Revision 2327 of "Talk:Attila_the_Hun/archive_1" on enwiki

Hi all, 

My field's modern & mediaeval (this bit's mine, so I can keep the "ae") history, with an emphasis on the economic & demographic. Leisure activities (if you can call them that) include reading, The Fall, old stuff generally (small towns, films, doorknobs, the usual) and good dark beers. Other likes include cats, green, Monty Python, foxes (so long as they don't go too near the cats) & the Missus. Dislikes include sirens, project management, gyratory systems and advertising. 

Cheers, 

Dave 
----
Hi, Dave and welcome -- WojPob

----
Hi David -- welcome to the Poland or German (Germanic, ur-German) debate. My advice to you now is to not get depressed when everything you say is contradicted because it doesn't suit certain irredentist arguments. This particular set of debates has been going on for several months, so be warned ;-) Otherwise, very nice work on the maps -- the rest of us looked, but didn't really bother to read because we accept the fact that maps tend to be fairly untrustworthy as sources. It's good to know that the initial citation was less than a proof of the "It's Prussian!" argument. [[JHK]]
---- 
Hello David,
I see that you have taken an interest in the places dear to my heart. Thank you so much for your wonderful input . It is such a pleasure to have someone working on the project with a clear understanding and unfuzzy arguments.
[[H. Jonat]]
---- 
Hello again,
I have a question or rather a favor to ask. You seem to know Latin.
Could you please translate: "Divina Clementia.March.Brandenb. SR Imp.,Camerarius et Nunc Temporis Archigeron Elector VII Obdin. Ducens.DVX Boruss etc "
Thank you so much
[[H. Jonat]]
---- 
David -- just so you know, Helga has a book of portraits of famous people that she uses as a source for a lot of her European rulers stuff. The link is on several of the talk pages to which she and I have both contributed. It's a beautiful book, but my take on it is that it is a typical book of exemplary <nowiki>and/or</nowiki> famous people. I've actually done a course in Germany on this type of volume, and one of the things that was very evident was that these books are not always accurate and often are the product of wishful thinking and a bit of sucking up to a patron. THis type of argument (i.e., that the inscription says "duke of Prussia, so he was duke of Prussia") has come up on several occasions -- this is the first time I've actually seen a solicitation for a translation, though. Best of luck -- [[JHK] 
---- 
David, the Jesuit part is written in an over 100 year old encyclopedia.
In reference to my ? a few days ago I guess, that you do not know Latin ?
[[H. Jonat]]
-----
HJ, the 'turned it over to Jesuits' is unforgivably vague. turned over his duchy to be ruled by jesuits? turned over religious instruction in his duchy to jesuits is the likely answer. -- MichaelTinkler 
---- 
I never saw your earlier note, I'm afraid, but Brandenburg/Prussian history isn't so obscure that it has to be gleaned from selective interpretation of contemporary illustrations (flatly contradicted by their own accompanying text - uncited, of course), obscure references to nominal titles, or unnamed encyclopaedias (which?). Why would Johann Georg, a Lutheran ruler, hand his dominions to the Jesuits? Would this revolutionary transformation in the religious balance of central Europe not have registered more forcefully in the historical record than appears to have been the case? 
---- 
(With all the ramblings of the professors I almost did not see your note either). The rulers at that time switched back and forth several times.8o percent were protestant. But there were Calvinists and all kinds of other reformers. Under the Habsburgs the Anti-Reformation brought the Catholics back to appr. 50/50 in Germany. Many Hohenzollern were Calvinists and always had to get along with the emperors , who headed the Catholic Anti-Reformation. [[Albert I of Prussia]] was Lutheran. Johann Georg and his brother [[Johann Sigismund]] took on reformed religion in 1613. The way it is written in wikipedia now is fine, because today it does not make much difference any more. 
---- 
HJ: Johann Sigismund certainly embraced Calvinism, but he's the only Brandenburg ruler I know of who did so. As far as I'm aware, Johann Georg never strayed from Lutheranism, though his realm welcomed Calvinists fleeing the Spanish Netherlands. Can you direct me to a source to the contrary? [[David Parker]]
---- 
To [[David Parker]] This Johann Georg Hohenzollern (1525-1598) remained Lutheran. His grandsons Johann Sigismund and Johann Georg , both sons of Joachim Friedrich,were raised at the court of their grandfather under a lutheran teacher. When both brothers went to study at Strassburg, they learned about Calvinism. The grandfather Johan Georg made them sign documents, not to change religion. Both brother changed to Reformed (I guess that is Calvinism ?) in 1613 .(from Kirchenlexikon -church lexicon).
(I removed the link to the grandfather.) [[H. Jonat]]
---- 
HJ: I suspected as much from your wording, but didn't have time to check it out. Yes, Reformed = Calvinist here. It's significant that Johann Sigismund accepted the state's Lutheran orientation, so his change of conscience remained a private affair rather than a matter of state. The confusion of the two Johan Georgs is a timely reminder, though, of the need to take care with statements of fact. [[David Parker]] 
----
Hi David, 

Noticed you're doing a lot of work on Early Mediaeval, as well as the dread Early Modern Germany.  I was wondering if I could entice you towards later Mediaeval -- especially post conquest England and 12th and 13th c. france? And maybe the Wars of the Roses?  I'm only asking because most of my most recent work has focused on pre-11th c, so I'm really comfortable with Carolingians, Merovingians, and Ottonians.  Michael is also an early specialist, plus lots of Byzantine.  We both do lots of ecclesiastical stuff,too.  No pressure, just trying to spread thin resources in the best way possible, and if you know the stuff, I won't have to do as much research! [[JHK]] 
---- 
Sure, always happy to oblige - just point me to anything in urgent need of attention, and I'll try to at least start sorting it out. I'm summoning the courage to start a Hundred Years War outline - and for once I'd be happy if anyone out there beat me to it. I'm still working on FS and M, by the way, and would welcome your or Michael's thoughts on origins and diffusion (I'm similarly more at ease with the 13th-14th centuries there). [[David Parker|DP]] 
----
Maybe I did just beat you to it on Budapest, but you wrote a ''much'' better article.  Congratulations -- [[user:Derek Ross]]
------------
To [[David Parker]] 
You apparently had some info that Georg Friedrich was not duke of Prussia and ''filed it under rubbish''. A 1588 coin III Gross Ar (Triplex Silver Groschen) clearly identifies Georg Friedrich as Duc and Dvx Prvssiae. I had added this on the Georg Friedrich site. That was removed. I re-inserted it on Talk/Georg riedrich. With the new system it is easy to miss messages. Therefore I am posting it here for you. Do we change it back to duke ?
[[H. Jonat]]
---- 
Howdy, all -- as I'm the person who pulled the coin, I thought I'd weigh in.  I've already tried to impress upon some people that coins are not always reliable sources.  A concrete example:
:in around 267 AD, A beautifully detailed aureus was circulated via the military through much of Gaul.  The coin bore the portrait of the Emperor Postumus.  The inscription on the obverse, IIRC, read Postumus Augustus, Divi Filius, Pontifex Maximus, Consul.  Problem? kinda.  Postumus was a usurper.  Gallienus was the Emperor at the time.  

Coins and inscriptions do not always tell the truth. [[JHK]]
---- 
HJ: My regnal information, which you share, states that Albert Frederick was duke of Prussia from 1568 until his death in 1618, when the title passed to the Brandenburg line. Clearly, a land can have only one duke. George Frederick's position was in fact regent. Albert Frederick remained the duke throughout.
-------------
David, the title of duke was not taken from Albert Frederick, but in his place other dukes of Prussia and electors of Brandenburg etc ruled. I added that info
on the [[Hohenzollern]] site. I have some question on the next duke of Prussia,  between 1608 and 1618.Was it the son of Joachim Friedrich or it may have been Maximilian (III) ,brother of emperor Mathias and son of emperor [[Maximilian II]] [[Habsburg]]. I see on Maximilian (III)'s coins the statement : ''Mag: Prvss:Ad Comes''
and ''Prvss :Admi''( That may pertain to the western Prussia part of Prussia ?).All the Habsburg were at that time grand masters of the Teutonic Knights, also the grand masters of the Order of the Golden Fleece.

The coins and the records, maps etc of that time, in my view, show more the realities of what really was at that time. 20th century interpretations or political correctness has often not shown many facts. Oftentimes there were not only one officeholder, but sometimes 2 kings, even 3 popes at the same time. So naturally there are different regions, that tell different histories from the same time. [[H. Jonat]]