Talk:Augustinus Rotundus

Untitled
Big thanks for your editions in this article, but i have few objection and if it`s not a problem, i would like to discuss it here before makeing any edits (well, except of minor typo corrects). So, i think that there should stay sentence that both Augustin and Długosz were lacking sources to support this Palemonids theory, it`s interesting and should be mentioned, but still... it`s only a legend. Next issue worth to mention is what he said about that Lithuanian language stayed only amongst the pesantry, i understand that its not nice for Lithuanians, but this is important and i think you shouldn`t eraseing it. We can argue if it was replaced by old-Belarussian, Latin, Polish or by all of that languages, but it`s undisputable fact. It doesn`t mean that Lithuanian national identity was also replaced, otherwise why Rotundus (and co.) will be writeing all of that, like "Rozmowy..."? This is similar issue to that P.S. of Nickolas the "Black" in his note to King Sigismund "...they`r Poles, we`r Lithuanians..." (note in Polish language!). Another thing is that "Lithuanian pride", which i think would sound better with "dignity", altrogh both words mean the same. And i`m not sure if pasquinade should be linked. Anyway, more important would be to expand bibliography section with other works, but i cannot find nothing more. It would be also good if you can give some referrences to your edits. P.S. If you know Polish at least little bit, i`v found full digitalized "Rozmowy Polaka z Litwinem" published in 1890 and i`ll of course add it to Rotundus wikipage. Greets. Mikołajski (talk) 15:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok one by one:
 * On the sources about Palemonids - it rather seems that I did not understand what you meant, you might rephrase that - I do not have problems with restoring this. As a legend it tis myth had rather strong influence, like adapting Latin as an unspoiled version of Lithuanian language by many noble families.
 * On the other hand I cannot agree, that statement, that Lithuanian language stayed only amongst the pesantry is a fact. Even after centuries of following Polonization and Russification great numbers of Lithuanian nobility were still speaking Lthuanian as a mother tongue - [referenced] informtion is provded here. Furthermore, I did not remove the sentence, I did just commented it out, as it was rather not understandable - where, in what context and by whom was it said. Speakin about the fact - I think it's a broader discussion subject, and it would be not solwed right now. I think mentioning, that Rotundus would be sufficent.
 * As for the note to the Stanislaus - wouldn't it be strange, to write it in some other language - like Lithuanian, that Stanislaus (educated in Krakow) did not understand? As for Lithuanian - Jagellons were perceived as a (somewhat) Lithuanian dynasty.
 * As for dignity - i do completely agree with you, this word is definitely better.
 * As for Conversation ... I do have commented Polish - and Lithuanian side by side translation of the work.
 * Have to go now, maybe will expand my answer a bit later.--Lokyz (talk) 15:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Swell, i`ll add it then. Yes, i don`t know Lithuanian, but i can understand why ancients were compareing it to Latin. Maybe its similarity is becouse Baltic languages are much older than Slavic or Germanic and i don`t know if really related to the Latin, but it`s possible. This or other way in the Crown it was also commonly used and it was of course becouse of church, which at that times was also educational institution, not to mention that before Nickolas Rej (who also lived at that time) latin was only one language used for documents and publications. Then it stayed as a part of sarmatism ideology, which was also claiming szlachta extraction or relation to the ancient Rome.
 * Ok, thanks for referrence, it might be that i just translated incorrect sentence, or may it be that Rotundus was mistaken, i`ll try to find it out and talk to the author of article in Polish wiki, until that this sentence will stay hidden, or if i`ll not suceed provideing explanation, will be erased. Speakein about the rusyfication, it was also present before union and polonization/latinization of the Lithuanian elites, becouse significant part of it was of Ruthenian and in many casas Rurikid stock. Of course it wasn`t forced, but rather natural process of cultures mergeing.
 * As for Conversation ...Than add this translation to this article (if you mean digitalised version of course), it will enrich this page alot.
 * I`v made some minor edits and leaved comment if it goes for his nobilitation, it`s rather important thing and i really wish to read more about it. I`v also changed sejm on sejmik, but i`m not sure if it is correct, anyway i haven`t heard about sejm in Grodno that year, Grodno Sejm makes some confusion. Ehh, this Bibliography section looks poor and all of it needs more referrences.
 * Ok, so i hope we`ll continue it and make this stub better. Thanks for everything. Mikołajski (talk) 16:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Some information about Commonwealth Sejm can be found here: Sejm_walny, and it seems that this (1568) year monarch of Commonwealth was residing in Hrodna\Grodno, so the Sejm was held there. Conversation translation is in the book I've metioned earlier.
 * Speaking about Ruthenisation-Polonization of Lithuanian elites it's rather complicated matter. There are evidences that in Lithuania propria ans Samogitia the effect was rather different than in Ruthenian lands, or in Poland. I think it was quite natural thing at the time, that after moving to some new location, one would accept local customs especialyg if someone moved from Vilnius or trakai to Polock or Kiev, one would not try to convert them all to paganism:) As for later times, the monarchs court had much influence, and all the "fashion" came from there. Latin stayed quite long, because of Stephan Bathory, who did not speak nor Polish, nor Rutheniian - only latin. So it did affect the magnates, and later higher nobility. Altough, as far I've read, this process was rather slow and nobility remained two or three-lingual for a really long time, and the differences were clearly evident until formation of modern nation conception. So much thoughts for now.Best regards--Lokyz (talk) 18:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, i mean other than wiki sources, most likely some digitalized Seyms proceedings (if it exists), or rather a book which is reffering to them. Yes, i see, you`r right about Hrodna (which Lukas is devastateing at now btw). Of course i was talking about Aukstata, Samogitia was even christianised much later and if i`m not wrong there was published prayer book (or Bible, i don`t remember now) in Samogitian dialect before other publications in Lithuanian. Haha, yeah but such things were happening, Lithuanian pagans were lacking organisations like orders and most of all will (i supose), to convert anyone. Similar way was with Waringas in Rus (and the same with name, Ruserna-Rus, Lithuania-.... Lithuania). It depends which "fasion" you mean, costumes, hairs, weaponary was rather eastern and speaking about Bathory Istavan, many customs were adopted from Hungary. Going back to the Augustin case, good edits you`v made, i`ll only correct some spelling and other minor errors, then researche him more to find some more of his works.Mikołajski (talk) 23:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Here you can find that Rotundus was speakeing about latin as a native Lithuanian language, maybe that`s why he stated that Lithuanian elites doesn`t speak Lithuanianian or rather that they, speakeing Latin, do in opposite to pesantry.
 * Fashion of everything - language, dresses, behavior models. And speaking about Rotundus we know also, what he did write about. The link you've provided clearly calls this Rotundus statament "a historiogpahical mythology - Historisher Mythenerzuegung. I did not found a word about peasants, this is rather, Lithuanians use Latin for their laws and their ritings, and in another place does point out that Lithuanians are from Italian origin.--Lokyz (talk) 22:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that`s why i`v said about it as a "native" language, i just guess that if he claimed that it`s real language of Lithuanians, he might consider Lithuanian just as a broken Latin. Anyway, it`s too messed up and it was said already. Btw. is it still stub?

Augustyn or Augustinus
Just a suggestion. Maybe it would be better to organize names following - Augustinus Rotundus, then pl form, then lt form. The Latin form is the most known,as per better known by his latinized name, Augustinus Rotundus in. Also, it should be noted, that Mieleski is added later, because he began to use it only after he was nobilitated.--Lokyz (talk) 20:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, in the prelude it will be Latin, Polish and Lithuanian (after all he was a Pole from Wieluń, i`v red however that it might be polonized Italian family), and then his inherited surname. I wish to see if he received some possesion when was nobilited, surnames in most cases were from nobles cityies names, so it`s verry probable that "Mielecki" wasn`t exception. Regards. Mikołajski (talk) 23:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * His wife was of Italian family, not sure about him. Don't have my books with me now.
 * The book I have read calls him "Mieleski". And indeed he was granted land near Stakliškės, that was former was Queen Bona Sforza estate. And well, I'm little confused here - one of the books says he was granted the estate, another - that Rotundus was appointed as an elder of Stakliškės.
 * There is also town Mielec in Southern Poland, and it might be the case of latinization of Mielec to Mieles. Anyway the connction of Rotundus with the town is rather unclear. So this time more confusion, than solid facts. Cheers.--Lokyz (talk) 10:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure that she was Italian? If you`v got referrence, i think it should be added. Same goes for Stakliškės, if it`s possible we can write that there`s confusion if he was landowner, or just officer-elder/starost. If we`v got nothing to explain his surname with land`s name, it will just stay like it is, unclear. Greets. Mikołajski (talk) 19:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The book says so. I might add this information after weekend, then we might de-stubb it.--Lokyz (talk) 22:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Quincunx
Sorry, but i cannot leave "pasquinade", however there were verry offending words towards Lithuanians, it was an important book and Lithuania was just briefly mentioned in it. I`v almost wrote big article about Orzechowski, he was just this kind of person which was able to insult anyone (and he wasn`t just Polish, he used to call himselve "gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus"), but to say that "Quincunx" was only anti-Lithuanian pasquinade is just not true. I belive that we can find a better word or some description to explain that Orzechowski just insulted Lithuanians in this book. Mikołajski (talk) 21:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Augustinus Rotundus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928105638/http://www.istorija.lt/lim/ragauskiene2000en.html to http://www.istorija.lt/lim/ragauskiene2000en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)