Consentius, a correspondent of Sidonius Apollinaris, was an outstanding representative of the Gaul aristocracy and of the intellectual elite of the times. Born, most probably around 410–420 A.D., he received an allround education which was typical of the contemporary aristocracy. He began his career during the reign of Valentinian III as tribunus et notarius. Whereas it is not certain whether he held the position of quaestor sacri palatii. What we do know is that he was sent as an envoy to the emperor of the Eastern Empire – Theodoric II, and that during his mission he was greatly assisted by his knowledge of Greek and (if we are to believe Sidonius), his great diplomatic talent. Consentius’ political activity did not mean that he neglected his intellectual interests; it is worth drawing attention to his love of the theatre. The next stage in his political career was the post of cura sacri palatii, which he held at the court of the emperor who came from Gaul, namely Sidonius’ father-in-law – Eparchius Avitus. Following the fall of Eparchius, Consentius, withdrew from public life altogether. He remained outside the sphere of politics also during the reign of emperor Antemius who enjoyed the support of a considerable section of the Gaul-Roman aristocracy. The reason why he lost interest in politics was probably due to the fact that Narbonne, Consentius’ native city, had found itself under the rule of the Visigoths. After his withdrawal from political life, Consentius, devoted himself entirely to his literary pursuits (he wrote in Latin and Greek) as well as to nurturing his social life. It may well be that he also maintained friendly relations with the Visigoth court. The precise date of his death is not known, but in all likelihood, he was still alive around the year 480. His biography allows one to trace the history of the Gaul-Roman aristocracy, whereas in the writings of Sidonius, we find a reflection of the ideals of his social class.

The problem of the Bogomil sect which was founded in the 10th century is not important exclusively from the point of view of the history of Bulgaria, or else generally of the Byzantine Orient. The fact that the Bogomils contributed in a significant way to the creation of the Cathar heresy which constituted a serious threat to the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, is the reason why this problem is important also from the point of view of the history of Western Europe.
Both Bogomils and Cathars have been frequently referred to in the sources as adherents of Manichaeism. Therefore, the main goal of the present article is to verify the legitimacy of this type of assertions, by analyzing the origin of the most characteristic and at the same time, the most “Manichaean” element of the Bogumil doctrine, namely its theology. In the article, the author confronts the existing theories in this respect with the testimony of the sources, whereas a comparative analysis of the theological doctrines of the three fundamental varieties of Bogomilism with the teachings of their potential initiators is legitimized by historical testimonies, that point out to the possibility of actual contacts between them.

