mail: Bill Thayer	Help	Up	Home
previous: Chapter 22 This webpage reproduces a chapter of The Story of Lithuania By Thomas G. Chase printed by Stratford House, Inc. New York, 1946 The text is in the public domain. This page has been carefully proofread and I believe it to be free of errors. If you find a mistake though, please let me know! next: Chapter 24

You can follow much of the geography by opening Ian Macky's large map of modern Lithuania
in a separate window.

 p226  Chapter XXIII
Forty Years of Repression

(The numbers link directly to the sections.)

Michael Muraviev's two year dictatorial rule (May, 1863–March, 1865) as the Governor-General of the Russian-occupied Grand Duchy of Lithuania, not only suppressed the insurrectionists, but also laid down the basis for the series of severe repressive measures of the following forty years.

Muraviev was an ardent Slavophil. After his release from prison, to which he had been sentenced for participation in the December uprising in 1825, he became a loyal supporter of the Tsar. He continually advocated the complete Russification of the so‑called Northwestern Provinces of the Russian Empire, that is, the areas of the historical Grand Duchy of Lithuania which under Russian domination had been divided into the six governments of Kaunas, Vilnius, Gardinas (all Lithuanian), and Mogilev, Vitebsk, Minsk (all White Ruthenian).⁠1 This attitude of Muraviev's was explicitly approved by the Tsar on the occasion of his appointment as the Governor-General of Lithuania.

Of course, Muraviev's reasoning was marred by a most serious blunder. It was a known fact that the Pole was considered a foreigner in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania both before the Union of Lublin (1569) and afterwards by reason of the regulations of the Lithuanian Statute. Likewise the eastern or White Ruthenian areas  p227 of the Lithuanian Grand Duchy were mainly Greek Orthodox in religion, while the western or truly Lithuanian areas were mainly Roman Catholic or Protestant. In the 19th century, especially, the majority of the landed gentry and petty civil officials throughout the entire territory of the historical Grand Duchy employed the Polish language, although the bulk of the population, the peasants, retained their White Ruthenian and purely Lithuanian languages in the east and the west respectively. But Muraviev was guilty of an egregious error in confusing Catholicism with Polish nationality and Orthodoxy with Russian national aspirations, when he doomed the Lithuanian-speaking peasant to assimilation by the Russian element.

1. Final Abolition of Serfdom

Having subdued the more serious efforts of the revolting landed gentry of Lithuania within six months, Muraviev proceeded with his program for the Russification of the so‑called Northwestern Provinces. He regarded the Catholic clergy and the Polonized nobility of Lithuania as the most dangerous obstacles to complete Russian domination. Consequently, his first measure was to win the good will of the Lithuanian-speaking peasants by improving their economic and social status at the expense of the upper classes, thereby widening the breach which already existed.

When Muraviev had arrived at Vilnius to assume his new post, the details of the abolition of serfdom, in accordance with the Manifesto of 1861, had not been carried out in Lithuania, due to the numerous disagreements between the peasants not landlords. The Arbiters of Peace consisted chiefly of the Polonized Lithuanian estate owners, who were rather reluctant to surrender better areas of land to the peasants and sought to retain every possible advantage for themselves. At the same time they had been the chief supporters of the revolt of 1863. Consequently, Muraviev banished and imprisoned these Arbiters of Peace and replaced them with Russians. He also introduced a number of instructions and orders to the reformed Super­visory Committees, fixing payments for the redemption of land according to locality and value, treating of  p228 various details which had given cause for disagreement, and almost invariably seeking to favor the Lithuanian peasant, whom he classed with the Russian subjects of the Empire. Furthermore, Muraviev concerned himself a great deal with the peasants who had previously obtained their freedom without land, and with the various servants who could not establish their eligibility for the possession of land, and with the granting of servitudes or equivalent benefits to the peasants. Although, through Muraviev's efforts, serfdom was definitely abolished in Lithuania, nevertheless the problem of land reform had not been thoroughly solved. Many remained landless and therefore emigrated to other countries. The Governor-General's intentions were not at all altruistic; they were an intimate part of his system of bringing about the Russification of the Lithuanian people and the utter destruction of the Polonized Lithuanian nobility.

2. Self-Government

The Manifesto of 1861 had also provided for a certain amount of autonomy in local administration for the peasants. Thus, each government (gubernia) was divided into village communities to be ruled by a freely elected Elder and the peasant Assembly. Several village communities formed a canton, at the head of which were a chairman and secretary, who usually were appointees of the estate owners, and who, according to Muraviev's declaration of August, 1863, favored only the affairs of the gentry in opposition to those of the peasantry. Consequently, he ordered a new election of officers, completely excluding any interference on the part of the nobility. And since, Muraviev claimed there were no suitable individuals in Lithuania who knew the Russian language, he appointed Russians to occupy the posts of secretaries. The introduction of Provincial Councils (Zemstvo) in 1864, which improved the form of self-government, was not extended to Lithuania, chiefly because it would have spelled the restoration of liberties to the landed gentry, who had proved themselves thoroughly disloyal to the Tsar in 1863.

Continuing his policy of redu­cing Lithuania to an indistinguishable part and parcel of the Russian Empire, Muraviev pursued five  p229 other modes of repression, which were to be continued over a period of almost forty years by his successors. These were: colonization, strengthening of the Orthodox religion, Russianization of the schools, suppression of the Catholic Church and the persecution of the Lithuanian press.

3. Russian Colonization

Before the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Republic, the presence of the Russian element in Lithuania Major was both insignificant and rather rare. Russian infiltration began only with the grants of confiscated estates to Russian dignitaries after 1795 and continued after the revolt of 1831 with the introduction of Russian peasants from the interior of the Tsar's Empire. However, a more energetic and systematic colonization of Lithuanian territories ensued upon the arrival of Muraviev. The opportunity was indeed at hand.

Throughout the so‑called Northwestern Provinces confiscation of possessions, exile and banishment of aristocrats and peasants had taken place on a large scale in 1863, thereby leaving a great deal of free land. These areas Muraviev (and his successors) sought to bestow on Russians for the purpose of colonization. He seriously restricted the possible purchase of land by the Lithuanian gentry and by the emancipated Lithuanian-speaking peasants. Landlords, suspected of complicity with the insurgents, were ordered either to exchange their estates for others in Russia Proper, or to sell them to individuals approved by the Russian authorities; the latter definitely excluded the Lithuanian boyars and Poles as eligible buyers. Since all land transactions were subject to the decision of the Russian governor, individuals of Russian nationality almost invariably received preference over the Lithuanian peasant.

In the course of time, Russian colonists increased in number.⁠2 It is estimated that seven thousand Russian families were settled in the Kaunas government alone by the end of the 19th century. And in spite of the support rendered them, these Russian emigrants proved  p230 generally un­success­ful and unable to influence the Lithuanians to any serious extent.

4. Orthodoxy

Muraviev also dedicated a great deal of energy to improve the status of the Orthodox Church and its adherents in the Northwestern Provinces. This procedure affected the White Ruthenian areas more than the truly Lithuanian areas of the Grand Duchy. In the former, all remnants of the Uniates were gradually demolished. In the latter, new Orthodox temples were erected in various sections — Vilnius, Kaunas and Gardinas. Temples, already existing, were renovated. The ministers were granted vast financial assistance for the organization of schools under their personal direction. Their salaries were increased. Grants of land were bestowed upon them. At times, they even assumed the roles of the police in behalf of the Tsar's interests. Furthermore, such details as the correctness of the Orthodox liturgy, prayerbooks in Russian and White Ruthenian tongues, devotional pictures and crosses were carefully attended to through the initiative of Muraviev. In fine, the Orthodox religion, foreign as it was to residents of Lithuania, was intended to promote the Russification of the Lithuanian people.

5. Schools

The campaign to Russianize schools in Lithuania had been inaugurated during the days of Novosiltsov. His program was intensified after the un­success­ful revolt of 1831. Its influence, however, had been more keenly felt only by the higher schools. In the meanwhile, elementary grade training had been carried on by numerous parochial schools, where the Lithuanian language was used and Polish and Russian were taught. The number of such schools increased, especially during the early years of the episcopate of Valancius, Bishop of Samogitia (1850‑75). Likewise, other private schools had been maintained on the estates of the gentry. All served to provide some education for the children of the peasant-serfs, to  p231 whom higher studies were simply impossible, unless gained through bribery or under the sponsor­ship of an influential aristocrat.

In 1861, Shirinski-Shichmatov, super­visor of the restored Vilnius Province of Education, proposed a very definite program of Russianization for all schools in Lithuania. The plan consisted of the total elimination of any remaining Polish influence, the temporary toleration of the Lithuanian language, and the exclusive employment of Russian teachers. Through Kornilov, Muraviev fathered a thorough and practical application of this policy. In 1864 he ordered the closing of all parochial schools, which until then had escaped more serious Russian domination. In their stead, in the governments of Gardinas, Kaunas, Vilnius and Minsk, schools subsidized and controlled by Russian authorities were substituted. The Lithuanian language was permitted to be used in the teaching of the catechism in parts of the Kaunas government alone. The Polish language was absolutely proscribed, and Russian was made the official tongue. Meanwhile, Russian-speaking teachers, unable to be understood by the Lithuanian children, were brought into the country while their salaries were increased some fifty per cent as an inducement to keep them at their posts. Where possible, these schools were established near Orthodox temples and always subjected to careful super­vision. Neither did the teachers' seminaries, organized at Molodeczno in the government of Minsk (1864) and at Panevezys (1872) produce any great number of capable instructors; and invariably, these men could not speak Lithuanian.

The Lithuanian gentry and the Catholic clergy of course, were not permitted to participate in the organization and administration of these schools, while the ministers of the Orthodox Church were quite often entrusted with such work. Taxes were exacted from the peasants for the support of this system of education. And Muraviev's successor forbade the use of the Lithuanian language, even for fundamental catechetical instructions.

 p232  6. The Catholic Church

Since some of the Catholic clergy in Lithuania had played an active part in the revolutionary movement of 1863, the Catholic Church was exposed to a series of repressive measures. Almost immediately, Muraviev attempted to bring the entire activity of the Catholic Church under Russian control. Those churches and monasteries which had not already been seized, were forbidden to be repaired without the permission of the Governor-General. Erection of new church buildings, public processions, public preaching were proscribed. Admission into monasteries and seminaries was declared permissible, only after the consent of the Governor and the Governor-General had been obtained. Bishops were ordered to consult Russian civil authorities before publishing assignments for the clergy. Only set, previously approved, and censored sermons were tolerated for use in the pulpits. Some 32 parishes, 52 chapels and 20 monasteries, suspected of conspiracy, were closed. Income for the support of clergy and churches was similarly affected by various restrictions. Wayside crosses which had dotted the Lithuanian countryside were removed. And the chancery of Bishop Valancius and his staff was transferred by Muraviev from Varniai to the town of Kaunas, where Russian super­vision could be more easily exercised.

Combatting all influence of the Polonized Lithuanian gentry, Muraviev forbade the public use of the Polish language and ordered the immediate elimination of all signs written in Polish and the dissolution of all existing Polish organizations, charitable or religious. At the same time, he suppressed the Temperance Society which, sponsored by Bishop Valancius, had gained great prominence in the diocese of Samogitia. The influence of this organization was clearly demonstrated in 1859, when the governments of Kaunas and Vilnius suffered a tremendous decrease of revenue from the poorer sale of alcoholic liquors. Previously, in 1858, attempts had been made to abolish the Temperance Society and its numerous branches. But it was only after Muraviev had forbidden all meetings and gatherings (1863), had branded the society as revolutionary, and  p233 imposed severe fines and penalties on the propagators of its ideals, that the Temperance Association was finally forced to discontinue its work.

7. The Press

Muraviev had quite success­fully filled all posts in the administrative organs of the land with Russians. Undoubtedly, the severest measure adopted, in order to hasten the Russification of the Lithuanian people, was the substitution of Russian characters for the Latin in the printing of Lithuanian literature. This mode of procedure was calculated to create a more intimate contact between the Lithuanians and the real Russian elements of the Empire. It was a severe blow to the literary movement, gaining momentum in Lithuania, especially since from 1845 to 1864 the publication of books in the Lithuanian language for Lithuania Major had greatly increased. Thus, while in 1835‑1844 only 38 new books had appeared, in 1845‑1854 some 101 Lithuanian books were published and no less than 249 were issued in 1855‑1864. The numbers of Lithuanian writers had likewise multiplied.

