![]() | Daily page views
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Harthacnut is not at name. Canute is a name. and Hartha- is a byname as the correct english name is Hartha-Canute
I danish the name with be Hårde-Knud.
I would like to despute the neutrality of the article. It describes the told tale as a fact, rather than as a chronicle of a single source that is not widely accepted, and especially not by danish historians.
the "interview" by Adam of Bremen of king Sweyn Estridsson is fiction.
Gnupa was danish king in 934 and Gorm was king in 936 and between these was Gnupas son king. It create a short regime of HarthacnutHåbet 08:17, 4 October 2006 (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 14:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
hi was just looking and is
Harthacanute the same person? and if so does this need to be merged --
Deadman (
talk) 08:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)--
Deadman (
talk)
09:57, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
"The reliability of Adam as a source is called into question since he omits any reference to Sweyn I's exile in Scotland."
I cannot gather who calls it into question, because the source given in the footnote seems to be only an edition of Adam's chronicle, not a historian's assessment of it. Besides, neither an author (nor an editor, publisher, or date and place of publishing...) is given.
But I do know that Adam does mention Sweyn's exile in Scotland. I even think Adam is the only original source to state that Sweyn ever was an exile in Scotland, and that this story is dismissed as a legend in anything scientific I ever read about Sweyn. That means the justification of why Adam is "unreliable" given here is wrong.
Actually, I think that Adam's "unreliability" is somewhat overemphasized here, considering there is hardly a written historical source which is held to be unconditionally reliable by historians. Although it is true that Adam's account of Sweyn's life contains several implausible and improbable elements which are generally rejected by historians, it still seems a rather vague and too general a claim to say that Adam is "unreliable", implying that all of his chronicle is discredited as a historical source, which I frankly think is untrue. At least an academic source for this statement should be specified.
Corinius ( talk) 02:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Could anyone cite any verifiable source to support the claims described in the section about that? Thanks. -- Bestiasonica ( talk) 18:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() | Daily page views
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Harthacnut is not at name. Canute is a name. and Hartha- is a byname as the correct english name is Hartha-Canute
I danish the name with be Hårde-Knud.
I would like to despute the neutrality of the article. It describes the told tale as a fact, rather than as a chronicle of a single source that is not widely accepted, and especially not by danish historians.
the "interview" by Adam of Bremen of king Sweyn Estridsson is fiction.
Gnupa was danish king in 934 and Gorm was king in 936 and between these was Gnupas son king. It create a short regime of HarthacnutHåbet 08:17, 4 October 2006 (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 14:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
hi was just looking and is
Harthacanute the same person? and if so does this need to be merged --
Deadman (
talk) 08:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)--
Deadman (
talk)
09:57, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
"The reliability of Adam as a source is called into question since he omits any reference to Sweyn I's exile in Scotland."
I cannot gather who calls it into question, because the source given in the footnote seems to be only an edition of Adam's chronicle, not a historian's assessment of it. Besides, neither an author (nor an editor, publisher, or date and place of publishing...) is given.
But I do know that Adam does mention Sweyn's exile in Scotland. I even think Adam is the only original source to state that Sweyn ever was an exile in Scotland, and that this story is dismissed as a legend in anything scientific I ever read about Sweyn. That means the justification of why Adam is "unreliable" given here is wrong.
Actually, I think that Adam's "unreliability" is somewhat overemphasized here, considering there is hardly a written historical source which is held to be unconditionally reliable by historians. Although it is true that Adam's account of Sweyn's life contains several implausible and improbable elements which are generally rejected by historians, it still seems a rather vague and too general a claim to say that Adam is "unreliable", implying that all of his chronicle is discredited as a historical source, which I frankly think is untrue. At least an academic source for this statement should be specified.
Corinius ( talk) 02:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Could anyone cite any verifiable source to support the claims described in the section about that? Thanks. -- Bestiasonica ( talk) 18:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)