Legend - Revision history

Simoncursitor at 08:35, 28 April 2006

2006-04-28T08:35:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:35, 28 April 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Legend''' is what you get left when ''history'' has fossilised part of the Past, and some more has been wardrobed into ''[[tradition]]''. Legend tends also to be the bits which people don't want you to believe (for example that the [[Norse]] were ever anything other than polite well-mannered people who navigated long distances to bring culture and civilization to Other Lands. ~~All~~ that about burning down [[monastery\|monasteries]] and so on is pure legend -- because, by now, the [[Norman]]s are the Governing Class.		'''Legend''' is what you get left when ''history'' has fossilised part of the Past, and some more has been wardrobed into ''[[tradition]]''. Legend tends also to be the bits which people don't want you to believe (for example that the [[Norse]] were ever anything other than polite well-mannered people who navigated long distances to bring culture and civilization to Other Lands. And all that about burning down [[monastery\|monasteries]] and so on is pure legend -- because, by now, the [[Norman]]s are the Governing Class).

	In [[period]], legends were probably as much a part of historicity as chronicles. Many people couldn't/didn't [[literacy\|read and write]], and the oral version, spoken and heard, was (unless by way of a [[bard]] who 'as-we-all-know' have flawless recall and a total commitment to veracity no matter what) basically one person's version of what had (or ought to have) happened.		In [[period]], legends were probably as much a part of historicity as chronicles. Many people couldn't/didn't [[literacy\|read and write]], and the oral version, spoken and heard, was (unless by way of a [[bard]] who 'as-we-all-know' have flawless recall and a total commitment to veracity no matter what) basically one person's version of what had (or ought to have) happened.

Cian: format, links

2006-04-28T06:56:42Z

format, links

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:56, 28 April 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Legend''' is what you get left when ''history'' has fossilised part of the Past, and some more has been wardrobed into ''tradition''. Legend tends also to be the bits which people don't want you to believe (for example that the Norse were ever anything other than polite well-mannered people who navigated long distances to bring culture and civilization to Other Lands. All that about ~~buring~~ down monasteries and so on is pure legend -- because, by now, the [[Norman]]s are the Governing Class.~~<p>~~		'''Legend''' is what you get left when ''history'' has fossilised part of the Past, and some more has been wardrobed into ''[[tradition]]''. Legend tends also to be the bits which people don't want you to believe (for example that the [[Norse]] were ever anything other than polite well-mannered people who navigated long distances to bring culture and civilization to Other Lands. All that about burning down [[monastery\|monasteries]] and so on is pure legend -- because, by now, the [[Norman]]s are the Governing Class.

	In [[period]], ~~'''legend'''~~ is probably as much a part of historicity as ~~chronicle~~. Many people couldn't/didn't read&write, and the oral version, spoken and heard, was (unless by way of a bard who 'as-we-all-know' have flawless recall and a total commitment to veracity no matter what) basically one person's version of what had (or ought to have) happened.~~<br>~~		In [[period]], legends were probably as much a part of historicity as chronicles. Many people couldn't/didn't [[literacy\|read and write]], and the oral version, spoken and heard, was (unless by way of a [[bard]] who 'as-we-all-know' have flawless recall and a total commitment to veracity no matter what) basically one person's version of what had (or ought to have) happened.
⚫	~~'''~~Legend~~'''~~ allows for a re-editing process to shade the past without actually destroying it. Without it, the trolls would be stone-dead, the ~~dragons~~ just lizards with bad breath, and Arthur a Hollywood caricature.~~<br>~~

	<br>
		⚫	Legend allows for a re-editing process to shade the past without actually destroying it. Without it, the trolls would be stone-dead, the [[dragon]]s just lizards with bad breath, and [[King Arthur\|Arthur]] a Hollywood caricature.
⚫	In short, Legend is the '''''myth'''''ing link

		⚫	In short, Legend is the '''''[[mythology\|myth]]'''''ing link

			''See also:''
			* [[No Shit, There I Was]] stories
			* [[Urban legend]]s

Simoncursitor at 08:47, 4 January 2005

2005-01-04T08:47:38Z

New page

'''Legend''' is what you get left when ''history'' has fossilised part of the Past, and some more has been wardrobed into ''tradition''. Legend tends also to be the bits which people don't want you to believe (for example that the Norse were ever anything other than polite well-mannered people who navigated long distances to bring culture and civilization to Other Lands. All that about buring down monasteries and so on is pure legend -- because, by now, the [[Norman]]s are the Governing Class.<p>
In [[period]], '''legend''' is probably as much a part of historicity as chronicle. Many people couldn't/didn't read&write, and the oral version, spoken and heard, was (unless by way of a bard who 'as-we-all-know' have flawless recall and a total commitment to veracity no matter what) basically one person's version of what had (or ought to have) happened.<br>
'''Legend''' allows for a re-editing process to shade the past without actually destroying it. Without it, the trolls would be stone-dead, the dragons just lizards with bad breath, and Arthur a Hollywood caricature.<br>
<br>
In short, Legend is the '''''myth'''''ing link