Talk:Dunstanburgh Castle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dunstanburgh Castle article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Military history WikiProject     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Associated task forces (general topics): Fortifications task force Military technology and engineering task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Medieval warfare task force (c. 500–c. 1500) Architecture WikiProject (Rated start-Class) Architecture Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. WikiProject UK geography This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements. United Kingdom Portal WikiProject England England Portal This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. WikiProject North East England This article supported by WikiProject North East England, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to North East England on Wikipedia. For further information or to participate, you can visit the Project page. North East England Portal ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Just curious, but wasn't Guy the Seeker famous for finding Arthur and his knights sleeping under Dunstanburgh, and making the wrong choice between a horn, a sword and...something else? I can't remember the legend properly, or I'd have added it in. Anyone else know it? -Egoinos

Yes, it was something along those lines in the only edition of the story I know. It is not inconsistent with the story given here by Jeandunston - Sir Guy goes wandering round the castle trying to rescue the maiden (or looking for shelter, or both?), and finds a big hall full of sleeping knights who wake up and charge at him when he chooses the wrong object. It was published in some Northumberland magazine, I think. In the version I saw I am not sure it explicitly says it was Arthur. But it's probably about 30 years since I last read it! Nevilley

The version I referred to was published about 60 years ago and treats the story somewhat humorously. The choice in this version was between a horn once belonging to Merlin and a gleaming sword. He chose the horn and inevitably the mighty blast he blew on it woke all the sleeping knights who charged at him whereupon he dropped the horn( though a voice had specifically told him to hang on to whatever he chose) grabbed his own sword and found himself outside again in the rain..The lady was reputed to be lying in a coffin and presumably she is still there. My version did not mention King Arthur, only Merlin and I would love to hear of other versions.Jeandunston

I think I heard it in a tape I had of Northumbrian legends. I'll have to go and listen to it again and tell you what it says :-) (I've been avoiding the tape because, sad to say, the Long Pack story has a tendency to give me the creeps...I'm such a coward!) - Egoinos

I'd love to hear more about your version,Egoinos. The version I mentioned was published in a series of four books called The Friday book of North Country Sketches originally appearing in the Newcastle Journal. It is the first story in the first book.Jeandunston

Apologies, turns out it was Sewingshields Castle I was thinking of! Egoinos

I'd heard these stories too - Legend and Northumbria has both of them, and does note that Sewingshields Story is close to the Dunstanburgh one. If you're really into Northumbrian Folk Stories, there's a book out this month called Northumberland Folk Tales. I swear I didn't write it, just saw it reviewed in a magazine and was reminded of this talk page... Henriksdal 15:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PoV

I was disgusted to see that this article contained loaded words like glorious and spectacular: this kind of thing must be stamped out. Thank goodness for the PoV Police who came along with their little parking ticket, because nailing the dreadful people who use words like this should be a very high priority for the encyclopaedia.

I have attempted to satisfy Police Constable PoV with a reword taking out the word "glorious" which so threatened the intellectual stability of the wiki. Of course it's tricky when the fact is that lots of people do indeed find it "glorious", and that, my dears, is actually a thing dangerously close to a fact. Obviously it would be much better if I could go up there and interview them all and say that 62.7 percent think it's choice A and so on, which would improve the quality no end. As it is I just stuck in some lame bit about the recent archaeologists' views on why it looks like that, so at least there is some tiny enhancement of content caused by this otherwise wasted time. Ooops sorry I mistyped that, it was meant to read "useful job of editing".

As for spectacular, I'm a bit stumped to be honest. It's on a f*cking great cliff on a near-island in the North Sea: it presents a spectacle. It is spectacular. Spectacular is what it is. I am having severe problems seeing what a fantastic NPoV rewrite could do to suppress this fact. Obviously getting rid of every adjective from every article in the wiki would be a good start. How about a description of how high the cliffs are? How many tons of rock are under the castle? Hmmm, it's jolly tricky. Maybe we should just leave it because it would be such a terrible terrible pain so say some bloody RUBBISH such as "perceived by many people as spectacular, though not by small babies, people who have a pathological disorder which prevents them from seeing perspective so they think it's the size of a matchbox etc" ... would that be much better? If the point of being a PoV Policeman is to replace one good word with 93 bad ones, then clearly yes, it would. And no doubt some humourless computer who thinks that their lunatic anal retentive approach to text is The One True Way will indeed come along and trash the article along just those lines one day: I can hardly wait. I suppose I might pop back in and alter things occasionally just to annoy them, but I probably can't be bothered.

Thank G*d I've given up editing Wikipedia so I don't have to worry about stuff like this any more :) ... yours, more in sorrow than in anger, and spectacularly and gloriously for ever more, 82.35.17.203 12:47, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Dungeon

144.32.128.155 added something which was later reworded (slightly) into: "Although it is rumoured that a "dungeon" exists, the "dungeon" is actually a small storage room, possibly used to store grain in the left side (on approach) of the main gatehouse." I am a bit confused by this, or possibly 144.32.128.155 is. The text actually refers to an underground room under a hatch, down which you need to climb a ladder. It is not on approach, it's accessed only from inside, once you are through the keep entrance completely. I have been down into this cellar and if it is a grain storage room then it is the most impractical, wet and badly-accessed one in the history of storage rooms! I think that we are talking about two different places, and that the dungeon is indeed a dungeon.

I would take this up with 144.32.128.155 directly but it's a shared IP at York so there is little future in that unless one had the most amazing stroke of luck, hence this here. I'm removing the phrase pending anyone bringing new information: but simply dismissing what was there earlier won't quite do. :) 138.37.199.199 16:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I should perhaps add that Week 3 of the English Heritage dig site contains this: "And, strangely, Dunstanburgh does have an underground chamber, cut into the hard basalt rock beneath one of the guard chambers of the great gatehouse. It's usually thought of as a dungeon, and it's now too dangerous to open to visitors. I'll have to return with a torch to take a look." I don't know if I can get its monster URL to work but here is a try: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.001002003005002002001003 - and all I would add to that is that it was not always too dangerous to open. I missed the hook-and-lantern bit mentioned in the article text, (possibly by decades), but they were still showing it to people in the 60s and maybe into the 70s. 138.37.199.199 17:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Dungeon

Hi, It was me that added the part about the dungeon. when I was last there, I spoke to a guide (I think working for English Heritage) who pointed out that dungeon was not actually a dungeon. I just hypothesized that it was a grain storage room, but it may have been used to store other things. About the location of the dungeon: when I said on approach, I was describing the side of the gatehouse, to prevent ambiguity. Perhaps I should have said, "the room is located in the left hand side of the gatehouse (left as thought you are approaching the structure from the outside)."

Sorry for the confusion. I guess it should probably be left to the imagination what the "room" was used for, unless they discover some hard archaeological evidence to support one theory or another.

Regards.

So, just out of curiosity and to make sure we are singing off the same hymn sheet (as it were), how exactly would you get INTO the dungeon or non-dungeon that you are describing? It IS the under-floor one, yes? 138.37.199.199 08:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thats correct. As the castle wasnt built for defence, but more as a residence, it would seem a bit illogical to bother having a dungeon. Thats just my two cents.

I feel that "As the castle wasnt built for defence, but more as a residence," is slightly over-interpreting the recent (and brilliant) EH stuff about this. It was, however you slice it and dice it, built as a castle, and it is therefore not unreasonable for it to have had a dungeon. No-one has authoritatively said that room isn't a dungeon and the old custodian, referred to in the text, (Mr Stephenson I think) was very clear that it was, and had some evidence in support. Having been down there it makes more sense to me as a dungeon than anything else - as any kind of storage space it is user-unfriendly in the Nth degree! :) I will have another look at the text and see if it may be modified to reflect some doubt, without trashing its current rather nice take on the castle. Thanks 138.37.199.199 08:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Further to that, the dungeon is now a reputed dungeon. OK?! Hope this works for people. :) 138.37.199.199 09:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)