LDK Ponų taryba ir Maskvos bajorai: formalieji paralelinės diplomatijos aspektai 1492–1569 m.

• Authors: Marius Sirutavičius

Abstracts

EN

Contemporary research of the practice of diplomatic contacts pays particular attention to the performative aspects of diplomatic communication i.e. patterns of behaviour formed with the help of ceremonies and rituals performed in the course of these ceremonies as well as ideological discoures which give a sense to them. The significance of the ceremonial as a model of communication and the norms of diplomatic intercourse in the relations between the GDL and Moscow cultivated at the summit – monarchal – level have been analysed from various perspectives in the author’s previous publications. This article focuses on the analysis of the topics in the international relations of a lower level – the contacts between the Council of Lords of the GDL and the Council of Noblemen of the Grand duke of Moscow. Even though the contacts with the Muscovite political elite cultivated in the name of the Council of Lords were not intense, they would undergo revival in the periods of complicated international relations and perform the functions of the resumption of relations in the periods of international conflicts and the tentative talks organized prior to the summit meetings. Normally the correspondence between the representatives of Lithuanian and Muscovite political elite would be resumed as the period of truce was approaching its end and initiated by one or the other side on the inter-institutional level or in the name of concrete influential individuals in pursuance of a more personal character of the communication. This practice of diplomatic interaction corresponded to the format of a semi-official channel of contacts. The tradition of parallel diplomatic contacts was formed in its course – the character of the issues tackled by the representatives of the political elite of the states as well as norms and forms of communication manifesting certain specifics. It is possible that the experience gained by the members of the state’s councils participating in diplomatic activities and representing their monarchs formed the basis for the practice of parallel diplomatic contacts and consequently the tradition of expertise of activities in the field of foreign politics. In the case of the Council of Lords the latter was granted legal basis starting with 1492 whereas the role of the councillors of the Grand duke of Moscow in this field was given a sense in the provisions of political ideology and the idea of counsel can be considered the element of ideological provisions that is most relevant to the analysed topic. In the period in question there obtained the view that the Grand duke had to confer with his supreme councillors in order to make weighty and reasonable decisions and, if required, transfer the responsibility for false and reckless actions on his councillors. In the Muscovite ideological literature some of the monarch’s councillors were referred to as honest, fair and capable of advising the monarch in a wise way so that he was bound to succeed and others – as mean, wicked and evil-minded. The former would give good and prudent recommendations and the monarch who followed them would do well. The latter, however, would induce the ruler to take a wrong step. According to political literature all successful actions of a sovereign were the result of a good piece of advice heard from the lips of a wise councillor. Failures and errors would be attributed to the evil-minded councillor. Although the said ideas were not given prominence in the writings of the GDL of the period in question, the materials derived from the correspondence that took place in the course of parallel diplomatic contacts suggest that the concepts of good and ill advice as well as those of good and ill councillor were relevant to both sides. Both countries would not only constantly emphasize the importance of a wise piece of advice to the monarch but also make appeals to Christian ethics. The repeatedly declared primary aim of parallel diplomatic contacts – reconciliation of the monarchs – as the frequent references in diplomatic rhetoric suggest, could have been achieved exclusively with the help of fair and wise pieces of advice. Thus, this attitude was employed to highlight the worthiness of a councillor initiating the resumption of diplomatic relations between the councils. The attitude that people’s behaviour and their decisions were conditioned by others and their recommendations was anchored in people’s minds in the period in question and evoked in the cases when the responsibility for poor decisions was transferred from the monarch on to his councillors. In the midst of the conflict of 1500–1503 Jan Zabrzeziński in his letter to Jakov Zacharjin did not blame the Grand duke of Moscow for the invasion into the GDL alleging that it must have happened because of an ill piece of advice and the councillors of Ivan III should have been named responsible for it. In response to the reproaches Jakov Zacharjin shifts the blame on the other side yet emphasizing the importance of recommendations. The transfer of responsibility on to the councillors based on the concept of good and ill councillors as well as good and ill advice implicated not only the attitudes suggested by Christian ethics but also weighty provisions of these diplomatic contacts echoing the functions of parallel diplomacy. Alongside the aforementioned function of diplomatic signal – dissemination of information and declaration of positions – other international issues related to the problems of hierarchal relation, supremacy and preferment were also tackled via the lower level diplomatic contacts.

• Publisher: Lietuvos istorijos institutas
• Journal: Lietuvos istorijos metraštis
• Year: 2010
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 5-28

Dates

published

2010

Contributors

author

Marius Sirutavičius

• Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas

Identifiers

Biblioteka Nauki

57627634