Talk:Origins of Prussia

message: Again I am disputing the truth of the sentence Conrad invaded and even took some Prussian territory in Kulmerland'. I will remove it in the future, unless i will see some evidence. One week of grace begins... szopen
------------
A number of historical facts were removed by szopen,
therefore entered here: 
MG 3/19/2006
----------
1)  The first attempts at conquering Prussia are recorded in 997 AD. <- This is false. In 997 there was mission of St. Adalbert. Since he went without soldiers and was martyred, it's hard to see it as "conquest".
2) Already several times before, particularly in 1220 and thereafter Konrad I of the duchy of Masovia was unsuccessfully trying to conquer Prussian land. <- This is a bit news for me. Konrad I was trying christianisation of Prussia in 1222 and 1223, IIRC, I am nto aware of any raid or anything in 1220.
3) Why the removal of "Polish" from duchy of Masovia? It was Polish duchy, period.
4) Due to a number of attempts by Konrad of Masovia to conquer Prussia, the Culmerland to the north of Masovia became quite devastated and Konrad feared for his own land in Masovia <- This is unclear. First, Culmerland was Konrad's land. it was part of Polish land since X century. It _was_ part of the Masovia, so why _north_ from Masovia?! It was devastated by Prussian raids. To repeat: CULMERLAND (ziemia chelminska) was part of Polish duchy since a long time before Konrad. First written mentioning of Chelmno as Polish town, the centre of Polish Ziemia Chelminska, is from 1065. So, in 1220 Culmerland was part of Poland since _AT LEAST_ 150 years (and more, since archeological findings confirm it was rather inhabited by Slavs, not Prussians. In 1216 Chelmno (Kulm) was invadaded and burned by _Prussians_. Trying to constantly write that Chelmno was "recently conquered" is falsification of the history.
Szopen 08:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

message: A sandbox in which to edit the last section and reach a consensus about what it should say, prior to release: Talk:Origins of Prussia/Sandbox. (Beobach972 17:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Adalbert of Prague article states that Boleslaw II had several members of Adalbert's family murdered, yet Boleslaw I sent soldiers to protect Adalbert in his mission to Prussia. Is this correct? -- Beobach972 17:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, Radomil explained that Boleslaw II (the Pious) was from Premyslid dynasty and was duke of Bohemia, not directly related to Bolesław I (Chrobry) from the Piast dynasty, who was duke and later king of Poland. -- Beobach972 19:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sandbox

message: I have removed the following text from the article:
The East Prussian dialect of German maintains a curious tradition of pluralisation, and does not pluralize words like standard German; "Mann" (the German word for man), for example, normally has the plural form "Männer", but in the East Prussian dialect it is simply Manns.
My reasons are:
# East Prussian is a dialect of Low German, not of standard (High) German.  
# S-plurals are a common phenomenon of Low Germanic languages.
# The putative implication that the pluralization of Low Prussian is somehow influenced by a Baltic language substrate is unsubstantiated.
# It is irrelevant to the context (discussion of Old Prussian laūks, which is, in any event, a singular form).
--Ziusudra 15:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant Germanic pluralization 

message: This article should be merged into Old Prussians. "Origins of Prussia" as a title is ambiguous - why should it relate to the medieval history of the region of Prussia, as opposed to the political origins of the state of Prussia? The content of this article essentially focuses on the Old Prussians, and seems to be a fork of that topic. Olessi (talk) 18:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger