Talk:Principality of Polotsk

message: For the means of consistency the state should be called Duchy of Polatsk as the same Slavic word княства is used for the Duchy of Zasłaŭje, Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Duchy of Ruthenia etc.--Czalex 14:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the title of other Rurikid rulers (knyaz) of the era is translated as "prince" all over Wikipedia, we should stick to the prevalent usage for consistency. The author of Duchy of Zasłaŭje created the article in error. There were Princes Zaslawski, not Dukes. Grand Duchy of Lithuania is a later and altogether different derivation: not only was it closer to kingdom or empire in size, but also the translation of the title of its rulers as "duke" has been generally adopted in Western languages for centuries. It is the exception rather than the rule. --Ghirla -трёп- 15:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not see much logic in this explanation, do you? Galantereischik (talk) 04:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ghirla's right. Principality is better than Duchy. Duchy is too formal too, and makes it sound like a western European territorial lordship or peerage. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Why Principality and not Duchy?

message: Ghirlandajo, you have canceled my edition concerning the origin name of the Polacak prinicpality, turning it to Russian spelling. This principality is on the territory of Belarus and had no connection with present Russia, so its origin name should be pointed in Belarusian or in Eastern-Slavic language of old Rus. But not in Russian.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.182.93.178 (talk) 20:57, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Those guys did not speak Belarusian, and the city was not known as "Polacak" at the time. Since the Old Russian name for the entity was not documented, the Russian one will have to suffice. If you can supply the Church Slavonic spelling instead, go on. --Ghirla-трёп- 15:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do not see why "Russian one will have to suffice". We are not talking about Russia here, but about ancestors of Belorussians. Perhaps you should know that belorussian and russian are different languages, do you? So we can tell at least about old belorussian. Church Slavonic(old bulgarian origin) is the language ised in Orthodox church and as basic language for "slavinization" in Russia lands. Lisouczyk1 (talk) 14:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

text:  I do not see the connection between Russian language and Principality of Polotsk. Yeah, they didn't speak Belarusian, they spoke East Slavonic = language of Old Rus (I think, you see the difference with Russian). Belarusian could be sufficient, since this is Belarusian history first of all. But Old Rus spelling would be better.  The name of the city at that time was Polotesk (Полотеск).--212.182.93.178 (talk) 23:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Language of the original name

message: "Pagan Lithuanians began consolidating and attacking lands of the principality." Lithuanians appeared in about XIX century. Those times were "Litvins".
Any references to the battles? Lisouczyk1 (talk) 14:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decline