The article deals with the problem of the social upturn and its arrangement by the means of social culture. Post-industrial society's decentration tendency that is a source for social destruction is analysed. In the context of the modern social theories, the article deals with the conceptions of revolution, alienation, rioting, and others. The article emphasizes the necessity for a new complex discipline - political juvenology for studies on the youth potential to achieve, by means of cultural riots, the new dynamic social stability.
The article deals with the problem of the social upturn and its arrangement by the means of social culture. Post-industrial society's decentration tendency that is a source for social destruction is analysed. In the context of the modern social theories, the article deals with the conceptions of revolution, alienation, rioting, and others. The article emphasizes the necessity for a new complex discipline - political juvenology for studies on the youth potential to achieve, by means of cultural riots, the new dynamic social stability.
The article deals with the problem of the social upturn and its arrangement by the means of social culture. Post-industrial society's decentration tendency that is a source for social destruction is analysed. In the context of the modern social theories, the article deals with the conceptions of revolution, alienation, rioting, and others. The article emphasizes the necessity for a new complex discipline - political juvenology for studies on the youth potential to achieve, by means of cultural riots, the new dynamic social stability.
The article deals with the problem of the social upturn and its arrangement by the means of social culture. Post-industrial society's decentration tendency that is a source for social destruction is analysed. In the context of the modern social theories, the article deals with the conceptions of revolution, alienation, rioting, and others. The article emphasizes the necessity for a new complex discipline - political juvenology for studies on the youth potential to achieve, by means of cultural riots, the new dynamic social stability.
Summary. The object of this research is to understand the territorialization process in the 14 - 16 centuries Grand Duches of Lithuania (GDL) and to find out the connect of the state territory and ruling class. First of all, bared on historiography we will try to find out the common formation process of the territorial state in Middle age. This will help to choose other criterions. In the second chapter GDL territorialization process is analized widely. The first stage in this process was determined by neighbour countries, such as Mazovia and the Teutonic Order. The Order, being aktiv territorial state, stimulated the interest of borders delimitation with GDL. The biggerst act of delimitation take part at the time of Great duke Vytautas. At the time of the latter rule the first Border between GDL and Order appears. In the third decade of the 15th century was passed to borde renovation process. The end of the process wan in 16 century. But, the border renovation process at the 16th century very intensive. It depend on inside colonization control. The collision of both borderland dvellers modificated state border. In 1545 the border between GDL and Prussiae was estabilished and the colomn with state coat of arm and inscription was made. It shows the concepsio of the state territory border. In the 16th century state line border appears. It's traits: populated borderland; detailed border marking; borders have to correspond to all social classes land limits; borders should have state and political mening. 1536, 1548 the borders between GDL and Polland was formed. Limitation was inspired by the inside colonization control. East GDL territorialization process coincided with Moscow state's rise and aim to get bock Ruthenianland. Although, the first agreement in this part were known from the Vytautas time. Territorialization process in the Est part is much in common as in the West. But in this part, marking the border, importand place played "the old" territorial division. Marking state border (between Moscow state and GDL) they usually conformed with the old land part. In the 16th century in the east part of GDL the delimitation process take part with the Turkey nad Tartar states. As the result of all these rprocesses GDL at the middle of the 16th century became a territorial state with clearely marked state boundaries.
Summary. The object of this research is to understand the territorialization process in the 14 - 16 centuries Grand Duches of Lithuania (GDL) and to find out the connect of the state territory and ruling class. First of all, bared on historiography we will try to find out the common formation process of the territorial state in Middle age. This will help to choose other criterions. In the second chapter GDL territorialization process is analized widely. The first stage in this process was determined by neighbour countries, such as Mazovia and the Teutonic Order. The Order, being aktiv territorial state, stimulated the interest of borders delimitation with GDL. The biggerst act of delimitation take part at the time of Great duke Vytautas. At the time of the latter rule the first Border between GDL and Order appears. In the third decade of the 15th century was passed to borde renovation process. The end of the process wan in 16 century. But, the border renovation process at the 16th century very intensive. It depend on inside colonization control. The collision of both borderland dvellers modificated state border. In 1545 the border between GDL and Prussiae was estabilished and the colomn with state coat of arm and inscription was made. It shows the concepsio of the state territory border. In the 16th century state line border appears. It's traits: populated borderland; detailed border marking; borders have to correspond to all social classes land limits; borders should have state and political mening. 1536, 1548 the borders between GDL and Polland was formed. Limitation was inspired by the inside colonization control. East GDL territorialization process coincided with Moscow state's rise and aim to get bock Ruthenianland. Although, the first agreement in this part were known from the Vytautas time. Territorialization process in the Est part is much in common as in the West. But in this part, marking the border, importand place played "the old" territorial division. Marking state border (between Moscow state and GDL) they usually conformed with the old land part. In the 16th century in the east part of GDL the delimitation process take part with the Turkey nad Tartar states. As the result of all these rprocesses GDL at the middle of the 16th century became a territorial state with clearely marked state boundaries.
