Table of Emperors by native language

[Boto von Ageduch]

Hello everybody,

I tried to make an overview over all Eastern Franconian / German / Roman / Holy Roman Kings/Emperors, sorted by native language. There is a fair number of occurring idioms. For German, I also include a rough distinction by dialect: In the first centuries these almost deserve the status of languages.

Eventually, I would like to put it on the wiki. But I first would like to learn whether you have major criticisms or if it makes sense at all. If we agree on a version for the rulers, we could gradually extend it to antikings and candidates (when it's on the wiki).


There is, of course, one basic problem: The "mother" tongue of a ruler is not too easy to find out; in some cases this information is not even passed on to us today. Some may have been bilingual, and it is not always clear which language came first (if any). Basically, this involves a lot of guessing.


Striking findings include the following:
- The large number of Czech and Dutch speakers.
- no English, Danish, Polish or Pomeranian, or Hungarian speakers; I am not aware of a promising individual of one of these groups; however, combining all of these and over all centuries I thought there might have been one or two of them.
- Not a single speaker of Eastern Central German (Thuringia, Upper-Elbe Saxony, Silesia).


So here is what I've come up with by now.
Your comments and corrections are welcome!




Czech

_____most of Luxemburg dynasty | 1347-1437

Italian

_____late Staufens (Frederich II, Konrad IV) | 1215-1254

Spanish

_____Ferdinand I of Habsburg | 1531–1564
_____Rudolf II of Habsburg | 1575-1612

French

_____Richard of Cornwall | 1257-1272
_____Henry VII of Luxemburg | 1308–1313

Dutch / Lower Frankonian:

_____most of Carolingian dynasty | at least until 876
_____Salian dynasty | 1024-1125
_____Willem of Holland | 1254-1256
_____Charles V of Habsbug | 1520-1556

Low German / Saxonian:

_____Konrad I | 911-918
_____Liudolfing/Ottonian dynasty | 919-1024
_____Lothar of Supplinburg | 1125-1137
_____Otto IV (Welf) | 1209-1218

High German
_____Central German
__________Western Central German

_______________Adolf of Nassau | 1292–1298
_______________Rupert of Wittelsbach (?) | 1400-1410
_______________Francis I of Habsburg-Lotharingia | 1745–1765

_____Upper German
__________Alamannian

_______________major part of Staufen dynasty | 1138-1208
_______________Rudolf of Habsburg | 1273–1291
_______________Albrecht of Habsburg | 1298–1308

__________Bavarian (wider sense)

_______________Louis IV of Wittelsbach | 1314–1347
_______________Rupert of Wittelsbach (?) | 1400-1410
_______________most of Habsburg dynasty | 1438-1519, 1564-1576, 1612(?)-1740
_______________Charles VII of Wittelsbach | 1742–1745
_______________last three Emperors (Habsburg-Lotharingia dynasty) | 1765-1806

[Feo]

an italian language didn't exist at that time

fredrick II and his successor probably spoke sicilian

that's a map of spoken languages in Italy at Dante's time

[Boto von Ageduch]

That's a fair point, I should treat it similarly to German.

Originally Posted by Feo

fredrick II and his successor probably spoke sicilian

As far as I know, Conrad's mother was Apulian. So perhaps his language tended more towards this variant.

Is there a superordinate term for Southern Italian idioms?

[kasumigenx]

Originally Posted by Boto von Ageduch

That's a fair point, I should treat it similarly to German.



As far as I know, Conrad's mother was Apulian. So perhaps his language tended more towards this variant.

Is there a superordinate term for Southern Italian idioms?

It is called Neapolitan.

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by kasumigenx

It is called Neapolitan.

Oh, please!

There's an italian language in the Middle-Ages, It's not because the dialectal form differed much from the "standard and merged form" than todays, that make it automaticly a new thing, needing a new name.
I blame the XIX to have invented a bad classification.

[kasumigenx]

Originally Posted by LSCatilina

Oh, please!

There's an italian language in the Middle-Ages, It's not because the dialectal form differed much from the "standard and merged form" than todays, that make it automaticly a new thing, needing a new name.
I blame the XIX to have invented a bad classification.

Northern Italian including Romansh of Switzerland is said to be similar to Occitan and Spanish in fact some say that Northern Italian dialects are inteligible with Occitan. Romagnol and Venetian are both said to share both characteristics of the other northern italian and the central italian dialects.

