Disputatio:Sacrum Romanum Imperium

Sacrum Romanum Imperium fuit pagina mensis Novembris 2023.

Sacrum Romanum Imperium recte dicendum est chartis documentisque concordantibus. --Enzian44 02:58, 9 Novembris 2008 (UTC)

Why has the title been changed from Sacrum Romanum Imperium to Imperium Romanum Sacrum?--Utilo 15:53, 30 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

The title was never changed, it was always Imperium Romanum Sacrum. --Alex1011 16:30, 30 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

I thought so, because there is a pagina redirectionis from Sacrum Romanum Imperium. - The real question is: Is Enzian44 right or not? The German Wikipedia states: "Der Name Sacrum Imperium ist für 1157 und der Titel Sacrum Romanum Imperium für 1254 erstmals urkundlich belegt. Seit dem späten 15. Jahrhundert setzte sich allmählich der Zusatz Deutscher Nation (lat. Nationis Germanicæ) durch."--Utilo 18:32, 30 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Sacrum Romanum Imperium (siglum SRI) seems to be best (40 000 google results). Sacrum imperium Romanum (180 000 google). Imperium Romanum Sacrum (40 000 google) seems to be only a modern war game or similar things. (Interesting [1])--Alex1011 19:13, 30 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Fine, also the sigla SRI seems to be old and well attested. It could be useful to specify emperors: Fridericus III > Fridericus III (imperator SIR). - According to your findings shouldn't the site be moved (back??) to "Sacrum Romanum Imperium"?--Utilo 21:40, 30 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

I found Latin attestations for "sacrum Romanum imperium" and "sacrum imperium Romanum" (the latter ex.gr. the treaty of Westphalia.) I would move to "sacrum Romanum imperium" (Latinitas of the Vatican). --Alex1011 23:21, 30 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the trend of discussion above, but I suggest avoiding abbreviations in pagenames. I think, even if attested, Latin abbreviations of that kind are not widely familiar. In most cases "imperator" is enough, isn't it? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:53, 31 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

You are right, I was "seduced" by the German Wikipedia ...--Utilo 10:37, 31 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

And I also agree with Alex1011 to move to "Sacrum Romanum Imperium"--Utilo 10:38, 31 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

Movi.--Alex1011 22:42, 31 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)

If memory serves, classical writers didn't like to string adjectives together without et or que or something else separating them (except maybe as predicate adjectives after a form of esse), so Sacrum Imperium Romanum would seem to be a more classical version, but the term didn't exist in classical times, and we have multiple attestations from the Middle Ages, so Sacrum Romanum Imperium would seem to be appropriate. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:08, 12 Septembris 2021 (UTC)

Bona proportio

Causa legibilitatis primam sententiam notasque eae subiunctas reduxi. Notas mea mente minus relevantes removi hicque posui:

Notae

Varietates Sacrum Romanorum Imperium et S.R.I., fontibus carentibus, removi, sed licet iterum inserere, fontibus utilibus munitas. NB: Notae subiunctae modo speciali scriptae sunt verbisque Anglicis farciuntur. Oportet Latine simplici modo reficere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:51, 12 Septembris 2021 (UTC)