Polska perpektywa jest taka że wciągnęliście nas w gnój, w który wcześniej wdepnęliście sami. Przez wschodni "gnój" rozumiem także system oligarchiczny, który różnił sie skrajnie od zachodniego porządku feudalnego "Dziwnym" trafem w polskiej literaturze nie znajdziesz poiweści osadzonej w realiach XVII Wielkopolski. Bo tam był spokój, ludzie normalnie żyli, bogacili sie i płacili podatki na wschodni bardach. Korona różniła sie od Litwy jak Bizancjum od Zachodniego Cesarstwa.Zamiast zająć się odzyskaniem Pomorza i Śląska wikłaliśmy sie w niekończące się wojny na wschodzie.
One thing missing from this video is that unlike other states in the west and east Poland and Lithuania percentage of nobles was 10% in comparison to 1% in most of the countries at that time. This means that 10% of population was actively participating in politics and had influence on the country's laws and policies.
While situation of Commonwealth's peasants was though and economic oppression of them was detrimental to Commonwealth's economy, but their situation was not as bad as this video portrays it. One issue had major influence. If a noble was far too oppressive then peasants escaped to other nobles who were more lenient. And there was not much that it can be do about it, because Commonwealth did not have police or military patrols. Hence before Russian troops started to patrol Commonwealth's roads the system was quite self regulating. Also it was not that all peasants had to work 3-4 days a week for the noble. It was 3-4 man-days a week. Hence if a peasant had 3 sons, then with his sons he was able to do the required work in a one day. And this, serfdom in Commonwealth was waaay more lenient than that in Russia.
@@greengeck0 Firstly why do you even assume that I am a Pole. Secondly I am one of the nerds who tries to highlight the difference between Crown and Grand Duchy and I tent to use Commonwealth instead of Poland and if you look close enough into my original comment there was two times where I wrote Commonwealth and two times Poland and it was my lack of attention. And most importantly during the Commonwealth it was common to call is just Poland and all nobility Polish citizens, why if you wanted make the distinction people back then would say "Crown", because in common day speech, especially in 18th century, Poland meant the whole Commonwealth. So calling it Commonwealth is anachronistic because people would say either informally "Poland" of formally "Common Commonwealth of Crown of Kingdom of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania". And also thanks for point my lack of attention, I corrected the post.
On Sarmatians, in lithuania you will often hear your grandparents and parents say "Ar neturi sarmatos?" "Don't you have any sarmata?", meaning don't you feel shame when doing usually doing violent things. Not sure whats the connection tbh, but just a fun tid bit
Actually, we already have a video on our channel - ruclips.net/video/oeakw_nEAk8/видео.htmlsi=dyzP5obIPLZrEp6L. But we are thinking of extending this topic
That's why Russian government makes Poland their worst enemy in europe. In their thinking Poland has an imperial past which is competition for them. No central-eastern European country can boast of something like that, neither Belarus, nor Latvia, Estonia, etc. And Poland and Lithuania were an empire, for a while but they was
The reason is deeper than just calling the state "of Rus". All these countries are Slavic. Slavs during pagan times were governing themselves by electing their leaders during a gathering called "wiec". Leaders where not hereditary so there was no guarantee that the offspring of the leader will inherit anything at all. So what is so different in Muscovy? Muscovy was under Mongolian occupation for much longer and the dukes of Moscow came to conclusion that the only way out of occupation is to be as ruthless as Mongols. This is why Muscovy became such a tyrannical centralistic state in contrast of the rest of Europe. At that time when nobles in Poland and Lithuania would enjoy laws protecting them and their fortunes that king could not break, in Muscovy Czar could behead anyone and take his possessions for himself or give it so someone else. In other words Polish-Lithuanian state was for the benefit its nobility while Muscovy was for Char himself. This stark difference in thinking about the state still exists. Also the reason why i don't say Russia is because there was no such country as Russia back there. Russia is a product of Catherine the Great. She rebranded Dutchy of Muscovy into Empire of Russia.
I would not call it an oligarchy. Szlachta was 10% of the society. That is a lot of people. Oligarchy typically means a rule of a few. Modern USA is more of an oligarchy with 10 people owning 10% of GDP and 30 people - 20%.
That maybe true in case of 16th ane early 17th century, Western countries had much more narrow circle of elites with the absolutist Monarchs on top, while in the Commonwealth power was distributer much wider, but infact later only the richest rody - the Magnateria influenced the country, most of Szlachta was dependent on them to some degree, anyway it was rather more stratified society then modern USA, at least life-standars of the poorest undoubtly grew.
@@arturhashmi6281 Yes, by the late 1600s, it was effectively an oligarchy of handful of magnate families with pockets deep enough to maintain large clientele among less affluent nobles, especially the landless ones whose main source of income were services for a magnate. The shift is visible in the way who spearheaded important reforms. One such thing was the 'executionist' (late 1500/early 1600s) movement of noble 'middle class' that opted (among other things) for execution of crown's rights to royal estates to prevent magnates from appropriating them. Whereas in the 1700s it was mostly a play between the king (who maintained his own clientele via distribution of land offices), individual magnates with their 'parties' of clients and increasingly foreign interference. Politically sensitive topic brought by some of the reformers was a call to REDUCE the suffrage by stripping the non-landed/financially dependent nobles of some of their political rights and thus dimishing the surface for political corruption, at the same time somewhat opening the system for burgher elites.
Isn't this a re-upload? (Edit: nope, it's an English version of a video I've seen on the channel Історія на Карті) Anyway, I think it's a great introduction to this often overlooked topic, surprisingly nuanced and accurate, clear, and visually pleasing. There's only some minor issues with the pronunciation of some place names. I think the ones that stood out the most were Krewo (Belarusian Kreva) and Bracław (Ukrainian Bratslav). Fun fact: these romanisations of their East Slavic names actually contain hints on how to pronounce their Polish versions, or how to pronounce the letters *w* and *c* in Polish words in general (unless in the diagraphs 'cz' and 'ch' or the diacritic ć).
Most of the nobels in Poland were poor or average. Many of them were working harder than peasants. There were cases when villages full of people which received nobility tittle.
Thanks for reminding to revisit this period in history about the less mentioned northern borders of Baltic region. We had all of history thought 3 times during school, but our region trough middle ages was so complicated that i forgot most of it. By my region i mean current Latvia and Estonia, as Livonian orden and war was a long and messy ordeal. I still don't get how after retaking Kurland from Livonia, Rzeczypostpolita took back the rest of Latvian territory east of Daugava river from Muscovian principality, but we're thankful if Lithuanians helped in that.
Most of the Lithuanian nobility were native Rusyns. Today we would say Belarusians and Ukrainians. These people were very quickly Polonized, both in terms of language and religion. A typical example is Prince Jarema Wiśniowiecki, whose grandfather was the ataman of the Zaporozhian Cossacks, and he himself was their main opponent. His parents were Orthodox, he himself was Catholic. The Wiśniowiecki family was one of the side lines of the Rurik family, the founders and rulers of Kievan Rus. After the death of Ivan the Terrible without an heir, it had just as much right to the Moscow throne as the Shuyskys and Romanovs. During many free elections, the incumbent Tsar or his successor was proposed as a candidate several times. The greatest opponents of this solution were not the Catholic nobility, but the Orthodox nobility. These people, who had relatives on the other side of the border, perfectly understood the dangers of the Russian model of governance, which, despite the passage of several centuries, had changed only slightly. Sigismund Augustus annexed the territories of today's Ukraine to the crown at the request of the nobility representing the annexed voivodeships. If it were not for the rapid Polonization of the Ruthenian nobility, it would be safe to say that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was equally a Polish, Lithuanian, Belarusian, Ukrainian and even, to some extent, Latvian state. As long as the people ruling these countries were in agreement and acted together for the common good, they were able to oppose Moscow Imperialism.
A appreciate that you are welcome to your own opinion and you covered a lot of territory, so I did not touch on this initially, but the more I think on it, the more I think I need to give a counterargument. Was the form of government in the PLC perfect? Definitely not. As you pointed out, during the entire period of the PLC, the majority of people were serfs, who were very unlikely to have an education, and, thus, to be able to vote intelligently, like paper was cheap enough to waste on ballots. The middle class, Jewish or not, may have had sufficient education, but were still denied a vote on principle. The PLC did have quite a few nobles with varying levels of education and they were allowed to vote, but they mostly voted in blocks to show loyalty to a protector, i.e., someone with greater power. So, in that sense, I can see how a person could say this is rule by oligarchs, whose status was generally hereditary. On the other side, how many Europeans elected a new monarch, usually a foreigner, after the death of the previous one? Usually that title was hereditary. Your handling of Henry shows exactly how powerful the Sejm was, which was also unusual at the time. During the period covered, I believe was when Louis of France stated, 'I am the State.' Were there problems? Definitely. The reason why the use of force was given to the nobles in the form of private armies was that often the Sejm did not allocate any funds to meet threats to the country's defense and if it did, these were raising of new units to meet that specific threat. In short, the national soldiers were too few in number and could be poorly trained. Why was this? Because of the veto. Any single, fairly lowly (small landholder) noble could block all the good work with a single veto. Thus, in conclusion, if it was oligarchical rule, how was this veto possible? I think, therefore, that it did show a way forward for more democratic rule. And remember that we in the West generally have a republican government, where representatives decide issues, rather that a democratic government where the people decide everything as a whole.
For a short period you would also have a personal union with saxony and the commonwealth from 1697 to 1763 under the augustines. It should have technically been called poland-saxony-lithuania but it was just called unia polsko-saksa in polish or sachsen-polen in german. After the polish partition many poles fled to saxony and a lot of people in saxony have a polish background due to that.
A nice start. It would be nice if more attention was given to using the correct term for the language. Thus, Lithuanian names should be in Lithuanian. (Only a problem in the beginning.) Also ethic Lithuanian lands exceeded the boundaries of present-day Lithuania. Next, Jews were specifically invited in to conduct commerce, at least in Lithuania, because initially the locals did not know Latin or how to conduct business with the West since their commercial ties before Lithuania's Baptism had been primarily with the Kyivan Rus'. In order to attract the Jews, they were given special rights, such as to be tried under noble law. I am not aware of Jews being serfs, but I am not a specialist in the area. Usually they lived in the cities. Because you credit them with 8% percent of the population but your demographic tables add up to 100% between nobles and serfs, you might go back and revise them. It should also be stressed that since the Jews had been invited in, I have heard of little antisemitism in Lithuania. ( I'll let others speak for the Ruthenians and Poles.) How many came directly because of the invitation and how many just followed the trend I cannot say, but different rules did not apply to the latter. Thus, you often hear that the Jews were invited in even though the majority likely came subsequently. I presume the right of veto will be in the subsequent posting on the PLC.
It's a huge topic, I admit. Since you got into government, one point not often made is that nationalism as we know it did not exist. One was loyal to one's lord, or perhaps better to say, to one's community. Each microregion spoke its own dialect and so they did not feel themselves loyal to the bigger community. You spoke of magnates, who were like mafia bosses in the sense that they were thinking more of their own power and position rather than the country as a whole. And lesser lords were loyal to them out of a sense of profit. The monarch was elected, but the rest existed for life or until someone bought their property. You worked for the lord not because he was a great guy but because there was nowhere else to go. For example, if you were a miller and left your land, you would just be in competition with the local miller in the place you moved to. And you spoke the wrong dialect. Thus, it was not like in the US South where slaves could flee elsewhere and start over. And so, when the serfs were emancipated, nothing much changed.
@@Tonio_Kreger Если в ВКЛ правили беларусы и они самыми главными были, то почему в Вильнюсе было более 50 католических костелов и только 4+- православных церквей? Почему все белорусские магнаты (Сапеги, Ходкевичи, Огински) положили хер на православие и русинские корни и создавали историю, что их генеалогия восходит от литовцев-жемайтов? Почему везде, где мы видим слово «Литва», «Литовский», «Литовец/литвин» - там литовский язык, а не белорусская мова? Если белорусы были литвинами, почему Скорина выпустил БИБЛИЮ РУСКУ, а не БИБЛИЮ ЛИТОВЬСКУ?
The first European Union 🇪🇺 in history was the Union of Poland and Lithuania plus citizens of Belarus, Ukraine, the Jewish faith, Russians, Tatars and several other nationalities. Beautiful pages of European history.
The free election by Polish/ Lithuanian nobility was quite ahead of its time. Even though it was about 10% of the population, in comparison to our European neighbours it was far more than a very hermetic elite not willing to let go of the power and control they inherited through generations/wealth. Giving the power to vote, even to 10% of the population was a huge step towards democratic election. This was ahead of its time and it was proven by “liberum veto” (anyone within Sejm was allowed to single handily oppose against establishing a new law, or crucial updates to the the existing). All though it sounds like a very fair and modern way to keep in touch with essential decisions within commonwealth. As much as it sounds just and fair it actually contributed to decline of the commonwealth and later partition of Poland.
it was never called Grand duchy of lithuania and rus only Grand Duchy of Lithuania Lituane, Lituanica and many other axonyms of latin and germanic langueges
@@Tonio_KregerЕсли уж пишешь полное название ВКЛ (Литвы), то пиши так: Великое Княжество Литовское, Жемойтийское, Руськое, Киевское, Мстиславское, Полоцкое, Минское, Новогрудское и иных литовских земель. Упрощенно - ВКЛ, еще более упрощенно - Литва. Но никак не Русь, не Беларусь, не БССР. Литва, литовское. Поэтому прочь, белорусы, руки от истории Литвы! Дальше снимайте ботинки и поднимайтесь на стулья! Это вся ваша борьба! Рабы!
The name of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the title of the owner changed over time, depending on the state borders and structure. In the middle of the 13th and the beginning of the 14th centuries, the state was called only Lithuania. Thus, in the deed of Grand Duke Mindaugas (1254), he is listed as "King of Lithuania". After joining Kyiv and other Ukrainian lands, the grand duke was called "King of the Lithuanians and many Ruthenians"). After the annexation of a part of Latvia, Grand Duke Gediminas began to be called "King of Lithuanians and Ruthenians, ruler and prince of Semigallia". After the annexation of Samogitia in the middle of the 15th century the grand duke is titled as "the grand duke... of all the Lithuanian lands and Samogitia and many Ruthenian lands." In the Statute of 1529, it was stated that "The written right was given to the lordship of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Samogitia and others through the most honorable Sigismund, by the grace of God, the King of Poland, the Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Samogitia , Masovia and others." However, after the creation of the Union of Lublin (1569) and the annexation of Ukraine to Poland, the country began to be called only the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, although the Grand Duke himself continued to be titled the Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Samogitia, Masovia, and after the annexation in 1561 of the Inflants - and Inflants.
@@TheRezro "Gediminas, by the grace of God, the King of Lithuanians and Ruthenians, the ruler and duke of Semigallia." - Gediminas's titles mentioned in his 26 May 1323 letter, which was sent to the Germanian cities. Source: Gedimino laiškai [Letters of Gediminas] (PDF) (in Lithuanian). Vilnius: Vilnius University, Institute of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore. p. 2. Retrieved 30 May 2021.
The worst thing is that it created friction between poles and lithuanians, they should have found nicer way to do that. But commonwealth were still cool as it was so big
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth was created by Sigismund II "August", who forced the Lithuanian nobility to accept the Union, if not then part by part he would annex Lithuanian lands to the Kingdom of Poland until all Lithuanian lands were under Polish control, then without the Union they would be under the Polish Crown. The king could do this with the Lithuanian lands, but he could not do this with the Polish lands. Historical Fact: The Lithuanian nobility was first against the Real Union and left the first session, but after Ukraine was separated from Lithuania and annexed to Poland, so the Lithuanian nobility returned to the session and signed the Real Union
You, my friend, turning it to some majesty from Poland perspective, a little modesty wouldn't hurt. It was not created by one man who by the way was of Lithuanian bloodline among other things, it principal there was longer and complex story. Don't let us down. 1. Lithuanian nobles ruled Lithuania GD lands(video said different). 2. Polish nobles in theory created union quite ago (in XIV cent.) when the Crown was given to Lithuanian Grand duchy from Gediminas dynasty Jagiello (after the Polish crown of course it continued as Jagiellonian dynasty what whose descendant was the aforementioned king Sigismund II "August"). So this union was more continuation then somewho came and created Union by force. 3. Factually two states Union (in XIV cent.) was not implemented by conditions in full because Jagiello had to come to reality of his brother Vytautas ruling the Lithuania, and together tightened the neckle around the strongest Power in Europe at that time - Teutonic Order (and here was a strong point where Poland needed Lithuania). 4. Back XVI cent. - Sigismund II "August" Jagiellonian was for the Union. 5. Lithuanian nobles also needed it, cause of troubles with moscow. They just wanted the privileges even to Polish nobles. And that was the biggest problem, they wanted to go in union with equal rights (Polish, of course, took care get major weight). 6. In between negotiation phases Sigismund II "August" using the circumstances by force took several lands(not Ukraine only). After that Polish nobles ensured majority for them and accepted the Union with even rights (but with something like "control packet" in pocket). And concluded Union on common will. 7. And BTW, it was good Polish play, not like similar but unsuccessful with Ukraine in XVIII.
@lafatrys it does not change the fact that the Union of Poland and Lithuania would have been created, and if it had not been created, Lithuania would probably not have been on the map earlier, whether from the Polish or Moscow side. The unification of these two nations (Kingdom of Poland ruled by Jagielonians and Great Duchy of Lithuania (what is legally under the rule of the Jagiellonians) was crucial to the history of that time, but the government outgrew those times and failed.
A mogła być Rzeczpospolita Trojga Narodów i kto wie jak potoczyłaby się historia i tej dzisiejszej wojny na Ukrainie i wszystkiego po drodze mogłoby nie być. Skro jesteś taki dobry to zrób film gdzie, kiedy i kto konkretnie popełnił błędy i jak to by mogło wyglądać gdyby tych błędów nie popełniono? Dasz radę?
Polityka Jezuitow za Zygmunta III spowodowala, ze Polska stala sie bardziej katolicka za cene spokoju wewnetrznego i spojnosci terytorialnej. Za to biskupom bylo dobrze ale ogolne skutki byly tragiczne.
The other important factor that united both countries under Jogaila/Jagiełło's rule was that in 1413 Forty-seven selected Lithuanian and Ruthenian Boyars were adopted by Polish families, granted Polish coats of arms and titles, some of them were Pagan not so long ago and after that they became part of the European Knighthood, Teutonic Order could not just claim any of their lands in the name of "Evangelization" anymore like they used to. Some of these Rody (Clans?) became the the co called Magnateria - most influential families in the Commonwealth. Lithuania received more autonomy then under rule of Vytautas, "the Lithuanian nobles could choose another Grand Duke instead of passing the title to Władysław II Jagiełło or his heir. However, culturally, Lithuania and Poland grew closer. Lithuania adopted Polish institutions of castellans and voivodes. Catholic Lithuanian nobles and church officials were granted equal rights with the Polish nobles and clergy." - wikipedia
@@ingemarsmit4840 I do not know where did you find this information, I know only about his grandma - Jewna being Ruthenian, but Jogalia had Lithuanian name, he spoke Lithuanian language and he was perceived as Lithuanian by his contemporaries. Aristocrats generally has mixed origin, but to say that he was Slavic seems as exageration.
Henryk Walezy potajemnie opuścił Polskę na wiadomość o niespodziewanej śmierci swojego brata ,po którym dziedziczył tron Francji. Szczęśliwie dla Polski i Litwy ,które zyskały osobie Batorego mądrego i walecznego króla. Walezy swoim zachowaniem na dworze Polsko -Litewskim siał ogólnie rzec ujmując- zgorszenie.
The ultra-selfish nobility eventually f-ed things up but how Vilnius was annexed by Poland (Piłsudski) much later in 1922 was a really shitty thing to do.
@@Jeff_Reyx all Lithuanians who felt culturally Polish as the result of polonization for centuries; pretty much the same argument Puto is making for eastern Ukraine and Crimea using the same methods and green men like Piłsudski resorted to in ‘21-22. Very shitty things to do that did Poland no good in Lithuania or Ukraine in the long-run.
@@Tonio_Kregerit was, is and always will be Vilnius. The Polish tried their best to stamp out the Lithuanian language and culture and they failed. I don’t come to the polish and call Warszawa, Varšuva now do I? So maybe a bit of common courtesy is owed here.
@@Jack_Dab It is Vilnius, but it was called Wilno by Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobles as well, can you understand that your translating is anachronistic towards history?
@@Походеньки For some parts of history Gdańsk was called Danzig, nobody argues with that, just like Wrocław was Breslau and Poznań was Posen. Anyway today they are not, just like Lviv is not Lwów anymore. Gdańsk is not the best example anyway, because originally it was Slavic city and Danzig is Latinized/Germanized version of it's name.
16:15 - Sarmatism wasn't an ideology, it was a more of a founding myth like Romulus and Remus. And no, it wasn't just nobility that was allegedly descended from Sarmatians, it was Slavs in general. The theory simply filled the gap (that we have to this day by the way) in knowledge of Slavic history before the middle ages - in 15th century some guys in Poland "figured out" that before Slavs became known as Slavs they were Sarmatians. 1. There is not a single founding legend of a Polish noble family that would even mention a wild claim of Sarmatians conquering the Slavs. 2. Nobody has ever objected to Ruthenian and Lithuanian nobility being equal with Polish nobility on the basis of them not being descended from Sarmatians - Ruthenians because they were just as Sarmatian as Poles and Lithuanians because Sarmatian theory was a gapfiller in Polish history and was never used to justify the social hierarchy. 3. Since the story of Piast the Wheelright is very well known and easy to google, here's a quote from "Ikones książąt i królów polskich" by Jan Głuchowski (1605), refering to legendary ruler Leszko II of the Popielid dynasty: "Don't be surprised that the prince has become of a ploughman, Who at first had little household equipment, And a narrow patch of farmland Also a poor palace made of brushwood. Fortune honored him with what it had in its power. And since he was worthy of this, that rightfully has happened, So that virtue, like an eagle, would look down from above And always reign in an uninterrupted glory." So we have legends of two different Polish rulers who were peasants before they became a prince, both very much present at the time of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. But sure, let's just assume that the Polish-Lithuanian nobility simultaneously believed that their ancestors were a Sarmatian nobility that conquered the Slavic peasants, that their ancestors were ennobled in 10th-15th century and that two oldest Polish dynasties had nothing to do with Sarmatians. 16:40 "Follow all orders from their lords" - Excuse me, what? Peasants had many duties to their lords, but they were very specified and nobleman had no right to just order his peasants to do whatever he wanted them to do. He could do it, of course, due to power dynamic and all that, and the peasant had no way of suing him for it, but abuse of power is a separate issue. As for the mentioned sexual violence, it was strictly illegal and rape was one of very few reasons for which peasants could move out of the village without their lord's permission - at which point a peasant would become a free man and could actually sue the nobleman 17:50 It wasn't impossible to leave the village, it was just limited to one man per year. Still sucked, but words like "impossible" have meaning you know.
To be fair, all of Belarus is is essentially ancestral baltic land. And the western 1/3rd of it Lithuanian. Even today, large amounts of Litvins live on the Belarusian side of the border. Lithuanians are badass though, last pagan nation of Europe.
Каким образом Польша забрала больше половины земель ВКЛ и при этом говорят шо именно Московия несла угрозу ВКЛ. Получается шо именно польское королевство стало оккупантом.
Widać że ktoś nie odrobił do końca lekcji z Historii i próbuje ją na nowo pisać . Wtedy nie było mowy o Ukrainie dwa król miał władze a nie tak jak tutaj się mówi . I wiele innych bzdur .
*My best friend is Radziwiłł and he does not call himself Radvila, his family acknowledge their Lithuanian ancestry, but they did not call themselves Radvila for the last 600 years. It's Lithuanian anachronism.
@@arturhashmi6281I think when it comes to history, the original name should be used. So Radvilos are original surname and your friend uses just polinsed version of it.
@@LukasSRR I think when it comes to people the way how they called themselves should be used and that would be honest historical perspective. Translating people's surnames eg. Chodkevičiai or Ostrogiškiai is anachronistic towards the people from 16h-18th century, especialy that most of the so called Lithuanian houses were in fact Ruthenian families, I understand where it comes from, it is a result of 19th century nationalism, Polish history from that period was also very centred on Poland while Ruthenian as well as Lithuanian side of the story was neglected. We need to be honest towards history, tearing it apart does not solve anything.
A third of modern Lithuanian territory historically was not considered and named Lithuania and was a separate region of the Grand Duchy with the name Samogitia. Аnd In general, while looking at old maps, the territory of modern Belarus and only part of modern Lithuania are labeled as Lithuania and so there are many questions about why this happened, if the majority of the population of this territory were Slavs, the lithuanian language was not written, lithuanian ethnicity was in the process of slavicization, and yet the territory was firmly associated with the Lithuania, and in the minds of contemporaries it was ok to say I am Lithuanian, although you were of slavic culture.
It is exactly the same case as Rus/Ruthenian people who inherited their ethnonym from the rulling Nordic elites while being generaly Slavic. The House of Gediminids was Lithuanian, Samogitians were other Baltic tribe which used almost the same language as Lithuanians, anyway Ruthenian people were aware of being who they are until 19-20th century when Ukrainians and Belarussians started to differentiate, but it was not unusual to identify as Ruthenian and Lithuanian in the same time. Most of the nobles in the Commonwealth identified as Polish on some leval anyway. It was not contradictory for them, It just depended on context. It may seem confusing for us - modern post-nationalistic society, but Commonwealth was in definition multi-nationalistic, You could be Tatar identifing as Lithuanian deputy choosing the Polish king in sejm, Ruthenian could be the language you speak and you could indetify as one while being on your Orthodox mass in contra to your Scotish neighbour who was Polish on sunday because he was Catholic. The most important thing was that you were all Nobles chosen by God to defend Christian Europe and that your ancestors were mythical Sarmatians.To be clear there were also people who identified wxlusively as Ruthenians, Polish or Lithuanian, but The quotes like "Gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus" show us how complex the nation of Commonwealth was. Russian tzarat and later the Soviets turned us against each other and they try to do this until this day, claims of Ivan the terrible are the same claims Putin has.
And now Belarusians keep coming to Lietuva to toil as serfs and slaves. The smaller Tzar in Mensk can't supply his citizens with Lithuanian salaries ? LOL.
They still writing Jogaila name in Polish but its ok when we know he was lived there all his life and we Lithuanians was bad on writing so usualy they use Polish letters and writing.
There was a principality of Lithuania, but in fact it was Slavic Lithuanian and more Slavic. There was Prussia, but German, not Baltic, Great Britain, but not Celtic-British, and there are many such names with a different essence in the world. As for the Duchy of Lithuania, it and Lithuania itself were no longer ruled by Lithuanians. Thus, until 1991, Lithuania was ruled by non-Lithuanians, as well as the principality.
Unfortunately for Polish People, they got a bad name, because of the Lithuanian, Belarussian and Rus noble families oppressing their own people in the Eastern lands. These oligarchs became self Polonised to acquire closeness to the Kingdom. They left their lands and lived in Poland. Their territories were run by Zyd. It was the Zyd parawhosite run the taverns, mills, and estates. Zyd also, Incredibly !, controlled the Orthodox Churches. Alcohol and Religion in the claws of narcissistic Zyd. There were many uprisings against Zyd oppressing the peasants. The most significant was the Cossack Rebellion. A great pogrom and a turning to Muscovy for support. Thus the end of the Oligarchs in the Commonwealth. And the beginning of Poland getting a bad reputation.
Modern British historian Norman Davies - "At the end of the 19th century, the Lithuanians, who were ahead of the Belarusians with the national revival, received the support of the Russian imperial, and then Soviet ideologists, thanks to which they managed to spread their own interpretation history." There is a term Lithuania, but the principality was Slavic Baltic and much more Slavic. There was Prussia, but German, not Baltic. Belv of Great Britain, but not Celtic British.
@@oldmenas Ну если у вас патриотичные заморочки, то учить вас надо.. Или вы некая элита мировая?? И ВКЛ и собственно Литва большее время свой цивилизации управлялась не литовцами..
This was I Rzeczypospolita. polish Empire. federal state with catholic King polish in Warsaw Warszawa ..from Election.. After Piast Dynasty..Decline Liberum veto.. weak army as consequence in 18 century only 100 thousand solders to defend the borders. NOT Enough Country of nobility who had the political power Constitution 3 maja may..1791 came to late They were trying to save this federal State.Caryca katherina Russia didint like this reform and soon her army came to Warsaw Suvorow army..Additionally she made agreement to partition this Federal State with Prussia and Austrio Hungary.and this Federal State gone from the map for 123 years until 1918 as second Rzeczypospolita polska. was born . Republic Of Poland . I Rzeczypospolita Poniatowski last King Abdicated and moved to Grodno from There to Petersburg . Died in Russia.. in 1938 came to Poland
@@antanassmetona4054 You just repeat Russian narrative withouth knowing it, they said the same under tzarat under rule of Soviets, "the bad rulling class from Poland spoiled everything", thats exactly how Russia is turning Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine and Belarus against each-other and thats one of the reason why this great country crumbled.
@@arturhashmi6281 Russian narrative? That's simply the Lithuanian narrative. And I wouldn't call it a narrative in the first place, cause it's simply a fact. The Polish nobles were the deciding factor as to why the Commonwealth failed. Unless you have an argument to refute that.
How Lithuanians love to write patriotic nonsense. And as if they had MindaugAS. The joke is that these are kind of Lithuanian authentic, invented by the linguist Kazimierz Buga in the 20th century. But the Lithuanians did not have a written language. Probably, I found it in the depths of the people's memory through psychoanalysis, exploring the people's subconscious. In Lietuva, there is not history, but a patriotic religion that you need to believe in. But their faith is strong...
Tell us the meaning of the name Mindaugas, please. All names have a meaning in their original language. For example, David means "beloved" in Hebrew because that's the language it comes from. David has no meaning in English as it's not an English name. Mindaugas has a meaning in Lithuanian and comes from Lithuanian words (to mention (mineti) and many (daug) meaning "mentioned by many"). What meaning does "Mendog" have in Russian? The answer is none.
@@Neji641212 This is just Latin term Rutheni was used in late medieval sources to describe East Slavs of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. But they still called themselves Russians until modern times. The Grand dukes of Kiev called themselves as Rus or Russians until they fell to Mongol Horde.
Unlike most videos this also tells the story from the Lithuaniam perspective, not just the polish one. Nice!
Greetings from Estonia
How many video on the polish-lithuanian commonwealth have you watched?
Dare I say, Lithuanian American or similar……. 😂😂😂😊
Polska perpektywa jest taka że wciągnęliście nas w gnój, w który wcześniej wdepnęliście sami. Przez wschodni "gnój" rozumiem także system oligarchiczny, który różnił sie skrajnie od zachodniego porządku feudalnego "Dziwnym" trafem w polskiej literaturze nie znajdziesz poiweści osadzonej w realiach XVII Wielkopolski. Bo tam był spokój, ludzie normalnie żyli, bogacili sie i płacili podatki na wschodni bardach. Korona różniła sie od Litwy jak Bizancjum od Zachodniego Cesarstwa.Zamiast zająć się odzyskaniem Pomorza i Śląska wikłaliśmy sie w niekończące się wojny na wschodzie.
This was Federal state Polish Empire I Rzeczypospolita Mocarstwo baltyckie according to West historias
The fact that someone has done it from more of a Lithuanian POV made this video so good!
First comment
Finally a video about polish-lithuanian Commonwealth ❤❤🎉🎉🎉
second*
One thing missing from this video is that unlike other states in the west and east Poland and Lithuania percentage of nobles was 10% in comparison to 1% in most of the countries at that time. This means that 10% of population was actively participating in politics and had influence on the country's laws and policies.
Conclusion? Never let your nobility to become too strong.
Fr John III Sobieski was good at that he just pay the nobility to fuck off from his ruling
become absolute or become obsolete
Z silnej arystokracji płyną też plusy którym ten materiał nie poświęcił miejsca. (To skomplikowany temat).
@@darek4470 NP?
And dont live near Russians 😀
As a Pole, I've learnt more from this video than from my school, where it was just "We Poland, we Lithuania, we together".
@@Petexy greetings from Estonia
IT was I Rzeczypospolita Polish Empire federal state with Balts and Rus and Polish people
@egertroos-qh7hw
and
@Petexy
Warm greetings and czesc from Latvia too, brothers in arms now, even if we didn't rule an empire😅✊
Ukraine- 😢
in highschool explenation of Polish-lithuania commonwealth is much more expanded than in primiary school
While situation of Commonwealth's peasants was though and economic oppression of them was detrimental to Commonwealth's economy, but their situation was not as bad as this video portrays it. One issue had major influence. If a noble was far too oppressive then peasants escaped to other nobles who were more lenient. And there was not much that it can be do about it, because Commonwealth did not have police or military patrols. Hence before Russian troops started to patrol Commonwealth's roads the system was quite self regulating. Also it was not that all peasants had to work 3-4 days a week for the noble. It was 3-4 man-days a week. Hence if a peasant had 3 sons, then with his sons he was able to do the required work in a one day. And this, serfdom in Commonwealth was waaay more lenient than that in Russia.
finally someone with sensible perspective on that
@@HCforLife1 tu nie o rozsądne podejście chodzi tylko o wiedzę historyczną. Jak uważasz zgadza się z faktami historycznymi, czy nie?
Yes, much better to be a normal person there than in Russia and it's still true! 😊
It's hilarious whena video finally represents the actual duality of commonwealth adnpole walks in and just goes back to caling it poland
@@greengeck0 Firstly why do you even assume that I am a Pole. Secondly I am one of the nerds who tries to highlight the difference between Crown and Grand Duchy and I tent to use Commonwealth instead of Poland and if you look close enough into my original comment there was two times where I wrote Commonwealth and two times Poland and it was my lack of attention. And most importantly during the Commonwealth it was common to call is just Poland and all nobility Polish citizens, why if you wanted make the distinction people back then would say "Crown", because in common day speech, especially in 18th century, Poland meant the whole Commonwealth. So calling it Commonwealth is anachronistic because people would say either informally "Poland" of formally "Common Commonwealth of Crown of Kingdom of Poland and Grand Duchy of Lithuania".
And also thanks for point my lack of attention, I corrected the post.
very good video. And the commonwealth is one of the most awesome countries ever. :D
On Sarmatians, in lithuania you will often hear your grandparents and parents say "Ar neturi sarmatos?" "Don't you have any sarmata?", meaning don't you feel shame when doing usually doing violent things.
Not sure whats the connection tbh, but just a fun tid bit
Really good history channel! Everything is explained very well!
This is what looked like goku and vegeta fusing up
Then God Russia comes. hahahaha
Can you make a video about Great Northern War❤❤
Sure, if the audience has a lot of interest in it
@@History_Mapped_Outplease make it
Actually, we already have a video on our channel - ruclips.net/video/oeakw_nEAk8/видео.htmlsi=dyzP5obIPLZrEp6L.
But we are thinking of extending this topic
@@History_Mapped_Out Can you at least make a video about 30 years war ?❤❤
@@History_Mapped_Out I seem to be pleaing for a video about the unification of spain or creation of Tsardom of Russia
That's why Russian government makes Poland their worst enemy in europe. In their thinking Poland has an imperial past which is competition for them. No central-eastern European country can boast of something like that, neither Belarus, nor Latvia, Estonia, etc. And Poland and Lithuania were an empire, for a while but they was
The reason is deeper than just calling the state "of Rus". All these countries are Slavic. Slavs during pagan times were governing themselves by electing their leaders during a gathering called "wiec". Leaders where not hereditary so there was no guarantee that the offspring of the leader will inherit anything at all. So what is so different in Muscovy? Muscovy was under Mongolian occupation for much longer and the dukes of Moscow came to conclusion that the only way out of occupation is to be as ruthless as Mongols. This is why Muscovy became such a tyrannical centralistic state in contrast of the rest of Europe. At that time when nobles in Poland and Lithuania would enjoy laws protecting them and their fortunes that king could not break, in Muscovy Czar could behead anyone and take his possessions for himself or give it so someone else. In other words Polish-Lithuanian state was for the benefit its nobility while Muscovy was for Char himself. This stark difference in thinking about the state still exists.
Also the reason why i don't say Russia is because there was no such country as Russia back there. Russia is a product of Catherine the Great. She rebranded Dutchy of Muscovy into Empire of Russia.
@@slawomirkulinski very well said 👏👏👏 the differences in thinking and culture exist from the beginning of the nations’ existence
@@slawomirkulinski One small correction: it was Peter I in 1723 who rebranded Moskovie into Rossiya.
great explanation
I would not call it an oligarchy. Szlachta was 10% of the society. That is a lot of people. Oligarchy typically means a rule of a few. Modern USA is more of an oligarchy with 10 people owning 10% of GDP and 30 people - 20%.
That maybe true in case of 16th ane early 17th century, Western countries had much more narrow circle of elites with the absolutist Monarchs on top, while in the Commonwealth power was distributer much wider, but infact later only the richest rody - the Magnateria influenced the country, most of Szlachta was dependent on them to some degree, anyway it was rather more stratified society then modern USA, at least life-standars of the poorest undoubtly grew.
@@arturhashmi6281 Yes, by the late 1600s, it was effectively an oligarchy of handful of magnate families with pockets deep enough to maintain large clientele among less affluent nobles, especially the landless ones whose main source of income were services for a magnate. The shift is visible in the way who spearheaded important reforms. One such thing was the 'executionist' (late 1500/early 1600s) movement of noble 'middle class' that opted (among other things) for execution of crown's rights to royal estates to prevent magnates from appropriating them. Whereas in the 1700s it was mostly a play between the king (who maintained his own clientele via distribution of land offices), individual magnates with their 'parties' of clients and increasingly foreign interference. Politically sensitive topic brought by some of the reformers was a call to REDUCE the suffrage by stripping the non-landed/financially dependent nobles of some of their political rights and thus dimishing the surface for political corruption, at the same time somewhat opening the system for burgher elites.
Love your content! Thanks For this ❤❤❤
As soon as I saw this video I knew I had to watch it. Thank you!
Dobry materiał dzięki 👍
JOGAILA 🇱🇹
Jogaila gaidys
Most epic medival empire ❤
That was created almost 80 years after the end of the medieval period.
Isn't this a re-upload? (Edit: nope, it's an English version of a video I've seen on the channel Історія на Карті) Anyway, I think it's a great introduction to this often overlooked topic, surprisingly nuanced and accurate, clear, and visually pleasing.
There's only some minor issues with the pronunciation of some place names. I think the ones that stood out the most were Krewo (Belarusian Kreva) and Bracław (Ukrainian Bratslav). Fun fact: these romanisations of their East Slavic names actually contain hints on how to pronounce their Polish versions, or how to pronounce the letters *w* and *c* in Polish words in general (unless in the diagraphs 'cz' and 'ch' or the diacritic ć).
Most of the nobels in Poland were poor or average. Many of them were working harder than peasants. There were cases when villages full of people which received nobility tittle.
Thanks for reminding to revisit this period in history about the less mentioned northern borders of Baltic region. We had all of history thought 3 times during school, but our region trough middle ages was so complicated that i forgot most of it. By my region i mean current Latvia and Estonia, as Livonian orden and war was a long and messy ordeal. I still don't get how after retaking Kurland from Livonia, Rzeczypostpolita took back the rest of Latvian territory east of Daugava river from Muscovian principality, but we're thankful if Lithuanians helped in that.
Great video!
A country that we need, but not deserve
This channel rules. I’m really chewing through all the videos
pretty nice overview, avoiding overpolonicised view.
Very well researched
Most of the Lithuanian nobility were native Rusyns. Today we would say Belarusians and Ukrainians. These people were very quickly Polonized, both in terms of language and religion. A typical example is Prince Jarema Wiśniowiecki, whose grandfather was the ataman of the Zaporozhian Cossacks, and he himself was their main opponent. His parents were Orthodox, he himself was Catholic. The Wiśniowiecki family was one of the side lines of the Rurik family, the founders and rulers of Kievan Rus. After the death of Ivan the Terrible without an heir, it had just as much right to the Moscow throne as the Shuyskys and Romanovs. During many free elections, the incumbent Tsar or his successor was proposed as a candidate several times. The greatest opponents of this solution were not the Catholic nobility, but the Orthodox nobility. These people, who had relatives on the other side of the border, perfectly understood the dangers of the Russian model of governance, which, despite the passage of several centuries, had changed only slightly. Sigismund Augustus annexed the territories of today's Ukraine to the crown at the request of the nobility representing the annexed voivodeships. If it were not for the rapid Polonization of the Ruthenian nobility, it would be safe to say that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was equally a Polish, Lithuanian, Belarusian, Ukrainian and even, to some extent, Latvian state. As long as the people ruling these countries were in agreement and acted together for the common good, they were able to oppose Moscow Imperialism.
A appreciate that you are welcome to your own opinion and you covered a lot of territory, so I did not touch on this initially, but the more I think on it, the more I think I need to give a counterargument. Was the form of government in the PLC perfect? Definitely not. As you pointed out, during the entire period of the PLC, the majority of people were serfs, who were very unlikely to have an education, and, thus, to be able to vote intelligently, like paper was cheap enough to waste on ballots. The middle class, Jewish or not, may have had sufficient education, but were still denied a vote on principle. The PLC did have quite a few nobles with varying levels of education and they were allowed to vote, but they mostly voted in blocks to show loyalty to a protector, i.e., someone with greater power. So, in that sense, I can see how a person could say this is rule by oligarchs, whose status was generally hereditary.
On the other side, how many Europeans elected a new monarch, usually a foreigner, after the death of the previous one? Usually that title was hereditary. Your handling of Henry shows exactly how powerful the Sejm was, which was also unusual at the time. During the period covered, I believe was when Louis of France stated, 'I am the State.'
Were there problems? Definitely. The reason why the use of force was given to the nobles in the form of private armies was that often the Sejm did not allocate any funds to meet threats to the country's defense and if it did, these were raising of new units to meet that specific threat. In short, the national soldiers were too few in number and could be poorly trained. Why was this? Because of the veto. Any single, fairly lowly (small landholder) noble could block all the good work with a single veto.
Thus, in conclusion, if it was oligarchical rule, how was this veto possible? I think, therefore, that it did show a way forward for more democratic rule. And remember that we in the West generally have a republican government, where representatives decide issues, rather that a democratic government where the people decide everything as a whole.
shogunate modern?
For a short period you would also have a personal union with saxony and the commonwealth from 1697 to 1763 under the augustines. It should have technically been called poland-saxony-lithuania but it was just called unia polsko-saksa in polish or sachsen-polen in german.
After the polish partition many poles fled to saxony and a lot of people in saxony have a polish background due to that.
FINALLY some good pronouciation its so rare to see it
Good stuff!
Very good video.
3-4 days work a week and 19 times less Money . Seems like they have a better life than most people's nova days .
3-4 days they were working for taxes, 2-3 days for themselves
the lack of AI is a cool change
A nice start.
It would be nice if more attention was given to using the correct term for the language. Thus, Lithuanian names should be in Lithuanian. (Only a problem in the beginning.) Also ethic Lithuanian lands exceeded the boundaries of present-day Lithuania.
Next, Jews were specifically invited in to conduct commerce, at least in Lithuania, because initially the locals did not know Latin or how to conduct business with the West since their commercial ties before Lithuania's Baptism had been primarily with the Kyivan Rus'. In order to attract the Jews, they were given special rights, such as to be tried under noble law. I am not aware of Jews being serfs, but I am not a specialist in the area. Usually they lived in the cities. Because you credit them with 8% percent of the population but your demographic tables add up to 100% between nobles and serfs, you might go back and revise them. It should also be stressed that since the Jews had been invited in, I have heard of little antisemitism in Lithuania. ( I'll let others speak for the Ruthenians and Poles.) How many came directly because of the invitation and how many just followed the trend I cannot say, but different rules did not apply to the latter. Thus, you often hear that the Jews were invited in even though the majority likely came subsequently.
I presume the right of veto will be in the subsequent posting on the PLC.
It's a huge topic, I admit. Since you got into government, one point not often made is that nationalism as we know it did not exist. One was loyal to one's lord, or perhaps better to say, to one's community. Each microregion spoke its own dialect and so they did not feel themselves loyal to the bigger community. You spoke of magnates, who were like mafia bosses in the sense that they were thinking more of their own power and position rather than the country as a whole. And lesser lords were loyal to them out of a sense of profit. The monarch was elected, but the rest existed for life or until someone bought their property. You worked for the lord not because he was a great guy but because there was nowhere else to go. For example, if you were a miller and left your land, you would just be in competition with the local miller in the place you moved to. And you spoke the wrong dialect. Thus, it was not like in the US South where slaves could flee elsewhere and start over. And so, when the serfs were emancipated, nothing much changed.
@@Tonio_Kreger Thank you for making that country's intention crystal clear. Always best to hear it from the source.
@@Tonio_Kreger Nice to see litvinist spewing their revisionism still to this day. How much rubles were you given today? 😊
@@Tonio_Kreger скаких пор Вилнюс был русским (белорусским)? белоруссы это русские с знаком качества, а Вилнобыл литовским городом.
@@Tonio_Kreger Если в ВКЛ правили беларусы и они самыми главными были, то почему в Вильнюсе было более 50 католических костелов и только 4+- православных церквей? Почему все белорусские магнаты (Сапеги, Ходкевичи, Огински) положили хер на православие и русинские корни и создавали историю, что их генеалогия восходит от литовцев-жемайтов?
Почему везде, где мы видим слово «Литва», «Литовский», «Литовец/литвин» - там литовский язык, а не белорусская мова?
Если белорусы были литвинами, почему Скорина выпустил БИБЛИЮ РУСКУ, а не БИБЛИЮ ЛИТОВЬСКУ?
The first European Union 🇪🇺 in history was the Union of Poland and Lithuania plus citizens of Belarus, Ukraine, the Jewish faith, Russians, Tatars and several other nationalities. Beautiful pages of European history.
I find it funny when ukkrainians say there were opressed by poles and it was always lithuanians XD
The free election by Polish/ Lithuanian nobility was quite ahead of its time. Even though it was about 10% of the population, in comparison to our European neighbours it was far more than a very hermetic elite not willing to let go of the power and control they inherited through generations/wealth. Giving the power to vote, even to 10% of the population was a huge step towards democratic election. This was ahead of its time and it was proven by “liberum veto” (anyone within Sejm was allowed to single handily oppose against establishing a new law, or crucial updates to the the existing). All though it sounds like a very fair and modern way to keep in touch with essential decisions within commonwealth. As much as it sounds just and fair it actually contributed to decline of the commonwealth and later partition of Poland.
it was never called Grand duchy of lithuania and rus
only Grand Duchy of Lithuania Lituane, Lituanica and many other axonyms of latin and germanic langueges
Jogaila was Grand Duke of Rus. Title was dropped only after war with fake Russia.
@@Tonio_KregerЕсли уж пишешь полное название ВКЛ (Литвы), то пиши так: Великое Княжество Литовское, Жемойтийское, Руськое, Киевское, Мстиславское, Полоцкое, Минское, Новогрудское и иных литовских земель. Упрощенно - ВКЛ, еще более упрощенно - Литва. Но никак не Русь, не Беларусь, не БССР. Литва, литовское. Поэтому прочь, белорусы, руки от истории Литвы! Дальше снимайте ботинки и поднимайтесь на стулья! Это вся ваша борьба! Рабы!
The name of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the title of the owner changed over time, depending on the state borders and structure.
In the middle of the 13th and the beginning of the 14th centuries, the state was called only Lithuania. Thus, in the deed of Grand Duke Mindaugas (1254), he is listed as "King of Lithuania". After joining Kyiv and other Ukrainian lands, the grand duke was called "King of the Lithuanians and many Ruthenians"). After the annexation of a part of Latvia, Grand Duke Gediminas began to be called "King of Lithuanians and Ruthenians, ruler and prince of Semigallia". After the annexation of Samogitia in the middle of the 15th century the grand duke is titled as "the grand duke... of all the Lithuanian lands and Samogitia and many Ruthenian lands." In the Statute of 1529, it was stated that "The written right was given to the lordship of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Samogitia and others through the most honorable Sigismund, by the grace of God, the King of Poland, the Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Samogitia , Masovia and others."
However, after the creation of the Union of Lublin (1569) and the annexation of Ukraine to Poland, the country began to be called only the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, although the Grand Duke himself continued to be titled the Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Samogitia, Masovia, and after the annexation in 1561 of the Inflants - and Inflants.
@@rapturefuturistics1975 Lithuania never did have title of Kingdom. Because it was not christian prior to Jogaila. And after that it did not matter.
@@TheRezro "Gediminas, by the grace of God, the King of Lithuanians and Ruthenians, the ruler and duke of Semigallia."
- Gediminas's titles mentioned in his 26 May 1323 letter, which was sent to the Germanian cities.
Source:
Gedimino laiškai [Letters of Gediminas] (PDF) (in Lithuanian). Vilnius: Vilnius University, Institute of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore. p. 2. Retrieved 30 May 2021.
10:30 Why is Kraków written in Polish🇵🇱 and Warsaw(Warszawa) in English🏴? Either this way or that way. Make up your mind Mister.😁
The worst thing is that it created friction between poles and lithuanians, they should have found nicer way to do that. But commonwealth were still cool as it was so big
Hey, what happened to the principality of Moscow video?
They are currently busy invading their neighbours 🤓
Wasn't Jagiełło your Lithuanian?
💪🇱🇹🇱🇹🇱🇹Lietuva
Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth was created by Sigismund II "August", who forced the Lithuanian nobility to accept the Union, if not then part by part he would annex Lithuanian lands to the Kingdom of Poland until all Lithuanian lands were under Polish control, then without the Union they would be under the Polish Crown. The king could do this with the Lithuanian lands, but he could not do this with the Polish lands. Historical Fact: The Lithuanian nobility was first against the Real Union and left the first session, but after Ukraine was separated from Lithuania and annexed to Poland, so the Lithuanian nobility returned to the session and signed the Real Union
It was Sigismund II August. Sigismund "the old” was his father
You, my friend, turning it to some majesty from Poland perspective, a little modesty wouldn't hurt. It was not created by one man who by the way was of Lithuanian bloodline among other things, it principal there was longer and complex story. Don't let us down.
1. Lithuanian nobles ruled Lithuania GD lands(video said different).
2. Polish nobles in theory created union quite ago (in XIV cent.) when the Crown was given to Lithuanian Grand duchy from Gediminas dynasty Jagiello (after the Polish crown of course it continued as Jagiellonian dynasty what whose descendant was the aforementioned king Sigismund II "August"). So this union was more continuation then somewho came and created Union by force.
3. Factually two states Union (in XIV cent.) was not implemented by conditions in full because Jagiello had to come to reality of his brother Vytautas ruling the Lithuania, and together tightened the neckle around the strongest Power in Europe at that time - Teutonic Order (and here was a strong point where Poland needed Lithuania).
4. Back XVI cent. - Sigismund II "August" Jagiellonian was for the Union.
5. Lithuanian nobles also needed it, cause of troubles with moscow. They just wanted the privileges even to Polish nobles. And that was the biggest problem, they wanted to go in union with equal rights (Polish, of course, took care get major weight).
6. In between negotiation phases Sigismund II "August" using the circumstances by force took several lands(not Ukraine only). After that Polish nobles ensured majority for them and accepted the Union with even rights (but with something like "control packet" in pocket). And concluded Union on common will.
7. And BTW, it was good Polish play, not like similar but unsuccessful with Ukraine in XVIII.
@lafatrys it does not change the fact that the Union of Poland and Lithuania would have been created, and if it had not been created, Lithuania would probably not have been on the map earlier, whether from the Polish or Moscow side. The unification of these two nations (Kingdom of Poland ruled by Jagielonians and Great Duchy of Lithuania (what is legally under the rule of the Jagiellonians) was crucial to the history of that time, but the government outgrew those times and failed.
@@Wiesto1 personal delusion is not fact.
Electing a new king back then sounds like the U.S. right now. Polarization and fighting between two sides.
A mogła być Rzeczpospolita Trojga Narodów i kto wie jak potoczyłaby się historia i tej dzisiejszej wojny na Ukrainie i wszystkiego po drodze mogłoby nie być. Skro jesteś taki dobry to zrób film gdzie, kiedy i kto konkretnie popełnił błędy i jak to by mogło wyglądać gdyby tych błędów nie popełniono? Dasz radę?
Polityka Jezuitow za Zygmunta III spowodowala, ze Polska stala sie bardziej katolicka za cene spokoju wewnetrznego i spojnosci terytorialnej. Za to biskupom bylo dobrze ale ogolne skutki byly tragiczne.
The other important factor that united both countries under Jogaila/Jagiełło's rule was that in 1413 Forty-seven selected Lithuanian and Ruthenian Boyars were adopted by Polish families, granted Polish coats of arms and titles, some of them were Pagan not so long ago and after that they became part of the European Knighthood, Teutonic Order could not just claim any of their lands in the name of "Evangelization" anymore like they used to. Some of these Rody (Clans?) became the the co called Magnateria - most influential families in the Commonwealth. Lithuania received more autonomy then under rule of Vytautas,
"the Lithuanian nobles could choose another Grand Duke instead of passing the title to Władysław II Jagiełło or his heir. However, culturally, Lithuania and Poland grew closer. Lithuania adopted Polish institutions of castellans and voivodes. Catholic Lithuanian nobles and church officials were granted equal rights with the Polish nobles and clergy." - wikipedia
Jogaila was 3/4 a Slav, his descendants were even more Slavs and less Lithuanians.
@@ingemarsmit4840 I do not know where did you find this information, I know only about his grandma - Jewna being Ruthenian, but Jogalia had Lithuanian name, he spoke Lithuanian language and he was perceived as Lithuanian by his contemporaries. Aristocrats generally has mixed origin, but to say that he was Slavic seems as exageration.
@@ingemarsmit4840We Lithuanians are Balto-Slavs , the West is rewriting the history and lying.
@@ingemarsmit4840Bulbarus detected lol
🇱🇹👑💪🏻💯
Bro upload the grand duchy of Moscow complete history
Nah
Nobody wants to hear about the Moskals these days
Union of Lublin
10:48 this has to be the worst trade deal in the history of trade deals no wander he run away.
an elected king is a debtor king.
Crap map there, Stefan Batory comes from independent Kingdom of Hungary, not from territory under Ottoman's control
To be clear he came from the Principality of Transylvania.
Around the 14:16 point in this video...........the Winged Hussars arrived! 🤘🎶
Comin down the mountainside!
What was in 09th Centuries, who ruled over the Kievan Rus, where were they located??????
First time you'll see a king renouncing a throne with all claims and fleeing the country. Is Poland that depressing?
Henryk Walezy potajemnie opuścił Polskę na wiadomość o niespodziewanej śmierci swojego brata ,po którym dziedziczył tron Francji. Szczęśliwie dla Polski i Litwy ,które zyskały osobie Batorego mądrego i walecznego króla. Walezy swoim zachowaniem na dworze Polsko -Litewskim siał ogólnie rzec ujmując- zgorszenie.
Ahh yes ancient polish-lithuanian cities of kursk and smolensk ❤
Im polish and im sat on this country 1RP king is from lithuenia dynasty
I Wonder what wluodve happened if they lossened nobility
pretty decent
become absolute or become obsolete
The ultra-selfish nobility eventually f-ed things up but how Vilnius was annexed by Poland (Piłsudski) much later in 1922 was a really shitty thing to do.
@@Tonio_Kregervlaznye miechty belakacapa 😂😂😂😂😂
Piłsudski identified as Lithuanian btw and he was dictator of Poland rulling unlawfuly
@@Tonio_Kreger posle ultimatuma ot polshi. A potom etix nacikov germanija i sovietski sojuz razjebali.
Akurat wtedy w Wilnie większości mieszkali Polacy
@@Jeff_Reyx all Lithuanians who felt culturally Polish as the result of polonization for centuries; pretty much the same argument Puto is making for eastern Ukraine and Crimea using the same methods and green men like Piłsudski resorted to in ‘21-22. Very shitty things to do that did Poland no good in Lithuania or Ukraine in the long-run.
Calling 16th century Russian state as "Moscow principality" is totally anochronistic.
20:29 Lwów, Kijów and Królewiec, not "Lviv", "Kyiv" and "Königsberg".
@@Tonio_Kregerit was, is and always will be Vilnius.
The Polish tried their best to stamp out the Lithuanian language and culture and they failed.
I don’t come to the polish and call Warszawa, Varšuva now do I? So maybe a bit of common courtesy is owed here.
@@Tonio_KregerWilña to be precise, Wilno is much later form. Sfill Lithuanian Baltic name. The city established, built and named by Lithuanians.
@@Jack_Dab It is Vilnius, but it was called Wilno by Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobles as well, can you understand that your translating is anachronistic towards history?
Hujevec😂😂😂😂 What about Danzig?😂😂😂
@@Походеньки For some parts of history Gdańsk was called Danzig, nobody argues with that, just like Wrocław was Breslau and Poznań was Posen. Anyway today they are not, just like Lviv is not Lwów anymore. Gdańsk is not the best example anyway, because originally it was Slavic city and Danzig is Latinized/Germanized version of it's name.
Love from Lithuania...Ačiū ❤️🔥
16:15 - Sarmatism wasn't an ideology, it was a more of a founding myth like Romulus and Remus. And no, it wasn't just nobility that was allegedly descended from Sarmatians, it was Slavs in general. The theory simply filled the gap (that we have to this day by the way) in knowledge of Slavic history before the middle ages - in 15th century some guys in Poland "figured out" that before Slavs became known as Slavs they were Sarmatians.
1. There is not a single founding legend of a Polish noble family that would even mention a wild claim of Sarmatians conquering the Slavs.
2. Nobody has ever objected to Ruthenian and Lithuanian nobility being equal with Polish nobility on the basis of them not being descended from Sarmatians - Ruthenians because they were just as Sarmatian as Poles and Lithuanians because Sarmatian theory was a gapfiller in Polish history and was never used to justify the social hierarchy.
3. Since the story of Piast the Wheelright is very well known and easy to google, here's a quote from "Ikones książąt i królów polskich" by Jan Głuchowski (1605), refering to legendary ruler Leszko II of the Popielid dynasty:
"Don't be surprised that the prince has become of a ploughman,
Who at first had little household equipment,
And a narrow patch of farmland
Also a poor palace made of brushwood.
Fortune honored him with what it had in its power.
And since he was worthy of this, that rightfully has happened,
So that virtue, like an eagle, would look down from above
And always reign in an uninterrupted glory."
So we have legends of two different Polish rulers who were peasants before they became a prince, both very much present at the time of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. But sure, let's just assume that the Polish-Lithuanian nobility simultaneously believed that their ancestors were a Sarmatian nobility that conquered the Slavic peasants, that their ancestors were ennobled in 10th-15th century and that two oldest Polish dynasties had nothing to do with Sarmatians.
16:40 "Follow all orders from their lords" - Excuse me, what? Peasants had many duties to their lords, but they were very specified and nobleman had no right to just order his peasants to do whatever he wanted them to do. He could do it, of course, due to power dynamic and all that, and the peasant had no way of suing him for it, but abuse of power is a separate issue.
As for the mentioned sexual violence, it was strictly illegal and rape was one of very few reasons for which peasants could move out of the village without their lord's permission - at which point a peasant would become a free man and could actually sue the nobleman
17:50 It wasn't impossible to leave the village, it was just limited to one man per year. Still sucked, but words like "impossible" have meaning you know.
Lithuania says Lithuania - Polish,
a Polish says Polish- Lithuania😂
Lithuania 🫡
Ivan wackenoff
Unia z litwa to błąd .wystarczyl sojusz wojskowy.A my na 300lat bronilismy litwy zamiast odzyskac Śląsk i pomorze.
To be fair, all of Belarus is is essentially ancestral baltic land. And the western 1/3rd of it Lithuanian. Even today, large amounts of Litvins live on the Belarusian side of the border.
Lithuanians are badass though, last pagan nation of Europe.
@@Tonio_Kregercio tebie belakacap nado ot litvy?
@@Tonio_KregerBelarusia is new fake country.Ocupied by russia
Каким образом Польша забрала больше половины земель ВКЛ и при этом говорят шо именно Московия несла угрозу ВКЛ. Получается шо именно польское королевство стало оккупантом.
Widać że ktoś nie odrobił do końca lekcji z Historii i próbuje ją na nowo pisać . Wtedy nie było mowy o Ukrainie dwa król miał władze a nie tak jak tutaj się mówi . I wiele innych bzdur .
Radvila*
*My best friend is Radziwiłł and he does not call himself Radvila, his family acknowledge their Lithuanian ancestry, but they did not call themselves Radvila for the last 600 years. It's Lithuanian anachronism.
@@arturhashmi6281I think when it comes to history, the original name should be used. So Radvilos are original surname and your friend uses just polinsed version of it.
@@LukasSRR I think when it comes to people the way how they called themselves should be used and that would be honest historical perspective. Translating people's surnames eg. Chodkevičiai or Ostrogiškiai is anachronistic towards the people from 16h-18th century, especialy that most of the so called Lithuanian houses were in fact Ruthenian families, I understand where it comes from, it is a result of 19th century nationalism, Polish history from that period was also very centred on Poland while Ruthenian as well as Lithuanian side of the story was neglected. We need to be honest towards history, tearing it apart does not solve anything.
Its Zygmunt II August not Sigusmunt
Łaciny się naucz, typie. Imiona królów się tłumaczy.
Hiiii
A third of modern Lithuanian territory historically was not considered and named Lithuania and was a separate region of the Grand Duchy with the name Samogitia. Аnd In general, while looking at old maps, the territory of modern Belarus and only part of modern Lithuania are labeled as Lithuania and so there are many questions about why this happened, if the majority of the population of this territory were Slavs, the lithuanian language was not written, lithuanian ethnicity was in the process of slavicization, and yet the territory was firmly associated with the Lithuania, and in the minds of contemporaries it was ok to say I am Lithuanian, although you were of slavic culture.
Because u fucking idiot, your brains are affected by youtube history only.
It is exactly the same case as Rus/Ruthenian people who inherited their ethnonym from the rulling Nordic elites while being generaly Slavic.
The House of Gediminids was Lithuanian, Samogitians were other Baltic tribe which used almost the same language as Lithuanians, anyway Ruthenian people were aware of being who they are until 19-20th century when Ukrainians and Belarussians started to differentiate, but it was not unusual to identify as Ruthenian and Lithuanian in the same time. Most of the nobles in the Commonwealth identified as Polish on some leval anyway. It was not contradictory for them, It just depended on context. It may seem confusing for us - modern post-nationalistic society, but Commonwealth was in definition multi-nationalistic, You could be Tatar identifing as Lithuanian deputy choosing the Polish king in sejm, Ruthenian could be the language you speak and you could indetify as one while being on your Orthodox mass in contra to your Scotish neighbour who was Polish on sunday because he was Catholic. The most important thing was that you were all Nobles chosen by God to defend Christian Europe and that your ancestors were mythical Sarmatians.To be clear there were also people who identified wxlusively as Ruthenians, Polish or Lithuanian, but The quotes like "Gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus" show us how complex the nation of Commonwealth was. Russian tzarat and later the Soviets turned us against each other and they try to do this until this day, claims of Ivan the terrible are the same claims Putin has.
@@arturhashmi6281 👏👍
So lithuanians got angry cuz they wanted more rights than polish nobility
And now Belarusians keep coming to Lietuva to toil as serfs and slaves. The smaller Tzar in Mensk can't supply his citizens with Lithuanian salaries ? LOL.
@@Tonio_Kreger Belarus (Lyda, Gardinas) are lithuanian cities, built by pagan lithuanians.
No thats wrong conclusion, they lived good together as one nation for hundereds of years.
Great video. Somehow happened that
“Polish” is swear word in Lithuania
at least use Lithuanians names
Which one? Jogaila or Vytautas are Lithuanian in the Commonwealth though nobody used Lithuanian names only Polish or Ruthenian.
@@arturhashmi6281 The first dukes used Lithuanian names, either way they spoke a lot, and the letter were signed in Lithuanian
They still writing Jogaila name in Polish but its ok when we know he was lived there all his life and we Lithuanians was bad on writing so usualy they use Polish letters and writing.
Interesting video. But you don't say anything about the lives of people with a mental or psychological disability in Renaissance Poland-Lithuania.
Why
A jakie było życie kalek w całej Europie?
Irrelevant to the theme of the video.
There was a principality of Lithuania, but in fact it was Slavic Lithuanian and more Slavic. There was Prussia, but German, not Baltic, Great Britain, but not Celtic-British, and there are many such names with a different essence in the world. As for the Duchy of Lithuania, it and Lithuania itself were no longer ruled by Lithuanians. Thus, until 1991, Lithuania was ruled by non-Lithuanians, as well as the principality.
Unfortunately for Polish People, they got a bad name, because of the Lithuanian, Belarussian and Rus noble families oppressing their own people in the Eastern lands. These oligarchs became self Polonised to acquire closeness to the Kingdom. They left their lands and lived in Poland.
Their territories were run by Zyd. It was the Zyd parawhosite run the taverns, mills, and estates. Zyd also, Incredibly !, controlled the Orthodox Churches. Alcohol and Religion in the claws of narcissistic Zyd.
There were many uprisings against Zyd oppressing the peasants. The most significant was the Cossack Rebellion. A great pogrom and a turning to Muscovy for support.
Thus the end of the Oligarchs in the Commonwealth.
And the beginning of Poland getting a bad reputation.
wrong ruthenians lived in south belarus and north ukraine
Modern British historian Norman Davies - "At the end of the 19th century, the Lithuanians, who were ahead of the Belarusians with the national revival, received the support of the Russian imperial, and then Soviet ideologists, thanks to which they managed to spread their own interpretation
history." There is a term Lithuania, but the principality was Slavic Baltic and much more Slavic. There was Prussia, but German, not Baltic. Belv of Great Britain, but not Celtic British.
Cio tebie belakacap nado ot litvy?
A ruSSian is teaching us history? 😂
@@oldmenas Ну если у вас патриотичные заморочки, то учить вас надо.. Или вы некая элита мировая?? И ВКЛ и собственно Литва большее время свой цивилизации управлялась не литовцами..
@@ingemarsmit4840 a ruSSian can teach only how to drink vodka and be lazy 😀
@@ingemarsmit4840speak in english so everyone could understand you.
This was I Rzeczypospolita. polish Empire. federal state with catholic King polish in Warsaw Warszawa ..from Election.. After Piast Dynasty..Decline Liberum veto.. weak army as consequence in 18 century only 100 thousand solders to defend the borders. NOT Enough Country of nobility who had the political power Constitution 3 maja may..1791 came to late They were trying to save this federal State.Caryca katherina Russia didint like this reform and soon her army came to Warsaw Suvorow army..Additionally she made agreement to partition this Federal State with Prussia and Austrio Hungary.and this Federal State gone from the map for 123 years until 1918 as second Rzeczypospolita polska. was born . Republic Of Poland . I Rzeczypospolita Poniatowski last King Abdicated and moved to Grodno from There to Petersburg . Died in Russia.. in 1938 came to Poland
Don't call it Ruthenia, it's a revisionist term, it was called Ruś/Rus
Rus translates to Ruthenia in English
Jewish comonwealth...
No wonder it crumbled
@@Acccelerate it crumbled because of the Polish noble greed.
@@antanassmetona4054 Idiota Litwin ze Żmudzi.
@@antanassmetona4054 You just repeat Russian narrative withouth knowing it, they said the same under tzarat under rule of Soviets, "the bad rulling class from Poland spoiled everything", thats exactly how Russia is turning Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine and Belarus against each-other and thats one of the reason why this great country crumbled.
@@arturhashmi6281 Russian narrative? That's simply the Lithuanian narrative. And I wouldn't call it a narrative in the first place, cause it's simply a fact. The Polish nobles were the deciding factor as to why the Commonwealth failed. Unless you have an argument to refute that.
Ruthenia+Lithuania+Corona=Polonia!!!
^^^^^^^Thats how Russian troll trying to be viewed as Polish look.
How Lithuanians love to write patriotic nonsense. And as if they had MindaugAS. The joke is that these are kind of Lithuanian authentic, invented by the linguist Kazimierz Buga in the 20th century. But the Lithuanians did not have a written language. Probably, I found it in the depths of the people's memory through psychoanalysis, exploring the people's subconscious.
In Lietuva, there is not history, but a patriotic religion that you need to believe in. But their faith is strong...
Brainwashed kid. Touch grass
How some wannabe lithuaniann russians love to write nonsence about Lithuania history and its names. Mindaugas is Lithuanian name.
Tell us the meaning of the name Mindaugas, please. All names have a meaning in their original language. For example, David means "beloved" in Hebrew because that's the language it comes from. David has no meaning in English as it's not an English name. Mindaugas has a meaning in Lithuanian and comes from Lithuanian words (to mention (mineti) and many (daug) meaning "mentioned by many"). What meaning does "Mendog" have in Russian? The answer is none.
@@ingemarsmit4840 I genuinely belive you have several untreated mental illnesses
This is the last time ukes were not completely useless.
ukes?
@interneteris Ukrainians
@@ronin36963 if you knew ANYTHING about history you would know ukrainians have made insane contributions to humanity and history LOL WHAT??
Ruthenian is a latinized term for russian to correct you on that one
ur crazy
@@andrius505 take your meds
Ruś =/= Rosja, Ruthenians =/= Russians, It's not the same. These 2 are distinct groups of people.
@@Neji641212 its the same group of people
Germanic people =/= Germans
Occupiers of Russian lands.
They weren’t russian
Bullshit.
Ruthenians are not Russians. These 2 are distinct groups of people.
@@Neji641212 This is just Latin term Rutheni was used in late medieval sources to describe East Slavs of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. But they still called themselves Russians until modern times. The Grand dukes of Kiev called themselves as Rus or Russians until they fell to Mongol Horde.
@@mikligardur9104 Rus werent even Russians