Talk:List of Pomeranian duchies and dukes

2006 talk

Can anyone translate this into English and wikify it with hyperlinks? User:Wetman 00:34, 24 September 2003

Already working on that, User:caius2ga cc 03:23, 2 October 2003

This article contains massiv pov stuff It is written to show that pomerania was always a polnish. using names of citys which are polnish fantasy names founded in 1945 after the expulsion of the german population. these names had not existed before 1945. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.173.252.9 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 22 May 2006

Which place names are invented after 1945? Unlike East Prussia, Pomerania was Slavic in the early Middle Ages. Even its name "Pomorze" meaning "Along the Sea" is still easy to understand for modern speakers of Polish (although the modern meaning would be "To the Sea"). A town in Pomerania to have an originally German name would have to be founded not earlier than in 14th century and in the case of Eastern Pomerania only after Poland was divided in late 18th century. The exception are a few new towns in Pomerania founded during the Teutonic Knights rule of Eastern Pomerania (1308-1466), like Lauenburg in Pommern -> presently Lębork), but even their Polish names are not in invented after 1945 but used for centuries because Eastern Pomerania belonged to Poland between 1466 and 1772.

Anyway, this article is mostly about 10-13th centuries before any of the German named towns could be founded. I believe we should use a close analogon of the Gdańsk vote decision in choosing Polish and German names for place names in Pomerania. The period of the Dukes of Pomerania, at least in Eastern Pomerania ended exactly at the time of Teutonic Knight and Brandenburg advances in Pomerania which were the direct result of the the local dynasties dying off. ProudPomeranian 11:39, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

You are wrong. In the duchy of Pomerania, even where slavic precursors of the latter towns existed, the towns where founded by German law and after the onset of massive German settlement (Ostsiedlung) throughout the 13th century. Often the name was derived from the Slavic name of the site (often a Pomeranian or Liutizian or Rani burgh), nevertheless the German names are the "original" names.Skäpperöd (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The fact that all the references on this page are Polish language looks really bad. A sprinkling of English and German ones would be helpful.--Stonemad GB 11:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Polish names for german rulers?

Sorry, but using polish names for rulers of something like the Duchy of Wolgast or the Duchy of Stettin/Szczecin looks like rewriting history. Many of these Duchies were part of Poland for maybe 100 years or so and part of the german and northern european culture group afterwards, ...and we can use english names for many of these rulers anyway. Of course, Boguslaw/Bogislaw was a traditional name in the dynasty used over centuries, but they weren't Poles anymore. Totally stupid is something like Jerzy (Georg), Franciszek (Franz) or Ernest Ludwik (Ernst Ludwig). 84.181.85.11 16:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The rulers were German speaking. 138.246.7.87 13:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Kashubians not Polabian.

I have a little trouble comprehending the following sentence from paragraph three of the article:

“ Western parts of Pomerania were inhabited by Kashubians, a Polabian people. ”

As I understand it, both the Kashubians (a subgroup of the Pomeranians) and the Polabians belonged to the Lechitic group of Western Slavs. However, the Polabians were known from their habitat "po-Laba" (along the Elbe--rather west of the Oder). Although the Polabians may have touched upon the Kashubians to in the vincinity of the Oder, this sentence in the article seems to muddle the usual taxonomy of the Western Slavic peoples. I propose to change it to read:

“ Eastern parts of Pomerania werre inhabited by the Kashubians, part of the Pomeranian subgroub of the Lechitic group. ”

Ziusudra 12:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Grammar

The article page is put together appallingly and obviously by someone for whom English is not their native language. It is a jumbled, unchronological, mess. I will attempt to clean it up but require to get a few books in front of me first. Christchurch (talk) 13:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Pomerelia / Eastern Pomerania

Pomerelia has never been a part of any Duchy of Pomerania, which is the topic of this article, so why is it mentioned here? It´s just confusing, so I would suggest to remove the last part of the history section.(HerkusMonte (talk) 08:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC))

In Polish, Pomerelia = Pomerania and the former German duchy/province of Pomerania = Western Pomerania (see the present voivodeship names). Skäpperöd (talk) 14:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The topic of this articel is "Dukes of Pomerania", so it should only describe the situation of the duchies, not the modern (Polish) Pomerania as a whole. The sentence:

While the Duchy of Pomerania had been incorporated in the Holy Roman Empire, Eastern Pomerania (Pomerelia or Gdańsk Pomerania) was controlled by the Teutonic Knights and the Kingdom of Poland. Predominantly inhabited by Kashubians, Poles, and a German minority, the territory was annexed from Poland by the Kingdom of Prussia during the Partitions of Poland.

has no coherence to the "Dukes of P." as Eastern P. (Pomerelia) has never been part of the duchy ( which is implied by this). No territory of any duchy was annexed during the partititions of Poland, as the duchies weren´t part of Poland ( definitely not in 1772). The duchies weren´t "predominantely inhabited by Poles and Kashubians .." ( as pomerelia was ). The article uses the modern (Polish) terms for Pomerania, which is not the topic. I still think, this last sentence is mixing up things and is confusing. (HerkusMonte (talk) 15:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC))

Bogislaw vs Bogusław, Stettin (Szczecin) vs Szczecin etc

I need to ask for help in this issue. In this article, user:Radomil is constantly reverting names of cities, part-duchies and dukes to their Polish version. Another related case better discussed on this talk page is a similar revert war at the Royal Castle, Poznań article, where user:Radomil and user:Molobo keep reverting Bogislaw V to Bogusław V and Stettin (Szczecin) to Szczecin. In my oppinion, this is not following WP:NCGN (including the Gdansk-Vote rules, on top of this page) and WP:NCON (esp Dealing with historical contexts section).

