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.
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.
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
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.
Actually, we already have a video on our channel - ua-cam.com/video/oeakw_nEAk8/v-deo.htmlsi=dyzP5obIPLZrEp6L. But we are thinking of extending this topic
This is an amazing video, I love how you explain and visualize history. Subscribed! P.S. using this knowledge to create an early version of the PLC in Crusader Kings 3. ;)
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.
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.
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.
Do tej pory tak jest. Wiele wsi, szczególnie na Podlasiu składa się w 100% z szlachty zagrodowej. Jednak alkoholizm albo inne patologie praktycznie tam nie występują.
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.
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).
Neither. It was ruthenian nobles who oppressed their ruthenian peasants. Those ruthenian nobles called them selves polish nobles, and that's who they were, but genetically they were ruthenians, often descendants of Rus boyars.
Great video, man! However, a small correction is needed. Peasants in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were not slaves. They had their own homes, private property, possessions and money, they were not reproduced, could marry whomever they wanted and regardless of whether they were subject to land law or punishment, they could not be killed on demand. The landowner was not obligated to provide them with food and shelter, and they were not considered his property like cattle, regardless of the fact that they could not leave the village. Once they escaped and lived for a year within the city walls, they could not be prosecuted. The law was not intended to protect them from capture, but rather to check whether the peasant was able to find new work, food and shelter within that one year. The myth of slavery was created solely to make Poland a colonial country, not better than our western neighbors. Thanks!
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.
@@arturhashmi6281 he spoke old belarusian (ruthenian) while was king of Poland, in polish sources. His last wife, mother of Jagellons also was ruthenian, with mother was Ulianna Tverska, from same family, princess of Tver.
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.
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
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 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.
very good explained! with exception of your comment of Oligarchy. It became a Oligarchy after the struggles mid 17th century, becaue the Magnats got richer & the population less wealthy after many wars. The USA started with 7% of population allowed to vote. here it was 10% and the other groups had their own representative systems. this was the bridge betwen medieval system to democrycy. because it is a easterneuropean state, the western historians always denied its position in history. And they do not want to admit how much they learned from it.
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.
basucly he was ruthenian (or belarusian), his grandmother was from greatest local family - Polock princess Evna (Eva), and his mother from same family Ulianna Tverska princess, and his wife - Sofia, Druck princess, this is all slavoc people and that family - Gedinimovichy - contunie to speak old Belarusian language, names and last names, not Baltic. In general that Grand Dutchy was mostly slavic culturally. But because Belarus under Soviet and russian control keep version where russians "save" ruthenians - "white russians" and history of GDL modern Lithuania complitely rewrite as about them. Ruthenians was cities and written culture for a centeries, when GDL was greated - there was no any baltic city. Most of aristocrats was also from Belarus. But fisrt Dinasty baltic, so Lithuanian in modern term. Not good educated Lithuanians getting very aggresive when anyone remind them that they was minority in country and baltic dynasty was only 90 years, because they agree only on absolute role, what is far from true
@@nomadicviewer But his father was lietuvis. And grandfather lietuvis Gediminas not some kind of Gediminovic . If you don't know nothing about lietuviai, please don't talk blsit
@Arv-pz9sy He cannot be "letuvis" as he half - ruthenian. And we became ducke of Grondo, became ortodox, married ortodox, and all ancetors was already slavic, Gediminovvichi slavinased complityle, but Gedimin(as) sire was baltic, or if you life - Lithuanian. Well all Europe has kings with not local nationalities, like in UK - 1000 people from not local dynasty.
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.
Why the help would you ever issue a declaration making you personally responsible for the debts of a foreign land, commit to funding a navy etc? That’s just making your new crown weaker
In Poland, few people know that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had two separate armies. Recently, some Polish idiot said that Lithuanians in the times of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth only had light cavalry.
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.
Większość uprzywilejowanych rodów litewskich to byli potomkowie Bałtów. Dlaczego? Poczytaj o uzgodnieniach Unii Horodelskiej i decyzji króla Jagiełły i księcia Witolda (obaj z bałtyjskiego rodu Giedyminowiczów). Co nie znaczy, że przedstawiciele rodów rusińskich nie mogli dołączyć do elity, ale to się odbywało później i powoli. Nie mówiąc o tym, że zdolna polityka Bałtów sprawiła, że potomkowie kniaziów i bojarów bez oporów przyjęli litewską tożsamość polityczną. Na pewno nigdy żaden z nich nie uważał się za Białorusina, bo czegoś takiego nie było. Kościuszko przypominał, że jest szlachcicem litewskim. Nigdy w swoim życiu nie użył przymiotnika "białoruski".
For some people who doesnt know the reality of Feudal Europe at that time can think the Commonwealth was some evil place that abused and slaved common people. It wasnt perfect, but still the nobility and middle class represented higher percentage than in any other state. Abuse and slavery of common people happened everywhere at that time. Thats a Feudal system for you. Same happened in Japan. Also origins and believes of population were very diverse and protected by law. So, compared to other states, it wasnt so bad.
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.
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.
I wasn’t sure why he started in teh 16th century insteat of teh 13th century and why he skipped over the Battle of Grunwald and then I realized it’s about the Commonwealth not the Grand Dutchy.
About commoners,its not true,for land they got from lord,they had provide in exchange some work like mentioned repairs...but about abuse,yes its correct,but also "szlachta" smaller land lords had limits and also been punished for if they went too far
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 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.
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.
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 .
@@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.
The official name is the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In this order. Poland was a kingdom and was also more populous than Lithuania.
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.
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
First comment
Finally a video about polish-lithuanian Commonwealth ❤❤🎉🎉🎉
second*
The fact that someone has done it from more of a Lithuanian POV made this video so good!
This was Poland's mistake. From then on, the country began to fall. Lithuanian magnates had too much power.
@@nnnnnn3647 and they all was Ruthenian (Belarusian)
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 😀
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.
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.
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
Even now in Serbia Bulgaria Croatia etc... SARMATA is called Sramata n etc.
Migla in Serbian is called Magla
" Don't you have any nobility or honor? Why Are you acting like a savage commoner" 😅
very good video. And the commonwealth is one of the most awesome countries ever. :D
Really good history channel! Everything is explained very well!
This is what looked like goku and vegeta fusing up
Then God Russia comes. hahahaha
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.
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 - ua-cam.com/video/oeakw_nEAk8/v-deo.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
This is an amazing video, I love how you explain and visualize history. Subscribed!
P.S. using this knowledge to create an early version of the PLC in Crusader Kings 3. ;)
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.
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!
great explanation
A country that we need, but not deserve
🇱🇹💪🇵🇱💪
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.
Do tej pory tak jest. Wiele wsi, szczególnie na Podlasiu składa się w 100% z szlachty zagrodowej. Jednak alkoholizm albo inne patologie praktycznie tam nie występują.
@@Lechoslaw8546 Są podobieństwa, ale wtedy też chłopstwo miało hierarchię. Byli komornicy i byli bauerzy.
Great video!
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.
Most epic medival empire ❤
That was created almost 80 years after the end of the medieval period.
Dobry materiał dzięki 👍
This channel rules. I’m really chewing through all the videos
Love from Lithuania...Ačiū ❤️🔥
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).
pretty nice overview, avoiding overpolonicised view.
the lack of AI is a cool change
Very well researched
I find it funny when ukkrainians say there were opressed by poles and it was always lithuanians XD
Neither. It was ruthenian nobles who oppressed their ruthenian peasants. Those ruthenian nobles called them selves polish nobles, and that's who they were, but genetically they were ruthenians, often descendants of Rus boyars.
