‘A Man of Phenomenal Intellectual Ability and Strong Ethical Principles’: January Uprising Insurgent Nikolai Witkowski in Siberian Exile.

Dzmitry Matwiejczyk

The January Uprising (1863–1864), which swept across the territories of present-day Belarus, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine, radically transformed the lives of many people, particularly its direct participants and their families. Thousands of them were exiled to Siberia, either to forced labour or to settlement. For some, exile proved profoundly destructive: they lost their health, their ties with loved ones, their former social standing, and often their lives. For others, however strange it may sound, exile became a catalyst that contributed to the formation of their identity as creators, in the broadest sense of the term. A significant proportion of the uprising’s participants were young people who had yet to find their path in life. From among them emerged capable entrepreneurs, skilled engineers, and gifted figures in the cultural and scientific spheres. Among the latter was Nikolai Witkowski.

He is not, however, a figure of the first rank in the history of nineteenth-century science. In his time, however, he made a substantial contribution to the development of research on archaeological monuments, as well as to the geology and geography of Siberia, and his achievements were well known to his contemporaries. He also contributed to the establishment of historical and natural sciences across the Russian Far East, and his discoveries were later included in all the major encyclopaedias of Siberian history known today (for example, the Siberian Soviet Encyclopaedia). Witkowski himself, however, remained somewhat in the shadow of another well-known insurgent from Belarus and explorer of Siberia, his friend Jan Czerski. Perhaps this is why his biography is less widely known to the general public.

Early Years: a Poor Family, Participation in the Uprising, and Two Sentences

Nikolai Witkowski was born on 28 July 1842 in the village of Kazanava (in the part of it known as the Mokshyna manor), in Surazh district, Vitebsk Governorate. He was the son of Jan, a small tenant farmer and son of Symon (born in 1813), and Bohumiła, the daughter of Sebastian Katowicz, who married in 1839. He had two brothers, Aleksander Dariusz (born in 1840) and Józef (born in 1848), as well as a sister, Apolonia (born between 1844 and 1846). The family was poor. His father was illiterate and leased the Mokshyna manor, which had an area typical of rural holdings of the time – half a włóka of land [1 włóka – approximately 17 hectares – ed. note]. However, this did not prevent him, in 1861, from obtaining confirmation of Russian noble status from the Heraldry Department of the Governing Senate of the Russian Empire [i.e. the nobility – ed. note], although this was achieved with the aid of a large number of falsified documents. For his family coat of arms, Jan Witkowski claimed the Poraj heraldic emblem, although this, too, is most likely a forgery.

In 1862, Nikolai Witkowski left his family and went to Mogilev Governorate. There he took up work as an estate manager (economus) in the Pavlovichi estate in Mogilev district, a decision that proved decisive for his future. In the spring of 1863, when insurgent units began to assemble in Mogilev Governorate, he – together with another resident of Pavlovichi, the excise inspector Marian von Robert – left on 21 April under the pretext of a hunting trip and joined the Mogilev insurgent detachment This unit was formed on 22 April at the Czarnaruczcza estate, owned by Michał Makowiecki. The detachment existed only for a very short time. After its formation, the unit moved westward in an attempt to join other insurgent detachments on the border between the Barysaw and Sienno districts. It was defeated on 27 April near the town of Slaveni in Sienno district, and the majority of its insurgents were taken prisoner. Witkowski initially managed to escape and returned to Pavlovichi on 28 April. However, he immediately surrendered to the Russian authorities. He was subsequently investigated by the Mogilev Investigative Commission and tried by the Mogilev Military Court Commission (also known as the Field Military Court Commission, established in Mogilev for political offenders).

By order of the confirmation issued by the Governor-General of Vilnius, Mikhail Muravyov, on 2 February 1864, Witkowski received a relatively lenient sentence – exile to the Penza Governorate under police supervision. However, the case then took an intriguing turn. Under one of the terms of the sentence, Witkowski was required to swear an oath of allegiance. It was precisely this oath that he refused to take. In 1864, such actions were interpreted by the Russian authorities as confirmation of anti-imperial views, which led to a significant tightening of the sentence. Witkowski was brought once again before a military court, and in May of that year a new judgement was passed: deprivation of civil rights, confiscation of property, and eight years’ penal servitude.

