Talk:Gwrtheyrnion
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Should this be categoried in "Kingdoms of Wales"? It is not normally included on maps of attested early kingdoms, but simply as a commote or region named in pre-1100 sources. It's only the story given by "Nennius" about Gwrtheyrn (if he actually existed) that backs this, although even Nennius goes on to describe him fleeing from there south to Deheubarth. I think we should be careful how we category these possible early minor kingdoms or we'll end up with dozens of them. Any thoughts on this? Enaidmawr (talk) 22:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- It's been a long time since this comment, but I think the issue is cleared up now. What the sources seem to agree on is that Gwrtheyrnion did form part of a regional kingdom (with Buellt), but that this didn't happen until around 800. The commote does seem to be named after Vortigern (perhaps long after), and the genealogy inserted in the Historia Brittonum shows that the later kings did claim descent from him, but there is no indication that it was a kingdom during his supposed timeframe.--Cúchullain t/c 16:29, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
context of the HB here
[edit]I seem to recall that the HB is associated with Gwynedd when this material was entered ... at that time the kings of Powys claimed legitimacy through Vortigern, and completely original, unflattering entries were made in the HB casting aspersions on a claimed ancestor, thus casting aspersions on the king of Powys. This was at a time when Gwynedd and Powys were serious rivals. There are constant apocryphal additions made to the HB and other references (most of which are incorporated into Arthurian-related stories uncritically) which serve an agenda and have nothing to recommend them as historically valid. If the HB is used as a reference here, shouldn't context also be noted? Omitting Gwynedd's agenda leaves a much different impression of the circumstances than if that information were at least mentioned. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- If you have sources to that effect, it would be interesting to add.--Cúchullain t/c 20:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Point made, and well-taken. fyi (not a recommendation), Kari Maund (The Welsh Kings) provides a quick-read on the topic in her intro; the book topic is on later kings. Regards, Notuncurious (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)