Editing Latinus (section)

== English mythology ==

The [[England|English]] once widely claimed as history,<ref name=about-ms255>{{cite web |url=https://quod.lib.umich.edu/b/brut/about/ |publisher=quod.lib.umich.edu |access-date=20 Jan 2022 |title=About the Brut Chronicle and Manuscript 255 }}</ref> an original peopling of the [[island|isle]] — at the time a land only of fantastical [[giant]]s — by descendants of the above-mentioned Eneas, perhaps via Latinus, and at least with Latinus as [[step-family]] of an [[ancestor]], though even in the time of the [[Renaissance]], a non-English [[audience]] as well at least one English [[writer]] found details of the stories less than convincing.<ref name=Rastell>{{cite book |last=Rastell |first=Johannes |date=1529 |title=The pastyme of people |publisher=in chepesyde at the sygne of the mearemayd next to pollys gate |url=https://archive.org/details/pastymeofpeoplec00rast/page/n9/mode/1up }}</ref>

The island known later as [[Great Britain|Britain]], was also previously known as [[Alba]], similarity of name supporting connection to the city of [[Alba, Italy|Alba in Italy]], said to have been built by Alcanius, son of Eneas, and third ruler of the Latins after Latinus, being either his grandson or step-grandson.

Even if one ignored obviously far-fetched elements of this [[foundation myth]] of Britain, [[John Rastell|Johannes Rastell]] writing in [[1529]] questioned, along these lines: &nbsp;Supposing the original Brits were descendants of a line of Latin kings — Brute the son of Silvius, son of Alcanius, son of Eneas who came to the [[Italian peninsula]] from Troy — then why should such a fact have escaped record in the [[Caesar's commentaries|writings]] of [[Julius Caesar]] when he had personally [[Surveying|surveyed]] the lands there he had conquered for Rome by [[48 BC]]? And indeed, why should the son Brutus have escaped from Latin histories altogether, given they did deal with Silvius and Alcanius, and 'all theyr childera & what became of them & how they endyd that succeeded them as kyngis'?

Other details he found were able to be discounted without resort to factual records, or with only very few facts needed other than everyday experience. Were the early inhabitants of Britain giants, descended from [[the Devil]] in union with 32 daughters of a king [[Dioclisian of Syria]]?  To Rastell, if the devil had power to sow such seeds at the earlier time, then why not in his own time?  Where were the giants today?

Other fanciful elements he reduced by [[logical deduction]] from intuitive [[psychology|psychological insights]], for example the greatly diminished chance of 32 daughters [[marriage|married]] to 32 kings on a single day, and all cooperating to [[murder|kill]] those 32 husbands in a single night; or in combination with analysis of [[logistics|logistical]] realities, such as the suggested [[Travel|voyage]] of all 32 murderous [[widow]]s to Britain without dispersion or diversion, over three thousand miles.

One renaissance writer Rastell was further able to discount the likelihood of any factuality to that ancient tale, due to his failure to discover, after diligent research, any authentic record of its origin or explanation as to why such record should be absent.

=== Further reading ===
* One surviving version of the [[Brut chronicle]] is a late Middle Ages manuscript, known as the [[St Albans Chronicle]].<ref name=stalbc>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/lewis_e_238/page/n9/mode/2up |title=The St Albans Chronicle |date=1400 }}</ref>