Memory of Social Elites. What Should Not Be Forgotten: The Case of the Lithuanian Princes in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries

Abstract

Commemorating an honourable vision of the past was an important commitment for pre-industrial elites in Europe as their position was largely based on knowledge about their family origins, alliances and achievements. It strictly concerned the Lithuanian princes, who originated from younger members of the ruling house of Gediminids and belonged to the social elites of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries. They generated cultural memory by composing genealogies or chronicles, as well as introducing expressive family symbols (names, titles, emblems, etc.). As the analysis shows, their image of the past consisted of the following components: an ‘ancient’ progenitor and main residences, dynastic origins, royal kinship with the Jagiellonians, family alliances, as well as ancestors' deeds and offices held. This image was so honourable and expressive that it was respected by the Crown (under the reign of the Jagiellonians) and noble public opinion (during the Commonwealth period). Consequently, the princes were provided with special honour privileges and exemptions, holding a unique position in the society of Poland and Lithuania throughout the period.

Notes

1 The paper shows results of the research project ‘Memory of dynastic origin of the Lithuanian princely families: written and visual methods of its consolidation from the 15^th to the 18^th century’, funded by the National Science Centre in Poland (grant No UMO-2013/11/N/HS3/04848).

2 The House of Sanguszko originated from Duke Sanguszko (died 1456/1463), the son of Duke Fiodor Olgerdovich and the grandson of Grand Duke Algirdas (Olgierd) of Lithuania. The House had estates in Volhynia. Szymon Samuel Sanguszko was a representative of a younger branch, the Kovel branch. More about the House of Sanguszko can be read in: Józef Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy od końca czternastego wieku (Warsaw, 1895), pp. 422-55; Polski słownik biograficzny 34 (Wrocław, 1992–1993), pp. 462-524.

3 Jan Assmann, Das kulturelle Gedächtnis. Schrift, Erinnerung und politische Identität in frühen Hochkulturen (Munich, 2005), p. 66.

4 For the first time the patronymic Lubartowicz was used in 1620, see Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, p. 453.

5 They were the following families: Sapieha, Chodkiewicz, Pac and Hornostaj. The coat of arms appeared on the Prince's seal of 1626 and in two panegyrics devoted to the Prince from 1638. A thorough analysis can be found in Jakub Rogulski, ‘Treści propagandowe herbu złożonego księcia Szymona Samuela Sanguszki z 1626 roku’, in Wojciech Drelicharz (ed.), Insignia et splendor. Heraldyka w służbie rodów szlacheckich i instytucji Kościoła (Krakow, 2011), pp. 9-84.

6 In 1543, Kovel was exchanged for estates in the Vitebsk Palatinate. More about the residence can be read in Rafał Nestorow, ‘Smolany Sanguszków w świetle inwentarzy i nieznanych materiałów archiwalnych’, in Józef Skrabski (ed.), Wokół Sanguszków. Dzieje-sztuka-kultura. Materiały I Ogólnopolskiej Konferencji Naukowej 29–30 czerwiec 2006, Ratusz, Muzeum Okręgowe w Tarnowie (Tarnów, 2007), pp. 109-17.

7 A manuscript of Prince Szymon Samuel Sanguszko with the genealogy can be found in the Central Archives of Historical Records in Warsaw [hereinafter: CAHR]: the Collection of Michał Marczak, vol. 6, pp. 7-14. The genealogy was written by Prince Szymon Samuel himself and had a great impact on promoting the dynastic origins of his family; in the seventeenth and eighteenth the genealogy was often copied and new manuscripts were used by many scholars and panegyrists, especially Wojciech Wijuk Kojałowicz and Kasper Niesiecki, who recognized the content of work as ‘authentic’ and deriving from original family documents. See: Kasper Niesiecki, Korona polska, ed. Jan Nepomucen Bobrowicz, vol. VIII (Lipsk, 1841), p. 234.

8 More can be learnt from Włodzimierz Dworzaczek, ‘Oblicze wyznaniowe senatu Rzeczypospolitej polskiej w dobie kontrreformacji’, in Zygmunt Szweykowski and others (eds), Munera litteraria. Księga ku czci Profesora Romana Pollaka (Poznań, 1962); Marzena Liedke, Od prawosławia do katolicyzmu. Ruscy możni i szlachta Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego wobec wyznań reformacyjnych (Białystok, 2004).

9 Remarkably, no prince Sanguszko received any nomination to an office between 1569 and 1597.

10 Maurice Halbwachs, On Collective Memory (Chicago and London, 1992), p. 128.

11 Jan Assmann, Das kulturelle Gedächtnis, p. 66.

12 Aleida Assmann, Erinnerungsräume. Formen und Wandlungen des kulturellen Gedächtnisses (Munich, 1999), pp. 134-7.

13 Ibid.

14 Hans Belting, Bild-Anthropologie. Entwürfe für eine Bildwissenschaft (Munich, 2001).

15 Here it should be noted that not only were symbols used by the Lithuanian princes to consolidate their collective memory. Places of memory which they created (necropolises, portrait galleries or residences), ‘holy’ objects (documents, family souvenirs or relics) they secured, as well as fundamental writings they composed were also very important carriers of dynastic memory. However, this part of cultural memory served primarily the family members, thus its social impact was limited. Therefore, it is omitted in this article, while the more public symbols are the main subject for analysis.

16 Much more Lithuanian princes lived in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania — the full list of them is presented by Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, p. xxii. However, not all of them succeeded in maintaining a high position and some of them fell into poverty and obscurity. This paper does not aim to determine what the reasons were, nevertheless it has to be stressed that the families which are known to be the descendants of Grand Duke Algirdas and thus the closest relatives of the Jagiellonians (Olelkowicz, Sanguszko, Czartoryski) remained important and powerful. It indicates that such a lineage provided not only prestige and fame, but also resources sufficient to maintain a political position.

17 The Olelkowicz-Słucki originated from Duke Olelko (died 1454), son of Vladimir Olgerdovich, while the Czartoryski from Duke Vasily, son of Constantine Olgerdovich. Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, pp. 18, 327-8. According to Jan Tęgowski, Pierwsze pokolenia Giedyminowiczów (Poznań, 1999), pp. 177–180 the Czartoryskis’ progenitor was a different Duke Constantine, son of Karijotas (Koriat) Gediminovich, but Wolff's thesis seems to be still more convincing. Remarkably, the progenitors of the Olelkowicz-Słucki and Czartoryski, as well as of the Sanguszko, were sons of Grand Duke Algirdas and thus uncles of King Władysław II Jagiełło. The Wiśniowiecki and Zbaraski were also thought to be the descendants of another of Algirdas's sons, Duke Karibut (Korybut), but their origins are problematic, as the majority of modern historians suppose that they originated from the Ruthenian dukes of Nesvizh from the Riurikid dynasty — more can be read in Ilona Czamańska, Wiśniowieccy (Poznań, 2007), pp. 19-20. Nevertheless, from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries no one had doubts that that the Wiśniowiecki and Zbaraski were the progeny of Grand Duke Gediminas as well.

18 It was due to the fact that the Lithuanian princes’ progenitors received their appanages in western Ruthenian duchies (created due to the fragmentation of the Kievan Rus’ in the twelfth century) which were conquered by grand dukes of Lithuania Gediminas and Algirdas in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Consequently, the Lithuanian princes from their very beginning were closely integrated into Orthodox and Ruthenian culture and formed the local elites.

19 According to calculations of Iwona Mytnik, Antroponimia Wołynia w XVI–XVIII wieku (Warsaw, 2010), p. 294, in the period before the Union of Lublin as much as 83% of princes and nobles of Volhynia and Ukraine used surnames created from their place of origin.

20 It can be observed in the case of the Sanguszko House whose two lines created their own names: the Kovel line started to use the name Kovelskiy, while the Kashyr line the name Kosherskiy. Bronisław Gorczak (ed.), Archiwum książąt Sanguszków w Sławucie 3 (Lwów, 1890), passim.

21 Closer analysis shows that to create such a name it was necessary to be the owner of the estate to which the name referred. Interestingly, since that moment the name was linked to a family permanently, and even the loss of the estate could not change it, as we can observe in the case of the Kovel line of Sanguszko princes.