The article analyzes the 17th -18th century steppe territory problem from the point of view of historical geography and historical cartography. Steppes are considered to be complex, multifaceted natural phenomena that determine the specific social and political development of their territories. The aim of this research is to recognise the territorial visualization of the steppe in 17th -18th c. maps intended for Eastern and Central Eastern Europe, Asia, and Ukraine in particular. The research centers on the works of French (Guillaume Le Vasseur de Beauplan, Nicolas Sanson d'Abbeville, Joseph-Nicolas Delisle, Guillaume Delisle), Italian (Giovanni-Antonio Rizzi-Zannoni), German (Johann Baptist Homann), and Austrian (Franz Johann Joseph von Reilly) cartographers. Their investigation discloses that in the maps of the period under consideration the steppes had already been mapped out not only as natural systems, but as socio-geographic and socio-economical structures as well. The main elements of the map contents, showing the steppe's territorial absorptive direction, development, and rates, were the cartography of the land road net, the defense systems as well as bridges, banks/ mounds, trenches, single fortified villages, and other minor-scale objects. These objects best reflect the links that tied the inhabitants and the whole state to the colonized space and also allow the consideration of human mobility in a particular territory, and of the possibilities of movement in general. The totality of natural, socio-economic, and military defensive attributes featured in the maps supports the idea that primacy was accorded to the military colonization aspect: the establishment of territorial structures was primarily based on the formation of a network of fortified villages/settlements and fort systems.
The article analyzes the 17th -18th century steppe territory problem from the point of view of historical geography and historical cartography. Steppes are considered to be complex, multifaceted natural phenomena that determine the specific social and political development of their territories. The aim of this research is to recognise the territorial visualization of the steppe in 17th -18th c. maps intended for Eastern and Central Eastern Europe, Asia, and Ukraine in particular. The research centers on the works of French (Guillaume Le Vasseur de Beauplan, Nicolas Sanson d'Abbeville, Joseph-Nicolas Delisle, Guillaume Delisle), Italian (Giovanni-Antonio Rizzi-Zannoni), German (Johann Baptist Homann), and Austrian (Franz Johann Joseph von Reilly) cartographers. Their investigation discloses that in the maps of the period under consideration the steppes had already been mapped out not only as natural systems, but as socio-geographic and socio-economical structures as well. The main elements of the map contents, showing the steppe's territorial absorptive direction, development, and rates, were the cartography of the land road net, the defense systems as well as bridges, banks/ mounds, trenches, single fortified villages, and other minor-scale objects. These objects best reflect the links that tied the inhabitants and the whole state to the colonized space and also allow the consideration of human mobility in a particular territory, and of the possibilities of movement in general. The totality of natural, socio-economic, and military defensive attributes featured in the maps supports the idea that primacy was accorded to the military colonization aspect: the establishment of territorial structures was primarily based on the formation of a network of fortified villages/settlements and fort systems.
The article analyzes the 17th -18th century steppe territory problem from the point of view of historical geography and historical cartography. Steppes are considered to be complex, multifaceted natural phenomena that determine the specific social and political development of their territories. The aim of this research is to recognise the territorial visualization of the steppe in 17th -18th c. maps intended for Eastern and Central Eastern Europe, Asia, and Ukraine in particular. The research centers on the works of French (Guillaume Le Vasseur de Beauplan, Nicolas Sanson d'Abbeville, Joseph-Nicolas Delisle, Guillaume Delisle), Italian (Giovanni-Antonio Rizzi-Zannoni), German (Johann Baptist Homann), and Austrian (Franz Johann Joseph von Reilly) cartographers. Their investigation discloses that in the maps of the period under consideration the steppes had already been mapped out not only as natural systems, but as socio-geographic and socio-economical structures as well. The main elements of the map contents, showing the steppe's territorial absorptive direction, development, and rates, were the cartography of the land road net, the defense systems as well as bridges, banks/ mounds, trenches, single fortified villages, and other minor-scale objects. These objects best reflect the links that tied the inhabitants and the whole state to the colonized space and also allow the consideration of human mobility in a particular territory, and of the possibilities of movement in general. The totality of natural, socio-economic, and military defensive attributes featured in the maps supports the idea that primacy was accorded to the military colonization aspect: the establishment of territorial structures was primarily based on the formation of a network of fortified villages/settlements and fort systems.
According to the latest research of the names of the dukes of Tartar origins in Lithuania it is evident that their names have been formed in five different ways: 1) by adding suffix -owicz to the name taken from the Bible, 2) by adding it to a Slavic or a Byzantian name, 3) by adding the suffix to the tribal Tartar nickname, 4) by taking the local place name, 5) by taking a Lithuanian spouse's name. Also their names show the exact time of their colonization in Lithuania and the reasons of their arrival. In this research facts that are not revealed in modern science are being analyzed. These facts mostly are kept silent because of prejudice, and thus the author states that in researches of history, philology and culture, so called 'politics of history' is being used. In this article the harm for the researches of Lithuanian Tartar culture and history is being shown. Tartar people in Lithuania settled already in the 14th century, and the reason for that was an escape from the Uzbek kings of the Golden Horde. Another statement is that Tartar dukes, who had a right to call themselves dukes, were originally from Mongolian emperor's Jesiugej Baatur's family, and this right and title were approved in Lithuanian and Polish parliaments; those titles have never been doubted. Also it is stated, that the religion of the first Tartar colonists was probably shamanistic beliefs, and later – Christian faith. The article is based on a deep analysis of historical, cultural, philological and literature sources. A conclusion suggests that scientists of the above- mentioned areas should more precisely research the names of the dukes of Tartar origin, as well as their input into Lithuanian culture and history.
According to the latest research of the names of the dukes of Tartar origins in Lithuania it is evident that their names have been formed in five different ways: 1) by adding suffix -owicz to the name taken from the Bible, 2) by adding it to a Slavic or a Byzantian name, 3) by adding the suffix to the tribal Tartar nickname, 4) by taking the local place name, 5) by taking a Lithuanian spouse's name. Also their names show the exact time of their colonization in Lithuania and the reasons of their arrival. In this research facts that are not revealed in modern science are being analyzed. These facts mostly are kept silent because of prejudice, and thus the author states that in researches of history, philology and culture, so called 'politics of history' is being used. In this article the harm for the researches of Lithuanian Tartar culture and history is being shown. Tartar people in Lithuania settled already in the 14th century, and the reason for that was an escape from the Uzbek kings of the Golden Horde. Another statement is that Tartar dukes, who had a right to call themselves dukes, were originally from Mongolian emperor's Jesiugej Baatur's family, and this right and title were approved in Lithuanian and Polish parliaments; those titles have never been doubted. Also it is stated, that the religion of the first Tartar colonists was probably shamanistic beliefs, and later – Christian faith. The article is based on a deep analysis of historical, cultural, philological and literature sources. A conclusion suggests that scientists of the above- mentioned areas should more precisely research the names of the dukes of Tartar origin, as well as their input into Lithuanian culture and history.
According to the latest research of the names of the dukes of Tartar origins in Lithuania it is evident that their names have been formed in five different ways: 1) by adding suffix -owicz to the name taken from the Bible, 2) by adding it to a Slavic or a Byzantian name, 3) by adding the suffix to the tribal Tartar nickname, 4) by taking the local place name, 5) by taking a Lithuanian spouse's name. Also their names show the exact time of their colonization in Lithuania and the reasons of their arrival. In this research facts that are not revealed in modern science are being analyzed. These facts mostly are kept silent because of prejudice, and thus the author states that in researches of history, philology and culture, so called 'politics of history' is being used. In this article the harm for the researches of Lithuanian Tartar culture and history is being shown. Tartar people in Lithuania settled already in the 14th century, and the reason for that was an escape from the Uzbek kings of the Golden Horde. Another statement is that Tartar dukes, who had a right to call themselves dukes, were originally from Mongolian emperor's Jesiugej Baatur's family, and this right and title were approved in Lithuanian and Polish parliaments; those titles have never been doubted. Also it is stated, that the religion of the first Tartar colonists was probably shamanistic beliefs, and later – Christian faith. The article is based on a deep analysis of historical, cultural, philological and literature sources. A conclusion suggests that scientists of the above- mentioned areas should more precisely research the names of the dukes of Tartar origin, as well as their input into Lithuanian culture and history.
