“Exceptional Success” Or the Source of Future Upheaval? Once Again to the Balance of Achievements and Losses of the Ukrainian Nobility at the Lublin Sejm of 1569
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/uhj2025.03.176Keywords:
ранньомодерна доба, українська еліта, Річ Посполита, Люблінська унія, Волинський і Київський привілеї, стратегіїAbstract
The aim is to analyze the key elements of the concept of its “exceptional success” in Lublin 1569.
The research is based on the principle of historicism and employs methods of contex tual analysis, comparative studies, and systematization.
Main results. It has been established that Ukrainian nobility, like other elites at that time, were fully aware of the signifi cance of political subjectivity and had every reason to promote the idea of Ruthenia as the third member of the Po lish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It has been proven that they recognized the harm of the idea of Ruthenia as a natural part of the Crown and deliberately disrupted this point in Kyivan privilege. However, the strategies employed in Lublin were limited to securing their prerogatives and guaran tees of estate inviolability. Th e price paid by the Ukrainian elite for their participation in the functioning of the Commonwealth included direct territorial losses in Lublin, the relentless erosion of the distinctiveness enshrined in the Kyiv and Volynian privileges, and the looming threat of losing the full structural integrity of the Ukrainian world. Th e study refutes the notions of “establishing a unique state connection between the Crown and the annexed lands” and the idea of the Commonwealth as “their own state” for Ukrai nians. It has been demonstrated that the “inviolable” Kyivan privilege was directly violated at the Lublin Sejm. Practical signifi cance. Th e practices of the Ukrainian elite in Lublin signifi cantly shaped the scholarly understanding of Ukraine’s presence within the Commonwealth until 1648 and fundamentally infl uenced the entire Ukrainian historical narrative.
References
Bilous, N. (2010). Liublinska uniia 1569 r.: istoriohrafichni pohliady ta interpretatsii (do 440-richchia Liublinskoi unii). Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal. 1: 65-83. [in Ukrainian].
Horobets, V. (2009). Ukraina: Lublinska unia ta narodzhennya novoi vitchyzny. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Kempa, T. (2023). Konstanty Wasyl Ostrogski (1526-1608), przywόdca społeczności prawosławnej w Rzeczypospolitej. Toruń. [in Polish]. doi: https://doi.org/10.12775/978-83-231-5302-3
Kempa, T. (2001). Magnateria ruska wobec unii lubelskiej (1569). Białoruskie Zeszyty Historyczne. Białystok. 16: 5-25. [in Polish].
Kempa, T. (2011). Możnowładztwo i szlachta ukraińska wobec unii lubelskiej (1569). Liublino unija: ideja ir jos tęstinumas / Unia lubelska: idea i jej kontynuacja. Vilnius. 172-187. [in Polish].
Kempa, T. (2019). The Attitude of Ruthenian Magnates and Nobles Toward the Union of Lublin (1569) as the Problem of Autonomy of the Ukrainian Lands within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Zapiski Historzychne. LXXXIV: 41-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.15762/ZH.2019.36
Litwin, H. (2019). Zjednoczenie narodόw cnych: polskiego, litewskiego, ruskiego: Wołyń i Kijowszczyzna w unii lubelskiej. Warszawa. [in Polish].
Litwin, H. (2016). Z narodu ruskoho: Shlakhta Kyivshchyny, Volyni ta Bratslavshchyny (1569-1648). Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Lulewicz, H. (2002). Gniewόw o unię ciąg dalszy: Stosunki polsko-litewskie w latach 1569-1588. Warszawa. [in Polish].
Mazur, K. (2004). Szlachta wolyńska wobec unii jagiełłońskiej w dobie sejmu 1569 r. Przegląd Historyczny. XCV (1): 37-52. [in Polish].
Starchenko, N. (2019). Liublinska uniia yak resurs formuvannia kontseptu politychnoho “narodu ruskoho” (1569-1648 rr.). Ukrainskyi istorychnyi zhurnal. 2: 4-45. [in Ukrainian].
Starchenko, N. (2021). Ukrainski svity Rechi Pospolytoi: Istorii pro istoriiu. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Sulyma-Kaminskyi A. (2011). Istoriia Rechi Pospolytoi yak istoriia bahatokh narodiv: 1505-1795: Hromadiany, yikhnia derzhava, suspilstvo, kultura. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Kolodziejczyk, D. (2008). Tertium non datur? Turetska alternatyva v zovnishnii politytsi Kozatskoi derzhavy. Hadiatska unia 1658 r. Kyiv. 67-80. [in Ukrainian].
Mykhaylovskiy, V. (2024). Reges nostri: Our Kings. Monarchs and dynasties in the history of Ukraine (1340-1795). Kraków.
Wόjcik, Z. (1988). Ukraina w ramach Rzeczypospolitej do połowy XVII w. (Prawo, programy, praktyka polityczna). Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis. Historia. LXVI. Wrocław. 59-74. [in Polish].
Yakovenko, N. (2012). Dzerkala identychnosti: Doslidzhennia z istorii uiavlen ta idei v Ukraini XVI — pochatku XVIII st. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
(2019). Unia lubelska 1569 roku: Akty prawne. Wstęp i opracowanie H. Litwin. Kijόw. [in Polish].
Brekhunenko, V., Boiko, P., Zaiats A. (2023). Prostorovi mezhi ukrainskoho svitu: kompleks uiavlen ta yikhnia realizatsiia v rannomodernii Ukraini (XVI-XVIII ct.). Lviv; Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Yakovenko, N. (2002). Paralelnyi svit: Doslidzhennia z istorii uiavlen ta idei v Ukraini XVI-XVIII st. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Kulakovskyi, P. (2002). Kantseliariia Ruskoi (Volynskoi) metryky 1569-1673 rr.: Studiia z istorii ukrainskoho rehionalizmu v Rechi Pospolytii. Ostroh; Lviv. [in Ukrainian].
Andreitsev, V., Ulianovskyi, V., Korotkyi, V. (Comps.). (2000). Korpus mahdeburzkykh hramot ukrainskym mistam: Dva proekty vydan 20-kh — 40-kh rr. XX st. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Wisner, X. (1978). Sejmiki litewskie i kwestia wyznaniowa 1611-1648. Odrodzienie i Reformacja w Polsce. Wrocław. 23: 123-150. [in Polish].
Shevchuk, V. (Comp.). (2001). Tysiacha rokiv ukrainskoi suspilno-politychnoi dumky u deviaty tomakh. T. 1. Kn. 2. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Plokhy, S. (2001). The Cossacks and Religion in Early Modern Ukraine. Oxford University Press Inc., New York. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199247394.001.0001
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ukrainian Historical Journal

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.


