Talk:Eardwulf of Northumbria

message: Angus, per your note, here's one comment about the article.  I think it might be best to merge the "Background" and "Patrician" sections.  The "Patrician" section serves well as an introduction, and in fact contains more background than the first section does.  I think a good way to run them together might be to start with some scene-settings along the lines of "During the latter half of the eighth century, the Northumbrian succession saw a long series of murdered and deposed kings, as five or more royal lines contended for the throne."  Then maybe give identifying names to the relevant lines: Alhred's line, Aethelwald Moll, and  Eadbert; then the conflict between the lines introduces Eardwulf, as the article already has it.  The new material I'm suggesting would just replace the first sentence of the "Patrician" section; I think the rest of it is fine -- it just needs more introduction and context-setting.
I think the material in "Background" might then fit in front of the sentence about Eardwulf being an enemy of the new king: that way the sequence is we get historical context first, then Eardwulf is mentioned and there's a short digression on his background, which is informed by the context; then we get his miraculous survival, and finally we get to the events of his accession.
I'll keep looking at the rest of the article and see if I can come up with any other suggestions for improvement.  Hope this is useful.  If you like, I can have a crack at this change myself, if you agree it would be an improvement.  Mike Christie (talk) 02:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mike, thanks for the good ideas. If you would be able to make these changes, please do! I'd really appreciate it. For Eadberht's family, I wrote a Leodwaldings for some reason or other. If you don't have the time, I'll try to implement your ideas over the weekend. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 08:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'll have a go at it -- I'm heading out of town for the weekend, so if I don't get it done today it'll be early next week, unless the place I'm going unexpectedly has wireless net access. Mike Christie (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background and Patrician sections 

message: This sentence:Osred, who returned from exile with a small army, encouraged by promises of support, was betrayed and killed by Æthelred's command on 14 September 792.seems to say more than is in the ASC.  Swanton's translation of the [E] text has Osred betrayed and driven from the kingdom in 790, with Aethelred succeeding, but there's no explicit statement of who betrayed Osred.  Then in 792 the [E] text says Osred came home from exile and was killed, with no further details.  Is the version in the article taken from Symeon? Mike Christie (talk) 00:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Osred 

message: Terminology is an area I know little about, but I wonder what value there is in using all three terms: dux, ealdorman, and patrician?  I understood them to be more or less interchangeable.  Are we doing the reader any favours by using these different terms?  Is one term predominant in Northumbrian texts, and if so should we use that in all cases?  Mike Christie (talk) 00:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find anything written about this.  The terms are reported as used, so I'm going to drop this.  Mike Christie (talk) 15:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ealdorman, dux, patrician 

message: With reference to the quote about the King of the Angles, and the reference to Roger of Hoveden having "Angels", it might be useful to quote Forsman (in the article already cited and linked for the next note).  She discusses the possible interpretations.  I'm a bit surprised to discover that she doesn't mention Hoveden -- I know nothing about Hoveden, and I suppose he could have copied from Symeon, so that this is a scribal error, but I can't see that asserted in the material I can find on Hoveden.  Anyway, I think the Angles/Angels question might be worth mentioning, if only in a footnote.  Mike Christie (talk) 01:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per Angus's opinion below I'm going to drop this; it's rather tangential at best. Mike Christie (talk) 15:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  King of the Angles/Angels 

message: It would be good to know what the source is for the story that Eardwulf married a daughter of Charlemagne's.  The source cited by Yorke is Levison, England and the Continent in the Eighth Century, 1946, which Google Books has no preview for.  Not a big deal, but would be interesting if we can find it. Mike Christie (talk) 01:56, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Found and added - it only took a decade. Agricolae (talk) 21:47, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:03, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

text: Better late than never, thank you very much for that. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 00:07, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charlemagne's illegitimate daughter 

message: I've done a rewrite of the Wada paragraph per Awadewit's comments and will post a note to FAC.  Just wanted to mention that I cut the sentence about Alric, son of Heardberht, out; it was hard to make the paragraph flow with it in there and when I went back to look for justification to keep it in I couldn't really find enough.  The point seems to be that Heardberht was killed by Æthelred, so Alric probably fought against him, but that doesn't mean he necessarily fought with Wada.  We don't know which side he's on and we don't know for sure that his father is the Heardberht killed by Æthelred.  So it didn't seem critical to keep it in there.  Please re-add if you think it is useful.  Mike Christie (talk) 17:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wada and Alric 

message: This time I bolded the text; it was a bit thin and spidery without the bolding.  I actually like the look of the other font, but I think readability is improved this way.  Anyway, comments welcome. Mike Christie (talk) 18:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map added 

message: Is it worth explaining etymology?  AFAICT this is the same word (or two words) as aardwolf. Wnt (talk) 10:54, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: None of my sources give the etymology; if there's a good source that does, we could add it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology?