- Institute of History
University of Warsaw
Krakowskie Przedmieście 26/28
00-927 Warsaw
Poland
Piotr Węcowski
University of Warsaw, Institue of History, Faculty Member
- History, Medieval History, Late Middle Ages, Late Medieval, •Auxiliary Sciences of History, 15th Century, and 177 moreThe Jagiellons, Jagiellon dynasty, Cultural History, Medieval Studies, Early Modern History, Historiography, Literacy, Memory Studies, Cultural Memory, History and Memory, Medieval Literature, History of Political Thought, History of the Book, Archival Studies, Manuscript Studies, Collective Memory, Language and Power, Archives, Violence, Sociology of Crime and Deviance, Medieval Europe, Renaissance Humanism, Genealogy, Propaganda, Political Violence, Manuscripts and Early Printed Books, Stereotypes and Prejudice, Paleography, History Of Emotions, Ritual, National Identity, Medieval England, History of Historiography, Lexicology, Codicology of medieval manuscripts, Travel Literature, Astrology, Codicology, Medieval French Literature, Commemoration and Memory, Orality-Literacy Studies, Medieval Historiography, Saints' Cults, Palaeography, Diplomatics (Medieval), Illumination (Manuscripts, Books), Canon Law, Polish History, Early Modern Political Thought, Latin Paleography, Poland, Courts and Elites (History), Medieval theology (Medieval Studies), Just War, Kingship (Medieval History), Czech & Slovak Studies, Medieval Canon & Roman Law, History of Hungary, Medieval Culture, Library history, Late Medieval English History, Medieval manuscripts & early printed books; history of libraries; visual arts & digital media, Papacy (Medieval Church History), Cult of Saints, Czech History, Middle English literature and culture, Medieval Chronicles, Modern and Postmodern Historiography, Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, Lieux de memoire, Medieval Germany, Queenship (Medieval History), Medieval Art History, Medieval Literacy, Editorial theory, Late Medieval History, Medieval Hungary, Incunabula, History of Central and Southeastern Europe, Charters and Paleography, 15th Century Burgundy, Medieval Medicine, Renaissance Historiography, Paleografia, Court history, Lithuanian History, Monarchy, Queenship in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, 15th century England, Twelfth-century England, Cardinals (Medieval Church History), Medieval Brittany, Medieval genealogy, Germany (Medieval Church History), John Wyclif, Road Studies, Christianization of Lithuania, Conversions to christianity of European countries, relicts of ancient religion, Matthias Corvinus, Piast Dynasty, Orderic Vitalis, Medieval Livonia, Bastard Feudalism, Royal Confessors, Historiography, Medieval Chronicles, Conciliarism, Historical Psychology, Claude De Seyssel, Abelard, Origin myths, Heraldry, Hagiography, Latin Palaeography, Medieval Church History, Anthropology, Late Medieval Bohemia and Central Europe, Late Medieval Religion, Monasticism and Devotion, Medieval Intellectual History, Chancery Studies, Scribes, History of Archives, Dyplomatyka, Jagiellonowie, Medieval Rhetoric, Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Habsburg Studies, European Medieval History, History of Religion (Medieval Studies), Medieval Latin Literature, Peter Abelard, Heloise and Abelard, Writings of Abelard and Heloise, History of Mentality, Mendicant Orders, History of Grand Duchy of Lithuania In the XVI-XVIII C., Medieval Poland, Saint Adalbert of Prague, Latin Literature, Sigillography, Medieval numismatics, Numismatics, Medieval Sigillography, Cosmas of Prague, Teutonic Knights, Land Policy and Governance, Property Rights, Cadastral Systems, Land Conflicts and Women's Land Right, Cultural Identity, Cultural Diplomacy, Cultural Exchange, Theory of History, Methodology of History, Central Europe, Historical Anthropology, Ceremony, Ritual and Performance, Political Rituals, Medieval Political Thought, Medieval Political Theory, Itineraria, Jagiellonians, Rituals, Medieval Ceremonial, Adventus Regis, Gesture, Rituals and Symbols (Medieval), Travel Writing, Metodologia Historii, Historiografia, Political History, Manuscripts (Medieval Studies), History of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, history of Great Duchy of Lithuania (XIV-XV), History of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Heraldry and Vexillology, Flags (Vexillology), late medieval and early modern history of European nobility and courts, and Regesta Imperiiedit
- 1972 - born 1997 - M.A., history, Institute of History Warsaw University "Działalność publiczna możnowładztwa małopo... more1972 - born
1997 - M.A., history, Institute of History Warsaw University "Działalność publiczna możnowładztwa małopolskiego w późnym średniowieczu. Itineraria kasztelanów i wojewodów krakowskich w czasach panowania Władysława Jagiełły (1386-1434)" [The Public Activity of Magnates from Little Poland. Itineraries of the Cracow Castellans and Voivodes during the Reign of Władysław Jagiełło (1386-1434)];
2004 - Ph.D., history, Institute of History Warsaw University "Mazowsze w Koronie. Propaganda i legitymizacja władzy Kazimierza Jagiellończyka na Mazowszu" [Mazovia in the Corona. Propaganda and the Legitimation of the Rule of Casimir Jagiellon in Mazovia [1462-1492];
2015 - post-doctoral degree (habilitacja) (also UW) - "Początki POlski w pamięci historycznej późnego średniowiecza" [The Origins of Poland in the Historical Memory of the Late Middle Ages].
since 2009 - Member of Board of "Studia Zrodloznawcze. Commentationes", a journal devoted to the study of sources, and auxiliary sciences of history;
since 2020 co-editor of "Studia Zrodloznawcze. Commentationes".edit
Publikacja zawiera informacje o wszystkich źródłach narracyjnych polskiego średniowiecza (do ok. 1520 r.) - pisanych zarówno w języku łacińskim, jak i polskim. Każdy utwór opisany jest wraz z informacjami o rękopisach, ewentualnych... more
Publikacja zawiera informacje o wszystkich źródłach narracyjnych polskiego średniowiecza (do ok. 1520 r.) - pisanych zarówno w języku łacińskim, jak i polskim. Każdy utwór opisany jest wraz z informacjami o rękopisach, ewentualnych wydaniach, opracowaniach.
http://otwartehistorie.pl/books/clavis-scriptorum-et-operum-medii-aevi-poloniae/
http://otwartehistorie.pl/books/clavis-scriptorum-et-operum-medii-aevi-poloniae/
Research Interests:
Publikacja zawiera informacje o wszystkich (znanych autorom) źródłach narracyjnych polskiego średniowiecza (do ok. 1520 r.) - pisanych zarówno w języku łacińskim, jak i polskim.... more
Publikacja zawiera informacje o wszystkich (znanych autorom) źródłach narracyjnych polskiego średniowiecza (do ok. 1520 r.) - pisanych zarówno w języku łacińskim, jak i polskim.
http://otwartehistorie.pl/books/clavis-scriptorum-et-operum-medii-aevi-poloniae-2/
http://otwartehistorie.pl/books/clavis-scriptorum-et-operum-medii-aevi-poloniae-2/
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The book touches upon late-mediaeval representations of the origins of Poland. Te historical memory was defined as “the beliefs and representations relating to the past, the beliefs and representations which influenced individuals and... more
The book touches upon late-mediaeval representations of the origins of Poland. Te historical memory was defined as “the beliefs and representations relating to the past, the beliefs and representations which influenced individuals and communities”. The said historical memory comprises the content (what was “remembered”?) and transmission (how, when and where it was “remembered”). The past was referred to and “talked about” through writing, image and material and immaterial symbols of memory. In turn, the said symbols of memory functioned mostly in the oral tradition.
The author revealed that in the late Middle Ages (XIV-XV c.) the times of Mieszko i and Bolesław Chrobry were still present and often recalled. It was widely known that it was at the time that Poland was baptized, became kingdom and the church organization was established. It was believed that it was at that time that further development activities of the Kingdom of Poland were taken and the standing of the state in the Christian community was defined.
The origins of Poland evinced an avid interest, which was manifested in the historiographic, hagiographic, liturgical and preacher’s works, as well as in the catalogues of the monarchs and church dignitaries, political speeches and treaties.
The amount of the original works and their copies is not insignificant likewise. Moreover, they functioned in various communities.
The access to the historical information transmitted through writing was limited to the people able to read in Latin, namely the clergy, noblemen and burgesses.
The information on the origins of Poland was received not only through writing, but also through image. Not too often could we come across narrative sequences telling about the old history, e.g. the Congress of Gniezno or the translation of
the body of St. Adalbert to Trzemeszno and Gniezno. However, one could draw on the origins of Poland in numerous ways, by way of illustration the attributes of St. Adalbert (pallium, archbishop’s crucifix) indicated the dignity of the archbishop
of Gniezno. Churches, built as it was maintained in “an old way”, evoked the associations with the origins of Poland. The iconographic sources indicate that the historical memory did not limit itself to the elitist circles, but it reached much further.
The scope of its influence may be confirmed by the oral historical tradition. Surely, all the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Poland (though, to a larger or smaller extent) could hear the sermons and clergymen preaching telling about a particular
saint and about the past of various places, churches, monasteries, etc. The Eucharistic duty and requirements of the parish life compelled the constant contact with the local priest. Pilgrimages to holy places connected to the cult of St. Adalbert or Five Holy Brothers enabled the said undertaking.
Late-mediaeval inhabitants of the Kingdom of Poland had as well a chance to listen to the stories on the origins of their own families and coats of arms, to learn about the old register of the borders of their own property, the origins of the stone
with the footprint of St. Adalbert or other objects linked to the origins of Poland.
Material and immaterial symbols of memory sent us back to the past and proved the authenticity of the said events. The aforementioned symbols did not usually bring extended narrations. Not infrequently they comprised short notes which were linked to other information and told us about values important for the community, e.g. the church of St. Adalbert in Krakow confirmed the stay of the saint in the town and his missionary activity in Poland, iron poles thrust in the Saale, Dnieper or Ossa Rivers indicated the territorial extent of the country and the mightiness of the Kingdom of Poland, etc. Considering the oral transmission of the information
on the old history we may assume that the range of the stories on the origins of Poland was great or even vast.
Nevertheless, it was not equivalent to the exactness and consistency of the message. The knowledge of most late-mediaeval inhabitants of the Kingdom on the origins of Poland was superficial: not too broad and often chaotic and imprecise, for instance they did not know the names of the early-mediaeval heroes, dates were mixed up or were unknown, heroes and sequences of events were confused,
etc. Late-mediaeval memory was often limited to the presentation of the events and a few heroes (Mieszko i — Dąbrówka, Bolesław Chrobry — St. Adalbert). Additionally, it referred to a few associations, e.g. the coronation of Chrobry, iron poles at the frontiers of Poland. Specific events and personages
constituted a point of reference, nonetheless, they could not be connected or arranged chronologically.
At times the information on the origins of Poland were used for the present needs, especially political and diplomatic. However, it appears to be somewhat difficult to encounter more extensive feature records. Only some historiographic and hagiographic works examine the said issue. The consistent narration on the early origins was accessible just to the few — the intellectual elite. They could reflect upon the origins of Poland with the in-depth knowledge and integrate numerous stories on the origins of the state into the ordered whole.
