Notice regarding Ties and Tiebreakers
Hmmm...

It seems there is a tie between Maybe this'll be different and Yes.
Indeeeed. I'm choosing to interpret that as meaning Stanisław is mentally committed to generalship and understands Livonia to be a Just War but perhaps isn't quite emotionally ready yetin line with his brooding, nervous nature and traumatic past. Ready, almost eager, but definitely terrified. If "yes" won he'd be shoving it down completely and if "different" won he'd be in gloomy brood-overdrive. The update that introduces the merc captain — coming after the election Sejm update(s) — will hopefully put it on display. tease tease

I ran a tiebreaker either early in this quest or maybe in a defunct one and my number one takeaway, unless it's a tangible go-left-go-right kind of thing, is to make both be true. the complexities of people blah blah.

But therefore let it be known to all that, were it the "who to talk to" choice for example, we would run it again!
 
Kir on Women and Law in Lithuania/the “Little Russias”
On our MC's speculation "that men from the Russias like their women on a particularly short leash", I'd say that it's largely unfounded. The Lithuanian Codex with its expanded rights for women (well, mostly noble women) was well-liked in both Lithuanian Ruthenia and later in Cossack Ukraine (to the point that the guy arguing in favor of annexation to empresses Elisabeth and Catherine II argued that "the Little Russians" seem to use any code they like: Lithuanian, Saxon, their own, except for the Russian Imperial laws). And even prior to that there were precedents for female regencies and holding of titles, at least on a small scale level (not taking the early "barbarian era" Queen Helen / Olga into account here), like the holders of Vinnytsia, or other Podolia titles: there is a reason Queen Bona Sforza, with her extensive personal holdings in Podolia and Volhynia, was a rather well-liked ruler for everyone but the current-and-future Cossacks (I should write up on Cossacks whenever we get to them).

On the other hand, Ostrogski's characterization is on point. Aside from personal troubles, he, as I imagine many other Ostrogskis, would be at least sore about matrilineal succession allowing the Piasts to take the lands of what is now Ruthenian Voievodeship, and as such be adverse to the idea of women influencing politics.

Not sure on the vote. Both the Valois AND the Habsburgs are complicit in some religious wrangling for it to be depicted as a non-issue, but then, as noted on his desire for truth-telling, going from our previous high-and-mighty points to realpolitik ones will likely damage our guy's image.
 
Last edited:
Sertorius on Law Enforcement and the Judiciary
[X] "I like the idea of the village. They'd be surrounded and outnumbered."

I prefer the overwhelming ambush from all sides in the village. The surest way of annihilating most if not all of the scum.

A few words regarding the cops.

So, law enforcement does exist of course. It's quite ineffective, but it exists. The local Starosta is the man responsible for the execution of law within his Starostwo (administrative unit, something like a County). Since the Starosta is usually some magnate or other rich noble that has better things to do, de facto the work is being carried out by his subordinate, a Podstarości, Wicestarosta, Burgrabia (sometimes called Murgrabia), Starosta Jurydyczny, Podwojewodzi... depends on the region of the Commonwealth. For Lithuania, it would be a Podwojewodzi (Vicepalatinus) or Podstarości (Vicecapitaneus) with the latter being a universal option for nearly the whole country. Think of him as the Sheriff, who has a few pleb Deputies to his name (Pachołkowie Starościńscy, Starosta's Men/Servants), that can count anything from half a dozen to a couple of dozens. They uphold the law, enforce court verdicts, guard the peace on the roads, etc. Before he and his men can do anything to a landed noble, there is a long legal fight (unless he was captured within 72 hours of committing a crime)... not so much with a poor nobleman without any land. Even then, the man usually has to send for help to other local noblemen to assist him with manpower in executing the law, if the perpetrator refuses to adhere to the courts... so yeah, it's a shitshow. Towns and cities keep town guards of course as well, but they cannot touch a nobleman, unless he causes trouble right in front of them.

