XVIII amžiaus studijos / The Eighteenth Century Studies

Straipsnyje siekiama pateikti apibendrintą vienos pagrindinių XVIII a. pirmosios pusės maisto gamybos šakų – mėsininkų-gyvulių skerdikų charakteristiką. Plačiai suvokiamo Vilniaus amatininkų „pasaulio“ tyrimai sudaro prielaidas kelti klausimą apie tai, ką apskritai žinome apie XVIII a. pirmojoje pusėje Vilniuje gyvenusius mėsininkus-skerdikus? Atsakyti į šį klausimą galime tik atlikę statistinę bei struktūrinę šaltinių analizę. Tyrimų objektu pasirinkti tik į cechinę organizaciją 1711–1748 m. laikotarpiu susivieniję mėsininkai. Straipsnyje išryškinamos sritys, kurių aprėptyje galime daryti tam tikras išvadas apie Vilniaus mėsininkų gyvenimą ir veiklą, o, remdamiesi šiomis išvadomis, sukurti kiek įmanoma universalesnį ir apibendrintą XVIII a. pirmojoje pusėje Vilniuje gyvenusio mėsininko paveikslą. Ieškant atsakymų į šiame straipsnyje iškeltus klausimus, išanalizuota Lietuvos valstybės istorijos archyve saugoma pirminių šaltinių medžiaga: ištirtos Vilniaus magdeburginio teismo (senasis fondas Nr. 22) bei Vilniaus magistrato (senasis fonas Nr. 23) knygos. Daug įdomios medžiagos surasta fonde Nr. 458, kuriame saugomos Vilniaus magistrato sąskaitų knygos (daugiausia mokesčių tarifų registrai). Atliekant tyrimą pagalbinę funkciją atliko publikuoti šaltiniai, iš kurių svarbiausi yra Vilniaus cechų aktai ir naujųjų miestiečių sąrašų publikacija. Išanalizavus šaltinius nustatyta, kad plėtros aspektu Vilniaus skerdikai buvo gana hermetiška (uždara) ir stabili grupė, apgyvendinta daugiausia katalikiškoje kultūroje arba Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės visuomenės kultūroje, daugiausia Vilniaus vaivadijoje. Mėsininkų-skerdikų grupė sudarė savo mikrovisuomenę, kuri veikė miesto struktūroje kaip didelė šeima. Viena vertus, kiekvienas skerdikas turėjo savo veiklos laisvę, tačiau rašytiniai įstatai ir susiformavę papročiai lėmė abipusę vieni kitų kontrolę. Būtent tokiu būdu buvo atliekama į Vilniaus rinką tiekiamos mėsos kokybės patikra. Užsiimdami tiek gyvulių skerdimu, tiek ir žalios mėsos bei odų prekyba, Vilniaus mėsininkai-skerdikai neišvengiamai turėjo tiesioginius kontaktus su žydais ir totoriais, nuosekliai siekdami apriboti jų veiklą bei pajungti savo kontrolei visą prekybą mėsos turguje. Kita vertus, mėsininkų-skerdikų cechas turėjo ryšių ir su kitais cechais, daugiausia odminiais ir didžiaisiais bei mažaisiais odininkais, įsiterpdavo į jų profesines kompetencijas bei konkuravo dėl odų supirkėjų. Siekdami apsaugoti savo profesines teises, ypač „išplėstinių kompetencijų“ srityje, kurias sudarė prekyba odomis, sugebėjo netgi manipuliuoti miesto valdžia. Mėsininkai-skerdikai sudarė bendriją, kuri sugebėjo kovoti už savo gerovę, o geriausias šios kovos įrodymas yra gautas leidimas prekiauti žuvimi pasninko laikotarpiu. Tokia situacija galėjo susiklostyti dėl to, kad mėsininkų-skerdikų parduodamų produktų paklausa visada buvo labai didelė. Todėl reikėjo visokeriopai „saugoti“ savo profesiją, kuri buvo savaime pelninga, o šiai veiklai vykdyti nebuvo būtini nei specialūs įrengimai ar technika, nei specialūs gebėjimai ar žinios.

This article is dedicated to one of the most notable late baroque architects of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Giuseppe Fontana ( Józef III, 1716 – before 1773). Being of Italian blood, architect Giuseppe Fontana was actually born in Warsaw, the capital of the Commonwealth of Both Nations, leaving a clear footprint in the culture of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Unable to establish himself in Vilnius, he moved close to Vitebsk. His choice to live and work on the north-eastern outskirts of the Commonwealth of Both Nations could have been influenced by his contacts with the influential representatives of the ruling class of Vitebsk voivodeship and also by the finding of a free space, “non monopolized” by the architects, strategically convenient geographic location and the aggregation of financially capable customers of architecture. The story of the family of Giuseppe Fontana is outstanding in the general cultural context. After settling in the Commonwealth of Both Nations at the end of the seventeenth century they shaped a peculiar dynasty of architects, which already in the first part of the eighteenth century was fully assimilated and Polonized. The professional career of father Giuseppe Giacomo (Józef II, 1676–1739/41), brothers Giacomo (Jakub, 1710–1773) and Giovanni Canzio (Jan Kanty, 1731–1800) in Warsaw and status in the royal court, professional career of uncle Domenic (Dominik, ca. 1680 – before 1755) in Grodno, all their contacts with influential aristocrats, accumulated family wealth and earned offices aided in reaching significant valuation in society and climbing the social ladder. In 1768, the Fontana family for their merits to the King was granted the status of nobility along with all respective rights, duties and privileges of the estate. The article analyses professional achievements of the Fontana family, their valuation in society and change in social status in the general context of artists and artisans. It shows, how the situation of family members and aspirations to become part of the class of nobility affected personal and professional life of Giuseppe Fontana.

The article deals with the problem of professional field of activity of an architect, the place of his profession in the system of crafts, sciences and arts, architects’ position in the society of the eighteenth century. Before the education reform undertaken by the Education Commission, architecture had not been developed into a separate subject that provided professional training in the schools of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The course in architecture was only a part of general education in Vilnius Jesuit Academy, in nobility schools of a military type, and Jesuit and Piarist Collegium Nobilium. There was not enough focus on architectural studies in these most important educational institutions of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: a short course of up to two years provided only general and technical basis of the theory of architecture based on classical orders, and it was not capable of training high ranked professionals-practitioners. Until the eighties of the 18th century, to become an independent professional architect one had to continue his studies abroad. It is argued that the Enlightenment concept of a creator serving to the state and society as well as representing them has provided an important impetus to the growth of the value of the architect’s profession and its social status. While many eighteenth-century artists were still very close to craftsmen in terms of social status (it was considered, that they used to do specific tasks and earn a living by employing manual / physical, not intellectual / mental powers), architects, due to the specifics of their education – studies at the university and military careers (they were mostly employed as engineers) were granted titles of nobility. In the eighteenth century, the social and material position of the architect-creator, who had been liberated from the crafts guild system, had evolved considerably and created conditions for privileges and for the establishment in the rank of nobility. The nobilitation of architects, who usually also had the rank of an officer and executed significant orders in large estates, intensified especially during the period of the partitions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Experienced architects were desired and welcome guests in the manors of the nobles. Successful architects used to invest accumulated funds in real estate and manors with land. The architect was no longer just a hired employee but became a patron himself – the one who was initiating and partly financing construction.

The article is dedicated to discussion about the opportunities artists had in the eighteenth-century Grand Duchy of Lithuania, what factors were defining artist’s career and his valuation and how it changed along with social and cultural shifts in the country. Historical sources retain names of around 700 artists that worked in the eighteenth-century Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The artists belonged to a peculiar inter-estate stratum with significant differences in education, social and economic situation. Majority of artists lived and worked in towns, with smaller part working in the manors of noblemen under continuous service or temporary contracts, and also there was a small number of artist friars who did jobs in various convents of the country. Social and economic situation of artists in towns was similar to that of craftsmen, yet artists working in the manors of aristocrats usually had status of the middle-rank manor officials. Still, eighteenth-century artists were able to achieve higher levels of career than most of craftsmen because of the rank of their patrons. The work of artists was in demand mostly in higher levels of society and that determined better pay, sponsoring of studies and other kind of encouragement. Career opportunities for artists were usually defined by their reputation and education. The top level of the career was occupied by the status of royal court artist, which was a guarantee of high qualification. Noblemen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Church hierarchy, when trying to realize important projects sought to engage the royal masters. Artists that studied abroad were also in demand. Noblemen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, because of the deficit of good artists, tried to keep those artists that worked long-term in their manors. Career of a court artist guaranteed steady payment and legal protection, however artists not always desired long-term service because of the significant limitations on their life and work. Difficulties in searching for a decent master encouraged noblemen to keep artists in their manors while teaching arts to local kids. The need in arts for vocation or special gifts is demonstrated by the fact that only a small part of children selected by the noblemen were able to learn painting. Apart from the ties to influential customers, to the career of an artist were important links to requested architects, also familial links to the ruling elites of towns and important officials of the courts. In the second half of the eighteenth century, especially at the end of the century, attitude towards artistic occupation has incurred significant changes. Social status of famous artists, large compensations and ennoblement affected attitudes towards arts among both the society and the artists, and promoted its prestige. Rise of prestige of the profession was aided by the fact that society started appreciating more of the local artists (artists-fellow countrymen). They have begun to be mentioned in various contexts among the most deserving of the nation.

On the basis of correspondence between Jean-Emmanuel Gilibert and the King of Poland and Grand Duke of Lithuania Stanislaw August, the article reveals issues of adaptation of a foreign scientist in the late eighteenth-century Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The attention is focused on the life of J.-E. Gilibert, his financial situation, his life and work conditions with the emphasis on health problems and psychological situation of the scientist, as well as the circumstances of his return to France. The research revealed, that one of the most important problems that faced J.-E. Gilibert upon his arrival to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the insufficient financing of his life and work. There were problems with his salary as the payments were late by half-year or more. Because of the non-payment of his designated salary, the scientist was forced to borrow with high interest in France and send money to Lithuania. Analysis of the correspondence shows that even upon the ninth year of his arrival to Lithuania, J.-E. Gilibert was still demanding to be paid for the time he was the director of the school in Grodno. J.-E. Gilibert was not satisfied with his living conditions in Grodno. In his contract with Antoni Tyzenhaus it was stated, that J.-E. Gilibert and his family will be provided with the living quarters suited for his status as doctor. However, the scientist was especially unhappy and even shocked that musicians of the town theatre and dancers lived much more comfortably than he did. The environment in Grodno also affected psychological condition of the scientist. J.-E. Gilibert enjoyed sharing his observations and to learn from experience of other researchers. However, he seriously lacked such social ties in Grodno. J.-E. Gilibert suffered from the feeling of isolation because he did not speak Polish and was unable to freely communicate with Grodno inhabitants, except for other foreigners.

The article reviews development of the military of one part in the Commonwealth of Both Nations, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, from the viewpoint of estate based structure, calling and professionalism. It reveals that, just like in the other armies of the eighteenth century, in Lithuania most of the estate structure could be found in cavalry, especially in the National Cavalry Brigades, and the least – in artillery and engineering corps. Estates did not carry only the negative meaning if the general level of education and skills among nobility was higher than the indicators in other estates. However, because of the generally low level of education before the reforms of the Commission of National Education, military units with estate based privileges (e. g. National Cavalry Brigades) were noted for a low level of professionalism and showed themselves poorly in the course of 1792 war with Russia and the uprising battles of 1794. At the same time, front guard regiments, made-up of Tartars and less privileged individuals, demonstrated much higher standards because estate exclusivity was accompanied by experience and military traditions carried over from the Seven-Year War. The highest standards of professionalism were maintained in the Lithuanian artillery and engineering corps. The progress was notable during the Four-Year Sejm, especially in the winter of 1791–1792. Infantry units were able to harmonize privileges of the estate structure with professional requirements and could be considered as matching the military of other countries in peace time. There was no place for calling in the army of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania prior to 1788 drive for expanding the military, and only during the war of 1792 attention was given to the skills of people, holding offices. During uprising of Tadeusz Kościuszko many gifted soldiers came to the fore, and even civilians with leadership gifts who led both improvised rebel units and large military units, thus opening pages of the noble tradition of uprisings in the nineteenth century, where calling and professionalism gradually pushed out the relics of estate-based military.

Through the case study of life and creation of Jan Bobrowski (1777–1823), student at Vilnius university department of literature and free arts, the article analyses how the first generation of professional intelligentsia came to life. Personal life and creation of Jan Bobrowski show, how in the junction of the eighteenth–nineteenth centuries a society was gradually emerging, in which professional career rather than social background was considered the indicator of personal success of a human being. J. Bobrowski chose his life in accordance with his calling. Educational work helped him not only to realise his intellectual aspirations, but also permitted ensurance of his material wellbeing. Active professional intellectual work placed J. Bobrowski among the ranks of the emerging intelligentsia. Educational works of J. Bobrowski served as educational popularization of science, whereas his participation in Vilnius Charity Fellowship had signs of social messiahship. This new group, represented by J. Bobrowski, which did not belong to estate structure, created personal space that matched their expectations. Wife of J. Bobrowski could also realize her creative potential whereas independent educational work provided her with opportunities to leave traditional social role of a woman.