When, in 1864, John Juska, teacher at St. Petersburg, visited Kornilov, the Curator at Vilnius, while making preparations for the publication of a Lithuanian-Russian grammar, the latter suggested that the Lithuanian text be transcribed into Russian characters. After first agreeing with Kornilov, Juska later refused to permit the publication of his grammar in this manner. Subsequently, Stanislas Mikucki, a Pole at Warsaw, expressed his willingness to cooperate with Kornilov's plan; a committee of four, consisting of Mikucki, Kreczinski, Ivinskis and Petkevicius, was then formed by Muraviev for this purpose. Ivinskis soon withdrew from the committee. Petkevicius who had previously given up Catholicism for Greek Orthodoxy, had been employed by the Russians in the censor's office in Lithuania since 1851.

It seems, however, that during his regime, Muraviev never issued a written order prohibiting the publication of books in the Lithuanian language with Latin characters. Nevertheless he did forbid the  p234 further propagation of Valancius' Zemaiciu Vyskupyste (The See of Samogitia) and some Lithuanian devotional books, as being dangerous and insidious to the Russian government. But it was his successor, Governor-General Constantine Kaufman, who on September 6, 1865, absolutely proscribed the use of Lithuanian books printed in Latin characters. Kreczinski was then delegated to super­vise the preparation of a Lithuanian grammar, prayerbook, hymnal and Bible in Russian characters.

The edict of the Governor-General, carried force only within the governments under his immediate jurisdiction (Kaunas, Vilnius, Gardinas, Mogilev, Minsk, Vitebsk) as long as they remained under martial law, and therefore no legal obstacles prevented the publication of Lithuanian literature in Latin characters in other domains of the Russian Empire. But shortly afterwards, Kaufman induced the Russian Minister of the Interior, Valuyev, to issue a request for the proclamation of similar prohibitions by the governors of all the other Russian gubernias. Valuyev's action, influencing the various governors, police forces, and censors, was supplemented by the Tsar's decree in 1866, which made the use of Russian characters compulsory for Lithuanian writings, published under the auspices of the government. The different authorities in charge of the administration of the country widened the scope of the Tsar's declaration to include Lithuanian books printed outside of Russia and proceeded to inaugurate an intense persecution of the Lithuanian press.

On March 28, 1871, martial law was repealed in Lithuania. Yet, practically all the prevailing regulations were maintained in force. But among them, a formal prohibition of Lithuanian books in Latin characters was no longer found. As a matter of fact, nine years later (1880), the Tsar's decree of 1866 was also repealed, when permission was granted for the printing of Lithuanian scholar­ly and scientific works in Latin characters, under the provision that these would not be propagated in the Northwestern and the Vistula provinces, that is, Lithuania and Poland respectively.

Although no further general prohibitions were issued, local administrative organs and governors took it upon themselves to  p235 continue the total suppression of Lithuanian literature. This unjust vigilance showed signs of weakening only after 1890, when authorities began occasionally to distinguish between books, which were anti-Russian in content, and books which did not propose revolutionary ideals, although they were printed in Latin characters.

In fine, Muraviev had outlined and prepared a plan for the complete Russification of the Northwestern Provinces. This system was closely followed by the Russian authorities for four decades with varying intensity. It did succeed to a vast degree in Russifying the White Ruthenian or eastern areas of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Nevertheless, among the truly Lithuanian element of Lithuania Major it proved a total failure. This oppression, of course, deprived the Lithuanian nation of its already strongly Polonized gentry, who later definitely began to consider itself as part of the old Poland, both politically and culturally. At the same time, it merely created a reaction among the Lithuanian-speaking people, which in turn aroused a deep national consciousness, particularly among the Lithuanian intelligentsia.

---

The Author's Notes:

1 The district of Bialystok had been incorporated with the government of Gardinas in 1842.

2 During Muraviev's two year stay, 76 families were established at Vilnius, 653 in the Kaunas government.

◂ previous						next ▸
Images with borders lead to more information. The thicker the border, the more information. (Details here.)
UP TO:		T. G. Chase: The Story of Lithuania	History of Lithuania	European History	Home
A page or image on this site is in the public domain ONLY if its URL has a total of one *asterisk. If the URL has two **asterisks, the item is copyright someone else, and used by permission or fair use. If the URL has none the item is © Bill Thayer. See my copyright page for details and contact information.

Accessibility