Jump to content

Talk:Carolingian cross

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Potential?

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To not merge given the uncontested objection with stale discussion. Klbrain (talk) 09:56, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt this has the potential for a full article. Googling "Carolingian cross" or "Karolingisches Kreuz", I do not find references to this emblem. Rather, the term describes any cross thought to date from the Carolingian period.[1] An exception would be this (dated 2012, no context, no references, basically a one-line entry under this book's section on "Triquetra"). --dab (𒁳) 07:50, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If no other comments, will be bold and merge in a few days. Ceoil (talk) 07:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have written this up as a full article, and as such, it should not be merged with the triquetra stub. I would like this article to be assessed, please. This article is good enough for a standalone piece. Radical Contrarian (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dating & Name

[edit]

The triquetra cross certainly predates the 9th century, as it appears on Celtic-influenced Anglo-Saxon coins of the 8th: https://www.spink.com/lot/21000000297 (see also: Abramson, Sceatta List 3rd Ed. pp. 345-349; Spink 2021)

Thus, referring to it as "Carolingian," even if Rudolf Koch identified it as such, seems inaccurate. I propose that the article be renamed to "Triquetra cross" and the revised dating be included. 74.78.200.109 (talk) 15:48, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]