This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Fr. Jonat -- I think it would be a good idea to review how Michael Tinkler et al. have been adding the names of saints and kings, so that you don't accidentally create somebody twice or get people with the same name confused. I'm still trying to figure it all out, myself! I think (the last time I looked, that people were creating saints without the "St." -- like Benedict, Adalbert of Prague, etc. There are a bunch of important Matildas in the Middle Ages -- and when you talk about any of the French/German nobility and royalty, they use the same names over and over again. JHK
It does get confusing. I agree to creating the pages without saint . The first names were a very important part, they did not just name a person, because it was a pretty name. A name was like a royal title . Oftentimes the person had a different name in reality . But same first names were a family and continued the royal line. Only later last names were used . H. Jonat and yes JHK , the previous note signed H.J. was mine.
I think it needs to be more specific than "was associated with." Was she his mistress? Did she go to the French court and met him on the way to the loo? JHK
So, i guess by this last paragraph:
His son Otto succeeded him as Emperor Otto I ("the Great"). His second son, Henry, became duke of Bavaria. A third son, Brun (or Bruno), became archbishop of Cologne. His son from his first marriage, Thankmar, rebelled against his half-brother Otto and was killed in battle in 936. His daughter Gerberga married Duke Giselbert of Lorraine and subsequently King Louis IV of France. His youngest daughter Hedwige of Saxony married Duke (Hugh the Great) of France and was the mother of Hugh Capet, the first Capetian king of France.
......that, since Henry was a decendant of Charlemange, that through him, his daughter marrying in to what would soon after become the ruling family of France (the Capets) that the Capets are indeed in that way a long decendant of Charlemange? -Tate
The following sentence is grammatically incorrect:
He appears in Return to Castle Wolfenstein when the nazi tryning wake him from the death so we can win the war. He is the last boss.
Not to mention very biased. "We"? In addition, shouldn't the title be more formal, as "Henry I of Germany", just as Frederick Barbarossa's article is called "Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor".
-Alex,
12.220.157.93 07:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Anyone have any insight into Henry's parents? This page says they were Otto the Illustrious and Hedwiga, a descendent of Charlemange, but Otto's page says he married Hathui, a daughter of a Duke of Austria. Was Hedwiga Otto's mistress, though that's not so likely, i suppose, if she were of "royal" blood. I'll question this on Otto's talk page too, since it's the same question for him, but backwards, i guess. Lindsay H. 08:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
The "Bamberg Horseman" or "Bambergian knight" seems to be a multiple personage: he portrays Henry I and his son Otto the Great at the same time. Wikipedia says so.
Indeed the historians don´t know exactly which person is depicted; maybe it is Henry II who founded the diocese Bamberg. Certainly neither Henry the Fowler nor Otto the Great are personified.
Alfred E. Neander 19:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I´m from Franconia. I´ve never heard that the "Bamberger Reiter" should be Henry I. Most probable theories name german king Philipp of Schwaben or Stephen of Hungary; others say its not a real person but a symbol for Staufer Dynasty or a "universal king" or even the Messiah. Kleeblatt ( talk) 19:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Henry I aka "the fowler" , "Heinrich der Vogler":
It is a legend that a delegation of German tribes met Henry in the woods to offer him the king´s crown while he was bird-hunting. The sport of catching birds in traps was regarded as a pleasure of the common man, not of noblemen. So the picture of Henry as "the fowler" shows him as a rustic, vital man, a future king of the common people, it became quite popular in the 19th century.
There are still several (!) places of the legendary event, e.g. the "Finkenherd" in Quedlinburg.
Maybe Henry I was busy with hunting birds when the delegation came, maybe he wasn´t. Maybe there never was a delegation, at least he was elected just by the Franconians and his own people, the Saxons.
As a matter of fact, Henry was the first king of his name to be king, and should be mentioned by his regnal name. Even in Germany he is better kown as Heinrich I., and less as Heinrich der Vogler.
Alfred E. Neander 19:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Strangely enough, the most popular poem praising Henry as a fowler oder Vogler ("Herr Heinrich sitzt am Vogelherd") was written by Johann Nepomuk Vogl, and one of the pictures portraying him as bird-hunter was painted by Hermann Vogel. Coincidence?
Alfred E. Neander 19:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
"Henry I is therefore considered the first German king"
Why is that so? First East Frankish king after the Carolingian dynasty was Conrad I. In some German sources Conrad is considered first German king, in most English sources it is Henry. Is there a reason to pick Henry? -- MacX85 ( talk) 17:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
In old german empire (Holy Roman Empire of German Nation) they saw a direct line from Frankish Empire to Germany and therefore Karl der Große (eng. Charlemagne) was regarded as first Emperor and all after him (frankish and german) are one line; Karls was and is today counted als Karl I. In 19th century till Nazi time prussian and nationalist historians regarded Henry as first king, but in Southern Germany Konrad I was regarded as the first one (well, he was Duke of Frankonia and elected at Forchheim). Today modern german historians agree: There is no exact date or person when "Germany" started. It was a process of transforming East Frankish Empire to Germany. It started with treaty of Verdun 843 when Lothar, Karl and Ludwig divided the Empire. They didn´t want to create new states or nations, just wanted to divide their heritage among some guys of the same familiy, but in fact they made way for that what became Germany and France. And remember oaths of Straßburg 842. Ludwig "germanicus" got a territory that was similar to later Germany. Another date was 911, when after dead of Ludwig the Child east frankish princes decided not to elect a carolingian but Konrad I. He failed as king, but later Henry of Saxony was elected. Both Konrad and Henry were related to Carolingian dynasty and their voters didn´t have in mind to create a new "german nation", they just wanted a king more powerfull than this weak west-frankish carolingians. Another dates were 936 when Otto became king and at least 962 when Otto became emperor. At the latest since 962 we can talk about "Germany". So between 843 and 962 there was a time of change and transforming. All kings between Ludwig and Otto can be seen as "East Frankish Kings" and "German Kings". A similar process happened in the west transforming "West Frankish Kingdom" into "France". Please notice: In Germany this king is "Heinrich I" (Henry I). "Heinrich der Vogler/Finkler" (Henry the Fowler) is unhistoric and not common use in Germany. It was so in 19th century till nazi time, but not before and today. Kleeblatt ( talk) 20:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC) ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Henry returned to public attention as a character in Richard Wagner's opera, Lohengrin (1850). There are indications that Heinrich Himmler imagined himself the reincarnation of the first king of Germany. Pretty dubious statement out of a pretty dubious book.-- Tresckow ( talk) 19:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move. Thanks Srnec, I read your comments with interest. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
The original title of this article was Henry the Fowler. It should be returned there; the relevant naming convention says If a monarch or prince is overwhelmingly known, in English, by a cognomen, it may be used, and there is then no need to disambiguate by adding Country. This is as overwhelmingly common, in English, as Henry the Lion, which is one of the examples. Let's move back. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Cursory Google Books scan:
Olessi ( talk) 21:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I added his place of birth and death. 24.31.169.252 ( talk) 11:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article be about Heinrich? Presidentbalut ( talk) 22:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
So wikipedia's policy is to give people wrong names? 68.45.174.58 ( talk) 04:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
The punctuation of this sentence--
"Matilda bore him three sons, one called Otto, and two daughters, Hedwig and Gerberga, and founded many religious institutions, including the abbey of Quedlinburg where Henry is buried and was later canonized." --gives us to understand that Henry was canonized. However, if one searches the internet data, it appears that Matilda is the only one who was canonized, having founded many religious institutions, including the abbey of Quedlinburg..."
Question: Is Henry a Saint, or is this just bad writing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.177.74 ( talk) 04:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
'Nazi ideology referred to Henry as a founding father of the German nation, fighting both the Latin Western Franks and the Slavic tribes of the East, thereby a precursor of the German Drang nach Osten."
