The Mabinogi Bibliography

[mabinogishan]

The Mabinogi Bibliography now has about 1,300 listings. Begun in 2012 and not expected to grow a great deal more, it covers all publications from 1795 to the present day. Mainly non-fiction, but a little about interpretations too. Many entries have notes on what they contain. There are category tags for searches.

mabinogistudy.com/bibliog/

The core is the Four Branches of the Mabinogi, so this is well covered, but there is a lot about the other Mabinogion tales as well. Plus a selection of background books, articles, websites, on history, language etc.

NOTE. The Mabinogi means a four part set of tales from medaeval Wales. The Mabinogion is a larger collection of very varied tales, also from  mediaeval wales. The Mabinogion always contains the Mabinogi, but the Mabinogo quartet is also found on its own.
These stories are the oldest prose tales of Britain.
Although the manuscripts are mediaeval, there are traces in the tales of the old gods of Wales and ancient Britain.

Also on my site are articles, and timelines, lists of useful sources etc.

WRITERS If you go to the source on zotero you can get a client to create bibliog references for your own writing. You can also create your own selection from my bibliography to reflect your own interests. Or make your own bibliography (free service).
www.zotero.org/groups/mabinogistudy/items

I love sharing my knowledge and do not like anyone to have to reinvent the wheel. I share a lot of my resources to help avoid that.

[Heron]

I notice you list Sioned Davies and then Charlotte Guest as the main translations.

Sioned Davies' translation is certainly the most recent and well regarded. But I think Patrick Ford's is worth including in main recommendations because it is the only modern scholarly translation that includes a significant discussion of the mythological aspects of the text.

[mabinogishan]

Heron I don't usually use a description like 'main translation' as different translations suit different purposes. For example a quick check online would be Will Parker's 2002; a scholarly check on manuscript reference or very literal translation would be Ellis 1929.

I personally prefer Ford as my default standby as a working translation - if I only need one, though I'm often comparing several. I also like John Bollard very much as his books have notes on the story pages themselves and lovely photography, a great introduction choice.
On my First Steps page I list Davies' and Bollard as the most recent.

But I can't remember where I might have mentioned Guest and Davies together - can you give me the link? I wouldn't want to give the wrong impression.
I like Guest and often say she is still much loved, and more accurate than her detractors say. But some of her turns of phrase are quaintly antique Victorian which doesn't suit all tastes.

[Heron]

Jan 22, 2016 20:47:41 GMT -1 mabinogishan said:

Heron I don't usually use a description like 'main translation' as different translations suit different purposes. For example a quick check online would be Will Parker's 2002; a scholarly check on manuscript reference or very literal translation would be Ellis 1929.

I personally prefer Ford as my default standby as a working translation - if I only need one, though I'm often comparing several. I also like John Bollard very much as his books have notes on the story pages themselves and lovely photography, a great introduction choice.
On my First Steps page I list Davies' and Bollard as the most recent.

But I can't remember where I might have mentioned Guest and Davies together - can you give me the link? I wouldn't want to give the wrong impression.
I like Guest and often say she is still much loved, and more accurate than her detractors say. But some of her turns of phrase are quaintly antique Victorian which doesn't suit all tastes.

I made the comment from memory after a tour around your many-layered site

Can't find the page I thought I remembered but my main point was just that Ford's introduction is the most useful for someone wanting an interpretation of the mythological aspects of the tales.

On the actual translations I suppose Sioned Davies' is the most accessible style. Before I could read the original I usually used the Jones & Jones translation which I suppose is too archaic for most people. Bollard's three books usefully separate the Four Branches from the Romances but you do have to but two volumes if you also want Culhwch and Olwen (and why wouldn't you?). Anthony Griffiths' photos are certainly a bonus here especially for those who don't know the landscapes or realise how the tales relate to actual places. I also like the way Bollard reflects the word order and style of the Welsh text. I just did an experiment taking a phrase from the Ifor Williams text and seeing how different translators dealt with it:

[From Branwen, when they open the door to leave Gwales]:

'Sef a wnaeth Heilyn uab Guyn dydgueith ...... heb ef'

Bollard: 'This is what Heilyn son of Gwyn did one day ..... he said'

Ford: 'One day, Heilyn son of Gwyn did something ..... he said'

Davies: 'One day, Heilyn son of Gwyn said...'

They all convey the same information. But Bollard remains closest to the Welsh words though it sounds a little odd in English. Ford does the same but in inverting it makes it sound more natural. Davies is the most natural in English in shortening 'This is what Heilyn did.. .he said' to simply 'Heilyn said '.

So if you want something that keeps close to the syntax as well as the meaning of the original, go for Bollard (I would).
But if you want an accessible read that sounds natural in English go for Davies.
Or go for Ford as a compromise.
Or learn to read the original of course.

[mabinogishan]

> I made the comment from memory after a tour around your many-layered site
> Can't find the page I thought I remembered ...

Well you are a very bad boy for being so casual, and pushing me to laboriously respond to a nonexistent point!
But thank you for the smidgen of appreciation on my site.

But a great delight to be able to discuss the translations with someone who knows their differences. Thank you for the pleasure.

> my main point was just that Ford's introduction is the most useful for someone wanting an interpretation of the mythological aspects of the tales.

I like him for concentrating on the older, native tales. I am not much interested in the Norman romances.
Also as you say he stays close to the original Welsh wording but to my mind without being awkward in English.

> Before I could read the original I usually used the Jones & Jones translation which I suppose is too archaic for most people.
Detest them for being so nsulting about Charlotte Guest in their intro. I can understand they were trying to replace her after a century of her dominance, but eurgh they are bitchy!

> Bollard's three books usefully separate the Four Branches from the Romances but you do have to but two volumes if you also want Culhwch and Olwen (and why wouldn't you?). Anthony Griffiths' photos are certainly a bonus here especially for those who don't know the landscapes or realise how the tales relate to actual places. I also like the way Bollard reflects the word order and style of the Welsh text.

Totally agree, excellent summary. I just wish Bollard's were available in cheaper paperbacks.

> I just did an experiment taking a phrase from the Ifor Williams text and seeing how different translators dealt with it:
I did a whole paper doing this with what I call the 'advent text' that is, the arrival of my lady Rhiannon at Arberth. Was a lt of fun.

> [From Branwen, when they open the door to leave Gwales]:
>'Sef a wnaeth Heilyn uab Guyn dydgueith ...... heb ef'
> Bollard: 'This is what Heilyn son of Gwyn did one day ..... he said'
> Ford: 'One day, Heilyn son of Gwyn did something ..... he said'
> Davies: 'One day, Heilyn son of Gwyn said...'
> They all convey the same information. But Bollard remains closest to the Welsh words though it sounds a little odd in English. Ford does the same but in inverting it makes it sound more natural. Davies is the most natural in English in shortening 'This is what Heilyn did.. .he said' to simply 'Heilyn said '.

You also said earlier 'I suppose Sioned Davies' is the most accessible style.'
Sioned Davies is so modernised that to me it denatures the language. There is a strong trend to coopt the tales into an English literature which I disapprove. I should add I do not speak as a Welsh snob (of which there are many!). I am by birth English but married a Welshman and fell in love with his country as well as him. Nor am I a Welsh speaker even, but I do try to manage at least titles and keywords.

Anyway far too much of using the English translated names and titles - the Red Book instead of Llyfr Coch. Always the Four Branches, never saying Pedair Cainc. I mean it's at least polite to give the Welsh name and the English trans. together at first, and then continue in English for comfort.
Otherwise the whole thing is being taken over as an English-American thing.
It is also completely overlooked that Guest as well as Pughe published BILINGUAL texts, they were not just translators. The English translation appeared on its own in 1877, and was given wide distribution by Everyman in 1906. But the constant reference to Guest as 'the translator' is part of the same pressure I think. Not to mention how dear William Pughe is just not mentioned and he published the very first stuff in 1795, 1799 and 1818. Sweet man. He did actually do the whole lot but died just as he finished and it was never published as a whole work. He even did illustrations which pant pant I am about to have scans sent to me from Aberystwyth!

> So if you want something that keeps close to the syntax as well as the meaning of the original, go for Bollard (I would).
Yes except I always recommend Ford or Davies as well because of the cost. On that count Parker online is free, and very readable.
> But if you want an accessible read that sounds natural in English go for Davies.
> Or go for Ford as a compromise.
I think that compromise is a very strong one, as in the best of both worlds. I have some disappointments with him on his intro, some points where he's sexist about my beloved Rhiannon, but over all he's very good.

> Or learn to read the original of course.
I think this was said lightly but it's important to say that it's asking a LOT! In my time I have coped with French, Spanish, Latin, Greek, a glimpse of Russian and Chinese ... never has language challenged me like the bloody Welsh! I doubt I'll ever really manage it. After two years though I can find my way around the original text with some effort so I can locate the excerpt I want. I can recognise certain keywords - am making my own glossary.

Hmm when I have a minute I'll draft an article on the translations and these issues ... and ask you to check it for me.