raveling in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 16th–17th Century. Mobility Conditions and Travellers’ Everyday Life

The article analyses traveling conditions in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 16th–17th century. It is aimed at establishing the reasons for the mobility of the GDL citizens in the period in question which were affected by social and economic changes as well as those related to the development of the urban network in the country. Several types of journeys have been distinguished which is indicative of the intensity of population mobility. The general road condition was far from excellent which affected their usability, particularly in wet spells. Attempts to ensure road maintenance and repairs were not equally distributed and not always timely. This was one of the factors accountable for the pace and comfort of traveling. The research also dwells on the everyday life on the road that both the citizens of the country and its visitors experienced as well as issues related to attacks on travellers and highway robberies. accentuată. Asigurarea lucrărilor de întreținere și reparații a drumurilor nu a fost realizată într-o manieră unitară iar muncile nu au fost întotdeauna efectuate în timp util. Acesta a fost unul dintre factorii responsabili pentru ritmul și confortul călătoriei. Cercetarea investighează, de asemenea, viața de zi cu zi pe trasele pe care s-au deplasat atât cetățenii țării, cât și vizitatorii acesteia, precum și aspectele legate de atacuri asupra călătorilor și jafuri la drumul mare.

Karvelis 11 touched a little upon the topics of the traveller's everyday life. Whereas historian Seweryn Wysłouch 12 in his book dwelled on such issues as travel arrangements, road maintenance, duties imposed on transported goods, and provision for travelling officials in the GDL in the 15th-16th c. Tomas Čelkis has also published several similar articles on the topic 13 . The lack in historiography suggests meager explication of the topic. This might be accountable for the fact that there is little data on traveling in the GDL in the works of scholars working on traveling and mobility related topics.
The analysis of the research subject is based on the primary archival and published sources. Relevant information can be expected in documents of more or less all categories. The author makes a wider use of narrative sources -memoires of 16th-17th century diplomats containing traveling data and travel accounts -as well as relies on the archives of the GDL Chancellery, the so-called Lithuanian Metrica, as materials pertaining to court matters contained therein is a source of information on people mobility: complaints about attacks on the roads are recorded, traveling related circumstances indicative of reasons and nature of mobility are described. Similar data can also be detected in the court books of the administrative units of the GDL. Although the said information is rather formal, taken as a whole it allows certain insights into mobility in the GDL.

Reasons for People Mobility in the GDL in the 16th-17th Century
In the 16th-17th c. people mobility in the GDL increased significantly as compared to previous centuries. This was due to changes in their social life. The country's administration in the 16th c. was for the most part based on the powers of officials traveling around the country, rather than the practice of the traveling sovereign 14 . The former were tasked with the administration of local territories on behalf of the sovereign. However, the links between these officials and the sovereign's court had to be rather tight 15 . And not only for the good of the proper functioning of the executive power but also because of the aspiration of the noble officials to maintain close relations with the sovereign as the nobility were concerned with their career, expected favors and privileges from the sovereign. The territorial administration of the country and the emergence of the local administration encouraged people to move around the territory for practical reasons. They had to take tribute to the sovereign's manors or fulfill certain traditional obligations which included maintenance of the sovereign's castles, shipment of construction materials or transportation of the sovereign's officials and their luggage from one place to another 16 . The functioning of courts also encouraged mobility of local population as people would appeal to judges and local officials (administrators) to execute justice 17 . The codification of the First Statute of Lithuania (1529) resulted in the inclusion of the generally accepted norm that if the court required evidence and reasoning, written documents were considered better and more trustworthy evidence than witness statements 18 . Therefore people tended to conclude property related agreements and conflict resolutions in writing and have them legally approved by a judge or a local official. Written documents acquired legal power. This way closer contacts between local people and officials were established, thus resulting in the need for a more intense mobility. On the other hand, no structural government of the country would have been possible save for such connections. Here the established network of overland roads came in handy as inland waterways were more intended for trade than for public life 19 .
Another important factor that induced mobility in the GDL in the 16th c. was changes in the social life. An increase in the functions that the nobility had developed in the 15th c. was observed. The clergy, whose representatives were in charge of pastoral care in their parishes and participated in the public life, is also attributable to the nobility as most of its representatives were from noble descent. In general, at that time the basis of the nobleman's status was landownership which in the 16th-17th c. underwent significant expansion as it was accompanied by the processes of peasants' enslavement which started back in the times of Grand Duke Vytautas 20 . As a reward for military service, the latter would give noblemen 17  lands with the peasants that inhabited them which in their own turn became legally "bound" to that land -not free but owned by the landlords. Thus in the 16th c. it became established that one of the centers of public life in a local area was the nobleman's manor with dependent lands and peasants' villages.
The 16th c. witnessed an intense process of internal colonization in the GDL -forested lands were cleared and used for peasants to settle. Changes in the historical landscape were for the most part affected by the Volok Reform implemented in 1547 (in order to increase the effectiveness of agriculture 21.4 ha size farms with a strict three-field system for crop rotation were established) 21 . The Reform had an impact on the country's urban structure -highlighted the distinction between rural and urban areas 22 . Changes in the network of settlements resulted in changes in the system of communication with the emergence of private roads around manors 23 . A new network of cities and towns was established in the GDL in the 16th-17th c. 24 . The cities, however, were rather agrarian in their nature as alongside "urban" businesses most citizens kept their "rural" businesses. The example of towns in the Duchy of Biržai suggests that townsmen owned land outside the town and would go to work on it 25 . Thus, to meet the demand for such short-distance trips the network of local roads in the  1547-1655 m.: 164-180, 403-412. area was established. The parish was an important axis of public life in the GDL. Not only people would go to churches, clergymen were also quite mobile. At that time there was a shortage of priests in the GDL parishes, therefore quite a few of them had a visiting priest who would serve two or more churches 26 .
Such local trips can be denominated as "minor trips" when only short distances were covered moving around the local area -going from towns (settlements) to mills, marketplaces, courts or churches. Whereas another type of traveling -long trips when long distances were covered and highways were used to travel from one urban centre to another -may as well be called "major trips". Such were travels that transcended the local spaces or state boundaries. Not only citizens of the GDL but also foreigners would set out on such journeys. They were mercantile in their naturelocal and foreign merchants were trading in the towns and cities of the GDL. However, this type of traveling also applies to diplomatic envoys tasked with certain foreign affairs related missions as well as educational trips (grad tur) when well-off noblemen would leave the GDL for foreign universities or cities 27 . There were travellers -the so-called roamers (usually from abroad) who would travel the world without any clear pragmatic or educational purposes, driven by a certain quest of adventure 28 . It seems that the trip itself was their goal and hobby especially when the financial circumstances would allow that. population as well as the whole of their everyday life. As suggested by travel accounts, in the 16th-17th c. foreigners from Western Europe viewed the GDL as a densely forested marshy land of harsh climate 29 . The research carried out by historian Wolfgang Behringer suggests 30 that back in 1965 Hubert Lamb had established that a certain warming was observed in Europe in the High Middle Ages (around 1000-1300) (source data were compared to the statistics of . At that time the climate that prevailed on the continent was characterized by hot and dry summers and mild winters which on average were 1-2°C warmer and further to the north might as well have been warmer up to 4°C. However, in the late 13th (early 14th) c. the climate all around Europe started to change -it was getting cooler and wetter and in the 14th c., with the beginning of the socalled Little Ice Age which continued up to the 19th c., was becoming even colder. It is believed that the peak of the cold spell was reached in the 17th c. 31 . The said climate changes were characteristic of all Europe. However, foreigners who visited the GDL in the 16th-17th c. noted cooler and damper climate in the country. Another feature that would catch their eye was tenebrous, densely forested, and barely urbanized landscape. What amplified these negative impressions was the obvious economic underdevelopment as compared to Western Europe. For example, in the early 17th c. British traveller Fynes Moryson wrote that Lithuania was extremely marshy and densely forested with settlements up to 20 German miles apart, therefore it was not recommended to travel around the country 29  in summer, only in winter when everything froze 32 . In fact, the quality of traveling and mobility in general in the region was subject to the existing system of roads. As it has already been mentioned, changes in the social and urban life in the GDL contributed to the maturity of the communication infrastructure. The network of roads that existed in the 16th-17th c. was well-established and rather dense 33 . Its smallest links were short-distance roads connecting villages and farmsteads which served the local community but were not particularly comfortable and the bridges across the rivers were poorly constructed and rather unstable. Other roads covered longer distances as they connected settlements with towns and played an important role in the country's public life. Most of them were used by traveling merchants. These roads were of much better condition as the powiat's local authorities were in charge of their maintenance. The emergence of major landownership and the network of economic centres, i.e. manors, was accompanied by the construction of long-distance private roads commissioned by noblemen. The principal arteries of land communication were public roads, otherwise known as highways. These were long-distance routes that connected urban, economic, and political centers. Smaller roads would lead to highways. Highway routes were used by the absolute majority of the population and foreign visitors. For example, at times merchants would be purposefully instructed to take certain highway routes so that they would trade and purchase wherever the authorities wanted them to, and this practice was regulated by law 34 . Today, it would be logical to assume that the distances of traveling routes should be based on the time-distance proportion so that the traveller reached the destination as fast as possible. However, in the period under consideration this logic was not always applied. For example, in the 16th c. the city of Trakai -the old capital of the GDL -was off the important trade route between the two metropolises -the Vilnius-Kaunas highway. Therefore in his privilege to Trakai issued in 1516 the sovereign of the GDL instructed all merchants traveling from Vilnius to Kaunas to make a detour to Trakai and trade there 35 .

The Better the Road the More Comfortable the Journey -the State of Overland Roads in the GDL
Foreign diplomats and envoys of certain states would take the largest and at times some of the smaller roads. In the 16th c., certain routes even had special names suggesting of their abovementioned function, for example, the "Old Envoy and Foot-messenger Route" 36 , the "Great Envoy Route" 37 , etc. In fact, highways were favored by travellers as most of them were controlled and guarded by the sovereign's officials 38 . Highways were traditionally regarded as roads that served the sovereign's needs 39 . Therefore the sovereign had to ensure that envoys and travellers would safely reach their destinations. Despite the dense network of roads their condition was rather poor, thus slowing the pace of traveling and making trips less comfortable. First of all, this was due to the GDL being a swampy and wet land. Cartographic sources of the 18th c., though for the most part focusing on the better cultivated landscape, evidence that the country was densely forested and rather marshy 40 . This again is suggested by the sources that make a distinction between seasonal "summer" and "winter" 35 Lietuvos Metrika. Knyga Nr. 9 (1511-1518 roads, thus adjusting to the relief 41 . Summer roads were more enduring, mostly used in the warm and wet season, however, they were longer as the road had to lead around the impassable wetlands. Winter roads would emerge in the cold season, after the marshes and rivers had frozen. For example, if local people were unable to transport the resources they had accumulated (feeds, wood) during the summer, they would leave them where they were and wait for the winter to take them home 42 . It can be noted that most foreign diplomats would travel in the region in the cold season as traveling then was faster and easier. They claim that in winter the beds of frozen rivers would turn into perfect "motorways" with no uphill or large obstacles and that by taking one you could be sure to always reach the intended destination 43 . For example, in 1516-1517 Sigismund von Herberstein was crossing the GDL in winter to get to Moscow 44 , whereas the envoy of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth Bernard Tanner travelled to Moscow in February-March of 1678 45 . However, there were cases when travellers would not take the season into consideration, for instance, the visit of German traveller Samuel Kiechel in 1586 46 . In any case, envoy trips were planned with regard to the political situation when certain urgent state-related issues had to be resolved. Similarly, merchants' trips could also not wait for a more comfortable season. 41 Tomas Čelkis, 'Vieškelio tinklo struktūra Lietuvos Didžiojoje Kunigaikštystėje XVI-XVII a. ': 43. 42 In the 1504 description of the boundaries of lands allocated by the sovereign to Vosylis Glinskis in Dubičiai area (outside Varėna) there is a reference to a "winter road" accross a swamp, as people could only carry hay across the swamp after it had frozen: Lietuvos Metrika. Knyga Nr. 5 (1427Nr. 5 ( -1506 (2) State officials were tasked with monitoring the condition of the most important roads and highways of the GDL, as this was the decisive factor in the intensity of the country's public life as well as efficiency of territorial administration and trade. If a road was in a bad state, merchants would refuse to travel along it to visit a town and would rather take a nearby more comfortable road. At times the sovereign would encourage the town community to fix their roads as it was obvious to his administration and the townsmen that such situation was to the prejudice of their trade-related interests 47 . The central authorities also made efforts to ensure proper road and bridge maintenance. Usually repair works on local roads were carried out on the initiative of local officials. There is evidence that in the 16th-17th c. the GDL voivodeships employed bridgemen 48 . Their function was to fix bridges and to rally people for such tasks. However, it is obvious that they were unable to take care of all the bridges, they focused their attention on the most important ones. Wooden bridges across rivers (which were in an overwhelming majority across the country) were most likely to suffer in spring when the floating ice would severely damage or even destroy them. This caused inconveniences not only to travellers but also to the locals. For instance, in 1529 parishioners complained to the priest that their way to Dubičiai (outside Varėna) church had been extremely dangerous and professedly several had even drowned while crossing the river 49 .
In spring, swollen rivers would often flood passages. For example, in the 16th c. envoy Sigismund von Herberstein indicated that while 47 In 1647 the sovereign of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth Władysław IV Vasa ordered the citizens of Simnas to cut some trees in his forest and make pavements around the town as the town was located in a hollow where roads after the rain were impassable. traveling from Vilnius to Moscow they had to take an uncomfortable and difficult road through melting snow and ice, among pools and lakes and near Opokai, in order to continue their journey, they even had to build a bridge across some pools and a river (colonorum nimirum multitudine praemissa, qui quaelibet impedimenta arboresque incidendo submovere, paludes ac fluvios pontibus sternere coguntur) 50 . There were no possibilities to fix all the bridges in time and at times the works would not start due to unresolved financial issues as no one wished to pay for the repairs. Such disputes would at times even end up in court. For example, in 1547 the sovereign's subjects from Sudervė volost (outside Vilnius) complained to the vicegerent in Vilnius that the noblemen residing in the area refused to help them with the maintenance of a bridge (exact location not indicated) as it was time to clean the silt, fix the bridge, and provide materials 51 . An attempt was made to lay the noblemen under the obligation to take a hand in the bridge maintenance works as they were also using it. In other cases, when there were no bridges, rivers were crossed at fords or passings where floats were used to get to the other bank of the river 52 .
Passage through marshes was even more difficult. Here medgrindos -laid out reinforced logs wide enough for two carriages to pass -proved very helpful 53 . Such structure would stretch for dozens of kilometers. The evidence can be found in the account of the Emperor's diplomat Francesco Da Collo's trip to Moscow in June of 1518 where he stated that having passed Brest they found themselves in the vast moorland which they crossed going along the "wooden road" for the rest of the day 54 . In other cases, in less marshy locations wet places were passed using less expensive techniques, i.e. by laying down bunches of tree branches, the so-called kamšos 55 . In particularly livery places embankments with log flooring in the width of two horse-driven carriages and stretching for up to 200 meters were erected 56 . Structures that facilitated communication were expensive, therefore they would mostly be built on central roads and highways where the traffic was heaviest. They would catch the travellers' eye not only because of their architecture but also because of the duties that were often collected in order to pass 57 .

Everyday Life on the GDL Roads
It has already been mentioned that 16th-17th c. trips in the GDL can be classified as "major trips" and "minor trips", based on their distances, destinations, composition of traveling groups, and other distinctions. However, when an attempt is made to understand the practical side of a trip and its everyday routine, it is necessary to speak about these trips in general, as if synthesizing the available data, as everyone who travelled at that time would sooner or later face most of the peculiarities of such journeys. Such approach to the reconstruction helps avoid distorting the general image of the research, moreover, makes it more thorough, discloses 54  preparations made before traveling, the proceedings, and various obstacles that travellers would face.
Local people who would take short-distance ("minor") trips left no accounts of the same as it was a part of their everyday life that no one would give much prominence. Whereas foreign envoys and merchants who travelled across the GDL would record their experience and part of their texts have been published 58 . Such accounts were popular in Western Europe as they helped learn more about little explored lands and travellers' experiences 59 . Meanwhile, detailed travel descriptions prepared by diplomats served as a kind of methodological means in the diplomatic work of their successors. Thus one learned about geography, traditions, and possible dangers in remote countries.
Diplomats who would go on long-distance cross-border trips were usually people of higher social status, mostly noblemen. In their everyday life they were also more mobile as periodically visited their manors scattered across the GDL. Based on R. Ragauskienė's calculations, at that time, if needed, some noblemen would cover up to 600 or even 1000 km 60 . Whereas common people of the GDL, such as peasants, lead rather sedentary lives and would only move in their local area. Although there were exceptional cases when they were required to fulfill the duty and offer a lift to the sovereign or a lord (carry tributes, goods), thus visiting more remote towns and castles situated as far as 120 km 61  (tradesmen) were much more mobile as they would take long-distance journeys covering 150-600 km 62 .
The size of the escort was subject to the purpose of the trip and the status of the traveller -the higher his status, the larger his escort 63 . Diplomats would be escorted by security guards and servants. Security guards would also escort noblemen's carriages 64 . Merchants made attempts to form larger groups 65 . An additional security option when traveling abroad was to request a guarantee letter -the safe-conduct document (Freies Geleit) -from the sovereign of the country you were about to visit, thus ensuring security in the lands under his rule 66 . These documents could be secured at the highest level -monarchs (their chancelleries) would address each other to request one. An eloquent example could be the safeconduct document issued in 1560 in the environment of the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I in favor of diplomat Valentin Saurman who went to the GDL and lived there for a while. It includes a request: we strictly instruct our subjects and those of the Holy Roman Empire and benevolently urge and kindly request all others not only to let the aforementioned envoy together with his escort and servants, horses, carriages, and all their items to freely, safely, and without any hindrance go, pass or stay at any place or location, but also to assist him and mediate in the provision of security guards, guides, horses, carriages, and 62 Raimonda Ragauskienė, '"Dingę istorijoje": XVI a. LDK privačių archyvų dokumentų dinamika ': 94. 63 In some cases, for example in the Grand Envoy of Lew Sapieha of 1600-1601 the escort consisted of nearly a thousand men, see Elijas Pilgrimovijus, Didžioji Leono Sapiegos pasiuntinybė į Maskvą, 1600-1601  all other items necessary to accelerate the journey for which he will pay the required and proper price 67 . This reveals a lot about the preparation for the trip. Protective letters were issued not only to diplomats, but also to merchants trading on a larger scale. In 1528, merchant from Constantinople Gaslan Karamant indicated at the Brest castle court that he had a guarantee letter signed by the King of Poland allowing him to safely transport goods across the GDL to Vilnius 68 .
There is a reference to guides in the above-cited Emperor's letter. These people were much needed and very helpful. They knew the correct and safe route and places where travellers could stop overnight, replenish their supplies, and feed the horses. There was a great risk of getting lost if one did not know the way. Therefore diplomats would accurately describe the routes they followed so that other envoys traveling later might use them 69 . According to R. Kamuntavičius, at the end of the 17th c. texts describing traveling peculiarities in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and even indicating distances between cities were published around Europe 70 . This material was very handy to merchants who were constantly on the move. In the 17th c. the city of Riga -a major commercial port on the Baltic Sea -was concerned with speeding up merchants' journeys, therefore special signs -several meters high wooden poles indicating distances and directions -were erected alongside the major roads 71 . They would feature Riga's coat of arms and indicate the distance left to the city. However, in order to avoid getting disorientated in the network of roads, one needed a guide. Unfortunately, they were rarely mentioned in travellers' itineraries, most probably due to the fact that few resolved to travel unexplored roads without a guide. The letter written in 1561 by the GDL envoys in Moscow to the King of the GDL Sigismund Augustus once again suggests that traveling without guides was complicated 72 . It was stated in the letter that following unsuccessful negotiations the envoys were urged to leave the territory of the state of Moscow in twelve days. Although the envoys of the GDL asked the Muscovites to assign a guide, their request was disregarded. The time allocated to cross the border of the GDL was insufficient, therefore the crazy haste resulted in the horses falling exhausted along the way, as the envoys risked their lives if they failed to leave the country on time.
It was not only the guides that were part of the escorts of some important people. Cooks are at times mentioned among other servants. The secretary of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth Petras Veževičius in his travel account written in 1635 makes numerous references to meal times as well as what and where he ate each day 73 . In 1678 the envoy of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Moscow B. Tanner also had a cook 74 . They were not only tasked with cooking but before setting out had to make an estimate of how much supplies they would need as in the sparsely populated GDL, especially its eastern regions, there were no possibilities to regularly replenish supplies 75 . Therefore travellers had to carry larger amounts of provisions. Foreign envoys who travelled across the GDL in the second half of the 15th c. would note that the country was densely forested with few settlements 76 . Alongside the roads they would spot camps with bonfires and firewood left by those who travelled before them. tramps on the roads, so guards were keeping watch when camping overnight. The sources offer no information on how and what the horses were fed during the trips, though an assumption can be made that travellers would carry hay and oats purchased in villages and inns along the way.
In his itinerary Sigismund von Herberstein, who in 1516-1517 crossed the GDL to get to Moscow, would more often than not indicate distances in miles between towns and settlements 77 . For example, eight miles across a forest separated Narew (Podlachia) from Krynki, where the officials of the GDL sovereign were awaiting him to accompany to Vilnius. This envoy described the GDL as densely forested. It was also indicated that on his way from Vilnius to Polotsk he passed numerous lakes, swamps, and vast forests stretching for fifty German miles 78 . Nevertheless, the traveller noted that, judging by the vegetation, the soil in this part of the country should be quite fertile. The road from Vilnius to Moscow was uncomfortable and difficult, covered in melting snow and ice and leading across pools and lakes 79 . Not only the trip was tiresome but the travellers had difficulties finding proper shelter to spend the nights. German traveller Samuel Kiechel visited the GDL in 1586 80 . On his way from Konigsberg he came to Grodno and then continued to Vilnius. He wrote that when the city was about three hours away they entered a dense and tenebrous forest, the road suddenly started winding uphill and from above the travellers could see a long valley punctuated by numerous towns and villages, around thirty of which were inhabited by Tartars. He spent eleven days in Vilnius and made friends with a merchant who was on his way to Riga. The merchant had hired two Tartars for four guilders to carry his goods. The traveller, however, pointed out, that the Tartars did not inspire much confidence neither in him nor in the merchant. Therefore, for confidence 77 (Vilnius, 1998): 193-197. reasons they were asked for a guaranty -an oath, which, it was claimed, was a common practice in such cases.
In the 17th c. the GDL was still viewed as a country offering little convenience to travellers. In 1636, apostolic nuncio Mario Filonardi described the trip from Vilnius to Warsaw as difficult and noted that the road winded through forests of high pines with few villages along the way 81 . An almost identical account is offered by Philippe Avril who in 1687-1689 transited to Moscow 82 , whereas in 1688, French serviceman François Paulin Dalairac made a remark about the harsh climate in the region (c`est un climat trop rude) 83 . The abovementioned envoy of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth B. Tanner had a very difficult journey to Moscow in February-March of 1678 84 . It was constantly raining along the way and with the melting snow it was so damp that the travellers had difficulties making fire. At times the road was impassable and horses would stick in the mud. It is no wonder that these travellers were trying to keep warm by consuming alcohol -beer and vodka with honey -when spending the nights at inns owned by local Jews. It is no secret that to set out on a trip like that one required a great deal of stamina and good health. Even more so as there were few possibilities to have a rest and spend the night at an inn as they were few and far between even at the central highways. According to R. Kamuntavičius, inns in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were rather poor, not at all times serving food, therefore travellers tried to take as much provisions as they could 85 Baranowski, Polska karczma. Restauracja. Kawiarnia (Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk: Ossolineum, 1979): 7-44. trimmed, fully or partially covered 92 . Based on the analogy with Poland, it is obvious that in 16th-17th c. journeys the most popular means of transport were four-wheel fully covered carts and carriages pulled by several pairs of horses 93 . Drawings produced by the Emperor's envoy Augustin Freiherr von Meyerberg, who in 1661-1662 travelled across the GDL to Moscow, depict towns and villages as well as one-horse four-wheel peasants' carts and fully covered carriages pulled by a team of horses and accompanied by groups of horsemen on the roads 94 . In winter horse-drawn sledges were used 95 . Horses were driven by the driver sitting in the sledge, though there were cases when the driver would sit on horseback. Vehicle breakdowns and wheel breakages were considered a great misfortune when traveling 96 . This would require repair works or would even lead to purchasing new carriages.
In general, it can be stated that traveling in the GDL was far from easy. Road condition was rather poor and travellers were not always lucky to find a place to spend the night. Those who set out on a trip had to be particularly patient and ready for the unexpected.

What Could Not be Foreseen -Dangers and Adventures on the Roads of the GDL
The experience of West European travellers suggests that it was not only the objective difficulties, such as hardly passable road sections, that awaited them on the roads -robber attacks were a common feature of traveling in the 16th-17th c. 97  heard the statements, observed that the incident occurred on private land rather than on a highway (public space). Thus the landlord could manage his possessions as he wished and the claim had to be heard as a dispute with regard to damaged property, rather than a highway robbery (which would have been prejudice to public interest) 101 .
No information about attacks on diplomats and foreign merchants traveling along the GDL roads and highways when on their "major trips" can be detected in the sources. Most probably due to the fact that they would travel in groups, accompanied by security guards, and carrying the sovereign's guarantee letters. In his memoirs nobleman Teodoras Jevlašauskis claims that when in 1586 he was traveling from Vilnius to Kaunas and spending a night at a wayside inn he was attacked by robbers. Fortunately, a group of merchants soon arrived at the inn and scared the robbers away 102 . The ample materials related to the 16th-17th c. court matters suggest that there was almost no serious organized robbery on the roads of the GDL as preventive measures were implemented against such criminal activities. Sources dating back to the 15th c. indicate that there was a special obligation in place for the noblemen to ensure security on the most important roads 103 . Whereas an inscription in the Brest castle book of 1693 suggests that following merchants' complaints with regard to highway robbery, captains of horses (Rittmeister) were appointed to guard the roads and catch offenders 104 .
Another example indicates that in 1575 people of the canon of Vilnius carrying animal pelts were ambushed by a company from Olizaravas manor, beaten up and robbed of their carts with the goods and money 112 . Documents of the castle court or the land court which dealt with criminal cases always described the loss suffered and detailed the lost items. A curious robbery testimony can be found among court documents of 1541 113 . Noblemen of Vitebsk voivodeship claimed that they were carrying tribute to the sovereign -eight and a half barrels of flour. On the highway in the vicinity of Rūdninkai (outside Vilnius) drunk officials of the sovereigns' forests Petras and Martynas left an inn and together with their accomplices attacked them, beat them up, took three horses and carts and even took off one nobleman's boots. The defendants, however, in response presented a different side of the story. They claimed that the noblemen of the Voivode of Vitebsk stopped at a ditch beside the road and made a fire thus waking a bear that was sleeping in the ditch. One can presume that the beast got out and attacked them so they ran away leaving the carts behind. All the accused admitted that they could not resist the temptation to rob the unattended carts but swore to God that this was their only wrongdoing. Thus the bear not only became one of the "eyewitnesses" but also a kind of a scapegoat for all the harm suffered. Foreign travellers would note that in the densely forested GDL there were lots of wild beasts that travellers should beware.
Traveling in the territory of the GDL was not dangerous. There were no organized gangs of robbers that would rampage in the country. Although there is evidence of isolated cases when merchants would complain about the threat of being robbed, most attacks on the roads become evident from court files when dealing with the locals' complaints with regard to injuries suffered when traveling. These offences, however, were rather spontaneous in their nature, instigated by accidental conversations, quarrels, and conflicts among fellow travellers.

Conclusions
1. Public mobility in the 16th-17th c. GDL was rather intense.
Territorial government and local administration encouraged people to move around the area due to practical needs. Another factor that stimulated mobility was the functionality of local courts. The said period witnessed the emergence of the network of land roads that connected settlements with noblemen's manors (economic centers) as well as newly established towns and cities. Roads connecting urban centers with their surroundings were established. The axis of public life in the GDL was the church visited by all the inhabitants of an area. 2. The local movement of people inhabiting a certain area and covering short distances to travel from settlements (towns) to mills, markets, courts or churches can be denominated as "minor trips". Journeys of a different kind -"major trips" -would include traveling long-distances along highways, crossing not only the local areas but, if needed, even state borders. Not only citizens of the GDL but also foreign merchants and diplomats would set out on such journeys. Educational trips when well-to-do noblemen would leave the GDL to go to foreign universities and cities can also be attributed to this type of journeys. 3. The quality of traveling in the GDL in the 16th-17th c., was subject to the climate and geographic conditions. Visitors from Western Europe viewed the GDL as a gaunt, densely forested, marshy, and little urbanized country. The locals, however, left no similar comments. Traveling conditions were subject to the state of the road network which in the period in question was well-established and quite dense. It consisted of four types of roads. The smallest local roads connected villages and served the needs of the local communities. Longer-distance roads connected settlements and towns, were part of the public life and thus better maintained. With the formation of the network of manors, noblemen would build private roads. The most important roads were the large highways that connected distant urban centers and that had other roads leading towards them. 4. Road condition in the GDL was rather poor and caused travellers certain inconveniences. Wet weather made traveling difficult, there even existed seasonal "summer" and "winter" roads. The latter would emerge when the swamps froze, thus allowing travellers to shorten distances by taking a more direct route along a swamp or another water body. The central government was concerned with the state of the roads and was engaged in their maintenance and repairs. Reinforced structures of logs were laid down and embankments were erected in impassable boggy sections. In spring, the floating ice would damage most and destroy some of the bridges. Repair works were slow, so travellers faced lots of inconveniences and at times even had to build their own bridges. 5. Better-off and higher-ranked people would travel with large escorts: security guards and service staff (servants, cooks, etc.). Oftentimes additional security when traveling abroad would be the guarantee letter issued by the sovereign of the destination country which served as legal protection. Guides who knew accurate and safe routes, safe places to spend the night, and wayside inns as well as settlements where travellers could replenish their supplies and feed the horses were very important. 6. In the eyes of foreign visitors the 16th-17th c. GDL was a travellerunfriendly country -densely forested, with few settlements, and harsh climate. Local people would not note these factors as shortcomings. However, they would also indicate that in spring part of the roads were impassable. Foreigners would complain about poor quality of inns as they were few along the highways and rather poor and cold. At times they would serve no food, only spirits. Alcohol consumption would often result in fights and thefts, therefore such inns were not a very safe place. 7. It was not particularly dangerous to travel in the GDL. There is no evidence in the sources about attacks on diplomats and merchants who crossed the GDL during their "major trips". The most