This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Is there a sense mentioning one of many Polish refugee camps and one of many functioning Polish embassy? I'm talking about that mentioning of camp in India during WWII. Szopen 09:35, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
I have a question: why are the names like Władysław, Bolesław spelt in such a strange way? If Polish diacritics are frowned upon while discussing Middle Ages history, how are we going to spell Józef Piłsudski?-- rwerp 19:17, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
While it may contain some useful details, it was POVed and I removed it from main space. It would better fit to History of Poland (1945-1989) anyway, I think. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:04, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
1) Many people think Poland was compensated with territories from Germany. This is wrong (this was just the idea of Stalin), because this areas were originally given to Poland by the Allies (USA and Great Britain) just for administration (as aimed against the soviet power). The Potsdam Conference acted clearly on the background of Germany in the borders of 31. of December 1937. It just ordered the "human and ordered transfer" of Germans out of the occupied (by Nazi Germany) polish territories (Article XIII of Potsdam Agreement). But Poland, Czechoslovakia etc., took advantage of the situation after the capitulation of Nazi Germany and ordered by decree the expulsion of nearly all Germans. Alone from Silesia, where the Germans settled for over 700 years, were expelled at least 3,5 mio german people. Many of them were murdered and violated or perished by starvation or frostbite. Some polish people call Silesia and other former german territories Regained Territories but this is anachronous at all.
Anon returns -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:22, 25 July 2005 (UTC): 2) This happened without the agreement of the Potsdam Conference, because it just ordered the "human and ordered transfer" of the Germans in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungaria. The so called Regained Territories belonged in that time still to Germany. They just were given by the Allies to Poland for administration.
I think the Early History of Poland section spends way too much time talking about the supposed Scandinavian connections of Mieszko I. I don't think this material, which appears in the Myths from Polish history article, should get any space in a small section that's supposed to summarize several hundred years of Polish history. And there is barely any information about the rozbicie dzielnicowe and subsequent reunification. If no one objects, I'll remove the Scandinavian reference and expand the other part. The Scandinavian material will still be accessible from the "Myths" link at the bottom of the article. Appleseed 16:19, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
On a sidenote, the entire early history of Poland is poorly covered - just check most of the links from Kingdom of Poland. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:17, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
The Allies didn´t order the transfer of Germans from their ancestral homelands like Silesia, where they had settled over centuries (Silesia belonged to the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation since the 14th century.) To call territories like Silesia "Regained Territories" it needs quite a lot of ignorance. This is my opinion. By all means, it is anacronous at all!
The Allies ordered an human an ordered transfer of Germans in territories which had been occupied by Nazi-Germany like for example the "Warthegau" in Poland.
The Allies ordered this because immediately after the capitulation of Nazi-Germany the expulsion of the Germans had begun - quite long before the Potsdam Conference. This expulsions where full of cruelty (violation of women of each age, murder, starvation, frostbite etc.) - You can compare this a little bit with the recent expulsions in Serbia.)
Well Poland expelled by decree the Germans - to create an ethnically pure / homogenous state. We call this "ethnically cleansing". It´s a terrible word (and action).
Now, to your specific points: 1) it is wrong to accusse Poland of those policies. Poland (Polish government) had little or no say in that matter: it was either not invited at all to conferences that determined it fate (like border changes at Yalta or German resettlement at Potsdam) or the represantatives send to post-1945 events were from new communist-controlled governments that were basically a mouthpiece for Soviet Union. Of course it does not mean that Poland was innocent, but it should be noted it was carrying out policies agreed upon by the allmighty Western Allies and Soviet Union, with Soviets controling its very government via their people.
2) My main problem with your above paragraph is that it is confusing and chronologically incorrect. You write: "This happened without the agreement of the Potsdam Conference, because it just ordered the "human and ordered transfer" of the Germans in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungaria. The so called Regained Territories belonged in that time still to Germany. They just were given by the Allies to Poland for administration." Yet the Yalta came first in January 45, determined the change of Polish borders (which happened contrary to the wishes of Poles!), then Potsdam in August 45 enforced the resettlement, so the territories in question do belonged to Poland (or in reality, to Soviets, whose Red Army administration was the real power on most of those territories)
3) Germany was the only country that hasn't recognized those facts (until 1990 Treaty on the Final Settlement With Respect to Germany) and it did refer to those territories as German Eastern Territories Under Polish Administration" (Deutsche Ostgebiete unter polnischer Verwaltung); this was however only a German POV, not shared by anybody else. Bottom line was: Germany lost the war, Allies&Soviet dicated the terms, both Germany and Poland had no choice but to do as they were told. Are you arguing that they were thus not in Poland's borders and thus not subject to Potsdam Agreement? Again, you may want to discus it at the more specific articles, but it is of little importance here, and I would recommend you give specific quotations from your sources to back up such a controversial POV.
4) I agree this was a cruel ordeal to everyone's involved (do remember then not only Germans were subject to those migrations at that time, the entire Eeastern Europe was 'on the move' due to the Allies/Soviet agreement - Germans, Poles, Ukrainians, Jews...). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:08, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
If you like to read more about this you can look for books (or in the internet) from US-american Alfred-Maurice de Zayas (UN High Commissioner for Human Rights). For example: "ZAYAS, Alfred M. de: Nemesis at Potsdam. The Anglo-Americans and the Expulsion of the Germans. Background, Execution, Consequences." Wikiferdi
Hello Piotrus!
Here some answers for discussing:
Ethnic cleansing generally
Each mandatory population transfer is a crime against humanity and international law. Item 3 Section B of the Nuremberg accusations against the Nazis was the “forced deportation of civil population” Item 4 Section A deals with crimes against humanity including mass deportations.
The “Germanisierung” policy (to make an ethnic homogenous aryan state) of Hitler was condemned.
“Homogenisation” – an idea for which the Nazis were condemned – and you want to defend it (“not to overstate its negative connotations”)?
Mr. de Zayas said with regard to the legal aspects of expulsion, that were such expulsions to take place today, there is no question that it would constitute the violation of various provisions of international law. (He is UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Don´t forget this.)
I propose to discuss this point on the discussion site of ethnic cleansing.
Expulsion of Germans
Following thoughts I take for the most part from a reading of Mr. de Zayas in Pittsburgh ( http://www.meaus.com/Expulsion_of_Germans.html)
There he quotes from Victor Gollancz's (he is not German) book “Our Threatened Values” (page 96):
"If the conscience of men ever again becomes sensitive, these expulsions will be remembered to the undying shame of all who committed or connived them... The Germans were expelled, not just with an absence of over-nice consideration, but with the very maximum of brutality."
Mr. de Zayas pronounces: “Some critical voices might say they have an axe to grind, that they are just trying to excuse themselves. But you have extensive documentation -- American, British, French documentation that prove the nature of the expulsions as an exceedingly cruel and brutal expulsion.”
In August of 1941 President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill had agreed in the middle of the Atlantic on the ship Augusta on the so-called Atlantic Charter. This Atlantic Charter provided that neither would seek territorial or other aggrandizement, and they both undertook a commitment to oppose "territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned."
Mr. de Zayas asserts that Robert Murphy, the political advisor of General Eisenhower, and later the political advisor of Clay during the occupation in Germany, had been one of the first official voices in the American government that opposed the Expulsion, and to criticize the manner in which the Expulsion was being carried out.
So, as a result of this and all the memoranda of Murphy, the American government had repeatedly protested at Warsaw and at Prague and had tried to get some cooperation from the Czechoslovak government and from the Polish government.
“But unfortunately the Soviet occupation forces in those areas encouraged both the Polish and the Czechoslovak governments in the Expulsion, so there was no way for the U.S. to effectively stop it.” (cf. Mr. de Zayas)
Maybe we can continue to discuss this on the discussion site of Expulsion of Germans after World War II
Potsdam Conference: Collaboration Polish communists with Stalin
I am under the impression, that for you Polish communists were “Soviets” (Russians). Well they were Poles and so they collaborated with Stalin similar as the Vichy–regime in France collaborated with Hitler. (Which are your sources for your opinion about this item?)
I think Poland should undertake responsibility for this part of her history although there is surely no „collective guilty“ (Germany undertakes responsibility for the Nazi crimes although not all Germans were Nazi. Hitler was elected in the last barely “free elections” only by around 40% of the Germans).
Has Poland ever charged Russia with invading Poland in the east at nearly the same time as Hitler invaded in the west? I have never heard about an apology etc. from Russia. Do you?
On another board somebody mentioned that it was Churchill who gave Stalin the idea to move Poland from east to west. But who gave Churchill this idea? During WWII the Polish government was in London in exile … Mr. de Zayas, who spoke with many prominent eyewitness, states that Churchill could agree to transfer as many Germans from East German territories as Polish people were to transfer from East Poland. But not more than 2 - 3 mio! (The West Allies weren´t interested in a large number of expellees/refugees because they were responsible for the nutrition of the Germans in their occupation zone.)
Well, Poland was not a part of the “big three” in Potsdam but the government of Poland was invited to Potsdam to express their opinion: They said that in this controversial areas (East Germany) would live just around 1,5 mio Germans and they would leave voluntarily after the harvest (cf. de Zayas).
Well, we could continue to discuss this on the site of Potsdam Conference
Potsdam Conference: Did the Allies really order the expulsion of the Germans?
The expulsion excesses had begun quite long before the Potsdam Conference took place and long before it concluded. Piotrus, if you are really convinced that Poland just fulfilled the orders of the Allies, please tell me who gave the order to expel the Germans (immediately after the end of WWII), when, where and with which resolution …?
And what´s about August Cardinal Hlond? He forced the German bishops to resignate long before the Potsdam Protocol.
We could discuss this on the site of Potsdam Conference or August Cardinal Hlond or both.
Apologies from Polish respectively German bishops
As I know, this apology was composed by both, Polish and German bishops. However, I am pleased about it, but what makes me sad is, that the bishops as they came back to Poland were called “traitors” by the Polish people who said: “We never forgive and we never forget”. So the Polish bishops had to almost revoke this letter and they wrote another “pastoral letter” in the beginning of 1966 which has relativized this excuse . Please could you solicitate me this letter? I am keen on knowing what is written there.
Well, actually I was thinking of an official excuse of politicians who speak for all and not clergymen who just represent one (small) group of a people. And here it doesn´t exist a clear excuse towards the German expellees – this is what I know. Piotrus, you mention Salomon Morel. Isn´t he that Jew whom Poland wants to trial – he isn´t trialed so far because he lives in Israel? Don´t you know somebody who is already convicted? I know something about a Pole who was the commandant of the concentration camp Lamsdorf (or similar) for Germans. He was indicted but I think so far not convicted.
Was the expulsion of the Germans a “genocide”?
Well, Mr. de Zayas, UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, said this. Also US-American politicians said and say this (even Mr. President George W. Bush has a similar attitude towards the expulsions of the Germans). If you have problems with this, maybe you can say this to Mr. de Zayas directly? Write in his guestbook: www.alfreddezayas.com
About "Norman Davies"
From the Site of Wikipedia on Norman Davies I took following sentence: The Jews "accuse him of minimizing historic anti-Semitism, and of promoting a view that the Holocaust occupies a position in international historiography which tends to minimize the suffering of non-Jewish Poles and even denounce them as anti-Semites."
Well Mr. de Zayas also is Professor an he is employed at the United Nations and at the President of the Pen Club. So I think this source is more reliable in this things.
Wikiferdi
Removed: "There is a controversial between historians around the world wether the Allies (especially Russia) or Polish politican together with Russia were constitutive for the expulsion of the Germans. Some historians see the Potsdam Protocol as a sanction for it. Others do not because they state that the Allies didn´t agree on a border between Poland and Germany at Potsdam." Too much weasel words - please exchange 'some historians' for specific names. Besides, you confuse Russia with the Soviet Union. And once again I'd like to remind you that Polish politicians had little say in anything that the Great Powers decided. Please, give the names of Polish politicians responsible for Potsdam or other policies. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:33, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Poland was invited to the Potsdam Conference on Juli 24 (1945) to explain their POV.
In the following I quote from:
James L. Gormly: From Potsdam to the COLD WAR. Big Three Diplomacy 1945-1947. Scholarly Resources Inc. Delaware, 1990 ( ISBN 0-8420-2334-8)
James L. Gormly was educated at the University of Arizona and the University of Conneticut, from which he received a Ph.D. in history. The author of numerous articles on U.S. foreign relations, in 1987 he completed The Collapse of the Grand Alliance, 1945-1948.
He is currently a professor of history at Washington and Jefferson College in Washington, Pennsylvania, where he chairs the department.
Quotations:
"The president (Truman) complained that there were now five occupation zones because the Soviets had turned over the area extending along the Oder and western Neisse to the Poles. This was in violation of the Yalta agreement. The president did not see how economic controls or reparations could operate if Germany was thus broken up." (p. 49)
"Churchill spoke strongly against giving the Poles control over an area in which some eight million Germans lived. Stalin insisted that the Germans had all fled and that the Poles were needed to fill the vacuum." (p. 50)
"On July 24 the Polish delegation arrived in Berlin, headed by Prime Minister Boleslaw Bierut and including Mikolajczyk and Foreign Minister Wincenty Rzymowksi. They consistently held to the position that the Oder and western Neisse rivers should be the frontier, and they vehemently argued their case before the foreign ministers, Churchill, and Truman, in turn." (p. 50)
The next day Churchill said to Stalin:
"The Poles are driving the Germans out of the Russian zone. That should not be done without considering its effect on the food supply and reparations. We are getting into a position where the Poles have food and coal, and we have the mass of (the) population thrown at us." (p.51)
"To the Soviets, reparations were more important than boundaries, and Stalin might have sold out the Poles if they had not so vociferously protested when, in spite of his 'illness', he consulted with them during the evening of July 29." (p.55f)
End of quotation
Well, I would say Germany and especially the expelled Germans had little to say about the expulsions. As Prof. Gormly writes, Poland was ensnarled in this dark chapter of postwar history. -- Wikiferdi 08:35, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Interesting. It does prove that the communist Polish government was in favour of the change (not suprising, one should remember that it mostly did what Stalin told them to). Still, it shows that the Poles were there (which conference does your quotation refer to, exactly? Potsdam, I assume?) and could argue and ask (explain their POV, as you write), but the eventual decision was not theirs, it was the Big Three who made it. Poles had the right to state their case, but not to vote. I wonder how much anything the Poles said could influence what the Big Three already agreed upon. Remember also that the Poles were divided, the Polish government in exile was opposed to the border change. Also, I wonder what does prof. Gromly mean by 'Stalin might have sold out the Poles'. You are right that Germans had even less choice then Poles. Poles were 'nominally' among the Allies. Germans were paying for the war. I wonder, were there any German representatives at Potsdam? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 09:52, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
The Sowjets broke the Allied compromises and Poland was not sad to obey the Sowjets
In Article IV (Reparations from Germany) of Potsdam Agreement the Allies write that Poland shall be compensated by the reparations made to U.S.S.R: "The U.S.S.R. undertakes to settle the reparation claims of Poland from its own share of reparations."
In Article IX the Allies write that Silesia etc. shall be put under Polish administration so that it "should not be considered as part of the Soviet Zone of occupation in Germany".
According to Potsdam the Sowjets didn´t have the right to take reparations from Silesia etc. because it wasn´t part of its occupation zone and Poland didn´t have the right to take reparations from Silesia etc. because it should be compensated from the reparations made to U.S.S.R.
In the Atlantic Charter 1941 the Allies decided not to make "territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned".
In Article IX b) of Potsdam the Allies "reaffirm (!) their opinion that the final delimitation of the western frontier of Poland should await the peace settlement" - which never took place because Stalin and Poland created accomplished facts by expelling nearly all native Germans from Silesia etc. and taking reparations from their area - this was clearly against the Potsdam Agreement (and Yalta) and against the Atlantic Charter.
-- Wikiferdi 09:50, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
"the possibility of Polish independence was kept alive by events within and without Poland throughout the nineteenth century."
Is this sentence correct? Or was the possibility of independence kept alive by events within and outside of Poland? Or inside and outside of Poland?
1) Middle Ages. The most part of Poles since the middle of the fourteenth century were serfs. Landowners gained almost unlimited ownership over serfs. The Polish expansion on the East (which began from annexation of Halich in 1349), in ancient russian principalities, carried the serfdom to the Ukrainians and Belorussians... Ben-Velvel 14:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
2) WWII.
You have overlooked the aggressive policy of Poland before the second world war. Poland has easy divided Czechoslovakia (annexation of Tessin) together with Nazi-Germany. [User:Ben-Velvel|Ben-Velvel]] 14:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
You have absolutely overlooked who has liberated Poland from German concentration camps, who saved Poles from Nazi-genocide and violent germanization, who stoped ethnic cleansings in polish villages in West Ukraine? I can remind. Soviets. 600 thousand Soviet soldiers died for your lifes. You must thank Soviets for big independent state of Poland including historical polish Silesia, Pomerania and East Prussia. It is not compensation for east regions. East regions, populated mainly by Ukrainians and Belorussians, were not the historical Polish territoies. Ben-Velvel 14:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns065.htm Quote: Telegram
VERY URGENT MOSCOW, September 9, 1939-12:56 a. m. Received September 9, 1939-5 a. m.
No. 300 of September 8
I have just received the following telephone message from Molotov:
"I have received your communication regarding the entry of German troops into Warsaw. Please convey my congratulations and greetings to the German Reich Government. Molotov."
SCHULENBURG
Called for common border with Germany:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns080.htm
Quote:
Telegram
STRICTLY SECRET Moscow, September 20, 1939-2:23 a. m. Received September 20, 1939-4:55 a. m.
No. 395 of September 19 Molotov stated to me today that the Soviet Government now considered the time ripe for it, jointly with the German Government, to establish definitively the structure of the Polish area. In this regard, Molotov hinted that the original inclination entertained by the Soviet Government and Stalin personally to permit the existence of a residual Poland had given way to the inclination to partition Poland along the Pissa-Narew-Vistula-San Line. The Soviet Government wishes to commence negotiations on this matter at once, and to conduct them in Moscow, since such negotiations must be conducted on the Soviet side by persons in the highest positions of authority, who cannot leave the Soviet Union. Request telegraphic instructions.
SCHULENBURG
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns082.htm Quote: Stalin and Molotov asked me to come to the Kremlin at 8 p. m. today. Stalin stated the following: In the final settlement of the Polish question anything that in the future might create friction between Germany and the Soviet Union must be avoided. From this point of view, he considered it wrong to leave an independent Polish rump state. He proposed the following: From the territory to the east of the demarcation line, all the Province of Lublin and that portion of the Province of Warsaw which extends to the Bug should be added to our share. In return, we should waive our claim to Lithuania.
Stalin designated this suggestion as a subject for the forthcoming negotiations with the Reich Foreign Minister and added that, if we consented, the Soviet Union would immediately take up the solution of the problem of the Baltic countries in accordance with the Protocol of August 23, and expected in this matter the unstinting support of the German Government. Stalin expressly indicated Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, but did not mention Finland. I replied to Stalin that I would report to my Government. SCHULENBURG
As can be seen above while Germany toyed with the idea of puppet state formed out of conquered Poland, Soviet Union pushed for common border with Germany.
Assisted German Army and war effort: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns077.htm Quote: I replied with emphasis that of course Germany was firmly determined to fulfill the terms of the Moscow agreements precisely, and I referred to point 2 of the communication made by me to Molotov on September 16 in accordance with the instructions of the Reich Foreign Minister (see telegram No. 360 of September 15 from there). I declared that it would be suitable for the High Command to withdraw to the line which had been agreed upon since, in this way, troops could be made available for the western front. Stalin replied that he had no doubt at all of the good faith of the German Government.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/ns072.htm Quote: 3) From the communication made to you by Molotov on September 14, we assume that the Soviet Government will take a hand militarily, and that it intends to begin its operation now. We welcome this. The Soviet Government thus relieves us of the necessity of annihilating the remainder of the Polish Army by pursuing it as far as the Russian boundary
Quote: 6) Since the military operations must be concluded as soon as possible because of the advanced season of the year, we would be gratified if the Soviet Government would set a day and hour on which their army would begin their advance, so that we on our part might govern ourselves accordingly. For the purpose of the necessary coordination of military operations on either side, it is also necessary that a representative of each Government, as well as German and Russian officers on the spot in the area of operations, should have a meeting in order to take the necessary steps, for which meeting we propose to assemble at Bialystok by air.
-- Molobo 14:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC) http://represii.org/eng/1939.html On 26 December 1939, Stalin thanks Ribbentrop for his birthday wishes, noting that the Soviet-German friendship has been strengthened by jointly spilled blood. In order to implement agreements concerning joint actions against the Polish underground, the Gestapo and the NKVD agree to cooperate. A joint training centre is created in the Polish city of Zakopane. In March 1940 the staff of the NKVD and the Reich Main Security Office attend a meeting, where these questions are discussed. By summer 1941 the NKVD has handed over to Germany more than 4,000 people, among them families of individuals arrested in the USSR and executed German Communists. In the course of military actions the commanders of forward units of the German and Soviet armies conduct an exchange of special communications officers. Special military parades take place in Grodno, Brest, and other cities even before Warsaw's capitulation. For example, at a military parade held in Grodno, Soviet corps commander V. Chuikov attends the pass in review with a German general, and General Heinz Guderian and Soviet brigade comman-der S. Kryvoshein attend the pass in review in Brest. -- Molobo 14:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC) http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/nazsov/sesupp1.htm The undersigned plenipotentiaries, on concluding the German Russian Boundary and Friendship Treaty, have declared their agreement upon the following:
Both parties will tolerate in their territories no Polish agitation which affects the territories of the other party. They will suppress in their territories all beginnings of such agitation and inform each other concerning suitable measures for this purpose.
Moscow, September 28,1939.
For the Government of the German Retch:
J. RIBBENTROP
By authority of the Government of the U.S.S.R.:
W. MOLOTOV -- Molobo 14:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Please read interview of Pawel Wieczorkiewicz in Rzeczpospolita of 28 september 2005. Poland dreamed of a joint campaign with Germans against the USSR...
«The partition of Russia has fundamental importance for our policy in the East. Our position will depend on, whether we shall accept participation in this partition. During this favorable historical moment Poland should not stand aside. Our task to be prepared both morally and material. Our overall objective is to weaken and crush Russia ». From the report of the Polish Joint Staff, 1938 «Z dziejów stosunków polsko-radzieckich. Studia i materiały», T.III. Warszawa, 1968, S. 262, 287.
Fact is fact. Till 1939 the USSR was in strong opposition to nazi Germany, supported republicans of Spain who struggled against German and Italian troops. USSR twice was at war against Japan which was an aggressive ally of Germany.
However in 1938 Germany signed the Munich treaty together with the Western Powers and together with Poland divided Czechoslovakia.
In 1939 Poland refused to participate in any measures of collective safety and then USSR signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Germany, wishing to prevent the German attack.
On September 17, 1939 German armies were in 150 kilometers from the Soviet border... Ben-Velvel 21:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Ben-Velvel, I know it's a digression and a rather minor detail, but I think a lot of the Katiusha Rockets were dragged over the Oder river, in 1945, on Studebaker trucks, by people eating spam. Dr. Dan 21:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
This page definately needs cleanup. It has no working images, there are user comments in the middle of the page, some of which extend the page horizontally much farther than it should, and it lacks organization, which makes it very hard to read understand, and learn from. I also worry about POV concerns, but those were covered above.
This page definately should not be merged with History of Poland. The
Polish Empire has enough history of it's own to deserve it's own page.
--
Rondmc170 16:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
shouldnt the Jedwabne pogrom and the Kielce pogrom be mentioned?-- Tresckow 20:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Should this article address how Poland came to be (or to remain) Catholic, whereas many other countries of "Eastern Europe" are variants of Russian Orthodox? In general, it might address Polish Catholicism more generally. Cbmccarthy 17:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Why is there absolutely no information on Polish history prior to the spread of Christianity?
For months now this page has had an enormous slab of unedited text, apparently copied and pasted from elsewhere, at the top of it. I think this should just be deleted - everything down to the Table of Contents, including the spurious 'bibliography' entry. Any objections? AlexTiefling ( talk) 09:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I'm interested in witch trials, and think that every country should be represented in the subject. As for Poland, it's hard to find anything about this on the net. If there is anyone here interested in the subject, I think it would be most interesting to have a Polish with trial represented here on wikipedia. Most countrys are alredy represented. I have heard about only two cases; two old women burned in 1793, and Barbara Zdunk, executed in 1811. These where mentioned on the net with very few words. Does anyone here know more about these cases? or any other? I would be grateful just for a stub or a name to google. -- Aciram ( talk) 11:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Just ran across the following. Not from scholarly source itself. Just wanted to know whether to follow it up: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=3133603
Thoughts? Student7 ( talk) 19:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The caption under the photo of the ruined castle her says it's in " Olsztyn, near Częstochowa" Olsztyn may be considered to be near Częstochowa in the sense that Glasgow is near London, but they're at opposite ends of Poland, the subject of the article. Maybe the author meant Olkusz. Somebody should figure this out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.102.241 ( talk) 12:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Walesa Kwas.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Could somebody supply reliable sources to this numbers?
“ | During the war, about 6 million Polish citizens were killed by Germans, and 2.5 million were deported to Germany for forced labour or to extermination camps such as Oświęcim Auschwitz. | ” |
How strong was the Polish population before and after the war?
How many Polish citizen were killed by Germans and how many were killed by Russians etc.?
Wouldn't it be better to specifiy these items and also the Jewish part of these Polish population?
The Poles which were deported to Auschwitz, are they already counted in the "6 million"?
Wikiferdi 21:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Treatment of Polish citizens by the occupants should provide relevant data. See also historical demographics of Poland for population figures.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 23:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, I can't find exact numbers of pre-war and post-war population in Poland on these sites.
Wikiferdi 21:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
At World War II casualties talk page there was once very good discussion with references about that. 6 millions deaths is including all Polish _citizens_, which also include non-ethnic Poles. For ethnic Poles not included in "Jewish Poles" category, the number is between 2 and 3 millions, vast majority of those killed by Germans. Szopen 07:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Why are you so sure about this? How much is "vast"? Once in Poland the Nazis were also blamed for the Katyn massacre and later on it was disclosed that the Soviets were responsible for it.
Wikiferdi 17:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikiferdi, except few communist lunatics in deep Stalinist period, none blamed Nazis for Katyn. The Katyn was simply not talked about throughout whole period, even though everyone knew what's that. What's more, earlier estimations of how many Poles died from hands of Soviet seems to be a bit overexxagerated, e.g. no serious historian claim now 1.5 million of deported Poles to Siberia. We are not sure whether Soviets killed 100.000 or 300.000 thousand, but we are sure that Nazis killed more, a lot more - they had much harsher politics (Soviets e.g. didn't shoot random people in random executions on the streets or razed whole villages) and a lot of more time (and also a lot less respect for Polish lives). Soviets killed hundreds of thousands while Germans millions. That's why it is safe to say Germans cause vast majority of Polish civilian losses during WWII.
Actually. the pages in wikipedia detailed that 350.000 Poles died as result of Soviet terror, and about 2 millions as result of Nazi terror (Historians are saying here rather from 1.8 to 2.5 million ethnic Poles, I saw different estimates). Also you have some 100.000 killed by Ukrainians and don't know how many killed by Lithuanians. But just adding the victims of main concentration camps will give 200.000 lives, add to that civilians who died during Warsaw Uprising (of which many thousands were deliberately killed in mass executions) and you have already more victims that Soviet terror. And now you can start adding to that more, e.g. in September and October 20.000 shot during only operation Tannenberg (not counting other executions and not counting other intelligenzaktions, which consumed another tens thousand), then add 20.000 victims of pacification actions (75 villages destroyed completely, and 750 affected by different form of mass executions), add victims of street executions, hostages, people who died during expulsions, slave labourers ... Szopen 09:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
On what are these estimates based? Had the Red Cross or other international authorities "counted" the "Nazi victims" - or the Red Army or other Soviet authorities? - Well, in that time when they were killed.
Wikiferdi 02:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
As - almost - always, there is "Auschwitz extermination camp", whick is untrue, as the Auschwitz was the concentration camp, and the nearby Birkenau was the extermination camp. Hence the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp(s) term. - n —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.75.108.135 ( talk) 23:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I think this article could be nominated for WP:GAC soon... -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 06:02, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.196.4.252 ( talk) 02:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
As this article approaches 200,000 bytes in size I could use some feedback on that issue. I started this work just to provide a better merge for the prehistory material. The "finished" (in the preliminary sense) Piast and Jagiellon sections are not overly detailed I feel, but the issue is the size of the total, which if countinued would result in an extraordinarily long article. The Piast section is 39 KB long, Jagiellon 66 KB and the Commonwealth already at the first half of the 17th century 46 KB. I could continue working on the general history and it could be decided later how to use this material, for example merge portions with more specific articles and abbreviate the whole for the overview article. Or may be someone has other ideas.
Orczar ( talk) 22:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
On 20 July 2009, the article had around 196,900 bytes. Due to numerous (often rather small) edits by Orzcar, it was expanded to 200k a few days later, and has reached 300k on 24 January 2010. The 340k mark was reached on 9 March 2010. Now, Special:LongPages last updated 23:53, 16 April 2010:
1. (hist) List of allied military operations of the Vietnam War [436,388 bytes] 2. (hist) List of Fellows of the Royal Society [391,274 bytes] 3. (hist) List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters [391,108 bytes] 4. (hist) Line of succession to the British throne [390,859 bytes] 5. (hist) Timeline of United States inventions [388,058 bytes] 6. (hist) Licensed and localized editions of Monopoly [361,427 bytes] 7. (hist) History of Poland [345,609 bytes] 8. (hist) United States at the 2008 Summer Olympics [339,380 bytes] 9. (hist) 2009–10 Coupe de France 1st through 2nd Rounds [329,515 bytes] 10. (hist) List of Spanish football transfers summer 2009 [315,062 bytes]
The intro alone has 16411 characters, covering more than a big modern PC screen, and according to Wikipedia:Lead_section#Length, it would even deserve an intro for itself, consisting of two or three paragraphs. According to Wikipedia:Splitting, articles > 100 KB Almost certainly should be divided, and those > 60 KB Probably should be divided. So, if Wikipedia guidelines apply also to the History of Poland, some partitions are necessary. Oddly, the corresponding article in German Wikipedia used to be the biggest there, too, being twice the size of the German equivalent to History of Germany (here, 114,238 bytes, less than a third). On the other hand, Polish WP "Historia Polski" has just 47,115 bytes, not even close to make their list of the 1000 longest pages, and it's even slightly shorter than the German history article there. -- Matthead Discuß 16:12, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Orczar ( talk) 12:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Orczar ( talk) 00:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Orczar ( talk) 03:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Working on further reducing this article to the short sections in the beginning of it now, moving longer developments into separate articles. Orczar ( talk) 16:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
The Eastern Europe article is fraught with errors, mislabels and slanted facts as if much of it was written by ultraconservatives during the Cold War from an ethnocentric position. If you agree with that Poland is a Central European state rather than a Soviet satellite, please assist in rewording/correcting the article lead and body. Gregorik ( talk) 06:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
The Eastern Europe article is fraught with errors, mislabels and slanted facts as if much of it was written by ultraconservatives during the Cold War from an ethnocentric position. If you agree with that Poland Czech r. Slovakia Hungary are Central European states rather than a Soviet satellite, please assist in rewording/correcting the article lead and body. It is un-encycopedic! (just read English Britannica and German Brockhaus) Gregorik ( talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.88.240 ( talk) 15:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I’m reading this pseudo history/conversation and I’m astounded. Like everything on Wiki, it is extremely amateurish. The history of Northern Europe was not complicated until the influence of Asian and Hamitic-Semitic cultures. The people of Northern Europe were living in small groups and always on the move – the architects of today’s world. The population of Northern Europe was small as they were concerned about quality not quantity. The knowledge was passed verbally and by example. The grandiosity, power hunger, blind greed are not North European traits. In addition they were not classified as Celts, Slavs original meaning Glorious (as stated in and early texts and many western history books i.e. “A brief history of ancient medieval and modern peoples” etc.) or Teutonic. There was no primitive hierarchy present, until cross breading with Asian and Hamitic-Semitic populations, which forced on Northern Europe God and Christianity-viciously killing people who had understanding of Universe and harmony with nature (including burning babies with so called original sin.) PS. In Poland, serfs were always only migrants or Poles cross-bread with migrants. They were in need of fertile land and Poles were in need of labor. Most Western, Eastern, Southern Europeans assimilated and consider themselves Poles. Semitic population only when cross-bread with Poles and only if they continued to live there considered themselves Poles (not always.) Remember to think for yourself – messengers motive is her/his own interest - especially changing history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.16.144.66 ( talk) 10:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Is it a purpose that there is nothing write about the germanic settlement until the 'barbarian migration'? In todays Poland area lived(latin): Gothones,Rugii,Burgundiones,Gepidae,Vandilii — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.78.106.4 ( talk) 09:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Marie Skłodowska-Curie: I can't find her. Soerfm ( talk) 10:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I will sort them out forthwith. Bear with. ;D LudicrousTripe ( talk) 17:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
If about 90% of Polish Jews were killed during World War II, as opposed to less than 10% of ethnic Poles, does it make sense to speak of "Extermination of Jews and Poles"? Orczar ( talk) 17:42, 22 September 2013 (UTC) Nazi Germany didn't manage to exterminate as many Poles as Jews, as Jews were their priority. Nevertheless it did engage in extermination of ethnic Polish population during the war, and planned for Poles as a nation to disappear somewhere around 50s.If you wish I can add sources confirming this.-- MyMoloboaccount ( talk) 18:36, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
/Gathering scientific evidence and bibliography - moved out of main namespace
BTW, i posted Dagome Iudex in latin. i will soon post article with discussion about Scandinavian beginnings of Mieszko. (first version) szopen
--- You're going to have to do better than: It was a wise political move to maintain sovereignty and remain independent from the German state. --MichaelTinkler
Re the tribes -- are they tribes or peoples? I'm not trying to be troublesome, but Baltic ethnicity has been a thorn in my side for a couple of months now. Personally, I would like to see only pertinent information, with links to each ethnic/cultural group involved... JHK
This article is *really* unNPOV and repeats lot of Polish nationalist propaganda. -- Taw
Old Introduction:
History of Poland is over 10 centuries long. It has been and to the present day is determined by Poland's geographical location. Poland has always been regarded as a bridge or barrier between the West and the (savage) East. From 966 AD Poland was included into the Latin Christian World and it was planned to make Poland as a forefront spreading Christianity eastward and defending the West at the same time. On numerous occasions Poland's existence was endangered by aggressive expansion of her neighbours that were greedy for new land - in 10 and 11th centuries the Czech and then Germans, Swedes, Russians and Austrians. There were times when once the grand and mighty Polish state was reduced to a small dukedom that was almost totally dependent on Russia. Worse still, Poland was altogether wiped out from the maps of Europe for many years until 1918 when after the World War I it regained independence. One of the features that best characterizes Polish people is that they stand strengthened in times of oppression and hardship. It is very well illustrated by the first line of the Polish national anthem : "Poland will not perish as long as we are alive..." Now, Poland is a proud nation of indisputable sovereignty, united with her allies in the NATO and aspiring to become a full member of the European Union.
Taw, I will be happy to copyedit for better English, sections, etc. In answer to your question about the use of the word 'duke', do you know what he was called in Latin documents of the time? I'm fairly familiar with those titles, and could probably come up with a correct translation in historical context. I am pretty sure that the title usually given is indeed Duke, but that meant something different in the 10th c. than in the 12th, and was also different for east and west... JHK
The problem is that in Polish we have only one word 'ksiaze' for many different concepts. In this case, Mieszko was just a crownless Christian ruler of a country. I'm not sure about his relation to the Emperor. It changed too often during early Polish history, and all crownless rulers are called 'ksiaze' anyway. Iirc he wasn't Emperor's vassal. -- Taw
Given the iudex thing, does anyone know (or have a good dictionary) any other possible translations for iudex (besides judge) in this context? JHK
What kind of evidence is *this* depending on:
I changed it to 'do not seem to have identified' pending further explanation.
BTW, Dagome Iudex is, IIRC, not the oldest document with reference to Poland. Is one of the oldest, but not _the_ oldest, unless i am mistaken. Widukind, Ibrahim Ibn Jakub etc wrote about Poland and Mieszko earlier.
And, in summary of Micheal Tinkler changes i saw "queation", but i can't find any his question here?
User:szopen
Removed for the main page :
In 1985 the Sczeczin bishop Jan Galecki praised the Catholic clergy of Poland for the roll they played in the establishment of "
Stabilisation of the Western Territories".
This roll of getting rid of minoritieswas defined by the highest ranking
church official of Poland Primate Cardinal
August Hlond over many years.
This is more a rant to justify some sulky feelings of resentment against
Poland than Polish history in its own right. It was Hitler and his politics
that was detrimental to the prosperity of the German Volk than Polish
nationalists etc.
Kpjas
Removed: Since the death of the Polish moderate leader Pilsudski in 1935, Poland's rulers have been openly nationalistic, lead by the highest authority in Poland the Primate of the Catholic Church of Poland, Cardinal August Hlond.
This just didn't make sense in context of where it was in the article, nor did it make sense in English. I also took out (again) this bit Kpjas objected to, because it didn't really fit.
Also, I revised much of the article to maintain chronological order and to introduce more NPOV. Then I noticed the bloody thing starts up again with the Middle Ages. I will try to incorporate the bottom section of the article, which has a lot of great information, into the upper portion and break it down into coherent chronological parts. JHK
Removed from the article:
The Polish Roman Catholic Primate, Cardinal
Hlond, returned to Poland from exile at the end of the war. One of his actions unpon arrival was to expel many ethnic German members of the clergy. There is still debate as to the reasons for Hlond's actions. Doubtless there were different motivations in different cases. Hlond was certainly a supporter of Polish nationalism, and this may have had something to do with the expulsions. But it should also be noted that some of the clergy had been seen as Nazi sympathizers, or even collaborators, and this may have had something to do with Hlond's actions. Finally, the expulsions, not only of German clergy, but also the majority of the ethnic German population, must be considered as part of the Soviet-supported reprisals against the Germans at the end of the war."
SC
Removed:
These are personal opinions that are put in to prove that Poland was not what it is claimed by (Polish) historians to be. I expect facts and balanced opinion based on scientific evidence from this article and not opposing Communist nationalistic propaganda with anti-Polish propaganda.
Kpjas 07:46 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Consider breaking this article into series. I think it has already been done, but there lacks a series box, like in History of Russia.
The public domain text from http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/pltoc.html can also be copied here. -- Jiang 23:29, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I;ve made few major changes. First, i removed constant mentioning that those and those prince joined Silesia to German empire (silly considering that in opinion of some whole Poland was formally part of HRE, HOLY ROMAN empire, not GERMAN empire). Second, i've corrected scale of Mongol invasion. It was exxagerated by XIX century German historians, but scaled down by Polish historians in XX century. Third, i corrected "Mieszko vassal of empire" mentionings. Mieszko and Boleslaw were keeping some of their lands as fief from empire, more or less formally, that for sure. Their exact relationship with empire is under very heavy studies from about 60 years.
I've also added mentionign that German law does not mean German settlers, and corrected mentioning that German settled only "easy" lands. Germans also settled in sparsely colonised regions of Sudety, for example, so it is not true. The article is IMHO in mess. Someone would hav to correct it, put all sudden mentionings of "Popielids" etc into correct places.[[user::szopen]]
The interests of the Russian-Soviet Empire in the Nazi-Soviet pact were to incorporate as much as possible of the nations they had already MOSTLY sujegated. That's why the border was placed were it was in the agreement! They didn't care for the strange math that chooses to count over two nations (Ukraine and Belarus') as a group instead of separately, in order to make the Poles look relatively more substantial! Genyo 16:30, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm preparing an article on the concept of Western Betrayal User:Halibutt/Western betrayal. Please feel free to drop in and help me finish it. Halibutt 09:51, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)The sell out at Yalta.
FDR and Churchill conspired indirectly to hand over Eastern European countries to the Soviet Union.
1. If the Allies had launched their D-day invasion through North Germany near Denmark. They would have ended the German war before the Soviets had time to cross to the western banks of the Dnieper. Thus preventing formation of the Eastern Block and limiting the extent and intensity of the cold war.
2. The Allied invasion of Europe actually took place in Italy 1943.
3. The Italian campaign was a waste of time. It was severely compromised in the North. Because of the Mountainous terrain. Allied soldiers made little progress. Only a few miles northward each month.
4. The Allies 1944 Normandy invasion was terribly mismanaged. Allied soldiers were shot at from the sea cliffs by German Soldiers. This delayed eastward troop movements.
5. Furthermore Army Generals who commanded troops at the Battles of the Arden and Ardenelles were feckless and should have been tried for treason and executed. They sent their troops to slaughter. And pinched escape transports for allied troops.
All of the events listed in #1 to #5 prolonged the European war. And permitted the Soviets to advance to east Berlin. Do not ever forget that: 6.The Allies repatriated Germany all the way through to the city of Berlin. Only later to withdraw to the West Germany boundary.
7. Leaving the absurd situation of partitioning a city. Also it is important to remember that:
8. The Czech republic that is the sudetenland and the city of Praque were also repatriated by the allies. Only to absurdly withdraw and leave the country to the Soviets.
Monedula added the following phrase: The downfall of Imperial Russia in 1917 (see Russian Revolution of 1917) was followed by the " Declaration of Rights of Peoples of Russia", promulgated on November 15, 1917 and signed by Lenin and Stalin. That Declaration granted to peoples of Russia the right to self-determination, including the right to secede completely. . With all due respect, no part of Poland was under Russian rule after 1915 and, although this declaration might've been a pretty gesture, it had little to do with both internal and international situation of Poland in 1918. At the moment the central powers collapsed allowing for Poland to be reborn, the nearest Russian administration was some 400 kilometres eastwards from the Polish borders and Lenin might've as well grant Zimbabwe independence - it would have the same effect. [[User:Halibutt| Halibu tt]] 16:31, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)
I agree that we should avoid touchy terms. However, in this context the usage of the word "totalitarian" is 100% acceptable. If Nazi Germany and Stalinist Soviet Union were not totalitarian - then which states where? The very word "totalitarism" (or " totalitarianism" was coined to show similarities between the two states - and that's what the wiki article on the phenomenon says. [[User:Halibutt| Halibutt]] 02:28, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)
--[[User:Halibutt| Halibutt]] 02:59, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
--Unregistered user Cactus Jack
I came across two boxes claiming to be lists of articles about the history of Poland. It looks as if there is some duplication which needs to be tidied up. -- Henrygb 11:56, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
History of Poland |
---|
These are an effect of our (still unfinished) work at the Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Poland. We are striving to categorise the Polish history onto a set of four or five series. The Polish statehood is simply a series listing all the independent states formed on Polish territory. Halibu tt 14:14, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
I just made a few changes to the grammar in the first section. Hope nobody minds.
jonecc
I changed the wording of some sentences in the sections dealing with the history of Poland during WWII and under communist rule, just to make them flow better. No information was added or deleted. - Adam
Descriptio Regni Poloniae, oder die Beschreibung des Königreichs Pohlen. ibid. 1647. Erneuret 1657. 1663. in 8. Latine. 1659. in 12 http://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/witte/witte2/s407.html