Talk:Nennius

Discussion
"Nennius the proto-Wikipedian: Discuss." (The identity of wiki-writers can be equally obscure, and articles can be "heaps of all that has been found", verifiable or otherwise) Jackiespeel (talk) 17:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC) Nice one! 124.120.212.108 (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

That's an interesting connection. I think many of these post-roman British historians might as well have prefaced their works with "What I Know Is".--121.218.37.232 (talk) 11:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Somewhat vague statements
Like " Some experts say that this was not the first compiled history of the Britons " As Harrison says of De Excidio Gildas " did not write history[...] in the sense that Gregory of Tours did" - but that is not to say he did not write history. And certainly he wrote using more sources than his first hand own knowledge, does this, then, make De Excido (part I) a "compiled history"? What are we trying to convey here? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC).


 * No real clue - I just maintain the article - it's very low down on my interest scale. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Nennius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080907061426/http://www.britishhistoryclub.com/bhc/sources/nennius_hb.html to http://www.britishhistoryclub.com/bhc/sources/nennius_hb.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:43, 29 August 2015 (UTC)