Authors

Maciej Mycielski¹;  ¹ University of Warsaw, Poland

Discussion

The Kingdom of Poland, established in 1815 by a decision of the Congress of Vienna, was united by a personal union with the Russian Empire. Endowed with a liberal constitution, having its own army, parliament (Sejm), a legal system separate from Russia, and ruled by Poles, it proved to be an impermanent entity. Its existence ended with an anti-Russian uprising in November 1830. For the next 90 years, until Poland regained its independence, the history of this short-lived state was the subject of reflection on the possibility of a Russian-Polish compromise. Reflecting on the reasons for the outbreak of the uprising, the political realities of the Kingdom were pointed out - the violation of the constitution, the role played in Warsaw by Tsar Alexander I's brother, Grand Duke Constantine, his enormous informal power and brutality in his relations with the Poles. Censorship, which prevented any debate on public issues, was pointed to, as well as harsh political repression. Nicholas I's withdrawal from earlier promises (made by Alexander I) to expand the Kingdom into the western gubernias of the Empire was also seen as an important reason for the delegitimisation of the political system. Similar explanations prevail in 20th century historiography. 

 Already contemporaries noted that the clash of very different political cultures was also a problem. For example, the expansion of the secret police subordinated to Grand Duke Constantine was accompanied by a feeling that this was a threat to national identity, as Poles were prone to openness and honesty in public life. This type of thinking referred to Polish republican ideas of the 17th and 18th centuries, to the opposition of despotic countries to ‘free nations’ and the resulting national stereotypes. Certainly an important element of this republican tradition was the treatment of the relationship with the monarch as a contract, and the constitution as a kind of agreement between the king and the nation. Great importance was attached to the Sejm - not only as a representative institution, but also as an element whose existence gives legitimacy to the entire political system, including the monarchy. Of great importance was the question of the functioning of local self-government and elected judicial authorities. 

 Alexander I's declarations repeatedly included the phrase about bestowing ‘national institutions’ on the Poles. This is an ambiguous term; it could simply mean a political separation from Russia, but it could also be understood as the bestowal of institutions continuing a certain political culture. It created expectations towards the monarch which, it seems, were often not understood by him, and certainly did not correspond to his ideas of how to govern a state, even a constitutional state.