In the year 1451 Mehmed II, known as Fātih, that is Conqueror, became the new Turkish sultan. From the very beginning of his reign, Mehmed consistently implemented his goal of carrying out the conquest of the Christian territories. Already in 1453, he annexed Constantinopole and in this way he finally put an end to the East-Roman Empire. Subsequently, he subjected Serbia, Albania and Greece and invaded Bosnia, Croatia and Dalmatia. He fought victorious battles with Venice and Genoa. He also invaded Italia and occupied Otranto. Yet in his efforts, he was always thwarted by the knights of St. John, also known as the Knights of Rhodes from the island of Rhodes where they settled already at the beginning of the 14th century. Wishing to finally crush the Knights, in May 1480 sultan Mehmed II decided to attack the island. The defense was conducted by the Master of the Knights of Rhodes, Pierre d’Aubusson. From the very beginning of the attack, the latter accompanied by his knights, successfully repulsed the Turkish attacks. On the side of the sea, it was the fort of St. Nicolas that successfully blocked the access to the city; during the siege, its crew had sunk many an enemy ship. The Turks had even planned an attack on the fort itself which was to take place at night on 18–19 June, 1480, when the Turkish galleys on board of which there were siege towers, approached it. The defenders answered with fire. Yet the maneuver of the followers of Allah was a trick whose aim was to detract the attention of the Christians, while the Turks were clandestinely building a pontoon bridge across the Mandraka bay. It was over this bridge that the Muslim troops which gathered on the shore planned to cross the bay and attack the “infidels”. On the 19th June, shortly before dawn, the Turkish troops launched the attack. The Muslim troops outnumbered the defenders considerably, yet the defenders managed to shell the pontoon bridge with canon fire; the bridge eventually fell apart and sank taking the crowding Muslims with it. After the unsuccessful attack on the fort of St. Nicolas, the Turks tried once again to conquer the city by launching a direct attack which began on the 28th July 1480, yet it too proved unsuccessful. So after an 89-day siege, the Osmans decided to withdraw from the fort which remained unconquered, thanks to the heroism of the Knights of Rhodes. The defense of Rhodes is an event which is relatively little known, yet one which has immense political significance both for Europe and for the order itself.In the year 1451 Mehmed II, known as Fātih, that is Conqueror, became the new Turkish sultan. From the very beginning of his reign, Mehmed consistently implemented his goal of carrying out the conquest of the Christian territories. Already in 1453, he annexed Constantinopole and in this way he finally put an end to the East-Roman Empire. Subsequently, he subjected Serbia, Albania and Greece and invaded Bosnia, Croatia and Dalmatia. He fought victorious battles with Venice and Genoa. He also invaded Italia and occupied Otranto. Yet in his efforts, he was always thwarted by the knights of St. John, also known as the Knights of Rhodes from the island of Rhodes where they settled already at the beginning of the 14th century. Wishing to finally crush the Knights, in May 1480 sultan Mehmed II decided to attack the island. The defense was conducted by the Master of the Knights of Rhodes, Pierre d’Aubusson. From the very beginning of the attack, the latter accompanied by his knights, successfully repulsed the Turkish attacks. On the side of the sea, it was the fort of St. Nicolas that successfully blocked the access to the city; during the siege, its crew had sunk many an enemy ship. The Turks had even planned an attack on the fort itself which was to take place at night on 18–19 June, 1480, when the Turkish galleys on board of which there were siege towers, approached it. The defenders answered with fire. Yet the maneuver of the followers of Allah was a trick whose aim was to detract the attention of the Christians, while the Turks were clandestinely building a pontoon bridge across the Mandraka bay. It was over this bridge that the Muslim troops which gathered on the shore planned to cross the bay and attack the “infidels”. On the 19th June, shortly before dawn, the Turkish troops launched the attack. The Muslim troops outnumbered the defenders considerably, yet the defenders managed to shell the pontoon bridge with canon fire; the bridge eventually fell apart and sank taking the crowding Muslims with it. After the unsuccessful attack on the fort of St. Nicolas, the Turks tried once again to conquer the city by launching a direct attack which began on the 28th July 1480, yet it too proved unsuccessful. So after an 89-day siege, the Osmans decided to withdraw from the fort which remained unconquered, thanks to the heroism of the Knights of Rhodes. The defense of Rhodes is an event which is relatively little known, yet one which has immense political significance both for Europe and for the order itself.

Zofia Potocka, daughter of Franciszek Ksawery Branicki and Aleksandra Engelhardt and wife of Artur Potocki, the proprietor of the “Pod Baranami” palace in Kraków as well as of the palace in Krzeszowice, was  well-known and respected personage in Kraków. From the moment she moved into the “Pod Baranami” Palacez with her husband, she took part in numerous charitable and cultural events in the city. She was often referred to as a guardian angel, as she supported such organizations as: the Fraternity of Mercy, the Religious Bank and the Charitable Society. Following the great fire of Kraków in 1850, she organized help to the fire victims. After her husband’s death in 1832, she obtained permission to bury him in the chapel dedicated to the Cleansing of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary in the Wawel Cathedral. The cathedral chapter even gave her permission to introduce certain architectural alterations in the above chapel. Zofia Potocka also contributed to the restoration of the royal tombs in the cathedral crypt and she also funded the purchase of the painting for the main altar of the Franciscan church in Kraków.

She was active not only on the social and cultural arena, but also led a busy social life. The “Pod Baranami” Palace became a social salon of Kraków which set the tone in the entire city and which had to be reckoned with. The other place where Zofia Potocka spent her days was Krzeszowice, where a palace and a church were built during her lifetime. Zofia purchased a plot of land in Krzeszowice where a spring with sulfurous water possessing medicinal properties was located. Later on, a home for senior citizens and the handicapped as well as a hospital were built there, from her initiative. During the January insurrection, Zofia Potocka organized a hospital for the wounded in Krzeszowice. Zofia Potocka and her life’s achievements have become a permanent element of history and are remembered by the inhabitants of both Kraków and Krzeszowice.

