| Revision as of 03:31, 21 May 2002 editGianfranco (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,116 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:54, 21 May 2002 edit undoJHK (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,951 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| :''The previous talk, about Copernicus' nationality, is now at ]'' | :''The previous talk, about Copernicus' nationality, is now at ]'' | ||
| ---- |
---- | ||
| Removed quote: | |||
| ''Poland had parts of Prussia occupied, tried to annex and wanted to have Polish coins in Prussia. | |||
| The cities of ], ] and Thorn did not want to give up their individual sovereign rights and | |||
| continued coining money. In 1519, 1522, and 1529 Copernicus published ''Money Reform Memoranda''. His 1529 writings | |||
| stated in part : | |||
| " Woe to you, unfortunate Prussiland, that you should have to suffer for such a bad money management!.. If we do not have relief here soon, then Prussia is soon going to have only coins left, which contain nothing but copper. Then all trade with foreign countries would stop. Which foreign tradesman would want to sell his merchandise for mere copper?... Such a break-up of Prussiland is silently observed by the big powers; they let our beloved fatherland, to which we owe everything, to which we owe life itself, from day to day collaps miserably.." | |||
| (excerpt from ], Copernicus, describing Prussia during the civil wars leading to the Reformation, transl by H. Jonat).'' | |||
| I'm really sorry, but this is just another attempt to throw in the Poland-Prussia debate in another guise. The manner in which the quote is presented, as well as the translation (there really ''is'' no such thing as Prussiland in English, and ''fatherland'' is doubtful at best), are simply unacceptable. Moreover, if this is a translation of someone's Latin-German translation, than I think that fatherland is simply the Latin patria -- VERY different than the context Helga would like us to accept. Again, there has been so much time spent on this, that it's bordering on the ridiculous. Still, as a professional historian, I cannot sit by and allow this blatant misrepresentation. People in Copernicus' time really didn't understand ethnicity and nationality in the same way that you want to believe, Fr. Jonat. And, contrary to what you may believe, i don't care if Copernicus is Polish, German, or even Thornisch! Gianfranco is correct about placing the man's accomplishments first. What I do care about is that the debate and the entire issue of nationality are framed within the proper context: that context is one of people with an ideological interest allowing that interest to shape a view of history that is in fact inaccurate. ], Tuesday, May 21, 2002 | |||
Revision as of 21:54, 21 May 2002
- The previous talk, about Copernicus' nationality, is now at talk:Copernicus' nationality
Removed quote:
Poland had parts of Prussia occupied, tried to annex and wanted to have Polish coins in Prussia. The cities of Elbing, Danzig and Thorn did not want to give up their individual sovereign rights and continued coining money. In 1519, 1522, and 1529 Copernicus published Money Reform Memoranda. His 1529 writings stated in part :
" Woe to you, unfortunate Prussiland, that you should have to suffer for such a bad money management!.. If we do not have relief here soon, then Prussia is soon going to have only coins left, which contain nothing but copper. Then all trade with foreign countries would stop. Which foreign tradesman would want to sell his merchandise for mere copper?... Such a break-up of Prussiland is silently observed by the big powers; they let our beloved fatherland, to which we owe everything, to which we owe life itself, from day to day collaps miserably.." (excerpt from Hermann Kersten, Copernicus, describing Prussia during the civil wars leading to the Reformation, transl by H. Jonat).
I'm really sorry, but this is just another attempt to throw in the Poland-Prussia debate in another guise. The manner in which the quote is presented, as well as the translation (there really is no such thing as Prussiland in English, and fatherland is doubtful at best), are simply unacceptable. Moreover, if this is a translation of someone's Latin-German translation, than I think that fatherland is simply the Latin patria -- VERY different than the context Helga would like us to accept. Again, there has been so much time spent on this, that it's bordering on the ridiculous. Still, as a professional historian, I cannot sit by and allow this blatant misrepresentation. People in Copernicus' time really didn't understand ethnicity and nationality in the same way that you want to believe, Fr. Jonat. And, contrary to what you may believe, i don't care if Copernicus is Polish, German, or even Thornisch! Gianfranco is correct about placing the man's accomplishments first. What I do care about is that the debate and the entire issue of nationality are framed within the proper context: that context is one of people with an ideological interest allowing that interest to shape a view of history that is in fact inaccurate. J Hofmann Kemp, Tuesday, May 21, 2002