Talk:Carniola
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The capital city of Carniola is Kranj.
I do not understand why present tense is used as this province ceased to exist with the break up of the Habsburg monarchy (in 1918). In early middle age Kranj was indeed the capital but later it moved to Ljubljana.
"is the Latin name of" - If you put that here then you would have to say the same on Lithuania, Estonia, Livonia and lots of other places. Of course it is Latin, but if used in English, it is an English word. The same applies to Cologne. Of course, Cologne is the French word for the city, but now it is English just as well. The current wording suggest there is no English name for it, and that is just not true. --213.72.187.106 10:20, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Merging
I am against merging this article with White Carniola. Carniola (Kranjska) was a province of the Austrian Empire and ceased to exist after WW1. It is traditionally divided (still is today) into three separate regions (no administrative function, just cultural): Lower Carniola, Upper Carniola and Inner Carniola (Dolenjska, Gorenjska and Notranjska respectively). White Carniola (Bela krajina) is mostly perceived as a part of Lower Carniola (Dolenjska), but is a culturally distinct area from the rest of Lower Carniola and therefore sometimes considered as a separate region.
I don't see any reason at all to merge the articles. edolen1 17:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Against the merge
You cannot merge these two articles together as Carniola (Kranjska) was a country once and White Carniola (Bela Krajina) is just a province in Slovenia that doesn't have much with the old Carniola (Kranjska).
Rok SLO, 5th August 2005
[edit] Merging with Duchy Of Carniola
Do we really need THREE separate sites for Carniola (Carniola March, Duchy of Carniola and Carniola in general)???? For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duchy_of_Carniola is the official article that you get directed to from the History Of Slovenia box. That article is way less complete than this one. Any ideas? Wikingus 11:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, we really need them. These are three distinct entities that have followed each other, have been administered differently, and do not have much in common. See also the previous sections. --Eleassar my talk 09:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I do not agree that there is no connection between those entities. They all had the same name and mainly the same territory. I believe there should be no doubt that Carniola from 1805/09 is the same as from 1848 - but restored from French occupation and constitutionaly reformed. As Carniola gave name to all three (two) entities and because those three articles are not complete (except March of Carniola), it would make sense to make only one chronologically organised article with sub-articles made from existing ones - explaining evolution from a march to a crown-land. That would give a complete data on one site, and give a visitor no need to additional clicking. I believe that historically most important facts are those in view of evolution and what it can be learned from it (historia magistae vitae est). But I would not oppose to make different articles in the future, when there would be enough data to make them. Navportus 20:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC).
- Duchy of Carniola only deals with the constituent land after the restoration of the Austrian Empire 1849 (not yet Austria-Hungary). Not much for a separate article and confusing as the older Duchy of Carniola had been established in 1364. 85.178.175.80 (talk) 19:49, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
