Talk:Baltic Sea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Baltic Sea is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Geography article has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale.
Portal:Germany
 Germany Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article is supported by the Geography WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage on Geography and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Geography, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

I'm not sure what Storebaelt is called in English. Great Belt sounds much more reasonable than Big Belt and Google yields more (and more plausible) results. I'll change it for now but it would be nice if some would look it up in a map or atlas. Thanks, Kosebamse 13:13 May 13, 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Mare Balticum or Mare Suebicum?

Many sources, including Wikipedia's article on Balts, cite Mare Suebicum rather than Mare Balticum as the Latin name for Baltic Sea. Which one is correct? BTW, it would also be appropriate to link to the page on Balts when explaining the ethymology. --193.2.69.128 11:24, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Other Historical Name Mare Germanicum

Besides having been recorded as Mare Balthicum, it was earlier recorded as Mare Germanicum by Jordanes. Thousand years later a map by Hartmann Schedel still shows Mare Germanicum [1] Moved it here, because of repeated removal by Balcer and Space Cadet [2]

MG 2/17/2006

[edit] Gandvik or Grandvik

Someone claims that Grand meant "great" in Old Norse. I can find no confirmation about this Grandvik is most likely a variation of Gandvik which referred to either the Gulf of Bothia or the White Sea.--Wiglaf 12:13, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

We better not trust single uncorrobated sources too much. :-) The whole matter seems rather controversial, and not very encyclopedic. /Tuomas 12:45, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Alright :-)--Wiglaf 12:54, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I admit that I made a leap too far by claiming that "Grand" would be Old Norse, which is of course, ahem, a bogus claim. Sorry, Wiglaf. (I do have a friend who might know more, I'll ask him.) Jhi 17:01, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

While I'm waiting for my friend (a professor in Old Norse) to comment, I looked up the Latin original of Saxo and it says: Ceterum Oceani superior flexus Daniam intersecando praetermeans australem Gothiae plagam sinu laxiore contingit; inferior vero meatus eius Norvagiaeque latus septentrionale praeteriens ad ortum versus magno cum latitudinis incremento solido limitatur anfractu. Quem maris terminum gentis nostrae veteres *Gandwicum* dixere. Igitur inter "Gandwicum" et meridianum pelagus breve continentis spatium patet, maria utrimquesecus allapsa prospectans; quod nisi rerum natura limitis loco congressis paene fluctibus obiecisset, Suetiam Norvagiamque conflui fretorum aestus in insulam redegissent. (http://www.kb.dk/elib/lit/dan/saxo/lat/or.dsr/0/2/index.htm) Sooo ... it would seem "Gandvik" would indeed be a good "scandinavization" for "Gandwicum". Now, I don't see any serpents in there, but that was only the first hit I could find (and the online edition is painful to search, page by page.) So I'm fine with "Gandvik".

The "Grandvik", then, might come from the most quoted English translation: Moreover, the upper bend of the ocean, which cuts through Denmark and flows past it, washes the southern side of Gothland with a gulf of some width; while its lower channel, passing the northern sides of Gothland and Norway, turns eastwards, widening much in breadth, and is bounded by a curve of firm land. This limit of the sea the elders of our race called *Grandvik*. Thus between *Grandvik* and the Southern Sea there lies a short span of mainland, facing the seas that wash on either shore; and but that nature had set this as a boundary where the billows almost meet, the tides of the two seas would have flowed into one, and cut off Sweden and Norway into an island. (http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/DanishHistory/preface.html)

So is the "Grandvik" just a typo of Oliver Elton (http://sunsite3.berkeley.edu/OMACL/DanishHistory/) (or an editor error)? Jhi 18:12, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Okay, got a reply . "Gandvik" is a well-known in Norse "legendary geography", and usually considered to be the White Sea (not the Baltic Sea, but Saxo might have been cutting corners, or misremembering, and this is legendary geography anyway). The etymology being /gandr/ "evil enchantment, in particular the witch's or wizard's staff". (No serpents, though.) (Interestingly, if you look at the map of the White Sea, there's a small town, "Kantalahti", "-lahti" being Finnish for "-vik" - in modern maps the name might be Russified to "Kandalaksha" or something like that.) So "Gandvik" is perfectly fine with me, but since I guess "Grandvik" can be found especially in English texts, it also should be mentioned (origin unknown). (A Norse root /granda/ apparently also exists, but that means "to harm", so it's probably not relevant here.) Jhi 18:33, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps we should rename it "Gandvik" in the text, if "Grandvik" seems to be a typo. I remember that there was a different name for the Baltic Sea in Old Norse. I'll see if I can find it, or perhaps your friend knows.--Wiglaf 11:00, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I'll rename it as "Gandvik", but since so many online references talk of "Grandvik", I'll mention that one too as a possible typo.

[edit] Origins of the name

I have replaced the speculations on the origins of the name Baltic sea. Last time I removed the speculations Jhi reverted it, so I hope he's happy now.--Wiglaf 13:22, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I am happier now. Your earlier edit summary for removing the *bhel rerefence only said "Nope, it is only a very direct connection." which left me rather confused as to your intent, and I felt leaving the *bhel in was better than removing it completely. Jhi 16:46, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My linguist friend thinks the current consensus still is the *bhel IE root or "shining white", so I think it should be reinstated as the primary explanation for the origin of the name. The later references and the Belt straits can of course still be mentioned. Jhi 18:37, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't understand which path *bhel would have taken to become part of "Baltic" (unless it was part of Xenophon's Baltia or Belt). I have checked the root at the American Heritage Dictionary, but there is no mention of the Baltic Sea [3]. I think the direct connection between Baltic and *Bhel seems very unlikely. Could your friend provide a language that called the Baltic Sea by a name based on this root before Adam of Bremen? If he can provide such a source, I will agree with you.--Wiglaf 15:44, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I will ask him. In the meanwhile I can find references to a late Roman historian Jordanes (Iordan), of Goth origin, that in the 6th century wrote the history of Goths. The history itself was probably at least partly somewhat fanciful but apparently Baltic Sea was mentioned a lot (since the origin was claimed to be Gotland.) But so far I haven't been able to locate the original text to find out what did Jordanes really call the sea. Another angle is that "white" is still in modern Lithuanian "baltas" (and Lithuania is widely recognized as the most "well-preserved" of all IE languages). (In Latvian, "white" is "balts".) Jhi 20:57, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Okay, it seems that the Jordanes is drying up... his "Getani" calls the Baltic Sea "Oceani Germanici" and "Balts" it calls "Aesti". (http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/Goths/Goths1.htm) So I think we would need someone Lithuanian to clear this one up... or lacking that, a Lithuanian etymological dictionary. But that doesn't necessarily give solid written proof since Lithuanian became a written language only in the 16th century.

My world doesn't come crumbling down if the *bhel explanation is not convincing everybody... BUT since a group of languages living by the sea still call the sea "a balt sea" AND "balt-" in those languages still means "white" AND the IE scholars have come to the conclusion that one of the *bhel IE roots meant "white", I would call the "*bhel theory" more than speculative. Jhi 21:44, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

According to Meriam Webster Online the origins are Mediaeval Latin, i.e. sources like Adam of Bremen [4]. Even though, the Baltic languages had such a word, the word "Baltic" seems to have been applied to the Baltic States during the Russian rule to distinguish them from the rest of the Empire. I believe you that the Baltic languages have such a word, but there is such a thing as remotivation, which means that if a word exists before a certain name is borrowed this first word will influence the form and the meaning of the borrowed name. Consequently, the modern Baltic names for the sea may very well mean "shining", but unless a "pre-Adam of Bremen form" can be attested in the Baltic languages, the naming constitutes most likely what is called folk etymology. --Wiglaf 10:44, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I'm not contesting the ML references, and since I don't have any earlier attested ones, the current "speculative "bhel" is fine.

[edit] Map should be corrected

The map is obviously incorrect, as Finland is not part of Scandinavia, and Poland is not a Baltic State. --Ghirlandajo 09:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Geologically and historically Finland is Scandinavia or Fennoscandia. The major geological divide run through Baltic Sea, Gulf of Finland, Lake Ladoga and Lake Onega and to the White Sea. In comparison Gulf of Bothnia is only superficially dividing two land masses.

Finland is indeed not a part of Scandinavia, which is defined as the peninsula where Sweden and Norway are located. Finland is a part of Fennoscandia. --Vuo 13:51, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
On the other hand, in English the distinction is not so clear. Usage where Scandinavia includes Finland and even Iceland is widespread enough that it has made it into dictionaries, and it is also acknowledged on the wikipedia Scandinavia page. Of course, the map could be changed in order to fight this shift in meaning, but that is of concern mostly to us Fennoscandians :) 84.239.128.9 14:39, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ice

I added some information on the icing of Baltic Sea. The section might need some references for at least what comes to historical occurences of freezing or not freezing that the text superficially mentions. However, I do not know very well how to make the links appear in Wikipedia.

Please do not delete the items, though -- I could say I have quite good knowledge on this, even though I must admit I am not a professional.

Added Jan 6 2006 23:45 UTC -- (Sorry, the automatical date signature is also something I quite am not aware of.)

[edit] East Sea ⇒ Sea of Japan redirection

It has been proposed that East Sea should redirect to the Sea of Japan page, instead of the current East Sea (disambiguation) page. As concensus will determine this, please discuss it here in Talk:Sea of Japan#East Sea diambiguation page. Thank you.

Note: Wikipedia:Disambiguation policy mandates that if there is risk of confusion, East Sea should redirect to a disambiguation page first. As some of you may know, East Sea has meant Baltic Sea in English for a very long time, as shown in this map.--Endroit 23:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Demographics

The demographics section says that 15 million people live within 10 km of the coast, but then goes on to say that 90% of the 22 million people living in cities > 250,000 live within 10 km of the coast, which would give 19.8 million people in that area. Anyone know which number is more accurate? Sort of pedantic, but it looks pretty silly for the article to apparently contradict itself within a couple lines.

[edit] Do we really need the Tourism Links section?

Do we need it? It seems a spamfest galore not worthy an encyclopedia. Why should we pomote some tourism organization? Friendly Neighbour 09:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It seems "un-encyclopedic". Moreover, very few other Wikipedia articles about places have "Tourism Links" sections. --Cultural Freedom 2006-07-16 09:58 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/a/l/Talk%7EBaltic_Sea_eb6a.html"