How was the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth perceived in the early-modern Italian princedoms? What were the main recurring elements?
In early Renaissance Italy, Poland-Lithuania appeared as a distant and vaguely defined land. Visual and textual descriptions were laconic, placing legendary Riphean and Hyperborean mountains within its borders, alongside vast forests and fields of gold guarded by gryphons. By the mid-sixteenth century, these mythical portrayals gradually gave way to more detailed and nuanced accounts, facilitated by expanding information networks. The Commonwealth became recognised for its abundance of natural resources, multicultural society, and the nobility's exceptional hospitality and linguistic skills. Italian observers admired the cosmopolitan nature of the Commonwealth’s elites but also criticised their penchant for revelry and stubbornness. The perception of Poland-Lithuania as a semi-wild frontier endured, influenced by Italian expectations rooted in their highly urbanised environment, making the Commonwealth’s expansive natural landscapes and fewer cities appear particularly striking. At the centre of many discussions was the Commonwealth’s distinctive political system—an elective monarchy in which the nobility chose their ruler during a country-wide assembly, an event often viewed by Italians as chaotic and troublesome.
Who were the main actors who contributed to shaping these images?
In an era predating modern communication, information moved with people. Starting from the 1550s onwards, encounters between the Commonwealth and the Italian city-states intensified. The actors responsible for shaping perceptions of Poland-Lithuania were all marked by a high degree of mobility. A significant part of that group were diplomats representing various rulers who travelled to Poland-Lithuania, sent regular dispatches back to their courts, and composed detailed final reports offering broader reflections on the political, social, and cultural conditions. Equally influential were merchants and professionals, such as artists, military engineers, and physicians, who sought employment in the region while maintaining correspondence with their homeland, often writing about their new experiences and sharing observations about the country. Particularly important were also students from Poland-Lithuania, who pursued part of their education at Italian universities. Their presence helped foster intellectual ties between the Italian peninsula and Central-Eastern Europe.
Coming to the present (or the recent past), what role do you think these perceptions play in the relations between former socialist Central-Eastern European countries and partner countries in Western-Nordic-Southern Europe?
Empirical and increasingly systematic information flows contributed to repositioning the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in Italian debates – from a mythical periphery to a complex part of Europe’s political and cultural landscape. In both the early modern and contemporary contexts, the dynamics of international relations have been closely tied to the quality and structure of communication networks. Today, inherited stereotypes about Central-Eastern Europe continue to inform certain narratives, but these can—and must—be critically reassessed. In a hyper-connected world, where misinformation circulates rapidly, meaningful cooperation must depend on a shared commitment to learning, listening, and engaging beyond inherited bias.
Klaudia Kuchno is a fifth-year PhD researcher in the Department of History of the European University Institute (EUI), specialising in the history of information, early modern diplomacy, and cultural encounters. Her PhD thesis, ‘Of Elections, Festivities, and Creatures. Information about Poland-Lithuania in Early Modern Florence’, is supervised by History Professor Giancarlo Casale, and Giorgio Riello.