Future of Belarus - Poland and EU or Russia?

[Domen]

You really believe that? PL's 'middle classes', burgesses and so on, were primarily German-speaking.

No. Large German-speaking communities were in several cities (including Cracow), but they underwent gradual Polonization later.

Later there was again a large influx of Germans, but that was after the partitions of Poland, during the 19th century.

And then was again an influx of Germans between 1939 and 1944.

Eastern Europe's German speakers, moved/wiped out by Stalin.

Maybe you did not notice, but Polish borders moved westward between 1939 and 1945.

And vast majority of Germans expelled after 1945, were expelled from those new territories.

Polani and Poles are the same thing.

No, they aren't the same. Just like Franks and French are not the same thing or Saxons / Normans and English are not the same.

The point is that 'Poles' were one of dozens of Slavic people (and did not include Mazovians, Pomeranians, Silesians and so on)

Mazovia was already within Polish borders when they were for the first time described (in document Dagome Iudex).

Man, I have some Medieval Pomeranian ancestors - so don't tell me, that I am not Polish.

I also have some German ancestors, who became Polonized (my maternal grandfather's surname was Meller).

but are a modern 'nation' because it was the identity was a convenient socio-political identity for Catholic Slavic speakers

Not "Catholic Slavic" speakers, but Polish speakers of all religions (majority of Poles being Catholics is only the result of Counterreformation). And Polish identity is older than Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Poland existed as a state already for over 600 years before it united with Lithuania in 1569.

In the same was that Samnians, Veiites and so on became Romans in the course of BC Italian history.

Yes, Poles also were formed from many Lechitic tribes (who, however, spoke pretty much the same language in 1000 AD - there were only minor regional differences between Western Slavic languages at that time). However, your claim that "Poles" was the name of one of tribes - is wrong.

There was never such a tribe called "Poles".

This name was given already to all Christianized inhabitants of the Polish state which emerged as the result of uniting many tribes.

I don't understand what point you're making.

I don't understand what point you're making, because it seems to me that you are confusing with each other and merging into one both different geographical regions, and different historical periods. For example, it seemed to me that you tried to prove the alleged presence of large German-speaking communities in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (which is period 1569 - 1795 and area within its borders), by saying that they were expulsed "from Poland" after 1945. This shows both lack of understanding of historical, political, geographical and social changes in Poland over centuries.

You both overlooked the fact that since the 2nd half of the 18th century until 1918 and then since 1939 until 1945 western parts of - respectively - Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the 2nd Republic of Poland were under Prussian / German occupation, as well as the fact that Polish borders were different in year 1000, different in year 1300, different in year 1600, different in year 1930 and different in year 1946.

There were around 180 minor and major border changes during over 1000 years of Polish history. The only border which remained relatively unchanged during this entire period, was southern border - while western, northern and eastern borders were changing relatively frequently.

So if you want to discuss the history of German-speaking communities in Poland, you should define the exact period and area.

I am quite knowledgeable about this and have been reading several books about this (including a book "Historia miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce" - "History of towns and urbanisation in Poland"). Western immigrants were often settling in towns and cities. Apart from urban settlements, there was also rural settlement of ethnic Germans in Poland - but during the Middle Ages it was limited only to several relatively small parts of Poland, while German peasants who settled in Poland during the Polish-Saxon union (in the 18th century) very quickly underwent Polonization.

In general the processes of both Polonization of ethnic Germans and Germanization of ethnic Poles were large-scale and fluent processes in history.

I have an ethnic Polish friend whose surname is Hirschfeld, and he is most certainly a descendant of a general of the Prussian army of this surname who fought in western Poland during the Spring of the Nations in 1848. His family at some point got Polonized.

BTW - during the Middle Ages German was - among Latin - a lingua franca in Poland (and in many other countries of Central and Eastern Europe), so it was used in daily life by many people who were not ethnic Germans, especially in businesses (while Latin was more a lingua franca of science and literature).

Moderator Action: Three posts merged. Please avoid posting multiple times in a row. If you have something to add after you have posted just edit your original post.

 

[Pangur Bán]

No. Large German-speaking communities were in several cities (including Cracow), but they underwent gradual Polonization later.

Later there was again a large influx of Germans, but that was after the partitions of Poland, during the 19th century.

And then was again an influx of Germans between 1939 and 1944.


Maybe you did not notice, but Polish borders moved westward between 1939 and 1945.

And vast majority of Germans expelled after 1945, were expelled from those new territories.


No, they aren't the same. Just like Franks and French are not the same thing or Saxons / Normans and English are not the same.

The urban sites of eastern Europe, between Germany and Russia, were largely German-speaking. Yes, in the 19th century as these turned into modern cities they became majority Slavic, but this is not relevant to the original point. Nationalism makes us want to fit medieval and early modern states to the narrow molds of the 'linguistic nation', but in truth Poland and 'Poland-Lithuania' were multi-lingual nations where German had a central place.

Mazovia was already within Polish borders when they were for the first time described (in document Dagome Iudex).

Man, I have some Medieval Pomeranian ancestors - so don't tell me, that I am not Polish.

I also have some German ancestors, who became Polonized (my maternal grandfather's surname was Meller).

The Mazovians are frequently differentiated from Poles, Pommeranians, and so on. The Mazovians were reduced to tributary status, but that doesn't mean they were Poles any more than 19th century Mazovians were Russians.

No, they aren't the same. Just like Franks and French are not the same thing or Saxons / Normans and English are not the same.

French and Franks are the same. It's only modern historiography that makes a difference. Yes, you can take the people called by such a name at different times and say 'look how different they are', but its a historical continuum and thus you cannot exploit diachronic differences of degree with synchronic differences of kind.

Not "Catholic Slavic" speakers, but Polish speakers of all religions (majority of Poles being Catholics is only the result of Counterreformation). And Polish identity is older than Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Poland existed as a state already for over 600 years before it united with Lithuania in 1569.

'Polish speakers' is a nationalist construct when used for that era. "Catholic Slavic" speakers is more precise for the purposes of a conversation such as this.

I don't understand what point you're making, because it seems to me that you are confusing with each other and merging into one both different geographical regions, and different historical periods. For example, it seemed to me that you tried to prove the alleged presence of large German-speaking communities in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (which is period 1569 - 1795 and area within its borders), by saying that they were expulsed "from Poland" after 1945. This shows both lack of understanding of historical, political, geographical and social changes in Poland over centuries.

You both overlooked the fact that since the 2nd half of the 18th century until 1918 and then since 1939 until 1945 western parts of - respectively - Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the 2nd Republic of Poland were under Prussian / German occupation, as well as the fact that Polish borders were different in year 1000, different in year 1300, different in year 1600, different in year 1930 and different in year 1946.

There were around 180 minor and major border changes during over 1000 years of Polish history. The only border which remained relatively unchanged during this entire period, was southern border - while western, northern and eastern borders were changing relatively frequently.

So if you want to discuss the history of German-speaking communities in Poland, you should define the exact period and area.

I am quite knowledgeable about this and have been reading several books about this (including a book "Historia miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce" - "History of towns and urbanisation in Poland"). Western immigrants were often settling in towns and cities. Apart from urban settlements, there was also rural settlement of ethnic Germans in Poland - but during the Middle Ages it was limited only to several relatively small parts of Poland, while German peasants who settled in Poland during the Polish-Saxon union (in the 18th century) very quickly underwent Polonization.

In general the processes of both Polonization of ethnic Germans and Germanization of ethnic Poles were large-scale and fluent processes in history.

I have an ethnic Polish friend whose surname is Hirschfeld, and he is most certainly a descendant of a general of the Prussian army of this surname who fought in western Poland during the Spring of the Nations in 1848. His family at some point got Polonized.

BTW - during the Middle Ages German was - among Latin - a lingua franca in Poland (and in many other countries of Central and Eastern Europe), so it was used in daily life by many people who were not ethnic Germans, especially in businesses (while Latin was more a lingua franca of science and literature).

Moderator Action: Three posts merged. Please avoid posting multiple times in a row. If you have something to add after you have posted just edit your original post.

Don't worry, none these comments are an attack on modern Polishness. We in Scotland have similar hokum nationalist / nation-orientated historical myths. Every nation does. One of the ways to do history properly is to expel it from the history books and concentrate on what people actually thought and did.

 

[Kyriakos]

Belorussia is already a member of CSTO and Customs Union, so yes, eternal suffering under ruthless Russian tyranny is likely outcome for them. EAU creation is planned on 2015.

I hope that Greece also joins the EAU...

 

[Domen]

'Polish speakers' is a nationalist construct when used for that era.

For which era? Is it also a nationalist construct to say about "English speakers" in 5th century AD ???

If yes, then entire wikipedia must be controlled by English nationalists, because they describe language spoken in Britain in 5th century as "Old English".

The urban sites of eastern Europe, between Germany and Russia, were largely German-speaking.

This is a totally unproven statement, especially if you give no specific timeframe, area and don't list these urban sites.

Map for year 1333:

Major urban sites of Poland in year 1333 - blue points are urban sites where majority of population was German-speaking, blue-red points are urban sites where there was large part of German-speaking population but still a minority and red points are urban sites where Polish-speaking population was a clear majority:

Blue-painted rural areas are areas where German-speaking peasants were settling:

And here ethnic composition of towns during 15th century (not all towns, just examples of course):

From the book "Dzieje miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce", page 226, table 25 "Ethnic composition of 15th century Polish towns":

Poland and 'Poland-Lithuania' were multi-lingual nations where German had a central place.

This is totally contrary to facts.

As I wrote, German was a lingua franca of business during the Middle Ages. But during the Renaissance it lost its importance as a lingua franca.

French and Franks are the same.

Once again not true. Frankish language was a Germanic language. French language is a Romanesque language.

We in Scotland

I thought you are from Albania, not from Scotland ???

The Mazovians are frequently differentiated from Poles, Pommeranians, and so on.

And Bavarians are frequently differentiated from Alemannics, Franconians, Saxons, Thuringians, Hessians, etc.

So what?

"Catholic Slavic" speakers is more precise

No - it is not - especially after the Reformation.

And Slavic languages were already differentiated from each other during the Middle Ages.

