Reply

Abstract

The commentaries of my colleagues, Professor Halecki and Dr. Jakstas, which make contributions both of fact and of judgment, represent diverse reactions to my paper. Indeed, at times, my colleagues advance opinions diametrically opposed. The very diversity of their reactions moves me to re-emphasize my view that additional research into many aspects of the subject is needed. On the issue of the extent of separatism, Professor Halecki asserts that I "greatly overestimated the separatist tendencies in the various provinces of the grand duchy, especially that in Samogitia, which was completely satisfied by the special privilege received soon after Casimir's election in 1440...." Dr. Jakstas, on the other hand, when writing of the subsequent period, asserts that "Samogitia developed into a semi-independent territory and was sometimes even called a princedom." Commenting on the Reformation, Halecki denies that this was a complication and asserts, "the very fact that this crisis started, developed, and ended simultaneously in each of the two states was a new evidence of the high degree of cultural unity which had been achieved in their relations." Dr. Jakstas counters with the affirmation, "Calvinism in Lithuania was much stronger and lasted longer than in Poland and consequently could have weakened the union if it [Calvinism] had prevailed." While Professor Halecki minimizes the Polish desire to dominate Lithuania, Dr. Jakstas emphasizes it and writes with regret, "It would have been desirable if Professor Backus had outlined the protracted rivalry of Poland and Lithuania for Podolia and Volhynia." Professor Halecki emphasizes cooperation between Poland and Lithuania, but Dr. Jakstas, while affirming the reality of such cooperation, asserts, "it is well known that the so-called real union was forced upon the Lithuanians by the imminent danger from Muscovy.