Talk:Principality of Lower Pannonia

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

Name[edit]

I wonder is name "Balaton Principality" a best choice for this article? "Balaton" is just modern magyarized name of the area and in the time when this principality existed, there were no Hungarians in the area. Also, some sources that I saw about this mention the principality under names "Pannonia" or "Pannonian Principality", so perhaps we can change name of this article into "Pannonian Principality"? PANONIAN (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theoretically no problem, but Pannonian principality is also the name of Savia in some texts and you should be sure that Balaton principality is not used in English texs (have you checked that somehow?)....But what interests me is your interesting last addition of territories - as far as I know, no Slovak source clains that those territories were in the principality, so you should add which author claims that. Personally I think you or someone is confusing this Pannonia with the other Croatian Pannonia. Juro 20:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no confusion - I just saw one historical map showing Slavic countries in the 9th century including Slavic state of Pannonia (Balaton Principality), which also include territory between Danube and Tisa and in the south of Drava. Another state called Savia (Pannonian Croatia) is also shown on this map. Regarding source, it is one book that I saw in bookshop, so I will go back there in monday and I will writte exact name of the source. Regarding name of the article, I do not know which of the names is most common in English - it should be checked anyway. By the way, I also found what was name of Feankish province - Pannonian March. Perhaps we can writte article about it if we find more data. PANONIAN (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I will look at the name when I have the time. I am quite sure that the problem will be that the principality does not occur in English texts at all. Juro 20:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

in euratlas.com , it is called 'country on the Save" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hxseek (talk • contribs) 10:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I just remeber: the article about Vukovar on Croatian Wikipedia also mention that Pribina ruled in the south of the Drava: http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vukovar Quote: "Ovdje je središte cijelog kraja u vrijeme kada knez Pribina, kao franački vazal, dobija stotinu sela uz rijeku Vuku sredinom 9. stoljeća." In English: "This was the center of the whole area in the time when prince Pribina, as Frankish vassal, gained 100 villages near river Vuka in the middle of the 9th century". PANONIAN (talk) 21:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but a wikipedia is not a sufficient source for things like that, we have to know the original source of this statement. Juro 01:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I provided original references now. Regarding name of the article, most sources that I saw, use names "Pannonia" or "Lower Pannonia", but since we already have articles about Roman provinces that had same names, it would not be the best solution to use those names. PANONIAN (talk) 14:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The name "Pannonia inferior" is just in the Holy Roman Era possible. After 1792 all names changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.2.186.235 (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Try the conversion of the bavarians and carantans of Salzburg early sources, http://www.amazon.de/Conversio-Bagoariorum-Carantanorum-Erzbischofs-Theotmar/dp/3775254153/ref=sr_1_1/028-3021403-2442920?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189800444&sr=8-1--Vargatamas 20:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great Moravians[edit]

I added Western Slavs which seems to be more acceptable with a reliable source. Later other theories/versions with other sources may be added. Squash Racket (talk) 11:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Romanians[edit]

Could somebody please explain this sentence to me? "The principality was one of the several Slavic states and groups connecting the areas inhabited by Slavs before they were divided into the northern and the southern Slavs by the conquests of the Franks, the arrival of the Magyars in Pannonia, and later by the expansion of the Romanians." I am confused. What did the Romanians do at the Principality of Balaton after the arrival of the Magyars in Pannonia? Maybe I do not know something, however I think the sentence is obscure.Fakirbakir (talk) 08:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I inserted few words. Now I understand.Fakirbakir (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barbarism or "archeology"[edit]

bones as waste in a territory of Zalavár by Hungarian archeologist Szőke Béla Miklós http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bzVNy8HNSsk/TckjGQhVs2I/AAAAAAAAAT0/pfUgm8gd2Vo/s1600/blat+kosti.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omen1229 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is this?[edit]

If my understanding is correct this polity was a "principality" ruled by a "dux/duke" (Pribina) and later by a "comes/count" (Kocel'). What is the reliable source based on which it is called "principality"? Borsoka (talk) 08:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If my understanding is correct, most of the territories of this "principality" (including its seat near Lake Balaton) were situated in the ancient province of UPPER Pannonia. What is the reliable source based on which it is called "of Lower Pannonia"? Borsoka (talk) 08:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorces: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], etc, etc. Both words, "principality" and "Lower Pannonia" are clearly established in sources. PANONIAN 08:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the above sources (even if my favorite is the first one which refers to the "Principality of Lower Pannonia" and its rulers "Markgraf Pribina"). What about Balaton Principality? I assume that the two articles cover the same topic, but I might be wrong. Borsoka (talk) 10:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are no two articles because article "Balaton Principality" was renamed to "Principality of Lower Pannonia". Name "Balaton" is anachronistic if we speak about that time period and less established in sources. It is not called "Balaton" even in Hungarian Wikipedia: http://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pannóniai_Fejedelemség PANONIAN 15:11, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see. There was a move without a previous proposal. Nevertheless, I can accept it because the name "Balaton Principality" is even more artificial than this one (for a "principality" ruled not by "princes" but by "dukes", "markgrafs" and "counts" :)). Borsoka (talk) 17:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, there are various titles used for its rulers in various sources, but "prince" is among them, so I would say that title is supported by the sources. PANONIAN 18:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Content[edit]

This article needs additional sources and verification because it may contain POV statements (counties as Blatno County?? Ptuj County?? Dudlebian County??, actual territory). Is there any primary source about name of Blatnograd? I thought it was Moosburg/Mosapurc/Urbs Paludarum in contemporary sources. Fakirbakir (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, but mechanical change "Slavic" to "Frankish" is not expression of need of sources. I understand your POV, but please be honest...--Yopie (talk) 08:17, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was a Frankish vassal duchy.....I've inserted some sources about it. Fakirbakir (talk) 09:30, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Although a Frankish vassal, it later started resisting the influence of German feudal lords and clergy, trying to organize an independent Slavic archdiocese" Is there any source about this?Fakirbakir (talk) 09:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It does not contain that statement "Slavic principality". It talks only about Pribina's "principality". Fakirbakir (talk) 19:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On the page 105 down is mentioned title Pannonian prince.--Yopie (talk) 11:43, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. Fakirbakir (talk) 15:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Those sources do not mention that "started resisting the influence of German feudal lords and clergy" he (Pribina) -presumably- applied for his own episcopate at the pope but was not successful. There was no resistance. Fakirbakir (talk) 08:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fletcher say, that it was "attempt to outflank German bishops" and Rona-Tas say that bishop of Saltzburg locked bishop of Pannonia in monastery. Locking someone in monastery is resistance. But I agree, this happened to Kocel.--Yopie (talk) 11:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Germanic burials[edit]

I did read that there was Germanic continuity (Gepids) toward the 'age of Avars' in Transdanubia. See:[8] Is there any presumably Germanic cemetery in the 8-9th centuries in Transdanubia? Fakirbakir (talk) 08:42, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

a case of Slavic, I guess Slovakian nationalism in Pannonia?[edit]

78.92.241.92 (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC) Besides of 'Great'? Moravia instead slightly Moravia please allow me to ask the editor(s) of this nonhistoric article: When You wrote Pribina was expelled from Nitra by Mojmir and came after some adventures to Mosapurc, where he simply fled to and got an estate granted as frankish vassal, how could he "settle on his father's land"? Why would an estate be a "principality"? Became he the "Prince of the Franks", or of the Moravians who expelled him and had no influence in this territory? Or did much Slavs come along with him, or knew they to invade Mosapurc before awaiting the Salvador Pribina, since You mention e.g. Avars living there since good two and half hundreds of years (Solitodum Avarorum) as nothing essential? I support here also the right question about Romanians there. Etc. Pribina had to flee from Nitra (inside Carpathians) just under Moravia (core land outside Carpathians) and was allowed to settle as vassal shortly for a couple of years, and that was it all. It is as simple. All other is mere neo-slavic fiction without any evidence and citation.[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism_and_ancient_history : Nationalism has provided a significant framework for historical writing in Europe and in those former colonies influenced by Europe since the nineteenth century. According to the medievalist historian Patrick J. Geary: "[The] modern [study of] history was born in the nineteenth century, conceived and developed as an instrument of European nationalism. As a tool of nationalist ideology, the history of Europe's nations was a great success, but it has turned our understanding of the past into a toxic waste dump, filled with the poison of ethnic nationalism, and the poison has seeped deep into popular consciousness." - truehistory

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. It's a pity that the nominator didn't construct the Google search per the instructions at WP:COMMONNAME, and that editors who critiqued it didn't link to an improved search. A further discussion with better evidence might produce a different result. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Principality of Lower Pannonia → Balaton Principality – More frequent name, it has 73 Google Books hits[9], "Principality of Lower Pannonia" has only 5 hits[10]. --Relisted. walk victor falk talk 21:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Fakirbakir (talk) 09:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, per WP:COMMONNAME. bobrayner (talk) 14:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, per WP:COMMONNAME. The above research should be improved. For instance "The Land Between: A History of Slovenia" does not contain the expression "Balaton Principality", but Google Books shows it among the books using this expression. Many of the hits are books based on WP articles. Borsoka (talk) 14:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: what about simply "Principality of Pannonia"? --Norden1990 (talk) 22:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I am not sure that proposed name is better. When i search, both name are used in the same ammount. And lot of them are from wikipedia. Principality of Pannonia have some more results. Is that maybe beteer? --Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 22:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the name "Lower Pannonia" used to refer to different territories: the Roman province, the Friulian vassal territory (south of Drava) and the Bavarian Balaton Principality, so using "Balaton Principality" would avoid confusion. Zhmr (talk) 14:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name[edit]

Gbooks hits has "Balaton principality" (7) versus "Principality of Lower Pannonia" (4). In Slovak, "Blatenské kniežatstvo" (14) is used.--Zoupan 02:47, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article needs to be refocused. 188.29.164.60 (talk) 12:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Image mistake[edit]

Can I just point out please that whoever typed Lower Pannonia across the infobox image needs geography classes. That (between the Raba and Drava) is Upper Pannonia. If anyone knows how, please correct it. 92.40.248.110 (talk) 09:34, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In fact the whole article has been misnamed thanks to an unmonitored and uncorrected move https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balaton_Principality&oldid=447618398 by a disruptive editor who has since quit wikipedia User:PANONIAN. It should be restored to its original name Balaton Principality which wa←s UPPER Pannonia *never* Lower Pannonia. 94.197.121.137 (talk) 10:14, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He must have confused Pribina, Ban of Croatia with Pribina. 94.197.121.137 (talk) 10:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is Balaton Principality? Are there realms named after a lake? Are there principalities ruled by counts? Borsoka (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Content fork[edit]

This article was originally about the Balaton Principality but seems to have turned into a content fork on Pannonian Croatia. I suggest butchering the article merging part with March of Pannonia, part with a new article on Pannonian Croatia, part with a new article on Lower Pannonia and the remainder into a new article dedicated to the Balaton Principality. And finally deleting this page name. But that is way too much work for me. 188.29.164.60 (talk) 12:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is Balaton Principality? Is it like Loch Ness Kingdom or Lake Ontario Marquesate? Borsoka (talk) 16:55, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think the province of Ontario is named after? 216.8.143.76 (talk) 20:47, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Since the 19th century there are territories named after a lake. Were there realms named after a lake in the Middle Ages? Who were the princes of Balaton? Borsoka (talk) 01:46, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There was no state named after Byzantium in the Middle Ages either. Hasn't stopped historians. 216.8.143.76 (talk) 13:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. And was there a principality in Transdanubia in the 9th century? If there was a principality, who were its rulers? Borsoka (talk) 16:01, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Pribina and Kocel under Frankish suzerainty. What are you getting at? 216.8.143.76 (talk) 17:11, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of them were princes. How could they rule a principality? Borsoka (talk) 17:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You'll have to take that up with historians like Timothy Reuter, Richard Fletcher and Simon MacLean. But really there's no contradiction between being a Slav prince and a Frankish count. 216.8.143.76 (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To which works do you refer? For instance, Oto Luthar (in his The Land Between: A History of Slovenia) does not use the term "Balaton Principality" ([11]). He mentiones that Pribina was mentioned as "Pannonian prince" in Slavic documents and "Count of the Slavs" in Latin charters. Borsoka (talk) 03:16, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Reuter, Germany in the Early Middle Ages, which says: "The question whether the Pribina/Kocel territory should be seen as a Frankish border county under a Slav prince or as a Slav client or buffer principality beyond the marches must remain unresolved, which in itself says a good deal about the fluidity of this part of the border. The territory was at any rate sufficiently under Frankish control to pass to Arnulf of Carinthia after Kocel's death." 216.8.143.76 (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For me Reuter's above text evidences that there is no consensus about the existence of a principality in Transdanubia in the 9th century. Why should we use an artificial name for a most probably never existing principality? Why should we ignore WP:NPOV and presenting a POV as a fact through using this artificial name? Borsoka (talk) 14:58, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So what's the correct name? 216.8.143.76 (talk) 18:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know. Do we need to dedicate an article to a never existing principality? Borsoka (talk) 04:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Re-read Reuter. He has Transdanubia ruled by a Slav prince in both scenarios. 216.8.143.76 (talk) 18:54, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it relevant? Does he write of a principality? Transylvania was ruled by the kings of Hungary - could we refer to Transylvania as Danubian/Tisan Kingdom? Borsoka (talk) 02:33, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You said, Neither of them were princes. How could they rule a principality? Then both you and I provided sources that refer to them as princes. Quoting from your own linked source, "In ... Pribina's last documented appearance ... his territory [is described] as a principality". What do you mean by "never existing principality"? Surely you don't mean that Pribina and Kocel never existed or governed Transdanubia. 216.8.143.76 (talk) 12:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Principality_of_Lower_Pannonia&oldid=1142326323"