Now, when it comes to noble brigands, if they have a banishment (exile, they have to leave the country) or worse, an infamy sentence to their name, they are screwed if captured. These verdicts were usually given in absentia, since many noblemen ignored the courts and never went to the hearings (and with the death penalty on the line in the more severe cases, who can blame them?). A banished noble, if captured, lands in prison but still has his privileges intact, therefore he cannot be killed on a whim. Infamy however, means that the noble loses all privileges and any man who kills him can do so without any repercussions and can expect a reward for his troubles from the authorities (and a banished noble who did the deed can have his banishment revoked). Also helping a infamis in any way (even giving him water) condemned the accomplice to the same status. In practice, you have to capture the man to enforce these laws. Some had magnate protectors that defended them from the courts and their verdicts (the infamous troublemaker and murderer Samuel Łaszcz had dozens of banishments and infamies to his name, yet was untouchable because he was protected by Hetman Stanisław Koniecpolski, since he was also an excellent soldier and leader in times of war; Koniecpolski needed such good men to fight the Tatars and any other enemies). Still, the raid itself is crime enough even if nobody had a sentence before and if captured by the law the attacker would have been subject to quick execution without a trial, since he was caught red-handed.

Some places do, however, execute the law with extreme impunity. The Royal court and the vincity of the monarch within the radius of a few miles are sacrosanct and anyone causing trouble or starting a fight there is subject to a very brutal crackdown and summary execution. The same will be with the Tribunals in the future, but they haven't been created yet (Court of Appeals for the Crown and Lithuania).

The interregnum itself is a time, when being a troublemaker is a bad idea. The regular Courts ceased to function (since they passed judgement in the name of the King, who was now dead). Kaptur (Hood) Courts were elected by each local Sejmik and worked in their stead during this time. The name came from the classic black hood used by executioners when perfoming the job. The Starostas and their men were subject to their whims. The Hood was a criminal court only and was surprisingly quick and effective at passing merciless judgements on anyone disturbing the peace during interregnum. There was a path of appeal to the General Confederation (the General Hood) but most brigands were summarily executed if they didn't have a magnate behind their back. The new King had to formally confirm all of the sentences of each Hood after his election.

Phew.

With all this in mind, back to our situation. The dead are dead, therefore no courts for them, no matter what they had done in life. If the village is owned by a private individual that cannot help for whatever reason (and he doesn't live there, since then his manor, servants and family would have been raided too and that implies he owns more than 1 village, making him a fairly rich man and a member of the middle nobility or a magnate), then he will be grateful to whomever saves his property from brigands. Whether it is a Radziwiłł force, a Starosta or whatever. Unless of course he has some beef with his saviour, who might use this opportunity to take over said village and lands by force (which was not so uncommon, especially for the rich and mighty). The local peasants (and administrator if present) of course will ask anyone for immediate help if available, therefore it would not be unreasonable for a passing troop to rescue them for a myriad of reasons, be it compensation, honor or anything else. The leader does accept the risk however for the situation and for his men, since they are in the employ of his master and should he be displeased with their intervention or its consequences, it may cost him his job or worse.

Edit

A few more notes:

Ukraine was by far the most lawless place of all, given its vast space, lack of law enforcement, frontier manners, Cossack and Tatar troubles and powerful magnates rulling the more civilized parts, waging a war with each other. It was the favourite destination of troublemakers, exiles, bandits, as well as men looking to earn their fortune. It's been sometimes called the Polish Wild West (or East in this case).

Each local Hood, as well as the General Hood enforced the peace using their own forces. Should they rely on Starostas alone (since they had no authority during interregnum, being enforcers of a dead King), they would have been as ineffective as them. Hoods raised their own troops using private money (the nobles themselves, their men, hired men, etc.) and used them to keep the peace, then disband them after the election was done. The General Hood had quite the force at its disposal to guard the election Sejm, so that Lord Firlej or anyone else would be disinclined to do something stupid there. Add to the mix the Hood Courts, that executed troublemakers without mercy (and very fast) and you have a country that was much safer during interregnum, than in times when there was a King on the throne!

In general, we can summarize the law and its enforcement in one short quotation.

"Every man in the Commonwealth is his own master, so long as he holds a sabre and can gather some men to his name."

The biggest stick rule mostly applies.
 
Last edited:
Sertorius on the Cultural Value of “Fantasy”
You try to talk but they're not words. You try again. And you begin to cry. She comes over with haste, wordless, and begins to massage your shoulders. "My lor— Stanisław, God be the judge for us, so if for some reason you don't want to… We can wait, He won't mind a little wait…"
Actually rich nobles tended to be as such more often than not. Having no worries about food or money, they could do whatever they wanted and sometimes that lead to various eccentricities and quirks.
"Yes, much like when the body is sick. Tell me, what do you know of the Rule of Saint Benedict?" he asks.
You wanted it, you got it. The Rule of St. Benedict was actually historically very important, as it was the first such ordinance in the Western Church. The famous quote ora et labora (pray and work) is taken directly from it. All the monastic orders in later centuries up until today based their ways upon the Rule of St. Benedict. It was the template, upon which everyone else worked to codify their own standards.
Packed into Wawel Cathedral like salting fish, you took up a prime, princely position in pews close to the altar, sandwiched between your brothers and the brothers Zborowski. Proper Andrzej and the bulldog of a little brother, Samuel.
The Zborowski family was a prominent one in the Crown. There are 6 Zborowski brothers, with only three seen here and all have risen high. Jan Zborowski may be currently the most famous (he was the one that went to bring back the King from France and is currently the Court Crown Hetman, having commanded the war efforts in Livonia with successes), but it was his brother Samuel that would rise well above everybody else. He will become the first great infamis of the Commonwealth, a legendary and infamous adventurer, troublemaker, murderer and even a Hetman of the Zaporozhian Cossacks. The "Zborowski Case" in about ten years time from now, will shake the Crown to its core and bring about the downfall of the entire family, slipping it into obscurity.

I have to say a few words about the second (after freedom) most important thing for the nobility of the Commonwealth. I'm talking about fantasy (yes, you heard me right). It's hard to explain exactly what fantasy was, since it's a very cultural-specific thing. However, I shall do what I can. It may be understood as a combination of charm, wits, honour, eccentricity, valour, high alcohol tolerance and oratory. The nobility showed a great deal of respect to men, who behaved according to certain cultural standards, that were understood as fantasy. It is exactly why the various scoundrels and murderers mentioned here were protected by the general nobility and held in high regard (with the exception of their victims of course) as paragons of fantasy. Any man can become an infamis in absentia. However, to be a true infamis required a great deal of fantasy, therefore in time the term ment not just criminals, but heroic outlaws Robin Hood-style. Of course the vast majority of them were terrible people, but for the noble populus they personified what it is to be a truly free nobleman, that can do whatever he wants.

In short, fantasy is sort of rogue-ish, not the knight in shining armour type thing.

A few examples:

A noble, that can drink a lot of alcohol all night, while entertaining his fellow men with funny and witty tales, is a man of fantasy.
A noble, that gives a fine speech before a crowd, while mentioning some Roman classics at that, is a man of fantasy.
A noble, that ties a naked Catholic priest to a horse and has him run around blindly in a crowded town, is a man of fantasy.
A noble, that generously buys everyone drinks while overpaying, is a man of fantasy.
A noble, that dresses in outlandish colours with gems and silver, is a man of fantasy.
A noble, that sneaks into a tent of an enemy general in the middle if his own camp to abduct him and escape unharmed, is a man of great fantasy.
A noble, that whips half a town of serfs just because they forgot to remove their caps while he was moving past them, is a man of great fantasy.
A noble, that escapes the dungeon of his hated foe by pretending to be somebody else and returns with an army behind his back to exact revenge, is a man of great fantasy.

To compare, Lord Firlej's stunt above, was a a sign of great fantasy, since he was able to do such an outrageous act and get away with it.
 
Last edited:
More on “Fantasy”
Just a few more things regarding fantasy.

Besides clothing, your very hairstyle could be seen as very... trendy. Fo instance, Zaporozhian Cossacks were famous for the osełedec, that is a single long clump of hair, that they grew from the top of their heads, while shaving the rest. Add the long (and I mean long) moustache and tie it up together with the long osełedec and you have peak fantasy, that even the nobles appreciated.

A real-life example: one infamis and his band of misfits were drinking in some tavern in town. Suddenly they decided to make a bet: they'll go to one of the town entries and beat up the first man that exists the place. So, when they arrived a carriage was just leaving. The passenger happened to be a Jesuit priest. The band shouted "Huzzah, get him!" When the terrified priest asked why are they assaulting him, the group calmly explained their bet. So, the Jesuit then responded immediately:

"In that case you are mistaken sirs. I wasn't the first to leave town, it was my coachman."

The band laughed at this witty display of fantasy and promptly beat up the poor servant instead.

In general, the more crazy, outrageous, outlandish and downright death-defying stunt you pull off and escape the consequences, the more fantasy you have.
 
Last edited:
Kir on Sarmatism
I have to say a few words about the second (after freedom) most important thing for the nobility of the Commonwealth. I'm talking about fantasy (yes, you heard me right). It's hard to explain exactly what fantasy was, since it's a very cultural-specific thing. However, I shall do what I can. It may be understood as a combination of charm, wits, honour, eccentricity, valour, high alcohol tolerance and oratory. The nobility showed a great deal of respect to men, who behaved according to certain cultural standards, that were understood as fantasy. It is exactly why the various scoundrels and murderers mentioned here were protected by the general nobility and held in high regard (with the exception of their victims of course) as paragons of fantasy. Any man can become an infamis in absentia. However, to be a true infamis required a great deal of fantasy, therefore in time the term ment not just criminals, but heroic outlaws Robin Hood-style. Of course the vast majority of them were terrible people, but for the noble populus they personified what it is to be a truly free nobleman, that can do whatever he wants.
And the historical mythos was used as "justification" for this cultural phenomenon. Eastern Europe was a bit of a latecomer to Renaissance trends, but collecting Roman-era maps and writings became an especially popular pastime. Since the Romans often extended "Sarmatia" all the way to the Baltics on such maps, it became a popularized metaphor of the Commonwealth, and the nobility enjoyed the idea of themselves as Sarmatians (with whom they associated fancy clothing and hair styles, particular armor and armaments, great cat skins etc.), and even used that idea to promote their particular feudal system and conquest, downsizing entire peoples, or even their own peoples, into being the denizens of "Scythians, who got conquered by Sarmatians", thus claiming the right to rule over them.
How did the "Scythians" react? Some took pride in it, like a rebellion of sorts, example being Hryhoryi Hrabianka. Some disagreed, arguing that Scythians and Sarmatians were already close relatives to make much distinction between them. For example, Samiylo Velychko wrote: "Look, you free neighboring peoples of all tribes and languages, at what then was done in defiance of God's and natural rights to the free noble, Sauromatian, Cossack-Ruthenian, people, who had long been famous for their courage and courageous warlike deeds not only in their own Europe, but in distant Asian countries, and another folk, also a Sauromatian one - the Poles, which has always been a brother to the Cimbrians, Scythians and Cossacks!"
So, while Sarmatism was undeniably firstmost a Polish "thing", Lithuanian and Ruthenian nobility also got onto it, although the latter continued to make up new weird quasi-historical analogues. Extrapolating from the location of Alania (East Sarmatia, now known as Ossetia) at the Caucasus mountains, they tried to tie the Khazars (spelled in Ukrainian as "Hozary") to the whole Sarmatian mythos (you can already see that in Hrabianka's writings), and from there make a linguistic "link" towards Cossacks (in Ukrainian also spelled with an "o", despite the word's seemingly obvious origin in the Turkic "Qazaq", possibly because there was still the influence of the word «Cosac», meaning watchmen or guardians, mentioned in the 14th century's Codex Cumanicus as a Cuman word). Thus 18th century Cossacks practiced not just Sarmatism, but also "Khazarism", associating Khazar's with Cossack-specific boldness and military campaigns. In both cases, little actual study of the history of Sarmats of Khazars was done to support these justifications.
Aside from Khazars, another Sarmatian-adjusted myth amongst the Ruthenians was specific to the Roxolani tribe (another Indo-Iranian tribe of late Roman era, either a part of the Sarmatians, or adjusted to them), with Roxolania/Roxolana being used as synonymous of Ruthenia/Ukraine when translating into Latin. Various figures of culture of the described era used "Roxolan" as a pen-name/self-id of sorts, to describe their land of origin. Furthermore, in Muscovy Ivan the Terrible also chose the Roxolani as an origin point of history for his realm, although in the next century it would be moved all the way to the grandsons of Noah.
 
