Talk:Ebrauc

Untitled

This article is talking about York, and should be merged and redirected. Luigi30 (Ταλκ) 14:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There was also a Dark Age kingdom called Ebrauc, where as the City of York was Caer Ebrauc James Frankcom 18:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Maybe they were called Ebrauc and Caer Ebrauc then, but the article currently claims that Ebrauc "is the Welsh name for the modern city of York". It's not. The modern Welsh for the modern city of York is Efrog. I tend (mildly) to agree that it should redirect to York. I'm actually surprised there is no History of York article: the place has history enough to justify one. --Telsa 16:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It should certainly be made clearer that this article is about the Brythonic kingdom which was centred on York rather than just about the city during the post-Roman era. I would suggest a title change. Despite the city being called Caer Ebrauc at this period, there is little evidence to suggest what the kingdom was actually called and it is generally referred to as the 'British Kingdom of York'. Walgamanus 23:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tidy up. The existence of this kingdom, though probable, is largely supposition and I have tried to make that clear. Walgamanus 17:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have changed "cumbric" to Brythonic in this sentance

"This city was called by the Cumbric name of Caer Ebrauc"

given Cumbric possibly never existed as a seperate language, and if it did no-one has any idea what the word for York was. Also Nennius was Welsh, not from Cumbria.

Boynamedsue 060806

"British"

"British control of Ebrauc was briefly restored under King Cadwallon ap Cadfan of Gwynedd who seized...." - British control as in....? Are people in Ebrauc not British? They might not be anglo saxon. But they're British surely. 'British' as a concept doesn't even exist at this time anyway, how on earth can 'British control' be restored? Do you mean Roman control or some other such thing? I don't pretend to know about the subject but the use of 'British' here just doesn't seem right. -Bannatyne84 (talk) 03:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is restoring Ebrauc to British control, as in native Britons, after it had been taken over by the Anglo-Saxons of Dewyr, or Deira. I think before the British Empire any reference to "British" tends to be concerning the native Britons. ---G.T.N. (talk) 11:32, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've rephrased it - "native Britons" is used above so seems safer. --GuillaumeTell (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Updated article

The article was speculative and mostly about possible connections to Peredur, who has his own article, and to speculations about York being part of the Old North. None of it was cited material and it had little to do with the article topic.

Updated the article with sourced material. Also updated the talk page banners (don't know what "class" to call it; if it didn't pop up from time to time as a "possible British kingdom", it would be a good candidate for AfD). Notuncurious (talk) 00:15, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that the suggestion that Ebrauc was a kingdom is particularly noteworthy. But as the medieval Welsh name for the city it would probably do to merge this into History of York.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the material belongs in H of Y (if it belongs anywhere) and this article could then be a redirect to it ... but I did a google search for ebrauc york kingdom restricted to site wiki.riteme.site, and there are quite a few ramifications (mostly minor, but they suggest that the issue is alive for some people) ... and I also removed Ebrauc from the {{Hen Ogledd}} template, so there seem to be people who consider it a kingdom. Will probably give things a chance to chill out, then put the material in H of Y and make this page a redirect, assuming there are no great objections. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 15:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]