Talk:Maramureș

Former talk page of Maramureş (historical region)

what is this article about

Maramures is not a region as the main meaning of the word region.(i hope i wont have to explain what a Maramures region implies). it is indeed a historical region of Romania Criztu 13:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

where is the the northern limit of maramures (ie how much of transcarpathia does it comprise)?Anonimu 23:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This article is about the so-called Romanian Maramures ... has nothing to do with the former Maramures region within the Kingdom of Hungary. The Romanian historical Maramures is somehow mixed with the former Maramures Raion, with the present day Maramures county ... etc. Transcarpathia is also a relatively new entity a direct result of the post Trianon period.

So the original Maramures was divided into present-day Romanian Maramures and Transcarphatia ... --fz22 13:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Maramures, from the way I look at things, is a historical region that had exactly the same boundary till 1918-1920, never being split. Presently, it is devided into a part in Ukraine (see the map at Northern Maramuresh (geographic region)) and Romania (see Maramureş County). NM is about 50% of territory and 30% of population of Zakarpattia, it is not coincident with the latter, as the political and economical centers of the later are outside NM.

This article should be about Maramures as historical region, before 1867. After 1867 we have artciles for administrative entities in the Kingdom of Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia and Ukraine. To help unite the issues, I intend to write an article History of Maramures, so for history can link there, but for geography, politics, culture, localities, people, one should write in the respective articles (my suggestion).

One can ask, why not writing articles for administrative units before 1867. Answer: it is almost impossible to find specific info for an article about a 20-years long administrative unit during 18th century. Sometimes one does not even know the precise year a unit was formed and dissolved, does not know who were the officials, has no demographic data for those 20 years, has no idea where to find an EXACT list of localities for that 20-year period. Such an article would be a permanent stub.:Dc76 17:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

was fully included in the Hungarian Kingdom in the 14th century?

Yes sure :))), were re-included teritories from some rebellious barons (Aba and Borsa family), but definetely wasn't a Slavic autonomous region ... Plus after the Mongol invasion the whole region was depopulated --fz22 20:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

after the Mongol invasion the whole region was depopulated... Care to share with us your sources for this piece of information? Dmaftei 22:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

In 1241-1242, Tatars have stayed 7 months in Transylvania, plundered, sieged all fortresses that were shut (except for 2 or 3, all fell), and in the process killed 50% of the population. This is worse than the desease of 1350s, when only 1/4 died. The population recovered quickly (one generation) every time. No region was entirely depopulated. There were some villages that siezed to exist, some where repopulated several years later. Colonization started around 1200, i.e. almost 2 generations before. Not only Transylvania, but other parts of the Kingdom of Hungary were depopulated, and there was no special need to populate Transylvania more than other regions. By the time the kings were able to practically stimullate collonization, the population recovered. The colonization continued in its own right, based on military and political reasons, not on Tatar invasion outcome.

