What do you think?
Rate this book
The Last King of Poland
An enthralling life of the young and dashing King of Poland by one of Britains most exceptional young historians.
550 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1992
42 people are currently reading
477 people want to read
About the author
Adam Zamoyski
27 books309 followersA historian and a member of the ancient Zamoyski family of Polish nobility. Born in New York City and raised in England. He is Chairman of the Board of the Princes Czartoryski Foundation. On June 16, 2001, in London, England, he married the artist Emma Sergeant.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
December 14, 2016
An extremely detailed, referenced and researched book on Stanisław II August the last King of Poland. It paints Stanislaw in a mainly positive light but covers all of his weaknesses - womanising, financial overspends and difficulties to build the coalition needed to protect his nation. He started his life as King with no real court, castle, retainers, income or assets. He had an impossible task and faced the power of his ex-lover Catherine the Great who constantly out-manoeuvred his political agenda. But he still was able to build a legacy although it included the loss of much of Poland.
June 25, 2024
Synopsis (although GoodReads does supply a one line synopsis it is so ridiculous that I had to provide more): Fascinating biography of the last King of Poland, and an account of a personal dream with all the elements of Grand tragedy. Young King Stanislaw Antoni Poniatowski was a perfect illustration of the contradictions of Europe's ideological and religious viewpoints: worshipped reason but was led by the heart. Stanislaw was eventually obliged to watch as everything he had tried to accomplish turned to dust and failure with the destruction of his country, his betrayal by those he thought he could trust and ultimately he was forced to abdicate, and live in exile in St Petersburg a broken man, deceived and disillusioned.
This is a first rate, and probably the first decent biography in English, of Poland's last king. Poor Poniatowski, he tried so hard to do good by Poland and was frustrated at every turn and then when things went belly up and the Kingdom dismantled he was blamed, insulted, denigrated and forgotten. A wonderful biography of a man far better than the sovereigns of his time Maria Theresa and Joseph II of Austria, Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine II of Russia who betrayed and ruined him and his country. Poniatowski was a good and cultivated man who tried to do right and was hampered on all sides, not least by the Polish nobility which dominated the Sjem.
Mr. Zamoyski is too good a historian elide unpleasant facts or to erect a revisionist history on fraudulent foundations. This is a very good biography and contribution to a historical period to little known.
This is a first rate, and probably the first decent biography in English, of Poland's last king. Poor Poniatowski, he tried so hard to do good by Poland and was frustrated at every turn and then when things went belly up and the Kingdom dismantled he was blamed, insulted, denigrated and forgotten. A wonderful biography of a man far better than the sovereigns of his time Maria Theresa and Joseph II of Austria, Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine II of Russia who betrayed and ruined him and his country. Poniatowski was a good and cultivated man who tried to do right and was hampered on all sides, not least by the Polish nobility which dominated the Sjem.
Mr. Zamoyski is too good a historian elide unpleasant facts or to erect a revisionist history on fraudulent foundations. This is a very good biography and contribution to a historical period to little known.
October 20, 2017
Adam Zomoyski starts his book by noting that there's no truly adequate biography of King Stanisław II Poniatowski in any language, and his doesn't measure up either. He figures Stanisław deserves two fairly large volumes to trace down every tangent related to his life. It would be a thoroughly scholarly work, and I doubt I'd read it, but after reading the book he did write, I can understand the desire.
Zamoyski paints a very positive picture of Stanisław, and while he does not hide his problems, he does not dwell on them either. As Poland pre-deceased him, it should be obvious that Stanisław has come in for a lot criticism and finger-pointing over the centuries. Unlike a lot of assessments of Stanisław (mostly starting right after the fact), Zamoyski generally celebrates his life and accomplishments. And there's a lot to admire; he was obviously a very intelligent man, who on several occasions took effective control of councils or parties designed to limit his power. An Enlightenment idealist, he managed to get elected King of Poland and start reforms while being pragmatic about what could actually be accomplished inside of Poland's delicate situation in the 18th Century.
And as in any good tragedy, these positive qualities are at the center of his problems. Zamoyski shows how he constantly wavered between his pragmatic and idealist impulses, eventually getting swept up in the Great Sejm and drafting up the constitution which led to the final partitions of Poland. He does not discuss the fact that his ability to change position, and re-align with which way the wind was blowing also probably caused a fair amount of trouble, as it would be harder to trust him; and yet there was often little choice, as his actual authority was low. Similarly, he showed an interest in all sorts of pursuits (very much a Renaissance Man), and spent a great deal of energy diverting himself between all of them, and I wonder if more may have been accomplished with better focus.
Stanisław was not a military leader, and the couple of wars that occurred in his reign are not covered in any major detail. Poland's military had been kept purposefully weak, and had to build up the army in a hurry after the new constitution. Given the challenges, it seems have performed well in the Polish–Russian War of 1792, and I'd like to see more about that.
An unfortunate final note is that my copy is a scan-and-OCR Kindle edition of an early 90's work, and it shows. The early part of the book is in very good shape, but as often happens, the cleanup of the text slowly degrades through the course of the book. Mostly, the problems are more minor than usual (a number of extraneous periods), but a number of 'e's have become 'c's, and very late in errors like "l)evichy" (Devichy) occur. This is a shame, as the text deserves better.
Zamoyski paints a very positive picture of Stanisław, and while he does not hide his problems, he does not dwell on them either. As Poland pre-deceased him, it should be obvious that Stanisław has come in for a lot criticism and finger-pointing over the centuries. Unlike a lot of assessments of Stanisław (mostly starting right after the fact), Zamoyski generally celebrates his life and accomplishments. And there's a lot to admire; he was obviously a very intelligent man, who on several occasions took effective control of councils or parties designed to limit his power. An Enlightenment idealist, he managed to get elected King of Poland and start reforms while being pragmatic about what could actually be accomplished inside of Poland's delicate situation in the 18th Century.
And as in any good tragedy, these positive qualities are at the center of his problems. Zamoyski shows how he constantly wavered between his pragmatic and idealist impulses, eventually getting swept up in the Great Sejm and drafting up the constitution which led to the final partitions of Poland. He does not discuss the fact that his ability to change position, and re-align with which way the wind was blowing also probably caused a fair amount of trouble, as it would be harder to trust him; and yet there was often little choice, as his actual authority was low. Similarly, he showed an interest in all sorts of pursuits (very much a Renaissance Man), and spent a great deal of energy diverting himself between all of them, and I wonder if more may have been accomplished with better focus.
Stanisław was not a military leader, and the couple of wars that occurred in his reign are not covered in any major detail. Poland's military had been kept purposefully weak, and had to build up the army in a hurry after the new constitution. Given the challenges, it seems have performed well in the Polish–Russian War of 1792, and I'd like to see more about that.
An unfortunate final note is that my copy is a scan-and-OCR Kindle edition of an early 90's work, and it shows. The early part of the book is in very good shape, but as often happens, the cleanup of the text slowly degrades through the course of the book. Mostly, the problems are more minor than usual (a number of extraneous periods), but a number of 'e's have become 'c's, and very late in errors like "l)evichy" (Devichy) occur. This is a shame, as the text deserves better.
October 19, 2016
History is written by the winners
The 4 stars versus 5 is because of the editing. Very distracting at times. Very well researched. Historical biographies are often sympathetic or oppositional. The truth is usually somewhere in between. Historians often ignore any documentation that does not support their theory. I feel like there is a nice balance here and references to actual documents to give a thorough account of the end of the monarchy in Poland. American history is often written to exclude European contributions to our Constitution and Declaration of independence. These omissions are often the case when Patriotism turns nations into chauvinist. I will admit to being ignorant of Poland's history of this era and was pleasantly surprised to find a thorough account. I enjoyed this and can recommend. Gbash
The 4 stars versus 5 is because of the editing. Very distracting at times. Very well researched. Historical biographies are often sympathetic or oppositional. The truth is usually somewhere in between. Historians often ignore any documentation that does not support their theory. I feel like there is a nice balance here and references to actual documents to give a thorough account of the end of the monarchy in Poland. American history is often written to exclude European contributions to our Constitution and Declaration of independence. These omissions are often the case when Patriotism turns nations into chauvinist. I will admit to being ignorant of Poland's history of this era and was pleasantly surprised to find a thorough account. I enjoyed this and can recommend. Gbash
March 29, 2023
Jag vill gärna tycka om denna - den beskriver ett tragiskt livsöde utan att göra en stor affär av saken, är detaljerad på de rätta ställena och tidvis välskriven. Den beskriver detaljerat spännande internationella intriger, och backar upp påståendena med faktiskt källmaterial. Trots det får jag medge att jag ganska ofta tappade intresset, och jag kommer inte runt att det är ett dåligt betyg för själva texten.
December 19, 2019
Stanislaw Poniatovski met the future Catherine the Great seven years before she became Empress of all the Russias. The meeting took place in her bedchamber and it seems they wasted no time in becoming lovers at this first meeting. He was then twenty-three.
Taking the long view, and despite occasional peaks, it was downhill all the way after that. Because it suited her at the time, Catherine managed to have Stanislaw made King of Poland. But to share a bed is not to share objectives: Stanislaw’s attempts to improve his native land were perceived as a threat. And not just by Catherine. Frederick the Great was a major player in undermining Poland at every opportunity, and the Austrians and French also took a lively interest in the country.
