Talk:Doyle

History of the name Doyle

While entertaining, the amount of information given is inappropriate for a DAB page and the language is more like a novel than encyclopaedic. It may also be questioned for originality. Doc 22:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Norse descent

if its norse descent rather than referring to the spanish, shouldn't it of been blonde stranger —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.132.207 (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't let stereotypes of Scandanavian-looks lead you astray, not all Vikings would have been as blonde as todays Swedes. What about the Norwegians and Danes, after all? Note that Scotland's Dougall (dubh gall), from whom Clan Mac Dougall, claims descent was descended from the King of Norway. Look at the Clann Doyle webpage http://www.doyle.com.au/ (granted, it's in severe need of updating, but it states they are descended from vikings rather than Spaniards). Do you have any proof aside from hair color for this assertion that Doyle's are descended from Spaniards? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.72.99.178 (talk) 01:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Notes

I am afraid I think the derivation of the name given here is misleading to say the least. Doo/Dhu derives from the Norse for black and indicates those who followed one of the two principal powers struggling for control of the Norse cities established in Ireland. Ultimately the followers of the black flag won. Dublin ,or as translated "Black Pool" ironically, takes its name for that. The name is Norse and nothing to do with dark haired Celts or the Spanish. Doyle literally was "black man/stranger" as Dooley was "black warrior/soldier".

Stephen Dooley (from Dublin, grandmother a Doyle) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Templar 71 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Well i agree recent edits to the article have hurt it a bit. But the name is indeed Gaelic in origin: dubh is Gaelic, not Norse. I think there are different views as to what 'black/dark' refers to though. The part of the article i've got a problem with is the web reference for the 'darker celts' stuff. It is from surnamedb.com which is not a reliable source. It is a website where an individual writes up origins for surnames himself, adding a couple every few days. We should stick to relevant published references, its really easy to do with surnames - so not?--Celtus (talk) 08:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

coat of arms

is there a coat of arms?

Olde English?

"...they were either 'Celts' (Olde English fleeing the Anglo-Saxon invaders of Northern England)..."

What does this mean? And I'm not referring to the funny spelling of "olde", either, which could just be a typo. Old English fleeing from the Anglo-Saxons? Eh? ðarkuncoll 08:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

That is the problem with using such a website as a reference. I think he's totally muddled things up a bit.

Fionnghoill was originally used to describe Norse (Norwegians). Then later it was commonly used to describe Hebrideans. Sometimes the term was also used to describe Anglo-Normans, who were called "Old English". Though the more common term for Anglo-Normans was Seanghoill "Old Foreigners" to difference themselves from the Dubhghoill the "new foreigners" or "dark foreigners" who came to Ireland during Tudor times. Does that make more sense to you?

So in this sense Dubhgall refers to new wave of foreigners (the English/British) about the time of the Tudor reconquest of Ireland, as opposed to those of originally "Anglo-Norman/English" ancestry who had by then integrated with the Irish over time (More Irish than the Irish themselves).--Celtus (talk) 09:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

My question was really concerned with the statement that the Old English fled from the Anglo-Saxons, since the English are the Anglo-Saxons. ðarkuncoll 09:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

No, in this case i think Old English means "Old English" (click the link).--Celtus (talk) 09:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Then it's wrong. The "Old English" to which you refer (a confusing name anyway, since they were Normans rather than English, and which should definitely be explained) arrived in Ireland in the 12th century. The Anglo-Saxons arrived in northern England about 500 years earlier, so how could they have driven them out? ðarkuncoll 09:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it doesn't make sense. That was pretty much my point when i replied to User:Templar 71 above—surnamedb.com sucks as a reference and should not be used. This mix-up alone should proves it is unreliable. The website is the work of a guy who has written up etymologies himself: "Micheal adding the odd name every now and then". In this case he butchered what the term Old English means in the context of Ireland, and went off about dark Celts and the "Olde English" fleeing Saxons. I'm gonna remove that chunk of the article (it was almost a copy and paste job anyways).--Celtus (talk) 05:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Danes and Norwegians

"It is commonly held that these terms were used to distinguish the darker-haired Danes from fair-haired Norwegians" It does not make sense. The proportion of blond people in DK and in N is about the same. I would even say the opposite, because Danemark and the islands of the North Sea and the Baltic were probably the Heimat of the Germanic tribes that are obviously the peoples who counted the more blond people, as Tacitus himself wrote and the archeological founds show. But it is not true for Norway that corresponds to a later extension of the Germanic people at the expense of non Germanic tribes like the Samis and they mixed up together. The translation must be different.Nortmannus (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)