Geheimdiplomatie - Schauprozess - Medienkrieg. Polen-Litauen und der Deutsche Orden um die Zeit des Konzils von Konstanz (1414-1418)

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Lietuvos Didžioji Kunigaikštystė; Lietuvos XV a. istorija; Lenkija; Kryžiuočių ordinas; Politika; Konstanco susirinkimas. Keywords: The Great Duchy of Lithuania; The Lithuanian XV c history; Poland; The Teutonic Order; The Council of Constance.

ENDuring the period of the Council of Constance, the conflict between the Monastic State of the Teutonic Order in Prussia developed into campaigns characterized by covert diplomacy, show trials and a media war. The Polish party accused the Teutonic Order of helping pagans – the Order was tactically connected with the Prussian tribes during military expeditions. After the ruler of Poland and Lithuania Władysław II Jagiełło [Jogaila] was baptized in 1386, the Teutonic Order’s mission to fight the pagans on the Lithuanian border no longer made any sense. King Władysław asked the Council of Constance to dissolve the military order as stipulated in international law. The Teutonic Knights accused the Poles of entering into an alliance with the pagans (they used the term to refer to baptized Lithuanians) and Tatars. This farfetched accusation led to further charges that the baptisms had been just for show and to allegations against orthodox Ruthenians (“schismatics”). On the other hand, Cracow’s academics, including Paweł Włodkowic, defended the military participation of the pagans in the conflict. They argued that even pagans had their own rights. Besides, the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom enjoyed the assistance of non-baptized tribes of their own country rather than foreign allies. The “fight with the pagans” consisted in antynomy, logical contradiction such as pretend vs real Christians, good and bad princes, cruel and peaceful countries, violent and loyal tribes – the terms through which the pagan topos had various connotations. Defining the baptized Lithuanians as “pagans” revealed the semantic meaning of the term, especially as the topos also had other connotations. In order to describe the variety of semantic nuances we still need to combat the dichotomy between “the other” and “our own” which underpinned the understanding of the term “paganism”. [From the publication]