Oбраз "ідеального короля" в інструкціях послам Руського воєводства на сейми 1669–1673 років
Loading...
Date
2022
Authors
Знак, Марта
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
У статті проаналізовано сприйняття шляхтою трьох сеймикових кіл Руського воєводства короля
Міхала І Вишневецького. Джерелом для цієї розвідки стали формули пошанування, вміщені в інструкціях
послам на сейм 1669–1673 рр. Згадка та подяка монаршій особі були обов’язковою їх частиною. Здебільшого її прописували у вступній клаузулі, після зазначення часу й місця парламентського зібрання та імен
обраних послів. У шляхетському соціумі Речі Посполитої сформувалися дві опінії щодо особи правителя:
ідеальна, що побутувала в мовно-писемній традиції, та реальна, яка опиралася на реляціях панівної
еліти з троном. У документальних джерелах, що проливають світло на діяльність шляхетських зібрань, відображено "портрет зразкового правителя", якого би бажали бачити політично активні репрезентанти шляхетського стану. Ідеальні образи короля-батька й мужнього рицаря були елементами
світоглядної культури шляхти. У статті продемонстровано, як відрізнялося реальне ставлення річпосполитської еліти від описаного в інструкціях послам на сейм на прикладі одного короля.
The attitude of aristocratic society to its monarch is an integral part of political culture. The relationship between the privileged section of the population and the king was formed as a result of the political activity of the former. The article analyzes the attitude of the nobility of the three Sejmiks of the Ruthenian Voivodeship toward the king of Michael I. The source for this study was the formulas of respect contained in the instructions to the ambassadors to the Diet (Sejm) of 1669-1673. Mentioning and thanking the king was a mandatory part of them. It was prescribed in the introductory clause, after indicating the time and place of the parliamentary meeting and the names of the elected ambassadors. In the aristocratic society of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, two opinions about the identity of the monarch were formed. The first is about the "ideal king", which is characteristic of the linguistic and written tradition. The second opinion was formed on the relations of the politically active elite with a particular monarch. The documents resulting from the activities of the Sejmiks reflect the image of the "ideal king". According to the nobility, the exemplary ruler was to be a "father" to his citizens and a brave warrior and defender of his Motherland. The myth of "King Piast" had a great influence. According to this myth, there was once a monarch who possessed all the best features of an early modern ruler. An important feature was the local origin of the future representative of the throne. King John II Casimir destroyed the image of the ideal monarch because he abdicated. King Michael I came from the Commonwealth. He was well acquainted with the traditions and policies of this state. In the case of King Michael, I, the Knights of the Sejmiks tried to maintain the image of a brave warrior, although he didn’t have much skill and didn’t win any military victories. In the end, the monarch didn’t overpower his father’s duty to reconcile the divided society.
The attitude of aristocratic society to its monarch is an integral part of political culture. The relationship between the privileged section of the population and the king was formed as a result of the political activity of the former. The article analyzes the attitude of the nobility of the three Sejmiks of the Ruthenian Voivodeship toward the king of Michael I. The source for this study was the formulas of respect contained in the instructions to the ambassadors to the Diet (Sejm) of 1669-1673. Mentioning and thanking the king was a mandatory part of them. It was prescribed in the introductory clause, after indicating the time and place of the parliamentary meeting and the names of the elected ambassadors. In the aristocratic society of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, two opinions about the identity of the monarch were formed. The first is about the "ideal king", which is characteristic of the linguistic and written tradition. The second opinion was formed on the relations of the politically active elite with a particular monarch. The documents resulting from the activities of the Sejmiks reflect the image of the "ideal king". According to the nobility, the exemplary ruler was to be a "father" to his citizens and a brave warrior and defender of his Motherland. The myth of "King Piast" had a great influence. According to this myth, there was once a monarch who possessed all the best features of an early modern ruler. An important feature was the local origin of the future representative of the throne. King John II Casimir destroyed the image of the ideal monarch because he abdicated. King Michael I came from the Commonwealth. He was well acquainted with the traditions and policies of this state. In the case of King Michael, I, the Knights of the Sejmiks tried to maintain the image of a brave warrior, although he didn’t have much skill and didn’t win any military victories. In the end, the monarch didn’t overpower his father’s duty to reconcile the divided society.
Description
Keywords
король, Міхал І Вишневецький, інструкція сеймовим послам, передсеймові сеймики, Руське воєводство, сейм, стаття, king, Michael I, instructions to the Diet (Sejm) ambassadors, Pre-Sejm sejmiks, Ruthenian Voivodeship, the Diet (Sejm)
Citation
Знак М. Я. Oбраз "ідеального короля" в інструкціях послам Руського воєводства на сейми 1669–1673 років / Знак М. Я. // Наукові записки НаУКМА. Історичні науки. - 2022. - Т. 5. - С. 13-18. - https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-3417.2022.5.13-18