# Talk:Christianity in Medieval Scotland

This review is transcluded from Talk:Christianity in Medieval Scotland/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sarnold17 (talk · contribs) 22:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello; I'll be picking up the review of this article.  I've only skimmed it and read the lead so far; I'll be back with comments in a day or two.Sarnold17 (talk) 22:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
The structure of the article looks great; well organised, nice image placement, well referenced with current material.  I'm having difficulty with the prose, however, so will have a lot of comments and a lot of questions.  If you feel that I am not a good person to be reviewing this, please let me know (nicely) so that we can get another reviewer.  You will see from my questions that I have little knowledge of the topic, but I nevertheless find it interesting, and wish to learn about the subject.  I'll save the lead for last, and begin with the main article.


### Early Christianisation
"While the Picts and Scots away from Roman influence would have remained pagan, it is generally presumed that Christianity would have survived after the departure of the Romans among the Brythonic enclaves such as Strathclyde, but retreated as the pagan Anglo-Saxons advanced."

Picts should be wikilinked the first time.'
 Done--SabreBD (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

"it is generally presumed"  Generally, avoid passive language.  Can we say "Most scholars presume..."
 Done I think we can say that.--SabreBD (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Can we use the word British, instead of Brythonic?  There is so much specialised language in this article, that any word that could be replaced with a more generally understood word should be replaced with that word.  Where is Strathclyde?  Scotland?  Britania?  I'm trying to picture just where these little pockets are located without having to go digging into some other article, and losing my train of thought.
I would rather keep Brythonic if at all possible. It is the correct term and nothing else quite means the same thing. Readers can click on the link if they do not know what it means or, for that matter the location of a place.--SabreBD (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
OK, but the preference would be that it is used in context so that the reader is not forced to click on the link to get the gist of the sentence, and this appears to be a key concept in the sentence.Sarnold17 (talk) 15:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
"While British Christians continued to practice inhumation without grave goods, the pagan Anglo-Saxons are visible in the archaeological record for England from their practice of cremation and burial in urns, accompanied by extensive grave goods, perhaps designed to accompany the dead to the afterlife."

Recommend "British Christians buried their dead without placing objects in the grave, whereas the pagan Anglo-Saxons practiced cremation and burial in urns, with objects placed in the grave for the presumed purpose of accompanying the dead to the afterlife."
 Done I swapped this out.--SabreBD (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
"In the sixth century missionaries from Ireland were operating on the British mainland. This movement is traditionally associated with the figures of St Ninian, St Kentigern and St Columba."

how about, "...operating on the British mainland, the most notable of whom were St Ninian, ..."
A bit tricky this one, as they may not actually have existed and the language is boxing around a very big scholarly argument.--SabreBD (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
OK, then I think the reader should be made aware that these are all possibly fictitious characters, because the word shadowy to me conveys an underworld spy rather than a Robin Hood or a King Arthur.Sarnold17 (talk) 15:17, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
"The shadowy figure of Kentigern is recorded as dying in c. 614 and seems to have been active in support of Christianity in the Strathclyde region."

Do you mean St Kentigern?  Why is he shadowy?  Can we remove this word?
Again, he may not have existed and we know almost nothing reliable about him.--SabreBD (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
This could be reworded "St Kentigern (died 614) worked in the Strathclyde region" and then joined with another sentence.
Ninian is now regarded as largely a construct of the Northumbrian church, after the Bernician takeover of Whithorn and conquest of southern Galloway.

Does this mean that St Ninian is a fictional character created by the Northumbrian church?  The remainder of the sentence is unintelligible to me.  Are any of those words or concepts important to a discussion of St Ninian?  Can we just give a year, or are the takeover and conquest highly important to the article?  If so, they need explanation.
"The name itself is a scribal corruption of Uinniau ('n's and 'u's look almost identical in early insular calligraphy), a saint of probable British extraction who is also known by the Gaelic equivalent of his name, Finnian.

Recommend: "The name Ninian is a..."
Where does the name Uinniau come from?  Is it important?  What is insular?  Recommend: "St Ninian was a saint of probable British extraction who is also known by his Gaelic name, Finnian" but then the next sentence would need to be modified.
"St Columba was probably a disciple of Uinniau. He left Ireland and founded the monastery at Iona off the West Coast of Scotland in 563 and from there carried out missions to the Scots of Dál Riata and the Picts."

Who were the Scots of Dal Riata?
"It seems likely that both the Scots and Picts had already begun to convert to Christianity before this period."

Which period?
"Saint Patrick referred in a letter to "apostate Picts", suggesting that they had previously been Christian, while the poem Y Gododdin, set in the early sixth century does not remark on the Picts as pagans."

I'm trying to figure out what's happening here.  Did Saint Patrick write about "apostate Picts," suggesting they had been Christian, which is supported by some poem that also suggests the Picts were not pagan?  As the sentence stands, I can't quite tell what's going on.  Also, should Saint Patrick be linked?
"One of the key indicators of Christianisation are long-cist cemeteries, which generally lie on an East-West orientation."

I don't think you mean the cemeteries are east-west, but rather the cists are east-west.
Recommend: "...of Christianisation are cemeteries containing long cists which are generally east-west in orientation."
"Many of them are in the vicinity of a church or possess an early Christian inscription."

