Central-Eastern Europe; in the mid-20th century; was a scene of Holocaust; mass killings; war; deportations and forced resettlements under the competing totalitarian invasions and afterwards. It was also the area where churches; politicians and citizens were engaged in reconciliation between antagonized religions and nations. This book presents several attempts to heal relations between Poles; Jews; Germans; Czechs; Ukrainians; Russians and Latvians as well as between Catholics; Protestants and Mariavites. Re-conciliatory practices of John Paul II and other Catholic leaders as well as Protestant churches are analysed in the first part of the book. Most of the remaining studies are focused on particular localities in Upper Silesia; Cieszyn Silesia; former Polish Livland and on the Polish-Ukrainian borderland. These detailed contributions combine sociological methods with anthropological insight and historical context. The authors are sociologists; psychologists and theologians and this leads to a fully interdisciplinary approach in the assessment of the recent state of inter-group relations in the region as well as in the proposed theory of peacebuilding and reconciliation.
#661856 in Books Mithec 2005-06-22Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.00 x 1.50 x 7.00l; 2.39 #File Name: 2913621066560 pages
Review
22 of 23 people found the following review helpful. Something of a disappointmentBy J. wensinkAfter having read the first volume of this expected series of 7 volumes I was triggered by the thesis of these authors that ancient Greek and Roman history did in fact take place in the Middle Ages. So I started studying medieval history of the Middle East - also known as Islamic history - to find out if the opponents of the ancient Greeks and Romans - the Acheamenid Persians; Sassanids; Scythians; Egyptians; etc. - also have their duplicates in medieval history. My search was disappointing: none of the many medieval Islamic dynasties seemed to correspond to the ancient middle eastern rulers.However; I did find a close correspondence between Herodotus' Persian kings and medieval events:- the defeat and capture of an Anatolian king - the Lydian Croesus - by the Persian conqueror Cyrus is identical to the defeat and capture of another Anatolian king - sultan Bayezid - by the Asian/Mongol conqueror Tamerlane;- the Persian conquest of Egypt by the cruel tyrant Cambyses reds almost exactly as the Ottoman conquest of Egypt by Selim the Grim (note the nickname!);- Darius the Lawgiver of the Persian Empire looks very much alike to Sulayman the Magnificent; the Lawgiver in Islamic history;- Xerxes; whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by the Greeks at the naval battle of Salamis; looks like Selim II (the Sot) whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by a Spanish-Italian alliance at the naval battle of Lepanto.I should have expected Fomenko et al. to arrive at similar conclusions; however; they claim that the Persian kings are the alter egos of the Angevin kings of Sicily whose biographies do not contain the exploits of the Persian kings.The similiarities I indicate lead to the conclusion that Herodotus must have written his Histories at the close of the 16th century. But this is extremely late; given that Herodotus is "the Father of History"; so therefore all other "ancient" histories must have been fabricated even later. Yet; the founders of modern chronology - Scaliger and Petavius - laid their foundations also at the close of the 16th century and had the full corpus of ancient histories already at their disposal.It seems to me that Fomenko has to address these inconsistencies; maybe in the forthcoming 5 volumes?Another critique of their book is that the correspondencies between different rulers are often based on a superficial comparison of the biographies; upon a more thorough comparison many details appear that do not correspond at all.Finally; the authors rely heavily on the works of Gregorovius (1821-1891!!) - his medieval histories of Rome and Athens - as the source of medieval history; these works are - at least in the West - hoplessly outdated and have been superceded by more up-to-date works (for instance; Julius Norwich's trilogy on Byzantine history is not even cited).0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy Milan StrbacExcellent and shocking!27 of 33 people found the following review helpful. a detailed timeline of classical history--- quite different from the conventional oneBy Timothy HorriganThis is the second volume in a projected 7-volume series. It's not quite as much fun as the first volume; where Dr. Fomenko outlined his radical historical theories. This is something of an appendix to volume 1; showing how the timelines of the "First" through "Third" Roman empires; ancient Egypt; ancient Greece; and the Bible are all reflections of events which took place in socalled "Medieval" times. The reason pre-1600 history tends to move in cycles of about 350 years (punctuated by Dark Ages) is; we are told; because there only is about 350 years of pre-1600 history in the first place.Since I went through the Columbia University's "Contemporary Civilization" program as an undergraduate; I was personally amused to see that two Classical Greek writers who were conventionally viewed as being ancient and historically inaccurate (though still great)-- i.e.; Homer and Herodotus--- are viewed here as being relatively recent and accurate (as well as great.)Fomenko's timeline becomes even more radical in this book: for example; Fomenko now tells us that Jesus probably lived in the 1100s; not the 1000s. And he was Russian.We have a few volumes left before Fomenko gets around to British and American history.
