The article constitutes a supplement and summary of the cycle dedicated to the view of Russian history in the writings of the times of the reign of King Stanislaus II (Dzieje Rosji w piśmiennictwie doby stanisławowskiej. Part I: until the 1st partition, „Z Badań nad Książką i Księgozbiorami Historycznymi”, vol. 9: 2015; Dzieje Rosji w piśmiennictwie doby stanisławowskiej. Part II: „Recherches sur les titres...” Feliksa Łoyki, „Z Badań nad Książką i Księgozbiorami Historycznymi”, vol. 11: 2017). The starting point of the preliminary research on this subject was Kazimierz Bartkiewicz’s list, which includes five items concerning Russia. This preliminary research disclosed several more titles and the work also covered cycles of articles „Pamiętnik Historyczno-Polityczny”, entries of Zbiór potrzebniejszych wiadomości, as well as a manuscript thesis of Łoyko Recherches sur les titres portés en différents tems par les souverains de Russie et de Moscovie. It still didn’t consider enough of the dominating role of Russia in public life of the Republic at that time. With certain reservations, only two texts can be viewed as an attempt of a comprehensive review of the history of our Eastern neighbour (Lacombe/Kniażewicz with Wyrwicz’s comments and Syruć/Rousset de Missy). A symbol of superficiality and brevity of Polish opinions on Russian topics is Zbiór potrzebniejszych wiadomości. Interest in the history of our powerful neighbour in the Polish writings of the 18th century became visible already in the Saxon times. It was accompanied by widening of the examination of life and undertaking by people attached to the Załuski Library of an editorial programme based on erudite model of historiography: thus came the questions concerning sources, subject bibliography, chronology, and fact-finding. This kind of “technical” attempts could be observed until 1781. Among the discussed publications translations formed a dominating part but none of them can be considered an adaptation or compilation. Polish translators concentrated on converting measures and values of money into our reality, stressed the issue of international obligations towards the Republic, and were sensitive to the issue of defence of the Catholic Church or Jesuits from external accusations (Syruć). The front runners here were French authors (Lacombe, De Mauvillon, De Bauclair) and German ones but closely connected with Russia (Pallas, Von Stӓhlin, Von Manstein, Schmidt). In Poland, also William Coxe’s Travels into Poland, Russia... were noticed, of which descriptions of the rule and “characters” of the rulers, from the times of Peter I onwards, were made available to the Polish public. Furthermore, there were attempts made to publish Russian texts but the basis of Russian history was still popular Western literature, mainly francophone. Writers of the times of the reign of King Stanislaus II were not willing to use their better understanding of the Russian world, blended in the cultural space of the Republic. They preferred to use French writers compiling texts, to copy or adapt their points of view, formulas and evaluations, even when being aware of structural errors of this historiography. After 1772, also voices of German authors were heard, who had known Russia from personal experience (Pallas, Von Stӓhlin, Schmidt), as well as an English historian, participant of a trip “to Northern countries” (Coxe). We should also confirm a traditional, negative stereotype of a “Muscovite”, which was particularly dominant in the description of the neglected epoch before the rule of Peter the Great. In the historiography of the times of the reign of King Stanislaus II that ruler is the central figure of Russia’s history. Voltaire presentation was for a long time a pattern of the description of his rule and not until the 1780s Coxe’s publication gave rise to the correction of this picture. At the same time an important source of hagiographic legend of the tsar – Von Stӓhlin’s Anegdoty – was translated into the Polish language. At the close of the First Republic, translations of De Mauvillon appeared, and particularly of De Bauclair that were addressed to the audience who welcomed sensational topics, which presented brutality of the fight at the time of Elisabeth, Peter III, and Catherine II. Those publications appeared in the provinces, and the rest in the enlightened Warsaw dedicated for people connected with Stanislaus Augustus. Zbiór dziejopisów polskich and, until certain time, also Kodeks by Dogiel (the work was continued under the auspices of the King) were the only effects of the activities of the milieu of Załuski Library thriving mainly in the Saxon times – “end of the world of noble erudites” can be connected with the turning point of the first partition. Descriptions of Russia’s history were dominated by chronicle perspective and we can try in vain to search for philosophical deliberations, or tribute to Voltaire’s postulates, who demanded from historians to include civilizational, economic, moral threads.
The article presents political, journalistic and legal-international context of preliminary research and source-studies publications in the times of the reign of Stanislaus Augustus. A constant need to legitimize the power of the King was in the centre of the scheme of historical projects launched by his circles. This tendency was depicted for example in two versions of the painting by Bernardo Bellotto (Canaletto) presenting the election of 1764. Their underlying intention was to accentuate the election’s conformity with political heritage, the rule of law and also with the tradition of the Polish nobility. The point of departure for ‘controlling the past’ was gaining power over its testimony. Therefore a lot of activities of people around the King were undertaken in relation to the public archives: collecting, organising, conservation, research and taking over of the archive material. The emperor ordered to continue the work on the Diplomatic Code that had been started by Piarist Maciej Dogiela. The work was specifically focused on current interests of Rzeczpospolita, as well as formal and legal overtones of published materials. In the international polemic about the First Partition such a ‘scholarly’ form – laborious and indirect to the heart of the problem – could not be applied. However, among the persons who at that time most probably presented the King’s and Rzeczpospolita’s position, we can find names of people known as members of the team working on the Code, other source studies and historiographic initiatives: Jacek Ogrodzki, Karol Wyrwicz, Klemens (Ignacy) Pokubiatta, and possibly also Adam Naruszewicz. Printed historical sources, both of narrative and legal character, played an exceptional role in that polemic. Feliks Łoyko – the most prominent polemicist of the Polish side – supported his historical argument only with source materials already published, probably to enable the reader to check for himself the quoted references. A competent polemic with the lawless partition could therefore be possible thanks to the achievements of source studies in the times of the reign of Augustus III and editorial plans of erudite people gathered around the Załuski Library. Moreover, there is no visible creative difference in this field between the Saxon epoch and the times of the reign of Stanislaus II, and that erudite formula of action, formally aimed at the past, was easily combined with current, pragmatic goals. Source-studies projects defending the rights of Rzeczpospolita could not be limited exclusively to the so-called royal castle circles and ‘state’ ventures. Also members of the elite who were in conflict with the ruler imposed by Russia were getting ready to polemicize with the propaganda of the partitioners. Analysis of the manuscript legacy of Józef Aleksander Jabłonowski contradicts a thesis that the Confederacy of Bar emigrants, when hearing the news about partition, limited themselves to proclaiming Lindawa manifesto. An example can be the draft of the manuscript 1144 Expositio fidelis et authentica juris ad Haliciam, Wlodimiriam, Luceoriam, Premisliam et alia…, preserved in the Princes Czartoryski Library in Kraków, having also its French version. There is an open question who was its author – some involvement of Józef Aleksander Jabłonowski is unquestionable. Jabłonowski’s materials reveal also some tracks of other preliminary research and lists related to the polemic with unlawful activities of the invaders.
The articles provides an analysis of historical Polish themes in the American and European cinema. The analysis shows close relation between cinema and national literary and artistic tradition of the time. It was a general rule that subsequent transformations of popular themes were appearing, along with changing means of expression and technical capabilities. In that tradition Polish themes were rare and not many of them could be found in plots of contemporary historical fi lms. In keeping with that tradition, historical subject matter was freely travestied according to aesthetic and entertainment needs.
At the time of sound fi lm (to the outbreak of the 2nd World War), Polish historical themes appeared in several German, French, Austrian and American feature films. Especially Germans involved in filmmaking were interested in the issues of Polish history, particularly at the time of the Third Reich, when the cinema was controlled by the government. Temporary thaw in Polish-German relations brought some film productions favourable to the Poles and their fight for freedom. Engineered by the authorities, some were even a co-production as a result of negotiations, as e.g. August der Starke (1936). The analysis of historical Polish themes in the American and European cinema shows close relation between cinema and national literary and artistic tradition of the time. It was a general rule that subsequent transformations of popular themes were appearing, along with changing means of expression and technical capabilities. In that tradition Polish themes were rare and not many of them could be found in plots of contemporary historical films. Apart from that, “common historical memorials” turned the attention of fi lmmakers to Polish themes, i.e. moments when Polish history crossed with their own historical events. In other cases it could have been some direct incentives from the part of the totalitarian authorities willing to show good relations with Poland or, for instance, to justify the occupation of its territory. In that “nationalized” cinema, which needed legitimisation of its propaganda, a strategy of “factual camoufl age” appeared – borrowing of historical props (e.g. the crown of Charles the Great), hiring consultants, etc.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.