<論説>コシチューシュコにおける反ナポレオン的行動の基盤

Abstract

一九世紀初頭、ワルシャワ公国成立期にも内外のポーランド人社会に影響力をもったフランス亡命中のコシチューシュコは、いかなる動機でナポレオンに加担しなかったのであろう。自由・共和主義と国民主義が、前半生におけるアメリカ革命や蜂起時代の活躍から強調されてきたが、親ロシア的チャルトリスキ家との全生涯を通じた親交も無視できない。また、後半生にあたるブリュメール一八日以降に結実すると考えてよい民族解放思想や、ツァールへの好意的姿勢も指摘されるべきであろう。本論は、分割前後のポーランド社会に即し、伝統的な地域主義を重視し、彼のワルシャワ公国時代の沈黙と、生涯の最終的段階とみられるウィーン会議前後の政界復帰が前半生の諸側面を定着させたことを明らかにする。その結果、複合的なスラヴ諸民族から構成されていたポーランド共和制王国の再建に対する彼の民族解放思想に注目する必要と、パン・スラヴ主義の形成におよぼした彼の積極約な役割をば、その全体像に賦与できないものかが問われよう。

On the eve of the Treaty of Tilsit, Tadeusz Kościuszko (1746-1817), the Polish national hero, who was emigrated to France, played an increasingly important role in the formation of the Duchy of Warsaw. It is very interesting why he decided against Napoleon's proposal, while the leaders of Polish Legions, inclusively nearly every Pole in and out of the country, and even the leaders of the partitioning Powers expected him to agree with Napoleon, but, he Kept silent until the Congress of Vienna. Leading opinion on this problem explains it as his liberal republicanism and patriotic nationalism against Bonaparte, shown already in the time of the American Revolution and in the Rising of 1794, that is, during the first half of his lifetime. But, his intimate relations with the proRussian Czartoryskis during his life, and his favorable view of Czar Paul I and Alexander I in the second half of his lifetime, especially after liberation from Petersburg in 1796, brings forth questions against the above-mentioned opinion. This article examines at first, his background of liberal republicanism and patriotic nationalism in connection with his Lithuanian background, in the context of political and social life in his time, and shows that his high position in the first half of his life became established after his long silence and a period of co-operation with A.J. Czartoryski at the time of the Congress of Vienna. Eliminating difficulties in the application of his beliefs and behavior up to the Defeat of Maciejowice in 1794 as the cause of his anti-Napoleonic behavior in 1806-1807, we see his dependence upon the Czartoryski's anti-Napoleonic policy with Czar Alexander I. From such viewpoints we see that his autonomous efforts under the hard and complicated situations occurring after the coup d'état of Brumaire, led to his anonymous catechetical booklet "Czy Polacy wybić się mogą na niepodlegolść" (May Poles Fight Their Way to Independence?), published in Paris in 1800, and a well-known letter to Fouché, in the beginning of 1807. From this, we come to realize that the very problem is his deep preoccupation of liberation of the many Slavonic peoples under the former United Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth against any partitioning Powers, determined his anti-Napoleonic behavior; and so he was a leading pioneer in the process toward crystallization of Pan-Slavism, and a great Slavophile.