"too overwhelming..." for what? Not a complete sentence as it stands. Are you using 'Deutsche Reich' to mean the eastern territory? It's unclear.
Did WW II begin Sep 1 ,1939 ? Did it begin at Versailles ?
Read the notes on that in article WW II . You say , did it begin with the invasion of the Sudetenland ?
I ask, what about the "Declaration of War against Germany by Judica of the World unite... " published March 4, 1933 in the Daily Express :
I welcome it if that someone explains this.
To Michael Tinkler ,
when you use the search engine www.webtop.com and type in :judea declares war on germany , daily express, you will find an article by the shofar archives on this. daily express was ( and still is) apparently a newspaper in London. There are other search engines, such as alta vista and other sites, which show the newspaper article
I only found this recently and am astonished at the nearly 70 years of silence surrounding it . You are now telling me this 1933 act has been terrorism .
Deutsche Reich is the official name for Germany as of 1871. People that lived within the Deutsche Reich were/are citizen of the Deutsche Reich or "Reichs-Deutsche". Germans who lived outside the boundaries of the "Deutsche Reich" are "Volksdeutsche" or ethnic Germans .
Also, I am agreeing with Michael Tinkler that the German phrases should be cleaned up and English used as the main language in the English-language Wikipedia.
Finally, I want to again mention that this article needs to be written in a less biased form. At present, it appears to be a backhanded apologia for Germany. At the least, it seems to equate the circumstances of the Germans in Eastern territories forcibly taken by their governments in previous centuries and forcibly settled by them with those of other "ethnically cleansed" populations. To this point, although I have heard of the expulsion of the Volksdeutsch from East-Central and Eastern Europe, I have never heard that there was any type of planned genocide carried out against them. J Hofmann Kemp
To Michael Tinklerand J Hofmann Kemp
Thank you for reading the article and for your input .
I added an article on refugees , to J H Kemp's attention . There were 9 million Volksdeutsche
plus 9 million Reichsdeutsche who were expelled.Volksdeutsche are people , who were not citizens of the Deutsche Reich-Germany , but were in earlier years Germans of the Holy Roman Empire.
Perhaps if this so called expulsion would not have been so minnimized ,as you demonstrate, all these millions and millions of refugees throughout all the world would not have to be.
H. Jonat
Right -- Please try to understand the objections here:
So -- would Mssrs. Jonat, Joachim, et al. please contribute articles that enrich our knowledge by showing us the whole story? Thanks. -- [[J Hofmann Ke
You are the experts in style and computer writing and I gladly let you enrich the stories.
I leave the cleaning up of the text also to you.
I am using 15th , 16th , 17th century maps to look at places and names . I am using Claudius Ptolemy : The Geography, Dover Publication original written ca 150 AD and Tacitus Agricola and Germania , written 98 AD, tranlation Mattingly .
I am looking at www.familysearch.com (LDS) for places , actual films of actual church records . They are all original records, if duplicates, it state so.
Please take the time and look up the church records for places like :
Bromberg , Posen , West Prussia : Thorn , Konitz , Culm , Dirschau , Elbing, Danzig East Prussia : Frauenburg , Braunsberg ,Heilsberg etc
I do not use any 18th or 19th century histories .
I am looking at an actual history record by the Holy Roman Empire from 1600 available on internet .
Please contact me if you would like to look at it also.
I also ask you to please read again the difference between Reichs-Deutsche and Volks- Deutsche . In you note above you still talk of Volksdeutsche only. You are completely overlooking the Reichs-Deutsche .
(Taking your comment on Volkdeutsche I have to surmise that almost none of the US inhabitants are actual native , none of the Mexicans are actual native , other than the Indians and most of the English are actually none-native.
So what kind of logic are you using ?
I would like to know , where you did your studying , what country ?
I came to live in California and with Genealogy Studies I am constantly asked any of these questions pertaining to history , why - how - when ,into every little detail. The older population , that is doing the genealogy research , knows absolutely zilch and never had any classes teaching them a n y of the European history , other than WW I or WW II connected so-called history (propaganda).
I concern myself with the truth.
H. Jonat
Hi H. Jonat. I have looked at your homepage http://www.crystalbay.net/prussia-baltic/ (it is yours, right?) and the various entries you have added to Wikipedia. And I have no doubts that you are very concerned about stuff related to Prussia in the past. But like Michael Tinkler and J Hofmann Kemp I also find your entries rather biased. I know that Wikipedia is self-correcting in the sense that someone else can allways edit your stories. But it would be a great help if you tried to write the whole story from the beginning. --css
MichaelTinkler offers:
The study of 'History' is more complicated than family names in written records. I have a great deal of respect for the practice of genealogy (my mother is a serious amateur genealogist; she is not interested in working on any other families so she sees no need to become a certified professional genealogist), but genealogists must be (and generally are) aware that church records have a severe weakness - personal names are as readily changed as clothing. In the 19th and the first two thirds of the twentieth centuries archaeologists who excavated graves and grave goods made many assumptions about the ethnicity of those buried in the graves based on jewelry found with the bones. No one ever seems to have considered the (surprisingly simple) question of fashion - could it be possible that in the past people wore jewelry not related to their ethnicity, but that of a more powerful or a more novel ethnic group? The answer given by contemporary archaeologists and historians is "Yes. That happened." Archaeologists have reexamined many old recorded digs and discovered many graves with MIXED styles of jewelry. Just as people marry across ethnic lines, they wear jewelry without regard to later archaeologists. The study of ethnicity in the medieval and early modern period has been completely revolutionized in the last 25 years by this kind of thinking. Older published sources are not to be relied on for that. Family names are very unstable, too. If your parish priest is German, he may write down your name the way a German would spell it. He may translate your name into a German occupation-name. You, of course, may be ethnically something else and choose to speak German and raise your children speaking German. Linguistic identity and ethnic identity are very unstable.
Old maps: old maps frequently represented the wishes of rulers rather than reality. Old maps cannot be used uncritically - who commissioned the map? Who made the drawings? Who published the map? Who REPUBLISHED the map, and was it still accurate, or was it just a lazy publisher? Aerial views of cities published in the Renaissance (Duerer, for instance) are almost entirely imaginary - remember, they could NOT work from an aerial photograph, but HAD to work from imagination.
I put up a note about why one cannot trust Tacitus on the German information in general - he was not an anthropologist; he did not speak any Germanic language; he was using the Germans as a counter-example to what he saw as the decadence of the Romans. If you think of Rousseau's 'noble savage' you won't be far off of Tacitus's ideal German. A 17th century history of the Holy Roman Empire is interesting, but not useful for a 21st century encyclopedia. J. Hoffmann Kemp may be able to suggest a more contemporary German language source for you to work from.
Just some pointers to why J. Hoffmann Kemp and I are busy revising your entries - we are working from the paradigm of modern scholarship. --MichaelTinkler