text:
John III Sobieski

John III Sobieski (Jan III Sobieski ; Jonas III Sobieskis ; Ioannes III Sobiscius  17 August 1629 – 17 June 1696) was King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania from 1674 until his death in 1696.

Born into Polish nobility, Sobieski was educated at the Jagiellonian University and toured Europe in his youth. As a soldier and later commander, he fought in the Khmelnytsky Uprising, the Russo-Polish War and during the Swedish invasion known as the Deluge. Sobieski demonstrated his military prowess during the war against the Ottoman Empire and established himself as a leading figure in Poland and Lithuania. In 1674, he was elected monarch of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth following the sudden and unexpected death of King Michael.

Sobieski's 24-year reign marked a period of the Commonwealth's stabilization, much needed after the turmoil of previous conflicts. Popular among his subjects, he was an able military leader, most famously for his victory over the Ottoman at the Battle of Vienna in 1683. The defeated Ottomans named Sobieski the "Lion of Lechistan", and the Pope hailed him as the saviour of Western Christendom. Suffering from poor health and obesity in later life, Sobieski died in 1696 and was buried at Wawel Cathedral in Kraków. He was succeeded by Augustus II of Poland and Saxony.

Youth
John Sobieski was born on 17 August 1629, in Olesko, now in Ukraine, then part of the Ruthenian Voivodeship in the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland, Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth to a renowned noble family de Sobieszyn Sobieski of Janina coat of arms. His father, Jakub Sobieski, was the Voivode of Ruthenia and Castellan of Kraków; his mother, Zofia Teofillia Daniłowicz was a granddaughter of Hetman Stanisław Żółkiewski. John Sobieski spent his childhood in Żółkiew. After graduating from Bartłomiej Nowodworski College in Kraków in 1643, young John Sobieski then graduated from the philosophical faculty of the University of Kraków in 1646. After finishing his studies, John and his brother Marek Sobieski left for western Europe, where he spent more than two years travelling. They visited Leipzig, Antwerp, Paris, London, Leiden, and The Hague. During that time, he met influential contemporary figures such as Louis II de Bourbon, Charles II of England and William II, Prince of Orange, and learned French, German, and Italian, in addition to Latin.

Both brothers returned to the Commonwealth in 1648. Upon receiving the news of the death of king Władysław IV Vasa and the hostilities of the Khmelnytsky Uprising, they volunteered for the army. They both fought in the siege of Zamość. They founded and commanded their own banners (chorągiew) of cavalry (one light, "cossack", and one heavy, of Polish hussars). Soon, the fortunes of war separated the brothers. In 1649, Jakub fought in the Battle of Zboriv. In 1652, Marek died in Tatar captivity after his capture at the Battle of Batih. John was promoted to the rank of pułkownik and fought with distinction in the Battle of Berestechko. In 1653, he voluntarily spent time as a hostage in the Crimean Tatar capital of Bakhchysarai. A promising commander, John was sent by King John II Casimir as one of the envoys in the diplomatic mission of Mikołaj Bieganowski to the Ottoman Empire. There, Sobieski learned the Tatar language and the Turkish language and studied Ottoman military traditions and tactics. It is likely he participated as part of the briefly allied Polish-Tatar forces in the 1655 Battle of Okhmativ.

After the start of the Swedish invasion of Poland known as "The Deluge", John Sobieski was among the Greater Polish regiments led by Krzysztof Opaliński, Palatine of Poznań which capitulated at Ujście, and swore allegiance to King Charles X Gustav of Sweden. However, around late March 1656, he abandoned their side, returning to the side of Polish king John II Casimir Vasa, enlisting under the command of hetmans Stefan Czarniecki and Jerzy Sebastian Lubomirski.

Commander

By 26 May 1656, he received the position of the chorąży koronny (Standard-bearer of the Crown). During the three-day-long battle of Warsaw of 1656, Sobieski commanded a 2,000-man strong regiment of Tatar cavalry. He took part in a number of engagements over the next two years, including the Siege of Toruń in 1658. In 1659, he was elected a deputy to the Sejm (Polish parliament), and was one of the Polish negotiators of the Treaty of Hadiach with the Cossacks. In 1660, he took part in the last offensive against the Swedes in Prussia, and was rewarded with the office of starost of Stryj. Soon afterward he took part in the war against the Russians, participating in the Battle of Slobodyshche and Battle of Lyubar, and later that year he again was one of the negotiators of a new treaty with the Cossacks (the Treaty of Cudnów).

Through personal connections, he became a strong supporter of the French faction in the Polish royal court, represented by Queen Marie Louise Gonzaga. His pro-French allegiance was reinforced in 1665, when he married Marie Casimire Louise de la Grange d'Arquien and was promoted to the rank of Grand Marshal of the Crown. In 1662, he was again elected a deputy to the Sejm, and took part in the work on reforming the military. He was also a member of the Sejm in 1664 and 1665. In between he participated in the Russian campaign of 1663. Sobieski remained loyal to the King during the Lubomirski Rebellion of 1665–66, though it was a difficult decision for him. He participated in the Sejm of 1665, and after some delays, accepted the prestigious office of the Marshal of the Crown on 18 May that year. Around late April or early May 1666 he received another high office of the Commonwealth, that of the Field Crown Hetman. Soon afterward, he was defeated at the Battle of Mątwy, and signed the Agreement of Łęgonice on 21 July, which ended the Lubomirski Rebellion.

In October 1667, he achieved another victory over the Cossacks of Petro Doroshenko and their Crimean Tatar allies in the Battle of Podhajce during the Polish–Cossack–Tatar War (1666–71). This allowed him to regain his image as a skilled military leader. Later that year, in November, his first child, James Louis Sobieski was born in Paris. On 5 February 1668, he achieved the rank of Grand Hetman of the Crown, the highest military rank in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, and thereby the de facto commander-in-chief of the entire Polish Army. Later that year he supported the French candidacy of Louis, Grand Condé for the Polish throne, and after this candidacy fell apart, Philip William, Elector Palatine. Following the election of Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki he joined the opposition faction; he and his allies helped veto several sejms (including the coronation ones), and his attitude once again resulted in him losing popularity among the regular szlachta. While his pro-French stance in politics alienated some, his military victories against invading Tatars in 1671 helped him gain other allies. The year 1672 saw internal politics destabilizing the Commonwealth, as the pro-French faction of Sobieski and pro-court faction of King Michał formed two confederations, which despite major Ottoman incursions in the south seemed more concerned with one another than with uniting to defend the country. The court faction called openly for confiscation of his estates and dismissal from office, and declared him an "enemy of the state". This division culminated in the humiliating Treaty of Buchach, where the Commonwealth was forced to cede territories to the Ottomans, but promise an annual tribute. Sobieski eventually succeeded in balancing politics and national defense, and a combination of his military victories over the invaders, and successful negotiations at the Sejm in April 1673, led to a compromise in which the court faction dropped its demands and challenges against him.

In the year 1672, the Polish-Lithuanian Tatars rose up in open rebellion against the Commonwealth. This was the widely remembered Lipka rebellion. Thanks to the efforts of Sobieski, who was held in great esteem by the Tatar soldiers, many of the Lipkas seeking asylum and service in the Ottoman Army returned to his command.

On 11 November 1673, Sobieski added a major victory to his list, this time defeating the Ottomans in the Battle of Khotyn and capturing the fortress located there. The news of the battle coincided with the death of King Michal the day before the battle. This made Sobieski one of the leading figures of the state, so on 19 May the following year, he was elected monarch of the Commonwealth. His candidacy was almost universally supported, with only a dozen or so members of the diet opposing him (mainly centered around magnates of the Lithuanian Pac family). In light of the war, requiring Sobieski to be on the front lines, the coronation ceremony was significantly delayed – he was crowned John III almost two years later, on 2 February 1676.

King of Poland

Though Poland-Lithuania was at that time the largest and one of the most populous states of Europe, Sobieski became a king of a country devastated by almost half a century of constant war. The treasury was almost empty and the court had little to offer the powerful magnates, who often allied themselves with foreign courts rather than the state.

Sobieski had a number of long-term plans, including establishing his own dynasty in the Commonwealth, regaining lost territories, and strengthening the country through various reforms. One of his ambitions was to unify Christian Europe in a crusade to drive the Turks out of Europe. At the beginning of his reign, however, the Polish state was in dire fiscal straits and faced military threats to the north. King Louis XIV of France promised to mediate a truce between the Ottomans and Poland so that Sobieski could focus his attentions on Prussia. The negotiations ended in failure and Sobieski's Baltic goals had to be tempered by the immediate reality of the Ottoman threat to the south.

In the autumn of 1674, he recommenced the war against the Ottomans and managed to recapture a number of cities and fortresses including Bratslav, Mogilev, and Bar, which re-established a strongly fortified line defending Poland's southern border in Ukraine. In 1675, Sobieski defeated a Turkish and Tatar offensive aiming at Lviv. In 1676, the Tatars began a counter-offensive and crossed the Dneper, but could not retake the strategic town of Żórawno, and a peace treaty (the Treaty of Żurawno) was signed soon afterwards. Although Kamieniec Podolski and much of Podolia remained a part of the Ottoman Empire, Poland gained the return of the towns of Bila Tserkva and Pavoloch.

The treaty with the Ottomans began a period of peace that was much needed for the repair of the country and strengthening of the royal authority. Sobieski managed to reform the Polish army completely. The army was reorganised into regiments, the infantry finally dropped pikes, replacing them with battle-axes, and the Polish cavalry adopted hussar and dragoon formations. Sobieski also greatly increased the number of cannon and introduced new artillery tactics.

Sobieski wanted to conquer Prussia with Swedish troops and French support. Regaining control of this autonomous province was in the Commonwealth's best interest, and Sobieski also hoped for it to become part of his family domain. To this end he made the secret Treaty of Jaworów (1675), but he achieved nothing. The wars with the Ottoman Empire were not decisively won by the Commonwealth, the ruler of Brandenburg-Prussia made treaties with France, Prussia defeated the Swedish invasion, and Sobieski's plans for the Commonwealth's own military campaign against Prussia was opposed by Commonwealth magnates, many of them taking the Prussian side. Backed by Brandenburg and Austria, internal enemies of Sobieski even planned to dethrone him and elect Charles of Lorraine.

The French-Prussian treaty of 1679 meant that Sobieski lost the major foreign ally for his planned campaign against Prussia; consequently, he started to distance himself from the pro-French faction, which, in turn, resulted in the cooling down of the Polish-French relations. During the Sejm of 1683, the French ambassador was expelled for involvement with a plan to dethrone Sobieski, which definitely marked the end of the Polish-French alliance. At the same time Sobieski made peace with the pro-Habsburg faction and started to gravitate towards an alliance with Austria. This did not end the existence of strong internal opposition to Sobieski; however, it changed a number of allegiances, and further opposition was temporarily weakened through the king's successful political maneuvering, including granting the Grand Hetman office to one of the opposition's chief leaders, Stanisław Jan Jabłonowski.

Conscious that Poland lacked allies and risked war against most of its neighbours (a situation similar to the Deluge), Sobieski allied himself by 1683 with Leopold I, of the Holy Roman Empire. Both sides promised to come to one's another aid if their capitals were threatened. The alliance was signed by royal representatives on 31 March 1683 and ratified by the Emperor and Polish parliament within weeks. Although aimed directly against the Ottomans and indirectly against France, it had the advantage of gaining internal support for the defense of Poland's southern borders. This was a beginning of what would become the Holy League, championed by Pope Innocent XI to preserve Christendom.

Meantime, in the spring of 1683, royal spies uncovered Ottoman preparations for a military campaign. Sobieski feared that the target might be the Polish cities of Lwów and Kraków. To counteract the threat, Sobieski began the fortification of the cities and ordered universal military conscription. In July, the Austrian envoy asked for Polish assistance. Soon afterward, the Polish army started massing for an expedition against the Ottomans, and in August was joined by Bavarians and Saxon allies under Charles of Lorraine.

Battle of Vienna

Sobieski's greatest success came in 1683, with his victory at the Battle of Vienna, in joint command of Polish and German troops, against the invading Ottomans under Kara Mustafa. Upon reaching Vienna on 12 September, with the Ottoman Army close to breaching the walls, Sobieski ordered a full attack. In the early morning, the united army of about 65,000 –76,000 men (including 22,000, –27,000 Poles ) attacked a Turkish force of about 143,000 men. At about 5:00 pm, after observing the infantry battle from the Kahlenberg hilltop, Sobieski led the Polish husaria cavalry along with Austrians and Germans in a massive charge down the hillside. Soon, the Ottoman battle line was broken and the Ottoman forces scattered in disarray. At 5:30 pm, Sobieski entered the deserted tent of Kara Mustafa and the Battle of Vienna ended.

The Pope and other foreign dignitaries hailed Sobieski as the "Savior of Vienna and Western European civilization." In a letter to his wife, he wrote, "All the common people kissed my hands, my feet, my clothes; others only touched me, saying: 'Ah, let us kiss so valiant a hand!'"

The war against the Ottomans was not yet over, and Sobieski continued the campaign with the Battle of Párkány on 7–9 October. After early victories, the Polish found themselves a junior partner in the Holy League, gaining no lasting territorial or political rewards. The prolonged and indecisive war also weakened Sobieski's position at home. For the next four years Poland would blockade the key fortress at Kamenets, and Ottoman Tatars would raid the borderlands. In 1691, Sobieski undertook another expedition to Moldavia, with slightly better results, but still with no decisive victories.

Later years and death
Although the King spent much time on the battlefields, which could suggest a good state of health, towards the end of his life he became seriously and increasingly ill.

King John III Sobieski died in Wilanów, Poland on 17 June 1696 from a sudden heart attack. His wife, Marie Casimire Louise, died in 1716 in Blois, France, and her body was returned to Poland. They are interred together in Wawel Cathedral, Kraków, although his heart is interred separately in the Church of the Transfiguration in Warsaw, Poland. He was succeeded by Augustus II.

Legacy and significance

Sobieski is remembered in Poland as a "hero king", victor at Vienna who defeated the Ottoman threat, an image that became particularly well recognized after his story was told in many works of 19th-century literature. In the Polish Biographical Dictionary he is described as "an individual above his contemporaries, but still one of them"; an oligarch and a magnate, interested in personal wealth and power. His ambitions for the most part were instilled in him by his beloved wife, whom he undoubtedly loved more than any throne (when being forced to divorce her and marry the former Queen as a condition to gain the throne, he immediately refused the throne) and tended to obey, at times blindly.

He failed to reform the ailing Commonwealth, and to secure the throne for his heir. At the same time, he displayed high military prowess, he was well educated and literate, and a patron of science and arts. He supported the astronomer Johannes Hevelius, mathematician Adam Adamandy Kochański and the historian and poet Wespazjan Kochowski. His Wilanów Palace became the first of many palaces that would dot the lands of the Commonwealth over the next two centuries.

Family

On 5 July 1665, he married the widow of Jan "Sobiepan" Zamoyski, Marie Casimire Louise de la Grange d'Arquien (1641–1716), of Nevers, Burgundy, France. Their children were:

 * James Louis Sobieski (2 November 1667 – 19 December 1737), married Countess Palatine Hedwig Elisabeth of Neuburg and had issue
 * twin daughters (9 May 1669), stillborn or died shortly after birth
 * Teresa Teofila (October 1670)
 * Adelajda Ludwika (15 October 1672 – 10 February 1677), called "Barbelune"
 * Maria Teresa (18 October 1673 – 7 December 1675), called "La Mannone"
 * daughter (October 1674), stillborn or died shortly after birth
 * Teresa Kunegunda (4 March 1676 – 10 March 1730), married Maximilian II Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria, and had issue
 * Aleksander Benedykt (6 September 1677 – 19 November 1714), died unmarried
 * daughter (13 November 1678), stillborn or died shortly after birth
 * Konstanty Władysław (1 May 1680 – 28 February 1726), married Maria Józefa Wessel but had no issue
 * Jan (4 June 1683 – 1 January/12 April 1685)
 * daughter (20 December 1684), stillborn or died shortly after birth

Royal titles

 * Official title : Ioannes III, Dei Gratia rex Poloniae, magnus dux Lithuaniae, Russiae, Prussiae, Masoviae, Samogitiae, Livoniae, Smolensciae, Kijoviae, Volhyniae, Podlachiae, Severiae, Czernichoviaeque, etc.
 * Official title : Jan III, z łaski Bożej, król Polski, wielki książę litewski, ruski, pruski, mazowiecki, żmudzki, kijowski, wołyński, podlaski i czernichowski, etc.
 * English translation: John III, by the grace of God King of Poland, Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Masovia, Samogitia, Livonia, Smolensk, Kyiv, Volhynia, Podlasie, Severia, and Chernihiv, etc.

Literary references

 * Vincenzo da Filicaia (1642–1707) wrote a collection of odes or canzoni about the raising of the siege of Vienna by King John III Sobieski titled "Canzoni in occasione dell'assedio, e liberazione di Vienna," published by Piero Matini in Florence in 1684.
 * the first known book review journal Nouvelles de la république des lettres (News from the Republic of Letters), edited and largely written by the Protestant philosopher Pierre Bayle, included a number of works about King Sobieski's victory in its 1st volume: an address to the King (pp. 179–180), Motet Dramatique ou Oratoire (pp. 181–182), Paralelle de Jules Cesar et du Roi de Pologne ("Venit, vidit, vicit..." (pp. 183–185)
 * William Wordsworth wrote on February 4, 1816, and published the same year among the "Sonnets dedicated to Liberty" (or "Poems dedicated to Independence and Liberty" ) his "Siege of Vienna Raised by John Sobieski", which was his take on da Falicaia's ode to Sobieski's victory, about which Wordworth wrote, "This, and his other poems on the same occasion [of Sobieski's raising the siege of Vienna], are superior perhaps to any lyrical pieces that contemporary events have ever given birth to, those of the Hebrew Scriptures only excepted.—W. W. (1816 and 1820.)"

