Talk:Jan Prosper Witkiewicz

Surely Polish is more correct?
Witkiewicz came from what is now modern Lithuania, but he was actually Polish. Jan Witkiewicz is definitely a Polish name, not a Lithuanian one. And the book cited here says he was Polish. Wouldn't it better to say he was an ethnic Pole from a part of the Russian empire that is now in Lithuania?--A.S. Brown (talk) 06:12, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

It's slightly more complicated than that. He was born to an old Samogitian family in the cultural heartland of Lithuania proper. He also lived most of his life in an area where Lithuanian was rarely replaced with Polish, as it may have been in other parts of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Also, he went to a school in Samogitia, which makes it likely that he knew some Lithuanian. But was he Lithuanian? Yes and no. His family probably spoke Polish for at least a couple of generations and he probably considered himself at least to an extent Polish (I'm guessing about the last point because we don't know the facts). But does this make him Polish? Again, not really.

Given the facts he is very much a product of his time - an individual born into the former lands of the multicultural Grand Duchy of Lithuania, whom we can not simply classify as either Lithuanian or Pole. Simply because at that time nationality was more fluid, particularly among the nobility, both upper and lower. One could identify oneself as both Lithuanian and Polish and see no contradiction in it.

As a result, I am determined to include Polish-Lithuanian in his ethnicity/nationality section, simply because that's the only category that can cover the complexity of Eastern European identity questions, without being biased to one side or the other. Oh and I have added a few footnotes as well. Pamishelisz (talk) 22:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, as the surname suggests, hist ethnicity was Ruthenian (Belarusian, in modern terms). Staszek Lem (talk) 23:56, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

As a self-proclaimed genealogy wonk I can actually deny any Ruthenian roots in this particular case. I've been doing some genealogy research in around that area for quite some time and I can say with great certainty that at least his family (or any other Witkiewicz in the area) is of Samogitian origin. If you'd actually look at the Bith/Death/Marriage certificates of that region (often available online) you will see that in the 18th century the surname reverts to Vitkevich and then in the 17th century it goes to its original form - Vitkus. On the one hand this can be explained by voluntary polonization of some people within the region, but on the other hand, Parish registry entries would often determine the evolution of a surname. From the 16th century up to the late 18th century everything was written down in latin and and from late 18th to early 19th century it was written in Polish. Afterwards everything is in Russian up until WWI. Tldr; in earlier parish records you'll find some Vitkus, but absolutely no Vitkevich/Witkiewicz surnames, but in late 18th century/early 19th century you will hardly find a Vitkus.

And there is solid evidence that his paternal ancestors have been around the area for centuries.

BTW, often surnames in PLC region would develop independently from each other, but over the course of a couple of centuries you might have a bunch of surnames that sound and look alike, but in reality have completely different origins. So by simply looking at a surname, particularly in the 18th or 19th century, it is virtually impossible to tell if someone's from Poland/Lithuania/Ruthenia/Russia or elsewhere. Unless it's a Baltic-Germanic or a Tatar surname. Pamishelisz (talk) 01:10, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected. I did not pay attention that it is a Slavic patronymic from a non-Slavic first name. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)