The article of opinion Jędrzej Kitowicz it does not it treat as source to meeting treat the secrets of policy only as example the opinions of average of nobility and lower clergy. It with this regard it is not essential treat the settlement the of events real run the exhibition on the current opinions of Polish society of kelter of diplomacy and attitudes and methods of working of diplomatists. In result article represents credulity Jędrzej Kitowicz, which he condemned simultaneously sharply Polish politicians’ credulity. He in his descriptions of events united reluctance in the face of diplomatists and rulers with surprisingly high acknowledgement for negative features of diplomacy, especially hypocrisy and cleverness. He refused Polish policies diplomatic talents, he in what looked for the sources of fall of country though he had seen in lack of real strength of state of principle his cause.
{"title":"Opinie księdza Jędrzeja Kitowicza o dyplomacji i dyplomatach","authors":"Andrzej Stroynowski","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.04","url":null,"abstract":"The article of opinion Jędrzej Kitowicz it does not it treat as source to meeting treat the secrets of policy only as example the opinions of average of nobility and lower clergy. It with this regard it is not essential treat the settlement the of events real run the exhibition on the current opinions of Polish society of kelter of diplomacy and attitudes and methods of working of diplomatists. In result article represents credulity Jędrzej Kitowicz, which he condemned simultaneously sharply Polish politicians’ credulity. He in his descriptions of events united reluctance in the face of diplomatists and rulers with surprisingly high acknowledgement for negative features of diplomacy, especially hypocrisy and cleverness. He refused Polish policies diplomatic talents, he in what looked for the sources of fall of country though he had seen in lack of real strength of state of principle his cause.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123654521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Prince Jerzy Zbaraski (1574–1631) was one of the most outstanding Polish politicians of the first half of 17th century. Since 1620 he held the prestigious office of castellan of Kraków. He was a recognized leader of the opposition in the second half of the reign of Sigismund III. Living permanently in Kraków, he carefully observed the actions of Bethlen Gábor, ruling in Transylvania, whom he considered as a faithful vasal of the Turkish Sultan. Zbaraski’s attitude to the Bethlen was ambivalent. On the one hand, the prince considered the ruler of Transylvania as a dangerous neighbor of the Commonwealth and warned the Polish king against him. On the other hand, he saw him as a potential ally against his own monarch. However, Bethlen’s efforts to obtain the Polish crown made the castellan of Kraków, dreaming of the Polish throne himself, perceive this neighbor with increasing reluctance. The article attempts to trace the attitude of prince Jerzy Zbaraski to the ruler of Transylvania in the years 1619–1629. The starting point for these considerations is the battle of Humienne (Hommonai) fought on November 23, 1619 (Jerzy Zbaraski was a resolute opponent of sending Polish troops to Transylvania). The final chord is the unexpected death of Bethlen Gábor, who died on November 15, 1629.
{"title":"Kasztelan krakowski Jerzy ks. Zbaraski wobec zagrożenia granic Rzeczypospolitej ze strony Siedmiogrodu","authors":"Zbigniew Anusik","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.06","url":null,"abstract":"Prince Jerzy Zbaraski (1574–1631) was one of the most outstanding Polish politicians of the first half of 17th century. Since 1620 he held the prestigious office of castellan of Kraków. He was a recognized leader of the opposition in the second half of the reign of Sigismund III. Living permanently in Kraków, he carefully observed the actions of Bethlen Gábor, ruling in Transylvania, whom he considered as a faithful vasal of the Turkish Sultan. Zbaraski’s attitude to the Bethlen was ambivalent. On the one hand, the prince considered the ruler of Transylvania as a dangerous neighbor of the Commonwealth and warned the Polish king against him. On the other hand, he saw him as a potential ally against his own monarch. However, Bethlen’s efforts to obtain the Polish crown made the castellan of Kraków, dreaming of the Polish throne himself, perceive this neighbor with increasing reluctance. The article attempts to trace the attitude of prince Jerzy Zbaraski to the ruler of Transylvania in the years 1619–1629. The starting point for these considerations is the battle of Humienne (Hommonai) fought on November 23, 1619 (Jerzy Zbaraski was a resolute opponent of sending Polish troops to Transylvania). The final chord is the unexpected death of Bethlen Gábor, who died on November 15, 1629.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128905252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The purpose of Stanisław Chomentowski’s mission as the Grand Ambassador to the Sublime Porte in 1712–1714 was to confirm the terms of the Treaty of Karlowitz, signed in 1699, and to reduce the political tension between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Turkey, which in late 1712 and throughout almost entire 1713 even threatened to erupt in an armed conflict between the two states. Considering the course of the mission, the difficulties in completing it, and even the temporary restriction of the Polish diplomat’s freedom on the territory of the Ottoman state, its results should be regarded as definitely positive. Chomentowski’s visit to Turkey, where he was supported by Augustus II’s other diplomats, Franciszek Goltz (starosta of Śrem) and Jan Spiegel, resulted in averting the Turkish threat and renewing the terms of the Treaty of Karlowitz. The three missions, conducted by Chomentowski, Spiegel and Goltz, should be studied in the context of Augustus II’s one large-scale diplomatic action, which ended successfully. It also proves that the work of the Polish diplomatic service in the times of the kings from the House of Wettin, about which historians, paradoxically, do not have a very high opinion to this day, was actually quite effective.
Stanisław Chomentowski作为1712年至1714年驻波兰大使的使命是确认1699年签署的《卡洛维茨条约》的条款，并减少波兰立陶宛联邦和土耳其之间的政治紧张局势，这种紧张局势在1712年末和几乎整个1713年期间甚至威胁要爆发两国之间的武装冲突。考虑到任务的过程，完成任务的困难，甚至暂时限制了波兰外交官在奥斯曼帝国领土上的自由，其结果应该被视为肯定是积极的。在奥古斯都二世的其他外交官Franciszek Goltz (starosta of Śrem)和Jan Spiegel的支持下，Chomentowski访问了土耳其，避免了土耳其的威胁，并延长了《卡洛维茨条约》的条款。Chomentowski、Spiegel和Goltz的这三次任务应该放在奥古斯都二世一次成功结束的大规模外交行动的背景下进行研究。这也证明了波兰外交部门在维廷王朝时期的工作是非常有效的，尽管历史学家们直到今天都没有给予很高的评价。
{"title":"Przed wyjazdem do Stambułu. Kilka uwag na temat przygotowania misji Stanisława Chomentowskiego, wojewody mazowieckiego, do Porty Ottomańskiej w 1712 roku","authors":"Adam Perłakowski","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.08","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.08","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of Stanisław Chomentowski’s mission as the Grand Ambassador to the Sublime Porte in 1712–1714 was to confirm the terms of the Treaty of Karlowitz, signed in 1699, and to reduce the political tension between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Turkey, which in late 1712 and throughout almost entire 1713 even threatened to erupt in an armed conflict between the two states. Considering the course of the mission, the difficulties in completing it, and even the temporary restriction of the Polish diplomat’s freedom on the territory of the Ottoman state, its results should be regarded as definitely positive. Chomentowski’s visit to Turkey, where he was supported by Augustus II’s other diplomats, Franciszek Goltz (starosta of Śrem) and Jan Spiegel, resulted in averting the Turkish threat and renewing the terms of the Treaty of Karlowitz. The three missions, conducted by Chomentowski, Spiegel and Goltz, should be studied in the context of Augustus II’s one large-scale diplomatic action, which ended successfully. It also proves that the work of the Polish diplomatic service in the times of the kings from the House of Wettin, about which historians, paradoxically, do not have a very high opinion to this day, was actually quite effective.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115596633","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The main purpose of this article is to present the role of the diplomatic mission of Jan Zawadzki to the North European courts in 1633 and the role it played in shaping and implementing the foreign policy plans of Wladyslaw IV. In relation to the literature on the subject so far, an innovative approach to the subject of this mission is to transfer the perspective of research from Zawadzki’s stay at individual courts, in favor of a comprehensive analysis of his mission. Research conducted in this way shows that the king already had a very complexed vision of his actions on the European arena at the time of taking the throne of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, as evidenced by the mission of Jan Zawadzki.
{"title":"Misja Jana Zawadzkiego na dwory Europy Północnej w 1633 roku a geneza polityki zagranicznej Władysława IV Wazy","authors":"M. Szymańska","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.07","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.07","url":null,"abstract":"The main purpose of this article is to present the role of the diplomatic mission of Jan Zawadzki to the North European courts in 1633 and the role it played in shaping and implementing the foreign policy plans of Wladyslaw IV. In relation to the literature on the subject so far, an innovative approach to the subject of this mission is to transfer the perspective of research from Zawadzki’s stay at individual courts, in favor of a comprehensive analysis of his mission. Research conducted in this way shows that the king already had a very complexed vision of his actions on the European arena at the time of taking the throne of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, as evidenced by the mission of Jan Zawadzki.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122331219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The conflict over trade between Poland and Moldavia in the 80s of the 18th century has already elicited interest of historians from Poland, Romania and Moldova. The contributions of Jan Reychman, Veniamin Ciobanu and Valentin Arapu are particularly relevant but they do not exhaust the analyzed topic. The time-frame of the article is 1780–1785 although the origin of the conflict dates back to 1778 when Constantin Moruzi forbade the import of Polish vodka to Moldavia. The year 1785 accepted as the final element in the time-frame does to mean that the conflict came to an end then. After Antoni Dzieduszycki had left Istanbul in 1780, the Polish affairs were taken over by Stanisław Pichelstein, whose official role was that of translator (dragoman) and Head of School of Oriental Languages. The article ends with the accession to the throne of Alexandru Mavrocordat II, who succeeded Alexandru Mavrocordat I; the ensuing response of the Polish political elite to this event is also analyzed. The sources that constitute the basis for the analysis come from The Central Archives of Historical Records in Warsaw, and they include the correspondence of Pichelstein with Stanisław August’s cabinet and Department of Foreign Affairs of the Permanent Council. Another important source that has not been used so far is Stanisław August’s domestic correspondence from the Princes Czartoryski Library in Cracow. It shows how the Polish court tried to make use of the contacts established with hospodars by the high-ranking officials from the voivodeships bordering on Moldavia (i.e. the voivodeships of Braclaw and Podolia) who made demands on Jassy. On behalf of the nobility in their voivodeships, the aforementioned officials demanded that restrictions on the vodka trade should be lifted. This was done in strict agreement with the recommendations from Warsaw.
{"title":"Polsko-mołdawski konflikt handlowy w latach 1780–1785 a polityka wewnętrzna Stanisława Augusta Poniatowskiego","authors":"Witold Filipczak","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.09","url":null,"abstract":"The conflict over trade between Poland and Moldavia in the 80s of the 18th century has already elicited interest of historians from Poland, Romania and Moldova. The contributions of Jan Reychman, Veniamin Ciobanu and Valentin Arapu are particularly relevant but they do not exhaust the analyzed topic. The time-frame of the article is 1780–1785 although the origin of the conflict dates back to 1778 when Constantin Moruzi forbade the import of Polish vodka to Moldavia. The year 1785 accepted as the final element in the time-frame does to mean that the conflict came to an end then. After Antoni Dzieduszycki had left Istanbul in 1780, the Polish affairs were taken over by Stanisław Pichelstein, whose official role was that of translator (dragoman) and Head of School of Oriental Languages. The article ends with the accession to the throne of Alexandru Mavrocordat II, who succeeded Alexandru Mavrocordat I; the ensuing response of the Polish political elite to this event is also analyzed. The sources that constitute the basis for the analysis come from The Central Archives of Historical Records in Warsaw, and they include the correspondence of Pichelstein with Stanisław August’s cabinet and Department of Foreign Affairs of the Permanent Council. Another important source that has not been used so far is Stanisław August’s domestic correspondence from the Princes Czartoryski Library in Cracow. It shows how the Polish court tried to make use of the contacts established with hospodars by the high-ranking officials from the voivodeships bordering on Moldavia (i.e. the voivodeships of Braclaw and Podolia) who made demands on Jassy. On behalf of the nobility in their voivodeships, the aforementioned officials demanded that restrictions on the vodka trade should be lifted. This was done in strict agreement with the recommendations from Warsaw.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134338217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fries’ Rebellion of 1799 was an uprising, in opposition to a direct federal property tax. It was an armed tax revolt led by John Fries. In July 1798, the Federalist-controlled U.S. Congress, voted a direct tax on all real property, including buildings, land and slaves. This tax widespread the national resentment against the “Allien and Sedition Acts”, which infuriated the German farmers of Bucks, Northampton, and Montgomery counties in Pennsylvania. Several hundred farmers took up arms. At Bethlehem, Pa. Fries and his men forced a group of tax resisters who had been imprisoned under the custody of the federal marshal. In response, President Adams called out a force of federal troops of militia, who marched into the rebellious counties and began making wholesale arrests of the insurgents. John Fries was captured and subsequently tried twice, convicted of treason and sentenced to hang. He was pardoned by Adams who declared a general amnesty for all those who had been involved in the rebellion.
{"title":"Rebelia Johna Friesa (1799–1800)","authors":"Jolanta A. Daszyńska","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.15","url":null,"abstract":"Fries’ Rebellion of 1799 was an uprising, in opposition to a direct federal property tax. It was an armed tax revolt led by John Fries. In July 1798, the Federalist-controlled U.S. Congress, voted a direct tax on all real property, including buildings, land and slaves. This tax widespread the national resentment against the “Allien and Sedition Acts”, which infuriated the German farmers of Bucks, Northampton, and Montgomery counties in Pennsylvania. Several hundred farmers took up arms. At Bethlehem, Pa. Fries and his men forced a group of tax resisters who had been imprisoned under the custody of the federal marshal. In response, President Adams called out a force of federal troops of militia, who marched into the rebellious counties and began making wholesale arrests of the insurgents. John Fries was captured and subsequently tried twice, convicted of treason and sentenced to hang. He was pardoned by Adams who declared a general amnesty for all those who had been involved in the rebellion.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127118666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the article, the Author outlined the course of the Austrian-Turkish peace negotiations in Sistova based on information published in the Polish-language Warsaw press. The talks, started in December 1790, were helding with the participation of representatives of the Triple Alliance of Loo (1788): Prussia, Great Britain and the Netherlands. As a result, Austria made peace with the Ottoman Empire (4 VIII 1791) on the basis of the territorial “status quo”, which terminated lasting since 1788 war between both countries. A separate convention stipulated that the emperor would retain Old Orşova with the adjacent district and a small area of Croatia till the Una river, with the Cettin and Drežnik fortresses. All in all, supplementing the press reports with findings of the literature on the subject, the Author managed to obtain a relatively complete and not yet fully studied in Polish historical literature image of the issue indicated in the title.
撰文人在文章中根据华沙波兰语报刊上发表的资料概述了奥地利-土耳其在锡斯托娃进行和平谈判的过程。会谈于1790年12月开始，参加会谈的有普鲁士、英国和荷兰三国同盟(1788年)的代表。结果，奥地利在领土“现状”的基础上与奥斯曼帝国(4 VIII 1791)达成和平，结束了自1788年以来两国之间持续的战争。一项单独的公约规定，皇帝将保留旧orova及其邻近地区和克罗地亚的一小部分地区，直到乌纳河，以及切廷和Drežnik堡垒。总而言之，作者用关于这个问题的文献的调查结果来补充新闻报道，设法获得了标题所述问题在波兰历史文献中相对完整但尚未充分研究的形象。
{"title":"Kongres pokojowy w Szystowie (1790–1791) na łamach prasy warszawskiej","authors":"Małgorzata Karkocha","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.14","url":null,"abstract":"In the article, the Author outlined the course of the Austrian-Turkish peace negotiations in Sistova based on information published in the Polish-language Warsaw press. The talks, started in December 1790, were helding with the participation of representatives of the Triple Alliance of Loo (1788): Prussia, Great Britain and the Netherlands. As a result, Austria made peace with the Ottoman Empire (4 VIII 1791) on the basis of the territorial “status quo”, which terminated lasting since 1788 war between both countries. A separate convention stipulated that the emperor would retain Old Orşova with the adjacent district and a small area of Croatia till the Una river, with the Cettin and Drežnik fortresses. All in all, supplementing the press reports with findings of the literature on the subject, the Author managed to obtain a relatively complete and not yet fully studied in Polish historical literature image of the issue indicated in the title.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128791051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jan III Sobieski was active in the domestic policy. He tried to influence pre-parliament dietines so they would elect the King’s sympathetic parliamentarians and to take into account instructions advantageous to the Court. There was lot of assembly in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the King needed many supporters – senators and local noble elites. However, he had a wide range of possibilities on how to win them. People trusted by the Court attended the dietines personally or through their family and political friends. They reported to the King on the results of deliberations, made sure people elected as deputies were recommended by the Monarch and there weren’t disadvantages for the Court in an instruction. Of course, the Court didn’t win the political fight everywhere. Sometimes a compromise with the opposition was necessary. Occasionally Court’s supporters interrupted a dietine to not allow the opposition to win. The King convened often a second dietine, which was sometimes held in secret, with a small circle of trusted people. The methods used by the King weren’t different from methods of opposition and Sobieski took advantage of the cracks in the parliamentary system of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
{"title":"Wpływ Jana III Sobieskiego na sejmiki ziemskie – próba interpretacji zjawiska","authors":"R. Kołodziej","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.03","url":null,"abstract":"Jan III Sobieski was active in the domestic policy. He tried to influence pre-parliament dietines so they would elect the King’s sympathetic parliamentarians and to take into account instructions advantageous to the Court. There was lot of assembly in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the King needed many supporters – senators and local noble elites. However, he had a wide range of possibilities on how to win them. People trusted by the Court attended the dietines personally or through their family and political friends. They reported to the King on the results of deliberations, made sure people elected as deputies were recommended by the Monarch and there weren’t disadvantages for the Court in an instruction. Of course, the Court didn’t win the political fight everywhere. Sometimes a compromise with the opposition was necessary. Occasionally Court’s supporters interrupted a dietine to not allow the opposition to win. The King convened often a second dietine, which was sometimes held in secret, with a small circle of trusted people. The methods used by the King weren’t different from methods of opposition and Sobieski took advantage of the cracks in the parliamentary system of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121094966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
No doubt the art of “diplomacy” as a skill or talent was beneficial to those who pursued a career path in the period of King Stanisław’s reign. This property or capability made it easier for those who enjoyed it to make a career and it also made it easier for them to keep afloat in the public life. Such skills enabled a given person to stand out. However, the examples which are presented demonstrate the possibilities of the advancement of poor noblemen. In the period of King Stanisław’s reign advancement was determined by aptitude and talent. Even though connections and background were important factors, their significance diminished gradually but discernibly. However, this change did not entirely entail a change of the thinking about the state. The new criteria of the making of elites were not always associated with ideological questions. In many cases a senator who was created, now not owing to his connections or background but owing to his talent, aptitude and the eponymous “diplomatic talent”, thought in particularistic terms. Unfortunately, he did not always take into account the interests of the entire Rzeczpospolita. However, let us admit that he strove to combine his interests with the demands of the land in which he operated.
{"title":"Sztuka „dyplomacji” i jej znaczenie w wewnętrznym życiu publicznym czasów stanisławowskich – o klientelizmie i nieprzypadkowych karierach myśli kilka","authors":"Dariusz Rolnik","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.05","url":null,"abstract":"No doubt the art of “diplomacy” as a skill or talent was beneficial to those who pursued a career path in the period of King Stanisław’s reign. This property or capability made it easier for those who enjoyed it to make a career and it also made it easier for them to keep afloat in the public life. Such skills enabled a given person to stand out. However, the examples which are presented demonstrate the possibilities of the advancement of poor noblemen. In the period of King Stanisław’s reign advancement was determined by aptitude and talent. Even though connections and background were important factors, their significance diminished gradually but discernibly. However, this change did not entirely entail a change of the thinking about the state. The new criteria of the making of elites were not always associated with ideological questions. In many cases a senator who was created, now not owing to his connections or background but owing to his talent, aptitude and the eponymous “diplomatic talent”, thought in particularistic terms. Unfortunately, he did not always take into account the interests of the entire Rzeczpospolita. However, let us admit that he strove to combine his interests with the demands of the land in which he operated.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130007630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
When the Great Sejm in 1788 decided to appoint a state foreign service, there was a problem of lack of appropriate officials and right. There were no regulations specific to the work of Polish diplomats posted to foreign royal courts. An example of how imprecise the organizational assumptions of Polish foreign policy resumed in December 1788 is the status of a secretary of the legation, who could act as “charge d’affaires” formal and informal. The article does not exhaust the entire subject matter, but merely mentions some of the problems that the representative with an unregulated diplomatic position had to deal with.
{"title":"Formalny i nieformalny status sekretarza polskiego korpusu dyplomatycznego na przykładzie misji w Kopenhadze (1792–1795)","authors":"Adrianna Czekalska","doi":"10.18778/8220-090-4.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18778/8220-090-4.10","url":null,"abstract":"When the Great Sejm in 1788 decided to appoint a state foreign service, there was a problem of lack of appropriate officials and right. There were no regulations specific to the work of Polish diplomats posted to foreign royal courts. An example of how imprecise the organizational assumptions of Polish foreign policy resumed in December 1788 is the status of a secretary of the legation, who could act as “charge d’affaires” formal and informal. The article does not exhaust the entire subject matter, but merely mentions some of the problems that the representative with an unregulated diplomatic position had to deal with.","PeriodicalId":375902,"journal":{"name":"Władza i polityka w czasach nowożytnych. Dyplomacja i sprawy wewnętrzne","volume":"130 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134435390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：