The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 24

Were Nobles during Commonwealth constituting the Nation of Poland?


Ironside 48 | 9,796
12 May 2011  #1
Nobles at the time were believing themselves distinctly different from other social group in the Commonwealth.
Where they a separate race as they claimed?
Where they constituting a body of citizens, not unlike those of the Romans of old?
Maybe only nobles were Poles and the others were only Mazurian, Ruthenian,Zmudzian and the like?

j
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
12 May 2011  #2
Nobles at the time were believing themselves distinctly different from other social group in the Commonwealth.

At what time Iron?

Where they a separate race as they claimed?

They never claimed that.

Where they constituting a body of citizens, not unlike those of the Romans of old?

Yes, they were the people with civil rights and priveliges.

Maybe only nobles were Poles and the others were only Mazurian, Ruthenian,Zmudzian and the like?

Based on what? Besides Iron this is histmag material not a PF thread.
OP Ironside 48 | 9,796
12 May 2011  #3
At what time Iron?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatism

They never claimed that.

At its core was a belief that Polish nobles were descended from the ancient Sarmatians.

Based on what?

Only asking :)State your opinion if you want.
SRK85 - | 72
13 May 2011  #4
Well nobles were the only people allowed to vote during the commonwealth. Elected officials of the Sejm voted on laws. Please refer to this book for more information.

amazon.com/Constitutions-Elections-Legislatures-Poland-1493 -1993/dp/0781806372
Softsong 5 | 495
16 May 2011  #5
Nobles at the time were believing themselves distinctly different from other social group in the Commonwealth.
Where they a separate race as they claimed?

That is an interesting question. I've always wondered how the nobles of various societies became "nobles." What made them better, was it that they accumulated wealth and then weaved a story about their origins being somehow more divine, or in this case, a separate race?

I read the linked article above and while it was only a tiny part of the article, it seemed to indicate that modern historians doubt that the nobility descended from Samatians:

"The alleged ancestors of the szlachta, the Sarmatians, were in reality a confederacy of mostly Iranian tribes north of the Black Sea, described by Herodotus in the 5th century BC as descendants of Scythians and Amazons, and displaced by the Goths in the 2nd century AD and had nothing to do with Poland; the legend however stuck...."

However, I did notice that they allowed some wiggle room for maybe an offshoot of the group from the Black Sea.

Either way, I always admired how the Polish nobility was so different than the Western nobility. I tell people all the time that Poland was more advanced as far as freedoms go than even England. In history classes in this country, they always mention the great Magna Carta when they speak of evolving freedoms in Europe.

I wonder if there are any genetic studies done on surviving Polish nobility to investigate the question from that aspect.

Either way, the idea and the traditions around it seemed to have had some very advanced and positive effects on Poland and Europe, at least until the whole thing degraded and lead to the downfall of Poland. (So much gridlock with the veto and the meddling into Polish elections by other countries).
Nathan 18 | 1,363
16 May 2011  #6
Maybe only nobles were Poles

From the picture, Ironside, they rather look like a sexually deviated, not a national group.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
16 May 2011  #7
I'm sure you prefer the national ukrainian dress of the time:


  • Ukrainian serf working polish fields.
Des Essientes 7 | 1,291
16 May 2011  #8
What made them better, was it that they accumulated wealth and then weaved a story about their origins being somehow more divine, or in this case, a separate race?

Accumulating wealth wasn't the only way to be admitted into the slachta as it is said that common soldiers were sometimes enobled for bravery upon the battlefield. As for the story regarding their Sarmatian origins the szlachta didn't weave the story entirely themselves, rather a book, written by Tacitus at around 100 AD, was discovered in Herschfeld abbey and sent to Italy in 1455, this book became known as The Germania. The tome placed the Sarmatians to the East of the Germans in the place Poland now occupied and so the Szlachta inferred that the Sarmatians must be their ancestors. There may actually be some truth to this genealogical claim because there are words in Polish that linguists claim are of Iranian, rather than Slavic origin, such as the name of the pagan diety Swarog as well as the monotheistic Bogu. People in other places in Europe almost certainly have Sarmatian ancestry. It is said that the names "Serb" and "Croat" both originally designated Sarmatian warbands, and it is a definite fact that many Alans (another name for Sarmatians) settled in France in the area of Orleans. The most direct descendants of the Sarmatians alive today in Europe are the Ossets who still speak a Persian tongue. As for this thread's titular question the answer is certainly yes. The Commonwealth was a noble republic not a popular one.
Softsong 5 | 495
16 May 2011  #9
Very interesting information. I was motivated, also to read about the Ossets.
OP Ironside 48 | 9,796
16 May 2011  #10
In case of Commonwealth it was their rights, which made them standing out not only from other social group but from other nobles in Europe and the world. They had a rights not unlike Roman citizens of old, no matter poor or rich, every noble enjoyed the same rights. Freedom breeds a different kind of men.

I read the linked article above and while it was only a tiny part of the article, it seemed to indicate that modern historians doubt that the nobility descended from Samatians:

To be honest nobody really investigated nobles from that angle.

I wonder if there are any genetic studies done on surviving Polish nobility to investigate the question from that aspect.

none that I'm aware of ...
I think that is a quite possible that some Sarmatians in times immemorial consisted an nucleus of group which latter become nobles. I wouldn't overestimated ethnic aspect of the Polish nobles, I think that Polish nobles were mix if you would think about ethnic aspect. What counted was culture, traditions and customs; interesting thought to ponder, whatever some elements of Sarmatian culture or ethos survived intertwined into a rich tradition of Polish nobles.

(So much gridlock with the veto and the meddling into Polish elections by other countries).

I would put the blame on the foreign origin of elected monarchs. They had no understanding of Polish constitution nor the will to work according to the guidelines of the law in Poland, and they used their prerogatives to muddle about and corrupt the system and the people.
Antek_Stalich 5 | 997
16 May 2011  #11
I think the the origin of all nobles was the caste of warlords and warriors, all over Europe.
Bear in mind: Any male szlachta member was expected to fight in wars, unless he was a priest or a civil official. This is why any szlachcic was expected to wear a saber in public. The fact they were also landlords or farmers is secondary thing. The ownership of the land was meant as the source of means for the szlachcic, so he could raise his squad (poczet) and set off to war. At least talking the Golden Era.
Nathan 18 | 1,363
16 May 2011  #12
I'm sure you prefer the national ukrainian dress of the time

;) It is more of the Medieval Europe - quite a fancy dressing ;) Ukies looked more like this at that time:

Ukie2

No feathers, Socki, come on ;)
David_18 68 | 982
16 May 2011  #13
Where they a separate race as they claimed?

No. They just romanticide their past and called themselfs Sarmatians, anyway it was more of a lifestyle.

The Sweds romanticide that they were the decendants of the Goths since their name sound similar to their ancestors the "Geats"

Where they constituting a body of citizens, not unlike those of the Romans of old?

Yes they were the backbone of the P-L Commonwealth.

Maybe only nobles were Poles and the others were only Mazurian, Ruthenian,Zmudzian and the like?

The nobles in P-L were all equal... Atleast in paper.

I'm sure you prefer the national ukrainian dress of the time:

Made my night thanks!

In case of Commonwealth it was their rights, which made them standing out not only from other social group but from other nobles in Europe and the world. They had a rights not unlike Roman citizens of old, no matter poor or rich, every noble enjoyed the same rights. Freedom breeds a different kind of men.

On paper yes. But if a lets say Mr Potocki wanted the tiny little village of the poor Mr Piotrowski he took it by sword, and then bribed his way out of the court.

I would put the blame on the foreign origin of elected monarchs. They had no understanding of Polish constitution nor the will to work according to the guidelines of the law in Poland,

That's the reason why the Szlachta wanted foreign monarchs. Why have strong king with power that will make you his puppet while you can have a weak king that will be your puppet?
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
17 May 2011  #14
;) It is more of the Medieval Europe - quite a fancy dressing ;) Ukies looked more like this at that time:

You're kidding right? Those are Cossacks, not ukrainians, and to be specific thats a 15th century ukrainian serf, 70% of ukrainian population consisted of serfs who plowed the fields of mostly Polish (but also some Ruthenian) magnates and nobles.

This is the direct reason why Ukraine does not have high culture today.

World is packed with women, and friend told me the Ukrainian girls were very nice ;)

And cheap:)
Antek_Stalich 5 | 997
17 May 2011  #15
I insist that Moderator removes bad talking of Nathan on Ukrainian girls.
This is offensive, racial, unfounded.

Also, Sokrates' claim on low culture in Ukraine today.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
17 May 2011  #16
Also, Sokrates' claim on low culture in Ukraine today.

My claim of low culture is not meant as offensive, Ukraine does not have a heritage of arts, literature and intellectual thought most european cultures have.

Ukrainian elites willingly embraced polish culture a solid between XV and XVI century leaving Ukraine decapitated, what remained (and flourishes today in Ukraine) was folk culture and peasant traditions, if you look into ukrainian culture you'll find it started to develop only some 30-40 years ago and whats there today is rudimentary at best.

I insist that Moderator removes bad talking of Nathan on Ukrainian girls.
This is offensive, racial, unfounded.

No its not, alcoholism and poverty are rampart in Ukraine, their women are treated like garbage and are poor to boot, most foreigners will have an easy going with most ukrainian girls since they'll see it as a chance to bail out of Ukraine.
Antek_Stalich 5 | 997
17 May 2011  #17
their women are treated like garbage and are poor to boot, most foreigners will have an easy going with most ukrainian girls since they'll see it as a chance to bail out of Ukraine.

Are trying to tell me Sokrates that I should abuse poor Ukrainian girls? Well, well, well...
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
17 May 2011  #18
I dont give a sh*t how you treat them all i'm doing is describing their situation, when i say they're cheap i mean it as a fact not an insult.
Antek_Stalich 5 | 997
17 May 2011  #19
I believe the Ukrainian girls are human in the first place and women as well. A humanist would have never said anything wrong on other human beings. A gentleman would have never said anything wrong about women.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
17 May 2011  #20
I'm neither a humanist nor a gentlemen then :)
OP Ironside 48 | 9,796
17 May 2011  #21
On paper yes. But if a lets say Mr Potocki wanted the tiny little village of the poor Mr Piotrowski he took it by sword, and then bribed his way out of the court.

Not necessarily, but you are right, somebody rich, connected and powerful have a better chance to get away with crime, but it is also the truth of our times.

In France or England if some simple or not so simple noble said publicly that King's policy is wrong, he was finished, quite literately, in Poland (Commonwealth - not so). Small but significant difference.

That's the reason why the Szlachta wanted foreign monarchs. Why have strong king with power that will make you his puppet while you can have a weak king that will be your puppet?

The reasons were a bit more complex than that!But the main reason of looking for a foreign prince was lack of suitable candidates inside Commonwealth, or at last majority of the nobles thought so.

Ukies

What ukies?

polish gun:

s-

hairy chest of your Cossack against :

d-
pawian 161 | 9,968
18 May 2011  #22
I'm neither a humanist nor a gentlemen then :)

So you are a swine.... :):):)
Nathan 18 | 1,363
18 May 2011  #23
against

That horse is gay ;)

polish gun

It looks more like kielbasa-making machine for an army ;)
Still impressive. Is it XVII century weapon? I bet it could clear any offensive.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
18 May 2011  #24
A 1640 Volley Gun, this baby has its barrels spread out for maximum damage, it wont kill anything thats more than 80 meters away but within that 80m it can bring down up to 50 men in under 10 seconds, there were even 50 barreled monsters.

Used by Poles, Turks and Austrians.


Home / History / Were Nobles during Commonwealth constituting the Nation of Poland?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.