Category talk:Earliest known manuscripts by language

Untitled

This is becoming an interesting little collection. I wonder if "manuscript" is the best word? Some of these are inscriptions, such as Franks Casket. Feasible alternatives to "manuscript" might be "inscription" or better, "document." --babbage 20:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This is a category for "the earliest known document recording particular human languages" according to the description, but the category name must surely be interpreted rather differently. I've just added the Black Book of Carmarthen (c. 1250) to the category, but having done that I wonder if I've done the right thing. It is the earliest surviving MS written entirely or subtantially in Welsh, however the earliest written Welsh texts are marginalia or short texts in Latin MSS, considerably earlier: however they could not be classified as Welsh language MSS (i.e. criteria manuscript by language). Also, the earliest examples of Welsh are even earlier, being words and short phrases inscribed on stone. So, if the Frank's Casket can be included here so could the earliest Welsh inscription. Yet the category clearly states manuscripts by language; neither artefacts or glosses in MSS primarily written in another/other languages fit that criteria. In the case of Welsh this makes a difference of at least 400 years. So, my question is - and I'd be glad to have people's opinion on this - should we rename the category or reword its description? Either way not a few of the articles here will need to be reclassified and/or other examples chosen in their place. Enaidmawr (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"document" seems like a reasonable alternative. --Akhilleus (talk) 06:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)