Talk:Battle of Dun Nechtain/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

The name of the battle

Would it not be more appropriate to have this battle referred to as "The Battle Of Dunnichen", as it is known in Scotland?

Lianachan 09:42, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

If everyone else calls it Nechtansmere, wouldn't that be more appropriate? Adam Bishop 10:22, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Isn't it normal for a battle to be referred to by whatever the victors called it? This one is only known as "Nechtansmere" due to Bede, who is notoriously unreliable when it comes to Scottish history. Although the Picts themselves probably called it something similar to Guereth Linn Garan, it would definately be more appropriate to refer to it by the Scottish name of the "Battle Of Dunnichen" (or even "of Dunnichen Moss").

Lianachan

Not necessarily, if it has a common name that is different from the name the victors give it. Adam Bishop 11:15, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

True, but I don't think Dunnichen is actually that obscure, or localised, a name for the battle. It seems to be well known by both names. Historically, The Annals Of Ulster refer to "the battle of Dun Nechtain" and The Annals of Tigernach mention "the battle of Dunnichen". Those, of course, are two of the major sources of information about both this battle and the early history of the northern British Isles. Surely it's worth, at the very least, a mention that the battle is also known as "The Battle Of Dunnichen"? Lianachan

Of course, mentioning that would be fine. I suppose it doesn't really matter what the title is as long as one name redirects to the other. Adam Bishop 16:56, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Dunnichen is by far the most common word used by academics these days, Dun/Duin Nechtain or Dunnichen being much more common. But I don't see what difference it makes; Dunnichen is in any case an anglicization of Dun Nechtain, so the Northumbrians would still have the last laugh. and the Picts would remain as silent as they were. ;) - Calgacus 06:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

With regards to the last laugh - I've already mentioned Guereth Linn Garan ... ;) Lianachan 07:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, Linn Garan is Welsh, from southern Wales. I know why that might be like Pictish, but of course, it isn't. - Calgacus 12:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's as close as we're likely to get to whatever the Picts themselves called the battle. I think the first time I saw it mentioned was Graeme Cruickshank's book. Lianachan 14:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Well,perhaps, but it'd be were risking to presume that. The eighth century Pictish kings probably spoke Old Irish, and Dun Nechtain is actually a plausible Pictish word anyways. - Calgacus 14:32, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Interestingly, I've just been looking at a transcript of Historia Brittonum, and it mentions the battle while talking about Ecgfrith. It says A tempore istius belli vocatur Gueith Lin Garan, translating it as From that time the battle is called "Gueith Lin Garan"". Lianachan 01:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, almost all work on this battle today refers to it as Dunnichen. Nechtansmere is a little outdated now. I vote the page be moved. - Calgacus 19:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

That's true. Apart from here, I haven't seen it refered to as Nechatansmere anywhere for ages. I (obviously) would support a move. Lianachan 23:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I have updated information regarding the siting of the battle. A new theory by Alex Woolf of St. Andrews University locates the battle in Dunachton, Invernessshire near Loch Insh. This siting follows on from his ground-breaking and compelling theory that relocates the Pictish Fortriu in Moray and Ross rather than further south. If the centre of Pictish power lay in the north, then the Dunachton siting would seem quite sound. --Karl Craig 02:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Woolf's new article conclusively proves Fortriu was in northern Scotland, and this is accepted by the Picticist community. The Dunachton theory is rather less compelling, but still interesting. Arguing against it is the proximity of the Aberlemno battle scenes to the old Dunnichen location, and the sheer distance from Ecgfrith's Northumbrian base. Ultimately, the reason I don't buy it is because I believe that the campaign is an English response to Verturian aggression; the run-up to the battle is a series of attacks by the men of Fortriu all around their borders (e.g. Orkney, Dundurn, etc); Bridei is reclaiming the land of his grandfather, "southern Pictland". I would not rule out the Dunachton theory though; I'd just say it is a little more contraversial than the Fortriu arguments. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 02:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Old conversation, I know (and I'm unsure how many who contributed to it are still here).

The Aberlemno stone is often attributed as a memorial to 'Nechtansmere', but the evidence for that is shaky. It's much later than the battle, probably by a hundred years or more. We don't know that the combatants in the picture (all nine of them) are indeed Picts and Northumbrians.

