Jump to content

Talk:Franconia

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


Untitled

[edit]

With all due respect for the upper Franconians of today, the Franks actually settled in the valley of the Scheldt river (think: Antwerp) and between the Rhine and Meuse (think Arnhem) in 290AD (they were given these lands by the then Roman emperor in return for their defence of the roman border) There is a region Salland in the province of Overijssel in the Netherlands of today that may (or may not) have something to do with the Salians. Later they took over the land in between, say from Dunkirk to Brussel to Aachen Koeln Xanten Arnhem to the coast at Den Haag. From there they conquered first Gallia and much later current Germany.

What was a "stem-duchy"? -- SJK

See Stem duchy. --Wetman 05:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely German concept, but legitimate. The Stem duchies are the duchies that made up the Holy Roman Empire. They include Franconia, Swabia, Bavaria and a bunch of others I can't remember off the top of my head. This is where all of the funky ethnicity stuff really starts -- for example, Franconia is first associated with the Konradiner, the family of Conrad, and generally goes back to the mid-ninth century. However, at the date that we first see members of that family in charge of the area (under Louis the Younger, I think), they were marcher lords administering a part of what was very much the Eastern Frankish kingdom. The Carolingians swapped people in and out of this area fairly frequently, although this particular family, including a couple Eberhards and gebhards, tended to be given responsibility here. Still, these guys were Franks, and there is evidence that the Conradiner came out of the area around Alsace, whiich lends itself to an argument for Swabian, Alsatian, or even Alemannian ethnicity...they were Franks.... JHK


I'm german and can not understand stem, but in Germany we call the stem-duchies "Stammesherzogtuemer", meaning tribal duchies. It has its origin in the opinion that originally the biggest german tribes had their own duchies (german: Herzogtuemer). These tribes are: Franken (Franconians/ Franks or how you want to call them), Schwaben (Swabians), Bayern (Bavarians), Sachsen (Saxons, those how settlet also to Engand). Thueringer (Thuringians ?) had no duchy (Herzogtum). So I could imagine that "stem" should be german "Stamm" (tribe), but I don't know. FH


"After the death of the last Carolingian king of the Eastern Carolingian kingdom, Louis the Child, the crown passed to Conrad I." How does this relate to Franconia? --rmhermen

Sorry -- this needs more explaination, but I didn't have time. Several members of Conrad's family had been made duces in the area now called Franconia during the reigns of Louis the german and his descendants. I'm almost positive that the Annales Fuldensis, our primary narrative source for the eastern Frankish kingdom for the 9th and early 10th centuries, calls them duces Thuringorum. Makes sense, because a great deal of what was considered Thuringia in the 6th through 9th centuries was later considered to be part of Franconia -- in fact, parts of what was once Franconia are actually not in Bavaria, but Hesse...boundaries change. I'm not sure when the Conradiner took on the title of Dukes of Franconia, but probably no earlier than the death of Louis the Child, and possibly not until Arnulf or Zwentibold at the beginning to middle of the 10th c. Don't hold me to this, but I think that Henry the Fowler and the Salians were somehow related. I'll have to check.

In the meantime, could someone please put Conrad back?

And could someone explain why that latest bit about the people in Franconia not considering themselves Bavarian is there? The article doesn't say that the inhabitants are Bavarian -- it says that the area was incorporated into Bavaria. It's getting really depressing to have every bloody German article corrupted with bogus NPOV sidesteps into ethnicity.

I wish H.J. would realize that her point could as easily be made by saying something like, "Although now a part of the state of Bavaria, the people of Franconia are proud of their history. They maintain many Franconian traditions....etc." JHK

Check back Frankonia and talk to see how long it took for people to catch on to the idea, that there is a Franconia and it is sectioned in Upper, Lower and Middle Franconia . The website I attached shows this and my very first Franconia entrance shows this. The website has that particular article by Dr.Thomas Dehler and I pointed it out . Now that people have become aware that not all of Bavaria is Bavarian ,you are welcome to post your sentence about the traditions. The reference to Dr. Dehler's article can go into the talk section.

Frau JHK, I really do not understand your hang-ups and why do you constantly mention ethnicity ?? user:H.J.

Hey JHK, why not just change the article--or is that what causes an "edit war"?  :-( H.J., please be reasonable; I think JHK is making a very reasonable point. Can't you find a wording that satisfies both of you? Come on, you're creative, I'm sure you can think of something.

I made the Salian link point to Salia--OK? (Why point to the adjective when you can link the noun, given that the noun will be the subject of an article when the adjective is less plausible as the subject of an article?) Also, I delinked Holy Roman Emperors--or were we actually going to make a page listing them? Maybe we are... --LMS

I think someone already did that, Larry. sjc

Larry, I'm not sure that 'Salia' exists. It's a derived nomenclature for the Salian Franks (which JHK will correct me about if I'm wrong). --MichaelTinkler
Thanks, Michael...
Thanks, Larry, for your input. It is much appreciated. Now, some answers/coments...
I didn't change it because I'm at work and didn't want to take the time -- I'd have checked back later and changed if necessary. Also, I am very tired of the edit wars -- it's one thing when one is dealing with rational discussion; another thing entirely when one has to explain that there are very legitimate scholarly reasons for the edits to someone who is either unwilling to understand or incapable of understanding those reasons.
Oh -- Salian is the correct word -- but should be combined with something like dynasty, house, HREs...or the Salians, I suppose, but that is unsatisfactory to my pea-brain.
Finally, H.J., my only hang-up (so to speak) is that I would like to work on original articles, rather than spending my time editing badly written ones that provide incomplete and/or incorrect information. Unfortunately, you have chosen to write on subjects toward which I naturally gravitate, which means I edit them. As for ethnicity, I think I am not the only one who has mentioned that each of your articles contains arguments based on a faulty understanding of the ancient and medieval worlds, especially in regards to the ethnicity of various groups. Several of us have tried to explain that the arguments presented vastly oversimplify the connections between various groups of peoples -- often to the point where they are misleading (and so much so that it seems deliberate). If nothing else, they are presented in an argumentative fashion -- like the Wir sind keine Bayer statement. JHK

I am repeating ,what I had already agreed on above. Check back Frankonia and talk to see how long it took for people to catch on to the idea, that there is a Franconia and it is sectioned in Upper, Lower and Middle Franconia . The website I attached shows this and my very first Franconia entrance shows this. The website has that particular article by Dr.Thomas Dehler and I pointed it out .

Now that people have become aware that not all of Bavaria is Bavarian ,you are welcome to post your sentence about the traditions. The reference to Dr. Dehler's article can go into the talk section.

It took x amount of tries till everyone got the point, that there is a Franconia (Frankish Land and Frankish people) besides Bavaria. I guess just simply stating it , as I did in my 1. entrance , is not enough .Unfortunately it seems that people need to be hit over the head with statements different to what they are accustomed to, in order to get it. I would much rather not have to do that.

When you read the article Wir sind keine Bayern you will realized that Dr. Dehler does not want to be argumentative ,but is stating important overlooked facts . The same goes for me. user:H.J.

I can't speak for Michael Tinkler, but his comment clearly indicates that he edited to turn your few unconnected sentences into good English. Everybody understood what you were saying, but they way you wrote it left most of your "important points" (the ones having to do with ethnicity, i.e., Fraenkisch vs. Bayerisch) with no context. This is what we have tried to explain many times. You simply throw out a bunch of facts, but don't explain how they fit together. If you had written the first entry so that it made sense, we wouldn't be here discussing it now. The way you wrote it used terms we don't use in English (Frankish instead of Franconian) that made it seem that you were saying that Franconia was forcibly made part of Bavaria, and that this was somehow against an implied order of "how things should be" (that is, Franken should be Franken).