Assuming good faith, I pointed out the WP:NCGN and the historical context in the edit summaries and on user talk pages:

___________________________________________________________________________________________

User talk whether to use Pomerania-Stettin (Szczecin) and Bogislaw or Szczecin and Bogusław copied from the resp user talk

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Please note that the duchy of Pomerania joined in to Saxony in 1164 and into the HRE in 1181, German settlement and adapting German law / language / culture followed thereon (see eg Ostsiedlung). Please note that the Pomeranian_language (East Pom) and Polabian dialects (West Pom) used before (Low) German was introduced are not equal to modern Polish, though related.

Please stop editwars on issues you obviously have not investigated deeply enough. If you want to discuss any specific matter you are welcome. Skäpperöd (talk) 14:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Your informations are... a little bit uncomplete. If Youre right why dukes of Poznań (Przemysł II), Western Pommerania (Bogusław IV in 1287) and Eastern Pommerania (Mściwój II in 1282) signed Treaty of Kępno against Brandenburg. This treaty also decided about succesion in Eastern Pommerania. So first check all historical facts before You chage anything. Radomil talk 14:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

With Brandenburg there was always struggling and warfare as Brandenburg sought to integrate the duchy of Pomerania within its realm, she also claimed Pomerania inheritance as a whole and Uckermark in specific throughout history - despite she would not succeed getting the whole duchy of Pom until the last Griffin died heirless, Brandenburg eg advanced into and temporarily incorporatet Stargard and (most of) Uckermark. There were a lot of treaties of Pomeranian dukes against Brandenburg or other threatening neighbors like Mecklenburg. The HRE's central authority most of the time was very limited, armed and diplomatic conflicts between the HRE's states/duchies/principalities were common until Prussia succeeded to create a much or less unified centralistic Germany under its hegemony in late modern times.

But in "our" case, alliances as the one you mentioned are not suitable for determing the language used in the duchy. Please, don't have your editwar continued as it really makes no sense to deny historical facts that can be studied with a low amount of time and means. Please inform yourself before further false edits are made.

Maybe you are confusing the duchy of Pom with Pomerelia? I really don't know what else I can do to get you study a bit of Pomeranian history which would prevent you from making false edits. Skäpperöd (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

As You wrote, HRE was rather virtual state at this time. Even such thing as homage doesn't mean that duchy became "German". If Your theory is right, after homage of Albrecht Hohenzollern to Zygmunt Stary in 1525 till 1657 Kaliningrad should be named Królewiec. If You're right why it isn't? Radomil talk 20:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

You don't get the point. Just because HRE was not a nation state in modern sense it does not mean that the duchy of Pomerania was not German. The duchy joined in as a Slavic one, yes, but the dukes themselves turned the duchy into a German one just thereafter. You need to read about Pomeranian history, I'm getting tired of stating what you could easily know by yourself if you would just start to inform yourself before starting a silly edit war. Skäpperöd (talk) 05:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they were Germanised during ages, but not in XIII century. So stop making those ridiculous changes. HRE wasnt national state, as PLC wasn't too, so "Kaliningrad case" it is very good example of mistake You're making in Your editions. Radomil talk 06:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

___________________________________________________________________________________________

User talk whether to use Bogislaw or Bogusław copied from the resp user talk pages

___________________________________________________________________________________________

..honestly, it doesn't make sense. I'm referring in particular to the Pomeranian rulers. Certainly, it would make sense to choose one spelling at least for the main entries, and possibly mention in the article that other versions exist? I mean, look: Bogusław_XIII,_Duke_of_Pomerania, Bogislaw_XIV,_Duke_of_Pomerania. It grates! Why not change all of them to Bogislaw? I know that "Bogusław" is the accurate Polish version, but names of rulers are customarily translated, so I would opt for an English version without diacritics. --Hburdon (talk) 20:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

To start with, can you prove that Bogislaw is the most common English version of that name? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 04:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I can't prove it. For whatever reason, when I researched the problem originally a year or two ago, I decided it was the most common, but I can't remember the rationale now. Would you agree, though, that it would make sense to unify the spellings? If yes, then I'll try and look up some English sources next time I'm in the library and see what spelling is used in proper printed matter. --Hburdon (talk) 10:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the unification, but when I searched for the name - also some time ago - it was my conclusion that none is the most common, and hence the original (Polish) makes most sense. Do not that we commonly do not translate first names.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ah, we do translate names of monarchs and rulers though. Besides, they were Pomeranian rulers, was Polish their first language or was it German? --Hburdon (talk) 17:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Language - good question, I do not know out of the top of my head. I'd guess many knew both... there was also the Pomeranian language.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The Bogislaws of the duchy of Pomerania should be adressed as Bogislaw, as this is how they called themselves - though the Latin form was also used as much of the bureaucracy was done in Latin. Starting with the late 12th cty, the language spoken was the Pommersch variety of Low German; before, Pomeranian language (Slavic, "sth between" Polabian and Polish) was most probably used, as the first records of the duchy are of the early 12th cty. Besides the use of (Low) German as their every-day language, the Bogislaws might have spoken other languages, too, as there was plenty of intermarriage with nobility all across Europe... Skäpperöd (talk) 19:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Read policy on Original Research please. --Molobo (talk) 20:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OR policy has nothing to do with this. Assuming good faith, I will not get deeper into the purpose of the above statement and just welcome anybody to read about Pomeranian history. I will not further participate in a personal debate with Molobo here as this is the wrong place to do so, eod. Skäpperöd (talk) 11:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

To prevent further edit and revert warfare on historical Pomeranian issues, I propose as a general rule following the Gdansk rule:

-use of Bogislaw etc rather than Bogusław etc for the dukes of Pomerania

-use of German placenames to refer to parts of the Duchy of Pomerania, for the parts of the former duchy now in Poland, the modern name might be indicated in parenthesis for orientation; eg duchy of (Pomerania-) Stettin (Szczecin) first, later also solely Stettin

-use of Polish and German placenames for Pomerelian duchies with those not used in the historical context of the issue in parenthesis

I think this is matching both common sense and wiki naming conventions. In my oppinion, this is clearly what the Gdansk rule states and no further rule needs to be issued. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

For the stubbettes I translated - Barnim II, Duke of Pomerania, Bogusław IV, Duke of Pomerania, Bogusław V, Duke of Pomerania - I used Polish because frwiki uses Polish. Obviously enough, those Bogusławs didn't last long. How one can feel so strongly about naming Dukes in Pomerania, yet not be interested enough to bother writing the articles, rather puzzles me. All things being equal, Germanising slavic names seems odd. This isn't quite Danzig, so yes for the places, but no for the personal names. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

fr.wiki is using Polish obviously for the same reason Polish names made it into en.wiki, and the reason is that for some articles, pl.wiki was used as a source and the names were not translated "back". Of course the Polish version of the names are used in pl.wiki, and there is the place to do so. But for what reason do you want to call a non-Polish person by the Polish variety of his name on en.wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skäpperöd (talk • contribs) 14:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Why do you want to call non-German people by German names? Look at Mestwin II. That's not Mestwin on the seal. As for Bogusław/Bogislaw, why not Boguslaw, Bugislav or Boguslav? Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:01, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there was a variety of spellings used reaching from Bugslav to Bogislaus, a uniform spelling code did not exist back then (Golden or Dark Age ?) Anyway, the Polish spelling was not used in the duchy of Pomerania, the "ł" never was a part of our alphabet. Over time, Bogislaw, Bogislaus and Bogislav in this order became the most "famous" spellings. About the Bogislaws being "non-German": the first two Bogislaws may indeed have prevailed a kind of Slavic (Wendish/Pomeranian) character, but even Bogislaw I already accepted the overlordship of Henry the Lion in 1164 (not just formally, as B. aided H. eg in his Rügen expeditions), and joined the HRE in 1181. Only a few years later, the shift was made to completely adopt German law, language, culture and to have the land settled with Germans and Germanised the remaining Wends - a process led and encouraged by the dukes. The following Bogislaws (and there were lots of them) were indeed German dukes with a favour for traditional names of their Griffin dynasty, that is Bogislaw and Wartislaw and the use of Slavia in their title. But just because of the names, they are not to be considered "Slavs" or either Poles.Skäpperöd (talk) 19:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

To Angus McLellan :

• How do you know that "Bogusław" is the original name and not the Polonized one?
• As the letter "ł" is unknown in English, it´s just logical, that Bogusław isn´t used in English.
• The Germanized name would be "Bogislaus", which is also used in older sources.
• As Skäpperöd already explained, (french) Wikipedia isn´t a source for (en)Wikipedia
• So the only question is, which name is used in the english speaking world, and this is not "Bogusław" ( no ł ) (Pommerland (talk) 19:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC))

Let me repeat myself: "that's not Mestwin on the seal" and "why not Boguslaw, Bugislav or Boguslav?". Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Danzig-Gdańsk vote doesn't apply here. If argumentation of Skäpperöd would be consider as correct we schould extend it also on "Kaliningrad Case", and change name of this city to Królewiec for period between 1525 and 1657, when dukes of Prussia gave homage to kings of PLC. Naming places in Slavic dukes by German names, especially when current names used in English are also Slavic is a nonsens. Radomil talk 15:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The "Kaliningrad case", if there is any, may be discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). I don't really get the last sentence, this is about historical issues, do not make a nationalist debate out of it. You certainly do not refer to the Stalingrad battle as the Volgograd battle or to the historical Lwów Voivodeship as Lviv Voivodeship, do you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skäpperöd (talk • contribs) 20:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that to use German names is the same wrong as to use Polish, but German is not Slavic language, not even close to any. All of Slavic (and Baltic) languages use Czech script for latin alphabet, only Polish got its own (which is 3 ages older) and it includes "ł". Since Polabian and Pommeranian dialects/languages are dead (except of Kashubian and two Sorbic), it`s rather hard to figure if they used "ł" or not, but it`s clear that thier names got some meaning. So Bogusław means "worshipping God" and Mściwój means "revangeing warrior", Mestvin means absolutelly nothing and for sure it`s only germanised or latinised version of original name, Bogislav is more acceptable if it goes for my opinion (Bogislaus is latinised form). The same goes for places, that`s why cityies names between Odra and Łaba(Elbe) means nothing in German, while in Czech/Sorbic/Polish do. I`m not sure if Abraham ben Jacob wrote name "Szczecin", or its latinised variant, but for sure wrote about it as a huge city, ages before single German settled there. That Pommerania was in Holy Roman Empire doesn`t mean it was in Germany, the same Czech Kingdom, Empire just doesn`t equal Germany and if any country can claim to be its sucessor, it`s Austria. Adoption of German customs or laws doesn`t indicate nationality, now it`s belived that language does, but let me remind you that till Renaissance national languages were out of use for official documents, German was some exception, but also not so common.

