Talk:Uhtred of Bamburgh

message: In his History of the Siege of Durham, as printed in The Church Historians of England Vol 3 Part ii p. 361, translation by Rev. Joseph Stevenson, M.A., published by the University College, Durham 1855, Simeon of Durham specifically says that Uhtred did not pay homage to Cnut, as this article claims. The precise wording is, "Ucthred, [sic] however, answered that he would do nothing of the sort, and declared that it would be the depth of baseness were he to act thus against his lord and father-in-law. ' Nothing would induce me,' said he, 'to take such a step: nor, indeed, ought I to do so. So long as king Ethelred lives, I will be faithful to him; for he is my lord and my wife's father, and the abundant honours and riches which are mine, I possess by his gift. I will never be a traitor to him.' Thus Cnut had no assistance from Ucthred." That Uhtred did not pay homage would seem to be the motive for Cnut to summon him and have him killed. Whereas if Uhtred did pay homage why did Cnut have him killed? Do you have a reference for the claim in this article that Uhtred did pay homage to Cnut? Cottonshirtτ 16:46, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paying homage to Cnut 

message: "he and forty of his men were murdered by Thurbrand the Hold, with assistance from Uhtred's own servant, Wighill and with the connivance of Cnut".   The article on Thurbrand the Hold considers Wighill to be the place where Uhtred was killed.  What is the source that says Wighill was Uhtred's servant?
193.11.40.10 (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Servant or village? 

message: The section regarding Uhtred in Bernard Cornwall's fictional accounts needs rewriting. Particularly where the language in the article diverges from encyclopedic content to an apology for not having a proper citation: "While I have no citation for this it is documented across the historical notes of his Saxon novels, though not all in one." I move for removing that whole paragraph as it is unimportant to the discussion of the historic person. --Jaiotu (talk) 07:11, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiction 

message: Notwithstanding the long terms standing of this name, it seems that the nickname 'the bold' is only used very scarcely in reliable modern sources. It appears to be a modern nickname that doesn't seem to be rooted in any medieval source, unless 'bold' is meant to be a translation of 'probus', used to characterise him once. Unless there are any objections I propose relocating this article to Uhtred of Bamburgh. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No objection. You preformed this move back in 2009, but self-reverted in 2010. I can't figure out where I got the title, since it doesn't seem to appear in Stenton and the only sources I can find online that were in existence back in 2006 are far too obscure to have been my source. Srnec (talk) 21:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can't remember what I thought 13 years ago precisely, but I'm sure I've always assumed that the name was based on something... but it doesn't seem to be. My one anxiety about the proposed name is that there is a son of Eadwulf I of Bamburgh also named Uhtred, who doesn't yet have a separate article yet and may never or may always be covered by Uhtred (Derbyshire ealdorman), who might be the same figure (there are at least two separate Uhtreds of the era, PASE IDs 6 and 7). Also, since you're here, do you know where the 'William' in 'William Walcher' comes from? I can only seem to find sources calling him Walcher, which is his Flemish personal name not a nickname, I don't understand why he would be called William too, unless there is some text that that tries to make the name 'William' because Walcher seems too 'barbaric'. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 13:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. The article was originally at Walcher, but was moved back in 2006. I can't seem to find a single source earlier than 2006 for "William Walcher". I have restored it to its original title and removed "William Walcher" from the article (unless a source can be found).  Do you know anything about the this? Srnec (talk) 23:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  It was at "William Walcher" when I first edited it back in 2007 or so, and I never got interested enough in him to expand the article much, so I never delved deeply into the name. Handbook of British Chronology 3rd ed. has him "Walcher". Fasti has him as "Walcher".... so I'm not going to complain about moving him. I'm buried in winter-weather-issues (we hit -40 degrees wind chill night before last, which is .. oddly, the same in both F & C) I can't see any reason to object to moving this article to Uhtred of Bamburgh either (to keep things on topic) Ealdgyth (talk) 13:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name