Academic literature on the topic 'The Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences in Vilnius'

On the annual conference held by the Faculty of Communication of the Vilnius University and the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences in November 2011. The theme of this year's conference is “The documentary heritage: development and communication”.

The article analyzes the state of research on the old historical Lithuanian personal libraries, including the means of inquiry and sources. The author also analyzes the similarities between personal library research and institutional library research.It was found that book ownership marks are the main and most widely applicable personal library research source. This resource is used productively after Lithuanian scientific libraries have accelerated the scientific cataloging of the old books and started recording the provenance of each item (such catalogs include catalogs of the Elsevier, the Aldine, paleotypes, Bibliotheca Sapiehana by Vilnius University Library, Lituanica catalog by the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, and the catalog of the 15th and 16th century books in Kaunas libraries by Kaunas County Public Library). The main and most widely applied Lithuanian historical personal library method is the provenance method, although good results are obtained using the hybrid method. The author concludes that most publications on old personal historic Lithuanian libraries limit their subjects to the personal libraries of nobility, state and religious actors (till the 19th Century) and the 19th century Lithuanian intellectuals. Historic personal libraries of lower-class individuals warrant more research (one example is Zigmantas Kiaupa’s publication about the book collections of ordinary old Kaunas’ citizens, published in 1985).

The aim of the article is to analyze the three letters written in Czech in 1884 and addressed to Polish poet, writer, literature critic, and translator Czesław Jankowski (1857–1929). The author of the letters is a previously unknown Czech woman, the daughter of a schoolteacher in the city of Kladno. She got acquainted with Cz. Jankowski in Krakow and became the object of his passion. The letters are stored in the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences in Vilnius. Although the author of this article has already mentioned the existence of these love letters in 2000, J. Hálkova’s letters to Cz. Jankowski have not yet been analyzed.

JAŠIŪNAI MANOR AS A SPACE FOR WRITING LITHUANIAN HISTORY The aim of this article is to discuss the Jašiūnai manor (Pol. Jaszuny; Russ. Яшуны; Vilniaus Governorate, Vilnius County), owned by the historian, journalist, poet, translator and collector Michał vel Michał Wincenty Feliks Baliński (1794–1864). The manor will be discussed not only as a cultural hub for intellectuals in a general sense, but also as a unique space for writing Lithuanian history. The term “space” is understood here in the broad sense, as of the manor—as well as in the more narrow sense, as of the library itself (the historian’s office). Especially important for this research was the latter concept of a “space within a space”, the “historian’s workshop”, and its epicenter—the archive (manuscript collection). The aim of the research was to reconstruct the story of the emergence and fate of this collection of documents including its contents, sources, and most importantly its thematic direction and distinctiveness. The research showed that the largest collection of historical documents once housed in the archive of the Jašiūnai manor library is now kept in the Jagiellonian Library (Krakow). This material remains important to the history of the city of Vilnius, Vilnius University, and Lithuania’s academic history. Supplementary elements include attention to the Radvila family, the period of Steponas Batoras’s rule, and the history of the Szubrawcy (rascals) Society. This last component can be considered as an integral part not only of the history of Vilnius city but also of its university. The dual nature of the Jašiūnai archive is not necessarily an asset. When the library and archive of Jan vel Jan Chrzciciel Władysław Sniadecki vel Śniadecki (1756–1830) was transferred to the manor, Baliński’s own collection, which initially focused on the history of Lithuanian cities and Szubrawcy Society (especially of the latter), wound up relegated to the background. Keeping in mind the “competition for libraries” among the intellectual manors of Lithuania in the first half of the 19th century as they sought to distinguish themselves, it is very possible to conclude that the former University rector’s installment in the manor can today be viewed as a “historical error”. Thus Jašiūnai lost some of its playfulness and distinctiveness in the context of other intellectual manors of that time. The situation would have been different if the Auszlawis (such was Balinski’s pseudonym in the Szubrawcy Society) collection had been associated not with Jan Sniadecki, but rather with the documentary legacy of Sotwaros (i.e. Jędrzej Sniadecki vel Śniadecki [1768–1838]), especially his documentation of the Szubrawcy. All the more so since the egodocuments of Balinski suggest the idea that its real hero was not Sniadecki the Elder, but Sniadecki Jr. Analysis of the Balinski archival collection only confirmed that which was shown by the previously executed so-called common biographical research of this historian and lord: he was relegated to the background by circumstances. That is to say, relegated to a life lived in the shadow of Jan Sniadecki’s personality and to the importance of the Szubrawcy ideology, especially in the early and last periods of his life. The Jašiūnai document collection housed in the Manuscripts Department of the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences shows that the latter circumstance was fully understood by Tadeusz vel Tadeusz Stanisław Wróblewski (1858–1925) and his peers. From here stems another “archival” conclusion regarding the uniqueness of the Wroblewski Library in our cultural and historical geography. The circumstances surrounding the transferral of the document collection from Jašiūnai remain unclear to this day, however it is very likely that Baliński’s will and testament was not taken into consideration. This shows that the owner of Jašiūnai did not have a Continuator for his work, and this can be seen in the ad te ipsum fragility of the collection.

Z PROBLEMÓW URZĘDOWEJ REJESTRACJI DRUKÓW W II RZECZYPOSPOLITEJ: EGZEMPLARZ OBOWIĄZKOWY, BIBLIOGRAFIA NARODOWA, STATYSTYKA WYDAWNICZARejestracja polskiej produkcji wydawniczej przed 1918 rokiem. Prawo o egzemplarzu obowiązkowym dla bibliotek 1919, 1927, 1932. Od „Biuletynu Bibliograficznego” i „Przewodnika Bibliograficznego” do „Urzędowego Wykazu Druków”.PROBLEMS OF THE STATE PRINTS REGISTRATION IN POLAND 1918–1939: LEGAL DEPOSIT, NATIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY, PUBLISHING STATISTICSThe author of the article analyses the history of official state registration of prints in Poland in 1919–1939. The main problem was to correlate the collecting of legal deposits as well as compile the current national bibliography and credible state publishing statistics. A signifi cant difficulty involved in compiling official book records was caused by the fact that had been no National Library before 1928. The article draws on the writings of bibliographers from the period Stefan Vrtel-Wierczyński, Jan Muszkowski, Władysław Tadeusz Wisłocki, Eustachy Gaberle, Jadwiga Dąbrowska, Helena Hleb-Koszańska. The author’s starting point is an analysis of legal deposit regulations issued three times: in 1919, 1927 and in 1932. According to the first regulations, legal deposits were to be given to university libraries in Kraków, Warsaw, Lviv, Lublin as well as the Public Library in Warsaw and the library of the Society of Friends of Sciences in Poznań. The main problem was that the regulations covered only part of the country formerly annexed by Russia and there was no specialist bibliographic institution Bibliographic Institute. Under the 1927 regulations, legal deposits were to be sent to the National Library, additionaly all journals were to be sent to the Ossolineum Library in Lviv. One legal deposit was also granted to five regional university libraries Warsaw, Vilnius, Lviv, Poznań, Kraków and two public libraries Warsaw, Toruń.Thus the legal deposit regulations were extended across the country. Under the 1932 regulations, legal deposits were to be given to the National Library, university libraries Jagiellonian Library, Warsaw University Library, Lviv University Library, Poznań University Library and Library of the Silesian Parliament later Silesian Library in Katowice, City Public Library in Toruń as well as the Wróblewski Library in Vilnius today Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences. The main problem in that period was the collecting of legal deposits.

The aim of this article is to investigate the history of the Cyrillic manuscript transcription of Selenographia (1647), which details Moon observation – the work of Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth astronomer Johannes Hevelius (Jan Heweliusz, 1611–1687). The codex is relevant in two aspects: first, as an example of a late-17th century book, incorporating the characteristics of both a manuscript and a printed publication; and second – as an example of scientific literature in the Commonwealth. Hevelius is a well-known sciencist. The researcher is recognized as the first precise topographer of the Moon. He has composed a catalogue of 1564 stars, discovered four comets, and defined new boundaries of several constellations. In historiography, the manuscript translation of Selenographia has been known since the end of the 19th century. However, in the beginning of the 20th century, the transcript was equated to a piece owned by Tsar Feodor III Alexeyevich (1661–1682), which was present in his library in 1682. The manuscript has been studied by multiple linguists, astronomers, and museologists from various countries; however, it is still yet to receive attention from Lithuanian scientists. This article aims to clarify the currently available scientific information regarding the manuscript version of J. Hevelius’s work Selenographia, which is presently kept in the Manuscript Department of the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences (LMAVB). This study also seeks to answer the following questions: whether the scientists of the GDL were aware of the piece and its Slavic translation, if there is a possibility that the codex may have belonged to the library of Tsar Feodor III Alexeyevich, and what are the history and the lifecycle of the codex. The object of this investigation is a manuscript codex (LMAVB RS F19–318) archived in the LMAVB. A digital copy of an exemplar archived in the Zurich ETH Library was used for comparative analysis. The history of astronomy in 17th century Europe and the GDL, as well as the placement of this work of Hevelius in that history, is shortly discussed and based on a literary analysis. This information was used to evaluate the scientific value of the manuscript codex under investigation and make conclusions regarding any possible demand for the translations of Selenographia in the GDL’s scientific environment of that time. Codicological and comparative analyses with the original print enabled to consider the circumstances of the translation and transcription of Selenographia and establish the characteristics of the manuscript codex. It was determined that the text is written in a hybrid Church Slavic language; it is written by several scribes in the Calligraphic Book Font with characteristics of the Chancellerie Font, distinctive to the cursives used in the 17th century in Kiev and Moscow. The transcription of the translation is illustrated with original copper engravings (17 of 140), hand-drawn copies of original drawings (17), and original (3) pictures. The majority of illustrations are missing, some blank gaps meant for tables are present, and several tables have been redacted completely. The contents of Selenographia were adapted to fit the environment of its purchaser: all dedications and celebratory texts dedicated to Hevelius were removed and supplementary texts were eliminated, an original preface created by the translator was added, and only an anonymous “ruler” is mentioned. The transcription of the text was intended to maintain the order of the text and illustrations as well as the exact glosses system present in the margins. All numbers and dates have been written in the Cyrillic alphabet; however a Western year numbering system was maintained, and the surnames of scientists were retained in their original Latin forms; objects named in schemes and diagrams were presented in the Latin alphabet. The coinciding fragments of an extant Selenographia translation (chapters 48, 51, 54, and 55) and texts of the codex kept in the LMAVB archives allow us to conclude that it is a translation made by S. Chizhinski during his service in Posol’skii prikaz (Moscow) in 1678–1681. Based on all the defined characteristics, as well as the unfinished appearance of the book and the variety of paper used, it may be concluded that it is a transcription meant for the diplomatic needs of Posol’skii prikaz rather than for the personal library of the Tsar.Efforts to find any evidence of the discussed Selenographia translation in the history of astronomy and book history in Lithuania were unsuccessful. It was not possible to clarify the history of the function of the codex as well. Nonetheless, the history of this book focuses one’s attention to another little-studied topic in Lithuania – the connections of literature and book culture in the 17th century that bridge the GDL and the Tsardom of Russia. To sum up, it may be concluded that access to new archival sources in Russia and Lithuania and a detailed chemical analysis of materials making up the codex (the ink in particular) would affirm or deny the conclusions reached in this study.

TEODOR NARBUTT’S SCIENTIFIC CORRESPONDENCE AS TESTIMONY TO THE ‘ACADEMIC’ NATURE OF DZIEJE NARODU LITEWSKIEGO S u m m a r y The critique of Dzieje narodu litewskiego (The History of the Lithuanian Nation 1–9, Vilnius, 1835–1841, [DNL]) had always made Teodor vel Teodor Mateusz Narbutt (vel O styk-Narbutt,1784–1864) argue that he was not a layman nor a wilful forger. His own approach to defending himself against the attack was unique: he prepared a second edition of DNL and the so-called New Mythology – Mytologija Litewska ze sczegółami do wiary, obyczajów i oświaty przedchrześciańskiej Narodu litewskiego odnoszącemi się (Lithuanian Mythology with Details about the Belief, Customs, and pre-Christianity Education of the Lithuanian Enlightenment, 1848), intended to publish the collection of sources of Lithuanian history kept at his manor in Szawry (Lith. Šiauriai; Grodno Governorate, as of 1843 Vilnius Governorate, Lida Region), and finally, as proof of his honest work, pieced together his scientific correspondence – the letters from scholars, old collectors, and other citizens that cared for Lithuania’s past. Today, this collection that Narbutt made himself – Korrespondencya Uczona (Scientific Correspondence [KU]) is kept at the Manuscript Department of the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Science (LMAVB : f. 18 [Manuscript collection B4], b. 185/2–185/16, 25r–791v). Narbutt’s peculiar method of defence bore an ad te ipsum character; however yet, due to historic circumstances (the sequestration of the Szawry manor, the seizure of the library and its transfer to the public library of Vilnius), originally designed as a tool of self-reflection, the collection became accessible to the public. And researchers dug into letters addressed to Narbutt with much gusto indeed. Nonetheless, the real attention grabbers were the celebrity names in this collection. Hence, just like the printed work of this historian, his handwritten legacy (in this case, correspondence), too, would often merit a fragmented read, which was largely due to its tremendous volume. For instance, DNL has 5,220 pages, KU 766 archival pages – a total of 1,532 pages recto and verso. In other words, letters to Narbutt were never approached in corpore, as an intentionally built collection with an incredibly bright idea and purpose. The idea that the appearance of this epistolary compendium had been inspired by autograph-hunting, a hot trend at thetime, should be disregarded straight away, because not every one of Narbutt’s correspondents was a celebrity. With a few exceptions, their overarching trait was intellectual work and love of Lithuanian antiques. The goal of the article was to approach the collection of letters to Narbutt as a whole, as a means of self-reflection a unique weapon of defence. Narbutt’s epistolary collection had never been dissected from any of these angles. The research has showed that today, KU consists of 386 letters. It is correspondence in Polish, German, Russian, and French (in the order of appearance) written in 1808–1858 (4 letters are not dated). Of the authors of the letters, 68 are men, 3 are women. The social picture of KU is very colourful: from gymnasium students to civil governors, from clergy to members of governorate statistical committees. Still, most of Narbutt’s correspondents were historians, archivists, and litterateurs. Some of the authors were litterateurs just as they were landlords; historians, as they were government officials; clergymen, as they were collectors. This motley crew had one thing in common: they all had read DNL. Cataclysmic political developments have prevented us from having KU in its final form. Not all the letters Narbutt himself had included in his collection have survived to this day. However, regardless of how incomplete KU today is, it features the names of nearly every scholar of Lithuania’s history or lover of Lithuanian antiques of the period nonetheless. The underlying theme of KU is Lithuania’s history, search for and dissemination of historic sources. The letters wax lyrical about DNL, while criticism is very subdued, if any. The collection reveals Narbutt as a prominent authority figure, a person that had rocked both the scientific world of the history of Lithuania and the public in general. KU had a high psychological value for Narbutt as well. DNL’s critique in the press was a source of daily stress, and the letters from Narbutt’s correspondents pointed to quite the opposite – approval of his research and DNL’s dissemination amidst the society. That was probably the reason why Narbutt fostered this collection so much. His ongoing concern was evident in his handmade folders for the letters, and even more so in his own notes. The books in his library were the only other thing that he would approach in a similar manner. 20th century historians have come to consider KU as a weighty piece of evidence of Narbutt as an honest researcher. However, what matters so much more is not the case of the so-called case of historic (non-)falsification, but the perception of KU as a whole. Most of the letters were written after the closure of the Imperial University of Vilnius. There was no official Vilnius school of history any more, but the historic thought had survived. It would present itself through search for and dissemination of sources of Lithuanian history, through historic tracts and reviews (anonymous as often as not). It would become evident on yet another level: in letters, hence private media that served as a forum for curious scientific seminars and epistolary dialogue on the subject of the history of Lithuania. It was through no accident that, instead of opting for just Correspondence, Narbutt titled his collection Scientific Correspondence. It stands to represent Szawry in its own peculiar way as well. The provincial manor became an intellectual centre – something that would have been impossible but for DNL, with all the mistakes that were (not) made in the tract.

Lietuvos mokslų akademijos Vrublevskių bibliotekaŽygimantų g. 1/8, LT-01102 Vilnius, LietuvaEl. paštas: narbutiene@mab.ltLietuvos mokslų akademijos Vrublevskių bibliotekos Retų spaudinių skyrius turi senas fondų komplektavimo tradicijas, syjančias su 1912 m. pradėjusia veikti Vilniaus advokato, bibliofilo Tado Vrublevskio (1858–1925) įkurtos bibliotekos formavimo raida. Specialusis raritetus komplektuojantis ir saugantis skyrius buvo įsteigtas 1957 m., sujungus tris – Senų, retų knygų, Meno leidinių ir Kartografijos leidinių – sektorius. Tai lėmė tolesnio dokumentų komplektavimo atrankos specifiką: čia saugomi ne tik seni ir reti spaudiniai, bet ir nauji meno bei kartografijos leidiniai. Lietuvos mokslų akademijos Vrublevskių bibliotekos Retų spaudinių skyriuje yra apie 400 tūkst. įvairaus pobūdžio dokumentų: knygų, periodinių leidinių, kartografinių spaudinių, meno albumų, raižinių, fotografijų, smulkiosios spaudos, mikrofilmų. Ši medžiaga sudaro atskirai suformuotus skyriaus fondus – rinkinius ir kolekcijas. Straipsnyje analizuojama, kaip Retų spaudinių skyriaus fondų turinys atitinka sąvokas „retas“ (raritetas) ir „cimelija“. Siekiama apibūdinti Retų spaudinių skyriaus komplektavimo turinį bei čia saugomų dokumentų atrankos specifiką. Taip pat norima prisiminti skyriaus fondų formavimo tradicijas ir nuspėti perspektyvas, leisiančias geriau ir racionaliau kaupti bei tvarkyti Retų spaudinių skyriaus dokumentus. Pagrindinis šaltinis – Retų spaudinių skyriaus darbo instrukcijos ir nuostatai.THE ACQUISITION OF RARE PUBLICATIONS IN THE WROBLEWSKI LIBRARY OF THE LITHUANIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: PROBLEMS, TRADITIONS, PERSPECTIVESDAIVA NARBUTIENĖ AbstractThe acquisition of rare publications has always been a challenge due to several factors. The first and foremost of them is the very concept of a rare publication, an issue that has been causing theo­retical disputes for more than a decade. Another factor that influences the formation of special collections is the historical development of a spe­cific library, shaped by the methods of obtaining documents. The structure of a library – the for­mation of its subdivisions – is also of importance. In addition to the above objective factors, there are also subjective aspects of work organization, such as the intellect and experience of the staff.Upon the merging of the sectors of Old and Rare Books, of Art and of Cartography, the Depar­tment of Old, Rare and Cartography Publications was founded in 1957. The character of the mer­ged sectors was the main factor that determined the nature of the acquired documents, which has remained almost unchanged until today. In 1991, this department was divided into two: the depar­tments of Old Periodicals and Rare Publications.The aim of this article is to characterize the acquisition strategy and the specifics of docu­ment selection in the Rare Book Department. Another objective is to overview the traditions of the formation of the department holdings and to outline the perspectives of a more effective kee­ping and cataloguing of documents. The main source is the Rules and Instructions for the work of the Rare Book Department.At present, the department operates on the basis of the Acquisition Instruction confir­med in 1996. The main principles of rare book acquisition are the following: age (pre-1801 publications), rarity (bibliographic rarities), va­lue, uniqueness (exceptional documents whose preservation requires special conditions). The documents from the holdings of the Rare Book Department in the WLLAS electronic catalogue are labeled CIM (the abbreviation of “cimelia”, the word derived from the Greek κειμήλιον and meaning “treasure”).The Rare Book Department holds more than 200 thousand documents of various nature: bo­oks, cartography publications, art albums, en­gravings, photographs, small documents, micro­films. These materials are grouped into separately formed collections.Lately, the problem of the acquisition of ne­wer documents (books, art albums, exhibition catalogues, accidental (small) documents) has become much more urgent. In our opinion, the Rare Book Department should accord more at­tention to printed heritage the concept of which is inseparable from a certain period in history.

The article discusses the cloth-bound and decorated books stored in the Rare Books Department of the Wroblewski Library of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, and expands on the use of textile depending on the content of the book and its purpose.

Memoirs “Notaty pamiętnikowe” of Antoni Łazarowicz (1819-1905), preserved in the manuscript in the Lithuanian Library of the Academy of Sciences Wróblewscy in Vilnius constitute a unique document. Their author, a civil servant in Vilnius, discovers his true attitude to the tsarist authorities in his diary. This interesting source shows the other face of a tsar official. It is also a valuable account of the living conditions of Borderland Intelligence in the 19th century.