The crisis in Polish-Lithuanian relations in the last years of the reign of Władysław II Jagiełło (Jogaila), caused by the coronation efforts of Vytautas the Great and later by Švitrigaila’s attempts to break up the union and achieve the full sovereignty of Lithuania, resulted in the parties presenting their arguments on the international arena in the speeches of deputies at the Reichstag in Nuremberg or to the Papal Curia, but also in the correspondence circulating between the courts of rulers, manifestos issued and consilia prepared by scholars. The use of letters and manifestos as a tool to present and promote the right to power became very evident during the dispute between natural brothers Władysław II Jagiełło and Švitrigaila. And it was not a matter of convincing each other between the conflicting parties or making them aware of the situation, but of outlining their reasons before external parties. In letters addressed to the Grand Master of the Teutonic Knights, King Władysław II wrote about the inheritance of power from his father and referred to the Lithuanian-Ruthenian rule as his heritage, calling the Grand Duchy of Lithuania his verum et legittimum patrimonium. His youngest brother similarly defended his power by referring to its basis. In the Vitebsk manifesto of March 1433 addressed to the Council of Basel, Švitrigaila’s loyal subjects drew attention primarily to the consensual election of the prince on Jogaila's advice and guidance, completely ignoring the question of hereditary rights. Moreover, in the light of the statement of the prince's Ruthenian subjects, it was only the legitimate election of Švitrigaila that made him verus heres. One of the letters presented at the council by Švitrigaila’s spokesmen, full of misrepresentations and accusations against Jogaila, led to a clash between Polish and Teutonic (as well as Švitrigaila’s) advocates. The exchange of letters, manifestos and consilia and the discussion that took place around the arguments raised in them regarding the right to succession and power in the Jagiellonian monarchy shaped the political culture of the elites and established the role of writings in it.

In the history of studies regarding the beginnings of Lithuania and rule of Mindaugas that have already been extensively conducted for 200 years, the works by Polish historians – J. Latkowski, W. Kamieniecki, H. Łowmiański, and H. Paszkiewicz – hold a significant position. The discussion of international historians around the concept of the genesis of Lithuania and opinions on Mindaugas and his actions shaped the long-term perception of the beginnings of Lithuania and its Christianization. The polemic, disrupted by the outbreak of the Second World War, was brought back later on, but with a lower impact and less prominent participation of Polish researchers. In Polish historiography, the neglected issue of the genesis of Lithuania and the beginnings of its Christianization, on a scientific level, was restored by K. Stopka (the 1st attempt of Christianization; 1987) and K. Pietkiewicz (the beginnings of statehood; 2010). At that time, extensive studies were carried out over the said subjects by medieval researcher E. Gudavičius who concluded his work in 1998 with a contemporary monograph titled Mindaugas. However, neither the Lithuanian researcher did refer in any way to the scientifically valuable studies by K. Stopka with regard to the baptism of Mindaugas, nor K. Pietkiewicz made a reference to the monograph by Gudavičius, although he is most certainly familiar with it. Pietkiewicz’s work is not the only example. Thus, it is worthwhile to confront the perception of the genesis of Lithuanian monarchy in the contemporary Polish historiography with the views on the same subject among Lithuanian researchers.