Talk:Count

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Europe Mid‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Etymology of Graf doubted

I am uneasy about some of the recent Anon. edits, linking "graf" with "graphein", etc. Will the more knowledgable vet this? --Wetman 07:05, 3 May 2005 (UTC) and Wetman 1 July 2005 07:32 (UTC). Subsequently I moved this text here: "These are not to be confused with various titles also containing the word -graf (in German, -grave in French and English, -graaf in Dutch) rather in its original sense (its medieval Latin original GRAFIO stems from the Greek verb graphein, to draw or to write : a public servant, as the Carolingian counts were before they gradually managed to obtain hereditary succession) "[reply]

I searched Perseus. The closest the Liddell & Scott had was "graphium," which is a synonym for stylus. It's possible that it is a medieval Latin coinage, but I've never heard of it. A search of the Saxo Grammaticus http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rostra.dk%2Flatin%2Fsaxo.html lexicon yiels the following under grav-:

gravamen, -inis i.q. molestia (c.adi. pro gen.obi.) Gertz M = onus

gravedo, -inis f. i.q. hebetudo; Gertz S 86, 17 = onus

gravis, -e I proprie A i.q. ponderosus B i.q. aliqua re gravatus II translate A de hominibus 1 i.q. audax, atrox, durus 2 i.q. cura affectus B de rebus 1 i.q. magni momenti, efficax, magnus; nota de somno i.q. profundus 125, 15 2 in malam partem i.q. acerbus, asper, durus, vehemens a generatim b speciatim de valetudine

graviter i.q. valde, multum, vehementer

gravitas, -tis 1 i.q. vis, auctoritas a c.gen. 2 i.q. severitas

gravo, -avi i.q. opprimo, vexo

gravor, -atus sum, -ari i.q. dubito, cunctor [re vera medial.pass. (gravo).RH]

I could make guesses based on that, but that would be original research. Still, a search of the Online Etymological Dictionary shows that grav- and graf- in the sense "to write, to carve" etc. have good Germanic pedigrees that make it unneccessary to invoke a Greek source. Neither the German and English graf articles cite their sources. It sounds like a folk etymology to me, and I don't think we should perpetuate it until we get to the bottom of this. --Jpbrenna 1 July 2005 07:12 (UTC)

grave (n.) Look up grave at Dictionary.com

O.E. græf "grave, ditch," from P.Gmc. *graban (cf. O.S. graf, O.Fris. gref, O.H.G. grab "grave, tomb;" O.N. gröf "cave," Goth. graba "ditch"), from PIE base *ghrebh-/*ghrobh- "to dig, to scratch, to scrape" (cf. O.C.S. grobu "grave, tomb"); related to grafan "to dig" (see grave (v.)). From Middle Ages to 17c., they were temporary, crudely marked repositories from which the bones were removed to ossuaries after some years and the grave used for a fresh burial. "Perpetual graves" became common from c.1650. To make (someone) turn in his grave "behave in some way that would have offended the dead person" is first recorded 1888. Graveyard shift "late-night work" is c.1907, from earlier nautical term, in reference to the loneliness of after-hours work.

grave (adj.) Look up grave at Dictionary.com

1541, from M.Fr. grave, from L. gravis "weighty, serious, heavy," from PIE base *gru- (cf. Skt. guruh "heavy, weighty;" Gk. baros "weight," barys "heavy;" Goth. kaurus "heavy").

grave (v.) Look up grave at Dictionary.com

O.E. grafan (p.t. grof, pp. grafen) "to dig, carve," from P.Gmc. *grabanan (cf. O.N. grafa, O.Fris. greva, O.H.G. graban, Goth. graban "to dig, carve"), from the same source as grave (n.). Its M.E. strong pp., graven, is the only part still active, the rest of the word supplanted by its derivative, engrave.

(Thanks! I moved the text in question to the opening paragraph above. Wetman 1 July 2005 07:32 (UTC))

We still have this impenetrable statement, which I'm moving here: "The German title Graf and its cognates may be based via their Latin form grafio on the Greek verb graphein to write." Whose Latin form? What kind of a Latin form is "grafio"? What would be the connection with a verb to write? Where is a source for this? --Wetman

Scots-Gaelic for 'Earl' & 'Countess'.

The Scots-Gaelic for 'Earl' is 'Iarla', & 'Countess' is 'Ban-Iarla'. - (Aidan Work 05:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC))[reply]

continuity

I know definitions are candidates for removal to the Wikidictionary, but shouldn't the whole definition/etymology section be moved there? Also - Count Chocula. Funny, but ... more fitting in Uncyclopedia. Chocula isn't the only fictional/humorous reference or usage, so shouldn't there be some additional section for just that? - IstvanWolf 04:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Mere dictionary definitions are indeed candidates for removal to Wikidictionary. The history of what words have been meaning, where they have come from and how they change in meaning is part of the history of ideas and quite clearly an encyclopedic topic, as this article itself demonstrates. Adding Count Chocula is an adolescent's joke. --Wetman 09:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian

I do not believe that Croatian knez, kneginja is etymologically derived from latin comes, count. It clearly is a version of slavic word knjaz... and knyazinja.. that means Prince and is a cognate of indo-eur words king.... croatian word should not be mentioned as etymological, and if it really there corresponds with prince as in otyher slavic languages, then it should not be here at alll. Suedois 22:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

aerodynamic domain

Aerodynamicists and in the general aerospace domain, "count" is an adimensional unit for measuring drag. The drag of an object is usually defined as the projection over an axis parallel to flow direction of the total aerodynamic loads that act upon the object (excluding thrust). The magnitude of the resulting drag vector is denoted by D (in Newtons if using SI units). The drag D is roughly proportional to the air-density and velocity^2, so usually the drag D is made adimensional by defining a coefficient CD such that D = 1/2*rho*V^2*c*CD, where c is a measure (in the order of magnitude) of the object's length, required to make CD non-dimensional. This convention was fixed years ago but the importance of the CD grew to a point where a difference of 0.0001 is enough to drop a couple chairs on a the Concord design. Therefore, aerodynamicists adopted the unit count, where a CD of 1 count is equal to CD = 0.0001 (10^-4). CD being adimensional, the "count" unit is also adimensional. (joaoliveira 19:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Start an article Count (aerodynamics) and note it at Count (disambiguation). --Wetman 12:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Papal nobility

Please excuse me, but are papal titles always at least partly in Italian(e.g. Principe de Polignac), or they are completely in the language of the recipient(e.g. Prince de Polignac)? I hope that this is not excessively irrelevant.--Anglius 19:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional Counts

Should there be a mention of the Count of Monte Cristo, a very important but fictional count? Mathwhiz90601 04:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are many counts in fiction. This article is about the history and development of the phenomenon of a "count". A List of counts in fiction might tire the reader as much as the compiler.--Wetman 13:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like...

I've heard (though ive been unable to find any academic verification online) that the nordic term Earl was adopted in Britain because Count was so phonetically similar to cunt. The fact that an Earl's wife is still called a Countess makes even more sense when considered in this light. I've actually run across this theory more than once, it seems to be pretty much accepted de facto even if it doesn't appear in the canon of linguistic history. I think this is pretty interesting, would anybody object to a casual reference to this somewhere in the first paragraph? Wording it NPOV would be tricky, so i'm not going to bother putting in the effort if its going to get deleted. --popefauvexxiii 02:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tee hee. April Fool! --Wetman 11:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

as hard is it might be to believe in light of the evidence, i was actually serious. --popefauvexxiii 05:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard that, too. I believe it is a fair assumption based on its lack of British use. Guv2006 (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

blatant vandalism by over excited editor removed 207.180.155.61 06:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)ab[reply]

Who is "count" Adam Brandon??? From what hell he is? Yopie 16:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

If Count Baltar is mentioned in a list then that list should also include Count Iblis :(

:( Count Iblis (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conti

Conti could also be John Conti 66.25.136.141 (talk) 04:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious counts

Both sections about counts in Albania and Australia seems to be dubious and as hoax. About "Castle Hill" in Australia are 0 ghits, about Albanian count I find ghits only in sites as Facebook etc. --Yopie 12:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

"single-headed eagle of sabre on gold"?

Is sabre a typo for sable? The footnotes don't clear it up. Urgos (talk) 06:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Counts as rulers of a county

In the article there is very little attention to the fact that counts were actual rulers of a county, see Count of Holland, Count of Toulouse, Count of Barcelona and many others. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:47, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Count. 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/20050510135935/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu:80/jod/texts/cassbook/chap1.html to http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/texts/cassbook/chap1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 16:50, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Count. 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/20060214093646/http://65.66.134.201:80/cgi-bin/webster/webster.exe?firstp=10661 to http://65.66.134.201/cgi-bin/webster/webster.exe?firstp=10661

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 12:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More subsections needed

There are significant omissions in this offering: e.g. Russian Empire, Kingdom of Romania, Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Iceland, Baltic states, Kingdom of Scotland. This is on the "to do list". --Po Mieczu (talk) 14:23, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from hrabia

For many years we had the tiny stub on Polish count equivalent, hrabia. In 15 years it hasn't improved, and :pl:hrabia is about the title count - in Poland and other countries. While in theory, I can see the article on this topics (hrabia, or count (Poland) existing as a stand-alone entry, the current entry doesn't necessitate a stand-alone article. I suggest merging this here, with no prejudice to splitting it once the section actually is longer than the current 2-3 sentences. Ping User:Nihil novi , User:Volunteer Marek, User:Oliszydlowski , User:Lembit Staan... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support merger. At present, the separate article for "hrabia" (the Polish equivalent for the European aristocratic title of "count") makes as much sense as would a separate English Wikipedia article for the Polish word "skarpeta" (the name for the article of apparel known in English as a "sock"). Nihil novi (talk) 22:02, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I started Noble titles in Poland, which would be a proper redirect for now. Lembit Staan (talk) 20:11, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of the word "allodialisation"

I have never encountered this word before until reading this article and an online search for it comes up without any dictionary entry or definition. Does anyone know what it means, and/or whether it has prior use in published material?

With z or s it comes up if you do a google search.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]