Jump to content

Talk:The Fens

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Loganberry (talk | contribs) at 11:26, 22 September 2005 (→‎Ely Cathedral: fine). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

As I understand it, the 'Gentlemen Adventurers' were people who had invested actively in the Dutch East India Company, and were rewarded by being given an area of bog thatr no one wanted near Boston, Lincolnshire. They drained it, and the area is today known and even signposted as as 'Adventurers Land'


In this context, my reading of Adventurer is 'speculator' or 'investor'. The people (ad)ventured their capital in a project such as a cargo from China or draining land, on condition that in return for its success, they got their cut of the profit. I suspect that you are combining the stories of more than one venture.

Formation

From the Formation section: "The three principal soil types resulting from this are the mineral-based silt, resulting from the energetic marine environment of the creeks and clay from the marsh and mud-flats." Only two soil types are listed, unless the sentence following is meant as the third. Educated clarification is needed. Pjrich 20:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that is clearer. If not, discuss it further. It was interesting to find that someone had read it! :-) (RJP 21:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Ely Cathedral

Ely Cathedral, on a rise of ground surrounded by fenlands, is known as the "Ship of the Fens". Its siege in 1071 is a story in itself.

Then tell it, either here or in the Ely Cathedral article (which currently says nothing about it); hinting that something interesting happened but not saying what is unbelievably irritating! Loganberry (Talk) 04:14, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. The trouble is that it involves Hereward "the Wake" and as it stands, the article on him needs a lot of work before it can usefully be referred to from other articles. That in turn involves a controversy between those who accept the Hereward story more or less as history presents it and those who regard it as more or less myth. It is easier to write about something else. :-) (RJP 07:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC))[reply]
All right then; I'm certainly no expert (if I were, I'd have written the story up myself!), so I agree that removing the reference seems like the best plan for the moment. Loganberry (Talk) 11:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]