Talk:Lazar of Serbia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Lazar of Serbia is part of the WikiProject Saints, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Saints on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to saints as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to saints. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Copyrighted text on this page used with permission. - Nikola 12:52, 24 September 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Mythical vs. historic Lazar

Seems like this leans quite heavily on the mythical perceptions of Lazar, as opposed to relying on the historical record. Which is not to say that the folk myth isn't an important aspect of Lazar, but maybe there should be two sections dealing with the historical figure vs. the legend. Because frankly the historical record isn't really all that scarce, it's just been overwhelmed by the hagiographic songs written in his own court after his death. I don't mind writing this but would like to first get some consensus before plunging into an edit war. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tracer bullet (talk • contribs) 14:57, 26 August 2004 (UTC).

I did that at Marko Kraljevic. But I don't see some mythical elements in this article? Nikola 15:21, 29 August 2004 (UTC)

Well mostly the stuff about Vuk Brankovic being expected but not arriving at Kosovo (he was there, and he fought), and speculation about how a different outcome of the battle would alter the course of Serbian history.

It's very important to establish that the historical Lazar was just a feudal lord, not ruler of "Serbia" but mostly just a small territory around Krusevac. There are some things he did which were lasting - like shifting the centres of power northward, but in a historical sense he was a pretty insignificant ruler, especially compared to Dusan or Nemanja.--tracer_bullet 14:07, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

Also, not sure if "Prince" is the correct translation of "Knez". Perhaps that should be clarified, as well as noting that the mythical Lazar often assumes the title of "Tsar". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tracer bullet (talk • contribs) 14:57, 26 August 2004 (UTC).

Yes, it should. Nikola 15:21, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Prince is the only valid translation of "Knez".Prince,meaning the son of king,who offtenly got a province to rule while his father is alive.The word of course got other meaning and it means the ruler of one part of the country.The other translations of the word "Knez" is Comes,which is simillar to word count,however,the Count is translated to Grof and it has nothing to do with Knez.Title Tzar (Tsar,Car,Emperor) is not valid with Lazar,because he was never crowned.It takes to patriarchs,or at least archibishops (archiepiscops) to crown a King into Emperor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.91.75.2 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC).

Prince is valid translation for Lazar, though note that it isn't for all knezes. For example, at one point of time knez could be simply village chief. Lazar was not crowned for tsar, but is oftenly called tsar in tradition, which should be noted. Nikola 10:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Marriage and Progeny

I have removed the following note from Olivera Despina since it is not true: "Balkan noblewomen married to an Ottoman sultan during this era of Turkish invasion were chosen into the sultan's harem.". Until Bayezid I's (and his wives') capture by Tamerlane in 1402, Ottoman Sultans married polygamously princesses of neighboring countries -- Byzantine, Serbian or daughters of other Turkish Khans. These women were not entered into the harem as an odalisque as the note implies. These were marriages contracted for political and dynastic reasons. Free smyrnan 13:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)