----- Original Message ----- From: "islandkaren" <islandkaren@bellsouth.net> To: "Nick Tullius" <ntullius@rogers.com>; "'Jody McKim Pharr'" <jodymckimpharr@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 6:12 PM Subject: Re: [DVHH] FW: German-Hungarians - Nationality vs Citizenship > > > Okee-Dokee! Ya know what, you guys win! > Catch ya later. > Karen. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nick Tullius" <ntullius@rogers.com> > To: "'islandkaren'" <islandkaren@bellsouth.net>; "'Jody McKim Pharr'" > <jodymckimpharr@comcast.net> > Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 4:54 PM > Subject: RE: [DVHH] FW: German-Hungarians - Nationality vs Citizenship > > > Jody and Karen, > > To avoid further gross misrepresentation of what I am saying, I would > really > like to see a distinction made between the PRIVATE and the GROUP. And that > preferably before any further public debate. > To try a simplification: I never said that the DS are a group that > is pure, 100% German. That does not even exist in Germany. Reality is, > that > the Danube Swabians as a group have a German nationality, i.e., they have > a > language with many German dialects, a way of life, a culture, a history. > What I object to, is when I see that Karen is trying to use her own > family history (and maybe sociology and DNA analysis) to prove that the DS > were not essentially a German group. > Looks like a grandiose undertaking, but doomed to failure because reality > interferes. > > Take care, > Nick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: islandkaren [mailto:islandkaren@bellsouth.net] > Sent: 4-May-14 16:00 > To: Jody McKim Pharr; 'Nick Tullius'; donauschwaben-villages@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [DVHH] FW: German-Hungarians - Nationality vs Citizenship > > Hi Jody! > > Thanks for your thoughts. You actually make my point in your last > sentence. > > I do not subscribe to black and white at all. Since I don't Nick keeps > schooling me on why I should get away from the "gray" of reality and stick > with the black and white definitions. > Karen. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jody McKim Pharr" <jodymckimpharr@comcast.net> > To: "'islandkaren'" <islandkaren@bellsouth.net>; "'Nick Tullius'" > <ntullius@rogers.com>; <donauschwaben-villages@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 3:15 PM > Subject: RE: [DVHH] FW: German-Hungarians - Nationality vs Citizenship > > > Karen, > > Thank you for expressing your detailed thoughts of why this matter is > important to you and could be to many other researchers on the list. > > We (the DVHH) should be mindful of those whose response would be: > " You come back at me and say, "nope, no one ever did that in all the > Villages", there is established fact about that!" Really??" > > And it would be fair not assume everything is black and white for > everyone. > > Jody > > > -----Original Message----- > From: donauschwaben-villages-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:donauschwaben-villages-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of > islandkaren > Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 2:41 PM > To: Nick Tullius; donauschwaben-villages@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [DVHH] FW: German-Hungarians - Nationality vs Citizenship > > Hi Nick! > > I am not "challenging" your expertise, not for a nanosecond. I am asking > for you to help me understand my very own relatives. I do not have your > first hand living experience in the Banat. I do have apparently just as > many blood relatives coming and going from the Banat. And......you have > now > met at least One person and a very large family group of people who were > born and came from the very same places you did....Nemetszentmihaly, > Temeswar, Grossdorf, Hatzfeld, Arad, Nemetszentpeter, Budapest, > Englesbrun, > and on and on. And they all identified themselves as Hungarians, > Banaters, > Germans (in my family it was always referred to as German Heritage, not > "ethnic Germans") and Romanians. And there are many of my family still in > what is now Romania and the Czech Republic, and Hungary and Russia, and > Austria and Germany and Italy. None of them used the term Swabian. > > So if I really am the "First" you have ever met.....can we discuss that > please. Cause I seem to feel when I read the List, that lots of "US", you > and me and all those folks, have lots of questions and are trying to > understand this fascinating history. > It just seems to me you are boxed into having an identity established by > the > agreed upon definitions and you are working real hard to have the evidence > fit the end result that has already been decided. I am very aware that in > all academic areas there is "established and universal agreement" on > certain > definitions for things. I am also aware that inside those definitions a > great deal of diversity existed before a majority label emerges to become > universal. > It just seems to me that the "evidence" shows something else. As I said > before, I was completely prepared to discovery "purity" in my own story, > and > was surprised by what I found. > I Never Ever heard the term DS, Swabian, Swowisch, Swobe or any other > spelling or tense, until I spent $900.00 25 years ago at Princeton > University to have some of my material translated. And for all the > "established fact" of DS history, I would still challenge that beyond our > own community of interest.....cause Princeton University Language > Department > at that time had very little information about DS....it is not an > established history. > So tell me what I do with that? Careful?! :):):) > > By the way, nothing I have said or think for that matter is to "change" > any > definition of anything, or any one. I certainly do not want to change > the > reality of my very own relatives. And I certainly don't want anything to > happen to this wonderful source called DVHH. > > What I have been hoping for since I am obviously passionate about all > this, > is that you folks with first hand