Great video, man! However, a small correction is needed. Peasants in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were not slaves. They had their own homes, private property, possessions and money, they were not reproduced, could marry whomever they wanted and regardless of whether they were subject to land law or punishment, they could not be killed on demand. The landowner was not obligated to provide them with food and shelter, and they were not considered his property like cattle, regardless of the fact that they could not leave the village. Once they escaped and lived for a year within the city walls, they could not be prosecuted. The law was not intended to protect them from capture, but rather to check whether the peasant was able to find new work, food and shelter within that one year. The myth of slavery was created solely to make Poland a colonial country, not better than our western neighbors. Thanks!
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
@@arturhashmi6281 he spoke old belarusian (ruthenian) while was king of Poland, in polish sources. His last wife, mother of Jagellons also was ruthenian, with mother was Ulianna Tverska, from same family, princess of Tver.
Good stuff!
Bardzo dobry film.
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
Very good video.
FINALLY some good pronouciation its so rare to see it
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.
JOGAILA 🇱🇹
Jogaila gaidys
Jagiełło PL
@ Lithuanian Jogaila was ruling Poland 👍
@@djdioga Yes, polish king Jagiełło ruling Kingdom of Poland.
@@xL4RG0x how old are you?
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
Electing a new king back then sounds like the U.S. right now. Polarization and fighting between two sides.
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 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.
very good explained!
with exception of your comment of Oligarchy.
It became a Oligarchy after the struggles mid 17th century, becaue the Magnats got richer & the population less wealthy after many wars.
The USA started with 7% of population allowed to vote.
here it was 10% and the other groups had their own representative systems.
this was the bridge betwen medieval system to democrycy.
because it is a easterneuropean state, the western historians always denied its position in history.
And they do not want to admit how much they learned from it.
Hey, what happened to the principality of Moscow video?
They are currently busy invading their neighbours 🤓
Make Lithuanian-Poland commonwealth great again !
10:30 Why is Kraków written in Polish🇵🇱 and Warsaw(Warszawa) in English🏴? Either this way or that way. Make up your mind Mister.😁
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.
5:45 Yes, we have annexed the Ukraine then - Lithuanians never forgave us... 😒
Wasn't Jagiełło your Lithuanian?
Originaly Jogaila. Son of Grand Duke Algirdas and grandson of Grand Duke Gediminas.
basucly he was ruthenian (or belarusian), his grandmother was from greatest local family - Polock princess Evna (Eva), and his mother from same family Ulianna Tverska princess, and his wife - Sofia, Druck princess, this is all slavoc people and that family - Gedinimovichy - contunie to speak old Belarusian language, names and last names, not Baltic. In general that Grand Dutchy was mostly slavic culturally. But because Belarus under Soviet and russian control keep version where russians "save" ruthenians - "white russians" and history of GDL modern Lithuania complitely rewrite as about them. Ruthenians was cities and written culture for a centeries, when GDL was greated - there was no any baltic city. Most of aristocrats was also from Belarus. But fisrt Dinasty baltic, so Lithuanian in modern term. Not good educated Lithuanians getting very aggresive when anyone remind them that they was minority in country and baltic dynasty was only 90 years, because they agree only on absolute role, what is far from true
@@nomadicviewer But his father was lietuvis. And grandfather lietuvis Gediminas not some kind of Gediminovic . If you don't know nothing about lietuviai, please don't talk blsit
@Arv-pz9sy He cannot be "letuvis" as he half - ruthenian. And we became ducke of Grondo, became ortodox, married ortodox, and all ancetors was already slavic, Gediminovvichi slavinased complityle, but Gedimin(as) sire was baltic, or if you life - Lithuanian. Well all Europe has kings with not local nationalities, like in UK - 1000 people from not local dynasty.
@@nomadicviewer you live in your fantasy world. Good luck
Not sure how uniting the two countries has anything to do with solving the problem of no successor.
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.
Why the help would you ever issue a declaration making you personally responsible for the debts of a foreign land, commit to funding a navy etc? That’s just making your new crown weaker
In Poland, few people know that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had two separate armies. Recently, some Polish idiot said that Lithuanians in the times of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth only had light cavalry.
Bro upload the grand duchy of Moscow complete history
Nah
Nobody wants to hear about the Moskals these days
Around the 14:16 point in this video...........the Winged Hussars arrived! 🤘🎶
Comin down the mountainside!
Stephen Batory, lol xD it sounds terribly funny to the Polish ear, apart from that the material is cool.
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.
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.
Większość uprzywilejowanych rodów litewskich to byli potomkowie Bałtów. Dlaczego? Poczytaj o uzgodnieniach Unii Horodelskiej i decyzji króla Jagiełły i księcia Witolda (obaj z bałtyjskiego rodu Giedyminowiczów). Co nie znaczy, że przedstawiciele rodów rusińskich nie mogli dołączyć do elity, ale to się odbywało później i powoli. Nie mówiąc o tym, że zdolna polityka Bałtów sprawiła, że potomkowie kniaziów i bojarów bez oporów przyjęli litewską tożsamość polityczną. Na pewno nigdy żaden z nich nie uważał się za Białorusina, bo czegoś takiego nie było. Kościuszko przypominał, że jest szlachcicem litewskim. Nigdy w swoim życiu nie użył przymiotnika "białoruski".
One of the best Polish kings was Hungarian, plus the famous 'vampires' Transylvania was in fact part of Hungary too those times
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.
For some people who doesnt know the reality of Feudal Europe at that time can think the Commonwealth was some evil place that abused and slaved common people. It wasnt perfect, but still the nobility and middle class represented higher percentage than in any other state. Abuse and slavery of common people happened everywhere at that time. Thats a Feudal system for you. Same happened in Japan. Also origins and believes of population were very diverse and protected by law. So, compared to other states, it wasnt so bad.
Tak na to patrze i mysle, na cholere pozwolilismy obcym koronowac sie na naszych wladcow
what kinda city is named krewo
Krėva
lol biggest tribe who made first country - Polock Dutchy - was called kriwichy.
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
belokacap on krokodil, belokacaps = serfs nothing more
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?
❤poland & Lithuania
I wasn’t sure why he started in teh 16th century insteat of teh 13th century and why he skipped over the Battle of Grunwald and then I realized it’s about the Commonwealth not the Grand Dutchy.
About commoners,its not true,for land they got from lord,they had provide in exchange some work like mentioned repairs...but about abuse,yes its correct,but also "szlachta" smaller land lords had limits and also been punished for if they went too far
Im polish and im sat on this country 1RP king is from lithuenia dynasty
👍👍👍
What was in 09th Centuries, who ruled over the Kievan Rus, where were they located??????
Ahh yes ancient polish-lithuanian cities of kursk and smolensk ❤
Union of Lublin
pretty decent
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.
Not a bad idea for today 🤔
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.
👍🏻 👍🏻
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.
20:28 Poland was like the only state in Central Eastern europe. That term literally just refers to the Commonwealth xD
💪🇱🇹🇱🇹🇱🇹Lietuva
become absolute or become obsolete
I Wonder what wluodve happened if they lossened nobility
jei ne Lenkai ,nebutu ir sukilimu,nes pries Lietuvius niekx ir nekilo?
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 .
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.
Vilnius, not Wilno; Krėva, not Krewo
Lithuania says Lithuania - Polish,
a Polish says Polish- Lithuania😂
The official name is the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In this order. Poland was a kingdom and was also more populous than Lithuania.
*VILNIUS
This was Poland's mistake. From then on, the country began to fall. Lithuanian magnates had too much power.
Ivan wackenoff
Great video. Somehow happened that
“Polish” is swear word in Lithuania
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.
Because all leaders where Lithuanians Vytautas, Radvila and so on. Mongol empire was Mongol empire despite international population
@Arv-pz9sy 99% of main goverment positions keeps slavic after 13 centery.
Hiiii