Talk:Louis II of Brieg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Biography / Royalty and Nobility (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.
 


Move from Ludwik II of Brzeg‎ to Louis II of Brieg[edit]

I moved the page since both Ludwik and Brzeg are Polish names. The duchy however wasn't Polish but a fief o the Bohemian crown, therefore Polish names shouldn't be used here. Karasek (talk) 08:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

The Duke was a member of the oldest Polish royal family the Piasts. The town at this time was ruled by a Duke from a Polish dynasty under the suzerenity of the Bohemian Crown. Bohemia was at this time part of a quite lose confederation of the Holy Roman Empire where the feudal fragmentation led to creation of de-facto independant states. So the German language is rather the third to be considered here, first two are Polish and Czech or even Latin which was official in Poland, Silesia, Bohemia and HRE. Opole.pl (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Two naming conventions first:
  • WP:NCGN#Use modern names, which states that "For example, we have articles called Istanbul, Dubrovnik, Volgograd and Saint Petersburg, these being the modern names of these cities, although former names (Constantinople, Ragusa, Stalingrad or Leningrad) are also used when referring to appropriate historical periods (if any), including such article names as Battle of Stalingrad and Sieges of Constantinople; not to mention separate articles on Constantinople and Byzantium on the historic cities on the site of modern Istanbul - or part of it. It is sometimes common practice in English to use name forms from different language to indicate cultural or political dominance. For example, Szczecin is often written as Stettin (the German name) for the period before 1945, likewise Gdańsk is called Danzig (the detailed decisions at Talk:Gdansk/Vote apply to that dispute; they are older than this page). There are other cities for which policy is still debated, such as Vilnius, which in various contexts is referred to as Vilnius, Wilno or Vilna."
  • WP:NCROY, and the "Most general rule overall: use the most common form of the name used in English if none of the rules below cover a specific problem."
The most common form of the name used in English is neither Ludwik nor Ludwig, it's Louis. NCROY applies here.
The name of the town follows NCGN. This part of Silesia was cultural and political German. The Silesian Piasts (not the Polish Piasts!) weren't eternal Poles, they changed like their country, even earlier! In case you don't believe it, thankfully we have some old documents and know how this ruler called himself:
  • "Wir Ludwig von gotes gnaden herczog in Slesien zum Legnicz zum Brige und zum Golberge" (1424)
  • "Wir Ludwig von gottes gnaden hertzug in Schlesien zum Brieg zu Lignitz und zu Strelin" (1427)
  • "Wir Ludowig von gotes genaden herczog in Slesien czum Brige unde in Strelen" (1429)
(source: Lehns- und Besitzurkunden Schlesiens und seiner einzelnen Fürstenthümer im Mittelalter, Zweiter Theil, Publicationen aus den k. Preussischen Staatsarchiven, Sechszehnter Band, Leipzig, 1883, page 370 - 378. Book available here: http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=Lehns-%20und%20Besitzurkunden) Karasek (talk) 10:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
The Silesian Piasts were nothing else than the Piasts. What is more they were the oldest line of this dynasty and direct heirs of Polish kings and dukes of Poland. Even after the fragmentation of Poland they were rulers in Kraków and therefore Dukes of Poland.
How can you know when did the Lower Silesian Piasts Germanised? The Opole Piasts for instance did not Germanise at all and the last of them did not even know German, yet they also were the Silesian Piasts. There is not any clear date that would allow us to start using the name Brieg and end using Brzeg as in the Gdańsk case (1308). Even in those German texts you quoted we have Legnicz next to Lignitz while the latest (from before 1945) name was Liegnitz and the Polish is Legnica or anchronic Lignica. As you can see the process of germanising of the names was not immidiate and took centuries. So why do you use modern German names of those towns if they then were not even formed yet?
The only solution here is to find a date, as in the Gdańsk case, and stick to it. Whether it would be, for instance, 1392 when the last independant Silesian Duchy came under Bohemian suzerenity or 1526 when the Bohemian Crown came permanently into the hands of a German Habsburg dynasty I dont know. Perhaps it schould be a different date for every duchy, as I said in Opole German was not known by the last Piasts from the 16th century at all. The one thing that is certain is that there schould be no arbitrary changing of names by single editors especially if those names were in use on Wikipedia and did not bother anyone else.
And there are those usual edits of yours. Deleting information that some Silesian towns were founded by Polish dukes or lied on a Polish territory. You erase the name Poland from all kinds of articles, change Polish names to German ones, delete sourced information and replace them with those written by H. Weczerka. To the record - he is not known outside Germany actually and does not use the newest sources created after Silesia returned to Poland in 1945.
Opole.pl (talk) 12:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
We don't talk about the dukes of Opole (I'm well aware of the difference between the duchies) but about the dukes of Brieg/Brzeg. I provided a source which clearly shows the use of the German language by the duke and his actual name, you (and Piotrus) provided nothing. If this isn't enough, I can also provide some sources which confirm the adoption of the German culture by the Piasts and the society during the 13th century. The fact moreover remains that the Silesian duchies back then were part of Bohemia and the HRE. The use of Polish naming conventions isn't appropriate here, since none of these duchies was ever part of Poland.
Your entire argument is solely based on the ancestry of the Piasts. The naming convention however don't follow the ancestry of a subject but the actual cultural and political situation and belonging at that time, which I documented with a source.
If you don't like my sources complain here. And I don't remove Polish names, I just follow Wikipedia guidelines. For someone of Polish ancestry but of German culture, living outside of Poland in a German society, the rules of the Gdansk vote apply.Karasek (talk) 17:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Case for move again[edit]

Rationale for Polish name

  • person descended from the Polish Piast dynasty
  • territory of the duchy belonged to Poland before the duchy was created
  • teritory of the duchy became part of Poland 270 years after the duchy dissolved

Rationale for German/name

  • duchy belonged to Bohemia and thus the HRE
  • person was Germanized
  • territory was Germanized

The duchy wasn't part of Poland but of Bohemia and the HRE. The duke was of Polish descent, but Germanized. The duchy was culturally and politically German dominated. The Wikipedia naming conventions important for this case are:

Karasek (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)