Talk:Kingdom of Dumnonia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Cornwall (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This redirect does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 High  This redirect has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

I think this would be better placed under the title "Kingdom of Cornwall", then linked to the article on modern Cornwall. Does anyone object? -- llywrch 23:47, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The link is a good idea. I see as a disadvantage of changing the title that when people see Kingdom of Cornwall they will think of Cornwall under its modern boundaries rather than the much larger Kernyw/Dumnonia of the 5th and 6th centuries. Also, I have hardly ever seen in books etc references to the 'Kingdom of Cornwall' . The most important question for the title is what do readers type into their search boxes to lead them to this page? WHat do you think? pachiaammos 07:43 26 Apr 2004

By "linked to" I meant that the article on Cornwall should link to it to cover the portion of the history prior to, say AD 800. Similar to how Sussex links to the Kingdom of Sussex, Kent to the Kingdom of Kent, etc. If the terminology "Kingdom of Cornwall" isn't applicable, then perhaps "Kingdom of Dumnonia" or just "Dumnonia". The reason I suggest this is that the connection of Kernyw with Cornwall wasn't apparent to me right off the bat -- & I'd venture that I know much more of the history of that corner of the world than the average Wikipedia user.
(P.S. It seems that you solved the problem with the tildes. Congrats!) -- llywrch 02:00, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
<<Dumnonia>>, or <<Dumnonia, Kingdom of>> is acceptable - people have heard of it:-) If you can link it to Somerset and Devon as well as Cornwall, so much the better. There is already an entry for <<Dumnonii>> which refers to Roman times so there is a case for merging these two.
I also think it should be joined under the heading for the Dumnonii tribe. If there was a sub-kingdom from Cornwall in Arthurian times, the Dumnonii ruling house is referred with as Corneu in some Middle Welsh texts, which seems to imply that Dumnonia and Kernyw are the same thing by at least the late 6th century.
In any case, nearly anything's better than "Kernyw", which is a name really nobody uses in English (10 google hits for Kernyw, about 3,600 for the Welsh spelling Cernyw, and 72,000 for the Cornish spelling Kernow). I'm going to move this to Kingdom of Cornwall then, as that seems to have met little resistance. QuartierLatin1968 08:30, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"Kingdom of Cornwall" is pure WP:OR and WP:FORKING for Cornish nationalism. The Kingdom was call the Kingdom of Dumononia, NOT the kingdom of Cornwall. It included Devon too. Wikipedia isn't a mythology soapbox. The British (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Missing editorial history[edit]

The earlier editorial history for this page may be found under the Kingdom of Dumnonia redirect page. Walgamanus (talk) 20:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Introductory content[edit]

I have just changed the introductory section towards a neutral POV. Perhaps the article is in need of review by an expert in the history of the period.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Everything done by User:The British is very suspect as he is now banned.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

June 2009[edit]

There are some issues with this article:-

  • Cornwall seems to have originally been part of the greater kingdom of Dumnonia- comment not very clear- I know what is meant, but Cornwall did not exist in this period.
  • However, some members of the recreational Celtic movement in Britain such as Peter Berresford Ellis- comment I can't say I am keen on the erm "recreational Celtic movement", I've heard of recreational drug users but not Celts! Would P.B.Ellis describe himself thus? I am going to check this.
  • Dumnonia had remained largely un-Romanized and settlements continued in use into the post-Roman period-comment Apart from the Roman villa at Illogan, Roman finds scattered throughout Devon and Cornwall and the Roman city of Isca Dumnoniorum not to mention the more uncertain sites named in the Ravenna Cosmography.
  • It is suggested that the kings were itinerant, stopping at various palaces, such as Tintagel, at different times of the year. Lesser lords built defended 'rounds' like Kelly Rounds and Castle Dore.

Castle Dore? Hmm... not sure anout that one. Again, this seems like theorising and conjecture.

  • Dumnonia may have reverted to paganism- comment no evidence for this whatsoever and no references, what Dumnonia entirely Christian before the Romans left? Tricky one here...!
  • after the Roman departure from Britain, or perhaps Christianity never reached these far-flung parts of the Empire. In the 5th and 6th centuries, however, the area was evangelized by the children of Brychan Brycheiniog and saints from Ireland comment -inaccurate.

The wording of this article needs attention in my opinion. Let me know what you think!


Brythonek (talk) 18:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I have now redirected this to Dumnonia. Most of the info in the "Kingdom of.." article came from David Nash Ford's "Early British Kingdoms" website, which is speculative and not a reliable source. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC)