Disputatio:Geuissae

Use of sources

Are the sources being forced a little? So far as I can see the Gewisse are not mentioned in the AS Chronicle. I have only found them named by Bede and in two Celtic sources. I'd suggest that it's important to make clear what those sources say (and any other sources I haven't found!), as a background to the claim that the Gewisse won battles with which no source actually credits them. Or have I got this wrong?

I changed "Britones" to "Britanni", but I think Bede uses the former term, so I was wrong. However, we need to distinguish these Britones of southern Britain from their close relatives the Bretons, perhaps by a link. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:52, 24 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

Re: Britones/Britanni, our current page Britanni (and its redirect Brittones) refer to the British peoples in general, acknowledging that the Classical term is Britanni and Britones is the post-Classical. Perhaps we could have three pages on the Britanni for the Iron Age people, and then something on the lines of Britones insulares and Britones Armoricani - if that's not too much of name-coining.

Re: battles, I might have been carried away reading the en:wiki page (where they only have secondary referecnes) - I certainly did not check the original sources. Sorry!--Xaverius 09:39, 24 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, and no need to apologise! I guessed you were translating from the English.

Now that I've got the primary sources at hand and also what looks like a good secondary source "The+Earliest+English+Kings"+Gewisse&source=bl&ots=c8rZgFdVsP&sig=ACfU3U1i5twSn1QY-8UmG08suKOltwvJQQ&hl=la&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjqu6fdxrTlAhX06eAKHchTBsUQ6AEwCnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q="The%20Earliest%20English%20Kings"%20Gewisse&f=false here (the same work that is already cited in our article), maybe I'll try adding the section about what the sources say, as I suggested. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:07, 24 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

OK, I've done that.

You took out the statement that the Chronicle attributes the battles of 552 and 556 to the Gewisse. Quite right. You inserted instead a footnote to Kirby. Well, bad luck, Xaveri, Kirby in the form available on the Web (see link above) says no such thing. But that's a bad online copy, so maybe, just maybe, you have seen a real paper copy of Kirby that does say this. Otherwise, that new footnote of yours has to go as well. Kirby is OK but (I think) inconsistent with himself about how to take the Gewisse. The author who really does make the odd claim about those battles (as cited in en:wiki) is E. T. Leeds, here on page 56, but why he suddenly on that page brings in the Gewisse and proposes that they are an alliance of Saxons and Jutes I can't see for the life of me! It's fantasy! I have found a recent and better guide now, I think: a 2018 article by Barbara Yorke. On this basis, I may rewrite the rest of the article: hope you don't mind. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:53, 24 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

Please, do! I just thoght I'd add a page that had something to add to Dorchester, but you have gone and done all the research!--Xaverius 18:58, 24 Octobris 2019 (UTC)

I really enjoy this stuff, you understand, especially when I'm supposed to be doing something else. Thanks for the excuse! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:07, 24 Octobris 2019 (UTC)