Talk:Lithuanian Civil War (1432–1438)

Common English name

This "war" was between Svitrigaila (Lithuania) and Jogaila (Poland) as Svitrigaila became Grand Duke of Lithuania without approval from Poland and did not agree to acknowledge superiority of Jogaila. He allied himself with Teutonic Knights and others (Livonia, Ruthenia, Moldovia, Tatars, etc.) In 1432 Svitrigaila was deposed by Sigismund Kestutaitis and a civil war erupted. It all ended in the Battle of Pabaiskas and Sigismund became the Grand Duke. Would like to hear some suggestions were to move the article. Civil war in Lithuania (1431–1435)? Renata (talk) 01:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

It is known as PTW in Polish historiography. How is it known in Lithuanian? And more important, in English? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

William Urban in his Tannenberg and After spends pages 306-313 to describe the conflict. He does not give a proper name, but mentions that it was a civil war caused by succession disputes. Usually his writing is from Teutonic perspective, but this time it's clear that the reason and force behind this war was Svitrigaila. Davis calls it "civil war in Lithuania" (God's playground, vol 1, page 135). There definite hostilities between PL and TE, but it was just a part of the larger civil-succession war in Lithuania. Renata (talk) 05:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Certainly a civil war in Lithuania was a part of it (and once this is expanded, will deserve its own article as a subarticle), but since other parties got involved, and fought each other, the civil war seems to have turned into a normal war. We can ask at WP:MILHIST if this argument is valid. As I've noted aboove, Polish historians use the term PTwar, and it is also used in English: Jędrzej Giertych, Brazilla Carroll Reece in Poland and Germany: A Reply to Congressman B. Carrol Reece of Tennessee: "There were new wars between Poland and the Teutonic Order in 1414, 1419, 1420—1422, 1431—1433, 1435, 1454—1466". Uniwersytet Warszawski Instytut Historyczny, Polskie Towarzystwo Historyczne Commission d'histoire médiévale, Quaestiones Medii Aevi: "This became the cause of a war in 1431 — 1435 between Poland and...". Stanislaus F. Belch, Paulus Vladimiri and His Doctrine Concerning International Law and Politic: "was occasioned by the renewal of war by the Order against Poland in 1431". Gerard Labuda, Stanisław Salmonowicz, Historia Pomorza, "Further hostilities between Poland and the Teutonic Knights; ... The war in the years 1431—1435". John France, The Crusades and the Expansion of Catholic Christendom, 1000-1714: "After Tannenberg, war between Poland and the Order dragged on until 1435". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

In all cases you cite the "war" is taken complete out of context and put with other wars - much different in circumstances. As I said, no one denies there were hostilities, but they were all part of a bigger conflict in Lithuania. Read the expanded article - though it still needs work, it gives a much better overview on what was going on. And you cannot really separate the PL-TE aspect from LT civil war. You would have two nearly identical articles repeating one another. Renata (talk) 22:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I think Eric Christiansen in his The Northern Crusades sums it up well: Grand Master von Russdof (...) grew friendly with the ancient Witold, and with his successor Svitrigal, but his intervention in the Lithuanian succession dispute of 1431-5 was not a success. (p. 242) Renata (talk) 22:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Piotrus, but none of your quotes have the ring of a proper name. To give a parallel more familiar to me, someone probably writes: "There was war between England and France between 1754 and 1763, 1778 and 1783, 1793 and 1802, and 1802 and 1815", but we don't call the American Revolutionary War "War between England and France", all the same. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 12:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Let's start with the new name: I am not convinced it is better either by the evidence provided (0 Google Print hits) and logic.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 13:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

One actually. We do not require that our disambiguator be common usage. That's not, I agree, much. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

• It seems clearly too obscure to have a common name in English, unless it is something completely different, which is possible. "Lithuanian Civil War" would of course be the usual English form, and this does seem to have ghits. But the alternatives should be incorporated in the lead. Johnbod (talk) 14:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
  • If it has no proper name in English, then we need a descriptive title. Although Piotrus' quotes come back into evidence for that, "Lithuanian civil war" has the advantage of not requiring dismabiguation, and the NCMedH appears to speak of it thus. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Well, I don't know what we call them, but the ghits suggested other episodes in the 16th & 20th centuries can be so called - of course with dates the title could stand alone, but a disam page might be a good idea anyway. Johnbod (talk) 14:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Incorrect. There is also a Civil war in Lithuania (1700) (although the name of that event is also disputable, see talk - comments appreciated).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course a part of the problem here is the issue of Polish/Lithuanian in name. There will be Lithuanian editors who will see the current name as some form of "diminishining Lithuanian role" and campaign for Lithuanian in name due to that, and vice versa for Polish editors. Perhaps another "Polish-Lithuanian–Teutonic War" would be a reasonable compromise (despite the fact that this is another invented name used to appease a certain group of editors...).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

The problem with current title is that it completely misses the entire point and reason for the conflict. PL-LT-TE war does not seem ok to me because there were two Lithuanians: one of Svitrigaila and another of Sigismund Kestutaitis, and the point of the war is still unclear. How about War of Lithuanian Succession (following Eric Christiansen)? No parties mentioned in the title, yet the point of the war is expressed exactly. Renata (talk) 17:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

That's a pretty name - but unused in literature. I've illustrated that this war has a clear name in Polish historiography (one that translates as the PTW); how is it called in Lithuanian? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It's been quite established that there is no name for it in English (as usual). In Lithuanian it also does not have a proper name, just generic "civil war", "succession dispute", etc. So we need a descriptive term. I believe "War of Lithuanian Succession" is the most descriptive & neutral. Renata (talk) 20:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe using the estabilished name from Polish historiography is better. We should try to find out if there is a German name, though.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

It's Polish-Teutonic(German) War in Hungarian, so let's leave it at that. Wandalstouring (talk) 11:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Analysis

There are at least 4 non-Polish & non-Lithuanian historians writing in English who refer to this conflict as some sort of "civil war" or "succession dispute" and spend at least a sentence to describe its essence:

• Daniel Stone: ... policies in Lithuania prolonged the civil war that had broken out after Vytautas died in 1430. (p. 22)
• Norman Davies: civil war in Lithuania (p.135)
• William Urban: succession crisis in Lithuania (p. 335)
• Eric Christiansen: Lithuanian succession dispute of 1431-5 (p. 242)

Those are only ones I have print copies of - instead of relying on scrapped Ghits. The first two are known for their works on Polish history, the last two - from works on Teutonic/Crusade history. None of Piotrus ghits hold any water:

• Jędrzej Giertych, Brazilla Carroll Reece in Poland and Germany: A Reply to Congressman B. Carrol Reece of Tennessee: "There were new wars between Poland and the Teutonic Order in 1414, 1419, 1420—1422, 1431—1433, 1435, 1454—1466". - As PMAnderson said, there was war between Russia and Sweden in 1700-1721, but it is known as the Great Northern War. And in the list given three wars have their proper names: Hunger, Gollub, and Thirteen Years' Wars
• Uniwersytet Warszawski Instytut Historyczny, Polskie Towarzystwo Historyczne Commission d'histoire médiévale, Quaestiones Medii Aevi: "This became the cause of a war in 1431 — 1435 between Poland and...". - you cannot even see what the "and" part is. Same as #1. Would be interesting to know the cause, though.
• Stanislaus F. Belch, Paulus Vladimiri and His Doctrine Concerning International Law and Politic: "was occasioned by the renewal of war by the Order against Poland in 1431". - all it says the order attacked Poland in 1431. "War" is not described.
• Gerard Labuda, Stanisław Salmonowicz, Historia Pomorza, "Further hostilities between Poland and the Teutonic Knights; ... The war in the years 1431—1435". - yes, there was a war in those years. What kind of war is quite another question.
• John France, The Crusades and the Expansion of Catholic Christendom, 1000-1714: "After Tannenberg, war between Poland and the Order dragged on until 1435". - Why? How were the wars in between called?

While the war remains too obscure to have any proper name, it's quite clear it was about succession in Lithuania. Wikipedia's title should reflect that. Renata (talk) 06:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not about correcting or proving your history thesis. I even agree with your logic (not with your critique of sources) and the "Lithuanian War of Succession" is nice - but ORish. You should publish an article about this war, giving it a name and arguing for it. Then we can use your new name in our article.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

My thesis? How about descriptions presented by non-Polish and non-Lithuanian historians in their well-respected works on Polish and Teutonic history? If you don't like War of Lithuanian Succession as a reasonable compromise, let's follow Davis, Stone, and Britannica (in article about Jogaila) by naming it Lithuanian civil war (1431–1435), my original proposal. I hope you won't argue that Davis and Britannica are ORish too. Renata (talk) 17:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Dubious. As I've shown above, the civil war was only a part of the larger Polish-Teutonic War, and this is why its referred to as a war (not a civil one) by so many authors..--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Shown above? Where? You need to get your history straight. Christiansen and Urban, who write extensively about Teutonic history, make it clear that Teutonic Knights got involved in the civil war in Lithuania, and not the other way around. I would like to see your sources, other than Ghit scraps where you cannot see more than five words. If you don't have them, I guess I'll proceed with the move. Renata (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You are free to proceed with a WP:RM, as I object to a move to the name hardly supported even by Lithuanian historiography, not to mention Polish/English/German and so on. I repeat: the civil war in Lithuania was only part of a wider conflict, which included hostilities along the Polish-Teutonic border, and involved also Pomeranian dukes and the Czech Hussites (and probably some other parties, too).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Hardly supported? 5 pure indisputable English references provided. For Lithuanian historiography, there is no proper name, but there is plenty of descriptive names ("civil war", "succession dispute" and variations thereupon) when writing about Svitrigaila and Sigismund. Part of the larger PL-TE war? Any non-nationalistic sources on that to counter Urban and Christiansen? Which one started first? According to Britannica article on Jogaila, PL-TE war ended in 1432. According to your own addition from Polish sources, some historians fracture the "bigger and wider" PL-TE war into periods of 1431-33 and 1435, when Lithuanian civil war continued from 1431 to 1435 (and technically to 1437, when Svitrigaila gave up). Just how Battle of Pabaiskas fits into the PL-TE war? Neither Poland not Teutons were biggest forces in that battle. Hussite invasion is part of much wider and bigger Hussite Wars and sometimes actually better known then the entire PL-TE war (Stephen Turnbull in Tannenberg 1410 mentions the invasion, but not the war (p. 84)). Renata (talk) 22:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Please don't move without consensus

Dear Renata, please use proper procedure - WP:RM - to move this article. I oppose the move from the original name, which I consider both better documented and logically more correct.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

...which you consider better... yet no evidence was provided in the ample time given. Renata (talk) 20:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It is obvious we need a third party to mediate here. You can select a procedure from WP:DR for that, although I believe WP:RM is simpler and the most adequate.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you consider using WP:RM in the Eldership of Samogitia case?--Lokyz (talk) 22:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Double redirects

Moving this page has created quite a few double redirects - see Special:WhatLinksHere/Polish-Teutonic War (1431-1435). TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 23:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Name

Since I believe we should note the importance of Lithuania in this conflict, I'd like to propose a move to Polish–Lithuanian-Teutonic War (1431–1435). Granted, this is not the estabilished name - but neither really is any other name we discussed; this conflict is mostly unknown to English historiography, and when mentioned, it has no common name.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

In English "Teutonic" sounds odd without an "Order" or "Knights". Sorry to add a further complication, but it does. Johnbod (talk) 03:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for reading some books and realizing how inadequate this title is. You criticized my proposal of War of Lithuanian Succession (which I think is most descriptive and least nationalistic) because it is made up and ORish. Your suggestion here has the exact same problem. Plus, since we are going for a descriptive name in absence of established proper name, it does not adequately describe the war. There were two Lithuania's: one of Svitrigaila, and another of Sigismund (thus civil war). Plus it does not give the character/cause of the war. It was nothing like the Polish-Lithuanian-Teutonic War in 1410.

So we are back at the Lithuanian Civil War. Supported by Norman Davies, Daniel Stone, Oskar Halecki (in several books), Dmytro Doroshenko, S. C. Rowell, Encyclopedia Britannica, and a whole bunch of Lithuanian historians who use the term "civil war" to describe the conflict. It is the least ORish name. Renata (talk) 02:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

And I have shown that plenty of historians use Polish-Teutonic war. And we are back to square one. Sigh.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

...and as seen in ==Analysis== above and PMAnderson they do not hold water. Most of them just say that Poland and Teutons waged wars against each other in these years.... Plus some sources say that war between PL and TE ended in 1432 (per Halecki and Britannica) or 1433 (per your own addition to the article and per Giertych). Plus Davies, Halecki, Urban, Christiancen make quite clear that fighting between PL and TE was just part of larger civil war or succession dispute in Lithuania. So no, we are not back at square one as I did not see a single argument againt Lithuanian Civil War. Renata (talk) 20:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Excommunication of Jogaila

I have never heard of it. It is not mentioned in our FA on Jogaila, neither. IIRC, the Order tried to get him excommunicated, but they never succeeded, and the papacy was actually relatively friendly to Poland (as the Lithuanian rebels were seen as more heretical).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)