The object of this research is the Zaberezinskis family among the political elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: the association of the family's history (its genealogy, economic, political, foundational activity) with the rest of the environment of the GDL rulers of the Jagiellonian Dynasty. The general backdrop of the political life of the GDL makes it possible to see and evaluate the weight of the Zaberezininkis family among the country's ruling elite. From the late 15th to the middle of the 16th century, the aristocratic authority with its ages-old roots acquired institutional form. Foreseeing the possibility of rulers residing outside the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (as during Kazimierz Jagiellonian's rule), Alexander Jagiellonian's privilege of 6 August 1492 authorized broader prerogatives for the Council of Lords. At the same time, on the eve of the proclamation of the Grand Duke, the summoned parliament initiated the tradition of representation of the nobility. Institutional changes were accompanied by the reception of humanistic ideas, legal culture and political theory, linked to the custom, increasing at the time, of nobility sending their offspring to universities to pursue higher education. The story of the Zaberezinskis family, descendants of Rimvydas, is presented In the context of the formation of the GDL Republic (Respublica Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae), a political nation of descendants of the Romans (as the Lithuanian nobility portrayed themselves). The earliest data on the kin are associated with the times of Sigismund Kęstutaitis, and the latest with those of Sigismund Augustus. Members of the family played a particularly significant role in the history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the times of Kazimierz Jagiellonian and his two sons Alexander and Sigismund the Old, from the 1480s until 1544. Responding to the postulates of the modern science of genealogy, the story of the family is presented according to its different branches. Against the background of key events in Lithuanian history, beginning from Jurgis Rimvydaitis and Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis, the careers of the latter's children and their descendants, their interrelationships, and factors influencing their careers are analysed. Due to the different status of different members of the family and the different amounts of data available in the sources, the questionnaire applied to different members of the family differs. Jonas Jurgaitis and his son Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis, who reached the highest posts, are the most significant, and the most extensive treatment is given to their biographies. The composition of the landholding and the development of the network of towns are discussed in a separate part of the study. The available data (including property holdings) do not directly confirm a family relationship between the Zaberezinskis and the Manvydas families. No sources have been found in which the Zaberezinskis in any way mention Manvydas or his brother, or a family relationship with them. In the view of the author of this work, the success of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinsky's career can be attributed to his holding the strategic post of Vicar of Polotsk at a key moment, the favour of Lithuanian Grand Duke Alexander and strong personal abilities. In consequence, Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinsky proved one of the most prominent personalities on the Council of Lords, achieving the particularly high offices of Voivode of Trakai and Grand Marshall, and personally taking part in the most important events in the interstate relations of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. For a variety of reasons (often due to early death), the only descendent of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis who achieved a significant political career was his son Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis (~1473-1538), who ultimately, like his father, assumed the posts of Voivode of Trakai and Grand Marshall of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. His relations with the other most influential high-ranking noblemen of the period are considered, especially the meaning of marriages contracted by him and arranged by him for his descendants and relatives. The gathered data regarding the formation and distribution of the family's latifundium show that the most important stage in the formation of the estate was the time of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis, although later the family also acquired significant properties through marriage and purchases. A major step in this process was the marriage of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis to the daughter, Ona, of Jonas Nasuta, who held large properties in Palenkė (Podlasie). Other ways land was acquired were purchases and gifts of the rulers (Casimir and Alexander). One such event that stands out is Alexander's gift in 1506 of the regions of Alytus and Simnas. Many of the surviving papers written by Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis in the final period of his life, when he resided in Alytus as Keeper of the City and the Region, testify to