269

The Memoirs of Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski, Assessor of Navahrudak (1546-1604) translated and annotated BY ALEXANDER NADSON Introduction: Jeŭłašeŭski and his Times The Memoirs of Jeŭłašeŭski, like many other works of Byelorussian literature, are practically inaccessible to students and remain for the majority of them little more than a name in a textbook. Needless to say, their existence is completely ignored by the general reading public, even in Byelorussia. And yet this work deserves to be better known, for it is of undoubted interest to the scholar and is capable of giving much enjoyment to the general reader. The author, Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski, was a minor nobleman from Lachavičy, a small town in the Navahrudak district of western Byelorussia. He was born on the 8th February 1546 and died most probably in 1604, for the last entry in his Memoirs refers to the events which occurred at the beginning of that year. His parents, Macarius and Theodora, must have had a large family, because Jeŭłašeŭski mentions that after their death it was his duty to look after his brothers and sisters, in addition to paying his father's “not inconsiderable debts.” As was customary at that time, Jeŭłašeŭski received a rudimentary private education at home, consisting mainly of the ability to read and write Byelorussian (or, as it was then called, Ruthenian), for, as he himself observes, “at that time there was no other learning in our parts.” He also knew Polish and, to crown his academic achieve­ ments, he mastered the Hebrew alphabet. Thus intellectually equipped, he entered the service of great noble families and was entrusted, to use his own words, “with the collection of taxes and keeping of accounts, seeing that I was well endowed by nature for these tasks.” At the same time he continued his practical education, becoming “more skilful in figures” under the direction of persons more experienced than himself. However Jeŭłašeŭski finally made his career not as an administrator of estates, but as a legal representative conducting lawsuits in property matters on behalf of his patrons. He must have acquired extensive legal knowledge, as he was briefed to appear in cases for hearing before the Royal court of justice. Jeŭłašeŭski was particularly closely connected with the Chadkievič family, whose loyal servant he considered himself to the end. While employed by the great, he never refused his services to his fellow squires, whether for the purpose of arranging a marriage or settling a quarrel over property rights. He also knew well how to look after his own interests, and never missed an opportunity to increase his fortune, or to obtain a lucrative office — such as that of Bridgemaster of Pinsk and Serveč. On the whole, however, he seems to have been of a friendly and sociable disposition, with a keen interest in local

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 270 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES public affairs. At least once, in 1579, he represented his county in Parliament, and in the year 1592 he was elected to the office of junior county judge (assessor). Jeŭłašeŭski, like the majority of his contemporaries in Byelorussia, belonged initially to the Orthodox Church. In 1566, however, he became Calvinist, and remained attached to his new faith till the end of his life. This did not prevent him from remaining on the best of terms with both Catholics and Orthodox, for, as he says himself, “at that time difference of religion was no obstacle to friendship.” His views on relations between different Christians may be called truly oecumenical, as appears from the following passage of his Memoirs: “May God grant even now the return of gentler times, that all Christians — who, even though they differ in some articles of faith, are Christians nevertheless, — may show greater respect for the supreme and greatest Christian monarch, the Pope; and may he, like a wise and kind father, love and suffer them all, in the likeness of the father of a family who knows and suffers all his sons, even if they differ from him and the other brothers in their opinions.” In Vilna Jeŭłašeŭski had many friends among the Catholic clergy and once was even invited to dine together with the Italian servants of Cardinal Aldobrandini, the future Pope Clement VIII. On the other hand he helped his widowed father to obtain the Orthodox bishopric of Pinsk, a task which — as he naively admits, — involved him in many “efforts, expenses and various practices.” His wife was Orthodox, but this fact did not prevent their married life from being a happy one, and together they raised a family of 9 sons and 5 daughters. To complete the picture it must be added that one of Jeŭłašeŭski's sons, Joachim, entered into the service of the Duke of Mantua, and thus was presumably a Catholic, while his other sons were educated at the Unitarian (Antitrinitarian) school at Iŭje. In spite of his obviously sincere piety Jeŭłašeŭski was not above believing in various apparitions, premonitions and other 'supernatural' phenomena. As to his Calvinism, the only real trace of it was his firm belief that he was in a particular manner protected by God who in mysterious ways always punished his enemies. Jeŭłašeŭski had a full and active life. This fact found its reflection in his Memoirs, where reminiscences of a personal nature intermingle freely with recollections of persons known and events witnessed by the author. Political events were not the prime interest of Jeŭłašeŭski, and he was content to make short notes of some of the most important of them, “knowing that enough has been written by others on this subject.” While retaining the character of personal reminiscences, the Memoirs provide a lively picture of the social life of Byelorussian nobility in the second half of the 16th century and indirectly shed some light on important political events in Byelorussia during one of the most interesting periods of its history. Byelorussia in the 16th century was part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which, from its very origin in the 13th century, was a multinational state, the two main ethnical groups being Byelorussians and Lithuanians. Of these two the Byelorussians were the more

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 271 civilised. They were Christians, having received baptism from Constantinople at the end of the 10th century, and at the time of the formation of the Grand Duchy they had behind them three centuries of vigorous cultural development. The Lithuanians on the other hand were still pagans and writing in their own language was unknown to them. It was therefore natural that the Lithuanian nobles, includ­ ing the Grand Dukes, should have tended to adopt the Byelorussian language, culture and customs, and that many of them should have even embraced Christianity. By the middle of the 14th century Byelorussian had become the official language of the Grand Duchy, and it was used in the Ducal chancery, in the law courts and in all official documents. It was thus with justified pride that the early 17th century Byelorussian poet J. K. Paškievič could write: Poland blooms with Latin genius, Lithuania with Ruthenian. Sans this in Poland thoul’t not prosper, Sans that in Litva seems a jester. Latin to one a tongue bestoweth, One sans Ruthenian downfall knoweth.1 In a similar way, in 1588, Leo Sapieha, then Vice-Chancellor of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, in a preface to the 3rd edition of the Code of civil and criminal law known as The Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, declared: “If it is shameful for some nations not to know their laws, how much more is it so for us, who have our laws written not in some foreign language, but in our own.”2 Leo Sapieha was a Byelorussian nobleman. So were the families of Chadkievič, Hlebovič, Chalecki, Skumin, Vałovič, Vojna and many others who occupied the highest posts in the Grand Duchy. Thus it happened that while the ethnical Lithuanians were 'byelorussianised' in the cultural sense, the Byelorussians themselves were undergoing the process of political ‘lithuanianisation.’ They considered the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as their own national state and, while remaining Byelorussians, took pride in the name of Lithuanians.3 In the year 1385 the Grand Duke of Lithuania Jahajła was offered the Polish crown together with the hand of the young queen Jadwiga. In return he promised to incorporate the Grand Duchy into Poland and to baptise the ethnical Lithuanians, who were still pagans, into the Catholic faith. The baptism and the subsequent establishment of the Catholic Church took place in 1387, thus introducing a new factor in the life of the country. On the other hand the attempt to undermine the political independence of the Grand Duchy met with strong resistance and had to be abandoned. There followed a period of close, although often uneasy alliance between the two countries, during which it often occurred that the same person was both the Grand Duke of Lithuania and King of Poland, although the two offices remained separate and independent. The alliance finally culminated in 1569 in the act of union known as Union of Lublin from the name of the Polish city in which it was concluded. From then on the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland were to form one

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 272 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES Commonwealth with one monarch and one Parliament. At the same time each country retained its own internal administration, army, treasury, code of law and language. Despite the fact that the Union of Lublin appeared to guarantee the equality and separate identity of both partners, it contained several clauses which gave Poland a dominating position. Inter alia it con­ firmed the act of the Grand Duke Sigismund Augustus (1548-1572) who in 1564 renounced his hereditary rights to the Grand Ducal throne in favour of the Polish crown. It was therefore understandable that the delegates from the Grand Duchy were reluctant to sign the Act of Union, fearing that it would mark the end of political indepen­ dence for their country. To weaken their resistance Sigismund Augustus, who was also the King of Poland and who strongly favoured the union, detached from the Grand Duchy her Ukrainian possessions and incorporated them into Poland. The loss of these lands was in itself perhaps not a bad thing, for it freed the Grand Duchy from the responsibility of defending the frontiers of territories which had never really formed an integral part of her domains and which in any event were attracted towards Poland of their own free will. However, this was not how it was seen by contemporaries, and one detects a note of bitterness in Jeŭłašeŭski’s description of these events. At the time of the Union of Lublin, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania had for over ten years been in a state of war with Muscovy over the possession of the Baltic (Livonian) provinces. The fortunes of war had favoured the enemy, who had occupied and ravaged practically the whole of northern Byelorussia, and the Grand Duchy required all the help she could get from Poland. Thus the delegates from the Grand Duchy were in no position to bargain, and were compelled to accept the union, even if some of the terms were harsh and humil­ iating for them. Their true feelings, however, were expressed by John Chadkievič, Lieutenant of Samogitia (and, incidentally, Jeŭłašeŭski’s employer), in his last-minute appeal to the king: “Your Majesty and all here present can bear witness that we have defended our native country with all our strength, and until the present day have preserved it intact with our blood and our lives. If we could not defend it now, it was only because we had to give way before difficulties, fate and time... We humbly implore (Your Majesty) to conclude this task in such a way that it should not carry with it enslavement and disgrace for us and our descendants. May this union be concluded in such a manner that there should be not the least blemish upon us... It would be very painful for us and our grandchildren if in time it became clear that one should look upon this work (i. e. union — Tr.) not with love but with bitterness, or that we should blame ourselves for not realising our enslavement.”4 The bitterness caused by the Union of Lublin persisted for a long time. There was an attempt — duly recorded by Jeŭłašeŭski, — to break it after the death of Sigismund Augustus in 1572, even at the cost of coming to terms with Moscow, the Grand Duchy’s traditional enemy. Even some forty years after the event, the anonymous author

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 273 of a political pamphlet known as The Speech of Mialeška could write: “Away with King Sigismund (i. e. Sigismund Augustus — Tr.)! He is not even worthy to be considered a man, for having become a Pole, he took away from us Volhynia and Padlassie. On the other hand Sigismund the First (i. e. Sigismund the Old, father of Sigismund Augustus — Tr.) — how sweet is his memory! He despised Germans like dogs and hated Poles with all their cunning, while he loved with all his heart our Lithuania and Ruś.”5 Circumstances were, however, against the break with Poland. The chief reason was, no doubt, the Livonian war with Moscow which was not successfully concluded till 1582. In the meantime the predom­ inance of Poland in political life had been growing, and her capital Warsaw, where the king usually resided and Parliament met, was rapidly becoming the centre of the Commonwealth. With political importance, Polish influence also grew in the cultural field. It was becoming more and more necessary for a great number of Byelorus­ sians to spend long periods of time in Warsaw, whether for the purpose of taking part in a Parliament session, or for some social or private reason, as for example attending to matters requiring royal decision or assent. A knowledge of the Polish language was thus becoming not only desirable, but a necessary attainment, and Polish culture and customs spread with the language. The office of the king in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was elective. The right to elect a new monarch was vested in the nobility, who exercised it through their representatives at a special Election Parliament. Each candidate to the throne had to confirm the old privileges of the nobility and accede to their new demands. The elec­ tions were by no means a peaceful business, and sometimes the quarrels between various factions developed into what can only be called a minor civil war. The nobility was thus a privileged class, being the only one which possessed full political rights. The most powerful political institution was Parliament, which consisted of two chambers: the Upper Cham­ ber, or Senate, which was composed of high Church and state dignitaries, appointed by the king; and the Lower Chamber (Sejm), consisting of the representatives of the nobility. Those representatives were elected at the county assemblies (sejmik), amongst whose other duties was the election of county magistrates.6 The institutions of Parliament, county assemblies and elective magistrates were introduced in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania a few years before the Union of Lublin, and marked the final stage of the transformation of the feudal monarchy into a parliamentary system. This change was accompanied by an increase in the political power of the minor nobility (šlachta) at the expense of the great magnates (pany), who in former days exercised an immense influence through the Grand Ducal Council (Rada). It was in order to extend their privileges and make them secure, that many of the minor nobility were not averse to the union with Poland, where their counterparts had attained positions of importance a long time before. Opposition to the union came mostly from the great magnates.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 274 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

Thus after the Union of Lublin, one could also apply to the Grand Duchy the Polish saying: “A squire on his farmstead is the equal of a palatine.” In practice, however, the magnates continued to play a preponderant role in the public life of the country. As in former days, they held all the most important public appointments and, having a great number of minor county gentry materially dependent upon them, they could exert a strong political pressure, both in local affairs and in parliament. Thus a Chadkievič and a Jeŭłašeŭski might in theory have been two noblemen with equal rights, but in fact neither of them had any illusions about their respective position, namely that of master and servant. Moreover, as far as Jeŭłašeŭski was concerned, he not only considered this to be a natural state of affairs, but even took pride in his status as a faithful retainer to a great noble family. The great magnates on the other hand expected their superior station to be publicly recognised. Failure in this might have unpleasant, if not tragic, consequences for the offender. The most striking example of this, described in lively detail by Jeŭłašeŭski, was the assassination of the naturalised Muscovite nobleman Vaładzimir Zabałocki by the servants of Prince Christopher Radzivił. This was the tragic outcome of a quarrel which broke out between the two on the previous day, when Zabałocki failed to doff his cap before the prince. On the whole, however, and in spite of many abuses, life in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 16th century was marked by a great degree of freedom and tolerance. Although in a state of almost continuous war with Moscow, there was no personal animosity towards individual Russians (or Muscovites, as they were then called), many of whom took refuge in the Grand Duchy in search of greater freedom than then existed in their native country. Such no doubt were the ancestors of Jeŭłašeŭski's wife, who settled in eastern Byelorussia as early as the 15th century. The flow of refugees was particularly great in the mid-sixteenth century, during the reign in Moscow of Ivan the Terrible. Vaładzimir Zabałocki, who died so tragically at the hands of Prince Radzivił's servants, was one of these and he, having become a citizen of the Grand Duchy, even occupied there important administrative posts. The most notable refugees of that time were, however, Ivan Fedorov and Piotr Mścisłaviec (the latter a Byelorussian), who had to escape from Moscow after an un­ successful attempt to establish a printing press there in 1564. They were received by the great Byelorussian magnate Gregory Chadkie­ vič, the supreme commander of the armies of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, who founded a printing press on his estate in Zabłudava in order to publish liturgical books for Orthodox Byelorussians. Another famous refugee was Prince Andrew Kurbskij (1528-83), an outstanding scholar and writer and an implacable opponent of Ivan the Terrible. While some Russians were seeking political asylum in Byelorussia, others came there in search of greater religious tolerance. Chief among these were Theodosius Kosoj and the Elder Artemius, who had to escape from the wrath of the official Russian Orthodox Church because of their somewhat unorthodox views. Religious freedom in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, although well

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 275 established by long-standing tradition, was not recognised by law till the second half of the 16th century. After their conversion to the Catholic faith at the end of the 14th century, the Grand Dukes introduced legislation favouring Catholics and restricting the political rights of members of the Orthodox Church, to which the majority of Byelorussians then belonged. However, as early as 1432 all these discriminatory laws were revoked with the exception of one, which debarred the non-Catholic magnates from holding offices which would make them members of the inner Grand Ducal Council. But even this statute remained largely a dead letter till 1563, when it was completely abolished. From that time forth, a man's religious convic­ tions — provided he was a Christian, — were declared to be no obstacle to any state appointment, however exalted. Perhaps one of the reasons for the abolition of all discriminatory laws in religious matters was the fact that the position of the Catholic Church had been shaken by the rapid progress of Calvinism, which in 1557 had found a powerful protector in the person of Prince Nicholas Radzivił ‘The Black’, Governor of Vilna and Chancellor of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This great magnate, who for a time was de facto ruler of the Grand Duchy, used all his influence to spread the new faith throughout his vast domains and throughout the whole country. His example was followed by other great noble families, Catholic and Orthodox alike, and by masses of minor gentry. The Polish Jesuit Peter Skarga, writing in 1597, calculated that in Navahrudak province alone, out of 600 noble families which had originally professed the Orthodox faith, only 16 remained un­ touched by the Reformation movement.7 Even if those figures were somewhat exaggerated, they still bear witness to the astonishing progress of the new faith. For a time it looked as though Calvinism might become the national religion of the Byelorussians. However events took a different turn. Prince Radzivił died in 1564, but even before his death he saw many of the most outstanding Calvinists pass over to the camp of the Antitrinitarians (also known as Unitarians, Arians and Socinians). A few years later, in 1569, the Catholic Bishop of Vilna, Valerian Pratasievič, disturbed by the progress of Protestant­ ism, invited the Jesuits to the capital of the Grand Duchy. Soon other foundations followed, and there began a religious struggle which lasted for many years and ended finally in the victory of the Catholic party. The main weapons in this struggle were polemical literature and schools. The latter, both Protestant and Catholic, attained high academic standards and made a valid contribution towards raising the cultural level of the country. The most famous of them was the Jesuit college in Vilna which in 1579 became a Univer­ sity. At the same time the schools became centres for disseminating Polish culture, since initially practically all Jesuits — as well as all outstanding Protestants — came from Poland. It is also for this reason that all religious controversy was conducted in either Polish or Latin. There were a few attempts to publish religious books in Byelorus­ sian. Thus in 1562 the Calvinist (later Antitrinitarian) Symon Budny,

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 276 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES in conjunction with his coreligionists Matthew Kaviačynski and Lawrence Kryškoŭski, published in Niaśviž — the property of Prince Radzivił, — a Catechism in Byelorussian, followed by his treatise entitled “The Justification of a Sinner before God.” In the dedication of the Catechism to the sons of Princes Radzivił 'The Black' and Radzivił 'The Redhead' (a cousin of the former), Budny wrote: “It is a just thing that Your Princely Graces should love the langu­ age of the people, among whom the ancestors and fathers of Your Princely Graces have held the highest offices.”8 After those two early attempts to write in what he calls “an ancient and illustrious langu­ age”, all Budny's other works were published either in Latin or in Polish. Far more significant was the activity of the Byelorussian Antitrinitarian Vasil Ciapinski who around the year 1580 began pub­ lishing the New Testament in a Byelorussian translation made by himself. In the preface he says that he undertook this work out of a feeling of benevolence toward his native country and in order to serve his people. He suffered deeply because of the decline of the Byelorussian language, and reproached the Orthodox clergy bitterly for their neglect in the field of education and for sending their children to Polish schools. “Who will not weep — he writes, — seeing such great princes, such illustrious lords, so many innocent children, men and wives in that noble Ruthenian nation, which used to be so full of spirit and learning, neglecting and even despising their glorious native langu­ age... And finally what can be more pitiful, what more repellent, than the fact that those among them who call themselves their spiritual leaders and teachers — I say this boldly — are the most ignorant and the least understanding; they do not try to improve and have no schools which would provide instruction, and thus being reduced to such a desperate state, they and their children have to avail themselves of Polish and other learning, not without great shame to themselves...”.9 Ciapinski hoped that his work would be useful to his Orthodox compatriots, and for that reason, parallel to his Byelorussian transla­ tion, he published the Church Slavonic text. He was a man remark­ able for his patriotic spirit, whilst in his ecumenism he certainly stood close to Jeŭłašeŭski. The Jesuits published a few books in Byelorussian between 1580 and 1585, among which was a short Catechism. It was not till the religious Union of Brest in 1596, however, and the ensuing controversy between Catholics and Orthodox, that religious literature in the Byelorussian language, mostly of a polemical character, experienced a certain revival. The position of the Orthodox Church, to which the great majority of Byelorussian people belonged, was not a happy one. From the 11th century it formed part of the Metropolitan province of Kiev which embraced all East Slavonic lands. As a result of the Tatar invasion in the 13th century, the Metropolitan was forced to leave his See, and some time afterwards a rivalry arose between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Duchy of Moscow, as to where his new residence should be. This quarrel, harmful to the Church, was not settled till

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 277 the year 1458, when the province was split into two. Moscow obtained its own Metropolitan See, while the Metropolitan of Kiev, who retained his old title, fixed his residence in the city of Navahrudak, thus beginning the line of Byelorussian Metropolitans of Kiev. At that time, however, the Grand Dukes of Lithuania were already Catholic and not particularly concerned with the wellbeing of the Orthodox Church. On the other hand they retained the right to appoint bishops and other ecclesiastical dignitaries. This gave rise to many abuses, and it frequently happened that high ecclesiastical posts were filled by unworthy or unsuitable persons. Jeŭłašeŭski gives a very good example of such an abuse in his description of how he succeeded in making his widowed father Bishop of Pinsk in order to console him for the loss of his wife. From the general tone of his description of the whole incident it is evident that he considered it to be a normal thing. The one field which was particularly neglected by the Orthodox Church was that of education. There were practically no Orthodox schools and all witnesses of that time are unanimous in decrying the ignorance of the clergy, the monks and even bishops. The only educa­ tion available was a private one of the kind described by Jeŭłašeŭski, and it pursued primarily a secular aim: to prepare a young man for a post in state or private service. Anybody wishing to continue his studies had to go to Poland or some other foreign country. Thus there was a real need for schools in the Grand Duchy, and one can under­ stand the enormous success of Catholics and Protestants in the field of education. In the second half of the 16th century some Orthodox began to show concern over the state of their Church. First in the field were the magnates like Gregory Chadkievič, mentioned before, who found­ ed a printing press for publishing liturgical books. But it was the townspeople — merchants and craftsmen, — and their confraternities, who were destined to play the most important role in the Orthodox revival. Confraternities were religious associations of laymen, and among their duties were the maintenance of churches, providing for the education of children, printing of religious books and looking to the spiritual well-being of their members. After 1580 they began to spring up in all the major Byelorussian cities. The most famous confraternity was that of the capital of the Grand Duchy, Vilna, and its school was for a certain time to the Orthodox what the Jesuit University in the same city was to the Catholics. Another group of Orthodox Byelorussians, which included many members of the hierarchy, began to look in the direction of the Catholic Church. Their attempts resulted finally in the Union of Brest (Bieraście) in 1596, when they recognized the supremacy of the Pope, while retaining their traditional religious customs and way of worship. They came to be known as Uniats and their Church as the Uniate Church. The Union of Brest brought no peace to the troubled religious waters of Byelorussia, and it met with vigorous opposition, especially from the confraternities. Thus began a new phase of religious controversy, this time between the Catholics and the Orthodox.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 278 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES One sad effect of all these religious upheavals was the worsening of personal relations between members of various faiths. Remember­ ing nostalgically in 1603 the times when “difference of religion was no obstacle to friendship”, Jeŭłašeŭski continues sadly: “For which reason that age seems to me golden in comparison with the present day, when even among people of the same faith hypocrisy reigns, but when it comes to different religions, then it is useless to look for love, sincerity and good manners.” The first part of the period described in Jeŭłašeŭski's Memoirs was dominated by the so called Livonian war with Muscovy. It started in 1558, when the Muscovite armies of Ivan the Terrible invaded the Baltic provinces of Livonia which placed themselves under the protection of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and it lasted until 1582. Although Moscow was finally defeated, the war itself, to use Jeŭła­ šeŭski's words, “brought precious little profit to the Commonwealth”, and was particularly disastrous for the north-eastern provinces of Byelorussia which suffered great damage and destruction during the 20 years of Muscovite occupation. Towards the end of the 16th century the south-eastern provinces of Byelorussia lived under the increasing threat of cossack raids from the neighbouring Ukraine. Those men, living on the border of the Commonwealth in constant battle readiness, were good, although undisciplined, fighters and, at best, unreliable allies. In their ranks they recruited many undesirable elements, attracted by free frontier life and the prospect of easy gain. Although recognizing the authority of the Polish king (the Ukraine was then part of Poland), they were the source of constant embarrassment to him, and their looting expeditions abroad prevented the establishment of good relations with neighbouring countries. Generally their expeditions were directed against the Turks, but the cossacks were not above enriching them­ selves at the expense of their fellow-Christians abroad and at home. In Byelorussia they were feared and disliked, as is shown by con­ temporary documents. Jeŭłašeŭski's vivid description of one partic­ ularly vicious raid of cossack bands under the leadership of Severjan Nalivajka in 1595, makes the reasons for these feelings quite clear. In 1601 the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, together with Poland, was again engaged in a war for the Baltic provinces, this time with Sweden, mainly because of the private ambitions of their Swedish- born king Sigismund III Wasa, whose long reign (1587-1632) must be considered as a great disaster to the Commonwealth. It was during this war that there emerged the military genius of John Charles Chadkievič (1560-1621), who may be regarded as the last in the line of great Byelorussian generals of the period of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. He was the son of John Chadkievič and brother of Alexander — who were both masters of Jeŭłašeŭski, — and for some time he had in his service Jeŭłašeŭski's elder son Jerome (Jaraš). Such was the general situation of Byelorussia in the times of Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski. It was a period marked by wars, religious quarrels and growing Polish influence in the political and cultural fields. Yet in spite of all this, the 16th and early 17th centuries were also times when Byelorussian culture flourished. At the beginning of

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 279 the 16th century, in 1517, the great Byelorussian scholar and human­ ist, Francis (Francišak) Skaryna of Połack began in Prague the printing of the Bible translated into Byelorussian by himself, “to the honour and glory of God One in Trinity, to the praise of His Immac­ ulate Mother Mary, the joy of all His angels and His saints, and for the good of the common people”, as he himself declares in one of his prefaces. He continued his work in 1525 in Vilna. From the artistic and technical point of view, Skaryna's editions are masterpieces of early printing, rarely equalled by his contemporaries, while his charming engravings compare favourably with the best European examples of that art. His original contribution to Byelorussian lit­ erature consists of prefaces to various books of the Bible. It was also in the 16th century that the great work of codification of Byelorus­ sian law was achieved. Under the name of The Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the code appeared in three editions — in 1529, 1566 and 1588, — and in the last of these, which was printed in Vilna in the printing press of the Mamonič brothers, the official status of the Byelorussian language in the Grand Duchy was confirmed, perhaps as a protest against growing Polish influences. Towards the end of the 16th century, in 1596, Lawrence Zizani, then a teacher at the Orthodox Confraternity School in Vilna, pub­ lished his Slavonic Grammar and Lexis, or Church Slavonic-Byelo­ russian dictionary — pioneering works in the field of Slavonic philology and Byelorussian lexicography. To his Grammar Zizani added a short Commentary on the Lord's Prayer, which was a fine example of Byelorussian spiritual literature in an age preoccupied with controversy. Finally it must be added that Byelorussian Church music, art and architecture also experienced a period of vigorous development. One of the most interesting Byelorussian artistic centres was the Orthodox monastery in Supraśl in western Byelorussia, which flourished under the enlightened patronage of the Chadkievič family. Byelorussian literature during the 16th and early 17th centuries, although it can hardly be described as abundant, possessed a number of interesting works, such as The Reports on Muscovite Affairs by Filon Kmita, various Lithuanian Chronicles, The Chronicle of Barku­ łabaŭ, The Speech of Mialeška and courtly verses by Paškievič, Rymša, Leo Mamonič and others. There were also several translations of Western works, among them the stories of Tristan and Isolde, Buovo and Attila. Many of the literary works originated in central Byelorussia and their authors (or translators) belonged no doubt to the same social class as Jeŭłašeŭski — the minor gentry, from which the bulk of public servants was recruited. They were the class which possessed the best knowledge of literary Byelorussian, for this was a necessary prerequisite for anybody seeking public appointment. It is obvious that some of them did not limit themselves to drafting official documents, but tried their skill in the literary field. Jeŭłašeŭski wrote his Memoirs in the years 1603-1604, as appears from references in the text. They end with the entry for 2nd January 1604 and give the impression of being unfinished, probably due to the death of the author, who had been in poor health since the murder of his son John in 1602. In writing his Memoirs Jeŭłašeŭski no doubt

