Talk:House of Babenberg
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Adalbert of Prague
The mentioning of Adalbert of Prague is certainly wrong. Adalbert of Prague was a) not a Babenberg by a long shot (he was Czech) and b) Born around 50 years AFTER the Babenberg feud. However, in lieu of any better sources to make the section better I'm just going to note it here.
Is this Arnulf of Carinthia? Arnulf the Eastern Frankish King? Or someone else. User:JHK
Neither (I think they're the same): would you believe, Arnulf the Bad (duke of Bavaria 907-37)? And I thought Nogbad was an invention! (Cue pathetically inaccurate article from 220.127.116.11.xxx headed "Arnulf the Bad" that fails to mention Bavaria but throws in some grandchildren who were in fact entirely unrelated)
- Ok -- he's another Arnulf -- but where did he come from? Oh- and there are two Carolingian Lothars, by the way -- but they're not HRE... User:JHK
Where do they come from, where do they go... none of it matters in the wacky world created by 18.104.22.168.xxx. He was the son of Leopold (Luitpold), duke of Bavaria 889-907, and the Babenbergs are sometimes known as the Luitpoldings. Leopold died fighting the Magyars at Bratislava, but I don't know where he originated DP
i'll take on the Liutpoldinger -- After all, I'm used to dealing with the oddities of Carolingian and post-Carolingian stuff, and actually know who these guys are. Helga has just taken so many things out of context in such a bizarre context that I didn't recognize people who were actually fairly prominent in my thesis! All that Wittelsbach stuff made me forget we were talking about people I've met -- plus I tend to think even earlier and associate the Babenberger with Poppo, comes (sometimes dux) of the Thuringian March (or Thuringia, depending on what the source is). I'm just going to have to take it as written that, if Helga wrote it, she took it from a webpage whose purpose is to prove that the page owner is somehow related to royalty, and go from there. The Leopolds (at least pre-12th c. ) should definitely be Liutpolds, though. He might have been related to Poppo's brother, Egino, who commanded the Ostmark under Louis the German (or the younger -- I need to look) Leopold is a later version of the name and should be shunned! User:JHK
The "Leopold" was mine - I read it as "Luitpold" (different?): if we're calling contemporary Germans Charles, Albert, Henry etc. shouldn't we do it consistently? I don't know, though, if the name really does translate - this is more your neck of the woods. For once, HJ is innocent on this one - can you really imagine her delving any deeper after that initial stub? DP
- Liutpold was the son of Ernst, generally regarded as a Bavarian leading man. The older name of the Babenberger was the Liudolfinger. I am not sure if the Liut- element was used in combination with the -bald/-pold element as a name within the (pre-) Babenbergers. I'll have to re-read W. Metz's article on the Babenberger to straighten it all out. I definitely think that there are some names that need to stay as written -- if only for convention's sake. After all, we call Clovis Clovis, although the later spelling of his name is Louis... I'm all for sticking with what is normal usage, even when it doesn't make a lot of sense!User:JHK
- (oh -- and it's Liut- rather than Luit- ;-) )
- Me, I prefer Chlodowicus. But then, that's me. MichaelTinkler
- (oh -- and it's Liut- rather than Luit- ;-) )
- Yeah... but then you get Anglophiles wanting to say Ludovic... ;-) JHK
No, I'm sorry, NOT Henry Babenberg. THey didn't use their family names that early. yuck. JHK
rename article into House of Babenberg?
Shouldn't this article be renamed into House of Babenberg in order to be in compliance with other royal houses such as House of Windsor and House of Bourbon, as well as the categories themselves? Gryffindor 08:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- I urge caution. Both of the other examples are currently reigning; in these cases the "House of .." is necessary for disambiguation purposes. How important does a family have to be in order to be "House of ..."? Is Hohenlohe important enough? How about Rothschild or Hearne? Noel S McFerran 10:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- This is an important house, so I would support the renaming. Charles 16:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. House of Windsor disambiguates from Windsor Castle, Windsor, Ontario usw. The dynasty here is clearly the primary usage; we don't even have an article on the eponymous castle, or the brook. Let's keep things simple, and avoid masking links. Septentrionalis 22:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Library of Congress
THE ALPINE-DANUBIAN REGION BEFORE THE HABSBURG DYNASTY The Celtic and Roman Eras Around 400 B.C., Celtic peoples from Western Europe settled in the eastern Alps. A Celtic state, Noricum, developed around the region's ironworks in the second century B.C. The Romans occupied Noricum without resistance in 9 B.C. and made the Danube River the effective northern frontier of their empire.
North of the Danube, various German tribes were already extending their territory. By the latter half of the second century A.D., they were making devastating incursions into Roman territories. Nevertheless, Roman arms and diplomacy maintained relative stability until the late fourth century, when other Germanic tribes, including the Ostrogoths, Visigoths, and Vandals, were able to establish settlements in Roman territory south of the Danube. The Roman province gradually became indefensible, and much of the Christian, Romanized population evacuated the region in 488. In 493 the Ostrogoths invaded Italy, seized control of what remained of the western half of the Roman Empire, and brought the Roman era in the eastern Alps to an end.
The Early Medieval Era Various Germanic and Slavic tribes vied for control of the eastern Alpine-Danubian region following the withdrawal and collapse of Roman authority. Among the Germanic tribes, Alemanni (later known as Swabians) and Bavarians were the most notable. The Alemanni had arrived during the Roman era and by 500 were permanently established in most of modern-day Switzerland and the Austrian province of Vorarlberg. The early history of the Bavarians is not clear, but by the mid-500s, they were established alongside remnants of earlier, Romanized peoples in areas north and south of the present-day border between Austria and Germany. Both Swabians and Bavarians were subject to another Germanic tribe, the Franks, but effective Frankish control did not occur until the time of Emperor Charlemagne in the late 700s.
Slavic peoples, including Slovenes, Croats, Czechs, and Slovaks, settled in the region as subject peoples of the Avars, a nomadic tribe, and gradually absorbed their nomadic overlords. During the Carolingian era (eighth and ninth centuries), the areas of Slavic settlement, like those of the Swabians and Bavarians, became subject to the Franks.
Under Frankish patronage, Irish monks, most notably Saint Columban and Saint Gall, pioneered the Christian evangelization of the region in the seventh and eighth centuries. Their work gave rise to important monasteries whose agricultural activities on the frontiers of the Carolingian Empire helped open the region's primeval forests to wider settlement. Eventually integrated into the feudal political structure, the abbots of these monasteries vied with bishops and secular lords for religious and political influence well into the modern era. Bishoprics were established in four major Bavarian towns in the 730s. Salzburg, the only one of these to lie within modern Austria, was raised to the status of an archbishopric in 798 and was given jurisdiction over the other bishoprics. Salzburg became the center of the Christian evangelization efforts in the Slavic territories, which were instrumental in spreading the political reach of the Carolingian Empire.