Talk:Jan Karol Chodkiewicz
Belarusian origin of Chodkiewicz (Chadkievič)
a) In all sources Chadkievicy are given as a Ruthenian (=Belarusian or Ukrainean) family. Their roots come from either Kiev or Lithuania, but never from Poland
b) Until some time Chadkievicy were orthodox: Православные владетели Заблудова Ходкевичи славились как ревностные защитники веры и народности
c) They opposed a Union of Grand Lithuania with Poland: Григорий Х. (умер в 1572 г.), великий гетман литовский, принадлежал к числу самых ревностных противников люблинской унии
d) And, finally, you might find this interesting: ...większość szlachty ze swojego etnicznego pochodzenia była Litwinami i Rusinami, mówiła już po polsku, ale miała litewską świadomość państwową. Poczucie świadomości narodowej możemy zauważyć w słowach Jana Karola Chodkiewicza: „Polacy dawno obchodzą się tak, by nas, wielkie rody litewskie, rozdrażnione do zguby przyprowadzić”.
e). Not just forefathers of Chadkievic were Ruthenian/Litvin - he was Litvin himself and considered himself as Litvin. This is a fact.
I understand, there could be some doubt about Damijeka - but here!?
It's not about "nationalism" or trying to "take Chadkievic away from Poles". We just need a bit of objectivity here, and not a Polish-only view on this person. Please stop vandalism by some users. --Czalex 15:32, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Aside from the fact that academic references would be preferable to online articles, I agree with you that Chodkiewicz had strong Lithuanian ancerstry and it should be mentioned in the article. As we discussed in Talk:Ignacy Domeyko article, he is one of the prime examples what it meant to be a citizen of the PLC. He was a Polish-Lithuanian, there is no doubt about this. Now, I could agree with adding Ruthenian to this, if others agree as well, however I don't think we can speak about him being Bielorussian or Ukrainian, as those nationalities evolved about two centuries later. To call him Bielorussian is just as erroneus as to call him Polish (meaning today's Poland, not the Polish as in Polish-Lithuanian Commownealth, which are not the same, obivously). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:31, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- My dear Czalex !!!
At first: Ruthenian doesn't mean "belorussian" or "ukrainian". It's error. Ruthenian - it means "Ruthenian". It's Simple. Idea of belarussian or ukrainian nation evolved 250 years after dead of Chodkiewicz (1621 year).
At second: I agree with you - roots of Chodkiewicz family was ruthenian or lithuanian-ruthenian (we don't know exactly).But it doesn't mean that in 1580 year or in 1600 year Jan Karol Chodkiewicz was Ruthenus. It's error. His family origin was ruthenian (or lithuanian-ruthenian) but he wasn't Ruthenus.
At third : I agree with you that Chodkiewicz family was very long time Orthodox confession -it's true. But Jan Karol and his father (probably since 1572 year) was of Roman Catholic Church confession. And next Chodkiewicz generations was Roman confession too.
At fourth: You wrote: "They opposed a Union of Grand Lithuania with Poland". I'm sorry but it is not true. The matter with Lublin Union was very complicated - outlook of Chodkiewicz family upon Union evolved and changed three times.
At fifth: You wrote: he was Litvin himself and considered himself as Litvin. This is a fact. It's true. But Litvin doesn't mean belarussian or ruthenian. "Litvin" means member of aristocracy and nobles in Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Aristocratic families in Grand Duchy of Lithuania regarded themselves as higher aristocracy than nobles in Polish Crown ("koroniarze", "Polacy"). Between Polish Crown nobles and Grand Duchy Lithuania nobles was antagonism : which origin is most gentle - lithuanian or in Crown? Lithuanian aristocracy regarded themselves as more gentle than in Crown because in Grand Duchy early rised up idea about ancient roman origin of Radziwiłł, Sapieha, Chodkiewicz.