The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the French political thought (1573-1795)1 - De Gruyter

Open Political Science, 2020; 3: 231–242

Research Article

Teresa Malinowska*

The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the
French political thought (1573-1795)1
https://doi.org/10.1515/openps-2020-0021
received July 1, 2020; accepted August 10, 2020.

Abstract: The modern Polish-Lithuanian Republic drew the attention of many French political authors like Théodore
de Bèze, Jean Boucher, Jean Bodin, Henri de Boulainvilliers, Montesquieu, Voltaire or Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The
Sarmatian State appeared in French political literature in 1573, when the French prince Henri de Valois was elected
king of the Polish-Lithuanian Republic, until 1795, when it disappeared from the map of Europe. It appeared not only in
political treaties but also in pamphlets, manifestos and travel literature. This article aims at analysing this continuous
presence, which constitutes a fascinating key for reading the French political debates of the modern era.

Keywords: Modern republicanism; modern absolutism; mixed monarchy; modern political thought; European
history; history of representations; Franco-Polish relationships.

In his monography, Olivier Christin wrote about the elections in medieval and modern Europe: “It is precisely by
recalling that past that we can understand some of the issues discussed today about the forms of democratic political
life”2. This way, the French historian underlined the meaning of political concepts and practices inherited from the
past. When talking about the electoral phenomenon in the modern era, one cannot forget the experience of the Polish-
Lithuanian Republic. Yet, it seems that it was still poorly apprehended. In 2008, Marc Bélissa made an important
statement concerning French eighteenth century studies: if the significance of the English or the Swedish model in the
enlightenment republican thought was quite well-known in France and Europe, the influence of the Rzeczpospolita
was often forgotten3. Nevertheless, in Poland some researchers, like Jan Dzięgielewski, Krzysztof Koehler, and Dorota
Muszytowska, inscribed the modern Polish political and institutional solutions among the honourable achievements
of European thought4.
     One possible way to evaluate the real impact of the Polish-Lithuanian Republic on the formation of other countries’
political concepts is to analyse its place in their political literature. Stanisław Kot followed this approach in his work
Rzeczpospolita Polska w literaturze politycznej Zachodu (Kraków 1919) in which he presented different nations’ opinions
about the Polish-Lithuanian political system. Despite him basing his study on a wide range of sources, the author
himself admitted that “researchers will always add supplements”. Indeed, some historians did continue this research
thread. For the 18th century, one can quote Larry Wolff’s Inventing Eastern Europe… (1994), Ryszard Wołoszyński’s
Polska w opiniach Francuzów o dawnej Polsce… (1964) or Marc Belissa’s, Jerzy Michalski’s, and Maciej Forycki’s works
about Poland in the enlightenment republicanism5. There are also fragmentary works about 16th-century political

1 The article is part of the project nr 2016/23/N/HS3/00376 financed by the National Science Center (Poland). It presents a synthesis of the
project’s results. Because of the limited space, I had to limit the footnotes to a minimum. The full bibliography of the presented research is
available in open access online: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02427199
2 O. Christin, Vox populi. Une Histoire du vote avant le suffrage universel, Paris 2014, p. 12.
3 M. Bélissa, La République polonaise dans le débat politique des Lumières in G. Bonnot de Mably, Du gouvernement et des lois de la Pologne
[1770-1771], Paris 2008, p. 8.
4 See for instance: J. Dzięgielewski, K. Koehler, D. Muszytowska (ed.), 1573. Our ancestor’s achievements made 440 years ago, Warszawa 2014.
5 L. Wolff, Inventing Eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment, Stanford 1994. R. Wołoszyński, Polska w opi-
niach Francuzów w XVIII wieku. Rulhière i jego współcześni, Warszawa 1964. M. Bélissa, La République polonaise dans le débat politique des

*Corresponding author: Teresa Malinowska, University Adam Mickiewicz, Poznań, Poland, E-mail: teresa.malinowska.91@gmail.com

   Open Access. © 2020 Teresa Malinowska, published by De Gruyter.                      This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

232         Teresa Malinowska

thought, like Jean-Marie Le Gall’s article about Polish tolerance in French 16th-century debate6. The 17th century was
much less studied from a political literature point of view. Existing works almost exclusively focus on travel literature7.
Despite these achievements, it seems that, after Stanisław Kot, there was no other long-term study encompassing
the whole modern era. The PhD thesis La République de Pologne dans les imprimés français (1573-1795). Penser les
relations entre gouvernants et gouvernés (Paris-Nanterre 2019) aims at re-examining this research field in the long-term
perspective. It analyses the image of the Polish-Lithuanian Republic in more than 150 French printings from 1573 to
1795. The expansion of the source material, thanks to the addition of previously unknown French writings, completes
and sometimes revises some statements made at the beginning of the 20th century by the Polish historian (and then
his followers). The chosen approach is also slightly different than Stanisław Kot’s. The Polish historian wrote: “my
intention was not to make a study on Western political literature, […] but to analyse critically the judgements of this
literature about the Rzeczpospolita”8. Here, the opinions of French thinkers about Poland are fully considered in the
context of concrete French political debates and ideas. Hence, my research is a “study on Western political literature”
examined from the point of view of the presence of the Polish theme. In this way, we can accurately determine the
context in which the Polish example was quoted, which in turn allows answering two key research questions: whether
the Republic of Nobles had any impact on the development of French political ideas and what that was; and how the
image of the Republic itself was shaped by the changes of the Gallic political thought. As a consequence, the purpose
of the research is to show the evolution of French representations of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth throughout
two centuries, not only in the context of events in Poland or Franco-Polish diplomatic relationships but mainly in the
context of French disputes on the form of government.
     This issue is even more fascinating in that, at the dawn of modern times, the Kingdom of France and the Polish-
Lithuanian Republic chose two totally different political paths. Whereas in France, the Valois and Bourbon dynasties
promoted and introduced a centralized and absolute royal power at the expense of conciliatory and representative
institutions, the Polish-Lithuanian nobility actively participated in the political life of the country and controlled the
monarchical power. Elections, regular convocations of the Parliament (Sejm) or–from the mid-17th century–the liberum
veto perfectly illustrated this Polish-Lithuanian divergence from France, where unconditional heredity, absolute royal
power, complete obedience, and loyalty were highly predicated and asserted, and where the General Estates had never
been convoked between 1614 and 1789.
     The analysis is enabled by the intense relations that France and Poland maintained throughout the modern era.
The study begins at the election of Henri de Valois to the Polish throne in1573, a founding moment of diplomatic and
cultural relations between the two states. This episode ended in 1575 with the deposition of Henri III in Poland after
he ascended to the French throne in 1574. In 1645, Marie de Gonzague, princess of Nevers, married the king of Poland
Ladislas IV and then his brother and successor John II Casimir. In 1674, John III Sobieski ascended the throne with his
French wife Marie-Casimire de La Grange d’Arquien. In 1725, it was a Polish woman, Marie Leszczynska, who became
queen of France by marrying Louis XV. After the war of succession of Poland (1733-1738), her father Stanislas Leszczynski,
the doubly elected and deposed king of Poland, was made duke of Lorraine and Bar. These marriages created Franco-
Polish courts, where the elites of the two countries had repeated contacts. In the second half of the 18th century, French
diplomacy encountered many difficulties in Poland and Lithuania. Yet, cultural exchange did not diminish. During
the Bar Confederation in 1768-1772, an unprecedented dialogue emerged between the Poles and French reformers such
as Mably, Rousseau or the physiocrats, without forgetting Voltaire’s support to the politics of Catherine II of Russia.
The partitions of Poland (1772, 1792, 1795), the constitution of May 3 1791, and the Kosciuszko Insurrection (1794-1795)
also elicited many comments in France, where at the same time the revolution undermined the foundations of the
Ancien Régime. These steady contacts left many testimonies in the form of political treaties, pamphlets, press articles,
memoirs, and travel diaries, which constitute the source material of the study.

