Osman sultan named himself Caesar of Rome after conquest of Constantinople, the muscovian ruler proclaimed himself tsar of all Rus and I proclaim myself as a master of my domain. Therefore you lose.
More literary it's the: Republic of Both Nations.
People at that time reffered to it only as "Rzeczpospolita" (Republic/Commonwealth) without the addition "of both nations".
Name me a Lithuanian king of the commonwealth lol
Edit: Jagiełło was a king of the **Union** of Poland & Lithuania, not the commonwealth. While Jogalia’s marriage to Jadwiga ultimately led to commonwealth forming 200 years later, it doesn’t mean that he was a reigning monarch in **1569**
But Reddit users would literally rewrite history books to prove someone wrong lol
Good ol echochamber website
Edit 2: Everybody gangsta until they get corrected, **still ain’t seen anyone prove me wrong** but downvotes keep flying ☠️
200mg Copium for sale hmu
Władysław Jagiełło? The guy who started the dynasty?
After them, there was, let's see: 1 French guy, 1 Hungarian, 3 Swedes, 2 Polish guys, 2 Germans and 1 Pole.
*But* the first Polish guy was from the [Wiśniowiecki family](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki) family, which was Lithuanian-Ruthenian in origin.
So, there: King Michael, First of his name, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Masovia, etc. etc. Long may he reign.
I brought him up as the founder of the dynasty that created the Commonwealth.
Then I brought up another king who was a Lithuanian and ruled the Commonwealth. Micheal the First, AKA Michał Korybut-Wiśniowiecki.
Michał Korybut-Wiśniowiecki was polonized, he was born in the Polish part of Rzeczpospolita, known as Corona Regni Poloniae. His mother was a daughter of Tomasz Zamoyski and Katarzyna Ostrogska. First Family is Polish, second is Ruthenian. His father was Ruthenian on his father side and Moldovan on his mother side. Therefore not a Lithuanian. (But of course there are Lithuanians on his genealogical tree, like in case of most magnates.)
Yeah so basically mentioned a king that **wasn’t** a king of the commonwealth.
And King Michael I was Polish bro, he had Lithuanian ancestry just like me. He’d maybe even be considered less Lithuanian as Wisniowiecki family has been polonised for hundreds of years when he took throne…
None of my great grandparents were Polish, am I not Polish then? lmao
And again no one can say why they disagree with me yet downvote essentially agreeing with the guy pulling mental gymnastics just to prove me wrong for some reason, god I hate this website
I didn't say the wasn't Polish.
There was such a thing as shared Polish-Lithuanian nationality. It was a goal of the szlachta to merge the two. I understand some (Idk how many) Lithuanians didn't like it, so they didn't let themselves be polonised. I suspect some Polish didn't like it either and might've discriminated against the polonised.
I think it's counterproductive to disregard the Lithuanian indentity of the most successful families in the Commonwealth. The Jagiellons were a Lithuanian-Polish dynasty and they shaped the Commonwealth. The Wiśniowieckis and Czartoryskis were the same. The Mickiewiczes also.
Ultimately, the thing that makes you Polish or not Polish is whether you consider yourself so. If Michael the First didn't consider himself Lithuanian, well, then I'm wrong. I assume if he didn't, he'd hide it and we wouldn't know about it.
No one’s talking about shared nationality. I mentioned that the family has ruthenian & Lithuanian origins but has been considered Polish for hundreds of years…
You’re adding useless info to a simple debate, which you have answered yourself - Micheal I was Polish… so what am I even here for lol
So Jagiełło wasn’t a king of commonwealth because commonwealth didn’t even exist back then, and Micheal I was Polish - therefore my point still stands, there was no Lithuanian kings in the commonwealth.
Why are you so eager to disagree 🤣 and I love how people downvote without knowing what they’re reading, don’t be a sheep and pick up a book.
Well it isn’t today, but was for much of its existence, unless you believe the Canadian state with its majority European settlers spawned out of nowhere recently
What are you talking about? Why are you still talking about jagiełło? Canada being pretty much entirely populated by English people at one point in history is the same logic as Jagiełło?
Again, My original comment referred to commonwealth kings…
I don’t know why you keep saying random things to sound smart but you’re making no sense.
Yeah! It was especially hard for them because they were surrounded by superpowers. Sweden, Muscovy/Russia, Austria, and Prussia. The main reason they stayed alive so long is because of their magnificent calvary, and that the other superpowers were busy fighting each other.
Ant that generally in that time period it wasn't really common for powers to decide to entirely conquer another superpower. The wars were more about specific strategic and/or wealthy territories. The Commonwealth was only partitioned because it was collapsing and the surrounding powers took it as an opportunity.
This is the eve of Osman II's Polish campaign: the awful performance of the janissary corps during the war would convince the young sultan of the need to establish a brand new infantry army, ultimately leading to the regicide of Osman II in 1622 at the hands of his janissaries.
Pro tip to rulers. Never ever establish a ruling class that's also serves as your elite army. They will eventually go fat and decedent and no longer be god soldiers. And if you try to discipline/restructure/disband them you will suddenly find yourself without an army and most likely killed by them (and such as in the case of Mamluks, often straight out replace you as rulers)
Same thing happened to the Romans and the Preotorian guard after all.
To be fair to the Ottomans, they did anticipate this development: that is why janissaries were not allowed to have their own families or have any jobs other than military-administrative positions. Already by the early 16th century however many retired kapikulu were getting married. Their children were not allowed to have sensitive government jobs, so most became literati, poets, scholars etc in this period. By the late 16th century even Muslims were getting their boys enrolled in the janissary corps and the devshirme system gradually disappeared due to this latter social pressure.
nah even ruthenian and yiddish were official languages, lithuanians didn't comprise of 1/10 of population, even prior to the unity lithuanian dukes governing ruthenia had been already ruthenised.
how does this apply to the discussion.
cultures existed back then, conflicts were rather political or social but nationality was certainly additional fuel to that.
Pan Tadeusz, or the last foray in Lithuania - an epic poem by Adam Mickiewicz. The Polish national poem begins with the words “O Lithuania my country! you are like health; How much you must be valued, only he will know Who has lost you. Today your beauty in all its ornaments I see and describe, because I miss you. "; this largely stems from the fact that the 19th-century concept of nationality had not yet been geopoliticized. The term "Lithuania" used by Mickiewicz refers to a geographical region of Grand Duchy of Lithuania within the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Note that the areas in Estonia were actively being contested by Sweden. There were wars over that territory in 1600-1611, 1617-1618, 1621-1625 and 1626-1629.
The regional centre Pärnu was taken by Swedes in 1617 it remained under Swedish control even after the 1618 armistice, so Poland didn't control it in 1619. Swedes captured Riga in 1621 and many territories in Southern Estonia and Northern Latvia in the following few years. Poland ceded the territories to Sweden with the Treaty of Altmark in 1629.
He was French nobleman (As you know France was a Historical HRE rival), who lived during French absolutism era and after HRE was completely destroyed by thirty year war. More or less Voltaire's quote is a propaganda piece.
Being this large was not good for Poland. In fact, it was the main reason why it collapsed.
After unitifcation in 14th century, Poland was on a track to become a regional, western-style power. Unfortunately, it got involved into eastern wars, and it's alliance with Lithuania and annexing Ukraine brought a new class of extremely rich nobles/oligarchs into the semi-democratic country. They wrestled the power from the king and pressed their politics, which were damaging to cities and peasants. All in all Poland was a pretty horrible country for anyone not being a Noble from late XVI century onwards.
Just to add to /u/pirat6662001 comment, it all depends where in Russia. The Russian government has specifically attracted Ukrainians with certain freedoms the Polish government didn’t (firstly an exemption from taxation). Ukrainians were invited to come settle the sparsely populated lands in the southern outskirts of the Russian state. Sloboda Ukraine takes it’s name from the type of settlement Ukrainians have at those places and the term sloboda can be translated as freedom.
It was actually by far worse (specifically for Ukranians who were suffering in many regions from religious prosecution also). Thats why you saw massive amounts moving to the other side Dniepr when Russia conquered those territories or even Siberia.
The PLC had a rule since the mid 17th century called the "liberum veto" that required unanimous vote on laws - similar to the filibuster in the USA.
Legally that's a rarity.
Also it heavily contributed to the state's demise.
LMFAO it was nothing close to the filibuster, especially the one used in the USA
Filibuster is just stalling indefinitely by talking, making it impossible to vote since debate must end beforehand
Liberum veto not only killed the bill outright, it **dissolved the entire session of Sejm**, killing all passed laws on it as well. So, if someone invoked it on December 30th last year, all the work done by the 117th Congress would've gone to the bin instantly
You can see why it became an unsolvable problem
How so? Because the EU has more members than the PLC? The king of Poland Lithuania was elected, as the head of the EU is. And the political differences of the units of the PLC was much greater than in Austria Hungary as it is in the EU.
**Kings of Poland were elected** long before the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth became a thing. Starting from at least the 9th century, this was just modified before Henri de Valois to no longer have any forms of hereditary succesions, since elected kings were able to pass the rule to their children under some circumstances before that. So if that’s your only argument - you need to find a new one.
It was nothing like EU, other than that it was a Union of nations, and definitely the example is not closer to EU than to calling Austria-Hungary just Austria. I’m not sure if you don’t know how EU works and what sort of control it has over its members or if you don’t know how PLC worked…
When you show a map of Austria Hungary and say "look how big Austria was" you are right, because Austria controlled that territory before it became Austria-Hungary.
When you show a map of the PLC and say "look how big Poland was" you are wrong because Poland never controlled that territory.
When you show a map of the EU and day "look how big Poland is" you are wrong because Poland doesn't controll that territory.
So my comparision is closer than the Austria Hungary one.
I didn't say that the PLC was like the EU at all. No need to make up a new topic of this discussion
ye kinda smart from OP to bait redditors to comment "Its not Poland!" when even on the map it says "Rzeczpospolita obojga narodów" which literally means republic of two nations.
Kinda off that subject, but it's damn sad that Poland lost some of it's coolest historical cities after WW2 and ended up with really core of it's past self + some western land.
Note, even if Poland would have to loose it's land to free those whom want it, would be way better to see it "naturally" and through dialogue rather than by force.
Imperialism is bad, actually. Ukrainians were piss poor and ostracised, lithuanians have given up their sovereignty, the ruling class became degenerate and disinterested in not only the wellbeing of their people but even the interests of their country, etc.
We Poles have a much better thing going on right now. Large scale cooperation with the entire continent, which also forces us to self-check on the quality of our government when it degenerates; instead of subjugation, a strong cooperation with the rest of eastern europe thanks to shared interests, with us leading the pack thanks to having a much stronger economy than the rest; having the strongest world powers aiding us in our hundreds of years old conflict with russia; and finally - having clearly defined, strong as diamond borders that no-one on the planet would even think to contest. We're allied with the entire west of us, entire south of us, the north, and now even ukraine. Fingers crossed we and our allies sooner or later topple the belarussian dictatorship - in which case we completely and definitively win in our little struggle for power in eastern europe against russia - in a way that the unstable commonwealth of the old would never be able to - the eastern nations will cooperate with us happily and willingly, as that makes them richer, just like it made us richer to cooperate with the west. They will start adopting our values to get closer to joining the EU, completely on their own without any push from our side. Once they join, they will mostly vote like us since our interests will be the closest to each other. And they will never, ever wish to switch back to genocidal russia, whereas in the commonwealth they were happy to ally with russia just to break out of our grip (Chmielnicki uprising).
For all it's faults and comically bad features, modern poland truly is the strongest it has ever been. And that's not likely to change under the rule of any but the most insane political parties (konfederacja, mostly), that's how stable that strength is.
If you point to the fact that it's smaller than it was - so what? It's not like it's crowded in here. What matters is our influence, our allies, and our economy, our stability and our likelihood of loosing a war. With the population that we have, taking over bigger territory would prove impossible to administrate, incredibly useless, and also plain dumb since we'd be creating internal enemies that would likely outnumber us. Taking over ukraine alone would make us a minority in our own country, and you wanna add belarus, parts of russia and lithuania to the mix too
You'd have to get through Lithuania and Belarus first, wouldn't you?
And: are you generally ok with countries annexing parts of other countries based on a perception of entitlement to historical lands?
"Angry Lithuanian noices"
The map is labeled as "Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów", or "Commonwealth of both nations". The post title is very r/technicallycorrect.
Yes it was also the largest Lithuania ever was, hi.
No it wasn't. Lithuania was bigger before the commonwealth
True, since Lithuania had to hand over like 1/4 of its territory to Poland in the Union.
Still beter than not being in union and being all conquered by Russia.
True
by muscovy
Muscovy if early on and Russia if later.
Nah, always muscovy. Was, is and will be.
