The Denmark-Norway one is interresting as it was clearly dominated by Denmark but they have comparable population, I can only really think of the cultural similarities as a reason it was kept togethor
After the political reforms of the 1860s, Hungary had enough autonomy to be considered a separate country in certain ways, albeit under the same political leadership and common policy.
Cossack Historian the Hungarian part of the empire had a lot of power actually it controled it’s own half of the empire such as Croatia and Slovakia and it can refuse demands from the Austrian government such as during ww1 when it refused to sell food to Austria and it can dissolve the union anytime such as after ww1 when it left the union and it had it own army so unlike the polish Lithuanian commonwealth Hungary was an equal to Austria And wanted to maintain the status quo and repeatedly shot down many attempts to federalize the empire.
Lithuania, Hungary and Scotland meet at a bar. *Scotland:* "Hey, how did you guys become subservient to your bigger neighbor?" *Lithuania:* "Oh, we feared we would be swallowed up by Russia so we had no choice but to agree to their terms. Hungary?" *Hungary:* "They used the fact we were dismembered by the Ottomans and then reconquered those lands to themselves. How about you, Scotland?" *Scotland:* "...We tried to set up a colony in Panama."
@@klanas40 That's before the Commonwealth and the ruling class was Baltic in Baltic Lithuania and Ruthenian in Belarus (although even then many of then many of the Baltic upper class spoke Ruthenian). The Baltic upper class would end up intermarrying with Poles and assimilating.
@@klanas40 77 people who signed the Union of Lublin were either ethnic Ruthenians (ancestors of Ukrainians and Belarusians) or Poles. It is strange if you consider that you ruled over Slavic slaves. And if you don't attribute Kalinowski or Mickiewicz -as at the end, they don't become Lithuanians.
My tip: if Austria rivals bohemia royal marry with the bohemians (dont ally them) and when they will have your dynasty on the throne claim it and declare war for easy personal union.
You should’ve mentioned the Jagiellonian dynasty, one of the main ruling families of Poland of Lithuanian origins, and the Radziwiłł family, one of if not the most powerful noble magnate families of the Commonwealth who were also originally Lithuanian (Radivillus), and, quite ironically, were some of the largest contributors to Polonization in the Grand Duchy.
@@anonimusmusic9095 Nice fake account and fake history, conflict-baiting putlerbot :) Does Dugin and the Kremlin at least pay you enough for all this spam so you could afford a VPN to be able to access proper internet like the rest of us?
Warsaw became the capital of Poland-and practically the Commonwealth-in 1569. In the early stages of the union, the Lithuanians did most of the heavy lifting when it came to conquest. Polish domination started with the Krewo Agreement of 1385 and the subsequent marriage of Queen Jadwiga of Poland to Grand Duke Jogaila of Lithuania, who was crowned jure uxoris King of Poland (as a new convert to Catholicism, Władysław Jagiełło). The Lithuanians agreed to this deal by hoping the already Christianized Poles would help them handle the Teutonic Knights scheming to conquer pagan Lithuania under the pretext of converting it. The military union crushed the might of the crusading Teutonic Knights (the Battle of Tannenberg, or Grunwald in 1410). Still, almost immediately after that, Lithuania ceded most of the territory under its control (mainly today's Ukraine and Belarus) to Polish domination. This lopsided relationship continued with interruptions until 1939.
To be fair most of Lithuanias land they got out of a massive power vacuum by chance, also from what I’ve read here when your being invaded you are extremely willing to trade some land that isn’t very Lithuanian to get help
One important thing to keep in mind, though, is that the Commonwealth was not a national state (or a union of two national states) as we understand that term today. The king did not care whether you spoke polish, lithuanian or german or whatever other local language, as long as you paid your taxes and did not cause trouble. Polonisation of the lithuanian part was therefore not an official state policy. It just happened because speaking polish was seen as a sign of upward social mobility since the polish (high) nobility had the richer fiefs at the outset of the union. The german speaking nobility in Prussia and Courland never polonised that much, because those places were semi-autonomous in the first place and also quite wealthy, due to their access to the sea. The commonalty did not polonise in most parts because this question of social status was a moot point for them anyway.
Spot on stuff re: social status. I hope most people realize as well that Latin was the language that was spreading at first rather than Polish, though it eventually followed. That said, just have to note that exception that the Prussian Baltic areas did self-Polonize in at least one very specific way. After opposing it initially, the German speaking burghers and nobles participated in local sejmniks for local governance and sent representatives to the Sejm. Why? Because it was a means to exercise political clout, and they learned to wield it just like everyone else. Accordingly, Poland's relatively broad franchise parliamentary style of politics spread as an institution north just as it had spread east to Lithuania. In other words, the political culture assimilated via useful institutions. Source: The Oxford History of Poland-Lithuania, Vol 1 by Robert Frost.
@@zubstep I was only refering to the adoption of the language, not the political system. But you are of course correct in that people adopted all those polish customs that gave them more influence and power. Which is also the reason why the citizens of Danzig were very adamant about being loyal subjects of the polish king and NOT the teutonic order (or the dukes of Prussia after the order had been secularised). More self-determination and fewer taxes.
"The king did not care whether you spoke polish, lithuanian or german or whatever other local language, as long as you paid your taxes and did not cause trouble."
its crazy to me that i never learned about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in history class - especially since it was not only the largest but also the most populated country in the 16th and 17th century.
I’m of Polish-Jewish background and I gotta say I’m confused about Polish history. Ik we go back a ways in Europe obviously but I never learned much of the history
@@plrc4593 I guess when did the poles first get land? Where does our Sence of self come from. Ik those are stupid questions but like I said idk much about my own history
Lithuanians were a minority in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, because during the medieval times, from their relatively small base of Lithuania Proper they conquered large swathes of land inhabited by the Ruthenians, ancestors of modern day Ukrainians and Belarusians. From what I understand Ruthenian nobility later came to call themselves "Lithuanians" as well, and after 1569 much of Lithuanian nobility gradually and willingfuly became polonized. So the issue of Polish/Lithuanian/Polish-Lithuanian identity is quite complex.
@@1MuchButteR1 it was. Also nobility felt culturally backwards, everyone around was Christian, while they were pagan and Teutons wanted them dead for it, getting much support.
@@matm4413 You cannot understand history if you look at the world in current situation. Being backwards is another propaganda, entire Western Europe had diplomatic relations with Pagan Lithuanian leaders.
1:26 "Polish being the largest group, followed by Ruthenians, Ukrainians..." Should be "followed by Ruthenians". Those later developed into Belarussians and Ukrainians.
@@buckplug2423 not true. There was no such word as Ukrainian even back then. Plus there didn't have their own identity because they were part of the ruthaian family. There were ruthaian dialects but not languages as you know it today. Belarusian and Ukrainian was only starting to separate.
@@buckplug2423 Well, it's arguable. If we consider linguistic split and eventual separation of Ukrainian and Belorussian languages it would be more like late XVIII century. So, my point is there is no hard line
To think, the Commonwealth was only created when Duke of Lithuania married a Polish Princess to stop the Great Northern Crusade. He originally wants to marry a Russian princess and convert, but the Crusaders made it clear that converting to Orthodox wouldn't stop the war. So Polish Princess it was.
Then was only personal union created. Commonwealth was formally created about 200 years later, despite for a very long time Poland and Lithuania effectively acted like one organism.
The commonwealth wasint called Polish lithuanian commonwealth, in Lithuanian its "Abiejų tautų respublika" which translates "two nation republic"and in polish its "Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów" which also translated "two nation republic, so its more made sence to call just "Commonwealth" or "two nation commonwealth" and not "Polish lithuanian commonwealth".
@@englishrival2020 Well kinda. The world Rzeczpospolita is an archaic word and is an literal translation of latin res publica just like commonwealth. Rzeczpospolita used to refer to every republic whether it was Roman Republic, Republic of Venice or PLC.
@@coloneltaynov7314 lol what? The official name of Poland is Rzeczpospolita Polska. It's not archaic at all. And you got it completely wrong - Rzeczpospolita refers only to Poland and every other republic is just "republika".
@@GreenRatel Only nowadays. As late as the early 20th century some people talked about the Rzplita Francuska, among others. The English name was changed probably because they didn't want to call a monarchy a republic, even if they do so in regards to Venice, which was officially a monarchy.
@PL They were though. The modern Ukrainian and Belarusian languages both branched off from Ruthenian, which was spoken by the ancestors of both countries from Medieval times until at some point in the Early Modern Era. Originally, back in the early Medieval period, they were all Rus' living under the Kyivan Rus' but the Mongols destroyed it. The Western part of the former Kyivan Rus' came under the control of the Poles and Lithuanians and the people living there became Ruthenians. The people of the Eastern part of the Kyivan Rus' stayed under Mongol domination for a few centuries more and became Russians under the Muscovites. The exception was the northernmost Rus' territory, the Novgorod Republic, which were never conquered by the Mongols. It remained an independent country until the Muscovites destroyed it.
But this term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth wrong! This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarchBut Poland was a matchless democratic noble republic at the time and therefore something vey special. So if there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita. By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term Rzeczpospolita. By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. I'll explain that in detail in the next comment!
@@akkiaddizone6889 Yup there are many of them, they want to erase Lithuania from it despite many of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth kings and queens being Lithuanian. He even said Vilnius and land near Latvia were Polish.
@@thefrench8847 Lithuania had its own council, court, army and nobility that fought for Lithuania and were influential enough to post-pone the union of commonwealth because it didn't fit interests of Lithuania
I am one of those Polonized Lithuanians. Was sure all my life that I am pure Polish, then after DNA tests, realised that my ancestors were Lithuanian aristocrats polonized centuries ago. Still have 55% of Baltic blood though :)
If you're talking about the Baltic haplogroup, it's quite common in South-Western Russia as well, and even found in significant (>10%) proportions as far as Chelyabinsk. Everyone's mixed. But if it's more than that, heritage doesn't have to come from centuries ago, it could easily come from less distant relatives who just went to Poland for education and/or opportunities, because Vilnius university was closed or something. I have even heard a story of a family getting completely Polonised during 1920s Vilnius region occupation. Lithuanian activists were actively persecuted, so one Lithuanian linguist decided that the best disguise was to move to Poland, pretend to be Polish and never tell your kids the truth... The disguise worked, but the children of this anti-Polonization Lithuanian activist grew up Polish...
Yes the Piłsudski times - I wonder what was a better choice for Lithuanians being part of after WW1 Poland or one of Soviet Republics run by Leninists and then Stalin. Looks like neither one.
@@pliedtka yeah, neither option was ideal. The Soviets acknowledged the existence of Lithuanian identity, but actively tried to kill every educated and even remotely wealthy or influential figure remaining from pre-occupation times, whereas the Poles would have likely left the intellectual and layers intact as long as they cooperated, but seeked to eliminate all traces of Lithuanian national identity at any cost and replace it with the a Polish one... But hey, at least of one of the two forces mentioned is mostly friendly these days.
The whole "Vilnius was 2% lithuanian in 1897" is bs. It was written by the russian empire which was trying to russify lithuania. Lithuanian press was forbiden untill 1904 and in those statistic the poles arent the biggest majority too it was jews. Lithuanians lost Grodno, lida, breslav, ashmiana, suwalki and Vilnius which was populated by ethnic lithuanians before. And the whole polish-lithuanian war is misunderstood. Pilsudski didnt want vilnius because it was "polish". Both Pilsudski and Želigowski wanted to restore the "old lithuania" the multi-ethnic and multi-lingual lithuania. And they both came from polonised lithuanian nobility. While the ethnic lithuanians wanted a "new lithuanian nation" populated only by ethnic lithuanians because of the whole polonisation, russofication and slavification in the past and vilnius is a historical city of lithuania. Pilsudski wrote a letter in two languages to the people of Vilnius in lithuanian and polish. He even promised to return Vilnius to Lithuanians if they accepted their vision of Lithuania but they refused which is the whole reason why the polish puppet state the republic of central lithuania was made. My great grandmother was just a polish speaking lithuanian.
Don't forget Lithuanians were a warrior pagan tribe running out of forests and slaughtering their enemy. Lithuanians fought the Mongols, Swedes, Russians, Ottomans and many others, without Lithuania there was no Poland .
That feel when Poland cucked over lithuania like 20 times and most ppl don't even know about it. I really mean it, like most Polish people haven't heard about Polish agression for Vilnus.
Polonization wasn't forced by the state but by social pressure on the generations of youth by Lithuanians themselves. It didn't come from Poles being assholes to Lithuanians but Lithuanian pragmatism.
I think the fact that Polish was the official language of Sejm also contributed to mass Polonization, especially when talking about nobility. Polish Kingdom was far richer than the duchy of Lithuania, they even held country's capital and had some of the most culturally and economically important cities, such as Gdansk and Lwov.
@@raceris7309 Polish became the official language after most of the Lithuanian nobility began to use it, not before. Lithuanian was considered in next years "some, bit interesting but local peasant language" and there was also problem with definition of "Lithuanian language" which could refer to the Baltic Lithuanian or to White Ruthenian dialects so attachment to language in national identification of Lithuanians was negligible before modern nationalism appeared.
To be honest, you do really poor job at explaining the history of Eastern Europe. First of all, this union was preceded by almost 200 years personal union under the Lithuanian monarchs of the Jagiellon dynasty, Lithuanian and Polish cultures started slowly mixing back then, and those 200 years made the Union possible in the first place. Seceond, Poland and Lithuania meant to be equal, hence the name in Polish and Lithuanian is "Res Publica of Both Nations". Lithuania had its own Military, Tresury, Education System etc. The Polonisation of Lithuanians was not forced, and Ruthenian was an official language of The Grand Duchy because it was codyfied much earlier than Lithuanian and was used by most of the population, not because Poles forbided Lithuanians from using their own language. Lithuania was hugly overextended, with very small population, they needed a strong ally to survive.
Nail on head!!! ... A really sloppy video that almost deliberately causes hate and division with false assumptions overlaid with contemporary victim narrative... What an absolute wank of poor quality content!!!
Extremely well said. Also worth noting, by 1386 Jagiello could see the days of remaining pagan and acting as an in-between the Catholic west and Orthodox east were over. He'd have to choose. To go with Catholicism and Poland was in significant part motivated to preserve Lithuanian identity from being subsumed into Ruthenian / Rus, which was already their language at the Lithuanian court. This point ought to be obviously relevant to modern day people, yet is totally missed in such videos on Lithuania or Poland-Lithuania.
The per se good video contains some mistakes. One of the most important mistakes is the use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. To use this term is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw. Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility because many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized. Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland. The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire. In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo. The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita. By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term
What is sort of relevant and missing is that Lithuanian capital Vilnius was so polonised people in Poland felt it should be polish city - after WW1. And so it was.
@Influence08 except you forget Muscovian tzar Ivan the Terrible occupied 1/2 of Grand Duchy of Lithuania and they needed to get rid of him, so Lithuanians traded Ukraine and independence for Polish help.
So basically both poland and lithuania were surrounded by enemies from all sides which made them both good friend which made them marry and unite to stand against germans, tatars, russians and turks
Wasn’t also about inheritance as well? Weren’t the kings of Poland and Lithuania prior to the Union brothers, and after the King of Poland died in a crusade against the Ottomans. Their was a succession crisis as he had no immediate heir, so they nobles decided to name the king of Lithuania their new King. Which at least set the stones to the Commonwealth.
@@brandonlyon730 History of Unions between Lithuania is long. First was in 1385 and the reason for that was desctibed by this dude above us. (Teutonic agression) Thing that you mentioned is the dead of Władysław III king of Poland and Hungary in that time Jagiellonian dynasty ruled both in Poland and Lithuania. After his death his brother Casimir IV became king and renew the Union in 1447 but it wasn't Commonwealth yet. Commonwealht was created in 1569 by the last Jaggielon king in defense against Russia who already seized half of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
Lithuania is a beautiful country, i was there in 2014 and I was blown away by how friendly people were, within 10 minutes of getting on the bus outside Vilnius central station a man asked me "Where are you from"? (I had a suitcase), I told him Australia and that I was very excited to be in his country as I had been reading about the grand dukes since I was 12. He smiled and said "You have come such a long way, your country is so big and I must say WELCOME TO MY LITHUANIA!!!" It was so nice to feel so welcome. In Klaepedia I was talking to the tour guide who took us to Nida for the day, took us Amber hunting on the Curonian Spit (Baltic Sea side) and once it was established that I had a genuine interest in Lithuania, that I had read books and knew my history, I basically had her to myself for the whole day, everyone else on the tour was an after-thought, I had an amazing time and when a bag went around to do an additional collection at the end of the day I slipped a €50 in it for her. When I went to a national park and stayed in a hotel kind of thing, it was a homestay kind of thing, I was wearing my Ukraine hoodie and the host thtew her arms around me and went full out in Russian, I only speak a little bit of Ukranian, not Russian but I picked up that she called me "brother" and even when i broke the news that I was Australian, I was treated special for the 2 day stay, the national park was amazingly beautiful, kyaking around the streams and through the lakes was amazing, even being attacked by a white swan was AMAZING. When I left I got off at the old Polish/Lithuanian border and made a little promise to the universe that I would return one day. Lithuania holds a very special place in my heart and always will. Finland is another favourite of mine but Lithuania felt like a second home to me 😚
Lithuanians see the Union with Poland as a curse but there was no other way. It was either getting culturally integrated by Poland or bleeding ourselves out with Sweden or russia
union was a necessity for lithuania as russia was getting stonger and more agressive taking back "eternal russian land". unfortunately it brought poland into conflict with not only russia but also with sweden through livonia which caused the downfall of poland
Actually, Poland Lithuania as a name is rather a TH-cam concept. The country’s official name was either Commonwealth (Republic) of Both Nations or simply Commonwealth (Republic) of Poland. Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth is rather a descriptive term if we want to stress which former countries formed the united state.
1:28 Rithuanians and Ukrainians during the Commonwealth. Ukrainian developed as a separate culture from Rithuanian/Rusyn after the partitions under the Russian Empire in the 1850s.
Actually Ukrainian national consciousness developed under the Austrian Empire. Austria supported Ukrainian national movements and directed them in counteraction to polish national movements in Galicia. Same story with modern Lithuanians under Russian Empire. Divide et impera.
@@Belnen You're actually wrong. Ukrainian national identity developed in central parts of modern-day Ukraine, which were under Russian Empire in 19th century. Ukrainianism was aimed to differentiate Ukrainians/Ruthenians/Little Russians from proper Russians (i.e. Great Russians), because official Russian Empire's position was that all East Slavs are one nation. This problem was not really a problem for Galician Ruthenians, who still continued to see themselves as Ruthenians and were officially recognized as such. Still, both Russian Ukrainians and Austrian Ruthenians still saw themselves as one nation but just with different names, and the term "Ukrainian" was fully adopted in Galicia only in the years of WW1.
the video is one big misunderstanding and thinking in a way of XIX or XX century, when it still was just XV or XVI. Back then - it really didn't matter if You were Lithuanian, Belarussian, Ukrainian or Polish by DNA (this countries will only be created later on in modern meaning), but it did matter if you were a nobleman... And it not just Poland that effected present-day Ukraine or Belarus, but it also Ukraine and Belarus or the Baltics which created and effected modern Poland - in politics, music, cuisine, art or literature and language... Poland proper lost it's ruler and got one from Lithuania. Before unions didn't even had any conflict with Moscow. Because of the union it has one till today... The slavic languages are very similar and many dialects existed so they were much more than 3 or 4 languages... Baltic languages are bit different, but still the Baltic people had and still have great impact on Poland, Ukraine and Belarus. Just look where the leader of Belarussian opposition is living - Vilnius - historical capital of Lithuania... Just look what's the banner of Belarussian opposition - pohonia/vitis...!
BUT...The good video contains some mistakes. One of the most important mistakes is the use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. To use this term is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw. Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility because many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized. Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland. The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire. In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo. The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita. By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
@@siratshi455 Actually, the current political borders of Poland are very similar to the ones of the original Polish state, and the current western territories had been getting gradually consumed by other countries. While the German presence is a big part of the territory's history, Poland had had some presence there before.
No. Middle ages Lithuania was founded by Baltic tribes originating entirely from modern day Lithuania. These tribes formed a kingdom that had almost the exact same territory as modern Lithuania. They then expanded to incorporate what is today Belarus, but that doesnt make the entire thing Belarus. It was ruled and owned by Lithuanians who expanded from the territory we still call Lithuania today
@@ethancole9168 No, the Jagiellonians were Slavic. King vladyslav jagiello didn't need translators to speak to his polish wife - Queen Jadwiga. Their marriage started Polish -lithuanian state. The Baltic tribes were north of Lithuania.
@@alexbrown2401 they were both north of, snd in Lithuania. Their range wasnt limited to Lithuania, but the ones within Lithuania formed Lithuania. Lithuania wasnt slavic. It was founded by Baltic peoples, and then later expanded to rule over slavic people
@@alexbrown2401 the written laungauge was later slavic because nobody could write or read in Lithuanian, so when they conquered slavic people who already had a written laungauge, they just used it. Prior to conquering the modern belarusian territory, they didnt write, read or speak slavic. Even after conquering the territory they still spoke Lithuanian in the original kingdoms territory, and it saw some use in the new slavic territory
Fun fact: there was a period when any Jew who baptised himself would be given money in Poland. Lithuania upstaged this by giving out land and noble titles to Jews who were willing to convert to Christianity, which caused a massive influx of Jews from all across Europe into Lithuania.
This video is heavily based on today's perceptions of nationality, and thus misleading. Lithuanian didn't mean a Lithuanian-speaking person or an ethnic Lithuanian at the time. Lithuanian meant a person who is a citizen of the Grand Duchy. Ruthenians thought of themselves as Lithuanians and were part of the ruling elite. Debating on ethnicity and language in the Commonwealth is so counterproductive. Many famous Commonwealth people were very mixed. Adam Mickiewicz was Polish, his family lived in modern day Belarus and he considered Lithuania to be his home. Same with Tadeusz Kosciuszko. Moreover, the Grand Duchy had its own law that was supreme over the federal law of the Commonwealth, and the citizens of the Grand Duchy were active political participants in the Commonwealth. They believed the Commonwealth to be their fatherland, and there's that, and in fact Lithuanians were more supportive of late 18th century reforms than Poles themselves. That said, Poland definitely was much more developed culturally and economically.
What you claim does not correspond to the historical reality, because the Poles ruled the Polish empire. That is why Lithuania was also Polonized. If the Poles hadn't been the rulers, there would have been no Polonization either, because then it wouldn't have been worth becoming a Pole. The video also didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw. Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility becuas many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized. Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland. The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire. In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties wich followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo. The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the asimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
By the way, to use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Debating Lithuanian nationality and calling Ruthenians Lithuanian works if you ignore everything before the commonwealth, and is also one of the reasons why the union fell
Цэнтральную частку дзяржавы ў палітычным эначэньні гэтага паняцьця складала «Літва», якая ўлучала Ашмянскую, Берасьцейскую, Браслаўскую, Ваўкавыскую, Віленскую, Вількамірскую, Гарадзенскую, Капыльскую, Клецкую, Кобрынскую, Лідзкую, Менскую, Наваградзкую, Нясьвіскую, Пінскую, Рэчыцкую, Слонімскую, Слуцкую, Троцкую і Тураўскую землі[4]. Дамінаваньне ў дзяржаве мелі фэўдалы цэнтральных (беларускіх) зямель, бо Вялікае Княства ўтварылася на беларускай тэрытарыяльнай, этнаграфічнай і культурнай аснове, а беларуская мова зьяўлялася дзяржаўнай[4]. Тут канцэнтравалася большасьць велікакняскіх і дзяржаўных маёнткаў, а таксама асноўныя маёнткі буйных фэўдалаў. Адсюль набіралася асноўная частка арміі, зьбіраліся асноўныя даходы ў дзяржаўны скарб. Буйныя фэўдалы зь беларускіх этнаграфічных зямель Алелькавічы, Друцкія, Глябовічы, Гальшанскія, Кішкі, Радзівілы, Сапегі і іншыя займалі кіроўныя пазыцыі ў дзяржаўным апараце[4]. Вялікае Княства Літоўскае ачольваў вялікі князь (гаспадар), які быў носьбітам вярхоўнай улады. Ягоны Гаспадарскі суд зьяўляўся найвышэйшай інстанцыяй. Да 15 стагодзьдзя ўрадавую дзейнасьць ажыцьцяўляў толькі сам князь, які выконваў усе функцыі кіраваньня дзяржавай. З-за патрэбы арганізацыі дваровай гаспадаркі і вырашэньня праблем ўнутранай ды вонкавай палітыкі зьявіліся пастаянныя службовыя асобы - спачатку маршалак, падкаморы, падчашы, чашнік, крайчы, стольнік, мечнік, кухмістр ды ішныя, у сярэдзіне 15 стагодзьдзя - пасады агульнадзяржаўнай адміністрацыі (падскарбі земскі, канцлер ды гетман найвышэйшы)[22]. Заканадаўчую функцыю вялікага князя абмяжоўваў сойм - зьезд дэлегатаў ад рэгіянальных збораў фэўдалаў (сходаў) - і вялікакняская Рада (з XVI ст. яе звалі Паны-Рада).
I did a Baltic tour in that year and visited all the countries touching the Baltic Sea. Without any hesitation I can say I loved all of those countries and peoples.
1:28 At the time of the Commonwealth existence there was no such nationality as Ukrainian, all eastern Slavs (beside Moscovites) who lived in the lands of the Principality of Kiev were considered Ruthenian, later Slavs living in Ukraine (Ukraine, can be loosely translated to the borderland) developed their own identity mostly because of growing cultural, religious and political differences between them and the mostly Polonised Belorussian Ruthenians. The shift happened mostly due the events like the Union of Brest, the decline of the grain cost that pushed the nobles to put more and more days of feudal service on mostly Ukrainian peasants, reduction of the Cossack Register, Tatar Raids, Cossack uprisings, etc. It was a slow proces and the Ukrainian identity was not jet crystallized until the XIXth century.
>developed their own identity That isn't true. The 'ukrainisation' of Ukraine happened thanks to the early XIXth century academics from Volynj and Kyjiv, that tried to resurgitate the old Ukrainian literary tradition (that died out in the late 17th century due to masse polonisation of the PLC) and sought to establish some sort of autonomy for the Ukrainian lands within the Russian Empire, an effort they'd previously failed to pull thru when the PLC in 1720 denied such academics to publish their books in Old Ukrainian (also known as Westrusian literary language, Prosta mova, old Belarussian etc)
@@anonymousbloke1 That's the Ukrainian point of view that puts Ukraine as a synonym of Kievan Rus. Of course Ukraine emerged from the heritage of Kiev but those nations are not the same. In current understanding of the word Ukrainian identity as culture different from Ruthenian started to emerge in XIXth century.
Kev there is no different 'culture' and it has nothing to do with who of the two is the real successor to the Rusj (cause every eastern Slavic nation is) What Ukraino-centric point of view are you even talking about?
@@anonymousbloke1 You see, Russia claims to be the true ancestor of Kiev, Ukraine does, as well as Belarus. That's the point, to some degree they all are, and none of them really is. Early Rus was shaped in big part by Viking nordic cultures mixed with Slavic paganism and Orthodox Christianity. It all changed with the Mongol invasion. Ruthenian culture and language mixed with Lithuanian, Polish and even nomad culture. Out of those mixes slowly emerged new cultures. Belorussian in Lithuania, Russian in The Duchy of Moscow .In XVI century the Zaporozhyan Cossack culture started to take form of early Ukrainian nationalism, but there was a list of differences between it and the early Kievian state.The Lands west of Dniepr were under heavy western influence prime example being the greco-catholic church. The language used by Ruthenians and Ukrainians is different, they have different customs etc. Italians are the ancestors of Rome, but Rome is not synonymous with Italy.
@@pacthug4life don't know if yours are merely misconceptions or you truly believe that, but: 1) first and foremost, the Lithuanian language has had virtually no influence on the ruthenian language, vocabulary of which mostly comes from Polish or from German/Latin thru German etc. 2) mongols have had little influence over ruthenians in social structure or dressing manner or whatever, if you are referring to the Cossacks. Sure, initially Danylo Halycjkyj, a 13th Ruthenian knjaz, formed his troops as if they were mongols, but that quickly changed a century after the Lithuanian conquest of Rusj. Cossacks on the other hand were mostly influenced by the sarmats and such, who'd lived there for centuries, and later on by tatars 3) the first ones to try and develop a sense for Ukrainian nationality were academics from Kyjiv and Volynj, not Cossacks (initially many of whom were Polish nobles) 4) last but not least, you have virtually NO IDEA who Ukrainians and Ruthenians are 4a. Ruthenian is a dialect of Ukrainian. Ruthenian, even in the westernmost regions of Slovakia or Serbia or whatever, is 90% intelligible to Ukrainian speakers; and the customs are those of Hutsuls so I dunno tf you're talking about 4b. Ukrainians are simply Ruthenians who'd assumed the 'Ukrainian' term to describe their nationality
00:53 Lithuania didn't necessarily ciede Ukraine to Poland. The countries were in a personal union, and so king Sigismund Augustus basically gave the lands to himself in order to force Lithuanian nobles to agree for a full union.
@@raceris7309 Mistake, Sigismund fid it, because ordinary Lithuanian nobility was influenced by rich nobility who didn't want to give up their influence. I remind you, you are a ruler and some magnates rebel against you And yes, at first mainly Poles wanted to unite, but it wasn't their idea. The ruler passed from dynastic policy to state policy In addition, at the time of signing the treaty, the Lithuanians had a much better opinion about Poland, which was caused by the Lithuanian-Russian war, where the Lithuanians had little problems It was mainly Lithuanian magnates who did not want the Union at that time and you know, the rich can do a lot
@@raceris7309 Local nobles from Ukraine were also eager to join the Kingdom of Poland. If not for their support Sigismund would'nt been able to pull it off.
Interesting video, but 4 mins is not really enough to cover all the ethnical details of this state. Fun fact - all the Polish kings from the end of 14th century until the end of 16th century were all Lithuanian. While few of the Grand Duchy's people spoke Lithuanian, most of the nobility from that part of the state considered themselves to be Lithuanian. Just remember that the whole ethnical state thing is a 19th century idea anyway, and even then people of 20th century like Pilsudski or Zeligowski called themselves Lithuanian, while none none of their ancestors have spoken the language for centuries. The dual nature of this state was again noted in the 1791 constitution, a later ammendment of it also gave the Grand Duchy and Poland an equal amount of parlament seats. All these points could be expanded and discussed further, but my goal is simply to show that calling The Commonwealth just Poland is not accurate at all. And winged hussars is a meme, not a point :)
This fact is very unknown, but today's Belarus is more of a descendent of the Lithuania of before than today's Lithuania is. The Belarusian language is based on Lithuanian of that time.
It's not based on Lithuanian of that time. Lithuanian language was always called Lithuanian language. Look anywhere. From 14th century Teutonic chronicles pointing out things like the Lithuanians using the word "pillis" for castle, to panegyric to sigismund vasa of 1589, Vasa the IV's order in Lithuanian of 1639, to the 1663 "biblia lituanica", Matthaus Pratorius pointing out in 17th century that "in Littaw 'mes girdime' means 'we hear'" and "in Littau the word for name is 'wardas'", Gottfried Hensel's linguistic map of Europe 1741, the Vilnius primers for kids from 1783, and so on and almost everything in between.
The only thing you could be referring to is state chancellery language, which was adopted as a practical decision, given the geopolitical situation of that time. And for most of the period when it was the dominant chancellery language Latin was used along side it. By late 16th century Polish was already the dominant chancellery language. And more so with every decade. But that probably doesn't mean that "Poland is more of a descendant of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" than the neighbors to it's east, does it? Language only became tied to national identity in the 19th century. Poland used Latin as it's chancellery language before they used Polish. Does that mean Italy is more of a descendant of historical Poland than Poland is? Same with Hungary? Kingdom of Hungary used Latin all the way up to 1784, when German replaced it and Hungarian only became official in 1867. The Georgians used Armenian for many centuries, even though they had their own written language. As did the Koreans and Japanese with Chinese. Korean only became official in the 2rd decade of the 20th century. Yet everyone knows what's Korean history.
Before the rise of nationalisms in the 19th century, it was not typical to hold language as a defining feature of one's identity. Names were typically translated between languages for ease of understanding. Knowing multiple languages was a large benefit and every court had it's dedicated translator scribes as well. The choice of state language was often influenced by the fact of needing it for diplomacy with powerful neighboring states that speak that particular language.
Oh I knew this would come, I could definitely be wrong but my grandfather was from Belarus. He did state more reasons which I can't remember as of now.
@@mp1335 actually belarusian was called lithuanian many times in informal way. And if you'd ask any belarusian peasant of 17-19 centurywhat language they were speaking, they'd say "lithuanian", but would speak clean belarusian. They also tended to call their motherland Lithuania. It was just like that because main language in whole Duchy was Ruthenian(also known as Old Belarusian in modern science of history), and up to 80-90% of population were slavs. Ruthenian was common even in some Samogitia, any nobleman had to know it(in times before commonwealth).
The per se good video contains some mistakes. One of the most important mistakes is the use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. To use this term is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw. Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility because many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized. Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland. The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire. In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo. The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita. By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term
Lithuanians we're pretty badass, fighting off the crusaders for two full centuries, sacking Moscow 3 times (Not conquering), Defeating Kiev at times, Being the first to defeat the mongols in battle (Followed by russians), Last to convert into christianity. They are really interesting for me, so i recommend spending more research into the country.
@@Cortesevasive see here's the thing, it's a theory, and only belarussians support it. Samogitians are a dialect of Lithuanian, not a separate nation lmao.
@@Cortesevasive You see only Belarusians support it because this lie only benefits them and no other credible western or far eastern historian agrees with this theory. moreover you can come to modern Samogitia and Vilnius and you will hear yourself how languages sound different
To further prove how strong was bound between Polish and Lithuanian nations it is good to point that brother of first Polish President (1922) signed Lithuanian Act of Independance 4 years earlier.
The wife(Joanna) of that brother(Stanislaw) of the first president of Poland(Gabriel) was the last owner of the manor of their noble family in Brėvikiai and she was Pilsudski's cousin. Also, the wife of Smetona, the first president of Lithuania(Sofija) was a member of the historic Chodakowski family of the commonwealth, which originated in Poland and a large part of it branched off into Lithuania over time. And her branch of that family did many things for the Lithuanian national revival.
After poland occupied vilnius 😂😂. They didn't want any relation with the poles, they only got back on speakin terms when the soviets were becoming a threat in the 30s
It's worth adding that there were separate units and there were 4 hetmans (marshalls), 2 great and 2 little. 1 great and 1 little per a constituency. Also, arguably the most powerful family of the country were Radziwiłłowie, who were Lithuanian and even plotted against the union
But the Radziwiłł opponents of the union with Poland were the exception. Because most of them were supporters of the union with Poland, because they were actually Polonized Lithuanian nobility, just as the majority of the Lithuanian nobility was also Polonized. They were so Polonized that in 1547 Barbara Radziwiłł married the Polish King Sigismund II August, thus becoming Queen of Poland. The name was Polonized too! The Radziwiłłs' first names were also mostly Polish. Because of the Polonization of the Lithuanian nobility, Polish first names were common! Like Bishop Mikołaj Radziwiłł or Prince Karol Stanisław Radziwiłł. By the way, to use the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as it is done in the video is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw. Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland. The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire. In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo. The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita. By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! You probably know Polish but I'll explain that for non-Poles. The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
You might slightly forgot that Commonwealth became a thing in XVI century, almost 200 years after the king you mention died, while before that it was different thing. The actual first king of the Commonwealth was if I remember correctly some french douchebag that left after a year.
A message to Lithuanians Lithuanians seem to be in odds nowadays with Poles even though it's quite obvious that making lithuanian culture more polish-like wasn't part of some grand scheme. As the author mentioned, Poland had much higher population than Lithuania, as a result of that nobles migrated from 'overpopulated' Poland to Lithuania. Since they were Poles, their houses were polish, etc. Some Lithuanians wanted to work for such nobles, so they intentionally or not embraced their culture. Obviously, a son of a noble who have moved to Lithuania, will be to an extent Lithuanian. Commonwealth of Both Nations (as it's called in Polish) resulted in the culture merge rather than Polonisation. I assure you Lithuanians, here schools teach absolutely no enmity between us. We are taught to treat you as equals and to us it doesn't matter whether someone was polish or lithuanian. A proof of that is the fact that many authors call themselves Lithuanians, and yet we treat them as national heroes. A best example of this is Adam Mickiewicz who at the beginning of his famous book 'Sir Thaddeus' says: Oh Lithuania, homeland mine...and then proceeds to describe it. I myself had to learn to recite this from memory. Yes, education system here requires you to memorise a praise of Lithuania. So don't inspire enmity between comrades in arms, who together fought in battles, many more of which are to come.
yeah no worries mate, its all bullshit propoganda anywhay, mostly it was done by ussr to make sure peoples of the subject states dint cooperate. most of the emnity stems from ww2 and the whole vilnius mess, most forget Vilnius was ocupied at the time by soviets and we were being pushed out, if it wasnt for poles suceding in batle for Warsaw everyone wouldve been screwed. Now in modern day we eastern europeans need to stand together as neighbours not as foes against threats from east and west to make sure we can live a happy and prosperous life.
@@learnprog5350 that "annexation" saved the citizens of the city. Don't forget what happened with the Lithuanian leaders and army when the Russians started their approach and withdraw from Lithuania after signing the pact between Russia and Lithuania on 12.07.1920. Your forces withdrew and left that city when Russians were leaving, that city was in majority populated with Poles. In 1920 the Red Army took the city twice, murdering quite a lot of Poles. After the Polish army entered the city they created the Republic of Central Lithuania and gave citizenship to EVERYONE that lived there for at least 5 years. Our leadership plans were to have one country with Lithuanians and Ruthenians.
And thus modern Polish identity was in part shaped by Polonized Belarusians (Ruthenians from the Grand Duchy), who called themselves Lithuanians but understood being Lithuanian as a special kind of being Polish, like Kościuszko or Mickiewicz. That's why the Polish national epic "Pan Tadeusz" starts with the words "Oh Lithuania, my homeland!" and takes place in modern Belarus. I love our weird history. :) Also, YEaH! History Matters made a video about Poland-Lithuania and it's just about one aspect of it, so more may come in the future!
This is actually much closer to the truth than the point of view presented in the video. Slavic peoples' history is too complicated for Anglo-Saxons to grasp:)
Note that many of the terms that you have used changed their meaning since then. In 16th-18th century, e.g. no one would think of the city of Lviv as being located in Ukraine because that name was used for lands east of Volhynia and Podolia. There was also no distinction between the Belarusian, Ukrainian and Russian languages - there were only Ruthenians who spoke various East Slavic dialects that formed the basis for the respective languages. Lithuanian was also a term that changed its meaning and at that time it was used to refer to the Grand Duchy, e.g. to distinguish between places with identical names, e.g. Brest-Litovsk was known in Polish as Brześć Litewski to distinguish it from Brześć Kujawski, and the current Belarusian capital, Minsk, was known as Mińsk Litewski, so one's interlocutor can know that you mean a place further away from Warsaw than Mińsk Mazowiecki.
In 16th-18th century, there was no distinction between the Belarusian, Ukrainian and Russian languages? You're delusional. The spoken form of these languages had probably diverged way earlier; and written Old East Slav was no longer a thing by that time.
@@arthursimsa9005 difference were probably quite big already but people from that time seen all of those languages just as Ruthenian which was pretty vague term overall and nowadays would be quite well fit into eastern slavic languages family.
Yeah right ! The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. The Poles were the imperial ruling ethnic group of the empire, which also clearly shows the politicization of Lithuania. Because it was worthwhile to belong to the imperial ruling ethnic group of Poland, there was this polonization. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. Before being taken over by Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw. Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility becuas they were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized. Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates that the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. That was by far not the only additional title of the Polish kings. For example, the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa had in addition to the Polish royal title, Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Poles ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by Polish troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost the power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical so the titles of other Polish kings like Stephen Báthory, also make clear. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia and Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of Poland. But only a short time because the armies of Polish King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore he couldn't defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. So by the imperial ruling population of Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire. In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Polish Crown. However, the various other treaties wich followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo. The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the asimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below!
So here I explain in detail the name of Poland, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita. By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
Another thing - while the nobles of all areas overwhelmingly spoke Polish (because that was the language of the elites), the common people did not. For instance, the nobles of the Ukrainian part of the commonwealth spoke Polish, but the peasants spoke Ukrainian. Same in Lithuania - the Lithuanian language was preserved by the peasants and other commoners. But the idea that Belarussian, Russian and Ukrainian were all the same was inaccurate - it is more accurate to say that there was more of a continuum of language, the same way that there was once a continuum of language from Madrid to Paris, with the language changing slightly with every passing mile from one city to the other, but being quite different in Paris from Madrid. But it is the case that the modern concept of Belarus was basically defined as that part of the eastern Slavs who ended up in the Lithuanian (as opposed to Polish) part of the commonwealth. The dividing line between old Lithuania and Old Poland is essentially today's dividing line between Belarus and Ukraine.
What do you mean by "Ruthenians and Ukrainians"? Ukrainians are Ruthenians. They started to call themselves Ukrainians only from the second half of the 19th century.
@Semper Fidelis I don’t know what are you talking about. This video is about the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth and its Ruthenians (Ukrainians + Belarusians). Not about Hungary and its Carpathian Ruthenians. Transcarpathia never was a part of the Polish-Lithuania although its Ruthenian inhabitants were settlers from Red Ruthenia (Podolia, Eastern Galicia, Volhynia and Lemkovyna).
@Semper Fidelis There was no independent state called Ukraine when the Crown of Poland existed. The province of the Crown with the name Ukraine was inhabited by the same Ruthenians as in Red Ruthenia. Nobody called themselves Ukrainians back then. As for loyalty, only the Ruthenian nobility was loyal to the Crown. Eventually they converted to Catholicism and became Poles. But Ruthenian peasantry hated it. There was a Ruthenian insurgent movement (opryshoks) against the Polish feudal lords in Red Ruthenia from the 16th century to the early 19th century. Only after the Austrian authorities repealed the Polish "panszczyzna" in the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria in 1848, the uprisings ended.
@Semper Fidelis The Kingdom of Ruthenia (Galicia-Lodomeria) was partitioned between Poland, Lithuania and Hungary starting from 1349. Galicia was incorporated into the Polish Crown in 1349 (till 1772). 423 years Podolia was incorporated in 1430 (till 1772 and 1793). 342-363 years Volhynia (Lodomeria) (except its western part which was incorporated in 1360s) and Podlachia were incorporated in 1569 (till 1795). 226 years Even though Ruthenians were divided between the Polish Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, they were still bound together. There were no real borders since the Union of Krewo (1385). And Lviv remained the center of cultural life for all Ruthenians in Poland and Lithuania. Even in 1517 Polish professor of Jagiellonian University Maciej Miechowita describing the Ruthenian lands from Peremyshl (Premysliensis), Kholm (Chelmensis) and Belz (Belzensis) in the west till the Don river (Tanais) in the east in his "Tractatus de duabus Sarmatis Europiana et Asiana", calls Lviv (Leopoliensis) the capital of Ruthenia (metropolis Russiae) and Kyiv (Kiow) the former capital of Ruthenia (quae olim metropolis Russiae fuit), but still the capital of the Ruthenian Orthodox Church in Poland and Lithuania. Meletiy Smotrytsky, Ivan Vyshensky, Kostiantyn Vasyl Ostrozky, Lavrenty Zyzany, Pamwo Berynda, Zacharija Kopystensky and many others famous Ruthenians were equally close to both Lviv and Kyiv. Kyiv-Mohyla Collegium/Academy was the leading center of higher education for all Ruthenians in the Commonwealth in 17th century.
@Semper Fidelis On May 10, 1848 Supreme Ruthenian Council (Holovna ruska rada) in Lviv published the Manifesto where it was clearly stated that the Galician Ruthenians are the part of the Great Ruthenian nation of 15 million people (total population of Ruthenians/Ukrainians in both Austria-Hungary and Russia in 1848) who speak the same language. 19th-century Austrian Galicia has become the historic Piedmont of the Ruthenian (Ukrainain) national revival since in the Russian Empire expressions of Ruthenian language and culture were persecuted. Russian authorities even closed the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1811. Many writers and poets were arrested and exiled. Some managed to escape to the Habsburg Empire. In the second half of the 19th century there were only two political movements among Ruthenians of Austria-Hungary: 1) Moscophiles accepted the Russian imperial idea of the triune Russian nation: Great Russians (Muscovites) + Little Russians (Ruthenians) + White Russians (Belarusians or White Ruthenians) and dreamed of joining Red Ruthenia to the Russian empire. 2) Narodovtsi or Ukrainophiles considered Ruthenians of Galicia, Bukovyna, and Transcarpathia a part of one Great Ruthenian (Ukrainian) nation from the San to the Don river. But they were against the idea of joining to the Russian empire because of the Russian chauvinism. Both Ruthenian political movements were in a severe confrontation with the Poles in Galicia. There were no any pro-Polish Ruthenian organizations at all. Ruthenians clearly remembered the polonisation, panszczyzna and the Polish chauvinism (Ty Polaku, stoj w szyszaku z orężem do boju! Ty, Rusinie, sk… synie, z widłami - do gnoju!). As soon as the Habsburg empire collapsed and Galician Ruthenians proclaimed the independent West Ukrainian National Republic, Polish-Ruthenian conflict turned into the armed struggle. Poles called it the Ruthenian campaign (Kampania ruska). The funniest and the saddest thing was that the Galician Ruthenians waited for help in their fight against Poles from the Ukrainian National Republic, but Ukrainian National Republic waited for help in their fight against Russians from the West Ukrainian National Republic and the Second Polish Republic.
@Semper Fidelis As for the elections in the Second Polish Republic. Most Galician Ruthenians (Uniates) just boycotted the Polish elections 1922, because they considered their land occupied and the Polish government illegitimate. But even of those who took part in the elections, the majority voted for the minority interest parties (77% Galician Uniates and 66% Volhynian, Polesian and Belarusian Orthodox Christians). In the Polish elections 1928 the minority interest parties were supported by 71% of Galician Uniates, by 21% of Volhynian, Polesian and Belarusian Orthodox Christians. Communists were supported by 12% Uniates and 44% Orthodox Christians). There were no pro-Polish Galician Ruthenians in 1944, but Galician Poles. Many of them were just polonized Ruthenians (Polish speaking Catholics), but still Poles. And they were not "physically eliminated", but transferred to Poland in 1944-1946 according to the treaty of population exchange between USSR and Poland. It was signed by the chairman of the Polish Committee of National Liberation Edward Osóbka-Morawski and the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR. Under the terms of this treaty all Poles from the western part of the Ukrainian SSR should have been transferred to Poland and all Ukrainians (Ruthenians) from the eastern part of Poland to the Ukrainian SSR. The population exchange has been officially ended on May 6, 1947. But the Poles hadn’t finished deportations on their side by this time. So they had started the new operation - the Operation Vistula. All the remaining Ruthenians had been forcibly resettled to the territories of pre-war Germany that became part of Poland after World War II. They were settled in small groups among a majority of Polish population in order to speed up the assimilation process. By the way, the present-day Galicia still is the most patriotic part of Ukraine.
No.. It doesnt depend on minority of groups.. Lithuania conquered Ruthenia, Lithuania itself was a small country so the Lithuanian group got smaller because Ruthenia was conquered
@@Qunas LT tauta nebuvo maza. Pats Vilnius prisijungia kaip Rusijos Imperijos trecias didziausias miestas. Tu ziuri pagal dabarti kur matosi Slavu skaičiu dominacija.
@@1MuchButteR1 Turiu omenyje kad Lietuva buvo tik Baltijos paprasta maziuke šalis, po laiko pradėjo užkariauti daugiau žemių kad padidėtų o Tikrieji Lietuviai gyveno tik Baltijos mazdaug regijone o ne kažkur Baltarusijoje, kadangi Lietuvių kurie mokėjo Lt kalbą Buvo normalus skaicius bet per laika vis daugiau zemių užkariaujant didėjo Rusių populiacija kas darė juos didesne grupe populecijos nes jų žemių daug tiesiog buvo užkariauta
Some polish remarks about such nice video :) - 0:58 dunno if Lithuania ceded is good wording. When debating what to do with the country after last Jagiellon's death, polish MPs wanted to join two countries in real union, while Lithuanian MPs were outraged and left that Parliament in sign of protest. Therefore it was finished without their part and Ukraine was annexed to threaten Lithuanian part -Also I think you missed a very important point, as it seems when you mention Ruthenian instead of Lithuanian as the official language that it was somehow insulting(?) for Lithuanians. Historically, beginning from 13th-14th century Lithuania was conquering more and more of the Rus lands, weakened by the Mongols. Due to their conquests the "original Lithuanians" became minority in their own country and thus more and more Ruthenian boyars became the nobility of Lithuania. Over time most of the nobility became Ruthenian(although i expect that many were long proud of their Baltic heritage) and Lithuania firstly became Ruthenian (ruthenized), before being slowly polonized beginning since late 15th century. tl;dr Lithuania stopped being lithuanian not because of Poland but because of expansion and being country with Ruthenian majority -one last thing, you made a distinction between Ruthenians and Ukrainians. The former is the term for all people native to Rus lands, Ukrainians are a modern nation, the same way as Byelarussians. I do not believe that this is in any way offensive, Ukrainians themselves believe in Cossacs being one of the motors that culturally seperated(distincted) them from the rest of Ruthenians, while tracing their identity back to the Kievan Rus, ruling over most of the Rus lands
Wrong, West Russian language never overtook Latin in administration in acts of Vilnius. Ruthenian domination of Lithuanian Proper is false , that occurred with arrival of Russian Empire.
I think he's simply calling the southern Ruthenes Ukrainians because that is what their descendants are now called. It's an anachronism but an understandable one.
@@SloveLDK Hey Samogitian, when Trump becomes US president, Putin will take you on a one-way trip to Siberia. And don't delude yourself that the Germans will save you.
@Fat Earther the duke of Lithuania married the king of Poland and formed the Polish-Lithuanian Union. The "king" of Poland was a woman at the time. I think that at the time only a king, not a queen could rule the kingdom. So they just crowned her as king.
Wasn’t she crowned “King” because of a loophole in polish law since Poland was dealing with a very bad secession crisis and the law never stated what gender the King had to be and a Queen can’t rule by themselves so she was given that title for the rest of her reign.
Heres the problem: the lithuanian language was opressed and consider inferior to polish. So polish slowly after reunion became a prestige langauge. It was soo bad that by mid 19th century lithuanian language was at bring of extinction. Another thing: before the union lithuania was more superior to Poland. With bigger territory and better although smaller army. So only after reunion Poland became more dominant. Then lithuanians wanted to be more cool so polinisation started. Many lithuanians today actually consider Commonwealth to be one of the worst periods in lithuanian history.
actually it's hard to call polonisation, more like a volunteer switching to speaking Polish. You have only your shliakhta to blame for that. Do you call Frenchanisation when Russian boyars who barely could speak correct Russian but spoke French in the Russian empire?
They didn't want to learn polish culture, they wanted polish nobility's benefits because they had more rights which didn't mean they were more modern, just that nobles had more power than kind. Lithuanian nobility was more modern since women there could inheret their husband's wealth while polish ones rarely
Read about their history before union. They were also really badass. Last nation to adopt Christianity. Successfully fighting off Teutonic and Livonian Orders for century or two. Made quite a empire, conquering ruthenian lands many time larger than their homeland.
@@mittag6326 it was more an effort of future belarusians than lithuanians. Also they didn't conquer any of ruthenian lands. They were either connected by marriage or voluntary join
The fact is that the Polish minority in Lithuania today is discriminated, disadvantaged and patronized by the Lithuanians. Today Lithuania would actually be obliged to set up bilingual (Polish Lithuanian) road signs in areas densely populated by poles. But Lithuania does not do that. In 2014 Šalčininkai district municipality administrative director Bolesław Daszkiewicz (Written in Polish) was fined about €12,500 for failure to execute a court ruling to remove Lithuanian-Polish street signs. Lucyna Kotłowska was fined ~€1700! The Lithuanians forced the Poles to Lithuanize their surnames, i.e. the spelling of the Polish surnames was changed against the will of the citizens, despite the Polish-Lithuanian agreement of 1994 which was supposed to protect the rights of the Lithuanian and Polish minorities. For example, the name Kleczkowski has to be spelled Klečkovski in official documents. These are just a few examples of many of the permanent discrimination against Poles in Lithuania! This has nothing to do with the crimes against Poles in the past. Becuase in 1918 in Wilno, today's Vilnius, the overwhelming majority of the population spoke Polish and only 4% of the inhabitants spoke Lithuanian. Unfortunately, the majority of the Polish population was expelled from the city and the area after 1945. Poles were also murdered during the expulsion. What is left is a Polish minority that is being discriminated against.
Though funnily enough Poland-Lithuania was also the most Democratic country in history until the 13 colonies created the U.S.A. because anyone that could prove they were a legitimate desedant of any noble large or small they could vote for the king.
@@alanpennie8013 Well not quite like ancient Athens. It was more of an aristocratic monarchy where as athens had no aristocrats. Poland right to vote for king was hereditary. Athens it was all freemen born in the republic. But yes, it did lead to instability and foreign intervention common.
@@yotubeification True. But the citizens of Athens were a minority of the adult male population of the city. And Poland's elective monarchy was indeed an invitation to the surrounding states to meddle in Polish politics whenever a new king was elected.
you’re suggesting forced polonisation - it never was in the times of commonwealth forced - it was out of convenience that Lithuanians and ruthenians polonised - Lithuanian higher class already having ruthenized before
Lithuanians love to complain about "polonization" yet the Lithuanians were the ones with the privileged minority ruling over a multiethnic state. Literally subjugated eastern slavs and baltic peoples for centuries both before and during the commonwealth.
That's right. He should've either distinguish Belarusians and Ukranians, or put us in one bulk as Ruthenians. Quite a messy video, oversimplified and with a lot of mistakes.
How Hungarian was Austria-Hungary?
How Norwegian was Denmark-Norway?
The Denmark-Norway one is interresting as it was clearly dominated by Denmark but they have comparable population, I can only really think of the cultural similarities as a reason it was kept togethor
After the political reforms of the 1860s, Hungary had enough autonomy to be considered a separate country in certain ways, albeit under the same political leadership and common policy.
Cossack Historian the Hungarian part of the empire had a lot of power actually it controled it’s own half of the empire such as Croatia and Slovakia and it can refuse demands from the Austrian government such as during ww1 when it refused to sell food to Austria and it can dissolve the union anytime such as after ww1 when it left the union and it had it own army so unlike the polish Lithuanian commonwealth Hungary was an equal to Austria And wanted to maintain the status quo and repeatedly shot down many attempts to federalize the empire.
@Chargingpath - well Hungary had a lot of control over its own half of the country and was close to independent, but had no power over Austria itself
or what about how portuguese was iberian union
0:16 that cuts deep
As a Scottish person, I can really relate to Lithuania
Lithuania, Hungary and Scotland meet at a bar.
*Scotland:* "Hey, how did you guys become subservient to your bigger neighbor?"
*Lithuania:* "Oh, we feared we would be swallowed up by Russia so we had no choice but to agree to their terms. Hungary?"
*Hungary:* "They used the fact we were dismembered by the Ottomans and then reconquered those lands to themselves. How about you, Scotland?"
*Scotland:* "...We tried to set up a colony in Panama."
yarpen26 Hey look man it seemed like a good idea at the time
Also note that the first king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was Lithuanian. Ring a bell?
@@PasserMontanus "What happens when the Commonwealth is yours... And then you lose it."
Same here, I’m welsg
People forget thay Lithuanianess had a multiethnic meaning at the fime and this is why Belarusians see themselves as Slavo-Lithuanians
Rulling class and core people were Baltic Lithuanians.
@@klanas40 That's before the Commonwealth and the ruling class was Baltic in Baltic Lithuania and Ruthenian in Belarus (although even then many of then many of the Baltic upper class spoke Ruthenian). The Baltic upper class would end up intermarrying with Poles and assimilating.
I'm from Belarus and nobody here sees us as baltic, we are slavs 100%.
@@klanas40 77 people who signed the Union of Lublin were either ethnic Ruthenians (ancestors of Ukrainians and Belarusians) or Poles. It is strange if you consider that you ruled over Slavic slaves. And if you don't attribute Kalinowski or Mickiewicz -as at the end, they don't become Lithuanians.
@@husbanana When did I say that
"Getting carved up by your Russian and German speaking neighbours, POLISH"
I love this channels humour
Yes XD
Well, Lithuania was partitioned between Third Reich (Klaipeda region) and Soviet Union, too.
@Influence08 0. Kurwa
I mean... Gotta admit that's accurate af
@Influence08 You suck and you know it.
This video has inspired me to play EU4 as the Commonwealth
Good luck
Poland is OP after 1.27
My tip: if Austria rivals bohemia royal marry with the bohemians (dont ally them) and when they will have your dynasty on the throne claim it and declare war for easy personal union.
just came back from a byzantium attempt. rip me
@Influence08 try ottomans or france lol
You should’ve mentioned the Jagiellonian dynasty, one of the main ruling families of Poland of Lithuanian origins, and the Radziwiłł family, one of if not the most powerful noble magnate families of the Commonwealth who were also originally Lithuanian (Radivillus), and, quite ironically, were some of the largest contributors to Polonization in the Grand Duchy.
It's Radvilos sis
Not Radvillus but Radvilos. But you are right. Thanks for pointing that out.
Radizwiłłs still exist, surprisingly.......
AnnoyinglySalty Yep. The wife of one of the Radziwill’s was on the reality show “The Real Housewives of NYC”.
@@anonimusmusic9095 Nice fake account and fake history, conflict-baiting putlerbot :) Does Dugin and the Kremlin at least pay you enough for all this spam so you could afford a VPN to be able to access proper internet like the rest of us?
Warsaw became the capital of Poland-and practically the Commonwealth-in 1569. In the early stages of the union, the Lithuanians did most of the heavy lifting when it came to conquest. Polish domination started with the Krewo Agreement of 1385 and the subsequent marriage of Queen Jadwiga of Poland to Grand Duke Jogaila of Lithuania, who was crowned jure uxoris King of Poland (as a new convert to Catholicism, Władysław Jagiełło). The Lithuanians agreed to this deal by hoping the already Christianized Poles would help them handle the Teutonic Knights scheming to conquer pagan Lithuania under the pretext of converting it. The military union crushed the might of the crusading Teutonic Knights (the Battle of Tannenberg, or Grunwald in 1410). Still, almost immediately after that, Lithuania ceded most of the territory under its control (mainly today's Ukraine and Belarus) to Polish domination. This lopsided relationship continued with interruptions until 1939.
0:54 Yeah like many people don’t realize this and it saddens me
To be fair most of Lithuanias land they got out of a massive power vacuum by chance, also from what I’ve read here when your being invaded you are extremely willing to trade some land that isn’t very Lithuanian to get help
All i have to say is: WE NEED A JAGIELLON
pick a local noble instead
@@mulan-jinglesemusicas1513 Much better choice, quick PU with Bohemia afterwards
WE NEED A PIAST
As a Muscovy player:
All pay you as much as you want, just pick a local noble
@@The-Samuil If you allow me to PU you than I won't chose a Lithuanian.
One important thing to keep in mind, though, is that the Commonwealth was not a national state (or a union of two national states) as we understand that term today. The king did not care whether you spoke polish, lithuanian or german or whatever other local language, as long as you paid your taxes and did not cause trouble.
Polonisation of the lithuanian part was therefore not an official state policy.
It just happened because speaking polish was seen as a sign of upward social mobility since the polish (high) nobility had the richer fiefs at the outset of the union.
The german speaking nobility in Prussia and Courland never polonised that much, because those places were semi-autonomous in the first place and also quite wealthy, due to their access to the sea.
The commonalty did not polonise in most parts because this question of social status was a moot point for them anyway.
Spot on stuff re: social status. I hope most people realize as well that Latin was the language that was spreading at first rather than Polish, though it eventually followed.
That said, just have to note that exception that the Prussian Baltic areas did self-Polonize in at least one very specific way. After opposing it initially, the German speaking burghers and nobles participated in local sejmniks for local governance and sent representatives to the Sejm. Why? Because it was a means to exercise political clout, and they learned to wield it just like everyone else. Accordingly, Poland's relatively broad franchise parliamentary style of politics spread as an institution north just as it had spread east to Lithuania. In other words, the political culture assimilated via useful institutions. Source: The Oxford History of Poland-Lithuania, Vol 1 by Robert Frost.
@@zubstep I was only refering to the adoption of the language, not the political system.
But you are of course correct in that people adopted all those polish customs that gave them more influence and power.
Which is also the reason why the citizens of Danzig were very adamant about being loyal subjects of the polish king and NOT the teutonic order (or the dukes of Prussia after the order had been secularised). More self-determination and fewer taxes.
MOOT
"The king did not care whether you spoke polish, lithuanian or german or whatever other local language, as long as you paid your taxes and did not cause trouble."
They were more advanced as a country than Western Europe at the time
its crazy to me that i never learned about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in history class - especially since it was not only the largest but also the most populated country in the 16th and 17th century.
I’m of Polish-Jewish background and I gotta say I’m confused about Polish history. Ik we go back a ways in Europe obviously but I never learned much of the history
What are you confused about for instance?
@@plrc4593 I guess when did the poles first get land? Where does our Sence of self come from. Ik those are stupid questions but like I said idk much about my own history
@@samgreen7334 Poles didn't get land, they created a country. Mieszko I did. His son Bolesław the Brave was the first Polish king.
It's like asking how Slovakian was Czechoslovakia.
Thanks for explaining this. 😮
I hate jadwiga, king of Poland.
Lithuanians were a minority in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, because during the medieval times, from their relatively small base of Lithuania Proper they conquered large swathes of land inhabited by the Ruthenians, ancestors of modern day Ukrainians and Belarusians. From what I understand Ruthenian nobility later came to call themselves "Lithuanians" as well, and after 1569 much of Lithuanian nobility gradually and willingfuly became polonized. So the issue of Polish/Lithuanian/Polish-Lithuanian identity is quite complex.
Lithuania Proper was not that small compared to East Slavic world, there were famines in Rus' post mongol invasions especially in Ukraine.
@@1MuchButteR1 it was. Also nobility felt culturally backwards, everyone around was Christian, while they were pagan and Teutons wanted them dead for it, getting much support.
@@matm4413 You cannot understand history if you look at the world in current situation. Being backwards is another propaganda, entire Western Europe had diplomatic relations with Pagan Lithuanian leaders.
@@1MuchButteR1 denying the role of the church in those times is what you speak against
1:26 "Polish being the largest group, followed by Ruthenians, Ukrainians..."
Should be "followed by Ruthenians". Those later developed into Belarussians and Ukrainians.
Yeah
Not exactly. Ukrainian cultural identity during the XVII century was already high enough to consider them a nation of their own.
@@buckplug2423 not true. There was no such word as Ukrainian even back then. Plus there didn't have their own identity because they were part of the ruthaian family. There were ruthaian dialects but not languages as you know it today. Belarusian and Ukrainian was only starting to separate.
@@buckplug2423 Well, it's arguable. If we consider linguistic split and eventual separation of Ukrainian and Belorussian languages it would be more like late XVIII century.
So, my point is there is no hard line
@@ЯрославКовальчук-и9ь Fair point.
To think, the Commonwealth was only created when Duke of Lithuania married a Polish Princess to stop the Great Northern Crusade. He originally wants to marry a Russian princess and convert, but the Crusaders made it clear that converting to Orthodox wouldn't stop the war. So Polish Princess it was.
Then was only personal union created. Commonwealth was formally created about 200 years later, despite for a very long time Poland and Lithuania effectively acted like one organism.
Also the whole Capital deal, that was one of the main reasons why the capital got moved to Warsaw, to be halfway between Vilinius and Kraków
The commonwealth wasint called Polish lithuanian commonwealth, in Lithuanian its "Abiejų tautų respublika" which translates "two nation republic"and in polish its "Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów" which also translated "two nation republic, so its more made sence to call just "Commonwealth" or "two nation commonwealth" and not "Polish lithuanian commonwealth".
"Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" is the established name in English though, so calling it something else would have made the video title confusing.
@@HeadsFullOfEyeballs Yeah they kind ruined the name, it should just be commonwealth because it was the ONLY commonwealth IN THE WORLD.
@@englishrival2020 Well kinda. The world Rzeczpospolita is an archaic word and is an literal translation of latin res publica just like commonwealth. Rzeczpospolita used to refer to every republic whether it was Roman Republic, Republic of Venice or PLC.
@@coloneltaynov7314 lol what? The official name of Poland is Rzeczpospolita Polska. It's not archaic at all. And you got it completely wrong - Rzeczpospolita refers only to Poland and every other republic is just "republika".
@@GreenRatel Only nowadays. As late as the early 20th century some people talked about the Rzplita Francuska, among others. The English name was changed probably because they didn't want to call a monarchy a republic, even if they do so in regards to Venice, which was officially a monarchy.
1:27
But Ruthenian and Ukrainian are just the same
@PL They were though. The modern Ukrainian and Belarusian languages both branched off from Ruthenian, which was spoken by the ancestors of both countries from Medieval times until at some point in the Early Modern Era.
Originally, back in the early Medieval period, they were all Rus' living under the Kyivan Rus' but the Mongols destroyed it. The Western part of the former Kyivan Rus' came under the control of the Poles and Lithuanians and the people living there became Ruthenians. The people of the Eastern part of the Kyivan Rus' stayed under Mongol domination for a few centuries more and became Russians under the Muscovites.
The exception was the northernmost Rus' territory, the Novgorod Republic, which were never conquered by the Mongols. It remained an independent country until the Muscovites destroyed it.
Still waiting for Poland to Anschluss Lithuania
You’re going to be waiting for something that will never happen. How sad.
@@SloveLDK that comment was so good like all your others on this video
@@Aleksander_Zgraja_Star thanks
based
0:55 so it was the king he gived it to poland bc lithuenia did run from the meeting
It is the longely awaited "The Early Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" you promised?
I'm pretty sure that was scrapped alongside all the potential 10-minute videos.
But this term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth wrong! This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown.
In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarchBut Poland was a matchless democratic noble republic at the time and therefore something vey special. So if there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita!
The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers.
I'll explain that in detail in the next comment!
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars least nationalistic Pole
Thanks for telling that your country oppressed Lithuanians and Ruthenians.
@@akkiaddizone6889 Yup there are many of them, they want to erase Lithuania from it despite many of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth kings and queens being Lithuanian.
He even said Vilnius and land near Latvia were Polish.
1:28 Isn't Ruthenian and Belarusian/Ukrainian the same?
Just as Hungarian was the Austro-Hungarian Empire
Except Hungary had more autonomy than Lithuania.
@@thefrench8847 Lithuania had its own council, court, army and nobility that fought for Lithuania and were influential enough to post-pone the union of commonwealth because it didn't fit interests of Lithuania
The fact what Poland had Lithuanian kings
So if the Lithuanians were polonized, does that make Lithuania a polony?
I'll see myself out...
Polonialism...
Make sure not to touch Polonium while going out!
Polonium was named after "Poland", a small historical detail
@@seneca983 Polished version of colonialism
@@grzegorzkonieczny2682: Haha!
(Or maybe colonialism is a colored version of polonialism.)
England would be a Polony now then😂
I am one of those Polonized Lithuanians. Was sure all my life that I am pure Polish, then after DNA tests, realised that my ancestors were Lithuanian aristocrats polonized centuries ago. Still have 55% of Baltic blood though :)
If you're talking about the Baltic haplogroup, it's quite common in South-Western Russia as well, and even found in significant (>10%) proportions as far as Chelyabinsk. Everyone's mixed.
But if it's more than that, heritage doesn't have to come from centuries ago, it could easily come from less distant relatives who just went to Poland for education and/or opportunities, because Vilnius university was closed or something. I have even heard a story of a family getting completely Polonised during 1920s Vilnius region occupation. Lithuanian activists were actively persecuted, so one Lithuanian linguist decided that the best disguise was to move to Poland, pretend to be Polish and never tell your kids the truth...
The disguise worked, but the children of this anti-Polonization Lithuanian activist grew up Polish...
Yes the Piłsudski times - I wonder what was a better choice for Lithuanians being part of after WW1 Poland or one of Soviet Republics run by Leninists and then Stalin. Looks like neither one.
@@pliedtka yeah, neither option was ideal. The Soviets acknowledged the existence of Lithuanian identity, but actively tried to kill every educated and even remotely wealthy or influential figure remaining from pre-occupation times, whereas the Poles would have likely left the intellectual and layers intact as long as they cooperated, but seeked to eliminate all traces of Lithuanian national identity at any cost and replace it with the a Polish one...
But hey, at least of one of the two forces mentioned is mostly friendly these days.
@@pliedtka by the way, did you make a comment where you mentioned your doctor and then deleted it? It shows up in my notifications feed...
The whole "Vilnius was 2% lithuanian in 1897" is bs. It was written by the russian empire which was trying to russify lithuania. Lithuanian press was forbiden untill 1904 and in those statistic the poles arent the biggest majority too it was jews. Lithuanians lost Grodno, lida, breslav, ashmiana, suwalki and Vilnius which was populated by ethnic lithuanians before. And the whole polish-lithuanian war is misunderstood. Pilsudski didnt want vilnius because it was "polish". Both Pilsudski and Želigowski wanted to restore the "old lithuania" the multi-ethnic and multi-lingual lithuania. And they both came from polonised lithuanian nobility. While the ethnic lithuanians wanted a "new lithuanian nation" populated only by ethnic lithuanians because of the whole polonisation, russofication and slavification in the past and vilnius is a historical city of lithuania. Pilsudski wrote a letter in two languages to the people of Vilnius in lithuanian and polish. He even promised to return Vilnius to Lithuanians if they accepted their vision of Lithuania but they refused which is the whole reason why the polish puppet state the republic of central lithuania was made. My great grandmother was just a polish speaking lithuanian.
🇱🇹💪🇵🇱💪
Don't forget Lithuanians were a warrior pagan tribe running out of forests and slaughtering their enemy. Lithuanians fought the Mongols, Swedes, Russians, Ottomans and many others, without Lithuania there was no Poland .
Maybe it's about time to restore the P-L Commonwealth?
@@plrc4593 maybe it's time for you to not open your mouth again?
@@plrc4593 What for.
Let Lithuania live in its land.
Funny how the Lithuanian dynasy of Jogaila on Cracow throne somehow got omitted here :D Yes, obviously a Polish guy commenting here :D
How to trigger a lithuanian: call Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth just Poland :)
@tu tu fucking autocorrect...
That feel when Poland cucked over lithuania like 20 times and most ppl don't even know about it. I really mean it, like most Polish people haven't heard about Polish agression for Vilnus.
Yeah, we do learn about it in school. It was called "Żeligowsky's Revolt", is this what you meant?
@@SKYCROOSWILSON census made by russians in 1897 shows that Lithuanians were only 2% in the area
@@mateuszk6825 zazdroszczę u mnie w regionie 1 na 20 osób wie, że ta wojna się wogóle wydarzyła.
Polonization wasn't forced by the state but by social pressure on the generations of youth by Lithuanians themselves. It didn't come from Poles being assholes to Lithuanians but Lithuanian pragmatism.
I think the fact that Polish was the official language of Sejm also contributed to mass Polonization, especially when talking about nobility. Polish Kingdom was far richer than the duchy of Lithuania, they even held country's capital and had some of the most culturally and economically important cities, such as Gdansk and Lwov.
@@raceris7309 Polish became the official language after most of the Lithuanian nobility began to use it, not before.
Lithuanian was considered in next years "some, bit interesting but local peasant language" and there was also problem with definition of "Lithuanian language" which could refer to the Baltic Lithuanian or to White Ruthenian dialects so attachment to language in national identification of Lithuanians was negligible before modern nationalism appeared.
To be honest, you do really poor job at explaining the history of Eastern Europe. First of all, this union was preceded by almost 200 years personal union under the Lithuanian monarchs of the Jagiellon dynasty, Lithuanian and Polish cultures started slowly mixing back then, and those 200 years made the Union possible in the first place. Seceond, Poland and Lithuania meant to be equal, hence the name in Polish and Lithuanian is "Res Publica of Both Nations". Lithuania had its own Military, Tresury, Education System etc. The Polonisation of Lithuanians was not forced, and Ruthenian was an official language of The Grand Duchy because it was codyfied much earlier than Lithuanian and was used by most of the population, not because Poles forbided Lithuanians from using their own language. Lithuania was hugly overextended, with very small population, they needed a strong ally to survive.
Nail on head!!! ... A really sloppy video that almost deliberately causes hate and division with false assumptions overlaid with contemporary victim narrative... What an absolute wank of poor quality content!!!
Extremely well said. Also worth noting, by 1386 Jagiello could see the days of remaining pagan and acting as an in-between the Catholic west and Orthodox east were over. He'd have to choose. To go with Catholicism and Poland was in significant part motivated to preserve Lithuanian identity from being subsumed into Ruthenian / Rus, which was already their language at the Lithuanian court. This point ought to be obviously relevant to modern day people, yet is totally missed in such videos on Lithuania or Poland-Lithuania.
@@zubstep Good point, it is true and people, especially Lithuanians tend to overlook it.
Zanzub and Mr Kowalski- spot on. Westerners oversimplify everything and too often prove to be ignorants.
of you would complain about the 10 minute oversimplification on the complicated history of a country. really now
sweden in 1700's would be so nice to visit and polish-lithuania being neighbors to sweden
GDL is Belarus
The uk is north Ireland 😂
@@SloveLDK But Northern Ireland is а part of the UK
@@landionchik just Ireland then
Ireland was apart of the uk a long time ago there fore it’s the true uk
Bring back 10 min. history!
Or just some longer episodes
absolutely, but i do still enjoy these
Yes please!
I prefer the shorter format
That would be helpful to fully explain how difficult it is to properly established just _who_ exactly could be seen as "Lithuanian" back then.
what about the belarusian part of the common wealth it was on the lithuanian side
great video, as allways
Very good videos. Very good context. As a lithuanian very glad that you created entire video about us.
@@tezja6775 exactly, Vilnius and not wILnO
The per se good video contains some mistakes. One of the most important mistakes is the use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. To use this term is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility because many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized.
Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland.
The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire.
In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo.
The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown.
In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita!
Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with
this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars do you like Poland?
What is sort of relevant and missing is that Lithuanian capital Vilnius was so polonised people in Poland felt it should be polish city - after WW1. And so it was.
Not anymore.
Can you do a video on how the Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth was formed?
@Influence08 except you forget Muscovian tzar Ivan the Terrible occupied 1/2 of Grand Duchy of Lithuania and they needed to get rid of him, so Lithuanians traded Ukraine and independence for Polish help.
So basically both poland and lithuania were surrounded by enemies from all sides which made them both good friend which made them marry and unite to stand against germans, tatars, russians and turks
Wasn’t also about inheritance as well? Weren’t the kings of Poland and Lithuania prior to the Union brothers, and after the King of Poland died in a crusade against the Ottomans. Their was a succession crisis as he had no immediate heir, so they nobles decided to name the king of Lithuania their new King. Which at least set the stones to the Commonwealth.
@@brandonlyon730 History of Unions between Lithuania is long.
First was in 1385 and the reason for that was desctibed by this dude above us. (Teutonic agression)
Thing that you mentioned is the dead of Władysław III king of Poland and Hungary in that time Jagiellonian dynasty ruled both in Poland and Lithuania. After his death his brother Casimir IV became king and renew the Union in 1447 but it wasn't Commonwealth yet.
Commonwealht was created in 1569 by the last Jaggielon king in defense against Russia who already seized half of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
It all started in 1444, as we all know, when Poland decided they NEED A JAGIELLON ON THE THRONE
1:28 Were Ruthenians and Ukrainians even differentiated at that point?
Lithuania is a beautiful country, i was there in 2014 and I was blown away by how friendly people were, within 10 minutes of getting on the bus outside Vilnius central station a man asked me "Where are you from"? (I had a suitcase), I told him Australia and that I was very excited to be in his country as I had been reading about the grand dukes since I was 12. He smiled and said "You have come such a long way, your country is so big and I must say WELCOME TO MY LITHUANIA!!!" It was so nice to feel so welcome. In Klaepedia I was talking to the tour guide who took us to Nida for the day, took us Amber hunting on the Curonian Spit (Baltic Sea side) and once it was established that I had a genuine interest in Lithuania, that I had read books and knew my history, I basically had her to myself for the whole day, everyone else on the tour was an after-thought, I had an amazing time and when a bag went around to do an additional collection at the end of the day I slipped a €50 in it for her. When I went to a national park and stayed in a hotel kind of thing, it was a homestay kind of thing, I was wearing my Ukraine hoodie and the host thtew her arms around me and went full out in Russian, I only speak a little bit of Ukranian, not Russian but I picked up that she called me "brother" and even when i broke the news that I was Australian, I was treated special for the 2 day stay, the national park was amazingly beautiful, kyaking around the streams and through the lakes was amazing, even being attacked by a white swan was AMAZING. When I left I got off at the old Polish/Lithuanian border and made a little promise to the universe that I would return one day. Lithuania holds a very special place in my heart and always will. Finland is another favourite of mine but Lithuania felt like a second home to me 😚
Dang, that’s awesome, makes me want to travel again. Thanks for sharing mate :)
im lithuanian and i'd say my country is alright but it's nice to hear that u liked visiting the country
Hello my frends forever !
@@prypiatshadow has it changed for the better or worse?
@@ohnoitsthecatman738 50/50
Lithuanians see the Union with Poland as a curse but there was no other way.
It was either getting culturally integrated by Poland or bleeding ourselves out with Sweden or russia
union was a necessity for lithuania as russia was getting stonger and more agressive taking back "eternal russian land". unfortunately it brought poland into conflict with not only russia but also with sweden through livonia which caused the downfall of poland
In the end it didn't help much,sadly it just gave them some more time.
And still after polonization and especially after rusianization we stayed ethnic Lithuanians and we kept our language which is thousands years old
Curse? That is sad. No one forced Lithuanian elites to polonise themselves. And they had equal rights as polish nobility.
@@werthor7083 especially considering the common wealth was one of the most ethnically diverse and religiously tolerant in Europe
How Scottish is Great Britain?
Actually, Poland Lithuania as a name is rather a TH-cam concept. The country’s official name was either Commonwealth (Republic) of Both Nations or simply Commonwealth (Republic) of Poland. Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth is rather a descriptive term if we want to stress which former countries formed the united state.
1:28 Rithuanians and Ukrainians during the Commonwealth. Ukrainian developed as a separate culture from Rithuanian/Rusyn after the partitions under the Russian Empire in the 1850s.
Actually Ukrainian national consciousness developed under the Austrian Empire.
Austria supported Ukrainian national movements and directed them in counteraction to polish national movements in Galicia.
Same story with modern Lithuanians under Russian Empire.
Divide et impera.
rithuanians? do you mean ruthenians?
@@maxybbg There are multiple spelling and names as it's not commonly talked about in English.
@@Belnen You're actually wrong. Ukrainian national identity developed in central parts of modern-day Ukraine, which were under Russian Empire in 19th century. Ukrainianism was aimed to differentiate Ukrainians/Ruthenians/Little Russians from proper Russians (i.e. Great Russians), because official Russian Empire's position was that all East Slavs are one nation. This problem was not really a problem for Galician Ruthenians, who still continued to see themselves as Ruthenians and were officially recognized as such. Still, both Russian Ukrainians and Austrian Ruthenians still saw themselves as one nation but just with different names, and the term "Ukrainian" was fully adopted in Galicia only in the years of WW1.
the video is one big misunderstanding and thinking in a way of XIX or XX century, when it still was just XV or XVI. Back then - it really didn't matter if You were Lithuanian, Belarussian, Ukrainian or Polish by DNA (this countries will only be created later on in modern meaning), but it did matter if you were a nobleman... And it not just Poland that effected present-day Ukraine or Belarus, but it also Ukraine and Belarus or the Baltics which created and effected modern Poland - in politics, music, cuisine, art or literature and language... Poland proper lost it's ruler and got one from Lithuania. Before unions didn't even had any conflict with Moscow. Because of the union it has one till today... The slavic languages are very similar and many dialects existed so they were much more than 3 or 4 languages... Baltic languages are bit different, but still the Baltic people had and still have great impact on Poland, Ukraine and Belarus. Just look where the leader of Belarussian opposition is living - Vilnius - historical capital of Lithuania... Just look what's the banner of Belarussian opposition - pohonia/vitis...!
This. This needs to be the most upvoted comment. Correct and informative.
Really good explanation - hard to find weak points, well done!
BUT...The good video contains some mistakes. One of the most important mistakes is the use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. To use this term is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility because many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized.
Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland.
The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire.
In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo.
The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown.
In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita!
Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with
this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
All lithuanians: LETS DECLARE WAR ON POLAND TO REGAIN OUR GLORY!
No... just no.
This wouldn't end well for you.
@@civishyperboreum6853 it probably would end well. As i think Russia even aid Lithuania here since taking out a stronger enemy is better.
I love the new 3 minute format, keep up the great work!
3:14 Just a country that moved 300 to the west in just one year
Not moved, but was moved by Stalin, without asking for it.
@@martinledermann1862 With Churchill and Roosevelt blessings.
At least we had those western territories in the past, I guess.
@@НавсегдаТвой never, tho there were some Slavic tribes in medieval times
@@siratshi455 Actually, the current political borders of Poland are very similar to the ones of the original Polish state, and the current western territories had been getting gradually consumed by other countries. While the German presence is a big part of the territory's history, Poland had had some presence there before.
The middle ages Lithuania is present day Belarus
No. Middle ages Lithuania was founded by Baltic tribes originating entirely from modern day Lithuania. These tribes formed a kingdom that had almost the exact same territory as modern Lithuania.
They then expanded to incorporate what is today Belarus, but that doesnt make the entire thing Belarus. It was ruled and owned by Lithuanians who expanded from the territory we still call Lithuania today
@@ethancole9168 No, the Jagiellonians were Slavic. King vladyslav jagiello didn't need translators to speak to his polish wife - Queen Jadwiga. Their marriage started Polish -lithuanian state. The Baltic tribes were north of Lithuania.
@@alexbrown2401 they were both north of, snd in Lithuania. Their range wasnt limited to Lithuania, but the ones within Lithuania formed Lithuania. Lithuania wasnt slavic. It was founded by Baltic peoples, and then later expanded to rule over slavic people
@@ethancole9168 No, Lithuania/Litwa was Slavic. The language was Slavic -old Belarusian
@@alexbrown2401 the written laungauge was later slavic because nobody could write or read in Lithuanian, so when they conquered slavic people who already had a written laungauge, they just used it.
Prior to conquering the modern belarusian territory, they didnt write, read or speak slavic. Even after conquering the territory they still spoke Lithuanian in the original kingdoms territory, and it saw some use in the new slavic territory
Fun fact: there was a period when any Jew who baptised himself would be given money in Poland. Lithuania upstaged this by giving out land and noble titles to Jews who were willing to convert to Christianity, which caused a massive influx of Jews from all across Europe into Lithuania.
This video is heavily based on today's perceptions of nationality, and thus misleading. Lithuanian didn't mean a Lithuanian-speaking person or an ethnic Lithuanian at the time. Lithuanian meant a person who is a citizen of the Grand Duchy. Ruthenians thought of themselves as Lithuanians and were part of the ruling elite.
Debating on ethnicity and language in the Commonwealth is so counterproductive. Many famous Commonwealth people were very mixed. Adam Mickiewicz was Polish, his family lived in modern day Belarus and he considered Lithuania to be his home. Same with Tadeusz Kosciuszko.
Moreover, the Grand Duchy had its own law that was supreme over the federal law of the Commonwealth, and the citizens of the Grand Duchy were active political participants in the Commonwealth. They believed the Commonwealth to be their fatherland, and there's that, and in fact Lithuanians were more supportive of late 18th century reforms than Poles themselves.
That said, Poland definitely was much more developed culturally and economically.
What you claim does not correspond to the historical reality, because the Poles ruled the Polish empire. That is why Lithuania was also Polonized. If the Poles hadn't been the rulers, there would have been no Polonization either, because then it wouldn't have been worth becoming a Pole. The video also didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility becuas many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized.
Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland.
The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire.
In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties wich followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo.
The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the asimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
By the way, to use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below!
By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
@@GreatPolishWingedHussars Nie posraj się
@@maksym1001 Oh someone from Vulgaristan who tries to cover up with vulgarity that he has no counterarguments! Pathetic behavior!
Debating Lithuanian nationality and calling Ruthenians Lithuanian works if you ignore everything before the commonwealth, and is also one of the reasons why the union fell
Цэнтральную частку дзяржавы ў палітычным эначэньні гэтага паняцьця складала «Літва», якая ўлучала Ашмянскую, Берасьцейскую, Браслаўскую, Ваўкавыскую, Віленскую, Вількамірскую, Гарадзенскую, Капыльскую, Клецкую, Кобрынскую, Лідзкую, Менскую, Наваградзкую, Нясьвіскую, Пінскую, Рэчыцкую, Слонімскую, Слуцкую, Троцкую і Тураўскую землі[4].
Дамінаваньне ў дзяржаве мелі фэўдалы цэнтральных (беларускіх) зямель, бо Вялікае Княства ўтварылася на беларускай тэрытарыяльнай, этнаграфічнай і культурнай аснове, а беларуская мова зьяўлялася дзяржаўнай[4]. Тут канцэнтравалася большасьць велікакняскіх і дзяржаўных маёнткаў, а таксама асноўныя маёнткі буйных фэўдалаў. Адсюль набіралася асноўная частка арміі, зьбіраліся асноўныя даходы ў дзяржаўны скарб. Буйныя фэўдалы зь беларускіх этнаграфічных зямель Алелькавічы, Друцкія, Глябовічы, Гальшанскія, Кішкі, Радзівілы, Сапегі і іншыя займалі кіроўныя пазыцыі ў дзяржаўным апараце[4].
Вялікае Княства Літоўскае ачольваў вялікі князь (гаспадар), які быў носьбітам вярхоўнай улады. Ягоны Гаспадарскі суд зьяўляўся найвышэйшай інстанцыяй. Да 15 стагодзьдзя ўрадавую дзейнасьць ажыцьцяўляў толькі сам князь, які выконваў усе функцыі кіраваньня дзяржавай. З-за патрэбы арганізацыі дваровай гаспадаркі і вырашэньня праблем ўнутранай ды вонкавай палітыкі зьявіліся пастаянныя службовыя асобы - спачатку маршалак, падкаморы, падчашы, чашнік, крайчы, стольнік, мечнік, кухмістр ды ішныя, у сярэдзіне 15 стагодзьдзя - пасады агульнадзяржаўнай адміністрацыі (падскарбі земскі, канцлер ды гетман найвышэйшы)[22].
Заканадаўчую функцыю вялікага князя абмяжоўваў сойм - зьезд дэлегатаў ад рэгіянальных збораў фэўдалаў (сходаў) - і вялікакняская Рада (з XVI ст. яе звалі Паны-Рада).
Як ви, білоруси, ідeнтифікуєтe самі сeбe? На старих картах українці позначeні як русини, а білоруси － як білі русини. Іноді вас позначали як литвинів.
@@dgsf9444 kak belarusi mozet bit litvini esli oni rusini?
0:26 CC says "to determine just how lift-away knee in the commonwealth was"
No idea animation disliked 0:12 - 0:17
I did a Baltic tour in that year and visited all the countries touching the Baltic Sea. Without any hesitation I can say I loved all of those countries and peoples.
0:15 Dang roasted Poland only 15 seconds into the video
1:28 At the time of the Commonwealth existence there was no such nationality as Ukrainian, all eastern Slavs (beside Moscovites) who lived in the lands of the Principality of Kiev were considered Ruthenian, later Slavs living in Ukraine (Ukraine, can be loosely translated to the borderland) developed their own identity mostly because of growing cultural, religious and political differences between them and the mostly Polonised Belorussian Ruthenians. The shift happened mostly due the events like the Union of Brest, the decline of the grain cost that pushed the nobles to put more and more days of feudal service on mostly Ukrainian peasants, reduction of the Cossack Register, Tatar Raids, Cossack uprisings, etc. It was a slow proces and the Ukrainian identity was not jet crystallized until the XIXth century.
>developed their own identity
That isn't true. The 'ukrainisation' of Ukraine happened thanks to the early XIXth century academics from Volynj and Kyjiv, that tried to resurgitate the old Ukrainian literary tradition (that died out in the late 17th century due to masse polonisation of the PLC) and sought to establish some sort of autonomy for the Ukrainian lands within the Russian Empire, an effort they'd previously failed to pull thru when the PLC in 1720 denied such academics to publish their books in Old Ukrainian (also known as Westrusian literary language, Prosta mova, old Belarussian etc)
@@anonymousbloke1 That's the Ukrainian point of view that puts Ukraine as a synonym of Kievan Rus. Of course Ukraine emerged from the heritage of Kiev but those nations are not the same. In current understanding of the word Ukrainian identity as culture different from Ruthenian started to emerge in XIXth century.
Kev there is no different 'culture' and it has nothing to do with who of the two is the real successor to the Rusj (cause every eastern Slavic nation is)
What Ukraino-centric point of view are you even talking about?
@@anonymousbloke1 You see, Russia claims to be the true ancestor of Kiev, Ukraine does, as well as Belarus. That's the point, to some degree they all are, and none of them really is.
Early Rus was shaped in big part by Viking nordic cultures mixed with Slavic paganism and Orthodox Christianity. It all changed with the Mongol invasion. Ruthenian culture and language mixed with Lithuanian, Polish and even nomad culture. Out of those mixes slowly emerged new cultures. Belorussian in Lithuania, Russian in The Duchy of Moscow .In XVI century the Zaporozhyan Cossack culture started to take form of early Ukrainian nationalism, but there was a list of differences between it and the early Kievian state.The Lands west of Dniepr were under heavy western influence prime example being the greco-catholic church. The language used by Ruthenians and Ukrainians is different, they have different customs etc. Italians are the ancestors of Rome, but Rome is not synonymous with Italy.
@@pacthug4life don't know if yours are merely misconceptions or you truly believe that, but:
1) first and foremost, the Lithuanian language has had virtually no influence on the ruthenian language, vocabulary of which mostly comes from Polish or from German/Latin thru German etc.
2) mongols have had little influence over ruthenians in social structure or dressing manner or whatever, if you are referring to the Cossacks. Sure, initially Danylo Halycjkyj, a 13th Ruthenian knjaz, formed his troops as if they were mongols, but that quickly changed a century after the Lithuanian conquest of Rusj.
Cossacks on the other hand were mostly influenced by the sarmats and such, who'd lived there for centuries, and later on by tatars
3) the first ones to try and develop a sense for Ukrainian nationality were academics from Kyjiv and Volynj, not Cossacks (initially many of whom were Polish nobles)
4) last but not least, you have virtually NO IDEA who Ukrainians and Ruthenians are
4a. Ruthenian is a dialect of Ukrainian. Ruthenian, even in the westernmost regions of Slovakia or Serbia or whatever, is 90% intelligible to Ukrainian speakers; and the customs are those of Hutsuls so I dunno tf you're talking about
4b. Ukrainians are simply Ruthenians who'd assumed the 'Ukrainian' term to describe their nationality
Our Poland-Lithuania is all Poland and no Lithuania.
00:53 Lithuania didn't necessarily ciede Ukraine to Poland. The countries were in a personal union, and so king Sigismund Augustus basically gave the lands to himself in order to force Lithuanian nobles to agree for a full union.
From what I learnt, Sigismund himself did that because he was pressured by Polish nobles.
@@raceris7309
The Polish nobles presumably reasoned that if Lithuania resumed independence Ukraine would be a nice consolation prize.
@@raceris7309 Mistake, Sigismund fid it, because ordinary Lithuanian nobility was influenced by rich nobility who didn't want to give up their influence. I remind you, you are a ruler and some magnates rebel against you
And yes, at first mainly Poles wanted to unite, but it wasn't their idea. The ruler passed from dynastic policy to state policy
In addition, at the time of signing the treaty, the Lithuanians had a much better opinion about Poland, which was caused by the Lithuanian-Russian war, where the Lithuanians had little problems
It was mainly Lithuanian magnates who did not want the Union at that time and you know, the rich can do a lot
@@raceris7309 Local nobles from Ukraine were also eager to join the Kingdom of Poland. If not for their support Sigismund would'nt been able to pull it off.
@@alanpennie8013 If Lithuania " regained independence" at the time it would be a nice prize for Moscow.
Interesting video, but 4 mins is not really enough to cover all the ethnical details of this state.
Fun fact - all the Polish kings from the end of 14th century until the end of 16th century were all Lithuanian.
While few of the Grand Duchy's people spoke Lithuanian, most of the nobility from that part of the state considered themselves to be Lithuanian. Just remember that the whole ethnical state thing is a 19th century idea anyway, and even then people of 20th century like Pilsudski or Zeligowski called themselves Lithuanian, while none none of their ancestors have spoken the language for centuries.
The dual nature of this state was again noted in the 1791 constitution, a later ammendment of it also gave the Grand Duchy and Poland an equal amount of parlament seats.
All these points could be expanded and discussed further, but my goal is simply to show that calling The Commonwealth just Poland is not accurate at all.
And winged hussars is a meme, not a point :)
This fact is very unknown, but today's Belarus is more of a descendent of the Lithuania of before than today's Lithuania is. The Belarusian language is based on Lithuanian of that time.
It's not based on Lithuanian of that time. Lithuanian language was always called Lithuanian language. Look anywhere. From 14th century Teutonic chronicles pointing out things like the Lithuanians using the word "pillis" for castle, to panegyric to sigismund vasa of 1589, Vasa the IV's order in Lithuanian of 1639, to the 1663 "biblia lituanica", Matthaus Pratorius pointing out in 17th century that "in Littaw 'mes girdime' means 'we hear'" and "in Littau the word for name is 'wardas'", Gottfried Hensel's linguistic map of Europe 1741, the Vilnius primers for kids from 1783, and so on and almost everything in between.
The only thing you could be referring to is state chancellery language, which was adopted as a practical decision, given the geopolitical situation of that time. And for most of the period when it was the dominant chancellery language Latin was used along side it. By late 16th century Polish was already the dominant chancellery language. And more so with every decade. But that probably doesn't mean that "Poland is more of a descendant of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" than the neighbors to it's east, does it? Language only became tied to national identity in the 19th century. Poland used Latin as it's chancellery language before they used Polish. Does that mean Italy is more of a descendant of historical Poland than Poland is? Same with Hungary? Kingdom of Hungary used Latin all the way up to 1784, when German replaced it and Hungarian only became official in 1867. The Georgians used Armenian for many centuries, even though they had their own written language. As did the Koreans and Japanese with Chinese. Korean only became official in the 2rd decade of the 20th century. Yet everyone knows what's Korean history.
Before the rise of nationalisms in the 19th century, it was not typical to hold language as a defining feature of one's identity. Names were typically translated between languages for ease of understanding. Knowing multiple languages was a large benefit and every court had it's dedicated translator scribes as well.
The choice of state language was often influenced by the fact of needing it for diplomacy with powerful neighboring states that speak that particular language.
Oh I knew this would come, I could definitely be wrong but my grandfather was from Belarus. He did state more reasons which I can't remember as of now.
@@mp1335 actually belarusian was called lithuanian many times in informal way. And if you'd ask any belarusian peasant of 17-19 centurywhat language they were speaking, they'd say "lithuanian", but would speak clean belarusian. They also tended to call their motherland Lithuania. It was just like that because main language in whole Duchy was Ruthenian(also known as Old Belarusian in modern science of history), and up to 80-90% of population were slavs. Ruthenian was common even in some Samogitia, any nobleman had to know it(in times before commonwealth).
I love my country! 🇱🇹
I always marvel at the level of detail in every map in every video. He gets rigths exclaves and tricky shapes and everything.
The per se good video contains some mistakes. One of the most important mistakes is the use of the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. To use this term is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility because many Russians were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized.
Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland.
The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire.
In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo.
The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown.
In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita!
Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with
this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term
0:37
Eew, long Poland
Lithuanians we're pretty badass, fighting off the crusaders for two full centuries, sacking Moscow 3 times (Not conquering), Defeating Kiev at times, Being the first to defeat the mongols in battle (Followed by russians), Last to convert into christianity.
They are really interesting for me, so i recommend spending more research into the country.
Its belarus, not lithuania. Lithuanians were samogitia
@@Cortesevasive found the bot.
@@realaurorien literally all belarussians i met support this theory...
@@Cortesevasive see here's the thing, it's a theory, and only belarussians support it. Samogitians are a dialect of Lithuanian, not a separate nation lmao.
@@Cortesevasive You see only Belarusians support it because this lie only benefits them and no other credible western or far eastern historian agrees with this theory. moreover you can come to modern Samogitia and Vilnius and you will hear yourself how languages sound different
1:27 What about the other Baltic peoples and the Finnic peoples like Livonians?
To further prove how strong was bound between Polish and Lithuanian nations it is good to point that brother of first Polish President (1922) signed Lithuanian Act of Independance 4 years earlier.
The wife(Joanna) of that brother(Stanislaw) of the first president of Poland(Gabriel) was the last owner of the manor of their noble family in Brėvikiai and she was Pilsudski's cousin. Also, the wife of Smetona, the first president of Lithuania(Sofija) was a member of the historic Chodakowski family of the commonwealth, which originated in Poland and a large part of it branched off into Lithuania over time. And her branch of that family did many things for the Lithuanian national revival.
@@mp1335 Joanna Narutowicz operated Polish school after the death of her husband and after the war she moved to Warsaw where she later died.
After poland occupied vilnius 😂😂. They didn't want any relation with the poles, they only got back on speakin terms when the soviets were becoming a threat in the 30s
@@flip849 That's the problem with being one state and than separating, the 20th century was a missed opportunity
It's worth adding that there were separate units and there were 4 hetmans (marshalls), 2 great and 2 little. 1 great and 1 little per a constituency. Also, arguably the most powerful family of the country were Radziwiłłowie, who were Lithuanian and even plotted against the union
But the Radziwiłł opponents of the union with Poland were the exception. Because most of them were supporters of the union with Poland, because they were actually Polonized Lithuanian nobility, just as the majority of the Lithuanian nobility was also Polonized. They were so Polonized that in 1547 Barbara Radziwiłł married the Polish King Sigismund II August, thus becoming Queen of Poland. The name was Polonized too! The Radziwiłłs' first names were also mostly Polish. Because of the Polonization of the Lithuanian nobility, Polish first names were common! Like Bishop Mikołaj Radziwiłł or Prince Karol Stanisław Radziwiłł. By the way, to use the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as it is done in the video is wrong because this term is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below! By the way, the Polish Empire could also be used as an alternative to Rzeczpospolita for this state if one wants to use a modern term. Because that was a Polish Empire and not a Polish Lithuanian Empire. Because the Poles completely dominated this state and were the rulers. The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. When Lithuania was united with Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates the fact that with the coronation as Polish king, the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. And that was by far not the only additional title to the title of the Polish king. For example the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa totaled these titles in addition to the title of King of Poland. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Polish king and parliament ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by the Polish king's troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the official king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland.
The official titles of other Polish kings, such as Stephen Báthory, also make this clear. But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical. What also clarifies Stephen Báthory's titles: Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia, also Prince of Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of the Polish King. But only a short time because the armies of King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore could not defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. By the way, the imperial ruling population were the Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire.
In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Crown of Poland. However, the various other treaties which followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo.
The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the assimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the Polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
In the next comment I will explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth!
So here I explain why it is wrong to call the Polish Empire the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown.
In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita!
Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with
this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER!
You probably know Polish but I'll explain that for non-Poles.
The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
How lithuanian is current lithuania?
Vitaŭt would have told you after 1392 Vostraŭ agreement
quite much apart from eastern part polish speaking majority and town visaginas russian majority
You missed to mention that the first King of the Commonwealth was lithuanian Jogaila
You might slightly forgot that Commonwealth became a thing in XVI century, almost 200 years after the king you mention died, while before that it was different thing. The actual first king of the Commonwealth was if I remember correctly some french douchebag that left after a year.
Jagiełło
A message to Lithuanians
Lithuanians seem to be in odds nowadays with Poles even though it's quite obvious that making lithuanian culture more polish-like wasn't part of some grand scheme. As the author mentioned, Poland had much higher population than Lithuania, as a result of that nobles migrated from 'overpopulated' Poland to Lithuania. Since they were Poles, their houses were polish, etc. Some Lithuanians wanted to work for such nobles, so they intentionally or not embraced their culture. Obviously, a son of a noble who have moved to Lithuania, will be to an extent Lithuanian. Commonwealth of Both Nations (as it's called in Polish) resulted in the culture merge rather than Polonisation. I assure you Lithuanians, here schools teach absolutely no enmity between us. We are taught to treat you as equals and to us it doesn't matter whether someone was polish or lithuanian. A proof of that is the fact that many authors call themselves Lithuanians, and yet we treat them as national heroes. A best example of this is Adam Mickiewicz who at the beginning of his famous book 'Sir Thaddeus' says: Oh Lithuania, homeland mine...and then proceeds to describe it. I myself had to learn to recite this from memory. Yes, education system here requires you to memorise a praise of Lithuania.
So don't inspire enmity between comrades in arms, who together fought in battles, many more of which are to come.
All this because of 1920 annexation of Vilnius.
yeah no worries mate, its all bullshit propoganda anywhay, mostly it was done by ussr to make sure peoples of the subject states dint cooperate. most of the emnity stems from ww2 and the whole vilnius mess, most forget Vilnius was ocupied at the time by soviets and we were being pushed out, if it wasnt for poles suceding in batle for Warsaw everyone wouldve been screwed. Now in modern day we eastern europeans need to stand together as neighbours not as foes against threats from east and west to make sure we can live a happy and prosperous life.
Wilna is belarusian city
@@dukeofthemapping1671 hah
@@learnprog5350 that "annexation" saved the citizens of the city. Don't forget what happened with the Lithuanian leaders and army when the Russians started their approach and withdraw from Lithuania after signing the pact between Russia and Lithuania on 12.07.1920. Your forces withdrew and left that city when Russians were leaving, that city was in majority populated with Poles. In 1920 the Red Army took the city twice, murdering quite a lot of Poles. After the Polish army entered the city they created the Republic of Central Lithuania and gave citizenship to EVERYONE that lived there for at least 5 years. Our leadership plans were to have one country with Lithuanians and Ruthenians.
And thus modern Polish identity was in part shaped by Polonized Belarusians (Ruthenians from the Grand Duchy), who called themselves Lithuanians but understood being Lithuanian as a special kind of being Polish, like Kościuszko or Mickiewicz. That's why the Polish national epic "Pan Tadeusz" starts with the words "Oh Lithuania, my homeland!" and takes place in modern Belarus. I love our weird history. :)
Also, YEaH! History Matters made a video about Poland-Lithuania and it's just about one aspect of it, so more may come in the future!
This is actually much closer to the truth than the point of view presented in the video. Slavic peoples' history is too complicated for Anglo-Saxons to grasp:)
@@AndyRhye true
@@hanshoffmann2582 Same as the rest of peasants all across the world. Not really that special.
there was no belarus ever, today is soviet creation
Hans Hoffmann you see the thing is, Polish peasants were treated the same way by the nobility really, that’s why peasants didn’t like the monarchs.
Note that many of the terms that you have used changed their meaning since then. In 16th-18th century, e.g. no one would think of the city of Lviv as being located in Ukraine because that name was used for lands east of Volhynia and Podolia. There was also no distinction between the Belarusian, Ukrainian and Russian languages - there were only Ruthenians who spoke various East Slavic dialects that formed the basis for the respective languages.
Lithuanian was also a term that changed its meaning and at that time it was used to refer to the Grand Duchy, e.g. to distinguish between places with identical names, e.g. Brest-Litovsk was known in Polish as Brześć Litewski to distinguish it from Brześć Kujawski, and the current Belarusian capital, Minsk, was known as Mińsk Litewski, so one's interlocutor can know that you mean a place further away from Warsaw than Mińsk Mazowiecki.
In 16th-18th century, there was no distinction between the Belarusian, Ukrainian and Russian languages? You're delusional. The spoken form of these languages had probably diverged way earlier; and written Old East Slav was no longer a thing by that time.
@@arthursimsa9005 difference were probably quite big already but people from that time seen all of those languages just as Ruthenian which was pretty vague term overall and nowadays would be quite well fit into eastern slavic languages family.
Yeah right ! The video didn't make clear enough how much the Poles dominated Lithuania. The Poles were the imperial ruling ethnic group of the empire, which also clearly shows the politicization of Lithuania. Because it was worthwhile to belong to the imperial ruling ethnic group of Poland, there was this polonization. In fact, this is also clearly shown by the real name of the state. The ruling Poles have also determined what the state should be called Polisch Rzeczpospolita! The Polish name was then adopted by the Lithuanians into the Liatuish languages as "Žečpospolita". By the way, Polish term for nobility ”szlachta” was also adopted into Lithuanian as ”šlėkta” like many other Polish words. As the video shows, the official languages were Polish and Latin. Everywhere the upper class spoke Polish. Before being taken over by Poland in 1385, the East Slavic language Ruthenian, as most common language, was used as the written language, not Lithuanian. Lithuanian was mostly used as a spoken language and not in writing, because the earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503-1525. The first book printed in the Lithuanian language was in 1547. The majority of the loanwords in Lithuanian were from Polish. This is also why Polish was able to spread so successfully in the Lithuanian. So the languages Lithuanian and Ruthenian were supplanted by Polish. Everywhere in the empire the upper class spoke Polish. Poles completely dominated the Lithuanians. Lithuania was voluntarily polonized. All relevant was Polish like also the Polish currency Polski Złoty. Złoty means golden in Polish. The capitals of the entire state were the Polish cities of Krakow and Warsaw.
Several times in history Poles have proposed Polish-Russian Union to Russian nobility. But that was always rejected by the Russian nobility becuas they were afraid of polonization, as was already happening with Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility. Because in fact, the Ruthenian territories were also polonized although these areas originally belonged to the Lithuanian dominion, but through the Union of Krewo in 1385, these Ruthenian areas, like the entire Lithuanian dominions, came under Polish supremacy. Step by step these areas were polonized.
Polish dominance over Lithuania also illustrates that the Polish king automatically became the grand duke of Lithuania. That was by far not the only additional title of the Polish kings. For example, the Polish King Sigismund III Vasa had in addition to the Polish royal title, Grand Duke of Lithuania and Grand Duke of Finland, Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Livonia, also Hereditary King of Sweden. Rus stands for Russia because the Poles ruled large areas of Russia at the time, and even Moscow was briefly occupied by Polish troops. Samogitia stands for the Baltic States, which the Polish king largely ruled. Hereditary king of Sweden and Grand Duke of Finland because the Polish king was also the king of Sweden for a short time. But he lost the power in Sweden and Finland. This list of titles makes it clear that Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of the many titles of the Polish king. But the most important title was always King of Poland.
But he titles of Polish kings were not always identical so the titles of other Polish kings like Stephen Báthory, also make clear. Grand Duke of Lithuania and Prince of Rus, Prussia, Mazovia, Volhynia, Podolia, Podlaskie, Severia, Czernihów, Samogitia, Kiev, Volhynia, Podlaskie, Livonia and Transylvania. He ruled large areas in southern Europe up to the Black Sea with Moldova. In 1462 even Caffa in Crimea was a protectorate of Poland. But only a short time because the armies of Polish King Casimir IV were involved with the war against the Teutonic Order and therefore he couldn't defend Caffa against the Ottomans. Poland was in the 15. century the largest kingdom in Europe. So it is no exaggeration to call this state a Polish empire because the Polish kings ruled at least over 15 different peoples and also over 5 different religious groups because an empire is a multi-ethnic state with political and military dominion of a population who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial ruled ethnicities and its culture. So by the imperial ruling population of Poles. This all shows the Polish dominance because in an empire reigns and dominates just one ethnic group. The Polish king was the head of all inhabitants of the empire.
In the end, the title Grand Duke of Lithuania was just one of many Polish king's titles. The title was particularly important only at the beginning of the Polish rule over Lithuania, when the Lithuanian nobility was not yet Polonized. At that time the Poles still had to pretend the Lithuanian nobility that this was not a takeover. The treaty of Krewo for personal union of Poland with Lithuania in 1385 was the decisive step in Poland's takeover of Lithuania. This union was declared indissoluble. This personal union meant that the Polish king should also be the ruler of Lithuania. In fact, the union treaty also contained the provision of the attaching of Lithuanian and Ruthenian lands to the Polish Crown. However, the various other treaties wich followed this treaty actually meant the takeover and Polonization of Lithuania too. A significant resolution was the adoption of Polish administrative divisions and offices like voivode and castellan by Lithuania. Even more important was that in total 47 selected Lithuanian nobles were adopted by Polish nobles heraldic families and granted Polish coats of arm. This symbolic gesture signified their desire to adopt Polish customs and integrate into Polish society. Because of this possibility of heraldic adoption, Poland had a much higher proportion of nobles than other European kingdoms. In Poland, the proportion of nobles in the total population was already 10-15% in the 16th century, in the rest of Europe it was 1%. Thus the Union of Krewo in 1385 signified the beginnings of the strengthened Polonization of Lithuania. Strengthened Polonization because the Polonization actually started before the Union of Krewo, because the Lithuania was Christianized from Poland. Priests, especially from Poland, Christianized Lithuania and priests had great influence at that time, so there was already a Polish influx in Lithuania before the Union of Krewo.
The revolutionary constitution Nihil Novi in 1505 passed by the Polish parliament applied to the entire Polish Empire as well as to Lithuania. Through this constitution, Poland became the Rzeczpospolita Nobles' Democracy! The state was no longer called the Kingdom of Poland, but the most serene (most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland. The constitution was the primary element of the democratic governance in the Polish kingdom which granted Parliament extensive powers. The Parliament (sejm) was a powerful political institution and the king could not pass most of laws without the approval of that body. Poland, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world! Warsaw was the primary location of the sejm. The Lithuanians have adopted the Polish word "sejm" as "seimas" for parliament from Polish! With this constitution, the Polish nobility, including the Polonized nobility in Lithuania and Ruthenia, actually had power in the state. Later the constitution was supplemented with the Henrycian Articles, which stipulated that the Polish king was elected by the nobility. The Articles incorporated the Warsaw Confederation provisions guaranteeing almost unprecedented religious freedom. It is worth to underline that according to the Articles, if the King were to transgress against the law or the privileges of the the nobility, the Articles authorized the the nobility to refuse the king’s orders and act against him. As mentioned above, the nobility made up up to 10-15% of the population in the Polish Empire, which meant that 10-15% of the population had democratic rights. This was revolutionary in comparison to other European nations ruled despotically by a single monarch, with the exception of the English.The final fusing was then in 1569 with the Union of Lublin. This union replaced the personal union with the real union of Poland and Lithuania. This union showed clearly how advanced the asimilation of Lithuania was. That was the last act of the polonization of Lithuania, in which it was only legally determined what had long been factual, that Poland had completely absorbed Lithuania. Poland was successful for centuries The Polish Empire, along with England, was a leader in democratic development in Europe, that was, in the world!
I explain why the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong in detail in the next comment below!
So here I explain in detail the name of Poland, repeating some aspects from above. To call this state Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is wrong. This term is wrong because the term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a modern, nonsensical invention by 20th century historians that does not correspond to reality. This state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown.
In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The correct translation of Rzeczpospolita would actually be republic. But it would still be wrong to use the English term republic to refer to this Polish state, because the republic is actually defined today as the opposite of a monarch. But Poland was a monarchical republic back then and therefore something special. If there is no suitable translation for a term, then the proper noun from the original language is usually used. In this case it is the Polish proper name Rzeczpospolita.
By the way, I know that's done in English-speaking countries, that republik is mistranslated as Commonwealth. This is because English is a very chaotic language with many vague terms. Unfortunately, this is currently the lingua franca worldwide. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth. That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita! Just because many use a wrong translation does not mean that it becomes a correct translation. Republic derived from Latin res publica for public affair is definitely not the same as common wealth (Commonwealth.) That's a fact. Public affair is not the same as common wealth! Therefore Commonwealth is the wrong translation for Rzeczpospolita!
Moreover, the term is being used incorrectly because the Polish term Rzeczpospolita has been mistranslated as Commonwealth. So the term Commonwealth is used because of an incorrect translation. For that reason alone, one should not use this term. In addition the Commonwealth of Nations as the union of the former British colonies has the official title "Commonwealth". If one compare these Polish state of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries with this Commonwealth one can see how absurd the term Commonwealth is instead of Rzeczpospolita. The term Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealt was not used at all in earlier times. It would be appropriate to speak of Rzeczpospolita because that was the traditional and official name of this state as a whole, including all duchies i.e. all areas dominated by the Polish Parliament and the Polish King. It is a combination of rzecz "thing, matter" and pospolita "common", a calque of the Latin res publica (res "thing" + publica "public, common"), so the republic, incorrectly translated as Commonwealth in English. By the way, in Poland, the word Rzeczpospolita is used exclusively in relation to the Republic of Poland, while other republic is referred to in Polish as "republika". Used in international treaties and diplomacy, the state has been called the most serene ( most high) Rzeczpospolita Poland (Polish: Najjaśniejsza Rzeczpospolita Polska, Latin: Serenissima Res Publica Poloniae or also Rzeczpospolita of the Polish Kingdom or Rzeczpospolita of Poland. Its residents simply referred it in the everyday language as Rzeczpospolita or Poland occasionally also the crown. But the state was never called Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. NEVER! The term Rzeczpospolita seems difficult to pronounce for non-Poles. But that is not the case at all. With a little practice, anyone can pronounce the term correctly, even you. A little help: Rz is pronounced like the "isi" in vision. So virzon sounds like vision. Cz sounds like the "ch" in church. So Czurcz sounds like church. But if one just use "sh" instead of "rz", that sounds close to Polish. "Ch" can be used instead of "cz". So Shechpospolita would be written in English, which could be pronounced without problems. So there is no reason not to use this correct term.
Another thing - while the nobles of all areas overwhelmingly spoke Polish (because that was the language of the elites), the common people did not. For instance, the nobles of the Ukrainian part of the commonwealth spoke Polish, but the peasants spoke Ukrainian. Same in Lithuania - the Lithuanian language was preserved by the peasants and other commoners.
But the idea that Belarussian, Russian and Ukrainian were all the same was inaccurate - it is more accurate to say that there was more of a continuum of language, the same way that there was once a continuum of language from Madrid to Paris, with the language changing slightly with every passing mile from one city to the other, but being quite different in Paris from Madrid.
But it is the case that the modern concept of Belarus was basically defined as that part of the eastern Slavs who ended up in the Lithuanian (as opposed to Polish) part of the commonwealth. The dividing line between old Lithuania and Old Poland is essentially today's dividing line between Belarus and Ukraine.
Lithuanian part of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was Ruthenian.
On what basis do you arrive at that generalization?
Uuh, how American is USA?
Spoilers: 0.05%
Great comment. I loved it. Greetings from JAV.
@@josephkrizauskas1052 me too
What do you mean by "Ruthenians and Ukrainians"? Ukrainians are Ruthenians. They started to call themselves Ukrainians only from the second half of the 19th century.
@Semper Fidelis I don’t know what are you talking about. This video is about the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth and its Ruthenians (Ukrainians + Belarusians). Not about Hungary and its Carpathian Ruthenians. Transcarpathia never was a part of the Polish-Lithuania although its Ruthenian inhabitants were settlers from Red Ruthenia (Podolia, Eastern Galicia, Volhynia and Lemkovyna).
@Semper Fidelis There was no independent state called Ukraine when the Crown of Poland existed. The province of the Crown with the name Ukraine was inhabited by the same Ruthenians as in Red Ruthenia. Nobody called themselves Ukrainians back then.
As for loyalty, only the Ruthenian nobility was loyal to the Crown. Eventually they converted to Catholicism and became Poles. But Ruthenian peasantry hated it. There was a Ruthenian insurgent movement (opryshoks) against the Polish feudal lords in Red Ruthenia from the 16th century to the early 19th century. Only after the Austrian authorities repealed the Polish "panszczyzna" in the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria in 1848, the uprisings ended.
@Semper Fidelis The Kingdom of Ruthenia (Galicia-Lodomeria) was partitioned between Poland, Lithuania and Hungary starting from 1349.
Galicia was incorporated into the Polish Crown in 1349 (till 1772). 423 years
Podolia was incorporated in 1430 (till 1772 and 1793). 342-363 years
Volhynia (Lodomeria) (except its western part which was incorporated in 1360s) and Podlachia were incorporated in 1569 (till 1795). 226 years
Even though Ruthenians were divided between the Polish Crown and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, they were still bound together. There were no real borders since the Union of Krewo (1385). And Lviv remained the center of cultural life for all Ruthenians in Poland and Lithuania. Even in 1517 Polish professor of Jagiellonian University Maciej Miechowita describing the Ruthenian lands from Peremyshl (Premysliensis), Kholm (Chelmensis) and Belz (Belzensis) in the west till the Don river (Tanais) in the east in his "Tractatus de duabus Sarmatis Europiana et Asiana", calls Lviv (Leopoliensis) the capital of Ruthenia (metropolis Russiae) and Kyiv (Kiow) the former capital of Ruthenia (quae olim metropolis Russiae fuit), but still the capital of the Ruthenian Orthodox Church in Poland and Lithuania.
Meletiy Smotrytsky, Ivan Vyshensky, Kostiantyn Vasyl Ostrozky, Lavrenty Zyzany, Pamwo Berynda, Zacharija Kopystensky and many others famous Ruthenians were equally close to both Lviv and Kyiv.
Kyiv-Mohyla Collegium/Academy was the leading center of higher education for all Ruthenians in the Commonwealth in 17th century.
@Semper Fidelis On May 10, 1848 Supreme Ruthenian Council (Holovna ruska rada) in Lviv published the Manifesto where it was clearly stated that the Galician Ruthenians are the part of the Great Ruthenian nation of 15 million people (total population of Ruthenians/Ukrainians in both Austria-Hungary and Russia in 1848) who speak the same language.
19th-century Austrian Galicia has become the historic Piedmont of the Ruthenian (Ukrainain) national revival since in the Russian Empire expressions of Ruthenian language and culture were persecuted. Russian authorities even closed the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy in 1811. Many writers and poets were arrested and exiled. Some managed to escape to the Habsburg Empire.
In the second half of the 19th century there were only two political movements among Ruthenians of Austria-Hungary:
1) Moscophiles accepted the Russian imperial idea of the triune Russian nation: Great Russians (Muscovites) + Little Russians (Ruthenians) + White Russians (Belarusians or White Ruthenians) and dreamed of joining Red Ruthenia to the Russian empire.
2) Narodovtsi or Ukrainophiles considered Ruthenians of Galicia, Bukovyna, and Transcarpathia a part of one Great Ruthenian (Ukrainian) nation from the San to the Don river. But they were against the idea of joining to the Russian empire because of the Russian chauvinism.
Both Ruthenian political movements were in a severe confrontation with the Poles in Galicia. There were no any pro-Polish Ruthenian organizations at all. Ruthenians clearly remembered the polonisation, panszczyzna and the Polish chauvinism (Ty Polaku, stoj w szyszaku z orężem do boju! Ty, Rusinie, sk… synie, z widłami - do gnoju!).
As soon as the Habsburg empire collapsed and Galician Ruthenians proclaimed the independent West Ukrainian National Republic, Polish-Ruthenian conflict turned into the armed struggle. Poles called it the Ruthenian campaign (Kampania ruska). The funniest and the saddest thing was that the Galician Ruthenians waited for help in their fight against Poles from the Ukrainian National Republic, but Ukrainian National Republic waited for help in their fight against Russians from the West Ukrainian National Republic and the Second Polish Republic.
@Semper Fidelis As for the elections in the Second Polish Republic. Most Galician Ruthenians (Uniates) just boycotted the Polish elections 1922, because they considered their land occupied and the Polish government illegitimate. But even of those who took part in the elections, the majority voted for the minority interest parties (77% Galician Uniates and 66% Volhynian, Polesian and Belarusian Orthodox Christians).
In the Polish elections 1928 the minority interest parties were supported by 71% of Galician Uniates, by 21% of Volhynian, Polesian and Belarusian Orthodox Christians. Communists were supported by 12% Uniates and 44% Orthodox Christians).
There were no pro-Polish Galician Ruthenians in 1944, but Galician Poles. Many of them were just polonized Ruthenians (Polish speaking Catholics), but still Poles. And they were not "physically eliminated", but transferred to Poland in 1944-1946 according to the treaty of population exchange between USSR and Poland.
It was signed by the chairman of the Polish Committee of National Liberation Edward Osóbka-Morawski and the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR.
Under the terms of this treaty all Poles from the western part of the Ukrainian SSR should have been transferred to Poland and all Ukrainians (Ruthenians) from the eastern part of Poland to the Ukrainian SSR.
The population exchange has been officially ended on May 6, 1947. But the Poles hadn’t finished deportations on their side by this time. So they had started the new operation - the Operation Vistula. All the remaining Ruthenians had been forcibly resettled to the territories of pre-war Germany that became part of Poland after World War II. They were settled in small groups among a majority of Polish population in order to speed up the assimilation process.
By the way, the present-day Galicia still is the most patriotic part of Ukraine.
So it was basically Polish Belarusian commonwealth?
de facto
Then it would be Polish-Rusin Commonwealth. Rus' had an official title in Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which was secondary to Lithuania.
No.. It doesnt depend on minority of groups.. Lithuania conquered Ruthenia, Lithuania itself was a small country so the Lithuanian group got smaller because Ruthenia was conquered
@@Qunas LT tauta nebuvo maza. Pats Vilnius prisijungia kaip Rusijos Imperijos trecias didziausias miestas. Tu ziuri pagal dabarti kur matosi Slavu skaičiu dominacija.
@@1MuchButteR1 Turiu omenyje kad Lietuva buvo tik Baltijos paprasta maziuke šalis, po laiko pradėjo užkariauti daugiau žemių kad padidėtų o Tikrieji Lietuviai gyveno tik Baltijos mazdaug regijone o ne kažkur Baltarusijoje, kadangi Lietuvių kurie mokėjo Lt kalbą Buvo normalus skaicius bet per laika vis daugiau zemių užkariaujant didėjo Rusių populiacija kas darė juos didesne grupe populecijos nes jų žemių daug tiesiog buvo užkariauta
1:29 i thought ruthenians and ukranians were the same thing?
You thought right
@@Vithimerius but History Matters said "followed by Ruthenians, Ukrainians" etc
@@scotandiamapping4549 I know, he’s wrong. Ukrainians called themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns) back then.
@@Vithimerius ye i thought that
Some polish remarks about such nice video :)
- 0:58 dunno if Lithuania ceded is good wording. When debating what to do with the country after last Jagiellon's death, polish MPs wanted to join two countries in real union, while Lithuanian MPs were outraged and left that Parliament in sign of protest. Therefore it was finished without their part and Ukraine was annexed to threaten Lithuanian part
-Also I think you missed a very important point, as it seems when you mention Ruthenian instead of Lithuanian as the official language that it was somehow insulting(?) for Lithuanians. Historically, beginning from 13th-14th century Lithuania was conquering more and more of the Rus lands, weakened by the Mongols. Due to their conquests the "original Lithuanians" became minority in their own country and thus more and more Ruthenian boyars became the nobility of Lithuania. Over time most of the nobility became Ruthenian(although i expect that many were long proud of their Baltic heritage) and Lithuania firstly became Ruthenian (ruthenized), before being slowly polonized beginning since late 15th century.
tl;dr Lithuania stopped being lithuanian not because of Poland but because of expansion and being country with Ruthenian majority
-one last thing, you made a distinction between Ruthenians and Ukrainians. The former is the term for all people native to Rus lands, Ukrainians are a modern nation, the same way as Byelarussians. I do not believe that this is in any way offensive, Ukrainians themselves believe in Cossacs being one of the motors that culturally seperated(distincted) them from the rest of Ruthenians, while tracing their identity back to the Kievan Rus, ruling over most of the Rus lands
Wrong, West Russian language never overtook Latin in administration in acts of Vilnius. Ruthenian domination of Lithuanian Proper is false , that occurred with arrival of Russian Empire.
I think he's simply calling the southern Ruthenes Ukrainians because that is what their descendants are now called. It's an anachronism but an understandable one.
It’s heartwarming to see the polonized Lithuanian share of the population shrink year by year. Finally they speak Lithuanian again!
By closing down Polish schools in the so-called "Lithuania", the Samogitians bought themselves a one-way ticket to Siberia.
@@polishgigachad7097 there is nothing you can do.
@@SloveLDK Hey Samogitian, when Trump becomes US president, Putin will take you on a one-way trip to Siberia. And don't delude yourself that the Germans will save you.
Už Lietuva vyrai!
I would also add that Lithuanians (usually) don't associate themselves with Commonwealth, while for instance many Belarusians do.
Lithuanians associate more with GDL
Thank you!
I'm a Pole, but I never call that state in XVIIth Century a ,,Poland". I always say: ,,Commonwealth" (as it originally was called).
Us lithuanian call it ATR as if in Abeju tautu Respublika aka "Both (or Two) Nation Republic"
Rzeczpospolita
@@matushka__ The Commonwealth was in no way, shape or form a Republic.... A Republic is literally defined as a state which doesn't have a monarch.
@@Wasserkaktus it wasnt , just the name was that , Like for example the people republic of korea it aint a republic its communist but "republic'
@@matushka__ A Communist Entity is still a Republic: A Republic is defined as a State lacking a monarch.
still lithuanian family ruled first "commonwealth" until last male died
@Fat Earther grow up
@Fat Earther the duke of Lithuania married the king of Poland and formed the Polish-Lithuanian Union.
The "king" of Poland was a woman at the time. I think that at the time only a king, not a queen could rule the kingdom. So they just crowned her as king.
Jagiellon dynasty quickly polonise themselves.
Wasn’t she crowned “King” because of a loophole in polish law since Poland was dealing with a very bad secession crisis and the law never stated what gender the King had to be and a Queen can’t rule by themselves so she was given that title for the rest of her reign.
@@brandonlyon730 Yes Hedwig (Jadwiga in Polish) was king not queen.
Heres the problem: the lithuanian language was opressed and consider inferior to polish. So polish slowly after reunion became a prestige langauge. It was soo bad that by mid 19th century lithuanian language was at bring of extinction.
Another thing: before the union lithuania was more superior to Poland. With bigger territory and better although smaller army. So only after reunion Poland became more dominant. Then lithuanians wanted to be more cool so polinisation started.
Many lithuanians today actually consider Commonwealth to be one of the worst periods in lithuanian history.
"superior" lmao, thats just fairytale (you just get your ass kicked by russians) and l**anian cope
actually it's hard to call polonisation, more like a volunteer switching to speaking Polish. You have only your shliakhta to blame for that. Do you call Frenchanisation when Russian boyars who barely could speak correct Russian but spoke French in the Russian empire?
2:15 XDD Lithuenians wants learn Polish culture because Polish culture was more modern
They didn't want to learn polish culture, they wanted polish nobility's benefits because they had more rights which didn't mean they were more modern, just that nobles had more power than kind. Lithuanian nobility was more modern since women there could inheret their husband's wealth while polish ones rarely
As a Pole I admire Lithuanian culture and language. Its so misterious and beautifull.
Read about their history before union. They were also really badass. Last nation to adopt Christianity. Successfully fighting off Teutonic and Livonian Orders for century or two. Made quite a empire, conquering ruthenian lands many time larger than their homeland.
Sure you do
Worship Giltine, acquire crusade.
@@mittag6326 it was more an effort of future belarusians than lithuanians. Also they didn't conquer any of ruthenian lands. They were either connected by marriage or voluntary join
The fact is that the Polish minority in Lithuania today is discriminated, disadvantaged and patronized by the Lithuanians. Today Lithuania would actually be obliged to set up bilingual (Polish Lithuanian) road signs in areas densely populated by poles. But Lithuania does not do that. In 2014 Šalčininkai district municipality administrative director Bolesław Daszkiewicz (Written in Polish) was fined about €12,500 for failure to execute a court ruling to remove Lithuanian-Polish street signs. Lucyna Kotłowska was fined ~€1700!
The Lithuanians forced the Poles to Lithuanize their surnames, i.e. the spelling of the Polish surnames was changed against the will of the citizens, despite the Polish-Lithuanian agreement of 1994 which was supposed to protect the rights of the Lithuanian and Polish minorities. For example, the name Kleczkowski has to be spelled Klečkovski in official documents.
These are just a few examples of many of the permanent discrimination against Poles in Lithuania! This has nothing to do with the crimes against Poles in the past. Becuase in 1918 in Wilno, today's Vilnius, the overwhelming majority of the population spoke Polish and only 4% of the inhabitants spoke Lithuanian. Unfortunately, the majority of the Polish population was expelled from the city and the area after 1945. Poles were also murdered during the expulsion. What is left is a Polish minority that is being discriminated against.
But did the Winged Hussars arrive?
Yes, they arrived.
@@grzegorzkonieczny2682 splendid
Sadly it was better if Winged Hussar did not arrive at all
@@kurniaerfan7307 Why?
So that Habsburg can not betray them century later
Actually leaving for Lithuania next Tuesday for a vacation. Awesome timing! :)
You mean Poland
@@nandinhocunha440 This is the second time when you call Lithuania Poland for an unknown reason. Lithuania is Lithuania and Poland is Poland.
@@raceris7309 he's trying to be funny, let him be.
@@vakaris41 I'm sad that five people didn't get the joke and I'm disappointed in him for not getting the joke
Some Lithuanians lost weir sens of humor in Poland :D
3:15
As a Polish, it hurts
Though funnily enough Poland-Lithuania was also the most Democratic country in history until the 13 colonies created the U.S.A. because anyone that could prove they were a legitimate desedant of any noble large or small they could vote for the king.
Joseph Henry.
It was a direct democracy too, like ancient Athens.
Didn't work too well for a country the size of Poland.
@@alanpennie8013 Well not quite like ancient Athens. It was more of an aristocratic monarchy where as athens had no aristocrats. Poland right to vote for king was hereditary. Athens it was all freemen born in the republic. But yes, it did lead to instability and foreign intervention common.
@@yotubeification
True. But the citizens of Athens were a minority of the adult male population of the city.
And Poland's elective monarchy was indeed an invitation to the surrounding states to meddle in Polish politics whenever a new king was elected.
@@alanpennie8013 Polish nobility seen itself as copying ancient Roman Republic and not Athens...
@@aleksandersokal5279 not at all, neither from Rome nor from Athens. Mega oversimplification.
you’re suggesting forced polonisation - it never was in the times of commonwealth forced - it was out of convenience that Lithuanians and ruthenians polonised - Lithuanian higher class already having ruthenized before
Lithuanians love to complain about "polonization" yet the Lithuanians were the ones with the privileged minority ruling over a multiethnic state. Literally subjugated eastern slavs and baltic peoples for centuries both before and during the commonwealth.
Evidence pls
1:28 Ruthenians and Ukrainians are the SAME THING. You can't count them separately. (unless the former contains Belarusians, but thats messy)
That's right. He should've either distinguish Belarusians and Ukranians, or put us in one bulk as Ruthenians. Quite a messy video, oversimplified and with a lot of mistakes.