Talk:Gregorian mission

Copyediting question

 * From Spread of bishoprics and church affairs: "The Kentish church sent Justus and Peter, the abbot of Sts Peter and Paul Abbey in Canterbury to the Council of Paris in 614...". I can't quite work this out. Are two abbeys being talked about here? St Peter Abbey and St Paul Abbey? If so, did they share abbots? It's the "the abbot of" bit I can't quite reconcile.


 * From Art and architecture: "Traditionally, this work has been associated with the Gregorian mission,[122] and it a sixth century work from Italy." Not sure what that means ...

--Malleus Fatuorum 21:50, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It's one abbey, and it was dedicated to both Peter and Paul. It later became St Augustine's Abbey. Phrasing that is going to be a bear though. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I just saw that in the last section. I don't understand tha "abbot" bit now though. Is "Justus and Peter" the name of one man? --Malleus Fatuorum 22:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * ghits reveal "the Abbey of St Peter and St Paul", "Saint Peter and Saint Paul Abbey" and "SS Peter and Paul Abbey" (P&O). Ning-ning (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * On the second point, I believe it should be "and it IS a sixth century work from Italy..." I think. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Celtic Christianity
I have tried to cite Yorke's The Conversion of Britain: Religion, Politics and Society in Britain c. 600–800 at the article Celtic Christianity, based on the material regarding Augustine's prophecy at this article (I also cited John Edward Lloyd, who has much the same interpretation). Can someone double check me and make sure I used it correctly?--Cúchullain t/ c 14:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

More info needed
Gregory intended Augustine to be the metropolitan archbishop of the southern part of the British Isles, and gave him authority over the British clergy but in a series of meetings with Augustine the local bishops refused to acknowledge this.

This sentence in the introduction seems to indicate that there were already churches well enough established to have "local bishops".

Hey, up to this point, the reader would be led to think that there was no church in England and that this was the first real mission. So somewhere, prior to this sentence, there needs to be a statement that the Christian church was already established.

Amandajm (talk) 02:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Angle, Saxon or Jute ?
So Augustine went to Canterbury, which according to the diagram was neither Angle nor Saxon, but Jute. And if you look up Aetherberht, it doesn't say what he was.Eregli bob (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, originally the article read "Germanic tribes" ... but some folks have kept messing with things all day... I've given up and will try to sort everything out after it's off the main page. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Mere coincidence?
The third paragraph of the background section starts:
 * The Anglo-Saxon invasions coincided with the disappearance of most remnants of Roman civilisation in the areas held by the Anglo-Saxons, including the economic and religious structures.[15] Whether this was a result of the Angles themselves, as the early medieval writer Gildas argued,[16] or mere coincidence is unclear.

In the second sentence, the attribution to Gildas is referenced to Yorke, but I read her as saying that Gildas blamed the decline of civilisation in British controlled areas on the sins of the Britons. In the Anglo-Saxon areas, the disappearance of Roman civilisation was presumably inevitable, and it seems odd to say that it might be "mere coincidence". Dudley Miles (talk) 17:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Location of "Augustine's Oak"
The text currently reads;
 * ... Augustine arranged a meeting with some of the native clergy some time between 602 and 604. The meeting took place at a tree later given the name "Augustine's Oak", which by the time of Bede was on the border of the Kingdom of Kent, probably around the present-day boundary between Somerset and Gloucestershire. "

When did Kent extend to the border of Somerset and Gloucestershire? I would be inclined to remove the mention of "the border of the Kingdom of Kent" but it appears to be cited. Anyone have a copy of Yorke's Conversion to confirm what is meant? Nedrutland (talk)

Bede states "id est robur Augustini, in confinio Huicciorum et Occidentalium Saxonum appellatur" so I would prefer "on the border of the Hwicce and West Saxons." Nedrutland (talk)
 * I've just removed the phrase about where it was in Bede's day - it's not really relevant to know. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Importance to English script
Nothing in the current article but how influential was the mission on English orthography?

Wikipedia's articles on runes generally credit the Hiberno-Scottish Missions with having supplanted the Germanic scripts. Insular script says that it developed from a melding of the Irish styles with Augustine's separate uncial system. Was there an official policy on scripts? and was it generally influential on the English prior to the arrival of the Irish and Scots? — Llywelyn II   13:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Nothing I've ever seen on the Gregorian mission says anything about it's influence on orthography - but that doesn't mean there isn't something somewhere... I see the claim in insular script is unsourced. I'll dig in some databases a bit and see if I can see anything. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks like E. A. Lowe's English Unical (Oxford 1960) is referred to often - here on page 3 McKittrick says "Quite apart from 'English uncial' whichhas been fully documented" and then footnotes Lowe's work complete. I'll see if I can get it through ILL. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * As I remember from my reading on St Cuthbert Gospel there was an influence - it would have been rather astonishing if there had not been, no? - but I don't know I have much to hand on it. There's a little at: Brown, Michelle P., Manuscripts from the Anglo-Saxon Age, 2007, British Library, ISBN 9780712306805, p. 13., which supports the claim in Insular script. I don't quite know what is meant by "prior to the arrival of the Irish and Scots" - really they were there first. Johnbod (talk) 15:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * At Cuthbert I said: "The script is the "capitular" form of uncial, with just a few emphasized letters at the start of sections in "text" uncial.[49] Close analysis of the changing style of details of the forms of letters allows the manuscript to be placed with some confidence within a chronological sequence of the few other manuscripts thought to have been produced at Wearmouth-Jarrow. The Northumbrian scribes "imitate very closely the best Italian manuscripts of about the sixth century",[50]" - refs to Brown (1969); Brown, T. J. (Julian), et al., The Stonyhurst Gospel of Saint John, 1969, Oxford University Press, printed for the Roxburghe Club (reproduces all pages), pp. 6-7, 72. I think the presumption is that they were familiar with MS brought from Italy by Augustine, Benedict Biscop, Adrian of Canterbury, Wilfrid, and others, and perhaps by seeing stuff on visits to Bobbio etc. Johnbod (talk) 18:27, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * According to Susan Irvine in the Oxford History of English, the Gregorian Mission was the second watershed in the development of Old English (after the invasion), as it led to the replacement of runes by the Latin alphabet. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Got Lowe's English Unical today. There is a bunch of technical bits but he comes down on the side of the Gregorian mission (with later input from books brought back by Benedict Biscop, Wilfrid, Theodore, and Hadrian) marking the introduction of unical into Britain and that forming the basis for the development of insular script. The specific citation would be to pages 6-8. I think maybe "The books that were brought by Augustine's missionaries marked the beginning of the development of insular script in Britain. The imported books were written in unical and they, along with books brought back by later visitors to the continent such as Wilfrid, Benedict Biscop, and others, were the examples which Anglo-Saxons scribes imitated and improved in the formation of a distinctive insular writing style." (sourced to Lowe - pp. 6-8). Tack it on at the end of the first paragraph of "Art, architecture and music"? Ealdgyth - Talk 20:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Merovingian support
Hello,

My translation of this article into French (fr:Mission grégorienne) is currently undergoing a peer review to become a Bon article (fr:Discussion:Mission grégorienne/Bon article). However, one of the reviewers pointed out what appears to be an inconsistency: The problem is that Theuderic and Theudebert only became kings after the death of Childebert, which means that Gregory couldn't have written to them as kings before the beginning of the mission. I would greatly appreciate if someone who has access to Higham's and Brooks' books (the references used for these passages) could check them to clarify this discrepancy. – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 19:21, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * In the section #Preparations (which presumably covers events taking place before the beginning of the missionaries' journey), it is said that the pope wrote to the Merovingian kings Theuderic II and Theudebert II.
 * in the section #Composition and arrival, it is said that the missionaries may have stopped their journey because of the death of King Childebert II, and that the news of his death may have been brought to Rome by Augustine.


 * Brooks doesn't mention Childebert on the cited pages; he only says that the "party" had received hospitality in Provence but halted there, "when their fears about the whole venture led Augustine to return to Rome." Gregory then wrote to the Roman monks on 23 July 596 instructing them to resume. "On the same occasion he also provided Augustine with letters of introduction to the Frankish kings, Theuderic and Theudebert …" – quotations are all from p. 4. I don't have access to Higham's book. HTH. Nortonius (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Okay, so the thing here is ... Augustine left Rome one time and got as far as somewhere in Gaul. In the summer of 596, he turned back to Rome, and Higham speculates that this was because of the political conditions around Childebert's death. Childebert died in June 596, so the letters of July 596 are after Childebert's death and it appears that Augustine carried them with him when he returned to Gaul on his second trip there (after returning to Rome in the summer 596). We could lessen the confusion by changing "preparations" section to not name the kings - just say "The pope wrote to some of the Merovingian rulers, seeking aid for the mission." Ealdgyth - Talk 20:28, 30 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks! That's more or less what I imagined the solution to be, but I didn't want to contradict Higham and/or Brooks inadvertently. I'll edit the French article to that effect; I'll let you decide whether you want to do the same here. – Swa cwæð Ælfgar (talk) 21:06, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes – in effect, when Childebert died, the mission's passport expired. Makes sense. The mission would presumably have carried letters addressed to Childebert (I don't know if that's made explicit anywhere, but Brooks's mention of a register suggests it might be), and the idea of turning up with an introduction to a dead king would've made me wobbly too! Nortonius (talk) 11:27, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

"Southern Britain"
By the time of the death of the last missionary in 653, the mission had established Christianity in southern Britain.

Were the Britons of what is now Cornwall/West Devon not in southern Britain? And, get me if I am wrong, but weren't they already Christian? cf. Celtic Christianity

Moreover, prior to the Anglo-Saxon migrations, much of Britain had been Christian already. Otherwise what of Saint Alban, archbishop Restitutus of London, and much archeological and historic evidence of Roman Christianity. Indeed, the only form of pre-AS Briton Christianity barred by the Anglo-saxon migrations was that of formal church presence. (all points taken from RS via the linked articles above).

Therefore, the mission did not establish Christianity in southern Britain. I grant that the mission re-established formal church presence in the lands governed by the Anglo-Saxons. 20040302 (talk) 08:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree and have amended accordingly. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC)