XVIII amžiaus studijos / The Eighteenth Century Studies

The aim of the article is an attempt to prepare a collective portrait of a group of former Jesuits who joined the order in Vilnius and, after the dissolution of the order, remained in the service of the Commission of National Education. In order to present the full image of this group, the numerical composition of ex-Jesuits (214 people), their territorial and social origin, education, employment history in the structures of the Commission of National Education and their age at the time of establishing the Commission were established. The article also presents the fate of the members of the described group after the end of the activities of the Commission of National Education, as well as their intellectual activity. The vast majority of the presented group were secondary school teachers in the Lithuanian Department in the years 1773–1794. Of the 10 schools of the Lithuanian Department, seven were post-Jesuit schools: in Grodno, Białystok, Pastawy, Vidzy, Vilnius, Vishnyev and Vawkavysk. Two of schools (in Szczuczyn Litewski and Lida), were Piarist schools. Jesuits taught at the school in Merkinė until 1776, after which the school was handed over to the Dominican Order The article brings out from oblivion ex-Jesuits, members and collaborators of the Society for Elementary Books, professors of the Vilnius Academy (later the Main School of Lithuania), general inspectors of the Commission, inspectors of parish schools, rectors of the schools of the Departments of Lithuania, Nowogrodek and Samogitia, as well as several people holding other important functions for the Commission of National Education.

On the map of schools in 18th-century Vilnius, a prominent place was occupied by the Vilnius Academy, which during the times of the Commission of National Education was called the Main School of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and after the loss of independence of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Vilnius Main School. In addition to the university, there were also schools providing secondary and elementary education, as well as educational institutions. The paper is an attempt to look at the possibilities of education in Vilnius during the period of the Commission of National Education and in the years after the Commission, until the reform of Alexander I in 1803.

The handwritten diary of Michał Kazimierz Radziwiłł (1702–1762), also known as Rybeńko, a source familiar to researchers dealing with the history of the 18th century in various fields, is certainly extremely interesting. The diary is kept in the Central Archives of Historical Records in Warsaw (Archiwum Główny Akt Dawnych w Warszawie, AGAD) in the Radziwiłł Archive collection (section VI, sign. II-80). Rybeńko was one of the richest magnates of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at the time, and this is evidenced by the numerous and extensive estates he owned in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. He owned about 20 towns, and more than 300 villages, which he inherited from his father and from his father-in-law Janusz Antoni Wiśniowiecki. In view of the above, and concerning the fact that Michal Kazimierz Radziwiłł held one of the highest senatorial offices (from 1744 he was governor of Vilnius, so he was formally in charge of the city that he knew well), did he include information about the capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the pages of his diary? Being a politically active man who was in possession of such extensive estates, he was constantly on the road (pursuing at the same time a variety of political, economic and social goals), which both his wives complained about. He stayed in many cities of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, including the capital of Lithuania. Therefore, this article has been written with the intention of presenting the diary as a source for researching one of the most important centres of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at that time. An attempt is made to consider the circumstances in which entries appear in the diary, whether the prince visited the city regularly or only occasionally, and whether the entries in the diary are systematic reports, or if they are ‘second hand’ information. Finally, the question should be raised as to what type of data was recorded by Rybeńko in the context of Vilnius, and to what extent it can be useful in the study of the city’s history. It also seems crucial to consider the question of what image of the Lithuanian capital emerges from the governor’s records.

International ideas about education and development, promoted in Cambodia by financial donors such as the World Bank, influence how the second and third generations of Cambodian genocide survivors interpret their reality and history. They believe that the destruction of the education system and the almost total massacre of educated people during the genocide (1975 to 1979) slowed down the country’s development. Young people often perceive the loss of human life as a loss of resources. In this article, I argue that this perception of people as resources is what bridges development, education and the history of Democratic Kampuchea. The historical interpretations among young people are similar to the interpretations advocated by Cambodian politicians, and resonate with the World Bank’s ideas on development.

In 1772, the first partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth occurred. A few outraged English and French pamphleteers grabbed a pen to defend its cause. The same year, John Lind released his Letters Concerning the Present State of Poland. In 1773, Simon Linguet published his Considérations politiques et philosophiques, sur les affaires présentes du Nord, et plus particulièrement sur celles de Pologne. In 1775, the Marquis de Caraccioli released La Pologne telle qu’elle a été, telle qu’elle est, telle qu’elle sera. This article aims at defining how these authors’ reactions to the first dismemberment of the Commonwealth contributed to the nascence of public opinion in the last quarter of the 18th century, thus accelerating the advent of a shared sentiment of European membership. The study is intended as a contribution to our knowledge of the reception in European public opinion of the partition of Poland-Lithuania. The article encompasses: I) the emergence of public opinion in 18th-century Britain and France; II) Caraccioli, Linguet and Lind: three different personalities devoted to the same cause; III) combating prejudices: Restoring the truth on serfdom in the Commonwealth, and the dissidents affair; IV) ensuring support for a king struggling alone against hostile neighbouring powers.