Talk:Germanic kingship

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Germanic kingship article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Norse history and culture High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Germanic studies

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Germanic studies articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Germanic studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studiesTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studiesAncient Germanic studies articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I think this needs a major re-write[edit]

The lede implies that this is an obsolete (or at least dubious) historical theory, but the main body of the article doesn't make it clear what is or is not accepted by modern historians. Indeed, it seems that the only doubts about the theory are expressed as a footnote in the lede, and the use of the word "alleged" in the first section heading. Nor is it clear if the "Later Developments" are also suspect. I think this needs to be restructured to describe:

The known facts (or at least, the known historical descriptions of the institution).
The 19th/early 20th century theories about the institution.
The modern academic view (detailing both the flaws with the older research, and what people now think "Germanic Kingship" was actually like).

I'd also suggest restoring the etymology (removed a couple of years ago by an anon). IMO, the origins of the words used to describe social institutions typically indicate something about what the people who named it thought about it, or what they claimed it was, so it is relevant to the article. Iapetus (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]