Maramures is first mentioned in Hungarian cronics in 1199 as unknown forrest, and exactly 100 years later, in 1299 as royal forest. From that year kings tried to bring the local nobles under their vassality. Maramures was an integral political entity at the time, a loose federation of local small nobles, viteji, under a dinastic voivod (generally, but not only, for judging matters). When the Anjou got in Hungary in 1320s, they wanted to bring Maramures under their vassality, and told the voivod he would be called a count. However, when voevods realized that meant to kneel, and generally to be called king's representative, they rejected. Carol Robert (first Anjou) had other more important problems, so he sort of gave Maramures a brake. When Louis (second Anjou) came in 1342, Maramures was among the first on the list. He managed to persuade many fighters from Maramures to participate in 1343 campain agaist Tatars in what later became Moldavia, which was very succesful. Louis struck gold by bringing Dragos to his side, for that was an old and very respected noble (not sure whether from Maramures or from Bistrita, or from Bukovina mountains). At any rate, as Dragos died in 1345, his son Sas was heart and soul with Anjou, who's determination ended Tatar yoke. Bogdan, the Maramures voevod, was not happy about this for political reasons. Louis persuaded small nobles of Maramures to come to his terms and serve as king representatives for subregions of Maramures. Bogdan was furious, and in 1349 made a sweep thoughout Maramures, throughing out everyone who swore aleagence to Louis. But in just a few months everything was back. At which point Bogdan realized, that he had to do something more radical. The move happened 10 years later, and was at least partially determined by the fact that Bogdan's daughter Muşata (a nickname, her Christian name was Margareta) was wife of a old noble in around present day Siret/Rădăuţi (and a vassal of Polish kings), who had at least two young sons from her, and at least one son from a previous mariage. Bogdan therefore had to interfere in envy between half-brothers. When Louis' sent army was defeted at Radauti 4 years later in 1363, Louis confiscated all Bogdan's lands in Maramures (theoretically Bogdan could still reclaim them, since he had just gone into an expedition), and appointed these kands to Dragos' grandsons Drag and Balc, who swore happily aleagence to Louis as voivods and counts of Maramures. So, 1363. :Dc76 18:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

PROBLEM

I moved Maramureş (historical region) to Maramures (historical region), but now I realize there are alomst 100 redirects here. Please help with suggestions! :Dc76 01:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I fixed all of the double redirects that were created with the move, but what is important is whether there are any double redirects, ususal redirects do not do any harm... But I could run WP:AWB to fix the links. —dima/s-ko/ 01:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you have a program, that's great. Can you, please, however wait 2-3 days before doing that, in case some people disagree with the move - to dicuss first. Thanks for your kind help.:Dc76 02:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't get why this page was moved. Maramureş is the correct spelling. Shouldn't we be moving Crişana to Crisana then? Khoikhoi 04:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, I should have discussed this more thouroughly first. (see also Talk:Northern Maramuresh (geographic region)) Maybe the move was worng, I don't know. It came out of the discussion with User:PANONIAN and User:DDima. Let's figure out. (I appologize in advance if we need to revert) Here are the reasons:

• Crişana is a region in Romania, while Maramures is both in Romania and Ukraine. In Romania it is spelled Maramureş, while in Ukraine it is spelled Maramuresh.
• If there would have been a name of some officially used administrative unit, then I understand and agree we should use the name in the language it is. E.g. Maramureş County, Máramaros (refering to the 1867-1918 county), Zakarpattia, etc. So we exclude all these cases, when the name is of some official entity.
• If a geographic or historic region is entirely in some country, then we have two options:
  • there is already a prefered English name, e.g. Transylvania
  • there is no preferred English name, so we use the one of that country in that country's spelling, e.g. Crişana
• If a region is divided betwen countries, then:
  • if there is a prefered English name, then we are done, e.g. Dobruja
  • if there is no preferred English name, we are stuck, and have to choose between one of the national spellings (POV), or find a middle solution (original research). OR might be little better solution, for in some cases the names in two languages differ very much, and we don't want to have South Eire and Northern Ireland (just a stupid example, I don't want to take any side there :-) )

This is exactly our situation: Maramureş (historical region) and Maramuresh (historical region) are national names, while Maramures (historical region) is our "invention" or "compromize". So, I (Romanian) moved a persived POV (by PANNONIAN who is Serbian and DDima who is Russian Ukrainian), to a persived original research. As I have done this, I noticed there are 100 or so links to it, and I realized I must have done something unwise. So I left the message here, and I hope someone would bring more light into the matter.

The other problem we have is Northern Maramuresh (geographic region). But this is somewhat easier: this is not an official entity, but it is situated entirely in Ukraine (although ethnically mixed), and there is no prefered English name. So, I guess according to the above here we should use Northern Maramuresh - one of the 3 Ukrainian versions, which lands 600+ google seaches, as opposed to 10 and 25 for the other two (as pointed by DDima) - also this of the 3 is more close to the prononciation in Romanian, so less chance of someone not understanding that Maramuresh, Maramureş, Mármaros, Maramures, Marmatia is actually the same thing. On the same tokken I guess it should be Southern Maramureş, which is less used, since it represents around 60% of the present day Maramureş County, and people simply refer to the county.

