Jump to content

Talk:Pied Piper of Hamelin: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
ClueBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 1 discussion to Talk:Pied Piper of Hamelin/Archive 1. (BOT)
 
(36 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Vital article|class=C|level=5|topic=Art
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Children's literature|importance=High}}
}}
{{WikiProject Mythology|importance=high}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Children's literature|class=C|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Mythology|class=C|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Germany|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|class=C|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Folklore|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Germany|class=C|importance=High}}
}}
}}
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
Line 17: Line 16:
}}{{Archives|bot=ClueBot III|age=90}}
}}{{Archives|bot=ClueBot III|age=90}}
<!-- Template:Setup cluebot archiving -->
<!-- Template:Setup cluebot archiving -->
== "It's been 100 years since our children left." ==

I looked up the source for this excerpt (9th citation). I found the passage in question in google books preview and it says (on page 89): "No written account appears in the town chronicles until a 1384 entry that read: 'It is 10 years since our children left.'" <ref>https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=pbyRAgAAQBAJ&pg=PR3&lpg=PR3&dq=Education+And+The+Market+Place,+Routledge,+1994,+ISBN+0-7507-0348&source=bl&ots=YgR_bN64fI&sig=ACfU3U0_6xjZaoIeh4wCy7h5fDLPAAS3rQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjk5om736fgAhUL448KHTPQBEcQ6AEwAHoECAQQAQ#v=twopage&q&f=false</ref> Also, it says on the wikipage that "Also, Hamelin town records start with this event" telling the reader that Hamelin's historical record opens with the pied piper, but the source for the citation may only be referring to the first reference to the event of when "our children left" specifically. The reader of Harty's essay mightn't conclude that's how the town's records begin. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/222.152.68.165|222.152.68.165]] ([[User talk:222.152.68.165#top|talk]]) 19:05, 6 February 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Actually I think this claim (and anything else from the same source) should be removed entirely. The article it's cited from is from a book on business management, with a whopping two paragraphs of (totally uncited) Pied Piper information serving solely as a lead-in for an extended analogy about business. Somehow I doubt the author made the journey to the Hamelin municipal archives for that purpose. So she's either just repeating some story she heard, or she managed to find an earlier source for this claim that has eluded the rest of us. Given the context, I think the former is a lot more likely, but either way, this claim doesn't belong here with a source of this quality. (It's nowhere to be found in the German version of the article either, for what it's worth.) -[[User:Elmer Clark|Elmer Clark]] ([[User talk:Elmer Clark|talk]]) 16:35, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

:Ok I've looked into this some more and it's a real mess. [[User:Lisapollison]] first added this quote and citation {{diff2|236050009|way back in 2008}}. At that point, it said 10 years, as it does now. Two years later an IP user {{diff2|369219121|changed 10 to 100 without comment}}, presumably because 100 fit the timeline as given in the rest of the article much better than 10, and he assumed it was a typo. And so it remained for ''nine years'' until you finally noticed and changed it back.
:In the meantime, the "100 years" version [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22100+years+since+our+children+left%22 spread through the Internet like wildfire], to the point that it seems at first glance to be well-established fact. But none of the results I checked cited anything more specific than "the town chronicle," and they all seemed like places that might easily have just cribbed the info from Wikipedia.
:So it seems what we have here is this: in 1994, some business consultant gives a brief, vague recap of the Pied Piper story as the opening to an otherwise-unrelated article. She includes a quotation from the town chronicle that she found...somewhere...which doesn't even line up with the other dates in her own article. A Wikipedian stumbles upon this article in 2008 and duly adds the information even though it doesn't really make sense. Two years later, someone else notices that it doesn't, and "fixes" it. The "fixed" version seems plausible, is still (mis-)cited to a book, and has a sort of hauntingly evocative air, so it gets repeated all over, even [https://www.boneandsickle.com/2018/07/02/it-is-100-years-since-our-children-left/ being used as the title of a podcast about the mystery]. At this point it's probably so ingrained as part of the story that we'll have people trying to add it back forever.
:It's not quite [[Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident|Seigenthaler]], but I'd say we got a pretty big collective egg on our face on this one. That is, unless someone shows up with a scan of the town chronicle or something and redeems it all! But I'm not holding my breath here. -[[User:Elmer Clark|Elmer Clark]] ([[User talk:Elmer Clark|talk]]) 17:30, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
::Thank you {{u|222.152.68.165}} for raising it and '''big''' thank you {{u|Elmer Clark}} for the extremely thorough and well-researched response. I had a quick look online and although there is some reference to it the German is slightly obscure (to me!) and it absolutely does not nail it to either 10 or 100 years in anything I have yet found. I agree that the source doesn't seem like it can possibly be an [[WP:RS|RS]] for Hamelin no matter how great it is on education funding or whateverthehell it's about. My instinct (which has no role to play here!) is that the shorter period is probably more likely but really, if it is that well-established at ''any'' time period, 10 or 100 or three weeks, surely it is documented somewhere so we don't have to make stuff up or rely on ludicrously tenuous references? So I agree that right now it should be removed. If any of us can do further research we can always revisit this, and it is all here on the Talk page (which needs archiving by the way) and in the history. But for now I think we should move to take it out, and soon. In this present form it's just too flimsy for an encyclopaedia. Best wishes to all [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 07:18, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
:::<small>Important COI notice: I once played in a very good [[W11 Opera|children's opera]] called ''Koppelberg'' and am therefore a major international expert on this topic. Unfortunately the show was set ''at the time of the events'', not later, and no-one even had a line saying {{tq|I must make a note to write all this up in the town chronicles in ten years, ermmm, or do I mean a hundred? Has anyone got a pencil please?}} Chiz sa Molesworth. Best to all. [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 07:18, 14 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
{{od}}For the moment, I have marked it as needing a better source, and have "corrected" it back to 10, which is supported, however weakly, by the only source we currently have. I'd be delighted if someone took action on this, or if it still needs doing next time I get a chance, I could. The discussion seems to have gone quiet but I suppose we could argue silence=consent? Cheers [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 08:24, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:Just to follow up a little on this, albeit after a gap (sorry). Because of {{u|Elmer Clark}}'s very useful work above I did, on 19 May 2019, order the {{tq|Education And The Market Place}} book. I carefully read the Pied Piper bits and then I threw the book away as I do not need a massively out-of-date book on that topic. I can confirm that there is ''nothing'' useful in this book for our article{{snd}}nothing that hints for a moment that we should treat it as an [[WP:RS|RS]]. Harty does ''not'' quote reliable sources for this: she just states stuff. I am sure she is or was great on Education And The Market Place but, as Elmer says, the PP stuff is {{tq|serving solely as a lead-in for an extended analogy about business}}. So, if she had talked about dogs or piccolo trumpets or Boeing aircraft then again it might have helped illustrate her point, but would be most unlikely to be stuff we needed to quote in encyclopaedia articles on those topics. It has no place at all here, and I have therefore removed the reference to her, and the side-mention of her in another ref. Best to all, [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 19:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
:: I had hoped I would have to have something relevant to add here, but my findings have been inconclusive. I can however, add what I found. The double dating appears to have been a real thing:

"The oldest city book of the city of Hameln - the first dated entry is from the year 1311 - is a Bergament- coder and mainly contains statues of the council, but also Copies of original finds that were probably entered at the same time as the original copy. To conclude Several such original finds and a dated statute, all from the 14th century, are now, strangely enough, double dated. The first gives the date and year of issue of the relevant certificate and is from written in the same hand as the whole original find; the second reads in two places: “post exitum puerorum” so and so many years and is, as can be clearly seen, from one hand first half of the 16th century added to the first year been joined. This second year, however, is always different, partly corrected and sometimes correct Bringing dating into any relationship. One sees but also on the indistinct pages and etchings that the Schreiber has tried in vain to find one of his coins to bring about the corresponding number. Bielmore loved it. He was mainly interested in saying “our children left” to insert into official documents." <ref>https://digital.slub-dresden.de/werkansicht/dlf/52862/275</ref> ''Der historische Kern der Hameler Rattenfängerfage'' (1882) by Dr. O. Meinardus
p. 263-264

Another source however places the statues book to 1375:

"The alternative dating to 1350 refers to a much-discussed entry in the Hamelin statutes book of 1375 called “Donat”, according to which the obscure addition “post exitum puerorum… cc ° lxxxiij” to the date 1351 refers to the number of days after the move ; see Werner Ueffing, “The Hamelin Rattenfängersage and their historical background”, in: Geschichte undgeschichte , ed. by N. Humburg, Hildesheim 1985, p. 185 ff .; based on: Hans Dobbertin, source collection , Göttingen 1970, p. 12 f." <ref>https://m.hausarbeiten.de/document/209093</ref>

Morever, all of these sources seem now to have disappeared(!?): <ref>https://archive.org/details/folklore03folkuoft/page/242/mode/2up?q=Donat</ref> The Pied Piper of Hamelin by Eliza Gutch in Folklore (1892)

I am not so eager to dismiss that this was a real thing, especially as the Lüneburg Manuscript from between c.1370–1450 mentions this traditions. This source had not been discovered yet when Dr. O. Meinardus wrote in 1882 or Eliza Gutch wrote in 1892. Moreover, I find it hard to believe that the documents disappeared in those precise ten years between their writings, meaning that Dr. Meinardus could not have possibly seen them himself. As to the other expert cited by Eliza Gutch, "Herr Sebastian Spilker, Junior Councillor of Hameln (1654?)", I am wary to trust any one opinion, and to quote Agatha Christie, "I am not a handwriting expert—I cannot pronounce definitely (and for that matter, I have never found two handwriting experts who agree on any point." [[User:BeatriceCastle|BeatriceCastle]] ([[User talk:BeatriceCastle|talk]])

{{Reflist-talk}}

== Archive ==

I would like to archive this ludicrously long and boring and repetitive and repetitive and boring and long and repetitive Talk page and set up some unaggressive auto-archiving for the future. Any dissent, flowers, chocolate, an ting? Please advise. Thanks [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 07:22, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
:Go for it! :) [[User:-sche|-sche]] ([[User talk:-sche|talk]]) 20:13, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
::{{done}} Now in and working. Let it not be said that it ever takes me ''more than two years'' to get round to doing things! Ha. Best to all [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 18:31, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

== Major source ==

Check out [http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20200902-the-grim-truth-behind-the-pied-piper this long explanation] from the BBC, with multiple focuses on 26 June 1284, which this article lacks. Much to write up here.[[Special:Contributions/1.64.229.166|1.64.229.166]] ([[User talk:1.64.229.166|talk]]) 09:04, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

==To check out==
==To check out==
''''Locations''''
''''Locations''''
Line 85: Line 45:


:Thanks for this. We are still looking forward to your help editing the article to improve it. [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 18:32, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
:Thanks for this. We are still looking forward to your help editing the article to improve it. [[User:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|DBaK]] ([[User talk:DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered|talk]]) 18:32, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

== Need photograph ==

Hi, In two places this article talk about some old written evidence about 1824, one on piped piper's house and at the town's gate. If you live in Hemlin, Germany, you have access 9f these places, I want you to add photographs of these evidences, so readers can read it.[[User:Success think|Success think]] ([[User talk:Success think|talk]]) 10:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

