差分

1958年にMatronae Austriahenaeが発見されるまでは、このテーマの研究では、ビードがこの神を創作したのではないかという疑問がしばしば提起されていた。Austriahenaeが発見されるまでは、このテーマの研究では、ビードがこの神を創作したのではないかという疑問がしばしば提起されていた。1892年、チャールズ・J・ビルソンは、彼の著作以前の学者たちが、ビードのエオステレの記述の存在について意見が分かれていたことを指摘し、「彼女の存在について疑いを持たない権威者の中には、W・グリム、ヴァッケナゲル、シンロック、そしてウルフがいる」と述べている。

In 1892, [[Charles J. Billson]] noted that scholars before his writing were divided about the existence of Bede's account of Ēostre, stating that "among authorities who have no doubt as to her existence are [[Wilhelm Grimm|W. Grimm]], [[Wilhelm Wackernagel|Wackernagel]], [[Karl Joseph Simrock|Sinrock]] {{sic}}, and Wolf. On the other hand, Weinhold rejects the idea on philological grounds, and so do Heinrich Leo and Hermann Oesre. Kuhn says, 'The Anglo-Saxon {{lang|ang|Eostre|italic=no}} looks like an invention of Bede;' and [[Wilhelm Mannhardt|Mannhardt]] also dismisses her as an etymological {{lang|la|[[deus ex machina|dea ex machina]]}}." Billson wrote that "the whole question turns ... upon Bede's credibility", and that "one is inclined to agree with Grimm, that it would be uncritical to saddle this eminent Father of the Church, who keeps Heathendom at arms' length and tells us less of than he knows, with the invention of this goddess." Billson pointed out that the [[Christianization]] of England started at the end of the 6th century, and, by the 7th, was completed. Billson argued that, as Bede was born in 672, Bede must have had opportunities to learn the names of the native goddesses of the Anglo-Saxons, "who were hardly extinct in his lifetime."<ref name="BILLSON448">Billson (1892:448).</ref>