In the late Middle Ages there was no institution that would set the tone and shape the historical memory among the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Poland. Various “memory communities” existed, the communities that formed particular circles (e.g. monks of Święty Krzyż or Trzemeszno) or social groups. Local communities, or even particular families and houses, formed separate “memory communities”. Different personages could be the members of several communities. Yet, each group functioned within a broader “memory community” embracing all the inhabitants of the late-mediaeval Kingdom of Poland.
Among a number of topics concerning the origins of Poland, the most popular in the late-mediaeval historical memory were the baptism of Mieszko i, the stay of St. Adalbert in Poland and the role of his relics, as well as the Congress of Gniezno,
during which (as it was held) the coronation of Bolesław Chrobry took place and the Kingdom of Poland was established. Oftentimes they referred to the formation
of the Polish church organization, foundation of the bishoprics and monasteries, territorial conquests of Bolesław Chrobry, the territorial extent of the state, and the stories on unsuccessful attempts at the royal coronation for the Polish ruler
in Rome.
The said stories were often linked to other narrations. Even main records (about Mieszko i and coronation of Bolesław Chrobry) were connected to other information and pertained to a broader sequence of events, the example of which could be the baptism of Mieszko i. Apart from baptism itself, supplementary notes appeared concerning the initial blindness of the ruler, the wedding with Dąbrówka, the birth of Bolesław
Chrobry or the beginnings of the Polish church organization. The baptism of the duke (and the whole state) did not, therefore, constitute a separate autonomous narration. It was a part (though the most important one) of a multi-element story, which was both to explicate the Christian origins of the community of Poles and the birth of the Polish state and church, and secure the place of the Polish state in the contemporary world.
The stories analysed in the book prove how additional themes, information and associations were added to the initial, laconic notes (e.g. coming from the early-mediaeval chronicles and hagiographies). They show as well how great was the need to supplement and explain what had not earlier been noted. The structure of the aforementioned stories point out to the importance of symbols in the late-mediaeval historical memory.
A number of versions of the stories on the same events functioned in the late-mediaeval historical memory, to wit the narration on the baptism of Mieszko i. Undeniably, the “canon of knowledge” linked to the origins of Poland existed in the late-mediaeval historical memory, nonetheless, there was no “standard clarification” of the said events. The narration could be built out of various elements, they could as well be
arranged and interpreted in a number of ways. It was not until the first decades of the 16th century that reasonably consistent
standard exposition of the origins of Poland commenced to be built. In its fundamental outline it remained to the 19th century. The emergence of the said canon was resultant upon the propagation of the manuscript copies of the Annals by Jan Długosz and printed works: the chronicles of the Poles by Maciej of Miechów, the lives of St. Adalbert and Stanisław and breviaries of various dioceses. In the said breviaries we could find legends on the Polish saints, the legends that bring
basic information on the origins of Poland.
The historical memory in the late Middle Ages was shaped not only by the historiographic works, which were directed above all at educated and elitist receivers. It was the hagiographic works, which acted as an abridged lecture on the history of
Poland, that reached greater audience. Numerous, late-mediaeval, modifications of earlier lives of St. Adalbert may serve as an example. Additionally, they constituted
the basis for the creation of sermons and liturgical works (e.g. hymns, breviary offices). It was the liturgy that was the most popular source of information on the early history. Not only did it address a greater number of people, but it also did it
sequentially and frequently. The liturgical works, however, contained only general information, which may be explained by universality, but also superficiality, of the historical knowledge in the late Middle Ages.
The author revealed that in the late Middle Ages (XIV-XV c.) the times of Mieszko i and Bolesław Chrobry were still present and often recalled. It was widely known that it was at the time that Poland was baptized, became kingdom and the church organization was established. It was believed that it was at that time that further development activities of the Kingdom of Poland were taken and the standing of the state in the Christian community was defined.
The origins of Poland evinced an avid interest, which was manifested in the historiographic, hagiographic, liturgical and preacher’s works, as well as in the catalogues of the monarchs and church dignitaries, political speeches and treaties.
The amount of the original works and their copies is not insignificant likewise. Moreover, they functioned in various communities.
The access to the historical information transmitted through writing was limited to the people able to read in Latin, namely the clergy, noblemen and burgesses.
The information on the origins of Poland was received not only through writing, but also through image. Not too often could we come across narrative sequences telling about the old history, e.g. the Congress of Gniezno or the translation of
the body of St. Adalbert to Trzemeszno and Gniezno. However, one could draw on the origins of Poland in numerous ways, by way of illustration the attributes of St. Adalbert (pallium, archbishop’s crucifix) indicated the dignity of the archbishop
of Gniezno. Churches, built as it was maintained in “an old way”, evoked the associations with the origins of Poland. The iconographic sources indicate that the historical memory did not limit itself to the elitist circles, but it reached much further.
The scope of its influence may be confirmed by the oral historical tradition. Surely, all the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Poland (though, to a larger or smaller extent) could hear the sermons and clergymen preaching telling about a particular
saint and about the past of various places, churches, monasteries, etc. The Eucharistic duty and requirements of the parish life compelled the constant contact with the local priest. Pilgrimages to holy places connected to the cult of St. Adalbert or Five Holy Brothers enabled the said undertaking.
Late-mediaeval inhabitants of the Kingdom of Poland had as well a chance to listen to the stories on the origins of their own families and coats of arms, to learn about the old register of the borders of their own property, the origins of the stone
with the footprint of St. Adalbert or other objects linked to the origins of Poland.
Material and immaterial symbols of memory sent us back to the past and proved the authenticity of the said events. The aforementioned symbols did not usually bring extended narrations. Not infrequently they comprised short notes which were linked to other information and told us about values important for the community, e.g. the church of St. Adalbert in Krakow confirmed the stay of the saint in the town and his missionary activity in Poland, iron poles thrust in the Saale, Dnieper or Ossa Rivers indicated the territorial extent of the country and the mightiness of the Kingdom of Poland, etc. Considering the oral transmission of the information
on the old history we may assume that the range of the stories on the origins of Poland was great or even vast.
Nevertheless, it was not equivalent to the exactness and consistency of the message. The knowledge of most late-mediaeval inhabitants of the Kingdom on the origins of Poland was superficial: not too broad and often chaotic and imprecise, for instance they did not know the names of the early-mediaeval heroes, dates were mixed up or were unknown, heroes and sequences of events were confused,
etc. Late-mediaeval memory was often limited to the presentation of the events and a few heroes (Mieszko i — Dąbrówka, Bolesław Chrobry — St. Adalbert). Additionally, it referred to a few associations, e.g. the coronation of Chrobry, iron poles at the frontiers of Poland. Specific events and personages
constituted a point of reference, nonetheless, they could not be connected or arranged chronologically.
At times the information on the origins of Poland were used for the present needs, especially political and diplomatic. However, it appears to be somewhat difficult to encounter more extensive feature records. Only some historiographic and hagiographic works examine the said issue. The consistent narration on the early origins was accessible just to the few — the intellectual elite. They could reflect upon the origins of Poland with the in-depth knowledge and integrate numerous stories on the origins of the state into the ordered whole.
In the late Middle Ages there was no institution that would set the tone and shape the historical memory among the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Poland. Various “memory communities” existed, the communities that formed particular circles (e.g. monks of Święty Krzyż or Trzemeszno) or social groups. Local communities, or even particular families and houses, formed separate “memory communities”. Different personages could be the members of several communities. Yet, each group functioned within a broader “memory community” embracing all the inhabitants of the late-mediaeval Kingdom of Poland.
Among a number of topics concerning the origins of Poland, the most popular in the late-mediaeval historical memory were the baptism of Mieszko i, the stay of St. Adalbert in Poland and the role of his relics, as well as the Congress of Gniezno,
during which (as it was held) the coronation of Bolesław Chrobry took place and the Kingdom of Poland was established. Oftentimes they referred to the formation
of the Polish church organization, foundation of the bishoprics and monasteries, territorial conquests of Bolesław Chrobry, the territorial extent of the state, and the stories on unsuccessful attempts at the royal coronation for the Polish ruler
in Rome.
The said stories were often linked to other narrations. Even main records (about Mieszko i and coronation of Bolesław Chrobry) were connected to other information and pertained to a broader sequence of events, the example of which could be the baptism of Mieszko i. Apart from baptism itself, supplementary notes appeared concerning the initial blindness of the ruler, the wedding with Dąbrówka, the birth of Bolesław
Chrobry or the beginnings of the Polish church organization. The baptism of the duke (and the whole state) did not, therefore, constitute a separate autonomous narration. It was a part (though the most important one) of a multi-element story, which was both to explicate the Christian origins of the community of Poles and the birth of the Polish state and church, and secure the place of the Polish state in the contemporary world.
The stories analysed in the book prove how additional themes, information and associations were added to the initial, laconic notes (e.g. coming from the early-mediaeval chronicles and hagiographies). They show as well how great was the need to supplement and explain what had not earlier been noted. The structure of the aforementioned stories point out to the importance of symbols in the late-mediaeval historical memory.
A number of versions of the stories on the same events functioned in the late-mediaeval historical memory, to wit the narration on the baptism of Mieszko i. Undeniably, the “canon of knowledge” linked to the origins of Poland existed in the late-mediaeval historical memory, nonetheless, there was no “standard clarification” of the said events. The narration could be built out of various elements, they could as well be
arranged and interpreted in a number of ways. It was not until the first decades of the 16th century that reasonably consistent
standard exposition of the origins of Poland commenced to be built. In its fundamental outline it remained to the 19th century. The emergence of the said canon was resultant upon the propagation of the manuscript copies of the Annals by Jan Długosz and printed works: the chronicles of the Poles by Maciej of Miechów, the lives of St. Adalbert and Stanisław and breviaries of various dioceses. In the said breviaries we could find legends on the Polish saints, the legends that bring
basic information on the origins of Poland.
The historical memory in the late Middle Ages was shaped not only by the historiographic works, which were directed above all at educated and elitist receivers. It was the hagiographic works, which acted as an abridged lecture on the history of
Poland, that reached greater audience. Numerous, late-mediaeval, modifications of earlier lives of St. Adalbert may serve as an example. Additionally, they constituted
the basis for the creation of sermons and liturgical works (e.g. hymns, breviary offices). It was the liturgy that was the most popular source of information on the early history. Not only did it address a greater number of people, but it also did it
sequentially and frequently. The liturgical works, however, contained only general information, which may be explained by universality, but also superficiality, of the historical knowledge in the late Middle Ages.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Bibliografia źródeł drukowanych do dziejów Polski późnego średniowiecza (1386-1506), część 1, pod redakcją P. Węcowskiego, opracowali P. Chojnacki, R. Jaworski, J. Kaliszuk, P. Węcowski, Warszawa 1999, pp. 214 (Bibliography of Printed Sources for the History of Late Medieval Poland, 1386-1506), ed. by P. Węcowski, part 1more
Research Interests:
"Działalność publiczna możnowładztwa małopolskiego w późnym średniowieczu. Itineraria kasztelanów i wojewodów krakowskich w czasach panowania Władysława Jagiełły, 1386-1434" (The Public Activity of Magnates from Little Poland. Itineraries of the Cracow Castellans and Voivodes during the Reign of Władysław Jagiełło (1386-1434), Warszawa 1998, pp. 215more
Research Interests:
The study by Piotr Węcowski Between science and politics, between history and archaeology: The Management of Research on the Origins of the Polish State (1949-1953) is devoted to the issue of state implantations into the research of the... more
The study by Piotr Węcowski Between science and politics, between history and archaeology: The Management of Research on the Origins of the Polish State (1949-1953) is devoted to the issue of state implantations into the research of the Early Middle Ages. The author predominantly focuses on the activity of Kierownictwo Badań nad Początkami Państwa Polskiego, the institution which was founded in connection with the preparation of the millennial anniversary of the emergence of the Polish state and developed its activity in 1948/1949-1953, i.e. at the time of the most intensive Stalinist terror in Poland. According to Węcowski, it was the largest humanities-orientated interdisciplinary project of Polish science in the 20th and 21st centuries. The head of this institution was the historian Aleksander Gieysztor along with the archaeologists Kazimierz Majewski and Zdzisław Rajewski. The aim of this institution was to introduce the Marxist method into Polish science and clearly prove the Slavic past of Silesia and Pomerania, the territories annexed to Poland in 1945. Despite intensive attempts to use the institution’s activities in party propaganda, the archaeologists and historians managed to preserve its scientific character and not succumb to external pressures. Although a wide range of the historians and archaeologists who participated in its work professed and
promoted Marxism, researchers thinking in other ways were not excluded from its activities. Even in this high-ideological period, it was still a haven for a number of scientists persecuted by the Communist regime.
promoted Marxism, researchers thinking in other ways were not excluded from its activities. Even in this high-ideological period, it was still a haven for a number of scientists persecuted by the Communist regime.
Research Interests:
The Archives of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw contain hitherto unknown letters written by historians Aleksander (1916–1999) and Irena (1914–1999) Gieysztor in 1937–1939 to their professor Marceli Handelsman (1882–1945). The... more
The Archives of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw contain hitherto unknown letters written by historians Aleksander (1916–1999) and Irena (1914–1999) Gieysztor in 1937–1939 to their professor Marceli Handelsman (1882–1945). The article contains an edition of the letters together with an introduction presenting the relationship between the Gieysztors and Handelsman (both before and during the war). The letters could be divided into two thematic groups. The first seven letters and the last one (written between November 1937 to July 1938 and in
August 1939) are devoted to Aleksander Gieysztor’s military service and activities related to the publication of his MA thesis. His fi ancé— Irena Czarnecka— was also involved in this latter venture. The second group is made up of twelve letters written by the couple from Paris between October 1938 and June 1939. The letters are an interesting contribution to the biography of Aleksander and Irena Gieysztor. They are a mine of information not only on their pre-war everyday life, but also
reveal their then dilemmas, feelings, and thoughts. They also could be regarded as a contribution to the history of pre-war intelligentsia. Of special interest could be opinions (occasionally formulated expressis verbis, and sometimes vaguely) of the young university graduate about the hardship of the barrack life as well as the French and Polish scientifi c community in Paris on the verge of war. What is interesting is a changing mood of Parisian letters, in harmony with the international
situation and impending war. The letters are also an expression of the
Gieysztors’ great attachment and respect to their Master— Marceli Handelsman.
August 1939) are devoted to Aleksander Gieysztor’s military service and activities related to the publication of his MA thesis. His fi ancé— Irena Czarnecka— was also involved in this latter venture. The second group is made up of twelve letters written by the couple from Paris between October 1938 and June 1939. The letters are an interesting contribution to the biography of Aleksander and Irena Gieysztor. They are a mine of information not only on their pre-war everyday life, but also
reveal their then dilemmas, feelings, and thoughts. They also could be regarded as a contribution to the history of pre-war intelligentsia. Of special interest could be opinions (occasionally formulated expressis verbis, and sometimes vaguely) of the young university graduate about the hardship of the barrack life as well as the French and Polish scientifi c community in Paris on the verge of war. What is interesting is a changing mood of Parisian letters, in harmony with the international
situation and impending war. The letters are also an expression of the
Gieysztors’ great attachment and respect to their Master— Marceli Handelsman.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
One of the motives to be found in Kazimierz Jagiellończyk’s political ideology was calling for peace, harmony and unity, addressed to both his subjects and the world. It derived from king’s belief in kindness peace and harmony bring. He... more
One of the motives to be found in Kazimierz Jagiellończyk’s political ideology was calling for peace, harmony and unity, addressed to both his subjects and the world. It derived from king’s belief in kindness peace and harmony bring. He claimed that state prosperity depends on them. The king’s duty, however, as a just (rex iustus) and peaceful (rex pacificus) king was to provide peace and harmony. The subjects should live in a brotherly harmony. It referred to both the relationships between Poles and Lithuanians as well as Prussians, and internal ones. It was
connected to among others the concept of the body of the Polish Crown (corpus regni Poloniae). All subjects were the members of the same body that should constitute unity. Calling for peace, harmony and unity also derived from the fact that Kazimierz Jagiellończyk perceived
them against a wider and divine background. He understood king’s duties as the manifestation of God’s actions on the earth. As it was Christ’s coming that provided peace to the earth, maintaining this peace was king’s duty.
connected to among others the concept of the body of the Polish Crown (corpus regni Poloniae). All subjects were the members of the same body that should constitute unity. Calling for peace, harmony and unity also derived from the fact that Kazimierz Jagiellończyk perceived
them against a wider and divine background. He understood king’s duties as the manifestation of God’s actions on the earth. As it was Christ’s coming that provided peace to the earth, maintaining this peace was king’s duty.