== Proposed merge of [[Pied Piper of Hamelin in popular culture]] into [[Pied Piper of Hamelin]] ==
{{Discussion top|result=No opposition to merging, so consensus comes out as '''merge''' of only referenced content. - [[User:Cukie Gherkin|Cukie Gherkin]] ([[User talk:Cukie Gherkin|talk]]) 05:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)}}
Most of this list is [[WP:OR]]. If we remove all of the unsourced content, then there would probably only be 3 entries left. As such, I suggest we merge this article per [[WP:MERGE#Text]]. [[User:Pizzaplayer219|<b style="background:#f5b836;color:#d12b1f;padding:1q;border-radius:5q;">Pizzaplayer219</b>]][[User talk:Pizzaplayer219|<sup>Talk</sup>]]<sub title="C" style="margin-left:-22q;">[[special:Contributions/Pizzaplayer219|Contribs]]</sub> 14:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Per nom. There is not much of substance in the article, which was a pointless split full of original research. [[User:Zxcvbnm|ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ]] ([[User talk:Zxcvbnm|ᴛ]]) 15:12, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Serious issues with [[WP:V]] and what's left would be too small to be split out. [[User:QuicoleJR|QuicoleJR]] ([[User talk:QuicoleJR|talk]]) 01:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Support''', and I'd suggest removing all of the uncited items in [[Pied_Piper_of_Hamelin#Adaptations]] as well, unless a work literally has "Pied Piper" in the title and we have an article on it. Shouldn't be hard to keep the list short if we follow [[WP:V]]. ~[[User:Maplestrip|<span style="color:#005080">Maplestrip/Mable</span>]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|<span style="color:#700090">chat</span>]]) 07:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

:* '''Support''' with an emphasis on information cited to reliable third-party sources. [[User:Shooterwalker|Shooterwalker]] ([[User talk:Shooterwalker|talk]]) 01:28, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Support''' a merge of only sourced content. - [[User:Cukie Gherkin|Cukie Gherkin]] ([[User talk:Cukie Gherkin|talk]]) 05:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
{{Discussion bottom}}

== "It is 100 years since our children left" ==

I have removed the following claim from the article, as it is not adequately supported by its references:

: The earliest written record is from the town chronicles in an entry from 1384 which reportedly states: "It is 100 years since our children left."

The two references given for this claim were:

* {{Cite web|last=Kadushin|first=Raphael|title=The grim truth behind the Pied Piper|url=https://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20200902-the-grim-truth-behind-the-pied-piper|access-date=2020-09-03|website=www.bbc.com|language=en}}
* {{cite book |first1=Jay |last1=Asher |first2=Jessica |last2=Freeburg |title=Piper |date=2017 |isbn=978-0448493688 |location=New York |publisher=Razorbill|quote=Researching earliest mentions of the Piper, we found sources quoting the first words in Hameln's town records, written in the ''Chronica ecclesiae Hamelensis'' of AD 1384: 'It is 100 years since our children left.'}}

The first of these references is a BBC Travel article which does not give references. The article is from 2020, long after the claim appeared in Wikipedia, so it is likely that this is a case of "[[xkcd:978/|citogenesis]]". The second of these references is to the introduction of a novel, not a scholarly work of non-fiction. It does include a citation to the ''Cronica ecclesiae Hamelensis'' (the chronicle of the church of Hamelin), but that is not adequate by itself: we need a more precise reference or a quotation of the original Latin.

There is an 1882 critical edition of the chronicle here (the text of the chronicle starts on p. 29):

* {{cite journal|first=Otto |last=Meinardus |year=1882 |title=Hameler Geschichtsquellen |journal=Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereins für Niedersachsen| volume=47 |pages=1–40 |url=https://digital.slub-dresden.de/werkansicht/dlf/52862/41}}

However, I could not find anything like the claim in the chronicle, so this seems to be a dead end.

Previously there was a third reference (for a variant of this claim with "10" rather than "100"):

* {{cite book |first=Shiela |last=Harty |chapter=Pied Piper Revisited |editor1=David Bridges |editor2=Terence H. McLaughlin |title=Education and the Market Place |page=89 |publisher=Routledge |year=1994 |isbn=0750703482 |quote=No written account appears in town chronicles until a 1384 entry that read: ‘It is 10 years since our children left.’}}

Harty does not say which "town chronicles" the entry appears in, so we are no better off. I think the burden ought to be on the proponents of the claim to locate a better source than any of these. [[User talk:Gdr|Gdr]] 15:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:24, 31 January 2024

To check out

[edit]

'Locations'

To the east of Hamelin was a gallows where criminals were hung. A 1622 image of the city can be seen here: https://www.dewezet.de/region/hintergrund/hintergrund-seite_artikel,-aberglaube-am-galgenberg-_arid,2504090.html It is today occupied by Galgenberg (literally "gallows hill") a street located at: 52.105078, 9.381509

"Calvary" is another name for golgotha, the place where Jesus was crucified. When the early text says "Calvary", it is possible that the place they were mentioning is the gallows to the east of Hamelin. This means the hill/koppen is the Basberg / Morgenstern hill immediately to the east of the gallows.

