Balcanica Posnaniensia Acta et studia
Not a member yet
338 research outputs found
Sort by
François Mitterrand wobec rozpadu Jugosławii w latach 1991-1995
Get PDFThe French President, Francois Mitterrand, followed with a great deal of attention a deepening collapse of Yugoslavia in the late 1980s of the 20th century. In the beginning, he believed that thanks to reforms and Serbians it will be possible to maintain Yugoslavia as a country. Mitterrand - as opposed to Kohl, who since the beginning of the conflict supported Croatian and Slovenian expectations of independence - was against a ‘wild’ independence. This caused a serious conflict in French-German relations during this time. Finally, in December 1991, France and other members of the European Community, facing a fait accompli by the German side, agreed to acknowledge the independence of all Yugoslav republics, on the condition that they met specified requirements concerning the observance of human rights, including the rights of minorities. Since the beginning of the Yugoslav conflict, Mitterrand was in favor of further mediations and against the military intervention of France or the European Community. He did not change his mind until the end of his presidency in 1995. He believed that one cannot respond with a war for a war. Mitterrand was in favor of sanctions against the fighting sides, he was ready to support the humanitarian aid. On June 28,1992, he went to the surrounded Sarajevo in order to support the local community. Although this trip met with a surprise and admiration of almost the whole world, Mitterrand’s policy became an object of criticism in France by some of French intellectuals. They accused him of supporting Serbians and of showing indifference toward their acts of genocide, above all, in Bosnia. Mitterrand did not agree with these accusations. He stressed that France did more than anybody else for Bosnia.The French President, Francois Mitterrand, followed with a great deal of attention a deepening collapse of Yugoslavia in the late 1980s of the 20th century. In the beginning, he believed that thanks to reforms and Serbians it will be possible to maintain Yugoslavia as a country. Mitterrand - as opposed to Kohl, who since the beginning of the conflict supported Croatian and Slovenian expectations of independence - was against a ‘wild’ independence. This caused a serious conflict in French-German relations during this time. Finally, in December 1991, France and other members of the European Community, facing a fait accompli by the German side, agreed to acknowledge the independence of all Yugoslav republics, on the condition that they met specified requirements concerning the observance of human rights, including the rights of minorities. Since the beginning of the Yugoslav conflict, Mitterrand was in favor of further mediations and against the military intervention of France or the European Community. He did not change his mind until the end of his presidency in 1995. He believed that one cannot respond with a war for a war. Mitterrand was in favor of sanctions against the fighting sides, he was ready to support the humanitarian aid. On June 28,1992, he went to the surrounded Sarajevo in order to support the local community. Although this trip met with a surprise and admiration of almost the whole world, Mitterrand’s policy became an object of criticism in France by some of French intellectuals. They accused him of supporting Serbians and of showing indifference toward their acts of genocide, above all, in Bosnia. Mitterrand did not agree with these accusations. He stressed that France did more than anybody else for Bosnia
Cesarstwo Łacińskie w oczach polskich dziejopisów od Jana Długosza do Macieja Stryjkowskiego
Get PDFUntil the times of Jan Długosz, Polish historians had not mentioned anything about the Latin Empire. It was Jan Długosz in his Chronicle who gave reliable and even extensive, though fragmentary, and slightly mixed information about it. He presented a summary of it and copied it with some chronological mistakes from Maciej of Miechów. In the second part of the 16th century, this information was repeated by Maciej Stryjkowski in his work: On the Beginnings. Stryjkowski enriched Długosz’s information with new one, coming from an unknown source. The information about the Latin Empire provided by the Polish chroniclers was fragmentary and distorted. The short-lived Latin Empire in the 15th and the 16th century did not deserve any special interest.Until the times of Jan Długosz, Polish historians had not mentioned anything about the Latin Empire. It was Jan Długosz in his Chronicle who gave reliable and even extensive, though fragmentary, and slightly mixed information about it. He presented a summary of it and copied it with some chronological mistakes from Maciej of Miechów. In the second part of the 16th century, this information was repeated by Maciej Stryjkowski in his work: On the Beginnings. Stryjkowski enriched Długosz’s information with new one, coming from an unknown source. The information about the Latin Empire provided by the Polish chroniclers was fragmentary and distorted. The short-lived Latin Empire in the 15th and the 16th century did not deserve any special interest
Бытовые нравы жителей Казахского Ханства
Get PDFThe Kazakh Khanate appeared in the middle of the 15th century. The political system took its final shape in the 17th century. Kazakh Khans were the descendants of the Genghizids (the descendants of the Genghis khan), who ruled Ak-Orda, Ghirai and Jani Beg. Yet, their power was limited to the Bey Council. The state administration was conducted by sultans, beys and batyrs. Only the descendants of Genghis Khan belonged to the group of sultans. Beys and batyrs had to be promoted to achieve their status. There existed a deep social and economic stratification and the subordination of poorer population to the owners of large packs and herds – bays. Shepherding was the main occupation for the Kazakhs.Their way of living was similar to the one of nomadic peoples, which wandered from Central Asia to South-Eastern Europe: the Bulgars, the Pechenegs and the Cumans. The Kazakhs raised mainly sheep, the richer ones also horses and camels, whereas cattle was raised very rarely. Locations for winter pasturing were chosen near rivers, woods and, in general, in the places were animals could find shelter against snowstorm, rainy weather or wind. In the winter, cattle slaughter sogum took place. Spring and autumn pastures were usually located in the steppe in open spaces and the summer ones on the border of the steppe. The sheep and horses were everything for the Kazakhs; they provided food, clothing, shelter (yurts) and household appliances. The land was cultivated to a small extent, most frequently, millet was sown. Only rarely and usually in the winter did the Kazakhs live in homesteads, mainly, clay huts.The Kazakh Khanate appeared in the middle of the 15th century. The political system took its final shape in the 17th century. Kazakh Khans were the descendants of the Genghizids (the descendants of the Genghis khan), who ruled Ak-Orda, Ghirai and Jani Beg. Yet, their power was limited to the Bey Council. The state administration was conducted by sultans, beys and batyrs. Only the descendants of Genghis Khan belonged to the group of sultans. Beys and batyrs had to be promoted to achieve their status. There existed a deep social and economic stratification and the subordination of poorer population to the owners of large packs and herds – bays. Shepherding was the main occupation for the Kazakhs.Their way of living was similar to the one of nomadic peoples, which wandered from Central Asia to South-Eastern Europe: the Bulgars, the Pechenegs and the Cumans. The Kazakhs raised mainly sheep, the richer ones also horses and camels, whereas cattle was raised very rarely. Locations for winter pasturing were chosen near rivers, woods and, in general, in the places were animals could find shelter against snowstorm, rainy weather or wind. In the winter, cattle slaughter sogum took place. Spring and autumn pastures were usually located in the steppe in open spaces and the summer ones on the border of the steppe. The sheep and horses were everything for the Kazakhs; they provided food, clothing, shelter (yurts) and household appliances. The land was cultivated to a small extent, most frequently, millet was sown. Only rarely and usually in the winter did the Kazakhs live in homesteads, mainly, clay huts.The Kazakh Khanate appeared in the middle of the 15th century. The political system took its final shape in the 17th century. Kazakh Khans were the descendants of the Genghizids (the descendants of the Genghis khan), who ruled Ak-Orda, Ghirai and Jani Beg. Yet, their power was limited to the Bey Council. The state administration was conducted by sultans, beys and batyrs. Only the descendants of Genghis Khan belonged to the group of sultans. Beys and batyrs had to be promoted to achieve their status. There existed a deep social and economic stratification and the subordination of poorer population to the owners of large packs and herds – bays. Shepherding was the main occupation for the Kazakhs.Their way of living was similar to the one of nomadic peoples, which wandered from Central Asia to South-Eastern Europe: the Bulgars, the Pechenegs and the Cumans. The Kazakhs raised mainly sheep, the richer ones also horses and camels, whereas cattle was raised very rarely. Locations for winter pasturing were chosen near rivers, woods and, in general, in the places were animals could find shelter against snowstorm, rainy weather or wind. In the winter, cattle slaughter sogum took place. Spring and autumn pastures were usually located in the steppe in open spaces and the summer ones on the border of the steppe. The sheep and horses were everything for the Kazakhs; they provided food, clothing, shelter (yurts) and household appliances. The land was cultivated to a small extent, most frequently, millet was sown. Only rarely and usually in the winter did the Kazakhs live in homesteads, mainly, clay huts
Hebdomon w ideologii cesarskiej Nowego Rzymu według tekstu kroniki Jana Skylitzesa
Get PDFFourty years have passed since the critical edition of “An Outline of History” (Synopsis Historion). In terms of the genre classification of the Byzantine literature, it is the chronicle of the history of the reign of the subsequent Byzantine emperors from 811 to 1057. The suburb of Hebdomon appears several times in “An Outline of History” and it plays a number of roles in the political customs of the then Byzantium. It functioned as a place of the enthronement of the Byzantineemperors, their triumphs, their ceremonious arrivals in the capital city, their departures beyond the walls of Constantinople and, in some cases, as a place of their burial. The term “Hebdomon” derives from the Greek numeral ébdomos, and it refers to the Latin expression septimum miliarium. It encompasses an area situated at a distance of seven Roman miles (c. 10 km) from the symbolic centre of Constantinople in the Augusteon square.Fourty years have passed since the critical edition of “An Outline of History” (Synopsis Historion). In terms of the genre classification of the Byzantine literature, it is the chronicle of the history of the reign of the subsequent Byzantine emperors from 811 to 1057. The suburb of Hebdomon appears several times in “An Outline of History” and it plays a number of roles in the political customs of the then Byzantium. It functioned as a place of the enthronement of the Byzantineemperors, their triumphs, their ceremonious arrivals in the capital city, their departures beyond the walls of Constantinople and, in some cases, as a place of their burial. The term “Hebdomon” derives from the Greek numeral ébdomos, and it refers to the Latin expression septimum miliarium. It encompasses an area situated at a distance of seven Roman miles (c. 10 km) from the symbolic centre of Constantinople in the Augusteon square
Góry Hemos jako miejsce schronienia, baza wypadowa i punkt obserwacyjny w świetle bułgarsko-bizantyńskich zmagań zbrojnych okresu wczesnego średniowiecza
Get PDFAfter the analysis of sources (coming mainly from the period of the 8th–9th centuries), the author of the article claims that still from the outset of the khanate on the lower Danube, Bulgarians made the Haemus Mountains (Stara Planina and Sredna Gora) a permanent protective barrier from behind which they could launch their attacks against the territory of Byzantine Thrace. The mountains functioned as an attack outpost (680/681, 763 and 792) and a convenient observation post, which was used to monitor the Byzantine military stationed both at the northern as well as southern foot of the range (708, 763, 811). The mountains were also used as a shelter to which the defeated Bulgarian troops would retreat (763, 811).After the analysis of sources (coming mainly from the period of the 8th–9th centuries), the author of the article claims that still from the outset of the khanate on the lower Danube, Bulgarians made the Haemus Mountains (Stara Planina and Sredna Gora) a permanent protective barrier from behind which they could launch their attacks against the territory of Byzantine Thrace. The mountains functioned as an attack outpost (680/681, 763 and 792) and a convenient observation post, which was used to monitor the Byzantine military stationed both at the northern as well as southern foot of the range (708, 763, 811). The mountains were also used as a shelter to which the defeated Bulgarian troops would retreat (763, 811)
Балканските војни и актуелните состојби на Балканот
Get PDFA populist slogan, with a crusade like overtones: “to liberate our Christian brothers”, served as an unassailable alibi for the expansionist aspirations of the small Balkan states in order to mobilize their population during the First Balkan War. The different interpretations of the phrase “Christian brothers” could already be seen in the Balkan pacts and their hidden annexes. The Second Balkan War quite openly revealed the sole objective of the Balkan states for territorial expansion in those wars. To each his own: Greece longed for the wheat fields of Macedonia and Edirne; Bulgaria longed for the warm seas of Macedonia and Edirne; Serbia longed to be a coastal country at any cost- if they could not reach the Salonika Bay, then through the Durres port; Montenegro longed for the Skhodër (Skadar/Shkodra) port, etc. The Second Balkan War proved to be the quintessence of different interpretation of the word “to liberate”. Even though the Balkan Wars lasted for almost a year (between 1912 and 1913), they left the Balkan people with severe consequences. Namely, since the Balkan territory was ethnically diverse, especially in a period when not all of the nations were yet completely defined, it was not possible to draw the state lines which could please everybody and which would not dissatisfy the population later. Thus, the same actors would actively participate in both World Wars. Because of this, the discontentment originating in the period of the Balkan Wars still burdens the relations between the Balkan countries to this day. The unresolved political questions, such as the problem of Macedonia and Kosovo, may have lasted the whole century. This, however, does not mean that history repeats itself, because history can never be the same. Frozen conflicts and unresolved issues still burden the Balkans and contribute to the very slow and hard development of its political culture.A populist slogan, with a crusade like overtones “to liberate our Christian brothers”, served as an unassailable alibi for the expansionist aspirations of the small Balkan states in order to mobilize their population during the First Balkan War. The different interpretations of the phrase “Christian brothers” could already be seen in the Balkan pacts and their hidden annexes. The Second Balkan War quite openly revealed the sole objective of the Balkan states for territorial expansion in those wars. To each his own: Greece longed for the wheat fields of Macedonia and Edirne; Bulgaria longed for the warm seas of Macedonia and Edirne; Serbia longed to be a coastal country at any cost- if they could not reach the Salonika Bay, then through the Durres port; Montenegro longed for the Skhodër (Skadar/Shkodra) port, etc. The Second Balkan War proved to be the quintessence of different interpretation of the word “to liberate”. Even though the Balkan Wars lasted for almost a year (between 1912 and 1913), they left the Balkan people with severe consequences. Namely, since the Balkan territory was ethnically diverse, especially in a period when not all of the nations were yet completely defined, it was not possible to draw the state lines which could please everybody and which would not dissatisfy the population later. Thus, the same actors would actively participate in both World Wars. Because of this, the discontentment originating in the period of the Balkan Wars still burdens the relations between the Balkan countries to this day. The unresolved political questions, such as the problem of Macedonia and Kosovo, may have lasted the whole century. This, however, does not mean that history repeats itself, because history can never be the same. Frozen conflicts and unresolved issues still burden the Balkans and contribute to the very slow and hard development of its political culture.A populist slogan, with a crusade like overtones: “to liberate our Christian brothers”, served as an unassailable alibi for the expansionist aspirations of the small Balkan states in order to mobilize their population during the First Balkan War. The different interpretations of the phrase “Christian brothers” could already be seen in the Balkan pacts and their hidden annexes. The Second Balkan War quite openly revealed the sole objective of the Balkan states for territorial expansion in those wars. To each his own: Greece longed for the wheat fields of Macedonia and Edirne; Bulgaria longed for the warm seas of Macedonia and Edirne; Serbia longed to be a coastal country at any cost- if they could not reach the Salonika Bay, then through the Durres port; Montenegro longed for the Skhodër (Skadar/Shkodra) port, etc. The Second Balkan War proved to be the quintessence of different interpretation of the word “to liberate”. Even though the Balkan Wars lasted for almost a year (between 1912 and 1913), they left the Balkan people with severe consequences. Namely, since the Balkan territory was ethnically diverse, especially in a period when not all of the nations were yet completely defined, it was not possible to draw the state lines which could please everybody and which would not dissatisfy the population later. Thus, the same actors would actively participate in both World Wars. Because of this, the discontentment originating in the period of the Balkan Wars still burdens the relations between the Balkan countries to this day. The unresolved political questions, such as the problem of Macedonia and Kosovo, may have lasted the whole century. This, however, does not mean that history repeats itself, because history can never be the same. Frozen conflicts and unresolved issues still burden the Balkans and contribute to the very slow and hard development of its political culture
Maciej Czerwiński, Semiotyka dyskursu historycznego. Chorwackie i serbskie syntezy dziejów narodu, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, Kraków 2012, ss. 291.
Get PDFNadzieje i stracone złudzenia. Wojny bałkańskie w świetle tekstów z kręgu Dimitriji Čupovskiego i Krste P. Misirkova
Get PDFThis article addresses the sense of national identity of the Macedonians in the period of the Balkan wars and their aftermath. The first source material were used journalistic texts and calls in the journal „Makedonskij Golos” published by Macedonian expatriates gathered around Dimitrija Čupovski in St. Petersburg in the years 1913-1914. Second was diary Dnevnik) written by Krste Petkov Misirkov in 1913. Expression of these two major characters in the Macedonian history reflect geopolitical policies conducted in the Slavic population in the Balkans. It is an important source material documenting the national consciousness of intelligence derived from the Macedonian lands. This indicates that the main topics which were then undertaken focused on the defense of the whole Macedonian territory, aspirations to create their own state and diversified approach to the idea of the Slavic community.This paper addresses the sense of national identity of the Macedonians in the period of the Balkan wars and their aftermath. The first source material were used journalistic texts and calls in the journal „Makedonskij Golos” published by Macedonian expatriates gathered around Dimitrija Čupovski in St. Petersburg in the years 1913-1914. Second was diary Dnevnik) written by Krste Petkov Misirkov in 1913. Expression of these two major characters in the Macedonian history reflect geopolitical policies conducted in the Slavic population in the Balkans. It is an important source material documenting the national consciousness of intelligence derived from the Macedonian lands. This indicates that the main topics which were then undertaken focused on the defense of the whole Macedonian territory, aspirations to create their own state and diversified approach to the idea of the Slavic community
British and Austrian documents for the position of the Muslim population in Salonica and its surrounding area during the Balkan Wars
Get PDFIn the article we shall study the position of the second largest community in the city of Salonica – the Muslim community – during the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), using British and Austrian documents. We can conclude that the Balkan Wars satisfied the ambitions of the Balkan states’ nationalist circles which, of course, had the politics of the Great Powers behind them. That such of the case was obvious at both conferences that took place in London at the same time – the Conference of the Ambassadors of the Great Powers and the Peace Conference of the Balkan states engaged in war. 80 years after these wars, a new war threatened the Balkans and was led, with all its attributes of cruelty, on the territory of former Yugoslavia. Reflecting on this phenomenon from today’s perspective, we can come to the conclusion that the historical lesson taught by the Balkan Wars (1912/13) had not been learnt.In the article we shall study the position of the second largest community in the city of Salonica – the Muslim community – during the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), using British and Austrian documents. We can conclude that the Balkan Wars satisfied the ambitions of the Balkan states’ nationalist circles which, of course, had the politics of the Great Powers behind them. That such of the case was obvious at both conferences that took place in London at the same time – the Conference of the Ambassadors of the Great Powers and the Peace Conference of the Balkan states engaged in war. 80 years after these wars, a new war threatened the Balkans and was led, with all its attributes of cruelty, on the territory of former Yugoslavia. Reflecting on this phenomenon from today’s perspective, we can come to the conclusion that the historical lesson taught by the Balkan Wars (1912/13) had not been learnt