調査した土地台帳(元資料あるいは要約資料)である.慈悲も申し立ての余地もない徹底的な調査ぶりから「最後の審判の日」になぞらえて "Domesday Book" と名付けられた.この名前は12世紀中頃までには一般的な呼称となっていたようである.
 人々の反感を買ったものの,この調査は仕事の細かさと速さの点で,中世においておそらく最も偉大な行政的な業績だった.調査は7--8人の委員によって実施され,各々が異なる地域を担当して,王と直接受封者の所領に関する詳細な報告書を編纂した.これらの報告書から王の書記官たちが要約を作成したもの,それが Domesday Book である.
 単数形で Domesday Book と呼ばれているが,実際には異なる2つの巻から成り立っている.第1巻 (Great Domesday) は,Essex, Norfolk, Suffolk を除くすべての州の要約記録を含んでいる.これらの3つの州に関しては,要約ではない完全な報告が第2巻 (Little Domesday) に保存されている.
 Domesday Book の名前資料としての価値と「使用上の注意」について,Clark (453--54) が解説していることを引用しよう.

For late OE name-forms of both kinds Domesday Book (DB) is the prime source; for many place-names, those from the North especially, it furnishes the earliest record extant . . . . DB proper consists of two volumes (recently rebound as five), always part of the state archives and now housed in the Public Record Office, wherefore they are together known as the 'Exchequer Domesday'. The two sections are, it must be emphasised, of different standing: 'Little DB', which deals with Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex, represents a redaction earlier and fuller --- therefore more useful to onomasticians --- than that of 'Great DB', which deals with the rest of the Conqueror's English realm. There are also various related records, usually known as 'satellites', some (like Exon DB) official, others private . . .; on matters ranging from administrative procedure to orthography, these supplement the information given by the Exchequer volumes. Although DB as it stands results from a survey undertaken in 1086, roughly half the material there dates back to pre-Conquest times. Based as they were upon enquiries made by several panels of commissioners who collected documentary as well as oral evidence and interrogated alike French-speaking post-Conquest settlers and survivors of the pre-Conquest land-holding classes, the extant DB texts, in which the commissioners' returns have to varying degrees been recast, need careful handling. At the orthographical level, basic to onomastic study, they are notoriously unreliable. For one thing, not all the scribes used the traditional OE orthography . . . . For another, working conditions were unpropitious: name-material, unlike common vocabulary, cannot be predicted from context, and so the DB clerks, interpreting utterances of witnesses from varied linguistic backgrounds, sometimes perhaps toothless ancients, and editing drafts that bristled with unfamiliarities, were liable to mishear, misread, misunderstand, miscopy or otherwise mangle the forms. Only lately has appreciation of the types and degrees of scribal error in DB made progress enough for former broad assumptions --- for instance, about 'Anglo-Norman influences' --- to be gradually replaced by recognition of specific auditory and visual confusions.

 ・ Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 1. Ed. Richard M. Hogg. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 452--89.

[ 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]

2023-08-21 Mon

#5229. 古英語期中に人名のトレンドは変わったか? [oe][anglo-saxon][onomastics][name_project][personal_name][diachrony][bede][domesday_book][by-name]

 Clark (461) は,Bede により731年に著わされた Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum (= Ecclesiastical History of the English People) と William I が1086年に作らせた土地台帳 the Domesday Book における人名を比較し,名付けの傾向の通時的変化らしきものについて次のように述べている.

Although neither sample can be taken fully to represent contemporary usages, it is no accident that in detail the recorded stocks differ, with deuterotheme usages similar but only half the protothemes in common. Even with allowance for the greater number of name-bearers represented in DB, overall variability seems little reduced. Some change of custom has none the less taken place: the fairly even seventh-century frequency-pattern has given way to a markedly uneven one, with many names occurring just once or twice but a particular few, such as Ælfrīc, Godrīc, Godwine, Lēofwine and Wulfrīc, having each a multitude of bearers distinguished from one another by by-names (a similar pattern appears in the names of Suffolk peasants of probably ca 1100 . . .). This development parallels those seen in continental West-Germanic communities. . . .

 必ずしも明確な通時的変化であるとして強調しているわけではないが,Clark は後期古英語にかけて人名の多様性が増してきたと分析していることがわかる.一方で,旧来の主要な少数の名前は残っており,同名の場合には別の要素 (by-names) を付け加えることにより区別されるようになってきたという.
 名付けの流行の変化の背後に何があったのか,気になるところだ.「#813. 英語の人名の歴史」 ([2011-07-19-1]) を参照.

 ・ Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 1. Ed. Richard M. Hogg. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 452--89.

[ 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]

2023-08-19 Sat

#5227. 古英語の名前研究のための原資料 [oe][anglo-saxon][onomastics][evidence][philology][methodology][name_project][domesday_book]

 連日の記事「#5225. アングロサクソン人名の構成要素 (2)」 ([2023-08-17-1]),「#5226. アングロサクソン人名の名付けの背景にある2つの動機づけ」 ([2023-08-18-1]) で引用・参照してきた Clark (453) より,そもそも古英語の名前研究 (onomastics) の原資料 (source-materials) にはどのようなものがあるのかを確認しておきたい.

The sources for early name-forms, of people and of places alike, are, in terms of the conventional disciplines, ones more often associated with 'History' than with 'English Studies': they range from chronicles through Latinised administrative records to inscriptions, monumental and other. Not only that: the aims and therefore also the findings of name-study are at least as often oriented towards socio-cultural or politico-economic history as towards linguistics. This all goes to emphasise how artificial the conventional distinctions are between the various fields of study.
   Thus, onomastic sources for the OE period include: chronicles, Latin and vernacular; libri vitae; inscriptions and coin-legends; charters, wills, writs and other business-records; and above all Domesday Book. Not only each type of source but each individual piece demands separate evaluation.

 伝統的な古英語の文献学的研究とは少々異なる視点が認められ,興味深い.とはいえ,文献学的研究から大きく外れているわけでもない.文献学でも引用内で列挙されている原資料はいずれも重要なものだし,引用の最後にあるように "each individual piece" の価値を探るという点も共通する.ただし,固有名は一般の単語よりも同定が難しいため,余計に慎重を要するという事情はありそうだ.

 ・ 「#1264. 歴史言語学の限界と,その克服への道」 ([2012-10-12-1])
 ・ 「#2865. 生き残りやすい言語証拠,消えやすい言語証拠――化石生成学からのヒント」 ([2017-03-01-1])
 ・ 「#1051. 英語史研究の対象となる資料 (1)」 ([2012-03-13-1])
 ・ 「#1052. 英語史研究の対象となる資料 (2)」 ([2012-03-14-1])

 ・ Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 1. Ed. Richard M. Hogg. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 452--89.

Referrer (Inside): [2023-08-24-1]

[ 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow