This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Off and on I have been working on a parliament of Prussia article (concerning the 19th century institution) which I will try to post in the new week or two.
From the glossary of Karin Friedrich's The Other Prussia: sejmik- Provincial diet or dietine of the local szlachta in the palatines and districts. After 1569, Poles called the Royal Prussian diet (Landesrat) the "Prussian sejmik, or sejmik generalny (general dietine)." Landrat, on the other hand, was a position of the Hohenzollern state. Feuchtwanger roughly translates Landrat as "county councillor" and compares it to a Justice of the Peace. McKay describes the Landrat as a provincial councillor who administered the largest districts.
I'm not sure off-hand how often there were meetings of the (East) Prussian estates after the age of absolutism. Provincial diets were reestablished in 1823, at least.
The topic is not entirely clear to me. It starts with the Teutonic Order state, then the article tries to encompass both Royal/West Prussia and Ducal/East Prussia without explaining the important differences. The end of story is unclear as well, how did the "Prussian Estates" turn (over time) into the provincial administrations of the Kingdom of Prussia. The following sentence sounds a bit naive to me: "The Order created the Estate to appease the local citizens, but over time the relations between the Order and the Estates grew strained, as the Order of knights treated local population with contempt." Estates used to exist all over Europe. There were of course political reasons for conflict. This should be explained in the article. As for the "contempt" factor, the remaining non-German natives were ruled or suppressed on the level of manorialism. The estates represented mainly the emerging new native German urban elites who tried to end the colonial ways of government (simplification). The Polish crown offered to them indeed more rights etc. - but in what was to be later called East Prussia the situation turned differently. I think it would be much easier to explain the political structures in the respective articles about the historic territories. And there is a factual mistake: The Duchy of Prussia did not come under the influence of the Electorate of Brandenburg with the Treaty of Oliva (1660), but since 1618 (personal union with Brandenburg) - notwithstandig the legal and status issues that continued to exist into mid-18th century. Finally, we do not learn much about what the composition of the "Prussian Estates" was, their privileges and their relations with the Order, Polish Crown, Duke of Prussia, Brandenburg rulers. --DaQuirin (talk) 18:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was no consensus to merge. Initial comments were leaning to merge despite opposition by User:Matthead. Comments by User:Karl.brown are noteworthy, in which this editor has stated the Preußischer Landtag article has been expanded and that a merge may no longer be necessary. Ultimately, there's no consensus for a merge here. Northamerica1000(talk)09:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then please explain what the value added is of having that as a separate article and how the redirects should be constructed. Simply objecting for the sake of objecting is not constructive. The two articles are about the same thing, with this one being more general and the other one under the German, rather than English name.radek (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant explanation, but could you clarify why not for those of us who somehow failed to understand it? PS. My guess is that PL article is supposed to be about a building, and this article, about an institution. If this is so, the PL article needs a major rewrite. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 05:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are not going to merge two different topics, even if you believe they are the same. Do you want to add a photo of the building to the article written by Piotrus? Preußischer Landtag covers several meanings over several centuries, up to the present day building. The current English article may be a mere stub in need of expansion and clarification, but thats no reason to redirect it to the article Prussian estates, which according to its content only covers the pre 1772 period in the Monastic state and Royal Prussia. It should be moved to Royal Prussian estates, and focus about the relation with the Polish Kingdom 1466-1772, to which Polish editors should be able to contribute. -- Matthead Discuß 06:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I want to add the photos to this article, what of it? I would also add the ... one, two, three ... three sentences that the other article consists of to this article. No reason why they should be separate and in any case Prussian Diet should redirect here rather than there for a number of reasons, like, to start with the fact that here #sentences>3.radek (talk) 08:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To educate you and your Polish companions about German language topics, spanning half a millennium? I've got a better idea: just leave it alone. Return to other battlefields. -- Matthead Discuß 22:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added a link to the merge discussion at the top of this page. Now that Preußischer Landtag has been expanded, it's no longer clear that a merge is necessary; instead, a summary style paragraph in Prussian estates, with a link to the main article in Preußischer Landtag may suffice, but I'd like to hear other's thoughts before !voting. --KarlB (talk) 04:29, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
