Talk:Hundreds of Cornwall

Untitled
I don't know of the word cantrev being used in traditional Cornish. The forms I've seen are kev(e)rang (and conteth?), but I can't even give a definite provenance for either at the moment. The spelling cantrev would be unlikely in traditional Cornish (you'd probably see cantreff or similar) while revived Cornish would spell it as kantrev or cantref, depending on the school of orthography. But kevrang is the real McCoy. QuartierLatin1968 05:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is pretty dreadful for the reasons stated here by others. Kevrangs are NOT hundreds. They don't mean 'hundred' they mean 'muster together' in Cornish. Cantref in Welsh does mean Hundred, but a Kevrang certainly DOES NOT. The word Cantref is NOT used in Cornish. Several Kevrangs contain multiple hundreds and are more like the size of Rutland. Pydar (Cornish 'four' hundred fighting mean). Trigg (Cornish 'three' hundred fighting men), Wivelshire (East and West, two hundred each). In this sense they may function more like counties and less like hundreds: We don't know how they function and should say so rather than making it up. There is no evidence that Athelstan had anything to do with the system of Kevrang, in fact the opposite is true since they are NOT hundreds: They seem to be a native form of administration and imply that the Cornish were left alone by Athelstan. I am surprised by the lack of reading done by the editors of this article. I suggest starting with Charles Thomas 'Celtic Britain' and follow his bibliography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.233.112.55 (talk) 12:55, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

evidence
The introductory paragraph is unsatisfactory: at present it is mere assertion without any references or documentary evidence (apart from the Gover one about the first appearance in a document of a word), not what one expects from an encyclopedia.

It is unhelpful to claim that the administration of Cornwall was “wholly different” from that of the rest of England and also to claim that it “mirrored” England’s.

The comments about constables are unsatisfactory. Law and order in the years after the Conquest were managed at the primary settlement level by tithings not parishes and this applies to Cornwall and the rest of England; we have the records of the eyres to prove it. Parishes in the rest of England had constables too.

The word shire is used in history (and today) not only for counties but also for smaller districts within shires/counties. It is claimed here, without evidence, that “shires in Cornwall mirrored the administrative apparatus of shires in England” and “the Cornish cantrev replicated England's shire system on a smaller scale.” I take this to mean that the shires in Cornwall were the equivalent of the shires in the rest of England not non-county smaller districts. Did the shires of Cornwall have the apparatus of counties? A sheriff each and a shire court for example? Please give evidence for the claim of equivalence. The county of Cornwall did have a sheriff and shire court and hundred courts.

Please put up the documentary evidence for the opening sentences and claims made therein, including the use of the word cantrev.Crococolana 01:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have amended the entry to remove unsourced material. Crococolana 18:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hundreds
Should articles on hundreds be titled Foo (hundred) or Hundred of Foo? Input and comments please at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  09:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite
I'm looking at completely overhauling the structure of this article and adding a huge amount of missing material to it, plus weeding out some irrelevant things. I'm working on this in my sandbox, if anyone has any suggestions let me know. Bodrugan (talk) 11:46, 16 May 2022 (UTC)