Jump to content

Talk:Golden Liberty

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NPOV Flag for Assessment Section

[edit]

To my reading, the assessment section is too dismissive of criticisms. Consider this authors points (this book is not cited in the Article): http://books.google.com/books?id=5fQDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA28&dq=%22golden+liberty%22&lr=&cd=16#v=onepage&q=%22golden%20liberty%22&f=false Chuckb187 (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

Is this term actually used in English at all, either to refer to the period of time or to the system of government? I've never seen it except on Wikipedia. john k 21:30, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I adopted the current name from the old Polish history article. I will check up on this. Perhaps a better name - this one is actually used - would be golden freedoms (pl. "złota wolność). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:15, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The closest Polish term I seem to recall is Rzeczpospolita szlachecka — "Republic of the Nobles" or "Commonwealth of the Nobles." But "Golden Liberty" (for the Polish Złota Wolność) might convey the spirit of the age even better. logologist 10:04, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Tnx. I will think about this and make a move (and redirects, oh, again) soon. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:26, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Is "Golden Liberty" used in English? Couldn't we have a name which a) clearly indicates that this is about Poland; and b) is actually used in English? john k 19:09, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Google shows 90 hits for Golden Liberty and 400 for Golden Freedom (and 650 for Golden Freedoms). But I trust Logologist feel in translation (unless he changes his mind and wants to move it all to Freedom, I won't object). This is a rare term, but the best translation I can find, unless you recommend using Polish or Latin. Also, Golden Libery is a key term used on Amazon [1]. Google test sample shows that half of uses on the web are non-wiki (10 for top 20 sample, 2 with liberty and 8 for freedom), so the term is in fact used in English, not invented. As I wrote earlier, I have no idea for a better title, I think this is now ok. Feel free to suggest anything. I think this translation of a Polish term is fairly good. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:34, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

== Political privilege The House of Representatives was the supreme power in Poland from 1505 to 1795. Over s million of free citizens lived in Poland by 1615 AD when population of Poland-Lithuania was eleven millions – twice of the population of England at that time.

Poland established a record in the world history of representative government. Every grown up citizen had the right to be a candidate for the throne of Poland in a free and general election. Every man and woman in Poland had the same rights to inherit property. The native legislative process shaped national culture of Poland. 

==

Hello all, The Wikipedia pages on the (constitutional) history of Poland seem very well-written and comprehensive. However, I have noticed that a page with a proper history of the evolution of the Polish constitution, incorporating all political privileges known to have been granted, is lacking. Therefore, if no-one disagrees, I will expand this page to describe the evolution of the Polish constitution towards constitutional monarchy through the granting of privileges and statutes. The couple of stubs on individual provileges should redirect here, because there simply isn't enough information about them on Wikipedia to give them standalone pages. Since pages like Polish Constitution link here for historical info, this page should be expanded in this regard anyway. 82.108.174.66 08:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that was me. Dan TV 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure if this page is the best page for it, but certainly such information would be welcomed. Do remember to reference it properly - and I am looking forward to the article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The real name of the State is Litva! And the official language in the Grand Principality of Litva was Old Belarusian! PLEASE, WRITE CORRECT NAMES IN THE ARTICLE AND USE THEM !!!

[edit]

I have a hope that You will agree with me. And I belive that name of each State must be translated for English from the language which the State uses or used. For example: Lietuva - Lithuania, Biełaruś or Беларусь - Belarus, Polska - Poland, Україна - Ukraine, Россия - Russia and etc.

Lithuania is translation from Lithuanian.

Although the Grand Principality of Litva was multi-national State the State language was Old Belarusian: "А писаръ земъский маеть по-руску литерами и словы рускими вси листы, выписы и позвы писати, а не иншимъ езыкомъ и словы." The Statute of GPL 1588. Part 4, article 1.

This article of the Statute of GPL 1588 in contemporary Belarusian: А пісар земскі мае па-руску літарамі і словамі ўсе лісты, выпісы і позвы пісаць, а ня іншым языком і словамі. Only the word "язык" has another equivalent in the modern Belarusian and nowadays used with another meaning.

Not each Ruthenian is Old Belarusian. But the Statutes of GPL and most of State documents in GPL is exactly in Old Belarusian. And it is not Lithuanian for sure:-) And the name of GPL as the Grand Principality of Lithuania is an evident mistake.

The State's name is Grand Principality of Litva.

Wnen Soviet Russia signed agreement with Independent Lithuania in 1920 Lithuanians demanded "to return" their Metrics (archives) of GPL. Famous historic Mitrafan Dounar-Zapolski offered to give Lithuanians ALL DOCUMENTS in Lithuanian. But such documents did not exist. Most of documents were in Old Belarusian, the rest of them were in Polish, Latin and German.

It wasn't exactly Belarusian State. But this nation had dominated. It was rather union of nations.

I think you are patriots and you love your country. You made great job and made nice group. But here you are nationalising history.

So I would appreciate very much if you USE CORRECT NAMES: the Grand Prinsipality of Litva, Polish-Litvian Commonwealth.

Thank you!

P.S. Lithuania is only small half of Litva. And I am sorry but Vilnia is a Lithuanian's town only since 10 October 1939 as a present of Stalin.

Till 1939 Vilnia was a Belarusian cultural center, and the Lithuanians were an ethnical minority there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.243.132.228 (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Golden Liberty. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Golden Liberty. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Equivocating "democracy" and "republic" notions in the article

[edit]

Nobles' Democracy is not democracy, it is aristocracy (by def.) "a republic under the presidency of the King" is not a republic , it's a monarchy. Otherwise, elected czars Boris Godunov, Vasilij Shujskij or Mikhail Romanov were the Russian republic presidents too. :-) Brambeus

Elections of kings and tsars happen, but only in extreme situations when there is no valid king. In Poland election of kings could happen anytime. In any case, you are contesting an established definition, supported by references to scholarly sources. Of course, "noble republic" is not republic in modern sense. Just as one may say there was no republic in Ancient Greece, because half of population were slaves and another halve were women, all without voice. Lembit Staan (talk) 16:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again one may insist the term republic is used here just for propagandistic needs as more than half of the population of Rzecz Pospolita were ukrainian and belorussian slaves (chlopy- хлопци).  :-( Brambeus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.233.220.41 (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And the beautiest half of wikipedians certainly would not agree to call Rzecz Pospolita a republic too, it seems to me. Brambeus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.233.220.41 (talk) 16:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is the suppression of orthodox christianity and old russian language in Rzecz Pospolita that produced the well known phenomenon of cossacks. Cossacks were orthodox chlops (slaves) fled from their polish (and lithuanian) catholic pans ( lords in polish) to the so called Wild Fields (Дикое Поле). See also Cossack uprisings: weren't these bloody rebellions against Rzecz Pospolita the direct consequence of the claimed "Golden Liberty", "nobles democracy", "polish-lithuanian republic" etc ? Brambeus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.233.220.41 (talk) 17:46, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Golden_Liberty&oldid=1205238897"