Popular culture

 * John III Sobieski's character is played by Jerzy Skolimowski in the 2012 English-language Polish and Italian historical drama film The Day of the Siege: September Eleven 1683
 * John III Sobieski sometimes appears in the loading screen in the computer strategy game, Europa Universalis IV.
 * His involvement in the Battle of Vienna is also referenced in the Baroque Cycle novels:

"When he turned to go back to the camp, he discovered that there was another man up on this hill, a stone's throw away: some kind of monk or holy man, perhaps, as he was dressed in a rough sackcloth robe, with no finery. But then the bloke whipped out a sword. It was not one of your needle-thin rapiers, such as fops pushed at each other in the streets of London and Paris, but some kind of relic of the Crusades, a two-handed production with a single crossbar instead of a proper guard—the sort of thing Richard the Lionhearted might've used to slay camels in the streets of Jerusalem. This man went down on one knee in the dirt, and he did it with verve and enthusiasm. You see your rich man kneeling in church and it takes him two or three minutes, you can hear his knees popping and sinews creaking, he totters this way and that, creating small alarums amongst the servants who are gripping his elbows. But this brute knelt easily, even lustily if such a thing were possible, and facing toward the city of Vienna, he planted his sword in the ground so that it became a steel cross. The morning light was shining directly into his grizzled face and glinting from the steel of the blade and glowing in some indifferent colored jewels set into the weapon's hilt and crossbar. The man bowed his head and took to mumbling in Latin. The hand that wasn't holding the sword was thumbing through a rosary—Jack's cue to exit stage right. But as he was leaving he recognized the man with the broadsword as King John Sobieski."
 * He appears in his pre-royalty status as a character in Mount & Blade: With Fire & Sword.
 * Sobieski appears as a character in the historical novel Poland by James A. Michener in a chapter recounting the Battle of Vienna.

title: John III Sobieski


text:
Talk:John III Sobieski

Opening comments
In English, we don't usually put the ruler's family name. Just to repeat myself. Again. JHK

I'm pretty sure the Poles didn't call him John; what was his original name, Jan? I think it should at least be mentioned in the article. Jeronimo

 * Lithuanians call him Jonas. So the name have to be translated (Poles also dont't write Elisabeth 2, but Elżbieta II) or write it also in lithuanian an ruthenian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karolis-lt (talk • contribs) 11:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Ermm...all respect to JHK, now departed, but in English we very usually call this fellow "John Sobieski". I think that for elected, non-dynastic Kings like the Polish ones, the surnames should be included when appropriate - as in this instance. john k 20:02, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Jeronimo, mayhaps the Poles didn't translate his name Jan into John, but this is an english-language encyclopedia, and the English name should be provided, correct? -Alex, 12.220.157.93 04:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC).

The Sobieski, Stuart Connection
I have just been watching Michael Portillo's Great Railway Journeys and, travelling in the Highlands, he investigates the history of tartan and two Sobieski-Stuart brothers claimed to have an old book on Scottish tartans which was used to reintroduce them after they were banned after the Battle of Culloden. As it turns out, this book was fake.

I decided to investigate this Polish-Scottish connection, dating back to Bonnie Prince Charlie as it seems a very interesting one. He was the son of the Old Pretender, Prince James, son of exiled Stuart King, James II & VII and his wife Maria Clementina Sobieska and great-grandson of John III Sobieski, most famous for the victory over the Ottoman Turks in the 1683 Battle of Vienna. It is John Sobieski who features as the hetman and who makes the grand entrance at the funeral of Michal Wolodeyowski at the end of Henryk Sienkiewicz's historical novel Fire in the Steppe. Ivankinsman (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

When was Jan III Sobieski elected the new monarch of the Commonwealth ?
The infobox and the main text have different dates for the Jan III Sobieski's election as the new monarch of the Commonwealth. Was it May 19 or May 21 ? --199.71.174.100 00:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

"Only 22 years"
Okay, 22 years is quite a while. I'm removing some of that. Reinsert it if you will. Aaрон Кинни (t) 23:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Renaming proposal - John III Sobieski
This article was moved to the Polish name in December 2005, along with several other articles. Many of the others have since been moved back to English names and this article should be moved back too, to the English name of "John III Sobieski", as it appears in English-language reference works, per the Wikipedia guideline of Use English. Please indicate below if you support or oppose this move. --Elonka 04:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, as nominator. --Elonka 04:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Well, if I remember well we already decided on Jan III Sobieski because the name was much more popular in English. Google Books Jan 297 John 295, Google hits Jan 95,800  John 14,000 --SylwiaS | talk 07:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If ones excludes "hotel", these 95,800 hits are reduced to 19,000, or less when "street" or other place names are also excluded. According to Google counts, "Jan III Sobieski" would be a good name for a traveller's guide to Poland then ... -- Matthead discuß!   O    16:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, the same then -hotel, -street Jan 15,600 John 12,800 .--SylwiaS | talk 18:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Among the first results for Jan, impartial sites like "gov.pl" pop up, pages titled "Jan III Sobieski: Listy do królowej Marysieńki" (do we have to consider that english?), and coins sold on ebay. For John, sites like britannica.com oder .edu sites show up first. So better stop beating this dead horse. -- Matthead discuß!  O    06:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Wait a minute, the first two sentences of the very first result for Jan deserves an honourable mention: "“He is a perfect oval which from a distance looks like a very large egg stood on the small end,” wrote one French observer, as he watched the Polish king, Jan III Sobieski. Blessed with a large head, enormous belly, and small feet, Jan Sobieski did indeed look something like an egg." -- Matthead discuß!  O    06:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Why don't you simply bring some evidence that John is more often used than Jan in English? BTW That page with Letters to Queen Marysieńka has his biography in English. I can't help it that people often look it up.--SylwiaS | talk 11:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Support Should be moved back to English name. If it gets left here, there will be two monarchs of Poland called John, and one call Jan (this one). Doesn't really make sense. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 09:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, as by nomination and Calgacus. -- Matthead discuß!  O    14:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - as Sylwia pointed out, Jan is already the most popular ENGLISH name for this king.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 14:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sylwia pointed out that Google can be (mis)used as a funny and useless source for naming historic figures. -- Matthead discuß!  O    16:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Support per above. Charles 14:33, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I would actually prefer John III of Poland, but within the limits of the proposal, I vote for the requested move. Shilkanni 18:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose As soon as I saw "Jan" and "Sobieski", "Polish Monarchs" popped right into my head. "John" and "III" meant I was fumbling for my List of Popes.  Per Sylwia, Jan is the common name. — MrDolomite | Talk 22:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I would, however support any combination of redirects which take all the various Jan/John/Sobieski/KingOfPoland and still get a reader where they need to go. — MrDolomite | Talk 22:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * While I prefer Jan, I wonder what do you think about John III Sobieski as compared to John III of Poland? See also John I of Poland, a monarch virtualy unknown to anybody but some people who put a very specific Wikipedia Naming Convention about rulers above such things as, oh, 99,9% of printed academic works in English language.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Support per WP:UE. -  AjaxSmack    00:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Name as it appears in encyclopedias and dictionaries
I really hate Google tests as a justification for "common usage in English", when we're talking about an individual who already has entire articles in major English-language encyclopedias. Here's a list of what I have easily available at the moment. If you have others, please feel free to add to the list. --Elonka 16:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedias

 * John III Sobieski {Online Britannica )
 * John III, king of Poland (Online Columbia )
 * John III Sobieski (Encyclopedia of World History )

That's nice, but since we don't care about encyclopedic use at Jogaila, why care about it here? :( --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 14:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Trivia: Scutum Sobieski modifications
The constellation Scutum Sobieski was named after John III Sobieski. The trivia section speculated that the name Sobieski was dropped since no other person/house kept it's constellation person/house connection. That's speculation – fascinating – but not proper for an encyclopedia. For talk page's it might be OK, however, since some editor might know a doctor, that actually know an old pergament where astronomer X writes to astronomer Y, saying that "this family stuff in the stars is unacceptable, I will speak for removing the name sobieski", etc. (just '''speculation – don't take this for truth, please!). Now speculation alternatives: Speculated: Rursus declamavi;  17:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) the name Scutum Sobieski was too long and awkward, and since there was no other shield in the sky, the astronomers decided Scutum was enough,
 * 2) all other "fawning" constellations were removed, f.ex. Sceptrum Brandenburgicum, Taurus Poniatovii, Telescopium Herschelii etc., but since Scutum was too well established, then only the the last name was dropped ...

But ... Stars named after individuals are seldom older than from the 19th century, and almost exclusively called after their "discoverers". Earlier star names named after persons ... well ... the practical joke names Rotanev and Sualocin (allegedly after Niccolò_Cacciatore), and then Cor Caroli. Only Cor Caroli after a non-astronomer Charles II of England, which makes person names after non-astronomers among the stars incredibly rare! Rursus declamavi;  17:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Any defeats?
Can anyone tell me if Sobieski ever lost a military engagement? I checked all the articles that wikipedia has on his battles and they're all victories. I wasn't able to find much on the smaller battles so I can't tell what their result was. Help is much appreciated. JRWalko 20:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

laurel wreath
Do the depictions of him wearing the triumphant commander's laurel wreath start after the Battle of Vienna? It seems a safe bet, but I'd like to be sure before mentioning it in the article. —Charles P._ (Mirv) 14:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Leelee Sobieski
She has the same last name, but I don't think her Jewish descent as it pertains to bagels warrants inclusion in this article. Any assertion of lineage to Jan III Sobieski belongs in Leelee's bio. Rstandefer 16:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Jan III Sobieski
Here's the beef. "Jan III Sobieski" Google Book Search yields 1087 results. These are English language titles of course. Although the same Google Book Search yields 1385 results for John III Sobieski, I would argue that, since the numbers are comparable, Wikipedia ought to promote the name most reflective of both English and Polish scientific literature. --Poeticbent talk  15:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

 * See above, consensus is John III Sobieski. -- Matthead discuß!    O       14:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

What consensus are you talking about? Please read the writing on the wall. There was no consensus, just a vote that went both ways and could be interpreted both ways depending on who contributed and why. I suspect however, that you wouldn't be making it difficult for the others if you actually cared.