The Siberian Period: Non-Penal Servitude and Self-Education

Witkowski arrived in Eastern Siberia later in 1864. It is likely that he was not in fact assigned to penal servitude in the strict sense of hard labour, which was not uncommon, as the local authorities in Siberia often redirected exiles to other forms of work at their own discretion. For the first five years, Witkowski worked as a farmhand for the Orthodox clergyman Pyotr Speransky in the village of Olonki, in the Balagansk district of the Irkutsk Governorate. He lived in an outbuilding in the yard and, being familiar with rural labour from childhood, carried out ordinary farm work. His relations with his employer were good – they often spent time in conversation. Witkowski also frequently looked after the clergyman’s three children. Moreover, the priest did not forbid visits at weekends from five fellow insurgents who had likewise been exiled. Although he was undoubtedly opposed to the uprising, he nevertheless engaged calmly in discussions with his political opponents. In the course of these conversations, Witkowski even expressed his own views on the uprising, which were later recorded by his friend Mikhail Ovchinnikov: ‘I,‘ he said, ‘am not Polish but Belarusian; for me, nationality and in particular the Polish uprising have no significance whatsoever. I joined the uprising only as a manifestation of a broader, universal human cause.’

Good relations with the Orthodox priest had another important consequence for Witkowski: they enabled him to expand his knowledge. The basis for this was his host’s library. Witkowski taught himself botany, as well as German and French, and more broadly engaged in self-education at the level of a secondary school curriculum. This was soon to have a profound impact on his future fate.

After five years, Speransky was transferred to another parish, and Witkowski was forced to take employment with a local peasant who treated the exiled insurgent in a completely different manner. He was often required to work as a cart driver and transport various ‘gentlemen’. Witkowski described his life during this period as follows: ‘The horses were usually thin, exhausted from work; they did not run, and the “master” would shout: “Move it, Polish mug!” Well, you lash the horses with a whip; they run a little, and then go slowly again. After that I leave the horses alone, thinking that the master is satisfied. But not here! Suddenly you feel the master “striking” you on the neck or the back, and sparks fly before your eyes. I turn around and ask: “Why are you beating me, sir? I am not the one riding, but the horses.” But he does not calm down: “Ride, Polish mug, faster, or I’ll count your teeth and ribs!”’

After the village of Olonki, Witkowski lived in the village of Telminskoye, also working as a farmhand. It was here that he first became acquainted with the sites of prehistoric human settlements along the banks of the Kitoi River. This, too, was later to have significant consequences for him.

In September 1873, Witkowski was granted permission to travel to Irkutsk for 20 days. He made immediate use of this opportunity. He managed to obtain successive postponements of his departure from the city, as a result of which he spent several years there. To support himself, he also took on occasional work, including water delivery. However, after several years, on the recommendation of some ‘gentleman,’ Witkowski became a private tutor in the household of the merchant Mietlayev, where he prepared the merchant’s daughter for admission to one of the girls’ institutes in Moscow.

Witkowski carried out his first scientific research in 1877. Commissioned by the East Siberian Section of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, he collected extensive botanical material in the vicinity of Irkutsk and systematised it. From that moment onwards, his path as a scientist began.

The Final Period of His Life: Scholarship and Suicide.

Chance plays a major role in every person’s life. In Witkowski’s case, there were many such instances. One of the most significant was the great fire that broke out in Irkutsk on 22–24 June 1879, which destroyed a large part of the city. Among other losses, the local branch of the East Siberian Museum was burnt down. Both its extensive library (over 10,000 volumes) and all its collections (more than 200,000 artefacts), amassed over several decades, were completely destroyed. The museum curator, Jan Czerski, initiated intensive efforts to establish a new museum and rebuild its collections. This, in turn, required new personnel. Czerski had the support of both the local civil administration and the leadership of the Branch. As a result, Witkowski – Czerski’s compatriot, who had already begun his scientific career – proved to be highly useful to him. At the end of 1879, Witkowski became a member of the Branch, and in 1880 he was appointed the new museum curator. However, in the beginning he had to take on the role of a museum builder – or more precisely, of constructing its new building. By the end of 1882, the institution had already begun operating in its new, purpose-built premises, although the building was still unfinished. In 1883, its formal inauguration took place.

Witkowski carried out his first archaeological excavations in 1880. The East Siberian Branch sent him to a region already familiar to him – on the banks of the Kitoi River near its confluence with the Angara – to conduct archaeological fieldwork. There, 14 skeletons were uncovered together with tools, which were dated to the Neolithic period. The results of the excavations were presented on 14 September 1880 at a general meeting of the Branch and constituted Witkowski’s first public presentation as an archaeologist. In 1881, the same findings were presented at the Fifth Archaeological Congress in Tbilisi, where they caused quite a sensation. The following 12 years were a period of highly intensive work for Witkowski.

In July 1881, the Branch sent him together with Czerski to the Transbaikal region as a botanist. From this expedition, he brought back extensive zoological and entomological material.

In 1882, Witkowski carried out what were arguably his most important archaeological investigations: in the spring in the village of Tunka in the Irkutsk district, and in the summer throughout the entire valley of the Angara River. The results were published in an article entitled ‘Traces of the Stone Age in the Angara River Valley’, which appeared in 1889 and brought Witkowski well-deserved fame as an archaeologist both in the Russian Empire and abroad. The Central Branch of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society awarded him a small gold medal for his achievements.

However, Witkowski was not engaged solely in archaeology and botany. In 1883, drawing on his practical experience in construction, he was appointed chief builder of the psychiatric department at the Irkutsk Kucznicheskaya Civil Hospital. He even undertook an official journey to European Russia in order to familiarise himself with the organisation of psychiatric hospitals there. In addition, a considerable amount of his time was taken up by his work at the museum and in the Irkutsk printing house. M. Ovchinnikov described his typical working day as follows: ‘From 6 to 9 he worked at the museum, from 9 to 3 or 4 in the printing house, rested, and at 5 or 6 he was back in the printing house, from 7 to 11 or 12 at the museum.’ Even if one assumes that Ovchinnikov allowed himself a certain degree of hyperbole, it is clear that Witkowski worked with extraordinary intensity.

On 15 May 1883, another amnesty was announced for exiled participants of the uprising. Witkowski took advantage of it and, in 1884, submitted a petition to the Vitebsk Assembly of Noble Deputies requesting the restoration of his noble rights. On 11 February 1884, the request was approved. The terms of the amnesty were as follows: ‘With full release from police supervision, with the right to freely choose a place of residence within the Empire without restrictions, and the right to apply for state and public offices.’ In other words, from 1884 onwards Witkowski lived in Siberia entirely of his own accord, no longer as a deportee.

Before his death, he was granted one last opportunity to see his native land. In the first half of the 1880s, he travelled to the Vitebsk Governorate, although not on his own affairs. He attempted to obtain funds for the medical treatment of his friend Jan Czerski from his relatives, but without success. Therefore, he travelled to Warsaw to see Benedykt Dybowski, and together they managed to secure the necessary funds, with which Witkowski returned to Siberia. Thanks to this, the treatment proved successful and Czerski’s health improved significantly, granting him several more years of life and productive work.

Among Witkowski’s final scientific projects was the study of prehistoric settlements in Mongolia along the Kitoi River. He, therefore, planned a separate expedition for 1892 or 1893, from the river’s sources to its mouth at the Angara. These plans, however, were never realised. On 24 September 1892, Nikolai Witkowski shot himself in the head in his home. He was then just over 40 years old. The investigation confirmed the fact of suicide, but cited as its cause a ‘psychological effect resulting from intense emotional agitation’. In other words, the exact reason remained unknown. For all Witkowski’s relatives and acquaintances, the suicide came as a profound shock, as he was known for his kind nature, sociability, and dedication to his research. He was survived by his wife and three children.

Legacy and Memory

Witkowski left behind approximately ten scholarly articles, which in fact marked the beginning of Neolithic research in Eastern Siberia. The Kitoi burial ground he discovered and studied, along with other investigations of prehistoric human activity in the Kitoi Valley, gave its name to the Early Neolithic Kitoi culture, dated to the 6th–5th millennium BCE.

Witkowski’s main contribution as an archaeologist lay in the fact that he, in effect, ‘discovered’ the Neolithic in Eastern Siberia. Prior to his work, Neolithic archaeological sites were not only unstudied but not even taken into consideration. Moreover, there was a prevailing view in academic circles that a Neolithic period in Eastern Siberia simply did not exist, due to the severe climate, which was thought to have made habitation by ancient humans impossible in such harsh conditions. Witkowski’s excavations demonstrated that Neolithic humans not only engaged in active economic life but also possessed a rich spiritual culture and left behind a substantial archaeological legacy. Witkowski’s achievements were described by Benedykt Dybowski as follows: ‘From that date began a new period of palaeoanthropological research in Eastern Siberia, the initiator, leader, and executor of which was the renowned self-taught Witkowski.’

The death of Nikolai Witkowski did not go unnoticed by his contemporaries. As early as the following year, his first obituary appeared in the journal ‘News and Archaeological Notes,’ published by the Moscow Archaeological Society. Its author, Alexei Ivanovsky, noted in particular: ‘Science has lost, in the person of Nikolai Ivanovich, one of its energetic and prolific workers in the sparsely cultivated field of Siberian archaeology.’ In 1907, the East Siberian Branch of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society marked the fifteenth anniversary of Witkowski’s death. At a ceremonial meeting held at the Irkutsk museum, one of his Siberian friends, Mikhail Ovchinnikov, read a biography of the deceased that he had written himself. In it, he praised Witkowski’s contributions to Siberian science as well as his personal qualities. Four years later, this address was published in the journal ‘Siberian Archive’ and, more generally, became the first publication in the inaugural issue of that periodical. In the same issue, another publication was devoted to Witkowski: it included letters from Jan Czerski to him from 1882–1883, which clearly attest to their warm friendship and close professional collaboration. Later still, in 1923, another exiled participant of the Belarusian uprising and eminent Siberian researcher, Benedykt Dybowski, wrote a short memoir about him. By that time, Dybowski was already an established figure in medicine and a widely recognised scientist. He believed that Witkowski had been born in 1843 and therefore framed his recollections around what he assumed would have been Witkowski’s 80th birthday.

These publications played an important role: they helped ensure that Witkowski’s name was not forgotten in either Polish or Russian historiography, and it has already been revived in Belarusian scholarship. His work is mentioned in all studies on the history of the development of Siberian science produced later, in the 20th and 21st centuries. For example, in 1927 the researcher Aleksandr Popov assessed his contribution as follows: ‘Monuments of archaeological activity by M. Witkowski, carried out in a strictly scientific manner, became a ray of light that brightly pierced the darkness of the prehistory of Eastern Siberia.’ More than 60 years later, in 1989, the researcher Galina Georgievskaya wrote of Witkowski: ‘The archaeologist’s work marked the beginning of the systematic study of Neolithic cultures in the Baikal region.’

Dzmitry Matveychyk (PhD) – Institute of History of the Polish Academy of Sciences

Selected sources and bibliography

[Dybowski D.], Pamiętnik dra Benedykta Dybowskiego od roku 1862 zacząwszy do roku 1878, Lwów: Wydawnictwo Zakładu Narodowego im. Ossolińskich, 1930;

Dybowski B., Wspomnienia biograficzne o archeologu i powstańcu polskim Mikołaju Witkowskim // Światowit. –T. 12. – 1924–1928. – s. 1–5;

Lietuvos valstybės istorijos archyvas (Litewskie Państwowe Archiwum Historyczne). – F. 1248 (Tymczasowy Audytoriat Polowy). Ap. 1. B. 400. – Szlachcice suraskiego powiatu witebskiej gubernii Witkowski Mikołaj i ostrołęckiego powiatu płockiej gubernii dymisjowany junkier Marjan von Robert. 29.11.1863–05.02.1880. – 25 k.;

Витковский Н.И., Следы каменного века в долине р. Ангары // Известия Восточно-Сибирского отделения Императорского Русского Географического Общества. – 1889. – Т. 20. – № 1. – С. 1–42; № 2. – С. 1–31;

Георгиевская Г.М., Китойская культура Прибайкалья. – Новосибирск: Наука. Сиб. отд-ние, 1989;

Ивановский А.Н., И. Витковский // Археологические известия и заметки. – Т. 1. –1893. – № 1. – С. 47–48;

Кухта А., «Я не паляк, а беларус»: паўстанец 1863 г. Мікалай Віткоўскі, яго жыцьцёвы шлях і навуковыя дасягненьні ў Сібіры // Маланка. – № 141. – травень 2016 г. – С. 8–10; № 142. – лістапад 2016 г. – С. 4–6;

Овчинников М.П., Н.И. Витковский // Сибирский архив. – 1911. – Т. 1. – № 1. – С. 1–11;

Нацыянальны гістарычны архіў Беларусі (далей – НГАБ). – Ф. 2512 (Віцебскі дваранскі дэпутацкі сход). Воп. 1. Спр. 488. – Рэестр пастаноў аб дваранскім паходжанні розных асоб. 1860 г. – 456 арк.;

НГАБ. – Ф. 2512. Воп. 1. Спр. 830. – Справа аб далучэнні розных асоб да дваранскага саслоўя. 1884 г. – 263 арк.;

НГАБ. – Ф. 2512. Воп. 3. Спр. 7. – Дваранская радаводная кніга Віцебскай губерні за 1860 г. – 111 арк.;

Попов А.В., Очерк палеоэтнологических исследований и достижений Восточно-Сибирского отделения Государственного Географического Общества за 75 лет (1851–1926 гг.) // Известия Восточно-Сибирского отделения Государственного Географического Общества. – Иркутск, 1927. – Т. 50, вып. 1. – С. 43–59.