Possible Intereuropean organizations after WW1?

Why anachronistic though? I'm not denying that it was majority Pole and Jewish at the time, but it's not like the Lithuanian population was nonexistent. Every demographic census in that region from 1897 to 1942 (I'm excluding the Soviet census since many poles were transferred to Poland) was very different depending on who did it (Russians, Germans, or Poles) and I'm not counting the Lithuanian censuses for obvious reasons. So we could say that at least 15-20% of Lithuanians were living in that region (not the city) or maybe even more. And in history, many nations had claims for regions that didn't have that many percent. Besides that, it is the historical capital.
I would say that Lithuania had the same claim as Poland did.
The old Grand Duchy of Lithuania was very much what we would today call a multi-ethnic state, insofar as today's vocabulary can be applied to the period before the emergence of modern nationalism. Vilnius was the capital of the state called Lithuania, but in the early 20th century ethnic Lithuanians had minimal presence there. The Russian, German and Polish censuses pre-WWII all record a negligible number of ethnic Lithuanians, circa 2%. Upon the occupation of the city in 1939 Lithuania began settling ethnic Lithuanians there which probably accounts for the increase recorded by the Germans in the 1940s. But prior to that the number of ethnic Lithuanians was negligible. Post-WWI Lithuania re-emerged as a nation-state which sought to suppress minorities within its territory, and not a continuation of the old multi-ethnic Lithuania. So it could hardly pose as a continuation of a state of a different type.

Being an ethnic Lithuanian state, and claiming the ethnically very much non-Lithuanian Vilna/Wilno/Vilnius area, was like wanting to have one's cake and eat it too.

States at the time found all sorts of reasons why they deserve more than the areas where they made up most of the population but I can't think of another case where a state wanted to stick it's capital in a city and area where its ethnicity was virtually absent.
 
Why anachronistic though? I'm not denying that it was majority Pole and Jewish at the time, but it's not like the Lithuanian population was nonexistent. Every demographic census in that region from 1897 to 1942 (I'm excluding the Soviet census since many poles were transferred to Poland) was very different depending on who did it (Russians, Germans, or Poles) and I'm not counting the Lithuanian censuses for obvious reasons. So we could say that at least 15-20% of Lithuanians were living in that region (not the city) or maybe even more. And in history, many nations had claims for regions that didn't have that many percent. Besides that, it is the historical capital.
I would say that Lithuania had the same claim as Poland did.
Lithuanian claim was historical rather than ethnic, thus comparable to Serbian claim to Kosovo (craddle of Serbian state inhabited by Albanians) or Russian claim to Kyiv (as Kyiv is seen as Mother of Rus' ).
 
The old Grand Duchy of Lithuania was very much what we would today call a multi-ethnic state, insofar as today's vocabulary can be applied to the period before the emergence of modern nationalism. Vilnius was the capital of the state called Lithuania, but in the early 20th century ethnic Lithuanians had minimal presence there. The Russian, German and Polish censuses pre-WWII all record a negligible number of ethnic Lithuanians, circa 2%. Upon the occupation of the city in 1939 Lithuania began settling ethnic Lithuanians there which probably accounts for the increase recorded by the Germans in the 1940s. But prior to that the number of ethnic Lithuanians was negligible. Post-WWI Lithuania re-emerged as a nation-state which sought to suppress minorities within its territory, and not a continuation of the old multi-ethnic Lithuania. So it could hardly pose as a continuation of a state of a different type.

Being an ethnic Lithuanian state, and claiming the ethnically very much non-Lithuanian Vilna/Wilno/Vilnius area, was like wanting to have one's cake and eat it too.

States at the time found all sorts of reasons why they deserve more than the areas where they made up most of the population but I can't think of another case where a state wanted to stick it's capital in a city and area where its ethnicity was virtually absent.
Yeah, that makes sense. Never thought of it being such a unique case (Wanting a capital where there weren't people of that ethnicity) but I guess the Lithuanian population would've grown quite rapidly if they were somehow able to hold Vilnius, with all the people from the villages and from Kaunas (I've read a memoir of a Lithuanian general from Kaunas that instantly moved with his family to Vilnius when they got it for a moment) moving to the new capital, like what happened with Kaunas where the population increased 8,6 times during the interwar period from ~18,000 to ~154,000 residents. And also using “questionable methods” to increase the Lithuanian numbers. But yeah, anyways thanks for the answer.
 
Lithuanian claim was historical rather than ethnic, thus comparable to Serbian claim to Kosovo (craddle of Serbian state inhabited by Albanians) or Russian claim to Kyiv (as Kyiv is seen as Mother of Rus' ).
True, I guess it was difficult for me to see it that way since I live in Vilnius and I'm used to seeing it being Lithuanian (population-wise) even when I'm aware that it was ethnically Polish for quite a long time.
 
True, I guess it was difficult for me to see it that way since I live in Vilnius and I'm used to seeing it being Lithuanian (population-wise) even when I'm aware that it was ethnically Polish for quite a long time.
It was situation comparable to Constantinopole/Istanbul (city of big importance for Greeks and originally inhabited by Greeks, but by 20th century it was predominately Turkish and Greek claim to the city was more historical than ethnic).
 
True, I guess it was difficult for me to see it that way since I live in Vilnius and I'm used to seeing it being Lithuanian (population-wise) even when I'm aware that it was ethnically Polish for quite a long time.

European history has far reaching and often annoying effects :)

I work for the US military and every 5 years so I have to get my clearances renewed. Ever single time I put that my wife's father was born in a certain town in Germany. Every time the computer hicupps and requests human intervention because said town in not IN Germany, it's in Poland. And I have to explain that when my wife's father was born it WAS in Germany... Imperial Germany, then it was in Poland and when my wife's father became a young man it was back to being German... then in Poland again. Should be coming due again and I'm betting the situation will still be an issue this time around again :)

Randy
 
Top