"Now on [Rupert's] flanks go horsemen like steel towers, and at his side one who wears a crown. Overhead, golden-glowing, flies a dragon banner. Those rebels who see know that this is Arthur come home. They remember what blood of Britain is in them too. Their leader casts down his standard and weeps. The King's riders burst through.'" (p. 220)
(Which King's?)
This partly answers my question here. Arthur's intervention is not only an overwhelming military solution but also an inspiring reminder of a common heritage. But inspiration must also accept change (see Ages Pass/Passages), as Charles I's concluding speech does at least in part.
Cromwell remains unbowed but must surrender when his army has dissolved.
"Britain" has many meanings. In That Hideous Strength, CS Lewis presents England as a conflict between (good) Logres and (bad) Britain, but that is unusual.
7 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And we see the Charles I of A MIDSUMMER TEMPEST candidly admitting many on his side had been unwilling to accept or listen to new ideas. But the rebels too had their share of blame: being often arrogant, intolerant, and hasty.
Ad astra! Sean
And the English are in fact a genetic mixture between the Germanic invaders of the 5th century and the Roman-era Britons (proto-Welsh): 38%/52%, according to the latest ancient DNA analysis.
Of course, the Britons of the Roman period themselves were descendants of invaders from the Rhine Delta area in the 2500's BCE, mostly (about 90%); those were the people who displaced the original Neolithic population, which in turn derived from Anatolia and had displaced and absorbed the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers.
So it goes... 8-).
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Of course! We are all of us descended from both invaders or the conquered. But I think we all also feel the need to believe in legitimizing legends or myths, which can take varied forms in different nations.
Ad astra! Sean
There was a British TV series where people traced their ancestry. Ainsley Harriott, a prominent black celebrity chef, found that his ancestors included not only slaves (expected) but also a slave owner (he swore in front of the camera).
Everyone on earth is descended from slaves and slave-owners; in 1086, 15% of the population of England were chattel slaves, and it had probably been higher in 1066. In the southwestern parts and the Welsh Marches it was over 25% and there were single estates with several hundred slaves.
Incidentally, "Welsh" means "slave" in Old English.
Slavery was a ubiquitous institution until historically quite recently -- the first large area of the world that -didn't- have slavery as an institution was western and central Europe in the high Middle Ages.
I take it that, over a long enough time, everyone is descended from everyone and, over a longer time, all Terrestrial life descends from a single self-replicating molecule.
I suppose that Ainsley was upset to find a specific named slave-owner in his comparatively recent ancestry, during the notorious slave trade era which was when racism of skin color originated.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling and Paul!
Mr. Stiring: OF course! Trace it back far enough and you can find anyone or any kind of person in your ancestry. Poul Anderson had a rebellious ex-slave founding the Terran Empire, no less!
Paul: What would really bother ME would be to find out I'm descended from Henry VIII and/or Oliver Cromwell, two of the nastiest persons in British history!
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment