![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The historians I've read identify Cynuit as Countisbury in Devon. Now I don't know much about local geography, but it seems to me that as long as the exact location of Cynuit is uncertain, the battle (and hence the article) ought to be called "Battle of Cynuit".
In general I agree a more neutral approach would be to have a main article "Battle of Cynw(u)it", with text stating it is likely to be Cannington. The evidence for a (the?) battle at Cannington is:
My 100-year old sources are W.H.P.Greswell (amateur, not very reliable by modern standards) and the Victoria History of Somerset (see picture credit for the map). I will try to find better archaeological references. It might also make sense to split Cannington Hill as a separate article about the Iron Age hill fort. -- Mikhailfranco 15:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the article should be split, with the titles "Battle of Cynwit" and "Cannington Hill". Adresia 10:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Reading the Chronicle and Asser, the only two contemporary English sources, both say that the landing and battle both happened in Devon. Why is etymologicial evidence being given priority over original textual material? Heliotic ( talk) 22:39, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
The article states that the landing was at Combwich (which is near Cannington). Is there any evidence at all for this claim? IF the landing was at Combwich, Cannington would be indicated as Asser's arx Cynuit. But IF arx Cynuit was Wind Hill, Countisbury, the landing is unlikely to have been at Combwich. Asser says 'ad Damnoniam', the Chronicle says 'Defenascire'. I don't think Asser would have called Combwich 'Devonshire'. Also there is a discrepancy between whether there were 1,200 men (Asser) or 800 men (Chronicle). Ioan_Dyfrig ( talk) 17:39, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
The term "juvenile historical novel" is used in this article - is this well known term used to describe something specific like an incomplete texts?.
If it one persons criticism of the text (thus subjective), I think the term should be removed.
If it is a review of the text (by person or a body) then it should be referenced as such, with the reference given, and not reported as mere fact as is the case at present. In any case, a review of a text is still subject (no matter the source of the review) and thus should not be part of this article.
Unless strong consensus is reached contrary to my statement above, I propose removing the word "juvenile" on the basis it is subjective and contributes nothing to this article. The offending statement may have more merit for inclusion in an article about The Marsh King per se.
Wikipedi is an encyclopaedia of fact, not forum of subjective opinion. -- Quantockgoblin 14:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
The Battle of Cynwit (though not identified by name) features prominantly in the historical novel The Price of Blood, Doris Sutcliffe Adams; Charles Scribner's Sons, NY; 1962.
Msdeberry (
talk) 14:41, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The sub section on the Siege and battle is uncited and has a citation needed tag - can anyone provide a source otherwise it will probably need to be removed.— Rod talk 09:11, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Is it worth mentioning when discussing The Last Kingdom that, as Bernard Cornwell himself notes in the historical notes section of the novel, its fictionalised version of Cynwit in the story takes place 2 years earlier than in reality? Dunarc ( talk) 22:51, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The historians I've read identify Cynuit as Countisbury in Devon. Now I don't know much about local geography, but it seems to me that as long as the exact location of Cynuit is uncertain, the battle (and hence the article) ought to be called "Battle of Cynuit".
In general I agree a more neutral approach would be to have a main article "Battle of Cynw(u)it", with text stating it is likely to be Cannington. The evidence for a (the?) battle at Cannington is:
My 100-year old sources are W.H.P.Greswell (amateur, not very reliable by modern standards) and the Victoria History of Somerset (see picture credit for the map). I will try to find better archaeological references. It might also make sense to split Cannington Hill as a separate article about the Iron Age hill fort. -- Mikhailfranco 15:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the article should be split, with the titles "Battle of Cynwit" and "Cannington Hill". Adresia 10:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Reading the Chronicle and Asser, the only two contemporary English sources, both say that the landing and battle both happened in Devon. Why is etymologicial evidence being given priority over original textual material? Heliotic ( talk) 22:39, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
The article states that the landing was at Combwich (which is near Cannington). Is there any evidence at all for this claim? IF the landing was at Combwich, Cannington would be indicated as Asser's arx Cynuit. But IF arx Cynuit was Wind Hill, Countisbury, the landing is unlikely to have been at Combwich. Asser says 'ad Damnoniam', the Chronicle says 'Defenascire'. I don't think Asser would have called Combwich 'Devonshire'. Also there is a discrepancy between whether there were 1,200 men (Asser) or 800 men (Chronicle). Ioan_Dyfrig ( talk) 17:39, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
The term "juvenile historical novel" is used in this article - is this well known term used to describe something specific like an incomplete texts?.
If it one persons criticism of the text (thus subjective), I think the term should be removed.
If it is a review of the text (by person or a body) then it should be referenced as such, with the reference given, and not reported as mere fact as is the case at present. In any case, a review of a text is still subject (no matter the source of the review) and thus should not be part of this article.
Unless strong consensus is reached contrary to my statement above, I propose removing the word "juvenile" on the basis it is subjective and contributes nothing to this article. The offending statement may have more merit for inclusion in an article about The Marsh King per se.
Wikipedi is an encyclopaedia of fact, not forum of subjective opinion. -- Quantockgoblin 14:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 08:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
The Battle of Cynwit (though not identified by name) features prominantly in the historical novel The Price of Blood, Doris Sutcliffe Adams; Charles Scribner's Sons, NY; 1962.
Msdeberry (
talk) 14:41, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The sub section on the Siege and battle is uncited and has a citation needed tag - can anyone provide a source otherwise it will probably need to be removed.— Rod talk 09:11, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Is it worth mentioning when discussing The Last Kingdom that, as Bernard Cornwell himself notes in the historical notes section of the novel, its fictionalised version of Cynwit in the story takes place 2 years earlier than in reality? Dunarc ( talk) 22:51, 3 August 2019 (UTC)