Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliography

Alexander, Michael. Medievalism: The Middle Ages in Modern England. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007.

Alexander gives a comprehensive layout of how the Medieval Revival got going. He contends against that idea that the revival was an escapist movement and proposes that it was instead a social and political construct. This fits with the argument that I am making.

Barczewski, Stephanie L. Myth and National Identity in Nineteenth-Century Britain: The Legends
of King Arthur and Robin Hood. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2000.
This source adds scope to the practice of re-inventing heroes of lore for political purposes.  

Bede, the Venerable. Ecclesiastical History of England, 2nd ed. Translated J.A. Giles. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1849; reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1971. Print.
Bede is one of the authors in the Arthurian tradition, he is useful for my timeline page.

Bryden, Inga. Reinventing King Arthur: The Arthurian Legends in Victorian Culture. Aldershot, Hants, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, c2005.
Bryden departs a bit from my point, focusing on peripheral authors who tapped in to the medieval revival instead of Tennyson, but this source is useful to show that the revival was trendy for a range of authors.

Chandler, Alice. A Dream of Order: The Medieval Ideal in Nineteenth-Century English Literature. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1970.
This source is useful because Chandler asserts that the Medieval Revival was a failure because it did not “fix” the problems it was meant to. Despite the ideals of chivalry and nobility there was still poverty and oppression after the revival ran its course.

Delheim, Charles. The Face of the Past: The Preservation of the Medieval Inheritance in
Victorian England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1892.
This source inspired my comment at the end of the introduction about how Victorian’s were fascinated with all things medieval. This adds perspective to my project because it talks about how after London was burned down in 1666 they rebuilt it in a style more gothic than it was before. 

Geoffrey of Monmouth. The History of the Kings of Britain. Translated and with an Introduction by Lewis Thorpe. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books Ltd, 1966; reprint, 1968. Print.
Geoffrey also is part of my timeline page. 

Gildas. De Excidio Britanniae et Conquestu. Translated and edited by J. A. Giles, Six Old English Chronicles. London: George Bell and Sons, 1900. Print.
Gildas is with Bede and Monmouth.

Girouard, Mark. The Return to Camelot: Chivalry and the English Gentleman. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.
Girouard explores the ideals and the reality of the chivalric code adopted in the Victorian era. This helps my project because he mentions the influence that Victoria and Albert had on this practice.

Machann, Clinton. Masculinity in four Victorian epics a Darwinist reading. 

Farnham, Surrey, England Burlington, VT Ashgate Pub., 2010,. pp 33-40. Print

This source talks about some criticism to Tennyson's Arthur, which say that he (Arthur) is too effeminate. That may or may not be the case, but it agrees with my notion of reinventing lore.

Mancoff, Debra N. King Arthur's Modern Return. New York: Garland Publishing, 1998.
This source is useful because it explores how the medieval revival, with King Arthur at the center, was tailor made for the Victorian age, which is exactly what I said but this source uses a variety of period-authors while I just focus on Tennyson.

Milbank, Alison. Dante and the Victorians. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1998. 
Again, a piece which is outside my particular topic, but this shares the idea that people pick and choose which aspects of a historical figure to remember, just like Tenyson did with Mallory’s Arthur. 

Palmgren, Jennifer A., and Lorretta M. Holloway, eds. Beyond Arthurian Romances: The Reach of Victorian Medievalism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
This source again adds scope to my project, it looks at medieval influences outside of the Arthurian tradition. 

Saunders, Clare Broome. Women Writers and Nineteenth-Century Medievalism. New York: Palgrave, 2009.
Saunders talks reports on the women’s perspective of the medieval revival. She uses female responses to the masculine image put forward by authors like Tennyson.

Simpson, Roger. Camelot Regained: The Arthurian Revival and Tennyson, 1800-1849.
Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1990.
This source argues against the notion that Tennyson was introducing Arthur to his audience. Instead he purports that they were at least loosely familiar with the Arthurian legends and would respond to a new treatment of them, such as what Tennyson provided them with.