It might be clearer to say "Many of these cemeteries [or graveyards] are..."  Also, why the word "or"?  These don't appear to be mutually exclusive.  Oh, I think I see what you are saying.  Something like "These cemeteries are suspected or known to be Christian because of their proximity to a church or because of Christian inscriptions found in them."
"These burials are found between the end of the Roman era and the twelfth century."

When is the end of the Roman era?  Maybe just say between the 5th and 12th centuries?
"They are concentrated strongly in eastern Scotland south of the Tay, in Angus, the Mearns, Lothian and the Borders."

What is the Tay?  What are all these other places?  towns?  cities?  regions?  provinces?  Instead of four linked terms, is there a single word or phrase that can capture the essence of where all these cemeteries are located?
"It is generally accepted among scholars that place-name element eccles-, from the Brythonic word for church, represents evidence of the British church of the Roman and immediate post-Roman period, most of which are located in the south-west, south and east."

Recommend: "Most scholars agree that the place-name element..."  I can't tell what you are then trying to say.  Where are these eccles places located? In Scotland?  Southwest, south and east of what place? Scotland?  What does all this have to do with cemeteries?  Some connection should be made.
"About a dozen inscribed stones of the 5th and 6th centuries, beginning with the so-called Latinus stone of Whithorn, dating to c. 450, indicate Christianity through their dedications and are spread across southern Scotland."

Recommend "from the 5th and 6th centuries" or "from the fifth and sixth centuries"
I hope I'm not being too picky, so tell me if I'm going way overboard.  My thinking is that if things are clear in my mind, then the general reader will also have a better chance of understanding.  I hope to get back to this tomorrow.Sarnold17 (talk) 01:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


### Celtic Church
"The Celtic church is a term which is used by scholars both for the Gaelic church and for the religious establishment of northern Britain prior to the twelfth century, when new religious institutions and ideologies of (primarily French origin) began to take root in Scotland." 

Parentheses need to be removed, since sentence makes no sense when removing the parenthetical phrase.
It had its origins in the conversion of Ireland from late Roman Britain associated with St. Patrick in the fifth century.

First word, "It" should be changed to "This church" since the subject of the previous sentence is the word "term" and not "church."
"Although there were few theological differences between Roman and Celtic Christianity there were differences over major issues of practice, including the method by which Easter was calculated, the form of tonsure, and minor differences in the rites of ordination, baptism and in the liturgy."

I recommend not making a distinction between major and minor differences, but instead just presenting the differences.  Recommend: While Roman and Celtic Christianity were largely similar, there were some differences in practice, such as the method of calculating Easter, and the form of head shaving known as tonsure.  Other differences were in the rites of ordination and baptism, and in the liturgy.  Also, I'd briefly explain what the liturgy is.
"The typical features of native Scottish Christianity that have been identified are relaxed ideas of clerical celibacy, intense secularization of ecclesiastical institutions, and the lack of a dioscesan structure, making abbots (or coarbs) more important offices of the native Scottish church above Bishops."

In the previous sentence the discussion was Roman vs Celtic Christianity.  Now we're talking about Scottish Christianity. Is it the same as Celtic, or does it differ from Celtic by having these relaxed ideas?  If so, that needs some explanation.  Can we use a more understandable terminology for "diolcesan structure" such as "church heirarchy."  Also, "have been identified" by whom?  Turn passive voice into active voice, e.g. "scholars have identified..."
"The part of southern Scotland dominated by the Anglians in this period had a Bishopric established at Abercorn in West Lothian, and it is presumed that it would have adopted the leadership of Rome after the Synod of Whitby in 663, until the Battle of Dunnichen in 685, when the Bishop and his followers were ejected."

What and where is West Lothian?  town? city? region? "...and it is presumed" by whom?  Turn passive into active, e.g. "so and so suggested that this area fell under Roman leadership in 663 when a synod took place (why did this happen?).  This lasted until 685 when the bishop (which bishop? the newly [or subsequently] installed bishop?)..."
"The Picts accepted the reforms of Rome under Nechtan mac Der-Ilei around 710."

We were talking about Scotland.  How do the Picts relate to the previous discussion?  What is that linked thing Der Ilei?  At least describe what it is.  Is it a treaty?  A person?  In other words, a reader should not have to go to a link to understand the essence of a sentence.  The link should be there only for further information, not for information critical to understanding the sentence.
"The followers of the Celtic traditions retreated to Iona and then to Innishbofin and the Western isles remained an outpost of Celtic practice for some time.(ref)Celtic Christianity continued to influence religion in England and across Europe into the late Middle Ages as part of the Hiberno-Scottish mission, spreading Christianity, monasteries, art and theological ideas across the continent."

The previous two sentences appear contradictory.  First we have Celtic traditions retreating to some outposts and islands, and then we have Celtic Christianity spreading across Europe?  Some explanation is needed for this.


### Gaelic monasticism
"Scotland was untouched by continental forms of monasticism until the late eleventh century."

Another word to trip me up.  Recommend: "Scotland was untouched by the method of establishing (building?) monasteries from continental Europe until the late 11th century." Either that or use "monasticism"  in context so that it is less austere.
"Some early Scottish establishments are famous for their dynasties of abbots, who were often secular clergy with families, most famously at Dunkeld and Brechin; but these existed across Scotland north of the Forth, as at Portmahomack, Mortlach, and Abernethy.

Recommend: "..., but also found across Scotland north of the..."
"Perhaps in reaction to this secularisation of monasticism a reforming movement of monks called Céli Dé (lit. "vassals of God"), anglicised as culdees, spread to Scotland from Ireland in the late eighth and early ninth centuries. Some Céli Dé took vows of chastity and poverty and while some lived individually as hermits, others lived beside or within existing monasteries."

I'd get rid of "monasticism" or find a place to use it in context.  Also, it sounds like the movement is called "Celi De" instead of the monks.  Recommend: "in reaction to this secularisation, a movement was begun by a group of monks called...and spread to Scotland from Ireland..."
"Physically monasteries differed significantly from those on the continent, and were often an isolated collection of wooden huts surrounded by a wall."

Recommend: "these monasteries" or "Scottish monasteries"
"Scottish monasticism remained a vital force into the high Middle Ages, playing a part in the Hiberno-Scottish mission, where monasteries, often called Schottenklöster, were founded by Gaelic monks on the continent, and Scottish monks, such as St Cathróe of Metz, became..."

Why were Scottish monks called by a German name?  Also, Hiberno-Scottish mission came up before.  Did you describe to the reader what it is and/or how it fits in?
"In most cases, these monks were not replaced by new continental monks in the Norman period and the tradition continued until the thirteenth century."

When is the Norman period?
I've made some rather extensive recommendations, and should probably hear from you before I continue any further.Sarnold17 (talk) 00:37, 3 October 2012 (UTC)


### Some general comments before continuing
As you can see by my above comments, I'm having a bit of difficulty with the language.  I think the article should be completely understandable to the general reader without the reader having to click on a single wikilink.  The reason for this is that at times the article will be printed out and then read, which means that clicking on links will not be an option.  Therefore, the meaning of words in a sentence should be obtainable from context.  I've mentioned the word Brythonic, which was a big stumbling block for me.  Let the reader learn the gist of what it means from the context of the first sentence in which it appears.  The next word that tripped me up was monasticism.  I think the best way to handle this word is to talk about monasteries a time or two, and then make the connection with the word monasticism.  Anytime the article mentions a location, let the reader know why that location is relevant to the article, or where it is, but I recommend that the reader not be forced to click on the link to discover the relevance to the article, because any train of thought developed in the reader's mind will then be lost, and the flow of the article broken.  I don't have all the answers, but I'm offering some suggestions so that the article sounds less like a PHD dissertation and more like a place where my high school kids can go to research the topic of Christianity in medieval Scotland.  Honestly, I'm not trying to overwhelm you with my comments; I'm trying to make this piece something that I can totally wrap my head around from beginning to end.Sarnold17 (talk) 15:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


### Conversion of Scandinavian Scotland
"There is evidence that Christianity made inroads into the Viking controlled Highland and Islands before the official conversion at the end of the tenth century."

This official conversion sounds to me like a monumental big deal, particularly to this article, and it seems to be rather casually mentioned here.  I would begin the entire section with something like "While the official conversion of Scotland [or whatever Scotland consisted of at the time] took place at the end of the tenth century, there is evidence that Christianity made inroads..." I think this better gives an introduction to what the subsection is about.
I recommend providing the reader with a sense of what the Highland and Islands are, just a few words, and then link to some of those words.  I, the reader, do not know what part of Scotland we are talking about without clicking on the link.
"According to the Orkneyinga Saga the Northern Isles were Christianised by Olav Tryggvasson, king of Norway, in 995 when he stopped at South Walls on his way from Ireland to Norway."

What is this saga?  Is it accepted as being valid?  Can we say "According to a saga that has been largely accepted by scholars, the "O... Saga", the Northern Isles..."
The King summoned the jarl Sigurd the Stout and said "I order you and all your subjects to be baptised. If you refuse, I'll have you killed on the spot and I swear I will ravage every island with fire and steel".

Recommend:  "The king summoned the local earl, known as "jarl", Sigurd the Stout..."


### Continental monasticism
"The introduction of the continental type of monasticism to Scotland is associated with Queen Margaret, the wife of Máel Coluim III, although her exact role is unclear. We know she was in communication with Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, and he provided a few monks for a new Benedictine abbey at Dunfermline (c. 1070)."

I've lost track of the big picture here.  Can I be brought back on track with something like: "Besides the conversion to Christianity, the high middle ages were also characterised by the introduction of monasticism from the continent.  This movement is largely attributed to Queen..."
"The first Augustinian priory was established at Scone by Alexander I in 1115. By the early thirteenth century, Augustinians had settled alongside, taken-over or reformed Céli Dé establishments at St Andrews, St Serf's Inch, Inchcolm, Inchmahome, Inchaffray, Restenneth and Iona, and had created numerous new establishments, such as Holyrood Abbey."

I recommend a transitional phrase be added here to link this with the previous section:  "In addition to the earlier introduction of continental monasteries, the first Augustinian priory was established..."
What's an Augustinian priory?  Is this a linkable term?  Can it be introduced with a single synonym or phrase?  Where did the Augustinians come from?
"The Cistercians achieved two important Scottish foundations, at Melrose (1136) and Dundrennan (1142), and the Tironensians achieved foundations at Selkirk, then Kelso, Arbroath, Lindores and Kilwinning."

Who were the Cistercians?  Where did they come from?  Recommend something of the gist of "Later, another group of whatevers, called the Cistercians, became founded in Scotland.  They were established at Melrose (1136), at... etc."
"Cluniacs founded an abbey at Paisley, the Premonstratensians at Whithorn and the Valliscaulians at Pluscarden. The military orders entered Scotland under David, with the Knights Templer founding Balantrodoch in Midlothian and the Knights Hospitallers being given Torphichen, West Lothian."

Recommend:  "Additional whatevers also became established during this timeframe, including the Cluniaces at Paisley, the..." or else just make this all part of the previous comment.


### Organisation
"From this period local lay landholders, perhaps following the example of David I, began to adopt the continental practice of building churches on their land for the local population and endowing them with land and a priest, beginning in the south, spreading to the north-east and then the west, being almost universal by the first survey of the Scottish Church for papal taxation in 1274."

Recommend breaking this long sentence into two: "...endowing them with land and a priest.  These churches began in the south..."
"The administration of these parishes was often given over to local monastic institutions in a process known as appropriation. By the time of the Reformation in the mid-sixteenth century 80 per cent of Scottish parishes were appropriated."

To me, "monasteries" sounds much less scary than "monastic institutions."
"The church in Scotland attained independent status after the Papal Bull of Celestine III (Cum universi, 1192) by which all Scottish bishoprics except Galloway were formally independent of York and Canterbury."

Recommend: "...after the papal decree of..." "...bishoprics except Galloway became formally independent..."
"It was in practice run by special councils of made up of all the bishops, with the bishop of St Andrews emerging as the most important player."

"...councils made up of all..."  Which bishops, all the bishops in the entire Christian Church?


### Cult of Saints
"Like every other Christian country, one of the main features of Medieval Scottish Christianity was the Cult of Saints."

The subject is "country" so it should read "features of medieval Scotland was..."
"The most important missionary saint was Columba, who emerged as a national figure in the combined Scottish and Pictish kingdom, with a new centre established in the east at Dunkeld by Kenneth I for part of his relics."

Recommend: "...by the Scottish monarch Kenneth I..."  Also, what is a centre for relics?  This appears to be a new concept in this article, and could use a bit of explanation.
He remained a major figure into the fourteenth century and a new foundation was endowed by William I at Arbroath Abbey and the relics in the Monymusk Reliquary handed over to the Abbot's care.

Again, this concept of relics, and handing over relics needs some kind of introduction/explanation.
"Regional saints remained important to local identities. In Strathclyde the most important saint was St Kentigern, in Lothian, St Cuthbert and after this martyrdom around 1115 a cult emerged in Orkney, Shetland and northern Scotland around Magnus Erlendsson, Earl of Orkney."

After what martyrdom?  What cult?  A cult focused on what or on whom?
"The cult of St Andrew in Scotland was established on the Eastern coast by the Pictish kings as early as the eighth century."

Some transitional words would be helpful, such as, "Yet another cult, that of St Andrew was established..."
"The shrine, which from the twelfth century was said to have contained the relics of the saint, brought to Scotland by Saint Regulus, began to attract pilgrims from Scotland, but also from England and further away."

What shrine?  relics of what saint?  brought to Scotland from where?
"By the twelfth century the site at Kilrymont, had become known simply as St. Andrews and it became increasingly associated with Scottish national identity and the royal family."

Is the site at Kilrymont a shrine?
"It was renewed as a focus for devotion with the patronage of Queen Margaret, who also became important after her canonisation in 1250 and the ceremonial transfer of her remains to Dunfermline Abbey, as one of most revered national saints."

Recommend: "...with the patronage of Queen Margaret, who became important as one of the most revered national saints following her canonisation in 1250 and the subsequent transfer of her remains to..."
"In the late Middle Ages the "international" cults, particularity those centred on the Virgin Mary and Christ, but also St Joseph, St. Anne, the Three Kings and the Apostles, would become more significant."

Recommend adding "in Scotland" at the end of the sentence.
This concludes my comments on the high middle ages.Sarnold17 (talk) 17:21, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


### The Church and politics
"In the Papal Schism (1378-1417)..."

Recommend: "During the Papal Schism..."
"In 1383, Clement VII appointed for Scotland its first cardinal, Walter Wardlaw, Bishop of Glasgow."

Recommend: "...appointed Scotland's first cardinal, Walter..."
"In the subsequent debates over Conciliarism and the authority of the pope, divisions mirrored political divisions in the country and church, with king James I and his chancellor John Cameron, Archbishop of Glasgow, becoming conciliarists and William Croyser, Archdeacon of Teviotdale, the leading opponent of Cameron, becoming a papalist."

Recommend two sentences: "...divisions in the country and church.  King James I and his chancellor became..."
There should be a few words describing what conciliarism is, followed by the linked word itself.  This is important since you mention the "conciliar movement" in the next sentence.  What is a papalist, as opposed to a papist?  Also, divisions where mirrored divisions in the country and church?  I thought you were talking about divisions in the church to begin with, so how can divisions in the church mirror divisions in the church?
"As elsewhere in Europe, the collapse of papal authority in the Papal Schism allowed the Scottish Crown to gain effective control of major ecclesiastical appointments within the kingdom, a position recognised by the Papacy in 1487."

I'm not understanding what the "position" is.  Do you mean that Scottish control of these major appointments was ultimately accepted by the papacy in 1487?  Clarification needed.  Also, shouldn't "in the Papal Schism" read "during the Papal Schism", or is this a facet of British English with which I'm not familiar?
"James IV used his pilgrimages to Tain and Whithorn to help bring Ross and Galloway under royal authority."

has Ross been mentioned before?  If not, it should be introduced. (is it a region? in other words, what are Ross and Galloway?)


### Popular religion
"Traditional Protestant historiography tended to stress the corruption and unpopularity of the late Medieval Scottish church, but more recent research has indicated the ways in which it met the spiritual needs of different social groups."

Recommend replacing "indicated" with "shown"
"Historians have discerned a decline of monasticism in this period, with many religious houses keeping smaller numbers of monks, and those remaining often abandoning communal living for a more individual and secular lifestyle."

By "decline of monasticism" do you mean that the influence of monasteries was in decline, or do you mean that monasteries were actually getting smaller, with fewer monks who were living less like monks?
"New monastic endowments from the nobility also declined in the fifteenth century. In contrast, the burghs saw the flourishing of mendicant orders of friars in the later fifteenth century, who placed an emphasis on preaching and ministering to the population."

OK, endowments to monasteries were in decline in the 15th century (usually numbers over 10 are not spelled out), and by contrast something was on the upswing, but I'm not sure what.  Who are the burghs?  A few words to explain mendicant orders of friars are needed.  How are the friars different from the monks?  Where did they come from?  Is "friardom" a new movement?  In other words, monasticism is in decline, and something else is taking its place.  What is it?  You are comparing two things here, and they need to be the same types of things that are being compared.
"The order of Observant Friars were organised as a Scottish province from 1467 and the older Franciscans and Dominicans were recognised as separate provinces in the 1480s."

This should read "The order of ... Friars was organised..."  This doesn't make sense to me.  How can a religious order become a political province?  In other words, an order is a religious group of clergy type people.  But a province has a land area and a population.  How can these be the same?
"In most burghs, in contrast to English towns where churches tended to proliferate, there was usually only one parish church, but as the doctrine of Purgatory gained in importance in the period, the number of chapelries, priests and masses for the dead within them grew rapidly."

why is this so?  Why would purgatory cause this growth?  Also, I'm surprised that English towns had a proliferation of churches; I've always envisioned a single church in each parish, though a bigger town would have multiple parishes (and of course cities would have many)
"The number of altars to saints also grew dramatically, with St. Mary's in Dundee having perhaps 48 and St Giles' in Edinburgh over 50, as did the number of saints celebrated in Scotland, with about 90 being added to the missal used in St Nicholas church in Aberdeen."

Two sentences might be better:  "The number of altars grew dramatically with...48..and over 50.  Likewise, the number of recognised saints grew as well with about 90 being added to [some unknown word meaning list of saints?] in St..in Aberdeen [during what timeframe?]
"New cults of devotion connected with Jesus and the Virgin Mary also began to reach Scotland in the fifteenth century, including The Five Wounds, The Holy Blood and The Holy Name of Jesus and new feasts including The Presentation, The Visitation and Mary of the Snows."

New cults began to reach Scotland in the 15th (numerical) century, and new feasts...  new feasts what?  These are put together as two sentences with a conjunction, but the second sentence is not complete.  Recommend: "New cults... began to reach Scotland during the 15th century, including..." (new sentence) "During the same period new feasts arrived as well, including The..."
"In the early fourteenth century the Papacy managed to minimise the problem of clerical pluralism, but with relatively poor livings and a shortage of clergy, particularly after the Black Death, meant that in the fifteenth century the number of clerics holding two or more livings rapidly increased."

This should probably go before the preceding paragraph to be somewhat chronological.
What is this problem of clerical pluralism?  Some explanation needed.  Maybe begin with "Prior to the 14th century the Scottish clergy tended to have two jobs, but the Papacy managed to minimise this problem of clerical pluralism.  However, in the 15th century, with poor livings...the number of clerics holding two or more livings once again increased.
"Heresy, in the form of Lollardry, began to reach Scotland from England and Bohemia in the early fifteenth century, but despite evidence of a number of burnings of heretics and limited apparent support for its anti-sacramental elements, it probably remained a relatively small movement."

Explanation for Lollardry needed.  Try: "Lollardry, a type of heresy that yah dee yah dee yah, began to reach Scotland..."
limited support by whom?  the populace? parishioners?
OK, I am done for now on the prose.  Tomorrow I'll attempt to take a look at the other items.  One thing I've noticed is that some of the image captions are a bit lengthy, and could use some trimming.  More on this later.Sarnold17 (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


### Lead
"Christianity is presumed to have survived among the Brythonic enclaves in the south of Scotland, but retreated as the pagan Anglo-Saxons advanced."

Recommend: ...survived among groups of Britons in southern Scotland..."
"Scotland was largely converted by Irish-Scots missions associated with figures such as St Columba from the fifth to the seventh centuries."

It was the missionaries that did the converting, and I recall them being called Irish, but not Irish-Scots in the main body.  I recommend: "...converted by Irish missionaries such as St Columba from the fifth..."
"These missions tended to found monastic institutions and collegiate churches that served large areas."

"tended to found" is saying a lot of nothing.  Recommend "These missionaries founded monasteries and..."  PLEASE don't use "monastic institution" when the word "monastery" says it so much more succinctly.  I think there is something like WP:Peacock that talks about this type of language.
"Partly as a result of these factors, scholars have identified a distinctive form of Celtic Christianity, in which abbots were more significant than bishops, attitudes to clerical celibacy were more relaxed and there were significant differences in practice with Roman Christianity, particularly the form of tonsure and the method of calculating Easter, although most of these issues had been resolved by the mid-seventh century."

