Talk:Antemurale myth

Merge with Antemurale Christianitatis
I think that this and the Antemurale Christianitatis article discuss the same issue. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk 02:01, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose: I am involved user because I am author and main contributor to this article. The Antemurale myth has two versions : 1) Religious and 2) Secular. The religious versions are connected to the myths of certain nation being antemurale of some religion, like Islam, Christianity... or some religious fractions within Christianity or Islam. The secular versions are connected to the myths of certain nation being antemurale of liberty, democracy, civilization,... Therefore it is obvious that Antemurale myth and Antemurale Christianitatis do not discuss the same issue because myth of Antemurale Christianitatis is only one part of the Antemurale myth complex. I plan to expand this article and make this much more obvious.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that now, after some expansion of the article, it is clear that Antemurale myth does not refer only to myth of being a bulwark of Christianity. It refers to many other myths like myth of being a bulwark of Islam, civilized Europe, free world against US domination, farmers as bulwark of moral virtues, Turkey as bulwark to Russia, Hitlers facism as bulwark to Stalins communism, Croatian tamburica bulwark against non-tamburica Serbs, myth of marriage being bulwark of the polis, Eastern Germany's myth of Soviet Union being a bulwark of piece in the world.... Besides Christianity there are many other religions and ideologies and their Antemurale myths. Equation of all Antemurale myths with only Antemurale Christianitatis would be very Christian-centric and wrong. Some of those myths are probably out of the scope of this article since it is about antemurale myth which is linked with nations.
 * I propose to close this discussion with no consensus to merge.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:55, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Everything you said above works as an argument for merger. Those could all be subsections of this article as they all refer to the fundamentally same concept.  Timbouctou ( talk ) 11:30, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't agree that we should include myths of being a bulwark of Islam, civilized Europe, free world against US domination, Turkey as bulwark to Russia, Hitlers facism as bulwark to Stalins communism... into article about only Antemurale Christianitatis. It is obvious that many of those myths are not related to Christianity at all. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What I had in mind was merging Antemurale Christianitatis into Antemurale myth.  Timbouctou ( talk ) 12:33, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry for misunderstanding. I agree with your logic because Antemurale Christianitatis overlap with the Antemurale myth. Taking in consideration that Antemurale Christianitatis is very notable topic itself I think it deserves its own article.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Antemurale myth. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://geocities.com/marin_serban/maner2004.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://geocities.com/marin_serban/maner2004.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:07, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Croatia myth
How can it be myth if Pope did call Croatia antemurale Christianitatis. And Serbs actually being Vlachs. There is historical document https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statuta_Valachorum. And on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morlachs it says they expressed Croat or Serb indentity based on religion in 19th century.

Balderdash: This article should at most be a small subsection!
Is this article some form of ideological historical negationism!? Someone already mentioned that it was used by Pope Leo X and is generally seen as a line of battle against the invading Ottoman empire in a long line of established scholarly writing for centuries. The conflicts of Jajce (1521, 1525), Kllis (1524), Mohacs (1526), and Vienna (1529) for example marked the line where the frontwall of Christendom (i.e Antemurale Christianitatis) existed against and was succesful in repelling Suleiman II onslaught on the European continent. So should Drang nach Osten also have a separate article called "Drang nach Osten myth"....Or maybe the Schlieffen plan by Alfred von Schlieffen could also be a myth or challenged as hoax created by "evil Jews" wanting to tarnish the reputation of the late 19th freedom loving  Germans? Merge this article with Antemurale Christianitatis, but make it a small subsection! MynameisadamB (talk) 12:17, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Not a fair and unbiased article
This article reads more like propaganda than a fair and balanced article. The usage of the word "myth" is derogatory and demeaning.

The "bulwarks" were primarily the result of defensive battles against foreign conquerors. At this time, colonialism is seen as a bad thing and thus defensive bulwarks should be seen as a good thing.

The only thing that makes sense is that the primary "author" is pushing globalist propaganda that seeks to destroy the validity of protecting the individualism and sovereignty of nation states. 198.251.52.109 (talk) 20:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)