Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:52, 26 April 2013

Hello, nice to meet you Skäpperöd and Volunteer Marek — I'm Feezo. I've taken a brief look at the background, and will be ready to start the next step (focused discussion) by tomorrow night. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 06:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Feezo.Volunteer Marek 22:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey. Skäpperöd (talk) 12:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Scope of the dispute

Would it be correct to say that the first primary issue is confined to this addition and File:Wrymouth expedition pomerania lutici.png? Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 22:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Sure.Volunteer Marek 22:41, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Or not quite. The original map was this one: . The way I understood Skapperod's initial complaint was that the name "Stralsund" did not exist in 1121. Which is true enough, the actual name was not recorded until 1234. I had included the name "Stralsund" just as a geographical marker/for sake of informativeness (without it a person looking at the map might not realize that this was the area of later Stralsund). As I've mentioned in the other threads (DR I think, thought it might have been RSN), the name "Stralsund" is actually not included in the original source, although the author does include it in the same book for later periods - which suggests that he is aware that this wasn't "Stralsund" yet.

Basically, on the one hand you want to include "Stralsund" for the sake of clarity, but on the other, it is true that this name did not exist yet in the period that the map covers.Volunteer Marek 22:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

@Feezo: Yes, and (same 1121 issue, another article; Oder-->Müritz part of that statement is not disputed). @VM, no comment yet, as this is purely about the scope of part one, right? Skäpperöd (talk) 12:28, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, the root question is: was a city at the site of modern Stralsund captured by Boleslaw in 1121? Volunteer Marek, can you confirm what the source says about this? Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The question is whether Boleslaw campaigned in the area of modern Stralsund.Volunteer Marek 02:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

But unless the source describes the capture of a city at the present location of Stralsund, the edit would have to be modified to "...as well as capturing Demmin (Dymin) and Stralsund (Strzałów)." The map could still include the city as a point of reference, perhaps labeled as (modern Stralsund) and without the red circle. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The circle is in the original map. You can see part of it in gbook preview .Volunteer Marek 02:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for clarifying - but the inline text does not mention the capture of Stralsund/Strzałów? Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 02:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Not in that particular source. Hold on, I seem to be having some internet problems. Give me a minute here.Volunteer Marek 03:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

This source states "He (Boleslaw) recaptured the whole area up to and well beyond the Oder, as far as the Island of Rugen". That doesn't mention Stralsund explicitly but "as far as the Island of Rugen" would cover Stralsund.

This source states (my translation, search for "Stralsund") "Polish and German expansion met with each other in this way in the area of upper Peene, from the Muritz Lake, to probably the area of today's Stralsund". What was going on was that Boleslaw was marching across Pomerania from the East, while the Holy Roman Emperor, Lothair was marching in from the West. The same source also says "In the west, the Polish conquest also most likely covered the towns of Gutzkow and Demmin, which, for unknown reasons St. Otto did not visit during his 1124 mission, although from other source we know that the inhabitants of the first of these places allied themselves with Poland in 1121".

This source says (my translation) "In the next year, this time through Demmin, Wolgast, Griefswald, and Stralsund, Boleslaw's knights reached the island of Rugen "crossing the sea""

This source says (my translation): "it was then that Boleslaw Krzywousty took all of Oder-Pomerania, as far as Rugen".

This source states (my translation) "under Boleslaw Krzywousy's rule when we (Poland) reached past Wolin, Szczecin and Stralsund and even established ourselves on Rugen"

Volunteer Marek 03:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

But with the possible exception of Jabłonka, none of those would seem to support the statement that Boleslaw captured Stralsund. So wouldn't it be more accurate to either not mention it, or use something like the wording "area of today's Stralsund", per your translation, for the inline text? Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 04:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

"area of today's Stralsund" is fine with me.Volunteer Marek 04:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

A technical note: I edit from GMT+2, so in most cases I won't be able to respond immediately.
@Feezo: Yes, was a city at the site of modern Stralsund captured by Boleslaw in 1121 is part of the question.
I'd like to add a procedural remark before VM's links are discussed. Part of the problem in the previous discussions was that the (alleged) references were not properly identified, and it is hard to respond to something named "here" or "this link" when there are multiple such links presented. It takes only a few short responses and nobody can identify anymore what link is being talked about and what actual reference is behind that link. I thus propose that whenever we are referring to a source here, we name it Author (YEAR): p. NR and pipe links where possible. Is that ok with everybody? Skäpperöd (talk) 04:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)