
handle: 11089/44852
Citizens of Minsk approached the sejmiks before the 1788 Sejm with the expectation of reforming the whole state. However, they wanted above all the successful development of their small homeland. This can be seen in subsequent sejmiks, where the main attention was paid to the election of officials, mainly deputies. It was only at the assembly in November 1790 that the citizens of Minsk supported the reforms, although they did not agree to the hereditary throne. On this point a change occurred in February 1792. This next assembly approved the Constitution of 3 May. Some of the citizens spoke against it in Minsk at that time. This was verified by the Polish-Russian war in defense of the May Act. Citizens of Minsk supported the reform camp, but they were also aware of the proximity of Russia. Later they acknowledged the advantage of the victors, but not convienced, they clung to their small homeland. Against this background, it is interesting to note the animosities between families forming the elite of the Minsk voivodeship. The bad Ignacy Daszkiewicz and the good Adam Chmara. The question remains open as to what extent the gravity of the situation, the threat of the fall of the Republic, induced the feuding families to reconcile and abandon privatism. However, it should be noted that in the Mińsk voivodeship – which is not an exception – all elite members worked together on important matters important for their small fatherlands, and making personal conflicts became of secondary importance.
Konstytucja 3 Maja, Sejm Czteroletni, Targowica Confederation, Sejmiki mińskie, Constitution of 3 May, Adam Chmara
Konstytucja 3 Maja, Sejm Czteroletni, Targowica Confederation, Sejmiki mińskie, Constitution of 3 May, Adam Chmara
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
