DOI Heft:
Nr. 2-3
DOI Artikel:Paszkiewicz, Mieczysław: Sir Peter Francis Bourgeois and his "Rotunda with Figures"
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18820#0067
mended the painter to the Prince. What followed, or, what is alleged to have followed is descri-
bed in Bryans Dictionary:
,, ...When the Prince Primate, brother to the unfortunate Stanislaus Augustus, King of Poland,
visited this country, he was particularly pleased with the works of Bourgeois and made him the
most flattering offers to induce him to return with him to Poland, which were gratefully acknowle-
dged, though they were politely declined. In 1791, however, he was appointed painter to the Kingof
Poland, who also conferred on him the honour of a Knight of the Order of Merit, on which occasion
he was introduced at the Court, and the King [George III] was pleased to confirm the title."10
The Times gives some more details:11 „The king of Poland has been pleased to confere on Francis
Bourgeois Esq. Member of the RA. the honour of Knighthood with the Order of Merit. Count
Buccaty, the Polish Ambassador, has remitted him the reward and letters patent by which he is
also appointed Painter to His Majesty."
As is mentioned in Bryans Dictionary the Polish distinction was confirmed by George III.
A rare occasion in which a foreign order was used as a sufficient reason for a British Knighthood:
rare, and of a doubtful legality. Francis Townsend, Pursuivant of Arms, regarded the case as
a regular one and lists Bourgeois as a Knight Bachelor: „Bourgeois Peter Francis RA, + Merit
of Poland, 12 April 1791."12
William A. Show on the other hand does not include the painter's name in the list of Knights of
England, and in a footnote gives his reasons: „In the Gazette dated for May 16th 1792 (p. 317)
there is an account of George III investing Sir William Sidney Smith with the insignia of the Royal
Swedish Order of the Sword. The Gazette adds in a footnote, not knighted on this occasion, that
ceremony having been performed by the late Swedish King in the field under the royal banner.
Townsend considers him entitled to the rank of a Knight Bachelor of England in consequence
of this recognition of his foreign knighthood having been marked at a date prior to the Regula-
tion of 1812, relative to Foreign Orders. I cannot follow the reasoning, and in accordance with
the rigorous plan of the present book I have omitted him and all other such foreign made knights
from my lists whether they had or had not obtained the royal licence to accept such foreign order
or knighthood. For this same reason I have ommited Peter Francis Bourgeois, a member of the
Royal Academy of London, who on the 16th April 1791 received the King's allowance of the
knighthood confered upon him by the King of Poland by diploma, dated at Warsaw, 16th Feb-
ruary 1791. Townsend on the contrary ranks him as a knight bachelor of England."13
W. Show, it should be noted, gives the date of the Polish diploma and also a slightly different
date for the English confirmation. But this doubtful English knighthood was based on a ficticious
Polish one. First „The order of Merit" did not exist in Poland in 1791. Secondly the receiving
of no order or medal in Poland was equivalent of a knighthood, or entitled any claim to it. Thirdly
in eighteenth century conferring knighthoods in Poland was not a prerogative of the king but
of the Parliament (Sejm). It could be performed by a new creation, or by a recognition of a fo-
reign knighthood.
The acts of Parliament were of course recorded and published, so it is easy to find out that
Bourgeois's knighthood was not granted nor considered. Even if the king sent letters patent to
the painter such a document would be illegal, nuli and void. If kings of Poland were not entitled
to bestow knighthoods in their own kingdom, their right to give titles in the foreign lands is
poubtful and disputable. They were certainly often using the benefit of any doubt. It is known
10. Brynn's Dictionary of Painters and Engrafprs, New Edition, reyised and enlarged by George C. Williamson, I, 1904, p. 183.
11. The Times, 4 April 1791, p. 3, col. 2.
12. F. Townsend, Calendar of Knights, containing lists of Knights Bachelors, British Knights of Foreign Orders..., London, 1828,
p. 72.
13. W.A. Shaw, The Knights ef England, London, 1906, II, p. 301.
57
bed in Bryans Dictionary:
,, ...When the Prince Primate, brother to the unfortunate Stanislaus Augustus, King of Poland,
visited this country, he was particularly pleased with the works of Bourgeois and made him the
most flattering offers to induce him to return with him to Poland, which were gratefully acknowle-
dged, though they were politely declined. In 1791, however, he was appointed painter to the Kingof
Poland, who also conferred on him the honour of a Knight of the Order of Merit, on which occasion
he was introduced at the Court, and the King [George III] was pleased to confirm the title."10
The Times gives some more details:11 „The king of Poland has been pleased to confere on Francis
Bourgeois Esq. Member of the RA. the honour of Knighthood with the Order of Merit. Count
Buccaty, the Polish Ambassador, has remitted him the reward and letters patent by which he is
also appointed Painter to His Majesty."
As is mentioned in Bryans Dictionary the Polish distinction was confirmed by George III.
A rare occasion in which a foreign order was used as a sufficient reason for a British Knighthood:
rare, and of a doubtful legality. Francis Townsend, Pursuivant of Arms, regarded the case as
a regular one and lists Bourgeois as a Knight Bachelor: „Bourgeois Peter Francis RA, + Merit
of Poland, 12 April 1791."12
William A. Show on the other hand does not include the painter's name in the list of Knights of
England, and in a footnote gives his reasons: „In the Gazette dated for May 16th 1792 (p. 317)
there is an account of George III investing Sir William Sidney Smith with the insignia of the Royal
Swedish Order of the Sword. The Gazette adds in a footnote, not knighted on this occasion, that
ceremony having been performed by the late Swedish King in the field under the royal banner.
Townsend considers him entitled to the rank of a Knight Bachelor of England in consequence
of this recognition of his foreign knighthood having been marked at a date prior to the Regula-
tion of 1812, relative to Foreign Orders. I cannot follow the reasoning, and in accordance with
the rigorous plan of the present book I have omitted him and all other such foreign made knights
from my lists whether they had or had not obtained the royal licence to accept such foreign order
or knighthood. For this same reason I have ommited Peter Francis Bourgeois, a member of the
Royal Academy of London, who on the 16th April 1791 received the King's allowance of the
knighthood confered upon him by the King of Poland by diploma, dated at Warsaw, 16th Feb-
ruary 1791. Townsend on the contrary ranks him as a knight bachelor of England."13
W. Show, it should be noted, gives the date of the Polish diploma and also a slightly different
date for the English confirmation. But this doubtful English knighthood was based on a ficticious
Polish one. First „The order of Merit" did not exist in Poland in 1791. Secondly the receiving
of no order or medal in Poland was equivalent of a knighthood, or entitled any claim to it. Thirdly
in eighteenth century conferring knighthoods in Poland was not a prerogative of the king but
of the Parliament (Sejm). It could be performed by a new creation, or by a recognition of a fo-
reign knighthood.
The acts of Parliament were of course recorded and published, so it is easy to find out that
Bourgeois's knighthood was not granted nor considered. Even if the king sent letters patent to
the painter such a document would be illegal, nuli and void. If kings of Poland were not entitled
to bestow knighthoods in their own kingdom, their right to give titles in the foreign lands is
poubtful and disputable. They were certainly often using the benefit of any doubt. It is known
10. Brynn's Dictionary of Painters and Engrafprs, New Edition, reyised and enlarged by George C. Williamson, I, 1904, p. 183.
11. The Times, 4 April 1791, p. 3, col. 2.
12. F. Townsend, Calendar of Knights, containing lists of Knights Bachelors, British Knights of Foreign Orders..., London, 1828,
p. 72.
13. W.A. Shaw, The Knights ef England, London, 1906, II, p. 301.
57