The Polish area under Prussian control

Discussions on other historical eras.
Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: The Polish area under Prussian control

Post by Peter K » 23 Mar 2016 19:05

Jan-Hendrik wrote:Deschner is a good one, but he has a hand to exaggarete much.

Jan-Hendrik
Yes, he surely exaggerated the number of victims of those "Northern Crusades" against Elbe Slavs.

In fact, entire population of Elbe Slavs numbered probably ca. 0,5 million - not as many as 2 million.

And of course many of them survived those wars and later gradually became assimilated, Germanized.
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

ManfredV
Member
Posts: 392
Joined: 10 May 2005 10:55
Location: Pirmasens

Re: The Polish area under Prussian control

Post by ManfredV » 24 Mar 2016 09:11

Thanks for the link to Brüggers work. It is a good example of the "new way" german historians found.
Since about 40 years a lot of research is done Germany about "Germania slavica" and the history of "Landesausbau" (or formerly called "Ostkolonisation").
They found a new more different view far away from former nationalistic and chauvinistic ideas. I hope that Polish and other slavic historians also found new sights.
About the Kashubians: originally they were a west slavic tribe/nation of their own. But their area was conquered by Germans and Poles and they were assimiltated during the centuries. No wonder that today most Kashubians in Poland say "we are Poles" and Polish state also regards them as polish.
It is a good idea to compare them with Bavarians: are Bavarians and Austrians Germans or not? Are the german speaking "Alemannen" in Switzerland Germans and the "Suisse Romands" french? Funny questions...

Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: The Polish area under Prussian control

Post by Peter K » 13 Apr 2016 21:54

ManfredV wrote:No wonder that today most Kashubians in Poland say "we are Poles"
They have been saying "we are Poles" already since the Middle Ages, and also during entire period 1772-1918.

Just look at the results of your own elections to the Reichstag before World War 1.

The Polish National Democratic Party (Polenpartei) won every single Reichstag election in Kashubia until WW1:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag ... ugust_1867
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1871
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1874
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1877
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1878
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1881
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1884
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1887
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1890
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1893
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1898
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1903
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1907
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1912

In each of those elections Polenpartei won in Kashubian-inhabited Wahlkreisen. Compare also these maps:

Image

Image
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

MMTB
Member
Posts: 30
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 08:11
Location: Australia

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by MMTB » 29 Apr 2016 04:38

Sure many areas where the Germanic tribes migrated too, especially with the start of the great migration of these Germanic tribes in the 4th century after the fall of the western Roman Empire, many of those areas were already populated with Celtic people. Probably many were assimilated with the Germanic people. Then in the 7th century, it was the start of the great Slavic migration. Many of these Slavic groups moved to areas where the Germanic people had already established communities, like southern and eastern Austria plus Eastern German areas. So maybe many German communities may have some Slavic and Celtic mix. Like wise some slavic communities, especially Slovenians and Czechs probably have some German and Celtic mix, as these areas had ancient Germanic and Celtic communities(pre Slavic era) ( Celtic Boii In Bohemia for example) plus they were an integral part of the Austrian empire for centuries. They had large German speaking communities,( Sudenten Germans in Czech republic and the Styrian and Gottschee Germans in Slovenia) and there were probably many mixing of the populations. Interesting stuff. I really like European history.

Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Peter K » 29 Apr 2016 07:58

MMTB wrote:Then in the 7th century, it was the start of the great Slavic migration. Many of these Slavic groups moved to areas where the Germanic people had already established communities, like southern and eastern Austria plus Eastern German areas.
Germanic groups had abandoned (or died out in) most of Austria and all of East Germany between the Elbe and the Oder.

Then, Slavic groups occupied those deserted lands practically without mixing with anyone, because there were no people there.

At least, there is no archaeological and palynological (pollen diagrams) evidence of unbroken, continued habitation.

Pollen diagrams tell us that fields ceased to be farmed and wild forests started to grow over former settlement areas.

So by the 7th century, areas in question became fully Slavic-inhabited.

Only later, in the mid-12th century, a large-scale German immigration into Slavic-inhabited lands started (and continued over a few next centuries). Over the next centuries a linguistic shift gradually took place in some of those lands, from Slavic-speaking to German-speaking.
Slovenians and Czechs probably have some German and Celtic mix,
It is rather the other way around - West Slavs and South-Western Slavs are the most purely Slavic groups (from genetic point of view), while East Slavs and South-Eastern Slavs are more "racially" (so to speak) mixed with other, Non-Slavic, populations (such as Ugro-Finns / Uralics, native Siberians, a little bit of Mongols etc. in case of Russians, Turkic-speaking nomads etc. in case of Ukrainians, East Balts etc. in case of Belarusians and indigenous Southern European Balkan groups etc. in case of South-Eastern Slavs).

Slovenes and Czechs are in terms of ancestry more "original Slavic" than e.g. Bulgarians.

In genetic admixture analysis, Bulgarians can be modeled as a 50/50 mix of "Southerners" (ancient peoples who resembled genetically modern groups such as Sicilians, Cypriots or Armenians) and Northern Slavs or Lithuanians (the fact that Lithuanians can also "pass" as a "racial" proxy for Early Slavs only testifies to the truth already long known by linguists, which is that there had originally been a common Balto-Slavic "race" or community, which only later - relatively recently - split into Balts and Slavs).
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Sheldrake » 29 Apr 2016 10:06

The whole question of "ethnicity" is a tricky area.

One definition of ethnicity is based on genetic inheritance. DNA analysis suggests that many people who would describe themselves as "English" were ethnic Germans. It is dangerous to write of ethnicity as if Ethnicity is not binary. Germans did not solely mate with other Germans.

Some figures have been used which refer to German speakers, while others refer to cultural and religious distinctions. Most Jews in Austria and Germany were German speakers, and largely integrated within the community. Accepting a definition of Germans that excludes Jews is accepting the Nazi racial premise.

Nor do people necessarily see themselves as one thing or another. Even within cultural groups some people have a stronger identify with some sub group or another. In the C19th there was a fad for creating national identities from exaggerated if not made up differences between peoples.

Furthermore the 2016 definitions are muddied by the nature of modern Europe. Just under 300,000 Germans live in the UK and just under 200,000 live in Spain. Note as well that around half a million poles and a similar number of Italians live in Germany

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo ... ives-where

Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Peter K » 29 Apr 2016 10:39

Language, religion, culture, tradition, identity, recent (up to several generations ago) genealogical ancestry - such and similar factors are usually mentioned as defining ethnicity (rather than deep genetic or "racial" origins).
Accepting a definition of Germans that excludes Jews is accepting the Nazi racial premise.
Not really, because Jews themselves identified as Jews and they preferred to be Jewish. Denying their Jewishness would be unacceptable, let Jewish people be proud of their own heritage.

If you claim that Jews in Germany were "good ethnic Germans", then you would also need to claim that Hitler exterminated Germans for being Germans, which would be a ridiculous notion (since in fact he exterminated or persecuted ethnic minorities for being Non-Germans).

And why do you even think that Jews want to be "included into Germans"? They are Jews - their ethnic history is much longer than German. In times when King Solomon ruled Ancient Israel, half-naked and at best half-civilized ancestors of Germans lived deep in the forests of Jutland and nobody in the literate world even heard about their existence.

There is no reason why would a typical Jew want to identify as an ethnic German.

Moreover, historically Jews have spoken multiple foreign languages (for example in times of Jesus they spoke Aramaic), and Hebrew was only their liturgical language. Jews are an ethno-religious group, and religion as well as genealogical heritage define them more than language (the reason why this is the case is precisely because they have spoken so many languages throughout history).
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Sheldrake » 29 Apr 2016 19:56

Peter K wrote:Language, religion, culture, tradition, identity, recent (up to several generations ago) genealogical ancestry - such and similar factors are usually mentioned as defining ethnicity (rather than deep genetic or "racial" origins).
Accepting a definition of Germans that excludes Jews is accepting the Nazi racial premise.
Not really, because Jews themselves identified as Jews and they preferred to be Jewish. Denying their Jewishness would be unacceptable, let Jewish people be proud of their own heritage.

If you claim that Jews in Germany were "good ethnic Germans", then you would also need to claim that Hitler exterminated Germans for being Germans, which would be a ridiculous notion (since in fact he exterminated or persecuted ethnic minorities for being Non-Germans).

(1) And why do you even think that Jews want to be "included into Germans"? They are Jews - their ethnic history is much longer than German. In times when King Solomon ruled Ancient Israel, half-naked and at best half-civilized ancestors of Germans lived deep in the forests of Jutland and nobody in the literate world even heard about their existence.

There is no reason why would a typical Jew want to identify as an ethnic German.

Moreover, historically Jews have spoken multiple foreign languages (for example in times of Jesus they spoke Aramaic), and Hebrew was only their liturgical language. Jews are an ethno-religious group, and religion as well as genealogical heritage define them more than language (the reason why this is the case is precisely because they have spoken so many languages throughout history).
Whoa!

Are you seriously suggesting that Jews could not be Germans, or that Jews living in France, Germany or Great Britain did not wish to be assimilated into the societies in which they lived?

From the C19th Jewish emancipation in Western Europe - including Austria and Germany gave jews the opportunity to assimilate and many did so. The recruitment records of Jews in Britian and Germany in WW1 shows the lengths to which Jews were keen to demonstrate their patriotism.
http://www.un.org/en/holocaustremembran ... Europe.pdf

Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Peter K » 29 Apr 2016 20:10

Are you seriously suggesting that Jews could not be Germans, or that Jews living in France, Germany or Great Britain did not wish to be assimilated into the societies in which they lived?
"Be assimilated into a society" = be a good citizen (civic assimilation). It is not necessarily the same as ethnic assimilation.

Are you claiming, for example, that ethnic Welsh are not integrated with the British society, due to being Non-English?

Does integration always require ethnic assimilation? Cannot ethnic majority and ethnic minorities coexist peacefully?
The recruitment records of Jews in Britian and Germany in WW1 shows the lengths to which Jews were keen to demonstrate their patriotism.
This has nothing to do with ethnicity. Civic patriotism (being loyal to your state of residence) isn't related to ethnicity.

You are confusing ethnicity with national identity and civic patriotism. Ethnic minorities aren't disloyal by definition.
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 2596
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Futurist » 29 Apr 2016 20:39

Peter K wrote:You are confusing ethnicity with national identity and civic patriotism. Ethnic minorities aren't disloyal by definition.
Yes; correct! After all, many ethnic Jews are loyal British, French, Italian, et cetera citizens. :)

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Sheldrake » 29 Apr 2016 22:27

Peter K wrote:
Are you seriously suggesting that Jews could not be Germans, or that Jews living in France, Germany or Great Britain did not wish to be assimilated into the societies in which they lived?
"Be assimilated into a society" = be a good citizen (civic assimilation). It is not necessarily the same as ethnic assimilation.

Are you claiming, for example, that ethnic Welsh are not integrated with the British society, due to being Non-English?

Does integration always require ethnic assimilation? Cannot ethnic majority and ethnic minorities coexist peacefully?
The recruitment records of Jews in Britian and Germany in WW1 shows the lengths to which Jews were keen to demonstrate their patriotism.
This has nothing to do with ethnicity. Civic patriotism (being loyal to your state of residence) isn't related to ethnicity.

You are confusing ethnicity with national identity and civic patriotism. Ethnic minorities aren't disloyal by definition.
Any discussion of nation states results in blurred and confused concepts of national and ethnic identity.

That is because the idea of "National Identity" attempts to draw lines a around territory full of a mix of people with a variety of religions, genes and cultural baggage.

"Germany" was a geographic description until 1870. How big Germany was to be and who were "ethnic Germans" took nearly a century and a heavy cost in lives and money. It also set Europe in the direction of creating a federal Europe which safeguards the rights of the minorities within each European sovereign state.

Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Peter K » 30 Apr 2016 09:52

Sheldrake wrote:Any discussion of nation states results in blurred and confused concepts of national and ethnic identity. That is because the idea of "National Identity" attempts to draw lines a around territory full of a mix of people with a variety of religions, genes and cultural baggage. "Germany" was a geographic description until 1870. How big Germany was to be and who were "ethnic Germans" took nearly a century and a heavy cost in lives and money.
Not really true. The existence of national identities dates back to times when first states emerged - so at least 5,000 years ago.

See the book "Nations: The Long History and Deep Roots of Political Ethnicity and Nationalism", Cambridge University Press 2013:

http://newbooksnetwork.com/azar-gat-nat ... e-up-2013/
When I went to college long ago, everyone had to read Marx and Engels’ Communist Manifesto (1848). I think I read it in half-a-dozen classes. Today Marx is out. Benedict Anderson, however, is in. You’d be hard-pressed to get a college degree without reading or at least hearing about his book Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (1983). That book says, in a phrase, that nations were invented, and quite recently at that. The trouble is that according to Azar Gat, Anderson is wrong. In his new book Nations: The Long History and Deep Roots of Political Ethnicity and Nationalism (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Gat musters a significant amount of evidence suggesting that humans are more-or-less hardwired for kin and ethnic preference–we’ve always liked people who look, talk and act like "us" more than "strangers" because we are built to do so. We didn’t "invent" the nation; it was–and remains–in us. Moreover, he shows that the historical record itself makes clear that something like nations have been with us since the state appeared 5,000 years ago. To be sure, their form has; but they were always around. This is important for the way we think about the world today. Marx thought classes were going to disappear They didn’t. Anderson and those who follow him seem to think that nations are going to disappear. They aren’t.
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Sheldrake » 30 Apr 2016 11:59

Peter K wrote:
Sheldrake wrote:Any discussion of nation states results in blurred and confused concepts of national and ethnic identity. That is because the idea of "National Identity" attempts to draw lines a around territory full of a mix of people with a variety of religions, genes and cultural baggage. "Germany" was a geographic description until 1870. How big Germany was to be and who were "ethnic Germans" took nearly a century and a heavy cost in lives and money.
Not really true. The existence of national identities dates back to times when first states emerged - so at least 5,000 years ago.

See the book "Nations: The Long History and Deep Roots of Political Ethnicity and Nationalism", Cambridge University Press 2013:

http://newbooksnetwork.com/azar-gat-nat ... e-up-2013/
When I went to college long ago, everyone had to read Marx and Engels’ Communist Manifesto (1848). I think I read it in half-a-dozen classes. Today Marx is out. Benedict Anderson, however, is in. You’d be hard-pressed to get a college degree without reading or at least hearing about his book Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (1983). That book says, in a phrase, that nations were invented, and quite recently at that. The trouble is that according to Azar Gat, Anderson is wrong. In his new book Nations: The Long History and Deep Roots of Political Ethnicity and Nationalism (Cambridge University Press, 2013), Gat musters a significant amount of evidence suggesting that humans are more-or-less hardwired for kin and ethnic preference–we’ve always liked people who look, talk and act like "us" more than "strangers" because we are built to do so. We didn’t "invent" the nation; it was–and remains–in us. Moreover, he shows that the historical record itself makes clear that something like nations have been with us since the state appeared 5,000 years ago. To be sure, their form has; but they were always around. This is important for the way we think about the world today. Marx thought classes were going to disappear They didn’t. Anderson and those who follow him seem to think that nations are going to disappear. They aren’t.
I am aware of the scientific/ genetic/ anthropological argument of the benefits of a preference for kinship, and the rtoops of tribalism and nationalism. But that does not automatically translate to

1) an inherent identify at a nation state level.

2) A universal acceptance that national identify is the only way that modern humanity addresses the question of identity.

The first social structures were tribal (Even the Jews saw themselves as twelve tribes) then came city states. (Athens , Sparta, Syracuse) After that were various empires offering the protection of a ruler/ some benefits of citizenship (Egypt Persian, Macedonia, Rome, The Caliphate, The Holy Roman Empire) The concept of a nation State emerges possibly sometime after 1400 with the western European states. (England, France, Spain and Portugal) Most of the rest of the world were created in the C18th -19th ( USA, Germany Italy most of Africa and South America) by drawing some arbitrary, if not gerrymandered lines around places ,allowing for a gerrymandered majority to claim self determination.

There are other models for identity. Marx did so by social class. The modern European experiment is to accept that the only way to reconcile irreconcilable demands for self determination in Europe is to share sovereignty and accept the looking glass solution of multiple identities. It does not matter if I see myself as an Englishman,one of my neighbor sees himself as an Irish Nationalist in a foreign country. Others, born in the UK call themselves British rather than English because "English" implies caucasian. My city is full of proud Londoners who would hesitate to call themselves "English" - though three or four generations hence their family would be as English as the Monarchy...

Peter K
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 3673
Joined: 12 Jul 2006 19:17
Location: Poland

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Peter K » 30 Apr 2016 13:27

The concept of a nation State emerges possibly sometime after 1400 with the western European states.
Azar Gat in his book mentions e.g. Portugal, Hungary, Denmark, Poland and England as examples of Early Medieval nation-states.

So we have both western and eastern European realms in this group.
Most of the rest of the world were created in the C18th -19th ( USA, Germany Italy most of Africa and South America)
When it comes to Italy - already Dante Alighieri (lived in 1265-1321) suggested that all of Italy should become politically united.

But indeed, it was only in the 19th century when unification happened.
There are words which carry the presage of defeat. Defence is such a word. What is the result of an even victorious defence? The next attempt of imposing it to that weaker, defender. The attacker, despite temporary setback, feels the master of situation.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 2579
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Exactly how many ethnic Germans lived outside of (Germany + Austria) in 1937 in comparison to right now (2016)?

Post by Sheldrake » 30 Apr 2016 14:35

Poland and Italy are rather difference cases.

Yes: The idea of a state led by Poles has existed for many centuries and at one point Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth covered much of Eastern Europe. However I don't think it can ever be claimed that the territory of the Duchy/ Kingdom of Poland ever could be claimed to have been occupied solely by Poles. I suspect that the area was a mix of peoples with a range of religious, cultural and lingusitic affiliation. I think Krakow might have been a mix of Germans Jews and Poles for many centuries.

Italy was a region where the affiliation to, and rivalry between city states was far stronger than any impulse to union, until the mid C19th. It is a moot point whether Italy is one country.

Return to “Other eras”