In the article the author analyzes the main causes of death of the inhabitants in the Bolechowice parish, in the years 1821–1841. The parish constituted a traditional peasant community of the period preceding the demographic transformation. The community was characterized by a high incidence of contagious diseases. The fundamental source used in the research were the parochial death records.

The villages making up the Bolechowice parish were situated in the vicinity of Kraków and the popular transport routes which only contributed to the spreading of infectious diseases. The above problem is best illustrated by the example of the epidemics of cholera which broke out in the year 1831 and which led to the greatest number of deaths in the Bolechowice parish in the whole period between the years 1821–1841. In the seven villages making up the Bolechowice parish, altogether 2169 deaths were recorded in the years 1821–1841. The most common causes of death in the community under consideration were: tuberculosis, old age, and “cough”. Over 85% of all deaths belonged to the group of 19 diseases and inborn and developmental defects. Deaths due to sudden causes were rather rare

The present publication is devoted to private collections of art and historical mementos in Vilnius at the turn of the 19th and at the beginning of the 20th century. In the article, the author presents the silhouettes of a number of lovers of antiquity who represent various social strata of contemporary Vilnius; he also takes into consideration the collectors’ biographies and the character of their collectors’ passion. He also describes the content of the collections preserved by them.
In spite of the repressive policy of the tsarist authorities, following the suppression of the January insurrection, the Polish community of Vilnius cultivated the historical memory, among others, by collecting mementos of the past. It was at this time, that a great number of big and small art collections came into existence, side by side with collections of archeological excavations, books, manuscripts, religious objects, as well as mementos of outstanding historical personages. Among the best known Vilnius art collectors, one finds names such as: Lucjan Moraczewski, Albert Zasztoft, Bolesław Szulski, Tadeusz Stanisław Wróblewski, Antoni Szutinas and many others. It was thanks to the activity of those people that many precious monuments of material culture have been preserved until the present day.

On 7th July, 1937 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent a letter to the authorities of the Jagiellonian University which contained a memorandum concerning the need to set up a Department of Colonial Studies within the university. In the letter, the Ministry suggested that in the following academic year, each of the university faculties should organize lectures and classes associated with colonial issues. The letter sent from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was an expression of the unofficial policy which Poland had conducted since the middle of the 30s of the 20th century. The change of the international situation, associated with Italy’s invasion of Abyssinia, the strengthening of the international position of Japan, in the Far East, as well as Germany’s return to the role of a superpower – was associated with the issue of a new division of territories to be colonized by the abovementioned countries. The government in Warsaw wished to “take advantage” of the situation and act, so that the interests of the Polish state would not be neglected in this respect. At this point, one should state clearly that Poland had never officially put a claim to any concrete territories. It was mainly the overcrowding in the rural areas, the unemployment in cities and above all, the lack of natural resources that induced the authorities to look for new sources of employment and mineral resources within the existing territorial division of the world. The Department of Colonial Studies at the Jagiellonian University was to serve as the breeding ground for future Polish colonial expansion which was to implement the above goals. Yet, what made it difficult to realize the above objectives was a lack of suitable academic personnel which would possess adequate theoretical and practical knowledge of the subject. Yet, in spite of this, in the years 1938-1939 the work on the realization of the project continued within the University; the best example of this is a “Course of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine” which was organized at the Medical Faculty. The actual classes organized in the Department of Colonial Studies were to begin in the academic year 1939/1940 whereas its graduates were to conduct the “cultural conquest of the tropics” in a “systematic and scientific way”. The outbreak of II World War put an end to all the big plans of both the government and the dedicated employees of the University.

The author of the present article describes the process of formation of the Craftsman Chamber in Kraków, in the years 1927–1929. He presents the fundamental legal principles of its formation, its organizational structure which is defined in its Statute, as well as the first elections of Chamber members in the year 1929. The Krakow Craftsman Chamber was founded on 30th December 1927, on the basis of a directive issued by the Minister of Industry and Trade, but the inauguration of its activity became possible only after the election of the first Gathering of Chamber Members. The above process had been concluded on 1st October 1929, that is on the day of validation of the election results. From this moment, the Craftsman Chamber in Krakow could commence the realization of its statutory tasks. The Chamber had survived the period of the German occupation; it functioned throughout the period of People’s Poland and it continues its statutory activity up until the present.

This presentation portrays leading politicians and military men of the Third Republic of France between March 1938 and April 1940. The text is based on press articles, diaries and diplomatic sources of Polish provenance. The paper’s objective is to show prominent politicians and military chiefs of France, which was a Poland’s ally since 1921, as perceived by the Polish public opinion in time when the fate of Europe hung in the balance.
The paper is divided into four parts. In the first part it describes the gradual departure from political ideas as represented by Le Front Populaire (the Peoples’ Front), almost univocally criticized in Poland, which ended in the designation of Edouard Daladier as Prime Minister of France. The second part covers nearly one year of E. Daladier’s government (the of middle of 1938 – the beginning 1939), when this new cabinet gained considerable trust and confidence upon the Vistula river, since Poles believed that this was a cabinet of national revival, which France needed much at this time. The next part is dedicated to the period preceding the outbreak of the Second War World and just after its beginning. At that time there were attempts to emphasize the military strength of the Third Republic and the outstanding personalities of its chiefs. However, one may find some information, which proved the reluctance of the French as well as their lack of preparation for the war. The last part refers to the spring and summer of 1940 and deals with two different opinions concerning the political and military situation of those days. On the one hand the Polish were proud of their heroic defense of their homeland in September 1939. On the other hand, they felt sadness and disappointment because of another defeat they had to experience. They also suffered because they lost hope for their prompt return to Poland, which could have only been possible upon the Allies’ victory.

The myth of the “Jewish communist communities” which functioned in the inter-war Poland, revived anew in the years 1944–1947. It was a phenomenon which was seemingly paradoxical as only a small percentage of the Jews who had formerly lived on Polish territories survived the war and the unprecedented tragedy of the Jewish population should have put a definite end to the anti-Semitic stereotypes. However, after the war, over a hundred thousand Jews returned to Poland, particularly from the territories of the USSR. In the new, post-war reality, it was only the Jewish minority that had officially gained recognition and obtained permission to set up its own political parties, together with young people’s extensions, its own schooling system, economic powerbase, cooperatives, farms and kibbutzes. Moreover, a disproportionately big number of Jews obtained positions in the power apparatus, and above all in the structures of repression of the communist state. The Jews made up as much as 27% of the total number of members of the counter-intelligence service at the Ministry of Public Security; 50% of the employees of the Press Control Department and 13% of the executives in the entire Ministry of Public Security were of Jewish descent. Despite the fact that by entering the communist power system, the Jews definitely severed their ties with the Jewish religion, tradition and the identity of their ancestors, yet according to the Polish nationalist parties and many individual Polish citizens, tainted by the nationalist atmosphere of I World War, they belonged to the stereotype of the “Jewish communist community”, understood here as an element of the plot of the international Jewry which used communism as an instrument of wielding control over the world. The above view, which was corroborated by the traditional anti-Semitism of a large section of the Polish society, as well as the ignorance and prejudice of the common people, and sometimes constituted the goal of conscious provocations of the authorities – was conducive to an aversion and hatred of the Jews as well as Jewish pogroms. Taking into consideration the amount of the clandestinely published press publications and leaflets, the myth of the Jewish “conspiracy” had found its way to a considerable numbers of Poles; yet it is impossible to define precisely the number of Polish citizens who really professed it.

Following the II World War, Italy and Yugoslavia occupied a special place in the foreign policy of the United States. The border dispute between Italy and Yugoslavia which dated back to the turn of the 40s and the beginning of the 50s of the 20th c., was yet another example of the international crisis in Europe at the time of the cold war. The article presents the activities of the American politicians undertaken towards Italy and Yugoslavia which aimed at incorporating these countries into the structures of Western European democracy. In the case of Italy, the above initiative of the American diplomacy proved to be successful and it led to the entry of the Italian republic into NATO, as well as the European economic and political structures. In the case of the other party participating in the dispute over Triest, i.e. Yugoslavia, the American presidents Truman and Eisenhower tried to take advantage of the crisis in the Yugoslav-Soviet relations, so as to win over marshal Tito and make him cooperate. Having decided to make concessions towards Yugoslavia with regard to the territorial claims made by marshal Tito, the Americans wished to achieve the superior goal: namely that of weakening the Socialist bloc by detaching Yugoslavia from it and making it join the West. The author evaluates the American policy towards Italy and Yugoslavia whose background was a territorial dispute over borderline territories. The main actors on the American political scene were forced to make some very difficult and delicate choices with regard to both parties participating in the above conflict.