22 For example, in 1528 the Olelkowicz-Słucki family possessed estates consisting of about 7,000 dymów (‘hearths’), the Sanguszko family possessed about 3,000 dymów, and the Czartoryski family about 1,000 dymów. More can be read in: Natalya Yakovenko, Ukrayins’ka shlyakhta z kintsya XIV do seredyny XVII stolittya. Volyn i Tsentral’na Ukrayina, (Kiev, 2008), pp. 77-127, p. 103. In the eighteenth century the Czartoryski, Sanguszko and Wiśniowiecki belonged to the richest magnate families of the Commonwealth. See: Teresa Zielińska, Magnateria polska epoki saskiej (Wrocław, 1977), passim.

23 At the end of the sixteenth century the Lithuanian Princes started to abandon the Ruthenian culture and religion and integrate with the Polish magnateria. Almost all of them had converted to Catholicism by 1610. Teresa Chynczewska-Hennel, Świadomość narodowa szlachty ukraińskiej i kozaczyzny od schyłku XVI do połowy XVII w. (Warsaw, 1985), p. 86. The process of the integration with the Polish elites lasted until about 1640s, when most of the Lithuanian princes confirmed their highest social status in the Commonwealth.

24 The patronymic ‘Olgierdowicz’ was used for the first time by Hrehory Sanguszko in 1601. See Zygmunt Luba Radzimiński, Monografia XX. Sanguszków, vol. III (Lwów, 1890), p. 188. Due to his death in 1601, his son, Adam Aleksander Sanguszko, became the proper bearer of the patronymic. It can be observed in a document from 1634. The National Archive in Krakow [hereinafter: NAK], the Sanguszko Princes Archive, teki ‘arabskie’ 1/9, p. 395. In the Wiśniowiecki family, the patronymic Korybutowicz appeared in a document of Adam Wiśniowiecki from 1609. Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, p. 557. Soon it was shortened to Korybut and henceforth this version was in use, for example in a document from 1620. Ibid., p. 558.

25 One of the Polish scholars of the time, Szymon Okolski, Orbis polonus, vol. 3 (Krakow, 1653), p. 78 considered Duke Liubartas to be the grandson of Gediminas. Apart from a few exceptions, this version was not accepted.

26 The patronymic Sanguszkowicz was used last time by Prince Hrehory Sanguszko in 1595. NAK, The Sanguszko Princes Archive, teki ‘rzymskie’ XXI/65, p. 323.

27 See the armorials of Bartosz Paprocki: Gniazdo cnoty, p. 1142 and Herby rycerstwa polskiego, p. 829, as well as the chronicle of Joachim Bielski, Kronika polska (Krakow, 1597), p. 622.

28 Being in touch with the Kashyr Sanguszko, Prince Szymon Samuel must have known their views on the origins of the family, however, it is impossible to determine what the Prince really thought about the issue.

29 Contemporary sixteenth-century Polish armorials confirmed that Duke Liubartas was the progenitor of the Sanguszko House, above all Wojciech Wijuk Kojałowicz, Herbarz rycerstwa W.X. litewskiego tak zwany Compendium, edn Franciszek Piekosiński (Krakow, 1897), p. 11; Niesiecki, Korona polska, vol. VIII, pp. 234-5.

30 A similar situation can be observed in the case of the Wiśniowiecki princes, who claimed as progenitor Kaributas, grandson of Gediminas, a view supported by Polish historians at the end of the sixteenth century, though modern scholars consider that the family is more likely to have descended from Ruthenian dukes of Nesvizh, that is, the Slavic (not Lithuanian) House of Riurik.

31 The title ‘prince of Chortoryisk and Klevan’ can be found in a document of Jerzy Czartoryski from 1598. The Princes Czartoryski Library in Krakow, the Parchment Collection, no 1037. The title ‘prince of Lubny’ was introduced by Jeremi Wiśniowiecki in the 1630s. Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, p. 562.

32 This is confirmed by the fact that Lithuanian princes’ estates were determined as ‘principalities’ (księstwa) in some eighteenth-century evidence, for example Prince Paweł Karol Sanguszko in a document of 1739 used the title ‘prince of the entire Iziaslav principality’ (książę na całym księstwie zasławskim). NAK, the Sanguszko Princes Archive, teki ‘arabskie’ 16/26, p. 1.

33 More can be read in: Witold Kamieniecki, Społeczeństwo litewskie w XV wieku (Warsaw, 1947), pp. 50-1; Lidia Korczak, Monarcha i poddani. System władzy w Wielkim Księstwie Litewskim w okresie wczesnojagiellońskim (Kraków, 2008), pp. 57-61.

34 The poorer princes and those of a lower condition ceased to use the title, as can be observed for example in such families like Kurcewicz and Buremski, which in the middle of the seventeenth century ceased to call themselves ‘princes’. See: Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, p. 200.

35 This is best seen on the basis of the princely seals published by Oleh Odnorozhenko, Rus’ki korolivs’ki, hospodars’ki ta knyazivs’ki pechatky XIII–XVI ct., Monumenta rutheniae heraldica, vol. II (Kharkiv, 2009), nos 170, 254, 316, 439, pp. 85, 100, 110, 130.

36 The mitre and the coat with the pavillon are clearly visible on the seal matrix of Prince Michał Fryderyk Czartoryski from the first half of the eighteenth century (figure 4)

37 In 1530s Pogoń appeared on the seals of the Lithunian ducal families. See: Odnorozhenko, Rus’ki korolivs’ki, gospodars’ki, nos 263, 264, 284, pp. 102, 105, as well as Jakub Rogulski, ‘Pieczęcie herbowe książąt Sanguszków z XVI–XVIII w.,’ in Zenon Piech (ed.), Dawne pieczęcie. Typologia – metody badań – interpretacje (Warsaw, 2015), pp. 435-76.

38 More can be learnt from: Zenon Piech, Monety, pieczęcie i herby w systemie symboli władzy Jagiellonów (Warsaw, 2003), pp. 227-9.

39 Consequently, other Lithuanian families, especially the ones which needed to confirm their Jagiellonian kinship, adopted Pogoń, among others the Wiśniowiecki House, which primarily used the emblem Korybut. For exemple, Pogoń can be found on the seal of Prince Jeremi Michał Wiśniowiecki from 1641. See: Odnorozhenko, Rus’ki korolivs’ki, gospodars’ki, no. 172, p. 86.

40 More can be learnt from: Piech, Monety, pieczęcie i herby, pp. 243-68.

41 Pogoń with Podwójny Krzyż can be found on the seals of Aleksander Czartoryski and Jerzy Olelkowicz-Słucki. See: Odnorozhenko, Rus’ki korolivs’ki, gospodars’ki, nos 440, 482, pp. 130, 139.

42 It is confirmed by the armorials of Paprocki, Gniazdo cnoty, p. 1136 and Herby rycerstwa polskiego, p. 761, where the image of Pogoń with Podwójny Krzyż was recognized to be the coat of arms of all Lithuanian princes.

43 This seal and the other one are discussed widely in: Jakub Rogulski, ‘Manifestacja dynastycznego pochodzenia na pieczęciach książąt Czartoryskich z drugiej połowy XVI wieku’, Rocznik Polskiego Towarzystwa Heraldycznego nowej serii 12 (2013), pp. 211-37.

44 The seals of princes Jerzy, Aleksander and Jan Szymon were published by: Odnorozhenko, Rus’ki korolivs’ki, nos 483-92, pp. 139-40.

45 Remarkably, the Czartoryski and Olelkowicz-Słucki families made an effort in the second half of the sixteenth century to provide their families hereditary posts in the Polish-Lithuanian Senate — more can be read in: Tomasz Kempa, ‘Zabiegi kniaziów Olelkowiczów słuckich o uzyskanie miejsca w senacie po 1569 roku’, Odrodzenie i reformacja w Polsce 47 (2003).

46 Prince Szymon Samuel Sanguszko was able to mention in his genealogy about twenty significant noble families of Poland and Lithuania to whom he was related in various degrees.

47 For example, in the 1590s Prince Jerzy Czartoryski used the coat of arms which consisted of emblems belonging to his family and the family of his mother Princess Anna Zasławska (figure 5). See: Rogulski, ‘Manifestacja dynastycznego pochodzenia’, p. 220.

48 This seal as well as the next one can be found in: NAK, the Sanguszko Princes Archive, teki ‘arabskie’ 16/26, p. 1; teki ‘arabskie’ 16/28, p. 4.

49 The conflict was discussed by Aleksandra Skrzypietz, ‘The Radzivills Towards the Heritage of the Sobieskis’, in Rimantas Sliužinskas (ed.), History and Culture of Baltic Region: Lithuania and Poland. Military History, Archaeology, Enthnology (Klaipėda, 2007), and Królewscy synowie Jakub, Aleksander i Konstanty Sobiescy (Katowice, 2011).

50 More about seizing the fortune by the Sanguszko princes can be read in works of Roman Marcinek, ‘Sanguszko, Paweł Karol’, Polski słownik biograficzny 34 (1992–93), pp. 498-500, and ‘Sanguszko, Janusz Aleksander’, ibid., pp. 490-2.

51 In the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth ordynat was a title used by a principal heir of fee tail estates called ordynacja. Ordynacja Ostrogska, with the centre in Ostroh, was created by Prince Janusz Ostrogski in 1609, and was inherited by the Zasławski, Lubomirski and Sanguszko.

52 The document can be found in NAK, the Sanguszko Princes Archive, teki ‘arabskie’ 21/22, p. 15: książę na Białym Kowlu, Ostrogu i Zasławiu, hrabia na Wiśniczu, Jarosławiu i Tarnowie, ordynat ostrogski.

53 It was linked to changes of the nobility ideology in the Commonwealth in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. More can be read in Sławomir Baczewski, Szlachectwo: studium z dziejów idei w piśmiennictwie staropolskim druga połowa XVI–XVII wieku (Lublin, 2009).

54 In 1712, Kazimierz Czartoryski was nominated Deputy Chancellor of Lithuania; after his death the office was given to his son, Michał Fryderyk, who later was advanced to Great Chancellor of Lithuania (1752). In turn, in the House of Sanguszko the first Lithuanian marshal was Paweł Karol Sanguszko, who was nominated Deputy Marshal of Lithuania in 1713 and was promoted to Great Marshal in 1734; after his death, his oldest son Janusz Aleksander became Deputy Marshal of Lithuania, but in 1760 he passed the office to his younger brother Józef Paulin, who was promoted to Great Marshal of Lithuania in 1768.

55 I omit the political circumstances of royal policy regarding nominating officials, since it is beyond the scope of the paper.

56 In the political hierarchy of that time, even a starosta had precedence over those who did not hold any office, including the princes claiming the best origins. See: Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, pp. xx-xxi.

57 Every ambitious noble wanted to have an official title, even a meaningless and purely nominal one. More can be read in Józef Matuszewski, ‘Tytułomania szlachecka w świetle patronimików odurzędniczych’, Rozprawy Komisji Językowej Łódzkiego Towarzystwa Naukowego, part I, 15 (1970), pp. 237-71; part II, 16 (1970), pp. 157-90.

58 The significance of Crown land for the magnateria is discussed by Zielińska, Magnateria polska epoki saskiej, pp. 79-137.

59 A ceremonial mace used by hetmans as an attribute of their highest military rank.

60 The Order of the White Eagle was instituted in 1705 by King Augustus II the Strong, and the Order of Saint Stanislaus was founded in 1765 by King Stanisław August Poniatowski. More can be read in Krzysztof Filipow, Falerystyka polska XVII–XIX wieku (Białystok, 2003).

61 The document has been quoted in many works, for the first time in Bartosz Paprocki, Herby rycerstwa polskiego (Krakow, 1584), p. 644. See also Kazimierz Józef Turowski (ed.), Herby rycerstwa polskiego przez Bartosza Paprockiego zebrane i wydane (Krakow, 1858), p. 828-9; Teodor Żychliński, Złota księga szlachty polskiej, vol. 8 (Poznań, 1886), p. 128. Nowadays the document can be found in the Czartoryski Library.

62 This has been suggested by Oskar Halecki, Ostatnie lata Świdrygiełły i sprawa wołyńska za Kazimierza Jagiellończyka (Krakow, 1915), pp. 69-70.

63 The best evidence was the fact that heraldic components of Pogoń ceased to be used by the Jagiellonians to create coats of arms of ennobled people: in this important role Pogoń was replaced by Orzeł Biały. More can be read in Piech, Monety, pieczęcie i herby, pp. 219ff.

64 Interestingly, the name ‘from the Lithuanian princes’ was later adopted by the Lithuanian princes. For example, it can be found on the epitaphs of Princes Dymitr and Roman Sanguszko from the 1550s and 1570s. The reproductions can be found in Zygmunt Luba Radzimiński, Monografia XX. Sanguszków, vol. II, Part 1 (Lwów, 1911), p. 122; Szymon Starowolski, Monumenta Sarmatarum beatae aeternitati adscriptorum (Krakow, 1655), p. 787, as well as in one of the panegyrics written to commemorate the wedding of Prince Jeremi Michał Wiśniowiecki from 1639. Wojciech Czarnocki, Kazanie w dzień ślubu … Jeremiego Michała z Książąt Litewskich Książęcia Korybutowicza na Wiśniowcu Wiśniowieckiego …  (Zamość, 1639).

65 Mikhail Osipovich Koyalovich (ed.), Dnevnik lublinskago sejma 1569 goda: soyedineniye Velikago Knyazhestva Litovskago s Korolevstvom Pol'skim (St. Petersburg, 1869), p. 386.

66 This is best evidenced by the speech of Prince Konstanty Wiśniowiecki, who on 24 May 1569 in Lublin said: ‘in our country there live princely houses which enjoy their famous hereditary names and dignities, and we would not be glad to see their dignities disparaged.’ Koyalovich, Dnevnik lublinskago sejma, p. 380.

67 The documents are published in Stanisław Kutrzeba and Władysław Semkowicz (eds), Akta unii Polski z Litwą 1385–1791 (Krakow, 1932), no. 148, pp. 331-47.

68 This record can be found not only in the acts of the Polish-Lithuanian union, but also in the acts of the incorporation of Volhynia, Bratslav and Kiev palatinates to the Kingdom of Poland, which were adopted by the Sejm of Lublin in 1569. See: Volumina Legum, vol. 2 (St. Petersburg, 1859), pp. 80-7.

69 Paprocki, Herby rycerstwa polskiego, pp. 828-9.

70 See: Juliusz Nowak-Dłużewski, Okolicznościowa poezja polityczna w Polsce. Zygmunt III (Warsaw, 1971), pp. 10ff.

71 The act is published in: Volumina Legum, vol. 4 (St. Petersburg, 1860), pp. 8-9. More about this controversy can be read in: Władysław Tomkiewicz, Jeremi Wiśniowiecki (1612–1651) (Oświęcim, 2017), pp. 108-12.

72 All arguments were presented by: Hieremiasz Bielejowski, Obrona tytułów książęcych od Rzeczypospolitej uchwałą sejmową pozwolonych (1641), p. A3.

73 Józef Aleksander Jabłonowski, Heraldyka to jest osada klejnotów rycerskich i wiadomość znaków herbownych (Lwów, 1742), VI, § 6.

74 Kazimierz Przyboś and Adam Perłakowski (eds), Andrzej Olszowski, Censura candidatorum sceptri Polonici (Krakow, 2013), pp. 90-91. I omit here other arguments which were presented in detail in the work.

75 Jan Albrych Janicki, Akt koronacyjej najjaśniejszego i najpotężniejszego monarchy Michała z Bożej Łaski króla polskiego …  (Krakow, 1670), p. Av.

76 Princes Paweł Karol Sanguszko and Janusz Antoni Wiśniowiecki were proposed as candidates during the election of 1733, and Prince August Aleksander Czartoryski during the election of 1763.

77 This is best evidenced at by succeeding prohibitions of foreign titles adopted by the Sejm in 1638, 1641 and 1673, which formally were in force until 1770s, as well as political writings like: Adam Grodziecki, Przestroga o tytułach i dygnitarstwach cudzoziemskich w polskim królestwie i w państwach do niego należących (1634). Foreign titles of magnate families were often ridiculed and sneered at by noble poets and writers, for example by Wacław Potocki, Poczet herbów szlachty Korony Polskiej i Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego (Krakow, 1696).

78 Hieremiasz Bielejowski, Obrona tytułów książęcych, p. A2v.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jakub Rogulski

Jakub Rogulski is a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of History of the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. He is the principal investigator of the research project: ‘Memory of Dynastic Origin of Lithuanian Ducal Families in the Fifteenth to Eighteenth Centuries’ (funded by the National Science Centre in Poland); and the author of over twenty scholarly articles in Polish, English and Ukrainian journals. He is currently preparing a doctoral thesis devoted to the representation of the Sanguszko princely family in the early modern era.