Talk:Beli Mawr

Consort of Dôn?

Any citation for that, from primary or secondary sources?--Vidkun 21:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, there's not. I think the only connection may be in one of the Welsh Triads which mentions Arianrhod, who is well established as the daughter of Don; it (Triad 35) says her father is Beli and her brother is Caswallawn. I know it's the only source connecting Arianrhod specifically to Beli and Caswallawn.--Cúchullain ^t/c 22:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge

I've removed the merge tag, Heli is a ficticious (probably, intended as real....ya know what I mean) character from Historia Regum Britanniae., whereas this guy is more of a myth...very possibly based on an actual person...just because they have similar names....not the same thing....92.1.86.73 (talk) 19:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Restored the tag. Geoffrey's pseudo-historical "Heli" is known to derive from the genuine Welsh mythical figure Beli. They are one and the same: in the Welsh mss. translations/adaptations of the Historia the character is called Beli, not Heli. Enaidmawr (talk) 00:13, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Merge done. Cavila (talk) 11:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Cavila. Tagged so long I'd almost forgotten about it! Enaidmawr (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Alternate Explanation for Beli son of Manogan

The article currently says the following:

"This Beli is actually derived from the historical pre-Roman, British king of the Catuvellauni tribe, Cunobelinus and his son Adminius (or Amminius). Via a series of textual corruptions that span several different popular books from Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages, the names of Cunobelinus and his son Adminius were combined and then jumbled, giving way to the new Welsh literary characters Beli and Manogan:[5][6] 1.Adminio, Cunobellini Brittannorum regis filio (Suetonius, Caligula, Ch. 44) 2.Minocynobellinum Britannorum regis filium (Orosius, Historia Adversus Paganos, vii 5.5) 3.Bellinus, filius Minocanni (Historia Brittonum, ch. 19)"

On p. 282 of TRIOEDD YNYS PRYDEIN (already cited in the article), however, Bromwich says the following: "[Nennius's] Bellinus filius Minocanni is obviously identical with Beli mab Mynogan, who thus appears in a variety of sources as the legendary British ruler from whom the Romans conquered the country. There is no need, therefore, to accept Zimmer's ingenious suggestion (Nennius Vindicatus, pp. 271-3) that Nennius's Bellinus arose as a 'ghost' name, out of a series of textual corruptions."

She then proceeds to give the explanation outlined in the Wiki article as it currently stands, where Bellinus filius Minocanni evolves from Orosius's Minocynobellinum. She continues: "But Beli Mawr is a character rooted far too firmly in Welsh tradition for his existence to be accounted for merely as an adaptation of Nennius's Bellinus. Further, Loth showed that Manogan itself can be explained as a Celtic name, since Monocan appears in the Cartulaire de Redon (RC LI, p. 10; Chr. Br., p. 152). Two further instances of this name in Celtic sources may also be included: Jes. Gen. XVIII Manogan m. Pascen m. Cadell; and the Ogham inscription MINNACCANNI (Macalister, Corpus Inscriptionum Insularum Celticarum I, no. 135)."

Am I reading this incorrectly, or is this a criticism of the idea that Beli son of Manogan is the result of a corrupted text? If so, should it be included in the article? Thanks.

Forgot to add the signature: Phi (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

OK. There seems to be a bit of confusion. The character "Beli son of Manogan" did arise out of a series of textual corruptions, but "Beli Mawr" and "Manogan", separately, are traditional. Sorry for the trouble. Phi (talk) 23:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)