Juro, are you making this up? Sources? References?
- No answer for that almost two-year-old question? Squash Racket 11:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Fixed RFCxxx template, changed param section to match actual section name.
DMcMPO11AAUK/
Talk/
Contribs
02:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
We would like to know more about the ancestry of the Hunt (Hont?) and Poznan (Pázmány?) families. Also rename the articles if necessary. Please provide reliable sources if possible. Squash Racket 16:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sources are in the article. Or do you find the Slovak Academy of Sciences an unreliable institution? Tankred 18:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have seen the other (questionable) sources and I don't know which information came from which source. According to these articles there are competing theories about the ancestry of these families, so the Slovak Academy may only represent one POV. And it does not seem to bother you that the term 'Slovak' may not be used in the 12th century as the phrase did not exist then. And you also stick to a POV (one of the theories) in the lead instead of an NPOV wording. I want the Community to look into this. Squash Racket 18:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hont-Pázmány family according to all Hungarian sources is of German, notably Swabian origin, and has nothing to do with Great Moravia. They settled down in Hungary in the late 10th century and most of their offsprings formed Hungarian noble houses. As I know all of these familes had Hungarian identity amd spoke and wrote in Hungarian, while I admit that some of them may use Slavic (proto-Slovak) language as well. -- Koppany 14:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- I really doubt this (or any noble) family in the Kingdom of Hungary had developed ethnic consciousness before the 16th century, but I know Wikipedians prefer to think about everyone in terms of modern nations, so let us do it. However, I wonder what sources claim that "all of these families... spoke and wrote in Hungarian". As far as I know, the elite used Latin as their principal language of communication until the 18th century. Many members of noble families were also known to be multilingual. As to the origin of this particular family, the article is mainly based on Lukačka's article and book (published by the Slovak Academy of Sciences). Lukačka's research is part of the mainstream science (unlike sources of Hungarian prehistory and some other articles on Wikipedia) and I have not read any published rebuttal of his findings. Is there any evidence for Hunt-Poznans' German origin apart from de Keza's chronicle? Is there any detailed analysis of this part of the chronicle in the Hungarian historiography? I am sure no medieval chronicle is taken as the Scripture by Hungarian historians, right? It would be nice, if everyone participating in this discussions provides references to academic sources, as the article in question does. Tankred 17:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ahoj Tankred! You are partly right. In the middle age there we can not speak about ethnic consciousness, and even for this is absolutely wrong to describe HontPázmánys as a Slovak noble familiy, the only correct statement would be a noble family in the Kingdom Hungary, especially in the present day Slovakia, Hungary, Romania (Partium) and Croatia (Slavonia). The elite used Latin in official documents but since the 16th century national languages i.e. Hungarian, Slovak were also used. Descendants of Hont-Pázmánys, e.g. Péter Pázmány, members of Forgách and Szuhay families wrote private letters in Hungarian and even books, but I do not know about any document written in Slovak by any member of Hont-Pázmány clan, but maybe you do, if so please inform me. I think we should use in the article the above suggested statement, while we can mention also that Slovak historians conisder thsi clan to be of Slavic ethnicity/origin, while Hungarian scholars consider them Hungarian and most of their descendants at least since the 16th century had Hungarian ethnic consciousness. If you know some families of the Hont-Pázmány clan that had Slovak concsiousness, we can also mention it in the article. This would be a definite NPOV. -- Koppany 16:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- I read Jan Lukačka's article online [1] and it seems to be of pretty low quality. For you this online article is more credible than a medieval chronicle? What has this got to do with the Slovak Academy? My main problem is you keep reverting to the version these were "Slovak" families which is not true even if they spoke Latin, the term itself did not exist these days. You think these families were cosmopolitan till the 16th century? If they lived in the Kingdom of Hungary for centuries probably they knew if they were Hungarian or not. Then this is simply the clearly Hungarian Pázmány family's article? I already suggested renaming the articles to Hont family and Pázmány family.
- You say you don't like when people divert discussion. Hungarian prehistory cites nine sources and if you have more credible sources than these then why don't you add them? You are right, there are weakly sourced articles on Wikipedia ( Samo, Principality of Nitra etc.). Squash Racket 05:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Add a reference: the Pallas Great Encyclopedia says [2]: according to Simon of Kéza, the 13th century Hungarian chronicler, the Hunt and Pázmán brothers came from Swabia, but Géza of Hungary stopped them. They presumably settled in 983, after the death of Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor kept them from fighting the Saracens in Sicily. Squash Racket 18:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Interestingly, I have just read János Karácsonyi's book: Magyar nemzetségek a XIV. század közepéig (Hungarian clans until the midst of 14th century) and he has proven that Hont-Pázmánys were neither German nor Slavic, but of Italian origin. It seems that Kézai was wrong indeed. [3]-- Koppany 10:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Juro, are you making this up? Sources? References?