Also: I would like to stress the importance of guidelines provided for your consideration at Naming conventions. Quote: “Editors are strongly discouraged from editing for the sole purpose of changing one controversial name to another.”

Somebody, please, write in the opening line that almost half of all English language titles speak of Jan III Sobieski instead of John III Sobieski. User:Matthead carefully removed that fact from the opening paragraph which speaks volumes about his intentions. --Poeticbent talk  16:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Jan III Sobieski (Ministry of Foreigns Affairs of Poland )
 * Jan III Sobieski (Hyperhistory.net )
 * Jan III Sobieski (University of Twente in Enschede )
 * Jan III Sobieski (Modern History Sourcebook )
 * Jan III Sobieski (IntraText Digital Library )
 * John III Sobieski, or Jan III Sobieski, king of Poland (www.britannica.com )
 * Jan III Sobieski (The Royal Collection, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II )
 * Jan III Sobieski (Norman Davies, God's Playground: A History of Poland )
 * Jan III Sobieski (Library of Congress ), etc.

 * You can try a proper WP:RM.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Before my edits, the article violated WP:MOS which says "If possible, the article’s title is the subject of the first sentence of the article, for example, “This Manual of Style is a style guide”". And besides, what were your unilateral move and edits, if not "for the sole purpose of changing one controversial name to another"? -- Matthead discuß!    O       00:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I made an edit that fixed the intro according to the article name (English Wikipedia), defended it (rv - John as per consensus article name) and then reverted back to the state before your unilateral move and changes (revert back to consensus Talk:Jan_III_Sobieski#Renaming_proposal_-_John_III_Sobieski). Poeticbent, better explain now where I "carefully removed that fact" "that almost half of all English language titles speak of Jan". All there is is this diff, which, compared to the last version of Piotrus, adds the underwhelming also referred to as before the other name version. -- Matthead discuß!    O       00:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Please don’t play dumb with me, Matthead. One look at your contributions proves that you have no interest in Polish history and the only reason you reverted all my good faith edits is to get back at Polish editors with whom you’ve been edit-warring for months over a couple of unrelated articles. A number of editors objected to John III Sobieski name change (see above), therefore my move was far from “unilateral”. It was inspired by comments from those who care about Polish history and are poised to promote it from the the same perspective.

When I changed the name of the article to Jan III Sobieski as per Ministry of Foreigns Affairs of Poland, I also included in the opening paragraph: “Jan III Sobieski, also referred to as John III Sobieski,” to indicate that both are established names in English. You removed that alternative name. You also removed all phrases and captions referring to English name Jan Sobieski, like “Monument to King Jan III Sobieski”, etc. You know better than that. --Poeticbent talk  15:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

John III Sobieski → Jan III Sobieski as per Ministry of Foreigns Affairs of Poland. See above.

 * Oppose unless the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs has taken control of English Wikipedia. Has anything changed since the last round? —    AjaxSmack     06:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Per the last round, indeed.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 10:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose as per above, the last round, and other John and John III. No privileges for Poland, Ministry of Foreigns Affairs or Jan Sobieski. -- Matthead discuß!    O       14:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support for reasons already mentioned, Space Cadet 15:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. As explained earlier, both names are used in English on equal footing and both are used by highly reputable sources. Wikipedia stands in the forefront of change though, allowing for names acceptable from multilingual perspective. The most important difference coming from the proposed name-change reflects the guidelines established at the source, promoted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland among numerous English language scholars who devote their life to the study of Polish history, Norman Davies being one of them. Besides, we are far from setting the precedence here. Please see other prominent Poles whose names could hardly be questioned, like Jan Długosz, Jan Matejko, Ignacy Jan Paderewski, Jan Kochanowski, Jan Zamoyski, Jan Potocki, Jan Piotr Sapieha, Jan Wielopolski, etc. The name John derives from the Latin Johanne (see: John (name)), simplified from Johannes. Seventeenth Century English texts still spelt the name Iohn (compare the Romanian Ion). Alternative and other language forms are: Yohanna (arabic: يوحنا), Eoin (Irish language derivation of Seán), Evan (Welsh a pre-Christian Celtic), Jevan (variation of Evan), Giovanni, Gianni (Italian), and Jan (Norwegian, Dutch, and Polish). It is my belief that the name Jan III Sobieski will serve the article better. --Poeticbent talk  15:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support for reasons stated above.--Molobo 20:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now. Polish monarch articles need to be mass-moved by name, not individually. Not against using modern orthographically Polish names for Polish monarchs in principle, irrespective of their popularity or lack of it, just needs to be consistent and must not mislead people into thinking that monarchs had only Polish culture, when indeed some were international in culture, or often bi-cultural Polish/German, Polish/Lithuanian, etc. Not sure if this vote has even been registered. In this case, it is clear that John is primarily Polish, but I'm opposing solely because such a move would result in some Polish Johns being John, while this guy would be Jan. Does it even make that much difference? John's an international name, not a name particularly associated with any other culture (i.e. German culture), and most English speakers will think of Jan not as Polish, but as Scandinavian. Anyways, properly propose a vote on all the Johns and I may change my vote. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 20:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose English names for historical monarchs, regardless of what the treatment is in Poland or the English form given by Polish agencies. Charles 04:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Wikipedia uses the most common name used in English scholarship. Noel S McFerran 04:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose as per AjaxSmack and Charles. Olessi 19:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose; use English. We say Henry IV of France; how is this different? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose, this is an English wikipedia.--Aldux 12:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose, currently there is no valid ground for changing established English name. M.K. 17:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 06:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Royal titles
I think that polish translation is wrong, there are two times "litewski" but it rather should be "inflancki". Please check it.--77.253.55.110 (talk) 23:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

This page was vandalized
I deleted the whole thing until it can be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gunslinger1812 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

This is an article?
Seriously? An article about a baby who died at two years old? He wasn't even the heir to the throne, since Poland was an elective monarchy. john k (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed: content moved to his father's article.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Ahnentafel removal
Here is a copy of the ahnentafel which was removed from the article, as seen in this edit. While I agree with the removal as so many persons are not notable, I have included here so that other editors can view it decide if those notable relations should be incorporated into the text. — MrDolomite • Talk 20:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

B-class review
This article is currently at start/C class, but could be improved to B-class if it had more (inline) citations. Also, some parts need expansion, the current article does not look comprehensive. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 18:42, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The ur-bagel?
''A legend of the origins of the bagel refers to John III Sobieski as the king to whom a Jewish baker gave the very first bagel in commemoration of his victory at Vienna in 1683. The round shape of the bagel was said to resemble the stirrups of Sobieski and his mounted warriors.''

Nothing against Jan Sobieski, but this sounds bogus. Cf. the entry on bagel: "Contrary to common legend, the bagel was not created in the shape of a stirrup to commemorate the victory of Poland's King Jan III Sobieski over the Ottoman Turks in the Battle of Vienna in 1683."

I read somewhere that the word "bagel" is etymologically related to the German verb beugen, to bend.

Sca (talk) 21:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I think that's why it says "A legend of...". Having said that, I thought the legend was about the croissant, not the bagel. Volunteer Marek 21:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Here's a source thought it seems to mix up the croissant and the bagel thing into one. Volunteer Marek  21:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Also it should be noted that the entry in the bagel article has a tag in it, while there are actually quite number of sources which make the connection between the bagel and Sobieski . True or not, it is a common origins story and I'm not seeing any sources which definitely disprove this particular one (of course personally I don't think this is the kind of thing that can actually be known). Volunteer Marek  22:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

 * For what it's worth, my Webster's New World Dictionary says "bagel" is related to etymologically to both Bügel (stirrup) and beugen — Bügel the noun presumably stemming from beugen the verb.

 * Also for what it's worth, the German Wiki entry says, in translation: "The name of the baked good probably stems from Middle High German bougel (ring) or from the Yiddish beigen (to bend)."

 * Footnote: In my Warsaw days, I used to buy bagels from a stand in an underground pedestrian passageway beneath Al. Ujazdowskie, near the north end of Łazienki Park. They had more body than the Americanized version here. Sca (talk) 14:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC).

 * You might mean pl:Obwarzanek krakowski, which needs translation to English Wikipedia. In Poland we classify it (I think) as a Pretzel, not a bagel, which is relatively unpopular (I have almost never seen it in Poland). Polish Wikipedia credits the Sobieski story to . We should probably add the references we found to the article... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 16:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Tak, that's what they looked like, all right. But they weren't totally hard, like pretzels are here (although we also have a soft pretzel variant sold at stands, but they are very soft). Sca (talk) 16:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Obwarzanki are neither pretzels nor bagels (there are regular pretzels in Poland) but their own (pretty awesome) thing. Volunteer Marek 16:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The connection of the name to Yiddish or even German makes perfect sense but it doesn't really contradict the (true, probably invented) Sobieski legend. Volunteer Marek 16:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Agreed. Sca (talk) 16:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I reverted that last addition - though I have no problem with it if a source can be found. Many of the sources I linked to above seem to take the legend at face value.16:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

hello
hello, am new here. please just get back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian225 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Picture removed
Hello, user Oliszydlowski reverted this picture when I added it to this article. Oliszydlowski, I realize that you have not yet had the opportunity to realise why that picture was added that you reverted. Maybe you didn't realize we are trying to nominate this picture Portrait of John III Sobieski as a Featured Picture. The same way there are Featured articles, there are Featured pictures too. That would be Featured Pictures.