A feigned Pictish 'retreat' from, say, Dundurn back to Fortriu by the most direct route would take them up Strathtay, into Glen Garry, through the pass of Drumochter into Strathspey, which goes straight past Dunachton. The route is defined by the topography... there's great big mountains on either side that force you up these narrow valleys. The Picts wouldn't be the last to use that route. General Wade improved the roads along this route as they gave the best access to the North, and it's the route that the A9 takes.

Invading Fortriu via the A9 would certainly have been more difficult than a jaunt into Angus, but we know the expedition was considered 'daft' by Ecgfrith's advisors. I'm not sure a trip into the 'friendly' Southern Pictish Zone would have upset them that much. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 11:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The original reason for the name change looks like good one, but now that recent research has suggested that the battle taking place at Dunnichen is at best questionable, would it be more neutral to move the page back to "Battle of Nechtansmere" until there is a more settled academic consensus as to the location? JimmyGuano (talk) 06:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I considered a name change when I updated the article, but it was giving me a headache so I stopped! It's probably most recognisable as the Battle of Dunnichen, but as there is an element of doubt that it happened there, I agree there's an argument for not calling it that. "Nechtansmere" is the name given by Symeon of Durham and, while it was once favoured, it's fallen into disuse. Linn Garan is the name given by Nennius, but while it may have been the original name, it's not widely recognisable or commonly called that.

The Irish Annals call it Dun Nechtain, and this is the name that Woolf uses in the title of his paper that suggests Dunachton. This would be my preferred option, with a redirect from Dunnichen.

While it's not the only argument in favour of Dunachton, the mountain issue is possibly less problematic for Dunnichen than it might appear. Similar examples of hill magnification can be found in the accounts of the Battle of Barry (fictional as it is now known to be), where the exact locations were known by the authors. Boece's account of the flight of Camus, as translated by Bellenden, goes as follows:

Quhil at last, the Danis war vincust, and Camus chasit to the montanis. The Scottis followit on him with sic fury, that he was finaly slane. In signe heirof, the place, quhare he was slane, is callit yit, Camustane

Camustane hill stands a mighty 172 meters above sea level, compared with Dunnichen's 233 meters. Boece, who lived within 3 miles of the hill would presumably been aware of this, but got carried away in the heat of the moment. It's not inconceivable that the same happened with Bede (original research and inadmissable to the article, of course). Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 10:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

There have been some fairly diminutive nominations for the site of the Battle of Mons Graupius as well, IIRC.

Battle of Dun Nechtain seems a good solution to me too, and is also the term already used in the lead when describing the battle in location-neutral terms. I shall make it so. JimmyGuano (talk) 18:29, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Slightly faster than I was expecting, but I suppose it can be easily reverted if anyone objects. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 19:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Fine by me. Akerbeltz (talk) 19:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Another Battle?

This seems as good a place to ask as any. A battle took place in 1130 between Óengus of Moray and David I's general Edward Siwardsson, at a location somewhere in Scotland north of the forth, but south of the grampians. I wanna open an article for this battle (I have all the main sources in front of me), but I can't find a name by which this battle is commnly called. Anyone know if there is one? - Calgacus 15:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps The Battle Of Inchbrae? Lianachan 18:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, that article is mostly historical fiction. I did |Siward Inchbrae| on a google search and found nothing. I'm curious where the writer got that idea from though, it could help find a real name. - Calgacus 18:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Corrected: Inchbare, not Inchbrae. ;) - Calgacus 18:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Reason for the battle

I notice the article says that Ecgfrith's attack was possibly to prevent Pictish southern raids. I understand that the most common view now is that this attack, which Ecgfrith carried out against the counsel of his advisors, was done because Bridei had either considerably reduced his tribute payments or had stopped them entirely. In the years prior to this battle, Bridei had been reasserting/expanding his influence all over Scotland - attacking Dunnottar in 680, the Orkney islands (which he "annhilated") in 681 or 682 and in Strathearn in 682 or 683. It's likely that Bridei saw an opportunity to take advantage of Ecgfrith's weakened position in the light of his defeat at Trent, especially baring in mind his own increased power. Lianachan 01:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're correct. See the new article just completed on King Bridei - Calgacus 16:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Possible clarifications?