Zamoyski explains why Catherine and Frederick were so determined that Poland should not succeed.
‘Russian reason of state could not countenance a strong Poland, while Prussia was almost pathologically afraid of a Polish resurgence. Poland was acceptable to both only if she remained impotent. Ultimately, it was the political and cultural renewal taking place in Poland that condemned the country to annihilation at their hands.’
Being King of Poland meant that Stanislaw was separated from Catherine, and it can safely be said that both soon looked elsewhere for gratification. But on the strength of their previous relationship, Stanislaw felt he could persuade Catherine of his point of view regarding the best interests of Poland and in that he was sadly mistaken.
Reading this book reinforced an existing belief that no one called ‘The Great’ deserves the title. What did Alexander the Great achieve? Nothing which lasted, but causing much death and destruction along the way. The two ‘greats’ in this story carved up Poland between them, greatly assisted by rivalries among the Poles themselves.
Catherine claimed to be enlightened and corresponded with Voltaire along the way, but by the end of her reign the serfs were worse off than they were at the beginning. To judge by the many concertos Quantz wrote for him, Frederick was a skilled player of the flute (not referred to in the book) but this didn’t stop him issuing counterfeit Polish currency with a view to undermining the Polish economy.
So at the political level this is a truly depressing read. The character of Stanislaw, though, is of considerable interest, and as luck would have it, we have a comprehensive analysis from the pen of the man himself. The following is a brief extract from a much longer self-analysis.
‘I have enough wit never to be behind in any conversation, but not enough to lead one very often or for very long, unless my feelings are engaged, or the taste that nature has given me for everything that touches on the arts. I am quick to perceive the ridiculous and the false in all their guises, to spot people’s tricks, and I have often been too quick to make them feel it. I hate bad company by inclination. A strong vein of laziness has prevented me from developing my talents and my knowledge as far as I might have. When I work, it is under inspiration. I either do a great deal all at once, or nothing at all; I do not commit myself easily, and that makes me appear more able than I am. As for what is normally called the conduct of business, I usually show too much candour and eagerness, and as a result I often commit blunders. I can judge an affair, I can find the fault in a project or in him who carries it out, but I need a word of advice or a brake to prevent me from committing the same fault myself.’
As far as I can tell, though I am not a historian, this book is well researched and is an engrossing account of its subject.
Taking the long view, and despite occasional peaks, it was downhill all the way after that. Because it suited her at the time, Catherine managed to have Stanislaw made King of Poland. But to share a bed is not to share objectives: Stanislaw’s attempts to improve his native land were perceived as a threat. And not just by Catherine. Frederick the Great was a major player in undermining Poland at every opportunity, and the Austrians and French also took a lively interest in the country.
Zamoyski explains why Catherine and Frederick were so determined that Poland should not succeed.
‘Russian reason of state could not countenance a strong Poland, while Prussia was almost pathologically afraid of a Polish resurgence. Poland was acceptable to both only if she remained impotent. Ultimately, it was the political and cultural renewal taking place in Poland that condemned the country to annihilation at their hands.’
Being King of Poland meant that Stanislaw was separated from Catherine, and it can safely be said that both soon looked elsewhere for gratification. But on the strength of their previous relationship, Stanislaw felt he could persuade Catherine of his point of view regarding the best interests of Poland and in that he was sadly mistaken.
Reading this book reinforced an existing belief that no one called ‘The Great’ deserves the title. What did Alexander the Great achieve? Nothing which lasted, but causing much death and destruction along the way. The two ‘greats’ in this story carved up Poland between them, greatly assisted by rivalries among the Poles themselves.
Catherine claimed to be enlightened and corresponded with Voltaire along the way, but by the end of her reign the serfs were worse off than they were at the beginning. To judge by the many concertos Quantz wrote for him, Frederick was a skilled player of the flute (not referred to in the book) but this didn’t stop him issuing counterfeit Polish currency with a view to undermining the Polish economy.
So at the political level this is a truly depressing read. The character of Stanislaw, though, is of considerable interest, and as luck would have it, we have a comprehensive analysis from the pen of the man himself. The following is a brief extract from a much longer self-analysis.
‘I have enough wit never to be behind in any conversation, but not enough to lead one very often or for very long, unless my feelings are engaged, or the taste that nature has given me for everything that touches on the arts. I am quick to perceive the ridiculous and the false in all their guises, to spot people’s tricks, and I have often been too quick to make them feel it. I hate bad company by inclination. A strong vein of laziness has prevented me from developing my talents and my knowledge as far as I might have. When I work, it is under inspiration. I either do a great deal all at once, or nothing at all; I do not commit myself easily, and that makes me appear more able than I am. As for what is normally called the conduct of business, I usually show too much candour and eagerness, and as a result I often commit blunders. I can judge an affair, I can find the fault in a project or in him who carries it out, but I need a word of advice or a brake to prevent me from committing the same fault myself.’