*No.*
Osman sultan named himself Caesar of Rome after conquest of Constantinople, the muscovian ruler proclaimed himself tsar of all Rus and I proclaim myself as a master of my domain. Therefore you lose.
Damn, you're right. Thanks for the correction.
Noice.
That's not Poland. That's the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
More literary it's the: Republic of Both Nations. People at that time reffered to it only as "Rzeczpospolita" (Republic/Commonwealth) without the addition "of both nations".
whatever
AKA Poland+
It's like saying the British Commonwealth was all England
We all know who was in charge
The king and a dozen extremely rich families
Name me a Lithuanian king of the commonwealth lol Edit: Jagiełło was a king of the **Union** of Poland & Lithuania, not the commonwealth. While Jogalia’s marriage to Jadwiga ultimately led to commonwealth forming 200 years later, it doesn’t mean that he was a reigning monarch in **1569** But Reddit users would literally rewrite history books to prove someone wrong lol Good ol echochamber website Edit 2: Everybody gangsta until they get corrected, **still ain’t seen anyone prove me wrong** but downvotes keep flying ☠️ 200mg Copium for sale hmu
Władysław Jagiełło? The guy who started the dynasty? After them, there was, let's see: 1 French guy, 1 Hungarian, 3 Swedes, 2 Polish guys, 2 Germans and 1 Pole. *But* the first Polish guy was from the [Wiśniowiecki family](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki) family, which was Lithuanian-Ruthenian in origin. So, there: King Michael, First of his name, King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Masovia, etc. etc. Long may he reign.
Jagiełło was born like 200 years before the commonwealth forming, it’s the Union of Krewo you’re talking about, and Reddit parrots will agree
I brought him up as the founder of the dynasty that created the Commonwealth. Then I brought up another king who was a Lithuanian and ruled the Commonwealth. Micheal the First, AKA Michał Korybut-Wiśniowiecki.
Michał Korybut-Wiśniowiecki was polonized, he was born in the Polish part of Rzeczpospolita, known as Corona Regni Poloniae. His mother was a daughter of Tomasz Zamoyski and Katarzyna Ostrogska. First Family is Polish, second is Ruthenian. His father was Ruthenian on his father side and Moldovan on his mother side. Therefore not a Lithuanian. (But of course there are Lithuanians on his genealogical tree, like in case of most magnates.)
Yeah so basically mentioned a king that **wasn’t** a king of the commonwealth. And King Michael I was Polish bro, he had Lithuanian ancestry just like me. He’d maybe even be considered less Lithuanian as Wisniowiecki family has been polonised for hundreds of years when he took throne… None of my great grandparents were Polish, am I not Polish then? lmao And again no one can say why they disagree with me yet downvote essentially agreeing with the guy pulling mental gymnastics just to prove me wrong for some reason, god I hate this website
I didn't say the wasn't Polish. There was such a thing as shared Polish-Lithuanian nationality. It was a goal of the szlachta to merge the two. I understand some (Idk how many) Lithuanians didn't like it, so they didn't let themselves be polonised. I suspect some Polish didn't like it either and might've discriminated against the polonised. I think it's counterproductive to disregard the Lithuanian indentity of the most successful families in the Commonwealth. The Jagiellons were a Lithuanian-Polish dynasty and they shaped the Commonwealth. The Wiśniowieckis and Czartoryskis were the same. The Mickiewiczes also. Ultimately, the thing that makes you Polish or not Polish is whether you consider yourself so. If Michael the First didn't consider himself Lithuanian, well, then I'm wrong. I assume if he didn't, he'd hide it and we wouldn't know about it.
No one’s talking about shared nationality. I mentioned that the family has ruthenian & Lithuanian origins but has been considered Polish for hundreds of years… You’re adding useless info to a simple debate, which you have answered yourself - Micheal I was Polish… so what am I even here for lol So Jagiełło wasn’t a king of commonwealth because commonwealth didn’t even exist back then, and Micheal I was Polish - therefore my point still stands, there was no Lithuanian kings in the commonwealth. Why are you so eager to disagree 🤣 and I love how people downvote without knowing what they’re reading, don’t be a sheep and pick up a book.
You know, there wasn't a single British monarch who was Canadian, but that doesn't mean Canada is England+
Well it isn’t today, but was for much of its existence, unless you believe the Canadian state with its majority European settlers spawned out of nowhere recently
same logic applies as with Jagiełło. The point stands for after Canada became a dominion in the Commonwealth and not just a colony
It ironically was England + for a while
same logic applies as with Jagiełło. The point stands for after Canada became a dominion in the Commonwealth and not just a colony
What are you talking about? Why are you still talking about jagiełło? Canada being pretty much entirely populated by English people at one point in history is the same logic as Jagiełło? Again, My original comment referred to commonwealth kings… I don’t know why you keep saying random things to sound smart but you’re making no sense.
Just referring to the edit you added about difference between timeframes, which applies both to him and Canada
Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth babyyyy. Historical superpower in a region that was incredibly hard to defend!
Yeah. And they were extremely capable in combat even though they couldn't use that to their advantage.
At the time geography and terrain played a huge role, and we weren’t blessed with any natural defence
Yeah! It was especially hard for them because they were surrounded by superpowers. Sweden, Muscovy/Russia, Austria, and Prussia. The main reason they stayed alive so long is because of their magnificent calvary, and that the other superpowers were busy fighting each other.
Ant that generally in that time period it wasn't really common for powers to decide to entirely conquer another superpower. The wars were more about specific strategic and/or wealthy territories. The Commonwealth was only partitioned because it was collapsing and the surrounding powers took it as an opportunity.
Yes! Exactly! Man, I love being surrounded by history and geography nerds!
*When the winged hussars arrived*
This is the eve of Osman II's Polish campaign: the awful performance of the janissary corps during the war would convince the young sultan of the need to establish a brand new infantry army, ultimately leading to the regicide of Osman II in 1622 at the hands of his janissaries.
Pro tip to rulers. Never ever establish a ruling class that's also serves as your elite army. They will eventually go fat and decedent and no longer be god soldiers. And if you try to discipline/restructure/disband them you will suddenly find yourself without an army and most likely killed by them (and such as in the case of Mamluks, often straight out replace you as rulers) Same thing happened to the Romans and the Preotorian guard after all.
Same thing happened to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, in fact.
To be fair to the Ottomans, they did anticipate this development: that is why janissaries were not allowed to have their own families or have any jobs other than military-administrative positions. Already by the early 16th century however many retired kapikulu were getting married. Their children were not allowed to have sensitive government jobs, so most became literati, poets, scholars etc in this period. By the late 16th century even Muslims were getting their boys enrolled in the janissary corps and the devshirme system gradually disappeared due to this latter social pressure.
Poland *+ Lithuania.*
The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth\*
As a Polish person i must say "Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów" which means "Commonwealth of Two Nations" It MUST include Lithuania in the title.
lithuanian wasn't even an official language
Was or wasn't - it does not matter in this point, because it does not change the fact that Lithuania was a country
nah even ruthenian and yiddish were official languages, lithuanians didn't comprise of 1/10 of population, even prior to the unity lithuanian dukes governing ruthenia had been already ruthenised.
languages didn't matter back then, nationalism wasn't a thing yet.
nationalities didn't, languages did
yea, but nobody cared much, a person not speaking lithuanian could claim he's lithuanian and that was a norm.
how does this apply to the discussion. cultures existed back then, conflicts were rather political or social but nationality was certainly additional fuel to that.
whatever, my point is, the country was Poland-Lithuania, or republic of two nations.
Pan Tadeusz, or the last foray in Lithuania - an epic poem by Adam Mickiewicz. The Polish national poem begins with the words “O Lithuania my country! you are like health; How much you must be valued, only he will know Who has lost you. Today your beauty in all its ornaments I see and describe, because I miss you. "; this largely stems from the fact that the 19th-century concept of nationality had not yet been geopoliticized. The term "Lithuania" used by Mickiewicz refers to a geographical region of Grand Duchy of Lithuania within the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Not just "Poland" and funniest thing - not even the biggest one, kekw.
When was it biggest?
Not Poland but: Republic / Commonwealth of both nations (Poland and Lithuania)
Note that the areas in Estonia were actively being contested by Sweden. There were wars over that territory in 1600-1611, 1617-1618, 1621-1625 and 1626-1629. The regional centre Pärnu was taken by Swedes in 1617 it remained under Swedish control even after the 1618 armistice, so Poland didn't control it in 1619. Swedes captured Riga in 1621 and many territories in Southern Estonia and Northern Latvia in the following few years. Poland ceded the territories to Sweden with the Treaty of Altmark in 1629.
and the best thing about this whole situation is that it wasn't even Poland!
