DOI article:
Getka-Kenig, Mikołaj: Traktat Sebastiana Sierakowskiego a problem popularyzacji wiedzy architektonicznej w Księstwie Warszawskim
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.44918#0118
Sierakowskis book also received two domestic reviews. The First one came from
Śniadecki117, with whom, as we know, Sierakowski was in perpetual contact, and who
had promised to help him in the dissemination of the treatise. The author of the second
one was Michał Kado118, a military engineer and a fbrmer professor of architecture in
Vilnius, who took the chair of architecture at the newly founded University of Warsaw
several years after.119 Also, they were both members of the Royal Society of Warsaw
Friends of Sciences. They had some substantive comments on the content, but other
than that they spoke in superlatives about the very fact of publishing this work, which
Śniadecki found “respectable”120, and Kado, a professional designer, believed to be
“highly recommendable and [...] useful”. The latter added that the work could be con-
sidered “a worthy ornament of every public and private library”121, which remained
exactly in accord with the author s ambitions. Significantly, however, what deserved
a particular distinction was the example which Sierakowski gave, in their opinion, to
“scholarly and wealthy Poles, how to improve themselves in learning, and by using their
wealth, to declare fruits of their work to the citizens, and win the gratitude of modern
times and lasting famę in posterity.” For it was, as Śniadecki noted, a work “as to the
expenditure of printing and etching very expensive”.122 Kado was even morę direct in
his critical assessment of “wealthy citizens of our country”, who - as he wrote - “have
so far given little similar example of sacrifice for the public good, of the part protected
from unnecessary expenses.” He even added that “we do not have the same national
spirit that would endeavour to help and support talent”, so typical of England, in
which “the desire for the famę of their own nation contributes greatly to the growth
of science, skills, fine arts, industry, and all kinds of handicraft”. At the same time,
he noted that similar publishing projects in France and Germany were “morę so the
subject of trading”, which had nothing to do with Sierakowskis work. In his belief,
“the morę praiseworthy our author is, as it was not for any commercial speculation,
but in the pure view of becoming useful to his countrymen, that he devoted much
time, effort and hard work, and for this reason only, as to gain this tender reward for
the virtuous soul, admitting that he served his country well [original emphasis - these
last words were most probably a quote, the source of which, however, has not been
given - M. G.-K.]”.123 Sierakowskis book was thus presented in these reviews as an
expression of an ideał, which the author himself had explained within the preface
to the treatise. That is, the responsibility of the higher strata towards the rest of the
society, and the use of surplus income in such a way as to serve the generał public.
This apparent selflessness of the author ennobled the subject itself, and at the same
time, the very idea of the publication, seen in terms of grand and noble civic merit
of the gentleman. It was also precisely the way to - somewhat obviously - encourage
117 J. Śniadecki, Architektura obeymująca wszelki gatunek murowania i budowania przez X. Se-
bastyana Hrabię Sierakowskiego i t.d., “Dziennik Wileński”, 1,1815, issue 1, pp. 90-99; issue 2,
pp. 182-196.
118 M. Kado, Architektura obeymująca wszelki gatunek murowania i budowania przez X. Sebastya-
na Hr. Sierakowskiego, “Pamiętnik Warszawski”, 3,1815, November, pp. 364-384; December,
pp. 510-536.
119 See: J. Samujłło, Kado (Cadeau, Kadau) Michał (1765-1824), in: Polski Słownik Biograficzny,
vol. 11, Wrocław 1964, pp. 408-409.
120 J. Śniadecki, Architektura obeymująca, issue 2, p. 195.
121 M. Kado, Architektura obeymująca, December, p. 535.
122 J. Śniadecki, Architektura obeymująca, issue 2, p. 195.
123 M. Kado, Architektura obeymująca, December, pp. 535-536.
116
ARTICLES
Mikołaj Getka-Kenig
Śniadecki117, with whom, as we know, Sierakowski was in perpetual contact, and who
had promised to help him in the dissemination of the treatise. The author of the second
one was Michał Kado118, a military engineer and a fbrmer professor of architecture in
Vilnius, who took the chair of architecture at the newly founded University of Warsaw
several years after.119 Also, they were both members of the Royal Society of Warsaw
Friends of Sciences. They had some substantive comments on the content, but other
than that they spoke in superlatives about the very fact of publishing this work, which
Śniadecki found “respectable”120, and Kado, a professional designer, believed to be
“highly recommendable and [...] useful”. The latter added that the work could be con-
sidered “a worthy ornament of every public and private library”121, which remained
exactly in accord with the author s ambitions. Significantly, however, what deserved
a particular distinction was the example which Sierakowski gave, in their opinion, to
“scholarly and wealthy Poles, how to improve themselves in learning, and by using their
wealth, to declare fruits of their work to the citizens, and win the gratitude of modern
times and lasting famę in posterity.” For it was, as Śniadecki noted, a work “as to the
expenditure of printing and etching very expensive”.122 Kado was even morę direct in
his critical assessment of “wealthy citizens of our country”, who - as he wrote - “have
so far given little similar example of sacrifice for the public good, of the part protected
from unnecessary expenses.” He even added that “we do not have the same national
spirit that would endeavour to help and support talent”, so typical of England, in
which “the desire for the famę of their own nation contributes greatly to the growth
of science, skills, fine arts, industry, and all kinds of handicraft”. At the same time,
he noted that similar publishing projects in France and Germany were “morę so the
subject of trading”, which had nothing to do with Sierakowskis work. In his belief,
“the morę praiseworthy our author is, as it was not for any commercial speculation,
but in the pure view of becoming useful to his countrymen, that he devoted much
time, effort and hard work, and for this reason only, as to gain this tender reward for
the virtuous soul, admitting that he served his country well [original emphasis - these
last words were most probably a quote, the source of which, however, has not been
given - M. G.-K.]”.123 Sierakowskis book was thus presented in these reviews as an
expression of an ideał, which the author himself had explained within the preface
to the treatise. That is, the responsibility of the higher strata towards the rest of the
society, and the use of surplus income in such a way as to serve the generał public.
This apparent selflessness of the author ennobled the subject itself, and at the same
time, the very idea of the publication, seen in terms of grand and noble civic merit
of the gentleman. It was also precisely the way to - somewhat obviously - encourage
117 J. Śniadecki, Architektura obeymująca wszelki gatunek murowania i budowania przez X. Se-
bastyana Hrabię Sierakowskiego i t.d., “Dziennik Wileński”, 1,1815, issue 1, pp. 90-99; issue 2,
pp. 182-196.
118 M. Kado, Architektura obeymująca wszelki gatunek murowania i budowania przez X. Sebastya-
na Hr. Sierakowskiego, “Pamiętnik Warszawski”, 3,1815, November, pp. 364-384; December,
pp. 510-536.
119 See: J. Samujłło, Kado (Cadeau, Kadau) Michał (1765-1824), in: Polski Słownik Biograficzny,
vol. 11, Wrocław 1964, pp. 408-409.
120 J. Śniadecki, Architektura obeymująca, issue 2, p. 195.
121 M. Kado, Architektura obeymująca, December, p. 535.
122 J. Śniadecki, Architektura obeymująca, issue 2, p. 195.
123 M. Kado, Architektura obeymująca, December, pp. 535-536.
116
ARTICLES
Mikołaj Getka-Kenig