Ogadai survives a bit more

Molobo

Banned
Perhaps linguistically monolithic, but ethnically?
Yes, ethnicly.97 % of Population are ethnic Poles.
There was a great deal of tolerance in Poland so each ethnic group kept to itself and had no need to blend in the society.


I think it is on-topic because Poland serves as an example of what might have happened if the Mongols had overrun more of Europe
The problem is that Mongols never conquered Poland.

Poles range from dark and hairy to redhead (Norwegian trait left by Vikings) to downright Turkish-looking, to blonde and blue-eyed; given the history, the commonwealth with Lithuania, the Teutonic Knights, the Jews (10% of the population, and even if they keep to themselves, there is ALWAYS mixing), conquest by Germans and Russians (several times), the presence of Hanseatic cities, conquest of parts of Bielorus and Ukraine after WWI, the country physically picked up and moved after WWII, not to mention Kashubs, Tatars, Golden Horde, etc, there is just about everything in Polish blood.

You are quite silly in this.Germans and Poles rarely married, the same with Russians.Mongols never conquered Poland, and Vikings had almost none impact on our culture.Likewise Tatars never mixed with Poles much having their own territory in Polish Commonwealth.Despite having many ethnic groups , the Polish society wasn't melting pot of people but rather a territory inhabited by many groups having their own life.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12107446&dopt=Abstract

Human Molecular Genetics Lab, Department of Forensic Medicine, Warsaw Medical Academy, Poland.

Different regional populations from Poland were studied in order to assess the genetic heterogeneity within Poland, investigate the genetic relationships with other European populations and provide a population-specific reference database for anthropological and forensic studies. Nine Y-chromosomal microsatellites were analysed in a total of 919 unrelated males from six regions of Poland and in 1,273 male individuals from nine other European populations. AMOVA revealed that all of the molecular variation in the Polish dataset is due to variation within populations, and no variation was detected among populations of different regions of Poland. However, in the non-Polish European dataset 9.3% ( P<0.0001) of the total variation was due to differences among populations. Consequently, differences in R(ST)-values between all possible pairs of Polish populations were not statistically significant, whereas significant differences were observed in nearly all comparisons of Polish and non-Polish European populations. Phylogenetic analyses demonstrated tight clustering of Polish populations separated from non-Polish groups. Population clustering based on Y-STR haplotypes generally correlates well with the geography and history of the region. Thus, our data are consistent with the assumption of homogeneity of present-day paternal lineages within Poland and their distinctiveness from other parts of Europe, at least in respect to their Y-STR haplotypes.
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Molobo said:
Despite having many ethnic groups , the Polish society wasn't melting pot of people but rather a territory inhabited by many groups having their own life.
That would make Poland pretty much unique in the annals of history.
 

Molobo

Banned
That would make Poland pretty much unique in the annals of history.
Well Poland's Commonwealth was unique in treatment of religious and ethnic groups compered to other European countries during that region.The same applies to invidual rights.
Allthough Wikipedia is generally shallow in my opinion you may check out this links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Liberty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth
The Commonwealth was notable for its political system, which was a precursor to modern democracy and federation; for its remarkable religious tolerance; and for the second-oldest written national constitution in the world.

As to Tatars :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipka_Tatars

Lipka Tatars
The Lipka Tatars were a noble military caste of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth who followed the Sunni branch of the Islamic religion and whose origins can be traced back to the Mongol Empire of Ghengis Khan, through the Khanate of the White Horde of Siberia. Towards the end of the 14th century, these Tatars were granted asylum and given noble status and land in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania by Vytautas the Great. From the very beginning of their settlement in Lithuania they were known as the Lipkas. While maintaining their Islamic religion they united their fate with that of the mainly Christian Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. From the Battle of Grunwald onwards the Lipka Tatar light cavalry regiments participated in every significant military campaign.

In religion and culture the Lipka Tatars differed from most other Islamic communities in respect of the treatment of their women, who always enjoyed a large degree of freedom, even during the years when the Lipkas were in the service of the Ottoman Empire. Co-education of male and female children was the norm, and Lipka women did not wear the veil - except at the marriage ceremony. While nominally Islamic, the customs and religious practices of the Lipka Tatars also accommodated many Christian elements adopted during their 600 years residence in Poland and Lithuania while still maintaining the traditions and superstitions from their nomadic Mongol past, such as the sacrifice of bulls in their mosques during the main religious festivals.

Diplomatic correspondence between the Crimean Khanate and Poland from the early 16th century refers to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth as the "land of the Poles and the Lipkas". By the 17th century the term Lipka Tatar began to appear in the official documents of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Once, it came about that the Tatar subjects rose up in open rebellion against the Commonwealth. This was the widely remembered Lipka Rebellion of the year 1672. Thanks to the efforts of King Jan III Sobieski, who was held in great esteem by the Tatar soldiers, many of the Lipkas seeking asylum and service in the Turkish army returned to his command and participated in the struggles with the Ottoman Empire up to the Peace of Karlowicki in 1699, including the Battle of Vienna (1683) that was to turn the tide of Islamic expansion into Europe and mark the beginning of the end for the Ottoman Empire.

Today, the majority of descendants of Tatar families in Poland can trace their descent from the noble status of the early Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
* 226: The Khanate of the White Horde of Siberia was established as one of the successor states to the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan . The first Khan, Orda was the second son of Jochi, the eldest son of Genghis Khan. The White Horde of Siberia occupied the southern Siberian steppe from the east of the Urals and the Caspian Sea to Mongolia.

* 1380: Khan Tokhtamysh, the hereditary ruler of the White Horde crossed west over the Urals and merged the White Horde with the Golden Horde whose first khan was Batu, the eldest son of Jochi. In 1382 the White and Golden Hordes sacked and burned Moscow. Tokhtamysh, allied with the great central Asian Tatar conqueror, Tamerlane reasserted Mongol power in Russia.

* 1397: After a series of disastrous military campaigns against his former protector, the great Tatar warlord Tamerlane, Tokhtamysh and the remnants of his clan were granted asylum and given estates and noble status in Grand Duchy of Lithuania by Vytautas the Great. The settlement of the Lipka Tatars in Lithuania in 1397 is recorded in the Chronicles of Jan Dlugosz.

* 1397: The Italian city state of Genoa funded a joint expedition by the forces of Khan Tokhtamysz and Grand Duke Witold against Tamerlane. This campaign was notable for the fact that the Lipka Tatars and Lithuanian armies were armed with handguns, but no major victories were achieved.

* July 15, 1410 The Battle of Grunwald took place on this day, between the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania on one side (estimated 39,000 troops), and the Teutonic Knights on the other (about 27,000 troops). In the battle the Teutonic Order state was defeated and never recovered its former influence. After the battle, rumours were spread across the Europe (probably as an excuse) that Teutons were only defeated with the help of numerous Muslim Tatar hordes. In fact, it was estimated there were around 1.000 horseback Tatars at Grunwald, the core being the Lipka Tatars settled in Grand Duchy of Lithuania, under the leadership of Jalal ad-Din, the son of Khan Tokhtamysh.

* 15th century onwards: Companies of Lipka Tatar light cavalry for a long time constituted one of the foundations of the military power of the Commonwealth. The Lithuanian Tatars, from the very beginning of their residence in Lithuania were known as the Lipkas. They united their fate with that of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. From the Battle of Grunwald onwards they participated in every significant military campaign.

* 1528: The Polish-Lithuanian nobility's legal right to retribution on the grounds of the wounding or killing of a nobleman or a member of his family is extended to the Lipka Tatars.

* 1672: This was the year of the Lipka Rebellion. As a reaction to restrictions on their religious freedoms and the erosion of their ancient rights and priviliges, the Lipka Tatar regiments stationed in the Podolia region of south-east Poland abandoned the Commonwealth at the start of the Polish-Turkish wars that were to last to end of the 17th Century with the Peace of Karlowicki in 1699. The Lipka Rebellion forms the background to the novel Pan Wolodyjowski, the final volume of the Nobel Prize winning historical Trylogia of Henryk Sienkiewicz. The 1969 film of Pan Wolodyjowski, directed by Jerzy Hoffman and starring Daniel Olbrychski as Azja Tuhaj-bejowicz, still remains the biggest box-office success in the history of Polish cinema.

* 1674: After the famous Polish victory at Chocim, the Lipka Tatars who held the Podolia for Turkey from the stronghold of Bar were besieged by the armies of Jan Sobieski, and a deal was struck that the Lipkas would return to the Polish side subject to their ancient rights and priviliges being restored.

* 1676: The Treaty of Zurawno that brought a temporary end to the Polish-Turkish wars stipulated that the Lipka Tatars were to be given a free individual choice of whether they wanted to serve the Ottoman Empire or the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth.

* 1677: The Sejm in March 1677 confirmed all the ancient Tatar rights and privileges. The Lipka Tatars were permitted to rebuild all their old mosques, to settle Christian labour on their estates and to buy up noble estates that had not previously belonged to Tatars. The Lipka Tatars were also freed from all taxation.

* 1679: As a reward for their return to the Commonwealth the Lipka Tatars were settled by King Jan Sobieski on Crown Estates in the provinces of Brest, Kobryn and Hrodna. The Tatars received land that had been cleared of the previous occupants, from 0.5 to 7.5 square kilometres per head, according to rank and length of service.

* 1683: Many of the Lipka Tatar rebels who returned to the service of the Commonwealth in 1674 were later to take part in the Vienna Campaign of 1683. This included the 60 Polish Tatars in the light cavalry company of Samuel Mirza Krzeczowski, who was later to save the life of King Jan III Sobieski during the disastrous first day of the Battle of Parkany, a few weeks after the great victory of the Battle of Vienna that was to turn the tide of Islamic expansion into Europe and mark the beginning of the end for the Ottoman Empire. The Lipka Tatars who fought on the Polish side at the Battle of Vienna, on 12th September 1683, wore a sprig of straw in their helmets to distinguish themselves from the Tatars fighting under Kara Mustafa on the Turkish side. Lipkas visiting Vienna traditionally wear straw hats to commemorate their ancestors’ participation in the breaking of the Siege of Vienna.

* 1699: Some of the Kamieniec based Lipka Tatars who had remained loyal to the Turkish Sultan were settled in Bessarabia along the borderlands between the Ottoman Empire and the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth as well as in the environs of Chocim and Kamieniec Podolski and in the town known as Lipkany.

* 1775: The Sejm reaffirmed the noble status of the Polish Lithuanian Tatars.

All Tatars enjoyed the status of nobility and as such took part in democratic liberties that Nobility had in Poland.
 

Molobo

Banned
Any historian who uses the word "democratic" to refer to a feudal society is de facto taking extreme liberties with the language and therefore should not be considered representative of normative usage.
A flawed argument-they were slaves in Athens but nobody denies Athens had democracy.
Likewise despite the existence of serfs the term Noble's Democracy is widely widespread and used by historians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Liberty
Golden Liberty
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Golden Liberty (latin: Aurea Libertas, Polish: Złota Wolność, sometimes used in plural form; this phenomena can be also reffered to as Golden Freedoms, Nobles' Democracy or Nobles' Commonwealth, Polish: Rzeczpospolita Szlachecka) refers to a unique democratic political system in the Kingdom of Poland and later, after the Union of Lublin (1569), in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Under that system, all nobles (szlachta) were equal and enjoyed extensive rights and priviliges. The szlachta controled the legislature (Sejm, the Polish parliament) and the Commonwealth's elected king.

* Nihil novi (1505).
* Pacta conventa and King Henry's Articles (1573).
* Szlachta history and political privileges.
* Sejm of the Kingdom of Poland and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
* Organization and politics of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Golden Liberty distinguished Poland and was a unique exception in times when absolutism in the main European countries on the East and the West was developing. Freedom and liberty, even if it applied only for one category of the society - the szlachta - were assets almost unknown in contemporary Europe, where monarchs hold power of life and death over all their citizens.
Yet the excesses of Golden Liberty resulted in the weakness of the central administration, weaknesses that eventualy allowed Commonwealth neighbours to paralyze its political system, deteriorate it to the brink of anarchy and eventually annex the powerless country in the partitions of Poland in late 18th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szlachta
(only a fragment)
The Polish nobility differed in many respects from the nobility of other countries. The most important difference was that, while in most European countries the nobility lost power while the ruler strove for absolute monarchy, in Poland the reverse process obtained: the nobility actually gained power at the expense of the king, and the political system evolved toward a partial democracy (and eventually, anarchy).
Polish noblewomen, early 17th century.
Enlarge
Polish noblewomen, early 17th century.

Poland's nobility were also more numerous than those of most other European countries, they formed some 8-10% of the population, and in some poorer regions (e.g. Mazowsze, the area centered on Warsaw) nearly 30%. By contrast, the nobilities of other European countries, except for Spain, amounted to a mere 1-3%.

There were a number of ways to upward social mobility and the achievement of nobility. Poland's nobility, unlike France's aristocracy, was not a rigidly exclusive, closed class. Many low-born individuals, including townsfolk, peasants and Jews, could and did rise in Polish society. Thus Poland's noble class was more stable than those of other countries, and so was spared the societal tensions and eventual disintegration that characterized the French revolution. Each szlachic had enormous influence over the country's politics, in some form even greater that what is enjoyed by the citizens of modern democratic countries. Between 1652 and 1791 any nobleman could nullify all the proceedings of a given sejm (Commonwealth parliament) or sejmik (Commonwealth local parliament) by exercising his individual right of liberum veto (latin: I don't allow), except in the case of a confederated sejm or confederated sejmik.

All children of Polish nobility inherited their noble status from a noble mother and father. Any individual could attain ennoblement (Polish: "nobilitacja") for special services to the state. A foreign noble might be naturalised as a Polish noble (Polish: "indygenat") by the Polish king (later, from 1641, only by a general sejm).

In theory at least, all Polish noblement were social equals. The poorest enjoyed the same rights as the wealthiest magnate. The exceptions were a few privileged families such as the Radziwiłł, Lubomirski and Czartoryski, who sported aristocratic titles received from foreign courts, such as "Prince." All other szlachta simply addressed each other by their given name or as "Mr. Brother" (Panie bracie).



Religious beliefs

Prior to the Reformation, the Polish nobility were mostly Catholic or Orthodox. Many families, however, soon adopted the reformed faiths. After the Counter-Reformation, when the Roman Catholic Church regained power in Poland, the nobility became almost exclusively Catholic, despite the fact that Roman Catholicism was not the majority religion in Poland (the Catholic and Orthodox churches each accounted for some 40% of the population, with the remaining 20% being Jews or members of Protestant denominations). Szlachta, as the Commonwealth itself, was extremly tolerant of other religions. There were almost no conflicts based on faith, and szlachta members are known to have intervened several times to pacify religious conflicts in cities and towns. In the 18th century, many followers of Jacob Frank joined the ranks of Jewish-descended Polish gentry.

Now perhaps we can move back on topic.
 
Last edited:
How possible is it, do you think, that Europe would become sort of a Giant Russia? (wait, err, an even bigger Russia. Ah, well, you know what I mean…)
 
Leo Caesius said:
While he was on a mission for his church, he was abducted by a secret society of Soviet Assyrian irredentists and subjected to a battery of brainwashing techniques perfected in Russia under the direction of Dr. Ivan Pavlov. After the Assyrians were satisfied with his treatment, they released him back into society with a hypnotic suggestion to await further orders. Apparently the trigger for this suggestion was anything to do with Turkish or Mongolian TLs.

They call him The Nestorian Candidate.

LOL!!!!! Pure genius, Leo.

(eyes roll back in head) Mother of Christ...NOT Mother of God...Constantinople wrong...
 

Molobo

Banned
Athens is, of course, a red herring.
Nope.Under your opinion Athens didn't have a democracy ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
The term democracy indicates a form of government where all the state's decisions are exercised directly or indirectly by a majority of its citizenry through a fair elective process. When these factors are met, a government can be classified as such. This can apply to a multitude of government systems as these concepts transcend and often occur concomitantly with other types.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejm
Power of the nobility and early sejms grew during the times of Poland's fragmentation (1146-1295), when power of individual rulers vaned and various councils and wiece grew stronger. The history of the Sejm dates back to 1182 and the first Sejm at Łęczyca. From 1493 forward, the indirect elections were repeated every two years. With time and the development of the unique Polish Golden Liberty the Sejm's powers increased.
A wiec in the time of King Kazimierz the Great (14th-century Poland).
Enlarge
A wiec in the time of King Kazimierz the Great (14th-century Poland).

The term "sejm" comes from an old Polish expression denoting a meeting of the populace. Since 14th century irregular sejm (described in various sources as latin contentio generalis, conventio magna, conventio solemna, parlamentum, parlamentum generale, dieta or Polish sejm walny) have been called by Polish kings. Since 1374 (przywilej koszycki), the king had to receive sejm permission to raise taxes. The General Sejm (Polish Sejm Generalny or Sejm Walny), first convoked by the king John I Olbracht in 1493 near Piotrków, evolved from earlier regional and provincial meetings (sejmiks, especially from sejmik generaly), which arose from the 1454 statute of Nieszawa, granted to the szlachta by King Casimir IV the Jagiellonian. Since 1493 Sejm Walny has been meeting irregulary, on average every year.

The first Sejm was composed of two chambers:

* A Senate of 81 bishops and other dignitaries
* A lower house, Sejm proper, of 54 deputies (Polish poseł, representing and elected by the local sejmiki)

The number of dignitaries and deputies in the lower chamber, and its power, increased over time, especially as the lower nobility pressured the king for more privileges when asked to provide military assistance in the form of pospolite ruszenie. After 1567 Union of Lublin, the Kingdom of Poland was transformed into the federation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Sejm was increased with the inclusion of the deputies from Lithuanian Sejmiks.

Sejms severely limited the king's powers. They had a final decision in legislation, taxation, budget and treasury matters (including military funding), foreign affairs and nobilitation. In 1573 Sejm guaranteed the religious tolerance in the Commonwealth territory, making it the refuge from the reformation and counter-reformation contemporary European wars.

Until Union of Lublin Sejms were held near Piotrkow, since Unia, in the Warsaw Royal Castle. Since 1673 each third Sejm was to take place in Grodno in Lithuania. It began with a ceremonial mass, then the Kanclerz (Chancellor) decreed the king's intentions, then senators had a voice. Afterwards, the king together with the Senate debated on the most important matters (usually foreign affairs), deputies debated separately under the leadership of the marshal of the sejm. In the matters deemed very important both senat and the sejm debated together in the chamber of the senate. The legislation was drafted in the lower chamber (Sejm). Members of the Sejm presented its proposed legislation to the gathered deputies of the Sejm, where they were discussed at length. The legislation was commonly negotiated by a deputation from the lower house (Sejm) with the upper chamber (Senate) and the reigning monarch (considered to be a third, separate Sejm chamber on his own).

Eventually, laws were approved or discarded at the joint final sitting of both chambers in the presence of the king. For a law to pass it needed a unanimous support from all Sejm deputies and the King. The Senate could not pass nor propose legislation and was an advisory body to the King. The King heard the Senate counsel and concluded the matter one way or another, although his power was restricted if all the Sejm speakers opposed the royal proposal. If there were conflicting views in the Senate, the king had to favour the existing law.

The king could not pass the laws himself without the approval of the Sejm, this being forbidden by szlachta priviliges like nihil novi from 1505. According to the "Nihil Novi" constitution a law passed by the Sejm had to be agreed by the three estates sitting there - the king, the Senate and and deputies from the Sejm. King Henry's Articles, signed by each king since 1573, required the king to call a general sejm (lasting six weeks) every two years, and provisions for the extraordinary sejm (Polish: sejm ekstraordynaryjny, nadzwyczajny) were also set down in this act. Extraordinary sejms could be called in times of national emergency and last shorter, for example, a sejm deciding whether to call pospolite ruszenie should not last longer than two weeks.

The Marshal (or Speaker) of the Sejm concluded the debates, but he was required to ask the members whether his understanding of the chamber's views was unanimously accepted by it. If anyone declared his opposition (Latin contradictio), the debate would be reopened and would continue until the opponents of the measure abandoned their opposition at the next attempt to reach a conclusion.

Until the end of 16th century unanimity, while preferred, was not required and majority voting was most common. Later, with the raise of magnates power, unanimity principe was reinforced with the szlachta right of liberum veto (from Latin, meaning: I don't allow). Eventually the pro-majority voting party almost disappeared in the 17th century, and majority voting was preserved only at the confederated sejms (sejm rokoszowy, konny, konfederacyjny). To increase the chance of unanimity agreement, voting was delayed until an agreement has been reached by often lengthy discussions. It had a certain negative character: it was enough if no formal exception was taken by anyone – even if some opposition did exist, it would not necessarily be upheld, in the face of sometimes menacing persuasion from the majority group. If, however, the deputies could not attain even such passive unanimity, or if the chamber's negotiations with the king proved futile then after six weeks (the upper time limit of its sittings) had elapsed, the deliberations as a whole were declared null and void. Sometimes, but rarely, a deputies from a local sejmik could object to the agreement and be granted an exception from this law, allowing it to pass. From the mid-17th century onwards, any objection to a Sejm resolution from either a deputy or a senator automatically caused other, previously approved resolutions to be rejected. This was because all resolutions passed by a given Sejm formed a whole and were published as constitutions of the Sejm e.g. Anno Domini 1667.

In the 16th century no single person or small group dared to hold up proceedings, but from second half of 17th century the liberum veto was used to paralyze the Sejm and brought the Commonwealth to the brink of collapse. The liberum veto was finally abolished by the Constitution of 3rd May in 1795.

The early statues passed by the Sejm were called "constitution" (Polish konstytucja or konstytucja sejmowa) and should not be confused with modern meaning of this word. The konstytucja passed by the Sejm had denoted all the legislation, of whatever character, that had been passed at a Sejm. Only with the May 3rd Constitution in 1795 did "konstytucja" assume its modern sense of a fundamental document of governance.

The final version of approved acts, which from the late 15th century until the early 16th century were divided into perpetual and temporary constitutions ('constitutiones perpetuae' and 'constitutiones temporales'), was drawn up at the sealing sessions, held after the close of the Sejm debate. These sessions were attended by the chancellor, the Speaker of the Sejm and deputations from the Sejm and the Senate. From the end of the 16th century, the constitutions they signed were printed, stamped with the royal seal and bearing the signatures of the Sejm speaker and the chancellor sent to the chancelleries of the municipal councils of all voivodships of the Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Until 1543 the resolutions were written in Latin, and later on in Polish. Those resolutions were presented soon after the Sejm on local sejmiki, known as sejmiki relacyjne. In accordance with the act of 1613, immediately after the close of Sejm debates, the constitutions it had passed were published by entering them in the registers of wherever the Sejm was meeting. Copies of them still had to be sent to municipal councils (urzędy grodzkie) throughout the country, where they were entered or - more commonly - incorporated in their printed form in the municipal registers (księgi grodzkie).

It is estimated that since 1493 and 1793 sejms were held 240 times, and total debate time was 44 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_election
Free election
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Free election (Polish: wolna elekcja) was the election of individual kings, rather than of dynasties, to the Polish throne between 1572 and 1791, when "free election" was abolished by the May 3rd Constitution (1791).

Actually the first documented election of a Polish king had occurred in 1386, with the selection of Wladyslaw Jagiello, grand duke of Lithuania, to be the first king of Poland's second dynasty. However, while the principle of election continued in effect throughout the nearly two centuries of the Jagiellon dynasty, it actually amounted to mere confirmation of the incoming dynast.

In 1572 Poland's Jagiellon dynasty became extinct upon the death, without a successor, of King Zygmunt II August. During the ensuing interregnum, anxiety for the safety of the Commonwealth eventually led to agreements among the political classes that, pending election of a new king, supreme authority would be exercised by the Roman Catholic primate, acting as interrex (from the Latin); that confederations (Polish: konfederacje) of nobility would assume power in the country's respective regions; and that, by the "Warsaw Confederation" of 1573, peace would be maintained among the realm's various religions. The most important decision, however, was that the next king would be chosen by election, whose terms were finally established at a convocation sejm (sejm konwokacyjny) in 1573. On the initiative of southern-Polish nobles, supported by the future Crown (i.e., Polish) great chancellor and hetman Jan Zamoyski, the election would be by all male szlachta (nobles) who assembled for the purpose.

The nobles voted by province (voivodship) in the presence of deputies, who conveyed the votes to the senate: the choice of king was announced by the senate's marshal and solemnized by the primate.

Royal elections were held at Wielka Wola, outside Warsaw (now that city's western, Wola district). The stormiest elections were those of 1575 and 1587, when matters came to blows among the divided nobles. Following an election, the king-elect was obliged to sign pacta conventa (Latin: "agreed-upon agreements")--laundry lists of campaign promises, seldom fulfilled--with his noble electors. The agreements included "King Henry's Articles" (artykuly henrykowskie), first imposed on Prince Henri de Valois (in Polish, Henryk Walezy) at the outset of his brief reign (upon the death of his brother, French King Charles IX, Henri de Valois fled Poland by night to claim the French throne).

The last of the Jagiellon kings, Zygmunt August, had in 1529 been elected vivente rege (Latin: "during the [previous] king's life"); and about 1660 Queen Ludwika Maria attempted to engineer a similar election. Such elections were meant to enhance the continuity of royal power.

Beginning in 1697, Polish royal elections ceased to be truly "free" and took place under duress from foreign armies.

The largest number of participating nobles (40-50,000) attended the first free election, in 1573. The second such election, in 1575, drew only 12,000.

Of course you are free to argue that a system where legislation is made by voting of citizens, the King is elected by them has nothing to do with democracy.

Anyway this is interesting topic Leo-and perhaps you should continue your attempts to pick at Poland on another thread instead of hijacking this one ok ?
 

Molobo

Banned
So members of the inner circle are permitted to select their leader but those who aren't part of this select group have no political say? I guess that would make the Soviet Union a democracy by your standards, Molobo.
That is silly as members of inner circle weren't the only citizens of SU.
You promise me that you'll stop massacring my language with your half-assed attempts at nationalist propaganda and I'll keep quiet, ok?
Bad day at work or something else ? Anyway the acknowledgment that Noble's Democracy was democratic in its structure and workings is commonly accepted, and I see no "nationalistic propaganda" in it.
You assume too much. I'm not picking on Poland, I'm picking on you.
Ah, so you are just a troll then.

If you want to cut and paste a few thousand more words from Wikipedia that nobody will ever read
Not my problem if you want to remain ignorant and refuse to educate yourself.After all, you admited that you are just interested in trolling.

But thanks from hijacking this thread Leo.I hope you keep your word.
 
AAAAAARRRRRRGGHH!

Poland was what we could call an "aristocratic republic," like the Draka. However, since most of the population could not participate in the government, it could not be called particularly democratic.

And yes, I know that Athenian democracy excluded most of the population (slaves and women), but poor Athenian freemen could participate in the elections.

The Nestorian Candidate says we should get back on topic.

Hmm...I think I'll attach that to my s/n.
 

Molobo

Banned
Poland was what we could call an "aristocratic republic," like the Draka.
Yes because we know Poland was a vicious slave holding murderous tyranny. :rolleyes:


And yes, I know that Athenian democracy excluded most of the population (slaves and women), but poor Athenian freemen could participate in the elections.
As freemen in Poland readily got noble's status and later took part in Sejm that is not an argument.

But yes let's return to the topic interrupted by Leo's rude comments.
 
Hermanubis said:
How possible is it, do you think, that Europe would become sort of a Giant Russia? (wait, err, an even bigger Russia. Ah, well, you know what I mean…)

In the sense of being isolated, xenophobic, and influenced by the cultural traditions of Oriental Despotism? Quite possibly... :(
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Molobo said:
But thanks from hijacking this thread Leo.I hope you keep your word.
Was that intended as some crude attempt to goad me?

Molobo said:
But yes let's return to the topic interrupted by Leo's rude comments.
You of all people have absolutely no reason to be condemning others as "rude" or "trolls."

But, in the interest of paying due respect to the others, I've eliminated my rather small contributions to this discussion. There still remains, of course, the 4000+ words of irrelevant information about the history of Poland which you've cribbed from Wikipedia and which have already filled up most of the page.

Regarding the survival of ethnic traces of the Mongols in Central Europe - even if the Mongols were eventually driven out there would most likely be communities of their descendants scattered throughout the continent, increasing as one heads east. People aren't like paint, you know; the colors don't simply mix together, but instead dominant traits get expressed increasingly often and recessive traits less so. One generation might favor the mother in some respects and the father in others, but that could change in future generations. The result would be a mixed population of which most members recognizably pertain to one or the other phenotype, just like in Turkey. You'd have Central-Asian looking people, Mediterranean types, and blonde Nordic types, all together. It is unlikely that any one of these would be wiped out (unless there were some kind of genocide) but the ratios might change slowly over time depending on the rate of population movements into and out of the country. As the population became more mixed, children resembling each of these types would be born to a single pair of parents, even if the parents themselves appear to be fairly homogenous.

If any of you have examined the late Roman encaustic mummy portraits from the Fayyum in Egypt, you'll see what I mean. The people depicted in these portraits are remarkably similar to the people living in Egypt today, despite the fact that Egypt has been the crossroads of so many civilizations and has been ruled by so many different groups. Of course, as you travel south, people get darker and start to resemble the Sudanese more closely, and in the north they have a tendency to look more Mediterranean, but both types are prevalent throughout the country.
 

Ian the Admin

Administrator
Donor
Molobo, haven't I told you *many* times to stop with these barrages of rude, trolling crap?

Yeah, I have.

Banned.
 
Ian the Admin said:
Molobo, haven't I told you *many* times to stop with these barrages of rude, trolling crap?

Yeah, I have.

Banned.

Now Molobo's gone, I guess we can continue the discussion.

I've added "The Nestorian Candidate" to my s/n. Thanks for the idea, Leo.

EDIT: Time to add Molobo to the list of the Fallen for "AH.com, the Series." A new Fallen, perhaps in denial about his evil nature?
 
Abdul Hadi Pasha said:
A couple of comments:

- I don't really see Ottomans developing in this TL; they were the result of being placed on the Byzantine frontier where they were able to capitalize on the campaigns against the dying empire, absorbing traditions and ideas from Byzantium, Persia, the Arab world, and Central Asia. In this TL, they are likely to be just another tribal group in the Mongol hordes.

You could argue that the founders were extremely talented and thus establish them somewhere, but they will not be OUR Ottomans.

- It doesn't seem likely to me that the Seljuks will survive this; they are too potent for the Mongols to leave intact in such a critical location. Perhaps a Mongol thrust into Asia Minor, plus Western preoccupation with the Mongol invasion, might actually allow a Byzantine revival! If anyone has the diplomatic chops to talk the Mongols away from them, it's the Byzantines, who don't really have anything they want anyway. Without pressure from Venice, Bulgaria, Serbia, and the Seljuks/Ottomans, there is really nothing to prevent the Byzantines from regaining lost ground. As allies of the Mongols they would actually be quite useful, and you could even see some Orthodox Khanates.

I like this idea, in fact it was one of the hypotesis I was working on... The byzantines could win for them the Rum Khan. He could convert to the orthodox faith and become Emperor with a Greek name (the Khanides dinasty :D ). The Orthodox would be mixed with nestorian, catholic and even some small islamic contributions.

The Khan of the Franks could eventually convert to catholicism or receiving strong population groups from the turks (the seljucs expelled by the Mongols and Byzantines, and the ottomans coming from the Caucasus). What do you think?

As for the western part I'll bet for an scandinavian expansion in north America, while Hispania expands in Africa.

One more thing, do you thing Ming China could become a colonial power with possesions in Indonesia, Australia, India, Africa and even Arabia?
 
Last edited:

Hendryk

Banned
Condottiero said:
One more thing, do you thing Ming China could become a colonial power with possesions in Indonesia, Australia, India, Africa and even Arabia?
I don't think Ming China would go after "possessions" in settled areas like Indonesia, India or Arabia. More likely, they would satellize local kingdoms and, in exchange for formal acknowledgement of their vassal status and the periodical sending of tribute, make them their privileged trading partners as well as protect them from outside interference. These places would soon be home to large overseas Chinese communities attracted by business opportunities.
In Africa and Australia, the Chinese presence would initially be limited to trading outposts, but should demographic growth in China lead to a shortage of arable land (or should protracted war or anarchy make the situation unberable), you may have actual large-scale migratory movements to those "new lands". However, Chinese settlements would be concentrated on the coastlines and fertile lowlands, leaving the hinterland natives more or less alone.
 
My Second Attempt at a Flag for the Kingdom of Hispania:
 

Attachments

  • Hispania.bmp
    242.2 KB · Views: 1,042
Top