Talk:Dumnonia

message: Did Dumnonia cover Cornwall? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.195.86.36 (talk • contribs) 
:This information is given in the article Walgamanus 08:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cover?

message: There has been a tradition of trying to find evidence for the separation of Cornwall from the rest of England for centuries.  In many cases this is entirely valid, however this is not the place to discuss such matters.  Through both Roman organisation, and the post Roman kingdom of Dumnonia, Cornwall formed an integral part.  Tintagel is a far larger settlement with far more imported high status objects than anywhere else in the southwest, even South Cadbury, which leads it to be a lgical capital for the kingdom.
Although there is literature, such as that done by Charles Thomas concerning Roman subcantons and sub kingdoms for Cornwall, there is no archaeological or historical evidence to back this up, and if anything  the evidence points to the contrary.  Charles Thomas in fact had to borrow the term sub-canton from its post medieval Swiss usage, hardly a comparable source.
Only after the Kingdom of Dumnonia was eroded down to an area highly comparable to modern day Cornwall can we talk about Cornwall in an a separate sense.  Further assimilation by Wessex into the region was halted by the Norman Conquest and a policy of divide and conquer.
I therefore propose that is inaccurate to refer to Cornwall as a separate entity in this article, but instead highlight its importnace in the Kingdom of Dumnonia.
*For more information:
**The Archaeology of Cornwall,  by Dr Caradoc Peters, Cornwall Editions.
**A History of Cornwall, Philip Payton, Cornwall Editions.
*Beware of outdated or unsourced areas in these books:
**Celtic Britain, Charles Thomas, Thames and Hudson.
**F E Halliday, A History of Cornwall, House of Stratus.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.136.31.72 (talk) 16:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dumnonia & Cornwall. 

message: Cadbury Castle, i.e. the hill fort at South Cadbury Somerset, is generally considered to be in the territory of the Durotriges.  There is a Cadbury in Devon but this is a different hillfort.
Adresia 09:49, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems to be some confusion about the time, all the maps seem to be of the Roman invasion in 43AD but talk of the Dumnonii controlling Cadbury seem to be talking the 5th century. Are there later maps? Did Dumnonia expand?  LamontCranston (talk) 14:28, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Cadbury Castle

message: Another user - User:Ghmyrtle - has put a suggested merger tag on this page, and the Dumnonii page.  So I've changed the two tags to both point at this section so it can be discussed. Stevebritgimp (talk) 19:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree - I think Dumnonii and Dumnonia are two separate things, one being a tribe or administrative division of early Roman Britain, and an ethnic group.  The other is a post-Roman British kingdom.  While you could say these are difficult to separate, to be vague for a moment, all books that I've read don't identify these two things.  People with knowledge in this area would immediately know the difference, even if it is only one letter. Stevebritgimp (talk) 19:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Comment - I am by no means an expert, so I'm coming to this as an interested reader, as most WP readers would.  In my view, as they stand, the articles do not differentiate clearly between the supposed pre-Roman "Dumnonii" and post-Roman "Dumnonia", or even state clearly whether, or why, such a distinction should be deemed to exist. Most sources I've looked up seem to regard the two terms as essentially interchangeable, in so far as the Dumnonii were the people who lived in Dumnonia, before and after the Roman period. Am I wrong?  Incidentally, the two articles were one until they were split by this edit in 2006. Before coming down one way or another, for or against merger, I'd like to hear the views of an expert or two. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose - per Stevebritgimp. And I think the articles differentiate themselves just fine - rst20xx (talk) 17:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose. The pre-Roman Dumnonii survived, largely Romanised and Christianised, to become the population of post-Roman Dumnonia. Each article does need a succinct summary of the other in appropriate places. --Wetman (talk) 17:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Oppose: distinct items require distinct entries. Walgamanus (talk) 20:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

text: OK, I've deleted the merger tag.  But see also below....  What is going on?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: I've deleted the ones that were there (see the discussion at  (the Sub-Roman Britain task force talk page. Historyfiles, by the way, is using material from this site: . Doug Weller (talk) 09:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: I have been bold and rewritten and restructured the article, using material from new sources as well as from other WP articles (where referenced).  Hope this has improved things!  In my view, the Kingdom of Dumnonia article should now be deleted and redirected to this article.  The articles on Kings of Dumnonia and Kingdom of Cornwall should still remain, but they need to be critically examined, with particular regard to the reliability of some of the sources.  Comments welcome!  Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite, July 2009 

message: I query this claimed root and its meaning. The online sources I have consulted suggest for deep "dubno" and for world "albjo". I have also seen a derivation of Dumnonia as "worshipers of the god Dumnos". This may be more plausible in view of the widespread occurrence of the name.  Adresia (talk) 13:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The derivation in the article is referenced here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was brought up on dumnoni meaning people of the land - maybe the 'world' or 'realm' sense of dumno in the reference.  There is effectively no difference between dubno and domno.  There are names Togidubnos, Cogidubnus, Togidumnus, etc.  Both b and m end up as v/f in Welsh.  Dubnovellaunus ended up both as Dyfnwal and Domhnaill and eventually Donald.  A more open question would be does that have any significance to Dumnoni/Dobunni, as another of my faded memories says the Dumnoni didn't produce coins, but did use Dobunnian coins.  We attach maybe too much significance to vague areas called 'the land' organised by Roman administrators who didn't speak the language.  Again for wikipedia purposes an outside source is king. Stevebritgimp (talk) 23:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: *dumno

message: Why has the Devon Flag been added to this article - it has no connection with the Kingdom of Dumnonia at all and was only created in 2003.  It isn't specifically intended as a Celtic flag.  (And I'm an enthusiast for the flag and the Celtic thing).  I really don't see what business it has here. Stevebritgimp (talk) 23:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. That was a very confusing infobox.--SabreBD (talk) 23:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do we know who added the infobox? It is an IP user. Stevebritgimp (talk) 23:12, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the infobox as it seemed like it would confuse matters rather than clarify them. To pick another example apart from the flag issue, it gave the impression that Dumnonia was succeeded by the Kingdom of Cornwall when it does not appear to have been a certainty that Dumnonia covered part of Cornwall. Nev1 (talk) 23:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Devon Flag 

message: The current text is "The Saxons may have expanded westward from eastern Somerset after a battle in 661 at Posentesburh, possibly Posbury near Crediton in Devon. In 682 they "advanced as far as the sea", but it is unclear where this was." Evidence for the battle of Posentesburh comes from the AS Chronicles(http://www.britannia.com/history/docs/658-75.html or(better) http://rae2007.cch.kcl.ac.uk/pase/apps/persons/index.html). In context, the battle appears to be against Wulfhere of Mercia and also Wessex may have lost. After googling, I found "The origins of Somerset" M. D. Costen - 1992. Which could be a reference to doubt over locating Posentesburh and it's significance to Devon. The other historical evidence for the early Saxon inroads into Devon is that according to The Life of Boniface, in the late 7th century, the ruler of the monastery of Examchester(which is equated with Exeter) has a Germanic name. And also Boniface who  studies there self-identifies as Anglosaxon. As far as I know, this is the only evidence, so it could be put in the text. Is there any more evidence?119.12.251.13 (talk) 07:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't add to this, but just noting that we don't use Britannia.com ("America's Gateway to the British Isles since 1996") as it isn't considered a reliable source by our criteria. But you've provided an alternative one. Dougweller (talk) 08:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: More work on early expansion into Dumnonia

message: I agree there is a reasonably well documented continuity among historians, even modern day ones. The folklore on the continuity is extensive. Much of this continuity is being documented through current period work, January 2013, on various webpages associated with Brittany. I've added some links to these and also added a link to the Brittany portal in Footnotes. This section holds great promise and should be developed more. Cornwall and Brittany are both modern Celtic Nations !96.224.73.113 (talk) 18:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Section: Possible Dumnonia Continuity with ... Brittany

message: I've initiated the use of Footnotes to separate explanations from the Reference function. See if you think it is suitable. This is used in many other historically oriented wikipedia sites to good result. Brittany portal added 96.224.73.113 (talk) 18:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnotes, References, and Other Support Items

message: The claim "Post-Roman imported pottery has been excavated from many sites across the region. An apparent surge in late 5th century Mediterranean imports is yet to be explained satisfactorily" has been tagged as being "old info". Can anyone update the information or explain what needs to be changed?— Rod talk 08:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imported pottery ? out of date info 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dumnonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090812235920/http://www.trevithick-society.org.uk/industry/cornish_history.htm to http://www.trevithick-society.org.uk/industry/cornish_history.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006082128/http://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/pearl_jspui/bitstream/10026.1/778/4/254389.pdf to http://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/pearl_jspui/bitstream/10026.1/778/4/254389.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:04, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dumnonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130504211440/http://rae2007.cch.kcl.ac.uk/pase/apps/locations/index.html to http://rae2007.cch.kcl.ac.uk/pase/apps/locations/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: @Dudley Miles deleted @Nwbeeson's map of pre-Roman Celtic tribes, stating that's it's "misleading". He probably knows more about early Britain than I do, so I'm not going to contest that claim. But that map, in one form or another, is on a lot of pages, on a lot of different versions of Wikipedia. If it's misleading enough to delete from an obscure page about one particular Celtic kingdom, it shouldn't be on any page. 
So the correct thing to do is have a discussion about whether the map needs to go away. That would happen by starting a deletion request from the map's Wikimedia Commons page. Use the "Deletion Request" button on the left.
In the meantime, I think it makes sense to revert the deletion of the map from this page. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not mean that it is misleading for all articles, just for this article. The map is of pre-Roman Celtic tribal areas, whereas the article is about post-Roman Dumnonia, when most of England was occupied by Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind then. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 23:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Map