This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Eboracum is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.
"A re-erected Roman column now stands, upside down, on nearby Deangate" Is there a reference for this "upside down" assertion? It's a commonplace in York & therefore on the net, but the head of education at the Minster recently said it was incorrect. Salvianus (talk) 16:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
The etymology through 'yew' is extremely dubious, and probably given that efrog (lower case 'e') in modern Welsh means 'the place of hogweed' (hogweed = efwr), nothing at all to do with yews (ywen, pl. yw). In modern Breton, hogweed is evor and yew (sing.) is ivinenn . I suggest the page should be reviewed and amended accordingly. Gwyddno (talk15:46, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
According to Rivert, Albert Lionel Frederick (1979), The place-names of Roman Britain, Batsford, p. 357, ISBN0713420774, Eboracum may derive from eburo-, the British for yew (making Eboracum the "place of yews, place abounding in yews"), or the personal name Eburos (known in Gaul) and the British -ac-, meaning "estate of" (making Eboracum "estate of Eburos"). In Rivet's words "We have no way of knowing which meaning is right, though Jackson (Britannia, I (1970), 73–74) regards the first as preferable, because the formation signifying "estate of" was rare in Britain." It looks like the English Heritage book used to source the etymology of the name in the Wikipedia article has come down on the side of the yew derivation, and I don't see a problem with using that as a source. Nev1 (talk) 17:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
I've been developing this page a bit over the last few days, but I just want to clarify my position in terms of COI. I work for a museum in Yorkshire and have access to viable paper resources to help expand this page exponentially - we have a Wikimedian in residence here (user:PatHadley as a point of cotnact) but I do not want to be seen as being a biased source. I would like opinions as to whether I should continue to expand the page for the benefit of WikiProject: Archaeology and WikiProject: Yorkshire or simply advise on potential references and additional material here on talk page. I can certainly advise on the topic in general. Comments please. Zakhx150 (talk) 13:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
No, WP:COI doesn't stop you from editing, please continue to do so, your efforts are appreciated. Dougweller (talk) 15:41, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Agreed, your help expanding the article will be very much appreciated.--Cúchullaint/c 16:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you folks. I shall wait a week or so and then proceed with alacrity. Zakhx150 (talk) 15:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
This article was edited as part of an edit-a-thon
The editor who attended the event may be a new editor. In an effort to support new editors, please assume good faith to their contributions before making changes. Thank you! Zakhx150 (talk) 11:33, 16 March 2014 (UTC)