Dmitrijus Dovgiala – paskutinysis Vilniaus archeografijos komisijos pirmininkas (1903–1915)

Throughout its existence (1864–1915), the Vilnius Commission for the Study and Publication of Old Acts, more commonly known as the Vilnius Archaeographic Commission, had seven leaders. The last of them was Dmitrij Dovgjallo (Lith. Daugėla; 1868–1942), appointed on 2 September 1913. The word “last” is a fateful one in Dovgjallo’s biography: he was also the last director (archivist) of the Central Archive of Old Act Books of the Vitebsk and Mogilev Governorates in Vitebsk, which closed in 1903. In addition, he served as the last chairman of the Temporary Commission for the Creation and Management of the Vilnius Public Library and Its Associated Museum. The aim of this article is to reconstruct the 13 years of Dovgjallo’s life spent in Vilnius, drawing on previously unused archival documents as well as little-studied printed sources (especially Dovgjallo’s opinion pieces) while also paying attention to the earlier period of his archival and archaeographic work in Vitebsk. Officially, Dovgjallo presented himself as a man of learning – an archivist, archaeographer, historian, and geographer – but in Vilnius he was most active as an opinion writer and public figure. His writing is characterised by strong empathy and resounding Great Russian rhetoric. He readily engaged in the activities of both state-supported secular societies and religious associations, in most of which he held leadership positions. As an active member of the Vilnius Holy Spirit Brotherhood, he also participated in numerous other initiatives, such as the founding of the Count Mikhail Muravyov Museum (he genuinely supported the idea of this institution from the very beginning) and the inauguration ceremonies of the monument to Empress Catherine II (1904); he also served as a member of the Council of the Church of the Transfer of the Relics of St. Nicholas (elected in 1912). In 1913, he took part in the commemorations of the fiftieth anniversary of the suppression of the 1863–1864 uprising, the 300th anniversary of the accession of the House of Romanov, and the consecration of the Church of St. Constantine and St. Michael (also known as the Romanov Church). The commemoration of historically and religiously significant dates via excursions and lectures was likewise an integral part of his pedagogical work at the Vilnius Realschule. Dovgjallo’s biography offers an inside view of the everyday life of the Russian cultural (scholarly) elite in Vilnius: the nuances of archival and archaeographic work, professional relationships (both collegial and hierarchical), domestic and financial affairs, and incentive mechanisms (the system of bonuses). He stood out from his colleagues for his pronounced rationality – he pursued a position (often several at once) only after carefully weighing its financial benefits. Such practicality contrasts with the idealism he proclaimed in his writings and the pathos he expressed regarding his personal contribution to restoring historical truth in the North-Western Province.