The following is excerpted from a larger article in Rodziny, The Journal of the Polish Genealogical Society of America, Winter 2010—Ed.  with translation assistance from William F. Hoffman

The collections of the Lithuanian State Historical Archives clearly reflect the geopolitical history of Poland and Lithuania, countries connected by a union lasting centuries. The parts of Lithuania with the largest number of Poles were the areas of Vilnius, Kaunas, Hrodna (now in Belarus), Trakai, Marijampolė, and Merkinė (Polish names Wilno, Kowno, Grodno, Troki, Mariampol, and Merecz, respectively). That accounts for the presence of popular Polish surnames on the pages of metrical registers.

My first, brief visit allowed me to familiarize myself generally with the functioning of the archives and their holdings. I was surprised at the time by the number of metrical and other databases. It was a good signal to plan for a longer visit. Half a year later, I showed up once more at 10 Gerosios Vilties Street in Vilnius; this time, I stayed in Vilnius for two weeks. The knowledge I acquired will be particularly useful to readers whose roots are in the current territories of Lithuania, northeastern Poland, and the borders of Belarus.

The fact that the archives possess large collections of metrical records cannot be denied, but some issues may put a damper on researchers’ enthusiasm and discourage them from a long and costly expedition. First, the research rooms cannot serve all those who want to use them. Every day, from Monday to Friday, the research rooms are completely full, and latecomers wait in the corridors, hunting for spaces to become free. There are two research rooms in two wings of the building, one for books—with 20 one-person tables—the other for microfilms, with 10 readers (usually one or two broken). To be guaranteed an open spot, researchers must be at the archives punctually when the research rooms open at 8:30 a.m. The archives does not accept appointments or reservations for spaces in the research rooms.

Secondly, the system for ordering records and having those orders filled limits and determines potential research output opportunities. One may order 10 units at one time, but may order more only after returning the first records. Materials are processed according to the user’s place in the ordering sequence. A request for books, placed before noon, is filled no earlier than the next day after 10 a.m., more often, in the afternoon hours or even the day after. The accompanying awareness of time wasted and the feeling of futility can be irritating. Fortunately, microfilms are provided much more quickly, within two to three hours. I quickly worked out a system to make maximum use of my time in the archives. I placed orders at the same time in both research rooms, and spent the long time waiting for books on work in the microfilm area. I reserved my place in the other work area by leaving sheets of paper with a pen.

What this means is that if one plans, for example, five days for research, no more than a total of 50 books can be examined. Some books contain sets of baptism, marriage, and death records compiled annually. From approximately the 1870s onward, separate books were kept for births, marriages, and deaths. This arrangement means that the daily limit restricts research to a period of three years. In view of these restrictions, dilemmas arise: which yearbooks and which records to designate to make our research as effective as possible? The records for one parish consist, on average, of about 200 signatures. To examine all the possible units for a given parish, one would need to remain in Vilnius for an entire month. This does not even take into account cases in which ancestors came from more than one parish. For an experienced researcher, this is like a blow to the heart, because such a researcher is capable of examining 50 books in a single day!

But that is still not the end to the obstacles. Another trap awaits when we select items from the standard inventory. Every item must be checked against the “black inventory,” a list of items excluded from access because of poor physical condition. On average, every second or third unit is on this blacklist. One of the key records in my case was a marriage record from before 1885, and the years 1880–84 were on that list. In addition, the archives routinely exclude successive units, which in practice means that we may receive part of the materials we ordered. It is a kind of roulette. The practice of genealogy has taught me patience, so I quickly consoled myself with the thought, “Maybe next year.” Unfortunately, that hope vanished the moment I heard one of the staff explain that items on the blacklist are awaiting restoration, and that may not happen for dozens of years.

One more significant and specific factor influences the effectiveness of research—the collective system of keeping records. The records of various parishes were compiled annually by deanery. For example, the yearly registers of the deanery of Merkinė/Merecz optimally would contain records from 21 parishes: Alovė, Alytus, Birštonas, Butrimonys, Daugai, Dusmenys, Jieznas, Marcinkonys, Merkinė, Nedzingė, Nemajūnai, Nemunaitis, Onuškis, Perloja, Pivašiūnai, Punia, Ratnyčia, Rūdninkai, Stakliškės, Valkininkai, and Varėna. Researchers must take into account changes in diocesan administrative structures for a given period. If available, overviews of a given diocese’s structure, churches, and properties are useful. This deanery system of records provides the chance to examine records from neighboring parishes; but on the other hand, it severely limits the number of available books for a specific parish connected with our ancestors.

The indexes that genealogists value so highly appear in many books, but no rule required that they must be provided. Thick volumes without indexes demand thumbing through more than 1,000 pages—although the practice at the time of entering surnames in the margins greatly facilitates the research process. Surname spellings and their variability can baffle a researcher. For that reason, it is worthwhile reading every record with any surname that resembles the one we want in sound or spelling. Names took on different spellings, depending on the nationality of the one doing the recording and the influences of Polonization and Russification.

Curiously, the Lithuanian Archives does not provide the original names in official transcripts. In documents from the 19th century, I read Iwan Petrulenis, Ekaterina Samujlewicz, Matwiej Kukowski, but in the Lithuanian transcripts, they appear as Jonas Petrulionis, Kotryna Samuilavičiūtė, and Motiejus Kukauskas. Such documents have only the hallmark of transcription and are, speaking frankly, forgeries. The irony of this procedure lies in the fact that it is prescribed by Lithuanian law. Formally imposed spelling of surnames has even become a bone of contention in the political relations of Lithuania and Poland. To this day, government negotiations and complaints before international justice and human rights tribunals have not helped.

Historically speaking, Polish-Lithuanian conflict has been going on for ages and ages. The mutual animosity began as early as the 16th century, when Poles regarded themselves as a nation at a higher stage of development than the “wild” Lithuanians. Conflict was also due to differing concepts of ethnicity, different languages and cultures, and separate ethnic identities. The Lithuanians deny any ethnic connection with the Slavs, identifying themselves as a Baltic people. Yet Lithuanians underwent Polonization in all stages of life—national administration, education, and religion—and even borrowed social habits. After the period of Polonization, Lithuanians revived their language and, during the period between the world wars, cleansed their language of all Slavic loan words.

Returning to the Historical Archives in Vilnius, I would like to end by praising its directorate highly in two regards. One is for the free access, without charge, to digital copies, so that each user can take photographs to his or her heart’s content—as long as no flash is used. The tables are equipped with lamps, and the daylight is excellent by the broad windowsills. I want to praise even more highly, the initiative for digitizing metrical records and making them available online.

Iwona Dakiniewicz is an experienced genealogical researcher who contributes free articles to Rodziny in order to share her expertise with it members. Readers may contact her at genealogy@ pro.onet.pl.