The article currently seems to read that the Brythonic and Scotti kingdoms mentioned in the article (Strathclyde, Dal Riata, etc) were instead Pictish. Should this not be corrected, seeing as they were not? Dal Riata was a Gaelic-speaking Scotti kingdom, while Strathclyde and Gododdin were Breton.

I couldn't interpret the relevant part that way myself, but I have made a slight edit which hopefully should help make the distinction. Lianachan 11:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge

The new article Battle of Dunnichen Moss would appear to describe the same battle, and should therefore be merged. New article also cites references not included here which may (or may not) be useful. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe the new article should be deleted? I'm surprised somebody created it in the first place, especially with that (practically never used) name when there's already an article about the battle. Lianachan (talk) 11:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

It can be redirected, redirects are harmless and cheap. Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Location

'The Venerable Bede recorded the location of the battle as Nechtansmere.'

Does Bede mention the battle elsewhere apart from Book 4 ch26 of Ecclesiastical History of England? I've read it a few times and he doesn't seem to explicitly name the location, just that it took place in 'inaccessible mountains' (which I guess is one of the reasons Alex Woolf suggests another location... Dunnichen only has a little hill).

CHAPTER XXVI

OF THE DEATH OF THE KINGS EGFRID AND LOTHERE.

[A.D. 684]

IN the year of our Lord's incarnation 684, Egfrid, king of the Northumbrians, sending Beort, his general, with an army, into Ireland, miserably wasted that harmless nation, which had always been most friendly to the English; insomuch that in their hostile rage they spared not even the churches or monasteries. Those islanders , to the utmost of their power, repelled force with force, and imploring the assistance of the Divine mercy, prayed long and fervently for vengeance and though such as curse cannot possess the kingdom of God, it is believed, that those who were justly cursed on account of their impiety, did soon suffer the penalty of their guilt from the avenging hand of God; for the very next year, that same king, rashly leading his army to ravage the province of the Picts, much against the advice of his friends, and particularly of Cuthbert, of blessed memory, who had been lately ordained his op, the enemy made show as if they fled, and the king was drawn into the straits of inaccessible mountains, and slain with the greatest part of his forces, on the 20th of May, in the fortieth year of his age, and the fifteenth of his reign. His friends, as has been said, advised him not to engage in this war; but he having the year before refused to listen to the most reverend father, Egbert, advising him not to attack the Scots, who did him no harm, it was laid upon him as a punishment for his sin, that he "should not now regard those who would have prevented his death.

From that time the hopes and strength of the English crown "began to waver and retrograde"; for the Picts recovered their own lands, which had been held by the English and the Scots that were in Britain, and some Of the Britons their liberty, which they have now enjoyed for about fortysix years. Among the many English that then either fell by the sword, or were made slaves, or escaped by flight out of the country of the Picts, the most reverend man of God, Trumwine, who had been made bishop over them, withdrew with his people that were in the monastery of Abercurnig, seated in the country of the English, but close by the arm of the sea which parts the lands of the English and the Scots. Having recommended his followers, wheresoever he could, to his friends in the monasteries, he chose his own place of residence in the monastery, which we have so often mentioned, of Men and women servants Of God, at Streaneshalch; and there he, for several years, led a life in all monastical austerity, not only to his own, but to the benefit of many, with a few of his own people; and dying there, he was buried in the church of St. Peter the Apostle, with the honour due to his life and rank. The royal virgin, Elfled, with her mother, Eanfled, whom we have mentioned before, then presided over that monastery; but when the bishop came thither, this devout worrian found in him extraordinary assistance in governing, and comfort to herself. Alfrid succeeded Egfrid in the throne, being a Irian most learned in Scripture, said to be brother to the other, and son to King Oswy : he nobly retrieved the ruined state of the kingdom, though within narrower bounds.

The same year, being the 685th from the incarnation Of our Lord Lothere, king of Kent, died on the sixth of February, ;4en he had reigned twelve years after his brother Egbert, who had reigned nine years : he was wounded in battle with the South Saxons, whom Edric, the son of Egbert, had raised against him, and died whilst his wound was being dressed. After him, the same Edric reigned a year and a half. On his death, kings of doubtful title, or foreigners, for some time wasted the kingdom, till the lawful king, Wictred, the son of Egbert, being settled in the throne, by his piety and zeal delivered his nation from foreign invasion.

Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It is mentioned in the Life of St Cuthbert, but again there is no mention of a specific location. I've altered the statement accordingly. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 18:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Background

I was going somewhere with the celtic church vs the Roman church, but it's getting a bit OR, so I'll tone it down a tad.Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 16:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Nomination

I've done a fair bit of editing on this article in the last few days. It's certainly better than 'stub' class now... hopefully it's GA class. If not, the review should provide some pointers. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 15:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Pre-review comments.

The lead needs expanding a little so that each section is referred to.

If Fortriu is to the north of the Mounth, why is an attack on Dunnottar described as being on the Southern Pictish Zone?

Remaining single quote marks need to go.

~~Given that you give a sympathetic ear to Woolf's Speyside conjecture, why is the article title not "Battle of Nechtansmere".~~ Strike this - I just saw the lengthy debate above. Can't bear to see all the red ink : ( Ben Mac Dui 20:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

You could provide grid reference NH818044 as External links for the two sites.

Note 28 has some kind of syntax problem - missing "which" after (1794)?: "The example Chalmers gives is Ainslie's map of Forfarshire (1794) does not show a lake in that position, nor do earlier maps, for example Pont (c1583-96); Roy (1747-55)". (This is interesting information btw and might be as well in the main text).

Hope that's helpful. Ben Mac Dui 19:58, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers!

I'll tackle the lead.

The Mounth hits the coast a little (not much) further north of Dunnottar, just above Stonehaven. Fraser describes Dunnottar as being in the Southern Pictish Zone.

I thought about renaming the article, but for the same reasons decided against it :) It's still commonly known as the Battle of Dunnichen and is likely to be for some time until the academic point of view (which is that it could be either location) filters down to the popular history books.

I've avoided giving map coordinates for the reason that the exact locations are not known... I agree it would be helpful (Dunachton is tricky to find, for example), I'll think about how best to do it.

I'll correct that note. I had the information about the maps in the main body but removed it to the notes because I was slightly uncomfortable with it as it's OR without a reference. I don't have easy access to the reference in which Rescobie loch was first suggested (Arnold T, (1882-5) Symeonis Monachi Opera Omnia, London: Rolls Series), but I suspect that would be the place to look.

Certainly is helpful! Cheers Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 20:58, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Gaelic name

In the lead, we have Dúin Nechaín listed as the Gaelic name for the battle. Is this accurate? The Annals of Tigernach record the battle as Cath Duín Nechtain and in the Annals of Ulster, Dún Nechtain in its translation, Bellum Duin Nechtain in the Latin original (all taken from the CELT project pages). I'm not a gaelic speaker (I'm pretty much limited to Ciamar a tha thu?)... is there a reason that the 't' has been dropped, or is it a typo? Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 09:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

This is Old Gaelic. There are a few variants, but the modern spelling would be "Cath Dhùn Neachdainn". --MacRusgail (talk) 19:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay... I've added the modern spelling you've given as well as an Old Gaelic version. I've also removed the statement that it was fought at 'Nechtansmere' as Nechtansmere is not a recognisable present-day location (rather an Anglian name for it) and there's ample discussion about the location further on in the article.

I thought about several different options (only modern gaelic, only old gaelic, old gaelic with modern in a footnote, but this option seemed best. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 10:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Dunnichen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi there, I have reviewed this article against the Wikipedia:good article criteria and although I am not quite prepared to pass the article for GA immediately, I don't think there is a long way to go. I have listed below the principle problems which prevent this article from achieving GA status and I have also appended a list of other comments which, whilst they are not essential for GA, may help in the future development of the article. The article now has seven days to address these issues, and should the contributors disagree with my comments then please indicate below why you disagree and suggest a solution, compromise or explanation. Further time will be granted if a concerted effort is being made to address the problems, and as long as somebody is genuinely trying to deal with the issues raised then I will not fail the article. I am aware that my standards are quite high, but I feel that an article deserves as thorough a review as possible when applying for GA and that a tough review process here is an important stepping stone to future FAC attempts. Please do not take offence at anything I have said, nothing is meant personally and maliciously and if anyone feels aggrieved then please notify me at once and I will attempt to clarify the comments in question. Finally, should anyone disagree with my review or eventual decision then please take the article to WP:GAR to allow a wider selection of editors to comment on the issues discussed here. Well done on the work so far.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Issues preventing promotion

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):

There is one major problem preventing promotion: the lead is in a bad shape. The lead should introduce the article in no less than two paragraphs and no more than four, providing brief summaries background, description of the event and the aftermath, highlighting the particularly notable points about this particular engagement. At the moment it doesn't do this, focusing instead on the paucity of information, not the information that is available.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

~~I have added one ^{[citation needed]} tag in a position I think requires one.--Jackyd101 (talk)~~ 19:25, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
Overall:
a Pass/Fail:

Other comments

(These comments are not essential to passing GAN)

Remember that wikipedia is an entry level resource, and so some people reading it will not know who Bede and the other chroniclers/historians are - briefly introduce them (i.e. antiquarian George Chalmers).
I noticed one or two references in the background section that come in the middle of sentences rather than after punctuation. This can make the prose harder to read, and I recommend relocating them after punctuation.

Hi Jackyd. I have addressed the points you made and rectified a couple of other minor errors. Let me know what you think, if there are any other issues you spot. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 22:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Excellent work, I have no qualms about passing the article now, congratulations. I have made a couple of minor formatting changes myself and there is one additional point to consider: the link to Irish in the lead goes to a disambiguation page - is there an article on Brega? Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:22, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks for reviewing it! Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 23:11, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Historic Scotland battlefields list

The decision to exclude the battle from the [Historic Scotland battlefields] list has been met with some dismay by the local press in Tayside:

"Angus dealt blow in bid for place on Scottish battlefields list, while Perthshire wins recognition", The Courier, December 17, 2012, retrieved December 17, 2012
"'It must be invading Northumbrians' — Dun Nechtain battlefield site remains in dispute", The Courier, May 12, 2012, retrieved December 17, 2012
"Historic Scotland hoping Angus battlefield knowledge has passed down through the ages", The Courier, April 25, 2012, retrieved December 17, 2012
"Dunnichen Hill loses fight to win place on Historic Scotland's list of battle sites", The Courier, August 10, 2011, retrieved December 17, 2012
"Fight to get Pictish battlefield at Nechtansmere included on Historic Scotland's official list", The Courier, February 21, 2011, retrieved December 17, 2012

Catfish Jim and the soapdish 14:49, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

The first link is broken, but the same article is at:

"No place on war list for Dunnichen", The Courier, December 17, 2012, retrieved December 18, 2012

To address one point in that article... Norman Atkinson, Angus Council's Cultural Services Director states:

“

This battle is meant to take place in the ninth hour of the Sunday, and a horseman had to make it through unfriendly territory to tell Ecgfrith’s widow on the Monday morning [...]

In friendly territory, with a change of horses, that’s possible but friendly territory would have stopped at Fife.”

”

The battle is supposed to have taken place on the Saturday, not the Sunday. The bit about the battle being at "the ninth hour" comes from the Anonymous Life of St Cuthbert:

“

At the time when King Ecgfrith was ravaging and laying waste the kingdom of the Picts, though finally in accordance with the predestined judgement of God he was to be overcome and slain, our holy bishop went to the city of Carlisle to visit the queen who was awaiting there the issue of events. On the Saturday, as the priests and deacons declare of whom many still survive, at the ninth hour they were looking at the the city wall and the well formerly built in a wonderful manner by the Romans. as Waga the reeve of the city, who was conducting them, explained. The bishop meanwhile stood leaning on his supporting staff, with his head inclined towards the ground and then he lifted up his eyes heavenwards again with a sigh and said: "Oh! oh! oh! I think that the war is over and that judgement has been given against our people in the battle." Then when they urgently asked him what had happened and desired to know, he said evasively: "Oh, my sons, look at the sky, consider the judgements of God" and so forth. And so after a few days they learned that it had been announced far and wide that a wretched and mournful battle had taken place at the very day and hour in which it had been revealed to him.

”

...and the horseman escaping the battle and arriving at Carlisle on the Monday comes from Bede's Prose Life of Cuthbert, ch27:

“

HOW, THOUGH AT A DISTANCE, HE SAW IN SPIRIT THE DEATH OF KING EGFRID, AND THE END OF HIS WARFARE, WHICH HE HAD FORETOLD

Now, when King Egfrid had rashly led his army against the Picts, and devastated their territories with most atrocious cruelty, the man of God, Cuthbert, knowing that the time was now come, concerning which he had prophesied the year before to his sister, that the king would live only one year more, came to Lugubalia (which is corruptly called by the English Luel) to speak to the queen, who was there awaiting the result of the war in her sister's monastery. But the next day, when the citizens were leading him to see the walls of the town, and the remarkable fountain, formerly built by the Romans, suddenly, as he was resting on his staff, he was disturbed in spirit, and, turning his countenance sorrowfully to the earth, he raised himself, and, lifting his eyes to heaven, groaned loudly, and said in a low voice, " Now, then, the contest is decided ! " Tbe presbyter, who was standing near, in incautious haste answered, and said, " How do you know it ? " But he, unwilling to declare more concerning those things which were revealed to him, said, " Do you not see how wonderfully the air is changed and disturbed? Who is able to investigate the judgments of the Almighty? " But he immediately entered in and spoke to the queen in private, for it was the Sabbath-day. "Take care," said he, "that you get into your chariot very early on the second day of the week, for it is not lawful to ride in a chariot on the Lord 's day; and go quickly to the royal city, lest, perchance, the king may have been slain. But I have been asked to go to-morrow to a neighbouring monastery, to consecrate a church, and will follow you as soon as that duty is finished."

But when the Lord's day was come, whilst he was preaching the word of God to the brethren of the same monastery, the sermon being finished, he began again to teach his listening congregation, as follows:-" I beseech you, my beloved, according to the admonitions of the Apostle, to watch, remain stedfast in the faith, act manfully, and be comforted, that no temptation may find you unprepared, but rather that you may be always mindful of the precept of the Lord Himself, ' Watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.' " But some thought he said this because a pestilence had not long before afflicted them and many others with a great mortality, and that he spoke of this scourge being about to return. But he, resuming his discourse, said, "When I formerly lived alone in my island, some of the brethren came to me on the day of the Holy Nativity, and asked me to go out of my cabin and solemnize with them this joyful and hallowed day. Yielding to their prayers, I went out, and we sat down to feast. But, in the middle of the banquet, I suddenly said to them, ' I beseech you, brethren, let us act cautiously and watchfully, lest, perchance, through carelessness and a sense of security, we be led into temptation.' But they answered, ' We entreat you, let us spend a joyful day now, for it is the birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ ! ' To which I agreed. Some time after this, when we were indulging ourselves in eating, merriment, and conversation, I again began to admonish them that we should be solicitous in prayer and watchfulness, and ever prepared to meet all temptations. But they replied, ' You teach well; nevertheless, as the days of fasting, watching, and prayer are numerous, let us to-day rejoice in the Lord. For the angel manifested great joy to the shepherds when the Lord was born, and told them that it was a day to be celebrated by all people ! Well, ' said I, ' let us do so. ' But when I repeated the words of the same admonition the third time, they perceived that I would not have suggested this so earnestly for no purpose, and said to me in fear, ' Let us do as you teach, for it is incumbent on us to watch in spirit, armed against the snares and temptations of the devil. ' When I said these things, I did not know any more than they that any new temptation would happen to us; but I was only admonished, as it were instinctively, that the state of the heart is to be always fortified against the storms of temptations. But when they returned from me to their own home, that is, to the monastery of Lindisfarne, they found that one of their brethren was dead of a pestilence; and the same disease increased, and raged so furiously from day to day, for months, and almost for a whole year, that the greater part of that noble assembly of spiritual fathers and brethren were sent into the presence of the Lord. Now, therefore, my brethren, watch and pray, that if any tribulation assail you, it may find you prepared. '

When the venerable man of God, Cuthbert, had said these things, the brethren thought, as I have before stated, that he spoke of a return of the pestilence. But the day after, a man who had escaped from the war explained, by the lamentable news which he brought, the hidden prophecies of the man of God. It appeared that the guards had been slain, and the king cut off by the sword of the enemy, on the very day and hour in which it was revealed to the man of God as he was standing near the well.

”

Even if we are to view these works of hagiography as reliable sources, the distance from Carlisle to Dunachton is around 210 miles compared with 180 miles between Carlisle and Dunnichen. Moreover, we do not have sufficient detail to be able to tell where friendly territory for the Bernicians started and ended. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 17:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Battle of Dun Nechtain. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 01:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)