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 280 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES utilised his diary, of which he makes one mention in the text. The existence of a diary is also supported by the fact that names, dates and descriptions of events in the Memoirs are usually very accurate. This makes the whole work a valuable source of historical material. It has been used in this way by Boniecki, Merczyng, Wolff, Lappo and others. Although Jeŭłašeŭski could hardly be called a great writer, he had a sound literary talent and a gift for easy and lively narrative which makes his Memoirs entertaining reading. The work abounds in fine descriptions of incidents experienced or witnessed by the author. By their vividness and wealth of detail those passages compare favour­ ably with the best literary examples of this kind in any language. On the other hand Jeŭłašeŭski was not very good at portraying human characters. In a few instances, however, he succeeded in revealing the character of a person, not by making a jugment, but through his report of that person's actions. The passages describing the conflict between Christopher Radzivił and Zabałocki, and the behaviour of the judge Ziankovič following the assassination of Jeŭłašeŭski's son, are the best examples of this. Jeŭłašeŭski's style is usually smooth, but with a definite leaning towards involved sentences — probably a life-long habit formed by dealing with legal and official documents. The language of the Memoirs is literary Middle Byelorussian, as used in official documents and contemporary works of literature. A strong Polish influence is felt throughout, stronger than in other Byelorussian writings of that time.10 This is not surprising, seeing that Jeŭłašeŭski, by virtue of his profession, used to spend consider­ able periods of time in Poland and had to deal with Poles and polon­ ised Byelorussian magnates. On the other hand this is an example of a general process of polonisation which the official Byelorussian language was undergoing at that time. This process introduced a strong element of artificiality into literary Middle Byelorussian and contributed not a little to its decline and disappearance towards the end of the 17th century. Its place was taken by the living language of the people, which became the basis of modern literary Byelorussian. The beginning of the formation of modern Byelorussian may be traced to the times of Jeŭłašeŭski with the appearance of the so-called Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ.11 It was a work similar in character to Jeŭłašeŭski's Memoirs and embraced roughly the same period of time. Its author, who was an inhabitant of the village of Barkułabaŭ in eastern Byelorussia, belonged most probably to the lower Ortho­ dox clergy and was closely associated with the life of the simple people. His language is an outstanding example of vigorous living Byelorussian, as spoken by the ordinary people, remarkably free from Polish or any other foreign influence. In this it contrasts favourably with the language of Jeŭłašeŭski. A comparison of the two works is instructive also for other reasons. The Chronicle gives much information about the life of the ordinary people — the peasants — whom Jeŭłašeŭski, like a good nobleman, tends to ignore in his Memoirs. *

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 281

The original manuscript of Jeŭłašeŭski's Memoirs was kept in the Potocki Library in Wilanów near Warsaw. There exists a 17th century copy which was kept in the Ossoliński Institute in L’vov and is now in the Library of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences in that city. It is from this copy that the Russian scholar V. Antonovič made his one and only printed edition of the Memoirs in Kijevskaja Starina in 1888.12 Before that, in 1860, Prince Lubomirski published the Memoirs in a Polish translation, made from the original in the Potocki Library by L. Ciemniewski.13 The present edition is based on the text published by Antonovič. The Polish version was used in the preparation of the English transla­ tion for comparison and clarification. In this way it has been possible to eliminate several minor inaccuracies, mainly concerning names and dates. In the preface to his publication Antonovič states that he made no attempt to reproduce the various graphical forms of 'я' and 'o', but otherwise left the text “almost in the same state as it was found in the copy of the Ossoliński Institute.” He made an exception with regard to the soft ('ь') and hard ('ъ') signs at the end of the words. According to him, the copyist did not follow any particular rule in writing or omitting them. Therefore, “to make reading more conven­ ient” Antonovič placed the hard signs at the end of the words wherever they were required by the 19th century Russian spelling rules, even if they were missing in the manuscript. It has since been shown that he made some other alterations14 which may have seemed of no significance to him but which nevertheless diminished the value of his publication for the philologist. However, since this is the only text available to date — and it presents more than a merely philological interest — it has seemed advisable to republish it, even in this imperfect form. In view of Antonovič's admission — and following the present-day practice in publication of old East Slavonic texts — the hard signs at the end of words have been omitted. The problem of rendering Byelorussian names in English presents several difficulties, mainly because many of those names have in the course of history undergone considerable changes and possess today two (or even more) alternative forms — one traditional and one modern. For the sake of simplicity and uniformity all Byelorussian surnames and geographical names in the English text have been given in their present-day official form, unless they have a well-established English form (e. g. Vilna).15 In some instances the traditional forms have been indicated in brackets or in notes. Christian names, on the other hand, have been replaced, wherever possible, by their English equivalents. It is hoped that this publication may prove a satisfactory substitute till such time as it will be possible to make a new edition from the original manuscript, if, indeed, it still exists. I should like to express my thanks to Mr. Guy Picarda for his unstinting help and advice in the preparation of this translation and commentary.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 282 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

Успаміны Тодара Еўлашэўскага

Самому пану Богу мому зо всяких доброд›йств его насветшое милости нех зостава вечна честь и хвала, за которого презренем и я, Федор Евлашевскій, уродилемсе от выше помененых родичов моих в Ляховичах в року от нароженя сына Божого 1546, м›сяца февраля 7 дня, в неделю, ночи пришлое, около полночи, а дано ми име ведля свята руского, которое было на он час в понед›лок, м›сеца февраля 8 дня, а у римлянов положено есть м›сеця марца 2 дня — Теодора, гетмана от Лициниуша змучоного. А яко мелом ведомость от роди­ чов, же в рок по уроженю моем, промовилем до отца моего »абба«, з чого се они урадовали; але я намней потом не мовил, аж в полъ­ чварта року от нарожиня моего почалом мовить, а в пятом року почато мне бавити наукою рускою, кгдыж в тых часех в той наглей стороне не было еще инших наук, и для того пришло ми зостати з рускою и полскою наукою; и по жидовскый написати умелом, але тое письмо их потребуе умеетности языка ебрайскаго, або хоть немецкого, кгдыж вже тепер библия жидовская немец­ ким езыком, а литерами их выдана, чогоб полским языком учини­ ти бы ее не могло для ортокграфеи, якей в инших языках не маш. А потом, удавши се на службу, трафяли ми се таки паны, которые ме оборачали до браня поборов и чиненя личб, порозумевши на то з натуры способногѓ; и пан Бог был завше зо мною.

А потом, за наступленем и поднесенем войны от короля его милости Жикгимонта Августа з кнезем Иваном московским, року 1564 м›сеца генваря 27 (былем в битве) на Иваным полю над рекою Улою, а потом — то и до вприкреня были ми частые язды на тые войны: а яко оттераз упатрую, мало потребные, бовем же и речи посполитой пожитку не веле те войны приносили, а мне паметне зостали для утерпеня великих пригод, трудностей, шкод и невыповеденых невчасов. Самому пану Богу хвала, же ме зо всих их выбавять, а праве на некоторых местцах чудовне охра­ нять рачил, давши ми праве у вшитких людей вдячность, ласку и учинность над надее мое, а неприятелей, которые некгды з задрости повставали и головы свои подносити хотели, значными плякгами отврачаючи, а упорных и дивными припадками з света зглажаю­ чи, жем тою праве толко ласкою Божою не толко убезпечоный, але и розпèщоный будучи, никгдым се ку оборон› от неприятелей моих не готовал, аним се за слова их брал, очекиваючи власне

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 283

The Memoirs of Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski

May the Lord God be praised for his divers benefits and most holy mercy, by whose providence I, Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski, was born of the above named parents in Lachavičy in the year of our Lord 1546 on the 7th day of February on Sunday night about midnight.1 I was given the name in honour of Saint Theodore, the general martyred by Licinius, whose feast at that time was on Monday 8th February according to the Ruthenian calendar,2 but the Romans have it on the 2nd day of March. As I learned from my parents, one year after my birth I called my father “abba”, for which they rejoiced; however after that I did not speak at all and only started to talk when I was three and a half years old. And when I was five, they began to entertain me with Ruthenian learning,3 for at that time in our parts there was no other, and thus I had to remain all my life with only a knowledge of Ruthenian and Polish. I could also write Jewish letters, but that writing requires a knowledge of the Hebrew language, or at least German, for nowadays the Jewish Bible is written in the German language, but in their characters. This could not be done in Polish because of the orthography which is different from that in other languages. Later, when I entered into service, I happened to become acquainted with various gentlemen who entrusted me with the collecting of taxes and the keeping of accounts, seeing that I was well endowed by nature for these tasks. And the Lord God has always been with me. Later, war broke out between His Majesty the King Sigismund Augustus and the Duke Ivan of Moscow, in the year 1564 on the 27th of January (I took part in the battle) at the Ivan Field near the River Uła.4 Afterwards I had more than enough of those military expedi­ tions for which, as I now see, there was little need, because they brought precious little profit to the Commonwealth, and, as for me, they remained in my memory only because of all the dangers, diff­ iculties, destruction and untold hardship. May the Lord God be praised for designing to deliver me from all these perils and even saving me miraculously in some places and making me earn the gratitude, favours and friendship of all men beyond my expectations; as for my enemies, whenever they, roused by envy, lifted up their heads, He chased them away with manifold afflictions and removed the obstinate from this world by wondrous means. Thus feeling secure in God’s favour, even indulged by him, I have never thought

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 284 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES помсты Божой, котра теж никгды не омешкала, а некгды и ве мне самым аж плач и велике порушене в духу чинила, уважаючи так вшехмоцного и великого Бога незапаметане мне, межи незличоным людом, яко робачка малого, и непожаловане тратити можнейших, над мене ку обороне моей.

Року 1565 мешкалем в месте виленском, выбираючи побор, наз­ ванный покгловный, гдем мел великую втеху, слухаючи слова Божого ве зборе хрестианском за министров вчоных: Вендрокгор­ ского и Костеницкого, а противным зась обычаем зналем великую ласку мужа годного памети, кнезя Яна Маковецкого, архидиякона варшавского, кустоша и каноника виленского, писаря в скарбе короля его милости, который ме барзей в те то личбы вправил и доброго ме пожитку набавил и веля людям в знаемость подал и залецил; бовем на он час разность веры не чинила наймнейшой розности приятелской, для чого самого тамтот век золотым ми се видил от нинейшого веку, кгде юж и межи одной веры людьми облуда все аступила, а покготовю межи розными веры ани се пытай о милость, щирость и правдиве добре заховане, а навенцей межи свецкими станы. Помню бовем и недавно прешлых часов, когды дисейший папеж Клеменс еще кардиналом был у короля его милости Стефана в Вилне, седилем у столу кнезя Балтромея Недызвицкого, каноника веленского, з преднейшыми слугами (влохами) его, тые же се кгды доведели, жем евангелик, дивова­ лись барзо, яко ме смел кнезь каноник на обед свой взывати, а кгды им он преложил, же в нас з того жадна ненависть не быва и милуемосе яко з добрыми приятылы, хвалили то влохи, мовечи, же ту Бог живе; а ганили свои домовы права а роднии неснаски. О Бог бы то дал, абы и тераз ласкавше веки наступить могли, жебы хрестияне, хоть в частях або обычаех веры порознени, але еднак хрестияне, преложеного и навышшого монархи хрестиян­ ского, отца папежа, в лепшим пошанованю мели, а од него, яко от отца мудрого и ласкавого зношони и миловани были, прикла­ дом отца домового, который сынов своих и розных от себе и от другой братіи в обычаях зносити умел.

1566 року, в осени, поветре кгвалтовне в месте Виленском было; мешкалем под ним не мало, бачечи там доктора Сепреза и инших каноников и людей розных, которе теж в тим поветрю живо зостали были, а маючи от помененого доктора пересторогу, межи иншими речами, абым се перелякненя варовал, кгдыж се и поку­ сы в поветрю указують, але, если бы се що привидило, жебым шедл против тому безпечно и до броне се мел, и то мело згинути; и так я юж будучи в себе постановеный, едучи з Вилна до дому, мяновите в Дорогове, в стодоле ночуючи, обачилем юж на свитаню в избе огнистого челов›ка, до которого гдым се порвал, он теж: до мне выступовал и, зшедши се серед избы, порвалем з запалем нож и ударилем нань, а он, зникнувши, знов се был в тым же куте указал и знову до мне шел; а я шапку рутилем нань и окно отворилем; юж малый день был, а то згинуло; а там в избе был

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 285 of defending myself against my enemies, neither did I heed their words, awaiting patiently this very wrath of God against them, which never tarried and which always moved me to tears, seeing the care bestowed upon me, a miserable worm among the multitude of men, by this Almighty and Great God, while at the same time He did not hesitate to destroy those mightier than I in my defence. During the year 1565 I resided in the city of Vilna,5 collecting the so-called poll-taxes. There I received great consolation, listening to the word of God preached to the Christian congregation by the learned ministers Wędrogorski and Kościeniecki.6 On the other hand I found great favour with a man worthy of memory, Father John Makaviecki, the Archdeacon of Warsaw, Custodian and Canon of Vilna, Secretary in the Treasury of His Majesty, who made me more skilled in figures and did me a great service by giving my name and recommending me to several people. For at that time difference of religion was no obstacle to friendship, for which reason that age seems to me golden in comparison with the present day, when even among people of the same faith hypocrisy reigns, but when it comes to different religions, then it is useless to look for love, sincerity and good manners, especially amongst lay people. I remember well from times not long ago, when the present Pope Clement was still a Cardinal at the court of His Majesty King Stephen in Vilna, I was sitting together with some of his foremost Italian servants at table in the house of Father Bartholomew Niadźviedzki, Canon of Vilna. On learning that I was an Evangelical they were astonished that the Canon dared to invite me to dinner, and when he explained that there was no hate among us and that we loved one another like good friends, the Italians were filled with praise and said that God Himself dwelt here, while at the same time they complained of their own domestic customs and disorders. May God grant even now the return of gentler times, that all Christians — who, even though they differ in some articles of faith, are Christ­ ians nevertheless, — may show greater respect for the supreme and greatest Christian monarch the Pope: and may he, like a wise and kind father, love and suffer them all, in the likeness of the father of a family who knows and suffers all his sons, even if they differ from him and the other brothers in their opinions. In the autumn of the year 1566 there was a plague in the city of Vilna; I lived there for some time, frequently seeing doctor Saprez, the Canons and other people who also remained alive during the plague. From this doctor I received advice to beware of fright, for there were temptations in the air, but if I saw anything, I should seize a weapon and walk towards the apparition and it would disappear. Thus forewarned, on my way home from Vilna, spending the night in a barn in Darahova, I saw a fiery man about daybreak. I moved in his direction and he also began to come towards me. Swiftly I grabbed a knife and struck at him. He, having disappeared, after a while appeared again in the corner and started to move towards me. Then I threw my hat after him and opened the window; it was beginning to be light and he disappeared. The host with his wife and my servant

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 286 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES господарь з жоною и пахолок подорожный, але того не слышели; потом балем се ехать до дому, розумеючи, жем се заповетрил; и тыж там умыслилем был бавить се длужей, до чого се теж и причина налезла: згинула ми была ручница коротка з олстрем з воза моего в стодоле, о которой выведане копным обычаем чини­ лем, а вшитким впродь то видене мое поведалем. Обачили потым ручничку мою над возом в самом верху завешану, аж драбину з веси принесши, знято ю. Затым невеста стара шляхтянка, неяка Жолнерова, кгдым ей мовил о том виденю, же се бою, если бым кгде не заповетрил се, бовем и в Новокгродку было поветре, она ми рече: »не бой се! не поветре!« але указавши недалеко свой домек, »з окна, поведила, виделам завше, яко лятавець приходит до той ту невесты господарской«. И так за ее отухою ехалем до дому, где за ласкою Божою зе вшитким здровым былем. Однож потом ве три чверти року припадать ми почало в спаню за яким колвек злякненем душене прикре барзо; и меновали докторове ту хоробу инкубусом и лечено ме на то на розных местцах, але хоть юж не так часто, яко з перву было, однакоже през увесь живот мой почувалем я в собе той припадок. Тогож року 1565 на перше роки земске ве всем панстве Литов­ ским о светом Михаиле, а Новокгрудски, за заповетренем места Новокгродского, в Ляховичах сужоны были; а старостою на он час был ляховицким пан Володимир Семенович Заболоцкий, зацного дому человек з Москвы. Року 1565, а веку моего 21, были летом у короля его милости Жикгмонта Августа послове великые московскые, то есть на имя: Федор Иванович Колычов, наместник суздалскій, человеков з ним 728, а коней 922; Григорій Иванович Накгой, дворецкий, людей з ним 269, а коней 384; Василей Яковлевич Щолканов, дъяк або писарь, людей з ним 228, а коней 332. Сума всих людей 1,225, а коней 1,638; з которыми о спокою ниц се не постановило. Тoe же осени король, его милость, был з войском в шику под Радошко­ вичами. Року 1568 по сойме Кгроденском и по зезде воинском ехал король, его милость, до Люблина для сконченя унеи; откуль року 1569, на другой недели посту великого, панове сенаторы литовсцы, бачечи веле речей собе противных, отехали были з Люблина; вшакже по великой ночи през универсалы короля его милости, за печатю коронною вынесеными, знову до Люблина собрани бу­ дучи, скончили унию августа месяца 11 дня. А предтым еще земля Киевская, Волынская и Подляшская до коруны присужоны и спи­ сами прилучоны были, не за раз, але з особна по одной земли от Литвы урываючи, яко свитчать привилия им даные: в Подляш­ ском найперша дата, албо снадней одерване; марта пятого, за тым у Волынской земли двадцать шостого дня мая, а Киевска земля и далей затрмана была, аж ей привилей выдано шостого дня чирв­ ца в оном же року 1569. Року 1570 был съем у Варшаве, але се розехали без констыту­ цией за незгодою, а под тым часом послы были у московского, а меновите с Полски: пан Ян з Борчина Кротоский, воевода ино­

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 287 were in the same room, but they saw nothing. Thereafter I was afraid to go home for fear of having caught the plague. Thus I decided to stay there longer, for which I found a good excuse: my short gun with the gunholder had disappeared from my carriage in the barn and I decided to conduct an investigation according to common custom,7 but first of all I told everybody of my vision. Later they found the gun hanging so high over the carriage that a ladder had to be brought from the village to take it down. Afterwards an old gentlewoman, called Žaŭniarova, when I told her of my nightmare and of my fears of catching the plague — for Navahrudak was also infected, — said: “Fear nothing! It is not the plague”, and, showing me the house nearby, added: “From my window I always see a ghost coming to the host's daughter-in-law.” Thus reassured by her, I continued my homeward journey and, by the grace of God, remained in good health. Only afterwards, about nine months later, I began to experience in my sleep a most unpleasant choking feeling whenever I was afraid of something. Doctors called this illness incubus. I tried many rem­ edies in various places, but nonetheless, although not so often now as previously, I have felt the effects of this my adventure all my life. In the same year 1565 the Michaelmas court sessions were held for the first time throughout the whole Lithuanian state,8 but the Nava­ hrudak9 session, by reason of the plague in that city, took place in Lachavičy; at that time the tenant of Lachavičy was Master Vaładzi­ mir, son of Simeon Zabałocki, a man of noble family from Moscow.10 In the year 1565, when I was 21 years old, the Muscovite envoys came to see His Majesty the King, and these were their names: Theodore Ivanovič Kolyčov, the governor of Suzdal’, with 728 men and 992 horse; Gregory Ivanovič Nagoj, courtier, and with him 269 men and 384 horse; Basil Jakovlevič Sčolkanov, secretary, with 228 men and 332 horse. Altogether there were 1225 men and 1638 horse; they came to no agreement regarding peace. In the autumn of the same year His Majesty the King was near Radaškavičy with the army ready for battle. In the year 1568, after the Parliament session in Hrodna11 and following on the assembly in Voiń, the King went to Lublin to conclude the union.12 During the second week in Lent of the year 1569 the Lithuanian senators, seeing many things which were contrary to their wishes, left Lublin; however after Easter they came back, having received the King's order under his seal, and, having assembled in Lublin, concluded the union on the 11th day of August. Before that date the lands of Kiev, Volhynia and Padlassie were annexed to the Polish crown, not all at the same time, but each being separately torn away from Lithuania, as the privileges granted to them show. First to go was Padlassie, torn away before the other lands on March the 5th, then came the turn of Volhynia, and the land of Kiev was retained the longest, until the decree of annexation was promulgated on the 6th June of the same year. In the year 1570 Parliament was held in Warsaw, but, because of dissention, all went home without any constitution being proclaimed. In the same year ambassadors were sent to the Duke of Moscow. The

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 288 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES влодзславский, и пан Рафал Лещинский з Лешна, староста раде­ евский, а з Литвы: пан Миколай Тальвиш, кашталян менский, а пан Андрей Иванович, писарь короля его милости; которые князю великому московскому Ивану Васильевичу о доконченью унее нашое ознаймили и примере на три лета принесли. Смеялсе мос­ ковскій на ознаймене уней, мовечи: »давном я то видал, же Ляхи и Литва королевские«. Того року трохам был до дому се з Варшавы звротил в лете и знову з початку осени ехалем до Варшавы и мешкалем там през вшитку осень ..... спысковалем в потребах короля его милости, хоть ми послуга мерзила. Пріехалем до дому остатнего дня грудня в року 1570, где застав­ ши пана отця и паню матку у вечери, зараз не моглем доседеть у столу: припала ми срога горячка, бовем в дорозе мелом при собе хорых людей и заповетрилемсе от них еще у Венкгрови, а потым, жем през тыйдень ехал не подаючи се, аж юж гвалтовне мя в дому зломало, и то была дивна справа Божа, же ми в дорозе уфолкговать рачил. Лежалем в той хоробе семь недель и отпады­ валем, або в рецыдыве входнлем, трикрать, даючи причины на то з необаченя моего, яко в молодом веку моем. Ледвем се выбил и оздровляти почал под месопусты в року 1571. В том року 1571, по великой ночи, ехалем до Варшавы и меш­ калем при дворе; аж липца 17 ехалем был до дому и, приехавши до местечка, што се зове Добрым, захоралем на горючку и казалем се везты аж до Брянска, маючи там доброго человека, кгосподаря Яна Манзика, гдем долежал выпоценя и сконченя той хоробы; а пани матка моя, не ведаючи о мне, гдем был и што се зо мною деяло, але серцем материнским чуючи то, велце се зфрасовала и здорове собе попсовала, звлаща по первих хоробах моих и фра­ сунках своих значне здоровя урвала; и за приеханем моим до дому але по первим привитаню жалосный былем, розумеючи о ей недолгом животе; якож потом в марцу пришлом живота доконала. А я еще осени той мусилем Варшаву наведити, кгдыж там ко­ роль, его милость, Август мешкал, а мне потребы короля, его ми­ лости, правние ку отправованю злецоны были. На початку року 1572 былем забавеный потребами его милости пана Миколая Криштофа Ходкевича, маршалка дворного, княжа­ ти на Олыце и Несвижу, а теразнейшого пана воеводы троцкого, которых потреб, яко у пана великого, досыть было. Але ми се наприкрили над инше справы якогось пана Шахна, земянина его княжеской милости з маетности Сверженской, который, задарши се з паном Миколаем Служкою, старостичем крычовскым, суседом той-же маетности Сверженской, дивне штуки вырежал и паны затруднил, аж добре се его милость пан маршалок (звлаща яко в молодым веку сам) доведивши се, з паном Служкою до поров­ наня приятелского пришол и пану Шахнови за добре не мел. От тых часов завшем служил в потребах его княжеской милости, пана воеводы нинейшого троцкого, хоть потым не завше притомне, однакже правдиве и пилне аж до той старости моей, в которой то, а меновите в року панском 1603 пишу и детком своим раду мою

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 289

Polish ambassadors were My Lord Jan Krotoski of Borczyn, Governor of Inowrocław, and My Lord Raphael Leszczyński of Leszno, Lieuten­ ant of Radziejewo; and from Lithuania My Lord Nicholas Talvoš, Castellan of Minsk, and Andrew Ivanovič, Secretary to His Majesty the King.13 The ambassadors informed the Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan Vasilevič about the conclusion of the Union and also offered an armistice for three years. The Muscovite laughed when he heard about the Union, saying: “I have known for a long time that the Poles and Lithuanians were the king's men.” In the summer of the same year I came home from Warsaw for a short time, but at the beginning of the fall I went back to Warsaw and lived there all autumn... I was acting as a clerk in the service of His Majesty the King, although I disliked this task very much. I came home on the last day of December in the year 1570 and arrived when my father and mother were having supper. However I could not remain at table till the end: I developed a high fever. On my way home I had been travelling with some sick people and was infected by them whilst still in Węgrów. I continued my journey for one week, suspecting nothing, and it was only at home that I was suddenly taken ill. It was the marvellous providence of God that spared me during the journey. I was ill for seven weeks and had three relapses because, being young, I was a little careless. It was only about Carnival 1571 that I began to recover and returned to good health. After Easter 1571 I went to Warsaw and resided there at Court. But on the 17th of July I was returning home, and, when I reached the town called Dobryń, I fell ill and contracted a high fever. I gave orders to be taken to Bransk where I knew a good landlord, Jan Manzik, with whom I stayed until the end of my illness. My mother, knowing nothing of where I was and what had happened to me, but sensing something with her maternal heart, was full of anxiety and thus endangered her own health which had already been weakened through the worries caused by my first illness. When I reached home and greeted her, my heart sank, for I understood that she would not live long. And indeed she died in March of the follow­ ing year. I had to go to Warsaw again in the autumn of that year, for His Majesty the King was there and I had certain legal matters entrusted to me for settlement. At the beginning of the year 1572 I was engaged in the affairs of His Grace Lord Nicholas Christopher Radzivił,14 Lord Marshal of the Court, Duke of Ołyka and Niaśviž and now Governor of Troki. He, as might be expected from such a great lord, had many problems, but the one that caused me the greatest worry was the case of a certain Master Šachno, a tenant of His Grace on the Śvieržań estate, who, having quarrelled with his neighbour in the said Śvieržań estate, Master Nicholas Słužka, son of the Lieutenant of Kryčaŭ, began to behave unpleasantly and caused trouble to all concerned. The Lord Marshal (who was still young), when he learnt the facts, made a friendly settlement with Master Słužka, but could not forgive Master Šachno. Thereafter I have served His Grace the Governor of Troki in many of his needs, if not always ably, yet ever diligently and

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 290 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES зоставую, абы се при мне и по мне его княжеской милости и детком и домови его кнажеской милости прикладом моим служить се не вымовляли. В том року 1572 дня 8 фебруарія сполнило ми се от нароженя моего лет 26, а семый двадкцатый настал. В тым-же року нещасливого месеца марца второго дня в неделе предеднем умерла намилшая матка моя Феодора з великим жалем пана отца нашого и нас, детей их милых; которой тело пристой­ ною учтивостю поховано в Ляховичех в церкви руской. А ту се за смертю пани матки моей розерване мыслей моих стало вторе: были ехать до Угор и до Туріи, зведати инше краины далеке, научить се ремесл розных, кгдижем был жалосный.

За смертю пана отца моего деток ховане и опатроване албо опека деток их, братей и сестер моих, на мя припадши, в тых кутех света мне затримали. Того-ж року был съем валный у Варшаве, але король, его ми­ лость, Август юж был хорый, протож се ничого не постановило. Был и чауш от турка; слухали го панове радние; на местцу коро­ левском арцыбискуп Якуб Уханский сидел. Мовил турчин, слуга чаушов, за его указованем турецким, по латине, которому призна­ вано, же добре мовил; а при отправеню чинил му респонс пан канцлер Валентый Дембинский по полску. И татарин наш нагото­ ванный хтел му толмачити, але чауш не казал, поведаючи, же сам розумит по полску; указовано то от многих людей, же се туркове в Парыжу французком пилне латины учат, а бодай не перенеслы се до них науки, яко се перенашали первей от народов тых до других, што тепер, яко слышемы о великих наук розмноженю в панствах турецких, хоть теж и веля християн, туркам прилекг­ лых, в языку се их турецком закохали; а што ведеть, ку чому то за часом своим пан Бог привести будет рачил?

Под тыж-же часом король, его милость, фримарком за Свислоч пустил Ляховичи его милости пану Яну Ходкевичу, на он час старосте жмутскому, и взял е его милость 12 дня червца в том року 1572; того теж дня человек зацный, подле Ляхович мешка­ ючий, Федор Юрыга, умер; ям был у Варшаве при дворе, где теж поветре морове значне се показовало. Король не хотел было вы­ ехати, аж дворяне на замку мреть почали: померли пахолята Бы­ лицкій и Конарскій, а червца 19 умер князь Массалский, в ласце на он час королевской будучий, тедыж король его милость, улек­ нувши се, дал се вывезти на ночь до Пракги за реку Вислу; и так далей проважоно короля у возе великом, на то заготованом з бло­ ками, а в ним ложко з королем лежачим высело. Приехано з ним так до Кнышина 28 червца, а я еще в дорозе впал в тежкую го­ рючку и казалем се вести до Кнышина, кгдем се ледве з тое го­ рючки выходил. Умер король, его милость, Август в понелелок липца 7 дня, годины третей з полудня, которого смерти, яко се там

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 291 honestly, until my old age, to wit the year of Our Lord 1603 in which I am writing all this; I leave this advice to my children, that they, whilst I am still alive — and when I am gone — should follow my example and never refuse to serve His Grace, his children and all his House. In that year 1572 on the 8th of February I completed the 26th year of my life and began the 27th. In the same unhappy year, on Sunday 2nd March early in the morning my beloved mother Theodora died, leaving my father and all of us, her dear children, in great sorrow. Her body was buried with all due reverence in the Ruthenian church in Lachavičy. After the death of my mother I had plans to travel in Hungary and Turkey, the which countries I wished to visit together with other faraway lands in order to acquire knowledge and to distract my mind, for I was depressed. However after the subsequent death of my father the duty of looking after my brothers and sisters fell upon me, and thus I was detained at home. During the same year Parliament was held in Warsaw, but His Majesty the King was already ill, and therefore nothing was decided. There was also present a Turkish envoy and the Lords of the Council gave him an audience. Archbishop James Uchański sat in the King's place. The envoy's servant, a Turk, spoke in Latin according to what the envoy told him to say and everybody agreed that he spoke well. An answer was given in Polish by Chancellor Walenty Dębiński. Our Tartar interpreter, specially trained for that purpose, wanted to translate, but the envoy said no, thereby letting everybody know that he understood Polish. Many people say that Turks are assiduously studying Latin in the French city of Paris, and it may happen that learning will pass to them, as it used to pass from one nation to another in former times. It seems that this is what is happening now, for we hear about the growth of learning in the dominions of the Turks, whilst on the other hand many Christians, who are neighbours of the Turks, have learned to appreciate the Turkish language. Who knows what is the Good Lord's purpose in all this. At about the same time His Majesty the King deigned to grant Lachavičy to Lord John Chadkievič, then Lord Lieutenant of Samo­ gitia, in exchange for Śvisłač.15 The transfer was effected in the year 1572 on the 12th of June. On the same day Theodore Juryha died — a good man who lived near Lachavičy. I was at that time in Warsaw at Court when the first signs of the plague became apparent. The King refused to leave until members of the Court began to die. The first to die were the page boys Bylicki and Konarski and on the 19th of June Prince Masalski, a favourite of the King, died. There­ after the King took fright and allowed himself to be carried to Praga across the river Vistula. Later he was carried further in a specially constructed carriage, in which was suspended a bed with the King lying in it. Thus they came to Knyszyn on 28th of June. On the way I was overcome by fever and gave orders that I too should be carried to Knyszyn, where I recovered with great difficulty. His Majesty the King Augustus died on Monday 7th July at 3 o'clock in the afternoon.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 292 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES сподевано, не таено, але зараз всим обявлено 8 дня липца; в шаты королевские убрано 9 липца; еще без труны на столе при стене всим людем, кто хотел видети тело королевское, указано. 10 липца до труны тело вложоно; а за тоюж смертю короля его милости и хоробою моею зостали листы мое неподписаны, которые мне ко­ роль, его милость, на маетности дание написати был казати рачнл, што се великому нещастю моему причитати мусить.

За тым зъезды в Полще и в Литве бывали. Послы цесарские и от инших панов приездили; от турка се пилно выстерегали; не­ мней розерваня з Литвою обавяли се, абы се Литва з московским не порозумела; и протож были от поляков в Кгродне пан воевода подолский и пан каменецкий, кгде се о згодной елекецыей намовили (опускаю то, яко ведаючи достаточне то от инших выписано). В тым-же року 1572, видечи я пана отца моего осиротелого и велце для смерти малжонки своей жалосного, радячисе и намовляючи се з ним, зрозумилем, жебы позволил на яким владычестве жи­ вота доконать; доведивши се о ваканцыей владычества пинского, чинилем всяке старане, не жалуючи праць, накладов и розных практик, кгдыж то все для добродея отца моего милого был пови­ нен; але кгды ми до накладов пенезей не стало, былем так нещаст­ ный, жем се ту около Ляхович у людей тых, которым ем се часто в потребах их згожал, на узычене пенезей способити не могл; аж, о котором мней надеи мелем, пан Андрей Жданович Доровский, и по смерти му добре слово зоставую, же ме пенезми был поратовал, жем то владичество пинское пану отцеви отримал; на которое в року 1573 стычня 15 дня в Новгородку от митрополиты Ионы Протасевича посвецоный был; до Пинска приехал на столицу свою 26 стычня в понеделок. З тых всих речей нехай буде на веки само­ му пану Богу честь и хвала. Аминь.

А так, з Пинска се отправивши, почалом се старати о отыскане в Турове, где князь Костантын, воевода кіевский, боронил, для чого знову переездов и накладов не мало быти мусело; былем в Турове у княжати, и зоставил ме еще на обетницы, и так долго зволок, аж в Кракове на коронацией короля Генриковой року 1574, кгдым му послужил до отысканя именей Острога и инших, през пана Лаского, воеводу сирацкого, королеви Августови заве­ деных, тож был в Туров пану отцу моему поступити казал. Там­ же ркомо, поуспокоивши се, пан отец мой был на той зацной сто­ лицы владычества пинского в всяком люцком поваженю, доброй славе и оздобе, але не долго, бо в року 1574, будучи в Турове, впал у фебру и з полрока в ней бывши, умер в Пинску, року 1575 дня 9 марца в середу ранючко, где потом и тело его поховано в церкви святое Пречистое, а на мене припало ховане деток и пла­ чене немало долгов его. Але Пан Бог мой не опускал ме и в тых речах, розумови моему трудных, але ме значне ратовал и зе вшех их выбавити рачил; нехай буде зе вшех добродеств своих Пан Бог похвален на веки. Аминь.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 293 His death, since it was expected, was not kept secret, but made known to all. On the 8th of July he was dressed in his royal robes and on the 9th of July his body without a coffin was laid out on a table near the wall and exhibited to all those who wished to see him. On the 10th of July the body was placed in the coffin. Because of the King's death and my illness there remained unsigned certain letters which the King had commanded me to write and which conferred upon me the ownership of certain properties. This I must consider as one of my great misfortunes. There were assemblies in Poland and Lithuania. Envoys from the Emperor and other great princes arrived; everybody was on their guard against the Turks; the Poles were afraid of a break with Lithu­ ania, and that the Lithuanians might come to terms with Moscow. Therefore the Polish envoys, the Governor of Podolia and the Castellan of Kamieniec, were sent to Hrodna where they agreed for the election to be held in common (I omit the rest, knowing that enough has been written by others on this subject).16 In the same year 1572, seeing my widowed father in great sorrow over the death of his wife and trying to console him, I understood from his conversation that he would like to finish his days in some bishopric. Having learnt that the See of Pinsk was vacant, I at once began to take the necessary steps, sparing no efforts, expenses and all sorts of practices, knowing that I owed this to my dear father and benefactor. I felt desperate when funds ran short and none of those round Lachavičy, whom I had helped in their needs before, would lend me money. It was Master Andrew Ždanovič Daroŭski — may I say a good word for him after his death, for he was the last person from whom I expected help, — who saved me by lending the necess­ ary sum, and thus I was able to obtain the See of Pinsk for my father. He was consecrated by the Metropolitan Jonah Pratasievič18 in Nava­ hrudak on the 15th day of January 1573 and took possession of his See on Monday 26th January. For all this may the Lord God be praised. Amen. Setting out from Pinsk I began to take steps to recover Turaŭ to which Prince Constantine,19 the Governor of Kiev, was forbidding access to my father. This again meant travels and expenses. I went to Turaŭ to see the Prince, but he left me with a promise and pro­ crastinated for a long time, till in 1574 in Cracow, during the corona­ tion of King Henry, I was able to help him to recover his properties of Ostrog and others, impounded by My Lord Laski, the Governor of Sieradź on behalf of King Augustus; only then did he give permission for my father to come to Turaŭ. Peace thus having been established, my father occupied that noble See of Pinsk, respected by all and enjoying a good name among men, but not for long: for in the year 1574, while in Turaŭ, he developed a high fever and, after ailing for half a year, died in Pinsk on the morning of Wednesday the 9th of March in the year 1575. He was buried in the church of Our Lady, and it fell to me to look after his children and to pay his not inconsid­ erable debts. However the Lord God did not abandon me in these difficulties, but always helped and saved me: may He be praised for His benefits. Amen.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 294 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES В том теж року умер в Ляховичах сын пана виленского, пан Ярош, маючи около лет 15, а в той мелодости своей был мудрости и розторопности великой. Умер теж пан Андрей Грегорович Ход­ кевич, подстолий великого княжества литовского, велице добро­ тливый и рыцерский пан, которому мено было дати в малженство воеводянку виленскую Радивиловну, але се то тою смертиею пана подстолего розервало; и выличил небощик пан виленский, же то юж была за его ведомостью одинаста пара людей з дому их Ход­ кевичовского, приходечи до сповиноваценя з домом Радивиловс­ ким, розервана. Року того-ж в маю зъехавши се панове и рыцерство до Стенжицы, конклюдовавши Генрика короля болше юж не чекати, до елекцыей нового пана приступили и змешкавши там три неделе, розехали се, в розерваню ничогô не справивши. Ехалем за позволенем пана моего до Острова, у Люблина местечка будучого, мелем справу там з шляхтою Казновскими от их братовое, цорки годного памети мужа Стефана Мостовничого, отца суседов моих, панов Вадошин­ ских. А, едучи до Брестя, пред Полюбичами былем в великом страху от грому, же муселисмы под частыми срокгими перунами, значне межи нами спадаючими, ехати мили з полтретей, не маючи, где зостановити се; потом, приехавши до дому, былем у того-то пана Мостовничого, а меновите липца 24, в неделю, а межи инши­ ми розмовами припоминалем тот страх громовый, якосмы се на­ терпели; он на то поведил, же му еще молодому в Кракове от якогось переежучого кгвяздара практыковано, же мел меть смерть от грому в року живота его шестдесятым, а яко-бы му юж з ласки Божей лят шестдесят минуло; и так се покгласкал по бороде; за чим на серцу моем стало ми го барзо жаль, и пытам: если се боит, кгды му се трафит быти под громом? рекл ми на то: же не дбает никгды, ежели где потреба была з душным збавенем. А по тых розмовах и розеханю нашом в десети днях, меновите серпня 4 дня, в четверг, того пана Мостовничого гром забил в полю, под сосною, под которую был, для дощу подехавши, станул. В той-же осени был пан виленский з войском у Лифлянтех; зоб­ равши се, взел Борку. А ям был на Волыню и у Олыце. А (к) воли пану Стефану Лозце, маршалку мозырскому, былем з ним у Ба­ бине, у шляхетного мужа, пана Андрея Бабинского и змовилисмы за него сестру пана Ложчину, панну Томилу, в том року 1575 ме­ сеца паздерника 21 дня. Року 1575 мисяца лютого осмого дня сполнило се мне лет трид­ цать и настал рок 31. Воды в том року на весне гвалтовные были, и трафило ми се быти, кгды бронено вырваня у млына ляховецкого, названого нового, где Януш млынар стал на крайней балце, отби­ яючи пешною кригу ледовую, а за ним два хлопы древном вели­ ким з мосту тлукли теж лед и упустили тот паль, который, выпад­ ши им з рук, ударил Януша млынаря в тыл головы, а он упал в став до воды и зараз през упуст пренесеный на дол у глубину великую и не рыхло з ней указал се, несеный далеко водою, а пешне пред се мел в руках своих; аж так и вышел з воды и над

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 295

In the same year Master Jerome, son of the Lord Castellan of Vilna, died in Lachavičy; he had reached the 15th year of his life and was a most sensible and intelligent person for his age. There also died Lord Andrew, son of Gregory, Chadkievič, the Court Chamberlain, a man of great virtue and chivalry.20 He was about to marry Lady Radzivił, daughter of the Governor of Vilna, but his death changed everything. The late Lord Castellan of Vilna reckoned that, to his knowledge, it was the 11th time that an intended marriage between the Houses of Radzivił and Chadkievič had broken down. In the same year the noblemen and knights assembled in Stężyca and resolved not to wait any longer for King Henry,21 but to elect a new king; however, having wasted three weeks, they went away with nothing because of discord. With the permission of His Lordship I went to Ostrów, a township near Lublin, where I had a matter to settle between the noble family of Kazanowski and their sister-in- law, the daughter of a man worthy of memory, Master Stephen the Bridgemaster, who was the father of my neighbours the Vadašynski. While going to Brest, before reaching Palubičy, I was much frighten­ ed by a thunderstorm with frequent lightning, through which we had to travel for some two and a half miles without shelter. After my return, on Sunday 24th July, I went to see the Bridgemaster and during our conversation I mentioned the frightening thunderstorm which I had experienced. He told me that when he was a young man in Cracow, a travelling astrologer foretold to him that he would be struck by lightning at the age of sixty; however, by God's grace, he was already past sixty. And saying this he stroked his beard. I felt real pity for him in my heart and asked him whether he was not afraid whenever he happened to be caught in a thunderstorm. He answered me that he did not care, but thought rather about the salvation of his soul. Ten days after this conversation, namely on the 4th of August, the Bridgemaster was struck dead by lightning in a field under a pine tree, where he was trying to find shelter from the rain. In the autumn of the same year the Lord Castellan of Vilna was in Livonia with his army, where he took Borka. I was at that time in Volhynia in Ołyka. At the request of Master Stephen Łozka, Marshal of Mazyr,22 I went with him to Babin to see a noble man, Andrew Babinski; there, on the 21st of October in the year 1575 we came to an agreement about the latter's marriage to Master Łozka's sister, Mistress Tomiła. In the year 157623 on the 8th day of the month of February I completed the 30th year of my life and began the 31st. There were violent floods that year and I happened to witness in Lachavičy an attempt to save the mill, known as the New Mill. Januš the miller was standing on the end beam trying to push away a big floe of ice with a pole, and behind him on the bridge two peasants were breaking the ice with a large wooden log; suddenly they let the log fall from their hands and it struck the miller Januš on the back of the head. He fell into the pond and was carried through the sluice into deep water; the current took him a long distance and he did not appear on the surface

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 296 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES надею всих нас, люди там будучих, жив зостал, бо не можна му было жадного ратунку дати.

Лета того от неякогось Пацкевича Степана и Михайла Зверева москвитина и от инших непріятелей моих, щастю моему, хоть ма­ лому, пред се заздрощаючих, мелем немалые фрасунки, з которых ме сам толко Пан Бог, хвалы вечное кгодный, вызволил. В том-же року вересня 11 дня былем на комисей в Менску, межи князем Соломирецким и местом менским; была бурда велика там и также Пан Бог оборонил.

Паздерника 5 выехалем з дому до Туруня и вступовалем до Белой, где была справа велика его милости пану Радзивилу з опе­ кунами Тетерского о имене Свержино; от туд на Варшаву ехалем и былем в Туруню 23 того месеца паздерника; там был юж Стефан король, яко 15 дня того месеца приехал и сеймовая, а цесар Макси­ милиян 12 дня паздерника умер; на сейме тым, кром намов о Кгдан­ щанах ничего не справивши, пожегнали послове короля его ми­ лость 2 декембра. Ям не мало справ судовых мел пред королем его милостю и щастило ми се за ласкою Божою.

Позналем се теж з королем Стефаном и его венкграми, которых найчастей панове до себе на обеды прошивали; и я помню: Заичди Януш, Барити Юригай, Нодох Петер, Батори Петер, Бурномиса Януш, Кенды Петер, Верфевич Мартин, Поляк Мигай, кухмистр Крачок, а пахолята: Ференцый и Асемерый.

Там-же в Туруню привиталем новый рок 1577, а в ним приеха­ лем до дому в неделю дня 13, месеца стычня; а уклопотаный вже будучи працами и волокитами уставычными, уважаючи теж волю и росказане Бога всемогучого, уступилем в том року 1577 месеца февраля десятого дня в малженство светое з теперешною малжон­ кою моею, Ганною Болотовною, сестрою пана Данила Болотовича з Руси; которых то Болотов продок, человек значный, еще за ко­ роля Казимира з Москвы был приехал, на имя Антоний Болото; и был славным мужом и потомки его през час немалый; а другие з них, розродивши се, розно се розышли и под панами некоторыми оселости боярские побравши, яко то ве Шклове и инде, мешкают. В маетности смы се з обу сторон ровной знесли были, але, з бло­ гословенства Божого, была нам семйа спора и помнажаючаясе над працу и надею нашу; милем з нее добру жону; не уприкрылы ми се для ней дни живота моего; была бовем у пригодах и хоробах серца мужского, цноты великой, пыха и злие мысли снать у ней никгды до серца не наступовали, ку убогим, хорым и засмучоным людям упреймого милосердія, же и в ночи, спати не могучи, о та­ ковых ратунку мыслила и старане чинила; а хоть у вере руской трывала, але так бачне и не упорне, же то намнейшей незгоды не указовало и люди видеть того не могли, тым-же болшей, смотречи на наше спокойное тихое и веселое помешкане, в заздрость впа­

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 297 till after a considerable time, all the while holding the pole in his hands. Finally, when all of us there present had lost all hope, for it was impossible to give him any help, he emerged from the water alive. During the summer of the same year I suffered much unpleasant­ ness from a certain Stephen Packievič and the Muscovite Michael Zverov, as well as from my other enemies, jealous of my little good fortune, but the Good God, worthy of eternal praise, delivered me from them. In the same year on the 11th of September I was in Minsk with a commission, trying to settle a dispute between that city and Prince Sałamiarecki. There was a great skirmish, but there also God preserved me intact. On the 5th of October I set out for Toruń, and on my way stopped at Biełaja, where a big lawsuit was in progress between His Grace Lord Radzivił and the trustees of Ciacierski concerning the Śvieržyna property. From thence I went to Warsaw and arrived in Toruń on the 23rd of the same month of October. King Stephen24 was already there; he came on the 15th of that month to preside over the Parliament, after the death of the Emperor Maximilian on the 12th of October. Except for voicing their complaints against the city of Gdańsk, nothing was decided at that Parliament and the delegates took leave of the King on the 2nd December. I had a number of lawsuits to settle before His Majesty the King and, by the grace of God, was successful. I also made the acquaintance of King Stephen and his Hungarians, whom our noblemen frequently invited to dinner; I remember the following names: Zaičdy Januš, Bariti Jurigaj, Nedoch Peter, Batory Peter, Burnemisa Januš, Kendy Peter, Verfevič Martin, Polak Mihaj, the kitchenmaster Kračok and the page boys Ferencyj and Asemeryj. In Toruń I saw in the new year of 1577 and came back home on Sunday the 13th day of the month of January. Being worn out by continuous labours and journeys, and also bowing to the will of God, on the 9th day of February of that year 1577 I entered into the bonds of holy matrimony with my present wife, Hanna Bałota, sister of Master Daniel Bałatovič of Ruś. The ancestor of these Bałotas, a man of some importance, by the name of Anthony Bałota, came from Moscow back in the times of King Casimir.25 He and his successors were quite famous for many years. Other descendants of the same family, having multiplied, went their own way; some of them have accepted properties on knight tenure under various lords in Škłoŭ and elsewhere and live there till the present day. We brought equal shares of property from both sides and, with the blessing of God, our family prospered far beyond our labours and expectations. She has been a good wife, and the days of my life have never been tiresome with her; in misfortunes and illnesses she has shown a strong heart and, being endowed with great virtues, pride and evil thought have never entered her mind. She has been full of compassion towards the poor, the sick and afflicted, so that even at nights, when unable to sleep, she would think of how to help them and afterwards would duly put it into practice. And although she persisted in her Ruthenian faith, she did it so quietly and without fuss that there has never been

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 298 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

даючи, мовами своими фальшивыми нас щипали и разными спо­ собы иншими; а наконец и чарами прешкодити то усиловали, але Пан Бог, который ме пасл одного самого, не опустил ме и з тою малжонкою моею и не подавал нас на волю неприятелей наших, але, их самых розными плякгами дотыкаючи, яко от скалы от нас отпалых и завстыжоных зоставовал, а нас, з ласки своей, в деточ­ ки помнажал; якож напрод ку великой потешности дал нам перво­ родного сына Яроша, а потым иншие сыны и цорки, же по нинеш­ ный рок 1604, яко се то пише, сполнило се сынов 9, а цорек пять, з которых юж мамы Яроша, сына нам милого, жонатого, а цорку нашу Райну в малженстве за паном Яном Греским выданую, о чом будеть на потым на местцу своем ширей.

В том року бавилем се в дому его милости пана виленского, а начастей в Ляховичах мешкал. Под тым-же часом в маетности бискупства виленского у Недведичах был урядником пан Василей Рогачовский, человек мудрый и великого захованя у людей. Мел малжонку у себе Токачовну, невесту барзо добрую; ово не ведет з чого впал в меланхолию, о всем собе зле тушачи, наконец о ласце у князя Валеряна, бискупа, пана своего, и товаришов; а бискуп он цнотливый миловал его яко сына и товарищи не были му не­ зычливыми; которого, яко на ме велце ласкавого, розными спо­ собы отводилем от того и поднялем се был ехать з ним до Вилна для опатреня здоровя его; а, зрозумевши по ним, же мыслил о учинене якой смерти собе, бо ме просил за жоною и цоркою своею, ознаймилем малжонце и некоторым слугам его; якож они покры­ ли были жел›за и ручницы, але в понеделок святочный в тым року, мая 27, кгды се люди при полудню розешли, замкнувши се сам один, ручником се в избе (повесил). Стало се то з великим страхом людцким, и сам его милость пан виленский, услышавши то в Ляховичах, был дивно стрывожоный и веле на то мовил, конкл›дуючи: »же не ведают люди, не ведают, що ест шатан!« а потом за его-ж милости помочю выпровадилем з Медведич до себе в дом малжонку и цорку небожчиковску и поховалисмы тело его в Ляховичах у старой церкве, а пани, змешкавши при мне и жоне моей в дому моем шесть недель, отехала в повет минский и шла была замуж за пана Макаровича. Я, жем се был барзей престрашил, бовем першого-ж дня, звлаща в ночи, былем там у паней Рогачевской, и знову в Ляховичах, мелем се не добре ве спаню, а летавцам што начастей видал, не толко в ночи, але и ве дне, же и иншие люди, при мне будучи, видали; мне теж не див было: надивнейший припадок, о котором в року 1566 писалем.

Того-ж лета король, его милость, Стефан под Кгданском з войском был, а московский Иван у Лифлянтех замков веле по­ брал и позаседал; тамже з под Кгданска з обозу принесено ми

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 299 any discord between us on this account, and some people, seeing our peaceful, serene and happy life, could not abide it and, overcome by envy, tried to hurt us with their sharp tongues and by other means, finally even resorting to sorcery to create trouble; but the Lord God, who watching over me when I was alone, has not abandoned me now with my wife and did not leave us at the mercy of our enemies, but, having punished them with appropriate plagues, left them full of shame after they rebounded from us as from a rock. At the same time He, in His great mercy, multiplied the number of our children; thus at first, to our great joy, He gave us our first-born son Jerome and then other sons and daughters, so that in the year 1604 in which I am writing these lines we have 9 sons and 5 daughters, of whom our dear son Jerome is already married,26 and so is our daughter Raina, who is the wife of John Hrušoŭski. But more will be said of this anon. During that year I was frequently at the house of the Lord Castellan of Vilna and resided for most of the time in Lachavičy. At about the same time the steward of Miadźviedzičy, the property of the Bishop of Vilna, was Master Basil Rahačoŭski, a wise and universally respected man. He had a wife, a very good lady of the Takačoŭski family. For reasons unknown he fell into a depression and began to see everything in a gloomy light, doubting even the good dispositions of His Lordship the Bishop Valerian27 and of his friends: and the good Bishop loved him as if he were his own son, while his friends were far from being ill-disposed towards him. Knowing that he was very fond of me, I tried by every means to dispel his depres­ sion and even offered to go with him to Vilna for his health's sake. Having understood that he intended to take his own life, for he asked me to look after his wife and daughter, I made this known to his wife and some of his servants and they hid away all guns and swords. However, on Monday 27th May of that year, it being a feast day, about midday, when all the people had gone away, he locked himself in his room and hanged himself with a towel. This accident gave rise to a great fear among the people, and the Lord Castellan of Vilna, who was then in Lachavičy, when he heard what had happened, was deeply shocked and repeated several times: “The people do not know, they do not know who the devil is.” Later on, with the assistance of His Lordship, I took the wife and daughter of the deceased from Miadźviedzičy to my house and we buried the body in the old church in Lachavičy. The widow, after having stayed for six weeks with my wife, departed for the Minsk county, where she married Master Makarovič. I was much afraid, because on the first day, and especially during the night, when I was at Mistress Rahačoŭski's house, and then again in Lachavičy, I slept badly and the old apparition began to visit me not only at nights, but also in the daytime, so that other people who were with me saw it; I was not astonished however, remembering what happened to me in 1566, of which I wrote before. In the summer of the same year King Stephen was near Gdańsk with the army, and the Muscovite Ivan took and fortified many castles in Livonia. From the camp near Gdańsk I received royal

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 300 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

листы короля, его милости, на мостовничество пинское и сервец­ кое по небожчику пану Стефане вакуючое. В месецы лютым указала се была комета велика на зимным восходе сонца и была час немалый. Року 1578 его милость пан Ходкевич, пан виленский, сам з войском ехал до Лифлянт, барзо хорый, а мене на съем до Вар­ шави выправил в пилных справах своих и княжати Корецкого, пришлого зятя своего; который съем зачатый был стычня 20 дня; маршалковал межи послами наш литвин — князь Лукаш Болько Свирский. На тот съем привезено Подкову и дано его зараз за страж гайдуком, потым и пута нань вложно над надее его, кгдыж му ласку королевску обецовано; того-ж потым лета пришлого ве Лвове, к воли туркови, стяти дано. На том-же сейме был у Вар­ шаве княже Ерый Фрыдерык з Аншпах, маркграбя бранденбур­ ский з малжонкою своею; вырежал му король Стефан и королева велику учтивость и банкет великий ве дне и в ноцы з танцами чинено; и выправил собе опеку над княжатем пруским, але му потом княжна малжонка его умерла; шидзоно при дворе, же се порушила танцем, припоминано то теж, же нешкодене был его милость пан Замойский, канцлер, от того Аншпаха, яко и от Кгданщан, а то щасте вшистко праве заразом з ласкою королев­ скою ему было припало. В том-лее року по святах в Новгородку, под роками земскими, запаливши се в ночи от стодолы пана Андрея Ивановича, писара короля его милости, згорело домов 12. В теж часы умер пан Але­ ксандер Ходкевич, староста городенский, пан барзо добрый; погреб был тела его у Супрасли 31 дня августа отправленый. О светом Михале былем при его милости у Городне, маючи великие справы перед судом земским. Того року 1578, 22 октобра побито от наших Москвы под Кесю о два... и арматы немало побрано... Року того-ж 1578 в листопаде дня 9, в день неделный умер княже его милость Юрей Слуцкий, през великие богатства и скарбы собраные славный пан. Року 1579 о трох кролех былем у Городном, маючи потребы немалые. В лютым засе 23 дня умерла побожна пани Маковецка Анна з Синевиц. В маю тож 3 дня в неделе былем при великим жалю и фрасунку у пана Ивана Баки у Осташине, именю его, где му умерла малжонка Александра княжна Крошинская. Че­ ловек то был невыповедяной доброти, пани шляхетна, бокгобой­ на, уроды пекной, але покоры болшой як веры, же от пана Бога и людий всих была милована; пророковалем на серцу моим, же не мел мети такой другой: якож взял потом тетку ее, котора пер­ вей была за Турчановским и Подаровским, Татянну Скуминовну, далеко юж розну от той первшой, хоть сестреницы ей, надер скупую, котора до забраня пенезей ему помогла, але от датку на збор новокгродский и учинки милосерные звыкло отвела, бо за

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 301 letters appointing me to the office of Bridgemaster at Pinsk and Sierviec, which had been vacant since the death of the late Master Stephen. In the month of February there appeared an enormous comet in the wintry sky at sunrise and it remained visible for a considerable time. In the same year 1578 His Grace the Lord Chadkievič, Castellan of Vilna, being very ill, went with his army to Livonia and sent me to the Parliament session in Warsaw to look after his affairs and those of his future son-in-law, Prince Karecki. Parliament was opened on the 20th day of January and the Speaker was our Lithuanian, Prince Luke Bolka-Śvirski.28 To that Parliament was brought Padkova who was immediately placed under guard and in chains, contrary to his expectations, for he had been promised the King's pardon. The follow­ ing summer in L'vov, at the insistence of the Turks, he was beheaded.29 At the same Parliament Prince George Frederick of Anspach, Mar­ grave of Brandenburg, was present with his wife. King Stephen and his Queen received him with great pomp and there were banquets and dances day and night. He obtained the rights of protectorate over the Prince of Prussia, but soon afterwards his wife died: the current joke at Court was that she strained herself in dancing. It was also recalled how the Lord Chancellor Zamojski was bribed by the same Anspach and the citizens of Gdańsk, but everything ended happily for him thanks to the King's good grace.30 In the same year after the feasts, at about the time of the summer quarter sessions of the courts, 12 houses were burnt down in Nava­ hrudak, having caught fire from the barn of Master Andrew Ivanovič, Secretary to His Majesty the King. About the same time Lord Alexander Chadkievič, Lieutenant of Hrodna, a very good man, died; the funeral took place in Supraśl on the 31st day of August. At Michaelmas I was with His Lordship in Hrodna, having many lawsuits to settle before the Magistrates Court. In the same year 1578 on the 22nd October Moscow was defeated by our forces near Keś two... (missing)... and many cannons were taken... (missing).31 In the same year 1578 on the 9th day of November Prince George of Słuck, renowned for his great riches and collections of treasure, died.32 In the year 1579 on the feastday of the Three Kings I was in Hrodna, having many affairs to settle there. On February 23rd the pious Lady Anna Makavieckaja of Siniavičy died. On Sunday 3rd May I witnessed the great sorrow and affliction of Master John Baka in his estate of Astašyn, where his wife Alexandra, Princess Krošyn­ skaja, died. She was a person of exceptional goodness, noble, God- fearing and beautiful, whose humility was matched by her faith, for which reason she was greatly loved by God and men. I told myself in my heart that he would never have another wife like her. And indeed he married her aunt Tatiana Skumin, who had been previously married to Turčanoŭski and Padaroŭski, and she proved to be com­ pletely different from her niece, his first wife. She was miserly to the extreme and helped him to hoard money, but dissuaded him from