I`m wondering how user Skäpperöd figured that people who use Slavic names and clearly referrs to themselves as a Slavs, are Germans ?? And speakeing if they were Polish or not, we can the same discuss if Austrians are Germans or not. Pommeranian languages belongs to the Lechitic languages group, word "Polish" or "Poland" comes just from one tribe (Polanie) which conquared/united others. I belive we don`t need to discuss if Thuringians, Bavarians or Saxxons aren`t Germans. Btw. Wends were just Slavs neighboring to Germans, this name comes from Sarmatian Wenedae, the same as hydronomy in Poland and eastern Germany, and still is used for Sorbs in Germany.

I don`t agree that German names for Slavic Dukes or thier cityies should be in en:wiki, Latin would be better, but the same incorrect. German name, if necessary, can be used in telmplate - (German: ...) for not German lands/persons names. So for Pomorze until Brandenburg took it (not Empire!), the same as we use name Constantinople before, and Istambul, after Ottoman takeover of this city, not just the second one. Mikołajski (talk) 00:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

So Bogusław means "worshipping God" ... The same goes for places, that`s why cityies names between Odra and Łaba(Elbe) means nothing in German, while in Czech/Sorbic/Polish do. That is correct, at least in most cases. For names of persons, no one here wants a Bogislaw to be named with the German (Gottfried ?) or Latin (Theodor ?) translation of his name, but apparently a distinct group of editors wants to push the Polish form. For the names of places, yes, the Polabian and Pomeranian site names have in many cases been adopted by the Germans during the Ostsiedlung and were not translated either. That may be one of the confusions here:

Some editors obviously mistake Polabian and (Slavic) Pomeranian roots of place names and personal names for a Polabian or (Slavic) Pomeranian character of these sites and persons. Further, some editors even confuse Polabian and Slavic Pomeranian with Polish.

Skäpperöd (talk) 07:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Names should be in their most recognizable English form. That's what wiki thinks at least. I don't see why Slavs should be given German names for the sake of it, but Pomeranians were not Poles and should not have their names written in the peculiar way Poles later chose to standardize their own written prestige variety of Slavic. So no łs and cs where the normal Latin alphabet requires ls and ts. These eastern European languages disputes are more often than not fights between different national dogs trying to pee against the same tree. My hope is that we can keep this nonsense out of it, though I despair a bit sometimes ... Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why Slavs should be given German names. For my comment on how "German" the name Bogislaw is, see above, again, I do not call to name him Gottfried. The duchy of Pomerania existed from the 12th to the 17th cty. In the 12th cty, it still had a Slavic character. This character got lost in the early 13th cty for most of the duchy (esp West and North) and in the course of the 14th cty for the Southeast except for some rural parts (Slovincians and Kashubs) as the dukes themselves organized the Ostsiedlung). If you are talking about Bogislaw I, you are right calling him a Slav (that is a Slavic Pomeranian, not a Pole). If you are talking about Bogislaw V, X or XIV, you are wrong.

As Mestwin is mentioned here several times, please note that Mestwin did not rule the duchy of Pomerania, but was a Pomerelian duke. In this area, the Slavic character lasted much longer and there were ties to Poland throughout history besides the ties to Germany, too. If there is an alternative spelling spread wider in English I have no problem with using that. Skäpperöd (talk) 07:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

So you do not agree that German names should be used, fine, why then names refering to Princedoms like Słupsk or cityies like Szczecin have German names? As i said, Polish is also incorrect, but verry close to original, as Pommeranian language was close to it. If we try to follow chronics, we`ll find that there was no Kraków, but Cracovia, or no Bydgoszcz but Bydgostia, same for others, becouse of what i said before. It`s not mistake to confuse Masovians, Vistulians etc. with Polish. Linguistic border between language and dialect is not clear in many cases (i though you`ll understand my examples with Austria, Bavaria etc...). I don`t agree that "Names should be in their most recognizable English form", if it goes for names of cityies/lands, especially if it`s hard to find English name for many of them, and also some are just German names adopted to English. We`r not discussing if Pommeranians were Polish or not, that they were or are (Kashubians) Lechitic Slavs is out of discussion the same. As i said "Bogislav" is acceptable, but "Mestwin", "Stettin" etc should stay on de:wiki, not here, eventually in lang-template in the head. Germans during eastern emigration didn`t made majority of eastern Pommerania for a long time (if ever did), with exception of Gdańsk and Toruń (not always btw). Yes, Dukes and Kings allowed it to happend, but conceptions of a state and nation had much different meaning till 19th century and not necessary majority of people was ruleing, as there was no democration. So if man had a name Bogi-slav, i think it`s clear to consider him as a Slav, as his parents called him. How many Bogislavs/Bogusławs are in Germany? Western Pommerania was Dukedom as well, so ruled by Dukes, the same couple others minor Princedoms. Please, tell me which ties with Germany could have it, if there was no Germany till 19th century? It`s rather Monastc State (one age) or Brandenburg-Prussia etc... Germany (one age), again if you wish to discus about ethnic relations of Pommeranians, we should talk about all of that Deutsch Lands and thier nationalityies, but there`s no comparation to Poland which time of feudal fragmentation ended in 14th c., without Pommerania however, but soon eastern was regained. It was not some relation, but just integral part of this state with exception of two ages. I just oppose to direct German nameing, especially in cases when German administration/ethnicy is dubious. Numbers of hits in google, or some democratic science via polls on which name when to use, are no arguments for me. We should use native names, or like in case of Constantinople/Istambul, official.Mikołajski (talk) 11:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong to say there was no Germany until the 19th century. The Holy Roman Empire, or at least the German Kingdom within it, was called Germany and is what the modern successor is based on. When someone ever says there was no Germany until the 19th century, it is a very easy way to tell they've almost no experience of certain aspects of medieval history. Anyways, medieval Poles or other Slavs would have written Szczecin much more like the German way (which is based on how the Slavs of the area said it ... not made up out of thin air!) than their own modern one, but that is neither here nor there. @ Skäpperöd, Dukes and Counts are usually leaders of the rural population of any area. Yes, the urban parts of virtually all western Slavia were predominantly German (or had significant "German" populations, oft with Slavic surnames like ... erm ... Copernic ;) ), but this has not so much relevance to rural warlords. Bogislaw, Wartislaw and such names are fine for me for the reasons Mikołajski outlined, just so long as there is no going over the top with the tree-pissing and making it Bogusław or Warcisław. I think something along those lines is already approaching consensus here. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it had a more-or-less defined territory in which it (or its parts, like a federative state) was sovereign, it had a head of state, a parliament, a central military organization, a central court and other institutions of government, i.e. many of the trappings of a early-modern state. Much has of course been made of the ineffectiveness of these institutions, but neither were similar institutions in other countries necessarily effective, what's more important is their structure and intent. Similarly the provinces making up the early modern Dutch Republic were sovereign in their own territory and could and sometimes did go to war on their own or conclude separate treaties with third parties. Amazingly, none of this prevented the Republic from being a state, much less from existing. So well, regardless even if possibly it might be argued that Germany or the HRE wasn't a state at the time, it's statehood doesn't determine it's existence. People at the time knew where and what Germany was. Csprrr (talk) 18:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

In historical writing, when one refers to nobility or royalty it's customary to translate their names to the language the author is using. So, for example, when referring to B(o/u)g(i/u)s(l/ł/w?)a(w/v), its not actually relevant what his names are in modern German or Polish, because this is the English Wikipedia. As can be seen in, for example, the House of Pomerania article, the names of German nobles are also translated; Henry the Lion, Henry never called himself that at the time, but that's how he's referred to in the English language at present. If Pomerania had a duke called Heinrich/Henryk/orso.. his name would also be Henry in English. B(o/u)g(i/u)s(l/ł/w?)a(w/v) is no exception. Now, the problem I guess here would then be that there is no agreed-on standard translation of the name to English. Whatever it is it certainly will not include letter 'ł' nor diacritics. Most common I've read (in English) are Bogislaw and Boguslaw. Now English may or may not have taken over these versions from German, but it doesn't matter how, when or from where this translation came to English, just that it's there. The origin of the name doesn't turn this into a question of whether Pomerania was German or Polish.

Even though it doesn't actually pertain to the question at hand just that someone's name is Bogi-slav doesn't prove his (irrelevant) ethnicity. People called Roman aren't Roman, people called François may or may not be actually French, etc. His parents named him this way because they thought it an appropriate name for a future ruler of Pomerania. On a related note, neither King Zwentibold (Svantepolk) of Lotharingia nor King Ladislaus (Ladislav) of Bohemia can be called Slavic even though their names are. Csprrr (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeedie. Names are predominantly chosen by family tradition and social environment. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Also on another tangential note; observe how, for example this page on Polish wikipedia about Margret of Hainault isn't constantly hounded by Dutch partisans insisting on renaming her 'Margaretha van Henegouwen' or 'Margriet van Beieren'. Similarly, Richard of Cornwall King of the Romans (Germany) is called Ryszard z Kornwalli on the Polish Wikipedia; not because he's Polish, not because his parents were Polish, not because he spoke Polish: it doesnt have anything to do with him personally - Ryszard just happens to be the translation of the name Richard in Polish, or the Polish version of the name if you like. Csprrr (talk) 16:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

But this is not de: Wikipoedia... to use German names... No one have any objections to German editors on de: Wiki that they use names like Stettin, Posen or Warschau. Radomil talk 21:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not proposing using German names. I'm proposing using English names, which are being misrepresented as being German because they happen to be the same or similar. Also this only applies to people belonging to the nobility or royalty not for places (which should generally use present day names for clarity I suppose). It's just a fact that these dukes of Pomerania are named Bogislaw or Boguslaw or something similar in English (i.e. no letter ' ł '). Just like English monarchs are named in Polish on the Polish Wikipedia. Csprrr (talk) 21:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Current English names are Szczecin, Słupsk and so on (not Stettin or Stolp), as Wolgast not Wołogoszcz. So let's keep current English names as You propose! (compare to Wikipedia rules: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Use English) Radomil talk 21:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Elimination of every diacritic that is not used in pure English word is also a little bit nonsense. What would You do with Baden-Württemberg? chnage it name to "Baden-Wurttemberg" or mayby better to avoid "ü" we should choose other name? For instatnt... Polish? pl:Badenia-Wirtembergia. As You can see, elimination of every possible diacritic is pure nonsens. Radomil talk 22:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

For the names of things other then nobles and royals, I guess it works on a case-by-case basis, for some terms there are accepted common English translations: i.e. it's Warsaw not Warszawa, Pomerania not Pomorze. The names of historical principalities, dukedoms and counties and such are not place names however. For example in English language literature in the context of principalities it's as far as I'm aware called Pomerania-Stettin or something similar not Pomorze-Szczecin, i.e. many of these names have accepted and commonly used English form, which happens to be based on the German form, but which is nonetheless part of the English language. On the other hand, names of cities, villages, rivers or other geographical features however are usually given in their present day form to facilitate locating them. Csprrr (talk) 22:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Same goes for Württemberg, if it had an accepted common English name/translation, that name would probably not include diacritics, but it doesn't have one and the German name is used. (Occasionally Wuerttemberg appears.) So for everything: if theres a common accepted English translation/version of the name (which mostly applies to: the names of countries and states and of historic personages) that should be used. If not the present day 'native' name should be (which may or may not contain loads of diacritics and special letters). Csprrr (talk) 22:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Anyhow as written in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Use English If the place does not exist anymore, or the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. -- the names of the principalities and dukedoms have English versions which are widely accepted in historical writing. Csprrr (talk) 23:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and where is proof that "Duchy of Stettin" is proper English historical name? Why are You so sure about frequency? Simple google test give us:

• Duchy of Szczecin [1] 16,100 vs. Duchy of Stettin [2] 12,400
• Duchy of Słupsk [3] 2,100 vs. Duchy of Stolp [4] 1,150

Radomil talk 23:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand looking at Google Books (i.e. also in actual published books, which should probably carry more weight) numbers of books that contain the term "" at least one time are:

• "Duchy of Stettin" / "Duke of Stettin" 40x/473x
• "Duchy of Szczecin" / "Duke of Szczecin" 10x/3x
• "Duchy of Stolp" / "Duke of Stolp" 0x/0x
• "Duchy of Słupsk" / "Duke of Słupsk" 2x/1x
• "Duchy of Pomerania-Stettin" / "Duke of Pomerania-Stettin" 6x/71x
• "Duchy of Pomerania-Szczecin" / "Duke of Pomerania-Szczecin" 0x/0x
• "Duchy of Pomerania-Stolp" / "Duchy of Pomerania-Stolp" 1x/3x
• "Duchy of Pomerania-Słupsk" / "Duke of Pomerania-Słupsk" 0x/0x

(a form including "Duchy of Pomorze" appeared once, as did a form containing "Duchy of Pommern") I think "Duchy of Stettin" or "Duchy of Pomerania-Stettin" should be used, but only when referring to this dukedom, the city itself should be called Szczecin probably. It's a tie I guess between Duchy of Słupsk or Pomerania-Stolp, I dunno. Csprrr (talk) 23:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a tie I guess between Duchy of Słupsk or Pomerania-Stolp. Stolp was the 15th cty splinter duchy's name, when the town's name was changed to Słupsk in 1945, the duchy was long gone - anyway I used to give the modern name in brackets for orientation. In Pomerelia, which is considered in Poland to be Eastern Pomerania, and whose medieval Slavic splinter duchies are listed in the Pomerania category, too even if they were never a part of the Duchy of Pomerania, I used to give the Polish name and the German name in brackets for orientation, as these towns the name of the duchies was derived from had a German tradition, too, besides their Kashubian and Polish tradition - that's why they are also referred to by their German names in historical writings.

For many cities in Pomerania, the "German", "Kashubian/Pomeranian" and "Polish" names are just different ways to spell and a slight difference in pronounciation rather than completely different names. The "German" name just matches English spelling and pronounciation best, another reason why this spelling is more widespread in English. Skäpperöd (talk) 07:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

well yes, I've always been reading about Stettin and Stolp in English texts if these places are used in the context of the names of dukedoms. I suppose it looks odd using Słupsk next to Stettin.. By its a tie I meant: the usage of Stolp v. Słupsk in books contained in Google Books in the context of the names of dukes and duchies appears to be (small, but) about equal. This doesn't match my own reading experience though, in which I've pretty much never seen a Duchy of Szczecin nor one of Słupsk mentioned. Anyway, the current way in which things are named in this article is perfectly clear and informative. The names of things in some language aren't decided by the these things, but by the people writing about them in this language. Whether or not Pomerania was German, Polish, Kashubian, Albanian or Irish -- it doesn't matter -- what matters is which words are used in appropriate English writing to talk about place/person X. Csprrr (talk) 09:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

As You wrote, You have never heard about those duchies. Number of works in Google Books is also very poor. Modern usage, and Wikipedia rules are in favor to modern names of places, so German names are irrevelant. As for Skäpperöds argumentation - German names are deformated. If You want know more read Słupsk#Name Radomil talk 15:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia rules favour the historical names if a historical context is covered that is known by this name in English (read WP:NCGN and Gdansk rule box on top of this page). This rule also applies if the term used in English is a transition of deformated German rather than of a more excellent language like Polish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skäpperöd (talk • contribs) 18:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I largely agree with Deacon. In accordance with WP:UE, we should name things by how they are most commonly known in English language sources. If the sources usually use a German or Latin name, then that is what WP should use. If the sources usually use a Slavic name, then that is what we should use. If the sources do not use diacritics when referring to medieval figures, then neither should we. Olessi (talk) 21:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

That someone didn`t heard something, prooves nothing. Were Stettin, Stolp etc. official names of that cityies/duchyies? Are there any sources about it from period before Brandenburg takeover? Except of sources in foreign languages. If it goes for all that Bogusławs, i`m quite confused, becouse Kashubians (closest tribe) spell "ł" just like in Polish, the same goes for "ó", and they use "w" instead of "v" (same in Polish, in opposite to other Slavic lang), so Bogusław seems to be similar to what was spelled in thier houses, ergo; native, historical name. As i said, Mestwin means nothing, it`s latinized/germanized name of "Mści-wój" (Mszczuj), since there`s no English spelling of this name, why should be latinized/germanized version used? I`m repeateing it: every of that names got some meaning, but not in foreign spelling, Cityies/lands the same. Speaking about historical context, i`m repeateing that officially it had not verry much to do with Garmany since Pommerania joined HRE (the same as for Bohemia and Moravia), rather since was taken by Brandenburg. I don`t think that we should use common names, but rather original or official (in historical context too, vide: Constantinople->Istambul). What Gdańsk "rule" has to do with it? Mikołajski (talk) 23:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Were Stettin, Stolp etc. official names of that cityies/duchyies? Yes, they were.

Are there any sources about it from period before Brandenburg takeover? Except of sources in foreign languages. Contemporary sources (coins, seals, official documents) preferrably used Latin.

If it goes for all that Bogusławs, i`m quite confused, becouse Kashubians (closest tribe) spell "ł" just like in Polish Please don't confuse modern Kashub with ancient Pomeranian. Kashub derived from Pomeranian, but there are some 800 years of German and Polish influence on modern Kashub. As for Szczecin, Kashub Sztetëno is just the modern version of its historical name Stettin.

i`m repeateing that officially it had not verry much to do with Garmany since Pommerania joined HRE (the same as for Bohemia and Moravia), rather since was taken by Brandenburg. The duchy of Pomerania joined HRE as a Slavic Pomeranian and Liutizian duchy, switched from Slavic customs / language /law and was settled with Germans (Saxons and Dutch), in that form excisted to 1630, when it was incorporated into Sweden and Brandenburg.Skäpperöd (talk) 07:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

What Gdańsk "rule" has to do with it? It says that for the Pomerelian city of Gdansk its historical name Danzig should be used in context regarding hist issues.

Ok, but when that names were official? We can use Latin, but the same as German, those are not real names. How can be Stettin historical name, if it means nothing? That`s why i was talking about names meaning, towns were/are called that for some reason, Stettin is just a fake name. I don`t want to confuse Kashubians, but it`s last survived Pommeranian tribe and thier dialect is for sure close to that which all of Bogusławs used, "ł" is not only sign, but also a phone, without equivalent in other (including Slavic) languages. And i`m not speakeing about modern Kashubians, but about thier first written texts from 16th-17th c. Speakeing about germanization of Pommerania, it wasn`t that fast if its Dukes had typical Slavic names, they could officially use Latin or German, but it wasn`t common language. If cityies like Kraków, Poznań or Wratislavia (Wrocław) were using officially Latin or German names, it doesn`t mean that now we should use them for periods before renaissance and developement of national languages, do we?

I don`t agree with that rule for the same reason. Anyhow, we`r talking about other, separate states - Pommeranian Princedoms. Pommerelia was separate for a short period of Polish feudal fragmentation, even Masovia was much longer. I hope we don`t need to discuss if Masovians were/are Lechitic (Polish) tribe or separate nation, same should be applied to Pommeranians. Present names weren`t just invited by bolsheviks when they moved our (and thier...) borders and resettled that terrains with people from some Lviv or Brest. It`s not "Szczecin" what`s artificial name, but Stettin is. Mikołajski (talk) 10:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Stettin is neither artificial nor a „fake“ name, only if you call Los Angeles or San Francisco „faked“ as they have their roots in Spanish. Every name has it´s roots and Stettin has Slavic roots as a lot of placenames all over Germany – nobody denies that, but it says nothing about the official name used in the past and also nothing about the English name used at that time, which is the only question here. How do you know which language Bogislaw spoke usually?(Pommerland (talk) 11:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC))

Ok, but when that names were official? From as early as we know of it until 1945, except for even earlier legendary records of Stettin as Burstaborg in Scandinavian tales.

Dear Mikołajski, as you and some other Polish editors have a picture of Pomerania as having been a Slavic duchy with the East strongly tied to Poland throughout history and the West just for some time oppressed by Germans sitting in some merchandary towns, I really have to keep inviting you to study Pomeranian history on sources other than post-war Polish propaganda. The making up of extremely exaggerated historical Polish claims had its time in the post-war period, just as German anti-Slavic propaganda had its time before, and now, after Solidarnosc and Leipzig, it is about time to settle down a little. Skäpperöd (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Los Angeles or San Francisco are just Spanish names, your comparation doesn`t fit into this subject. Not all over the Germany but in lands which were inhibited by west Slavs who founded that cityies with that names. I just guess that if some people are giveing a name to thier child in some language, it means that it`s thier language, especially if it`s not a spelling of a foreign name of some saint. German speaking people wouldn`t give such name to thier child, how many "Bogusławs" do you know? The question here is, if germanized/latinized names should be used for Slavic Dukes/Lands, my opinion is that present names are much closer to original and widely known.