The painting is a google file and is from the project Google art project, that deliver high-resolution images of artworks in collaboration with the museums. The Google Art Project is noted for its accuracy in the depictions of the artworks. This one was comming directly from the museum, and has a good chance to make it as a very good scan of high quality of a notable and important person. I am familiar with the requirements.

I tried to add a file that had a fair fighting chance, because I know how pictures are judged and what it takes to became a FP. The picture that in the lead and the other pictures in the article would get quickly   Oppose votes for a number of reasons. It is about how pictures are judged. I'm afraid that I if you remove the picture, we are not going to make it to nominate a painting of John III Sobieski as Featured picture. That would be a great pity. Please add back the picture to the article. If I don't get any response I will add it back for all the reasons above. Hafspajen (talk) 14:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Trivia legacy
I am moving this terrible and mostly unreferenced section here. I will write a new legacy and significance section, and I don't see much here worth retaining. Still, maybe somebody will want to do something with that.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * After World War II, a statue of John III Sobieski was "repatriated" to Gdańsk from Lwów (a city now in Ukraine currently named Lviv). The statue overlooks a little park at the old Gdańsk City Hall museum.
 * After the Battle of Vienna, the newly delineated Constellation of Scutum (Latin for shield) was originally named Scutum Sobiescianum by the astronomer Johannes Hevelius, in honor of John III Sobieski. While there are a few stars named after non-astronomers, this is the only constellation named after a real non-astronomer, moreover, one who was still alive when the constellation was named.
 * A legend of the origins of the bagel refers to John III Sobieski as the king to whom a Jewish baker gave the very first bagel in commemoration of his victory at Vienna in 1683. The round shape of the bagel was said to resemble the stirrups of Sobieski and his mounted warriors.
 * The EuroCity train route between Vienna and Warsaw (trains 104/105) are named after Sobieski.
 * A fragrance named Bouquet Sobieski created in 1908 by Polish American perfumer John Blocki
 * There is a modern proposition from non-Polish European newspapers to name the A2 highway in Poland after Sobieski.
 * Sobieski, a vodka brand named after His Majesty John III
 * A cigarette brand owned by British American Tobacco is called Jan III Sobieski

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John III Sobieski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161112212930/https://www.msz.gov.pl/resource/21badcbf-0c18-4fb8-8b19-3d382469d25f%3AJCR to https://www.msz.gov.pl/resource/21badcbf-0c18-4fb8-8b19-3d382469d25f%3AJCR
 * Added tag to http://wielkisobieski.pl/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:John III Sobieski


text:
Talk:Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki

Untitled
This is no badly named, but I don't know who this guy is from the article. Which Michael (number) is this, or does he have a better name? JHK

Move
This should be moved to Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki or Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki, I think. Comments? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:02, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I think if anything this article needs to be moved to Michał Wiśniowiecki of Poland per Wikipedia naming convention on naming royals? The current format looks ackward. Or maybe King Michał Wiśniowiecki of Poland? Gryffindor  20:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Names - English pages only.
 * Note: Google plain seems to ignore the difference between diactrics or not. Google Books however does not, thus I did most the searchers without Polish diactrics.

Counted by --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Michal Korybut Wisniowiecki/Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki Google 738, Books 3
 * Michal Wisniowiecki/Michał Wiśniowiecki Google 371, Books 2 (note this is not that precise, as there have been other Michał Wiśniowiecki's - although they are much less famous then the king Korybut)
 * Michal Korybut/Michał Korybut Google 788 Books 10 (this means there is about 50 plain Google, since there is 738 of MKW. Google Books is misleading here, (see examples) so I suggest to treat it as 3=0)
 * Michal of Poland/Michał of Poland 4, Books 0
 * Michael Korybut Wisniowiecki Google 987, Books 3
 * Michael Wisniowiecki Google 580, Books 13
 * Michael Korybut+Poland (to remove others) Google 1040 (note: that's about 50 new) Books 7
 * Michael of Poland Google 71, Books 3

Analysis: Michal vs Michael: 1100:1600 in Google, 3:19 in Print. It does appear that Michael is slightly more popular then Michal.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk  17:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

 * But also it is clearly shown that 'Michael of Poland' is a wiki-invented strange name. The only acceptable two names are the two I listed in the opening of this section: Michał or Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki. Since he was the first elected king from inside Poland, I'd vote for retention of his Polish name, instead of the Englicized 'Michael'.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Name
In addition to above, see aslo Naming_convention.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree this should be moved, at least to Michael Korybut or Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki. If even you think this, then you should probably just move it. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * would anyone object if I move to Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki? john k 04:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

First Polish monarch since Sigismund II?
I'm not sure that this statement makes much sense. The Jagiellons were a Lithuanian dynasty. Sigismund II was certainly born and raised in Poland, and I suppose we can consider him Polish in that sense, but if you consider him Polish in that regard, don't you have to consider Wladyslaw IV and John Casimir Polish as well? That is to say, what definition of "Polish" includes the Jagiellons and excludes the later Vasa rulers, who were likewise born in Poland? Michael is arguably the first Polish ruler since the death of Casimir the Great, isn't he? john k 04:04, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that this statement refers to the 'first from Polish nobility' (szlachta). Jagiellons were not Polish nobility, nor was W4W; in 17-18th centuries there was actually quite an interesting debate among nobility about about pros and cons of electing a 'Polish' king (at least in origins); one of Wiśniowiecki 'electoral ads' went along the lines of 'back to the Piasts' (of course the fact that his family had Ruthenian origins were conviniently ommitted by his suporters)... :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:00, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * So, as I said, he's arguably the first Polish monarch since Casimir III, right? The Jagiellons were no more Polish than the later Vasas in this sense, were they? john k 12:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I thinkt the text which currently states 'of Polish origin' is quite acceptable. Granted, the latter Jagiellons were quite polonized, but I think there is no denying the origins (which in J. case were Lithuanian, and Vasas, Swedish).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What I mean is, the article says he was the first monarch of Polish origins since Sigismund II Augustus. But Sigismund Augustus was from a Lithuanian family, and had no Polish ancestors. The current article seems to be saying that the later Jagiellons were "of Polish origins," but that the later Vasas were not.  john k 15:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

New naming discussion
Three years later, I no longer think my proposal above has merit. We should avoid anglicizing first names, and the name of this king was Michał, not Michael. Further, even if we were to agree on Micheal, there is no justification whatsoever for dropping his surname as was done in this move. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 23:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

 * I disagree. We should anglicize first names whenever the anglicized version is more common in English-language references. Name is not something that a person is born with; names are given and different cultures give different names to different people. When English-language sources use a name other than the person's "real" name, why would we insist on using the "real name"? Who is William Bradley Pitt and who is Brad Pitt? Do I need to list all English-language books which refer to this king as Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki (not to mention the books which refer to him as Michael Korybut)? It would certainly be easier to list those which refer to him Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki, for the number of those books is tiny. I really don't understand this fight against the most common name rule when the most common name is an anglicized version of the name; for example, I don't see many Polish Wikipedians fighting to move Elżbieta II to Elizabeth II, nor do I see Spanish Wikipedians fighting to move Isabel II to Elizabeth II. Surtsicna (talk) 11:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It's been eleven days. Is there still opposition to the most common name? (I forgot about this issue; I can thank SmackBot for bringing the article on my watchlist again) Surtsicna (talk) 14:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

 * I don't see a need to Anglicize this either. "Michal" is used in many English language sources, for example in Norman Davies classic history of Poland, "God's Playground" - . So yes, there is opposition. radek (talk) 18:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

 * And it is still not explained why we should drop his surname from the new name. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

 * We don't need to drop his surname; I dropped it because "Michael Korybut" is unambigious and descriptive enough (as is Marie Antoinette, where there is no need for of Austria or de Habsbourg-Lorraine). I wouldn't object to keeping the surname though. "Michal" is indeed used in many English-language sources, but it seems to me that "Michael" is used far more often. For example, Piotr Stefan Wandycz's history of East Central Europe from the Middle Ages to the present uses "Michael". Surtsicna (talk) 19:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

If nobody is going to bother discussing this issue, I will be bold. I shouldn't need to ask for an answer. Surtsicna (talk) 21:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

 * It's been four days since I asked for an answer and eight days since my last argument. I'm moving the article. Surtsicna (talk) 17:21, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Alexander Jagiellon which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 20:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Name
The discussion that took place three years ago resulted in this article being named Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki. For three years, nobody disputed that. The consensus did not "expire" after three years. If one wishes to rename the article, please start a new discussion. Surtsicna (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, I am not sure who you had in mind, but the information about the Order was inserted almost six years ago by an anonymous user. I agree with you - it seems rather trivial. Surtsicna (talk) 15:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

 * Let's do a proper WP:RM which will be properly advertised. PS. And for the record, it's not true that nobody disputed that - I did numerous times. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 15:15, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

 * A proper discussion should be made about the title Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki. The title Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki was a result of a discussion you participated in. You abandoned the discussion and I made the move. The article remained titled Michael Korybut Wiśniowiecki for three years until it was moved without a prior discussion and without a consensus, so it only makes sense to discuss that title, don't you think? Surtsicna (talk) 15:22, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki


text:
User:Adam Theo

Theoretic Solutions, an informal Wiki think-tank for Jabber, Digital Identity, and other Open Source ideas.

title: User:Adam Theo


text:
Talk:Habeas corpus

Habeas corpus and the Royal writ
Please see Writs (also xref'd in the article) where an explanation similar to that of Churchill is given. Regarding Fair use I have used ellipses to save space, but the brief sections quoted, (each about 1 1/2 sentences long) could be broken down into three even smaller fragments if that is desirable.

British Anti-Terror laws
I'm no fan of the abolition of habeas corpus (as it's about to be done in Aus), but the section on British anti-terrorist legislation is definitely not NPOV. It should be rephrased, but if I do it, the section would be a one-liner.

Cognate
Wouldn't "habeas" be a cognate with "haber", Spanish for "to have (verb)". Also, "corpus" sounds like "corpse".

Manifest Destiny problem
It seems to me that the article's statement that habeas corpus is / has been interpreted as being associated with Manifest Destiny should be cited, and if there is evidence for this claim, moved to a different section of the article; i.e., from Derivation to History.

More pressing is the subjective conjecture that: "In this sense habeas corpus justified American involvement in the Vietman War and the merciful killing of African-Americans along the coast of Ghana." There is no mention of Ghana in the Manifest Destiny article (nor Eisenhower's), nor any indication that this is an unbiased and factual description. Is the word "merciful" racist or ironic; I can't tell.

This article - A question of freedom: - seems to describe what the statement is alluding to, but shows a more believable portrayal of Ghana's independence being a political rallying point in the US, vis-a-vis the claim that African-Americans were killed along the coast of Ghana, which is obviously contentious, if not patently false.

I don't know what to do about this, other than deletion, but it seriously detracts from the article's quality.

title: Talk:Habeas corpus


text:
Dartmouth Dam

Dartmouth Dam is a large rock-fill embankment dam with an uncontrolled chute spillway across the Mitta Mitta, Gibbo and Dart rivers, the Morass Creek and a number of small tributaries. The dam is located near Mount Bogong in the north-east of the Australian state of Victoria. The dam's purpose includes irrigation, the generation of hydro-electric power, water supply and conservation. The impounded reservoir is called Dartmouth Reservoir, sometimes called Lake Dartmouth. The Dartmouth Power Station, a hydro-electric power station that generates power to the national grid, is located near the dam wall.

A smaller pond, called the Dartmouth Dam Regulating Pond or Banimboola Pondage, approximately 9 km downstream of the main dam, also across the Mitta Mitta River, is located adjacent the Banimboola Hydroelectric Power Station and forms part of the Dartmouth Dam complex of facilities.

Location and features
Designed by the State Rivers & Water Supply Commission of Victoria, construction commenced in 1973 and was completed in 1979 by Thiess Brothers, at a cost of A$179 million. The embankment dam wall is constructed with an earth core and rock fill, rising to a height of 180 m from the lowest part of the foundation to the roadway across the top of the dam, making the dam wall the highest in Australia.

The core component materials of the wall include 10.5 e6m3 of rock, 0.8 e6m3 of filter material made from crushed quarried rock, and 2.8 e6m3 of earth for the core. The reservoir has a capacity of 3856 GL, or approximately 6.7 times the capacity of Sydney Harbour; and can release a maximum outflow of approximately 12 GL per day in normal operation.

The crest of the uncontrolled spillway is 486 m and is approximately 92 m long. When full, flood flows spill over the crest and down an 80 m concrete chute. The water then returns to the river via an open rock cascade which gradually widens to 300 m at river level. Once Dartmouth Reservoir reaches 99% capacity, it is considered to be 'operationally full'. Releases are then set to pass inflows downstream to prevent the level rising further.

Releases are passed through the outlet works and power station whenever possible. Water will only flow over the spillway if significant flood inflows enter from upstream when the storage is close to full. This approach reduces the chance of downstream flooding, maximises operating flexibility for hydro-power generation, and protects the spillway.

The Dartmouth Dam stores water from the Victorian High Country's snow fields for summer release into the Mitta Mitta, and the downstream Lake Hume, and into the greater Murray River for irrigation. The reservoir's inflow and outflow capacity is quite small considering its size, meaning that its levels vary little compared with some other dams on the Murray and their tributaries.

The reservoir is a popular recreational trout fishery, being regularly restocked by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries.

Hydro-electric power generation
Designed by the State Electricity Commission of Victoria, and constructed by Lewis Constructions, and commissioned in January 1981, Dartmouth Power Station has one Francis turbine-generator, with a generating capacity of 180 MW, the largest single installed hydroelectric turbine in Australia. It is owned and operated by AGL Energy.

Power station damage
On 2 May 1990, the 180 MW Francis turbine-generator running at full speed was instantaneously stopped by a foreign body left in the penstock following maintenance. The installation shifted about 2 m within the base of the 180 m earth and rock fill gravity dam wall of the 3,906 GL reservoir. After initial consternation regarding the integrity of the wall, declared safe after lengthy assessment), the hydro installation was repaired/replaced, but was off-line for several years.

A breach of the wall would have obliterated a couple of small towns and a sparsely settled agricultural area in the relatively narrow 120 km Mitta Mitta valley below the dam. More significantly, it would have resulted in the over-topping and probable failure of the earthen walls of the 40 m, 3,038 GL Lake Hume, 200 km downstream on the Murray River. This is immediately upstream of the regional cities of Albury and Wodonga, and a much more intensively settled irrigation area, and consequences would have been disastrous.

In May 1990, the turbine casing and concrete machine block surrounding the power station were destroyed, when two steel beams entered the turbine. The resulting force ruined the power station and the dam's control systems, making it impossible to gradually release water from the near-capacity dam by conventional means. An improvised system, placing large pipes over the spillway to siphon water over it, was soon installed. The inflow from an unusually wet spring meant that the dam would have overflowed anyway, leading to a spectacular cascade over the huge rock steps, formed when the rock used for the dam was quarried from the valley walls. The station was re-built and recommissioned in 1993.

Pondage expansion
In 2003, the capacity of the regulating pondage was increased to further optimise the power station's generation flexibility. The station is connected to the electricity grid via a 220 kV transmission line to Mount Beauty, 40 km away.

Ecological impact on the Murray–Darling Basin
The construction and operation of Dartmouth Dam has caused significant changes to the flow patterns and ecology of the Mitta Mitta and Murray rivers. In particular, the unnaturally cold water released from the dam, up to 10 C colder than it naturally should be, contributed directly to the disappearance of the Murray cod, trout cod and Macquarie perch from the Mitta Mitta River within the first few years of the start of the dam's existence. Cold water pollution caused by Dartmouth Dam is also considered to have contributed to the disappearance of the freshwater catfish from the upper reaches of the Murray River.

Climate
Climate data for the region are sourced at the bottom of the dam wall, in a relatively sheltered spot at 365 m above sea level. Rainfall records began in 1918. Temperature records began in 1975. Winter is twice as wet as summer, and occasionally it may snow.

title: Dartmouth Dam


text:
Algebraic notation (chess)

Algebraic notation is the standard method for recording and describing the moves in a game of chess. It is based on a system of coordinates to uniquely identify each square on the board. It is now almost universally used by books, magazines, newspapers and software, and is the only form of notation recognized by FIDE, the international chess governing body.

An early form of algebraic notation was invented by the Syrian player Philip Stamma in the 18th century. In the 19th century, it came into general use in German chess literature, and was subsequently adopted in Russian chess literature. In English-speaking countries, the parallel method of descriptive notation was generally used in chess publications until the 1980s. Similar descriptive systems were in use in Spain and France. A few players still use descriptive notation, but it is no longer recognized by FIDE.

The term "algebraic notation" may be considered a misnomer, as the system is unrelated to algebra.

Naming the squares
Each square of the board is identified by a unique coordinate pair—a letter and a number—from White's point of view. The vertical columns of squares, called , are labeled a through h from White's left (the ) to right (the ). The horizontal rows of squares, called , are numbered 1 to 8 starting from White's side of the board. Thus each square has a unique identification of file letter followed by rank number. For example, the initial square of White's king is designated as "e1".

Naming the pieces
Each piece type (other than pawns) is identified by an uppercase letter. English-speaking players use the letters K for king, Q for queen, R for rook, B for bishop, and N for knight. Different initial letters are used by other languages.

In modern chess literature, especially that intended for an international audience, the language-specific letters are usually replaced by universally recognized piece symbols; for example, ♞c6 in place of Nc6. This style is known as figurine algebraic notation. The Unicode Miscellaneous Symbols set includes all the symbols necessary for figurine algebraic notation.

Notation for moves
In standard (or short form) algebraic notation, each move of a piece is indicated by the piece's uppercase letter, plus the coordinates of the destination square. For example, Be5 (bishop moves to e5), Nf3 (knight moves to f3). For pawn moves, a letter indicating pawn is not used, only the destination square is given. For example, c5 (pawn moves to c5).

Captures
When a piece makes a, an "x" is inserted immediately before the destination square. For example, Bxe5 (bishop captures the piece on e5). When a pawn makes a capture, the from which the pawn departed is used to identify the pawn. For example, exd5 (pawn on the e-file captures the piece on d5).

En passant captures are indicated by specifying the capturing pawn's file of departure, the "x", the destination square (not the square of the captured pawn), and (optionally) the suffix "e.p." indicating the capture was en passant. For example, exd6 e.p.

Sometimes a multiplication sign (×) or a colon is used instead of "x", either in the middle (B:e5) or at the end (Be5:). Some publications, such as the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings (ECO), omit any indication that a capture has been made; for example, Be5 instead of Bxe5; ed6 instead of exd6 or exd6 e.p.

