8
was formed sometimes to resist, sometimes to enforce the established law; and in the latter case it often took the shape of a "convocation," Convocations.which exactly resembled the Diet except that the veto was inadmissible. The Poles were always more happy in organising anarchy than in organising their institutions. Of course, the authority of a confederation depended upon the number and weight of its adherents; and it frequently happened that several of these bodies were sitting at the same time. We sometimes find in Polish history the Senate at variance with the Diet, the Diet with the king, the king with the grandees, the greater with the lesser nobles, and the whole nobility with their armed serfs. Among Strife among the nobles—how caused.the nobles religious inequality was the principal cause of dissension. Although none but Catholics could hold offices of state, a large number of the poorer nobles were "Dissidents," and belonged to the Greek or Protestant persuasion. They were thus naturally jealous of the official families; for, though all were theoretically equal, the differences of wealth and prestige Their three main classes.tended to divide them into three classes: first, a few princely families who owned whole provinces and aspired to the posts of the supreme executive; secondly, the average gentry, who scrambled for the lesser offices, or were indignant at their religious disabilities; and thirdly, the poorer freemen, who made up for their lack of power by a spirit of captious disaffection. In stormy times the confusion was increased by half the middle gentry taking part with the grandees and half with the freemen.
From the highest of these classes was sprung John Sobieski. He belonged to that group of families, whose ancestral device was the Ancestry of John Sobieski.Buckler—the most illustrious of the rude Polish coats of arms. Far back in the mist of ages are placed the exploits of Janik—the Polish Hercules—the founder of his house. His immediate ancestors had gained less doubtful laurels. His grandfather, Mark Sobieski, palatine of Lublin, had so great a military reputation that King Stephen Bathori (1575-1586) was wont to say that he would not fear to entrust to his single arm the defence of the fortunes of Poland. His father, James Sobieski, was not only an able general, but a man of cultivated mind, and of some diplomatic skill. To him belonged the real credit of the famous victory of Kotzim in 1621 over a vast host of Turks and Tartars, although the nominal commander of the Poles was the young Prince Wladislas, son of Sigismund III. His success in negotiating the treaty that followed was so conspicuous that he was afterwards sent on several foreign embassies to the Western Powers. Such eminence in peace as in war doubtless procured for him the post of castellan of Cracow[1]—the first secular- ↑ This castellan ranked even above all the palatines, and headed the Pospolite. The story is that in an important battle the palatine of Cracow ran away, while the castellan stood his ground, and their rank was thus reversed. (Coyer, Histoire de Sobieski, p. 69, 8vo ed.)
