The Fabricated Villain: Duke Skirgaila of the Gediminid Dynasty, and the Historiographical Construction of a Patrimonial Succession Crisis in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

The Fabricated Villain: Duke Skirgaila of the Gediminid Dynasty, and the Historiographical Construction of a Patrimonial Succession Crisis in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Abstract: Duke Skirgaila (c. 1354–1397), son of Algirdas and regent to Jogaila, has for centuries functioned in historical consciousness as a violent, incompetent, and politically untalented figure. This black legend, shaped by his contemporary antagonists, has not only dominated classical historiography but continues to resonate in modern popular culture, where the duke is recurrently reduced to the caricatured role of an inept alcoholic. This paper argues that the traditional image of Skirgaila is fundamentally a fabricated historiographical construct, designed to delegitimize actors inconvenient to the triumphant narrative of the Polish-Lithuanian Union and Vytautas the Great’s rise to power. Consequently, this study contributes to the contemporary academic trend of decentring and decolonizing East European historiography. The research employs critical discourse analysis (CDA) of primary sources alongside comparative historical sociology; specifically Z. Norkus' conceptualization of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as a "Patrimonial Empire." This methodological framework elevates Skirgaila’s story from a mere tale of personal failure to a crucial case study of a structural institutional crisis. Skirgaila’s tenure as Jogaila’s regent in Polotsk and subsequently in Trakai (1386–1392) was inherently unstable because his delegated authority ("proxy rule") lacked the indispensable "patrimonial legitimacy" within the Gediminid dynasty. His inability to secure Trakai against the claims of Vytautas—the traditional inheritor of Kęstutis' patrilineal domain - was not a reflection of his personal inadequacies, but a predictable outcome of this fundamental succession crisis. The regent's negative portrayal was systematically entrenched by a convergence of hegemonic perspectives: the pro-Vytautas Lithuanian chronicles, the pro-Jagiellonian Polish narrative (J. Długosz), and the Teutonic Order’s propaganda (Wigand of Marburg). To counter this discourse, the paper highlights Skirgaila's later, successful administrative tenure as Duke of Kyiv (1392–1397). His ability to effectively govern these vast, multi-ethnic, and Orthodox peripheries - thereby securing the southern flank of the Grand Duchy - demonstrates significant military and administrative competence, which has been systematically marginalized by a historiographical focus solely on his defeat in the Lithuanian metropolis. The analysis concludes that Skirgaila was not an inherent villain, but a politically necessary antagonist, whose constructed incompetence served to legitimize the new political order established between Jogaila and Vytautas.