When it is unambiguous to do so, a pawn capture is sometimes described by specifying only the files involved (exd or even ed). These shortened forms are sometimes called abbreviated algebraic notation or minimal algebraic notation.

Disambiguating moves
When two (or more) identical pieces can move to the same square, the moving piece is uniquely identified by specifying the piece's letter, followed by (in descending order of preference):
 * 1) the file of departure (if they differ)
 * 2) the rank of departure (if the files are the same but the ranks differ)

If neither file nor rank alone is sufficient to identify the piece, then both are specified.

In the diagram, both black rooks could legally move to f8, so the move of the d8-rook to f8 is disambiguated as Rdf8. For the white rooks on the a-file which could both move to a3, it is necessary to provide the of the moving piece, i.e., R1a3.

In the case of the white queen on h4 moving to e1, neither the rank nor file alone are sufficient to disambiguate from the other white queens. As such, this move is written Qh4e1.

As above, an "x" can be inserted to indicate a capture; for example, if the final case were a capture, it would be written as Qh4xe1.

Pawn promotion
When a pawn promotes, the piece promoted to is indicated at the end. For example, a pawn on e7 promoting to a queen on e8 may be variously rendered as e8Q, e8=Q, e8(Q), e8/Q etc.

 Draw offer
FIDE specifies draw offers to be recorded by an equals sign with parentheses "(=)" after the move on the. This is not usually included in published game scores.

Castling
Castling is indicated by the special notations 0-0 (for castling) and 0-0-0 ( castling). O-O and O-O-O (letter O rather than digit 0) are also commonly used.

Check
A move that places the opponent's king in check usually has the symbol "+" appended. Alternatively, sometimes a dagger (†) or the abbreviation "ch" is used. Some publications indicate a discovered check with an abbreviation such as "dis ch", or with a specific symbol. Double check is usually indicated the same as check, but is sometimes represented specifically as "dbl ch" or "++", particularly in older chess literature. Some publications such as ECO omit any indication of check.

Checkmate
Checkmate at the completion of moves is represented by the symbol "#" in standard FIDE notation and PGN. The word mate is commonly used instead; occasionally a double dagger ($‡$) or a double plus sign (++) is used, although the double plus sign is also used to represent "double check" when a king is under attack by two enemy pieces simultaneously. A checkmate is represented by "$≠$" (the not equal sign) in the macOS chess application. In Russian and ex-USSR publications, where captures are indicated by ":", checkmate can also be represented by "X" or "x".

End of game
The notation 1–0 at the completion of moves indicates that White won, 0–1 indicates that Black won, and ½–½ indicates a draw. In case of, the scores 0–0, ½–0, and 0–½ are also possible. If player(s) lost by default, results are +/−, −/+, or −/−.

Often there is no indication regarding how a player won or lost (other than checkmate, see above), so simply 1–0 or 0–1 may be written to show that one player resigned or lost due to time control or forfeit. Similarly, there is more than one way for a game to end in a draw. Sometimes direct information is given by the words "White resigns" or "Black resigns", though this is not considered part of the notation but rather a return to the surrounding narrative text.

Similar notations
Besides the standard (or short) algebraic notation already described, several similar systems have been used.

Long algebraic notation
In long algebraic notation, also known as fully expanded algebraic notation, both the starting and ending squares are specified, for example: e2e4. Sometimes these are separated by a hyphen, e.g. Nb1-c3, while captures are indicated by an "x", e.g. Rd3xd7. Long algebraic notation takes more space and is no longer commonly used in print; however, it has the advantage of clarity. Both short and long algebraic notation are acceptable for keeping a record of the moves on a scoresheet, as is required in FIDE rated games.

A form of long algebraic notation (without piece names) is also used by the Universal Chess Interface (UCI) standard, which is a common way for graphical chess programs to communicate with chess engines, e.g. e2e4, e1g1 (castling), e7e8q (promotion).

ICCF numeric notation
In international correspondence chess the use of algebraic notation may cause confusion, since different languages employ different names (and therefore different initial letters) for the pieces, and some players may be unfamiliar with the Latin alphabet. Hence, the standard for transmitting moves by post or email is ICCF numeric notation, which identifies squares using numerical coordinates, and identifies both the departure and destination squares. For example, the move 1.e4 is rendered as 1.5254. In recent years, the majority of correspondence games have been played on on-line servers rather than by email or post, leading to a decline in the use of ICCF numeric notation.

PGN
Portable Game Notation (PGN) is a text-based file format for storing chess games, which uses standard English algebraic notation and a small amount of markup. PGN can be processed by almost all chess software, as well as being easily readable by humans. For example, the Game of the Century could be represented as follows in PGN:

Formatting
A game or series of moves is generally written in one of two ways; in two columns, as White/Black pairs, preceded by the move number and a period:
 * 1. e4 e5
 * 2. Nf3 Nc6
 * 3. Bb5 a6

or horizontally:
 * 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6

Moves may be interspersed with commentary, called . When the resumes with a Black move, an ellipsis (...) fills the position of the White move, for example:
 * 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3
 * White attacks the black e-pawn.
 * 2... Nc6
 * Black defends and develops simultaneously.
 * 3. Bb5
 * White plays the Ruy Lopez.
 * 3... a6
 * Black elects Morphy's Defence.

Annotation symbols
Though not technically a part of algebraic notation, the following are some symbols commonly used by annotators, for example in publications Chess Informant and Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings, to give editorial comment on a move or position.

The symbol chosen is simply appended to the end of the move notation, for example, in the Soller Gambit: 1.d4 e5?! 2.dxe5 f6 3.e4! Nc6 4.Bc4+/−

History
Descriptive notation was usual in the Middle Ages in Europe. A form of algebraic chess notation that seems to have been borrowed from Muslim chess, however, appeared in Europe in a 12th century manuscript referred to as "MS. Paris Fr. 1173 (PP.)". The files run from a to h, just as they do in the current standard algebraic notation. The ranks, however, are also designated by letters, with the exception of the 8th rank which is distinct because it has no letter. The ranks are lettered in reverse – from the 7th to the 1st: k, l, m, n, o, p, q.

Another system of notation using only letters appears in a book of Mediaeval chess, Rechenmeister Jacob Köbel's Schachzabel Spiel of 1520.

Algebraic notation exists in various forms and languages and is based on a system developed by Philipp Stamma in the 1730s. Stamma used the modern names of the squares (and may have been the first to number the ranks), but he used p for pawn moves and the capital original of a piece (A through H) instead of the initial letter of the piece name as used now. Piece letters were introduced in the 1780s by Moses Hirschel, and Johann Allgaier with Aaron Alexandre developed the modern castling notation in the 1810s.

Algebraic notation was described in 1847 by Howard Staunton in his book The Chess-Player's Handbook. Staunton credits the idea to German authors, and in particular to "Alexandre, Jaenisch, and the Handbuch ." While algebraic notation has been used in German and Russian chess literature since the 19th century, the Anglosphere was slow to adopt it, using descriptive notation for much of the 20th century. Beginning in the 1970s, algebraic notation gradually became more common in English language publications, and by 1980 it had become the prevalent notation. In 1981, FIDE stopped recognizing descriptive notation, and algebraic notation became the accepted international standard.

Piece names in various languages
The table contains names for all the pieces as well as the words for, , and in several languages. Several languages use the Arabic loanword alfil for the piece called bishop in English; in this context it is a chess-specific term which no longer has its original meaning of "elephant".

title: Algebraic notation (chess)


text:
Milk bar

In Australia, a milk bar is a suburban local general store which can include delicatessens or "delis" and corner shops or corner stores. Similar, but not identical, establishments include tuck shops. Milk bars are traditionally a place where people buy newspapers, and fast-food items such as fish and chips, hamburgers, milkshakes, and snacks. They are essentially a smaller-scale suburban form of the convenience store but are more likely to be "mum and dad" small businesses rather than larger franchised operations. The term is also found in New Zealand, alongside the more local term dairy.

History

The first business using the name "milk bar" was started in India in 1930 by an Englishman, James Meadow Charles when he opened Lake View Milk Bar at Bangalore. The concept soon spread to the United Kingdom, where it was encouraged by the Temperance Society as a morally acceptable alternative to the pub, and over 1,000 milk bars had opened nationally by the end of 1936. Milk bars were known in the United States at least as early as 1940 as evidenced by contemporary radio recordings.

By the late 1940s, milk bars had evolved to not only sell groceries, but were also places where young people could buy ready-made food and non-alcoholic drinks, and could socialise. Milk bars often had jukeboxes and pinball machines (later upgraded to video games), with tables and chairs to encourage patrons to linger and spend more money.

The milk bar as a social venue was gradually replaced by fast food franchises, such as McDonald's, and shopping malls. Much of the elaborate decor has disappeared from the remaining milk bars. They are still found in many areas, often serving as convenience stores.

Australia
Milk bars in Australia today almost universally sell ice creams, lollies, chocolate bars, soft drinks, newspapers, bread, cigarettes and occasionally fast food. Most generally serve milk (in cartons or bottles) or other dairy related products. Although there are far fewer milk bars than there were during the 1970s and 80s due to changing shopping habits, most people living in suburban areas still have a milk bar within walking distance or a short drive of their home.

United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, the National Milk Bar franchise was founded in 1933 by Robert William Griffiths as an ordinary café/restaurant chain which is related to the original milk bars in name only. Once numbering around 20 outlets, which were located in Wales and in England near the Welsh border, now only one remains. In the UK, corner shops serve a similar function to milk bars in modern Australia, providing everyday groceries, sweets, newspapers and such.

There is a campaign in the United Kingdom to encourage schoolchildren to consume more dairy products, by installing 'milk bars' in schools. The idea is that if the dairy products are attractively presented and properly stored, the children will be more willing to buy them. The organisers behind the project work to develop links with school caterers, so that the handling of milk and dairy produce can be improved, and they promote milk consumption and encourage milk drinking to become a habit that will be carried into adulthood. The milk bar project has been extremely successful in Scotland for 18 years, and it is currently being extended across England and Wales.

Similar establishments
A "dairy bar" is the term for a similar restaurant/store common in the Northeastern United States, especially upstate New York, which is a large producer of dairy products. A "malt shop" (named for the ingredient in a malted milkshake) is very similar to a milk or dairy bar, serving milkshakes and soft drinks as well as limited foods, such as hamburgers and sandwiches. Although there are still a few around, these have largely fallen out of fashion in favor of fast food.

The term dairy is also used for these establishments in some places, particularly in New Zealand.

The term bar mleczny (lit. 'milk bar') in Poland is used to describe popular and cheap cafeterias from the communist era that still exist today. They provide a wide range of government-subsidised meals. In 2011, however, the Polish government began to withdraw their subsidies, and this led to protests by people opposed to their closure.

title: Milk bar


text:
Iguazu Falls

Iguazú Falls or Iguaçu Falls (Chororõ Yguasu, Cataratas del Iguazú ; Cataratas do Iguaçu ) are waterfalls of the Iguazu River on the border of the Argentine province of Misiones and the Brazilian state of Paraná. Together, they make up the largest waterfall system in the world. The falls divide the river into the upper and lower Iguazu. The Iguazu River rises near the heart of the city of Curitiba. For most of its course, the river flows through Brazil; however, most of the falls are on the Argentine side. Below its confluence with the San Antonio River, the Iguazu River forms the border between Argentina and Brazil.

The name Iguazú comes from the Guarani or Tupi words "y", meaning "water", and "ûasú" , meaning "big". Legend has it that a deity planned to marry a beautiful woman named Naipí, who fled with her mortal lover Tarobá in a canoe. In a rage, the deity sliced the river, creating the waterfalls and condemning the lovers to an eternal fall. The first European to record the existence of the falls was the Spanish Conquistador Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca in 1541.

Geology and geography
The staircase character of the falls consists of a two-step waterfall formed by three layers of basalt. The steps are 35 and 40 m in height. The columnar basalt rock sequences are part of the 1000 m Serra Geral formation within the Paleozoic-Mesozoic Paraná Basin. The tops of these sequences are characterized by 8-10 m of highly resistant vesicular basalt and the contact between these layers controls the shape of the falls. Headwater erosion rates are estimated at 1.4-2.1 cm/year. Numerous islands along the 2.7 km edge divide the falls into many separate waterfalls and cataracts, varying between 60 and 82 m high. The number of these smaller waterfalls fluctuates from 150 to 300, depending on the water level. About half of the river's flow falls into a long and narrow chasm called the Devil's Throat (Garganta del Diablo in Spanish or Garganta do Diabo in Portuguese).

The Devil's Throat canyon is 80–90 m wide and 70-80 m deep. Left of this canyon, another part of the river forms 160–200 individual falls, which merge into a single front during the flood stage. The largest falls are named San Martín, Adam and Eva, Penoni, and Bergano.

About 900 m of the 2.7 km length does not have water flowing over it. The water of the lower Iguazu collects in a canyon that drains into the Paraná River, a short distance downstream from the Itaipu Dam. The junction of the water flows marks the border between Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. Some points in the cities of Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil, Puerto Iguazú, Argentina, and Ciudad del Este, Paraguay, have access to the Iguazu River, where the borders of all three nations may be seen, a popular tourist attraction for visitors to the three cities.

The Iguazu Falls are arranged in a way that resembles a reversed letter "J". The Argentina–Brazil border runs through the Devil's Throat. On the right bank is the Brazilian territory, which is home to more than 95% of the Iguazu River basin but has just over 20% of the jumps of these falls, and the left side jumps are Argentine, which make up almost 80% of the falls.

Tourism
Aerolíneas Argentinas has direct flights from Buenos Aires to Iguazu International Airport. Azul, GOL, and LATAM Brasil offer services from main Brazilian cities to Foz do Iguaçu.

Access
The falls may be reached from two main towns, with one on either side of the falls: Foz do Iguaçu in Brazil and Puerto Iguazú in Argentina, as well as from Ciudad del Este, Paraguay, on the other side of the Paraná River from Foz do Iguaçu, each of those three cities having commercial airports. The falls are shared by the Iguazú National Park (Argentina) and Iguaçu National Park (Brazil). The two parks were designated UNESCO World Heritage Sites in 1984 and 1986, respectively.

The first proposal for a Brazilian national park aimed at providing a pristine environment to "future generations", just as "it had been created by God" and endowed with "all possible preservation, from the beautiful to the sublime, from the picturesque to the awesome" and "an unmatched flora" located in the "magnificent Iguaçu waterfalls". These were the words used by André Rebouças, an engineer, in his book Provinces of Paraná, Railways to Mato Grosso and Bolivia, which started up the campaign aimed at preserving the Iguaçu Falls in 1876. At this time, Yellowstone National Park in the US, the first national park in the world, was four years old.

On the Brazilian side, a walkway along the canyon has an extension to the lower base of Devil's Throat. Helicopter rides offering aerial views of the falls have been available from Brazil, but Argentina has prohibited such helicopter tours because of the adverse environmental impact on the flora and fauna of the falls. From Foz do Iguaçu airport, the park may be reached by taking a taxi or bus to the entrance of the park. Their park has an entrance fee on both sides. Once inside, free and frequent buses are provided to various points within the park. The town of Foz do Iguaçu is about 20 km away, and the airport is between the park and the town.

The Argentine access, across the forest, is by a Rainforest Ecological Train very similar to the one in Disney's Animal Kingdom. The train brings visitors to the entrance of Devil's Throat, as well as the upper and lower trails. The Paseo Garganta del Diablo is a 1 km trail that brings visitors directly over the falls of Devil's Throat, the highest and deepest of the falls. Other walkways allow access to the elongated stretch of falls across the forest on the Argentine side and to the boats that connect to San Martin Island. Also on the Argentine side, inflatable boat services take visitors very close to the falls.

The Brazilian transportation system aims at allowing an increase in the number of visitors, while reducing the adverse environmental impact, through an increase in the average number of passengers per vehicle inside the park. The new transportation system has a 72-passenger capacity and panoramic-view, double-deck buses.

Comparisons to other notable falls

Upon seeing Iguazu, the United States First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt reportedly exclaimed, "Poor Niagara!" (which, at 50 m or 165 feet, are a third shorter). Often, Iguazu also is compared with Victoria Falls in Southern Africa, which separates Zambia and Zimbabwe. Iguazu is wider but is split into roughly 275 distinct falls and large islands, whereas Victoria has the largest curtain of water in the world, at more than 1600 m wide and over 100 m in height (in low flow, Victoria is split into five by islands but in high flow, it may be uninterrupted). The only wider falls are extremely large rapid-like falls, such as the Boyoma Falls (Stanley Falls).

With the flooding of the Guaíra Falls in 1982, Iguazu currently has the sixth-greatest average annual flow of any waterfall in the world, following number five Niagara, with an average rate of 1746 m3/s. Its maximum recorded flow was 45700 m3/s on 9 June 2014. By comparison, the average flow of Niagara Falls is 2400 m3/s, with a maximum recorded flow of 8300 m3/s. The average flow at Victoria Falls is 1088 m3/s, with a maximum recorded flow of 7100 m3/s.

Climate
The Iguazu Falls experience a humid subtropical climate (Cfa, according to the Köppen climate classification) with abundant precipitation and high temperatures year-round. During the summer of 2006, a severe drought caused the Iguazu River to become diminished, reducing the amount of water flowing over the falls to 300 m3/s until early December. This was unusual, as dry periods normally last only a few weeks. The period with the greatest volume of water flowing over the falls is usually December to February, coinciding with one of the periods of greatest rainfall.

Portrayals in film
Iguazu Falls has been featured in several TV shows and movies, including:

• Le cascate dell'Iguazú (1907, Ambrosio. Shot by Roberto Omegna, 135 meters)

• Z Argentiny do Mexika (1954)

• Curucu, Beast of the Amazon (1956)

• Tarzan (1966–69)

• Moonraker (1979)

• The Mission (1986)

• Rage of Honor (1987)

• The Country Bears Down Under (1990)

• Baraka (1992)

• Extermineitors IV: Como hermanos gemelos (1992)

• O Trem Caipira (1994)

• Tummy (1995)

• Happy Together (1997)

• Mr. Magoo (1997)

• Miami Vice (2006)

• In the Hands of the Gods (2007)

• Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

• OSS 117: Rio ne répond plus (2009)

• Salve Geral (2009)

• Survivor: Tocantins (2009)

• Operação X (2011)

• Captain America: Civil War (2016)

• If Cats Disappeared from the World (2016)

• Soarin' Around the World (2016)

• A Fantastic Woman (2017)

• Black Panther (2018)

• New Year Blues (2021)

• Oh My Sunshine Night (2022)

title: Iguazu Falls