Talk:Old Saxony

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. Once references have been added, remove the `\|unref=` from this template.

Lower Saxony (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lower Saxony, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Lower SaxonyWikipedia:WikiProject Lower SaxonyTemplate:WikiProject Lower SaxonyLower Saxony articles

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

There are too many Saxon/Saxony references to let such an article go without a decent map.

Best regards, FrankB 22:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been reading up on this subject and will attempt to reorganize this wiki. I think the page should be broadly chronological (currently it keeps jumping about the 8th Century AD)...

Origins of Ancient Saxony, Tacitus, Germania Superior
Legends of Old Saxony, Conquest of Britannia, Conflict with Obotrites and Slavs
The religion of Old Saxony, Missionary work in Old Saxony,
Resistance to and Warfare with Charlemagne
The Duchy in the Early Middle Ages

I'll get something up soon James Frankcom (talk) 11:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC) {{Frisia/Fryslan}}[reply]

I'm not an expert, but isn't the Dutch Frisia/Fryslan not part of Old Saxony? As far as I know they are considered to be from Saxon descent. Thanks! 38.112.242.106 (talk) 19:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saxony = Saksa ?

Is this where we point out that the Finnish name for Germany is Saksa, and that it is something to do with something....sort of?...--83.108.28.69 (talk) 23:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-The word for Germany or German (or English even) in a lot of languages is some derivation of Saxon. In Welsh, for example, the word for English is Saeson, and the Germans who settled in Transylvania, which was not colonized or conquered by Saxons, are still called Transylvania Saxons. In any case, these are all names assigned by outsiders, so I don't think they necessarily reflect something more significant than one group treating the term Saxon as as a metonym for Germans in general (sort of the same way the word Welsh is a derivative of the Old English for "foreigner"). More to your point I'm not sure if that information has a place in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.255.1.56 (talk) 18:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

rulers?

chiefs, kings, dukes? There appears to be inconsistency with the title for the rulers of old Saxony. This article refers to Widulkind as a King, paramount chief and first duke, which I can understand. However, his predecessors are also called duke. My guess is that since they predate formal titles, they all apply, however there should be a way to do this that is less contradictory. after reading the articles on Widulkind and his predecessors, I realize two things, Saxony(or part of it) was under Frankish suzerainty long before Widulkind, and Widulkind didn't rule after his defeat. Either way it doesn't seem to be a formal title, and simply means leader. Tinynanorobots (talk) 23:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right, Widukind shouldn't be called a king and I've removed the word from his description. Source material (e.g. Bede) makes a big deal about the fact that the Old Saxons didn't have kings, so I think the word is very misleading, even if it is used here to mean a generic ruler. I'm guessing "duke" when it refers to Widukind and his predecessors is a translation of the Latin dux which does have the generic meaning of leader, but not necessarily the formal title. Chieftain's probably the best term for his title, I suppose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.255.1.56 (talk) 18:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flag and "end of historical era"

There is no scientific evidence for this flag, in fact there are "sagas" about Widukind using a black horse on his coat of arms before converting to Christian faith. This should however not be tretaed as a proper flag in an encyclopedia. It should thus be removed.

It is also not right that widuking became the duke of saxony. We actually know very little about Widukind. The part mentioning that should thus also be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.198.198 (talk) 17:09, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I made the changes mentioned above. I also changed the end of the era to the end of the Saxon Wars. After Widukind's Baptism there were still efforts to get rid of Frankish rule. The last uprising actually took place even 40 years later in the Stellinga. However, at that point Saxony could be considered an undisputed part of the Frankish Empire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.198.198 (talk) 17:20, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Horrible Quality, Lots of Mistakes

Wow, the more I read here the more shocked I am with how bad this article is. Like "Ultimately the Saxon people were forced to convert to Christianity and become a part of the Holy Roman Empire." The HRE did not even exist back then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.198.198 (talk) 17:25, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Schleswig-Holstein?

In the map, Old Saxony also seems to include large parts of Schleswig-Holstein. --Oddeivind (talk) 10:58, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And? Oleryhlolsson (talk) 22:31, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article states: "Old Saxony is the original homeland of the Saxons in the northwest corner of modern Germany and roughly corresponds today to the modern German states of Lower Saxony, Westphalia and western Saxony-Anhalt." If the map is correct, then Schleswig-Holstein should be added. --Oddeivind (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the map is fairly correct. Nordalbingia were a part of the original Old Saxony, but not Schleswig and neither the eastern parts of Holstein. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image

The image is the same as . It's unnecessary to have the same file twice under different names. Besides, the map claims to show the "Saxons' homelands" from ~700 but is in fact the Duchy of Saxony in the HRE ~1000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.61.201.254 (talk) 15:56, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

German article?

I assume that the above material must be covered by a more comprehensive German article to which this text is not linked.

Of course a place called "Old Saxony" never existed. As stated above, it was just how the Saxons of Britain referred to their German homeland to distinguish it from their new territory. In recent years British linguists also started to call the German homeland language "Old Saxon", and the British version "Old English" (instead of the formerly used "Anglo-Saxon"). Actually, there is hardly any difference between the two.--dunnhaupt (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]