Talk:Arminius

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] Steinhuder Meer

In the year 16 Arminius was defeated by the Romans in a battle between Weser river and lake "Steinhuder Meer" - is it this what was meant by "Steinhunder"? --Reinhard 15:45 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Very likely - Google gives several hits for this [1], however most german. And it also gives several sites where Steinhuder Meer is spelled Steinhunder Meer. andy 15:51 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
The name of the lake is "Steinhuder Meer". Steinhude is a small town, and Steinhuder is the genetive form, meaning "of" or "belonging to". Cosal 12:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jacob Hermann

Curious why Jacob Hermann doesn't get his own page with a disambiguation, rather than having them both on the same page under Arminius. Laura Scudder 02:01, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

?? He does have his own page - Jacobus Arminius. I clarified by pruning it to a topline disambig, which is what we usually do for "less-likely" ambiguities. Stan 03:15, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be a pain, and I know I'm late to the game here, but Jacobus Arminius founded an entire system of theological thought. Is he really a "less-likely"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.242.232 (talk) 14:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Segimer

I removed "Sygmyrgth", introduced by this edit, as I consider it a joke. --Matthead 08:36, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology of Arminius

The article treated the name "Arminius" as if there was a broad consensus about its meaning. This isn't the case. Some maintain that "Arminius" is a corruption of "Armenius" (suggesting that Arminius, during his time as a Roman auxiliary soldier, fought in Armenia), whilst others believe that it might be the name of the Patrician Roman family he was presumably associated with whilst in Roman service (a common practice). There is even a popular theory that Arminius is in fact the historical character behind Siegfried in the Nibelungenlied (an epic poem of around 1200) and other heroic poetry, both German and Norse. His name, then, would be something similar to Siegfried (especially since his uncle was called Segestes and his father, Segimer). So I guess there should be some discussion of the whole enigma of his name in the article. --Helmold 13:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Many centuries later", "the 1500s"

The article is slightly vague in places, for example saying that "Hermann" as a name for Arminius was invented "many centuries later" - I replaced this by saying "in the Reformation period". The article also claimed that the story of Arminius was revived in the 1500s with the recovery of the histories of Tacitus by German humanists. I changed "1500s" to "sixteenth century" since technically the 1500s only span the years from 1500 up to and including 1509.

[edit] This Article is Biased

The editor of this article has manipulated my research. I wrote down on this article a long time before that "He [Arminius]was ultimately unsuccessful in creating a united German front against the Empire, and was heavily defeated by Iulius Caesarius Claudianus Germanicus in subsequent Roman punitive operations (Tacitus, Annals 2.22, Suetonius, Caligula 1.4)." This is true, look for yourself.

Professor Goldsworthy stated, "Earlier in the same year Tiberius had refused an offer by a Cheruscan nobleman to assassinate the war leader, declaring that Rome did not employ such dishonorable methods. Clearly the victories of Germanicus were considered sufficient vengeance for Teutoberg Wald and the German leader was no longer felt to be a threat, since other Roman wars--notably that against Jugurtha--had been concluded by similar acts of treachery. Power was always precarious amongst the tribal peoples and perhaps Tiberius simply trusted to this fact to remove Arminius in due course, as in fact occurred." Goldsworthy is a reknowned military historian of Rome and I would trust his judgment over the biased editor of this article.

From a non-biased perspective, Rome did succeed in one way. They secured Gaul from the threat of a united Germany which was successfully maintained through military action and diplomacy. As I state in the article, which is supported by evidence, that the security of Gaul by acquiring a strong frontier in Germany was the primary concern of Augustus; and in this objective the Romans were successful. I may be wrong, and I challenge the editor to dissprove me with actual sources that Rome did have the intention of completely conquering Germania either before or after the battle of Teutoberg Forest.

Goldsworthy says that Roman casualties for the victory at the Weser River were light, but also notes that Tacitus does not give any precise figures. I was wondering where in your research you determined that both sides suffered heavily. Tacitus says "It was a great victory and without bloodshed to us. From nine in the morning to nightfall the enemy were slaughtered, and ten miles were covered with arms and dead bodies, while there were found amid the plunder the chains which the Germans had brought with them for the Romans, as though the issue were certain. The soldiers on the battle field hailed Tiberius as Imperator, and raised a mound on which arms were piled in the style of a trophy, with the names of the conquered tribes inscribed beneath them." (2.18)

Clean up your article Justinus Magnus 19:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

"He [Arminius]was ultimately unsuccessful in creating a united German front against the Empire, and was heavily defeated by Iulius Caesarius Claudianus Germanicus in subsequent Roman punitive operations" But he ultimately succeded in keeping the Romans out of Germany and was hailed as liberator of Germania by Tacitus. From a non-biased perspective, Rome did succeed in one way. They secured Gaul from the threat of a united Germany which was successfully maintained through military action and diplomacy." No they didn't. They failed to occupy Germania and in the next centuries Germanic tribes repeatedly invaded Gaul. The Germanic tribes were not united before the Romans came and they were not united once the Romans left. In fact the only way Germanic tribes could have been united was under a a Roman province. So your claim the Romans' goal was not to unite the Germanic tribes is obscure. If the Romans had succesfully occupied Germany, it wouldn't have taken until 1871 until a united Germany was on the map...132.231.54.1 11:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it did not take until 1871. Just take into account the Holy Roman Empire. Its starting point was either 800 (Charlemagne) or 936/962 (Otto I) -- as you please. At least until the Interregnum, there *was* a unified Germany. In spite, the socalled Kaiserreich which was created by Bismarck in 1871 did not include Austria, which certainly is a German state.

[edit] Modern descendants: family legend

Are there any modern texts that refer to descendants of Arminius/Herrman?

Legend passed down within my family states that we are the "Guardians of Herrman's grave" or something to that effect. I have confirmed that other persons with the same surname (from distant parts of the U.S.) have had the same story passed to them.

My own father claimed that he once had an old history book that clearly spells out the surname in relation to Herrman.Varingos 18:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)