User talk:Metabaronic

 '''Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. I'm only human, so if I've made a mistake, please don't hesitate in pointing it out to me. Insults, however, will just be reverted.'''

Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms Banner
Sadads (talk) 16:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Categories: Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms and Anglo-Saxon England
Again. Sadads (talk) 16:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC) And Again, Sadads (talk) 22:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC) again, Sadads (talk) 22:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

WPASK Assessment Drive
Hey all, our assessment process is raring for moving out, and just needs a little bit of help from you. First and foremost, our Quality and Importance scales need to be completed per consensus, please check them out at WikiProject_Anglo-Saxon_Kingdoms/Assessment and comment. Next, we have, as of my most recent assessments, 1122 articles that have not been assessed. All I ask is that each and every one of us assess ~10 articles each day you get on Wikipedia to speed up the process and let us really know what we have in our scope. Remember, we have Category, Template, Redirect and Disambiguation classes along with our more traditional stub through FA ratings, please use all of them and look for pages which fall within our scope. Thanks for all the help, Sadads (talk) 22:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Beorma Statue.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Beorma Statue.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The rationale has been expanded and more detail can be given as required.Metabaronic (talk) 07:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Beorma Statue.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Beorma Statue.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Idea on the origin of "Mercia" name.
First I would like to submit the online article on Marcomanni.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcomanni

The first line from that article.

Scholars believe their name derives possibly from Proto-Germanic forms of "march" ("frontier, border") and "men"Italic text

There is a deffinite connection between "Mercia" and "Marco". Therefore I would like to offer the idea that the term "Mercia" is a latinized version of a germanic word that meant "frontier land" in the same sense that "Marcomanni" meant "frontier men" or "Marsch Men". The reason I am posting this, well, is that during the time of Germanic settlement of Britain, the location of Mercia would have been frontier land for the Angles, Saxons and Jutes that settled there. Later on, as the frontiers of the AngloSaxons expanded, the name probably lost its original meaning, still it remained such until the kingdom was incorporated to England in 918. Still, that name must have meant something when it was given, so I think that in the time that the kingdom of Mercia was founded it was probably either the westernmost or Northwesternmost area of Anglosaxon realm in England. Therefore it was founded probably before Sussex (South Saxon land) or Northumbria. It could have been a frontier for a few decades or more until those were formed.

Historicaly there have been many examples of a "frontier land" taking the name that meant "frontier land" for those who conquered it and keeping it until present day. An example would be Ukraine, whose name means "frontier land" in Polish because that is what it was for the Polish who conquered it. There are other examples throughout history.

I hope this was helpful to you. I must admit I have always been curious on why "Mercia" had this particular name. This is the explanation I have come up with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.148.134 (talk) 05:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

To fix a mistake
Idea on the origin of "Mercia" name.

First I would like to submit the online article on Marcomanni. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcomanni The first line from that article. Scholars believe their name derives possibly from Proto-Germanic forms of "march" ("frontier, border") and "men"Italic text There is a deffinite connection between "Mercia" and "Marco". Therefore I would like to offer the idea that the term "Mercia" is a latinized version of a germanic word that meant "frontier land" in the same sense that "Marcomanni" meant "frontier men" or "Marsch Men". The reason I am posting this, well, is that during the time of Germanic settlement of Britain, the location of Mercia would have been frontier land for the Angles, Saxons and Jutes that settled there. Later on, as the frontiers of the AngloSaxons expanded, the name probably lost its original meaning, still it remained such until the kingdom was incorporated to England in 918. Still, that name must have meant something when it was given, so I think that in the time that the kingdom of Mercia was founded it was probably either the westernmost or Northwesternmost area of Anglosaxon realm in England. Therefore it was founded probably before WESSEX (WEST Saxon land) or Northumbria. It could have been a frontier for a few decades or more until those were formed. Historicaly there have been many examples of a "frontier land" taking the name that meant "frontier land" for those who conquered it and keeping it until present day. An example would be Ukraine, whose name means "frontier land" in Polish because that is what it was for the Polish who conquered it. There are other examples throughout history.

I wrote sussex instead of the Wessex I intended to write. Hence the repost, since I couldn't edit what I earlier wrote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.148.134 (talk) 05:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

edited Stafford, and Beorhthelm of Stafford
Hi Metabaronic

I am completely new to Wikipedia writing, so please be gentle.

I lived and worked in Stafford for 6 years in the mid-late 1970s as a (whisper) fresh-faced town planner with a personal interest in history / archaeology and was fascinated when the Earl Street excavation got underway.

I had a small but significant professional involvement by recognising the potential significance of redevelopment proposals around St Mary's churchyard (the council wanted to demolish all the buildings along St Mary's Grove and elsewhere around St John's market for a much larger redevelopment than was approved).

I'm proud to say I persuaded the council to limit the redevelopment and save the attractive but badly neglected buildings around the churchyard, with the enthusiastic support of the County's specialist, and the resultant excavations to the rear at last provide us with a rich source of critical new information on the history of the burh and Mercia.

Almost nothing was reported on these until now. Accidentally I have just come across the very recently published reports and a new book on the Anglo-Saxon burh by Prof Martin Carver. The book's £60 so it'll need a trip to the library!

However a great deal of new material and reinterpretations of the evidence is now available online which I devoured and I therefore edited the history section for Stafford to take the findings into account. I put the bugh's development into the unification of England context and highlighted the important role of women such as Æthelflæd, Lady of Mercia in the emergence of Anglo-Saxon Mercia. I removed the assertion that Stafford was her 'capital'.

However I am no Anglo-Saxon scholar/specialist.

I also made some minor corrections - regarding the physical geography of the bugh, corrected details about the Norman castle, made the history less of a Stafford Borough Council propaganda exercise and made other post Anglo-Saxon changes.

Anglo-Saxon Stafford. Archaeological Investigations 1954-2004. Martin Carver, 2010, Field Reports Online http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/collections/blurbs/912.cfm

The Stafford results are considered in their national and international context in the Research Report, the monograph Birth of a Borough - An Archaeological Study of Anglo-Saxon Stafford by Martin Carver (Boydell Press) [£60], which may be regarded as the synthesis that accompanies and draws on this archive. Martin Carver is Professor Emeritus of Archaeology at the University of York. http://www.boydellandbrewer.com/store/viewItem.asp?idProduct=13425

I also added a link in Beorhthelm of Stafford to another source I tripped over, a discussion, details and sources regarding St Bertelin, in Appendix 1 of The Stafford Hinterland – An archaeological review from the Roman Invasion to circa 850 AD by L C Bowkett, 1986 http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/arch-912-1/dissemination/pdf/Stafford_Field_Reports_11(Hinterland)/Stafford_Field_Reports_11_Hinterland.pdf

I think the Lichfield and Mercia Wiki entries need a thorough discussion of the massive hoard that was recently found and its implications, but I'm not expert enough to attempt this.

I think the watery settings of Stafford and Lichfield may hold some surprises in terms of ritual deposits, which do not seem to have been investigated. In Stafford I suspect that Severn Trent Water Authority's major dredging works in the late 70s to reduce flooding will have destroyed much. Possibly they did find things, so it would be worth asking them. Where was all the spoil dumped? They dredged, piled and lowered the river channel above, through and downstream by several feet - see the lower level path in the gardens opposite the railway station. I'm sorry that I wasn't aware of ritual water deposits at the time.

I am sure I haven't got all the Wikipedia citing conventions correct, so please do adjust these.

I hope this is helpful and keep up the excellent work.

Best regards Skinscribe Manchester Skinscribe (talk) 23:08, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Anglo-Saxon England Portal Template
I don't like barging in and messing with wikiproduct where my skills are probably considerably less than the editors that created them but something seems to have gone wrong with the portal template image as it currently displays the text 'File:Peterborough Chronicle cropped.jpg |32x28px|alt=Portal icon' although the image is still available at Commons. Keep up the good work. Keomike (talk) 20:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)