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 302 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

небожчицу першую и мне был кони зе три дал, а за той ни коз­ лятка, а еще ме и великой шкоды набавил: напервей по забитю сына моего Яна при Бруханском преставал, а потом, за отданем от велможного пана Александра Ходкевича маетности Добро­ мышльское сынови моему Ярошови, был заздростю затопеный, штрафуючи о то зацного пана и шацуючи ту маетность на пят­ надцать тисячей злотых: затым одервал в Деревней себе до жи­ вота: влок оселых з рудником и млыном пять, а суми прибавил за выкупно у себе над 14 сот коп грошей — еще шесть сот коп грошей: нех му то тогда Пан в он день справедливый Судя (одтасть). Того-ж року 1579, августа 4, у второк, годины 18, в месте ви­ ленском умер он великий пан, а монархам справами своими ровный Ян Ходкевич, пан виленский, староста жмудский, з вел­ кою жалостю люду посполитого; которого потом 13 октобра по­ греб отправено на замку виленском, в костеле святого Станислава. Король его милость Стефан в те часы был з войском под По­ лоцком и добыто Полоцка 30 дня августа. Потом в декабры был съем у Варшаве, на котором пан Андрей Тризна и я з повету новгородского послами были, и працовалис­ мы, пишучи трибунал; якож увесь написаный и король его ми­ лость подписал его нам, але выдати не мог без констытуцыей, которой з того сейму не было, толко универсал поборовый. Была там у Варшаве ей мость пани виленская, стараючи се о вечность маетности Свислоцкой. Докончил се тот сейм 9 стычня року 1580, а в тыден потом было веселе на замку; отдавал пан канцлер Замойский сестру свою за пана Дялынского. Там-же у Варшаве року 1580 стычня 18 згорело на предзамчу 60 домов; гайдуки и венкгрове незле бронили, лечь неподлей и рабовали, што се трафило, а король его милость был убралсе по великой острожности, бовем то в ночи было. В року 1580, месеца кветня 23, в суботу, на прояждце короля его милости Стафана у Вилни, замовивши се его милость пан Криштоф Радивил, пан троцкий, гетман великий з паном Воло­ димером Заболоцким, москвитином, якобы Влодымир не хотел му шапки зняти, пришли потом до слов злых з обудву сторон: здрады и отметки; кгды се мовил пан троцкий на Володымира, теды Володымир мовил: »самесь такий«. Зачим, образивши се пан троцкий, ехал до пана воеводы виленского, отца своего, который, выслухавши скаркги о той припадок, так му рек: »не помстишь ли му се того, теды и я о тобе так розуметь буду, яко то он назвал«. Той ночи намней пан троцкий не спал, фрасуючи се на Володимира, а стал за брамою завилейскою в дворе своем, про­ званном Довойновском, где до его милости зъехали се ротмистрове и жолнере великое множество; а Володымир стал у мешанина Полгрошка, которого дах припущоный был в дах каменницы

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 303 making any offering for the Navahrudak congregation or for any other charitable purpose. During the lifetime of his first wife he gave me three horses, but now not even a goat and, moreover, he has caused me a lot of trouble. First, after the murder of my son John he sided with Bruchanski; then, when Lord Alexander Chadkievič gave the property of Dabramyśl33 to my son Jerome, he, being moved by envy, taxed the good lord for this, assessing the value of that property at 15000 złoty; finally he managed to appropriate to himself the life interest in some 5 vałoka of land with an iron mine and mill in Dziareŭnia and added another 600 kора hrošaj to the price of 14 hundred for its repurchase.34 May the Lord deal with him according to his deeds on the Day of Judgement. In the same year 1579, on the 4th of August, at the 18th hour in the city of Vilna the Great Lord John Chadkievič, Castellan of Vilna, Lieutenant of Samogitia, equal by his deeds to kings, died to the great sorrow of the common people. He was buried on the 13th of October in the castle of Vilna in the church of St. Stanislas. His Majesty the King was at that time near Połack;35 and Połack was taken on the 30th of August.36 Afterwards in December37 there was a session of Parliament in Warsaw, at which Master Andrew Tryzna and myself represented the county of Navahrudak and were engaged in drafting the Rules of tht High Court.38 After their completion His Majesty the King signed them, but could not promulgate them without general constitutions which had not been passed by that Parliament, excepting the tax law. Her Grace the Dowager Lady of Vilna was also in Warsaw, trying to obtain the freehold of the Śvisłač estate. Parliament was dissolved on the 9th of January, and one week later there was a wedding in the castle: Lord Chancellor Zamojski was giving away his sister to Master Działynski in marriage. Also in Warsaw in the year 1580 on the 18th January sixty houses near the castle were burned down. The servants and Hungarians made brave attempts at salvage, but still more bravely did they attempt to steal anything they could lay their hands on. His Majesty the King got dressed as a precaution, for all this happened at night. On Saturday the 23rd day of April in the year 1580, while His Majesty the King was passing through Vilna, a quarrel broke out between Lord Christopher Radzivił,39 Castellan of Troki and Com­ mander-in-Chief, and Master Vaładzimir Zabałocki the Muscovite on the pretext that Vaładzimir deliberately failed to doff his cap before him. Angry words and recriminations were exchanged on both sides; whenever the Lord Castellan of Troki said something against Vała­ dzimir, the latter would reply: “And what about you?”. The Castellan of Troki, feeling offended, went to see his father, Lord Governor of Vilna, who, when he heard what had happened, said: “If you do not take revenge, then I shall believe every word he said against you.” That night the Lord Castellan of Troki, seething with anger against Vaładzimir, did not close an eye; he was staying at his house called Davajnoŭski outside the Zavilejskaja gate and there was a great num­ ber of officers and soldiers with him. Vaładzimir on the other hand was

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 304 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES Авкгуштына, войта виленского; з которое-же то каменицы и даху войтовского коморники пана троцкого вшедши под дах Полк­ грошков и прекопавшись в песку на избе, видели Володымера и што се з ним деяло, яко потом ездил до панов сенаторов, просе­ чи о поеднане пана троцкого, але же се было спознило, обецали му се были на ютро. Потом в господе своей ходил до лазней, о чим всем давали знать коморницы и инша челядь пану троцкому, пытаючи се: »каже ли? теды могут его з пулгаку забити«. Але его милость не казал, и так в тых пересылках ночь зошла, а рано, в неделю 24 кветня, ведечи пан троцкий о всем, же се Володимир готовал до церкви светое Пречистое, заехал з улицы и брамы Завилейской ку костелови св. Духа, где велкость людей пеших в кляшторе была, а ездни в улицы; и перепустивши Володимира за фортку, одни з стороны, а другие з великих ворот и з той улички указали се, пред которыми шол пехотою... Кгорецкий, маючи свой гнев на Володымира, тот споткавши се кинул Воло­ дымерови камнем до перси, а Володымир добыл шаблицы, кото­ рую носил з правой руки и левою се рукою боронил потужно. Москва, его слуги, поутекали, окроме Путила званого москви­ тина; тот се самотреть з литвинами двема зостановил, але от вел­ кости людей поранени заразем были, а Володымир, ку одной стро­ не под муры складаючи се, уступовал; тамже его тот-же Кгорец­ кий кордом под правое перси перепхнул, же юж без мовы ве двух годинах умер.

Та весть кгды короля Стефана на замку, еще не убраного, до­ шла, дивне се был стревожил, же не рыхло до убираня пришол, ходечи по покою, ляментуючи, аж подканцлерый коронный, князь Боруховский, приехавши, гамовал его, розважаючи тот нещастный припадок: ведаю, же и сам пан троцкий не хотел его забити, одно выбити, але се то иначей стало за власною вазнею Кгорецкого, же Володымир, зоставши старостою трабским при­ ворочал его под свою владзу з якимсь именьем его, которе пред тым в присуде тым трабском было; ехал был зараз потым пан троцкий до короля, але король, выславши к нему того-ж кнезя подканцлерого, воротил его и до себе ити не казал был; потом сам пан воевода виленский у короля был, отмовляючи сына свого и заступаючи, же то он казал, здаючи здорове свое на волю и ласку его королевской милости.

Не мало се то так терло. Сенаторове короля его милости усми­ ряли, аж 11 дня мая в середу допустил король его милость пану троцкому в себе быти, застановивши, абы намней Володымира не упоминал; и седил король на предпокою, а мы люде, не ведаючи того, тиснелисмысе, хотечи слышеть рацыю обмову пана троцкого,

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 305 staying with a citizen called Paŭhrošak, the roof of whose house adjoined to the roof of the house of Augustus, the chief judge of Vilna.40 From the roof of the judge's house the bailiffs of the Lord of Troki gained access to the loft of Paŭhrošak's house and from thence, having made a hole in the sand over the ceiling,41 were spying on Vaładzimir and his movements: how he went to see the senators, begging them to intercede for him before the Lord of Troki, but how they, since it was already late, promised to do this on the morrow; and how later, in his lodgings, he went to the bath-house. All this the bailiffs and other servants reported to the Lord of Troki asking him if it was his wish that they should kill him with a gun. But His Lordship did not permit this, and thus the whole night passed in the sending of these messages. In the morning on Sunday 24th April the Lord of Troki, knowing that Vaładzimir intended to go to the church of the Immaculate, rode out from the Zavilejskaja gate towards the church of the Holy Spirit, where there were many of his men on foot in the cloisters, while horsemen were waiting in the street. Having allowed Zabałocki through the gate, some of them appeared from one side, the others from the direction of the big gate, and in front of them walked... (missing)... Karecki who had a grudge against Vaładzimir and who hit him in the chest. Vaładzimir then unsheathed his sword, which he was carrying on his right side, and began to defend himself with his left hand. All his Muscovite servants ran away except a Muscovite called Pucila who engaged in a lone fight with two Lithuanians; however, because of the over­ whelming number of the attackers, they were both wounded and Vaładzimir had to retreat towards the wall. There the same Karecki struck him with a dagger in the right lung, so that after two hours he died without regaining consciousness. When the news reached the castle, King Stephen was not yet dressed, and so great was his distress that he could not go on with his morning toilet, but began to walk around the room lamenting. The Crown Deputy Chancellor Father Baranowski42 arrived and tried to calm him down by explaining the tragedy in the following manner: “I know that the Lord of Troki did not want to kill him, but only to give him a sound beating. It happened otherwise because of Karecki, whom Vaładzimir, when he became Tenant of Traby,43 tried to place under his authority because of a certain property which was formerly in the Traby jurisdiction.” Soon afterwards the Lord of Troki arrived to see the King, but the King, through the same Father Deputy Chancellor, informed him that he would not be received and should go away. Then the Lord Governor of Vilna came in person, present­ ing excuses for his son and defending him by saying that all this happened at his suggestion and that he was now placing himself at the will and mercy of His Majesty. This state of affairs lasted for a considerable time. The senators tried to calm down the anger of the King but it was only on Wednes­ day the 11th of May that the King admitted the Lord of Troki to his presence on condition that no mention of Vaładzimir should be made. The King was sitting in the ante-chamber and we, the people, were

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 306 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES который, пришедши, просил короля, абы не мел за зле, же през тот час з некоторых нещасных припадков своих у его королев­ ской милости не бывал, надто ничого болшей не мовечи; шел король на покой, а сенаторове, допровадивши его, зараз з паном троцким розехалисе. По тым на першом сейме, з ведомости королевское, сестра Во­ лодымирова, котора з Полоцка з мужом была взята, позвала была пана троцкого; там также сам пан воевода виленский пана троц­ кого заступовал. А маючи вшиток сенат по собе, короля ублагал и сестре Влодымеровой щось пенезми дал. На он час при забитю Володымира, король, в тым своем запаленый гневе, написал был цедулу рукою своею: кто был Володымир, яко лет двадцать чтыри стравил, на дворех королей венкгерского и полского се мужественно завше в речах рыцерских поступуючи, а того дня у спикненю и збунтованю людском згинул; и хтел то мети на хоругви над гробом его. Ям был добре ведом Володымира: и не учинил того он з пыхи якой, не чапкуючи пану троцкому, але з меланколией своей ве­ ликой, же, едучи, сам з собою мовил, мыслил и частокрот, на спотканю з паны, миял их, запомнявши се, хоть кто другий чап­ кованем почастил, то аж напомненый от слуг, волал за ним, для Бога просячи, абы не мел за зле. В теж часы был у короля в Вилни гонец московский, стараючи се о вызволене вязней и о примире. Року того-ж 1580 червця пятого дня, дворяне королевские, зеслани во Троках, поймали и, приведше до Вилна Григора Остика, дали до везеня пану маршалкови, которого потом, неяких намов и порозуменя его з Москвою досвятчивши, дано его стяти 18 дня того-ж мисяца червца в месте виленском пред костелом святоянским. А король того вечора выехал был на войну, и был потом под Луками. В Слуцку на тот час были 4 докторы: сандомерский Бартолян, краковский Мартин, Фоскос любелскый, Лавренцыуш слуцкий, старый и добрый; там се веле панов, пань и розного стану людей на лекарство зъехали, и якому Пан Бог здарил, оправовали се. Року того-ж 1580 вресня 5 король его милость под московским Луки взял был и люд под меч дано было, яко упорный, который замок потом за примирем вернен московскому. В теж часы пан Филон убезпечоный през фалшивые шпакги з невеликим людом припал был до Смоленска, а там великое войско было московское, же аж той-же ночи Филон уходил; людей наших сила погинуло; там-же суседа моего Михаила Зверова, москвитина, поймано и обвешоно; был ми то велким неприятелем, пане Боже отпусть му! В том-же року был король его милость, змовляючи се о потуж­ ности пришлое войны. Року 1581 генваря 20 в пятницу жона моя мила, Ганна Болотовна, уродила мне сына Иохима туж преде днем, а на цалом зекгару годины 14. Тот на сесь час, вже тому три роки, ве Влошех у княжати Мантуанского. Пане Боже му блогославь! В месецу червцу Москва, невидоме в руски земли вторгнувши, огнем и мечем и забранем великие шкоды починила.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 307 pressing one another, unconscious of everything else, trying to hear the apology of My Lord of Troki who, when he came, asked the King to forgive him for being unable to come earlier to pay his respects owing to certain unfortunate circumstances. No more was said. The King retired to his apartments, and the senators, having taken leave of him, withdrew, taking with them My Lord of Troki. After that, at the first Parliament session, Vaładzimir's sister and her husband were brought from Połack with the knowledge of the King and lodged a complaint against the Lord of Troki. The Lord Governor of Vilna was also there endeavouring to defend the Lord of Troki. Having all the Senate behind him, he persuaded the King not to pursue the matter, and to Vaładzimir's sister he gave a sum of money.44 At the time of Vaładzimir's murder the King in his wrath wrote with his own hand a note: who Vaładzimir was, how he had spent 24 years in the royal courts of Poland and Hungary, how he had always been brave and chivalrous and how he had perished through human pride and vanity. He desired this inscription to be displayed on the banner over the tomb of the deceased. I knew Vaładzimir well. It was not through pride that he did not doff his cap before the Lord of Troki, but because of his absent- mindedness. Often he used to talk to himself when riding and thus, immersed in deep thought, when he met some great lord, he would pass him by without noticing him and without answering any greet­ ing; but, when reminded of this by one of his servants, he would call back asking for God's sake not to think ill of him. At the same time there came to the King in Vilna a Muscovite envoy, seeking to obtain the release of the prisoners of war and an armistice. On the 5th day of June of the same year 1580 the royal courtiers, who had been sent to Troki, arrested and brought to Vilna Gregory Ościk and gave him into the keeping of the Lord Marshal; later his connivance and intelligence with Moscow having been proved, he was beheaded on the 18th of the same month in the city of Vilna in front of the church of St. John.45 In the evening of the same day the King left for the war and later stopped near Łuki. There were at that time four doctors in Słuck; Bartolan from Sandomierz, Martin from Cracow, Foscos from Lublin and Lawrence from Słuck, who was old but good; many great lords and ladies and people of all kinds resorted thither for treatment, and some of them recovered, if such was the will of God. On the 8th day of September of the same year 1580 His Majesty the King took Łuki from the Muscovites, and the whole population, on account of their stubborness, was put to the sword; the fortress itself however was returned to the Muscovites after the armistice. At the same time Master Filon,46 misinformed by false spies, attacked Smalensk with a small force, whereas there was a strong Muscovite garrison. A great number of our men perished and in the same night they were forced to retreat. My neighbour the Muscovite Michael Zverov was caught and hanged.47 He was my great enemy: may God forgive him!

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 308 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES Того лета и весны, в року 1581 король Стефан был под Псковом, гдем иж през хоробы мое не был, слухаю рад инших, которие, ведоми будучи, о том выписали; Бородич пан Иван, повинный мой, едучи з под Пскова, умер в дорозе кгрудня 22 дня, а похо­ ван у Кгравжишках.

Року 1582, названого от мене нещасливого з певных причин, же ми в ним марца 22 умер милый и единый же у мене рожоный брат мой Иван в месте виленском; и не дошла ме та ведомость през злую дорогу, аж за тыйдень; през который тыйдень, будучи я в дому моим, яко у тридцяти милях от Вилна, тескнилем барзо, жаловалем и мовилем до жоны моей, же запевне ми брат умер; так то серца людзкие чують з далека припадки деток и милых приятелей своих. А про тож ездилем до Вилна и далем тело его поховати, водле порученя его, у светое Тройцы, церкви руской; зажилем жалю над обычай и злое дороги, а, едучи назад, лед­ восми вси не потонули на Немне реце под Ивем. Ям был з гостем якимсь один там приехал, и юж се з нами пром починал был на нурте заливати, и так, напоминаючи перевозников, абы се не лякали (бо юж были шосты порутили, мовечи, же гинем), а горечо Пану Богу се молечи, переехали; а опосле слуги, з возом моим и зо всими конми едучи, на том-же местцу тонули, кони зпыхали, а тым болшей лодки заливали, же вси дошчки вода знесла, а воз передними колы завесил се в лоди, котора на гору шла, а другая се лодь у воду занурыла; люде перевозные и слуги мое были в лоди, а инши, побравши се конем за огоны, не ведели, што се з ними дее, ино кони шли теж за лодею вниз, куды вода несла, аж е потом на берег, гдем и я был, принесло межи лозы, и там се ратовали; ово толко, здумавши се дивным чудом Божим, хвали­ лем насветшое имя Его. Потом сентабра 23 отдалем сестру мою панну Зофею за пана Щасного Самсоновъского. Месеца паздерника 21, в неделю, умер зацный и богобойный муж Иван Третяк, при­ ятель дому нашого, а по нем декабра 10 умерла добрая приятель­ ка моя, пани Твиклинская Дорота Кграбовская, а сам по ней на велканоц умер року 1583.

Року 1583 под Кгромницу зима се постановила моцно по перв­ ших неуставичностях; мелем на тот час у себе велким приятелем старосту ляховицкого, пана Симона Шлятковского, которому дня 21 лютого жона, Сулимянка, умерла з великим жалем веля лю­ дей, а за нею в том-же року новембра 18 и сам Шлятковский умер, человек през великую доброту свою вечной годный памети.

В том року 1583 пани виленская в повете новгородском мешка­ ла, а я з роков на другие роки уставичне и в розные поветы: до Новгородка, Минска, Слонима и Волковыска ездити муселем; а в посте муселем у Вилни и знову о святках тамже быти для

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 309 In the same year His Majesty the King was considering the possibil­ ity of continuing the war. In the year 1581 on Friday 20th January just before dawn, when the 24-hour clock was showing the 14th hour, my beloved wife Hanna Bałotaŭna gave birth to our son Joachim. At the present time he has already been three years in Italy at the court of the Duke of Mantua. May God bless him! In the month of June Moscow unexpectedly invaded the Ruthenian lands, causing great damage by fire and sword. In the spring and summer of that year 1581 King Stephen was near Pskov, where I was unable to be present because of my illness, and learned what had happened from the writings of the others who were there.48 My kinsman Ivan Barodzič died on the 22nd of Decem­ ber on his way from Pskov and was buried in Graužyški. The year 1582 I consider to be ill-fated because of the death in Vilna on March the 22nd of my dear and only brother John. The news did not reach me till one week later because of bad road conditions. During all that week in my house, some thirty miles distant from Vilna, I was filled with anxiety and premonitions and was saying to my wife that surely my brother must have died: thus human hearts feel at a distance whenever something happens to their children or dear friends. Then I went to Vilna and ordered the body to be buried in the Ruthenian church of the Holy Trinity, according to his wishes. I experienced great sadness as well as much inconvenience because of bad roads, and on my way back I nearly drowned in the river Nioman near Iŭje. The water began to flood the ferry on which I and another traveller were standing and we, telling the ferrymen not to be afraid, — for they had already thrown away their poles saying that we were lost, — and praying fervently to God, somehow crossed the river. Then my servants, when they were crossing together with the horses and carriage, almost drowned at the same spot. The horses shied and the water flooded the boats, sweeping away all the boards, and the carriage was stuck with its front wheels in the first boat which remained afloat, while the second boat went under. Some ferrymen and servants were in the first boat, while the others grabbed the horses' tails and did not know what was happening to them, for the horses went under water together with the boat, and were carried away by the current until they were washed up among the reeds near the bank where I was standing, and thus all were saved. Having realised that what had happened was a miracle of God, I praised His holy Name. Then, on the 23rd of September I gave away my sister Sophie in marriage to Master Ščasny Samsanoŭski. On Sunday 21st of October there died a virtuous and godfearing man Ivan Treciak, a friend of our family; after him on 10th of December my good friend Mistress Dorothea Hraboŭskaja Ćviklinskaja died, and her husband followed her at Easter in the year 1583. About Candlemas in the year 1583, after a period of unsettled weather, a cold winter spell set in. I had at that time a good friend, Master Simeon Šlatkoŭski, steward of Lachavičy, whose wife, born Sulima, died on the 21st day of February to the great sorrow of many

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 310 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

справ задворных, которых се намножило было; мандатов всих было 17; розмышлялем в собе, яко за живота пана виленского и один позов по него не был, але се тепер нагородило: приятели не дбали на оное захованя давное, кождый своего щастя смотря, а Ходкевича жадного в раде королевской не было, а наконец и... ветуй Пане Боже на потым.

Року 1584 февраля 5 оженил се был пан Мартин Окунь з пан­ ною Боянецкою. А на заутре оженил се пан Ян Монвиж з панною Мложавъскою; отправовала си веселая пани виленская в Ляховичах з великим достатком. В марцум мел справ панских сила у Вилни пред королем, и в речах королевских пилновалем, и взывано ме на инстыгаторство.

В том року пани виленская мела затруднене немалое з Мат­ феем Волком, который, маючи еще от самого пана его милости фолварк ляховецкий Павлюковский у пети сот копах грошей, справил был собе другий лист неправдивый на другую такую-ж суму пенезей, для чого аж сама ездить до права мусила и оче­ висто перве у земства, а потом и у гроду фалшь задавала; потом он того листу отступил и то аж в пришлом року. В том року 1584 августа 28 уродил ми се сын мой Лаврын.

Року 1585 зима была барзо тепла; быдло на поли бывало и волы тучоно. Пан Кгзовскій старый в лютым паралижом рушоный, а 8 марца умер. Мая 26 перун замок на Мыши запалил, который барзо прудко згорел; тогож дня, а подобно в одной године, ударил перун в дворе моем у сырницу и голубинец, але не запалил и не забил ничого; дитя туж было и голубята в голубинцу.

Року тогож месеца новембра 3 жона моя сына Мартина уродила в ночи на 8 године.

Року 1586, будучи мне у писара ляховецкого, Федора Зенке­ вича, на чти, у других зваде, а за мои розважаня, ранено мне в руку левую и не ведилем от кого, а то было стычня 19 дня; а кгосподарь был целый; пред се потом врыхле 23 лютого умер з горючки; веку мел лет 36, человек был и мой приятель добрый. Потом в марцу былем в Вилни для потребы Кгославского и езди­ лем до Ковна; там же мя, марца 5 дня, ночуючи у Рынконтах, разбойницы мало были не забили, але, за ласкою Божою, вилен­ цов обоз немалый в туж стодолу наехали, а разбойницы поутека­

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 311

people, and in the same year on the 18th of November Šlatkoŭski followed her; he was a man worthy of memory because of his great goodness. In that year 1583 My Lady of Vilna was residing in the country of Navahrudak and I had to travel from one court session to another in Navahrudak, Minsk, Słonim and Vaŭkavysk; in Lent, and then again after Easter, I had to go to Vilna on account of the many lawsuits that had piled up. There were altogether 17 summonses. I reflected that during the lifetime of My Lord of Vilna there was not even one summons before him, while now there were so many: friends did not trouble to show their erstwhile deference, everybody was seeking to amass his own fortune, and there was no longer a Chadkievič in the King's Council; finally... (missing)... Lord God for the future. In the year 1584 on the 5th of February Master Martin Okuń married Mistress Bajanieckaja. On the next day Master John Monvid married Mistress Młažaŭskaja. The wedding feasts were most gener­ ously provided by My Lady of Vilna. In March I had many lawsuits on behalf of my masters in Vilna before the King and was also entrusted with looking after some royal affairs as well as being called upon to take part in certain inquiries. In the same year My Lady of Vilna had considerable difficulties with a certain Matthew Voŭk who, having received during the life­ time of His Lordship the Paŭlukoŭski estate near Lachavičy in settle­ ment of a claim for five kора hrošaj, uttered another forged letter for the same amount of money; for this reason Her Ladyship had to attend in person to seek redress first in the magistrates court and then in the county court, where she proved the falsity of the claim; afterwards Voŭk himself disclaimed that letter, but this happened only in the following year.49 In that year on August 28th my son Lawrence was born. In the year 1585 the winter was very mild: the cattle were left in the fields and oxen were still being fattened. Old Master Gzoŭski, who in February had been struck down by paralysis, died on the 8th of March. On the 26th of May the castle in Myš was struck by lightning, and it burnt down very quickly; on the same day and apparently at the same hour, lightning also struck the cheese pantry and pigeon house in my courtyard, but nothing was burned or killed, although there were a child and pigeons just near by. In the same year on the 3rd of November at the 8th hour of the night my wife gave birth to our son Martin. In the year 1586, whilst I was attending a reception in the house of the clerk of Lachavičy, Master Theodore Ziankievič, a quarrel broke out and for my attempts to intervene I was wounded in my left arm, I know not by whom. This occurred on the 19th of January. The host was unharmed, but soon afterwards, on the 23rd of Febru­ ary, he died of the fever; he was 36 years old, a good man and my friend. Then in March I was in Vilna on account of the Gasłoŭski case, and also went to Koŭna. On my way there, whilst I was spend­ ing the night in Rynkonty, some robbers nearly killed me, but, by

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 312 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES ли, а кгосподарь, якийсь теж нецнота, вымавлял се, же што мел чинити, кгдыж на ночь збере се немало и, што хотять, то чинять. Самому Пану Богу хвала за его оборону! Таже, до Вилни звро­ тивши се, далем был пенезей Кгославскому на имене его Скубя­ товское; перв заставою, а потом и на вечность купилем.

Король, его милость, мешкал того лета в Городне, отпочиваючи от первших прац своих; юж се теж часом капелюшем и рукави­ цами не мерзил, з чого Венкгрове сперва шидили; бавил се теж выездчанем на поле з мысливством. Мне того лета пришло в него и по два крот в потребах пани виленское и деток пана моего быть, якож меновите липца 24 мелом пред королем справу з Тара­ новским безносым, который, по змове з иншими жолнерами, якото хорый, на то выставеный был, розумеючи, же у короля в место ялмужней мел отрымати презыск на добрах панских за заслу­ женное свое, за чим бы своих долгов вси дойти могли; позвал был паню виленкую и детки о три тысечи золотых и кгдым указал истоты королевские и его самого, яко веле у скарбе славное паме­ ти пану виленскому и жолнером винно, а потом указалем про­ тестацыю сеймову, же се заплаты упомнено, и яко се змовили жолнери, и яку бы то шкоду детям пана моего принесло, теды, по одступеню моим (яком потым от панов ведал) в так ясней речи вагал се король долго, если (то) отложить, яком я просил, до заплаты тых сум з скарбу королевского, чили зараз присудить на добрах панских; в чом от панов рад, а меновите: пана Волови­ ча, пана виленского, пана Глебовича, воеводы троцкого, пана Льва Сапеги, канцлера, пана Войны, подканцлерого, спартый бу­ дучи, так позволил, мовечи: же конечне бым я те заслужоне тому жолнерови на добрах пана виленского присудил, бо не указано з тых протестацый сеймовых, же се упоминано заплаты именем своим и всих жолнеров. И так нам отложоно до заплаты з скарбу, ведля истот королевских. Ведае то Бог, когды то будет. Там же в Городне на тот час, июля 12, умер пан Михал Гарабурда, впад­ ши в горючку пятидневную; не могли докторове Буцеля и Сы­ мони урятовати и трема днями пред его смертю ознамили коро­ леви, и уряды его были назначони и упрошоны иншим.