information can enrich my secondhand > experience, not just tell me that I am somehow illegitimate or incorrect. > I > have discovered with this LIST that I certainly am not alone in my > experience. I can read all about the historical perspective that has > been > established so what I am hoping to find with folks like you is some real > insight into for instance why it is that my Grandmother had to change > religions 3 times in her lifetime in order to "get along"? That is real. > You come back at me and say, "nope, no one ever did that in all the > Villages", there is established fact about that!" Really?? > > My "sociologic perspective" is day to day. You are exactly right....it is > not however irrelevant or incorrect, and has zero to do with > reclassification. Remembering our relatives and ancestors is extremely > important. But not as we decide to define them. It is most important to > remember them the way they actually were. They in fact were not all > Germans. My relatives came from areas in Europe that were forever moving > back and forth geographically so their identity was very subjective to the > areas they inhabited. My relatives were multilingual, multicultural, > multireligious, and multinational, and there is nothing "amorphous" about > being multiethnic. Quite the contrary, my genealogic story is much richer > than just being "German". German is a part of the story. Not the > beginning > and the end of it. That is so much smaller than the reality. > > I am sure your experience regarding mixed marriages is true for you. That > does not make it universal. Surprising to me upon reading and researching > a > vast majority of the FBs out there not just regarding my immediate branch > family, was to discover the sameness of human nature. There were mixed > marriages, many "illegitimate births", the frequent practice of "common > law > marriage", and the shunning of women when social norms of the village > groups > were breached, the ability of the fathers to create children and leave, > and > the protection of the first born male over all other siblings. Nothing > new > there, and those things happened as frequently as all other cultures. > > Finally, no one should redefine anything. And certainly not based on what > I > have to say. But my story is not so different than lots of other DS > members....according to our LIst. Why in heaven's name is this so > threatening....the recognition that this was a complex, and once they > left > Western Europe, multinational and multicultural group of people who to > some > extent became very unique in their success as colonizers? > > While I am writing this it has occurred to me.....because I am rereading >your message to try and be specific, Why is it that all these people who >you > seem to believe had such a tight grasp on being just "ethnic Germans", DID > NOT at the time immigrate straight to Germany when things got bad?? Why > did > they think it was necessary to emigrate to Canada, USA, Australia, South > America, and anywhere else they could get to as quickly as possible, but > not > back to their " Homeland", Germany? > > Could it be because after they had been born in a bunch of other places, > had > lived their whole lives some place other than Germany, and in fact no > less > than several hundred years had passed...... they just didn't feel 100% > "German" anymore? > > Don't you have any curiosity about That?? I am zero threat to your > definitions. I'm just an historical bystander. And....I am curious as > hell > and love all the stories that don't fit the mold cause they are far more > real and infinitely richer than the definitions. > > Karen. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nick Tullius" <ntullius@rogers.com> > To: <donauschwaben-villages@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 9:34 AM > Subject: [DVHH] FW: German-Hungarians - Nationality vs Citizenship > > Hello Karen! > > You have not bored me and it is certainly not my intention to discourage > you > or anybody else from participating in the discussion or to have their own > private opinion about nationality and citizenship. > > It just looks to me like your "sociologic perspective"(and DNA analysis?) > leads you to a radical reclassification of the Danube Swabian identity. > You > can obviously produce a dissertation on the subject but "cui bono?" as the > Latins used to say. > > But first to our points of disagreement. Yes, the DS were also called > Germans (germani, nemţi, németek, nemci) by their neighbouring > nationalities, and they frequently used that term for their own > self-description. That has indeed been my personal experience, based on 25 > years of living in a German Banat village (96 percent German population) > and > in multiethnic Temeswar/Timişoara. I remain in contact with a number of > Banat Swabians currently living in Germany and Austria and I have read a > fair number of Banat-Swabian literature, from history to poetry and prose, > research papers and newspapers. I can assure that the group identity of > the > Donauschwaben as an ethnic German group is very well established and rests > on a solid foundation, developed over their 250-year history. > > In my 53 years in Canada, I have yet to meet a single DS immigrant who was > not aware of his nationality, or did not consider himself both a Swabian > and > an (ethnic) German. I do not have the statistics about the number or > proportion of mixed marriages in the old country, but my experience in a > few > Banat villages indicates that until the end of WWII there were very few. > > The objective of DVHH is Remembering Our Danube Swabian Ancestors. It > seems > clear to me that our ancestors would not want to be remembered as > something > other than Germans, and certainly not as some amorphous multiethnic > entity. > > Finally, given that the vast majority of our DS compatriots are now living > in Germany and Austria, would it not be just a bit presumptuous for any > one > of us "North American DS" to redefine their nationality? > > Cheers, > > Nick Tullius > >