This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Prince-Bishopric of Utrecht article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bishopric of Utrecht was copied or moved into User:BoBoMisiu/List of bishops and archbishops of Utrecht (695–1580) with this edit on 16:03, 2014-07-08. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bishopric of Utrecht was copied or moved into User:BoBoMisiu/List of Old Catholic archbishops of Utrecht with this edit on 20:11, 2014-09-03. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bishopric of Utrecht was copied or moved into User:BoBoMisiu/List of apostolic vicars and officials of the Dutch Mission with this edit on 21:18, 2014-09-03. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Material from Episcopal principality of Utrecht was split to Lordship of Utrecht on 2014-03-06T14:22:06. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:Episcopal principality of Utrecht. |
I just cleaned the article a bit and added some whitespace, so the article is no longer just one big pile of text. The article might need a new introduction though. Goingin 16:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
The article as it stands is a bit confusing being both concerned with both the persons of the (Arch)bishop and the (insitution) of the Diocese. I am going to rewrite a bit and will split this article in 2, maybe three articles. (considering the fact that the OC and RC Dioceses of Utrecht are quite different institutions.
-- Isolani 14:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The article is a conflation of the actual Bishopric of Utrecht, which was disestablished in 1528, and its successor, the Lordship of Utrecht, which was established in 1528.
Both the Dutch Wikipedia article "Sticht Utrecht" and the French Wikipedia article "Principauté d'Utrecht" show that it ended in 1528.
George Edmundson wrote, in History of Holland, that Henry of the Palatinate, "who in opposition to his wishes had been elected Bishop of Utrecht, was compelled (1528) to cede to" Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, "the temporalities of the see, retaining the spiritual office only." [1]: 21 Joseph Lins wrote, in the Catholic Encyclopedia, that Henry of the Palatinate who was also Bishop of Freising and Worms, resigned the see in 1528 with the consent of the chapter, and transferred his secular authority to Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, who was also Duke of Brabant and Count of Holland. Thus Utrecht came under the sovereignty of the Hapsburgs; the Chapters voluntarily transferred their right of electing the bishop to Charles V, and Pope Clement VII gave his consent to the proceeding. [2]
The article also confuses two types of administrative areas, the "Diocese of Utrecht", an ecclesiastical jurisdiction, with the "Bishopric of Utrecht", a civil jurisdiction. The diocese existed before, during, and after the bishopric.
References
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 01:21, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
This 2003 edit added content about 18th century events in an article about something that ended in 1528. This was clearly a misunderstanding about what the article was about. This 2005 edit added content which corrected the list of officials and added historical context but that correction was edited to:
Similarly, added content about the Dutch Mission and the next edit removed the list of officials and the term Dutch Mission. A few months later another list was added, along with the first reference (which was incorrectly located in a header).
I think that
this 2008 edit, in which
Arnoutf changed part of the lead
from: "[...] is a former Archbishopric [...] until the collapse of the Empire in the French Revolutionary Wars in 1806, being a territory of the Habsburgs from 1528 onwards."
to: "[...] is the Archbishopric [...] until the reformation in the Netherlands ended the official Catholic church hierarchy in 1580. The archbishopric was reinstated in 1853."
because the contributor thought he needed to "remove anti reformation/pro catholic POV lines"
but unfortunately distorted the basic facts about the subject. Again, in my opinion, just because the article is a conflation.
These facts need reliable sources and to be reintegrated into the article.
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Similarly, Watisfictie added a Former Country Infobox to the Archdiocese of Utrecht (695–1580) article. I, BoBoMisiu, reverted Watisfictie's edit and removed the Infobox.
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 19:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
BoBoMisiu, I thought it was wel known that in the early middle ages kings transferred worldly powers to bishops, since bishops - in contrary to counts and dukes - ought not to leave legitimate heirs. More on this in the following references, supporting that Archdiocese Utrecht had civil jurisdiction, before the Bishopric of Utrecht was erected:
-- Watisfictie ( talk) 20:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I think that this article, as well as the related articles found in the relevant discussion box above, can be improved by:
Please comment in Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Utrecht#Lists of bishops to centralize the discussion.
