Sharing Political Space: The Royal Court and the Polish-Lithuanian Sejm in the Seventeenth Century

IF 0.5 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Katarzyna Kosior
{"title":"Sharing Political Space: The Royal Court and the Polish-Lithuanian Sejm in the Seventeenth Century","authors":"Katarzyna Kosior","doi":"10.1177/02656914251353017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1667, Andrzej Maksymilian Fredro, political thinker and senator of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, argued that fewer sejms should be held to prevent the royal court's corruption of the szlachta from the lower chamber. He feared that envoys, tempted by a political career in the ambit of the court, would seek royal patronage and neglect their local and military responsibilities. This article thinks Fredro's concerns through spatially, considering how the blurring of parliamentary and courtly spaces was manifest at Wawel in Kraków and the royal palace in Warsaw, the royal residences where sejms took place. Limited space necessitated improvisation to facilitate the political processes of parliamentary monarchy. There were occasions when parliamentary activity spilled over into the royal apartments, which could be used as breakout rooms for ‘private discussion’, the work of commissions or deputations, and, crucially, by the king seeking to manage parliamentary conflict away from the public forum of sejm. This was vital given that the system was based on common consent, rather than a majority vote. At the same time, parliamentary space could be used for the entertainments and displays of royal favour associated with the royal court. Furthermore, parliamentary debates were open and public, meaning that courtiers were able to come in and out of parliamentary spaces, exerting influence over parliamentarians. The Polish-Lithuanian monarchy was parliamentary, but this article shows how its sejm was monarchical. To an extent, the king could manage parliamentary processes through the use of space and tempt the szlachta to strive for his favour. Drawing on Fredro's writings and parliamentary and szlachta diaries, which include accounts of the king hosting ‘convivial sessions’ in parliament, this article provides a new perspective on the entangled nature of courtly and parliamentary cultures in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.","PeriodicalId":44713,"journal":{"name":"European History Quarterly","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European History Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02656914251353017","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1667, Andrzej Maksymilian Fredro, political thinker and senator of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, argued that fewer sejms should be held to prevent the royal court's corruption of the szlachta from the lower chamber. He feared that envoys, tempted by a political career in the ambit of the court, would seek royal patronage and neglect their local and military responsibilities. This article thinks Fredro's concerns through spatially, considering how the blurring of parliamentary and courtly spaces was manifest at Wawel in Kraków and the royal palace in Warsaw, the royal residences where sejms took place. Limited space necessitated improvisation to facilitate the political processes of parliamentary monarchy. There were occasions when parliamentary activity spilled over into the royal apartments, which could be used as breakout rooms for ‘private discussion’, the work of commissions or deputations, and, crucially, by the king seeking to manage parliamentary conflict away from the public forum of sejm. This was vital given that the system was based on common consent, rather than a majority vote. At the same time, parliamentary space could be used for the entertainments and displays of royal favour associated with the royal court. Furthermore, parliamentary debates were open and public, meaning that courtiers were able to come in and out of parliamentary spaces, exerting influence over parliamentarians. The Polish-Lithuanian monarchy was parliamentary, but this article shows how its sejm was monarchical. To an extent, the king could manage parliamentary processes through the use of space and tempt the szlachta to strive for his favour. Drawing on Fredro's writings and parliamentary and szlachta diaries, which include accounts of the king hosting ‘convivial sessions’ in parliament, this article provides a new perspective on the entangled nature of courtly and parliamentary cultures in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
共享政治空间:17世纪的皇家宫廷和波兰立陶宛瑟姆
1667年,政治思想家、波兰立陶宛联邦参议员安德烈·马克西米利安·费德里罗(Andrzej Maksymilian Fredro)主张,应该减少瑟姆会议的举行,以防止王室对下议院的什拉赫塔(szlachta)的腐败。他担心使节受到朝廷范围内政治生涯的诱惑,会寻求王室的庇护,而忽视他们在地方和军事上的责任。本文从空间角度思考Fredro的关注,考虑国会与宫廷空间的模糊如何在Kraków的Wawel和华沙的皇家宫殿中体现出来。有限的空间需要即兴发挥,以促进议会君主制的政治进程。有时,议会活动会蔓延到王室公寓,这些公寓可以用作“私人讨论”的休息室,委员会或代表的工作,最重要的是,国王试图管理议会冲突,远离瑟姆的公共论坛。这一点至关重要,因为该制度是基于共同同意,而不是多数投票。与此同时,议会空间可以用于娱乐和展示与王室有关的王室恩惠。此外,议会辩论是公开和公开的,这意味着朝臣可以进出议会空间,对议员施加影响。波兰立陶宛的君主制是议会制,但这篇文章展示了它的瑟姆是如何君主制的。在某种程度上,国王可以通过利用空间来管理议会进程,并诱使什拉赫塔为他争取支持。本文以Fredro的著作、议会与szlachta的日记(包括国王在议会主持“欢乐会议”的记录)为基础,提供了一个新的视角,来看待波兰立陶宛联邦宫廷与议会文化的纠缠本质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: European History Quarterly has earned an international reputation as an essential resource on European history, publishing articles by eminent historians on a range of subjects from the later Middle Ages to post-1945. European History Quarterly also features review articles by leading authorities, offering a comprehensive survey of recent literature in a particular field, as well as an extensive book review section, enabling you to keep up to date with what"s being published in your field. The journal also features historiographical essays.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信