1Muzeum wojska polskiego

MUZEALNICTFWO

WOJSKOWE

(POLISH MILITARY MUSEUM)

POLISH-LITHUANIAN COMMONWEALTH MILITARY DRESS

in the 16th -17th C.

(POLSKIE UBIORY WOJSKOWE z XVI i XVII w. )

By ZOFIA STEFAŃSKA (b.1900 –1983)

Translation by R.B., Gentleman

Originally published in Polish by:

WYDAWNICTWO MINISTERSTWA OBRONY NARODOWEJ, Warsaw 1964

Translation ©2004 RB

(Translator’s notes: ‘Barwy’ is a challenging word often used in this text, which can mean “uniform”. But it may also mean, especially at this time, just clothing of a reasonably consistent color, or even cloth issued by the unit. The other term for uniform ‘munduru’ is less ambiguous in connoting clothes of similar cut and color, but especially in this context may mean non-uniform clothes issued by authority. Another thing to consider is that these garments were all hand made, dye lots were small and fabric was so expensive that only what was immediately needed was purchased, and then was worn to tatters. So naturally cut and color variability in a regiment would be much higher than we might expect. Another complicated word is “zbroi” which usually means armor but may also mean ‘kit’ as in set of clothes and other gear.

Thanks to M. Wolf for technical assistance with the translation. I consider this to be a draft, so corrections would be appreciated. After this project sat unfinished for a few years I just decided it was more important to get it out sooner rather than with every bit perfected)

The history of the evolution of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth military dress documents the use of uniforms in detail only from the beginning of the 18^th C. (‘Uniforms’ meaning both any clothing worn by the military and also the uniformity or lack thereof of this clothing.) Exceptions only survive: we know that, for example, King Batory at the end of the 16^th C., uniformed the newly organized ‘Select’ (wybraniecką) infantry in blue. Nevertheless, the entire 17^th C is essentially a blank spot in the record. However it is clear that whether due to the usual difficulties of wartime and eternal lack of money, or for other reasons, the end result was that infantry was frequently dressed insufficiently and even miserably. What are the implications of the failure to provide uniforms to Polish armies in the 17^th C.?

Szymon Starowolskiⁱ wrote in 1640: ‘The Sarmatiansⁱⁱ of ancient times dressed their infantry as well as cavalry in a uniform color. The same practice was followed by mercenaries from Germany and Hungary, both infantry and light cavalry. As only Poles use the kopiaⁱⁱⁱ lance, this distinguishes them from Asians as well as from all Europeans. Nevertheless, hussars attach single-color pennants to the kopia, to differentiate between units. Now the miserly captains have dressed the infantry in inappropriate and inconsistently colored clothing, even though regulations state that in units organized according to German custom, the commander should take care that the entire unit be dressed in uniform-color coats, not only to distinguish themselves from enemies, but to help by the uniform appearance to intimidate opponents, not to mention protect against severe weather ".

Starowolski captured the essence of requirements for a uniform in his final lines: 1) distinguish friendly from adversarial troops 2) suggest to the enemy the professionalism and solidity of your ranks 3) protect the body of the soldier in a planned and consistent way from the elements.

The absence of uniforms in Poland in the mid 17^th C. is not accidental and may have reflected a respect for tradition and the ‘old ways’. Poles thought this was the “ordinary" way and many believed that this state was not only not a shortcoming, but was even indispensable to military effectiveness. Starowolski outlined the ‘old ways’ allowing us to reconcile some aspects of dress over two generations from the 1570s, when, allegedly for the first time, Stephan Batory introduced a “uniform color for wybranie ‘select’ infantry. However, others had blazed this path before. Ancient customs already existed for uniformity in dress and color. For example, the king entered Cracow in 1576 in the midst of the town Foote guard in uniform magenta colored coats^iv.

As we can see from the military instructions prepared by Floriana Zebrzydowski^v for the Lithuanian grand hetman Mikolay Radziwiłł 1559, it is possible to demonstrate the appearance of Commonwealth troops in uniform colors 20 years earlier, in the mid 16^th C.. Article 28 regulating ‘Pouczenia’ states: “Na bar­wę, na rusznicę, na miecz, na oszczep ani na żadną zbroję ani broń, z którą służą, aby żądny nie śmiał grać ani pieniędzy pożyczać." Całość kontekstu wskazuje wyraźnie, że nie chodzi tu o 'żadne - po jecie liberii dworskiej, lecz o wyposażenie żołnierskie w stosunku, do całego wojska”.

(“uniforms, harquebus, swords, pikes, armor not other weapons, with whom serves, or eager not bold act nor money loan????/ ’. It indicate " integrity context distinctly, that it comes about here‘ free at court ???? -, but about soldiers’ gear in relation to the whole army.)

This is not all. In “Porządku praw rycerskich wojennych” (‘System of knightly combat’, prepared for king Zygmunt Agustus in 1557) ^vi Article 44 declares: “armors, swords, harquebus, and barwy (uniform or at least uniform-colored clothing) and stuff (military gear) should be neither loaned nor borrowed". That is important because the word barwy indicates particular concern about uniforms and issued non-weapon items are two of the five categories. The sentiment expressed closely matches that of the words in the regulation mentioned above. Therefore, can we conclude that at this moment in 1557, uniforms had already been introduced? Probably so, because other military regulations from 1544 and other sources from this time do not allude to uniform colors prior to 1557. They mention only “pieszego we zbroi” (armed foote) or “pachołka jezdnego zbrojnego” (men with military kit).^vii

That is the background of “barwy” or ‘uniforms’ among Commonwealth armies, let's examine dress more closely for each troop type.