For example Czech language already evolved into a different language from Polish during the Middle Ages.

The Mazovians were reduced to tributary status

Mazovia was part of the Polish state - not a tributary status - since the 10th century until the feudal fragmentation of the 13th century.

It became a Polish tributary after the reunification of Poland from its feudal fragmentation during the 14th century.

It was incorporated directly after Mazovian dukes of Polish Piast dynasty died childless one after another, in the 15th century.

In the 16th century Warsaw - which is a city located in Mazovia - became the capital of Poland.

We in Scotland have similar hokum nationalist / nation-orientated historical myths. Every nation does.

And you are supporting German historical myths, by not differentiating between Medieval tribes and dialects of the German language. If you claim that Mazovian was a different language than - let's say - Vistulan (Lesser Polish) - then you should also claim the same about for example Hessian and Allemanic.

Yes, in the 19th century as these turned into modern cities they became majority Slavic

Actually, the data for ethnic composition of the city of Poznań indicates something different.

Percentage of ethnic Germans among citizens of Poznań (Posen):

1816 census - 11% (including families of local Prussian military garrison, who came from Germany with soldiers)
1910 census - 42%

===============================================

As for Cracow, the Polish capital city before Warsaw (where capital was moved during the 16th century):

15th century (1400s) - nearly 30% of citizens of Cracow are ethnic Germans

17th century (1600s) - close to 0% of citizens of Cracow are ethnic Germans

 

[red_elk]

I hope that Greece also joins the EAU...

I think you are more than welcome, especially when you take Constantinople back
Come to the dark side!

 

[Domen]

Regarding the Polish language again.

Linguists commonly divide the history of Polish language for the following stages of development:

1) Old Polish - from the Early Middle Ages to the early 16th century

2) Middle Polish - since the early 16th century until the end of 18th century

3) New Polish - until 1930

4) Modern Polish - after 1930

==================================

The oldest known sentence written in Polish language and surviving to our times, was written in Wrocław in 1270 on page 24 of the Book of Henryków:

The entire Book of Henryków is written in Latin - like most of Polish documents and literature from that period.

BTW - you tried to claim that Medieval Silesian Slavic language was different than Medieval Polish language.

This is not true - actually, the Polish language largely evolved in the historical region of Silesia.

Many of surviving to modern times early written and printed relics of Polish language, are from Silesia (also the one posted above).

You can read more about it in my thread here: http://historum.com/european-histor...-culture-history-years-ca-1300-ca-1900-a.html

but in truth Poland and 'Poland-Lithuania' were multi-lingual nations

Vast majority of population of Medieval Poland was still Polish-speaking.

Poland became really multi-lingual only after 1350, when it conquered the Ruthenian kingdom of Halych-Volhynia. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was naturally multi-lingual, because it included vast primarily ethnic Ruthenian territories, as well as a relatively small territory inhabited mainly by ethnic Lithuanians and Samogitians. Temporarily also territories inhabited mainly by speakers of other languages were included (for example Livonia was mainly Latvian and Livonian speaking, with large groups of German-speakers - and in several parts of Royal Prussia there were large German-speaking communities as well).

Yes, you can take the people called by such a name at different times and say 'look how different they are', but its a historical continuum and thus you cannot exploit diachronic differences of degree with synchronic differences of kind.

What a total rubbish. As I wrote, majority of modern French are descendants of Romano-Celtic population which lived in the area of modern France at the turn of the Late Antiquity and the Dark Ages. Also their language belongs to the family of Romanesque languages (also known as Romance languages) - which are descendants of "barbarised Latin". On the other hand, Frankish language was a Germanic language, that is nowadays extinct.

Catholic

It is not even justified to apply the term "Catholic" to the Western Christian Church prior to times of Martin Luther and John Calvin.

There was no differentiation for "Catholic" and "Protestant" before the Reformation. There was simply Western (Latin) Christianity. And actually Eastern Slavs - such as Ruthenians, large numbers of whom inhabited the Kingdom of Poland since ca. 1350 - belonged to Eastern (Orthodox / Greek) Christianity.

=============================================

BTW:

I hope that Greece also joins the EAU...

Interesting change of attitude, because as we know major part of Greece previously refused to join it in 479 BC.

 

[Pangur Bán]

@Domen, you're not really understanding what I've been saying and I don't think I'm going to be able to change that--but it's been an interesting chat, so thanks.

 

[Domen]

I am perfectly understanding what you are saying.

The point is, that what you are saying is not entirely correct. Actually, it is largely incorrect.

Sorry, but you have just been showing, that have no idea about the history of evolution of Polish language, for example. You also have no idea about ethnic structures of population within Medieval Poland and later the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. As for the latter, you might want to read "Demografia Rzeczypospolitej Przedrozbiorowej" ("Demography of the Commonwealth Before the Partitions") by Cezary Kukło.

But there are also other sources which say about ethnic and linguistic structures of that state.

When it comes to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1569 - 1795):

Any form of German language (there were many dialects and sub-languages of German at that time - contrary to your depiction of this language as one "monolith", allegedly opposed by "countless small Slavic languages" instead of Polish) was not spoken by nobility anywhere outside of some parts of Prussia.

And you still claimed, that nobility in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was German-speaking. This is incorrect.

=========================================

And also I'm quite surprised that you are from Scotland and not from Albania.

=========================================

Pangur, you claimed that Pomeranians were allegedly not Poles.

But if so, then why did they speak Polish language even as late as the 17th century?

Original text of an oath (Lehnseidt) to Duke of Pomerania Barnim X, in its version (from 25.07.1601) designed for Pomeranians who didn't speak German:

"Ja NN przimawiony obieczuye y przissiegam Nayassnieyssemu wisoko urodzonemu Kziażecziu y panu Panu Boguslawowy, kiazecziu Sczeczinskie[mu], Pomorskie[mu], Kassubskiemu, Wandalskiemu, Rugiskiemu Graffowie Guczkowskiemu, panu powiatow Lamborskiemu, Bithowskiemu, thei ziemie kziazecziu y panu y Jego M'lczi pothomkom prawa y wierną przirodzona hulda, thak ze Jego M'czi chcze bicz wiernim, poslusnym y pokornim Jego M'lczi lepsse go wiedziecz skodi wistrzecz wedle mego przemozenia zabiegacz. Nathim mieczschu nye stane, gdzie by Jego M'lcz w ossobie we czczy wasneschi y dobr ktore Jego M'lcz theras ma y przislich czasów dostanie, obrazon albo zaskodzon. Jeśli o dobra rade bede napomnion zawzi, tho chcze radzicz, czo wedlug mojego rozumu Jego Mi'czi do czczi y dobrego przichodzi. Od thego mye niema odwiescz ynssego laski albo niełaski. Thaiemnosczi, które mnye beda od Jego Ml'czi zawierzone nie chcze do skody albo utrathy wyjawicz ale do smierczi y pogrzebu mego zachowacz. Jesli bim ja jakich dobr mi zathaionich sie dowiedzial, chcze trish wiernie wyjawicz. Ja chcze moie Dobra lenne, ktore mam od Jego Ml'czi y Domu thego Sczeczinskie[go], Pomorskie[go] indzie nie jako od Jego Mczi y od pothomkow // ktorzi ssie bedo po Jego Ml'czi rodzili. A jesli bi thich nie bolo od Naiasniejssego, Wisoko Urodzone[go] kziazeczia y Pana, Pana Kazimira, Kziazeczia Sczecinskie[go], Pomorskiego etc, mojemu the[mu] Ml'czi kziazecziu y Panu y Jego Ml'czi pothomkom mescziznom y thak dalej według zgody y zapisu, ktora ssie stala Wolyniu od inssich Ich Ml'czi kziazad Sczecinskich, Pomorskich etc. Ich Mlczi pothomkom mesczizni zawzdi prossicz, sukacz, odebracz prawa, dochodzicz y zasiugowacz. A jeslibi ssie przigodzilo, ys bi czi therazniejssi Ich Ml'czi wisocze drodzoni kziazetha y panowie Sczecinskie, Pomorskie etc, moie przirodzone kziazeta y panowie y ich Mll'czi potomkowie mesczizni przes smiercz czto Pan Bog Wssechmogaczi na dlugi czas przestrzecz y zachowacz raczy, odesly przes potomkow swoich wlasnich mesczizni zesle zamarly, yze by tak moich przyrodzonich panow pomorskich narodu wieczej nie stale, thak w tim przimierzu chcze themu Najaśnieissemu, Wisoczo Urodzonemu kziazecziu y Panu Panu Jochimowi Fridrichowi, Margraby Brandeburskie[mu], Swiethej Rzessy Aerczikomornikowi y Korfirstowi w Sląsku; na Korsnewie kziazecziu, Burgraby Nur//berskie[mu] Jego M'lczi y pothomkom Margrabom Brandeborskim zawsse thim korfirsthamy bedaczim y thim, ktorzi ssie od nich rodzą, za moye Pani thei ziemie przyacz y zaras jako thi przimierza wyssey wspomionen staną przes odmowy y odwloki przirodna holda y wszistko tho czinicz mam y chcze, czo mnie wiernemu podanemu nalezi swoiemu przirodzonemu panu y kziazecziu powinien y zawiazani jest wiernie przes wsselakiej zdrady, jako mnye Pan Bog pomoze przes Jezu Christa."

=====================================

I can understand every word from this oath, because it is simply written in archaic / old Polish language, or rather its Pomeranian dialect.

I wonder if for example Red Elk (from Russia) is also able to understand this - I'm sure he is not able to understand everything.

We also have on our forum users from Czech Republic - I bet they are also not able to fully understand this text above.

If users from Slavic countries such as Czech Republic or Russia can understand this - then please post your English translations.

 

[CavLancer]

Very interesting discussion guys, thank you for all the info and viewpoints expressed.

 

[Pangur Bán]

@ Domen, something that would help is if you familiarised yourself more with socio-linguistics and with academic analyses of nationalist movements.
I'd recommend to you Tomasz Kamusella,The Politics of Language and Nationalism in Modern Central Europe

Basically, one of the important things you're not getting is that 'languages' themselves are edifices of political power, constructs that are created and recreated to reflect political dynamics. In linguistic continua all that exist are isoglosses and socio-linguistic isogloss clusters, but with political nationalism they are grouped together under elite-community headings like 'Polish' or 'Russian' and the speech of the marginal are reclassified as 'dialects' (like 'Malorussian' or 'Pommeranian') to mirror their desired political relationship.

And for clarification, I did not claim that the nobility of P-L were German-speaking. The nobility were largely Slavic speaking. Some of them them knew German, but German speakers in P-L are not the nobles but the 'middle class', literates in aristocratic service, merchants, urban-craft specialists and so on ... even though many if not most of them were Slavs in 'origin', German/Yiddish was the language of those spheres. Like it or not this was the case. We all live in the EU now, so it's time to be comfortable with the diverse linguistic heritage of all our nations. Most of pre-war Germany was a Germanized zone of former Slavic speakers, and Berlin itself is as historically Slavic as Dublin or Cardiff are Irish or Welsh.

 

[Domen]

but German speakers in P-L are not the nobles but the 'middle class'

Which only confirms your lack of knowledge about the PLC, because in Poland-Lithuania nobility WAS the middle class.

Medium nobility (szlachta średnia) was the bulk of the middle class in Poland-Lithuania.

literates in aristocratic service, merchants, urban-craft specialists and so on ...

Servants in aristocratic service in the PLC were mostly Jews, certainly not Germans.

Urban-craft specialists were mostly ethnic Slavic - see for example surnames of skilled Polish artisans who were recruited by John Smith for his expedition at Jamestown in 1608 (those surnames were Michał Łowicki, Zbigniew Stefański, Jan Bogdan, Jan Mata, Stanisław Sadowski, Zaborowski, etc.).

Glass maker and merchant Zbigniew Stefański, published "Pamiętnik Handlowca" ("A Merchant's Memoir") in Amsterdam in 1624.

Sadowski and Zaborowski from Jamestwon are ancestors of Sandusky and Zabriskie families.

These are not German surnames.

As for merchants - the community of merchants was ethnically mixed as you can see from the source I posted above regarding 15th century.

============================================

BTW - so called "Germans" in Poland, were sometimes not even "Germans" in modern understanding, but Walloons, Dutch people, Frisians, etc. This is because the word "Niemcy" ("Germans" in Polish) was used to describe all foreigners from Western Europe who spoke languages similar to German.

Very significant part of 13th and 14th century settlers who came to Polish province of Silesia, were Walloons rather than Germans.

There were districts or settlements of Walloon weavers practically near every major city in Silesia - including Wrocław.

German/Yiddish was the language of those spheres.

Yiddish language is not German language. Also not all Jews who came to Poland spoke Yiddish, but also Hebrew and other languages.

This map shows directions of immigration of Jews to Poland - as you can see they migrated from various parts of Europe:

Like it or not this was the case.

You seem to be very big-headed.

But I suppose that you haven't read even 10% of the number of books I've read on this subject.

And you still claim, that you know all the answers.

and Berlin itself is as historically Slavic

Berlin was never part of the Polish state. Polabian and Lusatian tribes lived in the area of pre-1990 GDR (DDR).

Basically, one of the important things you're not getting is that 'languages' themselves are edifices of political power

In the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealtb all of political power was entirely in hands of nobility.

And nobility - as you have just agreed with me - was not German-speaking at all.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Which only confirms your lack of knowledge about the PLC, because in Poland-Lithuania nobility WAS the middle class.

Medium nobility (szlachta średnia) was the bulk of the middle class in Poland-Lithuania.

Servants in aristocratic service in the PLC were mostly Jews, certainly not Germans.

P-L's Jews were Germans. Just because Nazis didn't think you could be both doesn't mean we shouldn't.

And nobility aren't middle class. If you think that you need to familiarize yourself more with English usage.

Urban-craft specialists were mostly ethnic Slavic - see for example surnames of skilled Polish artisans who were recruited by John Smith for his expedition at Jamestown in 1608 (those surnames were Michał Łowicki, Zbigniew Stefański, Jan Bogdan, Jan Mata, Stanisław Sadowski, Zaborowski, etc.).

Glass maker and merchant Zbigniew Stefański, published "Pamiętnik Handlowca" ("A Merchant's Memoir") in Amsterdam in 1624.

Sadowski and Zaborowski from Jamestwon are ancestors of Sandusky and Zabriskie families.

These are not German surnames.

As for merchants - the community of merchants was ethnically mixed as you can see from the source I posted above regarding 15th century.

============================================

You're still making responses that show you've not read/understood my post properly.

BTW - so called "Germans" in Poland, were sometimes not even "Germans" in modern understanding, but Walloons, Dutch people, Frisians, etc. This is because the word "Niemcy" ("Germans" in Polish) was used to describe all foreigners from Western Europe who spoke languages similar to German.

Very significant part of 13th and 14th century settlers who came to Polish province of Silesia, were Walloons rather than Germans.

There were districts or settlements of Walloon weavers practically near every major city in Silesia - including Wrocław.

'German's in that sense is post-19th century. Pre-20th century usage of the word includes Frisians, Dutch, Austrians, Swiss, etc ... any Germanic-speakers in Continental Europe that's not Scandinavian.

Yiddish language is not German language. Also not all Jews who came to Poland spoke Yiddish, but also Hebrew and other languages.

This map shows directions of immigration of Jews to Poland - as you can see they migrated from various parts of Europe:

The Jews of eastern Europe come from the a Rhineland core. Yiddish is a form of German. Don't bother posting any links suggesting otherwise, because they'll be wrong and without meaning offence, I've got better things to do than respond over and over again to a bunch of poorly regurgitated quotes & 'sources' posted as 'comebacks' to points I never made.

 

[Domen]

P-L's Jews were Germans.

The Jews of eastern Europe come from the a Rhineland core.

The Jews of Poland came from many areas of Europe and they were migrating to Poland throughout many centuries.

The migration was not a sudden process, it was a gradual process and Jewish population in Poland was increasing gradually.

Don't bother posting any links suggesting otherwise,

Adopt a less pugnacious tone, or our discussion will have to end. I can see that you consider your historical knowledge as superior to my in this discussion, but you wrong, because I know a lot about this particular subject and treat me with due respect, or this discussion will come to its end.

What I posted is not a link, but a scan from a book, by the way.

Yiddish is a form of German.

Just like Pomeranian is a form of Polish.

Moreover - dialect of Polish spoken by Pomeranians was very similar to dialects spoken in other neighbouring regions.

Here you have a map of various ethnographic regions of Northern Poland (Kaszuby, Żuławy, Kociewie, Bory Tucholskie, Powiśle, Krajna, Pałuki, Kujawy, Ziemia Dobrzyńska, Ziemia Chełmińska, Ziemia Lubawska) - each of them had their own dialect, folk culture, traditions, etc.:

In the small region of Kociewie alone (see above) you could distinguish several ethnic sub-groups of Poles (see the map):

For example Kociewiacy (there is even a "Polish-Kociewian Dictionary" published in 2008 in Gdynia), Feteracy, Lasaki, Piaskarze.

Example of Kociewian dialect of Polish language can be seen here ("Anthem of Kociewie"):

http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kociewie#Hymn_Kociewski

In Bory Tucholskie lived people called Borowiacy (who were a sub-group of Kashubians).

In Cuiavia lived Kujawiacy, speaking Cuiavian dialect (which is a sub-dialect of Greater Polish / Polan dialect).

Kujawiacy further divided into several sub-groups (for example Borowiacy kujawscy).

Of course most of these folk dialects and folk cultures have dissapeared during the 19th and the 20th centuries.

'German's in that sense is post-19th century. Pre-20th century usage of the word includes Frisians, Dutch, Austrians, Swiss, etc.

Frisian language was more different from Austrian dialect, than Mazovian dialect was from Lesser Polish dialect.

Yet you claim that Firsians and Austrians were the same, while Mazovians and Lesser Poles were not the same. Where is logic?

And nobility aren't middle class. If you think that you need to familiarize yourself more with English usage.

In Poland nobility (szlachta - this can be also translated as gentry) was the middle class.

In Poland szlachta was up to 10% of the society (and in some regions - especially Mazovia - around 20% in the 16th century).

In England nobility was perhaps never more than 1% of the society.

Why should I familiarize myself with English usage of "nobility", if we are talking about Poland?

You should familiarize yourself with Polish usage of "szlachta" instead, mate.

But if you prefer, we can use the word "gentry" instead of "nobility" as translation of Polish "szlachta".

But in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth political-legal status of entire szlachta was the same - regardless of differences in financial status.

Just because Nazis didn't think you could be both doesn't mean we shouldn't.

By the 1930s large part of Jews in Poland were already Polonized - especially higher classes of the Jewish society were Polonized.

Just to mention people of culture, such as Julian Tuwim, who was Polish and Jewish, but certainly not German.

 

[Pangur Bán]

our discussion will have to end.

I suggested that above.

Just like Pomeranian is a form of Polish.

Yet you claim that Firsians and Austrians were the same, while Mazovians and Lesser Poles were not the same. Where is logic?

Good point. The reason I'm not so bothered is because 'Deutch'/'German' is, etymologically, like the term 'Slavic' rather than 'Polish' i.e. its totum pro partem rather than pars pro toto... at least in German and, sort of, in English. Just like 'Slovenian', or 'Romanian'. In French the term is pars pro toto like 'Polish', being derived from the name for a particular region Swabia (Allemania is a Romance/Latin name for Swabia, whose dukes ruled Germany for a period around the 12c). You are right that we need a different term for this to distance it from the modern country. 'Germanic' is too broad, and 'Continental Western Germanic' too convoluted. It's quite an annoying state of affairs.

 

[Domen]

Just like Pomeranian is a form of Polish.

Yet you claim that Firsians and Austrians were the same, while Mazovians and Lesser Poles were not the same. Where is logic?

Good point. The reason I'm not so bothered is because 'Deutch'/'German' is, etymologically, like the term 'Slavic' rather than 'Polish' i.e. its totum pro partem rather than ... at least in German and, sort of, in English. Just like 'Slovenian', or 'Romanian'. In French the term is pars pro toto like 'Polish', being derived from the name for a particular region Swabia (Allemania is a Romance/Latin name for Swabia, whole dukes ruled Germany for a period around the 12c). You are right that we need a different term for this to distance it from the modern country. 'Germanic' is too broad, and 'Continental Western Germanic' too convoluted. It's quite an annoying state of affairs.

So at least you understand one of my points now.

=============================

Regarding other points - you are still mixing various realities, regions and historical periods. For example you wrote that "Polish Jews were Germans" (because you consider Yiddish German) and you apparently apply this also to the 20th century, because you wrote "even if the Nazis thought otherwise".

As a matter of fact in the 20th century a large part of Polish Jews stated Polish or Hebrew as their mother tongue - not Yiddish. Especially Jewish intellectual elites were Polonized - people such as Tuwim, Lechoń, Słonimski, Hemar, Schultz, Wittlin, Borman, Grydzewski, etc. All these people of culture considered themselves as Polish first, only then Jewish - and certainly not as Germans. They spoke Polish in daily life, most of them did not even know Yiddish language.

Not to mention, that Yiddish is at least as distinct from German, as Slovak is from Polish. And perhaps even more distinct.

Regarding early history of Jews in Poland - I do not think that for example Jews who came to Renaissance Poland from Spain, spoke Yiddish. They could adopt Yiddish as their language later, though. But this does not justify you to apply something which might be true at one point in history, to entire history...

 

[Domen]

is because 'Deutch'/'German' is, etymologically, like the term 'Slavic' rather than 'Polish'

No, for me "Germanic" is like "Slavic", and "German" is like "Polish". And I don't know why would you think otherwise.

'Germanic' is too broad, and 'Continental Western Germanic' too convoluted.

"Continental Germanic" is OK to use in this case.

Eastern Germanic languages were already extinct during the discussed period, so we don't need to add "Western" part, because all were western.

BTW - Frisian language is not part of "Continental Germanic" language family, it belongs to "Anglo-Frisian" language family.

So Frisians who settled in Poland were actually "more English than German".

And Walloon language, is not even a Germanic language, but a Romance language. So they those Walloons were "more French than German".

In other words - around 50% of those people who according to you were "Germans", were in fact by no means Germans.

Flemish and Dutch settlers also did not speak German - although these are counted as "Continental Germanic" language family.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Why are you talking about the 20th century in that manner? You are trying to dispute my assertion that PLC had a Germanic middle class and that the cities became Slavicized after PLC in the 19c by going on about 20th century Jews claiming Polish or resurrected 20th Hebrew as their 'mother tongue'. Everyone knows about Polonophone and Russophone Jews, they have zilch to do with my assertion about the PLC.

RE: Yiddish/German, Slovak/Polish, very true. But the Germans of eastern Europe didn't speak 'German' in that sense, the dialects they spoke were just part of the same linguistic continuum of which standard High and Low German and standard modern Polish and Slovak are regional prestige variants. If you take my advice and do the reading I suggested you will understand this idea better.

RE: "TW - Frisian language is not part of "Continental Germanic" language family, it belongs to "Anglo-Frisian" language family." -- you're just looking at language trees which are attempts by linguists to track the course of certain diachronic changes. Frisian was always part of Continental Germanic dialect continuum.

RE: Walloon, the term 'Wahl-' is used by German speakers to refer to Romance speakers, not just those who happen to live in modern Belgium. And yes indeed, plenty of Welsh went to eastern Europe. So what?

 

[Domen]

You are trying to dispute my assertion that PLC had a Germanic middle class

Not trying, but actually disputing it, because it is clearly a wrong assertion.

If you take my advice and do the reading I suggested you will understand this idea better.

If you read Polish, then maybe you can also read some books that I recommend.

Or maybe I can actually quote some excerpts, which I already translated to English:

Please note, that this is about the 1400s, not about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth:

About 15th century (1400s) Poland:

"One of factors connecting higher classes of the society of towns and cities, was common language of business - "Lingua" (...) It conceptualized the community of elites. This "Lingua" was dual - Latin and German, especially Low German. The latter was needed especially for trade contracts, it allowed for better mutual understanding while concluding trade agreements concerning trade turnover between Poland and Lithuania, Prussia, Russia and Silesia. This is why - apart from Latin - correspondence was in this language not only in towns which had primarily ethnic German patriciate, such as Danzig, but also in other towns. In Warsaw, Przemysl, Olkusz in many cases German-language inscriptions were used in books. On one page of the civic book of Olkusz, transactions concerning lead trade with Krakow, dealings with a rich international company owned by Hans Schweidniczer were listed in German language, while matters concerning local loans - in Latin. Maciej Radoszka "recognovit", Stephan Eiser "hot bekannt" their obligations, but criteria of using "Lingua" were not homogenous. Ethnic Pole Mikołaj Pióro, a burgher from Olkusz, as well as his businesses, were being described once in German and once in Latin - the same inconsistency in language of business refers to ethnic German Hannus Hirschberg, a townsman from Kraków. In year 1450 among 199 entries in book of Olkusz, 60 - so 1/3 - were in German and the rest in Latin. (...) Transactions of Jan Wilk from Warsaw with Wroclaw (Breslau) were written in German, but transactions of Mikołaj Baryczka from Warsaw with Danzig - in Latin. In year 1511 also transactions of townsmen from Breslau were written in both languages - Latin and German. (...) Also characteristic terms of Macaronic language were in use: "Szachczyk roborum wanschos", which was sold to a Prussian townsman by a townsman from Zakroczym, most likely resembles influences of Polish language on pronunciation of German words in a Latin text. (...) The most interesting issue is (...) the role played by the Polish language, visible mostly through prism of every-day writing activities of townsmen. The basis for conclusions will be primarily Polish terms which were translated versions of Latin terms. Apparently the latter either did not fully conform to intentions of those who were writing, or matters were so important, that it was considered as expedient to write them down in commonly understood Polish language. (...) We can distinguish at least four spheres of daily urban life, in which Polish language was often used. First one (...) concerned landed property (...) Second one (...) concerned the sphere of cash transactions. The size of debt - "drugie połtory grzywny", "litkupnicy" (mercipotari), "pokup" (emptio), "czerwone złoto" (florenus ungaricus), "istne" (pecunia actualia), "wianował" (dotalitavit), "plathował" (persolvit), "przesscepovyecz dluznikov - alias interdictorum creditorum" - all these terms are related to the sphere of cash transactions, they show how far they came into use in daily life and Polish language in the 15th century. Third sphere concerned defining the degree of relationship and inheritance law, terms which required translation to Polish language. (...) Finally the fourth sphere of life, in which Polish language was often used, covered a very comprehensive scope of various offices, activities and items connected with work of townsmen. (...) Polish terminology existed also in various other disciplines, sometimes very specialistic ones. Bartłomiej from Bydgoszcz compiled in 1532 a Polish-Latin dictionary, listing for example over 600 entries concerning medical sciences, providing Polish translations for all of them. Even in vocabulary of maritime legal-commercial terms we can find influences of Polish language, many words were accomodated to Polish pronunciation. (...) 15th century handbooks of measures, scales, roads and settlements were taking into consideration Polish language, not only in areas where vast majority of members of all social classes spoke Polish in daily life - such as Lublin, Warsaw, Poznań, Gniezno, etc. - but also in multiethnic academic communities and in towns with large percentage of foreigners among the patriciate. In Danzig, which still belonged to the Teutonic Order, also Polish terms could be seen in civic books - for example Gdanczk. Polish language was also becoming gradually more and more popular among bachelors from Kraków. (...) Polish language in its written form, was being shaped mostly in urban centers. Also there existed and were publishing their works various writing workshops and printshops (...)"

From the book "Dzieje miast i mieszczaństwa w Polsce" ("History of towns and townsmen in Poland").

=======================================

The fact that Polish literary language evolved in urban centres, totally contradicts your point about allegedly "German-speaking" towns. Also such thing as "Polish language of business" already existed in the 15th century - of course it emerged as the result of translating Latin and Low German terms to Polish. There are also many Latin-Polish dictionaries of scientific and medical terms, published during the 15th and the 16th centuries.

=======================================

BTW - the link to Historum forum I provided, was a link to my own thread.

you're just looking at language trees which are attempts by linguists to track the course of certain diachronic changes.

So you reject what historians write, you reject what linguists write, etc.

Then what exactly is the basis of your strange assumptions? Considering that you reject common conclusions of scholars.

And yes indeed, plenty of Welsh went to eastern Europe. So what?

Actually I don't know about any large-scale Welsh immigration (maybe you are confusing Welsh with Walloon?).

Why are you talking about the 20th century in that manner?

Which part of my post are you referring to?

Cities became Slavicized after PLC in the 19c by going on about 20th century

Actually many cities became Germanized during the 19th century. For example Poznań - in 1816 German-speakers were 11% and 89% Polish-speakers, while in 1910 already 42% German-speakers and 58% Polish-speakers. As for Jews - Jews were never numerous in Poznań (like in most of Greater Poland region).

 

[Traitorfish]

Not trying, but actually disputing it, because it is clearly a wrong assertion.

What's clear about it?

 

[Domen]

What's clear about it?

The fact that in majority of towns there were no communities of ethnic German settlers.

Such communities existed usually in larger cities - but also not in all of them.

The fact that Polish literary language evolved in urban centres, totally contradicts your point about allegedly "German-speaking" towns. Also such thing as "Polish language of business" already existed in the 15th century - of course it emerged as the result of translating Latin and Low German terms to Polish. There are also many Latin-Polish dictionaries of scientific and medical terms, published during the 15th and the 16th centuries.

Example is the dictionary published by professor Jan Stanko in 1472:

7) Jan Stanko - famous 15th century professor of the Cracow University - was born in Silesia, in the city of Wroclaw. He is an author of the first known Polish-language natural sciences dictionary, which was written in year 1472. In his dictionary, Jan Stanko included around 20,000 Latin language scientific terms, 2,000 Polish language scientific terms describing fauna and flora, as well as 800 German language scientific terms. Among sources used by Jan Stanko when he was compiling his dictionary, were Czech language so called rostlinarze which included many terms from sciences of medicine and herbalism.