Too long for one sentence.  Recommend "...in which abbots were more significant..and attitudes...were more relaxed.  There were also differences in practice with Roman Christianity, particularly in the form of head shaving and the method of calculating Easter, though most of these differences had disappeared by the mid-seventh century."  The sentence doesn't imply that these differences were issues requiring resolution, so I've reworded accordingly.
"After the reconversion of Scandinavian Scotland from the tenth century, Christianity under papal authority was the dominant religion of the kingdom."

"from the tenth century" doesn't tell when the reconversion took place.  Recommend "After the reconversion...during the tenth century..."
"In the Norman period the Scottish church underwent a series of reforms and transformations. With royal and lay patronage, a clearer parochial structure based around local churches was developed."

It would be helpful to say when the Norman period is, and "during" a period seems to me to be more correct than "in a period." Therefore, I recommend: "During the Norman period, from xxxx to xxxx, the Scottish church..."
"Large numbers of new foundations, which followed continental forms of reformed monasticism, began to predominate and the Scottish church established its independence from England, developed a clearer diocesan structure, becoming a "special daughter of the see of Rome", but lacking leadership in the form of Archbishops."

The word "foundations" is vague, and I don't see what you mean.  Do you mean "A type of church hierarchy, incorporating continental forms of monasticism, became predominant, and the Scottish church established..., developed..., and became a "...", but lacked leadership in the form of..." ?
"In the late Middle Ages the problems of schism in the Catholic Church allowed the Scottish Crown to gain greater influence over senior appointments and two archbishoprics had been established by the end of the fifteenth century."

"15th century" I checked the MOS, and it appears that two syllable numbers are OK to be spelled out (I think this may have changed from earlier guidelines, but I'm not sure)Sarnold17 (talk) 01:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
"While some historians have discerned a decline of monasticism in the late Middle Ages, the mendicant orders of friars grew, particularly in the expanding burghs, to meet the spiritual needs of the population."

"some historians have discerned" is vague.  If some historians see a decline, you are implying that other historians don't see this at all.  You might do better to just say "The institution of monasteries (or "monasticism") declined during the middle ages, and was replaced by [this other institution having to do with friars] to meet the..."  I recommend that this friar material be spelled out in plain language in the lead, and then explained in the main body.
"Despite problems over the number and quality of clergy after the Black Death in the fourteenth century, and limited evidence of heresy in this period, the Church in Scotland remained relatively stable before the Reformation in the sixteenth century."

in this period => during this period?  Also, I think saying "up to" or "until" the Reformation, rather than "before" the Reformation, better conveys the fact that this is when stability ended (and Christianity was turned on its head).
That concludes the lead comments.Sarnold17 (talk) 01:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)


### Images
From the Wikipedia Manual of Style: "Captions should be succinct; more information about the image can be included on its description page, or in the main text."  Anything more than a single sentence or sentence fragment, to my way of thinking, is not succinct, so should be trimmed out.  Most of the captions are fine, but the images of the Kirkyard stone, tonsure, and Henry Wardlaw are too lengthy, and should be cut back.Sarnold17 (talk) 01:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)


### Final comments
Overall, the major aspects of this article are commendable, and it is in good position for nomination to GA status.  Though the number of comments might appear overwhelming, I've quoted entire sentences from the article, and many of the fixes will be modest word changes.  The major issue continues to be the language of the article, which needs to be brought down to an instructive level so that the article is understandable to the average person going to the encyclopedia for information.  I've offered many recommendations, and will offer more as changes are made.  Some of my comments I feel less passionate about as I've worked my way through the article, or as I better see the items in context.  I'm going to put the article on hold for two weeks to allow for changes to be made.Sarnold17 (talk) 01:09, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