'Dancing'

Tarantism was a form of Dancing mania, and was often performed on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul, which was the same day the children disappeared from Hamelin.

It may be that the midsummer celebrations in Hamelin 1284 were accompanied by entertainers from outside who were able to get the children to do a dancing craze, which led them out of Hamelin past the gallows area and the hill. There they kidnapped them and the children were then forcibly emigrated elsewhere.

--One Salient Oversight (talk) 03:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Greatly in need of more recent scholarship

[edit]

The overall tone of this entry is very amateurish. It is based on two unsupported assumptions:

  • All myths are garbled accounts of actual historical events.
  • People in former times were incapable of remembering things as they actually occurred, and were compelled to recall them via some unexplained dream-like process.

These are the twin assumptions of positivist scholarship which has been out-of-date for generations. Advances in structural anthropology and myth analysis have rendered this kind of thinking obsolete.

It is in one way extremely patronising towards other cultures, making them out to be uncomprehending children incapable of understanding their own experiences.

It is also just unconvincing. Chroniclers of the time seem to have been perfectly capable of recording all sorts of traumatic contemporary events such as plagues, regicides, fire, and earthquakes, but when modern readers encounter an aspect of a culture they have difficulty understanding, they immediately assume the explanation must be that the culture is cognitively defective in some way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.127.126.38 (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. We are still looking forward to your help editing the article to improve it. DBaK (talk) 18:32, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need photograph

[edit]

Hi, In two places this article talk about some old written evidence about 1824, one on piped piper's house and at the town's gate. If you live in Hemlin, Germany, you have access 9f these places, I want you to add photographs of these evidences, so readers can read it.Success think (talk) 10:32, 14 February 2022 (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.
No opposition to merging, so consensus comes out as merge of only referenced content. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 05:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of this list is WP:OR. If we remove all of the unsourced content, then there would probably only be 3 entries left. As such, I suggest we merge this article per WP:MERGE#Text. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 14:56, 5 June 2023 (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.

"It is 100 years since our children left"

[edit]

I have removed the following claim from the article, as it is not adequately supported by its references:

The earliest written record is from the town chronicles in an entry from 1384 which reportedly states: "It is 100 years since our children left."

The two references given for this claim were:

  • Kadushin, Raphael. "The grim truth behind the Pied Piper". www.bbc.com. Retrieved 2020-09-03.
  • Asher, Jay; Freeburg, Jessica (2017). Piper. New York: Razorbill. ISBN 978-0448493688. Researching earliest mentions of the Piper, we found sources quoting the first words in Hameln's town records, written in the Chronica ecclesiae Hamelensis of AD 1384: 'It is 100 years since our children left.'

The first of these references is a BBC Travel article which does not give references. The article is from 2020, long after the claim appeared in Wikipedia, so it is likely that this is a case of "citogenesis". The second of these references is to the introduction of a novel, not a scholarly work of non-fiction. It does include a citation to the Cronica ecclesiae Hamelensis (the chronicle of the church of Hamelin), but that is not adequate by itself: we need a more precise reference or a quotation of the original Latin.

There is an 1882 critical edition of the chronicle here (the text of the chronicle starts on p. 29):

However, I could not find anything like the claim in the chronicle, so this seems to be a dead end.

Previously there was a third reference (for a variant of this claim with "10" rather than "100"):

  • Harty, Shiela (1994). "Pied Piper Revisited". In David Bridges; Terence H. McLaughlin (eds.). Education and the Market Place. Routledge. p. 89. ISBN 0750703482. No written account appears in town chronicles until a 1384 entry that read: 'It is 10 years since our children left.'

Harty does not say which "town chronicles" the entry appears in, so we are no better off. I think the burden ought to be on the proponents of the claim to locate a better source than any of these. Gdr 15:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]