HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES - See also - Harvard University

REGIONALISM AND POLITICAL THOUGHT 181incorporation charters. The princes immediately began to campaignfor the preservation of their titles, in which they were supported by thedelegates from Lithuania and the incorporation lands. Although theDiet excluded the titles "accepted at the union" from its abolition offoreign titles, the eastern princes thought their position was threatened.Also, no specific mention was made of the titles guaranteed inthe incorporation of the Ukrainian lands into the Kingdom. 34When Kysil, himself not a prince, defended the titles of the princes,he was responding to the wishes of a very important part of the noblesof the eastern lands. The power of the princes had ensured that theVolhynian dietine (the only one in the incorporation lands for whichrecords are extant) demanded a new guarantee of the princely titles. 35Kysil undoubtedly reflected the sentiments of many non-princelynobles who, though attracted to the principle of nobiliary equality, stillviewed any infringement of the incorporation charters as an attack onthe liberties of all the nobles of the region.In defending the right of princes to their titles, Kysil adhered closelyto the words of the incorporation charters. He based his argument onthe guarantees made to the princes at the incorporation and on theservices the princes had rendered in defending the region. He maintainedthat "the orders of princes and noble families" had embarkedjointly on the union and that if the rights of princes were endangered,so soon might be the rights of the nobility. Although he emphasizedthat "the princes accepted equality and parity with our noble order,"Kysil maintained, too, that "we swore to hold their names in ancienthonor and dignity." He told the Diet: "You, Gracious Lords, acceptedtwo orders in the union and incorporation as an explicit wording." Infact, his discussion of princes and nobles as two separate orders neitherreflected the exact words of the incorporation charters nor the socialdivisions intended by that legislation. 36His insistence that the princesand nobles constituted two separate orders was an archaism thatconflicted with the constitutional theory of the Commonwealth andwith the very guarantee of equality. That in 1641 Kysil could still34For a discussion of the affair, see Ludwik Kubala, Jerzy Ossoliński, 2 vols.(Lviv, 1883), 1: 164-73. The constitution is in Volumina legum, 3: 931.3527 August 1639. Arkhiv lugo-Zapadnoi Rossii, pt. 2, vol. 1: 255-56.36On the wording of the charters, see Stanisław Kutrzeba and Władysław Semkowicz,Akta Unji Polski z Litwą, 1385-1791 (Cracow, 1932), pp. 300-319. The mostsimilar wording occurs in the order that the Volhynian populace swear allegiance tothe Kingdom of Poland; ibid., p. 298.