Talk:Johannes Dantiscus/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Another article badly written and badly cited, about someone utterly unimportant except that he was a bishoop of a place in Prussia -- or, he was important, but the wikipedian who wrote this has no sense of what historians consider useful information. JHK

This is what the article looked like before -- I had made some changes before I decided to add editorial comments to the text, in hopes that explanations and clarifications would be forthcoming:

Johann Flachsbinder, also known as Johann von Hoefen and sometimes known as Johann Danticus for his birthplace, was born in the Hansa city of Danzig in 1485.

Please note that you can make links say what you want but refer to something else by "pipelining" them. Please do so.

His father was a Danzig brewer and merchant. Johann became a church canon and a poet.

What his father did is not that important, historically, unless it bears on the life of the son -- how is this information relevant?

Emperor Maximilian I enoble him. He became bishop of Kulm, and later bishop of Ermeland, both dioceses in Prussia, governed by prince-bishops.

How was he ennobled (note spelling and correct verb tense) by Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor (note the way we use titles)? This is unclear. If the dioceses were governed by prince-bishops, then wasn't he a prince-bishop? Do these things have anything to do with each other? what?

He wrote many poems in Latin, as it was customary at that time.

How is this information significant? also, we say in English, "as was customary..."

Despite the surrounding Prussian lands turning Protestant, Ermland remained Catholic.

Again, how does this information relate to the whole? Was Danticus somehow responsible? Did Catholicism increase his prestige, or make his job more difficult? Also, please stick to one spelling of Ermeland -- don't change midway.

Von Hoefen or Danticus took part in the imperial Convention of Vienna in 1515 under Maximilian I.

What happened there? Whay is it important to know that Danticus was one of scores, if not hundreds, in attendance, unless something really momentous happened? I ask because it's normal for bishops (or prince-bishops) to attend such meetings...

Among his many works is the "Life of Johann von Hoefen" (Vita Joannis de Curus Dantici).

That's actually not the literal translation -- why did you choose to translate it that way?

He died in 1548 at Frauenburg, Ermland in Prussia.

Ref.

please spell out -- wikipedia is not paper

Cath. Enc.

I looked here -- where is this listed? I looked under von Hoefen and Danticus. When I googled, I could only find this on genealogical sites that also mention our friend Mr. Watzenrode.

Univ. Gda Prof.dr hab E. Kotoviki

Did you get the information from this professor directly? otherwise, you need to cite a work, with proper bibliographic information.

About the "Danti{s}cus" article: Of what nationality is Professor "Kotoviki" (because it sounds like a made up or badly misspelled Polish name)?

Is the professor really not aware that:

It's Dantiscus not Danticus (even all the German websites seem to possess that knowledge)
Jan Dantyszek (as he is generally known in the country of his was birth, life and death - Poland)was a Polish diplomat and ambassador for 28 years
he spent a big portion of his life at the court of the Polish kings
as Polish soldier he took part of the campaign, against the Turks and Moldavians
Warmia was in Poland until 1772 which may explain the mystery of why "Ermeland remained Catholic despite the surrounding Prussian lands turning Protestant"
Flachsbinder was his father's nickname, the family name was von Hoefen
about the only German thing about him was his grandfather;

or did you filter it out as "irrelevant"?

Space Cadet

The name of the Professor is corrected now. (I tried to find it again, could not., but today it came up on http://www.altavista.com : Dantiscus.

I also changed the heading to show the different spellings. "Fassbinder" was added by someone other than me. Therefore I now changed the text to reflect that. The German Institute in Warsaw : Deutsche Historische Institute DHI (I mentioned them months ago) is working with Polish experts to decipher the German language records in the "regained", or rather "reconquered"land , among them the German Language records of the prince-bishop of Ermland , Danti(s)cus. This has not been done by the Polish "liberators of the land" since take-over. It was started after 1992 and the DHI was approached in 1995, I believe.

I do not know (yet), when Danti(s)cus received the prince-bishop (Reichsfuerst) title, perhaps in 1515 by Maximilian in Vienna ? I originally did put an entry on the "first" Congress of Vienna (1515) and the importance of the emperor adopting Louis etc etc , but little remained. Emperor Maximilian made a deal with Sigismund I (then neglected to support the Protestants) Just as the Habsburgs were "inheriting" Hungary, Poland etc, they had set out to take over the Hanseatic League and inherit Prussia and what all else. It was more important that all should remain Catholic and it did not matter what language, as long as they were of the "correct political religion of that time".

By the way the grandmasters did not pledge allegiance to the Polish king (except Paul von Russdorf ?) and when Albrecht von Brandenburg Prussia became grandmaster, he also refused. He only pledged allegiance to his uncle Sigismund I on a personal basis , after he stepped down as grand master.

I know Danti(s)cus also received titles from emperor Charles V, date ? When this Danzig burgher became an Ermland resident, that was a different "state" ,he may or may not have been prince-bishop before becoming bishop of Ermland.

Under emperor Maximilian II's son Maximilian (III) the Teutonic Knights Grandmaster was a Habsburg (himself). Maximilian II and III were also elected king of Poland.

Sigismund I was duke of Silesia, later king of Poland. Sigismund III Vasa was king of Sweden, Gothland, Vandalorum and king of Poland and kept the official title king of Sweden all his life. The kings of Sweden were Reichsfuersten, or imperial princes for at least that part of Germany or Holy Roman Empire, that they ruled. And so on and so on.

It was standard procedure for all the rulers of Europe to interchange positions, offices, titles, if you will, because they were all intermarried and they bought and sold titles to territories and countries.

To the Erm(e)land spelling. I had entered an article under Ermland, because that is the modern spelling, even though centuries ago it was spelled Ermeland. Search engines give you much more info on Ermland, but again someone had changed wiki to Ermeland. Oh well. user:H.J.

And he was important because .... Danny

According to many sources, the history of polish diplmacy is divided into two periods: before and after Dantiscus. His carreer as a polish diplomat lasted over 30 years. Also, he belongs to the circle of the most outstanding Polish-Latin poets. Frau user:H.J. is trying to make him part of German history, based on the fact that his family came from Germany in XIV th century and that the land where he spent most of his life belonged to the Kingdom of Prussia in XIX th century.

Space Cadet

Additionally, she still hasn't bothered to fill in the blanks indicated above. And SC -- could you please review the notes on creating and editing pages? It seems that you often inadvertantly create pages where the page width gets extended past the window. Thanks! JHK

user:H.J., I'm sorry, but what you have added isn't a citation. I did find a University of Gdansk web site on von Hoefen, with an article written by the professor you name -- but i don't know how you make the connection to UNESCO -- there are lots of guidelines available on this site and many others on the proper forms for citing sources. Please use them, and use them properly, to help show that your use of the articles in question is legitimate. Also, there are many books called 'Kirchenlexicon' -- which one are you using? Why is this so difficult for you to grasp or, if you understand, to cooperate? JHK

JHK, on http://www.altavista.com search : Dantiscus the 4. article is: Jan Dantyszek.. click on this text in Polish and English language, go all the way down, click on :Virtual Library of Polish Literature and you come to UNESCO United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization, , which promote a strong public domain ..world's literary heritage. The Kirchenlexicon is bautz.de. Not too difficult. user:H.J.

If it isn't difficult, then you should have no problem citing the web sites correctly, and stating that they are public domain. I am not sure that the Kirchenlexicon at bautz.de is public domain. Even when something is public domain, you still have to cite properly -- otherwise it's considered plagiarism. Plagiarism isn't illegal -- just immoral and unethical. If people reading the wikipedia think that it is being created by people who are happy to plagiarize, it will make the whole project look bad. There are lots of guides out there on how to cite sources properly. It is your responsibility to read them and learn how to do it. The Chicago Manual of Style is one, and there are some guidelines on the 'pedia. Please take the time to learn how to do things correctly.