This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Iaroslavvs (talk | contribs) at 20:00, 18 December 2011 (→Requested move: answer to Septentrionalis' ridiculous arguments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:00, 18 December 2011 by Iaroslavvs (talk | contribs) (→Requested move: answer to Septentrionalis' ridiculous arguments)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Former countries (inactive) | |||
| ||||
 | Czech Republic Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
March: no!
I hereby suggest to change the headline to Margravate of Moravia. Austria has been a march (German: Mark) thousand years ago. But Moravia in the late Habsburg Empire has been a Margravate (German: Markgrafschaft), not a March. --Johnny3031 (talk) 21:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ehm, you should really learn the history, my friend. Yes, Austria was a march as was any other bordering land of Frankish Empire. The Austrian march (called Bavarian Eastern March or East Mark) was created as a german east march - nearly 200 years after Great Moravia. Moravia was titled margraviate by unfortunate Frederick Barbarossa in 1182. But be carefull by writing evident lies like "thousand years ago" on something like this german province (Austria). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fingon1 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Requested move
 | It has been proposed in this section that History of Moravia be renamed and moved to Margraviate of Moravia. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move |
March of Moravia → Margraviate of Moravia – More accurate name used by historians and reliable sources far more ( vs. hits in Google Books). Moreover, Moravia wasn't a march (German borderland established due to defence against the Slavs or Magyars) actually. --Iaroslavvs (talk) 17:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Not persuaded. I am even less persuaded by any definition of march which excludes the Earldom of Chester. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:22, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you should take into consideration these 3 points:
- 1. experts' point of view (see literature listed above in the Google Books result)
- 2. name of this land/administrative unit in Czech (Markrabství moravské not Marka moravská), German (Markgrafschaft Mähren not Mark Mähren) and Latin (Marchionatus Moraviae not Marca Moraviae) – i.e. original languages
- 3. fact of dissimilarity of Central Europe against British Isles
- This article should not be wrongly named only because the meaning of word "march" to vary in other part of Europe. --Iaroslavvs (talk) 22:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
- Make that vehemently oppose. We are written in English, not German or Czech; and the meaning of "march" in English is not so limited. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- I guess you vehemently reveal your own ignorance. :))) --Iaroslavvs (talk) 20:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
- Support (and alter lead to reflect the change). The main difficulty arises from a few sentences regardding the status of the area before their were margraves. I do not accept the Chester argument, and the Palatinate of Cheshire was not a marcher lordship anyway, but one of a series of palatinate earldoms donw the Welsh border. These were quite different constitutionally from marcher lordships, as the king's writ did not run in Wales. Anyway, I do not think it appropriate to use definitions relating specifically to the Welsh border to govern the situation in central Europe. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- If this article is moved, I shall dispute the accuracy of the title. It is, and remains, inappropriate nationalism to impose Czech or German definitions on English. I disagree with Peterkingiron's quibble about the Welsh Marches; but neither was any Lord Warden of the Marches sent forth against Slavs or Magyars. It may be worth distinguishing the 10th century lordship with which this article begins from Austro-Hungarian Moravia, if that is the point here. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- Are you able to perceive written text properly? Where do you find any trace of nationalism? How "nationalistic" is term "margraviate" against "march"? Both are English!! There is a terminological not nationalistic problem with the name of this article – nomenclature of this entity in original languages mentioned under 2nd point isn't pursuing of any nationalistic agenda. I listed it just to prove difference between both terms in area of Central and Eastern Europe. And such difference is also recognized by authorities in the field of history a historical geography! I repeat my 1st and main argument: take into consideration ... experts' point of view (see literature listed above in the Google Books result) Besides, how "Czech-nationalistic" are such sources as The Catholic Encyclopedia or The EB?? (Both use term margraviate.) --Iaroslavvs (talk) 20:00, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
- If this article is moved, I shall dispute the accuracy of the title. It is, and remains, inappropriate nationalism to impose Czech or German definitions on English. I disagree with Peterkingiron's quibble about the Welsh Marches; but neither was any Lord Warden of the Marches sent forth against Slavs or Magyars. It may be worth distinguishing the 10th century lordship with which this article begins from Austro-Hungarian Moravia, if that is the point here. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)