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)

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)