Comparing the Policies of Stefan Batory and Ivan the Terrible: As for the Victory of the European Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth Over the Despotic Muscovy in 1581

In the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the causes of the strengthening the mightiness of the state were as follows: A) the inner structure of the constitutional monarchy, because the parliamentary democracy of the noblemen in those times resulted more solid reliable state power, than the despotic dictature in the neighbouring Muscovy, which depended on the whim of a single ruler; – B) the cultural policy of King Báthory, because the highly educated people formed that narrow strata of the society, which the royal power may rely on, as clerks and diplomats; – C) the bourgeois development, which appeared in the evolving the Ukrainian brotherhoods, because these confraternities managed the schooling and printing, thus the intellectual level of the middleclass of the society could strengthen the state and the royal power; – D) the professional and excellent diplomacy of King Báthory, in which he could and did rely on excellently educated, gifted intellectuals. Albeit the personality of the King was not the only and mainly cause of strengthening the power of the state. In sum total, the structure of the state, thus the social, economic, and political aspects of development were the factors that resulted the heydays of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and its mightiness. In this aspect the rethinking and revaluation of the earlier paradigm of the historiography are necessary, and a modern approach, which we call ‘decolonization’, may result better insights into the complicated questions. The Duke of Moscow Ivan the Terrible invited book traders and a typographer to Moscow, with purpose to gain the fruits of the contemporary European culture, but the typographer was burned in Moscow for “heresy”. Thus, the Asiatic despotic state of Moscow was not able to achieve any fruit of European culture. On the contrary, the democratic Sejm of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (although of the nobility, the Szlachta) was unique at that time and controlled the power of the monarch. In a result, when the Sejm voted for an extraordinary tax and “manpower” for the second campaign of King Batory (his war consisted of three campaigns in 1579, 80, 81), the king was sure to have a strong background of his three countries (Polish Crown, Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and Transylvania, as well). At the same time, the Muscovian ruler was not sure of his subjects; Ivan was tried to be poisoned. Hence the psychotic sickness of Ivan and his violent character were not the only causes of the failure of those wars, but the differences between the two states in the social and political structure. Due to the bourgeois development in the Polish Crown and Grand Duke of Lithuania, Orthodoxy in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had opportunities for developing in the European way, which resulted such a situation was similar to Protestantism in the West; taking into consideration the spreading of book-printing and evolving of the national consciousness which happened due to the Protestantism in West. The “military potential” of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was much great due to the social, cultural, political structure, too, including the national consciousness of the Orthodox inhabitants, too, while the Muscovian autocratic state did not have such sufficient conditions for the “military potential”. This military potential of the modernized Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth defeated the Muscovian imperial expansion of Ivan IV, the Terrible, in that far historical past