Université Paris-Diderot – Paris 7UFR d'Études AnglophonesBât Olympe de Gouges5 rue Thomas Mann75205 Paris Cedex 13

The Perception of Poland in English Travel Literature through the Long Eighteenth Century

Karolina Godlewska

Master 2 Dissertation (British Civilization)Under the direction of Mr. Robert Mankin

June 2013

"When we reflect on the abject state to which a country is

reduced, where public spirit is extinct, the Crown degraded, the

Nobility enslaved or driven to wander in exile, and its fairest

provinces divided among foreign powers." (William Wraxall,

Memoirs of the courts of Berlin, Dresden, Warsaw, and Vienna)

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Dr. Robert Mankin,

my masters' thesis advisor. I am grateful to him for giving me the chance to

conduct this project, for his sincere engagements and help with the topic.

I also would like to thank my mother, brother and my whole family

for believing in me throughout the entire process. Most importantly, I would

like to thank George for giving me inspiration, being patient and

encouraging me.

Table of contents

1 . I n t r o d u c t i o n

1

Chapter I. The importance of the Grand Tour and travel literature in history

8

1 . 1 . T h e G r a n d T o u r

8

1 . 2 . R e a s o n s o p p o s i n g t r a v e l l i n g

13

1 . 3 . T r a v e l l e r s t o E a s t e r n E u r o p e

18

1 . 4 . T r a v e l l i t e r a t u r e

23

1 . 5 . T y p e s o f t r a v e l l i t e r a t u r e

23

1 . 6 . T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t r a v e l l i t e r a t u r e i n h i s t o r y

30

C h a p t e r I I . P r o g r e s s

32

2 . 1 . P r o g r e s s – a k e y t e r m o f t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t

32

A n n e - R o b e r t - J a c q u e s T u r g o t

34

A d a m S m i t h

35

J e a n - A n t o i n e - N i c o l a s C a r i t a t d e C o n d o r c e t

36

P r o g r e s s a s p o w e r

38

2 . 2 . ' N o b l e ' v s ' I g n o b l e S a v a g e s '

39

2 . 3 . T r a v e l l e r s o n P o l a n d

43

B e r n a r d C o n n o r , T h e H i s t o r y o f P o l a n d

43

Joseph Marshall, Travels through Holland, Flanders, Germany

46

William Wraxall, Cursory remarks made in a tour through some of the northern parts of

Europe

and Memoirs of the courts of Berlin, Dresden, Warsaw

50

William Coxe, Travels into Poland, Russia, Sweden, and Denmark

53

2.4. Theory of primitivism and its place in travellers' accounts

56

2 . 5 . F e u d a l i s m

57

Chapter III. Cartography in the eighteenth century as an example of progress as

power 63

3.1. State of cartography in Europe in the eighteenth century

63

3 . 2 . S t a t e o f c a r t o g r a p h y i n E a s t e r n E u r o p e

66

3 . 3 . M a p s a s a l a n g u a g e o f p o w e r

71

3.4. Examples of the maps presenting Eastern Europe

78

C h a p t e r I V . R a c e a n d s l a v e r y i s s u e s

93

4.1. Problem of race in the eighteenth century

93

4 . 2 . P o l i s h e s s e n c e

95

Connor about the essence from the times before the partitions

97

M a r s h a l l o n l u x u r y a n d r e l i g i o n

98

W r a x a l l o n S a r m a t i a n t r a d i t i o n s

100

C o x e o n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h t h e J e w s

102

4 . 3 . S l a v e r y

105

4 . 4 . S l a v e r y i n P o l a n d

108

T h e n o b i l i t y a n d t h e p e a s a n t s

109

T h e n o b i l i t y a n d p o l i t i c s

113

F o r e i g n e r s a n d P o l a n d

114

Catherine the Great and Stanislaw August Poniatowski

116

4 . 5 . D e p o p u l a t i o n a n d r u i n

117

5 . C o n c l u s i o n s

119

B i b l i o g r a p h y

124

Table of illustrations

Figure 1 Premiere partie de la Carte d'Europe contenant la France,

l'Alemagne, l'Italie, l'Espagne & les Isles Britanniq(ue)s (1754)

81

F i g u r e 2 E u r o p e ( 1 7 5 5 )

83

F i g u r e 3 A t l a s M i n i m u s o r a N e w S e t o f P o c k e t M a p s ( 1 7 5 8 )

84

F i g u re 4 P o l o n i a e R e g n u m , D u c a t u s q M a g n a e L i t h u a n i a e ( 1 7 6 2 )

86

Figure 5 A new map of the Kingdom of Poland with its dismembered provinces (1787)

88

Figure 6 Poland, Shewing the Claims of Russia, Prussia & Austria (1795)

90

F i g u r e 7 P r u s s i a n D o m i n i o n s ( 1 8 1 0 )

92

1. Introduction

In the middle of the seventeenth century, the Grand Tour became very popular in

England; it was the fashion to travel around the continent. The most popular destinations

were France and Italy. The Grand Tour reached its peak of popularity in the eighteenth

century, mainly due to economic improvements and transport, as well as ideas from the

Enlightenment. These ideas proclaimed the development of self, progress and freedom.

They influenced many travellers to set off on a journey because these trips were, for all

participants, a practical attempt to educate and develop oneself and acquire new qualities.

It was done not from books but through real contact with people and their existence,

fulfilling ideas of empiricism.

The majority of interest in travel literature during the eighteenth century came

from the Grand Tour. The travelogues were, next to the novels, the most amusing of the

literary genres. They were significant at the time because they influenced ordinary

readers (as well as scholars, philosophers and other travellers) to give specific opinions

on different subjects. Currently, travel literature provides a great deal of information

about the past, information that is very useful to historians and anthropologists.

In the second part of the eighteenth century travels to the other parts of Europe, as

well as other continents, became more and more popular. In the epoch of the reign of

Catherine the Great (1762-1796), a new variant of the Grand Tour appeared among

travellers – the Northern Tour, guided especially towards Russia, helping to satisfy the

curiosity regarding the growing power of the Russian Empire. The war of the Austrian

Succession (1740-1748) established Austria as a significant nation in Europe. The

country was placed directly between the West and the East, hence Austria was a place

worth visiting in the East. A few decades after the war, Austria combined forces with

Russia and Prussia (with Frederic II leading the growing potential of Prussia) and

together they conducted the first partition of Poland in 1772, the second in 1792 and the

third in 1795. These events disturbed the other countries of Europe who considered them

as absolutist proceeders. These were the main political events and therefore the main

reasons why travellers could have been interested in visiting Eastern Europe.

Considering the distance between England and the East of Europe, this part of the

continent was particularly interesting for the travellers. It was due to their curiosity about

new cultures, customs, and most likely, the policies and impact of these countries on their

own. As mentioned before, the political situation in this part of the continent was

violating the most noble ideas of the Enlightenment; hence there was an interest in

exploring the state of affairs thoroughly.

Among other places, travellers very often visited Poland. The country was very

ambiguous. Many writers could not decide if Poland was the first country belonging to

Asia or if it was still a part of Europe. Another question that was being asked was one

regarding the refinements and improvements of Poland. As Poland was not a significant

country on the European political field and was not a precursor in scientific or cultural

creations, many considered it as an unimportant nation. A few of the travellers decided to

check why Poland had a negative image while the whole Europe was and meant to be

developing. It is this perception that is the main theme of this work.

There are three types of primary sources used in this paper. The first group consist

of travel literature. The first important traveller, who was widely acknowledged as the

first author writing about Poland in English, was Bernard Connor. He was an English

physician who travelled to Poland in order to work as the guardian of the son of an

aristocrat. In 1694 Connor was appointed a physician to the Polish king that resulted in

him staying in Warsaw for a year. His material was an excellent source of information for

the later travellers. His two volumes of The History of Poland, in Several Letters to

Persons of Quality from 1698 was rich in details about history as well as politics of the

time. In his book Connor presented Poland mainly in a positive light, while mentioning

also that there were still some defects that were of a political nature. He saw that the

nobility was growing in their power, while other nationals were poor and deprived of

rights. The author, possibly influenced by The English Civil War (1642-1651), focused on

relationship between the Poles. Because the nobility had all the political power, it was

them who could improve the situation of a whole country. Connor therefore advocated

the idea of progress raised from political liberty.

Joseph Marshall was another traveller, who visited Poland about hundred years

later; a peculiar case for the historiography of travel literature. Many scholars suggested

that Marshall had never crossed the English border and that his accounts were fabricated.

Despite these accusations, Marshall has to be granted with an extreme talent, especially if

he indeed wrote his books without travelling. His work, Travels through Holland,

Flanders, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Lapland, Russia, the Ukraine, and Poland, in the

years 1768, 1769, and 1770, consists of three volumes containing detailed accounts of

different places. It was impossible for him to copy the work of others since Marshall

travelled before of most of the well-known travel writers. What is even more striking is

the fact that his accounts resemble a lot those of later travellers. They all decided upon

similar itineraries, visited the same places and provided similar descriptions. Marshall

offered the most focused account of the significance of economy. There is a theory that he

was a physiocrat due to his constant emphasis on agriculture, trade and commerce. His

economic beliefs, along with his strong opposition to slavery, suggest that Marshall could

have been inspired by the work of Adam Smith. However, the Wealth of Nations was

published seven years after Marshall's Travels, the influence therefore is not so straight

forward. Marshall is a truly ambiguous character for the historians, but for his

contemporaries the most essential were his opinions on other countries. He was a true

spokesman of the Enlightenment and of the idea that progress can be obtained only

through a stable economy and the freedom of people.

William Wraxall was the only traveller who visited Poland twice. He documented

his first tour in 1774 in the book Cursory remarks made in a tour through some of the

northern parts of Europe, particularly Copenhagen, Stockholm, and Petersburgh. He

came back to Poland three years later. The record of this trip can be found in Memoirs of

the courts of Berlin, Dresden, Warsaw, and Vienna, in the years 1777, 1778, and 1779.

Wraxall was the first traveller to encounter Poland in the official period of the partition.

The situation in the country must have been declining through the years, as Wraxall's first

book was a lot more optimistic than the second, although both related to the times after

the partition. In Cursory Remarks he described many places from an anthropological

point of view. Later, in Memoirs, he aimed at judging the guilty for a disgraceful situation

of the country, and innocent for their passiveness. Wraxall saw progress in social

improvements and freedom. From his accounts there are manifestations of a vision of

development focused primarily on social liberties.

William Coxe was the most well-known travel writer to his contemporaries; now

he is also very much acknowledged by the scholars. He was well-educated as a historian,

therefore his books are an example of well-constructed historical sources. Coxe is

considered to be the most objective of all the travellers due to his attention to the past as

well as present events connected with a specific story he encountered. His book Travels

into Poland, Russia, Sweden, and Denmark, interspersed with historical relations and

political inquiries was published in 1784 and each part of it provided a detailed account

on different parts of social, political and economic life. The same was the case for his

writings on Poland. Coxe created an image of the country from the past, to help the

reader understand various changes caused by the historical events. The description of an

eighteenth-century Poland is pessimistic and Coxe seems to blame for that state not only

political authorities (as was done by Connor), the government lacking in economic

decisions (as suggested by Marshall) and people being passive in regard to the declining

state of their country (reference to Wraxall), but all these individuals taken together. Coxe

adopted a holistic approach towards the improvement of Poland and hoped for refinement

in all areas of life.

The second type of the primary sources, used for the purpose of this paper, were

the books of the philosophers of the Enlightenment. Among the most significant figures

of the eighteenth-century domain of philosophy, Adam Ferguson, David Hume and Adam

Smith find a special place in this work. The strong mutual connection between the

travellers and philosophers of the Enlightenment forced them to analyse the books of the

aforementioned writers, in order to find the influences of the travellers on the writer's

perception on other countries, as well as the impact they had on the travellers.

Another kind of primary sources are maps of Europe, or most often Eastern

Europe. Maps, as an attribute of every traveller, are an example of a visual representation

of the visited countries. As travellers created literary descriptions, it is worth paying them

attention in order to compare them with their visual equivalents. Both works, literature

and maps, have to be read carefully, in between the lines, because both can carry

important details suggesting the power of one country over another. The aim of this paper

is to answer the significant question concerning power: did England enforce any kind of

power over Poland in the eighteenth century?

An attempt to answer this question can be found in the most important secondary

source of this work, a book Inventing Eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on the

Mind of the Enlightenment by Larry Wolff. Wolff is a professor of history at Stanford

University with an interest in, above all, Eastern Europe, Poland and the Enlightenment.

In Inventing Eastern Europe he presented a thesis that the backward Eastern Europe was

invented by the ideas of the Enlightenment as a complementary part to the developed

West. Wolff's thesis about the faults of the Enlightenment and England finds its place in

other secondary sources of the historians who were also critical about the age of reason.

Such authors were, among others, Robert Brenner, Daniel Chirot, Stuart Hall and Peter

Marshall. Jeremy Black is a historian who devoted his work to the study of the Grand

Tour, therefore his books were the most essential in finding information about the

background of this specific event in history. Charles Batten in his book Pleasurable

Instruction. From the Convention in the Eighteenth-Century Travel Literature provided

significant research on travel literature that appeared to be of great importance in this

paper.

In the first chapter the general background for the Grand Tour is presented. The

Grand Tour is described in terms of people's reasons for travelling, types of travellers and

typical destinations. Among countries like France and Italy, Eastern Europe finds its place

as a new and unknown part of the continent. This novelty would discourage many people

for the set of reasons, explained in the next point of the work. Further, there is an account

of the travellers visiting Poland: Bernard Connor, Joseph Marshall, William Wraxall and

William Coxe, and their motives to travel there. The following part is discussing the

subject of travel literature, its different types and its importance in the past and its

significance for the present times.

The second chapter is an analysis of a very broad idea of the Enlightenment – the

progress. Firstly, the progress is examined through an example of the philosophers

believing in the importance of freedom in acquiring an improvement. The discussed

figures are: Anne-Robert Jacques Turgot, Adam Smith and Jean-Antoine-Nicolas Caritat

de Condorcet. In opposition to the idea of progress-as-freedom is a concept of progress-

as-power that finds its place in the next point of the work. Further, there is explained a

theory that combines the two above mentioned approaches to progress, namely a theory

of the “'Noble' vs 'Ignoble Savages'.” Later in the text, each of the travellers' accounts is

analysed in order to find out if the theory found its reception in travellers' stories. The

conclusions from this research aim to answer this well-posed question. It also leads to

another part, in which feudalism is described as a dominant system in the eighteenth-

century Poland; a system that did not let Poland become a 'noble savage'.

Chapter three gives an insight into the state of cartography in eighteenth-century

Europe. In the first part an emphasis is put on the success of this domain in the west. The

second part shows the differences in attitudes towards cartography between the countries

of Eastern Europe, Russia and Poland. The information is then followed by the

explanation of the theory of 'maps as tools for power', created by Brian John Harley. The

last part is an exemplification and a discussion on the maps created in the eighteenth

century representing Europe, with an emphasis put on Poland. The maps are in this

chapter are an example of an indirect intellectual power enforced over Poland.

The last chapter is an example of direct power that brought Poland to decline. The

first part explains the background of the issues connected with race. Afterwards, the

description of a 'Polish race' reveals a particularity of the Polish essence and of national

character. Further, each of the travellers are analysed from the point of the specific

characteristics they noticed about the Poles: Connor is examined regarding the essence

from the times before the partitions, Marshall is discussed in the context of luxury and

religion, Wraxall is analysed in regard to the Sarmatian traditions and Coxe is described

in terms of the relationships of the Poles with the Jews. This part leads to the issue of

slavery, the background of which is presented in the next part of the chapter. From the

general view on slavery, the travellers' accounts are examined once again in order to find

out specific examples of slavery in Poland: the nobility vs the peasants, the nobility vs

politics, foreigners vs Poland and Catherine the Great vs Stanislaw August Poniatowski.

The conclusion of this part leads to the negative opinion of the country, namely

depopulation and ruin, that find their place in the last part of the work.

This paper is different from existing works because it gives an overall view on the

historical situation in Poland and its perception by the English travellers. The local

perception on slavery and race is strongly connected with issues concerning England at

the time. There are many other common points between English visitors and the Poles

that are not that obvious at once. The discrepancy found in the Enlightenment was one of

them. Philosophers and travellers advocated freedom, understanding and objective

knowledge, while they also accepted slavery, judgmental attitudes and the creation of the

false images of different places. For the purpose of this paper, the Enlightenment was

studied in an unconventional way. Its idealistic character was accepted, but only the

inconsistency of some of the ideals, was closely examined. Moreover, the paper aims to

create a representation of social relationships between Poland and England in the

eighteenth century. In a historical context, both countries had not much in common.

Nevertheless, over the period of one hundred years four travellers decided to examine the

country and write extensive accounts about it. There are a few interesting questions to be

asked that will hopefully be answered by the end of this work. Why Poland was such an

interesting destination? What kind of country did travellers encounter there – a European

or Asian country, civilized or barbaric, free or enslaved, progressing or regressing? What

issues emerged from their visits? How did their perception influence the country? How

did this perception change the relationships between England and Poland?

Chapter 1. The importance of the Grand Tour and travel literature in history

1.1. The Grand Tour

In general, the Grand Tour was predominantly an aristocratic usage. Among these

aristocrats there were different groups of people who were particularly interested in

setting out on a journey. In the beginning, the group consisted mostly of young men, who

were sent out in pursuit of knowledge concerning different parts of the world. Jeremy

Black believes that it was educational reasons that triggered an interest in the Grand Tour.

The principal arguments advanced in favour of foreign travel were that it equipped the traveller socially and provided him with useful knowledge and attainments. It was partly for this reason that many had part of their formal education, at school, academy or university, abroad […]. Education has been a central theme in British travel abroad from

the outset.1

The main advantage of the Grand Tour for a young traveller was the possibility for him to

obtain empirical knowledge, that he could not have found in books. Education at foreign

universities combined theoretical accomplishments with practical skills. This seemed like

the highest of all achievements, so many families decided to provide such educational

opportunities for their children.

The aristocratic boys were only one part of the larger group of travellers. Others

were setting off mainly to do work. These travellers were usually of an upper-class origin

politicians or ambassadors, also tutors, writers or children guardians. Usually, the lower

class of travellers, working abroad, had patrons or respectable friends who financially

sponsored their trips. This resulted in them writing letters with accounts of their

reflections on the places they visited. This correspondence could also have been due to

the need for the reporting of the progress of a journey and of a proof of the money spent.

Travelling for practical purposes was slowly transformed into tourism for pleasure

more than work or education. Tourists in this sense, travelled around the continent,

visited different places, enjoyed works of arts and explored new cultures. Their

discoveries resulted in many written accounts of their travels, in which the descriptions of

new experiences mingled with their own reflections. Due to the existence of a new

literary genre, travel literature, more people had access to discovering new lands through

travellers' books. Also, many writers, philosophers and anthropologists decided to visit

the continent in the footsteps of their favourite travellers, with their books as travel

guides. Readers in England became especially interested in the new literary genre,

making it one of the most recognizable of the century. People at the time already knew

the importance of travelling, proven by the conclusion of Richard Steele stated in 1712:

Certainly the true end of visiting foreign parts, is to look into their customs and policies, and observe in what particulars they excel or come short of your own; to unlearn some of the peculiarities in our manners, and wear off such awkward stiffnesses and affectations in our behaviour, as may possibly have been contracted from constantly associating with one nation of men, by a more free, general, and mixed conversation.2

Richard Steele was an Irish writer and politician, a friend of the traveller Joseph Addison.

In the excerpt from his essay for the magazine The Spectator he noticed the importance

of an anthropological approach towards newly explored lands and people. He focused his

attention on the comparison of the experiences of people from the visited places with

those of the travellers, in order to improve general manners and behaviour. Steele

believed that this improvement was the most positive aspect of travelling for the society.

Historians tried to focus on other, not necessarily historical or ideological, reasons

for setting off on a tour. Interestingly, Michael Mewshaw turned his attention towards

psychology and used the theory of Sigmund Freud.

The good doctor Sigmund Freud speculated that 'a great part of the pleasure of travel lies in the fulfilment of these early wishes to escape the family and especially the father'. In that sense, travel may be viewed as a rebellious, even a subversive act, part of the process of self-actualization. I travel to define and assert my existential identity. I

travel. Therefore I am.3

Mewshaw concluded that one can travel for his or her4 own satisfaction and a feeling of

self-accomplishment. Similarly, Paul Fussell in his book Abroad: British literary

traveling between the wars, stated that travel has a big impact on the state of arts, culture

and society in general; “Without travel, Fussell claims, there's inevitably 'a loss of

amplitude, a decay of imagination and intellectual possibility corresponding to the literal

loss of physical freedom'.”5 Thence, travelling at the time not only helped in developing

geographic and anthropological studies, but also, and perhaps most importantly, formed

people's lives. Moreover, experience of travelling was essential in traveller's lives and

developed their attitudes. Their presence in different countries also had an impact on the

citizens. In addition, the literature they produced, built the attitudes of the readers. These

examples exhibit the versatile role of travelling.

The Enlightenment was also an influence in travelling. The notion of freedom,

that was essential in the Enlightenment as well as eighteenth-century travelling, can be

divided into two issues. The first was due to the rise of colonialism in the sixteenth

century. Colonialism meant increased contact with other cultures, mainly on other

continents, so the need to explore the countries in Europe also needed to be satisfied.

Secondly, due to the importance of the Enlightenment's ideas of freedom and

independence, the problem of subordination of people and authoritarian power,

happening in the neighbouring countries, was a big issue that was questioned by many.

As in the 1770s. the political positions of countries such as Russia, Prussia and Austria

was rising, detrimental to Poland, British travellers desired to examine the situation of

subordination from one country to another.

Travellers' accounts are considered by contemporary scholars as anthropological

sources. As anthropology is a fairly new scientific discipline, travel literature serves as a

perfect genre for obtaining information about human life in the past. The travellers were

often influenced by their own history and experiences, when encountering new situations

abroad. This led to mental shortcuts that were distributed in the travel accounts and

therefore reinforced all over the world. One example of a mental shortcut is the

association of an ancient state of affairs in the world with contemporary (eighteenth

century) Poland; an association made often by the travellers. Wolff noticed the same

phenomenon and explained it as the use of travel literature for scientific source material.

He did this in the example of Claude-Charles de Peyssonnel's and Louis-Philippe de

Ségur's accounts (French diplomats and writers).

The juxtaposition of Peyssonell and Ségur, their analogous discoveries of ancient barbarians in contemporary Eastern Europe, suggests that the line between literary evocation and anthropological observation was not an emphatic one. Eastern Europe was precisely that part of Europe where such vestiges were in evidence, where ancient history met anthropology. The categories of ancient history that identified the barbarians of Eastern Europe, […] not only corresponded to the impressions of contemporary travelers, but also entered directly into the emerging social science of anthropology […]. For although the Slavs

were only one barbarian people among many in the enumerations of Peyssonell and Ségur, they were to become the essential ethnographic key to the modern idea of Eastern Europe.6

Wolff explained that experiences in the past, such as travels, created a particular type of

data; data that was highly subjective and marked with personal experience. The spread of

this information, due to popularity of travel literature, transferred these materials into the

scientific domain. It then started to be treated as objective knowledge. Therefore,

travelling was very strongly connected with anthropological practices. Even if the

travellers were not aware of it, every time they observed a specific situation and

described it with respect to the traditions and customs, they were adopting the role of an

anthropologist. Moreover, if travellers and contemporary anthropologists should be

compared, their tasks and methods of work would look very similar. It may mean that

travellers were in fact the first anthropologists.

Nathaniel Wraxall, one of the travellers in the eighteenth century, reduced the

reasons for travelling into a few statements: “the survey of nations and view of foreign

and dissimilar modes of acting and thinking to our own, is not only formed to enlarge the

human mind, and correct its early prejudices, but is calculated to charm and delight in a

supreme degree.”7 For him, travelling was a source of intellectual development,

reflection on the state of one's country and pleasure. Other travellers shared the same

opinion about travelling, at least, according to what they have written in their accounts.

Yet, current historians try to find different reasons for the same journeys. Most of these

journeys are ascribed, on the one hand, to natural curiosity of different political systems

and social life and, on the other hand, to the search for similarities and differences

between traveller's experiences and those of foreigners. The latter of these claims

suggests also that travel literature could have been often politicized.

There were different variations in the travelling, however, in the beginning of the

eighteenth century, the most common destinations from England were Italy and France,

sometimes also the Low Countries. All these places were associated with high culture,

good education, art and philosophy. The aforementioned reasons for travelling: curiosity,

knowledge, education, could all be satisfied only in this part of the continent. “Around

these bases a variety of possible itineraries could be devised. Personal preference,

fashion, convenience and the impact of external factors – war, political disorder and

disease – were all of importance.”8 There were people who decided to choose

destinations other than the most common ones. They were driven by different kind of

reasons in choosing their stops. Some of them, rejecting the fear of remote places and

lands unadapted to travel, chose Eastern Europe as the perfect place to be explored. This

new variant of the Grand Tour was soon named the Northern Tour. The possibility to

travel to Eastern Europe appeared to be very interesting to the travellers. These places

were attractive as they were a part of Europe, but at the same time, they were distant in

many possible ways. However, the idea of travelling there was appealing only to those

who were not afraid to face the difficulties of travelling and experience a reality that was

often unusual for them.

1.2. Reasons opposing travelling

Alongside the popular destinations such as Russia or Sweden, Poland was one

country usually visited simply due to its proximity to these places. Either that or the

mental connection between Poland and Russia. There were a few reasons why travellers

were not interested in this itinerary. Firstly, as Jeremy Black concluded, it was not an

interesting place to be, compared to the refinements of Italy or Paris. Moreover, it was

not on the way to any other popular destination, which resulted in it being forgotten by

travellers.9

Secondly, the country was underdeveloped and not prepared for tourists. The

roads and sleeping facilities were in a poor condition scaring off possible visitors. Such

criticising accounts can be found in all written travelogues. Wraxall had to continue his

trip overnight due to unbearable conditions in one of his inns:

The landlord endeavored to persuade me to stay till morning, as I had five-and-twenty miles to Konitz, through continued forests of sir, and deep sands. I would have accepted his advice, as, to say the truth, I was not totally without apprehensions in these woods by night, in an unfrequented part of Polish Prussia; but the horrid nastiness and pestilential smell resulting from it, in the cabins, for they cannot be called houses, at every village where I stopped, made it impossible to lie down or breathe in them. I therefore proceeded, as soon as horses could be procured, and about nine Sunday morning I got to Konitz.10

The travellers who decided to visit Poland, such as Wraxall, were prepared to face great

difficulties in order to get any information about the country. Others preferred to follow

the footsteps of travellers to Italy or France, knowing what to expect there.

As the roads were sometimes impassable, British travellers usually visited only

important places in Poland, like the economically significant port in Danzig; “Danzig, a

German Protestant fief or protectorate of Poland, contained a British colony and

monopolised almost the whole of Anglo-Polish trade and curiosity.”11 The concentration

of trade in one place, close to the sea border, was only one part of a lack of the bonds

between the two countries. The second was the lack of interest the Polish customers had

in English export goods. The information from the Foreign Office in 1765 stated that “the

Poles consumed no more than some £ 15,000 worth of British textiles, cutlery and other

products every year.”12 Also Marshall in his Travels mentioned that the goods were

mainly imported from Holland and France, not so much from England.13 Although a

number of 15,000 pounds, stated by the Foreign Office, may seem like a big amount of

money, it was still considerably smaller comparing to all the other goods imported to

Poland. When Coxe explained that the economic struggle of Poland was caused by a lack

of balance in trade, he stated specific numbers that depicted the difference between the

number of all imported products and those of English origin (worth £15,000):

As the Poles are obliged to draw from foreign countries the greatest part of the manufactured goods necessary for their interior consumption, the specie that is exported exceeds the imported more than 20,000,000 Polish florins, or £555,555.14

Considering that Coxe used genuine information, British imported commodities

constituted only one fourth of the surplus of all the imports. This meant that, indeed,

Polish consumers were not that interested in English goods, another reason for the lack of

a strong connection between the two countries.

The problem of the separation between England and Poland may have also been

language. While in Western Europe French or Latin were common languages, further east

it was difficult to communicate. In between the courts or aristocratic households, the

traveller struggled with simple tasks important to his journey, such as fetching horses or

asking for directions.

Poland, as a strongly Catholic country, was considered by a Protestant

Englishman, as a backward place. The situation of non-catholics was difficult at the time:

“Neither government thirsted for the blood of heretics, but each made heretics

uncomfortable. The British representative in Warsaw marvelled at the folly of a nation

which brought in foreign craftsmen only to prosecute them, so that hundreds left at a

time.”15 Poland was considered as the bulwark of Catholicism, with harsh opinions on

dissenters, so it is not surprising there was a lack of interest in this place among the

Protestant British travellers.

Another reason for weak contacts between England and Poland was the mixture

of history and political decisions. In the time of partitions16, Great Britain adopted a

passive policy towards Poland, condemning the dismemberment without any visible

actions: “The statesmen […] during those years realised one and all that Poland lay

beyond their sphere of action. Poland, as one of them bluntly declared, was the least

important to Britain of all Europe.”17 Considering all the aforementioned reasons, Great

Britain did not feel the need to kindle the fire of interest in Poland among British citizens.

The country was seen as a weak political ally (“Britain thought only of the Poles as a

persecuting race with an idiotic constitution.”) and an intellectually poor nation –

“Characters, natural history, inventions, antiquities, essays, poetry – in all these, […]

Poland offered nothing worthy of their attention.”18 Britain, as one of the biggest

colonial powers, was never interested in Poland as a political ally, considering the

country to be too weak to offer them any kind of support. This lack of political alliance

led to the rare appearance of Poland in the British field of play. Consequently, this

resulted in the creation of a scanty representation of the Poles and their achievements.

There exists another idea of why the Eastern part of Europe was not an interesting

destination for the travellers in the eighteenth century. Larry Wolff, a professor of history

at Stanford University, in his book Inventing Eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on

the Mind of the Enlightenment argued that, primarily, in the Renaissance, the division of

Europe was based on the cultivated South and the barbaric North. Over time, the interest

in the southern cities of Rome, Venice or Florence was fading much to the benefit of

developing (economically and as political powers) cities like London, Paris and

Amsterdam. The philosophers noticed a changing Europe and they enriched this new

image, enforcing the transition between the old and the new division.

The travellers were significant to this process. Visiting Eastern Europe they

carried “a mental map”19 of this place, connecting the diverse countries into one group,

setting it into contradiction with the West and therefore creating differences. Wolff

provided hegemonic reasons for travelling. He connected voyagers with map-makers and

stated that the latter created the new images of unknown parts of Europe to expose “the

cartographical ambition of Western Europe to master Eastern Europe in the eighteenth

century.”20 This was a long-term process and “not a natural distinction, or even an

innocent one, for it was produced as a work of: cultural creation, of intellectual artifice,

of ideological self-interest, and self-promotion.”21 According to Wolff, generation of

such contrast was carried on in order to show the superiority of the West. Western Europe

had a lower status than that of the other parts of Europe, for a long period of time and in

just as many areas of social and political life. As a result, they achieved the creation of

mental association between backwardness of Eastern Europe in opposition to the progress

of Western Europe.

The result of backwardness “was formulated as an intellectual problem of

unresolved contrast.”22 The difficulty, which may have made 'mental mapping' easier,

was the lack of real borders in Europe in the east, in the eighteenth century. People were

not sure where Europe ended and often identified Eastern Europe with the Orient. It is

essential to remember that not all scholars share the same negative opinion about the

Enlightenment. Nevertheless, for the purpose of this paper, it is important to notice the

positive as well as negative outputs of the Enlightenment that resulted in travelling to the

East of Europe.

The feeling of searching for the opposite of the positive West is also explained

through the example of the economy. According to Wolff, the Eastern European economy

was focused on the export of grain to the countries in the West. This reflected the creation

of a kind of periphery, where the centre was the West while the outside, the periphery,

was the East. Such state of affairs organized existing earlier economical models of

backwardness for the East. This idea was explained in the example of the theory of

Immanuel Wallerstein:

Immanuel Wallerstein, in his economic history of the Origins of the

European World-Economy, assigns to the sixteenth century the emergence of a capitalist 'core' in Western Europe, exercising its economic hegemony over a 'periphery' in Eastern Europe (and Hispanic America), creating a 'complementary divergence' out of an initially minimal economic disparity. […] The identification of Eastern Europe as economic periphery involves, to a certain extent, taking the culturally constructed unity of the eighteenth century and projecting it backward to organize an earlier economic model.23

After the period of economic backwardness in Eastern Europe in the sixteenth century,

the region began to develop. The agenda of superiority led the West to represent the other

part of Europe as economically weak. This resulted in return to the old model of the

sixteenth century, when commerce between the West and the East was based on the

centre of trade in the first place that exercised its economic power over the latter. Eastern

Europe economically depended on the West while the West had the ability to direct the

trade in order to obtain the most benefits.

Larry Wolff provided significant evidence for this in his book. In his thesis, Wolff

partly blamed the West, or the Enlightenment, for the backwardness of the East.

The Enlightenment’s accounts were not flatly false or fictitious; on the contrary, in an age of increasingly ambitious traveling and more critical observation, those lands were more frequently visited and thoroughly studied than ever before. The work of invention lay in the synthetic association of lands, which drew upon both fact and fiction, to produce the general rubric of Eastern Europe. That rubric represented an aggregation of general and associative observations over a diverse domain of lands and peoples. It is in that sense that Eastern Europe is a cultural construction, and intellectual invention, of the Enlightenment.24

Wolff argued that the intellectual ideas of the Enlightenment started this false and

ignorant construction. Travels and a quest for knowledge were examples of a refined part

of the ideology propagating travelling. Then, the invention of facts and false realities

distorted the image of Eastern Europe. This suggests a withdrawal from the ideology of

reason and truth. This conflict between the theory (noble ideology) and practice

(inventive stories distorting reality), presented on the example of East and West,

undermines the idea of the Enlightenment.

1.3. Travellers to Eastern Europe

Despite negative reasons against visiting Eastern Europe, there were still people

who decided to devote their time to exploring this part of the continent, especially

Poland. Bernard Connor lived in the years 1666-1698 and was born in Ireland. He was an

author who focused his interest entirely on Poland. He was a physician who received his

education in France, where he was appointed by the crown chancellor of Poland, Jan

Wielopolski, to take care of his sons. He travelled with them from France to Poland,

where he spent twelve months in Warsaw and got appointed to be the personal physician

to King Jan III Sobieski.25 The time spent in the capital gave Connor a basis for his

future scientific work as well as his book The History of Poland in Several Letters to

Persons of Quality, which is a detailed account of the country in the seventeenth century

as well as before. The author divided his work into two volumes. The first deals with the

Ancient state of Poland, where he recounted the history of the first kings, their reigns,

particularities of their life or even their legends, until the times of Frederic August; he

also described the state of commerce and cities in the past. In the second volume Connor

commented on the Present state of the country. His book became a reliable source of

information about politics in Poland throughout the seventeenth century. Connor devoted

room in his accounts to the fear and predictions about the regression of the country,

caused by the ruling class. He saw progress and development in the appropriate

management of the state and believed that political responsibilities should be performed

for the benefit of the state not individuals. Therefore, Connor was a spokesman of

political liberties leading to development.

It is difficult to find information on another British traveller, Joseph Marshall,

who in 1772 published his travel accounts entitled Travels through Holland, Flanders,

Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Lapland, Russia, the Ukraine, and Poland, in the years

1768, 1769, and 1770. What is known from his books is that he focused his visit on the

Central-Eastern part of Europe. He devoted the first volume of his book to Holland, the

second to Flanders, Germany, Denmark and Sweden, and the third to Lapland, Russia,

Poland and Bohemia. In his observations he adopted the attitude of an anthropologist.

Also, contrary to Connor, he didn't focus on past events but the present state of the

countries he visited. He devoted most of his reflections to Holland. Nevertheless Poland

was widely described by him too. Although it is arduous to get hold of his biography, his

name occurs often in the books of the travel historians. In British Residents and Visitors

in Russia during the Reign of Catherine the Great Anthony G. Cross mentioned the

Annual Register whose authors were sceptical about Marshall's travels and “another

writer noted that 'Marshall has published travels through various parts of Europe without

once having crossed the channel'.”26 Also Larry Wolff commented on the same question

of the authenticity of Marshall's trip, thus providing some more information about the

man himself –

If indeed Marshall's travels were a fraud and a fiction, his case clearly suggests that Eastern Europe offered fertile soil to the inventive imagination. Soil, in fact, was his chief preoccupation for he presented himself as an English landowner with an interest in scientific agricultural improvement, touring Europe to make comparative observations.27

It is true that Marshall devoted a lot of space in his accounts to agriculture. This

attachment may prove the point of Marshall being a physiocrat, which is the additional

information about the man. Moreover, this constant emphasis on the importance of trade,

commerce and agriculture shows that Marshall saw the progress of a country in its

economic liberty. He advocated this commercial freedom as the first step to a larger

development.

Sir Nathaniel William Wraxall was born in Bristol in 1751. He was educated, then

he worked abroad, and then he decided to become a professional travel writer. He

travelled all over Europe, especially Portugal and Scandinavia.28 He wrote his first book

concerning the North-East part of Europe in 1775 (Cursory remarks made in a tour

through some of the Northern parts of Europe, particularly Copenhagen, Stockholm and

Petersburg) and although Poland is not found in the title, the author devoted three letters

to describe what he found out on the way through the country. In his next book, about his

journey undertaken four years later, published in 1799 (Memoirs of the courts of Berlin,

Dresden, Warsaw, and Vienna), he had already written six letters about the state of affairs

in Poland. Wraxall is considered by historians as a reliable and interesting source of

information:

Nathaniel Wraxall when composing his Cursory Remarks judiciously directed his steps away from the grand tour to those regions 'where the greatest novelties were to be expected.' Wraxall's accounts of Sweden, Russia, and the less-traveled areas of France aim at exciting among readers novelty and admiration – those two powers most conductive to pleasure – by studiously avoiding 'the ground usually trodden by the English, in their passage from Calais into Italy,' it being 'too well known to afford... any information.'29

Wraxall's works are considered to be written in a sophisticated language and this is the

case for both of the books stated above. Wraxall, when describing reality, told a story to

the reader almost as a poet or a painter. His commentaries are full of picturesque details

that are used for anthropological explanations of the matters. The author decided to write

mainly about customs, people and culture. His accounts consist of a description of his

journey with the emphasis on cities, buildings, people and important events. Although

Wraxall placed different events in their historical context, his books are more a source of

knowledge about culture and social life than history itself. Therefore, Wraxall became an

author who, through his accounts, expressed a requirement of social liberties; general

happiness of people, minimal wealth for all, good infrastructure, proper relationships

among citizens. It seems like these elements were the most important for him on the way

to the growth of Poland and its progress.

William Coxe was born in London in 1748 and later in his life became one of the

most important travellers of the Enlightenment. He was a historian and a clergyman of

the Church of England. After his education he became a tutor to Lord Blandford, the

future eleventh earl of Pembroke. For four years Coxe travelled with his student around

Europe, which resulted in his three-volume book Travels into Poland, Russia, Sweden,

and Denmark, interspersed with historical relations and political inquiries published in

1784.30 This work is considered as a well structured and informative piece, mainly

because Coxe used to rewrite his accounts by adding important details and basing them

on the geographic, economic and scientific accounts he could get hold of. Anthony G.

Cross mentioned how highly recognised Coxe was in his times – “Coxe became more or

less the Baedeker of the eighteenth century; people would take his bulky volumes on their

own travels; travellers would test their own impressions against his; mothers, indeed,

would follow from afar their sons' progress by reference to his work.”31

Coxe wrote a rich account on the countries he visited and tried to focus his

attention equally on various parts of social, political and economic life. He studied the

history of the countries, observed people of different classes and backgrounds, took part

in important events and presented it all in the form of his detailed books. When

describing the Polish army, he took into consideration all the details, such as the origins

of people, their clothing and even breed of their horses!32 His descriptions, contrary to

Wraxall, consisted of stories from his journeys but also of a historical account. Coxe was

versatile, not only in his writing but also in his mode of thinking. Through his books, he

advocated an all-embracing idea of progress. He was a supporter of political freedom as

well as economic improvements and social advantages. He adopted a holistic vision of

progress in which every positive element of life could work for a benefit of the society.

Some of the authors adopted the anthropological methods of research and

described how people lived in society, how the community shaped them, what were the

origins of their customs, what impact a place had on their lives and other similar topics.

Others tried to create a rich source of knowledge about the country they visited by

explaining every domain of life in detail. Therefore, they looked for reasons of specific

policies and customs in the detailed histories of countries, rulers and the impact they had

on the current state of affairs. Although the accounts varied according to the writers,

many of them displayed similar modes of thinking, similar reflections or philosophies

about Poland.

1.4. Travel literature

In the eighteenth century the genre of travel journals, travel narratives and travel

memoirs – in short, travel literature – became one of the most popular in England. They

were widely read by the ordinary people, becoming an education for those who could

afford the price of a book.33 Travelogues were also highly considered by philosophers,

scholars and even other travellers: “travel accounts found honored places on the shelves

of Addison, Locke, Johnson, Hume, Gibbon, and Jefferson, influencing their ideas about

geography, science, and human nature.”34 The most important writers at the time were

attracted by travel literature, so the big success of this genre is usually ascribed to them.

They wrote their own accounts, as well as rewriting others, trying to fit them all into this

specific literary form. Valerie Wheeler sharply stated that “The traveller, a stranger who

for the most part remained 'raw' since he rarely visited any place twice, wrote of his

travels to sell books”35 which instantly takes away the Enlightenment's noble ideas of

travel as a quest for knowledge and new experiences.

1.5. Types of travel literature

There are few characteristics that distinguish travel literature from other kinds of

literature:

In distinguishing between fictional and nonfictional travel books and in describing the 'literary' nature of travel accounts, we have assumed these works are easily distinguishable from such literary genres as the novel, the biography, and the descriptive geography. The travel book's autobiographically determined narrative, however, suggests that it is merely a specialized form of biography describing the events in an author's life during a trip. […] Yet travel books also bear a striking resemblance to descriptive geographies in their treatment of such objects as the physical appearance, customs, commerce, history, and laws of specific areas. […] Despite these similarities to other conventional genres, the travel book seemed an easily distinguishable literary form to eighteenth-century readers.36

The main features of travel literature that it can be identify by are: autobiographical

narrative, descriptive style and a detailed style of writing. Although these characteristics

could have been found in other literary genres of the period, the readers were still able to

distinguish the travel literature from other types. They are significant characteristics as

they make it possible to find out if an author was subjective or objective in his opinions.

They also help one to find the influences that could have affected the travellers' accounts.

Travel literature in the eighteenth century always carried some kind of message; a

message distributed to many people due to travel literature's success. Therefore, it is

important to analyse travel accounts in a technical manner, in order to be able to analyse

them properly in terms of their impact, influences and consequences of specific details.

Batten in his book Pleasurable Instruction. Form and Convention in Eighteenth-

Century Travel Literature went into depth describing the history of travel writing in the

eighteenth century: the motives for writing this kind of literature, its conventions and

uses. In his opinion, the books firstly differed in their destination. Some accounts were

meant to be published and sold, others were written to relatives or friends and meant to

stay private. Naturally, the outcome would vary according to the recipient. If the book

had to meet a wider audience and be a success in the bookstores, the writers often needed

to mix fiction with facts to make their work interesting enough to ensure its triumph. An

example of such book can be seen in the Marshall's accounts concerning Poland; often

considered as being written without travelling abroad. There were many reasons why

Marshall could have decided on the action of writing about a topic that he did not master.

One of the most obvious reasons seems to be the fame and fortune of doing so. Travel

literature was very successful at the time so involvement in such an activity must have

been tempting even for Marshall. The books prepared for selling were polished in their

language and well organized. On the contrary, private accounts could expose a poorer or

easier style of writing, simply because they were not expected to be read by anybody else

other than the writer himself.

Batten focused his attention on finding the features of a perfect style of travel

accounts, which should “aim at 'a kind of middle rank between the solidity of studied

discourse and the freedom of colloquial conversation.'”37 According to Batten, the main

feature of a successful narration is a simple style, expressing the honesty of a writer,

without specialized definitions and sophisticated language. Such were the books of Coxe,

Wraxall or Richardson, whose well-written essays on history, politics, economy or culture

provided the information in a comprehensive and poetic fashion. This does not mean that

all private accounts were not appropriate for readers. Anthony G. Cross in his essay cited

an example of Letters from the Continent: Describing the Manners and Customs of

Germany, Poland, Russia, and Switzerland, in the Years 1790, 1791, and 1792; to a

Friend Residing in England published anonymously but attributed to Lionel Colmore.

This book, as the title suggests, was intended to reach only a friend but was published and

widely appreciated. Unusually, the author of this book moved the emphasis of his stories

from the descriptions of a country to those of people, which was a novelty at the time.38

Cross paid much attention to the unpublished accounts, which in his opinion reflect

mostly the immediate reaction to places, people and anecdotes. These observations

usually find their source in private diaries and manuscripts which for a historian are the

origin of a detailed account.

Another step in defining travel literature can be the differentiation of the literary

patterns. Batten made a primary comparison between journal and essay:

After undertaking a journey, an author may publish either a register of the journey itself or a description of the results of the trip: 'In the former case, it is a diary, under which head are to be classed all those books of travels written in the form of letters. The latter usually falls into the shape of essays on distinct subjects.'39

A writer of a diary is usually more believable in his stories but the threat for him is a one-

dimensional narrative. A traveller describes what he observes at the time but does not

match his stories with historical, scientific or cultural backgrounds to thoroughly

understand the cases. A writer of an essay has more advantages because his work can be

more complete and consistent. The travellers of the first kind could have been Marshall

and Wraxall who described their adventures in the journey focusing on realistic depiction

of reality. Connor and Coxe seem to have put more work in their accounts because they

were very well organized.

Another distinction can be seen based on the idea of organizing the accounts as

narratives. Firstly, there are journals that are labelled by dates. An example of this kind of

organisation is the work of Joseph Marshall who, in his Travels, placed his stories into

separate chapters and kept a proof of dates in every single part. The reader can easily

keep track of him and see how long the specific parts of the trip took him. There is also

an epistolary form that can be found in the accounts of Bernard Connor in his book The

History of Poland. Connor wrote letters to his patron, Lord William Dartmouth, and in

each of these letters he maintained detailed information about different areas of interest

concerning Poland. According to Batten, there is also a difference between the two ways

in which organising the writing can become unclear. This finds its example in the work of

Nathaniel Wraxall. In Cursory Remarks Wraxall wrote in the form of letters, to Lord

Viscount Clare, yet, he used headlines in the form of dates. Therefore, this distinction

may be important for some authors, but for others it was simply a means by which they

could keep track of their adventures as well as to write strictly to their reader(s). For

contemporary readers such details are significant in matching specific events with dates

and finding historical context for the incidents.

Although tourism was becoming more and more popular, most of the travellers

chose to write anthropological books from their voyages rather than travel guides. Travel

guides were refused as literature simply because of the lack of entertainment on their

part. Although travel literature answered the need for pleasure, it also sometimes focused

on a more utilitarian purpose. It was due to the changes in the reasons why people

travelled at this particular time as well as the changing fashions in travel literature. In the

beginning, apart from educational purposes, people travelled for pleasure and curiosity.

After the first wave of these travel accounts, others were being produced to complete or

replace the old ones, especially those of romantic writers who easily mixed facts with

fiction. At the end of the eighteenth century the books became more autobiographical

than before, memoirs were more often produced, and the impact was put on the creation

of a general judgment in the end of the reading. Another important feature at the time was

an encyclopaedic style of some to some books. The quest for knowledge in the eighteenth

century explains this educational idea that can be found in many respectable accounts:

When Smollett advises readers to look at Keyssler's Travels for a description of 'every thing worth seeing at Florence,' he recommends what might be called an encyclopedic travel book. Keyssler attempts in his almost two thousand pages to describe every object of interest not only to the reader who sits at home, but also to the traveler who needs practical advice while on the road and in the principal cities of Europe. […] Filled with such a large store of useful information, Keyssler's Travels understandably became a handbook for tourists like Gibbon while on the Continent.40

At the same time, the motive of a palimpsest text became popular among the

writers. The account was meant to reflect the idea of a text within text; conveying themes

from literature, philosophy and all that was connected with the story:

La littérature de voyage constitue ainsi une généalogie dense et complexe, accompagnée de figures obligées comme l'hommage aux plus vénérables des 'philosophes péripatéticiens', Montaigne, Bacon - en fait toute une méta-bibliothèque, un texte-palimpseste, une chaîne d'échos textuels, de reprises et de dénégations.41

Naturally, after an interest as such and the popularization of travel literature,

writers were in pursuit of a new subject, or rather new places, to entertain their readers

who had already heard a lot about the traditional Grand Tour destinations such as Italy

and France. Therefore, some travellers decided to explore new countries and regions,

Eastern Europe was one of them. In his book, Batten seems to be raising a question that is

connected to the transition between the reasons of writing travel literature: 'what is more

important in the travel accounts: pleasure or utility?'. He answers it by saying: “the travel

account directed to the general reader, the one in search of something more than

assistance in preparing for his own travels, always aimed at blending pleasure with

instruction in order to achieve an artistically pleasing literary experience.”42

Out of all the analysed travellers, it was Coxe who created an account that was the

most rich in literary sources. He worked on public and private letters, political documents

and decrees, books regarding the subject of his interest and other travellers' narratives. A

story of an assassination of the king was told to Coxe by Wraxall, of whom Coxe wrote

with extreme fondness:

The following circumstantial account of this singular occurrence was communicated to me by my ingenious friend Nathaniel Wraxal, Esq; whose name is well known in the literary world; and who, during his residence at Warsaw, obtained the most authentic information upon so interesting a transaction: as he has obligingly permitted me to enrich my work with this narration, I am happy to lay it before the reader in his own words.43

This excerpt shows how intertwined the literary world became in the eighteenth century.

Coxe knew Wraxall very well; so much that he chose to call him a friend. He also paid

Wraxall a compliment by saying that he was a famous writer. Coxe was a very accurate

author. Nevertheless, he trusted Wraxall so much that he decided to write his story and

even did it in his own words. Moreover, the books of both authors resemble each other in

their choice of depicted events from history. Wraxall and Coxe decided to visit Poland in

a similar way, saw the same places and described the same stories. Among others, the

descriptions that strike one with similarity are, that of the castle in Cracow, that of the

story of the Jewess Ester and representation of Warsaw. The travellers must have based

their stories on each others' but, most importantly, they also based their private opinions,

regarding the state of a country, on other accounts.

Coxe used Connor's History of Poland in writing the first part of his accounts.44

Connor's work was also very respected among the travellers as it consisted of a great deal

of reliable information about the political and historical state of the country. The man

resided for a few months in Warsaw, where he had access to the court documents as well

as other official papers that were not available to everybody. His book is rich in

information: statistics, the number of residents of each province and in particular the

characteristics of each of the members' of the diet. His account, although sometimes not

stated as such, must have been a primary source for many travellers in discovering the

historical background of Poland.

The traveller who probably worked on Connor's book, although did not declare it,

was Wraxall. His accounts are missing any footnotes or endnotes but considering

Connor's fame it can be assumed that Wraxall indeed based some of his accounts on The

History of Poland. Wraxall did not give out the names of the people that enriched his

book. One of the few was Mr. Wroughton, the English minister in Warsaw. Wraxall

mentioned him very often, as a helpful and very well-informed person at court.

The close relationships between the travellers may lead to the conclusion that they

influenced each other not only through their books but also in life. It seems like Wraxall

influenced Coxe in choosing a similar route through Poland because both men have

chosen to visit the country from the south to the north. Yet, the first of Wraxall's trips, the

one described in Cursory Remarks, was carried on in an opposite direction, from the

north to the south. Moreover, the same journey was undertaken by Marshall in his

Travels. Comparing the four books, two of Wraxall and one each of Coxe and Marshall,

there appear two patterns of journeys. Wraxall in Cursory Remarks and Marshall have

chosen the same route, while Wraxall in Memoirs and Coxe's different one. Probably,

Wraxall, seeing Poland from one side, decided to discover it from another. Still, although

the general plan of visiting Eastern Europe differed in both cases, Coxe and Wraxall seem

like two travellers who had a great impact on each other's books.

1.6. The importance of travel literature in history

The British travellers, visiting the countries of Eastern Europe, made harsh

criticisms towards these places. Such reflections were extremely important in travel

literature, especially that this genre had a great audience back in England. Nevertheless,

the writers had to be careful about their observations, especially ones considering the

political or economic state of affairs in the country they visited.

The traveler who chose to include reflections usually strove for four essential qualities: his opinions should not be too numerous, they should arise naturally out of the places described, they should be original, and they should not prejudicially conflict with accepted moral or political opinions.45

Although British travellers were taking notice of all such clues, it seems that sometimes

they felt like they were more entitled to the criticism than other people. Valerie Wheeler,

on the basis of the book of Paul Fussell, tried to find out why the criticism in travel

accounts was important and for what reasons the British felt more at ease with criticising:

The traveler expresses judgments about phenomena that violate the values of traveler and audience and thus entertain, stimulate, and by contrast reaffirm those values. Fussell speaks of the “unique British ability to spot anomalies and make a travel book by accumulating a great number of them” because of “a supreme confidence that one knows what is 'normal' and can gauge an anomaly by its distance from the socially expected”, an “unquestioned understanding of the norm and an unapologetic loyalty to it.” Without anomaly there is no travel book, no story to tell, and the more wondrous the anomalies the better the account – thus the tendency of earlier travel books to find cannibals and

dog-headed men, to tell tall stories and weird tales.46

The importance of travel literature in history, as well as geography, anthropology,

ethnography, social studies, etc., is immense. This essential nature was noticed by the

Scottish philosophers at the end of the eighteenth century. Both Adam Ferguson in the

second part of An Essay on the History of Civil Society (1767) and John Millar in The

Origin of the Distinction of Ranks (1771) agreed on the use of travel accounts in

understanding the past of human civilization. Ferguson believed that travellers were the

link that provided the information about the past that would not be achieved if it was not

for them: “Yet these particulars are a part in the description which is delivered by those

who have had opportunities of seeing mankind in their rudest condition: and beyond the

reach of such testimony, we can neither safely take, nor pretend to give, information on

the subject.”47 Millar was even more sure about the essential role history owes to travel

accounts:

[…] the reader, who is conversant in history, will readily perceive the difficulty of obtaining proper materials for speculations of this nature. […] Our information, therefore, with regard to the state of mankind in the rude parts of the world, is chiefly derived from the relations of travellers, whose character and situation in life, neither set them above the suspicion of being easily deceived, nor of endeavouring to misrepresent the facts which they have. From the number, however, and the variety of those relations, they acquire, in many cases, a degree of authority, upon which we may depend with security, and to which the narration of any single person, how respectable soever, can have no pretension.48

According to Millar, working with travel accounts is an accumulative process; once one

has many accounts, he can be sure to draw the right conclusion. Both Millar and

Ferguson agreed that the use of conjectures, or even the scholarly works of contemporary

authors, cannot be used as facts about history, simply because they were created by the

current standards. These standards are completely different than ones held by people in

the past thence historians should not work with a subjective, modern approach towards

history. Although scholars have few historical facts about some regions in the world, they

should still work on travel accounts about those places; travel literature can provide even

more information on the subject. The conclusions from travel literature are more reliable

than historical facts because they describe the sentiments, the positions and feelings of

people rather than specific stories. In general history, written from a distance, there is not

much written about the man.

Although Enlightenment's philosophers focused their attention on the rude

civilizations and state of mankind in ancient times, their philosophy of exaltation of travel

literature is still popular among the historians nowadays. Although any encyclopaedia

provides all of the organised information, it is the real perception of countries and people,

as seen through the eyes of a traveller, that exposes the most interesting ideas about the

human being.

Chapter 2 Progress

2.1. Progress – a key term of the Enlightenment

The period of the Enlightenment was characterized by noble and cultivated

theories of social order, human happiness and the development of civilization. One of

these theories, namely the idea of progress, appeared to be one of the most important, if

not the dominant. This was mainly because progress could have been linked with all the

other ideas or could become a context for them; explaining their success (progress,

development in a wanted direction) or failure. The eighteenth-century idea of progress

was new compared to the term that was widely used before. Formerly people connected

progress with the work of the divine power, explaining the improvements in society and

human life as decisions of God. The scientific spirit of the Enlightenment influenced and

secularized the idea of progress. Philosophers started to focus on a historical approach to

this idea, emphasizing the importance of natural causes and human experience in

opposition to unnatural acts of God. There were also other contexts in which the idea of

progress was noticed throughout the ages and which influenced it:

The Judeo-Christian tradition, with its linear view that history was aiming at something (redemption), offered one such intellectual context, while the traditional Greco-Roman notion of a repeating cycle of golden, silver, bronze, and leaden ages offered another. […] From the early Renaissance, humanists envisioned a history in which they themselves appeared as the worthy successors to classical antiquity, following a long period of decay and even darkness. The Protestants of the Reformation echoed this assessment in their criticism of medieval Roman Catholicism and their desire to restore essential elements of the early church. By the sixteenth century, the tripartite division of Western history into ancient, medieval, and modern eras was beginning to

emerge.49

These different historical contexts persuaded philosophers to study the term of progress

and especially its effects on different kinds of societies and civilizations. These context

also demonstrated the long existence of various types of development, something that

impelled eighteenth-century scholars to set forth the question of the state of nature. On

the one hand, the relationship between progress and different stages of development, and

on the other hand, the possibility of applying the idea of progress in various scientific and

social disciplines, resulted in different philosophical approaches towards progress. An

interesting approach for this paper is a differentiation between progress as freedom and

progress as power. The progress seen as different kind of liberties was being advocated

by the travellers (Connor – political freedom, Marshall – economic, Wraxall – social,

Coxe – holistic approach to freedom). Progress understood as power will be the best

observed on the example of cartography later on the text. Yet, the travellers, promoting

different ideas of progress, partly fulfilled the category of power too. They felt confident

in encouraging various actions and criticising possible mistakes but they never justified a

single failure. They usually based the opinions of the superiority of England on the

underdevelopment of other countries, that only enforced the idea of progress as an

ideological power. Before analysing this dual approach of the writers, it is important to

understand the philosophical foundations for the idea of progress seen as freedom. The

most recognized authors of the eighteenth-century working on this theme were, among

others, Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot, Adam Smith and Marquis de Condorcet.

Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot He was one of the philosophers who strongly emphasized

the close connection between the idea of progress and freedom:

He saw strong evidence in the record of the past for the inevitability of future advances in science, technology, and moral behavior. […] He thought indefinite progress was a central characteristic of life, and he considered the human species capable of perfectibility – not perfection

itself, but an ever nearer approach to perfection.50

Through his universal observations Turgot understood progress as a scientific, not

religious, process. Nevertheless, his reflections on perfectibility were often identified

with those of very religious philosophers at the time, namely Joseph Priestley and

Edmund Law; these men associated progress with Providence. Also Turgot used to

believe in the idea of a progress that is connected with spirituality. Only a few months

before his famous secularized speech, A Philosophical Review of the Successive

Advances of the Human Mind, delivered in Paris in 1750, Turgot was strongly connected

with the Catholic Church. His previous works were influenced by religious beliefs.

Although he added a few details on Providence in A Philosophical Review, this work

completely differed from the ones before. Robert Nisbet in his book explained the shift

into secular philosophy from a religious approach. He emphasized the fact that the

change of Turgot's beliefs fitted perfectly into philosophical trends of the Enlightenment.

Many philosophers and writers at the time had to face secularization of science and social

reality. They had to find a common point between the two realities that were so crucial to

people's lives. Moreover, even the transition itself was a proof of progress, development

and improvement of the human mind.

With respect to the idea of progress, Turgot, without abandoning the structure of framework of his first address at the Sorbonne, secularized

it. He was not the first, nor would he be the last, to put rationalist-naturalist content into a framework born of Christian dogma. […] Turgot's experience within a single year can be seen as the very epitome of the process of intellectual development we have been concerned with: processes which take us, as it were, from Providence-as-progress to progress-as-Providence.51

The most important idea of Turgot's work Universal History, from 1751, is the

four-stage evolution theory. In this story of universal human experience he presented four

stages that have been acquired by civilization in the pursuit of development: hunting,

pasturage, agriculture and navigation and commerce. “He deals with the rise of the first

governments, uniformly despotic and monarchical, and the beginnings of human

liberation from political despotism”52 and on this basis he concluded that freedom is a

necessity in any kind of human development. In the eighteenth-century there was a

tendency to be negative towards government, be in opposition to authoritarian power and

subjection. People with these attitudes were in favour of liberty more than power; when

the idea of freedom leading to progress appeared, they quickly approved it and embraced

it. Freedom and progress became the key terms of the Enlightenment's noble theories of

development.

Adam Smith The Scottish philosopher Adam Smith was also in favour of representing

mankind's development through a stadial model. According to him, analysis of each one

of the stages would present different approaches towards economy and property, allowing

people to recognize these patterns and understanding the history of the present

civilization.

Before we consider exactly this or any of the other methods by which property is acquired it will be proper to observe that the regulations concerning them must vary considerably according to the state or age society is in at that time. There are four distinct states which mankind

pass thro: – 1st, the Age of Hunters; 2ndly, the Age of Shepherds; 3dly,

the Age of Agriculture; and 4thly, the Age of Commerce.53

Similarly to Turgot, Smith advocated existence of freedom in progress, although for

Smith it was an economic freedom. Through the evolution of particular stages he tried to

discover how property developed and what was its impact on people. In the times of the

Enlightenment there were different categories involved with the idea of progress. Among

liberty and knowledge, property was another that became a key-element in working on

the history of mankind, refinement and general development. Smith noticed the

development of modes of subsistence and the importance of legislation that would protect

them. In general, most of the conflicts were due to problems with different kinds of

property. Therefore laws always had to deal with property one way or another.

Smith's method was to use experimental laws and observations from studies of

human nature. He adopted a holistic view on history and did not want to define matters

into closed categories. In the Enlightenment every single aspect of society was

interconnected; thus only a universal and wide approach could have given proper

explanations. Other Scottish scholars followed Smith in his four-stage evolution.

Moreover, Hume, Robertson, Ferguson, Millar, all agreed on the idea of acquiring

freedom through commerce. Most Scottish philosophers agreed that there was no

possibility for a cultivated society to exist if the national system was not developed. This

resulted in promotion of economic models of growth in Western Europe. In Eastern

Europe, as well as others, not as economically advanced areas, this theory gave reason to

placing those regions into ideologically lower stages of development.

Jean-Antoine-Nicolas Caritat de Condorcet Jean Condorcet was closer in his beliefs to

Turgot than Smith. He was optimistic in his beliefs in mankind's future. According to

Condorcet, one's happiness could be obtained by his own virtues and ability to progress.

Condorcet in this idea put an emphasis on all the virtues of a human being and his natural

need to improve. His work Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human

Mind advocated the perfectibility of the human being and is also an example of another

stage theory of development:

While in hiding from the Jacobins in 1793-1794, he wrote a Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind that is often considered the epitome of Enlightenment belief in progress. It described ten epochs of history, linked by the advancement of rational intelligence along a path of indefinite progress, despite the great weight of priestcraft and other obstacles. Historical progress had occurred in all domains, had quickened recently, and was capable of further acceleration by knowledgable human effort. Limitless perfectibility being a principal characteristic of the species, the coming tenth epoch

held enormous promise.54

In the description of Condorcet's theory, Turgot's perfectibility and secularization are

combined with Smith's stages of development that were modified into study of different

epochs. According to Condorcet, he himself lived in the ninth epoch, which would be

followed by the tenth – possibly due to the French Revolution. Along with the revolution,

he praised science as a crucial factor in progress towards the future. Science could not yet

rule society because of deeply rooted religious influences that still existed. He was

confident about the future of society and strongly believed in intellectual forces that

would govern humankind in the next epoch.55

As a scholar working from the intellectual heritage of Turgot, Condorcet has also

put great emphasis on equality in society. However, this equality was not universally

advocated. Condorcet presented the need for preserving some inequalities that could help

the society as a whole –

It is not absolute, total equality that Condorcet seeks and predicts for the future; not a levelling of human beings for its own sake. As we have already seen, Condorcet, for all his animosity toward the kinds of inequality, took note of the importance of preserving the possibility of

those inequalities which will be “useful to the interest of all.”56

Presumably, these would have been legal inequalities. Despite that, the philosopher was a

true supporter of human liberties also for women, slaves and ethnic minorities. It can be

stated that Condorcet was a spokesman of ideas that were chiefly established in society

only two centuries after his death.

These three representatives, of the stand in philosophy emphasizing freedom

connected with progress, must have been an influence for the many contemporaries,

travellers among them. In travel literature, the resemblance between these philosophical

theories and suggestions on progress done by the travellers is great. For example,

Marshall was a spokesman of Smith's theory due to his opinion about the importance of

trade in a country's development. He was also a supporter of Turgot's concept of

secularization, as he was against the influence of religion on political matters. These and

other connections with philosophy of progress-as-freedom will be shown later in the text.

Progress as power Robert Nisbet in his book History of the Idea of Progress made a

distinction between two philosophies of progress in the eighteenth century – progress as

freedom and as power. As described before, the theory of individual freedom was deeply

rooted in the minds of philosophers, similarly to a theory of power, although the latter

was mostly developed in the nineteenth century. Nevertheless, there were still thinkers of

the Enlightenment who worked on this issue such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Henri de

Saint-Simon. This idea has an indirect connection with the situation of Eastern Europe at

the time, as we shall see.

According to Nisbet, in the years 1750-1900 the new doctrines of nationalism,

statism, utopianism and racism soon came into life. They were all in use in the name of

some kind of progress; usually conflicts were covered up with ideas of liberation or

development. The philosophers who dealt with this tradition were also supporters of

freedom but Nisbet explains that this freedom, connected with power, differs widely from

the definition of freedom used by Turgot or Smith.

Freedom here is inseparable from some proffered community – political, social, racial, or other – and from the uses of coercion and strict discipline, when needed. Only through closer and more devoted awareness of himself as an organic part of the absolute state would the individual achieve, in Hegel's perspective, true freedom – a 'higher

freedom' than that posited by an Adam Smith.57

According to the philosophers, there was a need for influence, leadership and guidance

by cultured and educated people. These would protect civilization from decline and lead

it to the higher stage of development.

This idea of genuine influence between the nations was very noble. However, two

centuries later the belief in such influence was transformed into a theory of superiority of

one nation over others in the World Wars. The similar treatment, although more in an

intellectual than practical way, was observed in an example of relationships between

Western and Eastern Europe in the eighteenth century. The Enlightenment's conviction

about the need of guidance in less-developed countries and its belief in the superiority of

the West somewhat excused wars, colonization and intellectual imperialism in the world.

This idea of progress linked with power was two-way. On the one hand, it was utopian

and virtuous, because it was aimed at the improvement of civilization. On the other hand,

it exposed the weaker countries on the actions of authoritarian powers and therefore

deprived people of their individual liberties.58

2.2. 'Noble' vs 'Ignoble Savages'

Progress understood as the need for power and dominance was one of the

ideologies of Western imperialism in the world. Various wars for new territories were

explained by the protection of the citizens from unwanted foreign influences.

Explorations of new continents, regions and dominating the inhabitants were explained

by the need of the implementation of infrastructure to improve the state of the places.

Finally, colonization was explained by the will to bring civilization to savage nations. All

the above historical facts, resulting in dependence and a lack of freedom, are negative

examples of the discourse of progress as power. However, there appeared an another way

of understanding this negative discourse. Savage tribes started to be seen not only as

conquered peoples without any potential, but, in some cases, also as interesting

individuals.

In general, it was literature and art that focused firstly on the figure of a 'noble

savage'. This was due to different reasons, among them the shock of a new world. Also,

one of the motives was the same as the reason of writing travel accounts – the lack of

original topics and looking for new, innovative subjects and ideas. This could have

seemed like a good idea, especially because newly conquered nations were always being

associated with backwardness. This underdevelopment was unusual and therefore

interesting for more advanced Westerners. A unique representation of savages as full of

virtues, being close to the nature and living in a non-corrupted society was exotic and

exciting for readers at the time. In addition, philosophers got interested in the 'noble

savage' and tried to understand the circumstances connected with this phenomenon. The

general explanation of the morality of barbarians was well explained by Lois Whitney in

Primitivism and the Idea of Progress:

Since there is a natural tendency towards goodness among men and a light of nature by which even the most ignorant may know natural law, the laws of nature may often be more graciously followed among 'peasants' and 'simple men' than among more learned people. The complement to this corollary is the generalization that civilized men

have so degenerated that they no longer readily recognize or follow the laws of nature. But a third corollary provides for a few 'beautiful souls' even in our modern civilization who are so good by nature that they

follow the laws of nature unconsciously.59

This idea was first developed via the example of the conquered savages of North America

and other colonized countries in the seventeenth century. Nevertheless, it also

corresponds with the Europe of the eighteenth century. The West and East could equally

represent the corrupted nation on the one hand and natural morality on the other.

Having a new context for the conquered peoples, some philosophers were very

keen on developing it with an immediate connection to key terms of the Enlightenment.

The period was focused on liberty, virtues, individual value, human experience and

diversity. Many scholars were working on assimilation of the theory of merit of a savage

to the Enlightenment by asking questions such as: “What had led the West to its high

point of refinement and civilization? Did the West evolve from the same simple

beginnings as 'savage society' or were there different paths to 'civilization'?”60 Hobbes in

Leviathan explained the slow process of development in savage countries with the lack of

stable economy.

In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; […] and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent

death; and the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.61

Although, Hobbes in general did not believe in the greater development of society, in this

case he stated a causal link explaining why such a development cannot exist; he

associated the answer with the economy. Rousseau praised the natural society in which

man lives without any authority. Also, he believed that all the people were virtuous and it

was only a modern society that has corrupted them (a mirror image of theory of

primitivism). Diderot added a supplement to his Encyclopédie, dealing with the travel of

Bougainville to Tahiti, where he warned the Tahitians against the destruction of their way

of life by Westerners. “Thus the 'noble savage' became the vehicle for a wide-ranging

critique of the over-refinement, religious hypocrisy and divisions by social rank that

existed in the West.”62 John Locke believed that modern society in the past resembled

newly discovered lands. He was convinced that uncultivated nations will get to the same

stage of civilization as that which West has obtained.

Stuart Hall examined the theories of Hobbes, Rousseau, Lock and others, and

came up with interesting conclusions on the character of the Enlightenment. In his

opinion, most of the thinkers believed that all the nations of the world follow only one

path of development and some groups can be more advanced while others can stay

behind. The example of the first group was, with no doubt, the cultured West, an example

of the latter, savage Northern America. “This idea of a universal criterion of progress

modelled on the West became a feature of the new 'social science' to which the

Enlightenment gave birth.”63 Moreover, this discipline kept replicating the same wrong

stereotypes, conventions and labels about other underdeveloped regions in the world.

Therefore, the Enlightenment created a discipline that with direct positive slogans,

indirectly kept reinforcing the differences between the two social orders, if not creating

them from scratch as a complementary part of its own perfectionist image.

In Enlightenment discourse, the West was a model, the prototype and the measure of social progress. It was western progress, civilization, rationality and development that were celebrated. And yet, all this depended on the discursive figures of the 'noble vs ignoble savage', and of 'rude and refined nations' which had been formulated in the discourse of 'the West and the Rest'. So the Rest was critical for the formation of western Enlightenment – and therefore for modern social science. […] 'The Other' was the 'dark' side – forgotten, repressed and denied; the

reverse image of enlightenment and modernity.64

A similar point of view can be found in the previously cited Inventing Eastern Europe by

Larry Wolff. Both authors are rather negative about the idea of a virtuous savage. Before

concluding the existence of such a viewpoint, it is crucial to analyse the accounts of

travellers in pursuit of two approaches: favourable towards 'barbarian Easterners' or

rejecting their 'natural goodness'.

2.3. Travellers on Poland

Bernard Connor, The history of Poland Connor spent a lot of time in Poland so he was

truly immersed in the culture, social life and politics. He wrote his book focusing only on

this one country, unlike other travellers who usually described Poland in opposition to

other previously visited places. This and also the period in which Connor resided in

Poland (the period of the reign of the king Jan III Sobieski, considered as a favourable

time in Polish history) influenced him to be more sympathetic with the Polish state of

affairs.

An interesting part of the second volume is the description of the political arena.

The author exemplified policies established at the time or shortly before, such as the

elective crown, the division of government into three parts, the Great Diet or 'Liberum

Veto'. About eighty years before the first partition of Poland, Connor noticed the

disadvantages of these new changes in politics. These would all be cited by his

successors as the main reasons for the partition or the decline of the country. Connor

concluded on the changes by saying:

A mixt Government therefore made out of all these Three, is that which has proved most Agreeable to the Polish Nation, being a just Medium between the dangerous Extremities of an Absolute Monarchy, and those of Aristocracy and Democracy. It is this the Poles have pitch'd upon as most proper to preserve the public Liberty, and to perpetuate the Happiness of their State; being, it seems, perswaded that a Body Politic resembles a Humane in this, that as the one borrows all its Vigour and Health from a Just Temperament of the different Humours that compose it; so the other depends absolutely on that of the Three before-mention'd Forms of Government. And moreover, as the former subsists by the mutual Opposition of contrary Qualities, so the King, Senate and Gentry of Poland having in some measure different Interests and Inclinations, are not only hinder'd from deviating into vicious Extremities, but also through a Noble Emulation are excited to labour carefully for the Good of the Public.65

Connor in this passage emphasized that the creation of a new system was meant to be a

consensus between the absolutism, aristocracy and democracy; a new government that

meant to share responsibilities. He was a spokesman of the British system in which a

mixed government was a pride for all the citizens. In Poland, although an original system

was right, the corrupted nobility had already started to arrange it for their own benefit.

Although the official version proclaimed freedom from absolutism, the nobles soon after

became a source of authoritarian power in Poland. They used 'progress' as a tool for their

own exercise of power. Bury explained this phenomenon in his book The Idea of

Progress:

The ideals of liberty and democracy, which have their own ancient and independent justifications, have sought a new strength by attaching themselves to Progress. The conjunctions of “liberty and progress,” “democracy and progress,” meet us at every turn. Socialism, at an early stage of its modern development, sought the same aid. […] It is in the name of Progress that the doctrines who established the present reign of terror in Russia profess to act. All this shows the prevalent feeling that a social or political theory or programme is hardly tenable if it cannot claim that it harmonises with its controlling idea.66

Although Bury found the examples of the association of progress with various actions in

the history of the twentieth century, his approach can also be applied to the Polish

political arena of the eighteenth century. The political changes were made by nobility 'in

the name of the progress'. They were accepted as a virtuous step towards refinement

although, in fact, they turned out to be mere manipulations in order to gain domination.

Connor noted that the beginning of the crisis started with the death of Zygmunt II;

at the time when the aristocracy came up with the idea of an elective crown and specific

terms and conditions for the new king. These resulted in giving the gentry great

privileges and finally depriving the king of any power. The last king of Poland was the

best example of this conduct, but even Zygmunt III was limited in making decisions.

Moreover, in politics there was no place for the needs of ordinary people. Nobility was

focused on themselves. They were so afraid of losing control over the people, as well as

the king, that the idea of equality was not their priority. In the descriptions of the

meetings of members of the Diet, the gentry and clergy, as well as their conduct, were

depicted in a negative light – “Here Sir, I may remark a pleasant reflection of

Hauteville67, in his account of Poland, where he says, that the Poles employ more time in

drinking and feasting, than in debating matters of state, for that they never think on that

work till they begin to want money to buy Hungarian wine.”68

Connor compared the Polish Diet to the English Parliament and found out

similarities between the organisation of both places: “The diet of Poland (in some

respects) resembles our Parliament, being made up of two houses; the House of Senators,

answerable to our House of Lords; and the House of Nuncio's, not unlike our House of

Commons.”69 In fact, this was not the only similarity between the Polish and English

diets. Connor described the Polish Diet as a place for the meetings of acquaintances, a

social circle for discussing other matters besides politics; even a perfect place for

arranging marriages. The author disapproved of situations as such, yet did not mention

that similar events were taking place in his home country.

'Liberum Veto' was another element that led to the destruction of Poland,

according to Connor. It was a right to break the Diet session without giving any specific

reason and was used by foreign powers and corruptible nobles to obtain private benefits

and to prevent the progress of the country. In general, the lack of people's personal

freedom, reinforced by the behaviour of nobility, led the country to ruin. The absolutism

of the aristocracy deprived the country of any possibility to avoid the partitions.

No body but sees the unhappy state of the government of Poland; that their constitutions and privileges are most pernicious; that the unlimited and absolute liberty of each member makes all the republick slaves, either to the whimsy or factious obstinacy of one particular man […]. Thus Sir, you may perceive that affairs of the greatest consequence depend not only on the prudent deliberations of sober men, but also on the whimsical humours of the senseless or deprav'd. This excessive liberty of every private man shews that both the nation and the diet have none at all.70

Connor presented unfavourable images of the Polish political arena. He stated all the

calamities that ruled the political life and privileges that entirely corrupted the upper

class. If the members of the Diet cared more about the country, they could possibly

prevent a foreign occupation.

It was not only in government that the gentry exposed their superiority. The

traveller devoted a whole letter to the issue of the peasants, or more likely their life as

slaves to the nobility. This lack of independence and personal liberty was constantly

stopping the country from progress. The nobility was so focused on their own gains that

the vision of the country being prosperous was no longer their goal.

At the end of Connor's book, the emerging image of the Polish people is not

positive. Although Connor described the general character of the Poles as virtuous and

brave, represented the cities established ages before as great, and some of the people as

heroes (King Jan III Sobieski, Copernicus), the account of vices overshadowed it entirely.

Finally, the Poles were considered as bad warriors, people not skilled in besieging towns,

maintaining castles or security.71 According to Connor, above all, the bad administration

and the nobility that was self-seeking and corrupted, did not allow the country a chance to

progress.

Joseph Marshall, Travels Marshall conducted his reflections on Poland with a clear

division by province. In general, the Russian province was characterised by poverty, the

Prussian by order and the Austrian by commerce. This division is very important because

it shows the specific features Marshall endorsed for the country. In this analysis it is also

easy to see what kind of elements of the social order were those that led to the collapse of

the country, according to the author.

The Russian province was considered the poorest. Almost all the Polish people

were transferred to Russia, while Russian soldiers took their place and land. The rest of

the families lived in terrible conditions, often with animals, without any property. There

is an assumption that Marshall was a physiocrat which means that he believed that the

prosperity of a country depends solely on agriculture. This theory can be found in his

accounts, with his constant descriptions of land, modes of tillage and natural sources.

Alas, he was not satisfied by the state of Polish agriculture. He noticed some useful

landmarks that could serve cultivation but there were no people to take care of them and

no new inventions helping improvement.

The advantages of all the cultivation I saw are in the hands of the Russians, for the Polish nobles through most of the great province of Samogitia are driven from their estates. […] I had read that they used in this province none but wooden plough-shares, through a ridiculous

notion that the iron damaged their crops.72

Marshall not only noticed a lack of Polish people on their lands but also an insufficient

knowledge of soil cultivation. With such an inadequacy in tools, knowledge and work

force, there was no place for improvement. Marshall was certain that only a stable

economy, based on agriculture, could produce a surplus of wealth that could be used for

further improvements (here there is a close similarity to Smith's theory of progress). The

author was very negative about the progress of Poland simply because he saw the country

had sunk into stagnation. There was no progress towards higher stages of development

and it seemed like Poland just obtained the third of fourth stages, that of agriculture,

while other countries were already working on new technologies.

The Prussian state was inhabited by the Poles and the living conditions there were

a lot better than in the Russian province. This resulted in a more developed agriculture,

trade and commerce that is praised in Marshall's descriptions. The idea of paying

systematic taxes to the king in return for protection suited Marshall as another policy

supporting the country, as opposed to the Polish peasants paying very irregular taxes to

the nobles.

Apart from characterising the province in the present, he was also interested in the

general history of the country. The traveller saw the beginning of the Polish crisis in

religion. When Roman Catholic bishops did not want to agree on the recognition of other

religions (Protestants and Greeks), the civil war in Poland broke out. The king was

neutral, the nobility was rigid, and the peasants were the ones who suffered the most.

This remark resembles the need of secularization of the Enlightenment's theories. In the

eighteenth century the focal point was concentrated on the expansion of universal

morality and objective science in opposition to religious and mythical explanations.

Marshall, not only as a proponent of the Enlightenment but also as an Anglican

(presumably), was a strong critic of religion and especially its merging with politics. Here

there is a close connection with Turgot's philosophy that emphasised the importance of

secularization of process leading to progress.

Silesia, the Austrian part of Poland, was even more agreeable to the people than

Prussia. This country, in Marshall's account, was full of villages and cultivated land. The

new inhabitants were taken care of. Upon arrival they were given a place to live and

some land to cultivate. Even peasants seemed to be happy in this province despite the

high taxes and their belonging to the lowest class.

Nothing could be more striking, than the different appearance of Silesia

from that of Poland. We entered it the 13th, and found the country full of villages, half of which at least were peopled with Poles; the land all cultivated, and much of it extremely well; the houses and cottages in good repair; with all the appearances of ease and happiness; which formed such a contrast to the wretchedness we had so lately seen, that

the view had the effect of making Silesia appear a paradise.73

This state of affairs in Silesia was organized chiefly because of the implementation of

Smith's idea of progress; progress and development that was owed to trade and

commerce. People in Silesia were not entirely free but they did not work under an

authoritarian power. The well-constructed legislations allowed people to live, work and

gain at least enough money to survive. The Silesian authorities' impact on agriculture

helped to improve the economics of the province, thereby allowing people to invest

money in different kinds of developments.

Most of the descriptions of the bad treatment of peasants find their place in the

Russian and Prussian provinces. Not a single one can be found in the Austrian province.

Moreover, Marshall gave an example of a noble who treated his subjects with respect.

This concluded with him saving a lot of money.

This is a very rare instance in Poland; for they [peasants] are generally used, as I have often observed, in a most oppressive manner; but the good effect of this contrary treatment is extremely visible in the case of this nobleman, who, with only a small estate, compared with many in the kingdom, has by no means of a regular and consistent conduct towards his vassals, and by a constant attention to the culture of his land, been able to save much money; part of which he has laid out in fortifying his castle, which has more than once preserved his property

and his peasants.74

The owner has started the improvement of his estate with his kind attitude towards the

workers. When these felt respected and free, their work was more efficient and provided

more wealth than before. This surplus of wealth led to investments and further

improvements of the estate. This idea of emancipation followed by trade and prosperity

was seen by Marshall as the necessary step for the restoration of a country. He clearly

stated that in the province where people are treated with respect their work is a lot more

efficient; this labour enriches commerce, therefore making the country flourish.

The writer was not optimistic about the present condition nor about the future of

Poland. He considered the country as wretched, destroyed and with little hopes for near

future development. According to the traveller, depopulation was so great that it would

take centuries to restore the balance of people. These negative reflections show that

Marshall did not perceive Poland as a country that progressed. Moreover he did not

proclaim any specific remedies for the restoration of the country. However, it can be

concluded that in his opinion Poland needed what the Enlightenment's philosophers

promoted at the time: a democratic state, secularized policies also focused on balanced

economics and an expansion of trade.

William Wraxall, Cursory Remarks and Memoirs In the Cursory Remarks Wraxall

visited the north of Poland and made his way to the south. The traveller visited the

country just two years after the first partition. His accounts resulted in very interesting

records of the social condition of the country, but the general disposition of the place was

saddening. Through his description emerged an image of poverty, emptiness, and a lack

of any progress or glory. There was no trade in Poland, the lands were not cultivated, the

potential of people was unexploited and it was even dangerous and sometimes impossible

to travel from one place to another. This image of the country was not however

judgmental, as was the case with the previous travellers, but rather melancholic and

purely descriptive. Although he noticed all the negativity in the country, Wraxall still

devoted some place to describe the positive side of cities, buildings, castles and people.

He even told legends about the places he saw. In Cursory Remarks the traveller created a

picture of Poland as a country that was not perfect but still with many elements that were

worth mentioning. The country in this book was represented as a victim of the force of

foreign powers and ignorance of internal rule. It seems like Wraxall did not perceive the

country as a savage or barbarous land. He only expressed the compassion for its

treatment and appeared to state that Poland did not deserve such ruin.

Three years after the first short visit, Wraxall came back to Poland where the state

of the country had significantly declined. His accounts also changed from mild, non-

judgmental descriptions into more harsh illustrations of reality. The writer concluded the

state of a country in one statement: “indignation, when we reflect on the abject state to

which a country is reduced, where public spirit is extinct, the Crown degraded, the

Nobility enslaved or driven to wander in exile, and its fairest provinces divided among

foreign powers.”75

In the publication Wraxall conceived many reasons for the decline of Poland. One

of the possible causes was the character of the Poles who have always been enthusiastic

in their efforts but “deficient in judgment, desultory in conduct and precipitate in

projects.”76 In another place the writer stated:

The principal external causes which led to the partition of Poland: for, in the detestable and ruinous form of their constitution, must be sought the internal source of all their national calamities. What else could rationally be expected, as the natural death of a country, where the crown is at once elective, venal and powerless; where the nobility are independent, uncontrollable, and tyrannical; while the people are sunk in slavery, ignorance, oppression and poverty?77

Such severe criticism towards law and people themselves shows that Wraxall did not

believe that the Polish people were entirely aware what was good for them. It was hard

for him to apply the theory of “a noble savage” and find qualities in the Polish state of

living. It seems like in his opinion there was no trace of any willingness to change the

fate of the country.

Besides blaming the people in power for the wretched country, Wraxall focused

also on depicting the decline and havoc of the places he had seen a few years before.

Although his first book already showed the poverty and destruction, in the Memoirs he

presented an even worse picture of reality. The cities were in a terrible state and people

did not feel safe. For Wraxall, the people were used to such a state of affairs and even if

they were not, there was no place to get support. Because usually they did not mind living

in such conditions and because they agreed to such a state, the writer called them

barbaric. Also the peasants were blamed for their unlucky conduct as a result of their

character more than bad conditions. Wraxall is the author who described the Poles as

barbarians the most often. Among other instances, he said that the country is in a state of

“national barbarism and political humiliation”78 and he described a custom of marriage

as a “barbarous mirth.”79 Wraxall expressed himself using the negative context of

barbarism. In his descriptions he used only the word 'barbarian' instead of the word

'savage'. This choice of words shows that Wraxall was closer to a negative opinion about

the Poles than to a positive approach. That which Rousseau was writing about by

referring to a 'savage', that turned out to be a positive figure. For the traveller there was

no place for the natural virtuosity of a 'noble savage' among the Polish people.

Wraxall also focused his attention on the sovereign and aristocracy, representing

them as a core of the problem. The king was described as the pawn of Catherine the Great

and the man who epitomised the corruption of manners. With such a state of affairs all the

institutions were 'infected' with corruption and wretchedness: the army, church, court and

every department of private life.80 Wraxall was also opposed to the subversive character

of the nobility, which he gave proof of in a very sad description:

The great nobility are depraved, corrupt and destitute of enlightened patriotism: their education and habits extinguish every spark of public virtue. In their infancy they are surrounded by domestics or preceptors, who nourish those fatal prejudices and ideas of superiority, so calculated to harden the human heart.81

In his opinion, the gentry acted against the law although they were in power and had a

chance to improve lives of their subordinates. Wraxall advocated the Enlightened

patriotism that was understood by care of a country through Enlightened values such as

freedom and knowledge. The nobles did not give an example of morality and treated their

subjects as inferior creatures. They learnt these attitudes from past generations; the

negative attitudes were passively accumulated and reinforced with time. This situation,

when the whole ruling state was corrupted in terms of money as well as in terms of

morals, did not permit the growth of the state. Wraxall saw that the lack of any kind of

development resulted from the absence of liberty and cultivated, moral minds.

The traveller tried to depict some good characteristics of the Poles. Probably, it

was done to soften the negative image outlined in so many pages before or because he

tried to find the qualities that could suit the aforementioned 'theory of primitivism'. It

seems like it was a difficult task for Wraxall to make a depiction that consisted of merely

two pages and it was concluded with pessimistic words:

It is to be lamented that a race of men, endowed with such qualities and faculties, should in general be false, inconsistent, fickle, prodigal, and deficient in that judgement, conduct, and consistency of character, without which all external and ornamental talents are comparatively of

no value or importance.82

The writer was very melancholic and did not see any hope for Poland. He actually

foresaw the extinction of the country, which happened eighteenth years after. This vision

perfectly represents Wraxall's attitude towards the question of Polish progress. He did not

believe that a country with the scarce qualities as could be found in the Poles, had the

ability to be refined. He was a supporter of equality between people and social order that

leads to progress (connection with the Condorcet's theory of progress). Wraxall saw only

regression leading to total decline. In his opinion, Poland already had no history or

political existence. He made it clear that among all the disadvantages it was the lack of

social order, allies and revenues enough for emancipation that would lead the country to

decay. The internal dissolution of the people resulted in the external destruction of a

country.

William Coxe, Travels Coxe's literature is considered by contemporaries as one of the

most interesting of all in the travel literature of the eighteenth century. Indeed, his deep

accounts of events, supported by detailed information from history, geography and

anthropology, constituted an almost perfect picture of the countries he visited. In Poland

he was equally perceptive and insightful as in other places. Coxe tried to keep the

position of a neutral observer while describing the country, but the difficult situation that

he found, did not save him from criticism.

The traveller noticed everything that others saw: poverty, hunger, destruction,

despotism and immorality. In his accounts he combined a judgmental and a positive

attitude towards various situations. He related the negative elements, examined them as

wrong but also gave remedies. For stories about the subjection of the peasants he

provided records of good people who opposed the established order and freed the

subjects. By doing so, Coxe could have had two intentions. Firstly, he may have wanted

to instil hope for improvement among the Polish people. Secondly, he probably wanted to

show to his fellow-citizens and future readers not only the vices but also the Polish

virtues.

Commerce was widely noted as one of the principles of progress and Coxe was

aware of that (possibly influenced by the Smith's theory of progress). He devoted a lot of

space to the description of the state of trade in Poland. He paid attention to rivers, as the

best channels of exchanging goods, which were not exploited well enough. This was

blamed on the foolishness of people. As an example, Coxe told the story of a cardinal

who noticed the fertility of soil in the area and ordered it to be measured. Alas, the people

who were commissioned to do so, stated that it is not practical to cultivate the land.

The judicious author above-mentioned [Wiebitski], in touching upon his subjects, lamented the ignorance of his countrymen; and ridicules the precipitation with which they abandoned a plan so favourable to the improvement of their commerce. He shows, […] the inattention of the Poles to the natural advantages of their country.83

The traveller knew the great importance of trade, agriculture and commerce in pursuing

any kind of refinement. All the more, he continued to complain about the ill-educated

people who did not understand the significance of their behaviour.

According to Coxe, it was anarchy that led to the decline of the country. This

failure was commenced by the nobility that was constantly increasing its power and the

king who was left on the throne without any real authority.

The name of Poland still remains, but the nation no longer exists: an universal corruption and venality prevades all ranks of people. Many of the first nobility do not blush to receive pensions from foreign courts. One professes himself publicly an Austrian, a second a Prussian, a third a Frenchman, and a fourth a Russian.84

Aristocrats cared only about gaining more privileges. The fate of their people has became

a part of a bargain, for those who could pay, in order to control the country. The liberty of

the people, as well as that of the corrupted nobles, was gone. Without the self-esteem of

an upper class and at least minimal liberties for a lower class, Coxe did not see any

possibility for further development of Poland. He strongly linked the aforementioned

commerce with freedom in describing differences between the Polish and German

peasants. German ones were endowed with a few privileges that led to the flourishing of

agriculture, commerce and general well-being of society.

The author was not positive about the future of Poland. Although he did not

predict any specific situation, he believed that even if the country somehow overcame its

difficulties, the wretched state of the rulers would lead it into destruction again.

But when Poland (if ever that event should happen) is again left to herself, the same fury of contending parties, now smothered, but not annihilated, will probably break out with redoubled fury; and again generate those disturbances which have long convulsed this unhappy kingdom: and to what a wretched state is that country reduced, which owes its tranquility to the interposition of a foreign army!85

He believed that the vices of the Polish ruling class were so prevalent that nothing could

change them. The Poles were characterised as a people who strove for power and were

willing to do anything to gain it. Coxe was not optimistic at all by saying “if ever that

event should happen.” In the national character of the Polish nobles, he did not see any

natural qualities that could help the progress of the country in any way.

2.4. Theory of primitivism and its place in travellers' accounts

By analysing the most interesting excerpts of the travellers' accounts the general

conclusion is that the theory of primitivism was indeed only a theory. It does not find its

place in the practices of the supporters of the Enlightenment. The travellers, with the

exception of a few moments, were very negative about the natural state of society in

Poland. The theory of 'a noble savage' was based on virtues. Its core consisted of natural

goodness, morality, proper decisions and intellectual refinement, not necessarily based on

science. The situation in Poland was exactly opposite and this is what travellers

emphasized. Even with instances of decency, people were full of vices and ignorance.

Corruption, immorality and the quest for power eradicated all that Poland needed to

become a virtuous nation from the theory of a 'noble savage'. Presumably, this theory had

its application only in the colonial period in places such as Northern America. In fact,

people there did base their society mainly on the laws of nature, using them instead of

science in the understanding of different elements of the surrounding world. Such beliefs

in primitivism could have been answered there. In Poland, society was torn between two

realities. On the one hand, there was the negative side to society: backwardness of

morals, poor organization of the country, lack of property and lack of liberty. On the other

hand, the country had already had its Golden Ages and already left the 'first stage of

civilization'. This positive period took place in the sixteenth century, when the country

was large, economically stable and proud of its achievements in art, science and culture.

Therefore, the country, although being underdeveloped, could not have been considered

as absolutely savage. In the end, the country found itself 'in between' two states of

existence. On the one hand, it was considered as a truly backward and barbarian country

that was being deprived of any possibility to progress. On the other hand, it was not

perceived as one of these 'noble savage'-nations. This resulted in a country that had sunk

into stagnation in this 'in between' state that persisted over a long period of time.

2.5. Feudalism

It was not difficult for the travellers to call the Polish people barbaric. As

foreigners, they were at ease with comparing the situation they discovered in new places

with those they experienced in England. Although they tried to remain objective and not

influenced by their own history, it was natural to look for differences and similarities

between the countries' state of affairs.

When one society views another it seems inevitable that even those best informed will mix their knowledge with assumptions, preconceptions and prejudices. That is why we are concerned with the images created by this mixture in the minds of eighteenth-century Englishmen.86

In terms of Poland, British history was truly an influence for the travellers. The Polish

arena remarkably resembled the feudal states of Western Europe dating back to the

Middle Ages. Gideon Sjoberg explained the eleventh century feudalism by the following

characteristics:

The feudal order is characterized by rigid class or caste-like stratification and complex state, educational, and economic institutions – all of which necessitate an extensive division of labor. Furthermore, it has a relatively large population and an extended territorial base. […] Typically, feudalism is predicated on a large peasant population. These individuals live in a small village settlements and gain their livelihood primarily from intensive cultivation of the soil through the use of a simple technology. Scattered about the countryside they form the backbone of the feudal system.87

This description matches those of the travellers regarding Poland. They also focused their

observations on the division of labour that was concentrated on the lowest class of

society. They noticed that the peasants constituted the largest part of society although

they did not possess any power. Their houses were poorly constructed, they occupied

themselves only with the work of their master and in agriculture they used only the most

basic of tools; a wooden plough instead of iron one, etc. Indeed, the Polish economic

system in the eighteenth century was based on the main principals of feudalism. The elite

consisting of the aristocracy controlled the lower classes. The latter did not have any

choice but to provide them all the goods: free labour, food, military service, surplus of

wealth and many more. This situation reminded the British of the feudalistic system that

controlled England for a few centuries.

It must have been quite extraordinary for these men to encounter a model of

society from the twelfth century in modern Europe. Wraxall noticed the similarity to

feudalism when he was visiting the capital – Warsaw. Usually these central cities were

the most flourishing ones as the concentration of political life. In the Polish case, Wraxall

did not notice any splendour but an exemplary town of the feudal order:

Palaces and sheds, the mansions of the great, and the cottages of the poor, compose exclusively the larger portion of Warsaw. It is like an assemblage of nobles and slaves, of lords and vassals, such as the darkness of the middle ages when feudal tyranny prevailed universally, might have exhibited; but which, happily for mankind, is now no where to be seen except in Poland. Even Constantinopole is in this respect far less barbarous; […] The despotism of one man, however pernicious, is yet less destructive than the tyranny of a thousand petty despots; and the Turks, though fallen from their antient splendor, do not present a picture of national degradation or humiliation, such as the Poles at present offer the world.88

The barbarism of Poland was said to exceed that if the ancient state of Constantinople.

Wraxall set in opposition an ancient regime and present state of a country. This

opposition expresses how much Poland was backward in the eyes of the travellers. The

author was specific in his opinion about feudalism. This model used to work centuries

before but was fortunately transformed into other forms of development. Due to rooting it

out, Western countries got a chance to progress. The system has not served the interests

of whole communities, only the people in power.

Initially, feudalism was a military system. It was based on an army composed of

vassals, who by getting the land for cultivation, had a duty to fight for their masters. Coxe

found out that the Polish army was very similar to the group of vassals from the Middle

Ages:

The mode of levying and maintaining this army is exactly similar to that practiced under the feudal system. At present, though it is almost totally unfit for the purposes of repelling a foreign enemy, it is yet a powerful instrument in the hands of domestic faction: for the expedition with which it is raised under the feudal regulations, facilitates the formation of these dangerous confederacies, which suddenly start up on the contested election of a sovereign, or whenever the nobles are at variance with each other.89

The traveller again emphasized the distorted nature of Polish aristocracy. The army was

not well trained, did not get privileges from servitude and most often were involved in

simply solving the domestic disputes of the nobles.

Another characteristic of feudalism in Europe in between the seventh and

eleventh centuries was the subjection of people. Exactly the same relationship, based on

domination, was established in Poland between the nobles and peasants. An extract

below, although describing the European reality of the Middle Ages, resembles

eighteenth-century Poland.

The people, the most numerous as well as the most useful part of the community, were either reduced to a state of actual servitude, or treated with the same insolence and rigor as if they had been degraded into that wretched condition. The king, stripped of almost any prerogative, and without authority to enact or to execute salutary laws, could neither protect the innocent nor punish the guilty.90

Peasants in Poland were the largest out of all the classes. They were used by the nobility

to work for their wealth. Many of them were treated as slaves, as it is proven in all the

travellers' accounts. Also the king Stanislaw August Poniatowski is an equivalent of the

ruler in an excerpt. He was unable to make any significant political decisions. Coxe has

stated that Stanislaw was “the king, without influence, and consequently without a

shadow of authority […] the unfortunate monarch.”91 Both statements correspond to

each other and emphasise similarities between two orders of feudalism: one from the past

and one in present times. Feudalism was truly a degraded state, all the more the travellers

could not understand how it had survived in Poland for such a long time. In fact it was a

result of the intertwining of historical processes, inappropriate management of wealth and

the ignorance of the people.

There were many elements that inspired the British travellers to release the same

negative opinion on the state of Poland. One of them was certainly the Enlightenment.

Western Europe was immersed in the ideas of freedom, science and universality so the

travellers must have also been affected by these views. This inspired them to be open-

minded and to look for improvements. The fact that most of the travellers were well

educated is not without significance too. Their knowledge in different domains and their

being well read in contemporary philosophy and literature definitely helped them to

constitute their opinions about Poland. But their constant emphasis on values like

economy, trade and personal liberties showed that it was the historical experience of

England that led them to provide such similar points of view. They were aware of the

possibility of refinement and they associated the highest refinement with what they knew

best – their own country.

The Western world started to shift towards the early models of capitalism already

in the fifteenth century. Social mobility reinforced the middle class living in the towns.

These people were growing into a more important group that was trying to displace all

the habitual principles of a feudal economy. The moment at which they were deprived of

their rights led to the beginning of social revolutions, in England as well as France.

Daniel Chirot in The Rise of the West explained the most important factors that helped the

development of the region as simple advantages: “These were chiefly geographic

advantages, political ones, and a series of legal and religious developments which

emerged from the first two.”92 The geographic position of the West allowed the people to

cultivate the soil in an efficient way and breed animals for labour. These were basic but

significant elements that led to the beginning of social improvements. The political

division of land, creation of channels of communication such as rivers and roads and

change from production for use to the one of sale were also big factors in the transition.

Additional religious and legal changes in society only reinforced the new order.

Among all these processes the emergence of cities turned out to be almost an

essential element in forming the stronger image of Western Europe. The first cities were

established because of merchants settling near the castles in order to raise their earnings.

Also the peasants started to move to the towns and cities and this social mobility

increased the need for infrastructure as well as labour in the cities. These mixed group of

new citizens created a basic unit of future Western development:

The enlargement of the surplus transferred from peasant production, more in the form of jurisdictional and monopoly profits than in the form of rent from landed holdings, meant that lords' incomes were in fact realized more and more in cash. The division of labour between town and country, the development of towns not simply as markets where

rural produce was sold so as to raise cash for satisfaction of lord's exactions, but as centres of craft production, can, no doubt, be explained in general terms, as the response to the more efficient concentration of surplus in the hands of a more differentiated (and from the point of view of its cultural demands more sophisticated) aristocracy.93

These new centres had, according to Max Weber, great political autonomy and impact on

the ruling class. The sovereigns sought for hope in the cities when the feudal order was

slowly declining, therefore depriving them of profits. The relationship between the rulers

and cities was like a self-reinforcing engine; it was mutual. The royalty needed a new

source of income and cities needed the investments that improved their qualities. Weber

explained it by saying:

The urban autonomy of varying extent, which was the specific characteristic of the medieval Occidental city, developed only because and insofar as the non-urban power-holders did not yet possess a trained apparatus of officials able to meet the need for an urban administration even to the limited extent required by their own interest in the economic development of the city … The competition between non-urban powers, in particular the conflict of the central power with the great vassals and the hierocratic power of the church, came to the aid of the cities, especially since an alliance of any one of the contending powers with the money power of the burghers could provide it with decisive advantage.94

The travellers came to visit Eastern Europe from a country that has been evolving

from feudalism over one hundred years. They witnessed a more evolved type of national

improvement agenda. The British were taking care of not only their country but also their

colonies. They rationalized their legislations to be able to apply them in their dominions.

This imperialism resulted in improving technologies and communications in order to

supervise the new lands.

Although the philosophy of the Enlightenment provided noble ideas, it had also

equipped Westerners with the need of a comparative approach towards other nations. If

the Western conditions were given as superior and exemplary, every other country that

did not fulfil these criterions was considered as lower in the hierarchy of civilization. It

has to be emphasized that Poland in the eighteenth century was particularly disturbed and

a lot of criticism that it received was in accordance with facts. Nevertheless, the image of

backwardness was created by travellers not only from the emergence of facts but also

from the wrong placement of Poland in opposition to the state of England in the

eighteenth century. Robert Brenner tried to explain this phenomenon in his essay

Economic Backwardness in Eastern Europe in Light of Developments in the West:

The problem of backwardness in Eastern Europe is a question badly posed. Its unstated premise is the widely held view, originating with Adam Smith, that economic development is more or less natural to society and that its failure to occur must therefore require reference to certain exogenous interfering factors. The view that, historically speaking, non-development is the rule rather than the exception is, in some contrast, the point of departure for this essay. From this standpoint, if anything needs special explanation, it is the unprecedented breakthrough to sustained economic growth which took place in certain parts of Western Europe during the early modern period, rather than a supposed failure of development in Eastern

Europe.95

This work showed that it needed a lot of time and work to change the stand in this, so far

obvious, statement about the failure of countries of the East. Therefore, it is difficult to

blame the travellers for their reflections that were so strongly influenced by the dominant

intellectual ideologies and philosophical theories.

Chapter 3. Cartography in the eighteenth century as an example of progress as

power

3.1. State of cartography in Europe in the eighteenth century

The general state of cartography in the eighteenth century was very good due to

almost three centuries of experience in map-making. It was considered as an important

branch of science and was strongly connected to travelling. Also, the rulers and country

leaders understood that maps can serve as a tool of political power for them and their

countries, which made cartography a science in which many countries invested. The book

The Commerce of Cartography. Making and Marketing Maps in Eighteenth Century

France and England by Mary Sponberg Pedley is an in-depth story of the state of maps

in the eighteenth century; from planning to selling to evaluating the process. The author

distinguished two phases of interest in cartography after the Middle Ages. The first phase,

was the moment when people started debating the shape of the Earth, inspired by the

works of Galileo Galilei and the Geografia Riformata of Giovanni Battista Riccioli,

around the year 1650. Because they were progressing in their understanding of the

problem they were able to further apply this knowledge in a pragmatic fashion i.e.

cartography. The second phase, came in the 1750s when the national home surveys

became an instrument for supervising societies. For this task they needed the proper

tools: maps. Also, demands were made on schools to educate engineers and surveyors.96

The force of national institutions, as well as pervasive Enlightenments' ideologies, had a

big impact on the idea that maps provide an essential source of knowledge and power.

The political and social needs for cartography were soon formalised. The

institutions that had the biggest impact on cartography in the eighteenth century were,

among others, the Royal Society in London, the Académie Royale des Sciences in Paris,

the observatories in Greenwich and in Paris. The first two were established on intellectual

foundations – the works of Galileo, Francis Bacon and René Descartes.97 Furthermore,

the new schools, such as École d'Artillerie, École des Ponts et Chaussées in France or the

Academy at Woolwich in England, were being established to meet the needs of

cartography and to inspire the interests of new scientists.98 These Western European

institutions were cornerstones of science in the Enlightenment. Having such an educated

group of scholars, western countries took the lead in creating maps for other nations,

especially those in Eastern Europe. Despite the concentration of knowledge in these

countries, the map-making business was spreading globally because the interest in

cartography was rising not only among scholars but also among potential consumers,

such as merchants and investors.

Map consumers were of a different kind. They varied according to different kind

of maps. The maps had multifaceted character. When they were used according to

different needs, they 'produced' different kind of information.

Maps are 'graphic representations that facilitate a spatial understanding of things, concepts, conditions, processes, or events in the human world.' Because of their capacity to simplify the complex, maps can be

seen as 'simple iconic devices' wielding 'extraordinary authority.' […] Of singular importance in understanding the meaning of maps and their influence is the work of placing maps in their political, cultural, intellectual, and social contexts.99

The same map could have been used in different contexts if readers focused on different

aspects. Therefore such a map could provide all sorts of information. When map was

used in a political context, it was used by kings in planning the subjection of lands.

Travellers and anthropologists were reading maps in cultural and social contexts to

discover new states. The intellectual use of maps could have served as a tool of power; by

highlighting specific details the information about countries could have been

manipulated. The most common receivers of the maps were monarchs, for whom maps

were essential in planning battles and future conquests. The rulers, who were usually in

charge of the scientific or cartographic institutions, had therefore the easiest access to

maps.

The cultural agency of schools was probably the second biggest consumer. Firstly,

children were being taught geography via maps. Secondly, in higher education, many

maps were being used by professors in teaching topography and connected sciences.

These students were later on educated to become new map-making specialists.

The third group could be a blend of travellers and the readers of their books. To

fully represent their adventures, travellers would add a visual representation of the land

they visited in the form of a map. It helped the readers to better imagine the lands they

had visited, the distances travelled, as well as the difficulties that the author could have

experienced on the way (as in the case of travellers visiting Poland and facing a lack of

roads, that could have been easily represented on a map). Sometimes the travellers also

played the role of a proofreader, rewriting the maps, supplying additional details or

removing misleading information. In the eighteenth century, travel literature as well as

maps themselves became a source of pleasure and the object of desire among cultured

people.

Maps and globes had become a regular feature in the life of the literate. The number of maps found in personal libraries in both England and France increased throughout the century. […] As wall decorations, maps were described as 'the most commodious ornament for everyman's House.' William Leybourne echoed these sentiments in his Treatise on Plots (1653); maps were a 'neat ornament for the lord of the manor.' […] Printed maps illustrated French and English books, particularly history and military memoirs, as well as novels. […] Further evidence of the sale and collection of maps may be found in auction catalogues, in subscriber lists for maps and atlases, and in diaries and travel journals.100

This meant that maps were no longer solely in the domain of science and politics. Maps

started to educate, as well as, entertain people, who were looking to expand their

intellectual horizons.

3.2. State of cartography in Eastern Europe

Cartography produced in the western part of Europe triumphed in the eighteenth

century. The role of maps and map-making processes was rising slowly also in America

but it was in England and France that cartography was a prime business area. These two

countries were definitely the centre of the discipline. The concentration of interest was

due to two main reasons. Firstly, there was the biggest market of potential buyers, such as

scholars, students, philosophers or merchants. Secondly, the high-level of education given

to cartographers in many of the established schools, gave the West a chance to become a

mecca of talent in this domain.

With map-making flourishing in the West, educated Eastern Europeans realized

the growing importance of the field. Alas, there were only a small group of scholars who

were properly educated and had experience in cartography. They still belonged to the

elite of the country, who worked on important maps, but never had recognition from their

collaborators in the West. There were no special facilities to educate young cartographers,

while there were many in England and France. Perhaps, if the domain of cartography in

the east had been more developed at the time, these countries could have avoided

patriarchal treatment from the West. They could have geographically mastered their lands

on their own and felt responsible for their own maps. This would have also avoided

foreign misconceptions of their land. Although local authors could also distort the image

of their country presented in the maps, usually their maps were more reliable than foreign

ones. It was because the outsiders did not have feelings for the country, land or people.

This made their work more simplistic and exposed to disorders in the image.

Nevertheless, countries such as Poland or Russia had to rely on intellectuals from

abroad if they wanted to create maps to a Western standard. There were not enough

national scholars to be able to carry out extensive geographical works and were therefore

not recognized in the West. This was due not only to intellectual insufficiencies but

mainly because the Eastern scholars focused their efforts on mapping their own

neighbourhoods and not other parts of the world. Countries like England and France had

long since created maps of the world, atlases and charts of newly discovered lands. As

countries in the east were not included in the colonial power agenda, their needs were not

broad enough to explore and draw images of the new places. The war maps were

proceeded beyond the frontiers, but usually the battles were conducted in proximity to

their country, so the cartographers were not compelled to work out images of too many

distant areas.

Russia, which was generally the most aware of its needs among all the countries

of Eastern Europe, realized early on the importance of maps. The Russians invested in

foreign students asking them to work in the discipline.

In so far as Peter I and his immediate successors preferred any single foreign country as a source of intellectual stimulus for their people, they tended to choose Germany; and this preference was strengthened by the influence of their numerous German advisers, favourites, and officials.101

For Russia, because of the experiences with Germans working for the monarch, Germany

was the best country to invest in, in order to improve Russian cartography. One of the

aims of the reign of Peter the Great was to carry out a cultural revolution. He was the first

monarch to transform Russia into an independent and strong monarchy within Europe.

The Tsar focused his efforts on a two-way exchange. Firstly, many of the Russian

intellectuals, who decided to study abroad, got their education in Germany. Secondly, the

Academy of Sciences, established in 1725 in Moscow, hosted many German students.

The students were getting sponsored by the Russians and in return gave their skills and

knowledge to develop Russian cartography. This idea of investment in western human

capital, forced an intellectual growth of the country. It is interesting that Russia broke

with the continental belief in the superiority of England in cartography over exemplary

Germany. “To the Russian nobility the English by contrast appeared still primarily as

merchants, and hence faintly contemptible, while their close connection with the

unpopular navy earned them a good deal of dislike.”102 It appears that Russians treated

their well-established relationships (and possibly simply distance) as more important than

alleged advantages they could get from working with England.

The principal difference between the state of cartography in Russia and in Poland

was that while in Russia the monarch invested in the country's development, in Poland, in

the eighteenth century, the discipline was considered more of a hobby. When the Russians

were working on the improvement of their cartography, Poland' king Stanislaw August

Poniatowski refused to lend his maps to Tadeusz Kościuszko so that the latter could

prepare for battle. The king made the famous statement, “If I still had diamonds left, I

would prefer to give them, rather than these maps, which are the fruit of twenty years of

my efforts,”103 but later agreed to the demand. This unlikely approach to science shows

the difference between Russia and Poland. Russia was focused on its own growth and

from the beginning invested in maps and establishing cartography. Poland did not take

the same chances and maps were used more for private purposes than public utility. The

simple object of a map would not have saved Poland from being partitioned.

Nevertheless, it became an example of the awareness of Russia, which led them to be an

invader, and the naivety of the Polish monarch and his nobility, who finally became

subjects. Science of cartography and its understanding became for some countries a

useful political tool for obtaining power in Europe.

Michael J. Mikoś in his essay Monarchs and Magnates told the story of the king's

interest in cartography. Despite all the vices, the author paid respect to Stanislaw August

Poniatowski for his will to encourage map-making, even if it was made on a small-scale.

Similarly, Larry Wolff exalted the king for making room for cartography in his country,

which may have been the only reason why maps of Poland even existed at the time.104

Stanislaw was considered as an educated person who enjoyed art, science and

culture. He treated the affairs of science as he treated art, i.e. science was a hobby, a past-

time, mere entertainment. This artistic idealisation of all the disciplines led him to the

hobbyist treatment of domains that, as it was mentioned, could have helped him in

leadership.

After his election, [Stanislaw] undertook an ambitious program of creating appropriate conditions for the development of cartography, surrounded himself with astronomers and cartographers, organized an office of cartography at the Royal Castle in Warsaw, and assembled there a sizable collection of 325 maps, globes, and astronomical instruments.105

Although he managed to improve the discipline of map-making, the king did not profit as

much as he might have from this science.

The monarch united foreign intellectuals with native scholars and worked mainly

with Charles Perthées, Francis Czaki, Jozef Aleksander Jablonowski and Teodor Waga.

Perthées, for example, was in charge of making small maps of different regions of Poland

he had never visited. Although it seemed like a difficult task, the cartographer compiled

all the important information, with the help of bishops who provided the details about the

provinces. This is how he created a valuable representation of the Polish lands. Jozef

Aleksander Jablonowski compiled information for the first map of Poland, which was

drawn by Saint-Hilaire106 in 1755 in Paris. Francis Czaki collaborated with Jean-

Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville in 1761 on one of the maps of the country.107 These

binational cooperations were generally successful with the exception of one case. The

work on the atlas of Poland around the year 1770 was a laborious process and included

many scholars. The compilation of all the details in the final stage of the work was given

to Italian cartographer Giovanni Rizzi Zannoni. Zannoni, indeed, published his Carte de

la Pologne divisée par provinces et palatinates et subdivisée par districts in 1772 in

Paris, but claimed credit for creating the whole atlas. Prince Jablonowski got only a

'flattering dedication' on the side of the map for all the work he actually put into its

creation.108 This example clearly shows the difference between the objectives of foreign

and native cartographers towards national work. The foreign scholars were not bound, as

in Russia by academic commitments, or by attachment to the country, so intellectual theft

was not a problem for them.

Although it is very difficult to find maps that travellers used while travelling

around Poland and Europe, Coxe mentioned the map of Zannoni as one that was

generally in use in the eighteenth century.

The partition being made according to the map of Zannoni, the river Podhorts was taken as the eastern boundary of this dismembered province; but when the Austrian commissioners visited the spot, where

according to Zannoni the Podhorts flowed into the Dnieper, they found no river known to the inhabitants which answered to that name.109

The map was instantly associated with the creation of Zannoni, not Prince Jablonowski. It

means that the general public did not know about the dispute or even if they knew, they

accepted Zannoni as the author of the map. Coxe told the story in order to show that even

the map used for such a significant task as partition, bore great mistakes. Apart from this

record, no other examples of using maps can be found in travel accounts. Perhaps,

travellers did not decide to add any of the used maps in order to create a mental map of

visited lands, done through literary language.

Other misfortunes that occurred in Polish cartography were events in which the

maps were not secured properly. This led to many of them being burnt in fires, stolen or

taken away to other countries. The Polish cartography could not therefore provide a

proper means of supplying information, especially to foreigners who wanted to get to

know the country. With the lack of such maps, Western Europe took an initiative. By

exploring the East they pursued its superiority in somewhat discovering new lands and

obtaining an intellectually imperialistic power over Eastern Europe.

3.3. Maps as a language of power

Cartography in the eighteenth century was not yet a stable, fully established

discipline. Although the approach to this science significantly improved, it did not mean

that there was no market for new tools in cartography and new maps. The constant

political and territorial changes in the eighteenth century created a great need for new

maps, atlases and charts. In the eastern part of Europe, historical turmoils, such as the

creation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth or three partitions, encouraged the

map-making business to create new maps with up-to-date images. In the year of the first

partition, 1772, a French member of the Academy of Sciences in Petersburg, Jean-

Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville, published L'Empire de Russie, son origine et ses

accroissements to emphasise the new lands, whose possession had made Russia proud.

This example, of a rapid publication in order to show off the new gains, is but one case

showing the existence of power in images, especially maps.

Following the reasoning of Larry Wolff, that Western Europe had an ideological

agenda for establishing Eastern Europe; the “cartographical ambition of Western Europe

to master Eastern Europe in the eighteenth century”110 seemed an important symptom of

that ideological quest. A proper theory for that approach can be find in an essay by John

Brian Harley, Maps, Knowledge, and Power. His thesis that maps are important

documents that contribute to the discourse of power, casts a new light on the existing

Western definitions and traditions. In Harley's opinion, historians must shift their focus

from geographical representations embodied in the maps towards manipulation and

hidden information. The map is, for him, a “socially constructed form of knowledge”111

which is the result of a strong link between political geography and the history of

geographical thought.

Harley's methodology was to treat cartography as a language and examine the

maps in the frame of political power, focusing on the iconological approach:

Maps will be regarded as part of the broader family of value-laden images. […] We thus move the reading of maps away from the canons of traditional cartographical criticism with its string of binary oppositions between maps that are 'true and false', 'accurate and inaccurate', 'objective and subjective', 'literal and symbolic', or that are based on 'scientific integrity' as opposed to 'ideological distortion'. Maps are never value-free images […]. Both in the selectivity of their content and in their signs and styles of representation maps are a way of conceiving, articulating, and structuring the human world which is biased towards, promoted by, and exerts influence upon particular sets of social relation.112

The author based his theory on three distinctions. The first was, as mentioned before, the

language of cartography. This language conveys the ideas from the map in the way that

the receiver can understand them and stimulate a “search for evidence about aspects such

as the codes and context of cartography as well as its content in a traditional sense.”113

This approach to maps leads the receiver to being able to ask and answer questions about

“changing readerships for maps, about levels of carto-literacy, conditions of authorship,

aspects of secrecy and censorship, and also about the nature of the political statements

which are made by maps.”114 To treat cartography as a language, helping to find a

discourse of power in maps, is to be able to notice the possible agenda of map-makers in

the details of a map.

The second facet was based on the theory of iconology formulated by Erwin

Panofsky. Similarly to the language dimension, iconology brings the understanding that

images have two layers of meaning. The first is the literal sense of the figure, while the

second is a hidden layer of meaning. The latter is a symbolic vision of every image, in

this case a map. According to Harley, it is in this deeper sense that the political and power

dimension of an image provides the most important information for an insightful reader.

115

The last aspect of this theoretical perspective was derived from the

aforementioned idea that a map can produce knowledge in a social context. Harley was

building his belief on the works of Michel Foucault and Anthony Giddens. According to

Foucault, knowledge is a form of power. This was a starting point for Harley to

demonstrate that cartography is similarly a source of knowledge and therefore power,

because maps “cannot escape involvement in the process by which power is

deployed.”116 Giddens's contribution to this ideology is the theorization of the

“'authoritative resources' (as distinguished from material resources) controlled by the

state: 'storage of authoritative resources involves above all the retention and control of

information and knowledge'.”117 Maps bear the characteristics of surveillance, that can

make them the means of state control and political power. Harley made a remark about

the present times, when the complex states require more and better maps. This can also be

applied to the growing state of affairs in the eighteenth century.

To conclude, these three elements help to convert the one-dimensional image into

a detailed source of political power in society. In the words of Harley:

Maps as 'knowledge as power' are explored here under three headings: the universality of political contexts in the history of mapping; the way in which the exercise of power structures the content of maps; and how cartographic communication at a symbolic level can reinforce that exercise through map knowledge.118

This ideology is important in understanding the complex nature of maps. The use of

specific maps and atlases by the travellers, following Harley's point of view, could have

had a great impact on how they perceived the places they visited. Another element of

Harley's thesis, vital for the purpose of this paper, is the silence of maps, which means

that “maps – just as much as examples of literature or the spoken word – exert a social

influence through their omissions as much as by the features they depict and

emphasise.”119 The omission of some details could have been the result of an

unconscious will, the lack of experience or the political order. Even in the first two cases,

with accidental omissions, maps could have provided distorted information about the

countries. In the latter case, maps were clearly a tool for discrimination and imperialistic

agenda for power. By noticing the marginalized people, lands and other such elements on

the maps, Hartley may wish to restore social justice.

Mark Monmonier agreed with the possible double-meaning of maps. In his

opinion it is enforced by the paradox of cartographical representation, the receivers and

map-makers. “On n'échappe donc pas au paradoxe de la cartographie: pour offrir une

represéntation fidèle et fiable, une carte précise doit énoncer de pieux mensonges.”120

The paradox is the friction between the honest representation of the world, as a prime

reason for map-making, and the selective and incomplete approach that has to be

undertaken to create such an image. The receivers of such an imperfect image easily

accept it. They believe in the good intentions of the map-maker, taking into account a

small probability of error, as an element that may have occurred by mistake. However,

cartography should not be considered as a manipulated branch of science that should not

be trusted at all. On the contrary, it should be regarded as an objective science but studied

within many intellectual and social contexts.

Moreover, the map-makers usually are not a tool of propaganda in the hands of

the state. It is more of an unconscious choice between what to place in the map and what

to neglect. The author chooses different parameters, details and elements that he places in

his image and that makes it his map, in a way that there is only one map of that kind in

the world. Yet, such a map can provide different meanings according to different contexts

and people.

Une simple réflexion devrait mettre en garde les utilisateurs de cartes contre une naïveté aussi malsaine que largement répandue: une carte donnée, quelle qu'elle soit, n'est jamais que l'une des innombrables cartes que l'on pourrait dresser à partir de la même situation et des mêmes paramètres.121

Maps in this context always become different representations of reality, even if drawn

with the same parameters. For the travellers it meant that even if they used the same map,

they have seen different elements that interested them. Moreover, maps have to be

selective in nature, so the task of a cartographer is to make a choice between what to

show or emphasise and what to omit, and how to expose the chosen information in the

best way. Jeremy Black somewhat defended map-makers with respect to these difficult

decisions, which can have wide consequences in historical and social fields of study:

The subject of a map reflects choice; so also do the scale, projection, orientation, symbolization, key, colour, title and caption. To imagine that there is a totally objective cartography is to deny the element and nature of choice and to neglect the assumptions present in choices […].

Both assumptions and choices can require careful unpicking, as they entail subjective judgements […] whereas the ideology of modern cartography […] is that of accuracy, which is generally seen as an aspect of objectivity.122

Black suggested that it is not always a person that uses a map who changes its context,

but the map itself is in nature marked by the subjective nature of the cartographer. Maps

can never be objective but they can only aim to be accurate. This means that maps

themselves are a tool of power that can distort the image of a country; travellers were

only a part of the discovery of these specific details in a map.

Larry Wolff, in contrast, used the imperialistic character of maps as evidence for

his thesis of cartographical superiority of the West over the East. As the level of

cartography in Eastern Europe was not as developed as it was in England or France, the

task of preparing the map of a country was usually in the hand of a foreigner. Wolff

believed that this could have led to the manipulation on the part of Westerners; done in

order to create a new, obviously backward reality of the 'lost lands':

At the beginning of the eighteenth century the lands of Eastern Europe were still incompletely mapped by comparison to the cartographical standard of Western Europe, and the mapping of Eastern Europe that took place during the course of that century, often carried out by foreign experts, was a fundamental part of the general discovery which produced and organized knowledge of 'these lost lands'.123

This intellectual expansion led to the re-discovery of Eastern Europe by travellers,

scholars and cartographers, ratifying the positive and superior image of the West. This

approach also carried the marks of indirect imperialism, because the West created the

images of the East from scratch, implementing their own ideas for a representation of

these lands. As one of the examples of such double-meaning images, Wolff provided a

map of Russia made by Nicolas Sanson in 1695. In this map the details of cities and

places decreased as one moved to the east: “The predominance of little trees made it that

much easier to master this map 'with facility,' and reflected the still rudimentary mapping

of Russia at the end of the seventeenth century.”124 Another example was that of the

distortion of the image of Poland, found in the Encyclopédie of Diderot and d'Alembert.

The authors called for the use of land for commerce and trade and described it with close

connections to geographically distant places:

The rivers of Poland were no more than lines on the map, useless to the Poles themselves, but exciting to the imagination of geographers in Western Europe, who inevitably envisioned in Eastern Europe a meeting of the Orient and the Occident. Typically disorientating was the prospect of joining east and west by rivers that, fundamentally, flowed to the north or the south. Typically confusing was the elementary error by which the Encyclopedia allowed Poland access to the 'northern ocean,' when, in fact, Poland's northern coast was on the Baltic Sea. However much one insisted that Poland was a land of the North, it was nevertheless distinctly non-Arctic.125

The representation of the country, so remote from the original state, results in the

questioning of the reasons for such an article. If the writers of so excellent a source of

knowledge were not careful enough to produce reliable information about the

geographical state of affairs, other topics such as politics or culture could have also been

distorted in what could have produced far reaching consequences for the country.

Considering the popularity of the Encyclopédie, many readers must have merged the

writer's opinions with their existing view on Poland, which resulted in an alarming state

of knowledge regarding Eastern Europe among Westerners.

Travellers were an important source of information for cartographers at the time,

as they are for historians now. Cartographers and travellers had a two-way relationship.

Map-makers were the ones who created maps for the use of travellers. The places that

travellers could reach depended on their efforts and type of work. Likewise, the voyagers

were helpful to cartographers. They were the ones who often discovered new places and

provided new information for the maps. The Enlightenment also had an impact on this

relationship since travellers were meant to do “the work of 'enlightened people' seeking to

cast light upon the darkest corner of the continent”. One of the dark corners was

definitely Eastern Europe but philosophers of the Enlightenment (who also often made

maps themselves) associated the light of cartography with the light of civilization. This

light was meant to bring the East back from the darkness of backwardness.126

3.4. Examples of the maps presenting Eastern Europe

Along with the arguments regarding the Western agenda of superiority towards

the East, as shown by map-making domains, it is essential to analyse the maps

themselves. The travellers, Marshall, Wraxall and Coxe, did not give examples of the

maps they used in their travels. Despite that, they did mention in a few places, how they

related knowledge coming from the maps to the knowledge they got from experience.

Marshall when describing Russia noticed a great difference between these two kinds of

knowledge:

The reason must be, the country's being so extremely out of the way of all travellers, that not a person in a century goes to it, who takes notes of his observations with intention to lay them before the world […]; and hence it is that the greatest changes happen in such remote parts of the world, without any thing of the matter being known. And our writers of geography, who are every day publishing, copy each other in so slavish a manner, that a fact in 1578 is handed down to us as the only information we can have in 1769; a circumstance which reigns in all the books of general geography I have seen. Let me here add, that I have, in travelling to gain information, visited those countries about which it would be in vain to consult books.127

Marshall, although suspected of not visiting any countries abroad, treated himself as a

scientific explorer, who travelled in order to enrich cartography. He noticed the lack of

information in the books or maps on this part of Europe. He assigned this state of affairs

to the unpopularity of the place, that it did not encourage travellers to visit and therefore

create proper guides about the area. Also Coxe gave the expression of mental-mapping by

saying: “The Poles, in their features, look, customs, dress, and general appearance,

resemble Asiatics rather than Europeans; and they are unquestionably descended from

Tartar ancestors.”128 The author stated that the Polish characteristics belong more to an

Asian race than a European race. This opinion was the case for many other travellers at

the time (most often of those who did not travel to Eastern Europe). Such a comparison

reinforced the belief that Poland was the first country on the border with Asia and that it

already belonged to the Orient.

The travellers did not provide information about the sources of their maps,

suggesting in fact that their sources were not satisfactory enough. Yet, there are a few

maps dating from 1754 to 1812 that could be an example of the maps used by the

travellers or to show the treatment of Eastern Europe in cartography in the eighteenth

century. Moreover, each of the maps represents an idea of progress-as-power as was

discussed before. Of importance is the timeframe for the maps. The first four maps could

have been used for political reasons and were influenced by the Seven Years' War

1754-1763. The last three maps were certainly affected by the partitions of Poland in the

years 1772, 1792 and 1795.

Figure 1 is an atlas map of Europe created and published in France in 1754 by

Jean-Baptiste Bourguignon d'Anville, a French geographer and cartographer. The

presented map is drawn on two sheets, the relief is shown pictorially and political borders

are hand coloured.

Most of D'Anville's atlases were made up for the individual customer, so it appears that no two are alike. D'Anville's maps have a clarity and directness that is very 'modern'. He read widely, and incorporated the best available geographic knowledge into his work. The English and others copied from his maps extensively. Many of the maps were missing when we acquired this atlas, and have been added subsequently.129

D'Anville was an approved cartographer who was able to create very detailed maps, such

as the one from 1754. The full title of this map is Europe contenant la France,

l'Allemagne, l'Italie, l'Espagne & les Isles Britanniques.

As Poland, or any other country from the eastern part, is not considered in the

title, it is rather clear that it would not appear on the final map. Despite that, the author

decided to devote quite a large space in the top right corner to the sketch of Poland. The

northern and western part of the country are described in detail; the names of the bigger

towns and rivers, as well as small villages, are provided. In the northern part, belonging

to Prussia, the names of the particular regions (Pomern, Cassuben, Wenden) are also

mapped, which does not occur in any other part of the mapped land. Further east, the map

looses in detail. In the central part of Poland, only Warsaw is signalled as if it was the

only relevant city to be listed. This resembles travel accounts in which all the travellers

headed to Warsaw, expecting it to be glorious and different from all the poverty that had

been seen on the road.

In general, the peripheries of the map are filled with the names of the places on

every side of the map, except for Poland. Moreover, the protruding ends of countries like

Portugal, Italy or England, exceed even beyond the contours of the map. Southern parts

of Scandinavia, although being placed at the same latitude as Scotland, are cut out from

the map, while an image of Scotland is forced in. These are the visible choices made by a

cartographer on which places to expose and which to omit. For people using such a map

what strikes first is the focus on important countries and the lack of the focus on the

others; not worth exposing in detail at all. The observer sees Poland as a country that is

symbolizing the 'end of Europe' or 'the poor, empty state'. Other countries, to the West,

overflow the borders of the map while Poland is under-represented. This resulted in

reinforcing the common concepts of poverty and emptiness of the eastern countries. No

wonder that many people could have had a fragmentary representation of these countries

if they only used such maps.

Figure 1 Jean-Baptiste Bourguignon Anville, Premiere partie de la Carte d'Europe

contenant la France, l'Alemagne, l'Italie, l'Espagne & les Isles Britanniq(ue)s, 1754,

atlas map, 99 cm x 81 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

Figure 2 is an atlas map of Europe with annotations on the name, religion and

sovereigns of particular countries. It was reprinted in Paris in 1755 by the Abbé de

Dangeau. It is an engraved map with hand-coloured country boundaries. There are only a

few countries' names listed on the map: Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany,

Hungary, Poland, Russia (Moscovie). On the left side there is a column of text with

information on every single specified country, and additionally Courland (today Latvia).

The copy from the Rumsey Collection bears pen-and-ink modifications to the text.

Nouvelle méthode pour apprendre facilement et sans maitre la géographie, et les premiers principes du Blazon ... Compose par M. L'abbe de Dangeau, l'un des quarante de l'académie Françoise. Cette géographie de la France par l'Abbe de Dangeau est le manuscrit de l'auteur.130

The note on the map suggests that it was used for pedagogical purposes. The map must

have been used at school to teach the geography of Europe to children as indicated by the

words “apprendre facilement et sans maitre la géographie.” The map is only a draft of the

contours of the countries; it could not have been useful to scholars or travellers because

of the lack of important details. The author clearly made a distinction between the north-

eastern part of Europe, which he treated as a whole, and the rest of Europe. The specified

countries of the north are Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Iceland and from east Russia,

Poland and Hungary. An appearance of Germany among these countries is unusual.

Generally, Germany was associated with Austria, Italy, France and England as a western

country. Also on the map, a contour of this state is placed on the left page, signalling a

greater connection with the west. Nevertheless, Germany in the beginning of the

eighteenth century was still under the rule of the Austrian sovereigns. Moreover, the

struggle of Prussia and the Habsburg monarchy in the War of the Austrian Succession

(1740-48) led to the situation when Germany was not yet considered as a dominant power

in Europe. This could have caused the placing of the nation with the eastern countries.

The receiver at once associates the represented countries as a single block, a

counter-part to the western part. The aim of the presentation must have been to create two

maps with two different topics, first with the countries of Western and Southern Europe,

second with the Northern and Eastern. Such division, given to children, reinforces the

conviction of Europe's division into two separate parts.

Figure 2 Abbé de Dangeau, Europe, 1755, atlas map, 43 cm x 61 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

Figure 3 is an atlas map of Poland created and published in London in 1758. It

was drawn and engraved by John Gibson; Emanuel Bowen made revisions, corrections

and improvements. The full title of the map is Poland. Atlas Minimus or a New Set of

Pocket Maps of the Several Empires, Kingdoms and States of the Known World, with

Historical Extracts relative to each. According to the title, in London in the 1750s,

Poland was considered as a country of a 'known world', which means there existed

enough information to provide a detailed account of it. The map is an outline coloured

map of Poland and its lands, with the names explaining specific areas. There are two

columns of text explaining the size of each of the provinces. Although the map is not very

detailed, and does not give many names of the towns, the general draft of the provinces

provides a solid basis for geographical as well as political knowledge.

The map could have been created for people willing to understand the country in

general. It is not very detailed and it emphasises only the most important provinces. For

that reason it could have been a useful and uncomplicated tool in getting to know Poland.

The joint information about geographical distances between the provinces could have

also been useful to the travellers in their first attempts at researching the country.

Knowing how big the lands are in between their destinations, they could have planned

their trip based on individual provinces. Also, the map itself, because of the colours of the

lining, the displayed size and the concentration on only one country, made the journey

there encouraging. This map is in a contradiction to the argument that the English could

have tried to diminish Poland in cartographical works.

Figure John Gibson, Emanuel Bowen, Poland. Atlas Minimus or a New Set of Pocket

Maps, 1758, atlas map, 7 cm x 10 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

Figure 4 is an atlas map entitled Poloniae Regnum, Ducatusq Magnae Lithuaniae

created by Tobias Conrad Lotter and published by Tobias Lobeck in Augsburg in 1762.

The map illustrates the countries of the Baltic Region: Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine. It

is full coloured and is hand coloured on the outlines. The date is estimated.131 It lists

names of the biggest towns and selected smaller villages. Also, the names of the regions,

written in Latin, are mapped. The name of the sea is written in Dutch 'De Oost See',

which means the Eastern Sea. Both languages, Latin and Dutch, can signify that a map

was used by merchants. The specific indication of cities, towns and rivers were helpful in

navigating trade in the country. Poland at the time had imported goods from Holland as

well as France; this was recorded by Marshall: “The Dutch have all the supply of India

goods, and most of that of linen and woollen; and the French the principal part of the

silks, brandy, wines, and all the West India commodities.”132 The map indeed, could

have been of use for the Dutch, French and other merchants of different nationalities, as it

was written in universal Latin.

On the right side of the map, on the Lithuanian territories, but especially in

Muscovie, the representation of forests attracts attention. It seems like when going further

east, the urbanization diminishes in favour of uncultivated or husbandry areas. The image

of the great forests of Central Europe can be found in The History of the Decline and Fall

of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon twice: “In the time of Caesar the reindeer, as

well as the elk and the wild bull, was a native of the Hercynian forest, which then

overshadowed a great part of Germany and Poland”133 and “It is difficult in the dark

forests of Germany and Poland to pursue the emigrations of the Heruli.”134 The map

representation of the vast green areas in the East could have been connected with the

ancient idea of Central and Eastern Europe as planted with forests. It could have also

been a filling of a space that conveyed the idea of natural, savage lands of the far Eastern

Europe.

Another important detail on the map is the ideological definition of the four

corners of the world instead of a geographic one. On four sides of the map, outside the

square, there are four names defining the directions: in the west – Occidens, north –

Septentrio, east – Oriens, south – Merinies. The idea of using old geographical

designations may signalize the hidden agenda for communicating the existing ideological

frontiers of Europe. The familiar division between Occident and Orient signify the same

differences.

Figure Tobias Conrad Lotter, Tobias Lobeck, Poloniae Regnum, Ducatusq Magnae

Lithuaniae, 1762, atlas map, 11 cm x 13 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

Figure 5 is an atlas map entitled A new map of the Kingdom of Poland with its

dismembered provinces. It was made by Thomas Kitchin in 1787 and published by

Robert Sayer in London. It is an engraved map with coloured outlines of the provinces. It

shows vegetation, marshes, etc., and the relief is shown pictorially. The works on the atlas

were based on the maps of D'Anville and Robert.135 Again, the map is quite detailed.

Further east, the names of the towns disappear but it seems like the localization of the

forests and green areas is very well established. In the top right as well as bottom right

corners, there are only a couple of names of the towns with the perfect positioning of the

forests. It seems like these vast green areas were easier to be mapped by cartographers

than the specific towns or villages in the east. In the top left corner there is a chart with

the numbers of inhabitants of Poland belonging to different provinces:

The Kingdom of Poland before the Partition Treaty in 1775 contained 14,260,000 Inhabitants. The Russian Province, dismembered from Lithuania, contains 1,550,000. The Austrian Province, of Galicia which includes Lodomeria, contains 2,580,000. The Prussian Province, comprehending Polish or Western Prussia &c. contains 800,00. Total in the dismembered Provinces 4,930,000. Remains in Poland 9,330,000.136

This chart explains the division of lands and the amount of inhabitants per district.

Austria, as a precursor of the idea of partition, got the land with the largest population,

while the smallest territory was assigned to Prussia. With the first partition in 1772,

Poland had already lost a one-third of its lands. These statistics could have been placed

on the map in order to calm the other countries of Europe, already anxious of the unfair

dealings in the East. Considering that Poland did not have strong allies in Europe at the

time, the information of the withdrawal of 'only' one-third of this country, did not raise

widespread discontent among the western nations.

Coxe presented very similar statistics to those from the map in his Travels,

published in 1784; three years before the publication of the map.

Of the dismembered countries, the Russian province is the largest, the Austrian the most populous, and the Prussia the most commercial. The population of the whole amounts to near 5,000,000 of souls; the first containing 1,500,000, the second 2,500,000, and the third 860,000.137

Both sets of numbers are almost the same. It shows that authors of the map from 1787

used the calculations done a few years earlier. Therefore, the map was not fully updated

at the time when it was published. It may suggest that other maps could have been done

with the same neglect for important details such as specific numbers.

Figure Kitchin, Thomas, A new map of the Kingdom of Poland with its dismembered

provinces, 1787, atlas map, 48 cm x 66 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

Figure 6 is an atlas map printed by Mathew Carey on May 1, 1795 in

Philadelphia. The map is called Poland, Shewing the Claims of Russia, Prussia &

Austria. It represents the lands taken by Russia, Prussia and Austria in the third partition

of Poland in 1795. The map was originally uncoloured but some time later a few remarks

have been placed and highlighted with coloured pen and pencil.

Once more, some parts of the land are more detailed than others. In the bottom

right corner, Ukrainian lands are almost extending the borders of the map. Yet, on the

right side of the map, on the same longitude, the Russian lands are not detailed at all. The

author could have wanted to focus one's attention only on the lands that were taken by the

three powers and not mistake it with their official land from before the partition.

There is a legend on the left hand side of the map explaining which lands belong

to what country. The system used for such indications is not very good. It is difficult to

localize the regions by province and even harder to find out the borders of each district.

Presumably, an American cartographer could not have been sure about such details;

moreover these agreements on partition were constantly changing. The cartographer

somehow may have anticipated the criticism and added a remark in the bottom left corner

“Poland, Shewing the Claims of Russia, Prussia & Austria, until the late Depredations,

the extent of which cannot as yet be ascertained”. He could not predict the exact division

of lands mainly because the map was printed in May while the official agreement on the

partition was given in October 1795.

From the analysis of the language that the cartographer used, from the use of the

word 'depredations', it can be deduced that he treated the partition as a violation of an

established order. As mentioned before, the political events were encouraging the map-

making business to constantly issue improved copies. Such was the case of this map,

which represented Poland in a poor way, nevertheless addressing the need of providing

the newest information as soon as possible. Perhaps, the map was ordered by three

invaders, Russia, Prussia and Austria, due to a need of planning changes in the newly

possessed lands. It could have been also important for sovereigns of other countries to

obtain a map like this. Their political decisions and their receivers have changed and that

had to be taken into consideration.

Figure Carey, Mathew, Poland, Shewing the Claims of Russia, Prussia & Austria, 1795, atlas map, 32 cm x 37 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection

Figure 7 is an example of the maps from the beginning of the nineteenth century

that displayed improvements in cartography. The map depicts an image of Poland as a

country erased from the map of Europe. It was made by John Pinkerton, drawn by L.

Hebert and published by Cadell and Davies in London in 1810. It represents the lands

belonging to Prussia. The map comes from Pinkerton's Modern Atlas which is considered

one of the best English atlases of the period. It is an engraved map, fully hand-coloured

and the relief is shown by hachures138 (hachures is a type of graphic shading of selected

elements of the map, consisting of parallel or intersecting lines). Specific regions within

the Prussian provinces are marked by different colours, which makes it easier to read the

map.

It is a very detailed image of the country, consisting even of the names of the very

small villages. The situation of these villages is not always geographically correct, but in

general the map is very close to the perfect representation of the province in a way that

even the smallest villages are presented on the map. Due to its detailed character, the map

could have been used by travellers as it would be very easy to navigate the lands with this

map. Also, it could have been used by the government in order to survey the territories, or

soldiers having their garrisons even in villages. It would not be used by merchants

because the places located on the map were usually not connected with any kind of trade.

Most of the names of the towns and villages are changed into German

equivalents. This shows the one-sighted view of expansion that was an eradication of all

prevailing traditions, such as the names of the towns that has been always known in

Polish. This is an example of the imperialistic agenda of Germany who were not

concerned with any sentiments towards the Polish traditions but only about their conquer.

To conclude, the map varies from others that are dating even fifteen years earlier.

Possibly, the Prussian cartographers, influenced by the monarch, got interested in their

own lands and decided to create a proper map of their own estates. Also, the Prussian

administration of the lands could have made it more popular for visits as well as

explorations, which resulted in the improvement of cartography of this region.

Figure Pinkerton, John, Prussian Dominions, 1810, atlas map, 52 cm x 71 cm, David

Rumsey Map Collection

Most of the maps from the eighteenth century found in the David Rumsey

Historical Map Collection are maps created in England, France and the United States.

This truly shows that the countries of the Western part of Europe, and partially the United

States, were pioneers in cartography. The maps described represent only a small

percentage of the maps of Europe or Poland. The changing course of history was

inspiring the cartographers to create new maps of the same places, due to historical

changes as well as different ideas for their representation. As map-makers were educated

in different ways and had various political backgrounds and opinions on particular parts

of the world, the maps they created resembled each other only superficially. The details

were never identical. These unique characteristics and, most importantly, the way they

were displayed on maps were what the travellers were focusing on. Some maps, such as

those presented above, could have easily discouraged the travellers, who based their

decisions precisely on maps or other travel accounts. The maps described, especially

from the period before the last partition in 1795, were usually of a poor representation of

the eastern part of Europe. On the one hand, they were misleading in a way that many

details, which were known about these places, were not provided on such maps. On the

other hand, even Coxe, Wraxall and Marshall noticed the emptiness of the lands they

visited in Poland, which can make such a scanty portrayal reasonable. In two of the maps

the clear division of West versus East or Occident versus Orient is being shown. This

confirms Wolff's argument that indeed such separation existed in this period and was very

visible in the cartography. Moreover, all the maps, after being closely analysed, reveal

features of the discourse of power, as delineated by John Harley. Certainly, if the maps

were studied more closely, they would exhibit many more facets to prove the thesis of

Western Europe mastering the East. Nevertheless, the chosen viewpoints already go

closely together with the argument and endorse it.

Chapter 4. Race and slavery issues

4.1. Problem of race in the eighteenth century

The issue of race began to be noticed at the end of the fifteenth century. This was

due to the first voyages to the 'New World'. The explorers faced groups of people that did

not resemble them, in skin colour, traditions and manners. After a period of curiosity,

caused by the first contact, race started to be used as an analytical category. According to

Andrew Valls, it provided an easy method of differentiating people. Simple observation

enabled anyone to find differences in people's appearance. It allowed philosophers and

anthropologists to work on understanding the sources of these differences; racial

categories became scientific tools.139 Consequently, in the seventeenth century, race

became a central element of the economic and political agenda for the western world. The

use of this category justified the exploitation of colonized nations and created a

transformation of the social contract that started to be based on race.

In The Racial Contract, Charles Mills argues that one of the main devices of modern political philosophy, the social contract, is despite its universalist appearance racially coded. The actual social contract was a contract among whites, and the content of the agreement was to exclude

and exploit nonwhites.140

The author found proofs for his argument in the works of such philosophers as Hobbes,

Locke and Kant. Whenever these scholars mentioned the social contract, both parts of it

were meant to be white, moreover Europeans. Despite that, the use of race in this context

could have been mistakenly analysed in an anachronistic way. The philosophers were

indeed basing their theories only on white men but their general assumption was that all

men were equal. Nevertheless, their opinions still provided a basis for racial theories. So,

although different races were allegedly equal, the lower placement in the hierarchy of

development did not allow, the exemplary, Native Americans to contract with Europeans;

this led to abuse and advantage taking .

In the course of colonialism and imperial expansion, a distinction between two

types of approach towards race appeared: race-as-ethnicity and race-as-biology141. A

similar distinction was offered by Anthony Appiah, here cited by Andrew Valls: “As such,

racialism is the belief in 'racial essence.' While this view is mistaken, according to

Appiah, it presents 'a cognitive rather than a moral problem' because the issue is not a

normative one – how people are to be treated – but 'how the world is'”.142 These two

perspectives demonstrate that the original character of 'race' was only an expression of

typical appearance and character; initially the concept of race did not bear any intellectual

connotations with possible defects as it began to be done later. When, for different

purposes, people have started to be treated differently, only because of how they looked,

the positive attitude towards race has been changed and its category politicized.

The Enlightenment is considered as a controversial period in terms of discussions

about racism. On the one hand, it was the time when nationalism was still mild and the

general ideas of toleration were treated above the religious superstition and prejudice. On

the other hand, many important scholars of this period justified the different approach to

people, based on the race. This was mainly due to colonialism and western superiority

that needed to be somehow explained and justified.

Several critics and historians have identified the Enlightenment as the doctrinal fount of modern racism. They can point to a specific logic which connects secularisation to racism. If the early modern world was constrained in its attitudes to other races by the word of scripture, so the argument runs, then the Enlightenment witnessed a liberation of science and philosophy from the shackles of Christian tradition, which created the ideological space in which racist doctrines might flourish. […] Modern scholarly debates have also begun to rage about the relationship of the Enlightenment to the rise of Orientalism, triggered

by the work of Edward Said, and about the downgrading of a backward

eastern Europe by the western European Enlightenment.143

In the modern era, Enlightenment is associated with the approach of race-as-biology

rather than ethnicity. Many decades of rationalizing the slave trade and the conquest of

foreign lands enforced the creation of a very close link between the period of reason and

the advent of colonialism marked by racism. This connection was also emphasized by the

superiority of western Europe towards the east. Although the Easterners were not that

much different from the English in their appearance, there were many other elements that

helped to create a powerful distinction between the two regions of Europe.

4.2. Polish essence

The dominant theories about the nature of man in modern times, from Montaigne onward, including those of Descartes, Hobbes, Spinoza, Malebranche, Locke, Leibniz, Bayle, Berkeley, Hume and Kant, are all universalistic. They all define man in terms of mental and psychological characteristics. Size, skin color, religious beliefs, etc. do not enter into the question of whether he is to be treated in certain ways which differentiate him from animals or machines. However, the same people in the Enlightenment who could develop these theories of human nature could also provide the bases for theories claiming that some individuals, in fact millions of them, were less than men because they were dark, or

accepted the wrong religion.144

Philosophy was such a crucial element of the Enlightenment that it was, in fact, capable

of conveying all kinds of beliefs. Scholars, philosophers, ordinary people and, among

them, travellers, were receivers of these various philosophical theories that shaped their

minds. In one of his essays, David Hume wrote about national characters.145 This essay

could have had a big impact on travellers. Hume explained that there exists a tendency

for people of the same country to be similar to each other in manners and attitude.

Moreover, citizens of one country differ from those of another. Every nation has special

attributes that are explained by different causes. The author described a national character

in words:

Where a number of men are united into one political body, the occasions of their intercourse must be so frequent, for defence, commerce, and government, that, together with the same speech or language, they must acquire a resemblance in their manners, and have a common or national character, as well as a personal one, peculiar to each individual. Now though nature produces all kinds of temper and understanding in great abundance, it does not follow, that she always produces them in like proportions, and that in every society the ingredients of industry and indolence, valour and cowardice, humanity and brutality, wisdom and folly, will be mixed after the same manner.146

This specificity of attributes was often associated with climate. Hume mentioned it in his

essay but it was Montesquieu who was most often associated with this theory. According

to him, the temper depended on the hot or cold climate in which a man lived, and weather

had a big influence on his everyday decisions. When talking about eastern countries,

Montesquieu linked the context of the climate with an attachment to traditions.

If to that delicacy of organs which renders the eastern nations so susceptible of every impression, you add likewise a sort of indolence of mind, naturally connected with that of the body, by means of which they grow incapable of any exertion or effort; it is easy to comprehend,

that when once the soul has received an impression she cannot change it. This is the reason that the laws, manners, and customs, even those which seem quite indifferent, such as their mode of dress are the same to this very day in eastern countries as they were a thousand years ago.147

The attachment to specific elements of appearance as well as elements of social life was

also a common reflection of travellers. They closely observed the national character of

the Poles and the particular elements that had formed it – for example a national dress,

emphasizing Sarmatian roots, attitude towards tolerance and religion. It has to be

emphasized that only an upper class was perceived as one with a specific character. The

rest of the society, especially the peasants, did not have much to offer, that is why they

could not express their being in particular ways.

Connor about the essence from the times before the partitions Connor rejected the

theory of Montesquieu that climate formed the characters of people. He stated that the

Poles were very lively, strong and they lived long, in opposition to their neighbours –

Russians, Germans and Swedes. According to Connor, it was not climate but other

elements that helped Polish people to be vigorous. The reasons for the Polish character

were found in their diet, drinking, a way of life that was not luxurious, hunting,

exercising and most importantly, freedom: “Their health, vigour, and vivacity may

reasonably be augmented by their great freedom and privileges; for where slavery

hebetates and blunts the mind, and consequently enervates the body, liberty exhilerates

the one, and by that means strengthens the other”148. Connor was an agent of the

Enlightenment due to his belief in the importance of liberty in man's life. He was also an

optimist, when writing about Poland, as he did not predict a negative future for Poland.

He presented the character of the Poles as mainly positive. He also described the outfit of

Polish nobles. Its description became an important part of the story of each traveller,

exhibiting the essence transferred through costume.

The Polish men cut their hair about their ears like monks, as I observ'd in the first volume of this history. They raze away all the hair from their faces, leaving only one large whisker. They walk gravely with a poll-ax in their hands, and a sabre by their sides, which they never put off but when they go to bed. This sabre hangs by a strap of leather, to which is also fastened a handkercheif, a knife and sheath, and a small stone set in silver to whet their knife upon. They wash their faces and necks every morning in cold-water, and the fathers are accustom'd to make their children to wash themselves as soon as they are stirring, even in the

sharpest weather.149

Connor noticed that the outfit varied from those of different countries. Polish costumes

were usually inspired by the alleged ancestors of the Polish nobles, the Sarmatians. The

nobles believed in their aristocratic roots of Sarmatian ancestry from centuries before. In

order to express the apparent similarity, they adopted the fashion that distinguished them

from other nations and that expressed the distinctive elements, such as a shaved head and

moustache. The travellers, Connor among them, did not compliment the nobility on their

behaviour or their bravery. Contrary, they usually blamed them for the calamities of the

country. Therefore, the aristocracy did not behave as Sarmatians but only pretended to be

like them on the surface. The Polish essence was very superficial and, in fact, was

expressed only in a traditional dress.

Marshall on luxury and religion Marshall, when describing the character of the Poles,

focused his attention on foreign influences in fashion and lifestyle. He was invited for

dinner by one of the nobles in Gdansk. When visiting his house Marshall thoroughly

examined the interior as well as the family.

He has a large and convenient house, well furnished, and much in the English manner. His wife is an agreeable, sensible woman, a native of Silesia, who talked politicks incessantly […]. Their daughter, who entertained me on the harpsichord, Dantzick being pretty well supplid with musicians from Germany. Mr. Pratsky lives elegantly, but in the German manner, which is all the taste there: they sit long at their meals, and drink very heartily […]. Miss Pratsky, and other ladies I saw, aim in

their dress, I observed, at an imitation of the French taste.150

At Pratsky's family mansion, Marshall noticed many influences from abroad. The house

was decorated in an English way, this may have been the fashion at the time, as it was

also observed by Coxe in a different place.151 Gdansk, as a main merchant city in

Poland, was inhabited by many Germans. Hence, at Pratsky's, the German lifestyle

overruled the Polish ways and even entertainment, a song played by a daughter, was

probably the result of lessons with German musicians. The French fashion among women

was typical in many European countries, nevertheless, having outfits as such must have

been expensive. Using their wealth, the nobility indulged themselves in decorations and

goods imported from abroad. Their houses were examples of good taste, fine pieces of art

and foreign fashion. The nobility lived luxuriously, in order to express their aristocratic

origin. Although the times were difficult for most of the population, the fashion for

opulence and living beyond their means ruled in the minds of the nobility.

Not only Marshall, but also Coxe and Wraxall paid attention to this phenomenon.

Both of the latter visited aristocratic mansions and came to the same conclusions of

splendour. Similarly, the castle of the king in Warsaw was described by them as a place

strongly influenced by the English and French fashion. For them, two realities of

lifestyle, of nobility and peasants, created an opposition that found its place in the cities.

According to Coxe: “The whole town has a melancholy appearance, exhibiting that

strong contrast of wealth and poverty, luxury and distress, which pervades every part of

this unhappy country.”152 Wraxall shared this observation: “Many of the great families

continue to live in a style almost royal, amidst the ruins of their expiring country.”153

The upper class was criticized for focusing only on their wealth instead of the problems

of the failing country.

Despite their fascination for foreign objects, the Poles were not very keen on

people of different faiths. Although dissenters faced difficulties over the whole of Europe,

the split in faith in Poland led to the civil war. Marshall considered this, and the lack of

commerce, as the two main reasons for the ruin of the country.

Poland is divided into two grand parties, the Roman Catholicks, and the Protestants and Greeks. The former, for some ages past, have omitted (as has been the case in every country of Europe) no opportunities of oppressing the latter, and depriving them of that religious liberty to which they have a right by the constitution of the kingdom. A civil war immediately commenced. […] The success of the war was at first various; but every where the effect of it was destroying and plundering each other's estates, and utterly ruining a considerable part of the

kingdom.154

The Catholic priests could not accept the existence of Protestants and Greeks, expressing

therefore their very unchristian intolerance. The clergy, due to collaboration with the

nobility, possessed many privileges that they did not want to loose. The struggle for the

basic rights in the country caused the most problems to ordinary people, who could not

protect themselves nor flee the country in pursuit of protection abroad. The conflict once

again expressed the peculiar character of the Polish upper class. They formed alliances

with the clergy and fought fiercely in order to protect their power. Yet, they never decided

to battle for the felicity of their country and its citizens. It can be concluded that the

Polish essence at the time consisted more of political privileges and wealth than any

virtues.

Wraxall on Sarmatian traditions A strong Polish belief in Sarmatian roots was depicted

most of all in Wraxall's accounts. He returned at least three times to the issue of an outfit

that meant to represent a specific character of the Poles. By doing so, the traveller added

value to the costume that was an essential element of every respectable noble's

appearance. Wraxall's portrayal of the outfit was very similar to Connor's:

His head, which he shaves, is covered with a large fur bonnet. He wears a sort of hussar's dress, with long hanging sleeves, a sabre that reaches to the ground, and boots. His enormous moustachios complete the fierce singularity of his figure, and remind us of his Sarmatian origin.155

Both men focused their attention on shaved heads, moustaches and sabres at the side.

As opposed to Connor, for Wraxall the Polish appearance was displeasing and

harsh. Presumably, he recognized that the outfit was only a part of the Sarmatian role and

had nothing to do with the behaviour of the nobility. Among many accounts, in which

Wraxall stated the lack of virtue among the aristocracy, there was one specific that proved

the theory about Wraxall being able to see through the exterior appearance of the nobles.

The traveller mentioned the corruption of manners when telling a story about a Polish

lady Madam Zanguska. She was only twenty four years old and was already planning a

divorce. This was openly done in the presence of her husband and another lady, who was,

also openly, his mistress. Three people lived together in one house, in perfect relations.

Wraxall found this story disgraceful and the nobles immoral. This confirmed the theory

that Wraxall disapproved of the gentry's lifestyle so much that even their perfect

appearance did not persuade him to change his mind.

The author seems to have agreed with Montesquieu on his theory about the never

changing habits of some nations.

The Portugueze, the Russians, and the Neapolitan, are now no longer distinguishable from each other, and all the former originality of garb, which discriminated one nation from another, is lost. The Poles alone, who have survived their independence, have nevertheless tenaciously preserved their former habit, which hitherto the Russians have not attempted to compel them to renounce. A 'Piast,' or a gentleman, thus clothed, presents a striking contrast to those of every other country.156

As mentioned, for the Poles the outfit represented their connection with the ancient

Sarmatians. As the Sarmatians were virtuous and good warriors, the Polish nobles saw

them as role models. However, as their vices and corruption did not let them lead a

similar lifestyle, the nobility decided to express the Sarmatian tradition through very

visible elements, such as an outfit and preaching prominent slogans about their origin.

Coxe also noticed an attachment to the garment. When he met king Stanislaw August

Poniatowski for the first time, he noticed that he was dressed in modern clothes instead of

a national costume. Coxe stated that many modern gentlemen have decided to follow the

fashion of the ruler, but he also found many opponents to this idea.

The natives in general are so attached to this dress, that in the diet of convocation which assembled previous to the election of his present majesty, it was proposed to insert in the Pacta Conventa an article, whereby the king should be obliged to wear the Polish garment: but this motion was over-ruled.157

The creation of the Sarmatian identity, that in fact expressed only in the dress, was so

important for the aristocracy that they even wanted to change legislation. This exhibits

the nobility's attachment to superficial elements and representations. Yet, their tactic of

expressing Sarmatian attitudes was not consistent. The nobility indulged themselves with

modern foreign fashions and influences that did not support the image of an ancient

Sarmata. It was in fact only their formal dress that expressed alleged connection,

something that proves the point that aristocrats were very superficial and ignorant to

believe that an outfit will add to their character. Their own appearance was more

important than the appearance of their country that, on the European arena, was slowly

losing its ability.

Coxe on the relationships with the Jews The issue of race and tolerance also arose in the

case of the Jews inhabiting Poland in the eighteenth century. The Jews constituted a big

part of society and each traveller mentioned their existence on the Polish territories,

assigning them the role of maintaining commerce. Coxe referred to the Jews for the first

time when reporting his trips between the cities. According to the traveller, the only

accommodation on the road was provided by Jews. They owned the inns or offered their

own houses as places of rest, in exchange for money. The places were usually neglected,

not furnished and not prepared for the role of an inn. In spite of this condition, the Jews

were the only people who offered a place to stay for the travellers, so the visitors were

forced to pay them for lodging. The persistence of the Jews led them to monopolise the

domain of travelling and eventually most of the trade. This persistence was noticed also

by Wraxall. He described the Jews as strong people who, despite the inconveniences of

their fate, remain in the country and work for their success.

Warsaw is likewise crowded with Jews, who form a considerable proportion of the inhabitants. They wear a distinguishing dress, and derive a very precarious subsistence from the arts of fraudulent commerce, most of them being extremely poor. From time to time they are plundered, exiled, imprisoned, and massacred: yet, under such accumulated vexations, they continually multiply, and are here found in

far greater numbers than even at Amsterdam.158

The fact that there was such a great number of Jews in Poland was surprising for the

travellers. They could not understand the tolerance that the Poles had for them. The

nobles were usually very self-centred. In the religious civil war they, together with the

clergy, had already expressed their dislike to people of a different religious or political

belief. Theoretically, Jews should have been treated with a similar aversion. Nonetheless,

the Jews turned out to be a convenient tool for the nobility in preserving their wealth. The

relation between the two groups was thus mutual. The Jews undertook the trade and

commerce, which enriched the nobility, while enjoying many privileges obtained from

the Diet.

The privileges of the Jews were associated by Wraxall with the story of Ester who

was meant to be a mistress of one of the Polish kings, Casimir the Great. The king was

very much in love with her so he gave privileges to all the Jews. Her tomb was erected in

the gardens, near the palace in Cracow, reminding the travellers about this story. Yet Coxe

believed more in the political awareness of the king than his sentiments.

But when I consider the character of Casimir, I conceive that they [Jews] were indebted for their favourable reception in Poland more to his policy than to his affection for his mistress; for in those times the Jews were the richest and most commercial individuals in Europe; by allowing them therefore to settle in Poland, and by granting them some extraordinary immunities, he introduced trade and much wealth into his

dominions.159

Coxe was sure that Casimir knew that by granting rights to the Jews he could use their

trading skills in developing the situation of his country. Indeed, most of the trade was

owed to the foreigners and the Jews. The travellers, believing in the power of commerce

in gaining liberty, praised the Jews and compared them to the Polish people; the first

cared more about Poland than its own natives.

Jews owe the numerous privileges enjoyed by them in Poland, which is called the paradise of the Jews. [...] The number of Jews is now prodigious, and they have in a manner engrossed all the commerce of

the country; yet this flourishing state of affairs must not be attributed solely to the edicts of Casimir in their favour, but to the industry of those extraordinary people, to the indolence of the gentry, and

oppressed condition of the peasants.160

Apart from obvious advantages proceeding from the hard-working nature of the

Jews, they also paid taxes to the king that enriched the royal deposit. Among other

travellers, Connor mentioned the issue of taxes the most often, showing how important

this revenue was for the state.

The Jews are every where to be found in Poland, and enjoy their religion, and other privileges, without interruption; only they are restrain'd from trading within twelve leagues of Warsaw, by the constitutions. Their number is so great […] that there are above two millions of them in this kingdom, and that they are so privileg'd, that all this vast body pays not above a hundred and twenty thousand tinfes or florens a year to the states; which amounts to no more than twenty thousand dollars.161

Out of all the social classes in Poland, Jews were the most profitable of them all. The

nobility did not pay any taxes to the king. The peasants did but very often were not able

to give large amount of money due to their poverty. Therefore, the numerous Jews, when

most of them dealt with commerce and circulation of money, were able to increase

Poland's national income. It can be assumed, that it was important for the aristocracy as

well as the king to prevent the privileges of the Jews, in order to keep the profits coming.

Still, it is unusual that the conflicts between the clergy and other religious believers were

so fierce while the Jews were fully acknowledged in the country. Good relationships with

the Jews were bringing the upper class many benefits, so it seems that the clergy also had

to accept their existence in the Polish territories. Once again, the nobility along with the

clergy proved to be hypocritical. They persecuted other faiths but tolerated Jews due to

their profitability.

4.3. Slavery

Slavery in the historical British context can be examined in two ways. Firstly, it

can be investigated with the emphasis on the colonialism era and the events that

followed. Secondly, it can be understood paying attention to the processes that preceded

it; namely what had driven the British to create an empire. For the purpose of this paper,

the second question is more interesting. Although the British did not conquer Poland or

Eastern Europe, their intellectual conquest indeed took place there.

In the eighteenth century in England progress was associated with English

superiority. The British economy and political state, enforced mainly by colonialism and

slavery, were an example to many other European countries. These successes in different

fields strengthened British self-confidence. In the mid-nineteenth century, a French

aristocrat Arthur de Gobineau wrote an introduction to his book An Essay on the

Inequality of the Human Races, in which he proposed a philosophical basis for British

opinions on their superiority of the eighteenth century.

I was gradually penetrated by the conviction that the racial question overshadows all other problems of history, that it holds the key to them all, and that the inequality of the races from whose fusion a people is formed is enough to explain the whole course of its destiny. […] Thus, to take an example, a new era of power was opened for Great Britain by

the Anglo-Saxon invasion […] two branches of the same nation under the sceptre of a single house – a house that can trace its glorious title to the dim sources of the heroic nation itself. [...] By this method I convinced myself at last that everything great, noble, and fruitful in the works of man on this earth, in science, art, and civilization, derives from a single starting-point, is the development of a single germ and the result of a single thought; it belongs to one family alone, the different branches of which have reigned in all the civilized countries of the universe.162

Gobineau adopted a very simplistic point of view. He believed that all the successes and

failures of society can be associated with a specific race. Therefore, the British owed their

prosperity to their ancestors, just as Eastern Europeans owed their failures to theirs. This

strong belief in the importance of an origin, led the British to treat the colonised tribes as

lower people and ascribed them an inferior role in society.

Slavery was justified by the British as well as by the most famous representatives

of the Enlightenment. Hobbes in Leviathan explained that society must be ruled by an

absolute monarch. In his opinion, people feel a constant need for power that has to be

fulfilled: “A generall inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restlesse desire of power

after power, that ceaseth onely in Death”.163 Hobbes suggested that the quest for power

is natural and has to be satisfied. Colonizers in the Enlightenment could have understood

this passage as a justification for their striving of new lands and people; they could have

explained their negative actions as natural qualities or even virtues.

John Locke studied human nature and knowledge with reference to diversity. For

his sources he used many travel accounts and was the spokesman of toleration.

For Locke, the acknowledgment of diversity was not only an outcome of the investigation, but a methodological principle of the investigation

itself, set in place at the start. Thus we can see the logic behind scouring travel accounts, his efforts in the realm of natural philosophy, and his eventual production of Book I of the Essay. The outcome was a distinctive and influential, although hotly disputed, version of the natural history of man, one which confirmed the inescapable and apparently irreducible fact of diversity.164

Apart from his philosophical toleration, Locke also possessed shares in The Royal Africa

Company – the company that was responsible for the slave trade to England in the

seventeenth century. The philosophers of the Enlightenment had double standards in

regard to slavery. They were definitely opposed to intellectual, political and economic

slavery in 'civilized' countries. Yet, when the colonialism in Britain was bringing profits

they simply justified it.

Among all the philosophers, Hume is the most controversial, due to the footnote

added to his essay “Of National Characters”:

I am apt to suspect the negroes, and in general all the other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences.165

Contemporary scholars still try to restore the position of Hume in the philosophy of the

Enlightenment. They use arguments of an anachronistic understanding of his words and

try to depict him as an open and tolerant man. Nevertheless, his words in the essay were

definitely racist and it is important to focus on their possible impact on the society at the

time. Hume's words could have been of great influence for his contemporaries. They not

only justified the inferior treatment of Blacks but also showed that there were a few types

of mankind. This could have led to different interpretations, again justifying various types

of subjugation. Larry Wolff concluded in favour of indecision in the philosophers' beliefs,

providing the example of Richardson who travelled to Russia, who was also uncertain

which stance he should choose on the question of slavery. “The Enlightenment in general

was subject to ambivalence on the subject of slavery, wherever it occurred, and his

hesitation over emancipation was only typical of the times.”166

For Wolff slavery was another element enabling one to distinguish the two parts

of Europe from each other. The travellers represented Poland as an enslaved country. The

examples of slavery were usually associated with ancient events, never with the

contemporary history of slavery in England. This subjective representation corresponds to

Wolff's theory: “The association between backwardness and slavery was important for

establishing the relative distinction of civilization in Western Europe and Eastern Europe;

it complemented the association of slavery and despotism, which quite broadly

encompassed both Eastern Europe and the Orient.”167 Indeed, there were different types

of oppression in Poland but they were all described by the travellers only in the context of

Poland itself. They did not refer to British history, so intertwined with African trade and

issues of slavery. This exposes the Western agenda of superiority that emphasized the

negative elements of the country without relating them to other, very present

circumstances.

4.4. Slavery in Poland

In the Oxford English Dictionary one of the definitions of the word 'slave' is as

follows: “One who is the property of, and entirely subject to, another person, whether by

capture, purchase, or birth; a servant completely divested of freedom and personal

rights.”168 This definition corresponds to the situation of the Polish peasants in the

eighteenth century. Wraxall noticed that peasants were indeed a property of their owner

and could be easily sold. “They constitute indeed a part of the estate, as in Russia, and are

sold or transferred with the land.”169 Moreover, the fact of the Polish peasants being

deprived of any rights is unquestionable. Therefore, the Polish peasants relate to the

general definition of a 'slave'. Still more interesting is the information about the

etymology of this word:

Old French esclave (also modern French), sometimes feminine corresponding to the masculine esclaf , esclas (plural esclaz , esclauz , esclos , etc.) [...] the Slavonic population in parts of central Europe having been reduced to a servile condition by conquest; the transferred sense is clearly evidenced in documents of the 9th century. The form with initial scl- is also represented by older German schlav(e, sclav(e, German sklave. In English the reduction of scl- to sl- is normal, and the other Germanic languages show corresponding forms, as West Frisian slaef, North Frisian slaaw, Middle Dutch slave, slaef (Dutch slaaf), Middle Low German and Low German slave (hence Danish and Norwegian slave), older German slaf(e, Swedish slaf). The history of the words representing slave and Slav in late Greek, medieval Latin, and German, is very fully traced in Grimm's Deutsches Wörterbuch s.v. Sklave.170

The word 'slave' therefore derives from 'Slav' – characterising a group of people

originating from the same race, inhabiting lands of eastern Europe. According to the

etymology, the association was already made in the ninth century. The travellers, almost

ten centuries later, were at ease in describing the Poles as slaves. Was it only due to

historical word associations or was Poland indeed an enslaved country?

Nobility and the peasants When writing about slavery in Poland most of the time the

travellers associated it with the relationship between the nobility and the peasants. As the

feudal system prevailed in the country, the aristocracy remained in a superior role

towards their vassals. Moreover, the upper class did not recognize the aim of respecting

their subjects, in order to improve their own economic situation. On the contrary, the

nobility used their power only to diminish the peasants.

The travellers, informed by an experience of colonialism, compared the situation

in Poland with the situation of the slaves from America. They observed that the nobility

created themselves as those who have a special essence or character that led them to

diminish other people, in this case the peasants. The men treated their subjects only as

machines for creating wealth and were not interested in their humanity. The serfs were

treated like animals without intellectual capacity and ability to decide for themselves.

Although slavery in England was universally accepted, the image of the exploited Polish

people resulted in strong criticism for the upper class. The use of similar words and

expressions exhibit the unanimity of the travellers' opinions. According to Connor: “The

vassals, who are no better than slaves to the gentry, for they have no benefit of the laws,

can buy no estates, nor enjoy any property no more than our negroes in the West-Indies

can.”171 Marshall used exactly the same comparison with the slaves of the West-Indies

in a statement – “But the personal service, in which the lower ranks of Poland are kept, is

a mere slavery, such a despotism as the planters in the West-Indies use over their African

slaves.”172 Coxe referred to the inferior position of peasants without comparing them to

the American or African slaves – “The generality, indeed, of the Polish nobles are not

inclined either to establish or give efficacy to any regulations in favour of the peasants,

whom they scarcely consider as entitled to the common rights of humanity.”173

Elsewhere, he emphasized the intellectual association that nobility made between

servants and the farm animals – “The peasants in Poland, as in all feudal governments,

are serfs or slaves; and the value of an estate is not estimated so much from its extent, as

from the number of its peasants, who are transferred from one master to another like so

many head of cattle.”174 The general representation of gentry and peasants in the

travellers' accounts suggests the cruelty of one national towards another.

The reference to the slaves of the West-Indies was easy to make for the travellers

as the colonisation of this region was an important moment in British history. But it was

not a new event because the colonisation of the central part of America had already

started in the sixteenth century. The travellers therefore chose to compare modern Poland

with events from the past. Also David Hume had decided to raise the issue of slavery in

Poland and compared the country to the people of Gaul from centuries before. “The

Gauls had no domestic slaves, who formed a different order from the Plebes. The whole

common people were indeed a kind of slaves to the nobility, as the people of Poland are

at this day.”175 Travellers and philosophers also tended to compare European feudalism

from the eleventh century to the state of affairs in Poland in the eighteenth century. All

these examples show that travellers as well as philosophers, when depicting Poland, were

constantly emphasizing its backwardness and slow development.

Connor and Coxe were the only two travellers who hesitated in forwarding a

negative opinion about the aristocracy. Within twenty pages, Connor wrote alternatively

about the vices and virtues of the upper class. Especially when describing the situation of

the peasants, Connor contradicted himself a few times. At one point, he was extremely

proud that, though the nobility had the power of life and death over their subjects, they

did not use it. Later, Connor discovered the reasons for such a state.

Yet the Poles say, that though they have an absolute power over them, they seldom make use of it any more than other Christians do over their dogs or horses. Strange comparison! As if they spar'd the poor peoples lives rather out of self-interest, than charity; and by reason that they

thought they would be more serviceable to them living than dead.176

The reasons for maintaining the peasants on their lands were certainly not noble but

originated only from the need to profit. Despite that, making a decision about placing the

nobles on the side of the victims or the winners was difficult for Connor. At the time of

his residence in Poland, the political situation was only just starting to decline. Therefore,

Connor had already started to notice the faults of the countrymen. The history of the

country from and before the seventeenth century was mainly positive, thus it was difficult

for Connor to adopt a pessimistic attitude towards Polish matters. Likewise, Coxe had

difficulties in judging the reality of Poland, although already sunk in the partitions. Coxe

was very critical of the nobles, but when visiting their houses he was always full of praise

and approval. It seems as if every time Coxe was surrounded by luxury, he forgot all his

previous opinions. The people he was visiting were usually aristocrats who did not

harshly manifest their power over the peasants. Nevertheless, Coxe could have been more

aware of their neglect and ignorance towards the matters of the country.

Despite the majority of peasantry being affected by the ill treatment of the

nobility, the travellers also noticed in a few situations the protectors of the lower class.

Marshall noticed it firstly in Konigsberg where the peasants were paying very heavy

taxes to the king. However, these taxes were regular and calculated proportionally.

According to Marshall, this policy of gaining money from the workers brought profits to

the nobility as well as peace to the peasants. In Poland, servants usually did not know

when they would have to pay their share, so their everyday expenses could not have been

controlled. Further, on the road to Warsaw, Marshall met a noble who treated his subjects

with respect and was taking care of them. The people were happier and not so afraid,

therefore the man's profits were also greater. Coxe related to this mutual relationship

between the two classes by giving an example of the Enlightened idea of commerce being

followed by improvement.

A few nobles, however, of benevolent hearts and enlightened principles, have ventured upon the expedient of giving liberty to their vassals. The event has showed this project to be no less judicious than humane, no less friendly to their own interests than to the happiness of their peasants: for it appears that in the districts, in which the new arrangement has been introduced, the population of their villages is considerably increased, and the revenues of their estates augmented in a

triple proportion.177

The traveller described in detail the cases of a few noblemen who decided to free their

peasants. He compared their revenues from before the event and after, creating almost a

scientific chart with statistics about the situation.178 By showing the growth of an

income, Coxe suggested that freedom is good for economy and general progress. He

focused a lot on this phenomenon, in order to persuade other nationals to follow the

example of these few virtuous men.

The nobility and politics The nobility expressed their superiority not only to the peasants.

