http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13314 Mon, 06 Apr 2026 18:58:32 GMT 2026-04-06T18:58:32Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13514 Uzupełnienie do artykułu o lokacjach osad wiejskich na prawie niemieckim w dawnych posiadłościach pabianickich należących do kapituły krakowskiej Zajączkowski, Stanisław Marian In the regional „Pabianiciana” journal, vol. 3, my article concerned with the question mentioned above has appeared. In the text some deletions have been made without my approval or acknowledgement. In the typescript to be printed none my complements have been included. Consequently, in the present article I have accomplished all necessary corrections to the text published in the „Pabianiciana” journal, paying special attention to the problem of the „opole” nature as well as the question of the so called Pabianice land. Basing on more recent literature, I have also completed the question of the so called German law. Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13514 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13513 Kontrola Komisji Skarbu Litewskiego na sejmie z 1778 roku FILIPCZAK, WITOLD The Seym from 1778 was the first one to control the executive powers whose function was redefined as a result of reforms from the years 1764-1776. Excercising control over the Lithuanian Treasury Board was also important for political reasons. The issue at stake was the conflict involving Podskarbi Antoni Tyzenhauz, who was at the same time President of the Board and leader of Lithuanian royalists. This article presents the members of the committee that supervised the Board. Furthermore, it comments on the way the Board was discussed during the sessions held jointly by the Envoys’ Chamber and the Senate (22.10.1778). It was then that the report from the Board’s activities was submitted. The text also focuses on the debate in the course of which the Board’s activities were accepted through the vote (3-5.11.1778); the discussion on the subject took place after the chambers had been separated from one another. The article shows the backstage political intrigues involving King Stanislaw August and Russian ambassador O. Stackelberg. Their result was imposing limitations on Tyzenhauz’s position in the future. Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13513 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13512 Adam Małachowski i listy do niego z lat 1724-1767 w zbiorach Ossolineum Kobierecki, Michał Mr Adam Małachowski (about 1706-1767) is a characteristic representative of Saxonic period. He was an active member of Seym, advocate of liberum veto and wanted to preserve the rights and privileges of noblemen. Also, he was often elected to Seym, tribunals and deputations. Although he did not succeed in getting a senatorial seat, he was a remarkable figure in Parliament thanks to his relations with political parties and nobility in many provinces. Letters of many persons who wrote to him in different matters have been preserved to the present day. Most of the correspondence concerned political problems including the one with Mr Jan Klemens Branicki - the great royal hetman, Mr Jerzy Mniszech - the great royal major domo, Mr Tomasz Sołtyk - the voivode in Łęczyca and Mr Kajetan Sołtyk - the bishop in Kijów. These letters reflect Mr Malachowski’s connections with the political parties of Mr Branicki and Mr Mniszech as well as the mechanisms of mutual influence of magnate and a nobleman. A different type of correspondence are the letters from Mr A. Antoszewski, Mr Gordon - the superintendent of the Royal Treasury or Mr Wojciech Piastuszyński - the steward of an estate in Chwałowice. The main subject of these letters are the problem related to economy with political and regional information fairly often accompanying them. Political and family subjects are also to be found in the letters of Peter and Stanislaus Małachowscy - Adam’s sons. Besides abundant correspondence there are single letters or two and three written by one author. The main themes here are the requests for a candidate’s support to an office, different cases tried in tribunals or the requests for the future remembrance. Thanks to studies on Mr Adam Malachowski’s correspondence, we have far more information about the person himself as well as the role he played in the community of noblemen. We can assume that he was a close and valuable ally for magnates. For many people in the community of noblemen he was the man who could help somebody in getting promotion, he could give support for a given case tried in tribunals or just do another favour. Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13512 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13511 Broń strzelcza piechoty zaciężnej w latach 1471-1500 Grabarczyk, Tadeusz Registers of the mercenary infantry give many information about types of weapon and its quality. In Warsaw archive we have rolls from 1471, 1477 and 1496-1500 with information about 7000 mercenaries. In rolls we meet different descriptions of quality of crossbows like: good, bed, new, old, used, repaired. We can clasify about 47% of crossbows as bed, basing on the sources from 1471 and 1477, which contain all these terms. In 1496 we have 14%, and in 1498 - 22% bad or old crossbows. Registers give also information about different types of crossbows used by soldiers. They had crossbows with two kinds of bow - horn or steel. Only two from 597 mercenaries had this last type in 1496, similary in 1498, 9 from 725 crossbowmen possesed steel bows. Soldiers used three types of bend mechanism. The oldest one hed the bow-string stretched by hook fastened to soldier’s belt. This type is named kryg in Polish sources. Second kind of belt mechanism is goat’s foot called hewar in medieval Poland (from word „lewar” - lever). Drawing mechanism, which we know as cranequin or windelass appeared in sources as klyky (from Czech word klika - crank) and this is the third kind of mechanism. All these three different kinds of drawing mechanism could be used by soldiers of the one troop at the same time. Second typ of shooting weapon was bow. This kind of arms was unpopular among mercenaries in end of XV c. Only two soldiers used bows. First bow we meet in 1498 (it is 1 from 725 shooters). Second men with bow appeared in 1500 (rolls from this year mention 1 bowmen among 72 crossbowmen). Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/11089/13511 2000-01-01T00:00:00Z