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 20:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I have made bold to remove from here the names of bishops of Utrecht who were not prince-bishops: they don't belong here. Whether it is enough to direct the reader who wants to know the name of the prince-bishops to the list of the bishops of the same period is another matter. I am neutral on that question. Esoglou ( talk) 18:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
I changed the successor states from to Lordship of Utrecht, Lordship of Overijssel, and County of Drenthe with this edit. Watisfictie reverted this. The Burgundian Netherlands article shows that time frame is 1384–1482 while the Habsburg Netherlands article shows that time frame is 1482–1581. The Bishopric of Utrecht was disestablished in 1528 and could not be succeeded by Burgundian Netherlands which was disestablished in 1482 – that is 46 year earlier. The Lordship of Utrecht, Lordship of Overijssel, and County of Drenthe are the specific states within the Holy Roman Empire that succeeded the Bishopric of Utrecht. This is also shown on the nl:Sticht Utrecht page which is the Dutch version of the Bishopric of Utrecht page. Habsburg Netherlands "is the collective name of Holy Roman Empire fiefs in the Low Countries held by the House of Habsburg" ( Old revision of Habsburg Netherlands). I changed it back to the more specific state names. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 22:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
"Charles V was count of Holland, Duke of Brabant etc"shows there were separate states which were ruled by a common individual, Charles V. He appointed separate stadtholders for the Lordship of Utrecht and Lordship of Overijssel. The states had separate names and were not merged into a monolith but were ruled by separate stadtholders representing Charles V. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 03:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
In 1482, as guardian of his four-year old son Philip, the heir to the domains of the house of Burgundy, he [Maximilian] became regent of the Netherlands. His authority however was little recognised. Gelderland and Utrecht fell away altogether." [1]: 12
"were a number of Imperial and French fiefs ruled in personal union by the House of Valois-Burgundy and their Habsburg heirs in the period from 1384 to 1482."The personal union article states that
"A personal union is the combination of two or more different states who have the same monarch while their boundaries, laws, and interests remain distinct. It differs from a federation in that each constituent state has an independent government, whereas a federal state is united by a central government."Boleslaw Boczek states in, International law, that such "personal union does not acquire its own international legal personality." [2] Bengt Broms explained, in International law, that "a personal union does not signify the rise of a new unitary State" and each state "remains independent" so they may have similar foreign policies but "have different organs for internal legislation and administration."Broms points out that this was the case with Charles V. [3]
References
"point of view". My opinion is that the geography of the Rhine delta restricted real centralized control of the area. A garrison in the castle or town of Utrecht, in my opinion, could not control a large area through military acts alone. The local Frisian landowners, who were not states, must have been integrated into the power structure of the state (what ever that was) and maintained feudal stability for the state prior to the establishment of the Bishopric of Utrecht. Again, this is only my speculation while I do more research. The best case is that I find a source that describes the fragmentation of Lower Lorraine with dates from the period prior to the establishment of the Bishopric of Utrecht that names the state in the area.
I created a talkspace draft for collaborate on a cartulary section for the article. I believe this will help develop content about the history prior to the 1024 establishment of the Bishopric of Utrecht.
View the draft page at Talk:Bishopric of Utrecht/Cartulary section draft.
View the the draft's talk page at Talk:Bishopric of Utrecht/Cartulary section draft-talk. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 23:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Episcopal principality of Utrecht. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
I've restored the article to the original title of Bishopric of Utrecht over the redirect that was created by a move in 2015. The term used in describing episcopal principalities within the Holy Roman Empire is "Bishopric of X", compare "episcopal+principality+of+Utrecht"+-wiki+-wikipedia 38 hits for "episcopal principality of Utrecht" to "bishopric+of+utrecht"+-wiki+-wikipedia 15,500 hits for "bishopric of Utrecht". The term used in article titles across enwiki for spiritual territories is, similarly "Bishopric of X" and, while the Encyclopædia Britannica doesn't cover this in separate articles, it refers to "bishopric of … Utrecht" and "Sticht of Utrecht" in their article History of the Low Countries (my emphasis):
The most important ecclesiastical principalities in the Low Countries were the bishoprics of Liège, Utrecht, and, to a lesser degree, Cambrai
and
Thus the spiritual-territorial principalities of the bishops of Liège and Utrecht emerged—the prince-bishopric of Liège and the Sticht of Utrecht.
