[Commonwealth Query] - Good sources on Poland-Lithuania?

Hey guys, just a bit curious about Ye Old Commonwealth. I'm somewhat interested in examining the nobility of the period and seeing how much of it was actually Polish or Lithuanian, checking out Polonization of the state population and to what extent Sarmatism was present in culture and ideology. Any sources you could recommend would be appreciated.
 

Toraach

Banned
You forgot a ruthenian thing. Example in 16th century most of the Grand Duchy aristocracy was culturally and linguistically ruthenian. It is a common misconception to equating things called lithuanian in that period with ethnic Lithuanians and Lithuanian language.

In 18th century this country elite was totally polonized. So the first phrase of the polish national epic "Pan Tadeusz" is 'O Lithuania my fatherland...' Because for polish elites of that period Lithuania meant something like Masovia or other region. Also this epis has plot set in the middle of modern Belarus not in areas of modern Lithuania. Also Lithuania during that period meant much bigger area that modern one. It also included areas of modern Belarus.
 
You forgot a ruthenian thing. Example in 16th century most of the Grand Duchy aristocracy was culturally and linguistically ruthenian. It is a common misconception to equating things called lithuanian in that period with ethnic Lithuanians and Lithuanian language.

In 18th century this country elite was totally polonized. So the first phrase of the polish national epic "Pan Tadeusz" is 'O Lithuania my fatherland...' Because for polish elites of that period Lithuania meant something like Masovia or other region. Also this epis has plot set in the middle of modern Belarus not in areas of modern Lithuania. Also Lithuania during that period meant much bigger area that modern one. It also included areas of modern Belarus.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was such a strong Ruthenian aspect to the Commonwealth, or that Lithuania was more comparable to Belarus or Masovia. So what was the language makeup then? You said it was linguistically quite Ruthenian but what does that actually mean for non-nobility versus nobility?
 

Toraach

Banned
Interesting, I wasn't aware that there was such a strong Ruthenian aspect to the Commonwealth, or that Lithuania was more comparable to Belarus or Masovia. So what was the language makeup then? You said it was linguistically quite Ruthenian but what does that actually mean for non-nobility versus nobility?
No no you misundestood me abput Masovia. Masovia is a polish region and for Mickiewicz using of Lithuania was just awoking regional felings something Germans called 'heimat'. If he had been from Wyszków he would have written Masovia my fatherland instead of Lithuania. For Belarus at that period that was not an important name. A diffrent matter.

For linguolistic matter most peasantry in the Duchy was ruthenian speaking. Also nobility despite adopting ruthenian language called themselves still Lothuanians. In 17th century was the ultimate move to polonization there.

Of course there were all the time some nobles on Samigotia especially who all the time spoke Lithuanian.


I want to admit that what "Lithuanian" meant in the past was a complicated matter not simple like in modern states.


I forgot. In 16th century Ruthenian was a language of ducal chanchelary and laws.
 
Last edited:
I forgot. In 16th century Ruthenian was a language of ducal chanchelary and laws.

Which ultimately lead to something hilarious.
In 16th century and earlier, Lithuanian (that is eastern Commonwealth) nobles spoke Ruthenian. Therefore, Royal Courts in Kraków and Warszawa were sending all official documents addressed for east translated to Ruthenian. Reasonable, yes?
Except in later centuries, eastern Nobility polonised to the extent they no longer even spoke Ruthenian. But by virtue of momentum, Royal Court was still sending documents and letters translated to Rurhenian, which local officials had to translate back to Polish.
 

Toraach

Banned
Hey guys, just a bit curious about Ye Old Commonwealth. I'm somewhat interested in examining the nobility of the period and seeing how much of it was actually Polish or Lithuanian, checking out Polonization of the state population and to what extent Sarmatism was present in culture and ideology. Any sources you could recommend would be appreciated.
Dear Droman. Soon Augenis will write here and you will get a totally diffrent view of history.
 
Hey guys, just a bit curious about Ye Old Commonwealth. I'm somewhat interested in examining the nobility of the period and seeing how much of it was actually Polish or Lithuanian, checking out Polonization of the state population and to what extent Sarmatism was present in culture and ideology. Any sources you could recommend would be appreciated.
steps in to the thread like Hagrid in the Philosopher's Stone

Sorry I'm late.

If you want to read up on the Commonwealth of Both Nations, then I recommend learning either Polish, Lithuanian or Russian, because finding any good sources in English or any other language worth a damn is a pain. Norman Davies is good as expected (and probably the best English language source on the period in general), Daniel Stone and Robert Frost also have fairly good academic literature on the Commonwealth. If you want to immerse yourself in the period through fiction, then you can choose either Henryk Sienkiewicz's trilogy or the Silva Rerum series. However, all of them only offer a more or less general overview of the country, its history and society, so if you want to delve deeper, you'll have to read in the languages of one of the three nations.

And preferably pick only one of the three, because if you fly too close to the sun and try to read the Polish, Lithuanian, Russian, Belarusian AND Ukrainian views on this period, you'll just end up faced with too many conflicting viewpoints and biases to get an accurate view of the period.

Just look at our examples. I read the Lithuanian perspective. @Toraach probably reads the Russian, Belarusian or Ukrainian perspective (don't ask me which one, haven't figured out yet). Someone like, I dunno, @Jan Olbracht reads the Polish perspective. Whenever we discuss the Commonwealth, it ends in slapfights. Don't let such a slapfight happen in your brain, too.

Generally, English-language authors like Davies don't have as many biases as writers from Eastern Europe, so they're probably your best bet as a beginner anyway.
 
There is no need to read Polish, Lithuanian, Ukrainian and Belarusian sources to face problem of conflicting viewpoints. In Poland alone there are contradicting opinions, especially about reasons of fall of PLC-internal (view advocated since 19th century by so called "Cracow school") vs external ("Warsaw school"). Older works written before fall of communism may also include views taken straight from communist propaganda.
 

Toraach

Banned
There is no need to read Polish, Lithuanian, Ukrainian and Belarusian sources to face problem of conflicting viewpoints. In Poland alone there are contradicting opinions, especially about reasons of fall of PLC-internal (view advocated since 19th century by so called "Cracow school") vs external ("Warsaw school"). Older works written before fall of communism may also include views taken straight from communist propaganda.
I would like to hear your opinnion about this question.
 
I would like to hear your opinnion about this question.
These two can't be easily separated. Internal situation of PLC at the time of Partitions was shaped by actions of Catherine II, Familia's reforms, that eventually killed PLC, would not get so far without her initial support. OTL 18th century was worst possible outcome for PLC (ATL could be only better or equally bad), with certain people making more resonable decisions (especially 'Familia' and Poniatowski) PLC could survive and was not doomed from the start IMHO, like Cracow School claims.
 
Top