Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodow Calamitatis regnum Tom 2

Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów #2

by Paweł Jasienica

The Commonwealth Of Both Nations II - Calamity Of The Realm
by Pawel Jasienica
Translated by Alexander T. Jordan
Digital edition 2016 from original 1992
The fourth volume of Pawel Jasienica's magnificent epos of Polish history, "Calamity of the Realm," covers part of the 17th century and deals with a multitude of wars with Muscovy, Sweden, the Tartars, Cossacks, and Turks. It also describes the complex relations between Poland and France.
The dominant protagonist of the era was Jan III, one of the greatest kings in Poland's history. He was first and foremost a brilliant commander, whose victories won him the popularity which brought him to the throne.
Jasienica describes in colorful detail the many campaigns of Jan Sobieski, in which he demonstrated a tactical skill that won him battles against enemies far stronger in numbers.
Elected king in 1674, Sobieski proved to be a statesman as well as a soldier, but his task was rendered almost impossible by the intrigues of the powerful lords, who frustrated any attempt at adopting constitutional reform. The situation was complicated by his French-born queen, who tried to promote the interest of France and its King Louis XIV. King Sobieski's letters to his beloved wife show him to be a talented, poetic writer.
The highlight of Sobieski's reign was the great battle of Vienna in 1683. A huge Turkish army led by Kara Mustapha was advancing westward. The Habsburg emperor fled his capital of Vienna, unable to defend it. Germany could not match the Turkish army. The future of Europe was at stake. King Jan Sobieski came to the rescue at the head of the Polish army, smashing the Turks and thus any threat to the Western Europe by the Ottoman Empire.

The American Institute of Polish Culture
Mrs Blanka A. Rosenstiel founded the The American Institute of Polish Culture (AIPC) in 1972 as a non-profit, non-sectarian, tax-exempt Florida Corporation. The aims of the Institute are twofold: first, to share with the American society the heritage of Poland, which has contributed to many ways to Western civilization; second, to promote the scientific and artistic endeavors of Polish-Americans.
The AIPC has translated and published more than 20 books, including the five volume history of Poland - "Saga of a Nation" by Paweł Jasienica and the rare "Accomplished Senator" by Warzynice Grzymała Goslicki (1530-1607). The annual magazine, Good News, is set to all members and distributed to interested parties during the year.
The Institute established the Harriet Orsay Scholarship and awards 10 to 15 grants each year to talented students, preferably of Polish decent. It also sponsors several students each year to take part in summer courses at universities in Poland. Each year, the Institute holds the International Polonaise Ball, which serves as fundraiser. There are annual Christmas and Easter parties for members and friends.
In 1998, the Institute led a fundraising campaign with the establishment of the Kościuszko Chair of Polish Studies at the University of Virginia. The first chair holder was Prof. Wojciech Roszkowski of the University of Warsaw. The Kosciuszko Chair in Polish Studies is now at the Institute of World Politics and the chair holder is Dr Marek Chodakiewicz.
Our endeavors have received support from the state and local governments, the enthusiastic participation of other ethnic groups in the community and the friendly cooperation of the press, all of which help to strengthen our leading role in the cultural life of the community. We have many plans for new activities to promote knowledge about Poland and American Polonia. Buying this book you too support the activities of the Institute.

Genres: History, Polish Literature, Nonfiction, Audiobook

392 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1967

Reviews

[Filip · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reading this book was like watching a car crash in slow motion, with the minor hope spot of Jan III's reign. Not only does Jasienica clearly and quite accurately (in my opinion at least and I'm hardly an expert) describes the chain of events that brought the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth from being a regional power to being the regional whipping boy, but also manages to make the part of history that I (maybe due to my dislike of Sienkiewicz) have always found boring interesting. He also points towards some events that were happening that I didn't know much about and are still surprisingly relevant (book censorship, for example). However he doesn't make the all to common mistake on saying "Polish people were dumb" or even "it was all the fault of nobility/szlachta", pointing towards processes that led to this situation and showing situations in which szlachta tried to stop the negative changes, only to be hampered by other forces, often of the reigning monarch. So I guess now it is time to see how Jasienica puts Poland out of its misery in "Dzieje Agonii".

[Michał · Rating 4 out of 5]

Calamitatis regnum to prawdziwy galimatias faktów i opinii autora. Jasienica manewruje między wątkami i dygresjami, faktograficznie nie bierze jeńców zalewając czytelnika nazwiskami i wydarzeniami - stylistycznie książka jest niczym swobodny potok myśli historyka, który nie poddał się reżimowi redakcji i logiki. Jedocześnie to pejzaż kompletny, materiał na tło dla wielu innych dzieł kultury, wyjaśnienie praźródła polskiego „saudade”. Dla pasjonatów i dla patriotow pozycja obowiązkowa.

[Wojtek Babisz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jestem jak w transie. Czytam pochlaniam ksiazki Pawła Jasienicy i to kolejna z nich wlasnie.
Dlaczego Historia Polski potoczyla sie w kierunku anarchii magnackiej-pytanie to trapilo mnie od dawna.
Wszystko jest wytlumaczone w bardzo attakcyjny żywy sposób tym tomie.
Wiele sie dzialo i nauczycielka życia historia. W rzeczy samej jest.
Polecam

[Michał Hołda · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Jerzy Ossoliński never faltered for a single moment, never ceasing to be a sober, forward-thinking statesman. He did not abandon his grand plans. He continued, with all his strength of mind and will, to transform the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into an absolute monarchy. He began by containing the panic in Warsaw itself. He threatened to confiscate the property of anyone who dared to flee the capital to Prussia, the west of the country, or anywhere else."

On November 27, 1633, Jerzy Ossoliński entered Rome at the head of an impressive procession. The procession numbered 300 people, 22 carriages, 10 camels, and numerous horses, some of which were shod with golden horseshoes, which "accidentally" got lost. Besides Poles and Lithuanians, the parade also included Tatars, Armenians, and Cossacks.

It was an act of demonstration of the power and wealth of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, intended to demonstrate the country's diplomatic and political clout on the international stage, particularly towards the Pope and other European powers. This visit was part of a broader diplomatic strategy pursued by the Polish Grand Chancellor of the Crown, aimed at strengthening Poland's international position and gaining support for King Władysław IV's political plans.

After Ossoliński's return, King Władysław IV continued his policies, including efforts to elect his brother, Charles Ferdinand, to the Polish throne. Charles Ferdinand's election as King of Poland was unsuccessful. Although he was a candidate for the throne, he did not gain sufficient support, and the election ended with the election of John II Casimir Vasa. This election was achieved thanks to the support of Chancellor Jerzy Ossoliński and the Queen Dowager, Louise Maria Gonzaga, whom John Casimir himself married upon his accession to the throne. Due to a lack of support from key political players and strong competition from other candidates, especially Sigismund III Vasa, the electors feared that Charles Ferdinand, as the son of the King of Sweden, would provoke a conflict with that country.

"In August 1648—just as Adam-Kisiel was attempting to push eastward—another palace coup occurred in Istanbul. The minor Mehmed IV became Sultan. The new vizier abandoned his predecessor's peaceful policy. The Tatars would soon be permitted to support the Cossacks."

Sultan Ibrahim, his father, also known as Ibrahim the Mad, was deposed primarily due to his unpredictable and tyrannical behavior. His reign was characterized by excessive spending, cruelty, and disregard for the empire's prosperity, leading to widespread discontent among the Ottoman elite and populace. The Janissaries, a powerful military force, played a key role in his removal, along with other influential figures at the Ottoman court.

During the Polish-Cossack-Tatar War, Sultan Mehmed IV of the Ottoman Empire agreed to aid the Crimean Tatars by providing military support against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. This alliance was a continuation of the conflict and included Hetman Pyotr Doroshenko, who sought independence for Right-Bank Ukraine. The combined Ottoman-Cossack-Crimean forces, including Khan Selim I Giray, sought to secure Ukrainian territory under Doroshenko's rule.

Pyotr Doroshenko's political goal was to unite and strengthen the Cossack Hetmanate, particularly by uniting Right-Bank and Left-Bank Ukraine under his rule. He pursued this goal by maneuvering between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Ottoman Empire, and the Crimean Tatars, ultimately striving to establish an independent Cossack state.

Doroshenko sought the Ottoman Empire's protection from both Poland and Moscow. Although Mehmed IV granted it the status of a sancak (Ottoman administrative district) under his rule, Doroshenko publicly denied being a subject of the sultan. The agreement led to a joint Ottoman-Cossack-Crimean campaign against Poland, which ended with the capture of Kamianets-Podilskyi and the establishment of a protectorate over Cossack Ukraine.

"The chancellor miscalculated Kisiel's peace brokerage, which had serious prospects but fell victim to sabotage by 'incandescent people.'" Instead of merely making a show, the army now had to fight... under the command of a duvet, Latin, and a child. The nobility and the Sejm did not approve of these nominations. There were voices in favor of Lubomirski, Wiśniowiecki, Radziwiłł, and others. Ultimately, thirty-five military commissioners were added to the regiment, including various omitted, envious, and ambitious individuals, including Hieronim Radziejowski, the starost of Łomża. This reached the height of absurdity.

"Wacław Czapliński writes:

From the end of the 16th century, or at least from the Zebrzydowski Rebellion, individual magnates became accustomed to considering themselves unlimited rulers in the territories under their rule. According to them, the king was to be king in Warsaw, not in their provinces or voivodeships."

(At that time, our coats of arms included, among others,and the old knightly families of Erdman and Schaffgotsch.)"

The Erdman family is a noble family that played a significant role in Polish history, especially in Silesia. The aforementioned family was associated with the town of Kielary, where they owned an estate and a farm.

The Schaffgotsch family (formerly the Schoffs or Schaffs) is a noble family that played a significant role in Lower Silesia, especially in the Karkonosze and Cieplice regions. Although they are not directly connected to Bemowo in Warsaw, their history is closely linked to the Polish territories, and their influence on the history of the region is significant.

A Free State (German: Freie Standesherrschaft) is a historical territorial unit, separated from duchies in Silesia and other regions, which constituted the full allodial property of its owner, independent of the duchy in terms of its political system. The owner of such a state, called a free lord, did not hold a princely title, but He was directly subordinate to the king (in the case of Silesia, the Czech kings, and later the Habsburgs), to whom he paid homage and swore fealty.

"When the opportunity arose, Sweden and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth did not sign a peace treaty because Władysław IV categorically did not wish it. There was only a truce, which was to expire in 1661. John Casimir used the title of hereditary king of the Swedes, Goths, and Vandals, and considered himself as such. Three Swedish crowns adorned the breast of the Polish eagle on official state seals. They were stamped on the letters of credence with which our representatives traveled to Stockholm to discuss resolving disputes. The Swedes had a convenient excuse and refused to negotiate. This was the fate of "internuncio" Andrzej Morsztyn, sent at five minutes to twelve, in 1654."

"Our representatives did so immediately after him. At the last minute, John Casimir attempted to negotiate something for himself. Through French diplomacy, he suggested to the Swedes that the peace treaty include a condition obliging the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to grant him compensation. He therefore attempted to blackmail his own subjects with the aid of an enemy eager for war. With astonishing presence of mind, he ordered the Greater Poland troops to march on Ukraine as late as June 7th!"

"As early as November 20th, John Casimir, by a universal decree dated from Opole, called on his subjects to rise. He recommended something reminiscent of the later French concept of the levée en masse, for not only the nobility but also the common people were to band together, one to another, three to two, four to three, five to four, and, not missing an opportunity to defeat the enemy, await the monarch's return." On December 18th, the king did indeed march from Silesia to Poland. On December 29, Hetmans Potocki and Lanckoroński, who had just accepted Swedish protection, made a sudden retreat. They formed a confederation in Tyszowce, with the aim of fighting the invader and defending their rightful lord. The Tyszowce Confederation was a national uprising against the Swedes during the Swedish Deluge, formed in 1655. The initiators were Stefan Czarniecki, Stanisław Rewera Potocki, and Stanisław Lanckoroński. This confederation aimed to defend the country and restore the power of King John II Casimir.

"Joannes Weyhard Wrzeszczowicz ordered the villages around Koniecpol and Szczekociny to immediately deliver to the camp

...sixty thousand loaves of bread, eighty barrels of beer, four hundred bushels of oats, eight oxen, sixty sheep, four barrels of salt, a barrel of vodka, four hundred tallow candles, two hundred eggs, forty thousand cans of butter, geese and chickens, whatever was needed.

The order was ineffective, so a second one was immediately issued, calling for obedience "under severe and harsh punishment by fire and sword."

In the summer of 1656, Wrzesowicz was ordered to lead a Swedish-German unit (Brandenburgers and Saxons) of approximately 800-2,000 men to the relief of Kalisz, which was besieged by the Poles.

In 1656, the Brandenburgers and Saxons fought against the Poles at Filipów (also known as the Battle of Mieruniszki-Filipów) and Warsaw. The Battle of Filipów took place on October 22, and the Battle of Warsaw on July 28-30.

It ended with the victory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth forces under the command of Wincenty Aleksander Korwin Gosiewski over the Swedish-Brandenburgian-Prussian forces. As a result of the battle, Bogusław Radziwiłł, who had been held captive, regained his freedom, while the Polish forces, after initial successes, were defeated and dispersed.

The Battle of Warsaw in 1656 ended in defeat for the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, despite the participation of numerous Polish-Lithuanian forces. The fighting lasted three days, from July 28 to 30, and was the largest engagement during the Swedish Deluge. Despite the numerical superiority of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth forces, the allied forces, supported by infantry, dragoon, cavalry, and artillery regiments, proved stronger.

"It was not until 1660 that France officially became involved and nominated a candidate for our throne. This was Henry Louis, Duke of Enghien, son of Louis II, Prince of Condé, the Great of Condé, who had just kneeled and apologized to his monarch for having treated him so much worse than Bogusław Radziwiłł treated John Casimir here. The French national hero—the former victor of Rocroi, Fribourg, Nördlingen, and Lens—fought in the Spanish ranks against France for six solid years. (He was not a lone outlaw. Another outstanding French leader of his time, the Duke of Turenne, known in our country as Turenius, was able to behave quite similarly. Polish and Lithuanian apostates from the time of the Deluge were well aware of these examples and even cited them.)

During the Fronde, Henry III, Julius Bourbon-Condé, Duke of Enghien, resolved an ambivalent Consequences: first as a prince of the blood who supported the royal cause, and then as a member of the Fronde led by his father, the Grand Condé. He actively participated in the fighting alongside his father, particularly at the Battle of Bléneau.

The Fronde was a series of internal wars in France that took place between 1648 and 1653, during the minority of Louis XIV. These conflicts were influenced by the monarchy and its administration, led by Cardinal Mazarin. The Fronde interrupted the sustained growth of royal power in France.

The Fronde ultimately led to the consolidation of absolute monarchy in France, not to any constitutional reforms or limitations on royal power. It was the challenge posed to the monarchy by the faction of the Fronde, which was unable to unite and fight the royalist forces, that led to the defeat of the heroes.

"One could have remained in these pants by surrendering to the Tsar."

"Who secured a garrison?" and won over its commander, who calmly plowed and sowed, for spring 1660 was just approaching. The heir, who had come to his senses too late, bitterly lamented the state of his estate: "My manor house was burned down in Serwecz; a swiron, a threshing floor [...] I was afraid to come home, because we had quite a few heads cut off, both white and male, my subjects, whom the dogs dragged away and ate, so that there was no one to bury them," reminisces Bogusław Maskiewicz.

"Meanwhile, these admirers, now called malcontents in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, seemed to have eaten their fill. They had set their sights on a new "fool," the twenty-year-old nephew of the Condé, Charles Saint-Paul, Count de Longueville, and wanted to force him onto the throne. It is unknown whether Primate Prażmowski was really thinking of regicide. In any case, he talked about it with French envoy. A conspiracy aimed at dethronement certainly existed. Its head was the Primate, behaving like a brawler of the worst kind, with Jan Wielopolski, the Crown Treasurer and poet Jan Andrzej Morsztyn, and Krzysztof Grzymułtowski as the ringleaders. The friendship and assistance of a man who, above all, counted on the secession, bearing all the hallmarks of treason, to be least involved in scheming, because he was almost constantly with the army in Ruthenia. This was the Grand Hetman of the Crown, Jan Sobieski. One anonymous contemporary publicist revealed the essence of the matter, writing that poor Michał "owes it solely to the lords that the nobility elected him king." Indeed, on June 19, 1669, the mob imposed its will on the elite. It was a fruitless, unfortunately blindly executed attempt to disrupt the disastrous order established under the Vasa dynasty.

There was no faction in the Polish political camp that supported him in a way that would would suggest opposition to any other group. D'Orléans-Longueville was a French aristocrat and prince who did not actively participate in Polish politics or was associated with any particular court faction in Poland.

At the age of eighteen, in 1667, he accompanied the King of France on the Flanders Campaign and took part in the capture of Tournai, Douai, and Lille, and then the following year in the expedition to Franche-Comté. In late 1668, he led 100 gentlemen to fight the Turks during the Siege of Candia, but failed to break it. This siege was part of the long-running conflict between the Republic of Venice and the Ottoman Empire for control of Crete, specifically the city of Candia (now Heraklion). By 1668, the siege was well underway, having already been ongoing for some time.

Andrzej Olszowski, of the Prussian II coat of arms, bishop He was a supporter of the pro-French option during the election period following the abdication of John II Casimir. He supported the candidacy of the French prince, Grand Condé, and later played a key role in electing Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki as king. He was also a supporter of John III Sobieski, whom he crowned and signed his Pacta Conventa. He advocated an alliance with Napoleon Bonaparte.

"Thiet-mar, Bishop of Merseburg, who died in December 1018, wrote in his chronicle: 'For the greatest misfortune is when foreigners rule: hence arises oppression and greatness.The danger to freedom." The rules of logic and political technique mentioned above have been known for quite a long time, because Thietmar did not invent them. For more than eighty years, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was ruled by moral foreigners - born in Gripsholm, Łobzów, and Kraków. - It is seemingly incomprehensible that France behaved so stupidly and, wanting to ensure the total subservience of the Republic, pursued chimeras for so many years. Why did Paris not call its Eastern admirers and mercenaries to reason?"

"Well, the 17th century couldn't have predicted that Adolf Hitler would appear in the 20th century (who, by a strange coincidence, was fond of the color brown, just like Louis). He therefore felt for the King of France sentiments similar to those we felt for the builder of the "Thousand-Year Reich." Louis took the English opposition into his pay. The King of that country had long been systematically receiving... subsidies. Almost all of Europe was receiving French bribes at that time. Frederick William, who as Elector of Brandenburg, a member of the German Empire, owed allegiance to the Emperor, also didn't hide his hands from them. The Prince accepted the money and cared little about it, always minding his own business. The 17th century treated bribery and corruption in a very specific way. They didn't always have to equal guaranteed political gain on one side and betrayal on the other. King John III did not consider himself obliged to walk on the French stilts, always and everywhere, under all circumstances.

"John III was not an enemy of the Cossacks; he even counted himself among the supporters of the program of the late Hadiak Union. At one time, as hetman, he advocated cooperation with Doroshenko and tried to dissuade him from joining Mehmed IV. However, any royal sentiments on this matter must have been eminently platonic. On the thirtieth anniversary of Bohdan Khmelnytsky's speech, Ukraine no longer existed as an administrative entity. It was divided between not two, but three states. Moscow held Kiev and the Dnieper River, Turkey Bar and Kamianets-Podilskyi, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth the western reaches of the nation's lands, whose leaders had tried to play both sides for too long. Few words are needed to describe the fact of partition. So, at least let us not forget that for the Ukrainian people it meant hell.

– wrote German professor Hermann Conring. The aforementioned Frenchman, Kasper de Tende, echoed his sentiments:

The Polish nobility believes it is in its best interest not to wage war on anyone and to always remain at peace with its neighbors, that this will allow it to retain all its lands in their entirety. But it is mistaken, as reality demonstrates [...] Meanwhile, none of its neighbors could have held out against the Polish nobility if it had known its strength well and been able to submit to the discipline and orders of a single general. Providence had just sent the right general.

[Juliette · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've really enjoyed Jasienica’s political and military analysis of 17th century Poland, as it struggled through wars with Zaporozhian Cossacks, Russia, and suffered through the Swedish Deluge. If you’re interested in John III Sobieski, Jasienica does a rather different take on this historical figure than what you'd usually get at school.

The author also makes a few rather sarcastic remarks about book censorship, and although they pertain to the historical period covered in Calamitatis Regnum, I can’t imagine they made Polish Communist authorities particularly happy.



As a side note, I was appalled to discover the author’s second “wife” inherited partial copyright to his texts. Yes, I mean that Commie without honour, dignity or human decency, who cozied up to Jasienica, and married him shortly before his death, just so she could snitch on him to the communist Security Service.

That lowest of traitors, who sold the very person she swore to protect, and did much to destroy his life’s work, should have been in prison, doing time with other crims, come 1990.

Unfortunately, there’s no legislation against being a c**t, and little rehabilitative hope in incarcerating one. If she possessed a soul – which, I realize, is a matter of controversy – I’ve read about a place for people just like her, in Dante.

[Adrian Kowalczewski · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gdyby
Gdyby
Gdyby...

[Wojtek Konieczny · Rating 4 out of 5]

(Audiobook), 8/10
Lektor - 5/6

[Adam · Rating 5 out of 5]

Świetna książka, bardzo miło mi się ją czytało.

[Bartłomiej Falkowski · Rating 5 out of 5]

Druga część trylogii, opisująca XVII-wieczne wydarzenia aż do śmierci Jana III Sobieskiego. Analogicznie jak w przypadku części pierwszej - majstersztyk :)

Książka opisuje szczegółowo dwie nieszczęsne wojny prowadzone w tym okresie - Potop szwedzki oraz Powstanie Chmielnickiego. Szczególnie głęboko poddana analizie jest ta druga. Kwestia Ukrainy i jej przynależności do Rzeczpospolitej jako trzeciego członka Konfederacji jest niejednokrotnie powtarzana.

Co mi się podobało:
- nieuchronność zbliżającej się katastrofy pod koniec XVIII wieku nadaje każdej kolejnej stronie coraz bardziej tragicznego wymiaru. Szczególnie refleksyjne są te momenty, w których autor podkreśla mnogość potencjalnych rozwiązań mogących zmienić bieg wydarzeń. Widzimy kraj, który "słania się na nogach" ale ma jeszcze dość siły, aby walczyć i być niepodległy. Czułem się jak w dobrej powieści, w której od początku wiesz, że główny bohater ginie, ale do końca nieracjonalnie łudzisz się, że tak jednak nie będzie.
- opis panowania Jana III Sobieskiego, a najbardziej to jak warunki zewnętrzne są w stanie warunkować historię dziejów. Wielki wódz, wojownik i polityk rządzący krajem to nie zawsze jest recepta na sukces - zwykły pech potrafi zniweczyć wielkość charakteru.
- tak jak w poprzedniej części - styl pisania Pawła Jasienicy. Czuć tu silny patriotyzm, szacunek do historii, a jednocześnie brak strachu przed odważnymi, bardzo subiektywnymi tezami.

[Anna · Rating 4 out of 5]

Czytałam tą książkę w ramach fakultetu z historii w liceum i przygotowując się do egzaminów wstępnych na studia. Dobrze napisana.

[Łukasz Lichota · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best historical books are by Jasienica