This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ceawlin of Wessex article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms 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.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles
Thank the lord for this featured article which has no real information at all. Well, Cwumbuwm of Twyllwyd may have had two sons, or he may not have. The sources conflict, you see. He may have had a brother, whom he deposed, named Cwmwmwmwm, or perhaps he had a sister who deposed him, named Cyrrrdrrrd, we simply cannot know. But we're fairly certain he came from a land before time. Jesus Christ. Also, he may have been king for 7 years, or was it 32? One document recovered suggests he had a penis 10 miles long which could satisfy twelve million fair ladies at once. This document may or may not have been written by Crywerdyerdy himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.37.96 (talk) 04:52, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank-you for that ever-so helpful comment! One can only assume you've done bugger all in the way of studies of Anglo-Saxon Britain, then? Because this is probably as accurate an article on Ceawlin as you'll ever get. Skinny87 (talk) 07:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your sarcastic comments and nonexistant suggestions to Wikipedia. We appreciate the total disregard for our editors' hard work. Waygugin (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The IP appears to originate from Australia, you can hardly blame the poster, his knowledge of history will likely extend only 400 years back, the poor thing. Parrotof Doom10:39, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is what pre-modern history is often like. The obscurity of the sources and the distance in time make it hard to say anything categorically and unquestionably. It's hardly the editors' fault. Brutannica (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And it's particularly bad for Britain in that time period. Civilization had collapsed in Britain and was being overrun by mostly-illiterate barbarian kingdoms, so there's little documentation to be had. To make matters worse, the Viking raids of later centuries destroyed many of what records did exist, because the raiders had a bad habit of pillaging and burning monasteries. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 22:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A serious point about the conflicting dates may be that some events are recorded in the A-S Chronicle twice, mirrored from separate sources. Kenneth Harrison, "Early Wessex Annals in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle", The English Historical Review86.340 (July 1971:527-533) gives a detailed examination.--Wetman (talk) 22:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Evening Standard (an authoritative source for Old English - not) said "See - aw - lin". That's how the Viscount Weymouth, whose forename it is, says it. Angus McLellan(Talk)12:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as Angus says, the Evening Standard is not a definitive source. I'm not an expert, but my best guess would be a hard "C", because when Bede gives the name in Latin he also gives the West Saxon version of the name as "Ceaulin" ("qui lingua ipsorum Ceaulin vocabatur"). I know a little more about Latin than I do about Old English, and I am pretty sure that would have been a hard "C" to Bede. Mike Christie(talk)12:52, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So, it would be just like any other Latin or Old English word... you can pronounce it the contemporary way with a soft C (C's before e, i, and y are soft today), or you can pronounce it the way the original ancient speaker would have pronounced it, which was always hard. You have to decide whether to be authentic or customary... as far as I know, both work just as well! Jonathantalk01:26, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article quotes from the AS Chronicle for the year 592:
"Here there was great slaughter at Woden's Barrow, and Ceawlin was driven out."
Woden's Barrow is identified as a tumulus, now called Adam's Grave, at Alton Priors, Wiltshire.
Garmonsway's translation of the Chronicle also identifies Adam's Grave as the site of Woden's Barrow. However there are other candidates. I favour the double hill fort of Stantonbury and Winsbury about 5 miles south of Bath that was incorporated into the course of Wansdyke. Winsbury is clearly a Woden name. Such a location would be consistent with Ceawlin's conquest of Bath at the Battle of Dyrham in 577, 15 years earlier. 78.149.189.94 (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
