Talk:Septimania

message: *Can someone explain "the Basques defeated themselves in Roncesvalles"? This seems nonsensical. If it is meant that one Basque force defeated another, this should be made explicit. Otherwise, it just sounds like an insult at Basques (and I am not trying to stir up trouble over modern Basque separatism, I have no connection to either side in that struggle).
*It is likely French-accented English, being an over-literal translation of "... se sont défaits ..." = "... were defeated ...". Anthony Appleyard 05:48, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: The time-line format, which invariably stifles historical thinking and writing, is a step backwards here. The article will have to be re-edited as a series of literate paragraphs, each with thematic unity, following in chronological progression, as history is ordinarily written for adult readers, at some future time, by someone else. --Wetman
:I set the schematic timeline as Septimania timeline and restored the normal encyclopedia text here. Both are linked to one another at the heads of the pages, so nothing is lost. --Wetman 10:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time-line thinking 

message: The west of the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis was called Septimania informally from the time of Sidonius Apollinaris. The Franks took to calling it Hispania used that form into the eighth century, when they began to look back to "classical" usage and adopted Septimania again. The Visigoths always called it either Gallia or Narbonensis. After the Moorish conquest and the Frankish re-conquest, the region became Gothia in popular speech and eventually this trumped Septimania in educated/formal use. By the latter half of the ninth century, the region of "Gothia", which had included that part of the old province of Tarraconensis which had been annexed to Francia, was divided into two regions: the Hispanic march and the Gothic march, often joined together politically, but clearly distinct. The marca Hispanica came to be known as Catalonia, though it is unknown if the western Pyrenees or even Pallars and Ribagorza were part of the march, for they were not part of later Catalonia. This in sum is the history of the nomenclature for this region. How should the articles be strucutred? One article to deal with the whole? How does this article relate to an article on the Gothic march? Or the marca Hispanica? I would limit this article to covering the region from the late Empire through the Muslim conquest and then devoting two pages to the Frankish history: Hispanic march and Gothic march. Srnec 04:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The region is the subject, yes? The pays. Aren't the only real breaks in historical structure after the division in favor of Theodoric in 462 those that were occasioned by the Moorish conquest and Frankish reconquest? The Frankish term "Hispania" when applied to lands on their side of the Pyrenees (confusing to a reader like me:  was unaware of this Frankish usage) should be a paragraph in Septimania and a footnote-link in Hispania, right? Frankish Gothia is being treated with a redirect at Gothia (so many "Gothia"s.). Are the present arrangements good history? --Wetman 05:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The major break does occur in 462, but there are some other breaks of note, like when the counties south of the Pyrenees were attached to Septimania administratively and subsequently detached. And the region had no organised authority above that of the counts (except maybe Duke of Narbonne) until it came under the control of the central French government in the thirteenth century. By then it was called Languedoc. Also, the region varies over time, sometimes including Toulouse and sometimes not. I suppose I will handle this all at this article and include information on the Gothic march here too. I am mostly concerned with covering the political finery in a sensible way. In that vein, I need to adjust Prince of Gothia too. Srnec 23:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Structure

message: This article ignores the vital contribution of the Jewish community, and the historical fact of the short-lived emergence of a Jewish principality under the Makhir of Narbonne, the substantial evidence of which was supressed for centuries, but reassembled in the book A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France 768-900 by Arthur J. Zuckerman, published by Columbia University Press, 1965, 1972 [ISBN: 0-231-03298-6]. Time and tolerance permitting, I will try to address this; others welcome too. Kvitlach (talk) 19:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish Principality in 791 CE

message: "The name was used because the area was populated by a higher concentration of Goths than in surrounding regions. The rulers of this area, when joined with several counties, were titled the Marquesses of Gothia (and, also, the Dukes of Septimania)."
No source given and it kinda breaks the flow of the article before this point. Is it vandalism?--Menah the Great (talk) 18:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Weird sentence at the end

message: As your editing history demonstrates, you  seem to be reverting almost every constructive edit that I made in the last few days, completely out of nowhere and without justification.
Mind you, I have already reported you for your seemingly deliberate and nonsensical disruptive editing on several WP articles. I suggest you to stop and collaborate with other users, and avoid making inappropriate and grossly antisemitic comments in the edit summary, such as this one. GenoV84 (talk) 05:12, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persistent vandalism on several articles