Sertorius on Orsza and Offices
"Very good," says the king, devoid of any real reaction. "Congratulations, then. We hereby bestow upon you the castellancy of…" he looks back at his desk, at the parchments splayed across its tabletop. "Orsa Rutheniae. Congratulations, too, then, on your senatorial rank."

Orsza. You try to calculate in the blink of an eye: Witebsk Voivodeship, by the Muscovite border, smaller town… Krzysztof nearby… Castellans don't usually have to actually manage a damn thing… And you are a senator… "I am honored, Your Majesty."
Orsza actually has some history behind it. A border town, it was the site of 3 battles against Muscovy (1508, 1514, 1564). The most famous of these is of course the great victory in the second battle, where the Grand Lithuanian Hetman Prince Konstanty Ostrogski crushed a numerically superior enemy force. Fun fact: a few years earlier he was taken prisoner by Moscow, but managed to escape after feigning cooperation and swearing oaths before the Moscow Metropolitan (he was Orthodox) to serve the local Grand Duke. Keep in mind, such changes in allegiance happened surprisingly often, with Ruthenian Princes from both sides of the border going over to the enemy. Prince Mikołaj Radziwiłł the Red commanded in that last battle from ten years back.

The place is right next to the Dniepr river. It's Starosta is Filon Kmita-Czarnobylski (or just Filon Kmita, the second part is due to him becoming the owner of Czarnobyl... yes, that Chernobyl), an Orthodox middle nobleman from Ruthenia-Ukraine, that stayed in the service of the GDL after his home became part of the Crown. He was a frontier fighter of great skill and renown that raided Muscovite lands more than once during the Livonian Wars, now he sits there and guards the border, while collecting any useful intel.

A few words about the office:

There are a lot of offices for the rich and mighty (well, not that many, but they are diverse) and even more for the regular nobles (but still not enough for everyone).

You see, because titles have been banned, the nobles wished to elevate their names by holding an office. The vast majority of offices were only titular and symbolic. They had to do literally nothing. Even so, with that many nobles in the Commonwealth, there was still a great hunger for more titles because there weren't enough posts for everybody. Therefore the country has developed an unprecedented rule (again). Children and grandchildren of an office holder held their own honorary titles based upon the post of their ancestor. So, a son of a Starosta was a Starościc, and a grandson of one was a Starostowicz. Of course this rule was for the regular nobles, since the rich were always guaranteed to have some offices of their own so they did not bother with this nonsense.

A Castellan (Kasztelan) was mostly a symbolic office, but of senatorial rank (he was a member of the Senate, that sat and discussed with the King during parliamentary sessions). It's an office given mostly to the middle nobles and some rich ones (the Kasztelan of Kraków was formally the highest secular senatorial office, but it was mostly for prestige). The military formally had only Hetman offices (high command), while a Regimentarz was a temporary substitute chosen by a Hetman, the King as Commander-in-Chief or by the soldiers themselves, when the regular ones were unavailable for one reason or the other. The highest regular rank in the military was one of Colonel (Pułkownik). Above him were the Hetmans. A noble cannot be forced to serve, unless in the levée en masse, therefore the King cannot send us to an obscure post if we don't want it, since with our money and private armies we can do whatever we want militarily. As for an office to govern, 9/10 a rich noble never even visited the place, being happy with the title and letting a subordinate do the hard work, while he spends time in his estate drinking and partying.

