0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Thumbs Up |
Received: 6,665 Given: 7,052 |
I see the first point and you are right. I revoke my conclusion.
But before we invent something that is not yet recorded in history: What about if Kashubs with German surnames were ethnic Germans per 1400 AD that mainly were the result of a Germanisation among Kashubs?
The surnames then would reflect actual German ethnicity per 1400 AD. That would be in line with all.
Target: rothaer_scaled
Distance: 1.0091% / 0.01009085
39.8 (Balto-)Slavic
39.0 Germanic
19.2 Celtic-like
1.8 Graeco-Roman
0.2 Finnic-like
Thumbs Up |
Received: 6,665 Given: 7,052 |
Ofc. the adminitrative language played a role as for the question whether a Germanisation or Polonisation of the inhabitants was the trend.
But there will only be used a language that is present and understood in the environment. It must not have been the exclusive language of the environment. But if there are two languages in the environment, you will still have to use one of them for names (mustn't always be the same language). We can go on and imagine a special constellation where a German surname bearer was no ethnic German per 1400 AD (if that is needed for internal satisfaction).
But it's still valid: If you hear hooves, think about horses and not about zebras.
Target: rothaer_scaled
Distance: 1.0091% / 0.01009085
39.8 (Balto-)Slavic
39.0 Germanic
19.2 Celtic-like
1.8 Graeco-Roman
0.2 Finnic-like
Thumbs Up |
Received: 20,928 Given: 18,995 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 20,928 Given: 18,995 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1,917 Given: 1,040 |
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks