The Myths and Symbolism of Polish Independence Day

Biskupski M. B. B (2012). Independence Day. Myth, Symbol, and the Creation of Modern Poland. Oxford: Oxford University Press, XVI+200 p.

Review prepared by Liubou Kozik. 

The celebration of Independence Day (11 November) in Poland in recent years has had a distinctly political coloring, yet attitudes toward it reflect the existence of a certain division in contemporary Polish society. At the same time, the main disagreements are manifested not in which day should be considered Independence Day, but in attitudes toward the holiday itself and in the understanding of independence, or even, more deeply, of national identity. To understand their origins, it is necessary to look into the Polish past, to examine the history of the emergence of the holiday and its perception in society at different stages of development. Such an attempt was undertaken by Mieczysław Biskupski, who presented his observations and conclusions in the book “Independence Day. Myth, Symbol, and the Creation of Modern Poland.”

Over the course of ten chapters, the author examines the subject using a problem-chronological principle and identifies four periods in the perception of Independence Day: the interwar years, the Second World War, the postwar period (1945-1989), and Poland’s democratic development. In the interwar period he focuses on the emergence of Independence Day and its perception during parliamentary democracy (1918-1926), the formation and constitutional consolidation of the “Sanacja” regime (1926-1935), and the final prewar years. In analyzing Poland’s postwar history, the author considers the attitudes of the official authorities and their opponents toward Independence Day. The study concludes by defining the function of Independence Day in the Third Republic.

In the preface to the publication, Biskupski notes that Poland’s Independence Day has not always been celebrated on 11 November over the past century. Nevertheless, this day, together with the symbols and traditions associated with it, deserves the attention of researchers. It is difficult to disagree with this. It is also difficult to disagree with the author’s observation that in Poland this is a day when national martyrology is recalled, and therefore the holiday turns out to be very restrained and even gloomy (X).

The introduction is devoted by the author to defining the myths and symbols of Independence Day. First of all, he draws attention to the myth of the soldier and the martyr, whose origins he finds in the uprising of 1794 and the activity of Polish legions on Napoleon’s side. Biskupski notes that, under the influence of Romantic ideas, the military feats of 1794-1831 began to be mythologized and quickly became a component of the national tradition (2).

In the last third of the nineteenth century, under the influence of socioeconomic and political transformations, the insurgent tradition was replaced by “organic work” (as the Polish version of positivism), which made it possible to preserve the national tradition in the face of new challenges of the time. Yet here too the situation was not unambiguous. At the end of the nineteenth century, the question of the possibility of an armed uprising was raised again. In this connection, the uprising of 1863-1864 began to be viewed not as a national catastrophe, but as an experience in social mobilization and military tactics. Thus a new stage began in the exaltation of Polish martyrology.

Another myth closely connected with the military tradition is the martyrological understanding of Polish history: “Poland as a victim of the cruelty of history and Polish patriots as self-sacrificing martyrs” (3). Evidence of this, in Biskupski’s view, includes both particular works of art and literature and the cult of Tadeusz Kościuszko, whom many perceived as a symbol of armed uprising.

Thus, at the beginning of the twentieth century, legends and symbols became entrenched in Polish society and served as a moral justification for the active actions of some politicians. First and foremost, this concerns J. Piłsudski, who revived the insurgent myth (4) and tried to combine it with socialist ideas. The practical manifestation of actions in this direction was the creation in 1908 of the clandestine Union of Armed Struggle, and later the Polish Military Organization and the Polish Legions, which, in Biskupski’s opinion, were strongly mythologized from the very beginning. Their symbolization greatly exceeds their real significance (10-16, 18-21), something to which, incidentally, the Russian researcher Gennady Matveev also draws attention (Matveev, 2008: 86-88).

It should be noted that Piłsudski was not the only one who tried to “militarize politics.” Similar steps were taken by the National Democrats (Endeks), led by Roman Dmowski, something that was not often mentioned in the history of twentieth-century Poland (Poland in the Twentieth Century…, 2012). Biskupski sees the reasons for this in the struggle between the two politicians and their opposing views on territorial, national, and other questions.

Describing the choice of the date of Independence Day, the author notes that at different times there were up to seventeen proposals, based on the ideological preferences of different political forces. The ambiguity of the situation is also evidenced by the fact that Piłsudski’s telegram to the leading countries of the world, with information about the creation of an independent Polish Republic, did not contain the date of the emergence of the new state, and its author signed it as “commander-in-chief of the Polish army” (30).

11 November was not immediately chosen as Independence Day. The reason for this was, first of all, political and ideological disagreements between Piłsudski and his supporters on the one hand, and Dmowski and the Endeks’ allies on the other. In this connection, the author describes in detail the process of institutionalizing the holiday, the attitude of national minorities toward it, and its manifestations in public discourse, and notes that even the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the independent Polish Republic was marked by the existence of two mutually exclusive narratives and the competition of two myths.

A distinctive feature of Independence Day in the interwar period was its close connection with the image of Piłsudski. Evidence of this was the obligatory military parade during official ceremonies. In this way it was emphasized that Piłsudski and the army stood both at the origins of Polish independence and on guard over it. After the marshal’s death in 1935, certain changes were made to the ceremony of celebration. In effect, 11 November became Piłsudski’s day, while the very fact of the acquisition of independence receded into the background.

After analyzing the situation around Independence Day during the Second World War, Biskupski observed that the Germans traditionally arrested prewar Polish public and political figures on the eve of 11 November. The situation in the territory that passed to the USSR is generally unknown to the author (he mentions that the information is so fragmentary that it is difficult to draw any conclusion). Yet here, incidentally, it would be interesting to establish whether, in 1940, changes in Soviet policy on the Polish question were reflected in the authorities’ attitude toward the events of 11 November 1918. Was it really the case, as Biskupski mentions, that only in 1943 was there a first attempt to give a new meaning to the celebration of Independence Day (108)?

No less complicated was the attitude toward the events of 11 November 1918 in émigré circles. The position of the government in exile was strongly influenced by political struggle: the confrontation in the interwar period between Piłsudski and Władysław Sikorski (chairman of the Council of Ministers during the war) and the latter’s criticism of the Sanacja regime. The result was a division in the émigré milieu over the question of celebrating Independence Day. Biskupski notes that even before the communists came to power in Poland, Sikorski tried to destroy the legend of Piłsudski and the holiday associated with him: he decided that only 3 May, the Day of the Polish Constitution, deserved the status of a national holiday (114).

In general, the end of the war did not mean an end to disputes around 11 November and the role of Piłsudski. For the Piłsudskiites, Independence Day was closely connected with their ideological leader, while right-wing forces tried to show the influence of several factors on Poland’s acquisition of independence and to reduce the marshal’s role to a minimum.

In postwar Poland there was no place for the celebration of 11 November. The state holiday became 22 July 1944, the proclamation of the pro-communist Polish Committee of National Liberation. As for the prewar Independence Day, it was closely linked to the October Revolution in Russia and the proclamation of the people’s government by Ignacy Daszyński (this took place in Lublin on 7 November 1918). The existence of the interwar Polish Republic was subjected to harsh criticism, and the figure of Piłsudski, if mentioned at all (which was very rare), was mentioned negatively.

The author notes that from 1956 changes began to be observed in the official discourse of the Polish People’s Republic regarding the events of 11 November 1918 and Piłsudski, but they were not systematic in character. Only on 11 November 1978 did a mass celebration of Independence Day take place in Poland, though it was unofficial.

Referring to the opinion of the Canadian researcher Adam Bromke that Polish history is a dialectical struggle between realism and idealism, Biskupski notes that in the opposition circles of the Polish People’s Republic, 11 November was an extremely idealized holiday. And this despite the fact that the leaders of Solidarity rejected the insurgent tradition of the idealist Piłsudski and instead used the methods of the realist Endeks (136).

11 November as the Independence Day of the Polish Republic was restored on 11 February 1989 (157), and thus, after fifty years, again acquired state status. At the same time as political reforms, there was recognition of sites of memory associated with interwar Poland, and the ideological justification of the holiday changed. While in 1990 the emphasis was mainly on victory over the Bolsheviks, in subsequent years there was a “deepening” into history: the return of the cult of Piłsudski and the legions, and of the insurgent tradition. In parallel, far-right forces (the “reborn Endecja”) formed an alternative vision of history. Thus, over time, politicization became a characteristic feature of the holiday.

In the conclusion, Biskupski notes that as a symbol 11 November can say a great deal about contemporary Polish consciousness. First of all, the holiday testifies to the existence of an independent Poland for which Piłsudski fought. Closely connected with his figure is the legend and myth of the Polish Legions, which became a reflection of the insurgent tradition in Polish society. At the same time, Piłsudski had and still has the aura of a victor who fought selflessly for the restoration of his state. The fact that the Poland that emerged in 1918 was only a part of the great Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of which Poles dreamed adds a note of bitterness to the holiday; in this connection, Independence Day also carries a note of nostalgia for lost greatness.

One can agree with Biskupski that in contemporary Poland, 11 November corresponds to many desires of the Polish spirit: victory, heroism, a happy future, a romantic past, and the removal of unpleasant moments from it. Most of all, however, the holiday emphasizes that Poles are unlike other peoples of Eastern Europe. Thus, Independence Day for them is a day when one reflects on the honor and tragedy of one’s people (178).

To sum up, it is worth noting Biskupski’s nonstandard approach to the events under consideration. In his work, besides the myths and symbols announced in the title, one can find elements of the history of everyday life, descriptions of sites of memory, historical politics, collective consciousness, and much else. The book makes it possible to look at well-known facts of Polish history from new perspectives, and this circumstance may inspire researchers to seek the unknown in what seems already well known. This applies both to the history of Poland and to that of other countries.

Literature mentioned in the review

1. Matveev, Gennady (2008). Piłsudski. (Lives of Remarkable People: ZhZL. Issue 1331). Moscow: Molodaya gvardiya.

2. Poland in the Twentieth Century. Essays in Political History (2012). Moscow: INDRIK.