Talk:List of confederations of Germanic tribes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Germanic studies articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


regna or regnum? --Yak 16:22, Apr 3, 2004 (UTC)

My guess is that regna probably is in the nominative case, while regnum is in the accusative or dative case, but that is just a guess. 惑乱 分からん 00:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


"Franconian" points here, but no reference is given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcov (talkcontribs) 20:37, 18 August 2006 UTC

Important confederations left out[edit]

The most famous and important confederations are not mentioned: Franks, Alemanians, Saxons, Bayuvarians. Truchses 20:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, I would support removing or merging the confederations list; it doesn't really seem to have much to do with the Sippe. The Jade Knight (talk) 10:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree, the conferderation list is not partulcarly related to the sib in this context. I suggest separating the two, and creating an own sib article. –Holt TC 13:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


Olbia was not located in modern Odessa, I fixed that.--Igor "the Otter" 20:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


Why was this split without discussion or rationale? The article topic used to be the formation of bands or confederations in early Germanic society. Now we have a naked list article, and a leftover "Sibb" stub. Hardly an improvement. --dab (𒁳) 07:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see a 'rationale' was posted yesterday, under Important confederations left out above. Well. It's not a great idea to "fix" issues in an article by creating two stub articles with issues. The way forward is to build a comprehensive article on "confederations and bands in early Germanic society". Yes, that would require work. --dab (𒁳) 12:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Dieter. I apologize for any inconvenience I may have created, I got busy yesterday and did not make to finish what I had started. I was in fact not aware that there was a Sippe article, it all seems to be much of a mess. I would have commented differently if I had known. My original plan was to separate the information of the sippe from this article and give it a new and better home. I have gathered a bunch of references and I am currently trying to stitch the various patches together.
As the confederations and the sib, sippe, *sibbja, whatever you choose to call them, are only loosely related, I think there should be detailed articles on each individual concept, while a head article summarizes the different aspects of the "confederations and bands in early Germanic society" you suggested (or something similar, you get my drift). Cf. Death in Norse paganism as the head article, while Viking funeral, Hel (location) and Valhalla are all independent, elaborate and well-written sub-articles. If all aspects are to be explained in one single article, it can get rather confusing.
I hope we can continue towards a common goal on this one, I will use the Sippe talk page for any further questions and notes. –Holt TC 15:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)