Comments - ihei

I'm OK with the joke, I just think that the issue behind it is worth attention. "The union of two nations" is yet another offspring of XXst century propaganda. In terms of acctual demographic it is but a bald lie. Lithuanians often rue their supposed loss of independence after the Union of Lublin. How eagerly they forget, why did they agree in the first place: that was to secure their rule over Ruthenian population. So yeah, I guess a lot of Polish nobility were actually ********. Guess what: Lithuanians were no different. If you dig deep enough in human history, you realise that everyone has a whipping boy.

This is common misconception. In times of Commonwealth, the rights and privileges were pivotal to the society. Religion was secondary matter and ethnicity was not important at all. E.g. most people in Grand Duchy of Lithuania were ethnically Ruthenians, not Lithuanians. Yet they call it "Grand Duchy of Lithuania", how do you like that? The very act of Union of Lublin guaranteed the same rights to all the nobles in the realm: Lithuanian, Ruthenian or whatever noble would be regarded by law as Polish noble. That is the reason why the nobles called themselves "Poles" (meaning: citizens) and why the Commonwealth was called "Poland" without mentioning Lithuania. There was no contradiction in being Polish and Lithuanian at the same time. Check out the genealogies of famous people of Commonwealth: they are multiethnic and multicultural: Polish, Ruthenian, Lithuanian, German, French, Italian, Sveden, Scot and even more “imput”… even the Africans.
In the XVIII century "the Most Serene Commonwealth of Poland" is proper and legal name adding "and Lithuania" is even more proper and also politically correct yet anachronism. Please do not confuse Commonwealth with modern concepts of “Poland” and “Lithuania” which were born of modern, ethno-centric, nationalist propaganda. This stupid and poisonous thoughts served only to divide and hurt people.