Lumières, op. cit. M. Forycki, L’Anarchie polonaise : le système institutionnel républicain de la Pologne nobiliaire dans la pensée des Lumières,
Poznan-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines 2001. J. Michalski, Rousseau i sarmacki republikanizm, Warszawa 1977. J. Michalski, Sarmacki republika-
nizm w oczach Francuza: Mably i konfederaci barscy, Wrocław 1995.
6 J.M. Le Gall, La tolérance polonaise au prisme de l’intolérance française au XVIe siècle, „Renaissance and Reformation”, 2003/27, p. 53-84.
7 See for instance: T. Chynczewska-Hennel, Rzeczpospolita XVII wieku w oczach cudzoziemców, Warszawa 1994. W. Pawłowsla, Wiedza o
Polsce we Francji w XVII-tym wieku, Poznań 2014.
8 S. Kot, Rzeczpospolita Polska w literaturze politycznej Zachodu, Kraków 1919, p. VIII.

The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the French political thought (1573-1795)              233

    The aim of this article is to summarize the image of the Polish-Lithuanian Republic in these texts to show its role
in French political thought.

1 The Republic of Nobles in the political writings of opponents of
absolute monarchy: a mixed form of government to imitate
First, the example of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth appeared in French protestant literature. The May 1573
election of Henri de Valois occurred just several months after the Saint Bartholomew’s Day massacre. In those
circumstances, protestant tyrannomachs extensively mobilized the case of Poland, where peace reigned between
confessions and where the king was elected and subordinated to law and to the control of the Sejm. This example
supported their theory of the contract between the governors and the governed against the strengthening of royal power.
On this occasion, they referred to concepts such as mixed monarchy (monarchia mixta) or the right to disobedience (non
praestanda oboedentia). They also evoked the idea of joint, ancient, and libertarian political traditions shared by all the
peoples of the North, to which they included both the Poles and the French. The newest events in the Sarmatian state
served to attack the policy of the Valois dynasty and to justify the Huguenot armed opposition to the king, who according
to them, broke edicts of pacification, the law and his commitments towards his subjects. The Warsaw Confederation,
which confirmed religious peace, and the Henrician Articles, which defined the control of royal power, were quoted
as good solutions to follow. Those elements appeared both in political treaties–such as Theodor de Bèze Le Droit des
Magistrats (Geneva 1573), François Hotman Francogallia (1574), and the anonymous Vindiciae contra Tyrannos (1579)–
and in polemical literature–such as the anonymous Réveille-Matin des François (Edimbourg 1574), Simon Goulart’s
Mémoires de l’estat de France (Meidelbourg 1576) and Déclaration des causes qui ont meu ceux de la Religion a reprendre
les armes pour leur conservation (Montauban 1574) – a manifesto justifying armed resistance9.
     Contrary to an opinion widespread among historians, the cooling of diplomatic relations between France and Poland
after Henri’s dethronement was not synonymous with a total collapse of the French interest towards the Rzeczpospolita.
It continued to be discussed first in protestant writings and then in the Catholic League treaties. In 1584, the situation
in France changed dramatically. After the death of François of Anjou, Henri III’s brother and the last Valois descendant,
the closest successor to the crown was Henri of Bourbon, king of Navarre, one of the main leaders of Protestantism in
France. As a consequence, some Huguenot thinkers, like François Hotman, softened their previous critical statements
against absolute monarchy, whereas the catholic part of society opposed the accession to the throne of the protestant
prince, organized in a catholic League, and loudly propagated anti-absolutist theories. In this civil war context, Catholic
writers reinvested some arguments developed by protestant tyrannomachs, like the ideas of monarchia mixta, primitive
royal elections, the right to disobedience, the royal commitment expressed by an oath during the coronation ceremony.
By the same way, the Polish-Lithuanian theme remained very pregnant, even more as Henri’s final failure in Poland
brought new arguments. Indeed, Henri’s unsuccessful rule was an important topic in League’s polemical literature: it
aimed at proving that Henri III was a tyrant, which is why the Poles finally decided to dethrone him. This solution was
proposed as an example to follow in France10. Other cases of punished tyrants in Polish history were quoted, especially
that of Popiel. The story of this legendary king, devoured by rats, was quoted before and after the regicide of Henri III
in August 158911. Other political treaties, especially the De iusta Reipublicae Christianae authoritate in reges impios et

9 T. de Bèze, Du droit des magistrats [1574], Genève 1970, p. 24, 33-34. F. Hotman, Franco-Gallia [1574], Paris 1991, p. 60. S.J. Brutus, De la
puissance legitime du Prince sur le peuple, et du peuple sur le Prince : Traité tres utile, digne de lecture en ce temps, 1581, p. 103, 114-115, 144-145,
147, 167, 170, 208, 229. Le Réveille-Matin des François et de leurs voisins, Edynburg 1574, p. 135-151,158-159, 162-163,… Simon Goulart, Mémoires
de l’estat de France, sous Charles Neuviesme, Meidelbourg 1576. Déclaration des causes qui ont meu ceux de la Religion a reprendre les armes
pour leur conservation, Montauban 1574.
10 See for example: Les Meurs, humeurs et comportemens de Henry de Valois representez au vray depuis sa Naissance, Paris 1589, p. 9, 81; J.
Boucher, La Vie et faits notables de Henry de Valois. Où sont contenues les trahisons, perfidies sacrileges, exactions, cruautez, et hontes de cest
Hypocrite et Apostast, ennemy de la Religion Catholique, 1589, p. 11-12, 16, 40-41.
11 Histoire prodigieuse de Popiel, Roy de Pologne. Duquel les Tiranniques actes se peuvent conformer à son successeur Henry de Valois, 1589.
Le Discours au vray sur la mort et trepas de Henry de Valois, 1589.

234         Teresa Malinowska

haereticos (Anvers, 1591), wanted to demonstrate the possibility and the legitimacy to elect a new non-protestant king
of France through the General Estates. They largely evoked Sarmatian elections and political institutions12.
     The League ended with a failure: the General Estates, convoked by the League in 1593, failed to elect a new sovereign;
in 1594, Henri of Navarre officially converted to the catholic faith and received the crown of the Kingdom. During the
next decades, treaties and pamphlets against absolute monarchy became rarer, just like references to the Republic of
Poland. They would resurface, however, at the very beginning of Louis XIV’s reign, during the Fronde (1648-1653), the
last seventeenth-century major but unsuccessful noble rebellion in France.
     A few years before the Fronde, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth attracted French attention thanks to the
marriage of Louise-Marie de Gonzague with Ladislas IV, which took place in Paris per procura. When going to the
Rzeczpospolita, Louise-Marie was accompanied by a suite, among which was Jean Le Laboureur. When he returned
to France, the traveller published a journal of his journey Relation du Voyage de la Royne de Pologne... (1647)13. He
presented an advantageous image of the Polish-Lithuanian noble state: he praised the antiquity and the splendour of
the nobility, he approved its liberties and its central place in the government, as well as the moderate position of the
Polish king and its prodigality. Undoubtedly this enthusiasm reflected the political ideals of a part of French society.
This travel book was really successful: it was published first in 1647 and reissued in the context of the Fronde: twice
in 1648 and twice in 1649. This editorial success certainly contributed to the appearance of the Sarmatian theme in
the mazarinades. The image of Poland in those libels is ambiguous. On the one hand, it is criticized for the mercenary
engagement of Polish soldiers – “abominable people without faith nor religion”14 – within the French royal troops. The
text Remonstrance de la Reyne de Pologne à la Reyne de France... (1649) is particularly interesting: it refers to the queen
Louise-Marie de Gonzague, who complained against the French regent queen, who used her Polish soldiers against
Paris and the French people15. On the other hand, the Rzeczpospolita still appeared in other pamphlets as the land of
political liberties, where bad kings were banished, where people’s rights – including the right to disobedience – were
respected, where the aristocrats and nobles limited royal power16.
     After the failure of the rebellion in 1652-1653, the French monarchy succeeded in reasserting absolute royal power
and in maintaining certain stability within the country. The political disputes calmed down and references to a positive
representation to the Republic of Nobles became rarer. In the second half of the 17th century, only few texts offered a
relatively positive point of view about Poland. In his Mémoires, Beaujeu recognized the attractiveness of the Polish-
Lithuanian political system and expressed his nostalgia for the ancient magnificence of the French nobility, when
comparing it to the privileged Sarmatian aristocrats17. In the Censure, ou discours politique, touchant les Pretendans
à la Couronne de Pologne (1669) – a translation of bishop Andrzej Olszowski’s political text -, the Bourbons were
denounced bitterly for their vainglorious ambitions and the sacralisation of their persons, which abused the credulity
of the people18. After the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, Jurieu referred to the sovereignty of the people, very
discreetly mentioning the example of Poland in his Lettres pastorales19.
     The references to the Polish-Lithuanian example became much more frequent after the death of Louis XIV, when
his successors had to tackle the growing contestations of their absolute royal power. First, in Histoire de l’ancien
gouvernement de la France... (published in 1727), Henri de Boulainvilliers – a leading figure of the aristocratic anti-
absolutism – quoted Poland among other countries to prove that everywhere in Europe royal power was limited by an

12 F. Valérian, Pouvoir sacerdotal et haine du prochain. Une contribution anglaise au combat de la Ligue, Paris-Nanterre 2009, p. 16, 33, 47,
128-130, 222, 228, 255-256, 261-264.
13 J. Le Laboureur, Relation du Voyage de la Royne de Pologne et du retour de Madame la Maréchale de Guébriant, ambassadrice extraordi-
naire, Paris 1647.
14 Advertissement à Cohon, evesque de Dol, Paris, Arnould Cotinet, 1649, p. 6.
15 Remontrance de la Reyne de Pologne à la Reyne de France, touchant le déplaisir qu’elle a de voir combattre les Polonois contre les François,
Paris, Robert Feugé, 1649.
16 See for instance: Marc Vulson de La Colombière, Raisons d’estat contre le ministère estranger, 1649 in Célestin Moreau, Choix de Mazarina-
des, Paris, Jules Renouard, 1853, t. I, p. 60; Le Donjon du droit naturel divin contre toutes les attaques des Ennemis de Dieu, et de ses peuples:
donnant la Camusade, au Tres Illustre Grammairien de Samothrace, Paris, 1649, p. 10.
17 Les Mémoires du Chevalier de Beaujeu, Amsterdam 1700, p. 227-228, 395-396.
18 Censure, ou discours politique, touchant les pretendans à la couronne de Pologne, 1669, p. 81-82.
19 Pierre Jurieu, Lettres pastorales XVI-XVII-XVIII, 1689. Suivies de la réponse de Bossuet, Cinquième Avertissement aux protestants, 1690,
Caen, Université de Caen, 1991, p. 411.

The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the French political thought (1573-1795)          235

assembly20. The Commonwealth also appeared in Boulainvilliers’ Essais sur la noblesse de France (published in 1732), but
only in the footnotes of the editor. The commentator considered Poland a confirmation of Boulainvilliers’s statements
about ancient French liberties still existing in the Sarmatian Republic21. Those works had continuators among Jansenist
and parliamentary opponents to absolute monarchy. Louis-Adrien Lepaige developed the Polish-Lithuanian argument
in his Lettres historiques... (1753). He made a parallel between the Polish election diet and the Frank’s champs de Mars,
Frankish assemblies that took place in March. He explained the important role of the archbishop of Gnesne in Polish
elections through the place the Germans assigned to priests in their primitive assemblies22. Once again, Poland reflected
here the old French liberties and the ideal moderate monarchy from the past. The same function was attributed to the
Polish-Lithuanian model in Claude Mey and Gabriel Maultrot’s Maximes du droit public français (1772, 1775), where
historical references were more numerous and accurate23.
     The Polish-Lithuanian Republic inspired French opponents of absolute monarchy. All quoted authors shared the
same image of the Rzeczpospolita as a country of mixed or moderate monarchy and as a land of liberties, abolished
in France by the strengthening of royal power. They shared very similar political ideas with the Polish-Lithuanian
nobles. In this sense, they were the ones who best understood the principles and the aspirations of the Sarmatian
political system. However, a negative representation conveyed by the advocates of absolute monarchy competed with
this positive interpretation.

2 The Republic of Nobles in absolute monarchy treaties: for a criticism of
republican governments
In 1573, the French monarchy did not officially disapprove of Polish political and institutional choices. At the time of the
election, criticism was not part of its interests. Nevertheless, the way of presenting events and the Sarmatian country
remained very different from that of the adversaries of royal policy and absolute power. Even behind the praises of the
Polish-Lithuanian elective monarchy, discrete nuances favourable to a strong monarchical power were introduced.
For instance, royal printings emphasized the immeasurable friendship and concord among the Polish szlachta as
well as its reliable loyalty and unconditional allegiance to its king. It was confronted with the divided and rebellious
French nobility, who deserved to be excluded from political life24. Other writers related to the Court undermined the
dissenting aspects of the Polish-Lithuanian political system. Whereas opponents of absolute power clearly pointed at
electoral conditions imposed on Henri de Valois to illustrate the conditional nature of royal power, Jean Choisnin, in his
Mémoires, minimized their importance. He claimed that the acknowledgment of elective conditions was not necessary
to ascend the throne, and that they had been changed accordingly with the will of the new elected king25. A series of
similar nuances are to be found in many 1573-1574 official publications.
     After the dethronement of the Valois prince and the election of Stephen Bathory in 1575-1576, the French royal
printings became more overtly critical towards the Polish-Lithuanian Republic. Such authors as Louis Le Roy or
Jean Bodin laid the foundations of absolute power theory. In those circumstances, they indicated the weaknesses of
elective monarchies, providing examples from the history of Poland26. They still perceived some positive aspects in the
organization of the Commonwealth, but it was no longer the case of Jean Baricave who in 1614 rejected the Sarmatian

20 H. de Boulainvilliers, Histoire de l’ancien gouvernement de la France. Avec XIV Lettres Historiques sur les Parlemens ou Etats Généraux, La
Haye-Amsterdam 1727, p. 251-255.
21 H. de Boulainvilliers, Essais sur la noblesse de France, Amsterdam, 1732, p. 175, 222, 35 (of the suplement).
22 L.A. Lepaige, Lettres historiques sur les fonctions essentielles du Parlement, sur le droit des pairs et sur les lois fondamentales du royaume,
Amsterdam 1753, p. 15, 37.
23 C. Mey, G.N. Maultrot, Maximes du droit public français, t. I, p. 28, 145, 257-258, t. II, p. 225, 227-228.
24 See J.M. Le Gall’s analysis: J.M. Le Gall, La tolérance polonaise…, op. cit.
25 J. Choisnin, Mémoires ou Discours au vray de tout ce qui s’est faict et passé pour l’entière négociation de l’élection du roy de Polongne [1573]
in M. Petitot, Collection complète des mémoires relatifs à l’histoire de France, t. XXXVIII, Paris 1823, p. 161, 163.
26 L. Le Roy, De l’excellence du Gouvernement Royal, Paris 1575, p. 29-30, 34. About Poland i Bodin’s work: S. Kot, Rzeczpospolita…, op. cit.,
p. 47-56.

236         Teresa Malinowska

model, considering that it inevitably leads to the ruin of all kinds of monarchy27. Claude de Rubis in 1614 and Cardin
Le Bret in 1632 asserted that Polish royal power was worse than French royal power, because the first derived from the
people, whereas the second emanated directly from God, without any human intermediary whether it was the people,
the emperor, or the pope28. This statement constituted one of the main fundamental principles of French absolute
monarchy. Poland played a role of faire-valoir which proclaimed and underlined the superiority of the French dynasty
and the unquestionable absolute power of the French kings. In the first half of the 17th century, the French royal
refutation of the Polish model was well established.
     The refutation continued in the second half of the century, but it took a slightly different form. The Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth rarely appeared in political treaties, but mainly in histories of Poland, descriptions of Europe, memoirs,
and travel literature. The reflections were more pragmatic and concerned the practices of power. The advantages of a
strong uncontrolled royal power were opposed to the weaknesses of representative governments. Discipline, time, and
secrecy constituted the main discussed issues. Those three elements were supposed to assure efficiency to absolute
monarchy: discipline organized an effective army; the celerity of decision and execution, as well as secrecy–both
possible thanks to the rule of one absolute king–guaranteed diplomatic and interior security. Conversely, those three
features were supposed to be absent in republican governments because of privileges, public deliberations, and
limitation of royal prerogatives. The Polish-Lithuanian seventeenth-century difficulties were explained by this absence.
The paralysis of assemblies due to the liberum veto, the Cossack rebellion, the Swedish war, Lubomirski’s rokosz, John
II Casimir’s abdication, difficult interregnum after Sobieski’s death and the Northern Wars at the beginning of the 18th
century were quoted as a confirmation of the superiority of absolute monarchy, presented as the only existing political
system able to guarantee abundance and plenty to the people29.
     This conviction was maintained in some printings until the second half of the 18th century, as in Gaspard de Réal
La Science du gouvernement published between 1761 and 1764. This book can be considered as a synthesis of all the
criticisms, both theoretical and practical, against the mixed form of government in general and against the Polish-
Lithuanian Republic in particular. Referring to Jean Bodin’s theory of absolute sovereignty, the author considered any
sharing of sovereignty to be harmful. That is why he said that “the kings of England, Poland, and Sweden are not
real sovereigns”30. The example of the Polish king was further developed: he could not decide anything without the
acceptance of the Sejm. Privileges were considered as usurpations of royal power; interregna, elections, and revolts
as a source of anarchy; the liberum veto as a form of enslavement of the Republic to the will of a single deputy. The
peasant question served to denounce the political and social supremacy of the nobles. This is indeed a compendium
of all “absolutist” arguments against the political and social system of the Polish-Lithuanian State. La Science du
gouvernement was also the latest treaty in our source material to defend absolute monarchy in its classical form.
     In the 18th century, new currents of thought appeared. This change can be illustrated by the evolution of the
meaning of the word “reform”. Understood for a long time as a “restoration to order, to the old form”, it also gained
a new meaning mainly from the 1760s. Reformers increasingly aspired to a new society, to the creation of a new man,
calling for an overhaul of laws, institutions, social structures, and education31. In those approaches, the Republic of
Poland appeared as a field of experimentation.

27 J. Baricave, La Defense de la Monarchie Françoise, et autres monarchies, Toulouse 1614, p. 394-395.
28 C. de Rubis, Conference des prerogatives d’ancienneté et de noblesse, de la Monarchie, Roys, Royaumes, et maison Royale de France, Lyon
1614, p. 111-119, 207-266. C. Le Bret, De la Souveraineté du Roy, Paris 1632, p. 248-249.
29 This synthetic summary is based on the following source material: N. Payen, Les Voyages de Monsieur Payen, lieutenant general de Meaux,
Paris 1667; G. de Tende, Relation historique de la Pologne, Paris 1686; M.D. de La Bizardière, Histoire des dietes de Pologne pour les elections
des rois, Paris 1697; M.D. de La Bizardière, Histoire de la scission ou division arrivée en Pologne le XXVII Juin 1697 au sujet de l’election d’un Roy,
Paris 1699; J.G. Jolli, Histoire de la Pologne et du Grand Duché de Lithuanie depuis la fondation de la monarchie jusqu’à présent, Amsterdam
1698; Mémoires du comte Gaspard de Chavagnac [1699], Paris 1900.
30 G. de Réal, La Science du gouvernement, Paris 1761-1764, t. IV, p. 133-134.
31 Cf. I. Brancourt, Bruits de réforme dans le Paris du ministère du cardinal de Fleury ? in La Dynamique du changement politique et juridique:
la réforme, Aix-en-Provence 2013, p. 151. J. Innes, La « réforme » dans la vie politique anglaise, „Histoire, économie et société”, 2005/1, p. 75-76.

The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the French political thought (1573-1795)                 237

3 The Republic of Nobles in the new republicanism: between praise and
call for reform
The 1760s were marked in France by the revival of the republican thought. Stanislas Leszczynski had an important role
in this trend32. In 1749 he published La Voix libre du citoyen, a translation of his Głos wolny wolność ubezpieczający.
Though the exiled king recognized the weaknesses of the current state of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, he
proposed a reform fully in line with the Polish republican thought and he ultimately praised the republican form of
government33. Stanislas Leszczynski’s treaty had an important echo in French political literature. It was quoted in
Gabriel-François Coyer’s Histoire de Jean Sobieski, roi de Pologne (1761). In this book, the abbot praised Polish liberties
and the republican form of government and counted the Rzeczpospolita and its citizens among the free states and
peoples. He continuously compared the limited and elective monarchy of Poland with the absolute and hereditary
monarchy to show the superiority of the former over the latter34. That is why Coyer had problems with censorship:
the book was condemned, the printer prosecuted, the author exiled35. Yet, Coyer also found some faults in the Polish-
Lithuanian political system. He denounced the situation of peasants and called for the abolition of servitude, the
introduction of civil equality, and even to the allocation of political rights to non-nobles36. The second criticism
concerned the role of the Church in the Commonwealth. Coyer criticized the apostolic legate who had “an expanse of
power that no one would suffer elsewhere” and he disapproved the role of the Holy See in the coronation of kings37.
Those two postulates – the broadening of the social base of citizens and the elimination of the Church’s influence in
political life – were stated by almost all thinkers who aspired to a new society, independently of their institutional
project.
     They were present in Mably’s and Rousseau’s reform treaties. In 1770-1171, under the inspiration of Count
Wielhorski, the representation of the Bar Confederation in Paris, Mably wrote Du gouvernement et des lois de la Pologne
and Rousseau wrote Considérations sur le gouvernement de Pologne. Both authors recognized positive aspects of the
Republic of Nobles. They approved that the legislative power belonged to the Sejm and that royal power was highly
limited. However, they believed improvements needed to be made. They wanted to strengthen the legislative power
by regulating more strictly the running of assemblies (by the suppression of the liberum veto, a better preparation
of sessions, etc.) and by separating more clearly the legislative and executive powers. The executive power had to be
weakened by dividing it among different organs (the king, the senate, and the ministries) and by reducing the royal
ius distributivus. Both authors also agreed in their criticism of social inequalities, of the Polish educational system,
and of the role of Church in the State. Yet they disagreed in other aspects. Mably wanted to introduce heredity to
avoid interregnum troubles whereas Rousseau wanted to maintain electivity, perceived as a strong bulwark against
despotism38. The main differences lied in their understanding of patriotism, nation, and cosmopolitanism. As Marc
Belissa puts it, Mably proposed to “denationalize” Poland to “rebuild the republic on a rational basis” whereas Rousseau
called to “renationalize” Poland to “preserve its existence in a context of defeat”39. This explains why Mably and
Rousseau reacted differently to the failure of the Bar Confederation and the first partition of Poland (1772). While in the
Banquet des Politiques (1776), Mably expressed a certain bitterness towards Polish reality, Rousseau foresaw that Russia
might well engulf the Rzeczpospolita, but it would not be able to digest it because of Polish patriotism and preservation

32 Cf. J. Fabre, Stanislas Leszczyński et le mouvement philosophique en France au XVIIIe siècle in P. Francastel (ed.), Utopie et institutions au
XVIIIe siècle. Le Pragmatisme des Lumières, Paris 1963, p. 31.
33 M. Forycki, Stanisław Leszczyński – Sarmata i Europejczyk, Poznań 2006, p. 174.
34 G. Coyer, Histoire de Jean Sobieski, roi de Pologne, Varsovie-Paris 1761, t. I, p. V-VIII, 37, 40-41, 50, 134, 165-167, 188, 244-245, 295, 308-309,
328-329, 341, 343, 382, 388-389, 395-396, 406, 425, 439, t. II, p. 14-15, 25, 29-30, 41-42, 47, 58-59, 60, 69, 99, 104-105, 190-192, 195-196, 199-200, t. III,
p. 94-95, 105, 134-135, 147, 178, 249, 265-266, 294-295.
35 J. Fabre, Stanislas Leszczyński et le mouvement philosophique en France au XVIIIe siècle, op. cit., p. 37.
36 G. Coyer, Histoire de Jean Sobieski, op. cit., p. t. I, p. 31, 121-122, 171-172.
37 Ibidem, t. I, p. 56-57, 114-116.
38 Mably’s and Rousseau’s projects are more thoroughly presented and analysed in: M. Bélissa, La République polonaise dans le débat po-
litique des Lumières, op. cit. M. Forycki, L’Anarchie polonaise…, op. cit. J. Michalski, Rousseau i sarmacki republikanizm, op. cit. J. Michalski,
Sarmacki republikanizm w oczach Francuza…, op. cit.
39 M. Bélissa, La République polonaise dans le débat politique des Lumières, op. cit., p. 105.

238          Teresa Malinowska

of national identity40. In Mably’s and Rousseau’s works, Poland became a land of reform and experimentation. On
this occasion, both authors developed their ideas on the republican government and tried to adapt them to a concrete
context. Their texts were published and reedited during the next decades, when revolutions changed the political
landscape of France, Poland, and Europe.
     In 1772 the first partition of Poland fostered further discussions. Many texts questioned the fairness of the partition
and referred to the right of disobedience and opposition to the tyrant. In other pamphlets, authors denounced the
“insatiable desires” of monarchs who aspired to universal monarchy. Frederic II was compared to Louis XIV and criticized
for having put “all Europe in fire”41. Great conquerors like Alexander, Pompey, and Caesar were called the “plagues of
human race”42. One of the key principles of absolute monarchy, according to which the king was responsible for his
actions only before God was also questioned. In Les Droits des trois puissances..., the author stated that “there was no
maxim more able to corrupt kings and more destructive for the peoples”. Regarding the first partition, he appealed to the
“Tribunal of Nations” to judge the kings43. This idea was also present in Ange Goudar Le Procès des trois rois [...] plaidé
au Tribunal des Puissances Européennes (1780), where the three sovereigns who realized the partition were parodied,
condemned, and imprisoned for theft44. Those texts show how the partition participated in the disenchantment of
royal power in Europe. More broadly, the partition was increasingly interpreted in terms of an international war of
Monarchies and Despotisms against Republics, Aristocracies, and Democracies45. An idea emerged of an irreducible
conflict between the interests of monarchs and the rights of nations.
     This interpretation deepened during the next decades, when Polish events fuelled revolutionary and anti-
monarchical discourses in France. The failure of the Constitution of 3 May (1791) and of the Kosciuszko Uprising (1794),
which led to the second (1792) and the third partitions (1795), still served to denounce the “disorder created by kings”46,
especially by the three despots who then waged war against revolutionary France. The evolution of the Polish king’s
image in the revolutionary press shows the progressive radicalisation of the revolution in France towards an anti-
monarchical (and anti-aristocratic) form of government. At first, Stanislas Auguste enjoyed a good reputation in many
press titles, like in Le Moniteur or La Feuille Villageoise, because of his participation in the Constitution of 3 May47. Yet,
it changed radically from July 1792, when Stanislas Auguste joined the anti-constitutional Targowica confederation,
though it took place with the agreement of the main figures of the 3 May revolution. At approximately the same time in
France, monarchy was abolished (between August 10th and September 22nd, 1792). From then, monarchy in general and
Louis XVI and Stanislas August in particular were condemned in the revolutionary press48. At the assembly, Camille
Desmoulin even brought up the example of Stanislas Auguste to justify his will to condemn Louis XVI to death49. In
revolutionary discourses, the Kosciuszko insurrection was presented as a “true” revolution, popular and without a
king. Though it failed, it would have given birth to a modern “nation” by discrediting the monarchy and “the monster
of aristocracy […] before the majesty of the people”50. We are here in the presence of the contemporary definition of
the “republic” as a non-monarchical and non-aristocratic form of government by assembly, and of the contemporary
definition of the “nation” without distinction of birth nor privilege.
     If in France new republicanism led to the fall of the Ancien Regime monarchy, in Poland the old Republic was
destroyed by another form of political modernity: enlightened absolutism.

40 Compare: G. Bonnot de Mably, Le Banquet des Politiques [1776] in G. Bonnot de Mably, Du gouvernement et des lois de la Pologne [1770-
1771], Paris 2008, p. 351-352, 378.
41 Les Droits des trois puissances alliées sur plusieurs provinces de la République de Pologne, London 1774, p. XVII, XXV.
42 Le Partage de la Pologne en sept dialogues en forme de drame, London 1776, p. 11.
43 Les Droits des trois puissances..., op. cit., p. IV, VII, XXIII.
44 A. Goudar, Le Procès des trois rois, Louis XVI. De France-Bourbon, Charles III. D’Espagne-Bourbon, et George III. d’Hanovre, fabricant de
boutons, plaidé au Tribunal des Puissances-Européennes, traduit de l’anglois, London 1780, p. 41.
45 See for example: L.A. Caraccioli, La Pologne, telle qu’elle a été, telle qu’elle est, telle qu’elle sera, Varsovie-Poitiers 1775, t. II, p. 50-51, , t. III,
p. 8-9.123-124.
46 M. Bélissa, Les Lumières, le premier partage de la Pologne et le « système politique » de l’Europe, „Annales historiques de la Révolution
française”, 356, avril-juin 2009, p. 90-92.
47 A. Vuillez, La Perception française des affaires de Pologne 1791-1795, Besançon 2015, p. 103-104.
48 Ibidem, p. 187-193.
49 Ibidem, p. 193.
50 Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire des révolutions de Pologne, particulièrement à celle de 1794, par un Citoyen polonais, Paris 1795, p. 74-76.

The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the French political thought (1573-1795)          239

4 “Enlightened absolutism” about the Republic of Poland: an anarchical
system to eradicate
In the 18th century, some theorists and thinkers aspired to a “new society” but according to them, it had to be reached
through monarchs, because of absolute power monarchies. Here we call this approach “enlightened absolutism” or
“enlightened despotism”, though this term fosters many debates among historians. Such a project can be read in René
d’Argenson Considérations sur le gouvernement ancien et présent de la France written in 1739, published in 176451.
D’Argenson had a progressist vision of history. For him, absolute power was a progress because it destroyed feudalism
marked by feudal lords’ usurpations of royal power and by enslavement of non-nobles. Yet, he considered that progress
should continue to the introduction of civil equality and popular administration, but without undermining absolute
royal legislative power52. According to him, the Poland of his time was close to the feudal government of medieval
France, and was characterized by archaism in its social, political, and social structure. As such, it served to denounce
feudal government and more generally the government of aristocrats, perceived as enemies of progress53. This image of
the Polish feudal anarchy, rejected on the fringes of European progress, was destined to be a great success.
     Voltaire was one of its most influential propagators. In 1739, he wrote a letter to d’Argenson: “I like so much what
you say about Poland! I always looked at Poland as a beautiful subject of mockery, and as a miserable government!”54.
In his historical books Histoire de Charles XII (1732), Le Siècle de Louis XIV (1751), Essai sur les moeurs et l’esprit des
nations (1756) and Précis du siècle de Louis XIV (1768), the Polish-Lithuanian Republic was presented as a barbaric,
feudal, and anarchic government55, exactly like in d’Argenson’s work. In 1767-1773, during the conflict between the
Polish Bar Confederation and Russia, Voltaire sided with Catherine II, writing a series of pamphlets against Poland.
In Essai historique et critique sur les dissensions des Églises de Pologne (1767) and Discours aux conférés catholiques de
Kaminiek en Pologne (1768), he spread the image of a fanatic and obscurantist Poland56. At the same time, in Lettre sur
les panégyriques... (1767), he presented Catherine II as the champion of civilization, tolerance, and peace in Europe,
omitting some gruesome facts, like the massacres of the Uniates in the conquered territories57. The contrast between
a fanatic Poland and an enlightened Russia justified the armed expansion of Catherine II. The entry of her armies into
Lithuania and Poland appeared in Sermon prêché à Bâle... (1768) as “a conquest over fanaticism”, a “victory of the
peace-making spirit over the spirit of persecution” realized by a “peace army”58.
     In 1775, Voltaire admitted in a letter that he was fooled and surprised by the first partition of Poland. Yet, the
co-partitioners continued to use his rhetoric to justify the occupation of Polish-Lithuanian lands. In the numerous
publications published for this purpose, the courts of Vienna, Petersburg, and Berlin stated that the partition was
necessary to end the anarchy, the spirit of revolt, the fanaticism and archaism of Polish-Lithuanian nobles. Progress
justified here an armed occupation. At the same time, though they were often inspired by the Polish king, authors who
denounced the partition were accused of wanting to “overthrow the glorious throne” of Frederic II, of being “forever
indisposed against crowned heads”, of being “anti-authoritarian”59. The nobles of the Republic and their defenders
became here avant-garde anarchists and revolutionaries. From 1789, the mistake of “Jacobinism” was added to the list
of accusations against the Poles.

51 This treaty fostered many different interpretations and debates. Here, we present the interpretation of Peter Balazs with whom we entirely
agree: P. Balazs, La Philosophie politique et morale du marquis d’Argenson (1694-1757), Paris-Panthéon-Sorbonne 2004.
52 R. d’Argenson, Considérations sur le gouvernement ancien et présent de la France, Amsterdam 1764, p. 1, 26-28, 35, 267.
53 Ibidem, p. 4-5, 57.
54 S. Fiszer, L’Image de la Pologne et des Polonais dans l’œuvre de Voltaire, Nancy 1997, p. 172.
55 Ibidem, p. 32-36, 85-94.
56 Voltaire, Essai historique et critique sur les dissensions des Eglises de Pologne, Par Joseph Bourdillon, professeur en droit public, 1767 in Œu-
vres complètes de Voltaire, Paris 1894, t. XXVII, p. 206-219; Voltaire, Discours aux confédérés catholiques de Kaminiek en Pologne par Le Major
Kaiserling au service du Roi de Prusse, Amsterdam 1768.
57 Voltaire, Lettre sur les panégyriques par Irénée Alethès, professeur de droit dans le canton d’Uri, 1767 in Œuvres de Voltaire, Paris 1831, t.
XLIII, p. 223, 226.
58 Voltaire, Sermon prêché à Bâle, le premier jour de l’an 1768, par Josias Rosette in Œuvres complètes de Voltaire, Paris 1894, t. XXVII, p. 298.
59 Réfutation littéraire et politique de l’ouvrage dialgué ayant pour titre le Partage de la Pologne composée de sept Lettres pour répondre aux
Septs Dialogues, London 1776, p. 123, 154-155.

240         Teresa Malinowska

    This interpretation of Polish events was also conveyed by some French counterrevolutionaries, like Jean-Joseph
Fortia de Piles and Louis Boisgelin de Kerdu in Voyage [...] en Allemagne, Danemarck, Suède, Russie et Pologne (1796).
They positively received the Constitution of 3 May because they saw it as the opposite of the French revolution. For
instance, the Polish Constitution reinforced royal power, introducing heredity, whereas the French one weakened it60.
The authors explained the failure of this project by a lack of prudence and wisdom, believing that the reformers should
have relied on neighbouring monarchies without questioning their domination. They disregarded the question of
national independence, which seemed secondary to the political and social progress that the enlightened despots were
supposed to bring61. The Kosciuszko insurrection was viewed even more negatively. Fortia de Piles considered it an
imitation of the French revolution. He concluded: “Russian armies destroyed these monstrous institutions and Poland
must bless the day which illuminated its defeat.”62
    Ultimately, the writers favourable to “enlightened absolutism” placed their hopes for progress in monarchs.
According to them, the Polish-Lithuanian state, with its republican institutions and its aristocratic social organization
associated to anarchy, was an irreformable aberration. That is why the partitions realized by the “enlightened despots”
did not foster any opposition nor regret. Let us notice that it was not the position of all French counterrevolutionaries.
Pierre-Nicolas Anot and François Malfillatre presented a more balanced point of view and called their readers to review
their image of the barbaric Pole63.
    Between new republicanism and enlightened absolutism, other 18th century thinkers proposed another political
project with the model of a patriot king or constitutional monarchy.

5 Poland in kings and nations’ reconciliation projects: towards the model
of the constitutional monarchy
In a certain number of treaties, authors proposed to reform states in the enlightenment spirit relying on kings, but
without promoting absolute monarchy. Such a project can be read in César-Félicité Pyrrhys de Varille Lettres sur la
constitution actuelle de Pologne (1764, 1771). Tutor at the Sanguszko’s, this French noble was close to the reformist circles
of the Czartorski-Poniatowski family64. His book, published in French, is an echo of their political plans. Proposing a
monarchist vision of Polish history, Pyrrhys de Varille considered that the successive crisis of Polish political life resulted
from the weakening of royal power. Consequently, he called for its reinforcement. According to him, freedom was taken
to excess in Poland and should be reformed. Yet, he still believed that the Sejm should maintain legislative power
and that the king should remain subject to the law coming from the assembly. Finally, his reform project followed two
lines: ordering and strengthening the local and national assemblies as legislators of the Republic; and strengthening
the enforcement of laws around the royal power65. Lettres sur la constitution actuelle de Pologne were first published in
1764, amid an interregnum. Pyrrhys de Varille supported the candidacy of Stanislas Auguste Poniatowski. He presented
him as a “Citizen” and “Patriot King”, who would be able to implement his project66. This ideal, certainly inspired by
Bolingbroke’s The Idea of a Patriot King (1748), closed the treaty.

60 J.J. Fortia de Piles, Louis Boisgelin de Kerdu, Voyage de deux Français en Allemagne, Danemarck, Suède, Russie et Pologne, fait en 1790-1792,
t. V : Pologne et Autriche, Paris 1796, p. 99.
61 M. Marty, Voyageurs français en Pologne Durant la seconde moitié du XVIIIe siècle, Paris 2004, p. 300.
62 J.J. Fortia de Piles, Louis Boisgelin de Kerdu, Voyage de deux Français…, op. cit., p. 104-105.
63 P. Anot, F. Malfillatre, Les Deux Voyageurs ou Lettres sur la Belgique, la Hollande, l’Allemagne, la Pologne, la Prusse, l’Italie, la Sicile et
Malte, Paris 1803, p. 345.
64 I. Stasiewicy-Jasiukowa, Jean Jacques Rousseau ou John Locke ? Réflexions sur un traité de César Pyrrhys de Varille in I. Zatorska, A. Siemek
(ed.), Le Siècle de Rousseau et sa postérité. Mélanges offerts à Ewa Rzadkowska, Varsovie 1998, p. 175-184. A. Jakuboszczak, w. Sajkowski, Rze-
czpospolita szlachecka w oczach francuskich preceptorów w drugiej połowie XVIII wieku in A. Mikołajewska, w. Zientara (ed.), Rzeczpospolita
w oczach podróżników z Francji i Niemiec, Warszawa 2014, p. 71-86.
65 See especially the following pages: C.F. Pyrrhys de Varille, Lettres sur la constitution actuelle de la Pologne, et la tenue de ses Diètes, Paris-
Varsovie 1771, p. 15, 36-37, 40-116, 192-206.
66 Ibidem, p. 321, 328-329, 342-343.

The Polish-Lithuanian Republic of Nobles in the French political thought (1573-1795)           241

     Another group of reformers placed their hope in Stanislas Auguste: the physiocrats. Their position about the
Rzeczpospolita was quite specific. In France, physiocrats were generally in favour of a strong, even absolute, hereditary
monarchy. However, in their projects for Poland, they made concessions towards the republican regime. For example,
in Intérêt commun des Polonais..., Pierre-Paul Lemercier de La Rivière even questioned some royal prerogatives, what
was exceptional in his works67. It did not mean than physiocrats did not propose changes. Both Nicolas Baudeau and
Pierre-Paul Lemercier de La Rivière called for the limitation or the abrogation of the liberum veto, for instance. What
was especially important to them was the economic and social reform of the country. Nicolas Baudeau proposed his
view on economics and taxes in his Avis économiques aux citoyens éclairés de la République de Pologne... (1772)68. This
text was then quoted by Lemercier de La Rivière69. Socio-economic changes required education. Baudeau repeatedly
raised this issue in his Lettres historiques…70 Another physiocrat, Dupont de Nemours, worked in Poland as a secretary
of the Commission of National Education, created in 177371. To be short, the programme of the physiocrats can be
summed up as follows: new education, emancipation of the peasants and the bourgeoisie, strengthening of the state
to realise an efficient public policy. Nicolas Baudeau interpreted the reign of Stanislas Auguste as the realisation of this
project and praised his reforms and educational initiatives between 1764 and 176672. But Moscow’s politics halted this
progress. Nicolas Baudeau denounced the excessive ambition of empires which preferred to desolate neighbouring
nations rather that to develop and “conquest […] their own States”73. Between noble republicanism and enlightened
despotism, Baudeau called Poles to unite around Stanislas Auguste to achieve a social and economic reform.
     This idea was also developed in texts influenced by the Polish king after the first partition. In Les Droits des trois
puissances alliées..., the author suggested that external powers, mainly Prussia, sought to divide the nation and the
king74. Stanislas Aguste also expressed his will of peace and compromise with the nation, especially with the Bar
Confederation, through press titles like Courrier du Bas-Rhin and Gazette de France. The articles conveyed the portrait
of a king of Poland entirely devoted to the common good75. This propaganda effort continued during the following
decades, notably in the Gazette de Leyde inspired by the monarch from 1775 until the revolution. Jean Luzac, the
editor, propagated in this title the ideal of a good prince, of a moderate (not absolute) king devoted to the prosperity
of his subjects. Stanislas Auguste, with its efforts towards reform, fit this model76. During the revolution, the journalist
praised the Constitution of 3 May and the role of the king in its adoption. Realisation of the constitutional monarchy,
the “Polish revolution” of 1791 was presented as the opposite of the French one77. Not only did it strengthen royal
power, but it officially maintained the nobility (though it changed its social structure) and the Catholic religion, while
introducing social reforms. In short, the Constitution of 3 May provided an example of a moderate reform led by a wise
king. The same interpretation was proposed in other press titles like Rozoi’s Gazette de Paris or Mallet du Pan’s Mercure
de France78. The 3 May experience failed in summer 1792. The French monarchy collapsed at about the same time. From
then, only the projects of the revolutionary republicans and enlightened despots, with their interpretations of Polish
events, competed for dominance in the two countries.

67 B. Herencia, Pour la Pologne, la Suède, l’Espagne et autres textes. Œuvres d’expertise de Paul Lemercier de La Rivière (1772-1790), Genève
2016, p. 22.
68 N. Baudeau, Avis économiques aux citoyens éclairés de la République de Pologne, sur la manière de percevoir le revenu public, Amsterdam-
Paris 1772.
69 B. Herencia, Pour la Pologne, la Suède, l’Espagne et autres textes..., op. cit., p. 64-66, 105-108.
70 N. Baudeau, Lettres historiques sur l’état actuel de la Pologne, et sur l’origine de ses malheurs, Amsterdam-Paris 1772, p. 86,143-145, 293-294.
71 M. Figeac, Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours et ses conceptions de l’éducation dans la Pologne et la France du XVIIIe siècle in J. Duma-
nowski, M. Figeac, D. Tollet (ed.), France-Pologne : contacts, échanges culturels, représentations, fin XVIe-fin XIXe siècle, Paris 2016, p. 289-295.
72 N. Baudeau, Lettres historiques..., op. cit., p. 286-294, 302-303, 323-324.
73 Ibidem, p. 306-307. See also p. 79-80.
74 Les Droits des trois puissances..., op. cit., p. XVI.
75 P. Ugniewski, Media i dyplomacja. « Gazette de France » o sejmie rozbiorowym. 1773-1775, Warszawa 2006, p. 82-83, 91, 94.
76 P. Ugniewski, Ludwik XVI - Stanisław August: propagandowe wizerunki równoległe, Warszawa 2014.
77 P. Ugniewski, Między absolutyzmem a jakobinizmem. Gazeta Lejdejska o Francji i Polsce (1788-1794), Warszawa 1998.
78 M. Handelsman, La Constitution polonaise du 3 Mai et l’opinion française, « Révolution française », 191/11; A. Vuillez, La Perception fran-
çaise..., op. cit.