The share of Prussians in the newly formed Prussian tribe
For some time I have been concerned with the question of how many immigrants from Lithuania and Masovia were settled in East Prussia as part of the retreat until 1740.

At Dollinger, it reads like this: “However, special mention must be made of his generous settlement after the plague years in East Prussia, which was centrally managed by the state. The king had settlers from the Palatinate and Nassau, 2,000 Swiss and 17,000 Protestants driven out of Salzburg because of their faith immigrated to East Prussia. As a result, the East Prussian population grew by 160,000 between 1713 and 1740 to around 600,000 inhabitants. The population of East Prussia grew not least due to the personal ties to its princely patrons from Germans of different tribes and foreigners, including Lithuanians, to form a community of states. ”

Gause believes that the proportion of the Lithuanian and Mazovian elements in the Prussian tribe cannot be determined numerically. In any case, it was not small. The many names in –kat, kies, eit, at, is, us are of Lithuanian origin (Kukat, Budskies, Lenkeit, Szameitat, Jaguttis and Stantus are mentioned as examples). The Masurian names are –ski, ek (Kowalski, Ziemek), ak (Nowak) and a (Kurella, Slomka, Skwarra, Warda).

If you want to at least roughly calculate the Lithuanian and Masurian share of the Prussian tribe, then you should deal with the Prussians and then with the immigrant colonists, for whom there are estimated or literary values.

In the 13th century, the Prussians lived in the densely populated Gauen Pomesanien, Pogesanien, Warmien (Warmia), Barten, Natangen and Samland from the Weichsel to the Curonian Lagoon, to which the large but less densely populated Gauen Sassen, Galinden, Sudauen, Nadrauen and Schalauen were upstream in a wide arc from the southeast to the northeast. A disproportionately large part of the Prussian population lived in the Gau Samland.

The Prussians were forced Christianized by the Teutonic Order from 1231. When the subjugation of the last Prussian tribe of the Sudauer in 1283 ended a war of land grabbing lasting over 50 years, the country was called Prussia, on the eastern and southern borders of which a wilderness had emerged. Gause explains that in the course of the fighting the Nadrauen, Schalauen and Sudauen border quays became almost deserted. The remains of the Schalauer were put in villages near Tilsit and Ragnit. The surviving Sudauers were relocated from the Teutonic Order to the Samland unless they had escaped to Lithuania. The area was known for a long time as the “Sudauerwinkel”.

The great wave of immigration of German colonists subsided around 1320 (Gause). The settlement was then continued with the children of the immigrants as “internal colonization”. When the Teutonic Order suffered the defeat of Tannenberg in 1410, it had reached the edge of the wild.

According to “Territorien-Ploetz”, settlers from across the border were used to settle the wilderness on the eastern and southern borders. Masuria (from Mazovia) have migrated in small numbers since the 14th century, occasionally also Lithuanians and Ruthenians. After 1466 (the year of the 2nd Thorner Peace), the immigration of Mazury and Lithuanians increased and swelled especially in the first half of the 16th century. Masuria are not only employed as farmers, but also as landowners, they also penetrate the cities; Lithuanians are almost exclusively farmers. The south of the country has spoken mostly Masurian (“Masuria”) since the 16th century, the northeast Lithuanian (“Prussian-Lithuania”).

Now for the literature on Prussia:
Von Krockow speaks of “approximately 150,000 to 170,000 Prussians that existed between the Vistula and the Memel around 1230”. Boockmann refers to the latest estimate of the population at the time of the conquest of the country by the Teutonic Order and assumes 220,000 people for Prussia and the Kulmer Land. Higounet explains that “the population of Prussia was estimated at 170,000 at the beginning of the 13th century”. Boockmann also writes: “The population figures that are mentioned are inevitably based on estimates. According to such estimates, the population of Prussia was 140,000 before the conquest of the country by the Teutonic Order. Around 1400 the Prussian population in the religious state was probably just as strong – about 103,000 Germans and around 27,000 Poles came to it, especially in the Kulm region.

According to Schumacher, the order has neither “exterminated” the native Prussian population of his country, nor has it “Germanized” as planned. Against the attempt at extermination, even if it was intended, the simplest considerations would have been made by the

Expediency spoken. Since the settlement of the country with German peasants only started towards the end of the 13th century and was still not complete after 100 years, the order would have had in the first half century, in the whole second century, a large part of the necessary labor for agriculture, and thus it and its cities, lacked the indispensable livelihood. A more striking proof is, however, the documented fact that the order repeatedly issued prescriptions to Prussia from the 13th to the 15th century (volumes I, II to III, 1 of the Prussian document book and the document books of the four Prussian dioceses) and that a large part of the rural people spoke the Old Prussian language throughout the 16th century.

The majority of the Prussian population experienced a considerable reduction in their legal and economic situation. In the 15th century, with the gradual decline in the social and legal position of the German peasants, a certain rapprochement and fusion began between them and the Prussian peasants. Nevertheless, the Old Prussian language was still very widespread in the 16th century among the large majority of the peasant population, especially in Samland. The German village settlement did not penetrate into western Samland at all because there was a closed Prussian population. Even the eastern Samland (up to the Deime) could only be penetrated late and thinly with German village settlements.

When the Reformation was introduced, German preachers everywhere had to be provided with special interpreters, the so-called “Tolken”, who translated the German sermon into Old Prussian, as well as the translations of catechism into Old Prussian, which Duke Albrecht had made in 1545 and 1561 , met an urgent need. It was only in the course of the 17th century, after the merging between Prussia and Germans in the 16th century, with the further deterioration of the situation of German peasants, that the old Prussian language disappeared more quickly. In 1684 Hartknoch mentions that there are still a few people here and there who still understand the Old Prussian language (B. Ehrlich, Die alten Prussia, in: Der Ostdeutsche Volksboden, 1926, p. 266).

Wenzkus explains: “ As recent studies have shown, the devastating wars of this period had left so much land that the Prussian peasants could expand their land holdings to such an extent that they now reached the size of the German peasant country. On the other hand, since the situation of the German farmers deteriorated legally due to the enforcement of clod attachment and greater numbers of shares, the situation of the two groups of the population became very similar. This was the prerequisite for the Germanization of Prussian peasantry, which – already limited to small language islands in the 16th century – had ceased to exist in the 17th century ”.

Anyone who wants to present the quantitative development of the Prussian ethnic group in the context of the emerging Prussian tribe until 1740 cannot avoid extrapolating the growth of the Prussians in the same way as the growth of the various other population groups immigrated to East Prussia and recorded statistically, without the connubium to be considered beyond population limits!

In a separate table, the growth of the Prussians from 1400 to 1708, the year before the plague from 1709 – 1711, was calculated with an annual growth rate of 0.17%. Thereafter, the number of Prussians in 1708 was 228,743 heads (see Appendix 1, Prussian growth). In 1656, 6,849 victims from the Tatar invasion were taken into account.

According to reports, 13 cities, 249 villages and 37 churches were burned and destroyed, 23,000 people killed and 34,000 dragged away, according to the reports. Most of these unfortunate people died of hunger and cold. While Hermanowski reports that 1656 Tartar invasions occurred in the south of the country, Grenz explains that the Tartars invaded East Prussia and moved into Tilsit. Also in the main office in Insterburg the enemy raged terribly and haunted the place Gumbinnen. It seems certain that the events also hit the Gumbinnen district so badly that it could not recover in the next 50 years.

The annual growth rate of the German colonizers was also set at 0.17% between 1400 and 1708. This resulted in 166,312 Germans in 1708 . In 1656, 6,849 victims from the Tatar invasion were factored in.

An annual growth rate of 0.17% was also assumed for the estimated 1,300 Dutch and Scots who immigrated from 1523.

The 8,000 Huguenots who were admitted to East Prussia in 1685 also grew according to this model calculation with an annual growth rate of 0.17%.

The population of the Germans, Dutch, Scots, Huguenots and 500 French immigrants according to Schumacher was 176,911 in 1708 .

The Masurian / Polish element on the Prussian tribe can be estimated from several values ​​given in the literature. According to Schumacher, in Mazury of around 400,000 inhabitants in 1870, around 80% still spoke Masurian. Polish lexicons, on the other hand, emphasize under the keyword “Mazowsze pruskie” (Prussian Mazovia) that in 1870 ” 75 percent of the population was of Polish nationality ” and that their number only decreased “under the pressure of Germanization” (Kossert).

Schumacher informs that the king decreed in 1739 to teach German in the Lithuanian and Masurian schools, which significantly prepared the Germanization of these foreign-speaking sections of East Prussia. It is therefore permissible to increase the proportion of Mazury speaking Polish around 1800 by a few percentage points compared to 1870. If it were 10 percentage points, in Mazury around 1800, 85% of the population would speak Polish. Kossert offers a control option by publishing a list of the percentage of the German and Polish-speaking population in the Masurian districts of Johannisburg, Lötzen, Lyck, Oletzko, Sensburg, Ortelsburg, Neidenburg, Osterode in 1825 with an average value of 86.2% Polish-speaking Population.

Gause mentions that the East Prussian population grew to 1,823,000 heads by 1871. From a population table created by me, a population of 1,806,332 people can be read for 1870. 75% of 400,000 inhabitants in Masuria in 1870 are 300,000 inhabitants, 85% lead to a value of 340,000 heads. 340,000 of 1,806,332 inhabitants are 18.8% of the East Prussian population. If this percentage is based on the total population of 1708 (= 675,836 inhabitants), the number of 127,210 Polish speakers can be determined.

The population structure of Mazury in 1708:

85.0% Mazury 127210
7.5% Germans (estimated)   11225
7.5% Prussia (estimated)   11224

This leads to the population structure of East Prussia in 1708:

228743 Prußen 33.8%
166312 German 24.6%
10599 Dutch, Scots, Huguenots, French 01.6%
142972 Lithuanians (residual value) 21.2%
127210 Mazury 18.8%
675836 100%

The Great Plague of 1709-1711 is an important starting point for estimating population numbers in East Prussia. 10,834 farms were deserted by the plague, of which 8,411 (Insterburg, Tilsit, Ragnit and Memel alone) (= 77.6%). This means that the population loss in Prussian-Lithuania due to the plague can be estimated at 77.6% of 235,836 plague victims (Wank gives this number), i.e. 183,092 inhabitants. If one assumes a population loss of 80% due to the plague in Prussian Lithuania, the population residing there would have had the plague in 1708 228,865 inhabitants (= 33.9% of the total population of East Prussia). Terveen provides information for a control calculation: According to the tax table for the Kingdom of Prussia from 1701, the share of Prussian-Lithuania in the total rural population of East Prussia was very large. Of a total of 68,504 East Prussian boys, maids and farmers’ children, 24,451 worked in Prussian Lithuania (= 35.7%). The 33.9% given above take into account that there was relatively less urban population in Prussian-Lithuania than in all of East Prussia.

The population of Warmia belongs to East Prussia in all calculations, although Warmia had to be ceded to Poland from 1466 to 1772.

According to Hermanowski and Stamm, around 240,000 East Prussian residents each died as a result of the Great Plague. Based on around 600,000 inhabitants of the province, the population of East Prussia would have dropped to 360,000 at the end of 1711. Since Hermanowski specifies a population of 450,000 inhabitants in East Prussia in his lexicon for 1713, there is a difference of 90,000 inhabitants. Dollinger and Gause also make the same calculation error. Dollinger wrote in his table: ” 1708: Plague began in East Prussia (until 1711), in which around 250,000 of around 600,000 people died”. On the other hand, he lets the reader of the same work know that the East Prussian population grew from 160,000 to around 600,000 between 1713 and 1740. Gause mentions terrible losses that the province, especially its northern part, suffered from the plague of 1708 / -10 – around 240,000 people died of around 600,000 – and mentions in the next column: ” At the end of his busy life, the king had the Satisfaction that the province’s population had increased from 440,000 (1,713) to 600,000″. Dollinger thus makes its readers with a difference of 90,000 inhabitants think, while Gause is satisfied with a difference of 80,000 inhabitants. Terveen reports 241,171 plague victims and estimates the population of East Prussia at 600,000 before the plague. However, Grenz shows a way out of this muddle of numbers. He reports that the plague killed 200,000 to 250,000 of the 600,000 to 700,000 inhabitants in East Prussia. It is therefore realistic to assume that with Wank’s plague victim value of 235,836 people and a population of 440,000 in 1713 (Dollinger, Gause and Schumacher) 675,836 heads before the plague.

The determination of the number of victims by the Tatar invasion in 1656 requires a separate calculation:

The population figures of Prussian-Lithuania and Masuria in 1708 are calculated back to 1656 using the multiplier of 0.9154659 (= -0.17% annually).

1708 Prussian Lithuania 228865 1656 Prussian Lithuania 209518
1708 Masuria 149659 1656 Masuria 137008
1656 Prussian Lithuania: 130,886 Lithuanians 39,316 Germans 39,316 Prussia
1656 Masuria 116,456 Masuria 10,276 Germans 10,276 Prussia

40% of Tatar invasion victims are at the expense of the Prussian-Lithuanian population
57,000 x 0.40 = 22,800

60% of Tatar invasion victims are at the expense of the Masurian population
57,000 x 0.60 = 34,200

1656 Prussian-Lithuania: 209,518 – 22,800 = 186,718 (results in Tatar loss multiplier of 0.8911788)

130886 Lithuanian x 0.8911788 = 116643
39316 German x 0.8911788 = 35038
39316 Prußen x 0.8911788 = 35037

1656 Masuria: 137.008 – 34.200 = 102.808 (results in Tatar loss multiplier of 0.7503795)

116456 Mazury x 0.7503795 = 87386
10276 German x 0.7503795 = 7711
10276 Prußen x 0.7503795 = 7711

Tatar invasion losses:
Lithuanians 14,243, Germans 4,278 + 2,565 = 6,843, Prussia 4,279 + 2,565 = 6,844, Masuria 29,070

After the Tartar invasion, the Lithuanian and Polish-speaking population grew from 1656 to 1708 through surplus births and immigration to the values ​​projected for 1708.

Now to the effects of the population losses from the plague in 1709/1711:

Number of plague victims in Prussian Lithuania 183092
Number of plague victims in Masuria 44307
Number of plague victims in Königsberg 8437 (after Terveen)
Number of plague victims in East Prussia 235836 (after Wank)

1708 Prussian Lithuania

142972 Lithuanian x 0.2 = 28594
 42947 German x 0.2 = 8590
 42946 Prußen x 0.2 = 8589
228.865 – 183.092 = 45773

1708 Masuria

127210 Mazury x 0.7039469 = 89549
  11225 German x 0.7039469 = 7902
  11224 Prußen x 0.7039469 = 7901
149,659 – 44,307 = 105352

1708 Western East Prussia including Königsberg
228,743 Prussia minus 42,946 Prussia in Pr.-Lit. minus 11,224 Prussians in mas. = 174,573 Prussia

176,911 Germans etc. minus 42,947 Germans in Pr.-Lit. minus 11,225 Germans in Masuria. = 122,739 Germans etc. minus 8,437 plague victims = 114,302 Germans etc.

Since the Prussians lived mainly in the countryside, no plague victims are taken into account in the Prussians in Königsberg.

This results in the population structure of East Prussia at the end of 1711 :

28594 Lithuanian
89549 Mazury
130794 Germans etc.
191063 Prußen
440000 population

Based on Gause’s data on population statistics, an annual growth rate of 0.51417% can be calculated for the period from 1740 to 1816. This includes the losses from the Seven Years’ War. In the following calculations, this value increases to 0.6515% for the period from 1711 – 1740. It almost corresponds to the growth of the East Prussian population from 1910 to 1939 (0.6466%). The corresponding growth multiplier is 1.2072215 (see Appendix 2 Recalculation of the population of East Prussia from 1740 to 1711). The population of East Prussia determined for 1711 thus grew as follows until 1740:

28594 Lithuanian x 1.2072215 = 34,520
89549 Mazury x 1.2072215   = 108105
130794 Germans etc. x 1.2072215   = 157.897
191063 Prußen x 1.2072215   = 230655

To this number are to be added the settlers who were settled under Friedrich Wilhelm I in northern East Prussia as part of the retreat from 1714 to 1740.

I have worked on a dissertation on this subject, “State and Retablissement”, published in Göttingen in 1954, which, according to Schumacher, is based on the study of the files of the former State Archives in Königsberg (now Göttingen). The author Terveen is, however, not very concrete when it comes to the numbers of settlers from German territorial states. In the “notes” to his work he even writes: “It was not possible in the context of the preliminary work and not intended to provide a complete overview of all settlement groups in Pr.-Lit. to give …. When evaluating d. auswärt. Settlers must not go unnoticed that the nationals in the overall picture d. Repeuplication predominate …. The access of foreign colonists is, at least z. T., above all qualitatively significant (Magdeburg, Märker!) … “.

Terveen refers to Beheim-Schwarzbach, Hohenzollernsche colonization, and Beheim-Schwarzbach, Friedrich Wilhelm I colonization plant in Lithuania.

Perhaps the greatest mistake in Beheim-Schwarzbach’s accounts is that he does not take colonization with the Lithuanian-Polish elements sufficiently into account. This is the opinion of Skalweit. In addition, the work of Beheim-Schwarzbach is very much influenced by the idea of ​​”Germanization of Lithuania through the colonizing activity of Friedrich Wilhelm I”. A sample from page 78, Kolonisationswerk: ” We get a surprising result from these exact records, namely: that only the Lithuanian and the German” colonist “, but no actual old German rural population is listed in these offices. The conclusion suggests that, as in these ten Aemtern, also the composition in the other offices with a mixed population may have been so that the colonizations after the years of the plague, for some offices directly, for others indirectly demonstrable, laid the ground for sustainable, growing Germanization of Lithuania. The list of those ten offices gives a total of 2,393 families, of whom 1,335 are Lithuanians, leaving 1,058 colonial families ; … “Beheim-Schwarzbach derives Germanization from 44.2% colonial families and 55.8% Lithuanian families!

The settlers’ settlements from the literature after the Great Plague:
Skalweit explains: “As far as we know, printed literature does not mention that large settlement in the first years after the plague, where according to the government until the end of 1711 4,241 innkeepers took care of extinct heirs. Apart from 15 Swiss families, it was only carried out by the Lithuanian-Prussian population and Polish immigration. This settlement was the largest in terms of size, the cheapest in terms of cost, and the easiest to implement ”.

According to calculations made by Skalweit, a colonist family can be estimated on an average of 4.5 heads in this period. Accordingly, these families would have a head count of 19,085.

Stahl provides similar information since he reports that in 1711, 4,620 farms were occupied from the surplus of the local population. With that, the access from the own country was exhausted.

1712 and 1713
are the years of great immigration for Swiss and Germans.

Scaled mentioned 921 German families (4.5 heads each = 4,145 people)
318 Swiss families (4.5 heads each = 1,431 people)
435 Prussia and Lithuanians (4.5 heads each = 1,957 people)

The 4,145 Germans correspond to the “4,000 souls that were brought to Königsberg in 1711 and 1712” and mentioned by Skalweit, Terveen and Stahl. Stahl also names the areas from which the settlers come: Palatinate, Franconia, Anhalt, Braunschweig, Magdeburg, Halberstadt, Pomerania, Mark Brandenburg, Grafschaft Mark. Starting in 1713, I put the 4,145 people in an immigration table using the growth multiplier 1.1916441 = 4939 people

Skalweit indicates that among the Swiss immigrants in 1712 there were many who had to prove themselves unsuitable for the management of their farms and had to be removed again.

Farmers of other nationalities took their place.

At the end of April 1713 the settlement conditions tightened. Since the extinct farms were largely occupied, each resident should grow from their own resources in the future.

only 21 German families (each with 4.5 heads = 95 people) settled in Skalweit.

With the growth multiplier 1.1839316 you get into the immigration table = 112 people

Beheim-Schwarzbach names 8 Waldenser families near Stallupönen (4.5 heads x 1.1839316) = 43 people

According to Skalweit, 55 reformed families came from Nassau-Siegenschen = 248 people

which also mention Grenz and Stahl. The growth multiplier 1.1762676 leads to 292 people

Grenz mentioned another 48 people from Nassau-Siegen. With the growth multiplier 1.1762676 that is 56 people

In the following years, according to Skalweit, the number of settled farmers was low. To

the Swiss colony grew by a few families to 380 families. The 1,710 people come from 1719 with the growth multiplier 1.1461077 in the immigration table = 1960 people

This also includes the Palatinate and Nassauer who lived in the Swiss colony.

Palatinate families still entered the Swiss colony. Various information is available in the literature. Beheim-Schwarzbach speaks of 101 palatinates. Grenz lists 101 families who were assigned their residence in the Gumbinnen district (4.5 heads each = 455 people). Skalweit mentions 40 Palatinate families who entered the Swiss colony, reaching a maximum of 420 families (40 à 4.5 heads = 180 people) and 44 Palatinate families who arrived in Königsberg with over 200 people. From these values ​​I take the maximum of 455 people who come into the immigration table with the growth multiplier 1.1386884, i.e. 518 people

On the other hand, I exclude 110 Swiss families or 550 souls, whose immigration Beheim-Schwarzbach reported in 1718 and the following years. Skalweit believes that immigration was well planned but did not take place.

The spread of Lithuanians did not stop after Skalweit. But the increase was so small that it was at least offset by the peasant flight that had been particularly strong in these years.

1721 and 1722
The number of foreign colonists sent to Prussia from Germany in 1721 and 1722 totaled about 500 heads. The influx of Lithuanian, Prussian and Polish farmers (Skalweit) was probably greater. So with the growth multiplier I put 1,1276446,564 people in the immigration table .

At the end of 1722 the king from the Mark, Pomerania and other provinces wanted to send colonists to East Prussia.

About 2,750 people were sent to East Prussia in this way. In June 1723, when nearly 500 farming families had arrived in East Prussia, only 101 families were suitable for the settlement (Skalweit). So I added 455 people with the growth multiplier 1.1167195 = 508 people to the immigration table . An edict had to be issued that promised to protect the subjects from being sent to East Prussia.

In the conference on Ragnit, Löwensprung said that 400 immigration families would have to be counted on 200 farms, since half would be used to eradicate them (scale-wide).

From Palatinate and Nassau, 1,464 people are said to have emigrated to East Prussia after Skalweit. With the growth multiplier 1.1167195, that’s 1,635 people.

People from Hessen-Kassel also reported (an estimated 500). The growth multiplier 1.1167195 leads to 558 people

There was also a significant influx from the Polish regions.

In September, the king had compulsory military service under the Mennonites in the lowlands. After this act of violence, the 1000-strong colony emigrated (Skalweit). Therefore, Mennonites are not considered in this work for immigration.

the colonization plant stalled. However, Skalweit mentions about 100 families who were recruited before. But nothing happened in the following years.

100 families of 4.5 heads = 450 people, so that with the growth multiplier 1.088086, 490 people are included in the immigration table .

There is plenty of evidence of desertions. In a meeting and in the regulations for the farming of East Prussia on October 9, 1733, Friedrich Wilhelm I complained that, due to increasing desertions, almost a new establishment had to be undertaken to keep the population (Terveen).

The number of Salzburgers directed to Königsberg in 1732 (= 15,508 people) had dropped to 11,989 in 1734. According to Skalweit, this goes from the files of Geh. State Archives (Gen Dir. Ostpreuß. Mat. Tit. 34 Sect. 9 No. 9). Beheim-Schwarzbach comes to 11,888 Salzburg for the same time. I include 11,989 Salzburg citizens with the growth multiplier 1.0397316 in the immigration table = 12,465 people

Beheim-Schwarzbach reports that 13 Swiss families of 5 people each came to East Prussia. In contrast, Skalweit speaks of 13 Swiss families, who did not arrive in the Swiss colony but were settled in Masuria (in Staßwinnen in the Lötzen district). They did poorly and ran away except for 4 families. So I put 4 families of 4.5 heads = 18 people in the immigration table.

1,033 souls from Lorraine and Nassau came to East Prussia (Skalweit) = 1033 people

The total of the values ​​in the immigration table is 25,191 people. Thus 556,368 settlers are recorded.

A total of 281 Swiss families in 1740 can be calculated from the 68 Swiss from 1711 and the various positions in the immigration table. This number roughly corresponds to information from Skalweit, which reports that in 1729 the Lithuanian deputation specified 282 hosts as Swiss nationals.

From the immigration table it can be deduced that from 1711 – 1740 12,465 Salzburg, 1,682 Nassauer, 1,335 Palatinate, 7,201 settlers from other German tribes, 1,949 Swiss, 516 Lorraine and 43 Waldensians, a total of 25,191 immigrants came to East Prussia. In order to reach the population of 600,000 heads mentioned in the literature in 1740, 43,632 settlers, who would have to come from Lithuania or Masovia, are missing.

Mazovia has 4,841 settlers in order to increase the percentage of Masurian speakers (as in 1708) to 18.8%.

The remaining value for the Lithuanians is 38,791 settlers. This number of inhabitants must have been achieved through immigration or an annual growth rate higher than 0.6515%.

Thus, in the context of the retreat from 1711 to 1740, the following were settled in East Prussia:

25,191   settlers from German territorial states, Salzburg, Swiss and others           = 36.6%

  43,632   settlers from Lithuania / Prussian-Lithuania and Mazovia                                                = 63.4%

  68,823   settlers                                                                                                                                 = 100.0%

Skalweit explains: ” If we want to give a number about the total number of settlements in Lithuania at the end of the government of Friedrich Wilhelm I, then the statement that Schmoller found in the Gumbinn government archive and describes the peasant population in 1736 seems correct:

The numbers go well with other results, although it should be noted that the year 1736 was chosen quite early, until 1740 the situation changed a lot, and in particular the number of Salzburg residents on farms grew. Accordingly, the Lithuanians are more than twice as strong as the Salzburg, Swiss and Germans combined. Schmoller also emphasizes that among the 8,075 Lithuanians there should be many hundreds, which we would call colonists in today’s sense. Our investigation has confirmed this, and one will not say too much if one describes half as new … “It should also be noted that only the current population is given and not the large number of wiped out or escaped hosts who were also colonists at the time. And how large a part they are is demonstrated by the fact that on the occasion of the Salzburg immigration of 600 employed farming families half of the farms were given to poor or runaway hosts … ”

Let us return to the population table calculated for 1740 (growth from 1711 to l740) and add the immigration values:

Lithuanian 34,520 + 38791 = 73311 12.2%
Mazury 108105 + 4841 = 112946 18.8%
Germans etc. 157897 + 25191 = 183088 30.5%
Prußen 230655 = 230655 38.5%
600000 100%

As Skalweit expresses, half of the Lithuanians are new.

Boockmann refers to “many emigrations from Prussia” during the fighting against the Teutonic Order. Baumann writes about the last commander of the Sudauer, Skurdo, and the rest of his tribe: “With the possessions that were worth taking away and after their houses were destroyed by fire, the Sudauer moved to the land of their neighbors, the Lithuanians, a few centuries later to return home as “Lithuanian” immigrants “.

Probably also descendants of Nadrauer and Schalauer, who had once fled from the religious armies, immigrated as “Lithuanian” immigrants. We would have a good reason to increase the share of Prussians in the newly formed Prussian tribe at the expense of the Lithuanians.

I end my attempt to at least roughly calculate the Lithuanian and Masurian share of the Prussian tribe. The share of Germans, Dutch, Scots, Huguenots, French, French, Swiss and Salzburg in the newly formed Prussian tribe is likely to have decreased more real in 1740 due to the large number of farmers families who had been removed or fled, i.e. in favor of the share of Lithuanians. The Prussians, on the other hand, represented quantitatively in a model calculation up to 1740, without taking the connubium beyond the population limits into account, form a substantial part of the Prussian new tribe!

Harder writes in “Slavs and Balts in Germany”: “On a Slavic ethnic basis, the German people in the south-east and east of their settlement area have the new tribes of Mecklenburg, Brandenburg, Thuringia and Saxony (Upper Saxony), Pomerania and Silesia when entering history and finally, above all, the Prussians won on a Prussian basis ”. The latter is proven by my model calculation.

Baumann, Karl, The Prussia, Leer 1991

Beheim-Schwarzbach, M., Hohenzollernsche Colonization, Leipzig 1874

Beheim-Schwarzbach, M., Friedrich Wilhelm I’s colonization plant in Lithuania, primarily the Salzburg Colony, Königsberg 1879

Boockmann, Hartmut, German history in Eastern Europe, East Prussia u. West Prussia, Berlin 1992

Dollinger, Hans, Prussia, Prisma Verlag 1985

Gause, Fritz, East Prussia, Burkhard publishing house

Grenz, Rudolf, Stadt und Kreis Gumbinnen, Marburg 1971

Harder, Hans-Bernd, Germans, Slavs and Balts, Bonn, Cultural Foundation of the German Expellees, 1989

Hermanowski, Georg, East Prussia Lexicon, Augsburg 1998

Higounet, Charles, The German East Settlement in the Middle Ages, Berlin 1986

Kossert, Andreas, Masuria East Prussia forgotten south, Siedler Verlag, Berlin 2001

v. Krockow, Chr. Graf, encounter with East Prussia, Munich 1995

Schumacher, Bruno, History of East and West Prussia, Würzburg 1959

Skalweit, A, The East Prussian Domain Administration under Friedrich Wilhelm I and the Lithuanian Retablissement, Leipzig 1906

Stahl, F, Nassauische Bauern and other German settlers in East Prussia, lists of names from the 18th century, Königsberg (Pr.) 1936

Stamm, Hans-Ulrich, Ask me about East Prussia, Leer 1974

Territorien-Ploetz, History of the German States, Verlag Ploetz, Würzburg 1964

Terveen, Fritz, State and Retablissement, Diss. Göttingen 1954

Wank, Otto, Population fluctuation between East Prussia and neighboring countries from the 16th to 18th centuries, Old Prussian gender studies, volume 24, 1994

Wenskus, Reinhard, The German Order and the non-German population of Prussia, in: The German East Settlement of the Middle Ages, ed. by W. Schlesinger, Sigmaringen 1975