Talk:List of works by Bede

Using Giles for work descriptions

Notes on which works I have gone through Giles for.

• Commentary on Genesis
• De tabernaculo
• Commentary on Samuel
• Commentary on Mark
• Commentary on Luke
• Life of St Cuthbert (metrical)
• Letter to Plegwin
• Letters to Acca
• Letter to Helmwald
• Letter to Wicthede
• Letter to Albinus
• Letter to Egbert

-- Mike Christie (talk) 01:04, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Notes

• Need to find out more precise dates for the Mabillon Vetera Analecta; CE only says it began publication in 1675, and there were four volumes. I saw an unclear ref to a 1675-1685 date range but can't authenticate it.
• BEASE says there is only one item in Bede's list which is completely lost; others survive at least in fragments. These mss must have been found since Laistner; need to track those down.
• C.W. Jones -- Bedae opera temporibus will have a more detailed discussion of several of the mss than I'm going to find elsewhere; it covers the letters to Wicthede and Plegwin according to Laistner.
• For On Genesis there is a work by Kendall at least partly accessible on Google books; it comes up if you search for ""letter to acca" bede Giles".
• Giles does not have the letter to Helmwald so it's not clear when it was first published. Wallis, Reckoning of Time, may give the first publication.
• Giles says the letter to Wicthede was published in Hervagius, but does not say that was the first publication.
• The letter to Albinus is in Plummer but is not translated; PASE gives no translation reference. Colgrave refers his readers to Plummer and does not give it. I can find no reference to a translation anywhere else. Striking; per Higham there is no translation.
• Skipping the epigrams source in PASE for the moment; need to come back to it.
• Hymns in PASE has a note on which mss were used; need to check that against the work description and see if it covers the same mss. The problem now is that both PASE and Giles just say Cassander without giving a work title; from Giles I have a date, 1536.
• PASE gives source info for De die iudicii but I have it currently organized as "Poems" on the basis of (Laistner's?) comment that there is another surviving poem; need to reorg to fix this. Have now changed the editions table to cover De die iudicii; still need to modify the text and possibly add a line for the 1912 poem.
• For the metrical life of Cuthbert, PASE gives a forthcoming work by Lapidge which is not usable; need to find a prior translation if there is one. Striking; Higham gives no translation.
• The PASE source notes for the life of Anastasius cite a 3rd edition of Carnandet; the earlier two are "not examined" but may presumably also contain the work, so could be the first publication. Of course it could also be Hervagius that's the first.
• Laistner says the two books on Acts include Retractation, but others do not say this so I need to say so in the article. Actually Higham does the same thing so I will let this stand.
• Wallis, Reckoning of Time, p. 87, says mss of De temporum ratione are listed in Jones, BOD, a bibliographical abbreviation which isn't previewable on Google Books. Laistner says Jones listed the mss in Bedae Opera de Temporibus (1943), which may be the same reference.
• I may need to separate the two chronicles from the works on time for listing first editions. Per Wallis, pp. xcvii-xcviii, the first edition of the Chronica maiora (I think; it's from De temporum ratione ch. 66) was a 1505 edition that she gives no title, by Petrus Marena Aleander. (I'm doubtful because it was subsequently printed in a work called Chronica minora.)
• The Hymns and Homilies are both cited from CCSL CXXII by both PASE and Higham, but Higham dates the volume to 1965 whereas PASE says 1955. Need to find out which is right. PASE is right; I checked the publisher's website.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

PASE additional work names

PASE has some additional works that it distinguishes from the works they are embedded in or attached to. (Giles does this too with introductory letters.) After I've gone through the table I need to go back through PASE and understand each item; it may need to be mentioned in the relevant work section. It might also be good to have a separate section that covers this sort of work. Here are the PASE chapter headings that don't immediately seem to correspond with what's in the article now.

• Bede.AnnLib (Calendar)
• Bede.CapLect (Chapter Headings)
• Bede.CapLectIsDnProph (Chapter Headings of Isaiah, Daniel, the Twelve Prophets and Part of Jeremiah drawn from the Treatise of the Blessed Jerome)

  Higham lists this too; I'd like to know just what this is. Higham doesn't give an edition directly; he gives a reference to an article: "see P. Meyvaert, 'Bede's Capitula lectionum for the Old and New Testament', Revue Bénédictine 105 (1995) 348–380, partic. 362–3". Also under "Also, summaries of lessons..." Higham refers to the same article.

• Bede.CarmPs (Metrical Version of Psalm 112)
• Bede.ChronMaior (The Greater Chronicles, or Concerning the Six Ages of the World together with the Seventh and Eighth Age)
• Bede.Epig (Book of Epigrams)
• Bede.NomRegLocAct (Names of the Regions and Places in the Acts of the Apostles)
• Bede.OpusQuaest (On Eight Questions)
• Bede.OratDeum (Prayer to God)
• Bede.RatBissex (Concerning the Course of the Sun through the Months and the Signs: How the Leap-year Day is completed in its Fourth Year)
• Bede.SolilPs (Soliloquy on Psalm 41; On Psalm 83)

-- Mike Christie (talk) 23:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Cambridge biblio

Just a note to remind myself that the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature has a fairly thorough list of editions that should be looked at and possibly integrated into this article. Mike Christie (talk – library) 13:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

List of works by Bede → Bede bibliography – This is an author bibliography (works by Bede). As such the name change is to bring consistency to author bibliography titles per advice in WikiProject Bibliographies and per WP:PRINCIPALNAMINGCRITERIA policy of which Consistency is one. Mike Cline (talk) 18:07, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. I think the current title is a better choice; "bibliography" reads very oddly for a medieval author like Bede, since what he wrote and the books listed are two different things -- the edited texts, with annotations and commentary, are what's listed. I wasn't aware that there had been a consensus for this rename -- this article was moved unilaterally once before and the move was reversed, partly because of this evidence of a lack of consensus on the standard. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:05, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose the bilbiographic renamings currently going on are not distinguishing works by a person with works about a person. This doesn't matter when it's not a person (say geology), but when it is a person, we need to distinguish works by person A with works about person A. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 21:14, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment The discussion referenced by Mike Christie above occured in 2009. Since then, significant work has been done on WP:TITLE to include a lot of discussion about WP:PRINCIPALNAMINGCRITERIA and changes to the policy were made this year. The criteria of Consistency is policy and pretty clear. Our titles should be consistent across articles of a similar nature. There are currently 245 author bibliographies in Category:Bibliographies by author. 94% of those articles are entitled author bibliography. It seems to me that our Consistency policy should apply to this article as well. A list of works by an author is a bibliography by any other name.--Mike Cline (talk) 21:38, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment just because our current practice is substandard in distinguishing one type of biblio from the other (bibio of author X's works -vs- biblio of works about person X) does not mean we should propagate such a confusing syntax. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 05:38, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

• Comment I notice at WT:WikiProject Bibliographies that there is controversy over a mass rename of biblio/list of works articles, so the consistency claimed appears to be a newly created consistency based on a new project's recent guideline. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 06:34, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

• • Please note the that mass renaming alluded to above was done by User:Curb Chain unilaterally, and without any association with the WikiProject Bibliographies. Please read ANI discussions [1] and [2]. Additionally, User:70.24.248.23 has conveinently ignored the fact that Consistency is one of the five WP:PRINCIPALNAMINGCRITERIA contained in our titling policy. Within the Category:Bibliographies by author there are 244 entries. 232 of those entries ~(95%) are entitled Author bibiliography. Our WP:TITLE consistency policy reads: •Consistency – Does the proposed title follow the same pattern as those of similar articles? Many of these patterns are documented in the naming guidelines listed in the Specific-topic naming conventions box above, and ideally indicate titles that are in accordance with the principles behind the above questions. The bibliography project merely points out this consistency policy for author bibliographies, it doesn't and hasn't imposed it as a newly created consistency as 70.24.248.23 alludes to above. --Mike Cline (talk) 13:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dating

Currently the article reads

...edited by Franciscus Jametius, printed at Paris in three volumes in 1544, other works being available in separate editions.[89]...

but the linked volumes are clearly dated 1545 and usually discussed as published in that year. Is there some reason to believe the printing was mistaken? If so, there should be a note about it. — LlywelynII 18:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

I was probably the one who wrote that, a long time ago, but I'm afraid I have no memory of why. Feel free to change it. Perhaps I was looking at a source that gave that date? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)