Talk:Emeric, King of Hungary

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Borsoka in topic Henricus
Good articleEmeric, King of Hungary has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 11, 2015Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 28, 2015.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Emeric, King of Hungary persuaded Pope Innocent III to excommunicate the Venetians and the crusaders of the Fourth Crusade after they captured the Dalmatian town of Zadar in 1202?
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 30, 2017.

Henricus

edit

I don't know what the problem is, but perhaps a Hungarian source would help: [1]
See also Zoltan J. Farkas, "The Challenge of the Name America," in Names, 13, 1 (1965): 11–18, who discusses the Emeric-Henry connexion, but does not mention the king. Srnec (talk) 17:14, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you are right: no reliable source mentions that piece of information in connection with King Emeric. That is my only problem. Emeric was a man, therefore he must have had a heart. However, no reliable source writes that "Emeric had a heart", because it is not a relavant piece of information. As per WP:NOR, we do not mention information which cannot be substantiated by reliable sources, even if it is true (should we add that Emeric had a heart, ....?) I guess you think that King Emeric is identical with Saint Emeric of Hungary: in connection with the latter prince, all relevant scholarly book mention that his Hungarian name (Imre) is the old Hungarian variant of Heinrich/Henry. Borsoka (talk) 17:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
I have cited a reliable source, which you claim cannot be verified. Then I cited A Pallas nagy lexikona on the talk page to show that the cited source does indeed mean that "Henricus" was sometimes used of Emeric. What's the problem? Srnec (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, I have just realised that A Pallas nagy lexikona from the early 20th century says that "he is mentioned as Henricus in German chronicles", which may be a relevant information. However, your claim ("his name is a form of Henry") cannot be substantiated. Borsoka (talk) 03:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
Now you're just being silly. I have no idea what you expect. Or why you think "form" does not cover "variant", since you yourself just acknowledged it was a variant of Henry. Srnec (talk) 03:43, 30 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
Please read my above message again: none of the two works you have so far referred to states that "his name is a form/variant of Henry". One of the sources says that "also Henricus", the other source states that "he is mentioned as Henricus in German chronicles". Borsoka (talk) 04:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
For "King Henry of Hungary", see this or Helen Nicholson, Templars, Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights (1993), p. 24. Nora Berend, At the Gate of Christendom (2001), calls him "Imre (Emeric or Henry)" in the list of kings of Hungary. Erik Fügedi, in an essay in Kings, Bishops, Nobles and Burghers in Medieval Hungary (1986), qualifies King Imre as Henry. Srnec (talk) 13:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
Srnec, thank you for the above sources. I added the alternative name in the lead. Borsoka (talk) 09:12, 31 January 2015 (UTC)Reply