Talk:History of Lincolnshire

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Newark-on-Trent#History during the Civil War|Newark on Trent]] The anchor (#History during the Civil War) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

A druid nation?

"Lincolnshire before the Romans was a Druid nation". What is a druid nation? The druid link goes to a page explaining that the druids were a class within society. "Druid nation" makes it sound like a nation consisting entirely of druids. Telsa 08:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

True. Similarly "They also constructed sea defences, raising a large earth bank running along the coast some thirty miles from Ingoldmells to Boston, known now as Roman Bank." is a highly questionable statement except in its last clause. But the article just needs a little checking over. (RJP 09:37, 11 October 2005 (UTC))[reply]

King Arthur?

The bit in the "Saxons and Danes" section talks of Arthur as if he were an established, verifiable historical figure, and even gives a firm date for his death. That can't be right, he is at best legendary, if not the completely mythical memory of an old druid bear god. --Fire Star 21:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Red faced, I take back what I wrote. I have added brief notes about Arthur's first six battles to one or two articles see River Glen, Lincolnshire#History for example and I replied here before it occurred to me to check what I had put in the Lincs Hist article. In this connection, I hadn't added anything.

That said, some of what I wrote here remains true. The Arthur whose story has reached us after 1,500 years, during many of which the story was transmitted orally, is a compilation. Doubtless, gods got in there, but there is no reason to doubt that the man or possibly men, whose deeds were the incentive for beginning the story, existed. The best we can do now is to take the most reliable-looking sources and compare what they say happened, with the events of the world surrounding them, with the geography of the time, the politics, the known characters and the archaeology of the period. This last is best taken as a general context. For example, if the story says that a British leader lived in Norwich in 600, we might be sceptical as East Anglia had then been occupied by Angles for well over a hundred years. However, there are signs in the Guthlac story and elsewhere, that the British culture was still alive in Crowland in 699 for example.

This man, or these men may not have been known to his contemporaries as Arthur but that is as good a name as any for us to use when we are talking about him - unless he can be partially or wholly identified with such as Ambrosius Aurelianus, for example. Then of course, we are able to separate out the several bits of Arthur and the relevant names become appropriate.

The Lincolnshire connection with the first six of Arthur's battles, as listed by the Historia Britonum fits the geography, contemporary settlement pattern, archaeology, and place names of the region. Such a fit is not easily found elsewhere.

The section in the History of Lincolnshire, dealing with this period does need a revision of its facts and a re-write.

Shamefacedly, :) (RJP 10:34, 19 October 2005 (UTC))[reply]

No problem on my account. There are many primary sources (mostly pre-20th century) that will report on Arthur and others as historical figures. There are similar legends that may be based either on actual people or atavistic god or demi-god memories or a combination of them for Robin Hood, Beowulf etc. As long as we add the proper qualifying language, I see no reason to take any of the info out (which is why I didn't do it). Cheers, --Fire Star 21:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

This article is only just a c due to the lack of sources, more wirk here would be advisable.

95jb14 (talk) 18:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC), a member of WikiProject Lincolnshire[reply]

Middle ages

I've made a token start on this - surprised there was nothing before. Huge amounts could be said - there are so many villages abandoned after the black death, for example. Links to the elanor cross page. Could be expanded ad infinitim.

missing eras

Not a word about the coming of the railways, the burgeoning of industrial manufacture in the county, and the erection of red brick farms in huge numbers. The whole Victorian era is missing. Drainage of the fens, turnpike roads. Dick Turpin and trhe Ram-Jam Inn.

As is the era of the stage coach, Horncastle Canal, the wars of the roses, the east coast herring boom of the 1890s, seaside holidays and the rise of tourism, Napoleonic coast defences.

It seems to me that we can't hope to re-write the whole of England's history in here, but rather need to concentrate on uniquely Lincolnshire events or events with a Lincolnshire slant - hence my remarks about the number of abbeys in the Witham vale.Brunnian (talk) 09:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

useful reference

Useful web reference that I don't have time to incorporate right now: Roman Lincolnshire, 78 pages of it unforunately, I can't find a title or an author!--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 12:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of Lincolnshire. 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/20060904041559/http://www.wmich.edu/medieval/research/rawl/edmund/whitelock.html to http://www.wmich.edu/medieval/research/rawl/edmund/whitelock.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:08, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]