Wettin, Sachsen or Meissen?

+4 votes
I'm trying to plan merges for this line.  WikiTree has some under Meissen, and others under Wettin, Sachsen and Brandenburg.  Wikipedia says that the House of Wettin ruled territories of present-day German states of Saxony and Thuringia for 953 years.  FMG uses Wettin only internally within Meissen.

Which is the correct LNAB for this bunch?
WikiTree profile: Friederich III von Thuringia
asked in Genealogy Help by Vic Watt G2G6 Pilot (316k points)

2 Answers

+1 vote
Best answer
They are all from the Wettin dynasty but at different times ruled over different parts of Saxony/Thuringia, including Meissen.  About 1400 they inherited the Electorate of Saxony and about 50 years later split into two major lines, the Ernestine and Albertine.

The elder Ernestine line lost the Electorate and split into many minor families including Sachsen (or Saxe) Gotha, Saalfeld, Altenburg, Coburg etc and were the Royal families of Belgium, Great Britain, Portugal, Bulgaria etc

The Albertine line inherited the Electorate and then became Kings of Saxony (or Sachsen as it should be), and were also Kings of Poland.  They also split into 3 minor branches ; Weissenfels, Merseburg and Zeitz but none of them survived beyond three or four generations.

There are probably more LNABs for this family and I'm not sure there is an easy answer as to what they should be called.  Technically they should all be Wettin, but it's difficult to justify this as the LNAB for Queen Elizabeth II for instance.

personally I think they should be Wettin for the beginning of the dynasty but once they are firmly established as ruling a particular country/territory that name takes precedence.

Further comment -  although complete consistency in naming noble/royal families is a wonderful ideal, it would involve an enormous effort to change all the Wettin family, even if we could decide on the most appropriate name for them all, and that's just one family.  Also from what I can gather, making many changes to the LNAB can stuff up searching Wikitree.  

Where the LNAB doesn't fit in with the naming standard such as it includes a pre-surname, or is in an inappropriate language then it needs to be changed but otherwise if it is a name that is applicable to the family then I think it needs to stay.

There has been a lot of work on the categories recently by some hard working people and that is where I think you can consistenly link all the Wettin and other families into one group, rather than through the LNAB.
answered by John Atkinson G2G6 Pilot (316k points)
selected by Darlene Athey-Hill
I'd tend to agree with John on this, although the 'House of Wettin' isn't one of my strong points.  Definitely you should identify the profiles with both the 'House of Wettin' as well as the project template.  We've got new sub-projects of EuroAristo (announcement shortly), so the template will depend on the timeframe in which they lived.  As to the house designation, you can put [[Category:House of Wettin]] at the top of the biography in each profile and it will then show up here:  http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:House_of_Wettin .  Note on that page that there are 'sub-categories' (various Sachsen-Coburg primarily) to which they might also belong (as you know, some people can be identified with more than one house).

Thanks, Vic, for asking about the names and working on improving these profiles!

Darlene - Co-Leader, European Aristocrats Project
0 votes

A lot of these profiles are now getting ''surnames'' added, but these, what many people seem to think of and use as ''nicknames'' , are ''bynames'' and these were the surnames used by these people , so my suggestion is we should not longer try to find (or invent) and add all kinds of surnames that these people for sure did not use those days : http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/arval/bynames/ medieval bynames

It's just like patronyms, we don't give these people a surname just because we nowadays use surnames, so for these people , how I see it it's the same thing and as you can see here:


They did not add 'other' last names for them as well ...

Agree with John on the consistency part , it can be achieved by categorizing and is preferred .

For the LNAB , if  there are no records, registrations, manuscripts , books ,  so really nothing we can use for proof/ source, if they can be found (google) by it and in the original language, guess it's the most convenient for everyone of course, and people those days for sure didn't bother/ care about the names as much as we do now,  so no need to make things more complicated as they already are as well of course 

answered by Bea Wijma G2G6 Pilot (238k points)
edited by Bea Wijma

Related questions

+8 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
1 answer
133 views asked Jul 24, 2013 in Policy and Style by J Pictet G2G6 Mach 2 (30k points)
+2 votes
2 answers
+2 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
30 views asked Apr 21, 2017 in The Tree House by Anonymous Anonymous G2G2 (2.8k points)
+6 votes
0 answers

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright