By Kieran Stenson

My research is a small contribution to an old debate. In recent years, there has been a growing re-evaluation of the Polish Constitution of 1791 and especially its principal author, King Stanisław II August. Most often derided as a Russian puppet or traitor, the King has been reappraised as a legitimate patriot, a cautious and dedicated reformer who nevertheless oversaw the ship of state during its sinking. Historians have long debated the merits of the Constitution of 3 May 1791. It is variously interpreted as the culmination of Polish Enlightenment thought, a radical break with past political culture, or an antidemocratic product of the aristocracy.

The Constitution has been a subject of debate since its inception. In fact, one of its most interesting features is its argumentative nature—unlike most constitutions, which simply declare or establish their state’s institutions and framework, the Constitution of 3 May 1791 presents explicit arguments to the reader. For instance, Article VII, on the executive power, declares that

The most perfect government cannot exist or last without an effectual executive power. The happiness of the nation depends on just laws, but the good effects of laws flow only from their execution. Experience has taught us that the neglecting this essential part of government has overwhelmed Poland with disasters.

However, the corresponding Article on the legislature (Sejm in Polish) does not contain a similar passage. This tells us that the authors were concerned that the Constitution’s provisions, which strengthened the powers and prerogatives of the King, would be more controversial than its changes to the legislature. Considering the extremely republican (as in anti-monarchical) culture of the Polish nobility in general, this was a safe assumption. Analyzing these unique argumentative features reveals much of what the authors of the Constitution thought about Polish society at the time. My research offers a new framing through which to analyze the 1791 Constitution, a document of immense historical value, and replete with lessons for the reader of history.

Furthermore, the Constitution was a manifesto that promoted a new vision for the Polish world. In its rhetoric, we can see how its authors envisioned the future—on the whole, it appears far better than the historic fate of the Commonwealth’s populace. The Constitution, which was enacted against Russian wishes, proved that the Commonwealth, despite its decline, possessed the vitality and potential to recover. This could not be countenanced by Russian and Prussian raisons d'être, and the result was war and the end of the Commonwealth’s sovereign existence. The Constitution is an integral part of the history of the Commonwealth and its successor states of Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus (to name only a few). Considering the importance that this region still holds in American and world affairs today, continuing to broaden our understanding of Central-European history is of vital importance.

I hope that my research will provide food for thought in the field and provide an entry point for readers to learn about the Constitution of 3 May 1791, a fascinating document of immense historical value.