From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


The capital city of Carniola is Kranj.

I do not understand why present tense is used as this province ceased to exist with the break up of the Habsburg monarchy (in 1918). In early middle age Kranj was indeed the capital but later it moved to Ljubljana.

Yeah, no idea. I fixed it. john k 13:36, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"is the Latin name of" - If you put that here then you would have to say the same on Lithuania, Estonia, Livonia and lots of other places. Of course it is Latin, but if used in English, it is an English word. The same applies to Cologne. Of course, Cologne is the French word for the city, but now it is English just as well. The current wording suggest there is no English name for it, and that is just not true. -- 10:20, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)


I am against merging this article with White Carniola. Carniola (Kranjska) was a province of the Austrian Empire and ceased to exist after WW1. It is traditionally divided (still is today) into three separate regions (no administrative function, just cultural): Lower Carniola, Upper Carniola and Inner Carniola (Dolenjska, Gorenjska and Notranjska respectively). White Carniola (Bela krajina) is mostly perceived as a part of Lower Carniola (Dolenjska), but is a culturally distinct area from the rest of Lower Carniola and therefore sometimes considered as a separate region.

I don't see any reason at all to merge the articles. edolen1 17:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Against the merge[edit]

You cannot merge these two articles together as Carniola (Kranjska) was a country once and White Carniola (Bela Krajina) is just a province in Slovenia that doesn't have much with the old Carniola (Kranjska).

Rok SLO, 5th August 2005

Merging with Duchy Of Carniola[edit]

Do we really need THREE separate sites for Carniola (Carniola March, Duchy of Carniola and Carniola in general)???? For example, is the official article that you get directed to from the History Of Slovenia box. That article is way less complete than this one. Any ideas? Wikingus 11:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we really need them. These are three distinct entities that have followed each other, have been administered differently, and do not have much in common. See also the previous sections. --Eleassar my talk 09:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I do not agree that there is no connection between those entities. They all had the same name and mainly the same territory. I believe there should be no doubt that Carniola from 1805/09 is the same as from 1848 - but restored from French occupation and constitutionaly reformed. As Carniola gave name to all three (two) entities and because those three articles are not complete (except March of Carniola), it would make sense to make only one chronologically organised article with sub-articles made from existing ones - explaining evolution from a march to a crown-land. That would give a complete data on one site, and give a visitor no need to additional clicking. I believe that historically most important facts are those in view of evolution and what it can be learned from it (historia magistae vitae est). But I would not oppose to make different articles in the future, when there would be enough data to make them. Navportus 20:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC).
Duchy of Carniola only deals with the constituent land after the restoration of the Austrian Empire 1849 (not yet Austria-Hungary). Not much for a separate article and confusing as the older Duchy of Carniola had been established in 1364. (talk) 19:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Nauportus. Let's have one overview article, 'Carniola'. I don't see what's the connection between (the Slavic) Carniola of the Early Middle Ages and the later German-ruled Carniola. Otherwise, the march, the duchy and the crownland should be treated in one article, although detailed articles about any of them could be kept. --Eleassar my talk 21:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

include Carneola article in this one?[edit]

Someone proposed that this article and a short one titled Carneola be merged. There is a merge box in each article, which seem to direct discussion to this Talk page. Here is my two cents worth.

I would support that. The Carneola article includes a map already included in this article and the stage in history is already included in this article (Antiquity and Middle Ages). Making a clear path of the different peoples on the same land, and the different governance over the centuries seems best done in one article. The Early Medieval Principality is the same land, and what looks like the same name, as Carniola is given as the second spelling. What might be gained from the shorter article is the list of sources. The short article is just a paragraph, plus the map already in this article and a list of sources.

The still confusing part to me is that this article, Carniola, contains the History of Slovenia box, but that box has no link to this article. Merging Carneola into this should have the link in that box point to the section in this article, I think. Change the title of Antiquity and Middle Ages to Carneola, perhaps the simplest way? --Prairieplant (talk) 23:22, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The following sources were listed at Carneola (now a redirect):

  • Rajko Bratož, ed., Slovenija in sosednje dežele med antiko in karolinško dobo : začetki slovenske etnogeneze = Slowenien und die Nachbarländer zwischen Antike und karolingischer Epoche : Anfänge der slowenischen Ethnogenese, 2 zv. Ljubljana, 2000;
  • Timotej Knific, »Carniola Sclavorum Patria : Autochthons, Invaders, Neighbours«, v Trudy VI Meždunarodnogo kongressa slavjanskoj arheologii. Moscow, 1997. S. 314-323;
  • Peter Štih, »Carniola, patria Sclavorum«, Österreichische Osthefte 37 (1995). Pp. 845-861;
  • --, »Kranjska (Carniola) v zgodnjem srednjem veku«, in Zbornik Brižinski spomeniki, Dela SAZU, II. razr., 45. Ljubljana, 1996. Pp. 13-26;
  • --, Ozemlje Slovenije v zgodnjem srednjem veku : osnovne poteze zgodovinskega razvoja od začetka 6. stoletja do konca 9. stoletja. Ljubljana, 2001;
  • --, »Plemenske in državne tvorbe zgodnjega srednjega veka na slovanskem naselitvenem prostoru v Vzhodnih Alpah«, v Slovenci in država, Razprave SAZU I/17, Ljubljana, 1995.
  • -- in Vasko Simoniti, Slovenska zgodovina do razsvetljenstva. Ljubljana, Klagenfurt, [1995].

I am placing them here if anyone wants to format them and add them to the Further reading. Srnec (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2016 (UTC)