Talk:Holy Roman Empire

Map inaccuracies

The Infobox map needs to be changed

The current map in the infobox showing the map of the HRE in '1190', by one DannamEmpire has multiple issues. 1. The map is inconsistent with itself. in the infobox it refers to 1190, while the map page shows 1200-1250. 2. It is using a historical map as a basis that either does not show the borders of the Holy Roman Empire itself, or the map is highly inaccurate(most damningly the inclusion of Prussia) personally I believe it was drawn to exxaggarte the extent of HRE power during the age of rising nationalism, signified by the map discussing the "German Empire"(one 'Mitteleuropa zur Zeit der Staufer' Droysens/Andree) 3. These inaccuracies and usage of willfully inaccurate, misinformed, or biased sources has caused this a-historical permeation of Holy Roman Empire borders to spread not only to other language wikipedia pages, but to other media which use either the wiki map itself, or its source. We need to find a better map for this period, or replace the 'largest extent' idea from the infobox. While I'm biased I believe the Czech Wikipedia page for the HRE, one made by Alphathon, a longtime registered wikipedia user to be suitable, as it portrays the borders more accurately, and uses a less biased map source as a base. If you know of a more accurate map, or a more suitable for its place please share and discuss. File:Holy_Roman_Empire_1190.svg DrettTheBaron (talk) 22:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

The current map is derived from a published source: File:Droysens-26.jpg. Proposals to change it should present sources. Furius (talk) 08:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

The map on the Czech Wikipedia is based on a publication from 1923; the map on the English Wikipedia is based on one from 1886. Neither of our two maps seem to track the borders in its source very faithfully; just look at what they do to Italy. Renerpho (talk) 15:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

@Renerpho I agree. Both have issues. I just used a map with an already existing record of usage on wikipedia. It's why I asked for other people's proposals as I am aware of the issues with my proposed map. DrettTheBaron (talk) 15:39, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for explaining that. I think switching to File:Holy Roman Empire 1190.svg for the infobox would be wise, pending a map that presents Italy better. I would be very sad to lose File:Mitteleuropa_zur_Zeit_der_Staufer.svg altogether, since the presentation of the internal boundaries is invaluable. The ideal outcome would be a modified version of the map with the red border shifted, so that it doesn't claim that Silesia and the territories of the Teutonic Knights were within the empire. @Alphathon: created that map and so I think it would be good to give them an opportunity to contribute to this conversation. Furius (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Just to be clear, there are two maps being discussed here with similar names:

• Holy Roman Empire in 1190.svg by @DannamEmpire. This is the current map in the infobox.
• Holy Roman Empire 1190.svg by me (Alphathon). This is the one used on the Czech Wikipedia and the alternative proposed by DrettTheBaron.

DannamEmpire's map is derived from mine (or rather from the blank version Blank map of Europe 1190.svg) and mostly changes the north-eastern border to encompass Pomerelia and western Prussia (under the Teutonic Order) roughly based on Droysens-26/Mitteleuropa zur Zeit der Staufer, as well as integrating the Papacy. DannamEmpire's map does not seem to add Silesia to the HRE, unlike Droysens.

Mine is primarily based on Europe mediterranean 1190.jpg. The borders around Venice and the coastline of Frisia/the Netherlands are from Droysens. The north-eastern border of the HRE (with Poland) was also modified to encompass the Neumark; again this was mostly from Droysens (but aligns with the sub-map on Europe mediterranean 1190.jpg, dated 1176). I don't know/remember where the area around Słupsk/Stolp came from though; I really could/should have done a better job documenting it. I was also rather sloppy around the border of Silesia.

I think the southern boundary with Sicily may be inaccurate for 1190 – I think Abruzzo was taken by Sicily in (or before?) 1156.

I am uncertain about the status of the State of the Teutonic Order re. the Empire, although I believe it was ambiguous, similar to the Papacy (at least initially). Silesia though was (I think) unambiguously outside the Empire until it came under Bohemia in the 14c.

As it happens I've been trying to "upgrade" Mitteleuropa zur Zeit der Staufer.svg for a while as there are actually several issues with it (including some other inaccuracies by Droysens/Andree, some caused by me (mostly typos and such) and the distortion in the middle of the map around the border between Germany and Italy caused by the source scan straddling two pages of a book). Unfortunately there are some areas that are proving quite difficult.

For what it's worth Droysens isn't the only atlas which gives that eastern border – Muir's Historial Atlas 1976 (first edition 1938) does too, Silesia and all (maybe derived from the same source?).

Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 07:49, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I may be missing something obvious, but what is the source for the date (1190) in c:File:Holy_Roman_Empire_in_1190.svg? Does the source map Mitteleuropa zur Zeit der Staufer (Central Europe during the time of the Staufer) give a date I haven't seen, or could it be anything from 1138 to 1254?

The maps on this article all suffer from various inaccuracies, even those that are ultimately based on published sources. I hope things like Talk:Holy_Roman_Empire/Archive_7#Error_in_1618_map? can be an example of how to resolve those inaccuracies, one by one, to make sure that the great research and work put into the maps by individual users like Alphathon and others isn't wasted. Renerpho (talk) 17:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

It does not date to 1190. Although originally claimed to be 1190 by the uploader (presumably based on my original) they later changed the description from "in 1190" to "early to middle 13th century (c. 1200- c. 1250)"; the file name remained unchanged however. While no concrete date is given in the original source (Droysens) various elements place it in the first half of the 13th century (e.g. presence of the Teutonic Order in Prussia, Hohenstaufen Sicily, Epirus-held Corfu, existence of the Duchy of Merania etc). I believe it is actually a generalised overview rather than any specific date though, as some inclusions cannot be reconciled (unless they are simply errors). Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 02:35, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

I suspect they're a combination of both. Compare the sub-section below about some additional claimed inaccuracies, the veracity of which need to be confirmed.

If we want to show the HRE's at its greatest territorial extent (which is what the infobox currently does) then we need to

(1) establish when it was at its greatest extent, and
(2) find a reliable map for that date.

Both may be difficult/impossible, so maybe we should... change the goal? A map of every place that belonged to the HRE at some point in time? Renerpho (talk) 04:57, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

This map (or something like it) is the best solution that does not result in a WP:SYNTH. It no doubt has errors but this is to be expected of a map showing a whole continent. The advantage is that it's a single source which can easily be verified. Correcting every small "error" on this map would lead to a map with dozens of sources and little way to verify them or reconcile contradictions between sources. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 06:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@HetmanTheResearcher: That may be true if any of our two maps was closely following their source, in which case we could write "according to Droysens" (or whoever we choose to believe) in the image caption. But our maps don't follow their sources. Renerpho (talk) 13:18, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Good point. I would support removing all those regional sources then and leave only the general map of Europe. It's an infobox map that should provide a general picture, not really needed to have all those smaller sources. Regional maps can have their place in the main body of the article. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 16:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I understand (and share) your desire for a clean and well-referenced map, but it would be a shame to lose the work that was put into these. Maybe we can find a good compromise that works. Renerpho (talk) 19:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

If you're talking about this file: File:Mitteleuropa zur Zeit der Staufer.svg#file then I would have no problem keeping it. I don't actually see why Prussia (and its accuracy) is an issue since that is not the primary focus of the map; rather, the internal boundaries are. My issue is that taking this map that's showing 1250(?) and placing it in a map of Europe in 1190 is a synthesis of two maps (and assumes that the borders did not change in 60 years. If anything the bigger issue is that the current map does not even represent the source it is claiming to; Siciliy is clearly shown being in personal union in that map yet this is not reflected at all in the current infobox map. HetmanTheResearcher (talk) 19:06, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

This is NOT a map of circa 1610! The Netherlands were no longer part of the HRE (not since 1555 when Philips II inherited it from his father Charles V). ~2026-78249-9 (talk) 04:58, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

One more inaccuracy... Renerpho (talk) 10:23, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Ideally a "greatest extent" map should probably be there but if we cannot source one then it's really not that big of a deal. "A map of every place that belonged to the HRE at some point in time" seems reasonable in theory but I don't think it is a good idea in practice – if it is just all coloured the same that could easily be misconstrued in a maximalist, almost irredentist fashion, and if we can't source a "greatest extent" map then anything only occurring during that period (e.g. Prussia) would be equally suspect/dubious. (By the way, what do you mean by "I suspect they're a combination of both." – what does the "they" refer to?) Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 20:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

@Alphathon: "They" was referring to all the maps we're discussing. The published maps, and the two maps on Commons. "Both" was referring to "generalised overview" and "simply errors". Sorry for having been unclear there. Renerpho (talk) 21:00, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

No problem. Unlike the Droysens map the original 1190 source is explicitly claimed to be "about 1190". Unfortunately the title is cropped off on the one uploaded to commons but you can see the full thing here, where it is titled "Europe and the Mediterranean Lands about 1190". For what it's worth the next page "The Holy Roman Empire under the Hohenstaufen, 1138—1254 (which has to be a generalisation), also places both Pomerelia and Prussia within the Empire, explicitly stating "...Pomerania, Pomerelia and Prussia were added to the Empire during the Hohenstaufen Period." The page "Central Europe in 1378" also places the "Domain of the Teutonic Order", including Prussia and Pomerelia, in the empire. Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 22:53, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

On the other hand the page Europe, 1360—1400 seems to show it outside the empire. I suspect it's one of those weird situations where it is both true to say that it is part of the empire and outside it – as Srnec says, a sui generis. Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 01:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

@Chlebek Boży: Could you expand on what you said about East Prussia and the Gdansk Pomeralia? If there's a contradiction (maybe with different reliable sources making contradictory claims), that would be very good to know. Renerpho (talk) 00:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

as Srnec says, a sui generis -- how about using hachured lines for it in the map? Renerpho (talk) 01:39, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

@Alphathon: Sorry, I forgot to tag you. Renerpho (talk) 01:46, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Don't worry about it – there's no need to do it every time. Hatching isn't great for maps like that as we can't really control how they're viewed. A lighter green (like the Patrimony of Saint Peter/Latium on Holy Roman Empire 1190.svg) would probably be better. Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 03:21, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Anything that indicates that it's an unusual case would be fine. A lighter green sounds good to me. The same could be applied to other parts of the HRE that turn out to be weird. The less we falsely claim that this is a black and white (or "dark green and white") situation, the better. Renerpho (talk) 15:43, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

The chronology and sources given here may prove useful. Renerpho (talk) 06:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Given the different sources, and alleged inaccuracies of the various maps, creating one [as a union of maps] as an editor is WP:SYNTH. I believe we need to show an actual authoritative map that has been located outside of efforts made within WP to correct what we may think are inaccuracies. That is the job of a professional cartographer, IMO.  • Bobsd •  (talk) 21:50, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm afraid I agree with Bobsd. Renerpho (talk) 12:10, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

If the map in the infobox is inaccurate and we can't find an accurate map, why not just remove the map altogether? Isn't it better to have no map than to have an error-ridden one? ~2026-24307-27 (talk) 05:51, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Inaccurate map of the HRE in the 13th Century

This page needs to have the maps showing the peak of HRE, as well as the part of the article describing it removed immediately. The empire didn't control Silesia under the rule of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, with it only joining in the 14th Century, due to becoming a dependency of the Bohemian crown. Another inaccuracy are East Prussia and the Gdansk Pomerelia belonging to the Empire, at that time. They were never part of the HRE. Chlebek Boży (talk) 08:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

You are correct about Silesia. Srnec (talk) 18:02, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

@Alphathon: Are they right about Silesia? Your map c:File:Mitteleuropa zur Zeit der Staufer.svg (as well as Droysen) includes the Duchy of Silesia, and the article dates that map to the reign of Frederick II (1220-1250). If Silesia joined in 1328(?), that's a problem. Renerpho (talk) 18:17, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

See here for an explicit statement that Silesia became part ofthe Empire in 1335. As for the Ordenstaat, the Golden Bull of Rimini certainly treats the secular authority of the Order as stemming from the Empire, so while it was a bit sui generis in practice I think it is fine theoretically for the 13th century. Bigger issue is what lands were actually controlled by the Order at any given moment. That I cannot say. Srnec (talk) 18:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

@Renerpho: Yes, I believe Droysens was wrong to include Silesia on that map. It is one of the things I intend to correct about it when I get the updated one done. It is relatively simple to move the HRE border though so I could easily upload a version which just changes that in the meantime. The only question then is was it part of Poland or not not? (I don't know, and I think it was at least de facto independent at some points.) Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 20:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

The only question then is was it part of Poland or not not? -- Srnec's source seems to indicate that it was. Renerpho (talk) 21:05, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Where? I only see that it came to the Empire unequivocally in 1335 when Poland renounced its claims (referring to the Treaty of Trentschin), but that doesn't mean the Silesian dukes were vassals of the Polish High Duke/King at all previous dates. There was a period of fragmentation in Poland in the 12th-14th centuries during which the Polish "provinces" were de facto independent, although I don't know whether they still acknowledged the High Duke/King as overlord, or if they did whether it was anything more than nominal. (To be clear I am not claiming anything one way or another, I legitimately don't know.) Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 22:53, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I agree we should be careful with such claims/conclusions. Renerpho (talk) 00:39, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion: Put different maps of the HRE in it's evolution of territory

The HRE spanned a thousand years, from 962 if we start with Otto the great and ending in 1806. Since the empire lasted for so long, why don't we upt for example 4 different maps every 200 years, or even two. One map showing the empire in 1618 feels wrong. ~2026-29276-00 (talk) 21:33, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Finding even a single map of the HRE that shows its correct extend at any given time is hard to do; compare the discussion at Talk:Holy Roman Empire#Map inaccuracies about the numerous problems and anachronisms in the maps that are currently used. Coming up with multiple such maps for specific years sounds like an impossible task. Also compare Talk:Holy Roman Empire/Archive 7#Error in 1618 map?. Renerpho (talk) 01:25, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

add table of contents / index?

As a casual person who visits Wikipedia once or twice a day, I'm surprised this article doesn't have a table of contents or index (don't know the specific wiki term for this). Is this intentional or a victim of too many edits? Can such a thing be added? Thanks for reading this. ~2026-31534-87 (talk) 03:22, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2026

Someone appears to have accidentally copied and pasted their VPN passwords into the History section, this info should be removed. The information is on the third paragraph of the history section, starting with this sentence.

...[55][56] This can be seen as symbolic of the papacy turning away from the declining Byzantine Empire toward the new power of ExpressVpn.... ~2026-32141-91 (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done ☾⟣✦Inzessin✦⟢☽^(talk) 01:14, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Separate page for the Holy Roman Empire's history?

Though this request is based in a personal preference of mine, I believe that a history as nuanced and complex as the HRE's deserves to have a separate history article, mainly to be up to Wikipedia's standards. The current history section in this article is long and a bit cluttered, which would be solved, in my opinion, by leaving the length for the separate article and simplifying the summary.

It is fine if this is an unfulfillable request. Have a good day. Fishified53 (talk) 14:25, 15 June 2026 (UTC)