В том же року, окрутного кгрудня месеца 12 дня, тот славный и велце зацный пан и монарха великий, король, его милость, Стефан Баторый умер на замку городенском в милых палацах своих, от него збудованых. Шкода, королю, жесь по великих працах, до которых се был з молодости приучил, и те лет килка в Городном се у отпочиваню твоим забавил! А моим зданем, гды бысь звыклой працы уживал, еще бысь был далей потрвал; але певней ведал то пан Бог, чому так, а не иначей мети хотел.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 313 the grace of God, at that very moment a large convoy arrived from Vilna and the bandits fled. The landlord, himself a shady character, tried to make excuses saying that there was nothing he could do with all sorts of people coming for the night and doing what they wanted. May the Lord God be praised for saving me! Then, on my return to Vilna, I paid money to Gasłoŭski for his Skubiatoŭskaje estate; first I had it on lease and later acquired the freehold rights. His Majesty the King was at that time living in Hrodna, resting after his previous labours; he was no longer averse to wearing a hat or gloves, at which his Hungarians laughed at first. He spent his time riding and hunting. In the summer I saw him twice on behalf of My Lady of Vilna and her children. On the 24th of July I had a case before the King against Taranoŭski the Noseless. He, having conspired with other soldiers, was chosen by them, because he was an invalid, to present a petition to the King asking that he should, instead of compensation, be given permission to recover his back pay from the estate of His Lordship, after which all the others would try to get back their debts in a similar way. He made a claim for 3,000 złoty against My Lady of Vilna. I produced the letters of the King and his predecessors showing how much the Treasury owed the late Lord of Vilna of glorious memory and his soldiers, then recalled the protesta­ tions made in Parliament demanding the payment of wages, and also revealed the soldiers' conspiracy and how much harm it might do to the children of my master. After my departure (as I afterwards learnt from certain lords) the King hesitated for a long time over this perfectly straightforward case, whether he should accede to my request and refer the payment to the Royal Treasury, or order the sum to be recovered from the estate of His Lordship. Finally, since my case was supported by the Lords of the Council, — namely the Lord Castellan of Vilna Vałovič, the Lord Governor of Troki Hlebo­ vič, the Lord Chancellor Sapieha and the Lord Deputy Chancellor Vojna,50 — he gave in, saying, however, that he would have ordered the payments to be made out of the estate of the late Lord of Vilna but for the protestations with demands for back-pay raised in Parliament on behalf of His Lordship and his soldiers. Thus the case was referred to the Treasury, in accordance with the royal decree. God only knows when it will be settled. At the same time in Hrodna on the 12th of July there died Master Michael Haraburda after five days of high fever;51 doctors Buzzelli and Simoni were unable to save him and informed the King of this three days before the death. His offices were distributed among those who petitioned for them. In the same year, on the 12th day of the cruel month of December, that most illustrious and noble Lord and great Monarch, His Majesty King Stephen Batory died in the city of Hrodna in the beloved castle which he had built for himself. It is a pity, О King, that after the great toils to which you had been accustomed from your youth, the last few years of your life you spent in Hrodna in leisure and amuse­ ments. In my opinion you would have lived much longer, had you passed your time at your usual work. However such was the will of

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 314 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES Року 1587 стычня 9 снило ми се, о чим я не мыслил, жем был в месте влоским Мантуи, видел кнежей Матуи положене замку, места, вод, мостов мурованых. А кгдым то оповедал пану Андрее­ ви Скорулскому, который там бывал, поведил, же есть положене власне таке, як ми се снило. То снать презентовало ехане нам сына моего милого Явхима, который в року 1575 еще поехал, и по той час там мешка. Марца 16 уродила жона моя першу цорку Раину. Тогож року 1587, по смерти короля его милости Стефана, зхо­ дил тот рок елекцыями, бо порознивши се у обраню пана, едни чекали и привабили были Максымилияна, сына и брата цесарс­ кого, а инши, которые зезволили были на Жикгмонта, короля шведского, чекали его теж, и затым была им битва в Бычине, в року 1588, стычня 19 дня; по переграню стороны Максимилия­ новои, и сам был взятый, и немало панов полских, которые з ним переставали. А Жикгмонт, короля шведского сын, за приеханем своим был зараз коронованый, еще первей в року прошлым, 1587 декабря 26 дня. Року 1588, стычня 28 дня, Жикгмонт третый, король полский, на Литве присягу повторил, бовем был без наших коронован. В том року 1588 былем з паном Одаховским ве Шклове и в Копыси недель з осм. А пани виленская для лекарств была у Люблине, а кгды се ей на здоровю не поправовало, ехала была до дому, и едучи на дорозе, в местечку в Козим рынку умерла 3 дня кветня. А 21 червца погреб ей отправено у Гнезне в костеле евангелиц­ ком мурованом. В том же року липца 30 жона моя уродила цорку другую; дано ей имя Галшка. Року 1589 на нове лето у нас ту, в повете новокгродском, муж был барзо добрый Альбрехт Кавечинский; отдал разом на одным веселю три цорки све замуж; который, сынов не маючи, одно цорек шесть, не фрасовал се нам о то, и еще зознавал, же так му лепей; а то снать чинил з побожности своеи, же волю свою подбиял под волю Божу. А гды му се так трафило отдати замуж разом три цорки, люди посполитые практыковали не долго быть малженству так одного дня отданых; якож потом врыхле умер му старший зять Москалницкий, а в року 1603 померли два: Виров­ ский и Высоцкий. Ово не легце потреба важити и голосу людско­ го, ведля оней приповястки: »вокс попули — вокс Деи«, бовем о вере оного человека жаден вонтпити не може. Был и в том про­ батус, и того се он против той людской практыце, ему певне ведо­ мой, важил се з зупелности веры свей, же се ведля практыки той не могло стати ничого такого. Року 1589 стычня 28 дня пан Александер Ходкевич короля Жикгмонта третого у Гродне перший то кроть привитал, также

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 315 God, who knows best why all things are so ordained and not otherwise. On the 9th of January in the year 1587 I had a dream which I never thought to be possible, — namely, I dreamt that I was in the Italian city of Mantua and saw there the exact positions of the palace of the dukes of Mantua, of the whole town, the moats and the stone bridges. When I spoke of this to Master Andrew Skarulski, who had been there, he said that everything was exactly as I saw it in my dream. It seems that I had a presentiment of the journey of my son Joachim who went there in the year 160152 and still lives there. On the 16th of March my wife gave birth to our first daughter Raina. After the death of His Majesty King Stephen, the whole year 1587 was spent in electoral campaigns, for there were differences of opinion as to who should be the next monarch. Some supported Maximilian, son and brother of the Emperor, and waited on his arrival; others preferred Sigismund, the King of Sweden, and waited on him also. Then a battle was fought at Byczyn on the 19th day of January in the year 1588. The party of Maximilian was defeated and he himself taken prisoner, and with him many of his supporters from among the Polish lords. But even before that date, on the 19th day of December 1587, Sigismund, son of the King of Sweden, was crowned King immediately after his arrival.53 On the 22nd day of January in the year 1588 Sigismund III, King of Poland, repeated his oath in Lithuania, for he had been crowned without our representatives. During the same year 1588 I spent about eight weeks in Škłoŭ and Kopyś together with Master Adachoŭski. And My Lady of Vilna was in Lublin because of her health, but when her condition did not improve, she returned homewards and, on her way, in the town called Kozi Rynek, she died on the 3rd day of April. The funeral took place on the 21st of June in the Evangelical brick church in Hniezna.54 In the same year on the 30th of July my wife gave birth to our second daughter; she was given the name of Halška. In the year 1589 on New Year's day, here in the county of Nava­ hrudak, an excellent man Albrecht Kaviačyński55 gave away in marriage three of his daughters simultaneously. The fact that he had no sons but six daughters did not worry him at all, and he even maintained that it was better that way; but it seems to me that he said this out of piety, having subordinated his will to the will of God. When he gave away in marriage three of his daughters at the same time, the general opinion was that those marriages, celebrated on the same day, would not last long. And indeed, soon afterwards the elder son-in-law Maskalnicki died, as did the other two, Viroŭski and Vysocki, in the year 1603. Popular opinion must not be taken lightly, according to the saying: “Vox populi — vox Dei.” It is impossible to doubt the good faith of this man, and yet he dared to act against common human wisdom — which surely was known to him, — convinced that nothing of the sort would happen to him. On the 28th day of January of the year 1589 Lord Alexander Chadkievič greeted for the first time in Hrodna King Sigismund III

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 316 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

королевую тетку его и сестру его королевну их милость; мевал в себе сенаторов из двору королевского завше на учтах. Потом бы­ ла его милости справа, 31 стычня, о аренде мыт старых литевс­ ких, также о аренде з маетности Бирштанское и инших; меновано того на 50 тысячей коп литовских и указовано на то истоты пана небожчика, а в нас намнейшей квитацыей не было. Ям в тей справе мовил яко налепей, — пан Бог здарить рачил, — болшей се спускаючи на ласку его королевское милости, а указуючи веле заслуги пана его милости и иншие правные причины. А были при его королевской милости сенаторове: князь Барановский, бискуп, пан Дорогостайский, воевода полоцкий, пан подляшский, пан Са­ пега, канцлер; были вшитцы их милости нам зычливи, так, же декретом король его милость, даруючи то, отпустить и з того квитовати казать рачил. Тогож дня кнеже Семен Слуцкий короля витал пред покоем з орацыею наготованою, а яком ведял, от его милости, пана Миколая Крыштофа Радивила, воеводы троцкого, написаною; мел при собе зе двадесят особ ланцужно, але у пана Александра было теж нас также веле, а вшитко старие слуги, сивцов болшей, в жалоб› по паней виленской, теды король и пани болшей очи до нас обрацали и королеви указовано, же то вшитко слуги небожчика пана виленского, отца его; аж нам мило было того щастя заживати, бо и пан, и мы вшитцы зналисьмы велику милость от вшитких людей.

От своих приятелей горей-смы мели, бо, приехавши з того щастя, за якусь опеку поеднал пан Александер пана Волского осмънастусот коп грошей, а при нем и Кумолки (весь коштовна от Гнезна) за якимсь то змышленым правом зостали, а панов троцких трима тысечами и шестю сот коп грошей. Так-то дети пана моего в долги заводити почато. Потом поеднал князя Семена Слуцкого за неякую весь Хоромцы, от небожчика проданую, а на то права не мел очищати; описал се был за то заплатити дви тысящи злотых; отдано теж потом сестру их милости, панну Зофею, за пана Дорогостайского, року 1590 септембра 23, у Вилни, и то быти мусело з великим коштом их.

В той осени, року 1590 были поветра моровие на розных мест­ цах и в Новгородку срогое было. Октобря 31, року 1590 умер сусед и приятель мой, человек барзо добрый (беатус вир), пан Валентый Чарковский.

Року 1591 пан Александер Ходкевич посылал по всих маетнос­ тях отчизных, напоменаючи урядников, абы границы упевняли и з суседы без укривдженя их становили. Сам в Мышской мает­ ности выездчал, где боярове Мышсцы Бутримкове зашли были кгрунт Верещачин и, напрацовавши се там сам немало, потом

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 317 and Their Highnesses the King's aunt and sister. At the banquets he entertained senators from the royal court. Then on the 31st of January His Lordship's case was heard concerning the concession of the ancient Lithuanian tolls as well as the rents from the Birštany estate and others. The total sum of dues was estimated at 50,000 Lithuanian kора, in support of which claim the guarantees of His late Lordship were produced, but we had not even one receipt. I tried with the help of God to plead in this case as best as I could, though relying mostly on the mercy of His Majesty and pointing out the various and many services rendered by His Lordship and using other legitimate arguments. At that time there were with His Majesty the King the following senators: My Lord Bishop Baranowski, the Lord Governor of Połack Darahastajski,56 the Governor of Padlassie and the Lord Chancellor Sapieha.57 All of them were well disposed towards us, and thus His Majesty annulled the debt by decree and ordered that a receipt be issued. On the same day Prince Simeon of Słuck greeted the King at the entrance to his chamber with a prepared speech, which, as I learned later, was written by His Grace Prince Nicholas Christopher Radzivił, Governor of Troki. He had with him twenty persons of his retinue, but my Lord Alexander also had a large following, all of us being old servants, mostly with grey hair, in mourning for the Lady of Vilna. The King and the ladies frequently turned their eyes in our direction and it was pointed out to them that we were all servants of the late Lord of Vilna, father to His Lordship. And we felt happy and pleased because of the attention paid by all present to our master and to all of us. However from our friends we had worse treatment, for, after we came back from that happy event, Lord Alexander had to settle a difference with Master Volski over a certain guardianship by paying eighteen hundred kора hrošaj, and in addition the latter by some legal device retained Kumołki (a valuable village property near Hniezna). He also settled a case with My Lord of Troki by paying three thousand six hundred kора hrošaj. Thus the children of my late master began to contract debts. Then he settled some dispute with Prince Simeon of Słuck concerning the village of Charomcy which had been sold by his late Lordship without any title to do so; for this he promised to pay two thousand złoty. Afterwards His Lord­ ship's sister, Sophie, was married to Master Darahastajski in Vilna on the 23rd of September 1590 and this also entailed no inconsiderable expense.58 In the autumn of that year 1590, a plague affected various places, and it was particularly virulent in Navahrudak. On the 31st of Octob­ er in the year 1590 there died my neighbour and friend, a very good man (beatus vir) Master Valenty Čarkoŭski. In the year 1591 Lord Alexander Chadkievič sent an order to his family estates, reminding the bailiffs that they must set up equitable boundaries with the neighbours without wronging them. He himself went to his property of Myš where the bojars59 of Myš, the Butryms, encroached on the land of Vieraščaka. There he spared no effort and

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 318 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

вземше мене и старшого Бутримка, на строне отехавши, вынытал вшиткой правды, иж то они зашли и новы тесы на дереве простым грибом положили, а старую там ближей до Мыши указовали. А так, зрозумевши, зараз судям правду ознаймил, а старою грани­ цою от рогу граници Островское и Добромышльское вести тымже Бутримкам, а хлопом зараз копцы за собою копать казал, кгдыж се на те границе обоя сторона згодили; обнесло то его в похвалу веля людей.

Року 1592 яко з осени, так и от нового лета не докучили зимна и снегов не было, и была то зима праве безснежна; колами вси ездили. Пан Александер был на сеймику трибуналском и не хотел се подняти на трибунал, а мне Григорей Униховский зазрял, так, же Жабка з Бутушевичом обраны были. Марца 9 кнеже Ян Симеон Слуцкий умер; чирвца 30 умер теж пан Каспар Керснов­ ский, подсудок новгородский у Городей, маетности своей, поло­ живши се на приполудню спати. 16 серпня пан Ян Кароль Ходкевич ехал еще до чужих землей, а пан Александер до Варшавы на сейм послом ехал.

Року 1592, вресня 1, во второк, на соймику в Цырине обрано на елекцией подсудковской на тот уряд чтырох, то есть: Ивана Маскевича, Оникея Униховского, Миколая Подоровского и мене, из ласки Пана Бога всемогучого, кторый, яко хощет, керуе сер­ цами королев и вших людей ведля воли своей становит, отдано то подсудковство мне и привилей мне на то принесено до дому без великого стараня моего, 28 дня тогож месаца вресня. И виконалем присягу на тот уряд мой на роках Трехкролевых стычня 6 дня року 1593.

Пан Миколай Тлуховский, слуга еше небожчика пана, завше мне велику приязнь обецовал и утвержал то рукоданем, а никгды ниц у панов молодых не допомог, же мое речи шли нещасливе; потом дошедлем, же Иван Кречетовский, неприятель мой, запом­ нялый доброхотств моих, которыем еще отцу его Хоме, казнодею Клецкому, и матери его, кеды ю жиды клецкие были в долгах взяли, показовал, и его, от продаваня дров в Ляховичах голца вземши, до пани виленское залетил и при собе до права способил и приучати се праву казал, змовивше се з тым Тлуховским, не тылько мне, але и панов в их справах ошуковали, а собе наганя­ ли. Тлуховский маетность коштовну на Руси, названую Селцо, забрал, а Кречетовский Малковичи, Конюхи, Мазурковшизну; што все мне было от пана не толко обецано, але и листы подавано, которых потом пан Ян Кароль Ходкевич з их направы подписо­ вать и скончить не хотел. А так, кгды се готовано на веселе пана Жалинского з панною виленскою Галшкою и Тлуховскому дой­ зрети поручоно, нападла го хороба дворска, указуючи се на го­ лове и на чоле; чого он, хотечи без издебки збыть, казал жидови балверови мазати собе те кгузики шарою мастию, не замкнувши

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 319 finally called me and the elder Butrym to one side in order to find out the truth: how this encroachment was made and how the new boundary-marks had been cut into the trees, whereas the old ones were still visible nearer to Myš. Having thus ascertained the truth, he informed the judges, ordering the Butryms to re-establish the old boundaries, starting from the corner of the boundary between Astraŭki and Dabramyśl, and, since both parties agreed, he instruct­ ed the peasants to raise boundary mounds immediately. The news of his action spread around and he was widely praised by the people. In the year 1592 from autumn till the New Year there was no irksome cold and the winter was almost without snow; people travell­ ed in carriages. Lord Alexander was present at the High Court electoral assembly60 but declined to accept any office, whilst I was prevented from doing so through the envy of Gregory Unichoŭski,61 so that it was Žabka and Butuševič who were elected. On the 9th of March Prince John Simeon of Słuck died. On the 30th of June Caspar Kiarsnoŭski, Junior Judge of Navahrudak, died in his property of Harodziaj during his afternoon sleep. On the 16th of August Lord John Charles Chadkievič went again to foreign parts, while Lord Alexander set off for Warsaw to take part in the Parliament session. On Tuesday 1st of September in the year 1592 at the county assembly at Cyryn the following persons were elected to the office of Junior Judge; John Maskievič, Onikiej Unichoŭski, Nicholas Pada­ roŭski and myself, by the grace of Almighty God who reigns over the hearts of kings and directs all men according to his will. Thus I was given this office of Junior Judge with practically no effort on my part, and the letters of appointment were brought to my house on the 28th day of the same month of September. I was sworn in for that office during the Epiphany court session on the 6th day of January of the year 1593.62 Master Nicholas Tłuchoŭski, who had been an old servant of His late Lordship, had always outwardly shown me a great friendship, confirming it with a handshake, but never put in a good word for me with the young masters, when my affairs took a bad turn. Afterwards I learned that the cause of all this was my enemy, Master John Kre­ čatoŭski, who had forgotten the kindness shown by me to his father Thomas, the preacher of Kleck, and to his mother, when the Jews of Kleck were holding them for their debts; and also how when he was in extreme penury I saved him from the fate of selling firewood in Lachavičy and recommended him to my Lady of Vilna and, having suggested that he should study law, assisted him in acquiring legal knowledge. He, having conspired with the said Tłuchoŭski, began to cheat not only me, but also their Lordships, becoming rich at their expense. Tłuchoŭski appropriated to himself a valuable property in Ruś called Sialco, and Krečatoŭski took Malkavičy, Koniuchi and Mazurkaŭščyna. All those properties had been promised to me, but owing to their intrigues Lord John Charles Chadkievič refused to sign the letters of conveyance which had already been prepared. Later Tłuchoŭski, whilst he was in charge of the preparations for the

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 320 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES cе, звлаща зиме; и так ездил был з Ляхович до Гнезней, а звро­ тивши се до Ляхович дня 15 стычня, року 1593, казал еще лепей намазати; а в тым, кгды та масть серца допадла, тогож дня ве­ чор знагла умер. Сполнила се на ним та приповесть: »зрадливе серце само се поразит«; не иж бым се з помъсты Божий, над ниприятельми моими выконаной, радовати мел, але тым зтвор­ жам се у вере моей, же маю Бога правдивого и всемогучого, боронячого мене от всих неприятелей моих.

Року 1593 король, его милость, выехал з Варшавы до Кгданска и Швеции 23 серпня.

В том же року паздерника дня 15 умерла зацна и богобойна пани конюшина, Зофея Александровна Ходкевичовна Корицка.

Року 1594 мая 8, в пяток, припала хмара сродзе зимна, спусти­ ла снег великий и лежал три дни; померзло от той хмары и зимна и ветру гвалтовного сила людей, по трою индей веспол, а не могли собе помочи. Птатства по гнездах самем видел барзо веле позды­ ханых; страх был и под дахом седячи.

Троха перед тым, мая 1, отдалем Яроша сына до пана Яна Кароля Ходкевича; жичу му з паном его вшелякого блогословен­ ства Божого.

Року 1595 о трех королях роки-смы судили земскии новогрод­ скии.

В том року 1595 Налевайко козак, собравши войско козаков, первей се указовал на Подолю, у Волошех, кусил се был и о ту­ рецкие земли, потом, ворочаючи се до Полши, сплендровал маетности пана Калиновского, мстечи се за обешене некгдысь отца его Наливайкового, и еще снать от отца Калиновского. Тым юж заюшоный, шел до Луцка, в ярмарок праве, где бискуп з пред­ нейшими шляхтою выехавши, упоминал и еднал го за местом, и купцы зложили килка тисячи злотых, а не могло быти без збыт­ ков и шкод; от туд, юж лепей заюшоный, удал се на Полесе, аж до Петрикович, юж так своволне все починаючи и в коло обсылаю­ чи, подарки собе давати заказуючи; якож и давано, одно з Слуцка помешкано было, и прудкож убег (в) Слуцк новембра 6 дня и был там немало; заварли се были на замку з двема сынами, детми малыми пана виленского Яронима Ходкевича; а пан виленский, воевода новгородский, пан Скумин и инше паны и шляхта зъе­ хали се до Клецка; не ведили, што почать, услышавши, же се у замок слуцкий добыли юж. В тым послал был Наливайко пол­ ковника Мартинка (о котором веле трымал, якож и был челов›к серца великого) до Копыля з пятисот Козаков, который, з пригоды

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 321 marriage between Lady Halška of Vilna and Master Žalinski, was struck by the court disease which manifested itself on his head and forefront. In an attempt to get rid of it as soon as possible he gave orders to a Jewish barber to put grey ointment on the spots, but he did not stay indoors although it was winter. In this state he undertook a journey from Lachavičy to Hniezna, and on his return to Lachavičy on the 15th day of January in the year 1593 he asked for more ointment. However in the evening of the same day he died as soon as the ointment penetrated his heart. Thus was fulfilled the proverb: “A treacherous heart will kill itself.” Not that I rejoice in the vengeance of God against my enemies, but the thought that I have by my side the true and just God who defends me from my foes streng­ thens my faith. In the same year 1593 on the 23rd of August His Majesty the King left Warsaw for Gdańsk and thence for Sweden.63 In the same year, on the 15th day of October, there died the noble and pious lady Sophie Karyckaja, wife of the Royal Master of the Horse and daughter of Alexander Chadkievič.64 In the year 1594 on Friday the 8th of May a very cold cloud came and let fall a huge amount of snow which stayed for three days. Many people were frozen to death on account of that cloud and the cold and violent winds; in some places three persons were found huddled together, unable to help each other in spite of their number. I saw with my own eyes a great number of birds dead in their nests. It was a frightening thing even in the safety of one's own house. A short time before that event, on the 1st of May, I gave my son Jerome into service with the Lord John Charles Chadkievič: I wish him and His Lordship every blessing of God. In the year 1595 about the feast of Three Kings the court session was held in Navahrudak. In the same year 1595 the cossack Nalivajka,65 having assembled an army of cossacks, appeared first in Podolia and in Wallachia and even tried to raid the lands of the Turks. He then came back to Poland and plundered the estates of Master Kalinoŭski, thus taking revenge for the hanging of his, Nalivajka's, father, who had been hanged, apparently by the father of Kalinoŭski. Emboldened by success he went on to Łuck; it was a market day, and the bishop together with a company of notables came out and implored him to spare the town. The merchants collected some thousands of gold pieces, but this did not prevent outrages and damage. From thence, having become still more insolent, he set off for Palessie up to Pietrykaŭ, taking great liberties and sending messages far and wide with demands for ransom. Everyone paid up, but Słuck alone was slow, so he speedily went to Słuck, took the town on the 6th of November and tarried there for a considerable time. Only a few people, among whom were the two young sons of the Lord Castellan of Vilna Jerome Chadkievič,66 managed to shut themselves in the castle. In the meantime my Lord of Vilna, the Lord Governor of Navahrudak Lord Skumin67 and other lords and noblemen assembled in Kleck and did not know what to do, for the news had gone round that the castle of Słuck had already

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 322 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES там потрафивши гайдуков пана воеводы виленского, которые впадши до млына и испусту под местом, боронили пройштя до места и так справне Козаков настреляли и Мартинка забили, же сила их на пляцу, а инше, назад се цофнувши, по дорозе и хрус­ тох зоставили, а инши, пострелеными юж будучи, в огонь скака­ ли и згорели, бо были стайню дворовую, у того млынка будучую, запалили, же се барзо их мало до Слуцка воротило. Наливайко, стревожоный тым нещастем и розумеючи, же за тым з Клецка зобрани панове кусити се мели о него у Слуцку, зараз, яко тых в Копылю бито новембра 25, а он третого дня, новембра 27, з вечора, выбравши се з Слуцка, до Омгович знову ку Полесю вы­ тегнул и потом кгрудня 13 Могилева моцю добыл, места и замку, сплендровал и попалил; панове за ним выправили Буйвида, чело­ века памети годного, давши слуг своих, а пан виленский своего двору двесте коней, з которыми, яко розных панов слугами, ро­ зум сам указуе яко было Буйвидови трудно, же, за непослушен­ ством их, ничого годного почати не мог, толко зазябывши се, здрове стратил и у небачных людей на славе шванковати мусел; тамже згинул Оникей Униховский, человек серца доброго и вели­ кого захованя. Наливайко ходил потом над рекою Днепром в низ, аж потом, порвавши се з Рогачова за якимись практыками, при­ падал знова до Петрикович; поветы збегали се до купы и спрудка потом зъехали се новокгродскии в Копылю где был его княжеска милость пан Миколай Криштоф Радивил, воевода троцкій, на­ прод вшитких приехавши в килку сот человека, и тым вымог, же се инши спешили до его милости; за тым приехал пан воевода новокгродский и иншие панове и шиковали се в полю року 1596 дня 15 лютого; было людей о три тысечи готовых.

Аж мило было; давно юж войска не видевши, пан воевода се троцкий зе справованя людми вымовял и здавал то пану воеводе новгородскому; але, юж никому не уймуючи, признавам, яке до­ сыть се деяло порядкови пристойному; пан воевода виленский з поветом минским приехал до Шацка; тамже и наши з Копыля ехали, а Наливайко з Петрикович, бывши в Турове и в Городку болшей, удал се до Высоцка и на Волынь. Лобода теж, отвратив­ ши се от Шацка, шол тамже Киевщиною ку Наливайкови.

Року 1602 юж у нас в Новгородку роки звыклие земские по­ меняны были на сейме прошлом през послы наше: пана Зенкевы­ ча и пана Подаровского, котории, по тым сейме зъехавши се на роки нове Громничние, з собою се не згодили; и вымовял се пан Подаровский, же о той отмене и замешаню, радней ниж поправе роков, не ведал, хоть то по некоторых сеймиках упоминано было,

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 323 been taken. Meanwhile Nalivajka sent his colonel Marcinek (whom he held in high esteem, for he was a man of great heart) together with five hundred cossacks to Kapyl; there they chanced to meet the men of my Lord of Vilna, who, having come down to the mill and the dam, defended the entry to the town, and so good was their marks­ manship that they killed Marcinek himself and many of his cossacks who were left dead all over the place, while the others retreated by roads and through the bushes; others still, being wounded, jumped into the fire and were burned to death, for previously they had set fire to the stables which were near the mill. Thus very few of them came back to Słuck. Nalivajka, alarmed by the disaster, and having learnt that the nobles assembled in Kleck were thinking of attacking him in Słuck, abandoned Słuck without delay on the evening of the 27th of November — those in Kapyl had been defeated on the 25th of November — and marched towards Amhovičy and back to Palessie. Then, on the 13th of December, he took the castle and city of Mahiloŭ and, having plundered it, set it on fire.68 The lords sent in his pursuit Bujvid, a man worthy of memory, placing him in charge of their men, to which my Lord of Vilna added two hundred horsemen. Those men, being servants of various lords, were undisciplined and Bujvid,69 as might be expected, had no easy task with them: he achieved nothing, but, having caught cold, only ruined his health and undermined his reputation among certain people. It was then that Onikiej Unichoŭski, a man of great heart and many virtues, was killed.70 Nalivajka then went down the river Dniepr and, on reaching Rahačoŭ, for some reason turned back to Pietrykaŭ. All the counties gathered together against him, and the detachment from Navahrudak joined the others in Kapyl, where there was already Prince Nicholas Christopher Ra­ dzivił, the Governor of Troki, who came there first with a few hundred of his men, and thus caused the others to rally to him. When the Lord Governor of Navahrudak and other nobles arrived in the year 1596 on the 15th of February, they began to make preparations for the campaign. Altogether there were about three thousand men ready for battle. It was a pleasure to see: the Lord Governor of Troki, having had nothing to do with the army for a long time, declined to take com­ mand and proposed the Lord Governor of Navahrudak in his place. I must say that everything was done with good grace, due honour being given to everybody. Finally the Lord Governor of Vilna with a detachment from Minsk county, arrived in Šack, and our men hastened to join him there. At the same time Nalivajka from Pietry­ kaŭ, after a short stop in Turaŭ and Haradok, went to Vysock in Volhynia. Also Loboda, turning back from Šack, went to the land of Kiev to meet Nalivajka.71 In the year 1602 in Navahrudak the dates of the ordinary county court sessions had already been changed at the previous Parliament by our representatives Master Ziankovič and Master Padaroŭski, who disagreed on this point however when they met again after that Parliament during the Candlemas quarter session. Master Padaroŭski maintained that he had had nothing to do with that change, which

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 324 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES подал на сейме, абы в нас во всем панстве роки на розныи, а не одны часы, звычаем полским, постановены были (в нашом повете о том знать жадного чоловека не была воля, але и помышлене не было). Пан Василий Зенкович знал се, же се о то старал и пана Подаровского втегал, жебы и он на то призволил, але се он ник­ гды до того не знал. И так на тых злых, в серпах людских розер­ ваных роках будучи я от пана судии, тогож то пана Зенкевича напомненый, а не зезволяючи з множством людей на зламане тых (то) роков, при нем приставши, судилих ми е; не ушедлем помсты Божей, же ми на тых рокох, в лютым мисяцы, 16 дня, в суботу, забил сына моего Яна, второго по Ярошу, першим сыне моем, незбожный Олбрыхт Бруханский, з помочю Корсака, швакгра своего, там же на месте в Новогродку, о чем кгды мне, на судех седячему, ведомость дошла, просилем вшитких, абы там в рынок зо мною пошли, где пан судя з ласки своей продковал, мне держати казал, а иншим тело, юж забыте, сына мого, на сани взявши, на уряд, а потом до господы моей отпровадить казал. А внет потым, кгды се доведил, же того забитя сына моего была найветша причина тот Корсак, сестренец его, рушила го крев­ ность, а отрожене з духа по новокрещенству або давно не было, або на тот час утекло от него прочь. Послал до мене, абых слал за тыми, которы ехали в погонку за Бруханскими, жебы се што злого тому сестринку не стало, а ям не толко не слал никого, але ани ведил о ничием еханю и о свете: живлим был, або не? А на заютр в неделю, маючи в себе Выровского, Лоховского, Богуше­ вича и инших, приводил ме, абы з ним на судех заседал; видяло ми се, жем там был на он час не межи людми, але Каинами, и про то, чогом не рад мовил, мусилем речи: если розумити не хотят моей пригоды, абы их то самых поткало. Потом в понеделок, гдым се юж мел з места з телом провадити, подал ми пан судя, жебы не вадило постати в рынку з телом, а Лицыниуш жебы там премове учинил. Яж теды, яко дите от жыдов (яко поведают) зва­ беный и сподеваючи се, же ми улгу жалю Лицыниуш, яко чело­ век учоный, справит якими утешни мови, казалем се застановити в месте. Але же той Лицыниуш, ставши подле пана судии, взял аркгумент з Соломона о своволным млоденцу и также карал сына моего, в гробе юж будучого, я, видечи, же вшитко спросьно калем и похлебством смердело, казалем далей ехать, бо другого сына моего мел юж у себе от килку лет в науце и твиченю своим, а бодай негоршого выховал; нех им Пан одда, справедливый судя, бовем з тым нещестем моим вшитки облудные приятеле мое, машкары свои ухиливши, незбожние твары свои указали и ядо­ вите злости свои явней вылевати почали. Не заспал юж их вели­

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 325 had brought only confusion instead of improvement and, although some counties wanted it, (in our county nobody cared one way or the other), he proposed to Parliament that in the whole of our State the dates of the court sessions should remain different from, and not identical with, those customarily observed in the Polish courts. Master Ziankovič admitted that he favoured the change and even tried to persuade Master Padaroŭski to alter his opinion, but the latter had never given his assent. Thus we proceeded with the court sittings during that ill-fated session, which was already bringing discord in the hearts of men, and I, being reminded by the same Master Ziankovič, who was the presiding judge, and having taken his part attempted by reasoning with the people to prevent its complete breakdown. However I did not escape the vengeance of God, for it was during that session in the city of Navahrudak, on Saturday the 16th of February, that the godless Olbracht Bruchanski, with the help of his brother-in-law Korsak, killed my son John, my second after Jerome. When the news was brought to me, I was in the court and I immediately asked all those present to come with me to the market square. The judge kindly took the matter into his hands, instructing some to assist me, and ordering others to put the body of my slain son on sledges and bring it first to his office and then to my lodgings. Soon afterwards however, learning that one of those principally responsible for the slaying of my son was his nephew Korsak, he was swayed by the blood relationship, and it seems that the gift of the Holy Spirit which he had received at his new baptism had either long since been lost, or else had abandoned him at that very moment. He sent me a message asking me to recall those who had gone in pursuit of Bruchanski, lest they harm that nephew of his, whereas I not only had sent no one in any pursuit, but knew nothing of it, or anything else for that matter: I hardly knew whether I was alive or dead. On the next day, which was Sunday, he, having with him Vyroŭski, Lachoŭski, Bahuševič and others, tried to persuade me to continue the court sittings with him as usual. It seemed to me then that I was surrounded not by men but by Cains, and therefore — although I did not wish it, — I was forced to say that if they did not want to understand my sorrow, I would they might meet the same fate. Then on Monday, when I was on the point of leaving the town with the corpse, the judge suggested that it would not be amiss to stop at the market place and let Licinius make a speech,72 And I, like a child enticed by the Jews (as the saying goes), hoping that Licinius, being a learned man, would bring me some comfort with a few kind words, gave orders to stop. But this Licinius stood up beside the judge and, taking his text from Solomon about the self-willed young man, began to castigate my son who was lying in the coffin. I, seeing that all this stank indecently of flattery, gave orders to proceed, fearing only that he might corrupt my other son, whom he had had under his instruction and training for some years. May God, the righteous Judge, reward them according to their deeds! On the occasion of this my great sorrow, all my false friends, having cast off their masks, showed their godless faces and began openly to

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 326 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

кий Пан Бог мой, оборонца мой, не вонтплю о Его святой ласце и з иншими, же мне скутечну справедливость и екзекуцыю учи­ нити рачит.

И так плачливе з тых незбожне укнованых роков звротивши се, поховалом тело того забитого милого Яна, сына моего, в капли­ цы моей мурованой, дня 21 лютого. А в тым теж часе вышол день уроженя моего 21 лютого, который обсервовалем друкгды з ра­ достиу, а тераз з плачем и з великою жалостию, з чого всего нех будет похвалено име Пана Бога всемогучого.

З той так великой жалости моей о смерти, а тым барзей же забитю сына моего, немней теж з оказаня облудников, которы мне час немалый (за приятелей се и великих и верных удаваючи) лу­ дили, пофрасованый, впалем у велику, а до лечнованя не ведет яку хоробу: напрод марца 6 дня обумарлем без вшелякой причи­ ны на полторы годины и, пришедши к собе, былем мдлый, аж повторе марца 14, рано обумарши, о собе-м не ведел, а тогож дня, у вечор обумарши, былем в зафиценю шесть годин зегаровых; потом ве днях кветневых, приходечи к собе, ехалем был до Нов­ городка для роков марковских кветня 23 дня, и на дорозе у Вал­ сивце трохам был зомлел и затым, вжо приехавши до Новго­ родка, не заседалем на судах; обраный ва место мое, пан Григорей Немира, присегу на ти роки учинивше, отправовал их. В маю зась на рочках кгродских была справа нам о забите Яна, сына моего, з Бруховским и з сынами его и пошла была на инши речи, а у дру­ гих речах до трибуналу, а потом, на рочках липцовых, в небыт­ ности моей, през Яроша, сына моего, заварта была угода з Бру­ ханскими, ведля которой потым пред судом трибуналским, 13 месеца вересня, Бруханский сам и сынове его з цедул перепра­ шали мене и сынов моих и иншем им поотпушал, але иж не ставил отец Олбрыхта, сам за него, ведле опису своего, на рок зуполный на везене зесел в замку новгородском и в том похибив­ ши листу своего, што мел засести в дому замковым, по левой руце стоячим, то он по тойже левой руце, еше пред домом тым давным замковым, збудовал избе собе сам и в той засел был. А я се не користуючи в том его седеню, а сам там за хоробою моею ехать не могучи, посылалем з листы моими: первей зашитый, абы ехал з того грунта. Он до мне отписал, абых му послал на то лист отвороный; ям и такий лист ему посылал през зятя его Мокштыц­ кого и през Косаковского, до которых, яко они справу давали, так отповедел: »не ведаю, чому ме подсудок зтуде выправуе, вшак тераз зима; также и дома в избе седю, также мед пию, яко и дома, и таж жона зо мною спит, што и дома«. И так погоржони приятеле вротили се из тое учинности моей, и я потом от него жадногом сказаня и словечка не мел, аж послышалем, же умер там в том мешканю своим, а праве знагла. Были дивние голосы и мнеманя людцкие о той смерти его; я замилчывам, яко неведо­ мый в тым ничого певного.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 327 pour out their poisonous hatred. However the great God, my defend­ er, has not fallen asleep to their deeds and I have no doubt that in His mercy He will deign to see that justice be done to all. Thus weeping I came back from that ill-fated session and buried the body of my murdered son John in the brick-built family chapel on the 21st of February. It so happened that the 21st of February was also my birthday73 — a date which in other circumstances I observed with joy, but on this occasion I was full of tears and grief. However, may the Name of Lord God Almighty be praised in all things. Greatly sorrowing over the death — or should I say the murder, — of my son and also at the discovery of the falsity of men who had deceived me for so long, posing as my close and faithful friends, I was struck down by a mysterious illness for which no one knew the cure. It manifested itself for the first time on the 6th of March when I lost consciousness for one and a half hours for no apparent reason, and when I came to my senses, I felt faint; then in the morning of the 14th of March I fainted for the second time and remembered nothing, and in the evening of the same day, having fainted yet again, I remained in a coma for six hours by the clock. In April I began to feel better and went to Navahrudak on the 23rd of April for the St. Mark's court session,74 but having fainted on the way in Valsiučy, I resolved on my arrival in Navahrudak not to take part in the sessions of the court. For that term they elected in my place Master Gregory Niamira and he, having been sworn in, attended on the court. In May the case against Bruchanski and his sons for the murder of my son John was heard before the county court,75 but it was set down for hearing at the end of the session after the other cases, and then it was referred to the High Court.76 Then, during the July session, a settlement was reached in my absence between my son Jerome and Bruchanski. According to its terms, Bruchanski and his sons asked forgiveness in writing of me and my sons before the High Court on the 13th of September. I forgave the others, but since Olbracht was not present, his father gave a written undertaking to serve in his place one complete year of imprisonment in Navahrudak Castle. However he did not respect this undertaking, for he was to serve his sentence in the castle keep on the left hand side, but, in­ stead, he took up residence in his own small house which he had built long before to the left of the castle. Thus being cheated out of the sentence and unable to intervene personally because of illness, I began to send letters to him. First I sent a sealed letter, asking him to leave that place. He replied that I should send him an open letter. And when I sent such a letter through his son-in-law Makštycki and through Kasakoŭski, he gave them — as they afterwards told me, — the following answer: “I know not why the Assessor wishes to expel me from here, for it is winter now; I feel at home here, drinking mead, and my wife sleeps with me, just as at home.” Thus humiliated for trying to be helpful my friends went away; after that I heard not a word from him until I learned that he had suddenly died in that house of his. There were odd rumours and conjectures about his death, but I, knowing nothing for sure, hold my peace.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 328 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES Року 1603 од стычня 21 сейм великий зачинал се у Кракове для заповетреня у Варшаве, а в нас ту, у Новогродку, роки земские громничние сужоно. Але дня 20 лютого пригода стала се и бурда пану Зенковичу, судии нашому, з неяким Лякгеницким, жолне­ ром з роты кнезя Порецкого, зачим се и рота юж от Здетеля у пять милях до нас была воротила и роков нам досудити не дала, жесмы се без часу розехати мусели. Кветня 9 дня пан Самуил Волович оженил се. Наша Ходкеви­ човна, Гальшка, по Каменском вдовою зостала. О Марку св. хворалем и не моглем быть на роках обраный; на мое местце Марко Полонский, присегу учинивши, на одны тии рокы отправовал. Мая 8, на день Вступеня Панского, сынова моя Ярошова уро­ дила сына, которогом я был, ведля дня того, Станиславом мяновал, але прозвал го Яном. Было дите над подобенство детей вшитких росторопне, а знало, яко в килка лет, вшитко чудно и росло прудко. Потом умерло 7 кгрудня з великою жалостю в дому моем. Чирвца зась 29 мелом ласки Божие веселе в дому моим; за Яна Грушовского отдалем цорку мою Раину. Пане Боже и добродею мой, рач им блогословити! В том року 1603 мелом трое писане от милого сына моего Иохи­ ма, яко того лета з паном своим, княжатем Мантуанским, был в Неаполи; морем там ездил, яку там велику учтивость неапол­ чицы указовали княжати, немней яко великому монарше. Был там княже для лекарств. Мой зась сын, хоть там инших з моря мыто брало, здоровый был, а потым во вресню, впадши в дивне фебры, 23 дня мало не умер. А ям ту дома, тогож 23 вресня зле сны о ним видел и написалем был в минуцыях тогорочных, уте­ шивши се, же было то в первший квартал месеца; аж з писаня его тот же день 23 обачивши, дивовалем се чудом и справом Бо­ жим, хвалечи светое име Его. Далей в том року 1603 не было в моей ведомости, штобы писаня годно было, одно то, же пан Ян Кароль Ходкевич вжо то другий рок в Лифлантех з войском мешка, завезши там паню малжонку и сына Яроша малого. Дерпту, аж го праве знуждивши, ркомо през трактат достал, замечки околичне побрал и волости, под Ревель и Нарву уставичне узгоны чинил так безпечне, яко перед тим з чворнасоб болшим войском такой безпечности не уживано. Пане Боже му блогослови! Не слышалем я болше речей щасливых того року, але жалос­ ных, а наперв поветря морового у Вилне, и у нас ту, в Новгород­ ку, в месте и в повете добром ведом; зештя тож з света людей зацных гурмом праве в одным том року, которие порядком тим личу: В лютым 13 дня под Дерптом забито мужа годного памети,

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 329

In the year 1603, starting from the 21st of January, the great Parliament was held in Cracow because of the plague in Warsaw, and here in Navahrudak we held the Candlemas court session at about the same time. However on the 21st of February our judge Master Ziankovič picked a quarrel with a certain Lagienicki, a soldier serv­ ing with the regiment of Prince Parecki, for which reason the whole regiment came back to town from Dziatłava five miles away and prevented us from finishing the session, so that we had to break up before time. On April the 9th Master Samuel Vałovič married our Halška, born Chadkievič, who had remained a widow after the death of Žalinski. About the feast of St. Mark I fell ill and could not take part in the court sittings; Mark Pałonski having been duly sworn in, sat in my place during that session. On the 8th of May, the feast of the Ascension, my daughter-in-law, the wife of Jerome, gave birth to a son, whom I named John, although normally I should have called him Stanislas in honour of the saint of the day.77 He was an extremely intelligent child, who grew quickly and knew everything as though he were several years old. Then he died on the 7th of December leaving all my family in great sorrow. And on the 29th of June there was by the grace of God a wedding in my house: I gave my daughter Raina away in marriage to Master John Hrušoŭski. May my God and Benefactor deign to bless them! During the same year 1603 I had three letters from my son Joachim, who in that year was in Naples with his master, the Duke of Mantua. They went there by sea and the people of Naples showed as much honour to the Duke, as if he had been a great monarch. The Duke went there for health reasons. Although the others paid their debt to the sea, my son kept hale and well. Afterwards however, on the 23rd of September he nearly died, having contracted a strange fever. And I here at home on that same 23rd day of September had bad dreams about him and made a note to this effect in my diary at the time, feeling somewhat relieved, because it was the first quarter of the moon. Then, having learnt from his letter what had happened on that 23rd day, I marvelled at God's mysterious ways and praised His Holy Name. There was nothing else to my knowledge worthy of note in that year 1603, except that Lord John Charles Chadkievič had for the second year running been with the army in Livonia, having taken his wife and his little son Jerome there with him. He obtained Derpt by treaty, having previously almost starved it, and also took many castles and towns. He made continuous sorties up to Revel and Narva with complete impunity, a thing which no one before him dared to do with an army four times as large as his. May God bless him! I did not hear any further glad tidings in that year, but many sad ones. Firstly there was a plague in Vilna and also in the city and county of Navahrudak.78 There was quite a throng of noble and good people that passed away that year. I shall try to record them in order. On the 13th day of February Prince Demetrius, brother of Pału­

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 330 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

человека значне рыцерского, кнезя Дмитра, брата Полубенского. 13 марцу 12 дня умер пан Михал Фронцкевич, подкоморый полоцкий. Тогоже марца 20 дня умер пан Ян Одиховский, чело­ век в чужих краинах долго бывалый и велце человек добрый, а мой приятель правдивий. О заправду не умел або не хтел тот заживати облуды. В тым померли по собе прудко швакгрове два: Павел Вировский и Ян Высоцкий; умер теж Миколай Подаров­ ский. За ними теж в липцу дня 19 умер староста несвижский Войтех Першко, брат мой милый и человек велце добрый, кото­ рого погреб зложоный был зразу на 25 авкгуста, але иж, з пере­ зреня Божого, приехавши до Несвежа пан кграбя з Тенчына, тогож дня менованого, ве чварток вступил в малженство з кнеж­ ною Галшкою, цоркою его милости, пана воеводы троцкого, — рач им пане Боже благословити, — час погребу доброго слуги обра­ тил се в веселе в дому того велце зацного и побожного пана. А потом погреб тела пана Першкова отправеный был 4 дня вересня, также ве чварток, на котором были их милости сами: кнеже, его милость, воевода троцкий и пан кграбя. В тым же нещасливом року 1603, в листопаде 20 дня умер, а можна речи упал стлуп панства литовского, его милость пан Криштоф Радивил, воевода виленский, в Лосовней, именю цорки своей, паней Сапежиной, канцлерыной, в хоробе не долгой. По ним зараз умер теж пан Ян Карушевич, каштелян жомойдзкий; овож того так веле в том року было, аж было з пострахом великим успоминати. В том же року в кгрудни умер теж кнеже Александер Острожский, воевода волынский, в Красном, маетности своей на Подолю.

Не видивши теж там доброго товариства сусед, и приятель мой, пан Бенямин Чарковский, умер року 1604 стычня 2 дня, не в дому своим, але у Улулникох, у пана Григория Униховского, где се обадва лечили у неякого Шкота доктора. Мой то был великий приятель, понекгды зась в прешлых нехутях и задростях, кото­ рых ем был по ним и по пане Униховском дознал, а бодай и от инших, за тоюж нецностивою задростиу нещасною познавалем о непогамоване кглупство; розумет же Бог, чинячи другому доб­ ро, мел бы е в богатой руце своей так выдати, жебы тобе юж не мел чого з ласки своей дати. Дякую я Тобе, Боже мой, Отче пана нашего Исуса Христа, же меж иншими дары Твоими далесь ми то был, жем се задросты устеречи мог, так, же нигды серцем моим не пановала и непотребного (яком знал по инших) жалю, хоробе якой подобного, не чинила.

* * *

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 331

bienski, was killed near Derpt — a man worthy of memory because of his chivalry. On the 12th day of March Master Michael Franckie­ vič, the Land Judge of Połack,79 died. On the 20th day of the same month of March there passed away John Adachoŭski, a great travell­ er in foreign lands, a good man and my true friend. Indeed he had never known or used any falsehood. Then the two brothers-in-law, Paul Viroŭski and John Vysocki died one after another, and with them Master Nicholas Padaroŭski. Vojciech Pierška, the steward of Niaśviž, my dear brother and a very good man, was the next to die on the 19th of July. His funeral was at first fixed for the 25th of August, but it so happened that on the same day — which was Thursday, — the Count of Tęczyn, having come to Niaśviž, married Princess Halška, daughter to His Grace the Governor of Troki, and thus the day of the intended funeral of a faithful servant was transformed into a day of rejoicing in the house of that most noble and pious lord. May God bless the young couple! The funeral of Master Pierška was held instead on the 4th of September — which was also Thursday, — and there were present in person Their Lordships the Governor of Troki and the Count. In this ill-fated year of 1603, on the 20th day of November, there died — or should one rather say fell, — the pillar of the Lithuanian State, His Grace Lord Christopher Radzivił, Go­ vernor of Vilna; he died after a short illness in Łasosina, the property of his daughter, Lady Sapieha, wife of the Chancellor. Soon after him died Master John Naruševič, Castellan of Samogitia. There were indeed so many deaths in that year that one is afraid to remember them all. In December of the same year there also died Prince Alexander Astrožski, Governor of Volhynia, in his estate of Krasnaje in Podolia. No longer seeing any good company, my neighbour and friend Benjamin Čarkoŭski died on the 2nd day of January in the year 1604, not in his own house, but in the property of Master Gregory Unichoŭski at Ululniki, where they were both undergoing a course of treatment under a Scottish doctor. He became my great friend after some initial misunderstanding and unpleasantnesses, which I had to suffer from him and from Master Unichoŭski, as well as from others because of jelausy. It is a great foolishness to imagine that God while doing good to others, could in His generosity so expend His grace, that He would have nothing left to give to you. I thank Thee, О My God, Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, that, among Thy other gifts, Thou didst vouchsafe to keep me free from envy, which has never held sway in my heart or caused any of that unnecessary bitterness (such as I could see in others) which is like to a disease.80

* * *

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 332 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

Notes to Introduction

1) Полска квитнет лациною, Литва квитнет русчизною; Без той в Полсце не пробудешь, Без сей в Литве блазном будешь. Той лацина езык дает, Та без Руси не вытрвает. (Cf. R. Patry-Tamushanski, 'Byelorussian Renaissance Verse', The Journal of Byelorussian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, London 1965, pp. 28-29. English translation of the poem by Vera Rich). It may not be amiss to quote here the words of a modern Lithuanian scholar Kostas Korsakas: “The Byelorussian people have made a great contribution to the cultural development of the Lithuanian people. Lithuanians always remember with gratitude the fact that Byelorussians gave them the beginnings of their literacy. From the 14th century onwards every­ thing was written in the tongue, on the basis of which later developed the modern Byelorussian language.” (Quoted by: В. Вольскі, Нарысы па гісторыі беларускай літаратуры эпохі феадалізма, Minsk 1958, р. 60). 2) »... а если которому народу встыд прав своих не умети, поготовю нам, которыя не обчым яким языком, але своим власным права списаныя маем«. (Хрэстаматыя па гіcтopыі беларускай мовы, Выдавецтва Акадэміі Навук БССР, Vol. I, Minsk 1961, p. 212). 3) There is some confusion regarding the names of Byelorussia in the past. The following notes may help to throw some light on the subject. (i). Initially (ll-13th centuries) Byelorussia was called Ruś (Русь Latin Russia) in common with all other territories inhabited by the East Slavs. The inhabitants were called Ruthenians (Latin Rutheni, less frequently Russi), and their langu­ age — Ruthenian. When one had to be more specific, one used regional names, such as Land of Połack, Land of Turaŭ (Połackaja ziamla, Turaŭskaja ziamla) etc. (ii). With the formation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Byelorussians gradually began to call themselves Lithuanians in much the same way as the English today may call themselves British. Thus the first translator and printer of the Byelorussian Bible, Francis Skaryna of Połack, figures on the registers of the University of Cracow in 1506 as Franc. de Polaczko, Litphanus (Cf. J. Fijałek, Uchrześcijanienie Litwy przez Polskę. Polska i Litwa w stosunku dziejowym, Warsaw 1914, p. 159, footnote). Jeŭłašeŭski uses the words Lithu­ anian (Litva, Litvin) in the same sense when he writes that at the Parliament of 1579 the Speaker was “our Lithuanian, Prince Luke Bolka Śvirski”, or that in January 1588 king Sigismund “repeated his oath in Lithuania, for he was crowned without our representatives.” Alexander Brückner has this to say on the meaning of the word Lithuania in the 16th century: “We continuously talk about Lithuania, Lithuanian, but only instead of Byelorussia, Byelorussian, because in 1510 nobody even dreamt about ethnical Lithuania proper; still in 1562 Rej (a Polish poet — Tr.) called Byelorussian Lithuanian, whilst in Moscow even in the 17th century Lithuanian meant the same as Byelorussian.” (Cf. A. Brückner, 'Ruskopolski rękopis z r. 1510', Slavia, VII, Prague 1928-29, pp. 10-11). Another scholar who studied national relations in the Grand Duchy

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 333 of Lithuania came to the conclusion that by the middle of the 16th century “every nobleman in Lithuania considered himself Lithuanian, everyone spoke colloquial Byelorussian (Ukrainian in the south), everyone used conventional Ruthenian (Lithuano-Ruthenian) in writing. The national difference between ethnical Lithuanians and Ruthenians disappeared completely among the nobil­ ity; there remained only a difference of religion: one distinguished persons of 'Roman' and of 'Greek' faith.” (Cf. J. Jakubowski, Studya nad stosunkami narodowościowemi na Litwie przez Unią Lubelską, Warsaw, 1912, p. 81. By 'conventional Ruthenian' the author meant literary Middle Byelorussian). Traces of the use of the word Lithuanian as a national name for Byelorus­ sians survived almost to our days. In 1901 the Byelorussian poetess Maria Kosič published (in Russian) an ethnographical work entitled Lithuanian-Byelorus­ sians of Čarnihaŭ Province (M. Косич, Литвины-Белоруссы Черниговской губернии, Живая старина, StP, 1901). The district in question lies in the extreme south-east corner of Byelorussia, the farthest removed from Lithuania proper. (iii). Within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania the names Lithuania and Ruś had also a regional meaning. Lithuania was the western part of the country, the initial nucleus of the Grand Duchy. It included the districts of Vilna and Troki with mixed population, but mainly consisted of the ethnographical Byelo­ russian regions of Navahrudak, Hrodna, Brasłaŭ and extended eastwards as far as Minsk and southwards to Brest (Bieraście). The eastern and northern regions of Byelorussia along the rivers Dniepr and Dźvina were known as Ruś. Jeŭła­ šeŭski uses the word Ruś, and its adjectival derivative Ruthenian, in the regional sense when he writes that his wife's brother, who lived near Škłoŭ on the river Dniepr, was “Daniel Bałotavič of Ruś”; or that in 1581 the Muscov­ ite armies “unexpectedly invaded the Ruthenian lands.” On the other hand the author of the Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ — a village on the river Dniepr near Mahiloŭ, and therefore in Ruś, — writes in the following terms about the drought in the year 1583: “There was a great heatwave in the summer: rye, spring crops, grass and vegetables were all withered up in Lithuania, especially near Minsk and Vilna, and the poor people came to Ruś in search of bread.” (Баркулабовская летопись, Киевские университетские известия, № 12, Kiev, 1898, supplement, p. 6). The third important region of the Grand Duchy was Samogitia (Žmudź, or Žamajć), situated in the extreme north-western corner of the country. Today it forms the greater part of the territory of the Lithuanian Soviet Republic. Samogitia had always enjoyed a special status within the Grand Duchy, and was the guardian of the ethnical Lithuanian national spirit and traditions. For a long time the word Samogitian was synonymous with what one would call today ethnical Lithuanian. This regional composition of the Grand Duchy was reflected in the full title of its ruler who was called the Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruś and Samogitia. (iv). The Byelorussian literary language throughout the grandducal period was called Ruthenian (ruski jazyk). That is what Jeŭłašeŭski means when he says that at the age of five they began to entertain him with “Ruthenian learn­ ing” (naukoju ruskoju). Attempts by some contemporary writers, like Zizani, to call the Byelorussian language Lithuanian met with no success. The name Byelorussian language began to appear sporadically in the 17th century; it was used however mostly by the Muscovites and not by the Byelorussians themselves. Only in the 19th century did the name Byelorussian language come to be used more and more frequently by Byelorussian poets and writers such as Barščeŭski, Rypiński, Dunin-Marcinkievič and others. Considerable confusion was created by certain 19th century Russian scholars who, for reasons which have nothing to do with scholarship, began to call literary Middle Byelorussian a “West or Lithuano-Russian dialect.” The modern Byelorussian philologist L. Šakun summed up this trend in the following words: “Starting from false methodological positions, and in particular denying the separate existence of the Byelorussian people and language, some pre-revolutionary scholars, especially during their initial years of acquaintance with old Byelorussian literature, came to completely baseless, anti-scientific conclusions regarding the old Byelorussian (West Russian according to their terminology) literary mon­

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 334 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES uments. Some opinions of the pre-revolutionary scholars — representatives of official tsarist science, — can be only regarded as a slur on the Byelorussian nation, its national culture and language.” (Л. М. Шакун, »Да пытання аб паняцці 'Старая беларуская мова'«, Даследаванні па беларускай i рускай мовах, Minsk, 1960, р. 143). An exhaustive answer to those scholars was given in 1893 by Karski in his article What is the Old West-Russian Dialect? Having examined the problem with his usual thoroughness, he came to the following conclusion: “In our opinion the old West-Russian dialect was the language of the educated classes of society and was based on the language of the ordinary people belonging to the local Byelorussian ethnical group. Because of these circumstances, that is predominance of the Byelorussian elements, it must be called the Byelorussian language, adding only the word old in order to disting­ uish it from the modern Byelorussian. It is called Byelorussian by Busiajev, Ogonowski, Życiecki, Sobolevskij, Nedešev, Vladimirov and other modern scholars” (E. Ф. Карский, »Что такое древнее западнорусское наречие?«, Труды по белорусскому и другим славянским языкам, Moscow, 1962, р. 262). (v). The word Ruthenian (ruski) was also used in a religious sense to denote Orthodox Church or faith (i. e. in Jeŭłašeŭski's time; later it also came to denote the Uniate Church), as distinct from Roman or Latin (i. e. Catholic), or from Evangelical. Thus Jeŭłašeŭski — to take another example from his Memoirs, — writes that his mother was buried in the “Ruthenian church”, and that his wife persisted in the “Ruthenian faith.” (vi). The name Byelorussia (Biełaruś, Biełaja Ruś; Latin Russia Alba) seems to have appeared for the first time in the 14th century and was first used by German authors who called the Połack and Viciebsk regions in north-eastern Byelorussia Weizzen-Reuzen (E. Ф. Карский, Белоруссы, Vol. I, Warsaw, 1903, p. 115). It was thus a sub-region of Ruś. The name retained its purely local character for a long time and began slowly to gain ground in the 17th century, till it finally became the national name towards the end of the 19th century. The first person deliberately to use the words Byelorussia, Byelorussian in the modern sense appears to be 'the father of the Byelorussian national renaiss­ ance', the poet Francišak Bahuševič, who wrote in 1890: “Perhaps someone may ask: where is Byelorussia now? It is there, brothers, where our language lives: it extends from Vilna to Mazyr, from Viciebsk almost to Čarnihaŭ, there where Hrodna, Minsk, Mahiloŭ, Vilna and many other towns and villages lie...”. (Беларускія пісьменнікі другой паловы XІX стагоддзя, Выданне Акадэміі Навук БССР, Minsk 1956, р. 10). It may be noted that the present-day Russia was always called Muscovy, or Moscow (Maskva), and its inhabitants — Musco­ vites (Maskviciny). 4) M. О. Коялович, Дневник Люблинского Сейма 1569 года, StP, 1869, p. 467 etc. 5) »Проч Зыгмунда короля, того ничего и в люди личыть, бо той Подлясье и Волынь вынищыл, ляхом мянуючыся. Але Зыгмунда первого, солодкая память іeгo, бо той Немцев як собак не любил, и Ляхов з их хитростьми вельми не любил, а Литву и нашу Русь любительно миловал«. (Хрэстаматыя па гісторыі беларускай мовы, Выдавецтва Акадэміі Навук БССР, Vol. I, Minsk 1961, p. 316). 6) The basic administrative territorial unit in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the county (paviet). At the head of it was a Lieutenant (starosta or na­ miestnik; Latin capitaneus) who was appointed by the king for life and possessed extensive administrative and judicial powers. Counties were grouped into provinces, or palatinates (vajavodstva). The following provinces made up the Grand Duchy after 1569: Vilna, Troki, Nava­ hrudak, Połack, Viciebsk, Minsk, Brest, Mścisłaŭ and Samogitia which enjoyed a special status. The head of the province was the Governor, or Palatine (vaja­ voda) — a high dignitary of senatorial rank (princeps creatus), also appointed by the king for life. He was the military commander over the whole of his territory, and usually combined these duties with those of the Lieutenant in the chief county in his province. The chief crown officer in Samogitia bore the title of Lieutenant, but he was equal in rank to the Governor. In the chief city of each province there was a Castellan (kaštelan). He was also a dignitary of

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 335 senatorial rank, although not so high as the Governor (except the Castellans of Vilna and Troki which were among the most exalted offices in the whole Grand Duchy). The Castellan had certain military duties under the Governor, but no administrative or judicial powers. Usually a Castellan was called Lord of his titular city, e. g. Lord of Vilna, Lord of Mścisłaŭ (Pan Vilenski, Pan Mścisłaŭski) etc. The Governors and Castellans of Vilna and Troki took precedence over all other secular dignitaries in the Grand Duchy. Before the Union of Lublin they, together with the Bishop of Vilna and Lieutenant of Samogitia, formed the inner circle of the Grandducal Council (Pany-Rada) and had access to all State secrets. 7) Описание и оборона собору руского берестеиского, Русская историческая библиотека, Vol. XIX, StP, 1903, p. 214. 8) »Слушна бо речь ест, абы ваши княжецкие милости того народу язык миловати рачили, в котором давные предки и их милости отци ваших княжецких милости славне преднеишие предложенства несуть«. (А. Ф. Кор­ шунаў (compiler), Хрэстаматыя па старажытнай беларускай літаратуры, Minsk, 1959, р. 191). 9) »...хто бы не мусил плакати, видечи так великих княжат, таких панов зачных, так много деток невинных, мужов з жонами в таком зацном руском, а злаща перед тым довтипном, учоном народе езыка своего славного занедбане а просто взгарду... а наостаток, што может быти жалоснеишая, што шкарадша иж и тые, што ся межи ими зовут духовные и учители, смеле мовлю, наименеи его вырозуменя не знают, ани се в нем цвичат, але и школы ку науце его нигде не мают, зачим в полские або иные писма за такою неволею немалу и у себе и дети, не без встыду своего, бы се одно почули, немалого заправуют?«. (Коршунаў, op. cit., p. 199). 10) For a detailed analysis of Jeŭłašeŭski's language see: A. I. Жураўскі, Гісторыя беларускай літаратурнай мовы, Vol. I, Minsk, 1967, pp. 336-342. 11) »Баркулабовская летопись«, Киевские университетские известия, № 12, Kiev, 1898, Supplement pp. 1-38. Edited by M. Dovnar-Zapolskij. 12) »Дневник новгородского подсудка Федора Евлашевского«, Киевская старина, Vol. XIV, No. I, Kiev, 1886, pp. 128-160. Extensive extracts from this edition are printed in: Коршунаў op. cit., pp. 123-137. 13) Pamiętnik Teodora Jewłaszewskiego, Nowogrodzkiego podsądka. Wydał T. X-že L., Warsaw, 1860. 14) Cf. Жypаўcкі, op. cit., p. 336 (footnote). 15) The following works have served as a basis for the transcription of Byelorussian geographical place names: Атлас Беларускай Савецкай Сацы­ ялістычнай Рэспублікі, Minsk-Moscow 1958; М. П. Лобан, М. Р. Суднік, Арфаграфічны слоўнік, 2nd ed., Minsk 1966.

Notes to Memoirs

1) The beginning of the Memoirs seems to be missing. The name of Jeŭła­ šeŭski's mother, as he himself tells us, was Theodora. His widowed father finished his days as Orthodox Bishop of Pinsk. In the document confirming the appointment of his successor his name is given as Macarius (Cf. Акты отно­ сящиеся к истории Западной России (quoted later as А.З.Р.), Vol. III, StP, 1848, p. 188). It is probable, however, that this was not his original name, but a name assumed at the time of his monastic profession. 2) I. e. Orthodox. Cf. Introduction Note 3 (v). 3) I. e. Byelorussian. Cf. Introduction Note 3 (iv).

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 336 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

4) At the battle near the river Uła in northern Byelorussia the forces of the Duchy of Lithuania under the command of Nicholas Radzivił the Redhead (Cf. below Note 39) defeated the Muscovite army commanded by P. Šujskij, who was killed in the fight. For a description of the battle by an anonymous Byelorussian writer see А.З.Р. Vol. III, p. 133 etc. 5) Vilna, or Vilnia (today Vilnius, capital of the Lithuanian Soviet Republic) was the capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. 6) Nicholas Wędrogorski (or Wędrychowski) and Kościeniecki were Polish Calvinist preachers who were invited to the Grand Duchy by Nicholas Radzivił the Black. They subsequently adhered to the Antitrinitarian (Unitarian) confession. 7) The community court (kopny sud) was a traditional system of administering justice in Byelorussia — especially in the rural areas, — in which all adult members of the community (kapa) were called to participate. In Jeŭłašeŭski's time the custom was falling into disuse and being replaced by properly organ­ ised courts. 8) The elected magistrates' courts (ziemskija sudy; cf. below Note 62) were introduced for the first time throughout the Grand Duchy in that year. 9) Navahrudak, or Navahradak, is a town in the western region of central Byelorussia, which formed part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as early as the 13th century. In Jeŭłašeŭski's time Navahrudak was the capital of the province and county of the same name and the official place of residence of the Orthodox Metropolitan of Kiev. Lachavičy, Jeŭłašeŭski's birthplace, belong­ ed to the county of Navahrudak. It lies some 40 miles to the south-east of that town. 10) Lachavičy was initially a royal (grandducal before 1569) property. King Sigismund Augustus, who was always short of money, borrowed 6,000 kopa hrošaj (Cf. below Note 34) from Zabałocki and in return granted the latter Lachavičy in fee, so that he might recover his debt. However, in 1572, the king changed his mind and gave Lachavičy to John Chadkievič in exchange for the Śvisłač estate in western Byelorussia and soon afterwards he died. On the 3rd April 1574 Zabałocki filed a complaint before the newly elected King Henry, that he had only been able to recoup from Lachavičy 2,418 kора 23 hroš and 1 5 /2 pieniaź and demanded compensation. (Cf. И. И. Лаппо, Великое Княжество Литовское за время от заключения Люблинской Унии до смерти Стефана Батория, Vol. I, StP, 1901, p. 272). It would be interesting to know how this case ended. Very possibly, by way of compensation, Zabałocki obtained the town of Traby, of which he remained tenant for some time. Zabałocki is called starosta by Jeŭlašeŭski, which was the title of the chief crown officer of the county, i. e. Lieutenant, (having replaced the older name namiestnik). However, very often the tenants and administrators of the royal towns and estates (dziaržaŭcy) and even stewards (uradniki) of the private estates of big magnates were also called by that title. 11) Hrodna, or Horadnia, is an ancient city in western Byelorussia on the bank of the river Nioman. It was first mentioned in the 12th century as the capital of a small principality. It is famous for its beauty and many fine architectural monuments. Hrodna was a favourite place of residence for grand dukes and kings, and frequently played the role of unofficial second capital in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. 12) The Parliament of Hrodna in 1568 was the last Parliament held in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, during which it was finally decided to proceed with the union with Poland. Before going to Lublin to conclude the union, the delegates of the Grand Duchy assembled in the township of Voiń, or Vohiń, in the extreme south-west corner of the Bieraście (Brest) province of Byelo­ russia (today in the Lublin province of Poland). There on the 21st December 1568, they received assurances from Sigismund Augustus that their conditions for going to Lublin would be honoured (Cf. text in S. Kutrzeba & W. Semko­ wicz, Akta Unii Polski z Litwą, Cracow, 1932, pp. 189-92). These assurances were later broken.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 337

13) The word Pan may be rendered into English both as Lord and as Master, as the case may be. Originally it was used as a title by great magnates who were not descendants of the ancient ruling Houses and were not entitled to the style of kniaź, or prince. Later the word pan became also the usual form of address among the nobility. The expression Jaho Miłaść may be translated as: His Lordship, His Grace and His Majesty, according to the circumstances. 14) In Antonovič's edition the name is mistakenly given as Chadkievič. Nicholas Christopher Radzivił (1549-1616), Duke of Niaśviž and Ołyka, nick­ named 'the Orphan', was the eldest son of Nicholas Radzivił the Black. He occupied several important posts, but never rose to the same prominence as his father. Brought up in the Calvinist faith, he became a Catholic and displayed much zeal in undoing his father's religious work. His brother George also embraced the Catholic faith and became a Cardinal. The Radziviłs were by no means the most illustrious, but certainly the richest, and one of the most powerful magnate families in the Grand Duchy. They were of ethnical Lithuanian origin and, although staunch defenders of the political independence of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, in private life they became completely polonised at a very early stage. Their vast possessions in Byelorussia, such as Niaśviž, and later Słuck, came into their hands through matrimonial connections with other magnate families. Initially they were entitled to use the style pan, but not kniaź (prince). However, in order not to be outshone, in 1547 Nicholas Radzivił the Black and his cousin Nicholas Radzivił the Redhead managed to obtain from Emperor Charles V the title of Prince of the Holy Roman Empire. 15) It is from this time that the life-long connection of Jeŭłašeŭski with the family of Chadkievič seems to have begun. John Chadkievič (c. 1537-1579), the son of Jerome, belonged to one of the greatest Byelorussian magnate families, with a long tradition of distinguished service to the State. At one time he held simultaneously four offices of senator­ ial rank: Lieutenant of Samogitia, Lord High Marshal, Castellan of Vilna and Administrator of Livonia. This made him perhaps the most influential man in the Grand Duchy. As Administrator of Livonia he was granted powers over that province practically equal to those of a king, but no money, and thus he had to spend great sums from his own pocket to pay soldiers and for the main­ tenance of fortresses. His frequent demands for reimbursement remained, for the most part, unanswered. Dispirited and sick, he retired in 1578 and died in the following year. He left many unpaid debts which caused much worry to his widow and his sons. It was one of Jeŭłašeŭski's duties to help to straighten out his financial affairs. John Chadkievič spent almost half of his life fighting against Moscow, and realised the growing threat it presented to the Grand Duchy. He was therefore in favour of closer links with Poland, and he, together with his uncle Gregory (Cf. below Note 20), was the author of a special project for union, based on federal principles and safeguarding the complete autonomy of both partners. It was however rejected by the Poles. John Chadkievič was brought up as a Calvinist by his father who abandoned the Orthodox Church for the new faith, but later became Catholic. His wife Christine, daughter of the Polish magnate Jan Zborowski, Castellan of Cracow, remained Calvinist all her life. Of his two sons, Alexander (d. 1626) took little part in political life, whilst John Charles (1560-1621) followed in the footsteps of his father and his great uncle Gregory and became one of the greatest military leaders, rising to the rank of the Supreme Commander (Vialiki Hetman) of the armies of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. 16) King Sigismund Augustus, who died in 1572, was a direct descendant of the Grand Duke Jahajła, who became King of Poland in 1385. There was a strong sentimental attachment to the Jahajła dynasty, both in Poland and in the Grand Duchy, and there is no doubt that had Sigismund had an heir, he would have been elected king of the Commonwealth. He died childless, how­ ever, and his death plunged the country into electorial chaos. Many magnates of the Grand Duchy favoured Fedor, son of the Muscovite tsar Ivan the Terrible, hoping thus to end the Livonian War and to loosen the ties with

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 338 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

Poland. The principal opponent of Fedor's candidature was John Chadkievič. The whole scheme in any case came to nothing, since Ivan was unwilling to send his son, and wanted to become king himself. 17) The bishopric of Pinsk and Turaŭ, formerly the bishopric of Turaŭ, was one of the most ancient Byelorussian episcopal sees, possibly founded as early as 1005. Among its bishops it numbered St. Cyril of Turaŭ (1130-1182), the greatest early Byelorussian poet and writer. 18) Jonah Pratasievič-Astroŭski was Metropolitan of Kiev (Byelorussian line) from 1568 till 1578. He was elevated to the Metropolitan throne from the See of Pinsk and Turaŭ. Bishop Makary, in his History of the Russian Church, mistakenly states that Jonah was Bishop of Pinsk after Jeŭlašeŭski's father. (Cf. Макарий, История Русской Церкви, Vol. 9, StP, 1879, p. 392). 19) Prince Constantine Astrožski (1526-1608), Governor of Kiev was the greatest and most powerful of all Ukrainian magnates. In 1569 he favoured the annexation of the Ukraine to Poland. A zealous Orthodox, he did much towards raising the cultural level of the Orthodox clergy by founding on his estate at Ostrog in Volhynia a school and a printing press. Initially he seemed to favour the union of the Orthodox with the Catholics, but afterwards he became one of its greatest opponents. He also owned extensive estates in southern Byelo­ russia, including Turaŭ. 20) Andrew Chadkievič and his brother Alexander (Lieutenant of Hrodna) were sons of Gregory Chadkievič (d. 1572), the Supreme Commander of the armies of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Unlike their father they took little active part in public life. Gregory Chadkievič was the paternal uncle of John Chadkievič (Cf. Note 15). He was held in high esteem by Sigismund Augustus, who in 1559 made him Castellan of Troki in order, as he expressly states in his letter of appointment, “to have him nearer to our side... so that he may be all the time near our royal person to counsel us in all important royal and state affairs and needs” (Cf. И. Малиновский, Сборник материалов относящихся к истории Панов­ Рады Великого Княжества Литовского, Tomsk 1901, No. 88, p. 41). In 1561 Gregory was already Deputy Chief Commander. In this post he made an attempt to end the Livonian war by direct negotiations with the Muscovites 'as Orthodox to Orthodox', and failed, for while the talks were being held, the Muscovite armies attacked and ravaged the Viciebsk and Škłoŭ regions in north-eastern Byelorussia. He was also the author of the first Military Articles of the Grand Duchy (Cf. the Latin version in: A. Guagnini, Sarmatiae Europeae Descriptio, Cracow, 1578; also S. Kutrzeba, Polskie ustawy i artykuły wojskowe, Cracow, 1937, pp. 127-138). Gregory became Supreme Commander and Castellan of Vilna in 1566. Deeply attached to the Orthodox faith, Gregory was one of the first magnates who tried to help the Orthodox Church in Byelorussia in her difficulties. He richly endowed the church of his Zabłudaŭ estate in western Byelorussia and founded there a printing press for the publication of liturgical books. Printers Ivan Fedorov and Piotr Mścisłaviec worked there for some time after their escape from Moscow in 1564. Gregory and his sons were also protectors of the Orthodox monastery of Supraśl, founded by Gregory's father, Alexander Chad­ kievič (1457-1549), Governor of Navahrudak. 21) Henry de Valois (1551-1589), brother of the French king Charles IX, was elected king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth on the 11th November 1573. He did not arrive, however, till the following year, and was crowned king in Cracow on 21st February 1574. Four months later, when the news of the death of his brother reached him, on the 19th of June he escaped back to France, leaving behind him still greater chaos and consternation. Filon Kmita (Cf. Note 46) in his letter to Eustace Vałovič (Cf. Note 50) on the 5th of August 1574 expressed himself thus on this subject: “We turn our backs on the gate, and he sneaks out through a hole. It is not only we who cannot understand, but to the whole world such a royal escape is beyond comprehension. As it is unheard of for anyone to open the eyes of the blind, so it is also for the anointed of God to escape from his subjects in such a manner” (Cf. Źródła do dziejów Polski wyd. przez M. Malinowskiego i A. Przeździeckiego, Vol. 2, Vilna, 1844, p. 287).

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 339

22) The Marshal was the leader of the county nobility during a general mobilisation. His duty was to lead the military detachment from his county to the gathering place of the whole province and to place it under the command of the Governor. Stephen Łozka, son of Basil, belonged to a well known Byelo­ russian noble family from the Mazyr district in Palessie. His paternal aunt Anna married Leo Paciej, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Padskarbi) of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Their son, Adam Paciej, better known under his monastic name of Hypacius, was one of the chief promoters of the Church Union of Brest in 1596 and later became the Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev. (Cf. K. Niesiecki, Korona Polska, Vol. 3, L'vov, 1740, p. 619). 23) In the Antonovič edition the date is erroneously given as 1575. Cf. Pamiętnik p. 28. 24) Stephen Batory (1533-1586), Vajavoda (prince) of Transylvania, a Hun­ garian by birth, was elected king of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth on the 14th December 1574, two days after the opposing faction proclaimed the Austrian Emperor Maximilian king. Batory beat his rival by his swiftness of action, and the subsequent death of Maximilian prevented a serious conflict between the two countries. To preserve the link with the Jahajła dynasty Batory had to agree to marry Princess Anna, sister of the late King Sigismund Augustus, then in her fifties. He refused to be a mere figurehead of the nobility and took his royal duties seriously and with a great degree of success. He was also an outstanding military leader and his great achievement was the success­ ful termination of the Livonian war. Batory was highly thought of in Byelo­ russia, as appears from Jeŭłašeŭski's Memoirs and also from the following passage of the Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ: “That monarch, King Batory, Duke of Transylvania, was a man pious, chivalrous, a great soldier, fortunate, honest and just” (Баркулабовская летопись, p. 3). However, the author of the Chronicle, like a good Orthodox, adds immediately: “It was in his time that the new calendar began to creep in; that is why he did not live many years in the world” (Ibid.). 25) Casimir, son of Jahajła, was Grand Duke of Lithuania from 1440 till 1492. He became King of Poland in 1447. 26) In the Polish (Lubomirski) edition this reads: “married to the daughter of Master Stanisłaŭ Pietrašeŭski.” Cf. Pamiętnik p. 31. 27) Valerian Pratasievič-Šuškoŭski was the Catholic Bishop of Vilna from 1556 till 1580. He was born in Krajsk, some 30 miles north of Minsk, in central Byelorussia (Cf. W. Przyjałgowski, Żywoty biskupów wileńskich, Part 2, StP, 1860, p. 160). In 1569 he invited the Jesuits to Vilna. Bishop Makary thinks that he may have been a distant relative of the Orthodox Metropolitan Jonah Prata­ sievič (Cf. Макарий, op. cit., p. 350). 28) Prince Luke Bolka (i. e. son of Balesłaŭ) Śvirski (d. 1593) was a somewhat colourful figure of his times. Initially secretary to Nicholas Radzivił the Black, then a swashbuckling captain during the Livonian war and finally Marshal (Cf. Note 22) of the county of Brasłaŭ, he achieved notoriety in a number of courts of justice on account of numerous skirmishes and raids on the estates of his fellow-noblemen, conducted in conjunction with his boon companion Nicholas Ościk. The legal knowledge he acquired in this way appears to have served him well, for in 1569 Śvirski was appointed to the commission for the revision of the Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The family of Śvirski was of ethnical Lithuanian origin. (Cf. J. Wolff, Kniaziowie litewsko-ruscy, Warsaw, 1895, p. 515; also И. Лаппо, Литовский Статут 1588 года, Vol. I, part I, Kaunas, 1934, pp. 195-96). 29) Ivan Padkova, the cossack leader, was sentenced to death on the order of Stephen Batory for a raid on Wallachia. Batory wanted peace on the southern borders of the Commonwealth while he was preparing for his final campaign against Moscow. He was also known to dislike cossacks. 30) The Prince of Prussia owed allegiance to the Polish crown. German Electors tried to obtain the rights of protectorate over him, and entrusted Frederick of Anspach, Elector of Brandenburg with this mission. By acceding to the German demands, Batory ensured peace in the west whilst he was engaged

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 340 TНE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES in war with Moscow, as well as a certain amount of money to cover military expenses. The citizens of the Polish maritime city of Gdańsk were mostly German merchants. They supported Maximilian and defied Batory, when he ascended the throne. Batory in his turn declared them rebels and marched with his army against Gdańsk. Affairs took a bad turn for that city, and the inhabitants invited Frederick of Anspach to help in re-establishing peace between them and Batory. A compromise favourable to Gdańsk was reached, thanks largely to the Polish Chancellor Zamojski, who was won over by a bribe. 31) The battle of Keś (Wenden) was another famous victory over the Muscov­ ites won by the army of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania under the command of Nicholas Radzivił the Redhead. (For official reports of the battle in Byelo­ russian cf. А.З.Р., Nos. 105, 106, pp. 237-38). 32) Prince George Alelkavič of Słuck and Kapyl was a direct descendant of the Grand Duke of Lithuania Alhierd (d. 1377). The family was completely “byelorussianised” and deeply attached to the Orthodox faith. The Duchy of Słuck, although it formed part of the province of Navahrudak, enjoyed a special autonomous status in deference to the illustrious origins of its ruling House. Prince George left three sons: George, John-Simeon and Alexander. In his will he enjoined them to remain Orthodox. His wife, Catherine Tęczynska (who later married Christopher Radzivił), although Polish and Catholic, used her best endeavours to see that her late husband's wishes were fulfilled. She was only partially successful, however, for of the three, only George remained Orthodox, while the other two became Catholics. John-Simeon and Alexander died without leaving any children. George (d. circa 1591) had a daughter, Sophie, who was the last of the House of Alelkavič. She married Januš, son of Christo­ pher Radzivił. After her death Słuck became just another Radzivił property. (Cf. A. Boniecki, Poczet rodów w Wielkiem Księstwie Litewskiem, Warsaw, 1887, p. 233; also П. Н. Батюшков, Белоруссия и Литва, StP, 1890, Supplement, p. 72). 33) Dabramyśl is a village on the river Ščara some 30 miles south-west of Lachavičy. In the year 1619 Jerome (Jaraš) Jeŭłašeŭski, then already chief magistrate (ziemski suddzia) of Navahrudak, endowed the Calvinist church in Dabramyśl, founded by him and his wife Alexandra, with a large piece of land (Cf. H. Merczyng, Zbory i senatorowie protestanccy w dawnej Rzeczpospolitej, Warsaw, 1904, p. 85). 34) A hroš was a monetary unit in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania comparable in value to a shilling. It was divided into 10 pieniaź (pence). A Lithuanian kора 1 hrošaj contained 60 hroš and was equal to 2 /2 Polish złoty (gold pieces) or 75 Polish hroš. Vałoka was a measure of land approximately equal to 50 acres. 35) Połack, on the confluent of the two rivers Pałata and Dźvina, in northern Byelorussia, is the most ancient of all Byelorussian cities. It was first men­ tioned in the chronicles under the year 862 and was at one time capital of a powerful principality of the same name. In Jeŭłašeŭski's time it was a provin­ cial capital and the seat of an Orthodox Archbishop. During the Livonian war Połack was taken by the Muscovite troops in 1563, and remained in their possession till 1579. (For more about the capture of Połack cf.: 'The Taking of Połack', The Journal of Byelorussian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, London, 1965, pp. 16-22). 36) The following passage is found in the Lubomirski (Polish) edition, but is missing in Antonovič: “In the same year 1579 on the 7th day of September, my wife Hanna Bałota gave birth to our son John, who was afterwards killed by Olbracht Bruchanski during the court session in Navahrudak on the 16th day of February in the year 1602” (Cf. Pamiętnik, p. 37). 37) In the Lubomirski edition: “on the 20th of December” (Cf. Pamiętnik, p. 37). 38) The High court (Trybunał) of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was estab­ lished to hear appeals from the courts of first instance (County court, Ma­ gistrates' court, Land Tribunal). Its members — two from each county, — were

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 341 elected for one year at a special High Court electoral county assembly (sejmik trybunalski), which was to be held every year at Candlemas. The High Court went on a circuit which after 1588 consisted of the cities of Vilna, Navahrudak and Minsk. It began its sessions two weeks after Easter in Vilna, where it stayed for twelve weeks. Then, twenty two weeks after Easter, it went either to Navahrudak or to Minsk, visiting each city on alternate years. The Rules of the High Court (Sposab spraŭ trybunalskich) on which Jeŭłašeŭski and Tryzna, together with other members of Parliament from the Grand Duchy, worked, were not promulgated till 1st March 1581, and the first elections to the High Court were held at Candlemas 1582. 39) Christopher Radzivił (1547-1604) nicknamed “The Thunder”, was the son of Nicholas Radzivił the Redhead (1512-1584), Duke of Biržy and Dubinki and a cousin of Nicholas Radzivił the Black. Both father and son were fine military leaders, and each held in his turn the office of Supreme Commander (Vialiki Hetman) of the armed forces of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Both also held many important state offices, but neither distinguished himself in the political field. They were Calvinists, and after the death of Radzivił the Black, were considered to be the chief protectors of the Calvinist Church in the Grand Duchy. The pre-eminent position held by the House of Radzivił was largely due to the fact that the sister of Nicholas the Redhead, Barbara (d. 1551), was married to Sigismund Augustus. 40) Augustus Rotundus (d. 1582) was one of the most learned men of his time within the Grand Duchy. Practically nothing is known of his origin and early years. He studied at Wittemberg in 1538, and was Doctor utriusque juris and an outstanding Latin scholar. Soon after 1540 he became Royal secretary and occupied the important position of vojt (from the German Vogt), or chief magistrate of the city of Vilna (Vilna and other large cities of the Grand Duchy enjoyed self-government under the so-called Magdeburg Law and had their own courts). Rotundus was probably ennobled in or before 1567. He took part in the preparation of the 1566 edition of the Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and then in 1569 was elected to the commission for its amendment. Rotundus is thought to be the author of the Latin translation of the Statute, made in 1576 for Stephen Batory. In the preface to it, and the short history of the Lithuanian people (all in Latin), he appears to be the exponent of a nascent ethnical Lithuanian nationalism. Inter alia he repeats the legend according to which the Lithuanian nobles descended from ancient Romans. He generously admits that Byelorussian (Ruthenian) nobles were also of the same origin, but unfortunately they became separated from the Lithuanians because of the difference of religion. (Cf. the text of the preface in: Antoine Martel, La langue polonaise dans les pays ruthenes, Lille 1938, pp. 308-310). He also suggested substituting Latin for Byelorussian as the official language of the Grand Duchy. The best source of information about Rotundus to date is to be found in И. Лаппо, Литовский Статут 1588 года, Kaunas, 1934, pp. 48-81. 41) The wooden ceilings of the houses in Byelorussia are insulated with a layer of sand even to this day. 42) Cf. Pamiętnik, p. 40. In the Antonovič edition the name is given mistak­ enly as Boruchowski. Wojciech Baranowski (1548-1616) was an outstanding Polish statesman and churchman. 43) Cf. Note 10. 44) The case was no doubt heard before the Royal Court of Justice (dvorny sud), at which the king exercised his prerogative as the supreme magistrate of the realm. This was the most important of all courts, and before 1582 it was the only court of appeal. In theory the sovereign could hear and decide the cases alone. In practice, however, he would usually do this in the Senate, when Parliament was in session. At other times the king was aided by a permanent council of senators, not unlike the English Privy Council. Jeŭłašeŭski mentions several instances of cases — two of them in detail, — which he had to conduct before the king on behalf of his clients. After 1582 many of the cases, which formerly would have fallen under the royal prerogative, were taken over by the High Court.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 342 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

45) Gregory, son of George, Ościk was brother of George Ościk, Governor of Smalensk (d. 1579). He was convicted of high treason on the grounds of his correspondence with the Muscovite nobleman Naščokin, and sentenced to death. Since he was a member of an influential magnate family, his execution made a great impression on the people and was remembered for many years. When in 1654 the Muscovite troops took Smalensk, prevailing opinion in Byelorussia accused the then Governor of Smalensk, Philip Abuchovič, who had surrender­ ed the city, of treason. In a biting attack on Abuchovič written in a form of letter to him, the writer Cyprian Kamuniaka wrote: “People say that the execu­ tioner had so much frightened Ościk in Vilna, that his flesh was scattered around for a lesser crime, for he only wrote carelessly a letter to Moscow. And we even have kissed the tsar on the foot and accepted money, so how can we avoid a similar fate!” (Cf. Коршунаў, op. cit., p. 362). The family of Ościk seems to have shared a common origin with that of Radzivił. Their common ancestor was a certain Ościk who, from 1419-1442, held the post of Castellan of Vilna. He had two sons, Radzivił and Stanko. Radzivił Ościkavič founded the House of Radzivił, and Stanko — that of Ościk. (Cf. Boniecki, op. cit., p. 223). 46) Filon Kmita Čarnabylski (c. 1530-1587) was one of the most chivalrous figures in 16th century Byelorussia. Of Ukrainian-Byelorussian origin, he distinguished himself during the war with Moscow, and became a past master of guerilla tactics, attacking and destroying with a small mobile force the far larger formations of the enemy. In 1566 he was appointed Lieutenant of Orša, which was then an important frontier town, and became chief of the intell­ igence service of the Grand Duchy against Moscow. His Reports on Muscovite Affairs (Otpisy) to the Lords of the Council (Pany-Rada) of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the years 1573-74, apart from their factual interest, are considered to be one of the outstanding monuments of Byelorussian literature of that time. They are remarkable because of their lively style and the abundance of Byelorussian folk-sayings and proverbs which the author uses freely to illustrate his argument (For a more detailed study cf.: E. Карский, Белоруссы, Vol. 3, Part 2, Petrograd, 1921, pp. 110-113). Kmita's undoubted literary talent made his Polish biographer express a regret that he did not choose to write “in that language which was brought to perfection by the historians, orators and poets of the Sigismund epoch” (i. e. Polish; Cf.: Wiadomości о Filonie Kmicie Czarnobylskim, Źródła do dziejów Polski wyd. przez Mikołaja Malinowskiego i Alexandra Przeździeckiego, Vol. 2, Vilna, 1844, p. 341). In the same work on pp. 244-305 there is a complete set of Kmita's Reports, unfortunately in Polish orthography. A selection of his Reports is to be found also in А.З.Р., Vol. III No. 58, pp. 164-177. In 1579 Kmita was raised to senatorial rank and appointed Governor of Smalensk (Cf. the letter of appointment in А.З.Р., Vol III, No. 115, p. 249). It was probably with a view to liberating the city, whose name embell­ ished his seat in the senate, that Kmita undertook the attack mentioned by Jeŭłašeŭski. Filon Kmita was Orthodox and was married to Sophie, daughter of Gregory Chadkievič (Cf. Note 20). 47) Michael Zverov is an interesting example of a Muscovite refugee fighting in the ranks of the army of the Grand Duchy against his former countrymen. It is possible that some of his relatives took part in the battle on the other side. Filon Kmita mentions in his Reports the name of Ivan Zverov, a courtier, who was sent to him by the Muscovite Governor of Smalensk with important messages (Cf. Źródła, pp. 264, 266). 48) Batory's strategy was not to go to Livonia, where he was expected by the Muscovites, but to attack the enemy on his own territory. Subsequent events proved him right, and he was able to penetrate Russia as far north as Pskov. He could not take that city owing to its strong defences and when the siege began to drag on and winter set in, both parties sought an armistice. This was concluded on 15th January 1582 at Iam Zapolski, under the auspices of the Italian Jesuit Antonio Possevino (Cf. P. Pierling, La Russie et le Saint-Siege, Vol. 2, Paris 1897, pp. 115-154). Batory could be satisfied with the terms of the armistice: all Byelorussian lands (except Smalensk) were recovered, Livonia was freed, and Moscow was driven back from the Baltic Sea. 49) In the description of the cavalry regiment of Filon Kmita made in 1567

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 343 by Fronc (Francis) Žuk, secretary to Gregory Chadkievič (Cf. Note 20) there is mention of “lieutenant Matthew Voŭk, having under him ten horsemen. He has a grey horse, is clad in armour and a light open helmet, and is armed with a short two-edged sword, a cavalry sword, an arquebus and an axe” (Cf. Археографический сборник документов относящихся к истории Северо- западной Руси, Vol. 4, Vilna, 1867, No. 65, p. 215). Two years later, in 1569, a question arose concerning a certain sum of money owed by the Treasury of the Grand Duchy to Filon Kmita. Since there was no money in the Treasury — a not unusual state of affairs in the times of Sigismund Augustus, — the chief collector of taxes (hałoŭny paborca) of the Grand Duchy, Bishop George Pietkievič, referred Kmita's second-in-command (tavaryš) Voŭk to the collector of taxes in the Orša district, giving the latter the following injunction: “I ask and remind you, that you should give from the money collected by you to the above named lieutenant Matthew Voŭk the sum of 200 kора (hrošaj)... and for these 200 kора you should obtain a receipt which, when accompanied by this my letter... will be accepted by the Treasury in lieu of ready money” (ibid. p. 249). Thus it seems that Matthew Voŭk had had a certain experience in uttering receipts, whether genuine or false. According to Boniecki, the Voŭks were bojars from the Troki district in western Byelorussia (Cf. Boniecki, op. cit., p. 380). 50) Leo Sapieha (Cf. below Note 57) was at that time Deputy Chancellor (Padkanclery) and not the Chancellor (Kancler), as mistakenly stated by Jeŭła­ šeŭski. The office of Chancellor was held by Eustace Vałovič, who was at the same time Castellan of Vilna. Lawrence Vojna was not Deputy Chancellor till 1588. Eustace Vałovič was a brilliant Byelorussian statesman who from the relatively unimportant office of Deputy Lieutenant of Brest rose to occupy some of the highest posts in the Grand Duchy. He came from a wealthy (but by no means great) Byelorussian noble family of the Hrodna district. Original­ ly he was Orthodox, but later adhered to the Calvinist faith. Vałovič became Deputy Chancellor in 1566 and Castellan of Troki in 1569. A determined enemy of union with Poland, he thereafter used all his energies to oppose Polish influence and maintain a separate status for the Grand Duchy. He became Chancellor and Castellan of Vilna in 1579 and died in 1587. Vałovič was a highly popular and respected figure, as can be seen from the following con­ temporary opinion of him by a foreigner: “Summae nunc autoritatis est apud Vilnenses Eustachius Volovicz, non modo hoc nomine quod sit Castellanus et Cancellarius, sed quod eum propter eximias virtutes et opinionem summae prudentiae instar patris patriae amant et colunt. Non vidit ille Germaniam, nec unquam aspexit Italiam Galliamve, sed tamen et Germani, et Itali, et qui modo veniunt in aulam Regiam habent in eo quod mirentur et suspicient” (Quoted by: И. Лаппо, Статут Литовский, pp. 44-50). 51) Michael Haraburda (d. 1586) was an able Byelorussian diplomat. For a long time he occupied the post of Secretary to the Chancery of the Grand Duchy and took part in several embassies to Moscow and to the Crimean Tartars. He was considered an expert on Muscovite affairs. In 1573 Haraburda was sent to Moscow by the Lord of the Council of the Grand Duchy in order to invite Fedor, son of Ivan the Terrible, to accept the crown. He was most reluctant to undertake this task, as appears from the letter of Filon Kmita to Eustace Vałovič dated 1st June 1574: “...The Lord knows... what dangers and troubles we have had to experience living here, and not only from Moscow, but from our own people. And not only I, but also Master Haraburda, who in that dangerous time, by reason of his office, had to go to the Muscovites, sent there by the Lords of the Council. For some days here in Orša he wept, and would have gladly given much in order to be relieved of that embassy...” (Cf. Źródła p. 271; also А.З.Р., Vol. III, p. 171). This did not prevent him (and Kmita) from being suspected by John Chadkievič and others of pro-Muscovite sympathies, quite unjustly, as it proved later. In 1579-81 Haraburda took part in the war. In 1581 he was secretary of the Commonwealth delegation at the armistice talks with Moscow at Iam Zapolski. A curious incident befell him there. After the signing of the treaty on 15th January 1582, the Muscovites, to seal their word, kissed the cross proffered to them by the Orthodox Archbishop of Novgorod. Haraburda, who was the only

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 344 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

Orthodox member of the Commonwealth delegation, was invited to do the same. He refused, however, and preferred to take the oath together with his Catholic countrymen (Cf. Pierling, op. cit., p. 150). In 1584 Haraburda was appointed Castellan of Minsk and obtained his much- coveted seat in the Senate. He died in 1586 after his return from the last embassy to Moscow. The Chronicle of Barkułabай has this to say about him: “In the year 1586 in Lent Master Haraburda went with the embassy to Moscow. He brought from thence an armistice for 20 years and lived in Moscow till the seventh Saturday (after Easter — Tr.). After his return to Lithuania he died” (Баркулабовская летопись, р. 6). 52) Cf. Pamiętnik, p. 52. In the Antonovič edition the date is mistakenly given as 1585. 53) Sigismund III Vasa (1566-1632) was the son of John III, King of Sweden and Catherine, sister of Sigismund Augustus. On his mother's side he was thus a descendant of the Jahajła dynasty. His long reign was a disaster for the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, because of the many wars, unfortunate foreign interventions, and internal political and religious strife. 54) Hniezna (not to be confused with the Polish town of Gniezno) is a village in western Byelorussia some 5 miles south-west of Vaŭkavysk. It was the property of Chadkievič. Its church, which has remained unfinished, is consider­ ed to be one of the finest examples of Byelorussian late Gothic architecture (Cf. М. С. Кацер, Белорусская архитектура, Minsk 1956, p. 54). 55) Albrecht Kaviačynski was a Calvinist nobleman from Uzda in central Byelorussia. He was in service to Christopher Radzivił the Thunder. Albrecht's brother, Matthew Kaviačynski (d. 1572) was in service with Nicholas Radzivił the Black and occupied the office of steward of Niaśviž. There he established a printing press on which in 1562, together with Simon Budny and Lawrence Kryškoŭski, he published a Calvinist Catechism in Byelorussian (Cf. Polski słownik biograficzny, Vol. XII, Wroclaw-Warsaw-Cracow, 1966, p. 250). 56) Nicholas Darahastajski (d. 1597) was Governor of Połack from 1574. He was a fanatical Calvinist and displayed pro-Polish tendencies in politics. His harsh treatment of the citizens of Połack after its liberation in 1579 gave rise to many complaints against him. 57) Leo Sapieha (1557-1633) was the most outstanding Byelorussian statesman of his time. He came from a noble (but not great) Byelorussian family, which had originally lived in the Smalensk region and showed intense loyalty to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. One of his predecessors, Simeon, was a Chancery clerk from 1440 till 1449, and his widow, Nastasja, became abbess of the Ortho­ dox convent in Połack. Leo Sapieha's father, Ivan, was Lieutenant of Drahičyn. Leo was born Orthodox, but was brought up in the Calvinist faith at the court of Nicholas Radzivił the Black in Niaśviž, where he spent his childhood. His protestantism was strengthened by subsequent studies in Leipzig, and he did not become a Catholic till the year 1586. His career in the field of politics was rapid. He began as a simple courtier, but already by 1585, at the age of 28, he had become the Deputy Chancellor of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and in 1588 he was appointed Chancellor. To these dignities he later added those of Lord High Marshal and the Supreme Commander of the armies of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Leo Sapieha's name will for always be associated with the third edition of the Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania of 1588, which was prepared and published under his supervision. As a code of civil and criminal law it surpassed anything produced in the other countries of Eastern Europe at that time. The Polish historian S. Ptaszycki gave the following judgment on the activ­ ities of Leo Sapieha: “In his letters, in all things and all places, Sapieha stands for the protection of Lithuanian interests, and although sometimes he is in favour of Poland and Lithuania acting in common, still more does he show concern that the local Lithuanian laws should be preserved” (Cf. С. Пташиц­ кий, »Переписка литовского канцлера Льва Ивановича Сапеги«, Журнал министерства народного просвещения, StP., January 1893, p. 196). However, in spite of his patriotic feelings, Sapieha was completely polonised in his private

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 345 life, and it was the Polish language and not Byelorussian that he used every day. 58) Sophie Chadkievič (d. 1596) was daughter of John Chadkievič (Cf. Note 15). Christopher Darahastajski (1562-1615), whom she married, was the son of Nicholas Darahastajski (Cf. Note 56). Like his father he was a staunch Calvinist, and was considered one of the mainstays of the Calvinist Church in the Grand Duchy. Nevertheless, in order to obtain the office of Lord High Marshal (which he did in 1597) he agreed to accompany King Sigismund II — a fervent Catholic, — on a pilgrimage to the Polish Catholic shrine of Our Lady in Częstochowa. In 1603 he wrote and published an elegant book in Polish called Hippica, being helped in this task by another horse-lover, Nicholas Radzivił the Orphan. Darahastajski was completely polonised. 59) Originally bojars (bajary) in Byelorussia were the members of the knightly class whose duty it was to render military service whenever they were required to do so by the sovereign. Socially they were men of importance and some substance, consisting principally of land-owners. They eventually gave rise to the class of nobility in the Grand Duchy, which later became known as šlachta under Polish influence. In Jeŭłašeŭski's time the word bajary came to denote a social class intermed­ iate between the peasants and the nobility. They were land tenants, settled either on the royal estates or on those of great magnates, bound to their masters by a kind of feudal relationship. Unlike peasants, they were exempt from manual labour on the lord's land. On the other hand they owed the duty of military service under their masters. Although retaining personal freedom, bajary were not considered noble (šlachta) and could not enjoy the privileges and franchises of the nobility. They may be compared roughly to the English yeoman class (Cf. M. Довнар-Запольский, Государственное хозяйство Вели­ кого Княжества Литовского при Ягеллонах, Vol I, Kiev, 1901, pp. 655-57). 60) Cf. Note 38. 61) Gregory Unichoŭski (1549-1606) was a wealthy nobleman from Navahru­ dak county, with estates both in the country and in the town. He had in his possession an interesting manuscript containing the Lithuanian Chronicle, as well as Byelorussian versions of the stories of Tristan and Isolde, Buovo and Attila. On the last pages of the manuscript he recorded the most significant dates in the history of his family (Cf. A. Brückner, 'Ein weissrussischer Codex miscellaneus in Graflich Raczynskischen Bibliothek in Posen', Archiv für sla­ vische Philologie, Vol. 9, Berlin 1886, pp. 129-130; also А. Н. Веселовский, »Белорусские повести о Тристане, Вове и Атилле«, Сборник Отдела Русского Языка и Словесности Имп. Акад. Наук, Vol. 44, Part 2, StP, 1888, pp. 350-51). 62) A Magistrates' court (ziemski sud) existed in every county and consisted of a chief magistrate or presiding judge (ziemski suddzia), a junior judge or assessor (padsudak) and a clerk (pisar). All three were elected by the county nobility at a special assembly (sejmik). The appointments were held for life and the elections took place only when a vacancy occurred. The assembly elected four candidates for a given post and presented their names to the king, who appointed one of them. The Magistrates' court had jurisdiction over civil matters and there was a right of appeal to the High Court. There were normally three court sessions in the year: Michaelmas, Epiphany and Trinity. However, in order to speed up the course of justice, the judges could decide to hold additional sessions whenever a convenient occasion arose. The judges were remunerated out of costs borne by the litigants. Proceedings at the court had to be conducted in Byelorussian, and the Lithu­ anian Statute (Ed. 1588, Chap. 4, Art. 1) provided that: “The Magistrate's clerk must write all letters, copies and summonses in Ruthenian (i. e. Byelorussian — Tr.), with Ruthenian words and characters, and not in any other language or words” (»A писар земски маеть поруску, литерами и словы рускими, вси листы, выписы и позвы писати, а не иншим езыком и словы«). For a more detailed study of the Magistrates' courts see: И. Лаппо, »Земский суд в Великом Княжестве Литовском в конце XVI века«, Журнал Министер­ ства Народного Просвещения, StP, June 1897, pp. 263-301.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 346 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES

63) Sigismund Vasa went to be crowned King of Sweden after the death of his father. A fervent Catholic, he was disliked by his Lutheran subjects, and was compelled to return to Poland, leaving in his stead his uncle Charles of Søderman as Regent. The latter, however, was not content with his title and aspired to become himself King of Sweden. Hence the beginning of the conflict between the Commonwealth and Sweden which in 1601 culminated in war. 64) Sophie Karyckaja, born Chadkievič, was sister of Gregory Chadkievič and daughter of Alexander Chadkievič, Governor of Navahrudak (Cf. Note 20). 65) Severjan Nalivajka was a petty Ukrainian nobleman. He was initially in service with Prince Constantine Astrožski (Cf. Note 19) as was also his brother, an Orthodox priest. Later, with a band of cossacks, he began to organise raids both at home and abroad. The attempts of certain historians to present him as a hero fighting for the freedom of the people are not very convincing. 66) Jerome Chadkievič (d. 1617), son of George, was the nephew of Gregory Chadkievič (Cf. Note 20). He became Castellan of Vilna in 1595. He was the guardian of Sophie Alelkavič of Słuck and in this capacity opposed her marriage to Januš Radzivił (Cf. Note 32). Chancellor Leo Sapieha, a supporter of the Radzivił faction, threatened him, with exile unless he withdrew his opposition. 67) Theodore Skumin Tyškievič (d. 1618) belonged to one of the most illustrious Byelorussian noble families. Twice — in 1568 and in 1577, — he went with an embassy to Moscow; in 1586 he was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and became the Governor of Navahrudak in 1590. Tyškievič was one of the few Orthodox magnates who after 1596 adhered to the Church Union of Brest. 68) Mahiloŭ is an important city on the river Dniepr in eastern Byelorussia. The following passage from the Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ describes its destruc­ tion by Nalivajka: “In the year of the Lord 1595, on Monday the 30th day of the month of November, one week before the feast of Saint Nicholas, Severjan Nalivajka, having with him 2,000 cossacks, 14 cannons, mortars... (missing)... burned down the famous and pious city of Mahiloŭ, houses, shops and the fortress: altogether 500 houses and 400 shops with many riches. They killed, mutilated and violated the burghers, noblemen and all honest people — men, wives and children alike, — and took immense booty from the shops and houses” (Cf. Баркулабовская летопись, р. 19). 69) Nicholas Bujvid was the Lieutenant of Rečyca, a county situated in the extreme south-east of Byelorussia in the province of Minsk. It seems that Bujvid's loss of his good reputation was caused not only by the absence of any military success by his expedition, but also by the reprehensible behaviour of his troops regarding the local population. The Chronicle of Barku­ łabaŭ mentions that after a fruitless pursuit of the cossacks, the Lithuanian and Tartar troops went back “having looted this country”, and in particular Mahiloŭ which had already suffered much at the hands of Nalivajka. (Ibid.) 70) Onikiej Unichoŭski was the uncle of Gregory Unichoŭski (Cf. Note 61) who made a record of his death in his 'diary' (Cf. Brückner, 'Ein weissrussischer Codex', p. 30). He must have been a well-known person, for he is also men­ tioned by the author of the Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ, who mistakenly calls him Gregory, and describes the manner of his death: “From their encampment the cossacks of Nalivajka killed a noble man Gregory Aniuchoŭski with a cannon shot; first they killed the horse under him, then the cossacks, having made a sortie, hacked him to pieces” (ibid.). 71) Loboda was the commander of the so-called “Registered”, or officially recognised, cossacks. Despite this he joined Nalivajka and was later murdered by the cossacks at the instigation of the latter. An extensive passage of the Memoirs seems to be missing here. The Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ has this to say about the end of Nalivajka's rebellion: “Since the cossacks of Nalivajka began to ravage the castles and nobles' estates in the border lands, in the same year 1595 the Lithuanian army, having given them chase, defeated the cossacks near the village of Łubnia on the river Suła. First Savuła was beheaded, then Pančocha was quartered. As to Severjan

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access THE MEMOIRS OF T. JEŬŁAŠEŬSKI 347

Nalivajka, they, having captured him on the seventh Saturday, sent him to the king. There he was kept in prison till the feast of the Protection of Our Lady in the autumn; then they quartered him” (Cf. Баркулабовская летопись, р. 20). The passage contains several inaccuracies. Nalivajka was defeated by the Polish army and was executed one week after Easter, 1597. 72) Jan Licinius Niemyslovius Silesius was a Polish Unitarian who lived and worked in Byelorussia. He was for some time headmaster of the Unitarian school at Iŭje (some 25 miles north of Navahrudak) where some of Jeŭłašeŭski's sons were educated, as appears from the text of the Memoirs. Later he became a Unitarian preacher in Navahrudak. When relations between the Calvinists and Unitarians took a turn for the worse, Licinius published (in Latin and Polish) in Navahrudak in 1597 a work entitled Ad fratres ministros evangelicos pro ineunda concordia brevis et simplex parainesis. Among the names of persons to whom the book was dedicated appears that of Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski, Junior Judge of Navahrudak (Cf. K. Estereicher, Bibliografia polska, Vol. XXII, Cracow, 1906, p. 266). 73) The discrepancy between the dates of birth at the beginning of the Memoirs and here is due to the introduction of the Gregorian calendar. It seems that the new calendar was accepted without much resistance by Catholics and Protestants, but not by the Orthodox. The author of the Chronicle of Barku­ łabaŭ has this to say on the subject: “The new calendar was promulgated in the year 1583, during the reign of King Batory, at the time of Metropolitan Dzievačka, Terlecki the Pole being the Archbishop of Połack, for before that he was an army captain and led a life of dissipation. At that time there was great confusion among the lords and clergy, and also among the simple people there was great lamentation, much complaining, boasting, quarrelling, murder, robbery and swearing at the sight of how they established new feast days, changed holidays and switched market days for merchants — such was the confusion that it almost seemed as though it were the beginning of the coming of Antichrist” (Cf. Баркулабовская летопись, р. 7). 74) St. Mark's court session (April 25th) was not previously observed by the Magistrates' courts in the Grand Duchy. This was possibly one of those changes introduced to bring them in line with the procedure observed by Polish courts. 75) The assassination of Jeŭłašeŭski's son, being a criminal offence, fell under the jurisdiction of the County Court (sud hrodski or zamkovy). It was an institution much older than the Magistrates' court (Cf. Note 62), and its officers were not elected but appointed. The chief magistrate in the County court was the Lieutenant of the county who, as the representative of the sovereign, had the power to impose the death sentence. However, since the Lieutenancy was usually given to an important person who held several high post simultaneously, the Lithuanian Statute (Ed. 1588, Chap. 4, Art. 37) provid­ ed that the Governors and Lieutenants should “appoint their representative or deputy, a county judge and a clerk, selecting them from among good, virtuous men, learned in law and with a knowledge of the Ruthenian language, of noble birth, inhabitants of that county and natives of this state of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania” (...выбрати и на суд засадити наместника албо подстаростего, судью замкового и писара, людей добрых, цнотливых, годных в праве и писма руского умеетных, в том повете оселых и родичов того панства великого кня­ ства литовского...). The County court held monthly sessions, commencing on the 1st of each month. There was a right of appeal from its decisions to the High Court. For a more detailed study of the County courts see: И. Лаппо, »Гродский суд в Великом Княжестве Литовском в XVI в.«, Журнал министерства на­ родного просвещения, StP, January 1908, pp. 51-113. 76) The circuit of the High Court (Cf. Note 38) during the year 1602 included the city of Navahrudak. 77) St. Stanislas, Bishop of Cracow (feast day 7th May) was supposedly killed in 1079 by the Polish king Boleslas II while celebrating Mass. It is interesting to note how Polish and Catholic influences were slowly penetrating into the household of a Byelorussian Calvinist, the son of an Orthodox Bishop. 78) The Chronicle of Barkułabaŭ has this to say about this plague: “In the

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access 348 THE JOURNAL OF BYELORUSSIAN STUDIES city of Vilna, in Minsk, Radaškavičy, Orša, Škłoŭ and in many other castles there was a great plague during St. Philip's Fast (i. e. Advent, which begins among the Eastern Christians on the 15th of November — Tr.); and in the places not affected by the plague a strict watch was kept day and night on the highways and in the streets till Christmas, and thus the Lord God preserved them in good health” (Cf. Баркулабовская летопись, р. 29). 79) The Land Judge (padkamory) constituted a one-man Land Tribunal (padkamorski sud), a court concerned with the settlement of disputes over land boundaries. Every county had its own Land Judge, who was elected by the county nobility in a manner similar to that of the members of the Magistrates' court (Cf. Note 62). For a more detailed study of the Land Tribunal see: И. Лаппо, »Подкомор­ ский суд в Великом Княжестве Литовском в конце XVI и начале XVII века«, Журнал Министерства Народного Просвящения, StP, August 1899, pp. 341- 403. Michael Franckievič (i. e. son of Fronc or Froncko which was the Byelo­ russian form of Francis) was a nobleman from the county of Połack, whose grandfather came and settled there from Masovia in Poland. His first wife, Ann, was sister of the Chancellor Leo Sapieha. His second marriage was to the daughter of Matthew Kaviačyński (Cf. Note 55). (Cf. K. Niesiecki, Korona Polska, Vol. 2, L'vov, 1738, p. 165). 80) Little further is known of the history of the Jeŭłašeŭski family. The eldest son of Theodore Jeŭłašeŭski, Jerome, married Alexandra, daughter of Stanislas Pietrašeŭski. In 1619 he was the chief magistrate of Navahrudak. Another of the sons of Jeŭłašeŭski, whose name remains unknown, became Marshal of Słonim. His son, Casimir Lewis (Ludvik), was chamberlain to the kings Sigis­ mund III Vasa and Vładisłav IV and rose to become Castellan of Smalensk and finally, in 1662, Governor of Brest (Cf. K. Niesiecki, Korona Polska, Vol. 2, L'vov, 1738, p. 433).

Downloaded from Brill.com10/04/2021 12:40:52AM via free access