Lietuvos istorijos institutas

The article addresses the issue of how, following the manifest of 17 October 1905 of the Russian emperor Nikolai II, which declared the freedom of expression, the top authorities of Vilnius approached the influence of the periodical press on the spread of ideas and opinions and formation of respective attitudes, and to what extent they aimed (or did not aim) to restrict that influence.

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.

Straipsnyje nagrinėjama, kokią vietą Davainio-Silvestraičio etnologiniai tyrimai ir darbai užima XIX a. pab.–XX a. pr. lietuvių modernios tautos

The article presents the part of the written legacy of Davainis-Silvestraitis that had not yet been published and not included into the scientific circulation – his diary written in 1904–1911, aimed at overviewing the development of the Lithuanian national movement and to evaluate the national-social activities of the Lithuanian intellectuals in Vilnius. Davainis-Silvestraitis positioned himself as a public figure for whom the description of the events of the Lithuanian national movement had to be more important than himself or his personal experiences. However, the diary of Davainis-Silvestraitis that started as being written to others, very quickly became the diary for “self” which is primarily a more interesting material for reconstruction of his own life rather than the assessment of the Lithuanian national activities in Vilnius. The diary of Davainis-Silvestraitis perfectly reveals the difficult living and livelihood opportunities for Lithuanian intellectuals in Vilnius, whose main occupation was publicist activities. In his diary, Davainis-Silvestraitis simply “drowns” among the descriptions of his unsuccessful attempts to secure material well-being working in the Vilniaus žinios bookstore, writing articles and collecting adverts for the Lietuvių laikraštis newspaper. The descriptions of the Lithuanian national activities in Vilnius in the diary of Davainis- Silvestraitis are more like a documentary chronicle of events, rather than a deeper assessment of the phenomena and processes of the Lithuanian national movement, although he himself was often a participant of the events he was describing. Davainis-Silvestraitis presented his observations solely about the circumstances surrounding the signing of the “Lithuanian Memorandum to the Russian Prime Minister, Count S. Vitte” (1905), raising a hypothesis that the issue of the Suwalki Gubernia encouraged at least some of the Russian Empire representatives to have quite a favourable view on the appearance of this document. In his diary, Davainis-Silvestraitis suggested that some of the nobility representatives who supported the Lithuanian national movement had even visited the Great Seimas of Vilnius and that further cooperation was “deterred” by the position of some Lithuanian political parties and groups regarding the issue of land redistribution.