Again -- it's not necessarily that we don't get it -- it's that you present information in a way that people can read things in many ways. Perhaps you should consider that, if a bunch of native English speakers are confused by everything you write, it's not that we're stupid or bad at history, but that you don't write in a very clear manner. That's fine -- it's not your first language...maybe you should trust us to put things in good English, and learn from the edits how to better present your next entry. JHK

Franken not only should be Franken, Franken i s Franken (except in English language) . The people of Franconian (the 'Fraenkish') are called Francs (c=k) in a French language article on Franconia. I try , but I don't really think that my speech will ever match a Carl Schurz. I do trust all of you to put things in good English and thank you all for that. [[user:H.J.]

HJ, let me point out that you just called le langue francais 'French.' That is, indeed, its English-language name. 'Franconian' is the English-language name of Franken. --MichaelTinkler

JHK - do you think we need prospective links to the offices [Bishop of Bamberg], [Bishop of Wurzburg], and [Abbot of fulda]? Seems counterproductive to me. MichaelTinkler

I think they can go -- the cities should be enough. JHK

The people of Franconian (the 'Fraenkish') are called Francs (c=k) in a French language article on Franconia.

It is false, we call them Franconien. Franc is used to designate the French until the End of the Carolingian Dynasty, or to designate someone that is honest(il est franc/ he is honest), or something that it is free like Franche-Comté(Free-County) or port-franc(free-port), or the name of our money before the €. --86.220.167.48 (talk) 08:30, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

stem duchies

[edit]

AFAIK there were only six stem duchies - Swabia Franconia Lorraine Bavaria Saxony and Frisia

Frisia was never a duchy of the German Kingdom during Middle ages. I think there were five stem duchies. Hoss


Naming

[edit]

As mentioned above, shouldnt this article be under Franken? Or are we taking the view that as it is a historical region (not now an administrative region, as only its 3 subregions are) it is more common usage (eg in documents) to call it Franconia? Its just that I am going to get back to fixing German wine, and the wine growing region is legally named Franken (other parts of Bavaria dont make wine). I will happily make Franken (wine region) if necessary and link to Franconia and Bavaria if thats considered best. Justinc 18:55, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That certainly sounds the right tack to me. "Franconia" is a familiar historical designation, like Neustria, that doesn't precisely correspond with a contemporary administration. --Wetman 00:49, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Images from Franconia

[edit]

My Internet side http://olafzesewitz.de/gallery/deutschland/franken/ can supply meaningful supplementing pictorial material to the article. The pictorial material published there by me is not subject to restrictions of use in this format. The decision over screen selection, Upload and/or mounting an externally link on my web page I would like to leave to the authors of the article. --ozes

List of dukes?

[edit]

Shouldn't we have a list of dukes somewhere? john k (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I agree with the list. Where is it ? :s --82.155.78.69 (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it ?

[edit]

Your maps are crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.177.247.197 (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The most important city of modern day Franconia is Nuremberg. That should help you find the region. 80.132.24.228 (talk) 08:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Baden-Württemberg part of Franconia

[edit]

I don't succeed in adding the reference: http://www.regionalverband-heilbronn-franken.de/region/region_kurzportrait.html Maybe someone else can do this 80.132.37.19 (talk) 20:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

[edit]

why does Duke of Franconia redirect here and not to Duchy of Franconia? Tinynanorobots (talk) 05:23, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As of

[edit]

The as of template produces a capital A. Is that intended? (search term on page "Tauber") Agathoclea (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure where that came from. I wonder if it's intended to mean "since 2014"? In which case, why use a template? --Bermicourt (talk) 06:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Franconia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Portal:Franconia for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Franconia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Franconia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 20:24, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Language issues

[edit]

Beginning with the Test: "Franconia (German: Franken; Austro-Bavarian: Frankn, Franggn)"

"Frankn" and "Franggn" are NOT austrao-bavarian, they are franconian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exelloco (talk • contribs) 08:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Franconia&oldid=1236216122"