Dear Skäpperöd, i`ll try to say it with your words: as you and some other German editiors have a picture of "Groß Deutschland" etc. ... pre-war German propaganda... nazis bla bla bla. I`m not an expert in Pommeranian history, but that such things like cityies/lands/people names were originally Slavic is out of dispute, you all agree that Stettin, Mestwin, Kolberg or Pommern are just German spelling of Slavic names and that`s the point, not that Duchyies ties to its neighbors. Present names weren`t just made-up. While you`r trying to make from it just a common (and of course German) Marks/Lands artificially called like that after evil "Poles" in Potsdam "voluntary" exchanged it for thier eastern lands (which of course were held unrightfully). Do we fight over names of Vilnius, Lviv or some polonized Dukes, Counts and hordes of other nobles? Ask yourselve, who really should settle down? And if it goes for supressing, it`s not the place to speak about Veleti or Prussians uprisings, Mrg. Gero or Wichman, massacre of Gdańsk or "Prussian" policy toward Poles after partitions, but of course it`s all "post-war propaganda". Mikołajski (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I`m not an expert in Pommeranian history. Maybe we should change that first? Not that you need to become an "expert", but please read about some basic stuff like how the Slavic tribes of the region were transformed by their nobility into Northern Germans by adopting German language, custom and law and inviting German settlers to help develope their lands; how - even though the Wends were soon outnumbered by the Germans, mingled in and left behind most of their former customs - the Wendish placenames were kept instead of renaming everything, and how the Griffin dynasty kept on using names originating in the Slavic period even though this period was ended by members of this very dynasty itself. I do not mean that in any way offensive, but without a little knowledge on Pomeranian history we won't get anywhere here.

And yes, there were Slavic uprisings against HRE margraves, but that was in a period before the time we are talking about; and yes, there were partitions of Poland and Großdeutschland and a west shift of Poland, but that was in a period after the time we are talking about. Here, we cover the 12th to 17th cty. What makes you think I would consider that to be propaganda. I consider it to be propaganda if German-Slavic history is narrowed to those events and stereotypes are being build up by exaggerating a few facts and not telling the rest. That certainly happened in Polish post-war "Regained-territories"-propaganda - and what I feel from the responses of Polish editors to simple historical facts, that has not yet been identified as such by everyone. That is why I keep inviting everyone to study Pomeranian history and see by themselves. Skäpperöd (talk) 18:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

In addition to the Google books search by Csprr above, I ask to actually look at the books using the terms.

Duchy of Pomerania-Stettin or Stettin is used by all books published before 1945. Yet, it is also used by post-45 (anglosaxon) authors, eg

• Jane Turner, Jane Shoaf. Turner - 1996 "The Dictionary of Art"
• J. R. Mulryne, Helen Watanabe-O'Kelly, Margaret Shewring, Elizabeth Goldring, Sarah Knight - 2004 "Europa Triumphans: Court and Civic Festivals in Early Modern Europe"
• Beth Lettow Brusius, John Milton Liittschwager - 1984 "The Lettows"
• Andrew John Krzesiński - 1949 "W obronie Polski"
• Encyclopaedia Britannica, inc, Philip W. Goetz - 1987 "The New Encyclopaedia Britannica"
• and others

whereas Duchy of Pomerania-Szczecin is not used, and Duchy of Szczecin is used solely by a few Polish authors writing in English.

Therefore, as long as no one comes up with any proof that Duchy of Pomerania-Szczecin or Duchy of Szczecin is the widely accepted name for the historical duchy in English, these names should not be used as sole or primary names for the duchy. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

This few books published in more or less modern time, You cite dosen't proof that "Stettin" is widley accedpted English name for Szczecin in 13th c. As for now according to [[WP:NCGN] we shold use current name cause no widley accepted name. Radomil talk 20:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

You cite dosen't proof that "Stettin" is widley accedpted English name for Szczecin in 13th c

What else does it need ?! I provided proof that all books mentioning the duchy of Pomerania-Stettin before 1945 used (Pomerania-)Stettin, and that this usage has not changed after 45 even though the name-giving city has another official spelling now that also became accepted in English - for the modern city, not for the historical duchy. Widely accepted does not mean that any random WASP in Riverton, IL is using that term at least 3 times a day. Prove me wrong, provide sources.

Skäpperöd (talk) 21:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Every English language historical atlas I looked at at the university library (6 of them) has names such as Stettin, Stolp, Kolberg etc on ALL maps representing situations prior to 1945. There was just ONE exception to this, a map representing the ~970-1035 period was showing names Szczecin etc. Anyhow, as a historian and having looked at those atlasses (aswell as the usage in "The New Encyclopaedia Britannica") I feel I can say that Pomerania-Stettin and such are the widely accepted names of the historical duchies (and apparently also the cities 1035-1945) in the English language as used in reputable secondary/tertiary sources (such as historical atlasses and encyclopedias). And yes, widely accepted does not mean that everyone has to know these names, just that they're the names most frequently used and understood by professional English-language authors, which is clearly the case here. Csprrr (talk) 10:53, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

• Response to RfC Checking the policy on name conflicts in a historical context, and by analogy with Gdansk/Danzig, city names should be of the form "... [ name of city in historical period (modern name of city) ]... "

E.g.: "... stretching from Kolberg (Kołobrzeg) to Stettin (Szczecin) [...] around the strongholds of Stettin and Demmin... "

I think this principle has been clearly established in Wikipedia.¨victor falk 12:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Pomeranian duchies and dukes. 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/20070223033603/http://kaszuby.bytow.pl/radde/BogislawX.html to http://kaszuby.bytow.pl/radde/BogislawX.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 00:06, 27 December 2017 (UTC)