Talk:Burh
Latest comment: 9 years ago by 2003:45:4B6E:5006:226:8FF:FEDC:FD74 in topic burgh wordbit in placenames is found in its greatest concentration in East Anglia not Scotland
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
edit"no coin was to be struck outside a burh" - what does it supposed to mean?? what does the word "struck" has to do with conection? is it mean -"minted", or "taken out" - why is it so hard to use a standard word which can be understood by everyone? the word "struck" is completely unnecessary in this sentance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.69.168.95 (talk) 12:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- I have linked struck to Hammered coinage to resolve this difficulty --Frans Fowler (talk) 15:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Only eight of the burhs achieved municipal status in the Middle Ages
editThis sounds implausible. Only eight of the burhs recorded in the Burghal Hidage achieved municipal status in the Middle Ages, perhaps? Could someone with access to the referenced work by Tait check? --Frans Fowler (talk) 17:56, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- In all twenty-five burhs were constructed by Edward and his sister, if we include Chester and Manchester where old Roman walls were repaired. There were, however, two each at Buckingham and Hertford, and those at Bedford and Nottingham were merely bridgeheads for the attack on these Danish burhs. Of the twenty-one which remain after the necessary deduction only eightNote 1 are found as municipal boroughs later in the Middle Ages, though Manchester and Bakewell attained a quasi-burghal status under mesne lords. This small proportion, which more than reverses that of the Burghal Hidage is easily understood, since a majority of these forts were on the borders of Wales, a region much less favourable than Wessex to urban growth. Four of them are shown by their names to have been adaptations of more primitive fortifications. Four or five were so obscure that they still remain unidentified.... Note 1 Chester, Bridgenorth, Tamworth, Stafford, Hertford, Warwick, Buckingham, and Maldon - James Tait, The Medieval English Borough: Studies on Its Origins and Constitutional History (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1936), p. 24. Enjoy Wilfridselsey (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Wilfridselsey; that was quick, and helpful.
- So in effect, 'Only eight of the burhs achieved municipal status in the Middle Ages' means something like: only eight of the burhs founded by Edward the Elder and Edward's sister Æthelflæd (and, query, Æthelflæd's husband Æthelred, lord or ealdorman of Mercia) achieved municipal status in the later Middle Ages. However, Alfred also founded around 33 burhs. There were several more in the Danelaw -- the second map in the Five Boroughs of the Danelaw article shows some 18 candidates in about 912. Perhaps there were still more in English Northumbria. Unless I'm missing something or double-counting a lot, altogether there must have been more than 70 burhs founded in England in the 'burh-building age'. I think quite a few (many more than eight) of them are still substantial settlements today. If the data is available or can be readily compiled from available sources (I don't know), would it be good to replace 'Only eight of the burhs achieved municipal status in the Middle Ages' with, say, a table of recorded burhs in England (or recorded burhs in Wessex and Wessex-allied/dominated Mercia, if that is more in keeping with the scope of the article) from that period and what has become of them? --Frans Fowler (talk) 17:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- I am not sure that it is a worthwhile exercise trying to list all burhs that eventually had municiple status in this article. After all we are really talking how the burh started as part of the defence against the Vikings and then becoming something more. I think that lists of burhs that became boroughs are more relevant in the articles on Borough and Municipal borough. As pointed out, the Tait reference is currently incomplete and could do with some attention. Wilfridselsey (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- So in effect, 'Only eight of the burhs achieved municipal status in the Middle Ages' means something like: only eight of the burhs founded by Edward the Elder and Edward's sister Æthelflæd (and, query, Æthelflæd's husband Æthelred, lord or ealdorman of Mercia) achieved municipal status in the later Middle Ages. However, Alfred also founded around 33 burhs. There were several more in the Danelaw -- the second map in the Five Boroughs of the Danelaw article shows some 18 candidates in about 912. Perhaps there were still more in English Northumbria. Unless I'm missing something or double-counting a lot, altogether there must have been more than 70 burhs founded in England in the 'burh-building age'. I think quite a few (many more than eight) of them are still substantial settlements today. If the data is available or can be readily compiled from available sources (I don't know), would it be good to replace 'Only eight of the burhs achieved municipal status in the Middle Ages' with, say, a table of recorded burhs in England (or recorded burhs in Wessex and Wessex-allied/dominated Mercia, if that is more in keeping with the scope of the article) from that period and what has become of them? --Frans Fowler (talk) 17:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
burgh wordbit in placenames is found in its greatest concentration in East Anglia not Scotland
editThe following boldened text is downright untrue...
in English, developed variously as "borough",[1] "burg",[2] and (particularly in Scotland) "burgh".[3]
There many more -burgh- bearing placenames in England than in Scotland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:4B6E:5006:226:8FF:FEDC:FD74 (talk) 22:03, 14 February 2015 (UTC)