Talk:Lewis Namier

POV Issue

I have cut this paragraph out: "Some evidence put the guilt on Lewis Bernstein Namier for probably unauthorised altering in the British Foreign Ministry of the Curzon line, so that it did not include then the third most important Polish city of Lwów on the Polish side. This fact had great influence on the negotiations about the Polish eastern border on the peace conferences in Teheran and Yalta." as reflects very much an point of view. The word "guilt" implies that Namier did something wrong, and moreover none of the "evidence" for Namier's alleged "crime" is shown. The word this paragraph is phrased implies quite clearly that the city Lwów, which is now the Ukrainian city of Lviv should belong to Poland. In 1918-19, the Poles and the Ukrainians were fighting it for the control of Lwów/Lviv and this pargraph takes the Polish side; in Wikepedia we are supposed to be neutral and not takes sides in territorial disputes.A.S. Brown 11:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Once again, I have removed "He falsified the Curzon line, moving it to the west of Lviv", partly because it is unsourced, and partly it reflects a Polish POV, saying that the city of Lviv should have been included within the Curzon Line, but wasn't. --A.S. Brown (talk) 05:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

How to pronounce his name? In a French way, or a German way, or English way? Namiäää, Namia, Namiure????--141.84.29.78 (talk) 11:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Neigh as in horse; me as in not you; er as in Ur - it's quite simple really.--OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 21:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Place of birth

Was Wola Okrzejska part of the Austrian Empire? Henryk Sienkiewicz was born in the same village, which was, according to his article, in Russian Poland. Is it the same village? HerkusMonte (talk) 09:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

According to these maps the Lublin region became a part of the Duchy of Warsaw in 1809, later incorporated in the (Russian ruled) Congress Poland. Wola Okrejska lies about 64 km (40 mi) north-west of Lublin, so Namier was obviously born in the Russian part. I changed it accordingly. HerkusMonte (talk) 07:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Source of quote

The allegation that Namier was "taking ideas out of history" is attributed to sir Herbert Butterfield, but no source is given. The exact same expression is rendered on 133 webpages (according to google), none of which gives a quote. So did Butterfield really use this expression describing Namier, or is this just anecdotal? It would be very nice if someone could provide a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.213.54 (talk) 12:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

It's a mis-attribution, apparently. The quote is: "Darwin was accused of taking mind out of the universe; and Sir Lewis has been the Darwin of political history – in more senses than one", Times Literary Supplement (28 August 1953). It appeared in an unsigned article that someone claimed was written by Butterfield but was in fact written by A. J. P. Taylor. See this article.--Britannicus (talk) 02:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Namier

According to an earlier message "Neigh as in horse; me as in not you; er as in Ur - it's quite simple really.--OhNoPeedyPeebles". This pronunciation is the only one given in BBC Pronouncing Dictionary of British Names; 2nd ed. 1983; p. 178. However the lead here has the first syllable with a short "a": is there a reliable source for this?--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 13:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

 Fixed Thanks for the spot! LudicrousTripe (talk) 13:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lewis Namier. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222102914/http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/fulltxt.php?ICID=1127276 to http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/fulltxt.php?ICID=1127276
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222102914/http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/fulltxt.php?ICID=1127276 to http://journals.indexcopernicus.com/fulltxt.php?ICID=1127276

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:16, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Lwow Polish statistics

"He single-handedly reduced the number of ethnic Poles living in the region from 2 million down to 600–700 inhabitants. Professor Anna M. Cienciala believes that Namier was not the original initiator of this misrepresentation, but merely an unscrupulous supplier of handy arguments for the anti-Polish lobby among the Entente members." The first and second sentences seem to directly contradict each other. Indeed, the first sentence doesn't have any sourcing attached to it at all, unless the author is using the citation from the second sentence, and in that case, misusing the word "single-handedly". 108.48.20.101 (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

falsification

I suggest to delete the following:

Namier was later accused of changing the British proposal – the "Curzon Line" – for the eastern border of Poland by leaving the city of Lviv (in Polish, Lwów) and the Oil Basin on the eastern side when the British Foreign Office sent a cable to the Commissar for Foreign Affairs of Bolshevik Russia, Georgy Vasilyevich Chicherin. The Polish delegation had no knowledge of the existence of Line "A" whatsoever since the idea of handing Lwów over to the Bolsheviks was rejected by Prime Minister Władysław Grabski at the very beginning of talks. Lwów had never been under the Moscow rule in its history. Prof. Piotr Eberhardt from the Polish Academy of Sciences speculates that Lloyd George could have been aware of Namier's modification; Bartłomiej Rusin refutes the claims that Namier was responsible and calls him "merely a convenient supplier of anti‑Polish arguments". The earlier-approved compromised version of Curzon Line which was approved at the Spa Conference in Belgium was renamed by Namier as Curzon Line "B". Chicherin relayed this document to Lenin who rejected it nevertheless, assured of his victory over Poland followed by a planned annexation of its entire territory.

Indeed, in earlier Polish historiography there was a theory that Namier falsified the Spa despatch to the Soviets (Piszczkowski, Anglia a Polska 1914‑1939 w świetle dokumentów brytyjskich, London 1975, Batowski, Między dwiema wojnami 1919‑1939. Zarys historii dyplomatycznej, Kraków 1988). However, it is abandoned today. The works of Rusin and Nowak (referenced in the text) claim that Namier left the Foreign Office in April 1920 (and left London for Oxford on April 23, 1920), and both authors explicitly state that in July 1920 he was not in position to tamper with British diplomatic messages. With all due respect to work of the authors of the paragraph I suggest to be deleted, I believe it presents as controversial and debatable the issue which might have been such 30 years ago, but is now clear. And by the way, 2 other users who left their notes on this talk page also seem to be uneasy with wording and general spirit of the paragraph in question. rgds, --89.76.22.216 (talk) 14:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Lawrence Stone did not consider himself a Marxist historian

On page 58 of "The Causes of the English Revolution 1529-1642", Lawrence Stone describes himself as an "agnostic liberal", as opposed to the Marxist historian Christopher Hill. 2601:180:C102:5F10:35F1:894F:D8A3:DD2E (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, I've removed the word Marxist. DuncanHill (talk) 22:51, 6 July 2022 (UTC)