- No answer for that almost two-year-old question? Squash Racket 11:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Fixed RFCxxx template, changed param section to match actual section name.
DMcMPO11AAUK/
Talk/
Contribs
02:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
We would like to know more about the ancestry of the Hunt (Hont?) and Poznan (Pázmány?) families. Also rename the articles if necessary. Please provide reliable sources if possible. Squash Racket 16:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sources are in the article. Or do you find the Slovak Academy of Sciences an unreliable institution? Tankred 18:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have seen the other (questionable) sources and I don't know which information came from which source. According to these articles there are competing theories about the ancestry of these families, so the Slovak Academy may only represent one POV. And it does not seem to bother you that the term 'Slovak' may not be used in the 12th century as the phrase did not exist then. And you also stick to a POV (one of the theories) in the lead instead of an NPOV wording. I want the Community to look into this. Squash Racket 18:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hont-Pázmány family according to all Hungarian sources is of German, notably Swabian origin, and has nothing to do with Great Moravia. They settled down in Hungary in the late 10th century and most of their offsprings formed Hungarian noble houses. As I know all of these familes had Hungarian identity amd spoke and wrote in Hungarian, while I admit that some of them may use Slavic (proto-Slovak) language as well. -- Koppany 14:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- I really doubt this (or any noble) family in the Kingdom of Hungary had developed ethnic consciousness before the 16th century, but I know Wikipedians prefer to think about everyone in terms of modern nations, so let us do it. However, I wonder what sources claim that "all of these families... spoke and wrote in Hungarian". As far as I know, the elite used Latin as their principal language of communication until the 18th century. Many members of noble families were also known to be multilingual. As to the origin of this particular family, the article is mainly based on Lukačka's article and book (published by the Slovak Academy of Sciences). Lukačka's research is part of the mainstream science (unlike sources of Hungarian prehistory and some other articles on Wikipedia) and I have not read any published rebuttal of his findings. Is there any evidence for Hunt-Poznans' German origin apart from de Keza's chronicle? Is there any detailed analysis of this part of the chronicle in the Hungarian historiography? I am sure no medieval chronicle is taken as the Scripture by Hungarian historians, right? It would be nice, if everyone participating in this discussions provides references to academic sources, as the article in question does. Tankred 17:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ahoj Tankred! You are partly right. In the middle age there we can not speak about ethnic consciousness, and even for this is absolutely wrong to describe HontPázmánys as a Slovak noble familiy, the only correct statement would be a noble family in the Kingdom Hungary, especially in the present day Slovakia, Hungary, Romania (Partium) and Croatia (Slavonia). The elite used Latin in official documents but since the 16th century national languages i.e. Hungarian, Slovak were also used. Descendants of Hont-Pázmánys, e.g. Péter Pázmány, members of Forgách and Szuhay families wrote private letters in Hungarian and even books, but I do not know about any document written in Slovak by any member of Hont-Pázmány clan, but maybe you do, if so please inform me. I think we should use in the article the above suggested statement, while we can mention also that Slovak historians conisder thsi clan to be of Slavic ethnicity/origin, while Hungarian scholars consider them Hungarian and most of their descendants at least since the 16th century had Hungarian ethnic consciousness. If you know some families of the Hont-Pázmány clan that had Slovak concsiousness, we can also mention it in the article. This would be a definite NPOV. -- Koppany 16:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- I read Jan Lukačka's article online [1] and it seems to be of pretty low quality. For you this online article is more credible than a medieval chronicle? What has this got to do with the Slovak Academy? My main problem is you keep reverting to the version these were "Slovak" families which is not true even if they spoke Latin, the term itself did not exist these days. You think these families were cosmopolitan till the 16th century? If they lived in the Kingdom of Hungary for centuries probably they knew if they were Hungarian or not. Then this is simply the clearly Hungarian Pázmány family's article? I already suggested renaming the articles to Hont family and Pázmány family.
- You say you don't like when people divert discussion. Hungarian prehistory cites nine sources and if you have more credible sources than these then why don't you add them? You are right, there are weakly sourced articles on Wikipedia ( Samo, Principality of Nitra etc.). Squash Racket 05:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Add a reference: the Pallas Great Encyclopedia says [2]: according to Simon of Kéza, the 13th century Hungarian chronicler, the Hunt and Pázmán brothers came from Swabia, but Géza of Hungary stopped them. They presumably settled in 983, after the death of Otto II, Holy Roman Emperor kept them from fighting the Saracens in Sicily. Squash Racket 18:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Interestingly, I have just read János Karácsonyi's book: Magyar nemzetségek a XIV. század közepéig (Hungarian clans until the midst of 14th century) and he has proven that Hont-Pázmánys were neither German nor Slavic, but of Italian origin. It seems that Kézai was wrong indeed. [3]-- Koppany 10:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)