This article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Czech Republic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Czech RepublicWikipedia:WikiProject Czech RepublicTemplate:WikiProject Czech RepublicCzech Republic articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles
The introduction "the most intractable ......" is slanderous and should definitely be removed. The Norwegian mass killer Breivik took such nationalist expressions from Wikipedia for his manifesto to underline his demand for Europe`s ethnic cleansing of Muslims. He cited Wiipedia as a support for his ideas. The German admins are starting to delete nationalist opinions.--92.228.177.64 (talk) 16:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article needs a section on history of Sudeten Germans. You know, first records noting their presence, notable historical events, leaders etc. Generally pre-nationalism history. Otherwise it's a worthless article since everything it contains can be learned from articles about WW2 or about Czech and Slovakia. In its current shape it might as well be deleted. It needs information on culture, language etc. as articles on ethnic groups usually do. And notable Sudeten Germans sections should exist as well.
Also, how are factories important enough to be written about in the, uh, 2 sentence of the lead? This information belongs in the Sudentenland article, factories are not people, this is an article about people.
I'd do all this but I know close to nothing about this, I tried to found out and here I am on wikipedia, with no worthwhile information to be found.--109.196.118.133 (talk) 10:04, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Czech Kingdom of Bohemia and Magraviate of Moravia were historical lands, they existed with strong kings of House of Přemyslid.
German immigrants have known very well where they settled from the very beginning.
They arrived to the Czech Lands in every century, including many since 1850. These foreigners rarely accepted the Czech language. In Czech view they were immigrants and colonist.
--Posp68 (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A history section, though still lacking in both content and citations, has been added over the years. However, just to not leave this uncommented to deny the history of Germanic people & Germans in the area who played a significant & at times dominant role as a native population, defaming them as colonists or recent immigrants, is disgraceful. If it were part of the article, that kind of language would be a clear violation of the neutrality clause beyond the hatefully targeted historical revisionism. It has no place on Wikipedia. 2A02:1210:1CA7:D700:2546:4107:E6A:F322 (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
German Bohemians used Bavarian, Franconian, Thuringian, Lusatian and Silesian Dialects, the same dialects used in neighbouring German and Austrian regions. They did not only use Bavarian Dialects and Standard German (please excuse my poor English...).--87.150.92.13 (talk) 06:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find which Franconian dialect(s) the above commenter was referring to (Ethnologue doesn't list any as spoken in the Czech Republic) unless the commenter meant the North Bavarian (Upper Franconian) dialect of Bavarian mentioned in https://www.ethnologue.com/language/bar, and I wasn't able to find descriptions of Thuringian's geographical distribution. (Lusatian may be Sorbian, which would fit the geography per https://www.ethnologue.com/family/17-1181, but that's a Slavic language, and the comment sounded like it was referring to a Germanic language.)
(And on a personal note, there's nothing wrong with your English.)
Well, looking in the Czech Republic would not help anyway. You would have to go back to 1930 at the earliest. My knowledge of the language subject is not that great, and I had a hard time figuring out which languages were spoken. I do know, however, that Bavarian dialects were spoken. It is possible that Silesian German was spoken in the Silesian part of the Kingdom, but I can’t find any proof that it was. Sorbian isn’t a germanic language…German Bohemians had a close relationship with Bavaria, just as Austrians do. They are generally Catholic, and live in the same area. I imagine that if they were to speak anything, it would be something related to Bavarian. Perhaps, it is worthwhile to include Silesian German? RGloucester (talk) 14:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lower Silesian is confirmed in the Czech lands [1], so I’ll add it. RGloucester (talk) 14:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Thuringian-Upper Saxonian and Lusatian dialects are part of East Mittle German (part of High German) dialects as shown in this map: . Lusatian (number 44 in the map) is closely related to Silesian and is not Sorbian. But Lusatian and Sorbian are spoken in the same (ethnically mixed) region. Franconian dialects (45) are spoken in northern Bavaria. --87.150.92.13 (talk) 16:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC) (Hotti4)[reply]
Here you can find a map of the formerly used German dialects in the Czech lands: [2] --87.150.92.13 (talk) 16:50, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for helping out. If I'm reading that map correctly, the following dialects were spoken by German Bohemians:
Is this correct? My German is a bit bad.
RGloucester (talk) 17:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly correct. They spoke Upper Lusatian German, but not Low Lusatian German which is spoken a little bit north between Berlin and Saxony. Lusatia is a bilingual region (Slavonic Low and Upper Lusatian and German Low and Upper Lusatian). So it is a little bit complicated... --87.150.92.13 (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much. If you know anymore about the history of German Bohemians, please do contribute. I'm trying to make this a decent article. There isn't much on the subject in English, but I think it is too important to be left undeveloped. RGloucester (talk) 18:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do my very best (My family is of German Bohemian origin). But this already is a really great article. Maybe you could add a part about German Bohemians today: Some 15,000 Germans are living in Czech republic (number is decreasing due to assimilation). Most German Bohemian families settled in former Western Germany (esp. Bavaria and Hesse, but also Northern Germany). There most of them culturally assimilated to their new neighbours (especially the younger Generations), but in some families they have special traditions. So many of them still are catholic in diaspora, they often have certain bohemian influenced culinaric traditions etc.). Most German Bohemians are NOT member of any Sudeten German political organisation and do not identify with their political aims, but very many German Bohemians have been to their former home regions as visitors, maintain contacts privately or in business and many maintain friendships with Czech families now living there. --87.150.92.13 (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The term "Sudeten Germans" is far more common, whatever its political overtones may have been. The term "German Bohemians" looks like a translation of a revisionist German concept to rename a historic group of peoples, perhaps for reasons of political correctness. I propose it is moved back. --Bermicourt (talk) 18:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I expanded this article. It no longer just covers "Sudeten Germans". I added the history of Germans in Bohemia, who are commonly called German Bohemians, from the Middle Ages onward. To call the article Sudeten Germans would be an anachronism. Not to mention that "German Bohemian" was the original title of this group. They only came to be known as Sudeten Germans after the end of the First World War. The term "Sudetenland" did no exist until the turn of the 20th century. In fact, calling them this is more revisionist than the calling them German Bohemians. It simply does not make sense to move this article to Sudeten Germans. Furthermore, they are usually called "German Bohemians",because they were citizens of the Bohemian state (not Bohemian Germans. This is similar to "African Americans".). "Sudeten Germans" refers to geography, and not a state, so that’s why it the order is switched round. So, in other words, your search is wrong. What’s more, though, is that there will by definition be more results for Sudeten Germans because they are the dominant topic in English language discourse, because the focus is on their history around World War II, and then their expulsion. The reality is, though, that there is much more to the history of Germans in Bohemia than just that. I did comprehensive research in the library, and translated text from the article on the German Wikipedia. This is not the same article anymore. It now covers the whole history, not just one little segment, and hence, demands this title. RGloucester (talk) 19:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A Google books search simply can’t deal with the nuances of the situation…RGloucester (talk) 20:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well following Bernicourt's comments the move has been reverted per WP:BRD. The above might make a viable case for a WP:RM, but a bit more consensus and input about the article content first rather than an immediate RM would probably be better. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the move, as long as the text remains the same and makes it clear that "Sudeten Germans" was a politically charged neologism, and that Germans had lived in Bohemia since the 13th century at the least. This doesn't appear to be common knowledge among English-speakers, primarily because most of our familiarity with the topic is from World War II. That's all. I strongly contest, though Bermicourt's argument that "it was a revisionist German concept to rename a historic group of people's". In fact, that is exactly what "Sudetenland" and "Sudeten Germans" are. Germans had lived in Bohemia for centuries, and were defined by living there. They were not separate from the Czechs or Bohemia, in the way "Sudetenland" implies. They were simply German Bohemians. That was their traditional name. With rising ethnic nationalist in the 19th century though, and the unification of Germany, some people advanced an agenda separating German Bohemians from Bohemia, implying that they were an integral part of the "German Reich" or Großdeutschland. The term "Sudeten German", along with "Sudetenland" came to prominence after World War I, with the death of the k.u.k. monarchy, after the Province of German Bohemia was not allowed to become independent, or join Germany or Austria. German Bohemians were furious that they were left in state (the Czecho-Slovak Republic) that was designed so that even its name denied the integral German population of the land (there were more Germans in the C-S Republic than Slovaks). That's what caused the rise in nationalism, and their eventual support for the Nazis. Anyway, point being, while I'm fine with the title, I'm not fine with misinformation masquerading as an argument. So, let the air be cleared! RGloucester (talk) 02:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I completely agree with RGloucester and support renaming/moving the article to Bohemian Germans/German Bohemians (Deutschböhmen). For those who can speak Czech, here is an article by Leoš Jeleček from the Department of Social Geography and Regional Development, Charles University in Prague, which backs up Gloucester's claims above. The rise of the term "Sudeten" came only before the WWII, with establishing of German nationalist and chauvinist organizations, such as Sudetendeutsche Heimatsfront (later Sudetendeutsche Partei (SdP), today's Sudetendeutsche Landsmannschaft). Up to that time, it was mainly geographical term, rarely used in association with ethnic stratification in the Czech lands. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 08:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. We can solve this easily by having two articles (as German wikipedia does). The article entitled Sudeten Germans should deal with the origin of the term in the 19th century and the history of these peoples (when the term rose to prominence in both English and German) in the first half of the 20th century until the Sudeten Germans were largely absorbed into West Germany (in Bavaria even as an officially recognised additional ethnic or cultural group). Much of this article is devoted to that period and it is clear from the literature that Sudeten Germans is a term that is prominent enough to deserve its own article. The second article should be entitled "German Bohemians" or (as per de.wiki) "German Bohemians and German Moravians" and cover this wider definition from the Middle Ages to the present day, taking some material from here and adding the rest from de.wiki. Both articles need to be appropriately linked together. I would be happy to work on a translation of the latter article from de.wiki for the material not well covered here. I can set up a stub now, but please give me a couple of weeks to complete it as I am quite busy at the minute! Hope this helps. --Bermicourt (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It makes sense, too. I have no objections .. and I can offer my help, I think that this book is in my library. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 13:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t necessarily think that is a good idea, in a way. Well, first of all…in English it would not be "German Bohemians and Moravians", but just "German Bohemians". That’s because in English, Bohemian was used for everyone who lived in the Bohemian Crown Lands without distinction, for whatever reason (synecdoche). This was done in German too, but not to the same extent. That’s also why I had moved it the way it was. I understand why the German Wikipedia separates the two, because Germans know very well the the difference between the two terms. But, for English-speakers, this is more vague. The German Wikipedia treats the "German Bohemians" article as the page for the ethnicity as a whole. It uses "Sudeten Germans" merely as a page to describe the term from a "political standpoint", but not as an ethnic group (presumably to avoid offending people). Splitting this article would lead to confusion as to which as to whether they were separate topics or not, I think, and where to put the main body of the text. The history of Sudeten Germans is the history of German Bohemians…the only way it would work would be to take the text of the current article and place it at German Bohemians, but to create a new article on Sudeten Germans that only dealt with the term itself. The main text should not be at Sudeten Germans (and I believe this is the way the German Wikipedia deals with it). If one wanted to make "German Bohemians" the stub, that would not work., because it separates the people form their proper name. Because this is a mess, I think it might be better to leave this here at "Sudeten Germans", but keep the text as it is. I made sure to make this distinction clear in the text when I was working on it. If a split is necessary, the main text must be "German Bohemians" and "Sudeten Germans" must be an article only on the term itself. Otherwise, it would be utterly confusing RGloucester (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We may find it difficult to reach rapid resolution pursuing that course as the evidence does not seem to point that way. The English term "German Moravians" appears even more often in the literature (3620 times) than "German Bohemians" (2980 times); although neither is as common as "Sudeten Germans" (82300 times), indicating the importance of the latter. In addition, a key purpose of Wikipedia is to educate, so the fact that the first two terms are vague to the average English-speaker is not sufficient reason to ditch them in favour of a less precise approach. Finally, there is no confusion if one important chapter of the history of these peoples has a main article ("Sudeten Germans") of its own. The more generic "German Bohemians and Moravians" would just need a paragraph summarising the period, but pointing to the main article. Similar to the existing paragraph on the expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia which also has a signpost to its main article.
Interestingly, although the Sudeten German article on German Wikipedia is a little light, there are other articles e.g. one entitled the Sudeten German resistance to Nazism which could be incorporated into our main Sudeten German article. Again, I am happy to assist with translation. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:08, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It isn’t really "less precise". Bohemia, and Bohemian, in English, have always been understood include Moravia and all the crown lands of the Kingdom. Moravia is "known" but it was part of "Bohemia", as "Bohemia proper" was also part of "Bohemia the state". I suppose you can put it at "German Bohemians and Moravians", though it is not the most natural title of the article. They were referred to as "German Bohemians" because they were ethnic German residents of the Bohemian state (regardless of their residence in Moravia). These Google books searches are not usefull in a situation with so many nuances. For all you know, searching for German Moravian is getting results on the history of German Moravian stars. If I must I can get a dictionary/atlas/reference of Central Europe from the library that I was using before that states that they are clearly known as Bohemians ( the book is from 1910, so very current with the climax of Germans in Bohemia). Even if they are known as Moravians, that is just an additional category. Their citizenship was of Bohemia.
The Sudeten German article should not deal with history. It should deal with the term itself. The German Bohemians page should be the page that deals with these ethnic Germans in Bohemia as an ethnic grouping. The Sudeten German page should deal only with the term, its connotations and so forth. In other words, the German Bohemians page is the main page and the Sudeten German one is the subpage. Because, in the overarching history of German Bohemians, the Sudeten German piece is very small, regardless of how important it is to history. I would do it just like the German one. "Sudeten Germans is an alternative name for German Bohemians that arose…&c." Otherwise, the articles should remain together as not to prejudice one part of history in favor of another, which is what would inevitably happen if Sudeten Germans was the main article, and German Bohemians the sub-article. Furthermore, many people in the so-called "Sudetenland" rejected the terms in favor of the traditional ones, at the time. After World War II, they became even more heavily rejected in favor of the traditional terms. It seems unfair to impose a term on people that is heavily politically charged when describing their history. It is fine to describe the term, and explain its usage. But to give it priority over the neutral term seems wrong, especially considering that it is a very recent name for the group. RGloucester (talk) 00:04, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that "Sudeten Germans" is the secondary article, but not that it should be restricted to a terminology discussion. You seem to be arguing a POV rather than basing these articles on the literature which overwhelming talks about "Sudeten Germans" and the "Sudetenland", whatever the political connotations. And BTW all of the references to "German Moravians" in the literature that I checked were about the people, not "Moravian Stars" or other spurious topics. So however strongly you feel about this subject, we should be following the reliable English sources. --Bermicourt (talk) 06:53, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The literature that speaks about the World War II period does speak about Sudeten Germans. That is true. But that really doesn’t understand the nuance of the situation. It works if you are writing a book about a narrow portion of history, then sure, call them Sudeten Germans (which is confined to a very small part of the history). But if you are writing a book about the whole history of German Bohemians, obviously you will call them what they’ve been called for the majority of the time they have existed. I will, in time, provide many "reliable English sources" that are not from a useless Google book search that explain the traditional use of the word "Bohemian" in English. I’m not saying Moravian wasn’t used. But, Moravian was used differently from Bohemian. Moravia was the equivalent of a US state within the Bohemian Kingdom. Would you call someone from Connecticut a Connecticutian or an American? Most of the time, you would call them an American, unless you need to emphasize their place of residence in comparison to somewhere else within the country. The majority of the time, they were referred to as German Bohemians, just as Czechs in Moravia were referred to as just-plain Bohemians (and the language they spoke as "Bohemian"). That’s the way it was. One must look at it with a historical eye, and not from a modern perspective (where we are rather more sensitive to what other people "are" today). RGloucester (talk) 15:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, I think there is no reason why we can’t simply work with this article as it is. I do not think we need to split the article. Leave it as this title, and expand it. That seems simple enough to me. I already translated the meat history of German Bohemians prior to World War II from the German WP. So that’s taken care of. The rest can certainly be used to expand this article. The reason the German WP is split into two articles is to avoid offending people (delicate past to tread on, of course). We have no such scruples, apparently. RGloucester (talk) 15:25, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe that's simpler for now. Are there any elements of German Wikipedia that you would like me to translate for this or related articles? Or are you content to crack on with your own sources? Happy to help; just may need a couple of weeks to get round to it! --Bermicourt (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The one area we really lack is the bit directly after the First World War. There is a section on the "Republik Deutschböhmen" (Republic of German Bohemia) that we have nothing about here. That’d be very useful. RGloucester (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
New section completed. Please feel free to proof-read. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for your contribution! RGloucester (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent Facebook Böhmen, Mähren, Schlesien organized by Jewish German Bohemians. They do not want to be called Sudeten Germans as this does not cover the 800 years of German culture in Bohemia.--92.229.142.226 (talk) 19:29, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any records as to which towns in Germany were settled by Sudetens from which Czech villages? I had distant relatives in the villages of Velky Rybnik, formerly Grossenteich, and Hroznetin, formerly Lichdenstadt. I have no idea whether any survived and where specifically they ended up. 108.160.46.137 (talk) 19:25, 22 March 2013 (UTC) 3/22/2013[reply]
Ahnenforschung (looking for your ancestors) might help you.--92.229.242.145 (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)--92.229.242.145 (talk) 16:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 3 external links on Sudeten Germans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
"In theory, with the accession of the Czech Republic into the European Union, refugee Sudeten Germans and their descendants (or for that matter, also Germans with no previous link to the Bohemian lands) could have moved back there without needing the Czech government's permission – but in practice such a move did not materialize in any significant numbers, as they could not reclaim property and many were well established in Germany."
This is a sentence extracted from the article. Although it reads as meant well-intended, no source is given for the 2 arguments presented as to why those millions of people didn't return to their homeland. While they sound reasonable at face value, there isn't any more meat to that claim as there would be to suggest any other argument. You could say it plays a role that there's still widespread genocide apologia within Czechia that denies those people's place of origin or excuses the violence that was conducted - but there would need to be some sourcing for any of these claims to back them up. 2A02:1210:1CA7:D700:2C00:3572:605B:2892 (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
