Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus/Nationality/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Nicolaus Copernicus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
AfD result for article titled "Copernicus' nationality"
 | This article was nominated for deletion on November 2, 2005. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
— JIP | Talk 07:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
The article was subsequently deleted. The talk page from the deleted article is archived below, along with talk page discussions from Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus.
First discussion archived here
Removed this part to talk and put the correct place names and map on front:
Nicolaus (or Nicholas) Copernicus (1473-1543) was a Polish astronomer of German origins who developed a heliocentric (Sun-centered) theory of the solar system. He was also a priest and a medic.
His major theory was published in the book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium ("On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres") in the year of his death 1543, even though he had arrived at it several decades earlier. This book marks the beginning of the shift from a geocentric (and anthropocentric) universe. Copernicus held that the Earth is another planet revolving around the fixed sun once a year, and turning on its axis once a day. The theory, unfortunately, still had some serious defects, like circular as opposed to elliptical orbits and epicycles, that made it no more precise in predicting ephemerides than the then current tables based on Ptolemy's model. But it had a large influence on scientists such as Galileo and Kepler, who adopted, championed and, in Kepler's case, improved the model. The book was put on the Index of Forbidden Books in 1616 by the Roman Catholic Church. Galileo's observation of the phases of Venus produced the first observational evidence for Copernicus' theory.
Legend says that a printed copy of De revolutionibus was put in Copernicus's hands shortly before his death so that he could say goodbye to his opus vitae. He awoke from his stroke induced coma, looked at his book, and died peacefully.
It has now been confirmed by the scientific community that a number of theorems on which his theory of planetary motion was based were plagarized by him from the works of Arab & Persian astronomers of the 12th and 13th centuries. This fact is not widely known but very well documented.
Polish or German?
Copernicus is generally regarded as Polish, and in terms of the political geography of his time, this is undoubtedly correct. Torun, his place of birth, had passed from the suzerainty of the Order of Teutonic Knights to that of the King of Poland shortly after his father's arrival there from Krakow. However, ethnically both his mother and father were most likely of German origin. The family name can be traced to the town of Koppernigk near Neisse in Silesia, which was inhabited by Germans in the 14th century at the time of emigration from that region eastwards into Poland. No known letter written by him was in the Polish language -- they were all in Latin or German. However, that means little, as Latin was at the time the international language of scholars and those letters in German may have been addressed to Germans and therefore written in that language.
He was definitely Polish by allegiance (in terms of the politics of the time). In 1512, when he was Canon of the Chapter of Frombork, Copernicus swore allegiance to King Sigismund I of Poland. In 1520, after the outbreak of war between Poland and the Teutonic Knights, Copernicus was a member of the Polish embassy to the Grand Master requesting restoration of Braniewo to Poland. He also organized the defence of Olsztyn against the Order.
Polish or German?
Copernicus is generally regarded as Polish, and in terms of the political geography of his time, this is undoubtedly correct. Torun, his place of birth, had passed from the suzerainty of the Order of Teutonic Knights to that of the King of Poland shortly after his father's arrival there from Krakow. However, ethnically both his mother and father were most likely of German origin. The family name can be traced to the town of Koppernigk near Neisse in Silesia, which was inhabited by Germans in the 14th century at the time of emigration from that region eastwards into Poland. No known letter written by him was in the Polish language -- they were all in Latin or German. However, that means little, as Latin was at the time the international language of scholars and those letters in German may have been addressed to Germans and therefore written in that language.
He was definitely Polish by allegiance (in terms of the politics of the time). In 1512, when he was Canon of the Chapter of Frombork, Copernicus swore allegiance to King Sigismund I of Poland. In 1520, after the outbreak of war between Poland and the Teutonic Knights, Copernicus was a member of the Polish embassy to the Grand Master requesting restoration of Braniewo to Poland. He also organized the defence of Olsztyn against the Order.
He was definitely Polish by allegiance (in terms of the politics of the time). In 1512, when he was Canon of the Chapter of Frombork, Copernicus swore allegiance to King Sigismund I of Poland. In 1520, after the outbreak of war between Poland and the Teutonic Knights, Copernicus was a member of the Polish embassy to the Grand Master requesting restoration of Braniewo to Poland. He also organized the defence of Olsztyn against the Order.
I question this user:H.J.
