Talk:Lothian

Untitled

Lyonesse? Not so sure, Lyonesse is a kind of Celtic Atlantis. --MacRusgail 20:36, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Thoroughly Anglo-Saxon throughout Scottish history? Really?

From the Edinburgh page "The origin of the city's name is understood to come from the Brythonic Din Eidyn (Fort of Eidyn) from the time when it was a Gododdin hillfort." This seems to contradict the statement on this page that "[lothian is the] only part of the nation to have been thoroughly Anglo-Saxon throughout Scottish history". It can't have been always Anglo-Saxon if it was one Brythonic. Can someone reseach this detail further and correct it? Rincewind42 10:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Lothian was Anglo-Saxon prior to it being conquered by the Scots and became a part of Kingdom of Scotland and has thus indeed always been Anglo-Saxon with regard to Scottish history. Do not confuse geographical North Britain, which is now referred to as Scotland with regard to all periods of history simply because that is the contemporary name of the region, with the Scottish state which did not come into existence until founded by the aforementioned Scots during the latter stages of the first millenium. siarach 11:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

That's a rather convoluted argument and goes against the common understanding of the term "Scottish History". It also goes against the use of the term "Scottish History" as used in many other pages of the wikipedia. For example the History of Scotland page begins with "The history of Scotland begins around 10,000 years before the present day..." Or do you want them to edit that to "The history of Northern Britain, the area which later became known as Scotland, begins around 10,000 years before the present day..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rincewind42 (talk • contribs)

• Shrugs* I thought the context in which the reference was made was clear enough. Ive changed the relevant bit in the article to refer to the Kingdom of Scotland rather than the more ambiguous Scottish history. siarach 17:02, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• Shrugging isn't going to let you off the hook on this one. This whole section is so POV I can't quite actually believe it. Is this what Wikipedia has become? At one point it says "Indeed the earliest surviving use of the name "Engla land" (England) is in a version of Bede, in reference to Abercorn in West Lothian." - Abercorn may have indeed been controlled by the English from AD 678 to AD 685 under Bishop Trumwin, and Bede might have mentioned "Engla land" in the passing, but that doesn't make Abercorn English, or even an Anglo Saxon settlement never mind being part of "Engla land", however much you want to twist the truth to your POV. According to Bede, the Picts defeated them at the Battle of Dunnichen in AD 685, and Trumwin retreated south to Whitby (strange that he did not retreat to the nearest Anglo Saxon settlement in Lothian). I'd be really interested to see that list of Anglo Saxon settlements in Lothian alluded to in the article. Can anyone provide such a list?--62.249.233.80 (talk) 01:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The Kingdom of Scotland (843-1707 CE) annexed Lothian in 1018 CE, as mentioned earlier in the article. This means that for 175 years out of the total of the 864 years that the Kingdom of Scotland existed, Lothian was controlled by Anglo Saxons, as it had been since at least 643 CE when Oswald defeated Cadwallon. But being controlled by Anglo Saxons does not necessarily mean that everyone in Lothian spoke Anglo Saxon. No one doubts the fact that Lothian was never really a Gaelic speaking area, but there is little evidence to suggest that Anglo Saxon was spoken all over Lothian in the whole period between 843 and 1018 CE. That is such a sweeping generalisation. If Anglo Saxon was spoken all over Lothian, then where are all the Anglo Saxon settlements? I have removed this paragraph due to lack of evidence and citations. --81.132.170.63 (talk) 09:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)