This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Paulinus of York is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
Paulinus of York is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire
Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
After the appearance of Paulinus is described, there is the following statement:
Bede probably obtained this description from James the Deacon, one of Paulinus' associates, who still was alive in Bede's time.
Yet in Ecclesiastical History, Bedes plainly states in Chapter XVI that Paulinus' appearance was described to him by Deda of Partney. Is this disputed? Besides, James the Deacon died when Bede was a child, so it's not possible for the description to have come direct from him. Emma May Smith (talk) 14:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
I've edited this a bit to make it clearer that it was probably a chain of transmission in operation - it appears to have come through a number of sources before reaching Bede - Deda probalby got it from James, is the idea. Ealdgyth - Talk14:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Bede says that Deda obtained the description from an old man who was baptized by Paulinus at Tiwulfingchester (Littleborough, Nottinghamshire), so there's no need for James the Deacon to have been involved. I don't know if Bede's account is now disputed, but I don't see why it should be. What does the cited source, Blair World of Bede, actually say? Emma May Smith (talk) 17:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
The offending sentence has been removed, that's easier than spending way more time on the sourcing information in the article than the actual length of the description. As an aside, I did double check the information against the cited source for my first reply....the implication that Blair makes is that the information came from James the Deacon ultimately - but he doesn't explictly state so .. so rather than worry about it, it's gone. Ealdgyth - Talk17:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
I'm sorry that this has become negative for us. I only wanted to ensure that the information we give out is correct. The statement went against what I understood from elsewhere, and thought it best to ask for clarification. We're working together, not in conflict. Emma May Smith (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
Sorry if I seem cranky, but I've got another Featured Article on the main page today, which tends to ratchet up the stress levels, and I'm trying to do some other reviewing work also... along with a sick dog and a hyper kitten. Just a stressful day. Ealdgyth - Talk17:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
