Talk:Radziwiłł family

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Książę[edit]

Tytul "ksiaze" byl im przyznany przez Rzplita (jak w przypadku Czartoryskich), czy tylko nadany przez Cesarstwo?--Emax 19:40, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See The Princely Houses of Poland.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish?[edit]

Were Radziwills really Polish? Join the discussion that is relevant to all of the famous Polish-speaking personalities who were born in 18-19th centuries on the territories of what is now Belarus, and what was Litva back then. Talk:Ignacy Domeyko. --rydel 00:18, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As the name of their very country (Polish-Lithuanian...) commonwealth suggest it is a complicated issue. I'll take a look at the talk page you suggest. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:16, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Definitely, not Polish. Any members of the Radvila (Radziwill) family who appear until Union of Lublin must be called nobles of Grand Duchy of Lithuania; the rest of them - nobles of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth.--UmR 06:12:04, 2005-08-29 (UTC)

UmR, you sound like a Lithuanian nationalist (further supported by the fact that you aren't even a Wikipedia user). The Radziwill family stopped being "Lithuanian" after assimilating into the Polish szlachta and marrying into Polish nobility (this allegiance to Poland of the nobility in Lithuania was what some attribute as the cause of the resentment among rural Lithuanians, particularly during the rise of nationalism, that they were being ruled over by Poles). After the creation of an independent Lithuania, you will see that the Radziwill's since have often a strong patriotism for Poland, not Lithuania (i.e. Stanislaw Radziwill founded the Sikorski Historical Institute in London, for example). This is not an unusual phenomenon, that some distant origins begin elsewhere. If one were to nitpick everyone's DNA, you'd be suprised how mixed up Europe is. Take all those Lithuanians with Lithuanized names of Polish origin. --Vegalabs 00:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
M.K., why have you removed the qualifier from the article? There is nothing ambiguous about it. It is ambiguous at this point, and in fact the article as it stands makes clear the Lithuanian bias. I wonder how a Radziwill would feel today based on your and your compatriot's claims. Please see above if you have not read it yet. --Vegalabs 18:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vegalabs, because it is very very delicate way to say they were Polish from Grand Duchy of Lithuania or just Polish. I read you post and its Polish POV :) strong patriotism for Poland, not Lithuania interesting “fact”. DNA ? yes Radzivill originated in Lithuania. The main strong holds of them were in Grand Duchy of Lithuania. They oppose Liublin Union, even refuse to command an army then Polish “counterparts” arrived, this family members initiated and some interesting treaties like Union of Kėdainiai. And other interesting deeds. I do not going to deny impact of polonization to them and their deeds to Poland. But as you see to say just polish is a bit not right. And you know majority of Russian noblemen spoke in French as a main language tried to imitate them in appropriate time. So they French too? M.K.
MK, while I agree there are moments when this becomes a sensitive fact, I do not believe this is the case. First, I do not argue that language had anything to do with it. Low German was an "official" language of the PLC but its use does not make its users necessarily German. By becoming "Polonized" I was refering to the whole cultural and national implications this had (that is, integration). While it is undeniable and certainly true that the Radziwill family originated in Lithuania, a similar statement can be said of many families in a variety of countries. We might as well claim that decendents of Romans in Italy are Romans and not Italians (and interestingly, Lech Walesa has a distant connection with Roman nobility :). I believe that in this situation, where we refer to the family in the present tense, it is proper to say that they are a Polish noble family. They have made it quite clear what their nationality is (I've already mentioned Stanislaw Radziwill as a clear example, which is a fact you can look up). I am willing to say that they *are* a Polish noble family, and I'm willing to acknowledge that it began in Lithuania and became a powerful family in the PLC, but at this point, in the *present tense*, it is not at all ambiguous. As the article stands, is it Lithuanian POV since emphasis is placed on their origins. As far as DNA studies are concerned, my point is that ethnicity is a meaningless and bad argument for nationality and I've seen it slipping into arguments all over Wikipedia (even though it's not too applicable here, but I digress). Also, you point to Union of Kėdainiai as if it were a good thing. Janusz Radziwill is not at all viewed as a positive force for either Lithuania or the Radziwill family :). --Vegalabs 19:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Union of Kėdainiai was seen by many lithuanian nobles as a way to save Lithuanian independance and is not reearded as a very bad thing. Stop spreading Senkewicz based "obvious truths". As for your earlier saying - polish, with lituanized names: well, that reveals your ignorance of scientific discipline called history and philology , and love for XIX-th century polish literature:) Radvilos weren't Polish, up to XVII-th century they were absolutely not Polish patriots, but Lithuanian in a broader sense, meaning GDL.--Lokyz 21:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)P.S. And also as an ally way to fight again Russia, as Krown prowided NO support - neither by military neither by financial help.[reply]

Szlachta[edit]

I was not able to find such a word in a few English dictionaries that were available to me at the moment. The suggestion is not to use it, as not existent in English language. The problems about the word are:

  1. Not existant in English language.
  2. Szlachta or Šlėkta (lithuanian) is understood in Lithuania more as an offensive word to describe a degenerated person which due to some reason shows arogance as if he was noble. Both words didikas (lith. noble) and šlėkta are sometimes used in the same sentence as if reffering to two different things. Thus lithuanians reading an article a) might get insulted by someone calling a "lithuanian" noble šlėkta b) might get inadequate overall picture of personality, due to incorrect associations.
  3. Pro-Polish POV. Existing in almost all the articles written or edited by polish users. Extensive application of polish names, definitions, place-names is used, intentionally or incidentally (which I believe less and less as I read the articles and discussions here), to form an opinion in readers mind that an object of an article is (only) Polish related, while it is not true.--UmR 06:12:04, 2005-08-29 (UTC)
I initially opposed the usage of the term, but I got convinced to some extent. Firstly, the phenomenon of szlachta, that is the Polish gentry as they are sometimes referred to in English sources, is pretty much unique, both in terms of their numbers, culture, beliefs and so on.As such, the word is entering usage in English language as calling them gentry would suggest some similarity to the British gentry, which would be misleading.
We have no influence over various connotations of words in different languages. Nor I believe we should use it as a criterion for choosing names of articles.
Well, in this very context the Polish perspective is most surely the correct one. While the family traced its roots to Ruthenian boyars of the Grand Duchy, its history in the last several hundred years is primarily associated with Poland rather than Republic of Lithuania. The situation here is pretty much the same as with, say, British royal house. They are of German descent, yet the article on them describes them from the British perspective rather than German. It seems simply the most logical solution. //Halibutt 11:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
i'm absolutely sure, that every time you call "Radziwill The Black" "Polish", he turns around in the grave. You should study more his works and writings - let me put it in a polite way: he did'n like Poland at all.--Lokyz 10:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Szlachta' is used by hundreds of books.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remains[edit]

During excavations in Dubingiai (Dubinki) in 2004, in the place of currently destroyed church, archeologists found a number of human remains. On ~2005-05-02, after a year of investigations on the remains, they made a press conference in which it was anounced that mostly probably some remains found belong to Radziwills: Mikalojus Radvila Juodasis (Mikołaj 'Black' Radziwiłł) his wife Elžbieta Šidlovecka-Radvilienė (Elżbieta Szydłowiecka), Mikalojus Radvila Rudasis (Mikołaj 'Ginger' Radziwiłł), Jonušas VI Radvila (Janusz VI Radziwiłł). There is quite little further info available at the moment (at least to me :)), I can search for more if someone is interested.

This information can be added to the articles, if no disagreements occur.--UmR 06:12:04, 2005-08-29 (UTC)

Expansion[edit]

This article is no longer a stub, but I know far too little about the history of this family and of Poland-Lithuania to expand it properly. If you know more about this than I do, please help out. NatusRoma 9 July 2005 06:14 (UTC)

Structuration[edit]

I think the intro of the article (before the first section comes) should be shorter and many too detailed points should find theur way in later parts of the article.

Further, I think that because the article actualy tells as much, even more, what they were than what they are, it should also say it. Somehow this gives an impression that they are powerful in today Poland. Is it true, I mean, are they truly powerful in today Poland? Shilkanni 21:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly this needs a proper WP:LEAD and a copyedit. Please don't hesitate to be bold and improve it; editing articles is much more useful then moving them.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Radziwill[edit]

Can anyone confirm that Anthony Radziwill is indeed a descendant of this family? yugobrandon 07:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radziwill Descents[edit]

There is an early Radzwill line that is lost in time ?


And this later line down to today ... http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=DESC&db=maclaren&id=I71108


What about including the painter Franz Radziwill (1895-1983) in the list of descendants? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.212.192.189 (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Radziwill Kennedy?[edit]

What is the Radziwill Kennedy connection ?

Jackie Kennedy's sister married a Radziwill ?

Connected to this line ?


This may be late, but the question has gone unanswered and perhaps an answer may clarify some questions other persons may have. Jackie Kennedy's sister, Caroline Lee Bouvier, married Stanisław Albrecht Radziwiłł. They had two children: Anthony and Anna Christina. Jakto (talk) 00:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

alternate name[edit]

Evidence for Radvilas as an alternate EN-language name for this family can be found using this Google book search: [1] - hence restoring it. Novickas (talk) 12:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the same token, could you go to Vilnius and note that Wilno is an English name (per this)? Seriously, Radziwiłł is ~10 times as popular as Radvilas... ([2])... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 13:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio[edit]

Could the editor who inserted the sentence "The family has produced many outstanding politicians, military commanders, clergymen, cultural benefactors and entrepreneurs who left a significant mark on Lithuanian, Belarusian, Polish and general European history and culture" check whether it was copied from this source [3] "The family has produced many outstanding politicians, military commanders, clergymen, cultural benefactors and entrepreneurs who left a significant mark on the Polish and Lithuanian history and culture") or vice versa. The website asserts copyright (Published: 25/02/2001 (c) Peter Paul Bajer). Thanks, Novickas (talk) 16:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't rewriting those sentences be quicker then discussing them here? It took me 10 seconds to correct this copyvio :) Anyway, this sentence was copyvio, (c) from at least to 2000: [4]. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you, while you're at it, revise the sentences in Janusz Radziwiłł (1579–1620) that were also taken from this source?

Source: Janusz expanded the already immense family fortune through his first marriage to Zofia Olelkowicz Slucka, who, at her deathbed in 1612, left him a huge estate, including seven castles and some thirty-two villages. [5]

Article: Radziwiłł expanded the already immense Radziwiłł family fortune through his first marriage to Zofia Olelkowicz Słucka on 1 October 1600, who, at her deathbed in 1612, left him a large estate, including seven castles and palaces and some thirty-two villages.

Source: Just like his father, Janusz I took part in a military campaign against Swedes in Livonia.

Article: Just like his father, Radziwiłł took part in a military campaign against Sweden in Livonia. Novickas (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Janusz Radziwiłł (1612–1655) article: Upon marching into Kiev in 1651, he ordered a production of a commemorative medal on which he compared his victory to the taking of Kiev by the most powerful Polish King, Boleslaw Chrobry, some six hundred years earlier. Source: Upon marching into Kiev (Kyiv) in 1651, he ordered production of a commemorative medal on which he compared his victory to the taking of Kiev by the first Polish king, Boleslaw I of Poland, some six hundred years earlier. Novickas (talk) 18:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Current region[edit]

