Talk:March (territory)

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Former countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles Catalan-speaking countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking countries 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.Catalan-speaking countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesTemplate:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesCatalan-speaking countries articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. France Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Spain Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Someone posted

This article should be split into multiple articles accessible from a disambiguation page.

The point here is conversely, to draw together these various usages of "marches," some of them in forms that aren't superficially recognizable. Breaking up Wikipedia articles until the fragments bear no coherence actually loses inforemation. Compare "holistic".

--Wetman 04:48, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I was looking for something in this article about Mars, the Roman god of war. I had thought (mistakenly) that military titles like Marquis, Mark, etc. derived from the name of Mars, the Roman god of war. It might help to identify this as a misconception.

And for those who wonder about the connection between the modern English word "mark" and "the Proto-Indo-European root *mereg-, meaning 'edge, boundary'" mentioned in this article, there's an interesting etymology for the word "mark" in Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, 1999: [1375–1425; late ME marchen < MF march(i)er, OF marchier to tread, move < Frankish *markōn presumably, to mark, pace out (a boundary); see MARK¹].

--ScottS 17:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term March in March of Azerbaijan is referring to a march as in: 1. to walk with regular and measured tread, as soldiers on parade; advance in step in an organized body.

In this article, the Norse meaning of Heiðmörk is given as "the march of heath", while in the article on Hedmark, the Heið part is said to come from the heiðnir, a Germanic tribe in the region. I don't know which one is correct, but this inconsistency ought perhaps to be corrected? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hinakana (talk • contribs) 11:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rather, it should all be rewritten with reliable references. "Inconsistencies" like these may reflect a real lack of knowledge or certainty, either among the laypeople writing here or also among professionals. Both versions here may be guesswork, for example. 83.253.28.222 (talk) 20:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I must say that military frontier to which a link is made refering to balkans is totaly incorrect. Not only that none of the military frontiers listed in the article was not on the balkans peninsula, but these military frontiers actually divided central europe from the balkans (being located to the north of balkans) . The same border applies even today as border the balkan peninsula. Note that these military frontiers were part of Austria-Hungary while the balkans was under turkish occupation.Hammer of Habsburg (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been suggested that the use of the phrase British Isles in this article should be deleted. The use of this term in this article is being discussed atWT:BISE#March (territory) If you would like to contribute to the debate please do so.

Daicaregos (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC) Daicaregos (talk) 09:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further information has been added about the March in Ireland. As it's unrelated to the March in either Scotland or Wales, I've placed it in its own section. Daicaregos (talk) 16:50, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a problem though, when considering using British Isles. By using BI as a section heading, the island of Ireland would be grouped with Great Britain, Isle of Man & Channel Islands. GoodDay (talk) 16:00, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I say, the information about the March in Ireland is unrelated to the March in either Scotland or Wales. They should be in separate sections. Daicaregos (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The Welsh and Scottish marches were created on the borders between two countries (or kingdoms: Wales/England, Scotland/England). The Irish marches did not border England as they were confined solely on the island of Ireland.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If one section called Ireland, then the other would have to be called Great Britain. GoodDay (talk) 19:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The point is, all the mentioned marches are in the British Isles and they do, to a certain extent, relate to a shared history within the islands. It's a reasonable grouping. Why not put sub-headings in if you want? LemonMonday Talk 20:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose behind the Welsh and Scottish Marches was to have barons, acting in the King of England's interest, erect castles along the borders and provide garrisons to protect England from an invasion by the Welsh and Scots. Note I say protect England. In fact, Welsh Marcher barons were semi-autonomous with the King's writ rarely "extending beyond the Wye". They often rebelled against the English kings as in the case of the Despenser War in 1321-1322. The Irish marches only bordered the Irish Pale which was not England but rather the centre of English administration in Ireland. Not quite the same thing, LemonMonday.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeanne, I have to raise this again here. Only 6 days ago, you told us confidently that there were no such thing as marches in Ireland. Now you appear not to realise that Ireland was ruled by kings from England at this time to a large extent, and then reducing. The marches were therefore between England and the various "Hibernian" tribes. Same peoples, same cultures etc.

I asked you what you knew about ths subject and the references I offered this discussion. Did you read them? --LevenBoy (talk) 17:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you a source which says the name Marches was used for medieval Ireland in the same context as the Welsh and Scottish Marches? Oh and I was aware that Henry II claimed Ireland and subsequent English kings sent justiciars and and empowered Norman-Irish nobles to enforce this claim. We are talking about marches and not the Pale, which was the centre of English rule, not an extension or proxy of England!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting away from the point, which is that Ireland is part of the British Isles; those islands with a complex and shared history. That shared history, and culture, whether or not it relates directly to Pales, Marches or much else, is a good enough reason to group these subjects under the heading of British Isles. I fail to see why a source is needed, other than one which confirms the countries in question are actually in the British Isles. LemonMonday Talk 18:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That may well be your point, however it is not the point of either Wikipedia at large, or the March article. Fmph (talk) 18:22, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean - are you saying that Wikipedia does not countenance the fact that Ireland is part of the British Isles? LemonMonday Talk 18:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is that the question of whether Ireland is part of BI or not is irrelevant to this article, this discussion, and the encyclopaedia at large. Fmph (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, everybody knows Ireland is a part of the British Isles, thus the dispute over the term. GoodDay (talk) 22:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These headings need to be re-merged & re-named 'British Isles'. Then we can go through this mix-up, one step at a time. GoodDay (talk) 23:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I put a square bracket section into a <!-- ... --> thing because it disputes a statement in the intro without a reference for it and makes the intro unclear. If anyone objects, please talk to me. Manytexts (talk) 08:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article currently says:

In contrast to a mutually agreed upon demilitarised buffer zone, a march is a non-homeland territory fortified for defence against a rival power.

How were for example the Scottish Marches "a march is a non-homeland territory fortified for defence against a rival power" or the Welsh Marches non-homeland territory?

The definition here needs adjustment so I am going to change it to:

Marches was a medieval and early modern name for a border areas of a realm where different laws applied for defence of the border against hostile incursions, or to regulate border trade or both.

BTW the last references I have seen to Marches are in Germany and Italy during the Napoleonic Wars, specifically in some of the peace treaties eg s:Final Act of the Congress of Vienna/General Treaty (9 June 1815) see for example Germany Art. XXXI "A second from the Old March, through Gihorn and Noustadt to Minden."; and Italy Art. CIII "The Marches, with Camerino, and their dependencies...".

-- PBS (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't Finnmark be expanded upon? Because the medieval Finnmark was much larger than the modern day province in Norway. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/Norway_1020_AD.png/640px-Norway_1020_AD.png --77.222.163.148 (talk) 14:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]