File talk:Gepid kingdom 6th century.png

User Borsoka wrote this in en Wikipedia: "Even if the map is an excellent piece of work, I think it needs some modification. First of all, the territory between the Danube and the Tisza were not part of the Gepidic Kingdom. For example, Florin Curta in his book entitled "The Making of the Slavs" (ISBN 978-0-521-03615-3) writes that this territory was a "no man's land separating the Lombards from the Gepids" (op. cit. p. 198.). Similarly, Jordanes wrote of a Gepidia bordered by the Tisza, Olt and other rivers (Gothic History 5:33). Another suggestion: Şimleu Silvaniei/Szilágysomlyó, Apahida, Moreşti/Malomfalva and other settlements playing important role in the archaeology in Gepidia should be marked on the map. I hope these suggestions are acceptable for other editors."

My answer: primary source that I used for borders of Gepid State was this link: [1] Unfortunately, this link does not work any more, but I found two other links with same map: [2], [3]. So, according to that source, the territory between the Danube and the Tisa was indeed not part of the Gepid State in year 455, but it was part of it in 539-551 (which is the time period depicted on this map). So, map is not wrong but it shows one specific time period in which Gepid State had these borders. As for other settlements that had important role in the archeology in Gepidia, I can include more settlements to this map, of course. You should write here a list with names of settlements that should be included and you should provide a link to some sources that saying why these settlements are important and that showing exact position of these settlements. I would not agree with map changes that are not supported by good sources. PANONIAN (talk) 21:09, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, I have here good source with Gepid sites: [4], [5]. Now, Borsoka, you should say which of those should be included into my map? PANONIAN (talk) 21:18, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I examined this source by myself, and practically only Apahida locality is depicted there as more important than other ones. List of selected Gepid sites in en Wikipedia is unsourced, so we still need a source which will say which other Gepid sites are of high importance for archeology. PANONIAN (talk) 21:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, I included Apahida locality into this map. My basic idea was that map shows only most important cities (or localities) within Gepid State. So, I think that small settlements or archaeological sites of smaller significance should not be included here. Anyway, if anybody provides any source which says that there was some other very important city or archaeological locality in Gepid State, I will include that one as well. PANONIAN (talk) 10:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I see. If Şimleu Silvaniei could be added, I would be happy (it was an early center of power in Gepidia). I think the source of the map should also be added. Borsoka (talk) 16:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

What you mean by "the source of the map should also be added"? Added where? I listed my primary and secondary references in "References" section on map's page (and this is my main reference: http://www.historyonmaps.com/ColourSamples/cbig/Gepidak.jpg ). As for Şimleu Silvaniei, can you show me some source that says why this locality was important? For example, in this source, only Sirmium and Apahida are labeled as significant, while in this one there are only two marked cities: Sirmium and Singidunum (of course, there are two more red dots in that map in Transylvania - can you translate descriptions near these two red dots?). In meantime, I will search by myself are there some sources about Şimleu Silvaniei. PANONIAN (talk) 19:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I examined some sources, and I am not sure that they saying that this locality was an early center of power in Gepidia. If source presented on this page is interpreted correctly then we only have quoted author Bărbulescu who said that the "center of this early Gepidia is to be searched in the region of Şimleu Silvaniei". So, this is only opinion of this author that center of Gepid state "should be searched" somewhere in that region (it is not clearly defined that this center was there and it is especially not defined that it was located exactly at Şimleu Silvaniei locality (but rather "somewhere in that region")). Of course, there are sources that saying that Şimleu Silvaniei is a site of "the most valuable Gepid relics" or a site of "a gold treasure trove of a Gepid prince", but these are, again, not evidences that this was significant locality in this time (This Gepid prince could bury his treasure in some remote area if he aimed to hide it). The second problem is that this map shows late period of a Gepid state, so why an assumed Gepid center from the early period should be depicted? Even Apahida locality dating from the 5th century (not from 6th), but, as a site of royal graves, it could have certain spiritual importance in later time period, so inclusion of this site into map is generally good idea. Anyway, I would rather not include Şimleu Silvaniei due to mentioned reasons and due to the fact that I wanted to make an political map of Gepid Kingdom and not a map that would show archaeological localities. Of course, other Wiki users are free to create another map that will show archeological localities instead. This source would be useful to someone who might want to create such map: [6], [7]. Due to the fact that there are just too many these localities in this source, I would avoid creating such map by myself. PANONIAN (talk) 13:37, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The location of Slavs

I think the word Slavs needs to be removed. We simply don't know who lived in most places and the Slavs are a mystery in this period. Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:28, 7 April 2024 (UTC)