I placed Poland and the United States as the current regions the family is active in based on information presented in several of the family members articles (Stanisław Albrecht Radziwiłł, Anthony Radziwill, Anna Christina Radziwill, Krzysztof Mikołaj Radziwiłł, Anna Radziwiłł). Are there any family members currently active in Lithuania? Jakto (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are. AFAIK, at least one of them Aldona Radvilaitė, participated in reburial ceremony in Dubingiai. In any case use net with key words such as "Radvila", "Radvilienė", "Radvilaitė", etc. M.K. (talk) 07:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the information and the tip! I look forward to working alongside you in the development of this article. Jakto (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome, If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line on my user talk page. M.K. (talk)

Family tree[edit]

The big list of family members might benefit from the use of Template:familytree, and being trimmed down to notable members. Jakto (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Audio file[edit]

Would anyone consider making an audio file on the various languages' pronunciation of the family name? Jakto (talk) 19:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

This article was moved from Radziwiłł family to House of Radziwiłł last September by User:Iaroslavvs, citing "Wiki naming standards". First of all, what naming standards? Please link to the relevant policy. Per WP:COMMONNAME, GBooks search for "House of Radziwiłł" gives 253 hits; "Radziwiłł family" gives 661. As such, I think this should be moved back. (Note: Radziwiłł were never a royalty). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Neither a royal house nor a banking house (such as the House of Rothschild). Nihil novi (talk) 03:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 21:28, 12 April 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

House of Radziwiłł → Radziwiłł family – Per the discussion above, the old name (Radziwiłł family), from which this article was moved without discussion, seems both more correct and more common. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:58, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Lizdeika[edit]

Lizdeika legend should be mentioned as he was named as a founder of their family. It is believed, that this legendary part of their genealogy was created by the order of Radziwill/Radvilas themselves. Also, etymology of the name Lizdeika should be explained. --Žemėpatis (talk) 23:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Polish-Lithuanian[edit]

With a few edit around what kind of family this is, maybe this should be discussed. I think that calling Radziwiłłs "Polish noble and aristocratic family" is just as wrong as calling them "Lithuanian". Would "Polish-Lithuanian noble and aristocratic family" be better? It's the term that Britannica uses. No longer a penguin (talk) 11:53, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Although the family indeed originated in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, after the Union of Lublin, in the 16th century, the family became gradually polonized, with two main branches existing; one in the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland and one in the Grand Duchy. After the Constitution of May 3, 1791, the Grand Duchy was officially dissolved and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was renamed 'Commonwealth of Poland'; it existed until the Third Partition of Poland in 1795. From 1696 Polish became the official language of Lithuania and Ruthenia.[1] It was then that the family became involved in Polish politics as well as fought over the control of the Grand Duchy with other families such as the Czartoryski and Sapieha. Although the origin of the House of Radziwiłł has to be definitely highlighted and its Lithuanian ancestors mentioned. I believe that since the destruction of the GD of Lithuania and the Commonwealth in total, the family fought against Imperial Russia in both the November and January Uprisings together with the Polish insurgents. For instance one of them was Emilia Plater, a Polish national hero, born on the former territory of the Grand Duchy. Eventually all of those families of mixed origin, if still existent at that time, settled in reborn Second Polish Republic in 1918. Some immigrated to the West. Now there is a branch of American Radziwills. Therefore the family cannot be simply described as Polish-Lithuanian. Brittanica often relates to many Polish and Lithuanian nobles because of the official name of the country, 'Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, describing all of its citizens as Polish-Lithuanian, despite their faith or actual nationality. Furthermore the current and most popular name of the House (also the name of this article) is in Polish - Radziwiłł'. In Lithuanian and Latin languages it would be 'Radvila'. Furthermore the family greatly impacted on the culture of Poland, building the majority of their palaces and residences in Krakow, Szydlowiec, Zegrze, Nieborow and Warsaw. It should be taken into consideration that all members of the clan since Mikolaj "The Black" Radziwill adopted Polish names and either catholic or protestant faith. I would therefore say that they are a Polish noble and aristocratic family of Lithuanian origin. By saying that they are Polish-Lithuanian, we are suggesting that the family is still present in modern-day Lithuanian which is in fact not true.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oliszydlowski (talk • contribs) 09:05, 2016 May 18‎
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but a lot of the above is irrelevant or wrong:
  • "The family became gradually polonized". Yes, as did almost entire Lithuanian nobility, but that did not make them ethnic poles by itself.
  • "with two main branches existing; one in the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland and one in the Grand Duchy". [citation needed] for that one. The article describes two branches (both from GDL) and many sub-braches, but the branch that was the most prominent and long-lasting was present in both GDL and the Crown of Poland. This map] beautifully shows how the holdings of the family were in both GDL and Poland.
  • "After the Constitution of May 3, 1791, the Grand Duchy was officially dissolved and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was renamed 'Commonwealth of Poland'" Err... No. The constitution (if you read the article) envisioned a unitary state ('Commonwealth of Poland') while still recognizing GDL (see Reciprocal Guarantee of Two Nations) as a member that forms this commonwealth (with the Crown of Poland). That is also irrelevant, as the Constitution was overturned.
  • "it existed until the Third Partition of Poland in 1795". No, as mentioned, the constitution was overturned and if you read the article you pointed to, it talks about a partition and dissolution of "Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth". The name of the state that they are subject to is also completely irrelevant for Radziwiłłs, since by the same logic they should be called Russian or German noble family after the partitions.
  • "Furthermore the family greatly impacted on the culture of Poland". And Lithuania. And Belarus.
More importantly, I believe you are missing the point of my suggestion: I argue that it is incorrect to label them as only Polish noble family, since the family was extremely prominent long before entering Polish politics. In fact, a Radzivill led the GDL delegation in the negotiations for the Union of Lublin and opposed the integration of GDL with the Crown. That makes no sense in the current description. I would propose to remove reference to ethnicity entirely since the family as a whole (which is the scope of this article) clearly does not fit a single modern ethnicity.
The Radziwiłł family (Polish pronunciation: [radʑiˈviw]; Lithuanian: Radvila; Belarusian: Радзівіл, Radzivił; German: Radziwill) is an aristocratic family highly prominent for centuries, first in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, later in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Kingdom of Prussia. Descendants of Kristinas Astikas, a close associate of the 14th century Lithuanian ruler Vytautas, the family has produced many individuals notable in Lithuanian, Belarusian, Polish, German (particularly Prussian) and general European history and culture. The Radziwiłł family received the title of Reichsfürst (prince, Polish: książę, Lithuanian: kunigaikštis, Belarusian: князь, kniaź), from the Holy Roman Empire. Descendants of the family still live in Poland and the United States.
No longer a penguin (talk) 12:29, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to add that it is not very polite to introduce the changes back into the article as soon you post a comment in a discussion on the talk page, since a discussion should establish a consensus that should then be introduced into the article. No longer a penguin (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Mariusz Markiewicz: Historia Polski 1492–1795. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 2004, s. 126.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Radziwiłł. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Current heads of Reichsfürst-Lines?[edit]

Who is the current or last heads of the Radziwiłł Reichsfürst-Lines? Oasorgard (talk) 10:06, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Radziwiłł family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lead description[edit]

Itzhak Rosenberg - Whilst the description "Polonized Lithuanian family" is absolutely correct in the historical sense (as sourced), it is too indirect and sophisticated for the very first sentence of this article. Very few people know what "Polonized" means, which make it more of a trivial fact. Polish-Lithuanian or Lithuanian-Polish are both neutral, correct, and appropriate as it relates to the name of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Merangs (talk) 15:44, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merangs The sentence should be left as it was prior. It immediately specifies where the family was from - Lithuania (where else could Lithuanians be from?). As for sophistication, you can add more information to the lede, but that does not mean distorting source-based facts.
Plus, Polonization is not trivial, because it has sufficient notability for a Wikipedia article to exist about it and have thousands of articles written about it (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Polonization%22&btnG=). Sounds far from trivial.
Moreover, calling "Polish-Lithuanian" a better alternative is also masquerade, because "Polish-Lithuanian identity" has a mere few dozen results (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Polish-lithuanian+identity%22&btnG=). Sure, it has the notability to have its own article, but Polonization is far better known than the other one.
Furthermore, Polish-Lithuanian, Lithuanian-Polish or any variant thereof is not as you claim "correct", as the Radvila family was purely connected to Lithuania for centuries until 1569 and to say that this fits under "Polish-Lithuanian" is a straight-up lie. Yes, Radvila were very important in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but that should be mentioned in a sentence like "The Radziwiłł family had immense control over the affairs of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" or something similar, and not change it into "The Radziwiłł were Polish-Lithuanian". "Polish-Lithuanian" is actually worse for clarity, because it can refer to multiple things, e.g. Pole in Lithuania, Lithuanian in Poland, a person from Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and perhaps even the Polonized Lithuanian...
As it stands now, the sentence should be "Polonized Lithuanian family", because that is what the source says. To twist it into "Polish-Lithuanian" with personal insight is WP:OR, because instead of using sources, you conjecture, which is not what Wikipedia is about. --Itzhak Rosenberg (talk) 16:10, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The term "Polish-Lithuanian" clearly identifies two countries to which they owed allegiance or resided in. Their origin is mentioned in the second paragraph and infobox. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section states "The first paragraph should define or identify the topic with a neutral point of view, but without being too specific". What you are presenting is a POV interpretation (and that's not what Wikipedia is about), with as many sources as possible in an attempt to 'Lithuanianize' whatever is or was connected to Lithuania. Daniel Z. Stone (Source 1) outlined that from 17th century onwards the family was Polish and they have kept the Polish spelling of their name until this day. By stating 'Polonized Lithuanian', we emphasize their Lithuanian identity which today merely applies. You say that prior to 1569 the Radziwiłłs were "purely connected to Lithuania" - Mikołaj "the Black" Radziwiłł died before the union and did not speak Lithuanian (Source 2). The stages of Polonization took effect much earlier than you presume.
One can throw sources from both sides, which only really strengthens the "Polish-Lithuanian magnate family" description. It is neutral. An alternative could be "a Polish-Lithuanian family which originated in Kernavė". I am not saying one allegiance (or nationality) is more important than the other because the family reached the apex of its prominence during the times of the Commonwealth. However, you are evidently trying to deprive the Radziwills of a certain aspect of their identity. I suggest you do Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Merangs (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Radzwill family is an ethnic Lithuanian family which was later Polonized, therefore the lead description provided by Itzhak Rosenberg is absolutely accurate (their family tree starts in Kernavė/Trakai). Even Polish source supports such statements, so removal of such line as "Polonized Lithuanian magnate family" is simply an inappropriate action (1). Quote with a reference from the official website of the Biržai Region Museum: "In actuality, the Radziwiłł family is descended from the Astikai noble family, who originates from lands close to Kernavė and have later expanded to Užpaliai and Anykščiai. The Kernavė nobleman Kristinas Astikas (died ca. 1444) took part in drawing up the historically important treaties of Salynas, Torunė, Horodlė and Melno. In 1419, he became the Castellan of Vilnius. At the signing of the Union of Horodło in 1413, when 47 Polish nobles gave their coats of arms to Lithuanian families, he received the Coat of Arms of Trąby."(reference link). Kristinas Astikas is son of Radvila Astikas. Reference which supports statement that the Lithuanian nobility was Polonized: NATIONAL SELF-PERCEPTION AMONG THE LITHUANIAN NOBILITY: EVIDENCE FROM THE RADZIWIŁŁ FAMILY. -- Pofka (talk) 15:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Radziwiłł_family&oldid=1209944004"