This template is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.
It is very difficult to keep up with who has what when in Western Europe unless you are a scholar of the period. This template should help understanding. Student7 (talk) 01:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
You'll have to explain how. And why the word "hegemony"? Srnec (talk) 04:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
A definition: "Domination, influence, or authority over another, especially by one political group over a society or by one nation over others ..."
None of these tribes dominated the entire area at any one time.
It was a takeover by a tribe of a previously existing nation or country (usually former Roman Empire). There's no suggestion that these were sophisticated nation-states, though some had crude embassies and sometimes assumed the trappings of the former Empire. Student7 (talk) 11:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
The Franks established hegemony over Gaul, but not Western Europe. How does the template clarify this? Further, the dates attributed seem arbitrary. The Franks did not disappear in 843. Nor can the Byzantine presence in either Italy or Spain be referred to as "hegemony", since it was really the continued presence of the same political authority that had ruled those regions since the time of Christ. I think you need to work some more on this template to make it truly useful. Srnec (talk) 15:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Worse, the Byzantines continued on for a very long time. But, not in control of Western Europe. I altered the heading a little. As I mentioned above, great historians may already grasp all of this, but this is to help the ordinary reader. Student7 (talk) 01:29, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Suevi? Anglo-Saxons? Thuringii? Moors? And the template doesn't indicate either the kind of hegemony these tribes exercised or where or what exactly the dates signify. How will this really clarify things for the ordinary reader? Srnec (talk) 03:41, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, it did say regions in Western Europe. I suppose the Moors should be there. I confess to thinking the Anglo-Saxons had a different sphere of influence in Northern Europe rather than an equally vague Western Europe. I think it will be awhile before I try to template "Tribal hegemony in Britain during the Early Middle Ages", however needed this might be! I dismissed the Suevi and Thuringi out of hand as bit actors in Caesar's Commentaries. Perhaps that was unfair and they went on to greater glory later of which I was unaware. Student7 (talk) 12:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
And least not forget the Vikings and Norse conquerers of the Northernmost limits of the former Roman Empire, most notably the [[Kingdom of Normandy in the present-day region of Normandy, France. The Viking and Norse have briefly ruled the coastal ports and towns of the Atlantic coasts, the British Isles along side the Jutes and Danes from Denmark or the Frisian islands, and the Vikings continued the advance towards the Black Sea (esp. Crimea) by way of Russia, Ukraine and the Baltics. It is clearly understood the Norse-Vikings of Scandinavia lived beyond the boundaries of the Roman empire and were Christianized in the 11th century, but how much the Romans influenced the so-called "Barbarians" of Germania and Polonia is what caused them to move into conquering Rome. + 126.96.36.199 (talk) 23:16, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Again, let us consider time-frame. The template gets enormous if you roll the timeframe forward. "Hegemony" anyway refers to a predominate situation in Europe which was only occasionally achieved. The Vikings later and mainly Northern Europe, though they clearly sailed and conquered other places as well. It was a limited template. Not looking to try to "extend" it. Okay to come up with a new template with better coverage and perhaps different articles. Student7 (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)