— OwenBlacker ( talk; please {{ ping}} me in replies) 11:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Prince-Bishopric of Utrecht article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bishopric of Utrecht was copied or moved into User:BoBoMisiu/List of bishops and archbishops of Utrecht (695–1580) with this edit on 16:03, 2014-07-08. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bishopric of Utrecht was copied or moved into User:BoBoMisiu/List of Old Catholic archbishops of Utrecht with this edit on 20:11, 2014-09-03. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bishopric of Utrecht was copied or moved into User:BoBoMisiu/List of apostolic vicars and officials of the Dutch Mission with this edit on 21:18, 2014-09-03. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Material from Episcopal principality of Utrecht was split to Lordship of Utrecht on 2014-03-06T14:22:06. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:Episcopal principality of Utrecht. |
I just cleaned the article a bit and added some whitespace, so the article is no longer just one big pile of text. The article might need a new introduction though. Goingin 16:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
The article as it stands is a bit confusing being both concerned with both the persons of the (Arch)bishop and the (insitution) of the Diocese. I am going to rewrite a bit and will split this article in 2, maybe three articles. (considering the fact that the OC and RC Dioceses of Utrecht are quite different institutions.
-- Isolani 14:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The article is a conflation of the actual Bishopric of Utrecht, which was disestablished in 1528, and its successor, the Lordship of Utrecht, which was established in 1528.
Both the Dutch Wikipedia article "Sticht Utrecht" and the French Wikipedia article "Principauté d'Utrecht" show that it ended in 1528.
George Edmundson wrote, in History of Holland, that Henry of the Palatinate, "who in opposition to his wishes had been elected Bishop of Utrecht, was compelled (1528) to cede to" Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, "the temporalities of the see, retaining the spiritual office only." [1]: 21 Joseph Lins wrote, in the Catholic Encyclopedia, that Henry of the Palatinate who was also Bishop of Freising and Worms, resigned the see in 1528 with the consent of the chapter, and transferred his secular authority to Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, who was also Duke of Brabant and Count of Holland. Thus Utrecht came under the sovereignty of the Hapsburgs; the Chapters voluntarily transferred their right of electing the bishop to Charles V, and Pope Clement VII gave his consent to the proceeding. [2]
The article also confuses two types of administrative areas, the "Diocese of Utrecht", an ecclesiastical jurisdiction, with the "Bishopric of Utrecht", a civil jurisdiction. The diocese existed before, during, and after the bishopric.
References
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 01:21, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
This 2003 edit added content about 18th century events in an article about something that ended in 1528. This was clearly a misunderstanding about what the article was about. This 2005 edit added content which corrected the list of officials and added historical context but that correction was edited to:
Similarly, added content about the Dutch Mission and the next edit removed the list of officials and the term Dutch Mission. A few months later another list was added, along with the first reference (which was incorrectly located in a header).
I think that
this 2008 edit, in which
Arnoutf changed part of the lead
from: "[...] is a former Archbishopric [...] until the collapse of the Empire in the French Revolutionary Wars in 1806, being a territory of the Habsburgs from 1528 onwards."
to: "[...] is the Archbishopric [...] until the reformation in the Netherlands ended the official Catholic church hierarchy in 1580. The archbishopric was reinstated in 1853."
because the contributor thought he needed to "remove anti reformation/pro catholic POV lines"
but unfortunately distorted the basic facts about the subject. Again, in my opinion, just because the article is a conflation.
These facts need reliable sources and to be reintegrated into the article.
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 02:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Similarly, Watisfictie added a Former Country Infobox to the Archdiocese of Utrecht (695–1580) article. I, BoBoMisiu, reverted Watisfictie's edit and removed the Infobox.
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 19:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
BoBoMisiu, I thought it was wel known that in the early middle ages kings transferred worldly powers to bishops, since bishops - in contrary to counts and dukes - ought not to leave legitimate heirs. More on this in the following references, supporting that Archdiocese Utrecht had civil jurisdiction, before the Bishopric of Utrecht was erected:
-- Watisfictie ( talk) 20:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I think that this article, as well as the related articles found in the relevant discussion box above, can be improved by:
Please comment in Talk:Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Utrecht#Lists of bishops to centralize the discussion.
– BoBoMisiu ( talk) 20:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I have made bold to remove from here the names of bishops of Utrecht who were not prince-bishops: they don't belong here. Whether it is enough to direct the reader who wants to know the name of the prince-bishops to the list of the bishops of the same period is another matter. I am neutral on that question. Esoglou ( talk) 18:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
I changed the successor states from to Lordship of Utrecht, Lordship of Overijssel, and County of Drenthe with this edit. Watisfictie reverted this. The Burgundian Netherlands article shows that time frame is 1384–1482 while the Habsburg Netherlands article shows that time frame is 1482–1581. The Bishopric of Utrecht was disestablished in 1528 and could not be succeeded by Burgundian Netherlands which was disestablished in 1482 – that is 46 year earlier. The Lordship of Utrecht, Lordship of Overijssel, and County of Drenthe are the specific states within the Holy Roman Empire that succeeded the Bishopric of Utrecht. This is also shown on the nl:Sticht Utrecht page which is the Dutch version of the Bishopric of Utrecht page. Habsburg Netherlands "is the collective name of Holy Roman Empire fiefs in the Low Countries held by the House of Habsburg" ( Old revision of Habsburg Netherlands). I changed it back to the more specific state names. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 22:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
"Charles V was count of Holland, Duke of Brabant etc"shows there were separate states which were ruled by a common individual, Charles V. He appointed separate stadtholders for the Lordship of Utrecht and Lordship of Overijssel. The states had separate names and were not merged into a monolith but were ruled by separate stadtholders representing Charles V. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 03:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
In 1482, as guardian of his four-year old son Philip, the heir to the domains of the house of Burgundy, he [Maximilian] became regent of the Netherlands. His authority however was little recognised. Gelderland and Utrecht fell away altogether." [1]: 12
"were a number of Imperial and French fiefs ruled in personal union by the House of Valois-Burgundy and their Habsburg heirs in the period from 1384 to 1482."The personal union article states that
"A personal union is the combination of two or more different states who have the same monarch while their boundaries, laws, and interests remain distinct. It differs from a federation in that each constituent state has an independent government, whereas a federal state is united by a central government."Boleslaw Boczek states in, International law, that such "personal union does not acquire its own international legal personality." [2] Bengt Broms explained, in International law, that "a personal union does not signify the rise of a new unitary State" and each state "remains independent" so they may have similar foreign policies but "have different organs for internal legislation and administration."Broms points out that this was the case with Charles V. [3]
References
"point of view". My opinion is that the geography of the Rhine delta restricted real centralized control of the area. A garrison in the castle or town of Utrecht, in my opinion, could not control a large area through military acts alone. The local Frisian landowners, who were not states, must have been integrated into the power structure of the state (what ever that was) and maintained feudal stability for the state prior to the establishment of the Bishopric of Utrecht. Again, this is only my speculation while I do more research. The best case is that I find a source that describes the fragmentation of Lower Lorraine with dates from the period prior to the establishment of the Bishopric of Utrecht that names the state in the area.
I created a talkspace draft for collaborate on a cartulary section for the article. I believe this will help develop content about the history prior to the 1024 establishment of the Bishopric of Utrecht.
View the draft page at Talk:Bishopric of Utrecht/Cartulary section draft.
View the the draft's talk page at Talk:Bishopric of Utrecht/Cartulary section draft-talk. — BoBoMisiu ( talk) 23:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Episcopal principality of Utrecht. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
I've restored the article to the original title of Bishopric of Utrecht over the redirect that was created by a move in 2015. The term used in describing episcopal principalities within the Holy Roman Empire is "Bishopric of X", compare "episcopal+principality+of+Utrecht"+-wiki+-wikipedia 38 hits for "episcopal principality of Utrecht" to "bishopric+of+utrecht"+-wiki+-wikipedia 15,500 hits for "bishopric of Utrecht". The term used in article titles across enwiki for spiritual territories is, similarly "Bishopric of X" and, while the Encyclopædia Britannica doesn't cover this in separate articles, it refers to "bishopric of … Utrecht" and "Sticht of Utrecht" in their article History of the Low Countries (my emphasis):
The most important ecclesiastical principalities in the Low Countries were the bishoprics of Liège, Utrecht, and, to a lesser degree, Cambrai
and
Thus the spiritual-territorial principalities of the bishops of Liège and Utrecht emerged—the prince-bishopric of Liège and the Sticht of Utrecht.
— OwenBlacker ( talk; please {{ ping}} me in replies) 11:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)