Talk:Swedish Pomerania

Imperial princes?

Quoth the article:

Sweden held the Pomeranian parts of Germany as a fief from the Holy Roman Empire as Reichsfürsten (imperial princes).

This seems like a confusing use of the term "princes", as I would assume that this refers to a person, not a piece of territory. Does this mean that the Kings of Swedens were considered imperial princes, as they held territory in fief from the Emperor? --Jfruh (talk) 03:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. /B****n (talk) 13:59, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Swedish Pomerania#Integration in the eleventh hour

The last words of this sentence, … a number of social reforms were implemented and planned; the most important was the abolishment of serfdom by a royal statute on July 4, 1806, a practice that had never been implemented in Sweden itself, are a bit off the mark. Technically, Sweden never had serfs. In the first volume of his Swedish history, Vilhelm Moberg documents the existence of thralls in early times and there devolution into the Swedish lower class. Nonetheless, Sweden never had any serfs to liberate. — Robert Greer (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what the article is saying. The "practice that had never been implemented in Sweden itself" is serfdom. --Jfruh (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Population

Was there ever any ethnically Swedish settlement in Pomerania? Sca (talk) 17:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Many estates were distributed among Swedish nobles, and their was Swedish military, other officials and the like, though in the time of the empire these were not all ethnic Swedes in the modern sense. With all of these, especially military and nobility, there was substantial intermarriage. But large scale immigration or colonization did not take place. Skäpperöd (talk) 08:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Swedish Pomerania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100618152137/http://www.ruegen.de/gustavia.html to http://www.ruegen.de/gustavia.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110211080558/http://www.lub.lu.se/luft/diss/hum_250/hum_250_transit.html to http://www.lub.lu.se/luft/diss/hum_250/hum_250_transit.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.napoleonseries.org/articles/wars/forgotten.cfm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://wwwtest.library.ucla.edu/libraries/mgi/maps/blaeu/germania-nt.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:43, 9 December 2017 (UTC)