- Why? He lived in Poland (In part of Poland called Prussia, just like others where called Great Poland, Mazovia, Little Poland- if you will see map from that period, you will see map of Masovia, and no Polonia around). He was loyal to Polish state. His language - heh! in XVIII century one of most popular Polish Patriotic songs was in German, and was written by Danziger!szopen
A, one more thing: Mikolaj or Nikolaj, both forms were allowed in Polish by that time.
I have walked many years on this planet and Copernicus was always one of the guys to admire. It is nice to know that a guy from Poland (he was born in Polish Torun, studied in Polish Cracow, and died in Polish Frombork) wrote a book that started serious science not long after Gutenberg made publishing possible. The news that he might be a German hit me as much as if a German was to learn today that Gutenberg was Polish! I have never seen such a claim and never thought about the language he mights speak at home, although all my knowledge indicates it must have been Polish. As for his writings, no wonder it was in Latin (lingua franca of his day, esp. in science). He had also extensive German contacts. Note that only around Copernicus's death, first literary works in Polish were published. Polish language (esp. in writing) was still a toddler in the 16th century. -- Piotr Wozniak from Poland
- Copernicus is generally regarded as Polish, and in terms of the political geography of his time, this is undoubtedly correct. Torun, his place of birth, had passed from the suzerainty of the Order of Teutonic Knights to that of the King of Poland shortly after his father's arrival there from Krakow. However, ethnically both his mother and father were most likely of German origin. The family name can be traced to the town of Koppernigk near Neisse in Silesia, which was inhabited by Germans in the 14th century at the time of immigration from that region eastwards into Poland. No known letter written by him was in Polish language - they were all in Latin or German language - but native languages weren't widely used in writing at that time.
- He was definitely Polish by allegiance (in terms of the feudal politics of the time). In 1512, Copernicus as Canon of the Chapter of Frombork swore allegiance to King Sigismundus I of Poland. In 1520, after the outbreak of war with the Teutonic Knights, Copernicus was a member of the Polish embassy to the Grand Master requesting restoration of Braniewo to Poland. He also organized the defence of Olsztyn against the Order.
- But in any case, modern concepts of nationalism did not exist in his era, so the question is really an anachronism.
At that time many city dwellers in Poland was non-Polish ethnically and spoke German at home. Polish-or-German is ethnic, not national question, as there was no nationality at that time. Copernicus was most probably of German origins, his name is German and there isn't any prove that he even spoke Polish. That looks like a German living in Poland. -- Taw
I think that, if his allegiance was to Poland, he must be considered polish. For example, Einstein is usually cited as an American physicist of german origin, so Copernicus would be a Pole of German origin. Just my non-expert opinion. --AstroNomer
Here Einstein is usually cided as a Jewish physicis and Columbus as Italian, not Spanish, sailor.
- Columbus' father, mather, sister and 2 brothers were Italians, genovesi (from Genoa). They had in Genoa a huge business in wine and tissues (you know where the jeans comes from?). Strange, Columbus too was accidentally born in Italian Genoa. I wonder why some still insist in saying he was Italian...
In medieval times country wasn't that important. In feudalism, countries and pseudo-countries went up and down all the time. The only thing that could be reliably traced is ethnicity.
Actually, medieval ethnicity is a problem. In the Early Middle Ages (my end of the field) one of the real research growth areas is ethnicity-building. For instance, it is now quite clear that all those Germanic tribes (Ostro- and Visigoths, Lombards, Vandals, Heruli, Franks, etc., etc.) were very fluid concepts. We always knew that the Heruli had sort of dissolved into the Ostrogoths, but now it's clear that the Burgundians and the Bavarii were entirely composite groups - and the Bavarii Dukes were all Franks. Ethnicity is no clearer in the Middle Ages than it is today. Allegiance was clear - if someone changes allegiance, they have to swear a new and public oath. The *reasons* for that allegiance may or may not be 'volk'ish. --MichaelTinkler
I am amazed to find that there is actually a discussion going on and it is not just blindly
copied what almost all the modern historians for the last 50 years have been echoing.
For Nicolaus Copernicus read http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04352b.htm -Cath. Encyl. not always right, but much better than most books ( because written before WW I ).
Nicolaus never signed his name starting with - M -which he would have done if he was Polish, then he would have had the name or signed it M - Mikolaj .
He never spoke or wrote any word of Polish . He did write Latin and Greek . The official language in Prussia , where he was born, was Low German Hanseatic Platt . He was born in a Hanseatic city , that means only German language people were citizen of the city. Thorn or in Latin Thorunensis was in Culmerland ,Kulmerland . This was and is Old Prussi land . The people in the country and villages spoke old Prussian, see wikipedia Baltic, Prussian Language . His uncle , Lucas Watzenrode or Watzelrode was bishop of Ermland , that meant governor.
see the Catholic encyclopedia www.newadvent above for Ermland, independend bishopric, Culm , Silesia etc.
The allegiences were Feudal laws, pledges to an individual, and from him again to the next higher individual.
The only correct answer is , Copernicus was born in Thorn or Latin Thorun , Prussia ( Culmer Land ,later Kulmerland if you want to be more specific) and he lived and died in Frauenburg ,Prussia and Heilsberg , Prussia.
For church records from Thorn, Heilsberg,Braunsberg, Frauenburg see http://www.familysearch.com go to records-to places, type in the towm , then click on church record . You will find films taken by LDS of the original Kirchenbuecher- churchbooks.
Did the Elector or the Duke of Prussia of the Hohenzollern elector family of the Holy Roman Empire become Polish, because he gave an allegiance to an uncle (Sigismund I ), his mothers brother. ? Did the Polish dukes or kings become German , when they pledged allegiances to the German emperors ?
The people of Thorn did not become Polish , when again under the Feudal law they refused to pledge allegiance to the Teutonic Knights.
There was no state nationality , there was only citizenship. This meant if you wanted to live and work in a city and wanted to become a citizen you applied to the city council , which was the sole responsible government of a Hanseatic city. Then you became a citizen of that city , not of the city next door.
To Michael Tinkler , boy am I glad I am not writing this one.
H.J.
Is there a page in Wikipedia regarding ethnicity and nationalism in the 1400s-1500s? If so, could someone share that link? If not, some of the above might make for an interesting discussion. It appears to deserve attention as a topic. I don't feel competent to construct it, however (guess that makes me a Wikiwimp). --RjLesch
- of possibly German origins
Why "possibly" ? Is there anything that suggests otherwise ? --Taw
Took this from main page, where user:H.J. placed it. Looks like it says it's a map of Poland to me... JHK
Poland is to the south-west of Prussia , open the map for a look at the land of Prussia or Preussen where Copernicus was born :
Hanseatic city of Thorn ,( Civitatis Thorun(ensis) in Latin ) is located in Prussia, Kulmerland Culmerland (Culmigeria on the map )to the bottom left of the map . This map is from circa 1600 (published 1660) . It is also available re-published by Royal Geographic Society as "Blaeu's The grand Atlas of the 17th Century World ( Barnes & Noble).
1570 maps showing Prussia can be seen on: T # 70 Pomerania, Marca, Prussia T # 71 Prussia T # 72 Livonia T # 98 Index A-Z of the World- Atlas , but no Polonia ???
(Have available maps of 1493 , 1539 and 1547 showing Prussia or Preussen , but not on internet. user:H.J.
The map depicts not the country of Prussia, which simply did not exist in Copernicus' times, but a Polish province of Prussia, west part of which (the monastic state of Prussia, later Ducal Prussia) was administered by the German Order of Teutonic Knights, under direct suzerainity to Polish king. Copernicus, however, lived in the eastern part of that province, called Royal Prussia, an integral part of the Poland - Lithuania Commonwealth. Therefore any speculations trying to place Copernicus outside of Poland are absolutely untrue. Space Cadet.
Hey, 66.*, sorry about the editing conflicts. In general, please use the Preview button, and don't click the Save button till you're really done. This should minimize editing conflicts. -- Marj Tiefert, Sunday, April 14, 2002
Took AstroNomer's hint ref European and removed nonesense once again: Polish or German?
Copernicus is regarded as Polish, and in terms of the political geography of his time, this is undoubtedly correct. Torun, his place of birth, had passed from the suzerainty of the Order of Teutonic Knights to that of the King of Poland shortly after his father's arrival there from Krakow. However, ethnically both his mother and father were most likely of German origin. The family name can be traced to the town of Koppernigk near Neisse in Silesia, which was inhabited by Germans in the 14th century. No known letter written by him was in the Polish language -- they were all in Latin or German. However, that means little, as Latin was at the time the international language of scholars and those letters in German may have been addressed to Germans and therefore written in that language.
He was definitely Polish by allegiance (in terms of the politics of the time). In 1512, when he was Canon of the Chapter of Frombork, Copernicus swore allegiance to King Sigismund I of Poland. In 1520, after the outbreak of war between Poland and the Teutonic Knights, Copernicus was a member of the Polish embassy to the Grand Master requesting restoration of Braniewo to Poland. He also organized the defence of Olsztyn against the Order. H.J. May 16,2002
I think there must be a mention to the controversy (i put a very short paragraph about it), even if its not a detailed one. AstroNomer
HJ -- what you continue to do to this article is inexcusable. You are taking something created with NPOV, and just putting in what you, in your uninformed world, consider the truth. Moreover, your little "let's just say people can't agree" at the end was misleading. The truth is, most scholars do agree. You just don't want to accept that people had a very different world-view about nationality and ethnicity before the 19th century. Please stop -- what you are doing is worse than vandalism -- it is propogating half-truths, in the hope that you'll get away with them because many people don't know better. JHK
JHK your slanderous name-calling is unacceptable. You cannot even tell that I did not write the words, that you claimed I wrote and yet you want to pass yourself off as being a correct scholar. Copernicus was born in Thorn in Prussia. You do not have the right to say, it was in Poland, because it was not. Instead of searching for facts and correcting mistakes, you perpetuate them by your own false statement, that Copernicus was born in Thorn in Poland.
While I wrote this, Gianfranco's comment came it. I agree with Gianfranco. H.J.
I think we should keep on a more "encyclopedic" tone on the matter: the question of his nationality (whatever might it really represent, conclude or otherwise produce), effectively WAS widely discussed, with complex reasons proposed by both sides - for evident reasons. Whatever the final result or whatever the personal opinions on the real collective need of such a topic, we should consider (IMHO) that a relevant debate was going on for centuries and perhaps (as we can see) is not over. Many people weren't perhaps even aware that a such a debate existed, before reading this article.
None of us is wrong, and none of us is right, just because coming from one rather than from another world. Each of use responds of him/herself. And we are here to provide information, and (hopefully) contents, to uninformed worlds too, if we can decipher which ones they really are.
Wouldn't it be more useful to better describe Copernicus' contribution to general culture instead of giving all the attention to this (IMHO) quite useless debate? --Gianfranco
- Gianfranco, it would be much more useful, but I would like to see evidence of this so-called widespread debate -- at least before the 19th century. I have not been around much of late, and you were not present when Frau user:H.J. began to infest this site with articles that demonstrate a narrow, irredentist, POV. To the best of my knowledge, which is well grounded in European history and its research methodology, the kind of claims that belong to this debate are grounded in late-19th and early 20th century ethnic nationalism. They do not reflect the thinking of Copernicus' time.
- This is why several wikipedians contributed to the article as it stood before Fr. user:H.J. jumped back in with her, "Copernicus is Prussian and that's all there is to it," argument, which you improved somewhat. The problem is, of course, that by doing so, you have encouraged the idea that this debate is central to understanding Copernicus. As you point out above, it is minimal.
- Really, I had heard many years ago of this nationalistic dispute, and when I read this page (with all this attention to the point) I made a quick search on books to better remember. I then added what I found in an old abstract, where no details are given about the times of the debate, so I just took out the fact that the debate lasted for a relevant while (yes, every attribute is relative), if I well understood it.
- Of course, we needed first to consider Copernicus "important" in a modern sense, for this nationalistic dispute to have a meaning, and this could only happen in the last centuries. So, I am not contesting at all that the debate was in the times you indicated.
- I sincerely regret if my notes produced the result of giving even more importance to this matter, I had merely tried to give a draft of note that could explain what the thing was about, in order to provide NPOV elements to solve this stall and sooner get back to our good old "Nick". If we had spent just a third of the energies used for this "debate's debate" to develop instead the real topic, we would now read - i.e. - what his theories represented for the evolution of science, religion, culture. Not a minor issue, maybe.
