| Revision as of 19:17, 22 August 2011 editEjgreen77 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Template editors58,949 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:54, 20 October 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,677,634 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. The article is listed in the level 5 page: Western Europe. Remove 1 deprecated parameter: importance.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion | ||
| (32 intermediate revisions by 25 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|vital=yes| | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject Former countries|Prussia=Yes|Prussia-importance=}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Lithuania|importance=High|comments=}} | |||
| {{WPMA|class=Stub}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Russia|importance=Mid|hist=yes|ethno=yes}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Poland|importance=mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=mid}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Ethnic groups|importance=mid}} | |||
| }} | |||
| {{Archives}} | |||
| == External Links == | |||
| ==Recidivism of primitive polish chauvinism== | |||
| Every single external link on this page is a dead end with no content, can any fix this? | |||
| What evidence is there that Pruzzen meant "fair-haired?" | |||
| ] (]) 01:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
| Does anyone know if Danzig was almost entirely German -- or was there a sizable proportion of native ''Prussians'' living there? | |||
| :{{Fixed}} If any can ] can! ] ] 22:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
| In the beginning Gdansk was entirely Polish without any Prussian population. In XIII and especially XIV century there was a huge wave of Dutch, Flemmish and German immigration to the City. Since the city never belonged to original land of Prussians there was never a Prussian Population there.] 13:18, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC) | |||
| == Bizarre sentence == | |||
| Sorry, in the (today) Danzig/Gdansk region there was some "Ols Prussian" population, later replaced by a population that was/is not ("ethnically") Polish, but Cashubian. See e.g. Wiki in kaszëbsczi.--] (]) 14:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Call me slow ~ go ahead, it's been done many times before ~ but i cannot for the life of me work out exactly what is meant by this sentence: '' At the beginning of Baltic history, the Old Prussians were bordered by the Vistula and the Memel – earlier Mimmel – river, which outside of Prussia is called Neman Rivers with a southern depth to about Thorn at the Vistula river, which was Prussian, and the line of the River Narew.'' I have gone back in the history to try and work out who added, what might have been meant, but it seems to have been there for ages. It might mean something like ''At the beginning of Baltic history, Old Prussians were bordered by the Vistula and Neman rivers (the Neman is also called the Memel, in German), as far south as Thorn, on the Vistula'', but as i have no idea i'm not changing the article. If there is someone who knows, however, this portion of the article must be changed ~ if for no other reason than that it needs to be in good English: "southern depth" doesn't mean anything, and the phrase about the "line of the River Narew" is questionable. Cheers, ''']'''<sup>]</sup> 08:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *Proper citation would be helpful. The eastern mouth of the Vistula was indeed part of the Prussian homeland since before Slavs arrived. After their arrival, was the native population forced out, or were they absorbed? Citation? Does info on St. Adalbert give much detail? Also, after Danzig became a Hansa port was there zero population from the neighboring old Prussian area or was it entirely German and Dutch? | |||
| ::It appears to be written in a dialect known as "English Misplaced Pages". Get used to it if you come here often...] (]) 21:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC) | |||
| *This article should be expanded with a description of Prussian culture (see external links in the page), and a brief summary of the ]. Also, specifics on revival of culture and language may prove interesting. (Compare this article with that on ]. | |||
| :::More precisely: Get used to it if you plan to read articles that attract Polish nationalists. ] (]) 14:59, 8 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
| *Watch out for one particular vandal who will destroy any article which does not eulogize the glories of Communism and Poland! <br>--] | |||
| == Attention experts == | |||
| Spacecadet, you are full of yourself like the rest of Misplaced Pages's Polish flagwavers: "Polish without any Prussian population", you say? Clearly you don't know what the hell you are talking about. It was Prussian to begin with. Prussia has nothing to do with Germany until the 13th century. By an accunt of "nationality", the area rightfully belongs to the Lithuanian/Latvian Slavs. | |||
| Furthermore, there is a difference between Polish as a nationality and Poland the Kingdom, an imperial entity. That would be like calling Hannoverians British in the 18th Century. Its imperialist just like any other nation. Interestingly enough, the Prussians were conquered by BOTH the Teutons and the Poles ''in cooperation''...and to think that you thought Polish people inhabited the area from Manchuria to Belgium? Shame on you. | |||
| New page ]. ] (]) 21:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Gdańsk was founded in 980 and NO: it never had any Prussian population. Prussia was on the eastern side of the Vistula river! If you are calling Lithuanians and Latvians - Slavs, then it is you who has no clue. They are Balts, BTW. ] 17:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == who had assimilated the Old Prussians == | |||
| Not all of them - some run away to Lithuania or died.] (]) 09:28, 5 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
| No, I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. I was suggesting that the Slavs residing there originally had ventured from the east (Lithuania/Latvia was a reference point). I'm not sure anyone knows the answer to that one... | |||
| Of course, this is really irrelavant to the point I was making, which was that Slavic Pomerani and Kasubi tribes were living in the area before the Polish invaders arrived between 962 to 992. Wooden structures were already present before the Poles came, took the land and built Gdansk. The area was conquered by the Poles and became Polish through, surprise, expansion and assimilation. I am not arguing that Danzig was Prussian, but I am arguing that the region where Danzig was established was not an area where the Polish peoples had settled. Thus, the land is "Polish" just as much as it is anyone else's after they conquer it, according to your logic. | |||
| == Why is Prakrit included? == | |||
| Yes, the Baltic "Prussians" are on the other side of the river, but its on the other side of the river - not the ocean! The poles, on the other hand, settled nowhere near this location orginally and were much closer to the Warta River. | |||
| Why is the Indian language, Prakrit, included among the languages in which the name for the Old Prussian appears? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)</span></small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Hello guys. You men have touched on some big topics. I suppose what one can validly conclude about them depends in large part on the dates meant. Archaeology tells us the proto-Balts probably went to the west of the Vistula into Pomerania and also covered most of northern Russia. This was too early for any "Old Prussians", which brings up the question of language genesis and ethnogenesis. Slavic is rather early but when and how did Polish appear? There were no Poles along the Baltic originally; the language did not originate there. They kept moving into the Baltic down the Vistula, contending with the Prussians and taking their land. Their biggest expansion came when they formed a common state with the Lithuanians and built an empire across what is now Russia. While the Lithuanians were putting that in place they left the Old Prussians to the wolves. There were however early Slavs along the Baltic all the way into the Propommern. Charlemagne invited more in after the departure of the population of Schleswig-Holstein to Britain, which got him into trouble with the scandinavians. The Slavs in germany were the Wends. I think there might be some of them left. | |||
| Who cares what Prussians were called in Prakrit, it's irrelevant. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Now, I read a lot of talk here about Gdansk. Well, what of the Goths? The Vandals? Just where were they? Do you really think there was no city at Gdansk until 980? Was there any actual Polish spoken at that time anyway? If so, it must have been far from Gdansk. These questions of who settled Gdansk, where were the Prussians, where were the Balts, when did the Polish tribes or the Baltic tribes come into existence, etc. are bigger than a few centuries after the year 1000. There is at least 1000 years before then to cover, possibly more, and I don't see it being started yet. There are a lot of potential articles in it, a lot. It is going to have to be like a mosaic filled in a few pieces at a time. | |||
| ==Type Iesus Christus== | |||
| :Now, I don't mean to be insulting, but the passionate generalizations of newly patriotic Poles is not very helpful in achieving an objective history. Why don't you do the Polish Misplaced Pages? Today's issues have not a thing to do with 1000 years ago, as neither the issues nor the protagonists existed yet. Or shall we just give up and say that no objective history can be written, and concentrate on propaganda? But the we are going to need a history of propaganda, and a history of histories of propaganda, being careful it does not turn into a propaganda of propaganda, etc. Gosh, cleaning up and slanting history is like telling lies, the more you tell, the more you need to tell. I would say as a general rule that if you are resentful over the current location of the Polish border perhaps you should consider avoiding the topic on Misplaced Pages and let the 3rd parties handle it. Recuse yourselves.] 03:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ... into Google Search and there is a nice article on ]. | |||
| ==Vandalism== | |||
| == Romowo or Ramowo? == | |||
| There ''is'' no Prussian people, and has not been any since the 18th century. The inhabitants of East Prussia, who were expelled after the Second World War, considered themselves to be Germans. That they are now interested in reviving a "Prussian" identity is worth noting, but the idea that there is any kind of continuity between this and old Prussian culture is ridiculous. ] 02:09, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC) | |||
| What is the correct name of the capital of the Old Prussia? I find both Romowo and Ramowo.] (]) 01:26, 20 October 2018 (UTC) | |||
| :Misplaced Pages is maintained by compromise and co-operation with the community. If you have something worthwhile to contribute to an article you should do that. Blanking out the bulk of others' work, is not contribution and is in violation of Misplaced Pages's expressed policy. | |||
| :The whole point of the article, and what makes it interesting and relevant, is that they are still an identifiable ethnic group and some among them wish to revive certain markers. The current movement of cultural revival was sparked by their physical removal from the lands which they have inhabited since before history. | |||
| == Confusing Customs == | |||
| :You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But that's it -- it's an over-generalization. By the same logic, there are no Tibetan people and no Hawaiian people. By this logic, Koreans have no continuity with Koreans of the past because they were ruled so long by China and Japan. By this logic, Aborigines removed from their native lands cease to be Aborigine if they speak only English. This is ridiculous and offensive to people the world over. Needless to say, such a hostile racial stance is inappropriate on Misplaced Pages. | |||
| What is a 'commercial marriage' and what does 'submission' imply? "''Commercial marriage'' was widespread and after the husband's death, the widow fell to the son, like other inheritance. In addition, polygyny (up to three wives) was widespread. Adultery was a serious crime, punishable with death. After the ''submission'', commercial marriage and polygyny were forbidden." | |||
| :Intelligent conversation should be encouraged, not attacked. Without compromising neutrality, you could make an intelligent note of your opinion without gross censorship and ] of an article. You could, for example, ask the question: "If an ethnic group no longer speaks its native language, does it cease to exist? Does it lose the right to discuss its history since the said change?" If you are entitled to your opinion, others are entitled to theirs. Some Prussians do believe themselves to exist and wish to be heard, wrongly or rightly. | |||
| 'Commercial Marriage' does not appear to have a definition that I can find. Is this saying that marriage was seen as a commercial ''act'', as in ]? If it is trying to say that ] is paid, to whom is it paid and why would that make the marriage 'commercial' in nature? I thought perhaps it was that wives were bought and sold, but the 'adultery' bit makes that unlikely. The inheritance part is also confusing, as the 'widow fell to the son' can, as written, imply incestuous marriage (not really common outside Greek tragedy). On the other hand, if the wives were treated like chattel, did their status vis-à-vis the inheriting son change from mother to slave? | |||
| The last sentence in the section is also confusing. 'After the submission' begs the question, who was submitting to whom? Contextually, it should mean that after a woman 'submits' as part of an adulterous act (the last noun that would work as an antecedent), women could no longer be part of whatever a commercial marriage may be, nor could they join a polygynous group. Later in the article, a brief mention is made about the Old Prussians 'submitting' to the Teutonic Order. Is that what the author was saying? Cheers, ] (]) 21:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC) | |||
| == Picture of Catechism in Old Prussian == | |||
| :That said, do you have any knowledge of the Old Prussians to make an intelligent contribution? For example, Tacitus referred to them long before Adalbert. Moreover, there is a corpus of archaeological data from the region. If you have access to a university library, you could provide some intelligent input about this information. As it is, simply blanking out the bulk of an article doesn't demonstrate the minimum requisite knowledge necessary to contribute. | |||
| :--] | |||
| Does anyone have any verification of the authenticity of this book as being in Old Prussian? | |||
| The comparisons you are making are ridiculous. No people living in East Prussia had a sense of being part of a "Prussian" nationality before 1945. They considered themselves to be Germans (or, in some cases, Poles). The idea that they were "Prussians" is a political invention designed to make it seem as though innocent ''Prussians'' were kicked off their lands by the mean Russians because of things that Germans did. While this should be discussed, it is not at all the same thing as Tibetans or Koreans being ruled by foreigners. Also, my last name is ''Kenney'', and I did not even revert the article this last time. ] 00:09, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC) | |||
| The readable text on the cover reads "Catechisimus in preisßnisher sprach gecorrigieret und dagegen das deüdsche." (Catechism in Prussian language corrected and compared(?) to German.) (Sorry, can't figure how to type a long-s character.) | |||
| :My respectful suggestions: | |||
| :*Avoid generalizations such as "''no'' people." Substantiation? | |||
| :*Which Prussians considered themselves Poles? Is this supposition? Substantiation? | |||
| :*Do not conflate "nationality" with "ethnicity." | |||
| :*What do you know of current ethnic Prussians' ''political'' affiliation? Substantiation? | |||
| :*Why isn't the history of the Prussian Balts analogous to that of Tibetans or Koreans? Explain. | |||
| :*"Mean Russians" is POV. Would you really wish to discuss this? Are Russians truly mean? | |||
| This is German, or a German dialect, not a Baltic language related to Slavic languages. Perhaps the Prussian referred to in the title is High or Low Prussian; it's not Old Prussian. ] (]) 16:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC) | |||
| :Sorry about misspelling your last name (if it matters). You did commit vandalism on 20:22, 2004 Apr 1, unless someone forged your handle. | |||
| == Prussians and Picts and their refusal to adopt or have Concepts unknown and the lack of historical information == | |||
| :Quibling objections may be worthy of the Talk page, but are hardly justification for massive unilateral deletion, ie, ''vandalism.'' Why not just emend the article with your insights? That would be more helpful. At very least, express your objection, ''before'' blanking out most of an article with which you disagree. | |||
| seem very much like early families in the timeline of recorded history appear much the same way under Ceasar or Roman views and seem like families whom had very few actually known views or concepts both seem to blend into the surrounding tribes families and emerge as powerful entities whom adopt different concepts of others however the Prussians seem to continue on much longer and adopt much more powerful tribes under their names and live right on into modern day while the Picts stayed relatively independent until there leadership is extinguished by the Viking thus causing them to blend entirely into Scottish culture. | |||
| :I am sure others welcome your opinions as much as I. | |||
| Sources being Julius Caesars writings various historical Roma sources, Scottish historical sources, archeology of Scotland, various Prussian history of kings, Prussian sources of information leading up to Ww1, history of Prussian and Austrian conflict including WW2, history of rebellion of states within "German" Territories including religious Catholic and including Prussian Austrians struggles or rebellions seen by Prussians as Austrian agitation most Prussian territory was the result of such within Germany. As well as the rise of Prussia as a government against such agitation or the transformation from a entity of philosophical resistance to to a political party even as late as Ww1 we can see Austria removing troops of the eastern front from successes of Prussian leadership like Generalfeldmarschall Paul von Hindenburg and transfered to Bavarian leadership as a source of such information as a source leading to a relationship of early tribes whom refused to adopt such views and had very independent views and concepts a particular subject matter can not be given except a lack of general information on both parties known as the Picts and Prussians. ] (]) 16:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == Indigenous? == | |||
| :Best wishes, | |||
| :--] | |||
| Why does the lead call Old Prussian the Indigenous people of Prussia, while the lead references themselves say that Gothic tribes were the first settlers? ] (]) 16:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
| #Shouldn't you have to prove that there ''was'' a sense of Prussian ethnicity among the inhabitants of East Prussia? I've never read that there was. | |||
| #I imagine the southern inhabitants who voted for becoming part of Poland in that plebiscite did. I'm not sure how many of them there were. | |||
| #"Prussian" was neither a nationality nor an ethnicity. There was certainly a ''regional'' or ''civic'' identity of being Prussian (along with people in the Rhineland), and a ''regional'' identity as being East Prussians, but I've never read anything about a sense of ''ethnic'' identity | |||
| #There's no such thing as an ethnic Prussian, so I have no idea. Most of those who identify themselves as Prussian expellees are fairly right wing, though, was my understanding. | |||
| #Tibetans and Koreans have maintained a separate ethnic identity and their own language throughout recorded history. Furthermore, they have for long periods had a separate political identity (especially Korea, which has basically been independent or autonomous for most of modern history except the 1910-1945 period). Prussians have, so far as I can tell, never had a separate political identity. Their separate language disappeared by the 18th century. And this sense of ethnic identity was manufactures wholesale by a small number of rightwing expellees after they all ceased to live in East Prussia anyway. | |||
| #I wasn't saying the Russians were mean. I was saying that that argument is the reason why expellees from East Prussia try to pretend they have this phantom "Prussian" ethnicity. ] 01:52, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for your thoughtful answers. Perhaps some Wikipedian would care to address these issues. | |||
| :<br>--] | |||
| Mr. Kenney and Mr. Wighson, my goodness what a furor. You sound like a couple of college professors fighting for a stipend. And yet, there seems to be some partial truth in what each of you says. | |||
| I might note from what I have read that there is not a small number of expelees. The Russians were pretty mad. They had just lost 40 million people to German ideological shenanigans. Prussia was totally cleared out. Millions of people took it on the lam and every town city and village was destroyed, with their civic records dumped into German municipalities much further west. It will never be back, like it or not. Sorry, boys. Any attempt to restore Prussia is only fun and games, but you won't gain Russian approval, will you? They seem to have beat everyone else around there, and probably could still do it today. | |||
| As for the people that were cleared out, you seem to be having problems defining identity. Genetic identity is not cultural identity. Genes can't be contained and cultures change fast. There's a new field of study that matches the DNA of ancient remains to modern and tries to find moderns that are close to ancients. They can be found. I'm sure there are plenty of pockets of ancients in most populations. I got no doubt that that the cleared-out Prussians included many descendents of Germanized Prussians. I'm sure there were Gothic descendants also. Unless you massacre them, populations do not disappear, they go into other populations gene by gene. The plague did not take everyone; moreover, that was only the last vestige of Prussians. But politically speaking, who cares? The Russians aren't going to raise the Titanic or put Kaliningrad back to Koenigsburg. '''Funny enough, there is a civic movement of Russian inhabitants of Kaliningrad who try to get the name Koenigsberg back - like the people of Leningrad got the former name St. Petersburg back.''' | |||
| As for the culture, plenty of current Germans trace a connection back to Prussians. If you look up on Prussian Reconstructions you will find such words as klausewingi, "hearer", probably "Confessor." If you turn that into Polish you get Klausewitz and if you Germanize that you get Von Klausewitz. We already know that Copernicus was Kapernik, "coppersmith". Note the Slavic -nik, which was also Prussian. But, let's look at it another way. The Balts once extended all the way over to Moscow. Indeed the Lithuanians probably came from Belarus. So, the "Slavic" population of North Russia probably came from a Baltic one. Not only that, but Baltic and Slavic as well as Thracian are only developments of an original common language. Does all this do anything to your fixed ideas of ethnicity? | |||
| As for the ancient sources, the Balts no doubt appear, but to identify them for sure is harder. Are Herodotus' Gelones an early form of Galindi? I'd like to see more done along those lines. | |||
| ---- | |||
| == Complaint on the history == | |||
| I removed the following comment from the article, and adding it here for discussion: | |||
| '''' | |||
| ] ] 13:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Article name change == | |||
| I suggest the name of this article be changed from Prussian people to Baltic Prussians or Old Prussians. The current name is misleading in many ways. For one things most people still associate the words Prussia and Prussian(s) with the German-speaking duchy and kingdoms called Prussia. Right now when you enter the word Prussians into Misplaced Pages you come to this page, in contrast entering the words Prussia or Prussian leads to disambigumate pages where the different "Prussias" are desrcibed and the reader guided to the relevant topic. I suggest a name change for this article and a new disambigumate page instead of the current redict from Prussians to this page. --] 17:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Prussians vis-a-vis ] == | |||
| I wonder if any of them got lithuanised. The cultures seems akin to each other. And since the Lietuvinks were supposed to live where Prussians had done, I wouldn't be surprised if they had stemmed from them. ] 19:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Many of Old Prussians after last uprisal by ] have fled to Samogitia and ], where they were accpetd and given lands. In the eastern outskirts of historical Lithuanian propria there are still preserved places with names Prusai, Pruseliai. Others, who had left suffered heavy casualties after the great plague in 17th century, remaining were Lithuanised by sort of inner colonisation following that plague.--] 23:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :: It is known that old prussians settled around ] in ] (legend says the name of a town originates from Prussians). In Lithuania and Latvia, indeed, are placenames named after prussians, but are they named after old prussians? Old prussians not named themselves as prussians, it was ] used by neighbours. As far I know lithuanians named germans from Prussia as Prussians too.--] 10:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Requested move== | |||
| <div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #eeffee; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #AAAAAA;"><!-- Template:polltop --> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the {{{type|proposal}}}. <font color="red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</font> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. '' | |||
| {{{result|The result of the debate was}}} '''move''' and the article was moved by ]. | |||
| Prussian people → Old Prussians – "Old Prussians" refers specifically to the medieval Baltic tribes, while "Prussian people" may refer to either the Old Prussians or citizens of the former state of ]. ] 17:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===Survey=== | |||
| :''Add *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''' followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ''<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>'' | |||
| *'''Support''' as originator. ] 17:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===Discussion=== | |||
| :''Add any additional comments'' | |||
| ] and ] both give more hits for "Old Prussians" than "Baltic Prussians" (an alternative name). Compare , & , . ] 17:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <font color="red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</font> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:pollbottom --> | |||
| The move is wrong. Unfortunately I missed the poll. The name of the people is "]", not "Old Prussians". There was new ethnos kind of "New Prussians". The convenience of disambiguating is not valid reason for renaming the article. We don't rename ] into whatever it can be just because "Germans" may refer both to German ethnos and to citizens of ]. 22:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Prussians not German??? LOL== | |||
| "that state was led by ], not by the extinct Old Prussians." | |||
| Can anyone explain what this means? Its like that stupid Sound of Music that postulates Austrians aren't German because they're a political subdivision of racially Germanic people. | |||
| Similar, Prussia was nothing more than a tribe of Germanic people on the Baltic. I don't hvae time to re-write something like this so it makes sense, but this article is proof that idiocy and irrational bias continues to define much of Misplaced Pages. | |||
| ] {{unsignedIP|68.10.35.153|08:56, 13 December 2006}} | |||
| :The original Prussians were ] in origin, not ]. The German Teutonic Knights conquered Prussia, established German towns, and gradually killed off or assimilated the original Prussians. The later state of Prussia that developed was led by Germans and primarily populated with Germans, but took its name from the conquered territory, that of the Baltic Prussians. ] 18:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Interesting | |||
| borusci- remove the latin sci and you get boru. the people of boru or wolf. boru means (grey) wolf in karachay turkish. | |||
| ---- | |||
| This article lacks some important data. First, term Old Prussians was created by german historians in 19 century (by ] ?) to separate novadays Prussians and Prussians of the past. Second, Old Prussians not named itselves as Prussians, it was ], ] named themselves as Bartians, ] - as Sambians etc. Old Prussian were organized into one or less ] in the ], in the same time germans in this state begun to name itselves as Prussians. Third, etimology of name Prussians is unclear, one theory says it is related to ]. Anyway, main meaning Prussians refers to inhabitans of former Prussia and I wonder why when is typed "]" redirects to Old Prussians, and when is typed: "]" appears disambiguation page with links to ], but not to ancient ] tribe? --] 11:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == RFC: Merger == | |||
| ] and ] should be merged into this article, as all three articles cover the same topic. "Old Prussia" as a has no uniform meaning, although it often refers to "Prussia proper" (West and East Prussia) to differentiate from the rest of the Kingdom of Prussia, or to the Kingdom of Prussia before the Napoleonic era. "Origins of Prussia" as a title is ambiguous, and its content seems to be a fork of Old Prussians. ] (]) 18:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Since the merger proposal affects three relatively obscure articles, I have listed it at ] to widen its awareness. ] (]) 23:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Oppose'''-Old Prussians describes an ethnic group of people that were eliminated due to Germanisation and conquest of their land by Germanic invaders. Origins of Prussia is a completely different article about emergence of political entity. Old Prussians article is about culture, history, origin and eventual demise of Baltic ethnic group. Two completely different topics even if connect to each other.--] (]) 18:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Oppose'''. As per ]. ] refers to an ] nation annihilated by the ], while the ] leads to an establishment of a historic state of ] originating in the ]. Both articles should be improved to better reflect their differences. --] ] 19:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Oppose''' per Molobo. ] (]) 00:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| "Old Prussia" is ''original research'' titling for a concept that is the same as Old Prussians. "Old Prussia" as a phrase is ambiguous; a better title would be "]". Even then, I don't see how it would warrant being a separate article than "Old Prussians". The "Origins of Prussia" article in its present state does not describe the origins of the state of Prussia, but the origin of the Old Prussians; it is essentially ]. A better location for describing the origins of Prussia would be at ], although the article on ] already has clear links to its 'origins articles', ], ], and ]. "Old Prussia" and "Origins of Prussia" are both forks of "Old Prussians". ] (]) 22:36, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Support''' any attempt to clean up the terms and consolidate information. At the moment all articles are in pretty bad shape. Any work will be appreciated. ] (]) 23:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Support''' - the term "Old Prussia" is indeed ambiguous and weird, and "Origins of Prussia" is just genuinely terrible. ] (]) 15:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Support''' - the articles are on the same subject matter anyway.] (]) 20:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Since no further sources attesting to English usage of "Old Prussia" were provided, I have merged ] and ] into ] and ]; articles linking to Old Prussia were changed to link instead to Prussia (region). ] (]) 05:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:54, 20 October 2024
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
 Archives | |
|
|
External Links
Every single external link on this page is a dead end with no content, can any fix this?
24.201.231.187 (talk) 01:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Fixed If any can IABot can! : Noyster (talk), 22:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Bizarre sentence
Call me slow ~ go ahead, it's been done many times before ~ but i cannot for the life of me work out exactly what is meant by this sentence: At the beginning of Baltic history, the Old Prussians were bordered by the Vistula and the Memel – earlier Mimmel – river, which outside of Prussia is called Neman Rivers with a southern depth to about Thorn at the Vistula river, which was Prussian, and the line of the River Narew. I have gone back in the history to try and work out who added, what might have been meant, but it seems to have been there for ages. It might mean something like At the beginning of Baltic history, Old Prussians were bordered by the Vistula and Neman rivers (the Neman is also called the Memel, in German), as far south as Thorn, on the Vistula, but as i have no idea i'm not changing the article. If there is someone who knows, however, this portion of the article must be changed ~ if for no other reason than that it needs to be in good English: "southern depth" doesn't mean anything, and the phrase about the "line of the River Narew" is questionable. Cheers, Lindsay 08:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- It appears to be written in a dialect known as "English Misplaced Pages". Get used to it if you come here often...73.220.34.167 (talk) 21:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- More precisely: Get used to it if you plan to read articles that attract Polish nationalists. 2003:C8:F3C3:A6E3:5C1B:9B14:E57D:E4BF (talk) 14:59, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Attention experts
New page Prusi. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
who had assimilated the Old Prussians
Not all of them - some run away to Lithuania or died.Xx234 (talk) 09:28, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Why is Prakrit included?
Why is the Indian language, Prakrit, included among the languages in which the name for the Old Prussian appears? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RNajdek (talk • contribs) 15:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Who cares what Prussians were called in Prakrit, it's irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.183.6.63 (talk) 08:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Type Iesus Christus
... into Google Search and there is a nice article on Job (biblical figure).
Romowo or Ramowo?
What is the correct name of the capital of the Old Prussia? I find both Romowo and Ramowo.Aldrasto11 (talk) 01:26, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
Confusing Customs
What is a 'commercial marriage' and what does 'submission' imply? "Commercial marriage was widespread and after the husband's death, the widow fell to the son, like other inheritance. In addition, polygyny (up to three wives) was widespread. Adultery was a serious crime, punishable with death. After the submission, commercial marriage and polygyny were forbidden."
'Commercial Marriage' does not appear to have a definition that I can find. Is this saying that marriage was seen as a commercial act, as in transactional relationships? If it is trying to say that bride-price is paid, to whom is it paid and why would that make the marriage 'commercial' in nature? I thought perhaps it was that wives were bought and sold, but the 'adultery' bit makes that unlikely. The inheritance part is also confusing, as the 'widow fell to the son' can, as written, imply incestuous marriage (not really common outside Greek tragedy). On the other hand, if the wives were treated like chattel, did their status vis-à-vis the inheriting son change from mother to slave?
The last sentence in the section is also confusing. 'After the submission' begs the question, who was submitting to whom? Contextually, it should mean that after a woman 'submits' as part of an adulterous act (the last noun that would work as an antecedent), women could no longer be part of whatever a commercial marriage may be, nor could they join a polygynous group. Later in the article, a brief mention is made about the Old Prussians 'submitting' to the Teutonic Order. Is that what the author was saying? Cheers, Last1in (talk) 21:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Picture of Catechism in Old Prussian
Does anyone have any verification of the authenticity of this book as being in Old Prussian?
The readable text on the cover reads "Catechisimus in preisßnisher sprach gecorrigieret und dagegen das deüdsche." (Catechism in Prussian language corrected and compared(?) to German.) (Sorry, can't figure how to type a long-s character.)
This is German, or a German dialect, not a Baltic language related to Slavic languages. Perhaps the Prussian referred to in the title is High or Low Prussian; it's not Old Prussian. Me94306 (talk) 16:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Prussians and Picts and their refusal to adopt or have Concepts unknown and the lack of historical information
seem very much like early families in the timeline of recorded history appear much the same way under Ceasar or Roman views and seem like families whom had very few actually known views or concepts both seem to blend into the surrounding tribes families and emerge as powerful entities whom adopt different concepts of others however the Prussians seem to continue on much longer and adopt much more powerful tribes under their names and live right on into modern day while the Picts stayed relatively independent until there leadership is extinguished by the Viking thus causing them to blend entirely into Scottish culture. Sources being Julius Caesars writings various historical Roma sources, Scottish historical sources, archeology of Scotland, various Prussian history of kings, Prussian sources of information leading up to Ww1, history of Prussian and Austrian conflict including WW2, history of rebellion of states within "German" Territories including religious Catholic and including Prussian Austrians struggles or rebellions seen by Prussians as Austrian agitation most Prussian territory was the result of such within Germany. As well as the rise of Prussia as a government against such agitation or the transformation from a entity of philosophical resistance to to a political party even as late as Ww1 we can see Austria removing troops of the eastern front from successes of Prussian leadership like Generalfeldmarschall Paul von Hindenburg and transfered to Bavarian leadership as a source of such information as a source leading to a relationship of early tribes whom refused to adopt such views and had very independent views and concepts a particular subject matter can not be given except a lack of general information on both parties known as the Picts and Prussians. 209.171.85.93 (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Indigenous?
Why does the lead call Old Prussian the Indigenous people of Prussia, while the lead references themselves say that Gothic tribes were the first settlers? Crainsaw (talk) 16:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Categories:- Start-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in History
- Start-Class vital articles in History
- Start-Class former country articles
- WikiProject Former countries articles
- Start-Class Lithuania articles
- High-importance Lithuania articles
- Start-Class Russia articles
- Mid-importance Russia articles
- Mid-importance Start-Class Russia articles
- Start-Class Russia (history) articles
- History of Russia task force articles
- Start-Class Russia (demographics and ethnography) articles
- Demographics and ethnography of Russia task force articles
- WikiProject Russia articles
- Start-Class Poland articles
- Mid-importance Poland articles
- WikiProject Poland articles
- Start-Class Middle Ages articles
- Mid-importance Middle Ages articles
- Start-Class history articles
- All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
- Start-Class Ethnic groups articles
- Mid-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles