Talk:Glad (duke)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] name Glad of slavic origin

• "Name Glad is possible of Slavic origin, thought meaning of the name is not clear." - i could say "Name Glad is possible of Latin or Celtic origin, see Gladiator and Galahad, Galata". if you don't have something to substantiate the slavic "possibility", better leave it unaddressed -- Criztu 11:19, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The peoples of Glad

In fact GH never named the people of Glad. Anonymus only said that his army was supported by Cumans, Bulgars and Vlachs.

"dux illius patrie cum magno exercitiu equitum et peditum, adiutorio cumanorum et bulgarorum atque blacorum."

And a gesta is not a chronicle. A gesta is a peace of literature, a medieval historical novel.81.183.151.131 12:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

i am not sure, i know "gesta" means "an account". i checked other Gestas wikiarticles, and they are presented as chronicles, works, collection of annecdotes. Gesta Francorum says latin chronicle, Gesta Danorum says work of history, Gesta Romanorum says collection of annecdotes. Gesta Treverorum says collection of histories. Gesta Hungarorum says work of early history. while a Chronicle is "a historical account of facts and events". i donno, i just find it not aesthetical to have "Gesta Hungarorum is a gesta that ..." but if "Gesta Hungarorum is a chronicle that ..." woud be an incorect thing, i donno Criztu 13:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia article about Glad, not about Gesta Hungarorum. Thus, for this article is relevant everything we can know about Glad from all sources, not only from Gesta. The fact that area ruled by Glad was mainly populated by Slavs and Vlachs in this time is well known in history, no matter if that is mentioned in Gesta Hungarorum or not. Here are sources where that is mentioned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glad_(duke)#Literature PANONIAN (talk) 13:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The only source mentioning Glad is GH. References all based on GH. So if we speak about Glad and his subjects, then we must use Anonymus. And Anonymus says nothing. In fact he speaks about auxilliary troops which suggest that these people were not lived in this region. (Though this is only my interpretation, it is not relevant.)81.183.151.131 13:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

What you saying here? That we should use only one source for the article? But that is completelly ridiculous. Glad is maybe mentioned by name only in Gesta, but other sources certainly speak more about time period when Glad ruled, thus we must use these sources too to have decent article. PANONIAN (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

And other sources say that more than a half of the place names in Banat from that time were Slavic by origin, thus it is clear who lived there. PANONIAN (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Naturally, if there is only one. If you know any other source that mentions slavs and vlach as inhabitants of the region in the end of the 9th please share with me.! 81.183.151.131 14:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

By all means, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbs_of_Vojvodina#Literature Of course, most of these sources mention only Slavs as inhabitants of the region, but there were also a pockets of Vlachs and others of course. PANONIAN (talk) 14:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I am not a historian and this is not a place to settle disputes of historiography. (Though you did not give any primary sources.) I suggest that we should insert a remark that GH itslef did not give any information about this. Otherwise the text is misleading.

Glad had authority over the Slavs and Vlachs, which consisted most of the population of mentioned regions at the time, though Anonymus did not mention the ethnicity of the population. 84.2.156.252 13:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Same discussion again... If one want to write article about something then he should use all sources that provide any relevant information about the subject. If this article is only about text of the Gesta, then by all means that text should be mentioned there in its original form. However, this article is not about text of the Gesta, but about duke Glad, thus text of the Gesta is only one of the sources that speak about subject. I do not see that article claim that sentence "Glad had authority over the Slavs and Vlachs" is from the Gesta. So, what is a problem? PANONIAN (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)