Do not most people hold Heinrich der Vogler to be the Founding Father of the German Nation? HeinrichMueller ( talk) 22:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
He certainly is a founding father of the medieval German kingdom. The German nation however grew over the centuries into what it is today with many political breaks.-- MacX85 ( talk) 08:59, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Fr. Jonat -- I think it would be a good idea to review how Michael Tinkler et al. have been adding the names of saints and kings, so that you don't accidentally create somebody twice or get people with the same name confused. I'm still trying to figure it all out, myself! I think (the last time I looked, that people were creating saints without the "St." -- like Benedict, Adalbert of Prague, etc. There are a bunch of important Matildas in the Middle Ages -- and when you talk about any of the French/German nobility and royalty, they use the same names over and over again. JHK
It does get confusing. I agree to creating the pages without saint . The first names were a very important part, they did not just name a person, because it was a pretty name. A name was like a royal title . Oftentimes the person had a different name in reality . But same first names were a family and continued the royal line. Only later last names were used . H. Jonat and yes JHK , the previous note signed H.J. was mine.
I think it needs to be more specific than "was associated with." Was she his mistress? Did she go to the French court and met him on the way to the loo? JHK
So, i guess by this last paragraph:
His son Otto succeeded him as Emperor Otto I ("the Great"). His second son, Henry, became duke of Bavaria. A third son, Brun (or Bruno), became archbishop of Cologne. His son from his first marriage, Thankmar, rebelled against his half-brother Otto and was killed in battle in 936. His daughter Gerberga married Duke Giselbert of Lorraine and subsequently King Louis IV of France. His youngest daughter Hedwige of Saxony married Duke (Hugh the Great) of France and was the mother of Hugh Capet, the first Capetian king of France.
......that, since Henry was a decendant of Charlemange, that through him, his daughter marrying in to what would soon after become the ruling family of France (the Capets) that the Capets are indeed in that way a long decendant of Charlemange? -Tate
The following sentence is grammatically incorrect:
He appears in Return to Castle Wolfenstein when the nazi tryning wake him from the death so we can win the war. He is the last boss.
Not to mention very biased. "We"? In addition, shouldn't the title be more formal, as "Henry I of Germany", just as Frederick Barbarossa's article is called "Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor".
-Alex,
12.220.157.93 07:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Anyone have any insight into Henry's parents? This page says they were Otto the Illustrious and Hedwiga, a descendent of Charlemange, but Otto's page says he married Hathui, a daughter of a Duke of Austria. Was Hedwiga Otto's mistress, though that's not so likely, i suppose, if she were of "royal" blood. I'll question this on Otto's talk page too, since it's the same question for him, but backwards, i guess. Lindsay H. 08:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
The "Bamberg Horseman" or "Bambergian knight" seems to be a multiple personage: he portrays Henry I and his son Otto the Great at the same time. Wikipedia says so.
Indeed the historians don´t know exactly which person is depicted; maybe it is Henry II who founded the diocese Bamberg. Certainly neither Henry the Fowler nor Otto the Great are personified.
Alfred E. Neander 19:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I´m from Franconia. I´ve never heard that the "Bamberger Reiter" should be Henry I. Most probable theories name german king Philipp of Schwaben or Stephen of Hungary; others say its not a real person but a symbol for Staufer Dynasty or a "universal king" or even the Messiah. Kleeblatt ( talk) 19:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Henry I aka "the fowler" , "Heinrich der Vogler":
It is a legend that a delegation of German tribes met Henry in the woods to offer him the king´s crown while he was bird-hunting. The sport of catching birds in traps was regarded as a pleasure of the common man, not of noblemen. So the picture of Henry as "the fowler" shows him as a rustic, vital man, a future king of the common people, it became quite popular in the 19th century.
There are still several (!) places of the legendary event, e.g. the "Finkenherd" in Quedlinburg.
Maybe Henry I was busy with hunting birds when the delegation came, maybe he wasn´t. Maybe there never was a delegation, at least he was elected just by the Franconians and his own people, the Saxons.
As a matter of fact, Henry was the first king of his name to be king, and should be mentioned by his regnal name. Even in Germany he is better kown as Heinrich I., and less as Heinrich der Vogler.
Alfred E. Neander 19:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Strangely enough, the most popular poem praising Henry as a fowler oder Vogler ("Herr Heinrich sitzt am Vogelherd") was written by Johann Nepomuk Vogl, and one of the pictures portraying him as bird-hunter was painted by Hermann Vogel. Coincidence?
Alfred E. Neander 19:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
"Henry I is therefore considered the first German king"
Why is that so? First East Frankish king after the Carolingian dynasty was Conrad I. In some German sources Conrad is considered first German king, in most English sources it is Henry. Is there a reason to pick Henry? -- MacX85 ( talk) 17:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
In old german empire (Holy Roman Empire of German Nation) they saw a direct line from Frankish Empire to Germany and therefore Karl der Große (eng. Charlemagne) was regarded as first Emperor and all after him (frankish and german) are one line; Karls was and is today counted als Karl I. In 19th century till Nazi time prussian and nationalist historians regarded Henry as first king, but in Southern Germany Konrad I was regarded as the first one (well, he was Duke of Frankonia and elected at Forchheim). Today modern german historians agree: There is no exact date or person when "Germany" started. It was a process of transforming East Frankish Empire to Germany. It started with treaty of Verdun 843 when Lothar, Karl and Ludwig divided the Empire. They didn´t want to create new states or nations, just wanted to divide their heritage among some guys of the same familiy, but in fact they made way for that what became Germany and France. And remember oaths of Straßburg 842. Ludwig "germanicus" got a territory that was similar to later Germany. Another date was 911, when after dead of Ludwig the Child east frankish princes decided not to elect a carolingian but Konrad I. He failed as king, but later Henry of Saxony was elected. Both Konrad and Henry were related to Carolingian dynasty and their voters didn´t have in mind to create a new "german nation", they just wanted a king more powerfull than this weak west-frankish carolingians. Another dates were 936 when Otto became king and at least 962 when Otto became emperor. At the latest since 962 we can talk about "Germany". So between 843 and 962 there was a time of change and transforming. All kings between Ludwig and Otto can be seen as "East Frankish Kings" and "German Kings". A similar process happened in the west transforming "West Frankish Kingdom" into "France". Please notice: In Germany this king is "Heinrich I" (Henry I). "Heinrich der Vogler/Finkler" (Henry the Fowler) is unhistoric and not common use in Germany. It was so in 19th century till nazi time, but not before and today. Kleeblatt ( talk) 20:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC) ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Henry returned to public attention as a character in Richard Wagner's opera, Lohengrin (1850). There are indications that Heinrich Himmler imagined himself the reincarnation of the first king of Germany. Pretty dubious statement out of a pretty dubious book.-- Tresckow ( talk) 19:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move. Thanks Srnec, I read your comments with interest. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
The original title of this article was Henry the Fowler. It should be returned there; the relevant naming convention says If a monarch or prince is overwhelmingly known, in English, by a cognomen, it may be used, and there is then no need to disambiguate by adding Country. This is as overwhelmingly common, in English, as Henry the Lion, which is one of the examples. Let's move back. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Cursory Google Books scan:
Olessi ( talk) 21:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I added his place of birth and death. 24.31.169.252 ( talk) 11:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article be about Heinrich? Presidentbalut ( talk) 22:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
So wikipedia's policy is to give people wrong names? 68.45.174.58 ( talk) 04:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
The punctuation of this sentence--
"Matilda bore him three sons, one called Otto, and two daughters, Hedwig and Gerberga, and founded many religious institutions, including the abbey of Quedlinburg where Henry is buried and was later canonized." --gives us to understand that Henry was canonized. However, if one searches the internet data, it appears that Matilda is the only one who was canonized, having founded many religious institutions, including the abbey of Quedlinburg..."
Question: Is Henry a Saint, or is this just bad writing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.177.74 ( talk) 04:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
'Nazi ideology referred to Henry as a founding father of the German nation, fighting both the Latin Western Franks and the Slavic tribes of the East, thereby a precursor of the German Drang nach Osten."
Do not most people hold Heinrich der Vogler to be the Founding Father of the German Nation? HeinrichMueller ( talk) 22:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
He certainly is a founding father of the medieval German kingdom. The German nation however grew over the centuries into what it is today with many political breaks.-- MacX85 ( talk) 08:59, 26 November 2016 (UTC)