intense internal colonization of the area of Alytus and Simnas by the Nemunas River. Alytus and Simnas also include the most noteworthy church foundations made by Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis and his family, a clear witness to the founders' piety. As he gave the decisive impulse for Alytus and Simnas to become city-like settlements, he can properly be considered the founder of those cities. The political self-awareness of the Lithuanian aristocracy is best captured by the term from that period "the Republic of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" (Respublica Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae), as D. Kuolis has accurately observed. The theory of the Roman origins of the Lithuanian nobility, with all its consequences (such as e.g. the rule of law), can be considered the highest peak of the political culture of the ruling elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In 1525 (well before the Union of Lublin, which is often associated with Lithuanian republican traditions) Albertas Goštautas's memorial to the Grand Duchess Bona associated the notion of nobility with loyalty to the ruler and responsibility for the commonwealth (the republic). Although it can be said that certain Republican ideals drawn from antiquity thrived among the Lithuanian aristocracy, their dominant trait was conservatism (unwillingness to admit lesser nobility to the structures of power). The high-rank nobility clearly recognized the ruler as the head of the political body of the Grand Duchy, and sought for him a crown. The programme for a Kingdom of Lithuania should be linked to the need, fostered by aristocracy, for the GDL to have its own distinct identity, though having a separate ruler was important also for practical reasons: the unquestioned centralized government accelerated the defence mechanisms of the state. A contemporary observer testifies that, when the ruler was absent, the Lithuanian lords "did not know what to do, remained undecided and did nothing." The ruling elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, both in their actions and in what they wrote (in the Lithuanian chronicles and elsewhere), unequivocally showed that no agreements with the Polish Crown bound them. The role of the aristocracy in the political emancipation of the lesser nobility and the importance of the latter for the maturing of the Lithuanian-Polish Union are issues that still require further research. Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis gave some of his nobles personal freedom and economic autonomy, which can be regarded as a precondition for political emancipation.
The object of this research is the Zaberezinskis family among the political elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: the association of the family's history (its genealogy, economic, political, foundational activity) with the rest of the environment of the GDL rulers of the Jagiellonian Dynasty. The general backdrop of the political life of the GDL makes it possible to see and evaluate the weight of the Zaberezininkis family among the country's ruling elite. From the late 15th to the middle of the 16th century, the aristocratic authority with its ages-old roots acquired institutional form. Foreseeing the possibility of rulers residing outside the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (as during Kazimierz Jagiellonian's rule), Alexander Jagiellonian's privilege of 6 August 1492 authorized broader prerogatives for the Council of Lords. At the same time, on the eve of the proclamation of the Grand Duke, the summoned parliament initiated the tradition of representation of the nobility. Institutional changes were accompanied by the reception of humanistic ideas, legal culture and political theory, linked to the custom, increasing at the time, of nobility sending their offspring to universities to pursue higher education. The story of the Zaberezinskis family, descendants of Rimvydas, is presented In the context of the formation of the GDL Republic (Respublica Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae), a political nation of descendants of the Romans (as the Lithuanian nobility portrayed themselves). The earliest data on the kin are associated with the times of Sigismund Kęstutaitis, and the latest with those of Sigismund Augustus. Members of the family played a particularly significant role in the history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the times of Kazimierz Jagiellonian and his two sons Alexander and Sigismund the Old, from the 1480s until 1544. Responding to the postulates of the modern science of genealogy, the story of the family is presented according to its different branches. Against the background of key events in Lithuanian history, beginning from Jurgis Rimvydaitis and Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis, the careers of the latter's children and their descendants, their interrelationships, and factors influencing their careers are analysed. Due to the different status of different members of the family and the different amounts of data available in the sources, the questionnaire applied to different members of the family differs. Jonas Jurgaitis and his son Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis, who reached the highest