We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.
This article places into a broader scope of the research over the image of Gdańsk and its inhabitants in chronicles that are carried out by the authoress. It deals with the analysis of the historiographical sources originating from beyond Gdańsk. The majority of chronicles’ excerpts dedicated to Gdańsk deals with its political and trade activity. The authoress is particularly interested in the criteria, put forward by the chroniclers from 15th to 16th c., which decided on Gdańsk’s urban character, or indicated its value as a city and made it worth a visit. It was a period of intense development of this centre. The purpose of the analyses is to, i.a., check whether the contemporary chroniclers observed these changes and how they evaluated them. The issue has not yet been addressed in the literature of the subject. The analyses, referring to Hans Werner-Goetz’s methodology concerning the representations in chronicles (so-called Vorstellungsgeschichte), were carried out on various chronicles, relations and records, i.a. travel records (Gilbert de Lannoy and Mikołaj Wimann), Polish chronicles (Annales by Jan Długosz, chronicles by Bernard Wapowski, Joachim Bielski, Polonia by Marcin Kromer), foreign chronicles Germania by Eneas Silvius Piccolomini, Wandalia by Albert Krantz), or universal chronicles (Cosmographia by Sebastian Münster). The analysis shows that in the first half of the 15th century the contemporaneous authors did not stand out of other towns in the region (Jan Długosz, Gilbert de Lannoy, Eneas Silvius Piccolomini). Their assessment was made while they pondered on the city’s fortifications, geographical location and building material. It was not until the Thirteen Years War (1454–1466) and subsequent expansion of the city that the chronicles of the 16th c. noticed the ongoing change (especially Albrecht Krantz and Sebastian Münster). They described the “civilizational leap” that took place in Gdańsk in short time, namely during the life of one man. In their opinion, the changes were particularly noticeable in the fast pace of replacing wooden buildings with brick ones. The image of Gdańsk in the foreign chronicles does not contain elements of the descriptions of the city characteristic of Gdańsk records, which the authoress analyzed elsewhere – there are no references to specific buildings, streets and squares, that is, the living space of the city’s inhabitants.
More...
The article deals with transformation of relations between Soviet Russia and the USSR on the one side and the Holy See on the other from the Bolshevik Revolution in November 1917 until the outbreak of World War II in September 1939. It presents important personalities, milestones and friction areas of mutual contacts. It is based on extensive materials from the Historical Archive of the State Secretariat of the Holy See, as well as numerous foreign literatures, especially English, Italian and German.
More...
The Great Union of 1918 is the priceless good left to the descendants of the generation of the early twentieth century. The Great Union Centennial represents a moment of crossroads and a solemn occasion to renew the country project that brings us together, to rebuild solidarity between Romanians. The article is a retrospective of the events held in the Romanian Information Centre during 2018, the year of the Great Union Centennial.
More...
The topic “UN for the violation of the rights of Albanians in Kosovo 1990 - 1997, according to the records of the Kosovo Archives” made an attempt to analyze the treatment of the Kosovo issue at the UN, the activity of UN Special Rapporteurs on the human rights in coordination with the diplomatic missions of the international community, the European Union, the United States, in the framework of international relations, the New Order based on the UN Charter chapter on “Human Rights”.
More...
One of the most important issues facing the Mamluk State since its establishment was to continue the struggle with the Crusaders who settled in the region. In fact, after the failure of the 3rd Crusade, Egypt became the new strategic target of the Crusaders under the Ayyubid administration. The developments that started during the reign of Sultan Baybars continued in the period of Kalavun and al-Eshref until the conquest of Akka. From this point on, ez-Zâhir Baybars marched at the head of a large army at the beginning of February 1265 and took over the cities of Kaysariyye, Yafa, Aslis, and Arsuf. In the summer of 1266, he tookover Safad and er-Remle. It caused a heavy blow to Armenia Minor. In 1267, Sultan Baybars looted the districts of Taberiyye and Akkâ and invaded the cities of Jaffa, es-Shakif, and Arnun the following year. Finally, he crowned the invasion wars against the Crusaders with the conquest of Antioch (April 1268). Baybars’ conquering of Antioch has been marked by contradictions. However, he will eliminate the crusader presence in Antioch and its surrounding by various methods and occupy the areas in the north of Syria, and finally narrow the area of the Crusader activity. It is an extremely important event that Antioch was conquered by Muslims in 1268. Because Antioch is the second principality established by the Crusaders in the East (1097) after Urfa, and the capture of this place is a piece of new evidence that the great structure that the Crusaders set up in Syria towards the end of the 11th century began to collapse.
More...
In the context of discussions on hints of the possibility of withdrawing UNPROFOR from Bosnia and Herzegovina, there were several suggestions regarding the future operation of these forces. One of the proposals was the strengthening of UNPROFOR, and after the crisis with the United Nations hostages at the end of May of 1995, the process of the concrete realization of this idea was accelerated even more. It was quite clear that the UNPROFOR mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina itself had lost credibility and that radical reforms were needed in the organization to make it more effective. However, immediately after the decision to form the Rapid Reaction Force (RRF), their purpose was undefined, that is, there were certain essential differences between the British and French visions of the RRF. The paper will discuss the mentioned differences, the purpose of the troops, their financing, numerical and national composition, and other issues that were the subject of discussions at the meetings in Paris and New York in early June of 1995. Particularly great pressure on the issue of financing the troops was on the American administration, and this complex issue, as well as the role of the American Congress in not approving funds for the RRF, which will also be discussed in the paper. The adoption of the Security Council resolution of June 16 1995 approved the deployment of 12,500 troops who were part of the Force, but the question of whether the resolution resolved a number of ambiguities, as well as whether the purpose of the Force was defined in the period preceding the genocide in Srebrenica, will also be the subject of analysis in this paper. The documentation of the United Nations, UNMO, UNPROFOR, and the Clinton administration will help us to understand and answer these complex questions, which represented only one segment of very turbulent and dynamic events in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the period when these Forces were formed.
More...
Being the second longest river of Europe (the longest one is the Volga) the 2850 km long Danube connects different geographical, economic, political regions with various ethnic, religious, historical background. Touching 10 states it collects the waters of 14 countries in its 817 km2 drainage basin and provides the connection with the seas for the countries of the continent. It is an important international watercourse which creates a natural link between the West and the East inside Europe. It has been so for more than 2000 years, having advantages and sometimes disadvantages, too. The geographical importance of the Danube has always been tremendous throughout history; at the same time, it has always played an important role concerning cultural-historic aspects. Since the end of the 20th century, the Rhein-Maine-Danube canal and international watercourse with its 3500 navigable lengths create a unique opportunity for the countries it connects. All this enjoys an important priority in the Danube-region strategy of the EU. The authors of the study provide a short historical outline of the role the Danube has played in Europe with special emphasis on the 19-20th centuries, concerning international legal aspects as well.
More...
Japan's economy is invariably seen as a prime example of a capitalist system and an analysis of the elements on which the Japanese economy is founded seems to lead inexorably to the conclusion that Japan is an established member of the group of highly developed capitalist nations. Although the post-war economic crises have also affected the Japanese colossus, they have resisted due to the diversification of risks, the clients, the collaboration with multiple companies, the adaptation to new technologies, the innovation, the flexibility and above all, due to the formidable force of the Japanese people to overcome difficulties. Japan has a tradition of success, based on the military performance of the past. The orientation towards the performance of the Japanese companies, by the strategic character, can be correlated with the management of the military doctrine, both the classical and the modern one. The theme is anchored in reality because Japanese companies are a benchmark for emerging economies, as is the case in Romania.
More...
This study is an insight into the organisation of the Romanian diplomatic and consular service in Bulgaria during the Second World War, starting from brief biographical presentations for the heads of mission, comprising personal data, references of their professional path, and analyses of their activities during their service in Sofia, placed in the context of the relations between the two states. The diplomatic representation was led successively in the period 1939 – 1945 by Eugen Filotti, Gheorghe Caranfil, Ion Christu, Achil Barcianu – envoys extraordinary and plenipotentiary ministers. The Consulate of Varna was run by Mihail Oncescu-Beștelei, the Consulate of Rusciuc (Ruse) was run by Mihai Nicolau, at the one of Vidin by I. Oancea. For a short interval, the Consulate of Skopje became „subordinated“ to the Sofia Legation. The representation was run by Emil Oprișanu.
More...
Review of: Bartosz Dziewanowski‑Stefańczyk - Europa. Nasza historia, polsko‑niemiecki podręcznik dla klasy 8: Od wybuchu drugiej wojny światowej do czasów współczesnych, Wydawnictwa Szkolne i Pedagogiczne, Warszawa 2020, 175 s.
More...
The times between the Treaty of Adrianople and World War II were favorable to the Danubian navigation growing within the Romanian area, except for some breaking intervals. The international commerce of the Danubian hinterland, mainly through the agency of foreign shipping companies, was characterized during the 19th century by a diplomatic war among the great European powers. Russophobia that London chancelleries kept internationally up during the second quarter of the 19th century was for the public opinion a subject as topical as controlling of any epidemics on the continent. The two British contractors John Andrews and Joseph Prichard had got in 1829 an exclusive privilege being allowed to navigate steamboats on the Danube, for three years. It was the context of “The First Austrian Steamboat Shipping Company on the Danube” (Erste österreichische Donau Dampfschiffahrts Gesellschaft – D.D.S.G.) coming into being. The steamboat “Francis I” made the test way between Vienna and Budapest in September 1830, and revolutionized so the European navigation. Soon after the regular navigation between Vienna and Constantinopole would better connect the Oriental world with the Occidental realities in the “century of nations”. For the present study I have used besides a series of works preponderately published in West Europe, unplublished documents from the Diplomatic Archives of the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Bucharest, stock: Problema 68 (Societăţi de navigaţie fluvială, maritimă, aeriană: române şi străine). I might turn the readers’ attention to the fact that I won’t insist on the life and sociability on the ships that navigated on the Danube during the 19th century, however much exotic and captive would be such a subject.
More...
Built at the end of the 13th or the beginning of the 14th century, the royal fortress/castle at Jdioara, located on the road from Caransebeş to Lugoj, was part of the defensive chain in the Banat highlands against the Turkish penetration, as well as a checkpoint on the road to Transylvania. During that time the fortress/castle at Jdioara changed several owners, from voyvods of Transylvania (John Pongrácz of Dindeleag), princes of Hungary (John Corvinus, natural son of king Mathias Corvinus) or leaders (ban) of the so-called Banat of Caransebeş and Lugoj(Steven Tompa, Paul Keresztesi) to some members of local high ranking noble families (Macskási/Măcicaş ofTincova, Fiat of Armeniş/Caransebeş, Jósika of Caransebeş/Brănişca). %e last known owner of Jdioara before the Turkish seize of the banat of Caransebeş and Lugoj in 1658 was Sigismund Jósika, son of the former Transylvanian chancellor Steven Jósika. During the war between Austria and the Ottoman Empire the former Banat, as well as the fortress/castle at Jdioara, passed in the years from 1688 to 1699, for longer or shorter periods of time, from one hand to the other. Gabriel Jósika, a descendent of Sigismund Jósika, along with many noble-fellows fleeing from Caransebeş in 1658, returned with the Austrian army, seizing the opportunity to request the restitution of the lost real estates, among them the fortress/castle of Jdioara. General Federico Veterani, the commander in chief of Transylvania, granted to Gabriel Jósika (a man having a consistent political career in the autonomous Principality of Transylvania and thereafter under Habsburg rule) the possession of Jdioara and the surrounding villages by a donation-deed from January 24th, 1693. At the suggestion of the Imperial Court-Chamber (kaiserliche Hofkammer), Emperor Leopold Ist has decided that Jósika, as well as his other fellow-nobles, is to be considered only as a user and in no case as a full owner of the acquired estates, on the principle of uti possidetis. A final decision on the real possession was postponed after the conclusion of a peace with the Porte. During a journey to Vienna in the spring of 1697, Gabriel Jósika tried to obtain, by means of a petition filed to the Emperor, the acknowledgment of his full possession on Jdioara, but with no chance to succeed. Meanwhile, the treaty of peace concluded at Karlowitz (January 26th, 1699) granted the whole province of Banat to the Ottoman Empire, compelling Austria to demolish all occupied fortresses/castles, including Jdioara, before leaving the territory. The final Austro-Turkish convention from December 2nd, 1700 on the border-delimitation had put an end to all hopes of Gabriel Jósika. On January 19th, 1701, from his camp on the river Bistra, major general count Luigi Ferdinando Marsili, imperial commissioner in the region, ordered major Leopold Friedrich Ungar de Merana, commander in Caransebeş and of the military border in the Banatic highlands, to proceed without any delay to the demolition of the fortress/castle at Jdioara. The demolition works were entrusted to lieutenant-colonel Giovanni Morando Visconti, an imperial military engineer. On March 17th, 1701 he wrote to general Marsili, that on the previous day, at 16:00 hours, the fortress/castle at Jdioara was completely destroyed by successive gunpowder explosions.
More...
After the natural setback in the 1950s, when the whole world was getting reconfigured over new alignments, the inter-war institutions have been partially redeemed, keeping however only those functions considered useful and harmless for the Communist dictatorships of Eastern Europe. This article proposes a comparative analysis of two eminently socialist cultural institutions and the implications of the ideological components involved in their functioning: the I.R.R.C.S. in Romania and the Committee for Foreign Friendship and Cultural Relations in Bulgaria.
More...
The purpose of this article is to identify an unrecognized so far figure in the gallery of the 15th-century European rulers painted on the wall of the representative hall of the royal castle in Písek, South Bohemia. This painting underwent a complete conservation treatment in early 19th century, but without intervention into its contents. It represents the King of Bohemia, Vladislaus II Jagiellon (his image on the eastern wall is preserved in rudiments) in a sub-local context (a cityscape of Písek), that of the estate society of the Bohemian Kingdom (coats of arms of Bohemian nobility, for the most part aristocracy), and in the Europe’s politic space. This latter purpose serve the images of the Bohemian rulers – two predecessors of Vladislaus II on St. Wenceslaus throne (Ladislaus the Posthumous von Habsburg and George of Poděbrady), his father Casimir Jagiellon, the ruler of Poland and Lithuania, and the King of France Charles VII – all of them are signed on the ribbon labels. The name of the last of them, as well as his image, are preserved partially – it is a ruler wearing a crown, with a griffin on the shield, and a fragment of the name “uslaw”. Undoubtedly, despite the crown on his head, it is the Szczecin Prince Bogislaw X Griffin. The article doesn’t explain the reasons why this image appeared there. It only outlines the political context which can account for this situation. In 1479 in Olomouc Vladislaus II concluded a treaty with Matthias Corvinus concerning a divided sovereignty in the Bohemian Crown. The Bohemian King from the Jagiellonian dynasty in Prague was gradually coming out of the international political isolation (although in 1479 he wasn’t still recognized by the Pope) and was building his political powerbase in Europe. One element of his politics, including the definite orientation towards the North, was his marriage per procura with Barbara Hohenzollern, daughter of margrave Albrecht Achilles, to whom Bogislaw X denied to pay feudal homage. The Szczecin Prince could search support from the Jagiellons, on whose court in Cracow he was raised. The question of the feudal relation of Pomerania to Brandenburg probably had to be confronted with the problem of the earlier feudal dependence of the feudal rule of the Hohenzollerns from the Bohemian Crown, de facto effective until 1415, de jure rather still in force as the Bohemian Crown Archive carefully kept documents which specified the obligations of the Hohenzollerns towards Prague. The Písek painting came into existence in the royal castle which, however, was at the time a collateral of the Bohemian aristocrat Lev of Rožmitál (Rosmital), brother of the Bohemian queen Joanna (wife of the Vladislaus II’s predecessor, George), who was an outstanding diplomat, member of a mission to France, pilgrim to the Holy Land, perfectly knowledgeable of the nuances of politics of that time. The painting demands deeper analysis in the light of the Prague politics oriented towards Brandenburg-Pomerania, as well as the Bohemian associations of the actions undertaken by prince Bogislav X, who was connected, as it turns out, to the Bohemian milieu not only by the bishop of Kamieniec Pomorski, Benedykt of Waldstein, who floruit after the painting was made.
More...
After the destruction of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia in the middle of April 1941, massive changes occurred in the whole of southeastern Europe, and in the Danubian- Carpathian region. Hungary under Horthy, with the support of the Axis powers, tried to revive the idea of “Greater Hungary” whose borders would include territories of the long-gone Hungarian kingdom. Romania’s situation was most difficult, as it was forced to relinquish Transylvania. The situation of Romania resulted in the idea to develop closer ties with countries similar circumstances. The NDH accepted Romania’s proposal in order to strengthen its position in negotiations with Hungary regarding the return of occupied Međimurje and Baranja. Later, the Republic of Slovakia also accepted the Romanian initiative. As a result, the idea of renewing the Little Entete was reborn, but no longer with political foundations grounded in the Treaty of Versailles, but in the context of altering Southeastern Europe according to the plans of Berlin. In the meantime, because of war on the eastern front, and strong Italian sympathies for Hungary, Germany postponed the international conference on reorganizing Danubian and Balkan borders planned for the summer of 1942. Although it remained only in a speculative phase, ideas of renewing the Little Entente significantly unnerved Budapest, who relaxed its governmental policies toward non-Hungarian minorities in occupied territories. Discussions regarding the renewal of the Little Entente continued until the coup d’etat in Romania in the summer of 1944 and the arrival of communists in power.
More...
This text comprises the first complete critical edition of eight out of twelve primary sources contained in the fifteenth-century cartulary from the State of the Teutonic Order in Prussia. The cartulary is currently kept in the Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin and is marked with archival reference number OF 80a. The creation of the cartulary was connected with a dispute over the territory and the borders of the dominion of the Bishopric of Warmia (Ermland). It contains copies of the privileges issued by the bishop and the Cathedral Chapter of Warmia in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries for the towns located on the border with the Teutonic Order territories. Some copies of the documents are directly related to this dispute and refer to the judgement of the arbitration court of 1374 and the inspections of the border between the territory of the bishopric and the Order of 1428 and 1449. In order to present the reader with the most accurate version of the source text, the content of the cartulary, which is the basis of this edition, has been compared with other preserved copies of the documents published here. These copies were included in fifteenth-century books containing privileges issued by the Cathedral Chapter of Warmia, which are currently kept in the Archives of the Archdiocese of Warmia in Olsztyn.
More...
The article addresses an important but little-known issue of the conflict over the demarcation of the border between Estonia and (Soviet) Russia in the years 1917–1920, which was important for the international order in North-Eastern Europe after the First World War. The dispute over this matter was much broader than just bilateral, as the normalization of the situation in the Baltic region conditioned the possibility of extending the international order established by the Treaty of Versailles to Eastern Europe. This issue has not received a separate monograph so far, although it was addressed in historical publications, especially in the countries directly concerned. The analysis of the state of research, confronted with primary sources, constitutes the base for the article. After the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, Estonia quickly became an object of interest for the Bolsheviks, which almost ended up with the republic losing its independence. However, the politicians of the newly born Republic of Estonia showed great political skills by manoeuvring between Germany, the White and Red Armies, obtaining British aid and establishing military cooperation with Latvia, which was equally threatened. However, it was the Polish-Soviet War, which ended with the defeat of the Red Army, that turned out to be crucial. During disputes with the Whites and the Bolsheviks with regard to demarcation, Estonia successfully, at least in a short-term perspective, defended its historical rights to the regions of Narva and Petseri against its aggressive neighbour. From the point of view of diplomatic possibilities, the Estonians achieved everything that was achievable. The peace treaty signed in Tartu in 1920 ensured ‘perpetual guarantees’ which, however, lasted only for less than two decades.
More...