After the death of king Zygmunt II, the nobles voted for an elective crown and many

privileges for the members of the diet. This resulted in establishing the general collection

of legislation called the Pacta Conventa. It was meant to help in the determining a new

king but, in fact, it consisted mainly of privileges bestowed on to the aristocracy. The

upper class ruled against the law and necessities of the citizens. Along with increased

power, these men established another law called 'Liberum Veto'. Due to this law, any

member of a diet could break the session if he did not agree with any part of the

deliberations. This led the members to accept bribes from foreign rulers who wanted to

manipulate Polish affairs by not letting the resolutions be passed. The corruption in the

Polish diet was so widespread that even in the times of the first partition the foreign

powers managed to persuade many senators into accepting the political dismemberment

of the country. The government was infected by the worse vices and was thus considered

by the travellers as the source of the Polish defeat:

A kingdom, so lately the master or protector of its neighbours, would never have been so readily overwhelmed by them, without the most glaring imperfections in its government. Poland, in truth, formerly more powerful than any of the surrounding estates, has, from the defects of

its constitution, declined in the midst of general improvement.179

It seems like Coxe suggested that Poland was not considered as a wretched country until

the recent changes in the management of the state. Poland was on the way to the 'general

improvement' that was interrupted by the misrule of the aristocracy.

The nobility was so confident about their actions that they habitually opposed the

people as well as the king. Connor described this monopoly of power as an example of

the demand that Zygmunt II once presented to the nobles. He wanted to give part of the

land to the family member but the diet fiercely opposed this idea. This and many other

examples showed that the nobles had an interest in limiting the king in power and that

was done in order to establish an aristocratic monarchy.

Thus it appears, that, from the times of Louis to the present period, the nobles have continued without interruption to diminish the regal authority, and to augment their own privileges. Many of the concessions which they obtained from the sovereigns of the Jaghellon line, were just and reasonable, and aimed only at an equitable degree of freedom. When, however, an absolute right to dispose of so tempting opportunities of prescribing unconditional terms to every candidate for the throne, they were no longer content with that equal distribution of power, which is the excellence of a limited monarchy; but aspired to

and nearly attained a direct aristocracy under a regal title and form.180

Led only by their own greed, the nobility drastically changed the fate of a whole country.

They simply became the slaves of possessing power, whereby Poland became their slave.

Foreigners and Poland The plan of the appropriation of the Polish territories matured

over many years. The perfect situation occurred with the death of August III when the

crown became elective. Catherine the Great together with Frederic II and Joseph II

agreed on a plan to dismember the country and share its territories. When Catherine

raised to the throne her acquaintance, and a former lover, Stanislaw August Poniatowski,

his countrymen were displeased. Frederic II, through secret propaganda, set the nobility

against their new sovereign. This gave the invaders the opportunity to place their troops

on Polish territory for protection. “His insinuations were successful; and Poland soon

became a theatre of civil war, of insurrection, and devastation.”181 With all of these

internal calamities it was only a matter of time before Russia, Prussia and Austria signed

the agreement on the first partition in 1772. Polish nationals were not able to withstand

the crisis, and soon after, in 1792, they had to face the second partition by seizure of

lands. Poland was a servant to its neighbours for a few years but the third partition, in

1795, made the country a true slave to the three powers, for the next 123 years.

Out of the three invaders it was Russia that was considered by the travellers as the

most authoritarian one. The Empress was regarded as a despotic ruler and her decisions,

concerning foreign policies, were ruthless. When visiting the Russian province, Marshall

noticed that this area was the poorest one. Almost all the indigenous people were

deported to Russia to become vassals to Catherine and they were replaced by Russian

troops.182 Coxe too noticed a great number of soldiers and he speculated that their

number might exceed the Polish troops.

The whole kingdom is entirely under the protection, or, in other words, under the power of Russia, who rules over it with the same unbounded authority as over one of its provinces. […] In a word, the Russian troops hold the nobles in subjection, and for the present keep under internal feuds and commotions. […] and to what a wretched state is that country reduced, which owes its tranquility to the interposition of a

foreign army!183

The country was under foreign protection, something that did not answer the Polish

needs. On the contrary, the protection was, in fact, meant to prevent any kind of uprising;

the people were kept under surveillance. The situation was getting worse and more

dangerous with some Russians constituting 'mafia' groups, protecting “the most atrocious

delinquents for money”.184 The Russian province was ruined, vicious and the most

degenerated.

Poland was in an obvious state of slavery to the three powers but also found itself

as a slave by the indifference of the rest of the European countries. Especially England

and France, driven by the ideals of an Enlightened freedom, were the desired allies in the

struggle for independence. The nations were more passive than expected. “The courts of

London, Paris, Stockholm, and Copenhagen, remonstrated against the usurpations; but

remonstrances without assistance could be of no effect.”185 Poland was not considered

by them as an essential player in European politics, especially considering its poor

situation during the partitions. That is why the countries found no benefit in helping

Poland. Poland did not have resources, means and allies to overcome the difficulties, so

its only fate was enslavement. The Enlightened slogans about freedom once again turned

out to be mere words without meaning.

Catherine the Great and Stanislaw August Poniatowski The political efforts of the

Polish king were described by the travellers usually with words like 'neutral', 'passive' and

'without authority'. As it was Catherine who placed him on the throne for various,

personal and political reasons, Stanislaw agreed to be a pawn in the hands of the

invaders. All of the travellers noticed the sovereign's charm and it seemed like the charm

influenced Marshall and Wraxall most of all. Both men agreed that Stanislaw did not

have the ability to be a king but they also depicted him as a victim of foreign conspiracy.

Wraxall stated that Stanislaw had no choice but to surrender the country to Russia, as he

did not have any supporters among the citizens. Such a statement, if true, would exhibit

Stanislaw's lack of virtues – virtues generally needed for a sovereign to be successful in

politics. Moreover, Marshall called the king a patriot. “His Majesty is certainly a man of

quick parts, and has a truly patriotic concern for the miseries of his kingdom, which he is

utterly unable to prevent: the state, in which he lives is a regular court, which the

republick maintains for all its kings.”186 Marshall's opinion about Stanislaw's patriotism

was very much mistaken, as proven by the king's passiveness. Moreover, the use of the

word 'unable to prevent' once again emphasizes the sovereign's unpreparedness for his

role as king.

Although very fond of the king, Coxe described him without sentiments. “The

king, without influence, and consequently without a shadow of authority […] the

unfortunate monarch.”187 Stanislaw resembled more “the chief of a commonwealth, than

the sovereign of a powerful monarchy.”188 The king was only a hopeless spectator in the

events that were taking place in his country. He accepted the double role of sovereign of

Poland and emissary of Russia. He agreed to be the slave of Catherine but, presumably,

when doing so, he did not expect the immediate catastrophe that happened to the Polish

people.

4.5. Depopulation and ruin

Although it could have been easy for travellers to use the term 'slavery' for Slavic

people because of the connection of these two words, Poland in the eighteenth century

was indeed enslaved in every possible way. There was an external slavery, examples of

which were mentioned before. Of importance was also the slavery of the Polish people –

to their own essence and national character. “Another Polish historian of a great note, the

celebrated Stanislaus Lubienski bishop of Plotsko, justly contends that the Poles, free as

they pretend to be, are absolutely in a state of slavery, to which they have been reduced

by an inconsiderate passion for liberty.”189 The bishop blamed the oppressed state of the

country not on others, but on the Poles themselves. It was their attachment to supposed

liberties and privileges that led Poland to destruction.

The decline was visible at every step. Especially in between the cities and towns,

travellers often struggled to find a place to stay or even inhabitants' settlements to spot.

The country was almost empty and all the households encountered were in ruin.

Through a country that had hardly any appearance of present cultivation; many villages I passed were deserted, several mansions in ruins, and fields entirely waste that had once been tilled; the whole a very melancholy spectacle; but much of the country was partly marsh

and forest.190

Marshall noticed the same image of abandonment all the way from Gdansk to Warsaw.

He saw empty lands, burnt villages and destroyed houses with poor people. Marshall

found the worse situation to be in the South, where nine tenths of the area was fully

destroyed.191 Wraxall and Coxe shared the same opinion as Marshall about the

valuelessness of the lands in between Cracow and Warsaw. According to Wraxall, “No

tract of country in Europe can offer fewer objects of information, curiosity, or

amusement, in the common acceptation of the terms, than that which extends from the

gates of Cracow to the suburbs of Warsaw.”192 Coxe used almost exactly the same

description in his accounts.

I never saw a road so barren of interesting scenes as that from Cracow to Warsaw; there is not a single object throughout the whole tract, which can for a moment draw the attention of the most inquisitive traveller. [...] Though in the high road, which unites Cracow and Warsaw, in the course of about 258 English miles, we met in our progress only two carriages and about a dozen carts. The country was

equally thin of human habitations.193

The state of the Polish land was tragic. Moreover, this image definitely reinforced the

backward representation that had long been suspected by the travellers.

Nor were the cities an example of splendour and development. Wraxall's second

visit to Poland, four years after the first one, varied in his experiences. He noticed a great

many differences in the city of Gdansk that had changed so much, it did not resemble its

state from years before. “It is evidently much declined in population, industry, and riches,

since I last visited it, only four years ago.”194 Cracow was also described by Wraxall and

Coxe as a deserted city that had once been a flourishing capital of the kings, and how it

now barely existed. When describing Cracow, Coxe again referred to ancient history,

comparing the city to the ruins of old and majestic settlements. ”In a word, Cracow

exhibits the remains of ancient magnificence, and looks like a great capital in ruins.”195

This is another example of travellers associating Poland with archaic history.

All the hope was located in the capital of Poland – Warsaw. Usually, visiting other

countries, travellers also encountered poverty and decline in the lands, but the capitals

were always an exception. Warsaw was a surprise for its visitors. According to the

travellers it did not look like a city but more like a village. It was missing the splendour

and luxury usually associated with the residence of the kings. The city was neglected,

without facilities and infrastructure. People lived in awful conditions, amid the stench and

dirt.

As I walk through the streets of Warsaw I continually imagine myself in some scattered and half-ruined village. All the municipal defects of Cracow exist here in a greater degree. […] In a city where there are no lamps in winter, and no precautions taken for general security, any desperate banditti, protected by night, may commit the most atrocious

crimes.196

If the capital, with the power concentrated there, did not even provide examples of

progress, for travellers it was a sign of the total decline of the whole country. This

resulted in a melancholic representation of the state and a reinforcement of the image of

the backward country. One could say that once again Poland was being enslaved – though

this time, to the unchanging and negative representation created by the travellers.

5. Conclusions

The Grand Tour in the eighteenth century brought many advantages. For the

travellers it was the perfect occasion to experience new places and develop oneself. It

also promoted travel literature, a very interesting literary genre for the readers as well as a

source of information for scholars and philosophers. Moreover, travel literature became a

significant historical source for the contemporary scholars. Historians appreciate these

books for their detailed information about the various historical events and

anthropologists value them for an insight into people's lives in the past. Connor, Marshall,

Wraxall and Coxe deserve to be acknowledged by the scholars due to their books that

provide a whole range of information on different parts of Europe. They certainly

enriched the history and anthropology of Poland and often provided a different perception

of traditional matters.

It can be stated that the main reasons for visiting Poland were political reasons

and a curiosity connected with a division between Western and Eastern Europe. Connor

initiated the trips by chance. He suspected that in Poland there was a great interest in the

sciences, so he decided to examine it. Later travellers were influenced by the information

of the growing powers of Russia, Prussia and Austria. As the three countries conducted a

partition of Poland that was a violation of all the noble ideas of the Enlightenment, the

travellers wanted to inspect the situation. They were concerned about the country that

over one hundred years fell into considerable decline. In fact, they were probably more

concerned about the three powers more than Poland. As the latter was slowly losing its

independence, there was not much hope that it would be able to improve its situation over

a short period of time. That is why the travellers (Marshall, Wraxall, Coxe) visited the

countries that were involved in the partition and Poland seemed to be just another step on

the way; a visit to supervise the changes carried out there. Another reason for visiting

Poland was the reinforcement of the division of civilized Western Europe and the

backward East. The travellers wanted to examine this separation and get to know if

indeed Poland was more European or Asian. There are more comparisons of Poland to

western countries, that is why the travellers had agreed on placing Poland within

European borders. The old division suggested that barbarism had its roots in the north of

Europe. In the case of Wraxall (Cursory Remarks) and Coxe they both intellectually

linked Poland (a new barbaric nation) with more norther countries such as Sweden or

Denmark (the old barbaric nations) by visiting both regions within one trip. This is only

one of the many examples showing that indeed, the travellers and philosophers constantly

reinforced the differences between the two parts of Europe.

The fact that the differences between the two countries were continually repeated

could have resulted from the fact that travellers were an experienced people. They were

strongly influenced by English history, culture and traditions. It was natural for them to

compare and often exalt their own country. Moreover, the writers were affected by events

they encountered in others during their journeys. None of them visited Poland at a young

age, without significant knowledge on English state of affairs, and as a first country to be

discovered. That is why the travellers must be forgiven for some of their remarks. Yet, it

is striking that their opinions and beliefs were so unanimous. They were often struggling

with being objective and frequently judged the events without comparing them to the

same events taking place in their home country. The discrepancy in travellers' attitudes

makes it very difficult to state if their opinions were politicized or not. The answer to

such a question could try to be answered in a broader work of that sort.

The most striking elements of the Polish society for all the travellers was

definitely slavery, feudalism and self-confidence of the nobility. Although England had

been dealing with the issue of slavery for two centuries, the Enlightenment affected the

travellers to condemn any sort of subordination in other countries besides England.

Slavery in the west was very well organised. The countries were profiting from the slave

labour and trade of foreign goods. In Poland, slavery reinforced only one class of society,

the aristocracy. Moreover, the slaves in Poland were of the same nationality as their

owners, so the cruelty of one national towards another was inhumane for the travellers.

The Polish economic system, that was mainly based on feudalism, took the

writers back to the Europe of the Middle Ages. It was striking for them to experience the

things they had only read about in books. In Poland the travellers associated the slow

development of the country with the character of the upper class. The economic system

along with the aristocracy and the nearby political changes, created a vicious cycle. The

nobles held all the power in the country and did not let others participate in any

privileges. This led to the absence of important factors in its development like merchants,

cities and technologies. With the lack of these elements, the economy declined with the

nobility enslaving their peasants more and more; in order to obtain more and more

profits. The lack of a progressive sovereign and the loss of independence only accelerated

the downfall of the country. All aforementioned elements resulted in depopulation,

migrations and ruin. It was the nobility's greed that started this unfortunate set of events

in Poland. It seems like the four travellers represent the steps of this downhill journey.

Connor showed the prosperity of the country but also the first flaws that he noticed in the

aristocrats. Over one hundred years, until Marshall's visit, Poland declined until it became

the object of an easy gain for its neighbours. Marshall, and Wraxall soon after, advocated

single remedies to improve the state. Coxe, as the last traveller, focused on all the

possible elements, that could strengthen the country. All of them, influenced by the

Enlightenment's idea of progress, noted different elements that would improve the

situation in Poland; the upper class however was so strong and powerful that it was

impossible to implement any changes in their conduct.

The conclusions for the various, and at the same time similar, visions of Polish

reality are as follows. There was indeed the enforcement of power over Poland. Yet, the

origin of it came from internal problems, namely the authority of the aristocrats. The

problem was noticed by attentive travellers and represented by them as the destructive

issue of Polish society. As the situation in England was more advantageous, Polish events

seemed even more dreadful than they were. The literary representation provided an

opportunity for England to become superior in comparison with Poland. This power was

imposed in an intellectual way, as proven by travellers' accounts and various maps used

before in the text. Moreover, obvious physical power was enforced on Poland by its

neighbours through the partitions. These layers of different types of control and authority

led the country to become the weakest nation out of them all.

The travellers' visits did not influence Poland in any significant way. As it was

mentioned before, the upper class protected the state of affairs and knew that any

improvements to society would only deprive them of their profit, so they strongly

opposed it. The travel literature, founded during trips to Poland, also did not improve the

relationships between England and Poland. By reading this negative representation, the

Polish seemed very ignorant to the English. Moreover, the last partition of 1795 swiped

away Poland from the map of Europe for more than one hundred years, so English-Polish

political relations were no longer possible. Although the image of Poland in English

travel literature was pessimistic, influencing the readers to have a negative opinion about

the county, it was done in accordance with the truth: a reality at that time.

There are a few issues that could not be discussed in this paper, yet, are certainly

interesting starting-points for a broader piece of work. It would be of importance to carry

out separate research on the travellers. It would therefore be easier to establish whether or

not they were influenced in their opinions by any authorities and to what extent they

influenced each other. One topic that seems to be extremely inspiring is the story of

Joseph Marshall. His mysterious past does not allow us to make many conclusions about

his accounts. By obtaining a comprehensive bibliography of Marshall, research on other

connected topics would certainly bring new answers. A fascinating subject, strongly

connected with this work, would be to compare the images of other countries visited by

travellers with those of Poland. The comparison of these various representations would

give a new rich account of how the British perceived the whole of Eastern Europe in the

Enlightenment.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Anville, Bourguignon, Jean-Baptiste. Premiere partie de la Carte d'Europe contenant la

France, l'Alemagne, l'Italie, l'Espagne & les Isles Britanniq(ue)s, 1754. Atlas Map, 79

cm x 36 cm. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. http://bit.ly/1aI8wWZ (accessed

April 15, 2013).

Carey, Mathew. Poland, Shewing the Claims of Russia, Prussia & Austria, 1795. Atlas

map, 32 cm x 37 cm, David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. http://bit.ly/14aR9Ot

(accessed April 15, 2013).

Connor, Bernard. The History of Poland in Several Letters to Persons of Quality.

London, 1698.

Coxe, William. Travels into Poland, Russia, Sweden, and Denmark, interspersed with

historical relations and political inquiries, I. Dublin, 1784.

Dangeau, Abbé. Europe, 1755. Atlas map, 43 cm x 61 cm. David Rumsey Historical Map

Collection. http://bit.ly/Zyism7 (accessed April 15, 2013).

Ferguson, Adam. An Essay on the History of Civil Society. Dublin: Boulter Grierson,

1767.

Gibbon, Edward. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, I, V. London:

Longman, 1848.

Gibson, John and Bowen, Emanuel. Poland. Atlas Minimus or a New Set of Pocket Maps,

1758. Atlas map, 7 cm x 10 cm. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection http://bit.ly/

15jCDDA (accessed April 15, 2013).

Gobineau, Arthur. Dedication in The Inequality of Human Races, translated by Adrian

Collins. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1915.

Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. London: J. M. Dent and Sons, New York: E. P. Dutton &

Co.

Hume, David. “Of National Characters.” In Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects, I.

London: printed for T. Cadell, in the Strand: and A. Donaldson, and W. Creech, at

Edinburgh, 1777.

Kitchin, Thomas. A new map of the Kingdom of Poland with its dismembered provinces,

1787. Atlas map, 48 cm x 66 cm. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. http://bit.ly/

12porvu (accessed April 15, 2013).

Lotter, Tobias Conrad and Lobeck, Tobias. Poloniae Regnum, Ducatusq Magnae

Lithuaniae, 1762. Atlas map, 11 cm x 13 cm. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection.

http://bit.ly/17E4Byc (accessed April 15, 2013).

Marshall, Joseph. Travels through Holland, Flanders, Germany, Denmark, Sweden,

Lapland, Russia, the Ukraine, and Poland, in the years 1768, 1769, and 1770, III.

London, 1772.

Millar, John. The Origin of the Distinction of Ranks. J. J. Tourneisen, 1793.

Montesquieu, Charles. The Spirit of Laws, translated by Thomas Nugent, 6th edition.

London: F. Wingrave, 1793.

Pinkerton, John. Prussian Dominions, 1810. Atlas map, 52 cm x 71 cm. David Rumsey

Map Collection, http://bit.ly/11QCpop (accessed April 15, 2013).

Robertson, William. The History of the Reign of the Emperor Charles the Fifth, edited by

Wilfred Harold Munro. New York: AMS Press, 1968.

Smith, Adam. Lectures on Jurisprudence, edited by R.L. Meek, P.D. Raphael and P.G.

Stein. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990.

Steele, Richard. The Spectator. London: W. Lewis Finch Lane, 1836.

Wraxall, Nathaniel William. Cursory Remarks Made in a Tour Through Some of the

Northern Parts of Europe. London: T. Cadell, 1775.

Wraxall, Nathaniel William. Memoirs of the Courts of Berlin, Dresden, Warsaw, and

Vienna, in the years 1777, 1778, and 1779. London, 1799.

Secondary Sources

“Coxe, William (1748–1828).” Jeremy Knight In Oxford Dictionary of National

Biography, edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online

ed., edited by Lawrence Goldman, May 2009. http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/

6540 (accessed March 7, 2013).

Anderson, M. S. Some British Influences on Russian Intellectual Life and Society in the

18th Century. University College London, 1960.

Batten, Charles. Pleasurable Instruction. From the Convention in the Eighteenth-Century

Travel Literature. London: University of California Press Ltd., 1978.

Black, Jeremy. Maps and Politics. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1997.

Black, Jeremy. The British Abroad. The Grand Tour in the Eighteenth Century. Bath: The

Bath Press, 1992.

Bony, Alain. “De A(ddison) à W(ordsworth) en passant par S(terne): variations sur le

voyage continental au XVIIIe siècle.” In Le Récit de Voyage en Angleterre au XVIIIe

siècle, edited by Jean Viviès. Touluse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail, 1999.

Brenner, Robert. “Economic Backwardness in Eastern Europe in Light of Developments

in the West.” In The Origins of Backwardness in Eastern Europe. Economics and Politics

from the Middle Ages until the early Twentieth Century, edited by Daniel Chirot, 15-38.

University of California Press, 1989.

Bury, J.B. Preface to The Idea of Progress, by Bury J.B. London: MacMillan and Co.,

1921.

Carey, Daniel. Locke, Shaftesbury, and Hutcheson. Contesting diversity in the

Enlightenment and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Chirot, Daniel. The Rise of the West. American Sociological Association, 1985.

Cross, Anthony. “British Residents and Visitors in Russia during the Reign of Catherine

the Great: Tapped and Untapped Sources from British Archives.” In The Study of Russian

History from British Archival Sources, edited by Janet Hartley. London: Mansell

Publishing Limited, 1986.

Hall, Stuart. “The West and the Rest: Discourse and Power.” In Formations of Modernity,

edited by Stuart Hall and Bram Gieben. Oxford: The Open University, 1995.

Harley, Brian John. “Maps, Knowledge, and Power.” In The Iconography of Landscape.

Essays on symbolic representation, design and use of past environments, edited by Denis

Cosgrove, Stevens Daniels. Avon: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Hilton, Rodney. Feudalism and the Origins of Capitalism. Oxford University Press, 1976.

Kidd, Colin. The Forging of Races. Race and Scripture in the Protestant Atlantic World,

1600-2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Marshall, Peter James and Williams, Glyndwr. The Great map of mankind. British

perceptions of the world in the age of Enlightenment. London; Melbourne; Toronto: J.M.

Dent, 1982.

Mewshaw, Michael. Travel, Travel Writing, and the Literature of Travel. The Johns

Hopkins University Press, 2005.

Mikoś, Michael. “Monarchs and Magnates. Maps of Poland in the Sixteenth and

Eighteenth Centuries.” In Monarchs Ministers and Maps. The Emergence of Cartography

as a Tool of Government in Early Modern Europe, edited by David Buisseret. Chicago:

The University of Chicago Press, 2005.

Monmonier, Mark. Comment Faire Mentir les Cartes. Flammarion, 1993.

Nisbet, Robert. History of the Idea of Progress. Auckland: Heineman, 1980.

Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. "slave, n.1 (and adj.)". OED Online. March 2013. Oxford

University Press. http://www.oed.com.rproxy.sc.univ-paris-diderot.fr/view/Entry/

181477?rskey=bSQpBf&result=1&isAdvanced=false (accessed May 30, 2013).

Oxford English Dictionary. S.v. "slave, n.1 (and adj.)." OED Online (March 2013, Oxford

University Press) http://www.oed.com.rproxy.sc.univ-paris-diderot.fr/view/Entry/

181477?rskey=bSQpBf&result=1&isAdvanced=false (accessed May 30, 2013).

Pedley, Sponberg, Mary. The Commerce of Cartography. Making and Marketing Maps in

Eighteenth Century France and England. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,

2005.

Popkin, Richard. “The Philosophical Basis of Eighteenth-Century Racism.” In Studies in

Eighteenth Century Culture. Vol III: Racism in the Eighteenth Century, edited by Harold

Pagliaro. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1973.

Reddaway, W.F. Great Britain and Poland 1962-72. Cambridge University Press, 1934.

Sjoberg, Gideon. Folk and “Feudal” Societies. The University of Chicago Press, 1952.

Spadafora, David. The Idea of Progress in Eighteenth-Century Britain. New Haven,

1990.

Stone, Gerald. “Connor, Bernard (c.1666–1698).” Gerald Stone In Oxford Dictionary of

National Biography, edited by H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP,

2004. Online ed., edited by Lawrence Goldman, January 2008. http://

www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/6086 (accessed June 7, 2013).

Turner, Katherine. “Wraxall, Sir Nathaniel William, first baronet (1751–1831).”

Katherine Turner In Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, edited by H. C. G.

Matthew and Brian Harrison. Oxford: OUP, 2004. Online ed., edited by Lawrence

Goldman, January 2008. http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/30012 (accessed June 7,

2013).

Valls, Andrew. Race and Racism in Modern Philosophy. Ithaca, New York: Cornell

University Press, 2005.

Wheeler, Valerie. Travellers' Tales: Observations on the Travel Book and Ethnography.

The George Washington University Institute for Ethnographic Research, 1986.Knight,

Jeremy.

Whitney, Lois. Primitivism and the Idea of Progress in English Popular Literature of the

eighteenth century. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press, 1934.

Wolff, Larry. Inventing Eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the

Enlightenment. Stanford California: Stanford University Press, 1994.