posts, are the most significant, and the most extensive treatment is given to their biographies. The composition of the landholding and the development of the network of towns are discussed in a separate part of the study. The available data (including property holdings) do not directly confirm a family relationship between the Zaberezinskis and the Manvydas families. No sources have been found in which the Zaberezinskis in any way mention Manvydas or his brother, or a family relationship with them. In the view of the author of this work, the success of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinsky's career can be attributed to his holding the strategic post of Vicar of Polotsk at a key moment, the favour of Lithuanian Grand Duke Alexander and strong personal abilities. In consequence, Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinsky proved one of the most prominent personalities on the Council of Lords, achieving the particularly high offices of Voivode of Trakai and Grand Marshall, and personally taking part in the most important events in the interstate relations of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. For a variety of reasons (often due to early death), the only descendent of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis who achieved a significant political career was his son Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis (~1473-1538), who ultimately, like his father, assumed the posts of Voivode of Trakai and Grand Marshall of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. His relations with the other most influential high-ranking noblemen of the period are considered, especially the meaning of marriages contracted by him and arranged by him for his descendants and relatives. The gathered data regarding the formation and distribution of the family's latifundium show that the most important stage in the formation of the estate was the time of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis, although later the family also acquired significant properties through marriage and purchases. A major step in this process was the marriage of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis to the daughter, Ona, of Jonas Nasuta, who held large properties in Palenkė (Podlasie). Other ways land was acquired were purchases and gifts of the rulers (Casimir and Alexander). One such event that stands out is Alexander's gift in 1506 of the regions of Alytus and Simnas. Many of the surviving papers written by Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis in the final period of his life, when he resided in Alytus as Keeper of the City and the Region, testify to intense internal colonization of the area of Alytus and Simnas by the Nemunas River. Alytus and Simnas also include the most noteworthy church foundations made by Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis and his family, a clear witness to the founders' piety. As he gave the decisive impulse for Alytus and Simnas to become city-like settlements, he can properly be considered the founder of those cities. The political self-awareness of the Lithuanian aristocracy is best captured by the term from that period "the Republic of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" (Respublica Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae), as D. Kuolis has accurately observed. The theory of the Roman origins of the Lithuanian nobility, with all its consequences (such as e.g. the rule of law), can be considered the highest peak of the political culture of the ruling elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In 1525 (well before the Union of Lublin, which is often associated with Lithuanian republican traditions) Albertas Goštautas's memorial to the Grand Duchess Bona associated the notion of nobility with loyalty to the ruler and responsibility for the commonwealth (the republic). Although it can be said that certain Republican ideals drawn from antiquity thrived among the Lithuanian aristocracy, their dominant trait was conservatism (unwillingness to admit lesser nobility to the structures of power). The high-rank nobility clearly recognized the ruler as the head of the political body of the Grand Duchy, and sought for him a crown. The programme for a Kingdom of Lithuania should be linked to the need, fostered by aristocracy, for the GDL to have its own distinct identity, though having a separate ruler was important also for practical reasons: the unquestioned centralized government accelerated the defence mechanisms of the state. A contemporary observer testifies that, when the ruler was absent, the Lithuanian lords "did not know what to do, remained undecided and did nothing." The ruling elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, both in their actions and in what they wrote (in the Lithuanian chronicles and elsewhere), unequivocally showed that no agreements with the Polish Crown bound them. The role of the aristocracy in the political emancipation of the lesser nobility and the importance of the latter for the maturing of the Lithuanian-Polish Union are issues that still require further research. Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis gave some of his nobles personal freedom and economic autonomy, which can be regarded as a precondition for political emancipation.
The object of this research is the Zaberezinskis family among the political elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: the association of the family's history (its genealogy, economic, political, foundational activity) with the rest of the environment of the GDL rulers of the Jagiellonian Dynasty. The general backdrop of the political life of the GDL makes it possible to see and evaluate the weight of the Zaberezininkis family among the country's ruling elite. From the late 15th to the middle of the 16th century, the aristocratic authority with its ages-old roots acquired institutional form. Foreseeing the possibility of rulers residing outside the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (as during Kazimierz Jagiellonian's rule), Alexander Jagiellonian's privilege of 6 August 1492 authorized broader prerogatives for the Council of Lords. At the same time, on the eve of the proclamation of the Grand Duke, the summoned parliament initiated the tradition of representation of the nobility. Institutional changes were accompanied by the reception of humanistic ideas, legal culture and political theory, linked to the custom, increasing at the time, of nobility sending their offspring to universities to pursue higher education. The story of the Zaberezinskis family, descendants of Rimvydas, is presented In the context of the formation of the GDL Republic (Respublica Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae), a political nation of descendants of the Romans (as the Lithuanian nobility portrayed themselves). The earliest data on the kin are associated with the times of Sigismund Kęstutaitis, and the latest with those of Sigismund Augustus. Members of the family played a particularly significant role in the history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the times of Kazimierz Jagiellonian and his two sons Alexander and Sigismund the Old, from the 1480s until 1544. Responding to the postulates of the modern science of genealogy, the story of the family is presented according to its different branches. Against the background of key events in Lithuanian history, beginning from Jurgis Rimvydaitis and Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis, the careers of the latter's children and their descendants, their interrelationships, and factors influencing their careers are analysed. Due to the different status of different members of the family and the different amounts of data available in the sources, the questionnaire applied to different members of the family differs. Jonas Jurgaitis and his son Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis, who reached the highest posts, are the most significant, and the most extensive treatment is given to their biographies. The composition of the landholding and the development of the network of towns are discussed in a separate part of the study. The available data (including property holdings) do not directly confirm a family relationship between the Zaberezinskis and the Manvydas families. No sources have been found in which the Zaberezinskis in any way mention Manvydas or his brother, or a family relationship with them. In the view of the author of this work, the success of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinsky's career can be attributed to his holding the strategic post of Vicar of Polotsk at a key moment, the favour of Lithuanian Grand Duke Alexander and strong personal abilities. In consequence, Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinsky proved one of the most prominent personalities on the Council of Lords, achieving the particularly high offices of Voivode of Trakai and Grand Marshall, and personally taking part in the most important events in the interstate relations of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. For a variety of reasons (often due to early death), the only descendent of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis who achieved a significant political career was his son Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis (~1473-1538), who ultimately, like his father, assumed the posts of Voivode of Trakai and Grand Marshall of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. His relations with the other most influential high-ranking noblemen of the period are considered, especially the meaning of marriages contracted by him and arranged by him for his descendants and relatives. The gathered data regarding the formation and distribution of the family's latifundium show that the most important stage in the formation of the estate was the time of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis, although later the family also acquired significant properties through marriage and purchases. A major step in this process was the marriage of Jonas Jurgaitis Zaberezinskis to the daughter, Ona, of Jonas Nasuta, who held large properties in Palenkė (Podlasie). Other ways land was acquired were purchases and gifts of the rulers (Casimir and Alexander). One such event that stands out is Alexander's gift in 1506 of the regions of Alytus and Simnas. Many of the surviving papers written by Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis in the final period of his life, when he resided in Alytus as Keeper of the City and the Region, testify to intense internal colonization of the area of Alytus and Simnas by the Nemunas River. Alytus and Simnas also include the most noteworthy church foundations made by Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis and his family, a clear witness to the founders' piety. As he gave the decisive impulse for Alytus and Simnas to become city-like settlements, he can properly be considered the founder of those cities. The political self-awareness of the Lithuanian aristocracy is best captured by the term from that period "the Republic of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" (Respublica Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae), as D. Kuolis has accurately observed. The theory of the Roman origins of the Lithuanian nobility, with all its consequences (such as e.g. the rule of law), can be considered the highest peak of the political culture of the ruling elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. In 1525 (well before the Union of Lublin, which is often associated with Lithuanian republican traditions) Albertas Goštautas's memorial to the Grand Duchess Bona associated the notion of nobility with loyalty to the ruler and responsibility for the commonwealth (the republic). Although it can be said that certain Republican ideals drawn from antiquity thrived among the Lithuanian aristocracy, their dominant trait was conservatism (unwillingness to admit lesser nobility to the structures of power). The high-rank nobility clearly recognized the ruler as the head of the political body of the Grand Duchy, and sought for him a crown. The programme for a Kingdom of Lithuania should be linked to the need, fostered by aristocracy, for the GDL to have its own distinct identity, though having a separate ruler was important also for practical reasons: the unquestioned centralized government accelerated the defence mechanisms of the state. A contemporary observer testifies that, when the ruler was absent, the Lithuanian lords "did not know what to do, remained undecided and did nothing." The ruling elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, both in their actions and in what they wrote (in the Lithuanian chronicles and elsewhere), unequivocally showed that no agreements with the Polish Crown bound them. The role of the aristocracy in the political emancipation of the lesser nobility and the importance of the latter for the maturing of the Lithuanian-Polish Union are issues that still require further research. Jonas Jonaitis Zaberezinskis gave some of his nobles personal freedom and economic autonomy, which can be regarded as a precondition for political emancipation.