Maybe the first sentance of Maramures (historical region) should be:

The name Maramures is alternatively spelled Maramureş, Maramuresh, Mármaros, Marmaţia, Marmatia, etc, depending on the sourse. It denotes a historic and gepographic region, presently split between Romania (south, where it is part of Maramureş County), and Ukraine (north, where it is part of Zakarpattia Oblast).:Dc76 17:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I'm always against using misspellings on Wikipedia. "Maramures" how people spell "Maramureş" when there are technical limitations. You might also be interested in WP:UE, especially the section "Borderline cases"

Some cases are less clear-cut. There is a trend in part of the modern news media and maps to use native names of places and people, even if there is a long-accepted English name. For example, US newspapers generally refer to the Olympics in Torino even though most English texts still call the city Turin. However, newspapers in other parts of the English speaking world still use Turin. One should use judgment in such cases as to what would be the least surprising to a user finding the article. Whichever is chosen, one should place a redirect at the other title and mention both forms in the lead.

At the same time, when there is no long-established history of usage of the term, more consideration should be given to the correctness of translation, rather than frequency of usage (in a typical example of testing the usage by counting Google hits, if one version gets 92 hits, while another one gets 194 hits, it can hardly be decisive).

So, as I would support a solution, I oppose this particular one. Khoikhoi 01:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I must conceed, your arguments are sounder. I am changing my point of view, now I will defend Maramureş (historical region) (at least now I would be able to argument that). I am sincerely sorry for trubble with moving pages back and forth. If this needs more fixing, list below what things should I look for. Anyway, I will go through the redirects to check. Simultaneously, this has also solved the problem with Northern Maramuresh (geographic region):Dc76 15:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

interwiki info

Please also visit the romanian page for Maramureş where the work is in pregress: http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maramureş Thanks --Morosanul (talk) 12:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Organization

My conclusion after the organization work I’ve done on Romanian presentation of Maramureş, and considering the many meanings of the name Maramureş is as following:

Maramureş will be the main article for this subject, and here will also redirect from Maramureş (geographic region), Maramureş (historical region), Land of Maramureş or Ţara Maramureşului. (This should work for all the other possible spellings: Maramures, Maramuresh, Mármaros, Marmaţia, Marmatia).

This article will comprise position, limits, geography, history, people, culture and traditions of the region.

Máramaros comitatus (RO: comitatul Maramureş) - the historic administrative county (comitatus) of the Kingdom of Hungary,a and later Austrian Empire.

Maramureş County (RO:Judeţul Maramureş) - the present day administrative division in Romania. At the History section of this article can be presented Maramureş County between the World Wars (which has a special area in the Romanian Wiki under România interbelică project).

Northern Maramuresh (RO: Maramureşul de Nord) – now part of Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine, which has here a good article

Maramureş Mountains

All these lines should appear under Disambiguation page.

The reason for grouping in the same article the topics Maramureş, Maramureş (geographic region), Maramureş (historical region) and Land of Maramureş is that the geographical region was the source for both the historical region and the name given to different administrative structures organized here: Voivodeship, Comitatus, County or Judeţ.

Maramureş stood basically in its geographical borders, marked by the mountains surrounding the region, during the whole history.

This happend for many regions on the Romanian territory called Ţări (Lands), even for those which were never an administrative entity by themselves, as Ţara Oaşului, Ţara Lăpuşului, Ţara Moţilor, Ţara Zarandului, Ţara Loviştei, but are instead geographical and etno-cultural units.

--Morosanul (talk) 14:21, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree. This makes more sense than the current disambig page. Dc76\^talk 22:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

First, I am sorry I did not get the necessary time to restructure according to the above suggestions. Dc76\^talk 22:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually I’m planning to do myself all these changes, I only delayed my work on this issue to finish the Romanian article about Maramureş. Meantime I found your article History of Maramureş and I tried to match the information as much as my sources allow. As soon as I get to a fine result there, I’ll be able to start here from a better position. --Morosanul (talk) 08:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Very well. Dc76\^talk 21:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I understand what you mean. I also think the disambiguation page is short and clear. I thaught is necessary to make redirects for every variant and spelling in case of search, but this looks better.

I will strt translating the romanian article, but i will keep it shorter for 2 reasons: there is a special article on History of Maramures, and in my opinion an international reader do not want to get in too many detais which can discourage him to read a big article. --Morosanul (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

History issues

Dc76, do you have some references about paleolithic and mesolithic foundings in Maramures ? I only could find neolithics both in the Museum of Maramures and in the works i could acces. Thank you. --Morosanul (talk) 12:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Second, in the book I mentioned to you (M. Tomi) there is very little about it. I'm reproducing the entire thing below. Also, I remember that during the early stages of my editting I found a historic description in some semi-official site of the Zakarpatia Oblast (in several languages, including a translation into Romanian). I used some of the info from there in Northern Maramuresh, but I don't remember how far back it goes. I recall that I had some difficulty trying to figure out whether the different localities mentioned there were in Maramures, or in Ung, Bereg, Ugocsa. Also, please, if you have good info, do add it into Prehistoric Balkans as well. I mean, deffinitevely include there everything from the stone age, and also at least do mention major things from the bronze and iron ages up to 6th-5th centuries B.C.

Puţine cercetări de suprafaţă efectuate la Sighetu Marmaţiei şi la Câmpulung la Tisa au evidenţiat posibilitatea existenţei unor locuiri umane (pătrunderi sezoniere ale omului paleolitic din Ţara Oaşului?) datând din epoca paleolitică, fără a se putea stabili deocamdată cronologii şi tipologii specifice.

And a footnote:

Deoarece cercetările sistematice (abundă perieghezele şi descoperirile întâmplătoare, fără cercetarea stratigrafică adecvată şi cu unele studii tipologice sumare) lipsesc aproape cu desăvârşire pentru perioada preistorică, devine evident faptul că nu neputem permite a face încadrări cronologice specifice şi de fineţe pentru aceste epoci în privinţa descoperirilor făcute în Maramureşul istoric. Tocmai de aceea am preferat ca în prezenta lucrare să folosim doar o încadrare tipologică şi foarte generală pentru materialele care au fost găsite şi care sunt apte să dovedească existenţa locuirilor din preistorie de aici. Întro lucrare apărută în USRR (Istoria gorodov i sel Ukrainskoi SSR, Zakarpatskaia Oblast, 1981, pa.462 - History of cities and villages of Ukrainian SSR, Zacarpatia Oblast) se afirmă că cele mai vechi urme de locuire din dreapta Tisei datează de acum 50 000 ani (Musterian? Aurignacian?). Neavând access la această trimitere bibliografică, o consemnăm doar.

We can ask some Ukrainians to help us locate this mentioned book. However, I would caution you against taking seriously anything older than 42,000 years B.C., which is the date of the oldest known human remains in Europe. It is also probable that Soviet historians found something but did not have the tools to date it properly.

It seems that the oldest known permanent settlements in Maramureş are from the neolitic: Sighetu Marmaţiei, Crăciuneşti, Leordina, Năneşti, Onceşti, Corneşti, Coştiui, Săpânţa, Glod, Giuleşti, and Borşa. They are mostly "topor din piatră perforat", "daltă din piatră", "nuclee de obsidian". Dc76\^talk 22:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I know for sure about Paleolithic foundings in Ţara Oaşului at Boineşti, and Lăpuş at Suciu de Sus, but those in Maramureş are not yet confirmed. I would stick on Neolithic ones which are sure.

I would also be cautious about the information on local websites or newspapers because of the enthusiasm in taking unfiltered information, only based on the impact on public perception.

And btw, I do not have the M. Tomi’s book, I would need to know the population of Maramures voivodship / comitatus in different periods of time, estimation or later census. --Morosanul (talk) 09:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes to first paragraph. Yes to the second. To the third: ok, so let's do this way. You go first, and I follow suit. You edit the structure of those articles, then slowly copyedit them critically (place tags where you feel citations are needed, remove repetitions and dubious statements, etc). In parallel I will read the book, and following your structure will add info from it into the articles. If I find new references, I would also add them, but I will notify you of them as well, esp. if it's some website.

About population, it is not so easy, I have to read the entire book. In 10-15 minutes this is what I found:

• 1530. In aproprierea acestui reper cronologic populatia Maramuresului ar fi ajuns la 33.570 de suflete (cu o medie teoretica de 336 loc/asezare), marcand astfel o crestere demografica spectaculoasa de 13% in ultimul veac.
• Sfarsitul sec. 16 - incep. sec. 17. Sinteza demografica oferita de noul tratat de istorie nationala (v. bibl.) pentru Bihor, Satmar si Maramures (impreuna) se prezinta astfel: 380.000 locuitori la sf. sec. 16, 250.000 la incep. sec 17, 400.000 la mijl. sec. 17 (275.000 romani, 95.000 maghiari, 30.000 altii) si 375.000 la incep. sec. 17. Datele acestea trebuiesc luate in mare or relativitate, mai ales ca autorii tratatului (vol. 5, p. 474-475, 480) nu dau nicio trimitere bibliografica.
  • If I identify correctly in the bibliography section, it might be "Istoria romanilor", 8 vol., Ed. Academiei Romane, 2001, 2003
• There is a table with population with the following comment: Populatia Maramuresului din stanga Tisei a evoluat pala la Dictatul de la Viena conform tabelului de mai jos. (deoarece datele statistice difera destul de mult de la o sursa la alta, chiar atunci cand este vorba de statistici oficiale, acest tabel ca si cele de ami sustrebuie acceptate ca o ilustrare generala a unui fenomen atat de complex cum este cel demografic; spre exemplificare daca dam date din recensamintele din anii 1840-1900, facute dupa o "metodologie" adecvata intereselor maghiare, rezultatele sunt chiar hilare pentru Maramures; in perioada metionata populatia romaneasca a scazut de la 53.655 la 20.119 persoane, in vreme ce cea maghiara a crescut de la 12.513 la 42.403).
  • 1880: Romani 50.346, Germani 2.062, Ruteni/Ucraineni 11.934, Magiari 12.887, Evrei 14.467, Altii 2.907. Total 94.593
  • 1910: Romani 74.488, Germani 2.550, Ruteni/Ucraineni 19.956, Magiari 24.625, Evrei 27.002, Altii 449. Total 151.120
  • 1930: Romani 93.207, Germani 3.239, Ruteni/Ucraineni 19.230, Magiari 11.174, Evrei 33.828, Altii 897. Total 161.575
  • 1938: Romani 97.055, Germani 4.734, Ruteni/Ucraineni 19.864, Magiari 9.880, Evrei 37.430, Altii 214. Total 169.177
    • Note that the numbers don't add up 1910 (2000 souls difference) and 1880 (10 souls difference) Dc76\^talk 21:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Dc76\^talk 21:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

On Work

In Romania, the Maramures region is often considered to consist of the Satu Mare and Maramures counties

This map is suitable for Maramureş Region, the former administrative unit of Communist Romania in 1960-1968, which covered a much larger area than Maramureş County. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morosanul (talk • contribs) 09:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maramureș. 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/20131110070940/http://teofil-ivanciuc.weebly.com/lucr259rile-mele.html to http://teofil-ivanciuc.weebly.com/lucr259rile-mele.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 13:31, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Protected species: yew and larch - really?

Are the yew and larch really protected species? Hard to believe. Boscaswell talk 00:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)