Talk:Wimund/Archive 1

Son of William fitz Duncan & Wimund of the Isles

Richard Oram (David I), believes and argues quite convincingly that Wimund was the son of William fitz Duncan (NOT Óengus of Moray!). I think this text must be drastically alter to take account of this. Also, I think this should be moved to "Wimund of the Isles", after his bishopric, following the rules normal for styling office-holders on wiki. - Calgacus 22:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

The article, and William of Newburgh, says Wimind "invented the story that he was the son of the Earl of Moray". Is there a scholarly tradition to call him "Wimund of the Isles", Ive never heard him called that before, it's just "Wimund" (the Bishop being added for disambig purposes, but could just as easily use "pirate" instead). --Stbalbach 23:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

He was the Bishop of the Isles, so he should probably be named after his see in the event that someone ever does a list of bishops. Wimund (bishop), ain't a good name though. William moved to the Isle of Man early in his ecclesiastical career and is known to have styled himself bishop of "sancta ecclesia de Schith" (the holy church of Skye). William knew fluent Gaelic (otherwise how could he have been such a popular bishop and warleader in the isles?). It's a bit of a coincidence don't you think, that Wimund was born in William fitz Duncan's lands in north west England, moved freely through the Gaelic world, claimed the rulership of Moray and warred with David I (who pinched Moray after William's death) in northern Scotland. What other northern Englishman that you know of claimed lordships in the far north of Scotland for no reason? William of Newburgh isn't reliable on this, and is probably just echoing propaganda from David I. - Calgacus 23:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I thought Newburgh is the only source we have for Wimund. Sure, its possible to make educated guesses on Wikipedia so long as it's supported with published sources. I would suggest in that case, make a new section that summarizes the alternative view, keep both views. Is there a source that calls him "Wimund of the Isles"? When somthing is in ()'s, it is for Wikipedia disambig purposes, and has nothing to do with the name. It's safe to call him "Wimund", that is what our source calls him. If you can find that calls him "Wimund of the Isles" I would be more convinced. Or perhaps call the article "Wimund (Bishop of the Isles)". --Stbalbach 00:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)