Talk:Sachsenspiegel

Untitled

Earlier versions of this article were apparently based on a translation of the German Wikipedia article (citation required by copyleft?). -Boson 18:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

There was a cleanup tag that got removed, although some of the translation was, er, somewhat misleading, so I have attempted to remedy the worst instances of mistranslation and generally revise the article, rather than just put the cleanup tag back. I hope that is in order. Perhaps someone more knowlegeable about German legal history will take a look. -Boson 18:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe we can get a full translation of the German again? (Better, this time, if there were problems before) -LlywelynII (talk) 06:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Currently preparing an article

The Sachsenspiegel is my speciality, I have studied the document for over 10 years now. I am currently editing part of my thesis on the document so that it is suitable for a completely new article on this; there is a lot of rubbish in this article.—Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlosPauloEthetheth (talk • contribs) 15:11, 2 October 2006

If it's your specialty, please consider taking a few minutes and sprucing this up just a tad. (also, please sign your comments so we can get in touch with you...) Portia1780 (talk) 23:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I suppose that went by the wayside? or is there a much better article somewhere in the history?

Regardless, for any Deutschephone, the German article appears to be much more thorough than this one. Maybe we could get some translation? -LlywelynII (talk) 06:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

German?

I know that English uses the rather confusing term Low German for a language which is more related to non-Normandized dialects of English than to the German language, but a reference which claims that Eike used from those soundshifts might be appropiate. Erik Warmelink (talk) 23:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Pardon? -LlywelynII (talk) 06:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I believe what Erik Warmelink is trying to say is that in English at least, it is considered inaccurate to include any variety or stage of Low German (including the one at hand, Middle Saxon) under the rubric "German", even as a way of referring in general to (West Germanic) languages native to Germany, as opposed to a foreign administrative language like Latin. I'm going to come up with some kind of compromise by which I hope to preserve the original intent, without referring to Middle Saxon as if it were a subtype of German. "[The Sachsenspiegel] is important not only for its lasting effect on German law, but also as an early example of written German prose, being the first large legal document to be written in German, instead of Latin" in effect declares Low German (Low Saxon) to be a variety of the language we call (High) German, when in fact these are separate languages, with mostly separate histories, stretching back into prehistoric times. (Note however that "German law" is unproblematic, because "German" in that instance speaks not to the language the body of law is written in, but to the nation which primarily developed it.) Probably better would be "[The Sachsenspiegel] is important not only for its lasting effect on German law, but also as an early example of written prose in a German language, being the first large legal document to have been written in (Middle Low) German, instead of Latin." IfYouDoIfYouDon't (talk) 21:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Low German is not closer to english than to German. What a bunch of nonesense. Before all the divide and conquer leftist grabage arose it was never considered anything else but a northern German dialect, which it is. 178.24.247.123 (talk) 12:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Claiming that Low German was never considered anything else but a northern German dialect is itself a show of gross ignorance. It had a separate linguistic and literary development from High German, with works ranging from the Old Saxon Heliand through Middle Low German works such as Reynke de Vos, to modern contemporary literature. Low German did not develop in the north of the modern nation of Germany, but in ancient Germanic polities such as Saxony and later polities such as the Holy Roman Empire, where the Hanseatic cities were largely autonomous powers.

At the time of the Hanseatic League, Low German served as a lingua franca in northern Europe. It influenced languages such as English and Dutch, and profoundly changed Danish, Swedish and Norwegian through a massive injection of vocabulary. The fact that from early modern times onwards Low German was gradually replaced by High German in more and more aspects of life changes nothing about this history. Ni'jluuseger (talk) 15:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't imply it is a form of High German. It's a form of German, which has many dialects of which some are,in relatively modern times, classified as languages. Low German is a perfectly fine term to use. That OP is implying that low german is closer to english than to German already shows us that he/she doesn't have any understanding of the language or the text of the Sachsenspiegel itself. It's just your typical anti german troll really. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.17.140.107 (talk) 08:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Common law?

The article asserts that the Sachsenspiegel was divided into "common law" (Landrecht) and "feudal law" (Lehnrecht). However, my understanding is that common law is case law i.e. it is based on precedence, not statute. I also understood that, by contrast, Landrecht was based on a mix of custom, privileges and acts passed by reigning princes. Arnold (1991) describes it as "the customary law of the region". Is there an English term that better captures the sense of Landrecht than "common law"? --Bermicourt (talk) 16:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Translation/explanation of the word "Sachsenspiegel"

I wonder if we need at least a footnote, or even a paragraph, explaining the name.

We have previously had two different translations. Originally it was "Saxon mirror". It was later changed to "Saxon overview". Later still, it was changed back to "Saxon mirror". Now it has been again changed to "Saxon overview".

I would normally agree that "Spiegel" as used here has more the meaning of "overview" or "vademecum". I would almost go so far as to say that "Spiegel" is a homonym with two separate meanings and "mirror" is the wrong translation in this instance. However, the author does explicitly use the metaphor of a mirror when he explains the name:

"Spegel der Sassen
Scal di buk sin genant,
went Sassen recht is hir an bekant,
Als an eneme spegele de frouwen
er antlite scowen"

["Mirror of the Saxons" this book shall be called,for Saxon law is seen in it, just as women look at their face in a mirror.]
--Boson (talk) 13:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the indecisiveness. The issues is whether it's useful to have literary translations. So I hope the current current compromise is OK. Thanks for quoting the poem. It clarified a lot! Mootros (talk) 14:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's a good solution. --Boson (talk) 20:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Extreme simplification

There is some severe anachronism problem in this article. One thing was a link to the Holy Roman Empire that simply read "German Niddle Ages". The term "German" and "Germany" were used at least a dozen times in the lead with "Saxon" being used not once apart from the translation of the article title. Another bizarre claim is it "being the first lengthy legal document to have been written in a continental Germanic language, instead of Latin." Sorry? The Low Franconian Salic Law? Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 19:50, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

That was written in latin. 178.24.247.123 (talk) 14:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sachsenspiegel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070209010817/http://www.rechtsbuchforschung.de/ to http://www.rechtsbuchforschung.de/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:23, 7 December 2017 (UTC)