Once a powerful office and now but a shadow of itself, the Castellan gets to only do one thing. To lead the local levée en masse to its concentration point designated by the Voivode. Since rich nobles have better things to do, this was almost never exercised. Castellans also have two branches: major and minor. The major ones (more important cities) had their own chairs in the Senate, while the minor ones sat in the very back of the gathering, next to the wall on a common bench. I couldn't find the info, by I'm fairly certain that Orsza is the latter. Furthermore, Castellans couldn't become Starostas and hold other Senatorial offices (unless they step down).

In general, Lithuanians serve on the Muscovite and Livonian border, while the Crownlanders serve in Ukraine.

I would also like to use the opportunity to say a few words about the Starostas, since they come up quite often. There are two kinds of them: Starosta grodowy (Town Starosta) and Starosta niegrodowy (Estate Starosta). The town one is the Starosta I've said about before, with administrative duties and law enforcement powers. Whatever income came from the Crown-owned lands and insitutions there were used to pay the Starosta and to keep the local administration running. The Estate Starosta was the classic sinecure found in other countries. Lands and estates, that were given to the holder by the Crown as tenancy. The rewarded noble paid the agreed upon sum in money or in kind, while keeping the rest for himself. Such a Starosta had none of the rights and duties of the regular one, being happy with the title and the hefty pay that came with it.
 
Last edited:
Sertorius on Duels
"Goddamn you, Radziwiłł!" he roars in between coughs. "You little throat-punching bastard."

"Radziwiłł!" you repeat, filling with offense.
To call a Prince (or indeed any noble with influence) by his last name so blatantly was an offense. No wonder our hero is angry.
He seems to notice the booing; you do with him. He swings head about wildly. He shouts to be heard to those nearby: "I'll show you what I can really do, little boy — a duel with Hungarian sabers!" The older man raises a fist. "By Vespers, coward, in the courtyard."

People gasp and a hushed relating of information spreads through the stands. You look for Mariana and Marszowski and van Gistel but cannot see them. The King rises from his seat but a native minister whispers in his ear and he waves: go on.
Duels were forbidden by law (a fine and 6 months of prison time for the very act of a challenge or accepting it), however the King had the exclusive right to allow them. Truth be told, there is only one historical example of a monarch using this privilege. Mostly because nobody ever asked him for permission and did the thing unofficially. Besides the King, the Great Crown Marshal also had to agree, since he was the man responsible for the protection of the Court and it was he, who mercilessly punished any idiot, that shed blood near the King, as said before. An unofficial duel near the Court is a death sentence.

The monarch usually stipulated some rules, like time to prepare, weapons, etc. However, duels to the death were prohibited at all times and killing the opponent in a fight was treated as murder, thus our head will roll, since it would have been done near the King. The best part? Lithuanian law was very severe and had the death penalty for the very act of dueling, although it was not executed.
 
Last edited:
Sert. on the Strategic Importance of Smoleńsk
[X] Begin working with Kmita closely.

I mean, he is the man we will be cooperating with a lot. Best get it done.

You quickly come to understand that this is a river city. Despite its upstream position on Dniepr, Orsza bears the distinction of being great Smolensk's only downstream neighbor – everything that city produces, bound for Kijów and beyond, must pass through Orsza.

By the way, a quick strategic lesson:

Smoleńsk was the most important border fortress for either country. It has been called the Gate or Key to Lithuania or Muscovy, depends on who currently owns it. It is situated on the most direct and easiest route to and from Moscow, that leads conveniently between two great rivers: Dniepr and Dźwina (Daugava). It was therefore ideal for large-scale marches of troops, without any serious topographic obstacles along the way. Hence the powerful fortress to guard this strategic road. Smoleńsk was always well defended, heavily fortified and constantly upgraded with better walls, towers and cannons. It was a number one priority of any larger war (Livonia was an exception, since this front was of secondary importance, therefore raids by Kmita were enough to keep the enemy tied up here) between Lithuania and Muscovy to take the city and own it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top