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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a
WikiProject related to all activities of the
NorthGermanic peoples, both in
Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the
Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
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 articles
So the modern consensus seems to be that Witenagemot had no role in the coming about of Parliament? I'm sure it left at least a cultural tendency toward it.
knoodelhed (
talk) 20:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC)reply
I ma not sure whether the article covers this point. The best source is John Maddicott's The Origins of the English Parliament.
Dudley Miles (
talk) 20:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Scott Sanchez, I think the general consensus is that the witan and its Norman counterpart the curia regis probably did help lay the foundations for what would become parliament in the reign of Henry III. However, the belief prevalent before the World War 1 that the witan was some kind of representative democratic "proto-parliament" has been rejected by modern scholars. As @
Dudley Miles points out, Maddicott starts his book in 924, so he definitely sees the royal assemblies of the Anglo-Saxon period as contributing to what would become parliament. Perhaps the article needs to be more clearer on this issue.
Ltwin (
talk) 04:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Requested move 7 December 2021
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.
Witenagemot →
Witan – As explained in the article, Witenagemot is a rare usage, only occasionally attested at the end of the Anglo-Saxon period. It would be better to name the article "Witan", which was common in Anglo-Saxon sources.
Dudley Miles (
talk) 18:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
IPA of Witan
Could someone correct the opening sentence to show the pronunciation of the given word, Witan, rather than of the Old English form, witena ġemōt? Thanks.
Pooh bear138 (
talk) 09:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks for pointing this out. I have deleted for now, pending someone competent dealing with the problem.
Dudley Miles (
talk) 09:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)reply
Article reorganization
I just completed a reorganization of the article that I hope is an improvement. I updated some of the sources (many are from the 1800s and early 1900s). I also changed the section scheme (which used to be Terminology; Origin; Constitution and limitations; Function and legacy; American Revolution).The outline is now: