His rule has been looked more graciously only in recent decades. It was argued that perhaps he was not at all "a lazy and thoughtless lump of meat and fat" as assessed by interwar historians. But does whitewashing this monarch really make sense?
It must be admitted that Augustus III, ruling in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the years 1733–1763, had always had a bad press. Entire volumes have been written about his insolence and stupidity. It was even said that he shot dogs out of boredom. It was even good to criticize him .
These unequivocally negative opinions began to change only after the Second World War. The breakthrough was the biography of Professor Jacek Staszewski, published in 1989, who did a lot to improve the image of the mercilessly mocked king. People started to perceive him as a good politician, and even a reformer, who, however, was in a lost position in the face of the general backwardness of the Polish society that he was to rule.
"Without any political talent"
This relatively new trend in historiography can be found in the book "Rulers of Poland. A story re-told ” Adam Perłakowski from the Jagiellonian University is strongly opposed. He argues that calling the son of Augustus II the Strong a "reformer" requires a great deal of self-denial. “Augustus III cannot be defended. If we were to juxtapose the arguments for and against, the advantage of those against would be overwhelming, ”he argues. In his opinion:
August III was devoid of any political talent . I have the impression that many situations he simply did not understand, they overwhelmed him, and yet sometimes he wanted to play a leading political role, not only in the Commonwealth or Saxony, but also in Central Europe. The court in his day gradually ceased to be a promoter of any reforms, and eventually the king became completely passive.
Frederick Augustus II usually did not oppose his father's wishes - he was an obedient son and was not eager to rule.
Why such a harsh evaluation of the achievements of the second Wettin on the Polish throne? The list of his sins presented by Perłakowski is really long. Although the historian admits that, as a contender for the crown, Frederick Augustus II looked good, but at some point ... he stopped in development. The promising prince became "passive, sluggish and little interested in the affairs of the state" . Politics reportedly made him unhappy, and he showed no ambition to take it seriously. "Usually, the heir to the throne wants to rule and decide as quickly as possible. You can't see it in Frederick August II, ”argues the Krakow researcher.
This lack of willingness to reign was manifested, inter alia, in the system of government organization, both in Saxony and in Poland. Contrary to the claims of Professor Staszewski, who praised the monarch for introducing a "ministerial system", Perłakowski emphasizes that:
During the reign of Augustus III, there was no well-thought-out system of power that could serve the effective management of the state. The formula that August III chose had only one purpose:to make him comfortable. He appointed a minister who took the burden of dealing with the state off his shoulders, so that he would not have to strain himself (...).
Some historians claimed that the king even had the idea of creating the first Polish-Saxon government with Sułkowski as prime minister. But I don't really believe it, because to come up with something like that you need to have some ideas at all .
The curiosity is based on the book by Mirosław Maciorowski and Beata Maciejowska "Rulers of Poland. A story re-told ” (Agora Publishing House 2018).
The historian adds that the royal comfort reached its peak during the "reign" of Aleksander Józef Sułkowski's successor - Henryk Brühl, whose main task was to calm down the ruler, worried if he still had any money. "Jawohl, Eure Majestät" - replied the minister each time. Nothing else interested August.
"He didn't even really try"
Sax's mediocre political talents were fully revealed during the Silesian Wars. In the first of them (1740–1742), he took part alongside Prussia, hoping that he would manage to unite the territories of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Saxony by joining a part of the disputed district. The effect was easy to predict. "He lost his army, and he did not merge his two countries, because Frederick II did not intend to share Silesia," says Perłakowski. And he adds that the king of Prussia "easily beaten" our ruler.
Other initiatives of the monarch also turned out to be ineffective. "Throughout his reign, his moves were very inept, and in the 1850s - even tragic," says the historian ruthlessly. He also deprives Augustus III of his sophisticated cultural taste, which so far had been accorded to him by even the greatest critics. It is true that the king loved art, and in his time the best singers performed at the court. At the same time, however, he draws attention to the fact that Sas liked the exceptionally "stupid and primitive" librettos of operas. "It's as if an outstanding tenor is singing a song like today «Tralala, Antek plays the harmony ». But the king liked them immensely. " - he tells.
After such an introduction, it is hardly surprising that the researcher classifies the reign of Augustus III as a political catastrophe. One may even wonder if it was not during his reign that the Commonwealth lost any chance for political reforms. Perłakowski in the book "Rulers of Poland. A story re-told ” summarizes:
(...) Augustus III did not really have a defeat, both in Saxony and in Poland. He lost both in the field of domestic and international politics. The dependence of the Republic of Poland on Russia grew deeper. With time, without Moscow's will, nothing could be done. There was a gradual reduction of the country's sovereignty. And the crisis of the legislative power, ie the Seym, thwarted all attempts to change.
Augustus III was a mediocre king, but a good and loving spouse. In the portrait with his wife Maria Józefa.
I disagree with assessments that August III had no way to counter these phenomena. That he wanted to reform, but society did not let him. He just couldn't, couldn't, and didn't even try hard .
Despite this devastating criticism, the historian makes a reservation that he would not reach for the words of Professor Władysław Konopczyński, who in 1936 described Sas as "a lazy and thoughtless lump of meat and fat". He praises Augustus III for his ... marital fidelity, which no one seems to question. Anyway, the very wedding of the Polish-Saxon prince in 1719 became one of the most splendid events in Europe at that time. But maybe this is just a hidden suggestion that Frederick Augustus II should settle for the role of the husband ...
Source:
Trivia is the essence of our website. Short materials devoted to interesting anecdotes, surprising details from the past, strange news from the old press. Reading that will take you no more than 3 minutes, based on single sources. This particular material is based on:
- Mirosław Maciorowski, Beata Maciejowska, Rulers of Poland. History re-told , Agora Publishing House 2018.
Polish rulers in a new version:
