Search

29 listopada 1662 r. zastrzelony został hetman polny litewski i jednocześnie podskarbi wielki litewski Wincenty Aleksander Korwin Gosiewski. Był on członkiem partii francuskiej i politycznie związał się z królową Ludwiką Marią Gonzagą. Z tego też powodu popierał plany elekcji vivente rege. Zbrodni dokonali skonfederowani żołnierze litewscy pod dowództwem Konstantego Kotowskiego, choć obwiniano o to hetmana wielkiego litewskiego Pawła Jana Sapiehę, który jako przeciwnik polityczny Gosiewskiego miał rzekomo inspirować wojskowych do popełnienia zbrodni. W związku z funkcjonowaniem Wincentego Aleksandra w profrancuskim ugrupowaniu politycznym interesujące będzie, jak dyplomaci Ludwika XIV relacjonowali wydarzenia związane z jego zabójstwem. Niezbędna w tym przypadku jest analiza raportów dyplomatycznych wysyłanych do Paryża, a kwerenda tych dokumentów powinna pomóc w odpowiedzi na pytanie o rangę tego wydarzenia w oczach wysłanników Ludwika XIV., On November 29, 2019, the Lithuanian Field Hetman Wincenty Aleksander Gosiewski were killed. He was a member of the French party and politically associated with Ludwika Maria Gonzaga. For this reason, he supported the plans for the vivente rege election. Gosiewski’s murder was committed by confederated Lithuanian soldiers under the command of Konstanty Kotowski. Although the Grand Lithuanian Hetman Paweł Jan Sapieha was blamed for the crime. In reference to the functioning of W.A. Gosiewski in the pro-French political faction, it will be interesting how the diplomats of Louis XIV reported about the events connected with his murder. In this case, it is crucial to analyse diplomatic reports sent to Paris, and the query of these documents should help answer the question regarding the importance of Gosiewski’s murder in the eyes of the envoys of Louis XIV.

In 1648, an uprising broke out in Ukraine that belonged to Poland at the time. The war was not successful for the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The Cossacks and Tartars, who were helping them during the war, surrounded Zbaraż, about whose defense everyone knew in the country. King Jan Kazimierz decided to set out to rescue the besieged fortress. It was decided that not only Polish troops, but also soldiers of Lithuania would set out for Ukraine. Not only state armies, but also private regiments set out to fight. The article discusses the problem of the reasons for the participation of Lithuanians in the war, which was not only due to the provisions of the union, but also to be in the king’s party. Therefore, only the branches of magnates who belong to the Jan Kazimierz party joined the Polish army. The king’s army reached Zborów, where the battle ended with treaties. The Polish nobility was not happy with them, but they caused a temporary suspension of the war. Important will also be the international echoes of the battle of Zborow with the greater strength of the Cossacks and Tartars.

In the presented article, the author has concentrated on the presentation of the backroom activities of the brandenburgian elector's diplomats who resided in the Republic of Poland in the years 1668-1669. The main diplomats of the elector Friedrich Wilhelm Hohenzollern in that time were: Johann von Hoverbeck, Joachim Scultetus, Eusebius Brandt and Friedrich Jena. In the article there is shown an elaborate diplomatic game and actions using money and given promises to acquire political allies who would declare themselves for a candidate to a Polish crown - prince Philip Wilhelm Neuburg - supported by Friedrich Wilhelm Hohenzollern and Ludwik XN. Branderburgian-Prussian diplomats were leading talks, meeting the former king, Jan Kazimierzand officials of high rank to test their opinion and eventually pull them on their side. There is shown in the article that one of the ways to acquire political allies in the election fight was corruption used by foreign diplomats. The author, using the archival sources has presented diplomatic activities, in which money or a promise of a grace or an officewas a price for received support or service. It was possible to examine what sums of money were offered in these political auctions and to whom they were given, how people who were interested were increasing prices by themselves, sometimes playing on both sides. There is presented a game of elector Friedrich Wilhelm's diplomats, tending not only to corrupt magnates and important officials on the election time, but also they were trying to gain long-range aims by winning persons in high positions in the authority and officialhierarchy and on this way to gain precious and secret information about Polish politics. The political result of the election was unexpected, as the nobility has rejected foreign candidates to choose the native one - 19th June 1669 the prince Michał Korybut Wiśniowieckiwas elected to be a king of Poland. A big group of nobility were showing hostility toward backroom activity of senators and diplomats and a corruption used by them. It is worth to pay attention that the estimation of a new monarch by the elector's diplomats was very quick. They decided that a choice of him would not be unprofitable for the elector what was a very clear proof that the Friedrich Wilhelm'spolitics toward Poland was negative. In the conclusion, the author presented the then estimation of the corruption issue and opinions of contemporary academics who investigate this problem.