- Let's try this way: his nationality needs to revolve around his figure, it's not his figure that needs to revolve around his nationality, like the Sun is not revolving around Earth (someone said). :-) --Gianfranco
- As for you Frau user:H.J., first, the correct word, if true, would be libelous, as a website is a quasi-print format. However, it is not true. It's also ridiculous that a woman who has made very personal comments about others on this site would dare to be offended when someone points out scholarly misbehavior (and nothing personal). The facts are clear, and can be demonstrated in almost a year of your contributions: to date, you have repeatedly written articles that are at best misleading and often untrue or incorrect, grounded in part in your refusal to work according to NPOV policy; you have often plagiarized other sources; your contributions are seldom edited for grammar, typos, etc.; you tend to use untrustworthy sources because they support your somewhat rarified point of view. Initially, people assumed that you wanted to contribute to a group project, and tried to help you in interpreting your sources, checking facts, etc. You have clearly demonstrated that you have no interest in working in a collegial manner. It is your refusal to accept that yours is often not the accepted POV, and your willingness, nay, outright determination, to mislead others that I consider vandalism. I stand by that. JHK
Moving text from Nicolaus Copernicus, where it was removed to Talk:
"There were more Germans than Poles living in Krakow at the time of Copernicus during European Imperial rule. Russians, Poles and Czech had no difficulty in 1945 telling nationality, when nearly all ethnic Germans, many barely speaking any German, nevertheless were ethnically cleansed from Eastern European countries.
These new Slavic countries were formed by military take-overs after WW I. For many centuries German groups had lived there. 1945 it became part of the Polish pattern to claim everything was originally Polish by the Communist military government, lead by Soviet Union. These Communist Poles claim re-gained original Polish territory. Not even the Russian claim anything like that. The majority of people who had to lived under the communist system of propaganda, knew that they were fed lies.
One should remember however, that Stalin had powerful allies that aided him in his undertakings, thus making his total take-over of all of Eastern Europe for decades possible.
Copernicus lived for over fourty years in Frauenburg in Ermland in Prussia and he kept daily record books on rentals, incomes, secular and church business. He used his native language and spoke with the native people of the country. He was their physician and only occasionally did he work on his astronomy. He several times signed as his name Kopperlingk, obviously because his father's family business was copper and therefore the Low German Kopper (High German Kupfer) and the -lingk ending indicated someone who is dabbling in copper, a copperling. User:H.J.
The paragraph about nationality (and what above) could perhaps be better placed in a separate Copernicus' nationality page because:
- if we believe that this matter is not fundamental in describing Copernicus, it would not be appropriated to keep here all this stuff.
- if we believe instead that this matter is fundamental in describing Copernicus, it should deserve a separate page that could give this important discussion all the space it needs.
I agree with Gianfranco here - this "controversy" isn't important enough to warrent anything more than one or two sentences in the main Copernicus article. It would be more appropriate to have anything more than that elsewhere. --maveric149
I rewrote the second paragraph in the hopes of being NPOV and more accurately representing the nature of the controversy. I also separated the article into two sections. Perhaps the more theoretically sophisticated historians out there would take this opportunity to flesh out the second part. It might be a good "teaching moment" -- at least for some future reader who stumbles across this article. SR
I've rewritten the "Second Debate" section ever so slightly because as it stood it didn't really describe a debate at all (and it wasn't really all that NPOV, even if I do agree with its sentiments.) I hope these changes aren't going to spark off some enormous row. --Bth
If there weren't nations back then, how could there be nationalities? Kingturtle 08:24 27 May 2003 (UTC)
I've added two sentences, taken from discussion in the usenet. -- szopen
I removed last message from here. It was in polish language and against polish law -- inciting ethnic hate -- see polish penal code art. 119, section 2. See Page History below if this is a concern. Przepla
--- I just found that until partitions Germans generally considered Kopernik to be Polish astronom (including Prussian king, what was his name... Fryderyk? Who wrote that in letter to Voltaire). I think now, that Kopernik was ethnic German, political Pole - maybe in the sense he considered Poland to be his fatherland, and himself as German and Pole simultanously. szopen
Yes, yes,
Copernicus was German, Sklodowska was French, The Pope is Italian, Bush is Texan (just born and living under Yankee occupation), my father is also German since he was born during WWII in III Reich (few km from Vistula), and I am American because 99% what I speak and write is in English - this Polish passport of mine is very inconvenient. It actually may mean that I am Israeli. Did i mentioned that Lincoln was Mexican and Columbus American. Or rather Cuban?
PS Reading this discussion I recall my visit to Chicago Art Institute. Most of labels on world class paintings read like this:
Painting Title Name Born Died American Citizen since ...
Since that visit I am not mistaken anymore! All French impressionists were actualy American.
Good grief!
I see this is quite an old discussion, and one that descended into inanity at times.
I think Copernicus's reaction would be, in modern American terms, "Good grief!" In other words, what a waste of energy, space, thought, etc.
It's evident from reading the article and the discussion that Copernicus, like many other Europeans of the pre-modern era, did not fit anyone's concept of a discrete ethnic nationality. In his mentality, he probably was more what later generations would call a Renaissance man. It would be a mistake for both Poles and Germans to view him as "belonging" exclusively to one or the other nation.
If we must assign a nationality to this person, whose mother evidently was ethnically German, and who "spoke German as his native tongue" – but who lived in what was politically part of Poland and apparently sided with Poland in the political disputes of his day – let us call him German-Polish or Polish-German.
The widespread notion that every ethnic group must have its own homogenous nation-state is a relatively new one, and the horrors produced by such ideas when they're taken to extremes are matters of living memory. Let us not project such stupidities back centuries to people who would have had a much broader outlook on ethnicity.
When Lincoln died, someone said: "Now he belongs to the ages," or something to that effect. Copernicus belongs to humankind, not to one country alone. Sca 20:58, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
All Enlish language encyclopedias I've encountered called him a Polish astronomer. So those who want to call him "Polish" here, are not projecting any stupidities, but are just using the commonly accepted encyclopedic sources. Space Cadet 22:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
From one of the leading astronomical and space oriented news webpage: http://www.space.com/news/ap_051103_copernicus.html Jerzy Gassowski, head of an archaeology and anthropology institute in Pultusk, central Poland, said his four-member team found what appears to be the skull of the Polish astronomer and clergyman in August, after a one-year search of tombs under the church floor. --Molobo 02:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Through the ethnic lens
Yes, I know he's commonly referred to as a Polish astronomer. The fact that this simplification is widespread doesn't necessarily make it accurate, however. What about his "native tongue" – isn't that the most commonly used criterion for ethnic identity? Linguistic minorities formerly existed in many European countries, and still exist in some, where the dread hand of ethnic cleansing hasn't swept them out.
In the U.S. we have had lots of hyphenated Americans – Italian-American, Irish-American, Polish-American, etc. In our case, part of what the hyphenated national label denotes is that the person typically spoke some other language than English as his or her "mother tongue" (except for the Irish). Why would it be so offensive from the Polish (nationalist?) point of view to call Copernicus a German-Polish astronomer? I think it's because many Poles tend to view everything "German" through the lens of the Nazi experience. But Copernicus lived long before the Nazis.
Here's a question for Molobo, Space Cadet, Halibutt: Suppose the Nazis and WWII had never happened – wouldn't Poland be a more interesting country if it still had large minorities of Jews, Belarussians, Lithuanians, Ukrainians and, yes, Germans?
But back to Copernicus: At the very least, the article should spell out his ethnic duality and include, parenthetically, the German names of the towns associated with him that were generally used during his time. (See: http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Copernicus.html.) Otherwise, it presents a misleading picture, which of course is what half-truths are designed to do. Sca 19:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Copernicus lived long before Nazis, but right during the Teutonic Knights, so what's your point?
-- That you shouldn't view all German influences in Poland as negative solely because of the Nazi horrors. – sca
If Poland had more minorities, yes, it would still be an interesting country, so what's your point?
-- That the fact that Copernicus was apparently partially German shouldn't be viewed as negative by Poles, and makes him more interesting as a historical personality. Also, it bespeaks the ethnographic history of northeastern PL, the former East Prussia, which as I've said many times seems to be something many modern Poles would like to obscure. – sca
I don't think that Britannica uses what you call "widespread simplifications". Space Cadet 23:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
-- Maybe not, but in this case they did. – sca
My opinion on this case was expressed few times before, and it hasn't changed. I think he could be described as Polish-German astronomer. Szopen 19:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
-- In American usage, at least, and probably generally in English elsewhere, if you say Polish-German the emphasis is on German but if you say German-Polish the emphasis is on Polish. Seems to me that in this sense Copernicus was German-Polish, i.e. a Pole politically and a resident of what constituted Poland at the time, but (mainly) German in ethnic terms. But as said above, I don't think the man himself would have been impressed with efforts to claim him solely for one nation (as opposed to state) or the other.