Livonian and Courlander nobility in Samogitia in the 17th and 18th century

The main issue of this paper is Livonian nobles’ immigration to Lithuania. This topic is very difficult to investigate, because of significant deficiency in sources presenting a registration of estates and real estate transactions from Livonia and Courland. There are no registers of owners, tenants, or pledgees of estates from Grand Duchy of Lithuania from the 16th to the 18th century and therefore primary sources for research presented in the paper are military and tax registers from 1567, 1621, 1667, 1690 and 1765. Unfortunately those registers have many disadvantages, which need to behighlighted. The author of the article analysed transformations of nobles’ surnames. The findings of this analysis show that in the above mentioned period of time several dozensof Livonian and Coulrand noble families settled in Samogitia. Those families were forced to leave Livonia as they remained loyal to the Polish king, although they also wanted toimprove their economic status.  The paper was originally published as Inflantczycy i Kurlandczycy na Żmudzi w XVI–XVIII wieku, “Klio” 2015, vol. 35 (4), pp. 45–68; DOI: 10.12775/KLIO.2015.044

Livonian and Courlander nobility in Samogitia in the 17th and 18th century

The main issue of this paper is Livonian nobles’ immigration to Lithuania. This topic is very difficult to investigate, because of significant deficiency in sources presenting a registration of estates and real estate transactions from Livonia and Courland. There are no registers of owners, tenants, or pledgees of estates from Grand Duchy of Lithuania from the 16th to the 18th century and therefore primary sources for research presented in the paper are military and tax registers from 1567, 1621, 1667, 1690 and 1765. Unfortunately those registers have many disadvantages, which need to be highlighted. The author of the article analysed transformations of nobles’ surnames. The findings of this analysis show that in the above mentioned period of time several dozens of Livonian and Coulrand noble families settled in Samogitia. Those families were forced to leave Livonia as they remained loyal to the Polish king, although they also wanted to improve their economic status.     The paper was originally published as Inflantczycy i Kurlandczycy na Żmudzi w XVI–XVIII wieku, “Klio” 2015, vol. 35 (4), pp. 45–68; DOI: 10.12775/KLIO.2015.044

Inflantczycy i Kurlandczycy na Żmudzi w XVI–XVIII wieku

W artykule podjęto problem napływu szlachty pochodzenia inflanckiego na ziemie litewskie. Jest on trudny do opracowania z powodu braku źródeł rejestrujących stan posiadania i transakcje majątkowe (ksiąg grodzkich, ziemskich) z terenu Inflant i Kurlandii. Nie ma też wykazów wszystkich właścicieli, dzierżawców i zastawników dóbr w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim z XVI–XVIII wieku. Podstawą badań są popisy pospolitego ruszenia i rejestry podymnego z lat 1567, 1621, 1667, 1690 i 1765. Są to źródła zawodne, które tylko w pewnym stopniu mogą odzwierciedlać stan zaludnienia kraju, ale nie dysponujemy prawie żadnymi innymi dokumentami. Autor podjął się analizy dostępnych źródeł, zwracając uwagę m.in. na kwestię brzmienia nazwisk szlacheckich. Z przeprowadzonej analizy wynika, że w omawianym okresie na Żmudzi osiedliło się kilkadziesiąt rodzin inflanckich i kurlandzkich, zmuszonych do ucieczki z Inflant, dochowujących wierności królom Polski, ale też poszukujących na ziemiach litewskich łatwiejszego życia

Pod wspólnym niebem : narody dawnej Rzeczypospolitej

Zbiór tekstów opisujących grupy etniczne i religijne zamieszkujące Rzeczpospolitą Obojga Narodów, czyli Litwinów, Białorusinów, Ukraińców, Niemców, Żydów, Ormian, Tatarów, Karaimów, Cygan-Romów, Włochów, Szkotów i holenderskich Menonitów.Michał Kopczyński - WSTĘP; Andrzej Rachuba - LITWINI; Oleg Łatyszonek - BIAŁORUSINI; Mirosław Nagielski - UKRAIŃCY; Igor Kąkolewski - NIEMCY; Andrzej Żbikowski - ŻYDZI; Krzysztof Stopka - ORMIANIE; Jan Tyszkiewicz TATARZY; Anna Klimowicz - KARAIMI; Lech Mróz - CYGANIE-ROMOWIE; Wojciech Tygielski - WŁOSI; Jacek Wijaczka - SZKOCI; Edmund Kizik - MENNONICI; Wojciech Tygielski - A GDZIE POLACY? BIOGRAMY AUTORÓW.Agnieszka Uziębł

The Editions of Regional Councils’ Records From the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie dotychczasowego stanu edycji akt sejmikowych z ziem Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego od 1566 do 1794 r. Choć pierwsze wydanie drukiem litewskiej (wileńskiej) uchwały sejmikowej miało miejsce jeszcze w końcu XVIII w., to w przeciwieństwie do ziem Korony Polskiej historycy polscy w późniejszych wiekach w zasadzie mało się nimi interesowali. Stosunkowo dużo akt sejmikowych wydała w XIX w. Wileńska Archeograficzna Komisja, ale należy do tych edycji mieć nadzwyczajny krytycyzm, gdyż miała ona wyraźne zlecenie kształtowania obrazu Rzeczypospolitej (a zwłaszcza Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego) przez pryzmat wymagań politycznych i wyznaniowych. Dla polskich badaczy przeszłości ważne były zaś przede wszystkim ziemie polskie i sytuacji nie poprawiło odzyskanie przez Polskę niepodległości w 1918 r. Chcę więc zaprezentować poglądy niektórych z owych historyków na potrzebę takich edycji (zwłaszcza na zjeździe historyków w Wilnie w 1935 r.), ich formę i dorobek edycyjny akt sejmikowych w wiekach XIX–XXI z podziałem na tomy stricte prezentujące takowe akta (wydawane przez wspomnianą Komisję Archeograficzną), na okazjonalne i przypadkowe ich edycje, na dorobek historiografii rosyjskiej, polskiej, litewskiej i białoruskiej. Jakie są widoczne już efekty istnego wybuchu edycji akt sejmikowych w ostatnim dziesięcioleciu i jakie perspektywy? W jakich ośrodkach naukowych podjęte zostały projekty edycyjne i jak wyglądają zespoły je realizujące?The aim of the article is to present the current state of editing sejmiks’ records from the lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from 1566 to 1794. Although the first printed edition of Lithuanian (Vilnius) sejmiks’ resolutions took place as late as the end of the 18th century, in contrast to the lands of the Polish Crown, Polish historians took little interest in them in later centuries. A relatively large number of sejmik records were published in the 19th century by Vilnius Archaeographical Commission, but one should be extremely critical of these editions, as it was clearly commissioned to shape the picture of the Commonwealth (and especially the Grand Duchy of Lithuania) through the prism of political and confessional requirements. For Polish scholars of the past, on the other hand, it was primarily the Polish lands that were important and the situation was not improved by Poland’s regaining of independence in 1918. Therefore, I would like to present the views of some of these historians on the need for such editions (especially at the historians’ congress in Vilnius in 1935), their form and the achievements of editing sejm records in the 19th – 21st centuries, divided into volumes strictly presenting such records (published by the abovementioned Archaeographical Commission), occasional and incidental editions, and the achievements of Russian, Polish, Lithuanian and Byelorussian historiography. What are the already visible effects of the veritable explosion of editions of sejmik records in the last decade and what are the prospects? In which research centres have editing projects been undertaken and what are the teams carrying them out

An attempt to equalize the powers of Lithuanian hetman offices under King John II Casimir Vasa.

The aim of the article is to present the attempts undertaken by King John II Casimir Vasa to make equal the powers of Lithuanian hetmans and thus to limit the authority of the Lithuanian grand hetman. Despite the fact that the Lithuanian offi ces of hetman were modelled on the Crown ones, they were characterised by certain diff erences. The first and most important was the fact that the filed hetman was not subordinated to the grand hetman, but the latter had much greater powers over the army than his "younger" colleague. This resulted in practical gradation of the offices, although an informal one. King John Casimir sought to change this state of aff airs with a reform of the offi ce of hetman. First, he wanted to limit the scope of grand hetman's authority through an appropriate oath, but the attempt failed at the 1654 Sejm session. At the same time, he took steps to weaken the power of the grand hetman in Lithuania, initially by his objection to the appointment of Field Hetman Janusz Radziwiłł to the office, and after a failure of this measure, by appointing to the office of field hetman a man who was totally devoted to him in the person of Grand Treasurer Wincenty Korwin Gosiewski. Holding two extremely important offi ces, both with the authority over military matters, Gosiewski was able to control and frustrate Radziwiłł's actions considered unfavourable for the court. With it, the king formed a separate division for Gosiewski in the Lithuanian army, exempted from the authority of the grand hetman. In practice, this step brough a series of misfortunes for Lithuania in her struggles with the aggressions of Moscow and Sweden in 1654-1655. The king, however, did not draw appropriate conclusions, and in 1656, after Gosiewski escaped from Swedish captivity, handed him over the command over a part of the army (the so-called "left wing") and decided to totally free him from the authority of the unfriendly to him, powerful and moody Grand Hetman Paweł Jan Sapieha. Initially, Gosiewski only ignored or changed Sapieha's orders related to the authority of the grand hetman (a winter allowance for the army, called hiberna ["winter bread"], judicature, soldier's pay), yet finally, he wanted the king to fulfil his promise and make him the grand hetman. Since Sapieha had not the least intention to resign his office, John Casimir decided to equalise the scope of authority of the two hetman offi ces, and to abolish in their titles the "grand" and "field" terms, making them both "hetmans of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania". Despite the threat of confederation of Sapieha troops, the king pushed his project through to completion at the Częstochowa convocation of 1657. This met with a fierce response from the grand hetman of Lithuania, who with his division of the Lithuanian army (the so-called "right wing") and his faction forced the king to abandon his plans. Finally, however, both hetmans had to reconcile themselves with the status quo, which meant a considerable Gosiewski's independence and some superior prerogatives of Sapieha. King John Casimir, however, did not allow to consolidate the army, and aft er Gosiewski was taken captive in the battle of Werki fought in 1658 against Russia, he appointed commander of the left wing division first Samuel Komorowski and then Michał Kazimierz Pac. It was Pac who, as the grand hetman aft er Sapieha's death, abolished the split of the Lithuanian army into two divisions. The last attempt to "describe" the offices King John Casimir undertook not long before his abdication only to fail on