Tibet in the Crimea? Polish Embassy to the Kalmyks of 1653 and a Project of an Anti-Muslim Alliance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/APH.2016.114.08Słowa kluczowe
Kalmyks, Crimean Tatars, Poland, Christian-Buddhist relations, Turkish languageAbstrakt
In early modern world, cross-cultural contacts were not a monopoly of Western European ‘trading nations’ and they were not made exclusively through trans-ocean trade. Buddhist Kalmyks arrived in Eastern Europe at the beginning of the seventeenth century and have remained there until today. Following the medieval tradition when Christian Europe looked for allies in Inner Asia against ‘the Muslim danger’, Moscow and Warsaw competed to win the Kalmyks over so that they would become their allies against the Crimean Tatars. In 1653, the Polish court prepared an embassy to the Kalmyks, proposing to help them conquer the Crimean Peninsula in return for a military alliance. Curiously, the letters of the Polish king and chancellor were written in Turkish and drawn in Arabic script, as in that period these were the accepted media of Eurasian communication, even though the letters’ tenor was anti-Muslim. Both letters are extant today and their content is analysed in the article.Bibliografia
Abrahamowicz Zygmunt, ‘The unrealized legation of Kasper Szymański to the Kalmuks and Persia in 1653’, Folia Orientalia, xii (1970), 9–23.
Bang Peter Fibiger and Kołodziejczyk Dariusz (eds.), Universal Empire. A Comparative Approach to Imperial Culture and Representation in Eurasian History (Cambridge, 2012).
Baranowski Bohdan, Znajomość Wschodu w dawnej Polsce do XVIII wieku (Łódź, 1950). Bareja-Starzyńska Agata, The Biography of the First Khalkha Jetsundampa Zanabazar by Zaya Pandita Luvsanprinlei. Studies, Annotated Translation, Transliteration and Facsimile (Warszawa, 2015).
Ciesielski Tomasz, Od Batohu do Żwańca. Wojna na Ukrainie, Podolu i o Mołdawię 1652–1653 (Zabrze, 2007).
Ciesielski Tomasz, Sejm brzeski 1653 r. Studium z dziejów Rzeczypospolitej w latach 1652–1653 (Toruń, 2004).
Darwin John, After Tamerlane. The Global History of Empire since 1405 (London, 2007). Faizov [Faiz] Sagit, Tugra i vselennaya. Mokhabbat-name i shert-name krymskikh khanov i printsev v ornamental’nom, sakral’nom i diplomaticheskom kontekstakh (Moskva and Bakhchisaraĭ, 2002).
Grousset René, L’empire des steppes. Attila, Gengis-khan, Tamerlan (Paris, 1948).
Keenan Edward, ‘Muscovy and Kazan: Some introductory remarks on the patterns of steppe diplomacy’, Slavic Review. American Quarterly of Soviet and East European Studies, xxvi (1967), 548–58.
Khodarkovsky Michael, Where Two Worlds Met. The Russian State and the Kalmyk Nomads, 1600–1771 (Ithaca and London, 1992).
Kołodziejczyk Dariusz, ‘Lice and locusts or allies and brethren? The ambivalent attitude towards the Crimean Tatars in early modern Poland-Lithuania’, in Maria Baramowa, Grigor Boykov and Ivan Parvev (eds.), Bordering early modern Europe (Wiesbaden, 2015), 39–44.
Kołodziejczyk Dariusz, ‘Popytki vosstanovleniya mongol’skoĭ traditsii v Krymskom khanstve nachala XVII veka: baĭsa, Tat ve Tavgach’, Zolotoordynskoe obozrenie / The Golden Horde Review, 3 (2015), 91–101.
Kołodziejczyk Dariusz, The Crimean Khanate and Poland-Lithuania. International Diplomacy on the European Periphery (15th–18th century). A Study of Peace Treaties Followed by Annotated Documents (Leiden and Boston, 2011).
Lemercier-Quelquejay Chantal, ‘Les Kalmuks de la Volga entre l’Empire russe et l’Empire ottoman sous le règne de Pierre le Grand (d’après les documents des Archives Ottomanes)’, Cahiers du monde russe et soviétique, vii, 1 (1966), 63–76. Melville Charles, ‘The royal image in Mongol Iran’, in Lynette Mitchell and Charles Melville (eds.), Every Inch a King. Comparative Studies on Kings and Kingship in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds (Leiden and Boston, 2013), 343–69.
Milewski Dariusz, Rywalizacja polsko-kozacka o Mołdawię w dobie powstania Bohdana Chmielnickiego (1648–1653) (Zabrze, 2011).
Miyawaki Junko, ‘The legitimacy of khanship among the Oyirad (Kalmyk) tribes in relation to the Chinggisid principle’, in Reuven Amitai-Preiss and David O. Morgan (eds.), The Mongol Empire and its Legacy (Leiden, Boston, and Köln, 2000), 319–31.
Nguyen Duc Ha, Polscy misjonarze na Dalekim Wschodzie w XVII–XVIII wieku (Warszawa, 2006).
Okada Hidehiro and Miyawaki-Okada Junko, ‘The biography of Zaya Pandita, the greatest Oirad monk’, in Johan Elverskog (ed.), Biographies of Eminent Mongol Buddhists (PIATS 2006: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Königswinter 2006) (Halle, 2008), 29–48.
Parker Geoffrey, Global Crisis. War, Climate Change and Catastrophe in the Seventeenth Century (New Haven and London, 2013).
Rota Giorgio, ‘Safavids and Kalmyks in the 17th century: a preliminary assessment’, in Antonio Panaino and Riccardo Zipoli (eds.), Classical and Contemporary Iranian Studies (Proceedings of the 5th Conference of the Societas Iranologica Europaea held in Ravenna, 6–11 October 2003, 2, Milano, 2006), 189–204.
Soucek Svat, A History of Inner Asia (Cambridge, 2000).
Trepavlov Vadim, “Belyĭ tsar’”: Obraz monarkha i predstavleniya o poddanstve u narodov Rossii XV–XVIII vv. (Moskva, 2007).
Trepavlov Vadim, Istoriya Nogaĭskoĭ ordy (Moskva, 2001).
Trepavlov Vadim, Sibirskiĭ yurt posle Ermaka. Kuchum i Kuchumovichi v bor’be za revansh (Moskva, 2012).
Wójcik Zbigniew (ed.), Historia dyplomacji polskiej, ii: 1572–1795 (Warszawa, 1982).
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Title, logo and layout of journal are reserved trademarks of APH.Statystyki
Liczba wyświetleń i pobrań: 785
Liczba cytowań: 2