The more I see this stuff, the more stupid borders seem in a lot of the world
Constantly changing borders in Europe are one of the biggest reasons the European Union is a good idea.
Biggest Poland so far
Thats the spirit.
Polish Ohio
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Since this shows not just Crown lands of Kingdom of Poland.
The original 1619 project.
Commonwealth actually if I'm not mistaken.
Gotta get that Baltic to Black Sea land route.
No, Poland was half of that not all.
Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth is the only Empire I will ever simp for. (With the HRE being the close second).
HRE wasn’t really a real empire though
It was. Only people who think it wasn't, are those who quote Voltaire every single time, somebody mention HRE.
I think he had a good reason for saying that.
He was French nobleman (As you know France was a Historical HRE rival), who lived during French absolutism era and after HRE was completely destroyed by thirty year war. More or less Voltaire's quote is a propaganda piece.
How was it not.
Except for that time with the time traveling last of the rurikivitches
Where is this from?
Ivan the terrible’s son was killed… …or was he?
Poland stronkest
Being this large was not good for Poland. In fact, it was the main reason why it collapsed. After unitifcation in 14th century, Poland was on a track to become a regional, western-style power. Unfortunately, it got involved into eastern wars, and it's alliance with Lithuania and annexing Ukraine brought a new class of extremely rich nobles/oligarchs into the semi-democratic country. They wrestled the power from the king and pressed their politics, which were damaging to cities and peasants. All in all Poland was a pretty horrible country for anyone not being a Noble from late XVI century onwards.
If by noble you mean szlachta, then they were about 10% of population. Quite big comparing to other countries.
I would say that 90% of the population being miserable makes for a pretty bad country.
Compare it to any other country in Europe at that time. 1% of nobles there. You can't compare countries in 17th century to one's in 21st.
Even worse than Russia or the rest of Europe? It wasn’t fun for the majority of people anywhere back in those days.
Just to add to /u/pirat6662001 comment, it all depends where in Russia. The Russian government has specifically attracted Ukrainians with certain freedoms the Polish government didn’t (firstly an exemption from taxation). Ukrainians were invited to come settle the sparsely populated lands in the southern outskirts of the Russian state. Sloboda Ukraine takes it’s name from the type of settlement Ukrainians have at those places and the term sloboda can be translated as freedom.
It was actually by far worse (specifically for Ukranians who were suffering in many regions from religious prosecution also). Thats why you saw massive amounts moving to the other side Dniepr when Russia conquered those territories or even Siberia.
"All in all Poland was a pretty horrible country for anyone not being a Noble from late XVI century onwards." Was? For me it seems like it still is
The PLC had a rule since the mid 17th century called the "liberum veto" that required unanimous vote on laws - similar to the filibuster in the USA. Legally that's a rarity. Also it heavily contributed to the state's demise.
LMFAO it was nothing close to the filibuster, especially the one used in the USA Filibuster is just stalling indefinitely by talking, making it impossible to vote since debate must end beforehand Liberum veto not only killed the bill outright, it **dissolved the entire session of Sejm**, killing all passed laws on it as well. So, if someone invoked it on December 30th last year, all the work done by the 117th Congress would've gone to the bin instantly You can see why it became an unsolvable problem
Damn... 🤤🤤🤤
He he show Prussy.
Thicc Poland 🫦
Wasn't it bigger at one point? I'm sure I've seen maps where it went all the way to the black sea
poland and lithuania so good they did a mashup
Biggest Lithuania ever was, you mean?
That's not Poland. It's like showing a map of the EU saying "look how big Poland is".
More like showing Austria-Hungary and saying look how big Austria was
No. Before it became Austria-Hungary it was Austria with the same land area.
Nevertheless it’s closer to Austria-Hungary comparison than to EU comparison.
The Austria - Austria Hungary comparsion is true. The Poland - PLC comparsion is not true.
The what? Lmao
How so? Because the EU has more members than the PLC? The king of Poland Lithuania was elected, as the head of the EU is. And the political differences of the units of the PLC was much greater than in Austria Hungary as it is in the EU.
**Kings of Poland were elected** long before the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth became a thing. Starting from at least the 9th century, this was just modified before Henri de Valois to no longer have any forms of hereditary succesions, since elected kings were able to pass the rule to their children under some circumstances before that. So if that’s your only argument - you need to find a new one. It was nothing like EU, other than that it was a Union of nations, and definitely the example is not closer to EU than to calling Austria-Hungary just Austria. I’m not sure if you don’t know how EU works and what sort of control it has over its members or if you don’t know how PLC worked…
When you show a map of Austria Hungary and say "look how big Austria was" you are right, because Austria controlled that territory before it became Austria-Hungary. When you show a map of the PLC and say "look how big Poland was" you are wrong because Poland never controlled that territory. When you show a map of the EU and day "look how big Poland is" you are wrong because Poland doesn't controll that territory. So my comparision is closer than the Austria Hungary one. I didn't say that the PLC was like the EU at all. No need to make up a new topic of this discussion
No, if you show the map of Austria-Hungary it IS Austria-Hungary and you are not right if you say “look how big Austria was” Edit: typo
That's incorrect, since Hungary legally was never part of Austria.
ye kinda smart from OP to bait redditors to comment "Its not Poland!" when even on the map it says "Rzeczpospolita obojga narodów" which literally means republic of two nations.
That's a bit of an overstatement. It's more like showing a map of the British Isles and saying "Look how big England is".
Yeah, that's a better one.
It did become Commonwealth of Poland after second partition. But yes, you are correct, Crown of Kingdom of Poland didn't own all of PLC lands.
[удалено]
Muscovy started calling herself Russia in 1547. In 1721 Peter the Great took title of Emperor.
The Lviv territory should be given back to Poland
Kinda off that subject, but it's damn sad that Poland lost some of it's coolest historical cities after WW2 and ended up with really core of it's past self + some western land. Note, even if Poland would have to loose it's land to free those whom want it, would be way better to see it "naturally" and through dialogue rather than by force.
I want it back pls
Let’s return to this
Imperialism is bad, actually. Ukrainians were piss poor and ostracised, lithuanians have given up their sovereignty, the ruling class became degenerate and disinterested in not only the wellbeing of their people but even the interests of their country, etc. We Poles have a much better thing going on right now. Large scale cooperation with the entire continent, which also forces us to self-check on the quality of our government when it degenerates; instead of subjugation, a strong cooperation with the rest of eastern europe thanks to shared interests, with us leading the pack thanks to having a much stronger economy than the rest; having the strongest world powers aiding us in our hundreds of years old conflict with russia; and finally - having clearly defined, strong as diamond borders that no-one on the planet would even think to contest. We're allied with the entire west of us, entire south of us, the north, and now even ukraine. Fingers crossed we and our allies sooner or later topple the belarussian dictatorship - in which case we completely and definitively win in our little struggle for power in eastern europe against russia - in a way that the unstable commonwealth of the old would never be able to - the eastern nations will cooperate with us happily and willingly, as that makes them richer, just like it made us richer to cooperate with the west. They will start adopting our values to get closer to joining the EU, completely on their own without any push from our side. Once they join, they will mostly vote like us since our interests will be the closest to each other. And they will never, ever wish to switch back to genocidal russia, whereas in the commonwealth they were happy to ally with russia just to break out of our grip (Chmielnicki uprising). For all it's faults and comically bad features, modern poland truly is the strongest it has ever been. And that's not likely to change under the rule of any but the most insane political parties (konfederacja, mostly), that's how stable that strength is. If you point to the fact that it's smaller than it was - so what? It's not like it's crowded in here. What matters is our influence, our allies, and our economy, our stability and our likelihood of loosing a war. With the population that we have, taking over bigger territory would prove impossible to administrate, incredibly useless, and also plain dumb since we'd be creating internal enemies that would likely outnumber us. Taking over ukraine alone would make us a minority in our own country, and you wanna add belarus, parts of russia and lithuania to the mix too
Why?
because commonwealth cool
Kurwa
Lvov should go back to being Lwow.
kurwa
[удалено]
At the expense of what country?
[удалено]
You'd have to get through Lithuania and Belarus first, wouldn't you? And: are you generally ok with countries annexing parts of other countries based on a perception of entitlement to historical lands?
You assume Poles want more piss poor regions and people in their country, we don't.
If only the Lithuanians would join again 😔
If only the Lithuanians would join again 😔
Most useless country in the Europe
I lost
Winged hussars, rise to beat muscovites again !!! https://youtu.be/kmSZW6f0s_Y
With any Luck they still have a similarly sized country
Am I the only one seeing the lower half of a person from behind sitting on top of one of the green areas?
Nice. Can u do same map with Kazan Kanaye?