### GA Checklist
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

This review is transcluded from Talk:Christianity in Medieval Scotland/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 12:01, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for taking this on. I should point out because it may save a lot of work, that all the suggestions from the GA1 were implemented, as far as possible, before re-submission, especially the issues of clarity and captions.--SabreBD (talk) 12:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I sort of started from scratch anyway. Sarastro1 (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
General: I think I could pass this one as it stands, regarding the GA criteria. It is a really interesting read, and covers all the required ground. Several of my points are rather picky, and are perhaps aimed more towards FA level, where I think it may be worth heading at some point. So feel free to argue. Good stuff, though. (As you may gather, I have some background in this area, particularly the earlier stuff.) Sarastro1 (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Picky is good, done in the right spirit. I welcome any advice that might point forward for the article. I also think you have spotted some errors I missed, so I pretty much plan to work through the points below.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
No problem, and feel free to tell me to get lost on any of the points! Sarastro1 (talk) 15:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
"Christianity in Medieval Scotland includes all aspects of Christianity in the modern borders of Scotland, between the end of the Roman occupation of Britain in the fifth century and the Renaissance and beginnings of the Reformation in the early sixteenth century.": A slightly clumsy introduction. Do we really need to define the scope so rigidly? And this may be a case where the bolded title is not needed in the first sentence.
 Done I usually get pulled up when I assume a level of knowledge here, but I have removed the definition of the period and linked to [Scotland in the] Middle Ages. Looking at WP:LEAD I think the title does lend itself to being used easily and naturally in the opening sentence, so I think it is probably best to keep this in bold.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Is there a link for "found", as this may be obscure to non-specialists?
Sorry which "found" is this, or did you mean "founded"?--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes, founded, found, foundation: anything that links to the idea. Sarastro1 (talk) 15:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
I cannot find anything that seems helpful, despite quite a lot of looking. I guess any article on "monastic foundations" would end up being a redirect to monasticism.--SabreBD (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
"There is evidence to suggest that Roman occupation brought Christianity to the north of the Province of Britannia": Is it worth specifying what this is, either in the main text or a note?
 Done I just included it in the sentence.--SabreBD (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
"who had close links with the island of Ireland": I don't think we need to say that Ireland is an island. And it also sounds a little odd if you try to say it aloud.
 Done I think that was there to stress that there was no Irish kingdom, but probably unnecessary, so I removed it.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
"Later Columbian influence": Should this be "Columban" rather than "Columbian"?
Ha, yes, not relevant now because of the following point.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
"Later Columbian influence would extend to the Hebrides.": A little ambiguous. Does this mean the influence of Columba himself, or his "style"? Also, do we need "would extend" rather than "extended"?
 Done It is really his successors, so I changed this to Iona.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
"In the seventh century, St. Aidan went from Iona to found a church at Lindisfarne off the east coast of Northumbria,[11] from where its influence spread into what is now south-east Scotland.": Dangling participle here: the subject of the first clause is St Aidan, but transforms to the church in the second.
 Done I split it in two and clarified the second part.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
"His Life of St. Columba stressed the saint's piety and miracles and elevated him to become the apostle of North Britain in general": And…and…and. Perhaps reorganise this a little.
 Done In the end I dropped the miracles and..., its the geographic bit that matters.--SabreBD (talk) 15:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
"It has been suggested that this process began early": Who has suggested? Possibly better to alter this so that the next sentence begins "The process may have begun early;…"
 Done--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
"In addition the poem Y Gododdin, set in the early sixth century and probably written in what is now Scotland, notably does not remark on the Picts as pagans.": "Notably" rather interrupts the flow of this sentence and could be safely removed. Also a little POVish.
 Done--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
"Conversion of the Pictish élite seems likely to have run over a considerable period, beginning in the fifth century and not complete until the seventh[17] and conversion of the general population may have stretched into the eighth century.[10]": Is it worth explicitly making the point that it is impossible to know anything for certain about all this, given the scare evidence, and the limitations of what is available. (For example, Fletcher's Conversion book goes into a lot of detail about this, although not specifically about Scotland.) Or you may feel that these sentences are enough.
I was relying on the opening sentence of the paragraph: "The means and speed by which the Picts converted to Christianity is uncertain" - is that enough?--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
That's fine with me. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
"These cemeteries are suspected, or known to be Christian, because of their proximity to a church, or because of Christian inscriptions found in them.[19] These burials…": Successive sentences beginning "these".
 Done removed one.--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
How far was Scotland Christian? The early sections describe the different "areas" and influences. Were all these Christianised? To what extent? Are there examples of pagan survival? Did the (possible) surviving Christians contribute to this process at all? Any clashes? (And I appreciate that the answers may be unknown)
The answers are pretty much unknown, we have a bit of difficult archaeology and some unreliable saints lives. Neither throw much light on paganism. Our best evidence for pagan "survivalism" is in later medieval practices within Catholicism and it is very difficult to read that back into the eighth century. It may be best just to let the reader make their own mind up.--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
No problem; that subject is a minefield anyway! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Also, how deliberate was this conversion? Was there a "master plan" (such as the Gregorian missions in England) or was it just random? If so, can we say what prompted it? Why so many in such a short time? (Again, Fletcher covers some of this if you feel it is needed)
My copy of Fletcher is at work, but I may be able to find it online. Will come back to this one.--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
To be honest, it's not essential for GA. The Fletcher stuff (my copy is temporarily inaccessible!) is fairly general and goes from Roman times when no-one bothered much with conversion to the big push of the 7th century onwards. More for background really. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Nevertheless I managed to find an online copy and added a sentence. I would really appreciate it if you could take a look at this and see if it helps and is sufficient.--SabreBD (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Why are italics used for "Celtic Church"?--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
My understanding of WP:ITALICS is that they are preferred to inverted commas for emphasis, but they could just be removed if you think the emphasis is unnecessary.--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't think it's necessary but the choice is yours. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I removed them. I think it is still clear.--SabreBD (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
"The Celtic Church is a term which is used by scholars both to describe a specific form of Christianity with its origins in the conversion of Ireland traditionally associated with St. Patrick, which later spread to northern Britain through Iona, and as a general description for the Christian establishment of northern Britain prior to the twelfth century, when new religious institutions and ideologies of primarily French origin began to take root in Scotland." Horribly long sentence. I think a little reworking may be needed.
 Done Divided into three.--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Perfect now. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
"The Celtic form of Christianity has been contrasted with that derived from missions from Rome": Contrasted how?
I think the bit about tonsures, Easter and other differences covers this.--SabreBD (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
OK. Sarastro1 (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
"Subsequent missions then helped convert the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms": Doesn't quite match the previous sentence; these are the Celtic missions which went into those kingdoms, presumably.
 Done It was referring to missions from Canterbury. Assuming it is clear from what has gone before that both sorts influenced Northumberland.--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
"In addition scholars have identified significant characteristics of the organisation of Irish and Scottish Christianity as, relaxed ideas of clerical celibacy, intense secularisation of ecclesiastical institutions, and the lack of a diocesan structure, making abbots (or coarbs), rather than bishops, the most important element the church hierarchy.": I'm not entirely sure this makes sense. Missing word?
 Done I broke this into two sentences - hopefully clearer.--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
The evidence suggests that the Synod of Whitby may have been more-or-less ignored at first in Scotland; is it worth saying so explicitly.
 Done - sort of. Not quite sure if that can be fitted in here. Whitby was only about Northumbrian observance of course and it is difficult to say "Scottish Christianity" here as there isn't a Scotland. I added a phrase that should make it clear that this is only about Northumbria.--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps a word or two on what Cluniac reform meant, and how this contrasted with the existing Celtic church may be useful for the general reader.
There is some of this in the next section. I tried to fit it in here but it broke up the point.--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
OK. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
"with Robert I carrying the brecbennoch": Noun plus ing form. Better as "Robert I carried…"
 Done--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
"between those who back the church council as the ultimate authority in the church and those that backed the papacy": Mixed tenses here.
 Done--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Is there anything more, other than the parts included, which could be said about architecture in the period? Sarastro1 (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Well there is a whole article on this at Church architecture in Scotland. Since I wrote that perhaps it is difficult for me to judge what also fits here. I may have erred on the side of caution, not wanting to keep rewriting the same article. I will take another look.--SabreBD (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
I added some information on early churches and Romanesque styles, both of which fit with major influences. It might be good to have something on Gothic styles, but I cannot work out where it would go, so might have to give that some more thought.--SabreBD (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Sourcing: Forgot to add this earlier: spot checks reveal no problems and sourcing looks very good. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:21, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Unless I missed something, I think that is all the suggestions dealt with as much as I can.--SabreBD (talk) 17:40, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Everything looks really good. Passing now, and maybe you should think about aiming this at FA in future. I think a PR and a few more eyes and it would be ready. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Many thanks for a very helpful review and recommendations.--SabreBD (talk) 22:47, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I have zero expertise on this subject, so I will not press for any particular change, but I would like to raise the matter of the following, taken from the introduction:
"Historians have discerned a decline in traditional monastic life in the late Middle Ages, but the mendicant orders of friars grew, particularly in the expanding burghs, to meet the spiritual needs of the population."
The phrase "to meet the spiritual needs of the population" assumes the population had "spiritual needs", whatever those might be. This seems to me to be more religious bias than historical fact. It rather implies that the rise of these mendicant orders was caused by a grass-roots demand for them, and that they could not have risen for other, more pragmatic reasons than to "meet the spiritual needs of the population". I, for one, am not sure there is such a thing as a "spiritual need", and there is certainly no evidence given in this article to support this assertion. At the very least, anyone using this phrase "spiritual need" ought to give a proper definition of it. In an historical article I would also expect some connecting of dots to show how these dubious "spiritual needs" were the causative factor in the rise of mendicant orders (which is what this statement implies), and some discussion of why these mendicants were able to fulfill the populations "spiritual needs" while the more traditional monasteries failed to do so. In effect, the quoted statement seems to me to be more a research hypothesis than a reliable bit of information. To treat the rise of the mendicant orders as if some sort of market mechanism was in play seems simple-minded at best. I don't think we should apply 21st century market ideology to medieval history, but if those with more expertise say this is, in fact, the case, I shall certainly stand down and respect their opinion.
Baon (talk) 14:31, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I think it is actually a pretty innocuous phrase, but I have changed it to something more obviously in line with the main text, of which this is a summary.--SabreBD (talk) 17:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't know whether it is innocuous or not, but I think that's irrelevant. I am not complaining that a phrase may be offensive, I am questioning whether a statement is meaningful and accurate. You removed the casual implication, which I think is great since I think it is indefensible. But I'm not absolutely certain of that. Alternatively, I would have been happy with an explanation and evidence of its truth. If it is, in fact, true, I would be much happier knowing that (!) than with simply mooting the matter.
But if you see the problem I am trying to point out, I suggest you take a look at similar language used in the section entitled "Popular religion". In particular, "...more recent research has indicated the ways in which it [the Medieval Scottish church] met the spiritual needs of different social groups." There are two citations to that quotation that I examined through Google books and neither of them produce a hit on the phrase "spiritual needs"... so if evidence supporting the assertion exists in the cited works, it is not easy to find without a close reading. And without knowing what the phrase "spiritual needs" means, which is in no way obvious, even the most painstaking reading may be futile. As I said, I have no historical expertise in this area. But I do have a sense that if the church incites fear in a population with a doctrine such as hell or purgatory, and then turns around and offers solace and redemption, it is misleading to characterize that as "meeting people's spiritual needs", unless the church's role in first creating those "needs" is emphasized.
I am not saying there are no social benefits to religion, which is perhaps what those cited works intend to describe. I am questioning language that seems to assert that "spiritual needs" are inherent needs of human beings, which create a demand for what we might call 'spiritual services' which religions then attempt to deliver in the same way that your grocer attempts to meet your inherent need for nourishment. The competing theory that religion is a means of social control imposed from the top down to serve the interest of rulers, not a benign response to the inherent needs of the masses, is preemptively dismissed by such market based language. In any event, assertions about "spiritual needs" do not seem to me to be historical assertions so much as philosophical (or theological) ones, and so, from my point of view, do not belong in an historical article unless they are accompanied by lucid definitions and strong historical evidence. I am not so much objecting to the phrase "spiritual needs" as to its decontextualization and the resulting theological implications of the statements containing it. The point is not to remove offense, it is to remove errors of fact and supply sufficient supporting evidence for historical propositions. Baon (talk) 05:57, 13 April 2016 (UTC)