Research Interests:
The essay presents the politics of the Jagiellons towards the magnates and political elite of the Kingdom of Poland in the 14th–16th centuries, together with political measures employed by the Jagiellons in their “political game” with the... more
The essay presents the politics of the Jagiellons towards the magnates and political elite of the Kingdom of Poland in the 14th–16th centuries, together with political measures employed by the Jagiellons in their “political game” with the powerful and wealthy. Almost all Jagiellons sought to weaken the position of magnates and to support aspirations of the middle nobility. Their activities, however, were not directed against the magnates as the whole social stratum, but only against the current distribution of political forces, elite of magnates and concrete individuals
or parties. The king wanted to introduce to the elite new persons who, without the support and influences enjoyed by the old elites, would be forced to take into account the king’s will and to remain loyal to him. None of the Polish Jagiellons wanted to “eradicate” magnates as a group or to marginalise them and oust them from power. It was impossible, for the middle nobility was too weak politically. It could have played a role in deterring and pressuring the magnates but could not
counterbalance the power of magnates and their position in the state. This did not change until the time of Sigismund Augustus’ rule. The late medieval and early modern political scene should not be regarded as the struggle of the king and middle nobility against magnates. It was, rather, the struggle between magnate parties or factions with the Jagiellons often supporting one of them against another. The rulers tried to manoeuvre between the existing parties and play the role of an “arbiter”
on the political scene, which meant advancing the interests of some magnate factions at the expense of others or backing up magnates of one province against those of other regions, basing on a long-standing antagonism between the provinces of Great Poland and Little Poland.
The latter action illustrates one of the political methods employed by the Jagiellons – dividing and breaking up of the opposition. This weakened the force and effectiveness of the king’s adversaries and made it more difficult for them to unite against the monarch. There was also another political stratagem willingly used by the Jagiellons, that is to delay certain decisions and stall for time in order to bring about the split among the magnates. This playing for time was not motivated by the
will to investigate certain decisions more thoroughly. This method was a political blackmail with which the monarch held his opponents in check. They could not act openly against the king and had to wait for his move. Another effective measure used by the Jagiellons was to threaten and intimidate their subjects. The king’s anger could be manifested in many various ways, such as the withdrawal of the royal favour and, for instance, deprival of the Crown lands or removal from the royal council. It could also be manifested in an ostentatious refusal by the king to give someone his hand. When other political tactics failed, the Jagiellons could always resort to the extremity: their obstinacy. Even magnates were unable to make the king withdraw or cancel his decisions. This stubbornness as the last resort in the realisation of their intentions resulted from the great authority enjoyed by the Jagiellons in the state. And it was their authority that very often made it possible for the Jagiellon kings to bring about desired results without violence and bloodshed. Despite the increased legal limitations of power of the Polish rulers, there was in the Polish Kingdom a strong conviction about the exalted and unquestionable position of the monarch in the state. It was the king who was the central authority of the state and the whole political system.
or parties. The king wanted to introduce to the elite new persons who, without the support and influences enjoyed by the old elites, would be forced to take into account the king’s will and to remain loyal to him. None of the Polish Jagiellons wanted to “eradicate” magnates as a group or to marginalise them and oust them from power. It was impossible, for the middle nobility was too weak politically. It could have played a role in deterring and pressuring the magnates but could not
counterbalance the power of magnates and their position in the state. This did not change until the time of Sigismund Augustus’ rule. The late medieval and early modern political scene should not be regarded as the struggle of the king and middle nobility against magnates. It was, rather, the struggle between magnate parties or factions with the Jagiellons often supporting one of them against another. The rulers tried to manoeuvre between the existing parties and play the role of an “arbiter”
on the political scene, which meant advancing the interests of some magnate factions at the expense of others or backing up magnates of one province against those of other regions, basing on a long-standing antagonism between the provinces of Great Poland and Little Poland.
The latter action illustrates one of the political methods employed by the Jagiellons – dividing and breaking up of the opposition. This weakened the force and effectiveness of the king’s adversaries and made it more difficult for them to unite against the monarch. There was also another political stratagem willingly used by the Jagiellons, that is to delay certain decisions and stall for time in order to bring about the split among the magnates. This playing for time was not motivated by the
will to investigate certain decisions more thoroughly. This method was a political blackmail with which the monarch held his opponents in check. They could not act openly against the king and had to wait for his move. Another effective measure used by the Jagiellons was to threaten and intimidate their subjects. The king’s anger could be manifested in many various ways, such as the withdrawal of the royal favour and, for instance, deprival of the Crown lands or removal from the royal council. It could also be manifested in an ostentatious refusal by the king to give someone his hand. When other political tactics failed, the Jagiellons could always resort to the extremity: their obstinacy. Even magnates were unable to make the king withdraw or cancel his decisions. This stubbornness as the last resort in the realisation of their intentions resulted from the great authority enjoyed by the Jagiellons in the state. And it was their authority that very often made it possible for the Jagiellon kings to bring about desired results without violence and bloodshed. Despite the increased legal limitations of power of the Polish rulers, there was in the Polish Kingdom a strong conviction about the exalted and unquestionable position of the monarch in the state. It was the king who was the central authority of the state and the whole political system.
Research Interests:
Piotr Węcowski in the chapter „Opera minora” Jana z Dąbrówki [John of Dąbrówka’s minor works] completes the picture of John’s legacy with seven other historiographic works, which are only seldomly discussed, if they don’t remain unknown... more
Piotr Węcowski in the chapter „Opera minora” Jana z Dąbrówki [John
of Dąbrówka’s minor works] completes the picture of John’s legacy with seven other historiographic works, which are only seldomly discussed, if they don’t remain unknown to some scholars at all. These are as follows: Rodowód książąt polskich [Pedigree of Polish Dukes], Poczet książąt i królów polskich [Guide to Polish dukes and kings], Genealogia książąt pomorskich [Genealogy of the Dukes of Pomerania], adaptation of the Rocznik małopolski [Annals of Lesser Poland], Katalog biskupów krakowskich [Catalogue of the bishops of Cracow], a legal-historical treatise (1464), and Oratio contra Cruciferos (1462–1464). Taking them all into account allows one to better show the intellectual profile
of the commentator, and informal leader of the group of royal experts
in times of Casimir IV Jagiellon.
of Dąbrówka’s minor works] completes the picture of John’s legacy with seven other historiographic works, which are only seldomly discussed, if they don’t remain unknown to some scholars at all. These are as follows: Rodowód książąt polskich [Pedigree of Polish Dukes], Poczet książąt i królów polskich [Guide to Polish dukes and kings], Genealogia książąt pomorskich [Genealogy of the Dukes of Pomerania], adaptation of the Rocznik małopolski [Annals of Lesser Poland], Katalog biskupów krakowskich [Catalogue of the bishops of Cracow], a legal-historical treatise (1464), and Oratio contra Cruciferos (1462–1464). Taking them all into account allows one to better show the intellectual profile
of the commentator, and informal leader of the group of royal experts
in times of Casimir IV Jagiellon.
Research Interests:
The historian Karol Buczek from Cracow was in prison from 1946. His arrest was connected with the fight of communists with the opposition, especially the Polish People’s Party, of which Buczek was an activist. In November of 1954 Buczek... more
The historian Karol Buczek from Cracow was in prison from 1946. His arrest was connected with the fight of communists with the opposition, especially the Polish People’s Party, of which Buczek was an activist. In November of 1954 Buczek was granted a year’s leave, while in June of 1956 the Council of State suspended his imprisonment. During those two years Buczek corresponded with his friend from Poznań, the historian Gerard Labuda. The letters show, how difficult it was for Buczek to function in the first dozen or so months of being at large, when the threat of returning to prison was still real. They show the state of mind of the Cracow historian, his thoughts, worries and uncertainly about his future, as well as an attempt at returning to scholarly life. The letters may be an important contribution to understanding how a Polish intellectual (scholar) functioned in the first months of leaving a Stalinist prison.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Literacy, Medieval History, Medieval Studies, Medieval Historiography, Propaganda, and 13 moreHistoriography, Orality-Literacy Studies, Memory Studies, Cultural Memory, Medieval Literacy, Collective Memory, Poland, Medieval Poland, Medieval Political Culture, The Jagiellons, Jagiellon dynasty, Origin myths, and Medieval Literacy and Communication
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Walka o symbol, czyli dlaczego Kazimierz Jagiellończyk nie używał pieczęci majestatowej?, [w:] Moc a její symbolika ve středověku, red. M. Nodl, A. Pleszczyński, Colloquia mediaevalia Pragensia, 13, Praha 2011, s. 137-153 (A Quarrel about the Symbol, or Why Casimir Jagiellonian Did Not Use Majestic Seal?)more
Research Interests:
The Majestic Seal of Kazimierz Jagiellon. Datation and an Attempt at Explaining Why the King Ceased Using It The majestic seal (sigillum maiestatis) was the most important seal in the sphragistic system of each state. It possessed the... more
The Majestic Seal of Kazimierz Jagiellon. Datation and an Attempt at Explaining Why the King Ceased Using It
The majestic seal (sigillum maiestatis) was the most important seal in the sphragistic system of each state. It possessed the greatest legal power and was attached to eternal documents. Only this particular seal guaranteed the inviolability and incontestability of a document. From the end of the thirteenth century all Polish kings used the majestic seal. The ruler who ceased doing so was Kazimierz Jagiellon who for the major part of his reign (1447-1492) did not create a majestic seal until 1467-1470.
The author attempts to prove that the king intentionally did not employ a majestic seal. The reasons for his decision should be sought in the legal and social rank of the reception of this type of seal. For many years, Kazimierz did not wish to confirm his documents with the most prominent seal, thus keeping his subjects uncertain as regards the permanence of the issued documents. He found it more convenient to attach other seals, since in this manner he undermined the message and durability of his obligations vis a vis his subjects, leaving himself an opportunity to manoeuvre on the domestic scene. Only upon a single occasion, under the impact of financial problems and a difficult international situation of the state, did Kazimierz Jagiellon resolve to attach a majestic seal, when in November 1470 he confirmed the privileges and tax exemptions of the gentry and clergy of the Polish Kingdom.
The majestic seal (sigillum maiestatis) was the most important seal in the sphragistic system of each state. It possessed the greatest legal power and was attached to eternal documents. Only this particular seal guaranteed the inviolability and incontestability of a document. From the end of the thirteenth century all Polish kings used the majestic seal. The ruler who ceased doing so was Kazimierz Jagiellon who for the major part of his reign (1447-1492) did not create a majestic seal until 1467-1470.
The author attempts to prove that the king intentionally did not employ a majestic seal. The reasons for his decision should be sought in the legal and social rank of the reception of this type of seal. For many years, Kazimierz did not wish to confirm his documents with the most prominent seal, thus keeping his subjects uncertain as regards the permanence of the issued documents. He found it more convenient to attach other seals, since in this manner he undermined the message and durability of his obligations vis a vis his subjects, leaving himself an opportunity to manoeuvre on the domestic scene. Only upon a single occasion, under the impact of financial problems and a difficult international situation of the state, did Kazimierz Jagiellon resolve to attach a majestic seal, when in November 1470 he confirmed the privileges and tax exemptions of the gentry and clergy of the Polish Kingdom.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Strata korony królewskiej po śmierci św. Stanisława w opinii pisarzy późnego średniowiecza, [w:] Christianitas Romana. Studia ofiarowane Profesorowi Romanowi Michałowskiemu, red. K. Skiwierczyński, Warszawa 2009, s. 274-299 (The loss of the royal crown after St Stanisław's death in the opinions of late medieval writers)more
P. Węcowski's starting point of discussion (The loss of the royal crown after St Stanisław's death in the opinions of late medieval writers) is the thirteenth-century work by Wincenty of Kielce (Kielcza), who introduced a motif of the... more
P. Węcowski's starting point of discussion (The loss of the royal crown after St Stanisław's death in the opinions of late medieval writers) is the thirteenth-century work by Wincenty of Kielce (Kielcza), who introduced a motif of the loss of the crown, the decline of the dignity of the kingdom in Poland and the division and separation of the regions of the country. It was regarded as a punishment that God sent upon the Polish for the sins of their monarch, Bolesław the Munificent, who had killed the bishop of Cracow, Stanisław. This opinion was becoming quite popular already in the thirteenth century, and it was widely know and accepted in the fifteenth century. At that time other motifs appeared, or which the first version lacked: the episcopal throne in Cracow empty for four years, the interdict that was cast upon Poland, Polish kings deprived from the patronage over some ecclesiastical sites and the Teutonic Knight's attacks on Poland. However, this interpretation was not readily accepted by everyone, as it undermined the arguments of Polish diplomats in the territorial conflicts with the Order of the Teutonic Knights and with Masovia. Those arguments were based on another concept that the kingdom persisted and was to persist even without the kings. The motif of Stanisław's murder and its consequences was further developed by Jan Długosz (d. 1480). His work was widely accessible thanks to its printed editions, which appeared as early as 1511. Thus, Długosz's interpretation became a canonical text of the Polish history and remained implanted in the Polish historical consciousness until the nineteenth century.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Itineraria Jagiellonów (Rec.: M. Neuman, K. Pietkiewicz, Lietuvos didžiojo kunigaikščio ir Lenkijos karaliaus Aleksandro Jogailaičio itinerariumas (1492 m. birelis-1506 m. rugpjutis), "Lietuvos Istorijos Metraštis", 1995, s. 154-240 – I. Sulkovska-Kurasewa, Itinerarij Kazimira Jagellona, “Issledovanija po istorii Litovskoj Metriku”, Moskva 1989, s. 264-334), "Studia Źródłoznawcze. Commentationes", t. XXXVII, 2000, s. 153-163more
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The author examines the significance of court conventions held in Little Poland in the political life of Poland during the reign of Władysław Jagiełło (1386-1434). Such conventions emerged in about the middle of the fourtheent century... more
The author examines the significance of court conventions held in Little Poland in the political life of Poland during the reign of Władysław Jagiełło (1386-1434). Such conventions emerged in about the middle of the fourtheent century and, next to courts held personally by the king, constitued the supreme instance in the judical system of the nobility. The highest officials in Little Poland (castellan and Cracow voivode) almost always attended the conventions (at the time of Władysław Jagiełło the presence of those officials was not confirmed only at four out a total of 65 conventions). Other officials from the Little Poland attended the Cracow conventions just as frequently.
During the Middle Ages, the Cracow court conventions comprised a meeting place for the elite of Little Poland. Its members discussed joint undertakings vis a vis the king and magnates from other provinces of the state. At the same time, judical conventions formed an arena for political confrontations between the dignitaries of Little Poland, who arrived in the company of their clients and adherents. Finally, the conventions offered a convenient forum for personal meetings between the magnates and those representatives of the genry who did not hold official posts, and a school of political thought for that estate. Sources inform predominantly about the judical aspect of the activity of the conventions, which also played a legislative role and exerted an impact on the nominations of court officials.
The conventions were a self-gouvernment could be regarded as "pre-representative (pre-parliamentarian) conventions", and constitued one of the elements of an evolution from a pre-representative system to estate representation proper. Consequently, they should be included into reflections on the origin of Polish parlamentarianism. In the first place, however, the conventions in question were an indispensable component of the "political theatre" of the state, without which it is impossible to explain the mechanisms of political life in Late Middle Ages.
During the Middle Ages, the Cracow court conventions comprised a meeting place for the elite of Little Poland. Its members discussed joint undertakings vis a vis the king and magnates from other provinces of the state. At the same time, judical conventions formed an arena for political confrontations between the dignitaries of Little Poland, who arrived in the company of their clients and adherents. Finally, the conventions offered a convenient forum for personal meetings between the magnates and those representatives of the genry who did not hold official posts, and a school of political thought for that estate. Sources inform predominantly about the judical aspect of the activity of the conventions, which also played a legislative role and exerted an impact on the nominations of court officials.
The conventions were a self-gouvernment could be regarded as "pre-representative (pre-parliamentarian) conventions", and constitued one of the elements of an evolution from a pre-representative system to estate representation proper. Consequently, they should be included into reflections on the origin of Polish parlamentarianism. In the first place, however, the conventions in question were an indispensable component of the "political theatre" of the state, without which it is impossible to explain the mechanisms of political life in Late Middle Ages.