This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The idea that Götaland or any part of it has ever been a "kingdom" is a matter based solely on myth - though I'm not too keen on formulating this part of the article myself, as the dispute of the relationship between Götaland and Svealand during pre-history is still very much alive today. Recent worthy (Swedish popular) literature would include Maja Hagerman's "Spåren efter kungens män" and Mats G. Larsson's very recent book (2003) on the Götalands. There are recent similar books belonging in the Västgötaskolan camp as well, but none of them in my opinion/to my knowledge worthy of mention. The outline Larsson hints at for the unification of the two regions, based mainly on place-names (distribution and chronology), makes sense (again, imo) and is very much a rebuttal of the Västgötaskolan claims. OlofE 13:22 May 4, 2003 (UTC)
Giving the image that Västra Götaland has ever been a kingdom is downright falsary, neither is there any proof or even implication of warfare for prolonged periods between the two regions. Implying that Västgötar==Visigoths and Östgötar==Ostrogoths is laughable and ridiculous, apart from the claim made by same IP that all goths come from Gotland. So I reversed that junk. OlofE 19:03, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Well OlofE, you react strongly against traditional theories. What about giving any "proof" for your point of view?
The relationship between Geats and Swedes is a very infected part of Swedish history with modern Geats questioning whether the Geats were conquered by the Swedes. There are also newer definitions of Sweden, where Sweden was "unified" like Norway and Denmark, and where Sweden did not exist prior to the event when the Geats and the Swedes shared the same king. Moreover, the theory that Götaland consisted of petty kingdoms is the mainstream version of Swedish history, since it is assumed that the traditional provinces were once independent (i.e. petty kingdoms in the sens of Norwegian petty kingdoms prior to the unification by Harald Fairhair) and so it can't be said that it was one independent kingdom. I have tried to make the introduction more neutral by writing that it once consisted of petty kingdoms.-- Wiglaf 08:37, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The history section contained variuous erroneous or dubious claims. It struck me that the whole topic isn't of crucial importance, so I juist deleted the whole thing rather than rewriting it. I suppose it will be reverted. No matter. Davidweman 11:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Actually, that's entirely fair. I apologise. I'm not sure there are any historians who think there were any stable territorial units pre-unification. Political power gradually became territirial instead of personal. Some historians would say that to speculate at all about the political situation pre-unification.
Davidweman 19:16, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
"You claim that Sweden was the creation of some kind of union between Svealand and Götaland"
No. I suspect Peter Sawyer is right that there were no stable territorial units before unification, and that that happened during Knut Eriksson's reign, not earlier. How the process of unification really played out can only be guessed at though, so any definitive claims should be avoided. Translating Svithiod as Sweden is misleading though not exactly wrong. Davidweman
'Geats' may be jutes rather than götar, and götar shouldn't be called geats in English. I'd guess it is götar, but it is unknowable, and not generally agreed. Davidweman
Btw, why no references to Tacitus or Jordanes?
"I suspect that you belong to Västgötaskolan" Most certainly not! Davidweman
I'd say Larsson's point of view is in the minority. But that's not the issue. Unknowable and/or contested claims should not be stated as fact in wikipedia. If your aware of Sawyer, you're aware that in fact thee's not an "internationa consensus" for your various claims.
Why do I bother?
Davidweman 17:09, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
This map shows modern Götaland. There is a confusion in how we should describe Götaland and Skåneland in the " East Danes" article. --Comanche cph 17:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
The article states that Götaland once consisted of pettty kingdoms, and that Västergötland and Östergötland were once rival kingdoms themselves. That's just a theory, a theory few or no historians believe in, at that. So the article should be changed. I should have made a note on the talk page, but I didn't anticipate controversy. I don't actually 'believe that Svealand and Götaland agreed to enter some kind of union by the name "Sweden"', btw.
Davidweman 08:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
You sound upset, dude. Why? I don't imply any of that. Have you had a lot of arguments with västgötaskolan-type cranks, and let that flavor your response, perhaps? But I agree it's a problematic sentence, too vague and confusing without us saying more.
This is a factual dispute, not a POV dispute. No scholar would argue we can *know* if there were petty kindoms, and I assume you don't either. There are no contemporary sources. Some names I can think of: Peter Sawyer and Lars Gahrn, who don't agree on much, would agree on this. Birgit Sawyer too, of course. Henrik Jansson. Thomas Lindqvist (though, erm, I might confuse him w someone else. I haven't studied this stuff in five years.)
Looking at your edits, you seem knowleadgeble about this stuff, so maybe I'm mistaken about the scholarly consensus, but not about the fact that no one really knows. We can't just write it as fact. I'd be interested in your sources though. Would be fun to read about this stuff again.
I don't really care about the Sweden/svealand question that much. I liked my version better, but the old one is fine.
Davidweman 10:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
The flag presented in the article is the flag of Östergötland, not Götaland.
BarrBarrBarr 11:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Is there Coat of arms of Götaland, who knows? I Know CoA of Östergötaland, of Västergötaland, but what's about whole Götaland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.86.230.114 ( talk) 08:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Götaland the same as Gotland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.185.27.224 ( talk) 14:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Looking at File:Sverigekarta-Landsdelar_Götaland.svg, it seems Nässjö is at its center so I used its coordinates for this article. DynV ( talk) 16:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Source needed tags have been removed here but no sorces were provided. We need sources for these claims. I believe the claims are wrong. -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 01:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Götaland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:37, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The idea that Götaland or any part of it has ever been a "kingdom" is a matter based solely on myth - though I'm not too keen on formulating this part of the article myself, as the dispute of the relationship between Götaland and Svealand during pre-history is still very much alive today. Recent worthy (Swedish popular) literature would include Maja Hagerman's "Spåren efter kungens män" and Mats G. Larsson's very recent book (2003) on the Götalands. There are recent similar books belonging in the Västgötaskolan camp as well, but none of them in my opinion/to my knowledge worthy of mention. The outline Larsson hints at for the unification of the two regions, based mainly on place-names (distribution and chronology), makes sense (again, imo) and is very much a rebuttal of the Västgötaskolan claims. OlofE 13:22 May 4, 2003 (UTC)
Giving the image that Västra Götaland has ever been a kingdom is downright falsary, neither is there any proof or even implication of warfare for prolonged periods between the two regions. Implying that Västgötar==Visigoths and Östgötar==Ostrogoths is laughable and ridiculous, apart from the claim made by same IP that all goths come from Gotland. So I reversed that junk. OlofE 19:03, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Well OlofE, you react strongly against traditional theories. What about giving any "proof" for your point of view?
The relationship between Geats and Swedes is a very infected part of Swedish history with modern Geats questioning whether the Geats were conquered by the Swedes. There are also newer definitions of Sweden, where Sweden was "unified" like Norway and Denmark, and where Sweden did not exist prior to the event when the Geats and the Swedes shared the same king. Moreover, the theory that Götaland consisted of petty kingdoms is the mainstream version of Swedish history, since it is assumed that the traditional provinces were once independent (i.e. petty kingdoms in the sens of Norwegian petty kingdoms prior to the unification by Harald Fairhair) and so it can't be said that it was one independent kingdom. I have tried to make the introduction more neutral by writing that it once consisted of petty kingdoms.-- Wiglaf 08:37, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The history section contained variuous erroneous or dubious claims. It struck me that the whole topic isn't of crucial importance, so I juist deleted the whole thing rather than rewriting it. I suppose it will be reverted. No matter. Davidweman 11:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Actually, that's entirely fair. I apologise. I'm not sure there are any historians who think there were any stable territorial units pre-unification. Political power gradually became territirial instead of personal. Some historians would say that to speculate at all about the political situation pre-unification.
Davidweman 19:16, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
"You claim that Sweden was the creation of some kind of union between Svealand and Götaland"
No. I suspect Peter Sawyer is right that there were no stable territorial units before unification, and that that happened during Knut Eriksson's reign, not earlier. How the process of unification really played out can only be guessed at though, so any definitive claims should be avoided. Translating Svithiod as Sweden is misleading though not exactly wrong. Davidweman
'Geats' may be jutes rather than götar, and götar shouldn't be called geats in English. I'd guess it is götar, but it is unknowable, and not generally agreed. Davidweman
Btw, why no references to Tacitus or Jordanes?
"I suspect that you belong to Västgötaskolan" Most certainly not! Davidweman
I'd say Larsson's point of view is in the minority. But that's not the issue. Unknowable and/or contested claims should not be stated as fact in wikipedia. If your aware of Sawyer, you're aware that in fact thee's not an "internationa consensus" for your various claims.
Why do I bother?
Davidweman 17:09, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
This map shows modern Götaland. There is a confusion in how we should describe Götaland and Skåneland in the " East Danes" article. --Comanche cph 17:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
The article states that Götaland once consisted of pettty kingdoms, and that Västergötland and Östergötland were once rival kingdoms themselves. That's just a theory, a theory few or no historians believe in, at that. So the article should be changed. I should have made a note on the talk page, but I didn't anticipate controversy. I don't actually 'believe that Svealand and Götaland agreed to enter some kind of union by the name "Sweden"', btw.
Davidweman 08:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
You sound upset, dude. Why? I don't imply any of that. Have you had a lot of arguments with västgötaskolan-type cranks, and let that flavor your response, perhaps? But I agree it's a problematic sentence, too vague and confusing without us saying more.
This is a factual dispute, not a POV dispute. No scholar would argue we can *know* if there were petty kindoms, and I assume you don't either. There are no contemporary sources. Some names I can think of: Peter Sawyer and Lars Gahrn, who don't agree on much, would agree on this. Birgit Sawyer too, of course. Henrik Jansson. Thomas Lindqvist (though, erm, I might confuse him w someone else. I haven't studied this stuff in five years.)
Looking at your edits, you seem knowleadgeble about this stuff, so maybe I'm mistaken about the scholarly consensus, but not about the fact that no one really knows. We can't just write it as fact. I'd be interested in your sources though. Would be fun to read about this stuff again.
I don't really care about the Sweden/svealand question that much. I liked my version better, but the old one is fine.
Davidweman 10:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
The flag presented in the article is the flag of Östergötland, not Götaland.
BarrBarrBarr 11:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Is there Coat of arms of Götaland, who knows? I Know CoA of Östergötaland, of Västergötaland, but what's about whole Götaland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.86.230.114 ( talk) 08:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Götaland the same as Gotland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.185.27.224 ( talk) 14:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Looking at File:Sverigekarta-Landsdelar_Götaland.svg, it seems Nässjö is at its center so I used its coordinates for this article. DynV ( talk) 16:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Source needed tags have been removed here but no sorces were provided. We need sources for these claims. I believe the claims are wrong. -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 01:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Götaland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:37, 26 October 2017 (UTC)