Talk:Cnut

When did Canute become "Great"?

I never saw the phrase "Cnut the Great" until I saw this article a few years ago. I grew up learning that only Alfred had this designation. Indeed Alfred, the savior of his country and his people, seems to merit this epithet better than Cnut.

Alfred understood that his people needed history to remind them of their loyalties. So he instituted a chronicle, a record of current events, unique in Europe. The saviour of the English language, he was also the founder of English prose. No other English monarch is remembered as "Great". "The Story of English", McNeil, Cran & McCrumb, 1986.

A separate section on nomenclature is typical in Wikipedia and this change, if it indeed is an accepted change, should be mentioned somewhere in the article.68.196.10.68 (talk) 16:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)captcrisis

That is an interesting question and one I have sometimes wondered about. Among modern historians the term seems to be mainly used by Timothy Bolton - it is the title of his well regarded biography. I have looked to see whether he discusses the term, and presumably he does but I cannot see where without reading the whole book. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Designations might change over time. Cnut the Great was "Emperor of the North" and founder of the shortlived "Northsea Empire". In Danish he has 'always' been refered to as Knud den Store = Cnut the Great (or Magnus when latin is used). Perhaps it's a characteristic of our time, that we in some connections seek to sort of synchronize the expressions used in various langauges? But to use the designation "the Great" can some times be a fairly modern phenomenon. Take the Danish King Godfred/Gudfred (c. 804-810), until the 1980'ies no one ever called him "den Store" and untill around 2010 this expression was only rarely used, but since then it has become more common to use and perhaps in another decade or two he will predominantly be refered to as "Godfred den Store"? Oleryhlolsson (talk) 18:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Just plain (non-great) "Canute" is the almost unanimous verdict on Ngram. ThuDauMot (talk) 01:18, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Cnut being one of 'the Great's is by merit of being a king of multiple kingdoms. Alfred being the only English monarch called the great is true, because Cnut was Danish not English, whereas all other kings were English/British or the group they were from became English/British, like the normans Kind Regards, NotAnotherNameGuy (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Catholic Church

“was a source of great prestige and leverage within the Catholic Church and among the”. At this time there was no distinction between Christian churches. Better to use Rome or Constantinople for instance. 24.135.96.71 (talk) 18:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Removed mention of the Catholic Church per WP:LEAD, as it is not mentioned anywhere in the article body. TylerBurden (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Vinland Saga

He's a main character in a recent critically acclaimed anime which depicts his ascent & reign. I think this is worthy of a sentence, at least. Rianinspace (talk) 12:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

If you can provide WP:RS showing that this is notable enough to be added, sure. TylerBurden (talk) 21:37, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The last thing I want to suggest is cluttering the lead further, but other dictionaries do indicate a non-palatalized variation of the second syllable's pronunciation, i.e. /kəˈnuːt/ kə-NOOT as opposed to /kəˈnjuːt/ kə-NYOOT.

• "Canute". Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster.

Remsense ‥ 论 17:49, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Note that besides TV personalities blindly pronouncing every vowel in the latinized "Canute" spelling, the normal pronunciation of the name "Knud" in modern Danish/Norwegian is Danish pronunciation: [[ˈknuðˀ]], the same as of our similar word for a "knot", i.e. a single syllable, where "kn" is a diphtong of the first half of a K sound and a normal length N sound, then a U sound as in fUll, and finally the TH sound as in wiTH . The transition from K to N is as smooth as the transition from C to L in "club ", see [[1]] 94.18.197.26 (talk) 00:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Cnut the great title change

I think the article should be renamed Cnut the Great because that’s how many people know him. Other rulers like Alfred the Great and William the Conqueror have their epithets in the title, and using “the Great” here would make the page more consistent and recognizable. Proguyiscool (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

This has been discussed many times in the past. See the list of formal proposals for name changes above. I do not think this should be raised yet again. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:35, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Infobox dates

While some people here think that because the infobox already gives the date where Cnut died which is basically when his reign ended and thus we don't need to add the dates in the infobox for his title as King of England. But still, I think we should add the dates to the page as if you look at Queen Elizabeth II for example, the infobox already had the day she died, but for her title as Queen of the United Kingdom in the infobox, the dates are still there (6 February 1952 – 8 September 2022), so why can't we do the same for Cnut (18 October or 30 November 1016 – 12 November 1035) or at least (1016 – 12 November 1935)? Richie1509 (talk) 02:41, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

You still haven't provided a citation for the first two dates. I see little point in repeating the last date four times in the same infobox. The infobox is already lengthy and the repetition is unnecessary. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:05, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

But look at articles like Queen Victoria with both her titles as Queen of the United Kingdom and Empress of India, the date when her reign ended (her death, 22 January 1901) was included in the infobox. It's also the same for monarchs like James VI and I or William III. Richie1509 (talk) 09:57, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:OTHERCONTENT applies here. Focusing on this article, at a distance of 990 years the precise date is not so significant to the general reader that it must be repeated four times in the infobox. See MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, The purpose of an infobox is to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article. Barring the specific exceptions listed below, an article should remain complete with its infobox ignored. The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Some infoboxes need to use more than a handful of fields, but information should be presented in a short format wherever possible, and should exclude unnecessary content. NebY (talk) 10:08, 10 October 2025 (UTC)