Talk:Dub, King of Scotland

Picture

Seems like the picture of the male in the suit bears little to no relevance, if it's even the correct picture to begin with. Anyone want to look into this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.27.250 (talk) 16:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Variant names

Is Dubh an alternative spelling? If so, it should be included. Duff is a common Anglicisation and should be included. He is sometimes confronted as "Duff the Black" and the nature of the nickname "the Black" (a translation of Dub) should be included. I'd add it, but I am afraid to touch the issue of Anglicisations on Scotland-related pages. Srnec 04:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Dubh is the modern Scots Gaelic version. Duff is a rather antiquated anglicisation. Cináed -> Kenneth and Máel Coluim -> Malcolm are current, I'm not sure that Dub -> Duff is. It's only likely to be found in old books (so, yes, it's on the the internet). So those can be added. But even A.D.M. Barrell's Medieval Scotland, a ruthlessly anglicising modern introductory history, uses Dub. The Latin chronicles use Niger, the Annals of Ulster call him Dub m. Mael Coluim. My thought is that he was probably not called Dub(h). The Duan Albanach uses Dubhoda dén or Dub(h)od the vehement (translated as impetuous elsewhere in the same document). An Irish king of the same period, Ruaidrí ua Canannáin, whose name is derived from ruaid, red, is in fact called just ruaid in some sources. R. Andrew McDonald's History, Literature, and Music in Scotland, 700-1560 touches on this, but doesn't actually offer an opinion. There may be something in Hudson's Kings of Celtic Scotland or his Prophecy of Berchán. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Eclipse

Neither of the eclipses mentioned were total from Scotland, though it seems more likely that the 966 one was visible, astronomical help would be useful. Rich Farmbrough, 21:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC).

Fife

The text says: "Dub left at least one son, Kenneth III (Cináed mac Dub). Although his descendants did not compete successfully for the kingship of Alba after Cináed was killed in 1005, they did hold the mormaerdom of Fife. The MacDuib (or MacDuff) held the mormaerdom, and later earldom, until 1371."

This is nonsense. Who dreamed this up? Freuchie (talk) 12:50, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 27 September 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No prejudice against a broader discussion to discuss renaming all Scottish monarchs from before a certain cutoff point. I will create the proposed title as a redirect. Jenks24 (talk) 11:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

---

Dub, King of Scotland → Dub, King of Alba – It wasn't called Scotland yet, and we're saying ourselves he was king of Alba, and the sources generally seem to prefer this.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:47, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose The Kingdom of Scotland, and particularly the numbering of its monarchs, is conventionally considered to start with Kenneth MacAlpin (aka Kenneth I). There may be a case for moving all monarchs before a given cut-off point, but I don't think this should be done piecemeal. What should the cut-off point be? Since Alba is really the Gaelic name for Scotland, is the distinction crucial? PatGallacher (talk) 14:24, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose I think that there is probably a good argument in principle for the change - but while academic sources now tend to prefer to use Alba rather than Scotland to refer to the kingdom in its earliest centuries, this (at least in English) has only become the case in the last few decades, and the general public (particularly outside Scotland) is only just starting to catch up. And when it comes to Wikipedia biographical article titles, Alba currently only seems to be being used in redirects (at least for the Scottish kingdom rather than the Spanish duchy or pre-Roman Latin kingdom), not in main article titles - while Scotland seems to be being used in the article titles of at least three of Dub's predecessors. In these circumstances, I would probably support a general change on policy grounds in relevant article titles before a suitable cut-off point (possibly Malcolm III?), but not for just this one article by itself. Though I certainly would support the use of Dub, King of Alba as a redirect meanwhile. PWilkinson (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support, but with adjustments I agree that King of Scotland is unsatisfactory. The key text I would follow in naming conventions would be Woolf's Pictland to Alba. He has it as Dub son of Máel Coluim, king of Alba. I would also like to suggest that this is applied to all figures of this period of history (i.e. pre-Malcolm III) as per @Angusmclellan:'s excellent suggestion at Talk:Kenneth MacAlpin#New Edinburgh History_naming. WP:COMMONNAME does not wash here.Catfish Jim and the soapdish 17:14, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

• While I support this move in principle, I agree with the recommendations that it would be most productive to first establish consensus for a policy change (maybe at WT:NCROY, or the talk page of a relevant WikiProject) and then to WP:CONSISTENTly apply that change to all article titles affected by the result. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:13, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Don't see any advantage in the move. The rationale in the opening post is not correct. Alba is just the Gaelic name for what in English is called Scotland, that was the same in Dub's era as it is in ours, Scotland is the English name for Alba from c. 900 onwards. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.