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by kasumigenx

Northern Italian including Romansh of Switzerland is said to be similar to Occitan and Spanish in fact some say that Northern Italian dialects are inteligible with Occitan.

New for me. Sure, I'm not a specialist of northern dialects of Italy, and i spoke only "standard" Italian, but the evolution from latin is quite different, in ethymology by exemple, and i'm very dubious about the inteligibility with Occitan (personaly i'm used to talk and read other occitan dialects, catalan language, and catalan, and lombard seems to be radically different). Aslo the linguistic border in Lombardia between cccitan(provencal) and western lombardic is really precise, could it be if the inter-understablity would so close?

Of course, some aspects are certainly closers, as in Occitan, northern dialects seems to be more "frenchized" (many exemples, as pronounciation of "c" as "ch" and not "k" etc.), i don't denied that. Maybe it's more differences, and i would enjoy read about it (in MP), but the more important thing about classify language is a original vocabulary (different ethymological evolution from latin, as -or ->-ore/-or/-eur), systematical grammar differences, and, of course, the self-recogniztion by the users of the language.

So, in Middle-Age, southern Italians tought what about their language? Different as language, dialect?
The problem here, is the lack of more or less central authority which could have named and trying to classify the dialects and the languages, as the Kingdom of France tried in the MA.

After that, in will less dubious of a separation between North and Central/South Italy for language than a Central/south separation

[kasumigenx]

Originally Posted by LSCatilina

New for me. Sure, I'm not a specialist of northern dialects of Italy, and i spoke only "standard" Italian, but the evolution from latin is quite different, in ethymology by exemple, and i'm very dubious about the inteligibility with Occitan (personaly i'm used to talk and read other occitan dialects, catalan language, and catalan, and lombard seems to be radically different). Aslo the linguistic border in Lombardia between cccitan(provencal) and western lombardic is really precise, could it be if the inter-understablity would so close?

Of course, some aspects are certainly closers, as in Occitan, northern dialects seems to be more "frenchized" (many exemples, as pronounciation of "c" as "ch" and not "k" etc.), i don't denied that. Maybe it's more differences, and i would enjoy read about it (in MP), but the more important thing about classify language is a original vocabulary (different ethymological evolution from latin, as -or ->-ore/-or/-eur), systematical grammar differences, and, of course, the self-recogniztion by the users of the language.

So, in Middle-Age, southern Italians tought what about their language? Different as language, dialect?
The problem here, is the lack of more or less central authority which could have named and trying to classify the dialects and the languages, as the Kingdom of France tried in the MA.

After that, in will less dubious of a separation between North and Central/South Italy for language than a Central/south separation

Both French south of the joret line, Nord Occitan and Arpitan share the palatalization of /k/ and /g/ before front vowels..

Yes, I agree on that regarding the Italian dialects that they had not been studied much.

[Khan Mengsk]

Originally Posted by Feo

an italian language didn't exist at that time

fredrick II and his successor probably spoke sicilian

that's a map of spoken languages in Italy at Dante's time

Yes is correct, but i remember the kings here in Italy speek in other languages as french or germany language. Latin in that time is allway consider a official language but only for some important questions or states like Vatican City State, or it used for science and justice for exemple.
The languages reported on this map are the languages of the peoples.

Cè atu dite? Cint cint cu mò di fedimi un plaseir... fevela un puc par furlan chi soij cence flat XD

[Boto von Ageduch]

Thank you very much for your hints!

I suppose in this case the question is not so critical, as we only have a couple of individuals from the extreme South of Italy.


As you've pointed out, I've also read that even today, there is a continuous transition from Lombardian into Occitan dialects. But this also holds between High German, Low German, and Dutch; and nobody doubts that they constitute at least two (if not three) different languages. So I suppose "Italian: Sicilian/Apulian" will do in this case. Agreed?


Any ideas about the correctness of assigning French and Czech to the respective Emperors?

[Theodoric]

I think you're conflating Frankish and Franconian too much. The Ancient version of Dutch is more accurately called 'Old Frankish', and I doubt people as far east as the area we now call 'Franconia'/Franken in Germany spoke what was essentially a western Istvaeonic dialect. The Franks were a rather diverse tribal alliance, to say the least.

This means that the Salian dynasty, which is quite oddly named in the first place, should not be placed in the same category as the 'real' Salians, Ripuarians etc. who did 'early Dutch' for the most part.

I could be wrong, though. Perhaps they did speak some form of Low Frankish only to turn completely Hochdeutsch a few centuries later. :/

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by Boto von Ageduch

Thank you very much for your hints!

Any ideas about the correctness of assigning French and Czech to the respective Emperors?

I think that using southern Italian would be more accurate, in a historical sense, until we could find a source of how the medieval inhabitants of southern Italy considered their own language/dialect and how this l/d is linked to the general speaking in Italy. At my knowledge (really limited), the only more or less accurate linguistic work in Italy is the one of Dante (and it's not really accurate, putting the language of Oil until the Pyrenees in Aquitaine, etc.), so i think if we don't have an accurate choice, the better is to keep a certain blur about the language/dialects in the Middle-Age.

So, southern Italian would be fine, by not "choosing" language or dialects.

For french, well, his definition is quite well knowed, and not posing an issue The problems with italian speakings, is that the dialectal form were formalized by all the italian states, and the "standard" form didn't appear as soon than the rest of western/southern latin europe.

[kasumigenx]

Originally Posted by LSCatilina

At my knowledge (really limited), the only more or less accurate linguistic work in Italy is the one of Dante (and it's not really accurate, putting the language of Oil until the Pyrenees in Aquitaine, etc.), so i think if we don't have an accurate choice, the better is to keep a certain blur about the language/dialects in the Middle-Age.

Actually, Occitan was sometimes called Aquitanian in the past, I think Aquitanian is more correct because Occitan was once spoken in the visigothic kingdom of Aquitaine.
http://valoc.blogspot.com/

Yes, it is true that the romance languages of italy weren't standardized until risorgimento which gives the other languages of italy a weak identity.

[LSCatilina]

Originally Posted by kasumigenx

Actually, Occitan was sometimes called Aquitanian in the past, I think Aquitanian is more correct because Occitan was once spoken in the visigothic kingdom of Aquitaine.
http://valoc.blogspot.com/

For occitan names, it was never called aquitanian.
The first name was "roman" and can be found in frankish chronicles, opposing the franks, in the North, to the romans, in the south.
Think about romanian, by exemple.
When the franks talk about aquitanian, they talk about 1)the lordoms in Aquitania 2)the principality joining vascons and romans led by Lop or Odon 3)The kingdom ceated by Charlemagne for his son. It's only a political definition

The next name was Provencal, because the south of the kingdom was made, for one part, by the former lands of the Provincia. You can find it in the crusades's chronicles.

After the Crusade of 1209 and the subsequent annexation of Languedoc into the royal domain, the royal administration forged a word for calling the aera, using the word "oc" (for yes, in opposition of "oil") and "Aquitania" calling the land "Oc-citania". It served then to call the language, but not really that used and finished to design only the Languedoc.

Until the XIX, the language had be called "Gascon" (one of the occitan dialects) and the area Gascony (not only the region on the left side of Garona).

Then, with the felibrige movment, Provencal and Occitan were reused, but as Provencal could design aslo the dialect, Occitan was reused.

So, for a medieval use, and for not make a confusion between the language and its dialects, i think that use Occitan, instead of Provencal or Gascon, is the better.

[kasumigenx]

Originally Posted by LSCatilina

For occitan names, it was never called aquitanian.
The first name was "roman" and can be found in frankish chronicles, opposing the franks, in the North, to the romans, in the south.
Think about romanian, by exemple.
When the franks talk about aquitanian, they talk about 1)the lordoms in Aquitania 2)the principality joining vascons and romans led by Lop or Odon 3)The kingdom ceated by Charlemagne for his son. It's only a political definition

The next name was Provencal, because the south of the kingdom was made, for one part, by the former lands of the Provincia. You can find it in the crusades's chronicles.

After the Crusade of 1209 and the subsequent annexation of Languedoc into the royal domain, the royal administration forged a word for calling the aera, using the word "oc" (for yes, in opposition of "oil") and "Aquitania" calling the land "Oc-citania". It served then to call the language, but not really that used and finished to design only the Languedoc.

Until the XIX, the language had be called "Gascon" (one of the occitan dialects) and the area Gascony (not only the region on the left side of Garona).

Then, with the felibrige movment, Provencal and Occitan were reused, but as Provencal could design aslo the dialect, Occitan was reused.

So, for a medieval use, and for not make a confusion between the language and its dialects, i think that use Occitan, instead of Provencal or Gascon, is the better.

I agree on that..
In Spain Occitan was called Limousin...

So had things turn out the other way Occitan will be called Romanenc right?

Arpitans in Switzerland call themselves Romands.