As far as I can tell, though I am not a historian, this book is well researched and is an engrossing account of its subject.
August 23, 2021
I'm a big fan of Adam Zamoyski's books. His various histories of Poland are fantastic. So this biography of Stanisław II is a bit disappointing by his standards. It's still a good reads, and at times fascinating. It's clearly a labour of love, Zamoyski is trying to rehabilitate the reputation of a figure who in his opinion has been unfairly maligned. But in trying to be comprehensive the tale meanders at times and becomes bogged down in too much detail. If you are interested in Polish history, as I am, or in understanding the history of power on the fringes of the Russian empire (from the 18th century to now) then this is worth reading. Not only do you gain an understanding of power politics, and the interplay of ideologies but also one of the most tragic episodes in Poland's tragic history.
October 6, 2014
This took me a long time to read, but it was worth it to fill in the gap in my appreciation of this king. Ultimately, a tragic figure; even today, his legacy is widely misunderstood. I think I shall now look to see if I can find anything on his martial nephew Jozef.
January 25, 2024
This book was a fascinating read! Being interested in Napoleonic History, this book was fantastic at explaining the downfall of Poland and the geo-politics of the era to give context to my interest. This book was incredibly well researched. I was impressed by the level of detail the author was able to provide about Stanislaw. The author did a great job exploring the king’s politics and diplomacy while also delving deep into his psyche and his feelings at the time. The Last King of Poland was a tragic story, but it is an incredibly beautiful one that should be told. I give the book 5 out of 5 stars! I loved it!
May 3, 2022
It is very fitting to have finished this book on the 3rd of May (not done on purpose!). It was a heavy read at times, and one can tell the author was trying hard to reinstate Stanisław's tainted reputation. I found his life as tragic as the fate of Poland in the 18th century. Laden with dates and details, and not without personal comments of the author, I still enjoyed reading it. I found numerous very interesting snippets about Poland, its society and how it was seen by other powers. A must read for any Pole.
April 3, 2024
This captivating and enlightening biography has been a excellent "read" for me - I recently returned from a week in Poland, dividing my time between Warsaw and Krakow.
It's not only a "conventional" biography - it's also a study of how the Poles lost their territorial integrity and what was left of their sovereignty in 35 fate-full years, from 1760 to 1795.
How odd that "the Last King of Poland" and "German" Empress of Russia Catherine should have been lovers for a brief time in the 1750s! "You can't make this stuff up."
It's not only a "conventional" biography - it's also a study of how the Poles lost their territorial integrity and what was left of their sovereignty in 35 fate-full years, from 1760 to 1795.
How odd that "the Last King of Poland" and "German" Empress of Russia Catherine should have been lovers for a brief time in the 1750s! "You can't make this stuff up."
June 15, 2024
I have to admit my Polish history was/is thin. After a trip there I thought I should know more. I read the book but feel little wiser. A complex story strong on detail but devoid of any purpose. He was a king but an elected one he was caught between forces much greater than himself. I tried to read the wiki but that is as obscure as the book.
To understand Poland you have to start somewhere but I still don't know where that is.
To understand Poland you have to start somewhere but I still don't know where that is.
November 23, 2022
Biography about the last monarch to rule the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth of Poland, Stanisław II, August Poniatowski. As a young man he was the lover of Catherine the Great in St. Petersburg in 1755. On the death of the Polish king August II in 1763, it was with Catherine's support that he was elected king at the age of 32.
January 12, 2023
Simply brilliant in content and detail, style, conveying very well moods and struggles of nation, and personality and public and private struggles of a great knowledgeable, educated, able, skilled, cultivated and cultured man, statesman and king.
April 12, 2024
Poor poor Stainslaw if only Poland wasn't already ruined when he got to the throne the commonwealth may have survived.
October 31, 2020
Seriously hard going which made it seriously boring
April 19, 2015
Few historians are able to help North Americans understand Polish history as well as Adam Zamoyski. In illuminating Poland to the outsider no book is better than the Last King of Poland. Zamoyski manages to make the murky politics of the Polish nobility and the BAR confederacy understandable. Similarly, he lays out clearly Catherine the Great's progressive agenda for her empire and the nature of her complex relationship with Poland. In addition he guides the reader deftly through the nefarious plots of the master schemer Frederick the Great of Prussia. The Last King of Poland is a treasure for anyone wishing to understand Poland at the time of the partitions and its subsequent long struggle for national revival.
Read
October 10, 2012Very interesting survey. If You want understand Chopin's music background - have to read this book.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews