The Rise of the Lithuanian National Monuments: Cultivation, Expression

CEU eTD Collection Second Karl Reader: Professor Hall Supervisor: TrencsényiBalázs Professor CULTIVATION, EXPRESSIONANDCULTIVATION, RESURRECTION THE RISELITHUANIAN THE OF THE NATIONAL In requirements for fulfillmentof the thedegree partial of Central European University MONUMENTS:

History Department Budapest, Hungary Silvija AurylaitėSilvija Master o

Submitted to Submitted 2013 By

f Arts

CEU eTD Collection such with accordance in made copies Further made. instruct copies such any of part a form must page This librarian. the from obtained be may Details Library. European Central the in ma be may part, or full in either process, any by Copies Author. the with rests thesis this of text the in Copyright Statement of Copyright ions may permissionmade ofthe thewritten Author. without notbe de only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged lodged and Author the givenby instructions the accordancewith in only de i

CEU eTD Collection projects national three the questing national for of developement the through instead revealed is monument national Lithuanian interwar the of experience dynamic The Vilnius. center historical lost Duch Grand the of memory the propagating regime, authoritarian the of discourse historicist dominant the than rather House” “National Lithuanian the of idea prewar i Resurrection of Church the and museum Culture and War Magnus monuments national Lithuanian interwar of cluster the about is thesis The Abstract n Kaunas, the temporary capital of Lithuania. It draws the origins of the monuments from the the from monuments the of origins the It draws Lithuania. of capital temporary Kaunas,the n

cultivation , expression

and ii

resurre ction.

–

which arose in the 1930s 1930s the in arose which y of Lithuania and the the and Lithuania yof –

the Vytautas Vytautas the CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusions Chapter 6Urban Organicism ChapterResurrection as 5The Nation ChapterExpression as 4The Nation ChapterCultivation as 3The Nation Chapter 2The Origins Chapter 1The ExperienceofNational Monument Moment bienheureux Table Contents of

......

...... iii

......

79 74 63 49 37 19 13

7 1

CEU eTD Collection East Central European cities. interwar about writings historical the in possible is body, the and mind the of reunification the experience, urban national the of redemption a how of suggestion a to leads approach a the and into space material monument the national where whole, European comprehensive Central East an of records historical of snapshots of kind a on tackle Ide insights. and significance new with endowed remembered, be to order in “forgotten” monument; national Lithuanian the of idea of history the of moment) a of kind some for searches instead thesis This experience. their and monuments national of nature contested the of knowledge reserved a only provides It reason. and experience immediate consciousness, of moments the it, calls Proust this that suggest I belon monument. physical the and records visual and textual historical the on rely and memory, national of project the in involved institutions and groups, activists, the national the of nature fluid this grasp To struggle. constant a therefore is form, monumental, physical, a in idea national single a consolidate to attempt Any revisions. and contradictions internal to subject fluid, sourc intellectual its monument, national a of form the in nation the reify to leaders national of wish the Despite expression. material its and idea national the of intersection the occupying paradoxical, essentially is monument national The havingbut in neweyes The realvoyage seeking notin consists ofdiscoverynewlandscapes bienheureux Moment s o n tep t rcntut the reconstruct to attempt an to gs involuntary memory involuntary ( Ma rcel Proust

monument the historian usually seeks to explain the interests of of interests the explain to seeks usually historian the monument

)

of the national monument which binds together the the together binds which monument national the of outr memory voluntary 1

e –

the concept of the nation the of concept the

ainl da nesc. hs new This intersect. idea national moment bienheureux moment

f h ntoa mnmn, as monument, national the of ally, it is an aspiration to to aspiration an is it ally,

(felicitous (felicitous – historical

remains remains CEU eTD Collection 69 1996), Institute, Heritage Cultural of Conservation Issuesthe in Philosophical and Historical 1 i the while wars, nation’s the of memory recent cultivation th Museum, War the of part was which Garden, National the of case the In time. dominant the of “diversifiers” more same the at it challenging and complementing opposition, its were than rather discourse nationalist they Thus capital. temporary the in homes contemporary for need their in support public for search common a by united were clergy the and museums Culture and War the of spokesmen The regime. historicist dominant the than Lithuania.central capital cultural of a become to potential a with time first the for Kaunas endowed which House”, “National the oftheidea prewaroftensions the in regimedominantthe but in Inot search origins whose “uni of sort a were monuments national Lithuanian the that I argue thesis this In regained. be to Poland, of control under then Vilnius, center historical the for waiting an officially wasregime the while initiatives local as Lithuania independent newly of in monuments national modern “intentional” Riegl Alois historian Austrian ofunambiguoussense called easily be not could Kaunas, Resurrection of Church the and museum Culture and Lithuania. of Duchy Grand monuments national Lithuanian of cluster style medieval fascist the However, the of memory the and tradition folk Lithuanian nat of source a As regimes. nationalist European Eastern interwar national other with interwar along experience core a as dominates onward, 1926 from power in regime authoritarian

Alois Riegl, “The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Es Its ofMonuments: Cult Modern “The Riegl, Alois ional identity it was based on a set of recognizable national symbols, consisting of of consisting symbols, national recognizable of set a on based was it identity ional h well The On the other the On

of the medieval national history intersected with its founder’s cultivation of the the of cultivation founder’s its with intersected history national medieval the of

- researched historicist approach to the Lithuanian nation of the nationalist nationalist the of nation Lithuanian the to approach historicist researched 83.

hand, the leaders of the three national projects were no less “intentional” “intentional” less no were projects national three the of leaders the hand,

sence and Its Development” in Nicholas Price et al. (ed.), (ed.), al. et Price Nicholas in Development” Its and sence 2

dea of the Čiurlionis Gallery on its own own its on Gallery Čiurlionis the of dea 1 . They appeared in the temporarycapita the appearedin They . –

hc eegd n h 13s in 1930s the in emerged which

(Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Conservation Getty Angeles: (Los – tninl monuments” ntentional

Vytautas Magnus Wa Magnus Vytautas e rhetorical rhetorical e r l CEU eTD Collection a at the attempts of disappearance the with coincided 1930s the in ideologies nationalist of the maturation where Europe, Central East interwar in experience national the of redemption the for East Central European experience. particular a with monuments Lithuanian style fascist I of complex center. the endowed national that suggest modernist the of establishment the undergoing was capital temporary material the Vilnius, capital was historical rhetoric official the dominant “nationalizing” the virtually While period. interwar the of throughout cluster emerging monuments the national of experience paradoxical descriptive a remained duality inner potential competing with it endowed This Kaunas. in production cultural national organic for stood who those and Lithuania, of Duchy advocat who those between discussion this of core the at itself finding House”, “National the of idea The emerged. Kaunas in church Catholic the and Vilnius in elite national the between approaches pot the about debates prewar the in was It Kaunas. capital temporary the in monuments national of complex a to crystallized House” “National Lithuanian the of idea prewar unrealized the how shows It monument. national cont the reveal to aims which approach my exactly is It the secularregimenational idea. inthe basi main the as Catholicism a for called hand, other the on Church, the of project The autonomy. artistic national modern advocating by policy heritage and art official the questioned It is unusual in Lithuanian historical studies to see the three projects as part of a whole. whole. a of part as projects three the see to studies historical Lithuanian in unusual is It I argue that the cluster of Lith of cluster the that argue I d h ntoa “elmto” f inu, h hsoia cptl of capital historical the Vilnius, of “reclamation” national the ed national style.

Because of their ornament their of Because s for the nation building, calling into question the centrality of of centrality the question into calling building, nation the for s

uanian monuments in Kaunas is an example of the quest quest the of example an is Kaunas in monuments uanian

ential capital city, when for the first time the divergentthe time first the for city,when capital ential historicist 3

n ogncs sds I ru tha argue I sides. organicist and - inuities in the idea of the Lithuanian the of idea the in inuities less facade there is a need to take a a take to need a is there facade less resurrection expression

pc o the of space the Grand Grand t this this t

and and

of of CEU eTD Collection of kind some reach to dialogu able were thus and debates, national key the of aware were who building, nation Lithuanian of process the following were least at or part taking were who a of sensibilities national radiant the national particular for instead look I thesis. the of scope the beyond lie however, visitors, of feelings personal The passerby. a of account historical a than rather co It space. and time its of transcendence the The descriptions. their and projects experience architectural changing in manifested they as flux a for searching am I 1930s, the to 1920s the from Resurrection, of Church the and museums Culture and War the projects, national three the of idea shifting the following By nature. dialogical its for search monum national Lithuanian the of imagination the European in Central dwelling suggest East I architecture, century 20th early and 19th late the about studies the in practice audience wh images”, “identitarian though monologue identity from further step e. s

. Instead of searching for searching of Instead .

of a particular national monument here is not a moment of the first encounter but but encounter first the of moment a not is here monument national particular a of

monument leaving aside the question how they interact with the visitors visitors the with interact they how question the aside leaving monument oet bienheureux, moment - focused approach which claims the architecture is speaking in in speaking is architecture the claims which approach focused

“national languages” on the facades the on languages” “national an attempt at the “lib the at attempt an uld be more deeply reflected in in reflected deeply more be uld 4

c ae ihr ucsfl o t reach to not successful either are ich rto”o ainl da in ideas national of eration” , what is the common common the is what , émigré émigré literature n in ent their their CEU eTD Collection dynamism the in culture, national Lithuanian interwar on discussions broader the into place Gallery,Čiurlionis Kapočius,Feliksas of and theChurch thespokesman committee. building the of director the Galaunė, Paulius Garden, National the and museum War the of founder a for search their though them guided which personalities national resurrection though space material the in themselves imagined th and museum Culture and are War projects the how national on focus interwar I three discussed. the monument, national Lithuanian the of idea the European Central experienc the of dynamism the uncover to helps which experience urban Fig 1. After the individual cases have been examined, been have cases individual the After on literature the reviews chapter theoretical the thesis, the of structure the delineate To Vladimiras Dubeneckis, sketch of the WarMuseum, Dubeneckis,Vladimiras ofthe sketch 1920. . Those shifting ideas of the national projects were closely related to the the to related closely were projects national the of ideas shifting Those . national monuments. After the short introduction to the prewar origins of of origins prewar the to introduction short the After monuments. national 5

I will take them as a whole in order to order in whole a as them take will I

home: Vladas Nagevičius, the the Nagevičius, Vladas home:

cultivation e Church of Resurrection Resurrection of Church e e of e , expression interwar East interwar

and and

CEU eTD Collection nature ofth the about regime historicist the with debated who philosophy cultural Lithuanian of school dy more much C often East interwar the in forgotten is latter The nation. the of perceptions integrative more and historicist the between e Lithuanian nation suggesting syntheticLithuaniane a approach. more namic national urban experience. urban national namic entral European urban studies precluding from discovery of a a of discovery from precluding studies urban European entral 6

In Lithuanian case I will tackle on the strong strong the on tackle will I case Lithuanian In

CEU eTD Collection 1867 architecture, 6 5 4 3 City Reader Blackwell 2 based successfulfailed and both be can recognition the where nation, of perception fluid always the recognize to order image identitarian monuments national in inscribed narratives historical national particular for searching discerned usually is architecture public or monument the of content national the not did nations neighboring local reflect “necessarily the or Vienna, center the imperial by the shared Europe, vocabulary, Western artistic certain of use The contexts. ideological and political were they as i architecture “discovered” architects, of and activists meaning(s) national by a prescribed for search a to limited often is monuments century the redemptionexperience ofthe urban ofthe of turn the of metropolis the in alienation urban about diagnosis Simmel’s Georg old years twenty the revised he when period interwar S experience. national redemptive potentially its recognize to order in monument national a approach to how question a on tackle to seeks chapter This of National The Experience Monument Chapter 1

Rogers Brubaker, “Beyond ‘Identity’”, in in “Beyond‘Identity’”, RogersBrubaker, 192. Popescu, in Identity”, Time: “Space, Popescu, Carmen in Ga Life”(1903), Mental and Metropolis “The Simmel, Georg Ákos Moravánszky, ÁkosMoravánszky, nEs Cnrl uoetecnet of concept the Europe Central East In national of content national of question the historiography European Central East In –

ee atclry togy soitd ih ainl languages national with associated strongly particularly were

- 1918 Competing visions: aesthetic invention and social imagination in Central European European Central in imagination social and invention aesthetic visions: Competing

4 (Malden: Blackwell, 2002). Blackwell, (Malden: ed Ca .

(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998). Press, MIT (Cambridge: 5 .

the identity, but it empower it but identity, the mn oec suggest Popescu rmen

Theory and S and Theory National Identities National

historical cityhistorical Paris. ainl styles national 7

ociety,

using ed

vol. 29 (2000), 1 (2000), 29 vol. to represent it” represent to

ry Bridge and Sophie Watson (eds.), (eds.), Watson Sophie and ryBridge , vol. 8, issue 3 (2006), 193. (2006), 3 issue 8, vol. , rbkrs oin of notion Brubaker’s

imilaly Walter Benjamin did in the the in did Benjamin Walter imilaly 2 ,

–

to find the possibility of the the of possibility the find to

n formal analysis of space or or space of analysis formal n historical and la and historical - 47. 3 . Conceived in this way, this in Conceived .

6 . Both were pictured pictured were Both . ,

n forming and identification

e lo folk also ter The The their

in -

CEU eTD Collection 44. 1986), Press, MIT (Cambridge: 7 str memories personal the remaining for search in in environment fleeting wandering disappearing the following was hand, other the on Benjamin, clashes. ideological bigger are Schork space. urban of Vienna’s thedialogical formation emphasis on tostress his approach studies tourban influential Schorke’s Carl revise to suggest I this For space. material and idea its of evolution surfaces, aimingat not deeperexperiences. with play mere a instead became and allusions, being halted surfaces architectural the since 19th of end the of architecturedecorative the context European Central East In space. personal fading with intermingled were that cities into economy market of intervention by urban caused attitude the about worried was Benjamin increasi disenchantment, Walter Simmel, George of influence under of notion The modernity. Western of experience urban invite That visions. national can environment architectural their so nations, different of to monument, the spatialandemphasize its experie of content national to approaches historiographical established the of some of revision a for calls period interwar the during styles architectural national for search movemen national emerging of part as empire Habsburg of cities multicultural of space urban in “recognition” for fight of kind similar a in part taking

David Frisby, David

ro As the interwar East Central European city experience is characterized by a cohabitation a cohabitation experience characterized by East European cityAs the interwarCentral is h eprec o te atclr n particular the of experience The oted in the crisis of modernity, i modernity, of crisis the in oted

century suggest similar experience of detachment, difficulties in being recognized, recognized, being in difficulties detachment, of experience similar suggest century Fragments of modernity: theories of modernity in the w the in modernity of theories modernity: of Fragments e suggests that the foundational ideas of the architecture of Vienna’ Ringstrasse Ringstrasse Vienna’ of architecture the of ideas foundational the that suggests e g eahet rm h ubn pc, rain f cran blase certain a of creation space, urban the from detachment ng d for an East Central European type of type European Central East an for d

ntial quality thevisualmessage. besides t was shaped by individual ideas individual by shaped was t ational space, I suggest, could be grasped in the the in grasped be could suggest, I space, ational

flaneur ts. ork of Simmel, Kracauer, and Benjamin and Kracauer, Simmel, of ork

be The disappearance of the trend to to trend the of disappearance The approached as a multiplicity of of multiplicity a as approached

is twofold is flaneur

7 which reflected which . On the one hand, hand, one the On . , mixed with the with mixed , eets, eets,

the the

- CEU eTD Collection 8 c of frame a as monument allows history intellectual The ideologies. national competing of spectrum whole the unclose to enough is monument particular one history; urban on generalizations elite cultural and intellectual political, of visions the exclusively reflect and space urban in manifestations unproblematic track ofintellectua the tying strongly by dimension forth a with space work. urban Vienna’s filled at Schorske Similarly is communication deeper a but “recognition” the not here thus and senses body profou more us provides monument the that recognizes Lefebvre Furthermore, within. from itself dialogical but multilingual, just not texture a but text a less architectureis architec to approach semiotic sided one the questioned Lefebvre understanding o dialogical suggested a in but found he representations architectural visual in much so not lies to approach sophisticated Schorske’ of strength the period, interwar the representation elite’s ofcultural sensibilities. particular particular in in inherent ideas and mind situated more much was approach Benjamin’s Thus use. historical their and sites architectural individual the between reunion of Benja possibility space, urban of emerging of experience collective the find to quest his for helpful more is Schorske Where times. modern in reinvented be can they how and

Henri Lefebvre, Henri Lefebvre, When we are looking for ways of grasping the national aspect of urban experience in in experience urban of aspect national the grasping of ways for looking are we When n h bo on book the In places; The Production of Space of Production The f the architecturalf the environment, l discourse with the metamorphosis ofurban withthe metamorphosis l discourse space.

it was more about concrete urban experien urban concrete about more was it fin - ertain ideas and senses about the nation that extend the specific specific the extend that nation the about senses and ideas ertain de

- siecle of Vienna. The interwar period does not let for big big for let not does period interwar The Vienna. of

(Oxford: Blackwell, 1991). Blackwell, (Oxford:

8 Vienna various motives and ideas appear as rather rather as appear ideas and motives various Vienna . If it was a literary work, it would be not a monologue, a not be would it work, literary a was If it . nd experience than a visual artwork, it involves all our our all involves it artwork, visual a than experience nd

an emphasis on an

its its ce rather than architecture as as architecture than rather ce becoming ture, ture,

fin he - . Similarly, Henri de approaching

min offers the the offers min suggested that that suggested - siecle siecle Vien

the the na na CEU eTD Collection 9 th from seen As space. urban material and monument, the between relation definethe to approachis to monuments national experie effective and sound most the of some for settinga as used were missing,history were national was aspiration fascist timelessness to it bring to aiming theoretical least at space, urban loaded tradition, classical the the There Germany. a with it endow to space, historical interwar of intherul background the during stayed which Lithuania and Poland Romania, in thought of schools the example, for history, urban European Central East interwar in overlooked often is nation to approaches the about understanding th reduced Thus rhetoric. official the in “frozen” sensibility, national a with dealing historians, urban by unnoticed remain own their creating experience, integrative at aiming nation, to approaches the projects, national various of source major national a as historicist emphasized competing are interpretations the While nation. of essence the of about dynamism discourse very internal the maintaining in important are which but space urban on influence indirect only had have might that nation of visions alternative those daylight into bring to the about debate intellectual broader a into Stepping place.

Emilio Gentile, EmilioGentile, h ls apc i rvsn te aaim f cose o te xeine f national of experience the for Schorske of paradigm the revising in aspect last The on influence have can discourse national such how of examples best the of One rhtcue provides architecture The sacralization of politics in fascistItaly in politics of sacralization The

o lre xet elzd Italian realized. extent large a to nces Europe. ininterwar nationalist nationalist was

h domin the

oe o some

ideology, placi ideology, - ing historicist regimes.ing historicist f the best examples of interwar monuments where this this where monuments interwar of examples best the f temporal experiences, can be found in fascist Italy and Italy fascist in found be can experiences, temporal n fre uig h itra revising interwar the during force ant

ng the nation the ng

(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996). Press, University (Cambridge:Harvard monuments e interwar fascist architecture, the the architecture, fascist interwar e

national culture national e relevance of the radical integral integral radical the of relevance e ideas of the of ideas in mythical time time mythical in ,

hr ay iet luin to allusions direct any where

main initiators of the the of initiators main loci 9

. Furthermore, the Furthermore, . is needed in order order in needed is

stemming from from stemming of nation, often nation, of the historically historically the

interwar

CEU eTD Collection ucp.com/images/PallasmaaTW.pdf Helsinki (2010). Architecture, of School ofTechnology, Helsinkiat University 13 12 11 Theory and History 10 discourse ontological and historicist between spectrum the along somewhere distributed time, th in monument, the in space in manifestations concrete beyond fields, broader searching emphasi The terms. static in treated still was the to next space architectural concrete image identitarian a of importance the include to tried White’s, nationalgraspedmuch as could monument. it be fromcomplex aparticular I the call thesis closer inthis linear comes narrative, towhat it leading narratives and pictures fragmentary explaining of Instead an from genres different as just seen be could c same the of formats various these White, by suggested as Bakhtin, theorist literary of ideas the Using space. of use and changes construction, visualizations, sketches, descriptions, ex are ideas national of ideas uniqueness transposition term the use to suggestion Whyte’s William use I Instead narrative. historical or language visual the in lie necessary not does two the between relation

Juhani Pallasmaa, “Touching the World architecture, hapticity and the emanci the and hapticity architecture, theWorld “Touching Juhani Pallasmaa, 189. Popescu, Ibid. Wil liam Whyte, “How do buildings mean? Some issues of interpretation in the history of architecture”, in architecture”, historyof in the ofinterpretation Someissues mean? “Howbuildings do liamWhyte,

An article by Popescu by article An identitarian ainl style national

for experience of national monument behind its its behind monument national of experience for

was often a common aim of national philosophers and architects promoting the the promoting architects and philosophers national of aim common a often was

f ntoa) ideas (national) of , vol. 45, no. 2 (2006), no. (2006), 153 2 45, vol. , 12

. approach and invites for a much more fluid perception of national space. national of perception fluid more much a for invites and approach

pressed. In the case of national monuments this can be reflected in the the in reflected be can this monuments national of case the In pressed. But the manifestation of national sensibility (narrative) in architecture in (narrative) sensibility national of manifestation the But is thesis it becomes an intersection of different approaches to national national to approaches different of intersection an becomes it thesis is . The

Space, Time and Identity and Time Space,

differ 10 ne s only is ence . The search for for search The . - 11 177. . This way of seeing national monument steps away steps monument national seeing of way This .

11 s on intellectual discourse in this thesis allows thesis this in discourse intellectual on s

in the forms and stages in which they the the they which in stages and forms the in

organicity (2006) 13 . As for the for As . materiality; , experience pu , www.arquitectura blished in the same year as as year same the in blished pation of the eye”, Speech given given eye”, the Speech of pation authenticity to the final work in the the in work final the to national time national

it extends into much into extends it

of national space, as national space,as of

representation and , translation -

inscribed national oncern oncern

of of or CEU eTD Collection the totality of the experience the of on

imagination and imagination the changes nation. As for the for As nation. in the in

plans, gradual additions to the national space,national the to additions gradualplans,

formation of formation national space national

beyond the concretebeyond the the spa , the emphasis in this thesis will be put on the p the on put be will thesis this in emphasis the , ce rather than its final form. final its than rather ce 12

site

and time.

never realized ideas, all ideas, realized never Thus the visualizations, visualizations, the Thus rocess

form

CEU eTD Collection 14 international good in believed clergy, the unlike activists, Vilnius’ of one Smetona, hand, Church The language. inapassivewidespread that stood resis ofinstitutions net and culture national Lithuanian of carrier main was which peasantry, Lithuanian on impact traditional immense preserved who Catholics, of Jakš over. take to willingwas elite Vilnius’ which leadership national of leaders,Lithuanian national movement, whoresided. supported also where lands, Lithuanian ethnographical of center a as Jakštas miracle a was origins their to polonized back “convert” Lithuanians to that thought he and roots, cultural deep there planted has culture emphasized Jakštas seas. Baltic to Black the from once extended that Lithuania, of Duchy Grand medieval of times the from environment multicultural its of much retained Kaun Dambrauskas Aleksandras Catholic a Lithuania, of president Kau time first the for envisaged overlooked, often is what and, identity, national Lithuanian of part inseparable the as imagination popular the in Vilnius established discussion This Empire. ca cultural potential the about century national Lithuanian interwar the of The monuments. origins prewar the introduce I chapter short this In Origins The Chapter 2

DariusStali nas as anas pot as as as a more benevolent center than the the than center benevolent more a as as The discussion about the potential capital city, more broadly, was related to the question tothe question related was broadly, city,potential capitalmore about the The discussion In polemics with a young national activist from Vilnius, Antanas Smetona, the future future the Smetona, Antanas Vilnius, from activist national young a with polemics In ū nas, “Kauno vizija XX a. pradžioje”, in pradžioje”, a. XX vizija “Kauno nas,

ential city capital initial

idea of the “National House” was part of the discussions of early 20th early20th of discussions the of part was House” “National the ofidea

before it became the temporarbefore became it pital of Lithuania, still within the czarist Russian Russian czarist the within still Lithuania, of pital

Darbai irDarbai dienos 13

fin de siècle de fin

14 Kua ct ised a pooe by promoted was instead city Kaunas . tance to Russian policy.tance toRussian Onthe other , no. 4 (1997), 59 (1997), 4 no. ,

historical capital Vilnius, which which Vilnius, capital historical ycapitalLithuania of in1919.

- aša i 10 suggested 1907 in Jakštas the main forces of Catholic Catholic of forces main the tas spoke in the name the in spoke tas - 64.

has

that Polish Polish that retained a a retained

CEU eTD Collection 18 comparativam 17 istoriografija 16 15 Mi Adam poet Polish a not was it Ultimately, Piłsudski. Józef general Polish was I, War World the before federation a as Commonwealth Lithuanian Polish the recreate to promoters last the of One intersecting multiple of zone stre the while projects, national a was Lithuania, of sensibility Duchy Grand medieval of tradition Duchy Grand the of bearers true the as themselves saw Pol of part integral an as Lithuania projected them po difficult into forced were war the before Lithuanians Polish Many Vilnius. of heritage historical the to rights cultural t claiming many among group one century only 20th were the nationalists Lithuanians of beginning the At capital. historical the of “reclamation” Lithuanian“recovery” asthenew of outposts of existing oldinstitutions national activists were activelyLithuanian thereto found newnational even societiesand and Poles Russians. Jews, the among activities national active into themselves immerse to Vilnius to universities foreign from back came just who elite, cultural Vilnius’ of name the in spoke usedas it Vilnius, Lithuaniansto of rights legal the about thought he declare; to independence Lithuanian for circumstances

Adam Mickiewicz, AdamMickiewicz, poezijoje”, baltarusių ir lietuvių Vilniaus miestas tarpukario “Gedimino Lapinskienė, Alma Kulakauskas, Antanas Aleksandravičius, Egidijus Smetona, Antanas The claim for Vilnius by the cultural elite was linked to the attempt at intensive cultural cultural intensive at attempt the to linked was elite cultural the by Vilnius for claim The Fin

(Kaunas: , vol. 4 (2009). 4 vol. , ckiewicz, who nostalgically mourned the extinction of the Lithuanian nation Lithuanian the of extinction the mourned nostalgically who ckiewicz, de siècle de Raštai Pan

Vytauto Didžiojo universitetoleidykla, Didžiojo Vytauto

Tadeusz or The Last Foray in Lithuania: A Tale of the Gentry During 1811 During Gentry Tale the A of Lithuania: in Last Foray The Tadeuszor , [vol. 1]: 1]: [vol. ,

Vilnius had around two percent of ethnic Lithuanians, but the new new the but Lithuanians, ethnic of percent two around had Vilnius

sition to decide who they are, they who decide to sition

Vienybės gairėmis Vienybės ets of Vilnius were dominated by urban activities of the Jews. the of activities urban by dominated were Vilnius of ets to be a former capital of the Grand Duchy of LithuaniaGrandDuchythe of formerofcapital a be to Nuo amžių slenksčio: amžių Nuo 14

(Kaunas: Spindulio spaustuvė, 1930), 4. 1930), spaustuvė, Spindulio (Kaunas:

and and its culture, while the Belorussians Belorussians the while culture, its and and

2001), 42. 2001), Poles or Lithuanians or Poles

naujausia naujausia 17 . Thus Vilnius, as a bastion a as Vilnius, Thus . Lietuvos XIX amžiaus amžiaus LietuvosXIX er itrcl and historical heir Acta litteraria Acta

to project culture. 16 however, , . Many of Many . - 1812. 15

. He.

the the 18 ,

CEU eTD Collection 20 (Budapest 1770 Europe Southeast and Central in Identity Collective of 19 was control czarist the after that suggests Balkelis 1905. after spread which protests, peasant massive the of leadership the take could parties the of none that appeared t seemed peasants The revolution. Russian the after held 1905, in Vilnius of Assembly Grand the in peasants of masses the encountered time first the for they when elite national the by surprise acute more become to soon lifewill village of reality the from elite new the of detachment of problem The Vilnius. elite, in outpost i urban party Democrat Christian a founded first also Kaunas, their created They encyclical. new the following sphere, social in activity showed increasingly clergy the rule Czarist Under I. War World before clergy the by whichlead subsequentVilnius maininfluence takeoverof to tothe the city multicultural the in activists cultural Lithuanian of attempts first the of paradoxes the of were porous wooden sings before covered houses ofmodernity and mostly with had The church. Orthodox t of part modern The Russia. czarist of border the at 1882 in founded bastion, military a as known mostly was Kaunas Church, Lithuanian of outpost new a being Besides city. czarist foreign seen asitis Vilnius, from speech his in1919before to rights the to claim a as Poles by used was which Piłsudski of memory personal the but

Tomas Balkelis, TomasBalkelis, (1922). in Vilnius” delivered “Address Piłsudski, Jozef own was built by the czar in the mid 19th century that placed urban domination of the the of domination urban placed that century 19th mid the in czar the by built was own nie inu, Ka Vilnius, Unlike The book by Tomas Balkelis, called “The Making Modern Lithuania” Modern Making “The called Balkelis, Tomas by book The h frt generati first the

: Central European University Press, 2010). Press, University : CentralEuropean soon It autonomy. cultural of projects the than needs social their about more care o The Making of Modern Lithuania Modern of Making The – rectangular streets of Kaunas, of streets rectangular on of educated peasantry, peasantry, educated of on

relate unas had little of its own identity. It was usually considered as a a as considered usually was It identity. own its of little had unas

d to the national leadership. Balkelis shows the moment of the of moment the shows Balkelis leadership. national the to d

(London,

Modernism – 1945 n 1905. In the mea the In 1905. n

the entered into cosmopolitan urban life in in life urban cosmopolitan into entered NewYork: the bas the :

annexation Texts and Commentaries Texts and : The Creation of Nation of Creation The is for modern city development, development, city modern for is

Routledge, 19 .

ntime, the new national new the ntime, the national productionthe

2011). , vol. III/1 III/1 vol. ,

20 - States , reveals some reveals , enhanced, a a enhanced, :

1918. Discourses Discourses

CEU eTD Collection 25 barai Kultūros 24 23 22 21 antiques also and art modern art, folk Lithuanian the contain to had which build, to House” “National a for Vilnius in Hill Tauras on bought was land The space. needed which libraries, and collections national Lithuanian existing several production cultural active of center as seen was it 1907 around elite national Vilnius by Revived Basanavičius. Jonas patchiarch Lithuanianstate, ofthe most nobilitywere cultural ofPolish identit shared a of years hundred two After influence. cultural deeper much a had period Polish the Russia, from independence formal sought Lithuanians While closed. was university Vilnius 1863 in uprising unsuccessful second the after held was “roots” Russian of recovery intensive An 1795. in Commonwealth cz the Vilnius the of context the in House” “National Lithuanian the of Egidijus idea The by noticed As natio a project. as it saw some some national sole a not was heritage local collected which Vilnius in societies severalwere there Aleksandravičius, it century, 20th the of for national autonomy Vilnius the while Church, the by taken was influence main the where started, production cultural Lithuanian of period calmer

Ibid, 12. Ibid, in Vilniuje”, namai” lietuvių “Tautos idėja: “Neįgyvendinta Grigaravičius, Algirdas Sirutavičius, Vladas 55. Aleksandravičius, Aleksandravičius, Egidijus 11 Balkelis, When it comes to the idea the to comes it When h ie o Ltuna “ainl os” a frt noe i 10 b te national the by 1900 in invoked first was House” “National Lithuanian of idea The rs Rsi, nertd hr atr h tid iiin f oih Lithuanian Polish of division third the after there integrated Russia, arist had to go through at least two obstacles. First of all, the Lithuanian lands belonged to to belonged lands Lithuanian the all, of First obstacles. two least at through go to had

- , no. 10 (1998), 14. 10 no. , 15.

21 .

XIX amžiaus profiliai amžiaus XIX

nal

–

of a ban was put on printing in Latin letters for forty years forty for letters Latin in printing on put was ban a project; ’

elite was distrusted by Russians for their determined quest quest determined their for Russians by distrusted was elite a Lit a 24

hc tre so it mr cnrt pla concrete more into soon turned which huanian “National House” in Vilnius in the beginning beginning the in Vilnius in House” “National huanian

the others perceived others the

(Vilnius: 16

Lietuvos rašytojų sąjungos leidykla, sąjungos rašytojų Lietuvos 25 . To in To . still inner dynamism to this idea,this to dynamism inner still this

y in terms of a homeland a of terms in 23

multilayered claims of of claims multilayered

1993), 43. 1993), ns to join join to ns –

only only

and 22 . CEU eTD Collection Vol. 28 27 26 passports Vilnius special stagings, events of series a thought Lithuania of Duke Kaunas history national the of years hundred two the from element “Polish” the excluded cult the of a after power regime nationalist authoritarian the of ideology leading temporary capitalKaunas. the of streets the in mainlymanifested was that town historical the of nationalization “virtual” of years subsequent the for source main a became interwar the in independence Lithuanian of th of experienceurban interwar the into directly transposed were they that Isuggest nationalism. product cultural passive or active an of question the Kaunas, and Vilnius between dilemma the monuments: national interwar the for tensions key the instilled debate this palace, national Lithuanian first character,and Ver in palace aristocratic their On alternative. real a of suggestion project was it

Dangiras Mačiulis, “Vilniaus vaizdinys Vilnių vaduojančioje Lietuvoje”, in Lietuvoje”, vaduojančioje vaizdinysVilnių “Vilniaus Mačiulis, Dangiras Nikžentaitis Alvydas Ibid. e temporary capital city Kaunas. city capital temporary e

(2009), 6. (2009), Even if the conflict between Vilniu between conflict the if Even mtn’ spot for support Smetona’s

on hlegd y h ceg fo Kua. hi dsrs aot h ntoa elite national the about distrust Their Kaunas. from clergy the by challenged soon ’ okd oe s dfne f h rl o ceg i nto bidn rte ta a than rather building nation in clergy of role the of defense a as more looked

urban space with a presence of the historical capital and the “memory” of the Gra the of “memory” the and capital historical the of presence a with space urban

of Vilnius in the 1920s and Vytautas Magnus’ jubilee celebrations in 1930 1930 in celebrations jubilee Magnus’ Vytautas and 1920s the in Vilnius of

coup d’etat d’etat coup was ion, the emphasis on nation or state building, national Catholicism or Catholic Catholic or Catholicism national building, state or nation on emphasis the ion, meant toprovide needs, only suchas thebasic meant libraries ,

Vytauto ir Jogailos įvaizdis Lietuvos ir Lenkijos visuomenėse ir Lenkijos Lietuvos įvaizdis ir Jogailos Vytauto in 1926 in ii Vlis fr fl house folk a for (Vilnius) kiai

cie utrl pr cultural active to change to

28 A failure to retain the capital Vilnius after Vilnius capital the retain to failure A . The so called “national called so The . s and Kaunas from 1907 till 1914 did not result in a a in result not did 1914 till 1907 from Kaunas and s

own they started organizing acquisition of an old old an of acquisition organizing started they own

the coalition government. The historicist projects historicist The government. coalition the 17

dcin curd nw cp. I scope. new a acquired oduction

–

eiain, ainl etvte, temporal festivities, national dedications, la b Smetona, by lead ,

hc lce ay utrl elitist cultural any lacked which dynamism” Acta litteraria comparativa litteraria Acta

(Vilnius: 26 29 . , promoted by the by promoted ,

which

the declaration declaration the Aidai, t became a a became t 27

. It fused It . 2002), 34. 2002), ae to came , nd nd ’

CEU eTD Collection 29 Fig with the revival thought ofthemovement Catholic in of 1930s the in and policy, educational Lithuanian on influence the for Catholics with competed ideologist nationalist

Town Old The Vytautas Alantas, Vytautas 2. Location of the interwar Lithuani ofthe interwar Location

Žygiuojanti tauta Žygiuojanti Vytautas Vytautas

(K lna drn te newr dmntd t dominated interwar, the during Alantas aunas: Pažanga, 1940), 17. aunas:1940), Pažanga, Magnus Magnus Vytautas The New Town The an national monuments Kaunas. in

of Resurrection

new humanism.

he urban space; it it space; urban he

CEU eTD Collection leidykla, instituto 30 National a for palace new a of creation the in resulted Museum, War old the of front in 1930 in laid Magnus, Vytautas to monument the of stone foundational The struggles. national rece the by secured Garden, National the into hero Lithuanian medieval an him monument.” “eternal for build to planned which regime, nationalist the by organized jubilee, Magnus' Vyta Duke Grand of celebration long year into integrated was Museum War the 1930 In Nagevičius. of hands the in it placed which Ministry Military the by 1922 in decree a of day collecting in antiques. interest and doctors medical as status professional their by connected were two The Nagevičius. founder the of friend close a was who Vilnius from guest distinguished Romanum Forum Lithuanian the as known became It place. took festivities national main the where space civic Lithuanian main the into itself outgrew soon museum War The heroes. national Lithuanian gradually was the which founded Garden, he National graveyard a of feeling the to create To museum. War future the house to Nagevičius Vladasgeneral by taken churchwas Orthodox an oftower the with housegarrison and growth gradual the setting urban o strengthening an in reflected vividly Kaunas, of avenue main the outside just 1920s early in emerged which Garden, National the and Museum War The The NationCultivationas Chapter 3

Dangiras Mačiulis Dangiras The

re were several symbolic foundational days of the War museum. The first was the the was first The museum. War the of days foundational symbolic several were re

2005), 207. 2005), Ltuna ntoaim throughout nationalism Lithuanian f , Valstybės kultūros politika Lietuvoje 1927 Lietuvoje politika kultūros Valstybės , i te wo the in , 30

This marked the ideological introduction of an established cult of this this of cult established an of introduction ideological the marked This

rds of the Lithuanian “national father” Jonas Basanavičius, a a Basanavičius, Jonas father” “national Lithuanian the of rds

ild ih n ra o mnmns o 9h century 19th to monuments of array an with filled 19

- the interwar period. The former czarist czarist former The period. interwar the 1940 metais 1940

(Vilnius:

Lietuvos istorijos Lietuvosistorijos nt memory of the the of memory nt utas utas CEU eTD Collection 54. 2009), Press, University 32 31 Fig Europeancountries post of spectrum a embodied garden National A personality. his reflected that touches personal declarative non of cultivation be can Nagevičius Garden, legitima the of supervisor and founder a As Garden. National the of formation the following by and writings, his of some details, biographical his from traced be Nag founder the of initiative personal the with overlapping) (and contrast in placed is ideology, regime’s authoritarian the chapter, calls Nora Pierre what of intersection an at developing was supervised ministries. by different museums separate two roof its under hosting 1936, in Museum

Maria Bucur, Bucur, Maria in Mémoire”, Lieux de Les History: “Between and Nora, Memory Pierre 3. sget ht h itra pro’ cnrl ihain ii sae te a museum, War the space, civic Lithuanian central period’s interwar the that suggest I The War the1920s. MuseumThe in tely called a called tely

of the national space. This cultivation lacked any clear planning; instead it was fullwas it instead lackedplanning; clear cultivation any space. This national the of Heroes and victims: remembering war in twentieth warin remembering victims: and Heroes history 32 . , a more constructive approach to the nation represented by the the by represented nation the to approach constructive more a , gardener

evičius and his attitudes toward the national space. The latter will will latter The space. national the toward attitudes his and evičius

, and his activities throughout the entire interwar period interwar entire the throughout activities his and ,

- war sensibilities common to other interwar interwar other to common sensibilities war - century Romania century Representations , those of the War and Culture, Culture, and War the of those , memory

(Bloomington: Indiana (Bloomington: Indiana

and and te ae ie the time same the t , no. 2 no. , history 6 (1989), (1989), 7 6 31 . In this this In . –

as a a as - 24.

CEU eTD Collection new a of cultivation the meant It society. and military between reconciliation the mean would center national new a of foundation the Kaunas historical of view of point the From forts. shri national a into blossomed I War World after structures abandoned those of One town. the integrating roads of maze a into reincarnated were forts useless the 1918 in Empire Russian the of dissolution the After administra military other many with along czar a was in 1848by andEastfounded West empire. between at theczarist Ashelter of the border major a town fortress rate first a as known marked was Kaunas Lithuania, of capital temporary the becoming also t of end center the at civic acquired identity, Lithuanian own Kaunas’ of new reconsideration the of appearance the Kaunas, of history local the of perspective the from hand, other the On Europe. Central East in states i new the of fragility physical and ideological of sense the and soldiers post felt deeply characterizing factors many reflected Fig 4. Nagevičius’s idea to found the War Museum and the closely related National Garden Garden National related closely the and Museum War the found to idea Nagevičius’s The War thelate MuseumThe in ne in a middle of the town, surrounded by eight heavy military military heavy eight by surrounded town, the of middle a in ne

1930s.

tive buildings spread throughout the town. town. the throughout spread buildings tive - war experiences: the major losses of of losses major the experiences: war

e 19 he ndependent nation nation ndependent th

century. Before Before century. CEU eTD Collection in description detailed a issued museum War the properly, dress to how of questions to response In rose. single a given were they which for clothes, Lithuanian traditional in dressed women to dedicated attention special the by furthered was space military the of face human The invalids. war the to dedicated as space Fig 5. role ofthe nownotonly military,responsible state forbu borders, the public new the suggest to town the of defenses exterior the from emphasis the relocated space national

Following the example of the House of Invalids in Paris, Nagevičius conceived his civic his Nagevičiusconceived Paris, Invalidsin of House the of example Followingthe The 19th century fortress of Kaunas. of century fortress The 19th

unity, finally breaking up the symbolic load of the czarist forts. The national military military national The forts. czarist the of load symbolic the up breaking finally unity, -

Nagevičius encouraged them to v to them encouraged Nagevičius 22

t for the nationalt for culture. the isit the Garden the isit

CEU eTD Collection 35 101 1986), Chicago, of University 34 33 add was soldier unknown the of grave The independence. for battles the of lands the from brought stones of pyramid high meter 6 a Solder; Fallen the of statue the to belonged pantheon” “national the in place prevalent a Russia, as realism in national educated established generation older the of artists Dobužinskis, Mstislavas architect the and Zikaras Juozas sculptor The Museum. War the by acquisitions special and donations with creature pagan donated Lithuanian this in statues air open first the of one Symbolically, stone. foundational a with 1930 in roots its planted Magnus Vytautas of the memory beforehistorical garden the in primacy took mixture This traditions. folk national and century, of “fighters” intellectual national the participated, he which in struggles national Lithuanian of memory recent the emphasized He space. Garden the and museum War the of with exchange cultural mutual promoting Africa Lithuania South to went he 1930 in and hills; period interwar the During years. several for service overseas of experiences broadening mind the having to addition in solders treating independence for battles the during field the in served he was archeologist; and doctor military a as educated was He beautification. land and traditions, national women, protection, animal marines, for he societies founded involved: was which he activities in varietyofNagevičiusreveals other a Garden the in mannequin a on demonstrating to addition

Karo muziejaus almanachas muziejaus Karo A.Vita Robert A M. . K. Nagevičius’ perception of the nation was consistently demonstrated in the arrangement the in demonstrated consistently was nation the of perception Nagevičius’ 34 -

acija, “Lietuvaitės, atgaivinkite tautinius rūbus”, in rūbus”, tautinius atgaivinkite “Lietuvaitės, acija, .

s, Civil - Military Relations in Lithuania Under President Antanas Smetona, 1926 Smetona, Antanas UnderPresident Lithuania in Relations Military kaukas

(Kaunas: Kauno Vytauto Didžiojo karo muziejus, 2006). karo Didžiojo Vytauto (Kaunas: Kauno ed later, surrounded by wooden crosses collected during special special during collected crosses wooden by surrounded later, ed

- he continued archeological expeditions in the Lithuanian castle castle Lithuanian the in expeditions archeological continued he

105.

, known for collecting money collecting for known ,

lo n o te is poesoa Lithuanian professional first the of one also aesthetic experience of the Garden. The central central The Garden. the of experience aesthetic 23

Trimitas 33 , no. 26 (1927). 26 no. , . 35 eie ti, h borpy of biography the this, Besides . Later it was gradually filled gradually was it Later .

national space was that of a a of that was space national

- 1940

the 19th 19th the

(Loyola CEU eTD Collection 36 give never “We’ll chant period interwar famous a with sign a eve Year’s New like occasions a of form the resembling Dobužinskis, architect the by tower church old an for topping new a in manifested Garden National the in Vilnius of appearance first delicate very The occupation. its of day the and foundation its of day the of commemorations spe the during repeatedly invoked and Garden National the in times several inscribed f fountain a and lion a of sculpture the while monuments the around blooming were general, American an from present a roses, The symbolism. national of sculpture national famous a center the at other; each facing seeder, a and smuggler book a of sculptures for Garden Lithuanian separate a envisaged Nagevičius palace, new a to museum old the rearrangement and changes major After Garden. National the in Catholicism to rebirth symbolic a gave Maironis poet national the of bust a Later anthem. national Lithuanian the of author the being to addition in 1880s feeli national romantic early the revived second the and 1840s, the in Lithuanianhistory historyof Polish from “separation” the for calledfirst the Kudirka; Vincas and Daukantas Simonas for erected were activists national the of busts first Lithuaniangarden ge brightbloomingcompany Libertya intheof found itselfin Kaunas’ Latvia, of capital the of square main the in alone loom to erected Riga, in Liberty Liber of Statue modest a Further, Poles. and bermontinins, bolsheviks, the with fights in died who solders 4000 than more for stood they Together lands. Lithuanian all represent to expeditions amily

J. Pronckus, “Karo muzėjus su laisvės var muzėjus laisvės su “Karo Pronckus, J. y a agl ih nokd ad, rs u fr eea mtr. nie h Sau of Statue the Unlike meters. several for up arose hands, unlocked with angel an ty, The loss of Vilnius also belonged to the memory of the recent past. Its absence was was absence Its past. recent the of memory the to belonged also Vilnius of loss The –

inserted some aristocraticinserted pictureLithuanian Garden. flavor theof into Nation a Spinner (1940) was foreseen; finally they had to embrace all the Lithuanian Lithuanian the all embrace to had they finally foreseen; was (1940) Spinner a

of the Garden took place in 1932, related to a relocation of of relocation a to related 1932, in place took Garden the of pu”, in pu”, Lietuvos žinios Lietuvos 24

g fr pstv ntoa wr i the in work national positive a for ngs

(1922 06 18). 06 (1922 –

presents by the Tiškevičiai Tiškevičiai the by presents

castle 36 ntlemen. The ntlemen. The O special On .

cial cial CEU eTD Collection 39 38 37 regaining Vilnius. “the burying though not is came” Dukes the ways Vilnius the though but Warsaw, to way “the that reminded Nagevičius act. foundational Magnus’ the introducing while Vilnius” capital your occupied and contract the broken has Pole the Lithuanian, “Remember, pronounced: and occupation, Vilnius’ of years the in Vilnius of was space inscription capital’s temporary ardent most the and last The attached. also were Klaipėda lands audibl a be to had it 1922 in museum War the of tower old the to temporarily Raised with lost. was capital the before Vilnius independence achieved congratulate to sent America, in community Lithuanian the from gift a was missing the cop the of Bell, Liberty the in embodied sign was capital historical profound more The tower. the on blinking was Vilnius” without up

“Klastingas lenkas savo sutartį sulaužė”, in sulaužė”, savosutartį lenkas “Klastingas in “Juodasispaminklas”, Vaižgantas, in kareivį”, nežinomąjį “Pagerbsime viršininkas, muziejaus Karo 37 O te oe tre ot o am o te ihain ie o Vlis Kua and Kaunas Vilnius, of cites Lithuanian the of arms of coats three tower the On .

relations between the two nations”, suggested more the burial of the belief in belief the of burial the more suggested nations”, two the between relations

monument anticipated the advent of a combatant rhetoric of Vytautas Vytautas of rhetoric combatant a of advent the anticipated monument

an obelisk an Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos Karys – , n ,

e reminder of the not yet fully united Lithuanian united fully yet not the of reminder e the Black Monument, which commemorated ten ten commemorated which Monument, Black the o. 42 (1930). 42 o.

(1930 10 09). 10 (1930 25

38 . Paradoxically, the shape of a black obelisk, black a of shape the Paradoxically, . . The speech given by Nagevičius in 1930 in Nagevičius by given speech The .

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos

y of the American Liberty Bell. It Bell. Liberty American the of y

(1934 11 20). 11 (1934

CEU eTD Collection 7. Fig The Black Monument. 6. The modified tower of anoldOrthodoxmodified towerof churchThe tower.

1930

CEU eTD Collection in reikalu”, statymo kitųmuziejų ir 43 42 41 40 compatible cul the of objections the despite museum Magnus Vytautas combined the in 1930 in fulfilled downstairs museum war “weighty” the above ceilings glass under i practice the was as museums, cultural other with together museum War the combine to suggest to first also was he infrastructure; modern with museum historical his envisaged Nagevičius regimes. the of application foundatio its and past of sense deeper general’s the to attention pay to needs one that suggest I 1920s. the of end the until floor each on styles architectural museum War new the imagined Nagevičius museum, andwasdangerammunition offire ina military with filled fully already was hut wooden the considering space museum new a for “ringing was Ministry Military the with Nagevičius 1920s early the in Already preferences. aesthetic conservative the his to of light certain layers a gives the suggest, I between history, moving experience personal His born. was he where to close seasi the of hills Lithuanian the in digging spent years the and archeologist, an as carrier professional his from concluded be can unity, national of sense a restore to attempt an

P. Galaunė, A. Galdikas, P. Kalpokas, J. Vienožinskis, “Dėl straipsnio Karo Muzi Karo straipsnio “Dėl Vienožinskis, J. Kalpokas, P. Galaunė, A. Galdikas, P. Ibid. 06.05 1922 51, ap.l, b. f.1764, valstybės archyvas, Lietuvoscentrinis 12.05 1927 51, ap.l, b. f.1764, valstybės archyvas, Lietuvoscentrinis tural elite, who indicated that the two museums were neither stylistically, nor ideologically ideologically nor stylistically, neither were museums two the that indicated who elite, tural

Nagevičius’

n other European capitals. For the cultural museum he suggested the upper floors floors upper the suggested he museum cultural the For capitals. European other n 43 .

perception of the nation, his emphasis on the memories of the recent past, past, recent the of memories the on emphasis his nation, the of perception national style national

Lietuva

, practiced by the interwar East Central European historicist historicist European Central East interwar the by practiced , 41 ns in order to distinguish it from the more formalistic formalistic more the from it distinguish to order in ns ; this became a prevailing idea for the future War museum War future the for idea prevailing a became this ;

(1924 04 16). 04 (1924 40 . In ofthe. meeting extension concerning a the special 27

as a castle on a hill with different different with hill a on castle a as

the bells” about the need need the about bells” the 42 ejaus, Čiurlionies Galerijos Galerijos Čiurlionies ejaus, Ti sgeto was suggestion This . de areas areas de CEU eTD Collection 45 special the during found be 44 could which everything from gathered curiosities of room a in front ofthe Garden” invalids for house the into integrated be will materials remaining The anew. building to order new standing already the of feet the at destroyed was it before topping, “Lithuanian” new a with endowed now church, Orthodox former the of tower the kissing publicly by museum the of foundations old the to respect of foreig the of domestication the of meaning a acquired it” of care taking are we them. “Now by and accommodated now is it place, this on here enemies were there if even that in ceremony the In faults. past its for it redeeming was way a in which foundation czarist its for respectexpressed it Garden.Notably, National the of metamorphosis Fig. 8.

Ibid. in muziejas bokšto”, senojo iš vėliava valstybės nuleista kartą “Paskutinį

The similar quest for a continuous experienceThe questa similar bespotted continuous inthe first for could W the in rooted were continuity for quest his andmateriality and past of sense Nagevičius’ The War byproposal Dubeneckis MuseumThe 45 .

44 . Here Nagevičius’ idea of the of idea Nagevičius’ Here . palace. Nagevičius explained that “they are destroying in in destroying are “they that explained Nagevičius palace. 28

( not realized n environment. Nagevičius gave a sign sign a gave Nagevičius environment. n ) Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos .

cultivation

1936 Nagevičius said Nagevičius 1936

(1934 11 10). 11 (1934 of the of ar Museum, ar Museum, garden

also also CEU eTD Collection (Kaunas: 49 48 47 46 had what about discussions into public broader the of involvement Nagevičiusa servedas endowed provided funds public substantial the for museum a in place a worth were they whether and museum, War the in works the of quality artistic stru andwars historical the of themes exploring were who generation older of artists recruited He narratives. national unity of feeling garden. a to museum modern the of visit the extend to layout new the in preserved be must which experience museum the of part integral an as Garden National the emphasized F divisions. thematic the from aside order conceived a without displayed was museum the before space of lack the of Because collection. museum the in past the reassembled which icons and relicts experience material the on reliance a through lands national of reunification search instead Garden National the and Museum Šapoka Adolfas of interpretations historical the on relied which policy regime’s authoritarian of part substantial a history; the of reading evaluative and selective a built be could future a which on wholeness, dispersed a for search a in all Nagevičius, by personally and solders, of missions

Giedrė Jankevičiūtė, Jankevičiūtė, Giedrė Pen Pr. Šapoka, Adolfas Pronckus. Truly, the War Museum and the National Garden contained little “democracy” or or “democracy” little contained Garden National the and Museum War the Truly, the of experience aesthetic the through was It

- Nacionalinis M. K. Čiurlio K. M. Nacionalinis tis, “Pirmas karo muzejuje koncertas”, inkoncertas”, muzejuje karo “Pirmas tis, ih n dctoa tn; ee r ws in was art here tone; educational an with

48 Lietuvos istorija Lietuvos . It was deeply rooted in the 19th century romantic historical tradition and tradition historical romantic century 19th the in rooted deeply was It . Dailė ir valstybė: ir Dailė ggles. Galaunė, the head of the Čiurlionis Gallery, used to question the question to used Gallery, Čiurlionis the of head the ggles.Galaunė, gardener

(Kauna nio dailės muziejus, niodailės 46 .

relocated to modern apartments in 1934 everything was was everything 1934 in apartments modern to relocated . The space organized by Nagevi by organized space The .

dailės gyvenimas Lietuvos Respublikoje 1918 Respublikoje Lietuvos gyvenimas dailės s: Švietimo ministerijos Knygų leidimo komisija, 1936). komisija, Knygų leidimo ministerijos s: Švietimo Lietuva 29

2003), 126 2003),

ed for a unity with the past and a symbolic symbolic a and past the with unity a for ed (1922 07 18). 07 (1922

Garden that Nagevičius tried to achieve a a achieve to tried Nagevičius that Garden 49 Te hl ntoa sae a thus was space national whole The . evc o te nation the of service - 129.

čius can be contrasted with contrasted be can čius

to be included into the the into included be to - 1940 inally, Nagevičius Nagevičius inally, 47 passeggiata a te uh as much the as ,

. The idea War War idea The . –

touchable touchable

in the the in CEU eTD Collection aidas 51 “National 50 a name his in erect to decision a reached committee the variants, possible of several Vytautas.major a monumentintroduced for the After discussion internal of theidea crit officials, state of committee special The regime. the by advocated version, official the before celebrations Magnus Vytautas the of eve the in tested finally were nationhood, of experience authentic modern forsearch his as well as tragedy thecollection was to introduced national the of document “archeological” modern sound and nude a instead museum; War youth contemporary in crashed journal plane the the though when Even Germany. ended tragically Lithuania to America of States United the they times rout Their ocean. an cross those historyto in plane a with journey longest second the planned In 1933. in independence Lithuanian of name the in trip famous a took herois national century 20th of moment new aintroduced it impulse; modern a it gave 1933 spacein museum artworksgained new modern historicist the when occurred museum the of experience interwar overall the in change major The supervision. and care, help, support, his with initiative, his under museum”, the of “spirit factum advertised mostly where Garden the in changes the Museum, National MagnusVytautas the into transformation its untill museum the of infancy the From space. national symbolic

“Vytauto Didžiojo Komiteto paiškinimas dėl Vytauto Didžiojo muziejaus patalpų naudojimo”, in naudojimo”,in muziejaus patalpų Didžiojo Vytauto Komiteto dėl paiškinimas Didžiojo “Vytauto in žuvus”, Girėnui ir gairės Dariui Lietuvos “Jaunosios Keliuotis, Juozas

(1935 06 03). 06 (1935 The “flight” of the young Lithuanian pilots Steponas Darius and Stasys Girėnas into the the into Girėnas Stasys and Darius Steponas pilots Lithuanian young the of “flight” The Nagevičius’ personal attitude toward the nation and contributions to contributions and nation the toward attitude Nagevičius’personal in the national press. They usually occurred usually They press. national the in m and pathos. The two brothers, pilots, activists in youth sport, and education, education, and sport, youth in activists pilots, brothers, two The pathos. and m

50 , they did not become a source for a modern artistic reflection artistic modern a for source a become not did they ,

architectural frames after new toits palace. themuseum moved

Naujoji Romuva Romuva Naujoji –

a formless mass of the destroyed planea mass ofthedestroyed formless iqued for its bureaucratic composition, in 1929 in composition, bureaucratic its for iqued 30

under generosity of the founder and the the and founder the of generosity under ald hm eos n mdl for models and heroes them called Naujoji Romuva, Naujoji national

no. 134 (1933). (1933). 134 no. Lituanica Lietuvos Lietuvos gardening

e from from e n the in post

. - ,

CEU eTD Collection 54 53 52 year the of highlight med the for forms artistic modern provided this All contests. artistic special the in glory medieval to attention Magnus special Vytautas for called special committee The Museum. War the in trip the ending and starting villages, symbolic aroun taken The was It 1930. in launched was portrait his of journey lands”. “his throughout journey symbolic a in “see” later would he which university, a and schools, bridges, as such name, his with Kaunas in places many endowed kin himself crown to failure the and death Magnus' Vytautas of anniversary year 500 the for jubilee the of celebrations year long one extensive the marked year1930 The Vytautas Magnus special military preparation that and space, his character militant the of remind toand complain to writingletters was Nagevičius ThenEducation. of Ministry the assignedto was museum combined the of guidance the when himself, Nagevičius against turned soon museology and education to themselves limiting candidates, other the nation” the of “disciplining the in museum the of role the and militarism” “living about spoke He Magnus. Vytautas for monument planned officially an for center a as serve to preparedness Nagevičius from committee letter a organizational received Magnus Vytautas the competition, foreseen In the home. to contemporary connection new a for searched which municipality’s, Kaunas the including Museum”

Lietuvos centrinis valstybės archyvas, f. 1764, ap. l, b. 51, 1931 12 16.12 1931 51, ap.l, b. f.1764, valstybės archyvas, Lietuvoscentrinis ap.2, 52 b. 16, f.1640, valstybės archyvas, Lietuvoscentrinis valstybės archyvas Lietuvoscentrinis –

52 the achiev the Ta gv mn exp many gave That .

ed unity with the nation, according to him, was nothing to compare with compare to nothing was him, to according nation, the with unity ed –

the Vytautas Magnus monument Magnus Vytautas the 54

, f. 1640, ap. 2, b. 16, ap.2, b. 16, f.1640,

where he reminded about the maturity of his place, its its place, his of maturity the about reminded he where cain fr eea free several for ectations 31

1929 10 16, 26. 16, 10 1929 ieval figure. In preparation for a main main a for preparation In figure. ieval

- 55. it can not be lead by a person without without person a by lead be not can it

–

the committee sent a request to the the to request a sent committee the

d many Lithuanian towns and and towns Lithuanian many d - laig ainl museums, national floating 53 . Ironically, the matter the Ironically, . g. This occasion This g. CEU eTD Collection 58 57 56 55 sour a past, medieval Lithuanian the to Garden the the in link of new a tone create to proclaiming had act The foundational “mistake”. historical the correct to Duke the to obligation th of that feeling: a Museum, War for twofold called theGardenan in old of foundational laid stoneand the National hanging Museum was inthe air. rhetorica the it; in part taking were museums which unclear chosen solved was museum national the of issue yea Magnus Vytautas the of National eve the new of minute the last the for in Finally, candidate Museum. serious most the was hill Vytautas the upon, expand to museums of complex a for tiny too considered was location Museum War current the While t respect to order in restored be to has castle Kaunas’ that claimed who Galaunė, and Dobužinskis connoisseurs art responsefrom negative Ita received castle. Kaunas’ of ruins the Magnus museum Vytautas one into exhibitions, and collections for space lacking museums, existing the fit formal more was question the Museum; National Lithuanian the of idea the embrace museum new combined a for form a suggest to asking municipality the and museums existing the of leaders

Lietuvos centrinis valstybės archyva Lietuvoscentrinis 22. 08, 04 ap.2, 1929 b. 16, f.1640, valstybės archyvas, Lietuvoscentrinis valstybės archyvas Lietuvoscentrinis Lietuvoscent ce of inspiration for nation building. The recent memory of the national struggles and the the and struggles national the of memory recent The building. nation for inspiration of ce Concernin h tn o te aiet o te yats ans uem ipitd n the in imprinted museum, Magnus Vytautas the of manifesto the of tone The 58 . Ironically, during the foundational stone ceremony at the end of 1930 it was still was it 1930 of end the at ceremony stone foundational the during Ironically, . mdr peec o Vtua Mgs gadu, n Vlis s national a as Vilnius and grandeur, Magus’ Vytautas of presence modern e rinis valstybės archyvas, f. 1640, ap. 2, b. 16, 06 4, 4, 2. ap.2, 06 b. 16, f.1640, valstybės archyvas, rinis g the location of the new national monument, the committee tried to reserve reserve to tried committee the monument, national new the of location the g 56 . 55

. As it was well noti well was it As .

s, f. 1640, ap. 2, b. 16, 1930 11 30, 89. 30, 11 ap.2, 1930 b. 16, f.1640, s, , f. 1640, ap. 2, b. ap.2, b. 16, f.1640, ced by Galaunė, they following discussion did not did discussion following they Galaunė, by ced –

a location of the current War museum place was was place museum War current the of location a

1930 11 30, 89. 30, 11 1930

l nationalist regime’s project of of project regime’s nationalist l

r, very burning burning very r, he past he -

how to to how 57 . CEU eTD Collection 59 “soldier MikėnasJuozas times” frombyplace. foundits themedieval thesculptor a Garden the in while hill; Žižkov’s on Independence of monument Prague’s the to comparable Dobužinkis), by (1938, crypt Vytautas’ and sculpture, Vytautas’ with Dobužinskis) by i interior (1936, way entry new a with only added was integration museum, Magnus its after museum, War The experience. national uninterrupted more а for quest the in rooted museum, War the of idea formed fully a hiding finally was remained symbols national rhetoric The Reisonas. Karolis of architect by plan a to according constellations reorganized only untouched, authentic Its symbols. recognizable easy official and repetitive national of variety a on based experience national “organized” the for drive a as goal “unreachable” an production of national advocated ideologist culture, byAlantas thenationalist with added be to had Garden the in victory

Alantas,50. h dcaain nrdcd h uiu sae f h Gre it a oe strategically more a into Garden the of space unique the introduced declaration The

ue cltr o the of sculpture huge 59 .

t Vytautas nto

CEU eTD Collection some running students In young for center. asylum of civic place a national became even the Garden National of the occasions owner an as than rather guest distinguished a as figureMagnus’ Vytautas with compete him let to or audience the and president the between hierarchies clear impose to created was Garden National the in arrangement special No grandeur. Vytautas’ of Smetona Antanas president ceremonies b a from audience its addressed official during contrary, the On Lithuania. of capital temporary the of space urban the in regime authoritarian the of centrality the establish for was monument” it or “eternal do, to failed an it What ofMagnus. Vytautas need the and museums, central two least at for space for problems two solved propaganda nationalist for committee special Magnus Figs.& 10. 9

h aporain f h Wr uem n te Či the and Museum War the of appropriation The The War 1939. interior, Museum The , standing behind as a firm background. Smetona was welcomed to the Garden Garden the to welcomed was Smetona background. firm a as behind standing , alcony in the War Museum’s facade remaining in the shadow shadow the in remaining facade Museum’s War the in alcony 34

not explicitly outspoken as an aim, was to to was aim, an as outspoken explicitly not urlionis Gallery by the Vytautas Vytautas the by Gallery urlionis

–

an urgent need need urgent an CEU eTD Collection 63 62 61 134. (2002), Lithuanian the on 60 put was emphasis “performative” The statehood. Lithuanian modern altern intersecting two embodied it 1930, in Garden National neoclassical requested was inthe competition before style II War World th about spoke 1939 from complex governmental planned the of image The displayed. publicly be to chance a given never was style” “official the of wealth” “wooden military.The ofthe “shelter” the regimefell under Kaunas’ space, urban the th from where, place, second the became Club Military the Symbolically, style” “official the in artists Lithuanian best the by produced was president rooms both of the interior wooden The between Magnus. Vytautas equality symbolic a established they There president. the of meetings official the for rooms representative two were there Club Military the of floor third an as known also soldiers, the of education spiritual the for dedicated Club, Military the Museum, War the of space democratic the Unlike place. divine a of connotations it gave Basanavičius, linguist Nagevičiu general of initiative state the and military the by closely public performance theceremonies. official of a though mainly regime the of terms historicist the in “nationalized” was Garden National accepted was Lithuania with relations diplomatic restore to ultimatum re from

Jankevičiūtė, in rūmai”, “Ramovės 102. Vitas, in Kaune”, tarpukario studentųdemonstracijos “Politinės AušraJurevičiūtė, Interestingly, there was one more representative place in the temporary capital, shared capital, temporary the in place representative more one was there Interestingly, Finally, when the nationalist ideology officially became part of the experience of the the of experience the of part became officially ideology nationalist the when Finally, ies persecutions gime’s

47. entertainment club, was reserved for exclusive people. It was because on the the on because was It people. exclusive for reserved was club, entertainment

Kardas , no. 8 (1937). 8 no. ,

– 60

a mixture of themes from Middle Ages and the folk culture folk the and Ages Middle from themes of mixture a Oc Ngvču ws amn pol atr h Polish the after people calming was Nagevičius Once . s and opened in 1936; the name “ramovė”, suggested by a a by suggested “ramovė”, name the 1936; in opened and s

–

the Military Club. It was also created under the the under created also was It Club. Military the 35

e changed taste of the regime; the the regime; the of taste changed e ative versions of the history of of history the of versions ative Kauno istorijos metraštis istorijos Kauno 61 63 . Thus in this way the way this in Thus . .

e perspective of of perspective e , vol. 3 3 vol. , and and 62 .

CEU eTD Collection seegetting hisplace by clothes. stripping old bigger its off the nicely into fits this All suggested.initially Nagevičius as just museum, of name prestigious a with museum of idea Nagevičius’ cultivation of fulfillment a more was importance national significant of palace tr Consequently, the Garden. material ofthe space the in embodied was fights independence national recent of memory the while past medieval

than its absorption. The enlargement, supported by the state, endowed the War War the endowed state, the by supported enlargement, The absorption. its than Vytautas Magnus; it was expanded to include a Cultural a include to expanded was it Magnus; Vytautas 36

ansformation of the wooden hut into a stone a stone hutinto wooden ansformation the of

gardener’s

wish to to wish CEU eTD Collection Fig. siecle Lithaunian distinguished a of name the under work creative national the allembrace to the than ambitious less no was space, national the of director the was who Galaunė, Juozas castle. the War about the dreaming of Museum, hut wooden the of one reminded it way a in house, temporary built specially museum national Lithuanian first the of flashed light a Ažuolynashill, on 1924 Lithuania,in of temporarycapital the placerepresentationalof Whi The Nationas Expression Chapter 4 le the National Garden was little by little establishing itself as the main civic civic main the as itself establishing little by little was Garden National the le 11.

artist Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis. artist Konstantinas Mikalojus The plan of the Čiurlionis’ Gallery byČiurlionis’ Dube Vladimiras the The planof

gardener 37

as he already envisaged already he as –

h Čuloi Gley Loc Gallery. Čiurlionis The neckis, 1924. a new modern palace palace modern new a

ated in a a in ated fin - de -

CEU eTD Collection unreleasedintegrate energypart world. and itasan of to hisuniversalist organic artistic Lith recognize to artists first the of one was Čiurlionis composer, and painter The museum. national opened newly the of collection the in role central a played which art, touchingup was Gallery Čiurlionis’ the fighters, national the of energy wasted the of memory the about nationalwere sources “authentic” own experience: MuseumWar of spoke suggestingtheir the yet a forming ideologically was which debate the culture; national Lithuanian of nature the about debates important mostthe of some of prophetsthe Theyalso were spaces. outgrownmuseum un the about press national the in lamented Fig. 12. - to - Throughout the 1920s, both the War museum and the Čiurlionis’ Gallery constantly constantly Gallery Čiurlionis’ the and museum War the both 1920s, the Throughout e yats Ma Vytautas be The Čiurlionis Gallery (the Gallery The Čiurlionis temporary palace) by on unreleased energies of folk culture. The latter was best expressed in Čiurlionis’ Čiurlionis’ in expressed best waslatter The culture. folk energiesof unreleased on gnus monument. Both museum directors, Galaunė and Nagevičius, Nagevičius, and Galaunė directors, museum Both monument. gnus bearable conditions of their collections and their their and collections their of conditions bearable 38

Vladimiras Dubeneckis,Vladimiras 1925. uanian folk’s folk’s uanian

CEU eTD Collection 64 of division Maceina’s philosopher Lithuanian idea ofthe Garden National toamerefunction representation. of state sinc Nagevičius’ ignoring were creation” about is museum cultural the manner while destruction, simplified a in described was difference main act cultural other and Galaunė by signed letter public a idea, his to response In museum. War the of extension an as them combine to suggested officially Nagevičius 1920s the In sensibilities. national two the of irreconcilability Fig.

Galaunė, Galdikas et al. et Galaunė,Galdikas 13. The very dynamism between the two national sensibilities can be found in the the in found be can sensibilities national two the between dynamism very The who Gallery, Čiurlionis of director the was it Interestingly, The i nterior

the

Čiurlionis Gallery, 1920s. Čiurlionis

ere devotion for national activities; instead they reduced his his reduced they instead activities; national for devotion ere ivists, expressed great discontent with the idea. The idea. the with discontent great expressed ivists,

39 cultures of form of cultures

64 – Ntby te utrl activists cultural the Notably, .

and te a msu i about is museum War “the cultures of expression, of cultures was pointing out the very very the out pointing was

and and CEU eTD Collection 69 68 muziejus, dailės Čiurlionio K. M. Nacionalinis 67 visuomeniškumas 66 65 more a painting understandable historicist than a thatfor peasantclaimed Čiurlionis evenacclaimed.folk were Galaunė widely national Lithuanian in inspirations and writings Čiurlionis’ content, national its about feelings hi of power expressive the of sources important most the of one was which spirit, folk the Lithuanian genius” “national a even or artist, national significant a local many I War World before symbolism national expressing at better much was Garden, the for requested Spinner, the of statue the that contended Nagevičius Instead, Čiurlioni critiqued who Jakštas Adomas critic conservative the by art Čiurlionis’ of different evaluations prewar the two in found advocating be can symbolisms museums interwar two the between misconception s nation, to approach academic and historicist dominant the against project national this posed naturally that creation; national of source relieved non a uniqueness, national Lithuanian for searched Gallery Čiurlionis of director the true the was culture folk Lithuanian that claim his

Paulius Galaunė, „Lietuvos meno keliai“, in keliai“,in meno „Lietuvos PauliusGalaunė, Veljataga J Veljataga, Pillė Maceina, Antanas olita Mulevičiūtė, Mulevičiūtė, olita , 77. , s works. Although Čiurlionis’ art was full of mysticism, which caused ambiguous ambiguous caused which mysticism, of full was art Čiurlionis’ Although works. s

(Vilnius: Lietuvos kultūros tyrimų kultūros Lietuvos (Vilnius: Lietuvos estetinė mintis XIX a. pabaigoje pabaigoje a. XIX mintis estetinė Lietuvos

Raštai Modernizmo link: Modernizmo , vol. 1 (Vilnius: Mintis, 1 vol. ,

curators recognized Čiurlionis’ Čiurlionis’ recognized curators

dailės gyvenimas Lietuvos Respublikoje, 1918 Lietuvos Respublikoje, gyvenimas dailės

Baras 2001), 29. 2001),

1991), 501 1991), , no. no. , institutas, 2011) institutas, 40 69

67 ’ ybls a to eahd rm reality from detached too as symbolism s’

2 (1925). 2 . . Despite the conservative criticism, already criticism, conservative the Despite .

– upported by the state. The roots of this this of roots The state. the by upported culture of expression of culture

XX a. pirmoje pusėje: meno tautiškumas ir tautiškumas meno pusėje: pirmoje a. XX - 505.

, 69 , 68 Hs anig aldd epy to deeply alluded paintings His . - 70.

symbolism - 65 1940 . Similarly, Galaunė,Similarly, .

and treated him as as him treated and

(Kaunas: (Kaunas: ’ art was much ’ art much was

national national 66 . CEU eTD Collection 70 Education of Ministry the by museum the to prescribed collections small many other and gathered modernart, national art, Lithuanian folk it growing. core Atits Lithuanian i dispersed heritage collecting years several spent and professional Paris young in a studied who of Galaunė, hands museologist into taken soon was museum the of guidance The wife. state the after collection art Fig. 14.

Galaunė, Galdikas et al. et Galaunė,Galdikas The M. K. fin - de Čiurlionis, “REX”, 1909. Čiurlionis, “REX”, - siecle n Russian lands. With time the art collection of the Čiurlionis Gallery was was GalleryČiurlionis the of collection art the time With lands. Russian n

universalist art of Čiurlionis became a core of the Lithuanian national national Lithuanian the of core a became Čiurlionis of art universalist

ogt floig i ery et, l o hs rwrs rm his from artworks his of all death, early his following bought,

. Thus in its cont its in Thus . ent the ent CEU eTD Collection etnografi ir istorijos TSR 72 71 Čiurlioni and Galaunė with shared was expression modernist national cityscape Vilnius’ by studying inspired much time was much and culture spent folk Lithuanian He architect. than rather artist an of sensibility the him gave expressi national unique a for search a in engaged later he mastership, classical in Petersburg inSaint to the architectLithuania,entrusted Dubeneckis. wasEducated Vladimiras v first The The Expression creationwhich national revised creative themodern capacities. national of “spring” new a of appearance an marked finally, stage, third The art. m national the of maturation the marked period second The form. aesthetic desired the and collection museum’s the in Čiurlionis of place prominent the from reflected as Vilnius of memory the c which collection museum folk below; growing collection national the for “umbrella” an as served culture folk Lithuanian placed he which significan new acquired museum national new the of basis the as art Čiurlionis’ of heritage the state, independent an of context new the in Vilnius of environment multicultural competitive a in House” “National Lithuanian the Basanavičius with I. inTogether War World before life cultural Vilnius' activists main three of one was Čiurlionis because was This Hill. Tauras on Vilnius in Museum House”/ “National realized never but planned once the reminded Gallery Čiurlionis

Vladimiras Dubeneckis: jubiliejinė kūrybos paroda, skirta 100 skirta paroda, kūrybos jubiliejinė Dubeneckis: Vladimiras LaimaLaučkaitė, useum’s collection in the search to represent the whole of the Lithuanian national Lithuanian the of whole the represent to search the in collection useum’s isualization of the Čiurlionis Gallery, the future central cultural museum of of museum cultural central future the Gallery, Čiurlionis the of isualization

Vilniaus dailė XX amžiaus pradžioje amžiaus XX dailė Vilniaus jos muziejus, jos expressionism ould be discerned in the 1920s. The first period was very much in in much very was period first The 1920s. the in discerned be ould

1988).

became a connecting line between the three periods of the the of periods three the between line connecting a became

(Vilnius:

e I ugs ta te nvrait ol into world universalist the that suggest I ce. -

osioms gimimo metinėms gimimo osioms

Baltos lankos, Baltos

2002).

he promoted the idea of of idea the promoted he 72 tu hs neet in interest his thus ;

(Vilnius: Lietuvos Lietuvos (Vilnius: s. In the 1920s 1920s the In s. on which which on 71 . But . CEU eTD Collection 74 73 and use, temporary for built yeardesigned by architect inthe same thesame house missing waitingfor financialresources. the neoclassical modest a in opened was museum The f Lithuanian of well the uncoveringof slight discoveryand young. the However, so awaypassed who genius” “national the of heritage the “celebrate” to had Lithuania, of city capital temporary the of hill “Nat Vilnius’ of absence very the for stood crown this Finally paintings. Čiurlionis’ from crown stylized a with decorated 1924 in Gallery Čiurlionis’ the of visualization first the in reflected were house, Opera an of endeavor characterizin museum classicism, a and also aesthetics include baroque to musicality, expanded later which idea the for money collecting started and Vilnius in house Opera an about idea an with up came elite cultural Kaunas’ part. the in D which performance in singer, opera Lithuanian famous a by opera theater National Kaunas successful a after 1920 in idea spontaneous a was It symbols. precursor its of main sourcesnational baroque folkart liedintheand Vilnius’ Lithuanian the about ideas developing was Dubeneckis

Donaldas Strikulis, “Tautos namų idėja namų “Tautos idėja Strikulis, Donaldas mūsųin architektūrą”, “Apie Vladimiras Dubeneckis, Some additional sources of the initial idea of the Gallery can be found in the fail the in found be can Gallery the of idea initial the of sources additional Some olk spirit by Čiurlionis was not destined to flourish into the modern palace. modern the into flourish to destined not was Čiurlionis by spirit olk –

h Tlp os i Vlis te ui big n o Ltuna national Lithuanian of one being tulip the Vilnius, in House Tulip the

–

Tulpių rūmai”, in Tulpių ional House”. The envisaged Gallery, mounted on the the on mounted Gallery, envisaged The House”. ional 43 Baras

Šiaurės Atėnai Šiaurės , no. 1 (1925), 93. (1925), 1 no. , national style national 73 te nelzd spontaneous unrealized the g . , no. 12 (2011 8. 25), 03 (2011 12 no. ,

; he suggested that its its that suggested he ; ubeneckis also took took also ubeneckis

74 ed idea idea ed The .

CEU eTD Collection 75 latter the For art. religious and heritage gentry’s “forgotten” the of collection systematic and protection the for calling actively was writings his in Galaunė museum the of core the formed “state a than as rather it museum” emphasized “national and regime the from museum national the of idea the distanced further Galaunė areas. exhibition limited the in privileged been always has which art, Čiurlionis for encompassing more was Museum” changed had museum national central the of open the from counted idea expanding, initial was the collection national ofthe frame time temporaryGallery. Asthe be can space urban Kaunas' in project national Fig.

Galaunė, Galdikas et al. et Galaunė,Galdikas 15. The second symbolic stage in the formation of the idea and the form of the Čiurlionis’ Čiurlionis’ the of form the and idea the of formation the in stage symbolic second The Vladimiras Dubeneckis’Vladimiras of sketch

75 . He still promised a promised still He .

uem. eie te ok n mdr at which art modern and folk the Besides museum”. the – 44 Čiurlionis Gallery, 1920s. Čiurlionis Galaunė now suggested that a title of “National “National of title a that suggested now Galaunė

secured special place in the museumthe in place special secured

ing date of the the of date ing

CEU eTD Collection 79 78 77 76 of source a as art folk national of rehabilitation the and sincerity for quest the forefront the They endeavor. constructive very a hiding was ARS group the tone revolutionary avant Lithuanian early the of times Western universities insearchforway a outo from returned who generation younger new the and their universities, Russian recieved the who in education those between period, the of artists the among division generational demons and art national the of nature the about discussion new a create to determinationa expressed they manifestoIn their ARS. called painters, of group new awas cultural modernist the of tradition the revived which 1932 in novelty fresh The art. national modern into experiences life urban of introduction popular a in West and E from motifs similar used who Šimonis Kazys like artists, modernist Lithuanian newer near “shelved” was Čiurlionis Now books. with it to contributing and heritage his researching living a less and century 20th Instead memory. early of spirit the of history a more and more becoming heritage artistic Lithuanian the of the into breathed was air new and and archeological Nagevičius. preoccupiedbothGalaunė sites, foun suggested he

Mulevičiūtė, 173. Mulevičiūtė, ARS,in in reikalu”, muziejaus “Tautos PauliusGalaunė, “Bažnytin PauliusGalaunė, The third stage of the idea of the national space can be counted from 1930 when some some when 1930 from counted be can space national the of idea the of stage third The As noticed by Jolita Mulevičiūtė, the tone of the ARS manifesto differed much from the the from much differedmanifesto ARS the of tone the Mulevičiūtė, Jolita by noticed As K , no. 5 (1932). (1932). 5 no. , ainl style national

of keeping Čiurlionis as the face of the whole collection, Galaunė suggested suggested Galaunė collection, whole the of face the as Čiurlionis keeping of ding a separate museum separate a ding

io meno paroda”, in meno paroda”, io r deco art

f h epoch the of “whole” the Galaunė, to according represented, which museum 77

tl; r h yug avant young the or style; B ta tm te nvrait ol o Čuloi was Čiurlionis of world universalist the time that By . - adss te ieay group literary the gardists, Gimtasis Kraštas Gimtasis Pradai iržygiai Pradai 76 78 . Several areas, like the Lithuanian cross tradition cross Lithuanian the like areas, Several . f artistic stagnation.artistic f Ter xiiin i 1931 in exhibitions Their . 45

expression , no. 3 no. , , no. 1 (1939). 1 no. , - trated the existence of the clear clear the of existence the trated 4 (1927). 4 -

gardists who called for the the for called who gardists from the ti the from

eui vėjai Keturi

– mes of Čiurlionis, Čiurlionis, of mes 94 rvkd a provoked 1934 79 Bhn the Behind .

returned to to returned ast CEU eTD Collection 81 80 Galau 1924 of letter Ithad museum. cultural the for unsuitable as castle medieval the of idea the aboutcomplained official the In museum. War the of space official representative museum national modern modernity, cultural This experience. creation folk preservin the of mediator a itself in become should artist, national modern the by fully created monument, national ideal the that suggests th of efforts the were important Galaunė For experience. momentous and processual capacity, transformative its on but space, “archeological” Nagevičius’ the was as heritage, preserved on reliant less was Galaunė, by constraint a without nature from unfolding is art the where sculpture, folk in hidden energy of sources new in a for search a towards in tradition Vilnius’ from further step a light”, “creative a at attempt new a marked manifesto ARS the art, Čiurlionis’ of “umbrella” the Under line. interrupted artwor modern the and folk the how to impetus new a gave they art national of collection Galaunė’s for paintings, their than revolutionary more much sounded manifesto ARS’ Although creation. artistic modern museo in specialist a as only not himself showed Galaunė way this In ARS. group the for as well as autonomy, artistic for support expressed always director, museum a as Galaunė, modernity. and tradition of reconciliation place new its for find to world, Čiurlionis’ in tradition expression national modernist

Paulius Galaunė, PauliusGalaunė, 174. Mulevičiūtė, What united Galaunė with the manifesto of the group ARS was that he also sought sought also he that was ARS group the of manifesto the with Galaunė united What tegrative experience. national g the movement and exchange, was reflected in Galaunė’s imagined experience of a a of experience imagined Galaunė’s in reflected was exchange, and movement the g 81 . The source of an authentic national exp national authentic an of source The . Lietuvių liaudies skulptūros prob skulptūros liaudies Lietuvių

– ks

it was projected as a direct opposition to a static conservative conservative static a to opposition direct a as projected was it

80 – e modern artists to perceive the mind of folk artists. This logic This artists. folk of mind the perceive to artists modern e

I ti wy h AS aiet rvsd h pae f folk of place the revised manifesto ARS the way this In . the core of the museum the of core the

logy, but also able to reflect on the dynamism of of dynamism the on reflect to able also but logy, lemos 46

(Kaunas, 1932), 13. (Kaunas,1932), erience in the national space, organized organized space, national the in erience in the universal history though the the though history universal the in –

could be again related into a non non a into related again be could

nė nė CEU eTD Collection 83 keen a himself 82 was Dubeneckis if Even monument. national the of space architectural the in reflection visible a had ARS group the by represented arts, visual the in energycreative look monument the make to committee Magnus the Vytautas of quest initial the neither Interestingly, museums. two the between space of division problem practical more and ideological less new a brought monument national 1920s. the of opponents national two the reconciled symbolically 6 1934 in works construction of end the and 1930, in laid monument, the of stone foundational historicist of union The monument. national Magnus Vytautas one in nation the toward sensibilities irreconcilable seemingly two unite to task a civic space. representative established to the foreseenbenext could museum culturalthe of secondary role a Only museum. War old the of Garden National the in held stone, foundational museum’s wh reason the been have may That Church. National the and museum War the of that to space urban Kaunas’ in museum Čiurlionis of importance symbolic the equaled have would which museum, national the to museum folk air open the of dreamt he an space follow this, to Related national change. transnational of avenue his made this of all countries; Scandinavian and Western of novelties the Lithuania to bringing to countries foreign with exchanges art many organizing as well in pavilions Lithuanian the for preparing actively was himself Galaunė mood ceremonial a with endowed than rather exchange, cultural and flux for open be to

PauliusGalaunė, al. et Galaunė,Galdikas F inally, in 1930 the Vytautas Magnus committee dedicated to the architect Dubeneckis architect the to dedicated committee Magnus Vytautas the 1930 in inally,

and

organic

“Oro muziejai”, in muziejai”, “Oro

sensibilities needed to occur in the name of the National Museum. The The Museum. National the of name the in occur neededto sensibilities

y Galaunė did not appear in the ceremony of Vytautas Magnus Magnus Vytautas of ceremony the in appear not did Galaunė y Gimtasis kraštas Gimtasis 83 . It was one of his strongest unrealized wishes related wishes unrealized strongest his of one Itwas . 47 , no. 2 (1934). 2 no. ,

war

and ing the example seen in Scandinavian, Scandinavian, in seen example the ing culture

nati the , onal The idea of the shared shared the of idea The form nr h otus of outburst the nor ,

World exhibitions, as exhibitions, World

n the and –

conten that of of that 82 t - , . CEU eTD Collection crown. Fig. 16. national of ideas the monument Magnus’ Vytautas in reconciled architect the way this In museum. the to entrance second large a into it transform to crown Čiurlionis’ of motif the modernized a of consisted two from which monument Museum War the of arrangement old the plan new national the in preserved wisely Dubeneckis the of idea the in fused 1930 of plan narr “national the an for search conscious a as discourse architectural interwar the in reflected been not has death his of eve the in modernism to turn folk and baroque of use sensitive the of promoter

The Čiurlionis Gallery during the construction in the 1930s and the Čiurlionis’ Gallery theconstruction during the1930sand in TheČiurlionis’ Čiurlionis cultivation

wooden hut and a church tower. On the other side of the monument he fully he monument the of side other the On tower. church a and hut wooden atives” which could cause new arguments between the two museums two the between arguments new cause could which atives” and of national folk organic expression 48

national style national

art in the name of the of name the in art .

. I suggest that instead of using using of instead that suggest I . national style national national

concepts . But his But . –

the the . CEU eTD Collection 85 84 the by totality for quest a whereas nation, the of creation” “organic an as state the worshiped young The nature. differenta of werefor aimed theyexperiences However, 1930s. the of end the towards period tense most its reached which regime authoritarian the of rhetoric the and philosophy of experience the for quest time same the at activists national and priest a being of uneasiness growing the about complaining was fo gratitude of sign a as Christ of Heart the to nation Paris’ of example the follow to Lithuanians 1922” in Paris” from learn “Let’s article the in Bučys Petras time first the for invoked was latter The Resurrection. of Church the of idea the and celebrations Magnus’ Vytautas promoted he 1920s the In monuments. national interwar one in spotted be can difference This revival. national the commemorate to church national a of idea revived the and monument MagnusVytautas yet formed increasingnot betweenwasa tension reg nationalist the of ideas strengthened the ideologically for space central claimed which monuments national capital temporary the of space urban indep Lithuanian of decade second The The Nationas Resurrection Chapter 5

Mačiulis in išPrancūzų”, Bučys,“Pasimokykim Petras

personal cleavage, that of the writer’s Vaižgantas, who was a “godfather” of the two the of “godfather” a was who Vaižgantas, writer’s the of that cleavage, personal , 224. , 85 . This tesion associated with an increasing stress on Lithuanian nation building, a building, nation Lithuanian on stress increasing an with associated tesion This . Lithuanian Catholic philosophers emphasized the centrality of the nation; they they nation; the of centrality the emphasized philosophers Catholic Lithuanian

ime and the Catholic Church. Already before 1930 a new ideological ideological new a 1930 before Already Church. Catholic the and ime

national totality reflected in interwar Lithuanian cultural cultural Lithuanian interwar in reflected totality national –

the urban “liberalism” of the 1920s gave way for two for way gave 1920s the of “liberalism” urban the endence brought a maturation of national ideas in the the in ideas national of maturation a brought endence Laisvė

Sacre Coeur Sacre , no. 24 (1922 02 28). 02 (1922 24 no. , 49

r its care. Meanwhile in 1930 Vaižgantas 1930 in Meanwhile care. its r

church and to submit the Lithuanian the submit to and church 84

, in which he suggested for the for suggested he which in ,

by the priest priest the by CEU eTD Collection 88 87 (Vilnius: 86 Several centrality. renewed Town Old Kaunas’ of heart the in erected were its buildings administration claimed it where Town Old the into interventions urban historicist new a with space strugg this urban interpretation, Kaunas' endowing at attempt Lithuanian an the Like of community. center a as Kaunas revive to had which struggle, of previously. flavor national little Church Catholic the Meanwhile had which Kaunas of space urban the “nationalizing” rhetorically projects, many with town modern the though rippled which Magnus, Vytautas m cultural national of campaigns the After planning. czarist 19 of legacy the of much had which space urban Kaunas' of conquest rhetorical beginning as anindependent exclusively announced project, was thenation funded by very the from Resurrection of Church the of idea the while project, state “representational” the press the in kind: different a of were monument grand more a need Lithuanians that show to Garden National the in Solder Fallen the of monument small a to church national the of Kaunas One off one played o another. wereagainst never of space urban in Resurrection of Church the and Magnus Vytautas the 1920s, the throughout eve ofwar submission unconditional for invitation in itself manifested authoritarianregime

Kun. F Kapočius, “Mūsų prisikėlimo bažnyčia”, in bažnyčia”, prisikėlimo “Mūsų Kun.F Kapočius, in statyba”, bažnyčios “KaipeinaPrisikėlimo Dementavičius, Justinas Ironically, unlike the War and Culture museums whose ideologies were contrasted contrasted were ideologies whose museums Culture and War the unlike Ironically, led i te 90 te eie an regime the 1920s the in Already

Vilniaus universitetas, Vilniaus 86 .

Valstybės sampr Valstybės le lacked any destructive form. At most, it manifested in several several in manifested it most, At form. destructive any lacked le

2012), 122. 2012),

op d’etat coup

also endowed their idea of a national monument with a motif motif a with monument national a of idea their endowed also obilization obilization ata Lietuvoje: modernios lietuviškos politinės minties ištakos ir raida ištakos minties politinės lietuviškos modernios Lietuvoje: ata

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos

n 96 te uhrtra rgm luce two launched regime authoritarian the 1926, in te ciit o te ahlc hrh tre a started Church Catholic the of activists the d

Lietuva Vytautas Magnus museum was presented as a a as presented was museum Magnus Vytautas 50

–

the cult of Vilnius and the Grand Duke Duke Grand the and Vilnius of cult the

(1936 11 22). 11 (1936 927 11 25). 11 927 87 . In many aspects the two monuments two the aspects many In . f the press articles compared idea f the articles the press

–

the Town Hall and and Hall Town the - idd Catholic minded

to state in thein state to th

88 century .

CEU eTD Collection 91 90 89 areawhere activereligious themost supportersChurch resided. ofthe Resurrection an in period interwar the during times several itself outgrew which church, wooden modest i much was called, was church new the which in tone victorious the Ultimately, square”. “Independence it around square the naming by and church Catholic a to it converting by “neutralized” eventually was church Orthodox be to threatened seriously was which Kaunas, in not was generals supported the of one by committee building Church the in expressed Monument, the church for Orthodox ruins of the the the suggestion touse Nevertheless, destruction. its before tower czarist “domesticated” a kissing be will years few a in who Nagevičius, general the of that to position his compare can We committee. building slavers” Lithuanian of “bastion a stood once where chosen was church new the of location the enemy: national a organized who cleric famous a Valančius, temperance the19 movement in priest the of statue huge a Also square”. Cathedra the

I. Šeinius, “Soboras”, in Šeinius, “Soboras”, I. in paminklas”, Lietuvos didis “Nepriklausomos Strimaitis, Just. in bažnyčią”, įPrisikėlimo nugabentas jau “Akmuo Otherwise, the rhetorical struggle for urban space was a competition with a faded faded a with competition a was space urban for struggle rhetorical the Otherwise, 90

even if it was the sole most commonly detested and visually dominating building dominating visually and detested commonly most sole the was it if even l square, they were later critiqued for the “distortion of the integrity of the whole whole the of integrity the of “distortion the for critiqued later were they square, l 89 , as was commonly invoked by Kapočius, the spokesman of the of spokesman the Kapočius, by invoked commonly was as , Bangos , no. 27 (1932). 27 no. ,

centuryLithuanian villages, was by advocated Vaižgan n contrast with its precursor in Žaliakanis district Žaliakanis in precursor its with contrast n

Lietuva 51

(1934 06 28). 06 (1934 lw u i te newr press interwar the in up blown Lietuva

foundations of the new National of National thenew foundations (1926 01 13). 01 (1926

91 Church The . tas. –

a CEU eTD Collection 92 national the by meeting first the in reached was revival national the commemorate to Church the 1920s, the in Ironically, elite. cultural Vilnius the by project the with contrasted was which Catholics, Kaunas’ by promoted century, 20th the of decade first the for need the Monument National discuss to invited Metropolitain the here Hall, Swan’s Hall’s Town the in 1924 in intellectuals” prominent “200 of meeting a in reached was consensus” “common Resurrection of Church the that was capital, temporary the of space urban in priority the for monuments Fig. 17.

Just. Strimaitis, “Nepriklaus Strimaitis, Just. hr tee a a infcn dfeec bten h srgl o to national two of struggle the between difference significant a lay there Where The Orthodox Church, thebeginning oftheThe 20thcentury.

was presented as an exclusively “democratic” project. It was initiated after a a after initiated was It project. “democratic” exclusively an as presented was 92 . These “elections” recalled the idea of a “democratic” folk house of the the of house folk “democratic” a of idea the recalled “elections” These . omos Lietuvos didis paminklas”, in paminklas”, Lietuvos didis omos

Lietuva

(1926 01 13). 01 (1926

eiin o ul the build to decision

CEU eTD Collection 98 97 96 95 94 93 of stages all about people the inform to tried Kapočius critique. the answered personally he was monument the of visualizations of series A discussion. many caused idea monument’s the that contention the expressed he press; the in present personally monument big another for necessity no nicest, the and greatest opi the of was church, the the of idea the supported who Nagevičius, although be to has monument the that repeated frequently Kapočius tone “dictatorial” a called reader one what into turned soon “democracy” Paradoxically, this gardener the of position the than different very sounded monument national central its establish to nation speaking started it created, was Kapočius by represented committee special stancebolshevist boycott to encouraged which Society, Kudirka Vincas the by expressed was such, as church national the of idea the museum or parliament a as such house, public a or composition me first the in considered independence, independence national to contributed who others many abandoned and Lithuanians Catholic only represented church national a of idea appeared articles Critical claims. article another society Lithuanian of layers all of “representatives as stood supposedly which elite

Just. Strimaitis, “Nepriklausomos Lietuvos didis paminklas”, in paminklas”, Lietuvos didis “Nepriklausomos Strimaitis, Just. in reikalu”, statybos bažnyčios “Prisikėlimo Architektas, in bažnyčioms”, “Nenori Katalikas, pam “Tautos Bičiūnas, V. inpaminklas”, vardo “Lietuvoslietuvių ir Lozoraitienė, VinventaMatalaitytė in bažnyčia”, prisikėlimo “Mūsų Kun.Kapočius, As soon as the agreement to build a Church as a National Monument was reached, and a a reached,and National a was Monument aas build Church agreement to the As soonas , as if the “client of the monument is the nation itself” nation the is monument the of “client the if as ,

of the National Garden, who treated himself as himself treated who Garden, National the of 96 .

the whole project. The Catholic press responded with accusations of a a of accusations with responded press Catholic The project. whole the inklo sumanymo reikalu”, in in sumanymo reikalu”, inklo

Vienybė , no. 7 (1930). 7 no. , tn ad n h ntoa pes ws sculptural a was press, national the in and eting Lietuva 98 94 53 Ulk Ngvču, aois a always was Kapočius Nagevičius, Unlike . Aog lentv wy t commemorate to ways alternative Among .

Rytas

in the press afterwards complaining that the that complaining afterwards press the in Lietuva (1927 11 24). 11 (1927

(1923 12 23). 12 (1923 Lietuva

(1927 12 06). 12 (1927

if he were in were he if

(1926 01 13). 01 (1926 . Following the nation’s “will” nation’s the Following . 95

. The only overt objection to objection overt only The . Lietuva published in the press and and press the in published

service for the nation the for service

(1926 02 06). 02 (1926 nion that there was was there that nion in th in e name of the the of name e

” 93 as , – .

CEU eTD Collection 102 101 100 99 national a of idea latter idea the to arts all submit would which monument a need they sensibility modernist more a for called meeting first the in Bučys, priest the Church, the of initiator the hand, other the On museum. Magnus Vytautas the of architect a in monument national the of idea the fulfill could who Lithuania in artist other no was there that suggested further He sensibility. artistic strong reminded Bičiūnas here. example an was Vilnius capital historical the town; the to relation organic the idea, first the promoted who Bičiūnas’, Vytautas by article i other the Vilnius; of nostalgia period the of sensibilities national contrasting two revealed interestingly, a in be to had it Vaižgantas, era” “new a in bring to had church national the of idea the projects, national two other the Unlike on. 1920s early from press interwar the national of idea the in stages Several The Resurrection Lithuanianfrom its society to organ building promised o source main the were donations the because assured, be to support public for important was it believed he construction, monument’s the

Ks., “Paremkime bažnyčios statybą”, in statybą”, “Paremkimebažnyčios Ks.,

Just. Strimaitis, “Nepriklausomos Lietuvos didis paminklas”, in paminklas”, Lietuvos didis “Nepriklausomos Strimaitis, Just. Bi V. in šventykla”, paminklas “Atgimimo Vaižgantas, Tumas J. Kan. 99 č I hd o rvd a anfcn eprec o ntoa gadu, o eoe gift a become to grandeur, national of experience magnificent a provide to had It . i ū nas, “Tautos paminklo sumanymo reikalu”, in in sumanymo reikalu”, paminklo “Tautos nas, httebrqecuce hc eamr eealcetdb rhtcswt a with architects by created all were admire we which churches baroque the that

–

the biggest national monument in the Northern countries with the biggest the with countries Northern the in monument national biggestthe gesamtkunstwerk

elf.

ntroduced a modern constructivist approach. According to an an to According approach. constructivist modern a ntroduced

ainl style national Ū kininko patar kininko resurrection , will be developed further throughout the interwar the throughout further developed be will , 54

Rytas 100 fnig Ay rc cud e ad o the for paid be could price Any funding. f jas in Kaunas’ urban space: as requested by by requested as space: urban Kaunas’ in .

(1936 11 26). 11 (1936 national style national can be discerned from the discussions of of discussions the from discerned be can

hs al o a nqe ainl style, national unique a for call This (1923 12 23). 12 (1923 Lietuva Lietuva

(1926 01 13). 01 (1926 (1923 08 19). 08 (1923

of the national church national the of style national

besides Du besides

– –

he suggested that that suggested he one rooted in the the in rooted one beneckis

had to create an an create to had 102 101 . This .

–

the

CEU eTD Collection 103 Reisonas. Karolis Fig. 18. na of idea the with approach constructivist his combine to way a find to order in Church, his of variants new multiple produce to asked was Reisonas, winner, place third the committee, After origins. Latvian of Protestant a Reisonas, Karolis engineer the for support continuous expressed committee architects” calls “Kapočius whom engineers, and artists only ar the selected who committee special the press, interwar the in noticed was it as Firstly, engineering. modern of help a with period

tional “Prisikėlimo bažnyčios reikalu”, in reikalu”, bažnyčios “Prisikėlimo One of many projects of the Church of Resurrection project (1928) proposedOne project theChurchofResurrection by ofmany projects resurrection

the contest, in which none of 15 participating architects satisfied the the satisfied architects participating 15 of none which in contest, the

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos htcua rjc dd o cnanay rhtcs but architects, any contain not did project chitectural

(1930 03 08). (1930 55

103 Frhroe te Church the Furthermore, .

CEU eTD Collection 105 104 andVilnius blessing it could this lands; Lithuanian of unification the commemorate to dedicated exactly was it capital: historical the betray not did monument the but that claimed Vilnius, Kapočius capitals. temporary the and historical of the of unification transcendental absence the embody not did monument the that first the museums, Čiurlionis’ and War was difference the Vilnius; with contact a establish to sought the also Church the of visualization of projects initial the to Similarly lands. to introduced was Catholicism which after Magnus, Vytautas of death the from Vilnius towards figurefacing Christ re Reisonas independence national by to path project weighted clearly first a suggested The capital. historical its and statehood historical Lithuanian closely 1929, presented the five ages of suffering which one has to climb on the way to reach a huge huge a reach to way the on climb to has one which suffering of ages five the presented

J. Matijošaitis, “Prisikė Matijošaitis, J. in projektas”, bažnyčos “Atsikėlimo Matijošaitis, J. The first widely disseminated and discussed visualization of the National Monument in Monument National the of visualization discussed and disseminated widely first The

id h iiil da f ainlrlgos resurrection national/religious of idea initial the tied limo bažnyčia Kaune”, in Kaune”, limobažnyčia 105 .

104 . Five hundred years of national suffering were counted were suffering nationalyears of hundred Five . Rytas Rytas 56

be seen in Christ’s hand, raised to the side of of side the to raised hand, Christ’s in seen be

(1929 03 28). 03 (1929

(1929 05 11). 05 (1929

–

he introduced “stairs which which “stairs introduced he rather searched for a a for searched rather

to the memory of of memory the to

Lithuanian CEU eTD Collection react negative a provoked solution eclectic an Such paintings. Čiurlionis’ to similarity its for it applauded Žmuidzinavičius painter the the whereas style, from castle medieval ideas some borrowed Reisonas plan first his In solutions. engineering using by of idea the of representation literary a into fused were which narratives national several Fig. 19. The expected The The non realized project theChurchofResurrection of byReisonas,1929. The Karolis nonrealized national style national

of the national church in Reiso in church national the of 57

nas’ plan was embodied in in embodied was plan nas’ ion in the press. A A press. the in ion rising

CEU eTD Collection 107 106 th ofInstead daylight. even an with church the of interior the fill to had materiality, their questioning walls, the in windows of Hundreds Bučys of wish initial an realize Architecturally monument. new the of features new key the of one became transparency for quest The victory. nationala of celebration of one sufferingwith national of motif the replaced project this Ideologically explorations. artist own architect’s of maturation a demonstrated also outwards construction engineering the of exposition The statehood. Lithuanian of narratives historical the on dependence its from resurrection idea the embody to form architectural of maturation a reflected it words; Jacyniene’s to listen to problematic the Žaliakalnis which could hill, sustain sucha not largechurch. as well as required have would version first the which expenses huge the to due also was this that explained Kapočius project. different cardinally and new a yea a After times. modern the reflect would that forms artistic new for public the from request the as well monumentality and symbolism high of declaration spa urban Kaunas’ in church the of centrality called so the and form architectural national the of idea the between mismatch a found She transcendence. and unity of sense of lack the for Reisonas by arts to approach monumentalf modern in embodied becanresurrection project Kairiūkštytė Halina historian art professional

HalinaKairiukštytė HalinaKairiukštytė of national resurrection. A great change was introduced to purify it a national national a it purify to introduced was change great A resurrection. national of The second approved version of the Church of Resurrection by Reisonas in 1930 proved 1930proved Reisonas in Resurrection Church by the of approved of version The second 106 bsds rtcs se ute dvlpd h ies f o te da f national a of idea the how of ideas the developed further she criticism besides ; r of discussions the first project of the National Monument was quietly changed to to changed quietly was Monument National the of project first the discussions of r - - Jacynienė, “Dėl Prisikėlimo bažnyčios projekto”, in projekto”, bažnyčios “Dėl Prisikėlimo Jacynienė, in kritikos”, bažnyčios “Dėl prisikėlimo Jacynienė,

ce. Jacynienė called it a mere decoration hidden behind the the behind hidden decoration mere a it called Jacynienė ce. –

o aiiae drc cneto te epe n God. and people the connection direct a facilitate to e spiral stairs, which would have created a difficult difficult a created have would which stairs, spiral e 58 -

ayin dvtd eea atce t te first the to articles several devoted Jacynienė

107 . This criticism was soon recognized, as recognized, soon was criticism This . orms. Jacynienė critiqued the industrialthe critiqued orms. Jacynienė

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos t hwd n siain to aspiration an showed it

(1929 11 28). 11 (1929

(1929 11 04). 11 (1929

ol of soil

the the CEU eTD Collection Fig. 20. divine and resurrection theverticality into architectu of national of history the “compressed” instead It history. artistic its and capital historicalthe to connectionsallliteral lost Church the ofproject new the of façadeFinally, the its in already“lightness” with monument a of idea the provided which planned was Pantheon national a Church, the of underground the In terrace. roof the along placed be sculptu the and air, open the in be to had church the of altar second The believers. thousand three to up for roof a terrace onthe introduced huge visualization thenew theroof, thechapelclimb to on The chosen theChurchofResurrection of project The byReisonas. Karolis ral roads, featuring the parallel roads of suffering by Christ and the nation, had to to had nation, the and Christ by suffering of roads parallel the featuring roads, ral ral lines. 59

material basis. material CEU eTD Collection Fig. 22. Fig. 21. The Church of Church ofResurrection, 1930s. the The planof Resurrection, interior. Resurrection,

CEU eTD Collection 111 110 109 108 submissio donations more for need no was there said he and forts”, the from children poor “most the of some by donated were of process a hundreds in children thanked who priests, the of one by “betrayed” was event the during “relief” of mood The disappearance. own its “celebrated” Congress the during time years ten within fr arose which Monument, National The Palace. Stalin’s of history the of one reminds that “presence”; its about knew everyone already because built be to need not did it were stage a entered Resurrection of Church always their supportthe idea national of monument falter not did clergy the that confessed He 1930s. the t of all absorbed foundations end in progress the about informed Kapočius as God” of help a “with only built being of stage a enter soon will it that finished, be not will signed was Christ of Heart the to a nation people, of mass the of submission of act by an and laid was hill attendedŽaliakalnis on church the of stone ceremony,foundational the During itself. Monument National the event ofthein 1934.This theveryCh marked climax Congress Eucharistic Lithuanian first the during confirmed symbolically was 1930 in project

“Rytoj dedamas Prisikėlimo bažnyčios kertinis akmuo”, in in kertinisakmuo”, bažnyčios dedamas Prisikėlimo “Rytoj in busstatoma”, “Prisikėlimo Ra., bažnyčia Pr. Ibid. A. P The quest to give away mediation between the nation and God in the final architectural final the in God and nation the between mediation away give to quest The After the act of submission to Christ’s Heart Christ’s to submission of act the After -

nis., “Kaip auga Kaune Pabaltijo meno šedevras”, in in meno šedevras”, Pabaltijo Kaune “Kaip auga nis., n to the Christ’s heart remainedheart Christ’s the to n ion for help in bringing up the foundational stone, for the coins which coins the for stone, foundational the up bringing in help for ion –

Kapočius insisted they will never give up, because the people will will people the because up, give never will they insisted Kapočius he initially collected money collected initially he –

the most important part was already done, and now only the the only now and done, already was part important most the

om a struggle for its own “invention” of itself in 1926, in itself of “invention” own its for struggle a om . By that time nobody expected that this monument monument this that expected nobody time that By . 111 Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos . While the ceremony of the foundational stone ofstone foundational the of ceremonythe While . 61

XX amžius XX 110 Lietuva

was signed officially, the project of the the of project the officially, signed was urch ofResurrection .

(1931 11 09). 11 (1931 109 . Despite this, the enthusiasm of the of enthusiasm the this, Despite .

(1934 06 28). 06 (1934

(1939 09 05). 09 (1939

–

a symbolicend of 108 , CEU eTD Collection werein the nostalgia totake coming never invited of part future. the cerem Eucharistic the of children the generation, war older of by people and attended invalids, veterans, mostly was past the for nostalgia the with permeated Museum War the 62

ony ony CEU eTD Collection 112 simulation the of imposition the avoided and nation the on emphasis different a suggested space urban Kaunas’ in sensibilities national multiple “open an as 1920s the in appeared projects where Kaunas, capital temporary the of history urban the in spotted state’s organism. authori system democratic a recovering of idea the to critical equally was manifesto the behind group the But fascisms. clea political its Mounier’s Emmanuel for regime authoritarian the critiqued and manifesto Lithuanian The society. Christian on writings Maritain Jacques by influenced was which plurality cultural reflec organicism for quest The than state”. “organic an of rather idea the in role crucial a played above, from life national the organizing below from manifested production, cultural The Keliuotis. Juozas magazine philosoph the including intellectuals Lithuanian famous a 1936 in published state”, organic the “Towards with manifesto “democracy” urban this of parallels some suggest to like would I chapter i national their of expression the for autonomy cultural a relative requested which Kaunas in emerged projects national independent three 1920s early In OrganicismUrban Chapter 6

“Įorgan A certain correlation with the idea of an “organic state” and cultural autonomy can be be can autonomy cultural and state” “organic an of idea the with correlation certain A ains wih ol aan ntl te nenl utrl yaim no h static the into dynamism cultural internal the instill again would which tarianism iškos valstybės kūrybą”, in kūrybą”, valstybės iškos

vages, and the application of the external qualities of interwar European European interwar of qualities external the of application the and vages,

–

they sought their own middle way between parliamentarism and and parliamentarism between way middle own their sought they

ted the values of the movement of movement the of values the ted Naujoji Romuva, Romuva, Naujoji 63 - 8 169 8 (1936), of constellation The project. national ended”

r naa Mcia n te dtr f the of editor the and Maceina Antanas er

of a single “consensual” definition of the of definition “consensual” single a of 112 - 75. 75.

Naujoji Romuva Naujoji dea in an urban space. In this this In space. urban an in dea

new humanism new a spectrum of national national of spectrum a , signed by 16 by signed , , calling for for calling , CEU eTD Collection 114 113 national on emphasis an shared Catholics the and regime interwar the both Although elite. cultural Vilnius’ by advocated House” “National the to house folk “organic” an of idea their Lith the of idea the national ideas. of competition urbanthe in win to order in experiences, national “complete” more alternative, problems practical the can that one assume philosopher, cultural a by led were projects national three the of none Although picture. universal larger a within nation Lithuanian the place to attempt an was this chapters, discu As wars. the between decades two the throughout regime nationalist historicist a to respect in position “defensive” a embodied collectively suggest, I Lithuania, own history, style and the its became monuments national Kaunas’ two of source main Ultimatelythe identity. localand urban Kaunas’ of continuation a instead demonstrated culture national of centers new the as and military the of establishment The build. to edifice national new a for repertoire iconographical strong a as served which city, historical the of imageries the of flood the to differentiation” “federalized a for “unarticulated” org quest Šalkauskis’ the of one state the of idea an to individual state”, “organic center. the its Unlike at individual the placing rights, human of guarantor a as it saw he Šalkauskis, by emphasized was state” “organic an of idea the of aspect democratic The nation. Lithuanian

Stasys Šalkauskis, “ StasysŠalkauskis, StasysŠalkauskis, The interwar period’s main tensions in this way revived the prewar tensions inherent in inherent tensions prewar the revived way this in tensions main period’s interwar The of capital temporary the in home a for searched which projects national three All

Raštai anicism of interwar Kaunas’ urban space manifested itself in a “resistance” “resistance” ina Kaunas’ urban spaceitself manifested ofinterwar anicism Romuviečių uanian “National House”; there the Catholics from Kaunas juxtaposed juxtaposed Kaunas from Catholics the there House”; “National uanian , vol. 1 (Vilnius: Mintis, 1993), 288 1993), (Vilnius: Mintis, 1 vol. , –

characteristic ofthe toKaunas

newr acs, codn t hm ws ie t sbi an submit to aimed was him, to according fascism, interwar deklaracija”

113 . In national projects in Kaunas’ urban space thus reminds thus space urban Kaunas’ in projects national In . –

, in , h lc o s of lack the Naujoji Romuva Naujoji 64

- pace 289. , no. 11 (1936). 11 no. ,

1930s. –

encouraged them to search for for search to them encouraged

114 ssed in the previous the in ssed Utmtl, the Ultimately, . the church church the CEU eTD Collection 116 115 the up bring to responsibility the attributed He reconciled. be to have which springs (active) historica many of result a cultures Eastern and Western bridge to mission a having as culture national Lithuanian described Lithuania, in 1920s the in influential were cultu national on discussions interwar some with to reach. audience national the for meanings “local” create to had which palette, artistic universal a of styles, historical the though expressed hope, and suffering grandeur, national of moments “educationalthe antone”, with historicalfused styleswasof use The Kaunashill. brushstrokes modest the from ways: multiple in nostalgia their reflected they Vilnius, loosing of trauma recent the by affected much still 1920s, the In struggle. national inner an emphasized decade l external an on relied decade first the of visualizations architectural The period. interwar the in stages two through went projects, later explicitly theclaimed nationalbesy cannot that culture vividly was culture, the where Altantas, national ideologist national the and Šalkauskis between on discussion a in expressed debates interwar of dynamism the maintained which offic the and nation Lithuanian the to approach synthetic a between clash The experience. national integrative more a sought Catholics of generation new the while culture, cultu

Stasys Šalkauskis, StasysŠalkauskis, Alantas,30. ral production, the regime promulgated the historical memory and “unique” Lithuanian “unique” and memory historical the promulgated regime the production, ral A quest for a more universalist national experience, inherent in the three national urban urban national three the in inherent experience, national universalist more a for quest A h iiil us fr “ytei” ouin o te ainl ouet hd parallels had monuments national the for solution “synthetic” a for quest initial The

the castle motifs on the clock tower to the mirage of resurrected Čiurlionis’ on resurrected on Čiurlionis’ tothe of mirage tower ontheclock motifs castle the Pedag oginiai raštai oginiai l circumstances, mostly affected by Eastern (passive) and Western Western and (passive) Eastern by affected mostly circumstances, l

( Kaunas iteral struggle for national existence, while the second second the while existence, national for struggle iteral : Šviesa 65

116

, 1991), 167. 1991), , re. The philosopher Šalkauskis, whose ideas ideas whose Šalkauskis, philosopher The re. . According to him, the national culture was culture national the him, to According .

nthetic butonly trulyunique which were part part were which ial nationalism, ial 115 .

CEU eTD Collection 120 119 118 117 ma and nomadic coexisting its in Maceina by found was dynamism inner nation’s history own nation’s of recreation a on but influences, historical of reception critical cul its limited and nation the of nature dynamic the of source different a underline to theories Šalkauskis’ revised He Šalkauskis. than nation Lithuanian on influences cultural Western fascis into ideas architectural separate two of maturation the paralleled also 1930s, the of end the towards radicalized increasingly which mission, national Lithuanian the on writings His Maceina. of idea Šalkauskis’ time that of question the that demonstrated early ofthe national visualizations p the in prevailed nation Lithuanian small the of mood combatant the Similarly century. 19th self geopolitics Lithuanian on book Pakštas’ to threat a pose culture to national a of not uniqueness way, healthy a in languages architectural universal appropriate messenge national “educational” were 1920s the in monuments national the of visualizations initial the Similarly dimension. ontological the in participate and create to mission, its understand to nation the for help to had it writings; Šalkauskis’s in role intelligentsia the to level universal the to culture national

Maceina, 396 Maceina, 22. Ibid., Artūras Sverdiolas, 174. Ibid., tural contacts. The essence of of essence The contacts. tural - eesv, nie dm ikeizs oih avto fcsd ainl iso o the of mission national focused salvation Polish Mickiewicz’s Adam unlike defensive, The final architectural visualizations of the Lithuanian national monuments in the 1930s 1930s the in Lithuanianmonuments national the of visualizations architectural finalThe

- 524. t -

style monuments. Maceina had much stronger negative feelings towards towards feelings negative stronger much had Maceina monuments. style Kultūros filosofija Lietuvoje filosofija Kultūros

s ynthesis 118 national form national . According to Šalkauskis, who was influenced by Kazys by influenced was who Šalkauskis, to According . synthesis rojects, them“ready” making tocounterattack.

119 was taken over and developed by his pupil Antanas Antanas pupil his by developed and over taken was

, the task of th of task the , (Vilnius: Mintis, 1983), 32. 1983), (Vilnius: Mintis,

for Maceina was not so much dependent on a a on dependent much so not was Maceina for 66

and

universal content universal e Lithuanian nation in the world was world the in nation Lithuanian e 117 . Education played a significant a played Education .

rs. They were trying to to trying were They rs.

was posed anew. By By anew. posed was

ternalistic ternalistic 120 . The . CEU eTD Collection 123 122 121 might what from and politics cultural and linguistic European Central/East in rooted deeply inter “conservative that nationalism Donskis Leonidas of claim the question to calls monuments, national sens national modern discovered The national the Visiting monuments self urban statement inthecapital urbanLithuania. landscapetemporary of ofthe eternal to s history national architectural the modernist of “compression” two the Thus time. religious expression regime the of sources ideological to it reduced which monument Magnus experience, Vytautas The national narratives. national competing of source main 1930s a the as visuality of from monuments departed national the of visualizations the histo Meanwhile, universal particularities. in partaking as envisaged was It influence. self a into nation the marches nature of idea the treated cycles in constantly reoccur and perception human beyond was which origins,

Ibid. 501 Ibid., Ibid. - a Ltuna inte Lithuanian war 122

123 cmoe o mtirhl tahet o h gon, noma ground, the to attachment matriarchal of composed , - . Consequently, he departed from Šalkauskis’ reliance on East and West to “close” to West and East on reliance Šalkauskis’ from departed he Consequently, . 505. – –

while the Church of Resurrection placed the national experience in a cyclical cyclical a in experience national the placed Resurrection of Church the while

nldn wa mgt e ae pioohc nationalism philosophic named be might what including

synthesis - otie mtpyis wee ainl dcto as hd little had also education national where metaphysics, contained llectual culture sprang from peripheral models of consciousness consciousness of models peripheral from sprang culture llectual

less in congruity than Šalkauskis; he underlined its paradoxical its underlined he Šalkauskis; than congruity in less

ibility, embodied in two Lithuanian modernist interwar modernist Lithuanian two in embodied ibility, –

the history of Lithuanian statehood and national national and statehood Lithuanian of history the 67

olutions finally embodied a a embodied finally olutions ry and preserving its own own its preserving and ry - repetition, a firm national national firm a repetition,

“compressed” the twofold twofold the “compressed”

i feig o the of feelings dic –

ht characterized that 121 Maceina . CEU eTD Collection 127 126 125 Thought European East in Studies 124 o principle organizing an as served still the reach to tradition folk the modernize to willing canon idealistic the in rooted ideas, aesthetic teacher’s his revised 1930s the in Influence tradition. local the in but classical, the in not lied theperiod of discussions cultural Lithuanian in found modernity national of sources intellectual the but architecture, fascist Italian fashism” and German “folk to similar of were monuments sort these Externally a of manifestation a also were 1930s the in monuments two the national of architecture modernist the that suggest can one period, the of public educated one his writingsinto sensibilities thetwoopposing By in reconciled he use. modernity of experience of core very the coordinated at nation the of concept the placing more a for art folk Lithuanian from acquired energy the channel to gener “old an considered was 1930s of end the towards which ARS, group artist the of discoveries the “radicalized” further he art; folk on based expression, modernist a for searched Keliuotis Sorbonne. the in studied he whom Bergson, Henri of philosophy of club the in period the of intellectual artists and intellectuals Lithuanian many itself around gathered magazine The popular the of voice magazine the represented sophisticated, philosophically less journal the associatedwith philosop Lithuanian modernity” of fear the called be

Veljataga, 158. Veljataga, 111 Mulevičiūtė, 51. Mulevičiūtė, Worlds ofTwo Boundary “Onthe Leonidas Donskis, aig no osdrto te nlec o te oeet of movement the of influence the consideration into Taking 125 Naujoji Romuva Naujoji

whi

- h nopse ie ag ftpc rm ol oiis o oen art. modern to politics world from topics of range wide a encompassed ch 115.

y ws h ifunil nelcul oeet of movement intellectual influential the was hy, Naujoji Romuva Naujoji . Keliuotis’ own perception of nation was much influenced by t by influenced much was nation of perception own Keliuotis’ . , vol. 54, no. 3 195. 3 no. (2002), 54, vol. ,

124 Wa h de nt etoe aog h interwar the among mentioned not does he What . f the facades and the volumes of the national national the of volumes the and facades the f

(1930 68 : Lithuanian Philosophy in the Twentieth Century”, in in Century”, the Twentieth in Philosophy : Lithuanian

- 126 1940). Its editor Juozas Keliuotis, although Keliuotis, Juozas editor Its 1940).

universal content. content. universal .

d by Šalkauskis, Keliuotis Šalkauskis, by d ajj Romuva Naujoji The classical tradition classical The ation”. He aspired aspired He ation”. e humanism, new 127 h was he ;

on the the on he he .

CEU eTD Collection 131 130 129 128 This rituals. religious the during totality of experience an for called also clergy Lithuanian the itself, around space urban the “conquer” to aimed which ceremonies fascist the to Similar sacreda into “stepping feelingof assurethe to had hill, of Lithuania” fields the entering of experience “the provided said, they statues, national and crosses lost getting Garden, National the Visiting monuments. the of parts central almost and integral as considered were which terrace, air open the and Garden National the invo and visiting of experience the on emphasis put also press interwar The messages. historical inscribed “intentionally” the beyond sensibilities national coded deeper ever into us brings start we if Similarly, world the to back consciousness our direct buildings great itself; architecture beyond experience theornament inherentin na the of purity the for quest a forms, architectural their and visions national ofunity the to rapprochement a suggested It monuments. national of visions first the of change cardinal tho demonstrated journal the of popularity the Therefore coordinated. not was this though even monuments national two history Romuva by advocated style neoclassical the towards tendency the reflected they monuments;

“Pašventinti Tautos prisikėlimo prisikėlimo Tautos “Pašventinti Pronckus. Pallasmaa. 128. Mulevičiūtė, lving oneself in the national rituals under the open sky in the extensive outdoor spaces, outdoor extensive the in sky open the under rituals national the in oneself lving codn t Jhn Phalasmaa, Juhani to According 128

in the 1930s, that followed the general tendencies in the Western interwar art art interwar Western the in tendencies general the followed that 1930s, the in . Furthermore, the sense the Furthermore, . 130

, whereas the Church of Resurrection, founded on the stone brought from Olive from brought stone the on founded Resurrection, of Church the whereas ,

g te ifra gie fr h gnrl uine o t itrrt the interpret to how audience general the for guide” “informal the ugh from the outside of the interwar Lithuanian national monuments, it it monuments, national Lithuanian interwar the of outside the from –

h lwr mhszd oiotlt ad h upr verticality upper the and horizontality emphasized lower the

bažnyčios pamatai”, in in pamatai”, bažnyčios

of balance and the share of the weight was created between created was weight the of share the and balance of - less monuments. less “ the the ultimate meaning of any significant building is is building significant any of meaning ultimate 69

Lietuva

(1934 06 30). 06 (1934 land, that extends the national soil” national the extends that land,

among the wooden wooden the among Naujoji Romuva Naujoji Naujoji Naujoji tional tional

129 131 – . .

CEU eTD Collection 133 132 unity a in intimacyor in taken Church, the of terrace the from city whole the of viewstunning t Unlike city. the light guiding a become to had it lights, artificial of hundreds by illuminated night, the During world. the of beginning the center, very the mark to had It sides. all from attraction stable a was Resurrection of Church lines vertical the by lifted being ceased never were eyes the explains, Kapočius monument, the reach to help famous the visit to self and exercise physical for pilgrimage asked center, Lithuanian determined a into trip a made famous This the of monument. building national the about news omnipotent the by stimulated was probably was Ž the about on land sacral a into entering hand, other the On bronze. was emotionless cold Garden National The smell. special a andmetamorphosis, contrasts layering with garden rose a by surrounded acquisitions, new and donations with complemented continuously growth, gradual of space a was it relicts: national of “forest” a like more yearslooked it Forten noticing. without entered G National The space. every withproud Lithuanian respond will the visit who foreigners capita the temporary anthem… second our become will which submission that repeating be will small to big Lithuaniansfrom all and world the andLithuania all throughout of limits the extend would

“Kaip yra su Paminklinė Prisikėlimo bažnyčia”, in in bažnyčia”, Prisikėlimo yra Paminklinė “Kaipsu A.P The two monuments created two different experiences of visiting the Lithuanian sacral sacral Lithuanian the visiting of experiences different two created monuments two The - nis, “Kaip auga Kaune pabaltijo meno šedevras”, inmeno šedevras”, pabaltijo Kaune “Kaip auga nis, 133 he cozy space of the Garden, crowded with antiquity, one had to be offered a a offeredbe to had one antiquity, with crowded Garden, the of space cozy he l will be surprised what’s happening, why people pray in the streets, and and streets, the in pray people why happening, what’s surprised be will l . Unlike the “national forest” in the middle of the modern urban jungle, the jungle, urban modern the of middle the in forest” “nationalthe Unlike . arden, cultivated in the middle of the city, could have been easily easily been have could city, the of middle the in cultivated arden,

h mnmn isl: te ass il e ped y h radio the by spread be will masses the “ itself: monument the

–

transformation of woodintostone,familiar facestransformation into –

this is is this Lithuania”the sacred Lietuva 70

point that was a gathering point for everyone for point gathering a was that point

XX amžius XX

(1933 05 30). 05 (1933 - determination t determination

(1939 09 05). 09 (1939

o climb up the hill. To To hill. the up climb o 132 .

–

a lighthouse of of lighthouse a aliakalnis hill aliakalnis

CEU eTD Collection 135 134 Orthodox Russian of bells the with sound the compose to efforts many put Nagevičius 1920s of sound the to perfecting gradual of sound the from extended period the throughout spaces national Lithuanian the of soundscape architecture of experience distances than rather be touched. great from adorned be to had it lights, artificial by night the during Illuminated top. its on put A form. threenave small of hundreds with decorated be crosses to had it outside the From intersection. rounded itself in cross huge a embody to had over Resurrection of Church the of project all first the hand, other the On Lithuania. from collected villagers, by made handwork, wooden tangible a as soil national Natio the In monuments. both in motifs central the of one a were symbol, national Lithuanian the crosses, The Magnus. Vytautas hero medieval co crosses handmade the peasants”, the with warriors consi space official the Where recognizability. and familiarity, locality, about was suggests, already name the as museum, War the at Garden National The distances. small and approachability the settlement, the of scale human the retained museum palace new the Even scale. human the and space material the between relationship city above from victory feelingof the Herecommunity. Catholic the with

“Ka projektas”. bažnyčios “Atsikėlimo Matijošaitis, ip statoma Prisikėlimo bažnyčia”, in in bažnyčia”, Prisikėlimo statoma ip The experience of visiting the two monuments was based on a very different different very a on based was monuments two the visiting of experience The The acoustic experience of the national spaces spaces national the of experience acoustic The 134 , something much critiqued by Jancyniene. The second project of the Church was a was Church the of project second The Jancyniene. by critiqued much something , –

had toendowsense theviewerhad withofeverything a control of around.

– triumphant cross, a concrete structure of seven meter’s height meter’s seven of structure concrete a cross, triumphant

it had to be b be to had it –

to fill it will emotions reaching the visitors from within. The The within. from visitors the reaching emotions will it fill to

uilt on a structure of “Lithuanian cross”, that is a cross with cross a is that cross”, “Lithuanian of structure a on uilt XX amžius XX imagined bells calling from the top of the hill. In the the In hill. the of top the from calling bells imagined

(1937 06 21). 06 (1937 71

nal Garden they were immersed in the the in immersed were they Garden nal - existed next to the monument for the for monument the to next existed had to speak “in accord” with the the with accord” “in speak to had

–

the power to observe the observe to power the sted of a mixture of “the “the of mixture a of sted 135 of the War War the of , had to beto had ,

historical historical

CEU eTD Collection 140 139 138 137 136 coordinated heroes, national the for masses daily hold to planned Kapočius built, be to was himse Garden the of founder the by suggested was Resurrection of Church the with heroes buried soldiers national nam Vytautas the under crypt a to lead museum War the of facade the on doors The souls. national the of burial respectful a to dedicated fully was monument national lower The care. spiritual national the C whereas foundations, national strong culture national Lithuanian of core the shoulders” its “under took monument lower The Christ. Jesus and Magnus Vytautas capi temporary the of “kingdoms” interconnected but verywell knownintheperiod. d town Kaunas’ of heights the to lead national the struggles”, of “bells as blessed were which bells, the of sound The tower. museum new War the of church Orthodox Museum, “modified” the in hanged 1920s, the in bells the of sound 1930s the in carillon a acquire to preparation the detail in explained guidanc the under harmony in sound materials and different size of bells the make to searchedhow churches. He istinguished by size and power, the best in all of Northern Europe Northern of all in best the power, and size by istinguished

“Karo muziejaus žuvusiųjų skyrių įtengti tikimasi dar šiais metais”, in metais”, šiais dar tikimasi įtengti skyrių muziejausžuvusiųjų “Karo pamatai”. bažnyčios Prisikėlimo Tautos “Pašventinti Kapoč “Dek. in varpai”, Didžiojo Vytauto “Kaipskambings K P. Therefore, the motif of motif the Therefore, lf who promoted the Church of Resurrection as a national Pantheon. When the Church Church the When Pantheon. national a as Resurrection of Church the promoted who lf - nas, “Kokias melodijas girdėsim iš muziejaus bokšto”, in bokšto”, muziejaus iš girdėsimmelodijas “Kokias nas,

were transformed into to a coordinated sound of the famous carillon, hanged in a a in hanged carillon, famous the of sound coordinated a to into transformed were ius apie Prisikėlimo bažnyčios statybą”, in in statybą”, Prisikėlimobažnyčios ius apie 140 e, sunk in the darkness of black marble, surrounded by names of fallen fallen of names by surrounded marble, black of darkness the in sunk e, e of the key bell key the of e , invoking the mood of a burial ceremony. The symbolic connection of the of connection symbolic The ceremony. burial a of mood the invoking ,

national struggles national

–

h wr n clua museums cultural and war the

–

the Liberty Bell Liberty the hrist resided in the upper kingdom upper the in resided hrist Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos 72

became one common denominator of the two two the of denominator common one became XX amžius XX tal, erected in the 1930s for the Duke Duke the for 1930s the in erected tal, –

(1935 05 31). 05 (1935

136 XX amžius XX to the idea of a magnificent organ, organ, magnificent a of idea the to . The national press highlighted and highlighted press national The .

(1937 02 27). 02 (1937 Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos

(1937 06 25). 06 (1937

– 138

visually establishing the the establishing visually

, which was never seen never was which , 137

(1937 07 08). 07 (1937 Tu, h uneven the Thus, . 139

, responsible for responsible ,

CEU eTD Collection 143 142 141 “national thepointwhere story” Museum exactlyfrom War untold. left it the urban an into entered symbolically thus Resurrection of Church The divine. the and nation source h an it of attraction light; oflightand experience tobereacheda architectural thoughmeans;tobecome had themonumentboth had a in of totalityfor quest a way In this window. hidden special througha bydaylight illuminated be depicted be to had natio which the from scenes with altar main Christ the behind painting” “magnificent of presence overwhelming The exterior. and interior between line the diminish to had architecture of means modern The fundaments. the the per to had hill the on monument national entering the of transparency and light the Thus of sense resurrected” be a to died “we that without remind to had reached above inscription an be while underground, to had Pantheon national the Vytautas, monument national lower the by established tradition the with

“Kaip yra su paminkline bažnyčia”, in bažnyčia”, yrapaminkline “Kaipsu A.P to bažnyčios “Prisikėjimo Kz, - nis, “Kaip auga Kaune pabaltijo meno šedevras”, inmeno šedevras”, pabaltijo Kaune “Kaip auga nis, limesni statybos darbai pradedami netrukus” pradedami statybosdarbai limesni

Lietuva

(1933 05 30). 05 (1933 ad tofacilitate connection between a the promised 73

XX amžius XX

(1939 09 05). 09 (1939 ,

in 141

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos Ulk i te cry the in Unlike .

nal history nal

(1936 03 01). 03 (1936 meate it from from it meate 143 , had to had , t of pt 142

. CEU eTD Collection trend of redem midway the through the passing without of experience example an became monuments national Lithuanian and for philosophers cultural interwar Lithuanian of search the where monuments, ornament in resulted this Finally capital. temporary the in roots deep plant to quest a experience, national synthetic more a at attempts individual the showed national at aiming cultivatio and cluster, the forming initiatives national three the of interweaving the upon touched I instead, comp the embrace not the of sources the regimes, historicist European Central East interwar own czarist urban heritage. r interwar the meant which experience national urban Lithuanian in church Catholic the and military the of centrality the established 1930s the in maturation monuments national of yet the of dynamism the forming wereprojects nation three arisenspontaneously the Vilnius, capital official the of loss the of circumstances political unfortunate the in 1920s, the of th of manifestation side” a “organic as them showed thesis The production. cultural national organic as Kaunas of idea forgotten the of realization a as them “reminded” the in indulgence The Conclusions universal content universal In this way I showed that the attention on the part of historians given to “intentional” “intentional” to given historians of part the on attention the that showed I way this In “ intentional” n , expression,

e unrealized prewar idea of the Lithuanian “National House”. In the the In House”. “National Lithuanian the of idea prewar unrealized e national styles national

were given a physical expression. I argue that the interwar cluster of of cluster interwar the that argue I expression. physical a given were , lex national urban national experience of the period. In this thesis, thesis, this In period. the of experience national urban national lex

and final Their streets. Kaunas’ in presence Vilnius’ virtual under hidden in

outr memory voluntary

resurrection noutr memory involuntary .

T dsigih hm rm h hsoiit eie I regime historicist the from them distinguish To . 74

f newr ihain ainl monuments national Lithuanian interwar of

– , which I found in the development and and development the in found I which ,

the 19th century East Central European European Central East century 19th the econsideration of Kaunas’ Kaunas’ of econsideration - es Lithuani less voluntary memory, voluntary pted national urban urban national pted a potential center of of center potential national form national - to an national national an - be clu be ster ster do do

CEU eTD Collection atte of notion radicalized Maceina’s philosopher Catholic the to approach Lithuania q articulated culture, Dubeneckis’ so indirect their to explorationsartistic connectthese To God. the and nation the connectionbetweenunmediated an of idea the embody to references historicist the from form architectural of “distillation” of concepts opposing Magnus Vytautas the of case the In ideas. national Lithuanian integralist two for form monumental so the was case special Lithuanian in style fascist chosen the Lithuanianon culture. national m would which a became never Lithuania in style demanded modern the case, Italian interwar the example, for e the of writings the in of values Catholic modern the fascist dec two the throughout monuments mpted toclose The focus on the evolution of the experience of interwar Lithuanian national national Lithuanian interwar of experience the of evolution the on focus The

- Following the shifting experience of the Lithuanian national monument, I suggest that that suggest I monument, national Lithuanian the of experience shifting the Following style monuments. The unique intellectual sources of the Lithuanian monuments were monuments Lithuanian the of sources intellectual unique The monuments. style

’ prahn t Kluts dnmc ecpin f h fl at Whereas art. folk the of perception dynamic Keliuotis’ to approaching

monument, the fascist style appeared as a fulfillment of the quest to combine the combine to quest the of fulfillment a as appeared style fascist the monument, a te hrh f Resurrection, of Church the was national style national

uest for for uest oens sye a te liae oenzto o te ore o national of sources the of modernization ultimate the was style modernist ake the monuments a direct expression of the strong the of expression direct a monuments the ake its history its urces, the interwar philosophical discourse about Lithuanian nation, nation, Lithuanian about discourse philosophical interwar the urces, transcendental war ditor Juozas Keliuotis and Keliuotis Juozas ditor twsnta usoe tep t a at attempt outspoken an not was it ,

and

in a

new humanism humanism new culture metaphysical

experience through architectural forms forms architectural through experience ades showed that they were gradually maturing into into maturing gradually were they that showed ades In .

the case of the Church of Resurrection it was a a was it Resurrection of Church the of case the 75 where

and folk art traditions, which were radicalized radicalized were which traditions, art folk and cycle of self

the Reisonas philosopher - repetition. lution of a struggle to create the the create to struggle a of lution “ introduced national

Antanas Maceina. Unlike, Unlike, Maceina. Antanas

metaphysical

organic ” the

a constructivist constructivist a n h interwar the in ain which nation

experience discourse discourse h best the CEU eTD Collection modernist contrary, the On of perception organic the monum end ofwhich 19thcentury, turned thenational external inner strugglefrom to self refl a as reconciliation resurrection where monuments, national upper the for as now stood Resurrection, embodied nation, of perceptions organicist Catholic and historicist The established. was House” “National Lithuanian the for experience. national emerge museums, Culture and War the together fused which Magnus,Vytautas of monument national first The period.prewar the from dated which national the between t to indebted remained 1920s the that showed nature their in dialogicalas monuments national the see to attempt The nation. the of experience urban integrative more re authoritarian bythe nationalhistoricist perception,promulgated the with in tension monument gime, revealed that during the interwar period there was a gradual move towards an overall overall an towards move gradual a was there period interwar the during that revealed gime, integral experience integral emerging The second part of the thesis, which placed the experience of the “organicist” national “organicist” the of experience the placed which thesis, the of part second The Finally, the discovered quest for a redemptive experience of the Lithuanian national national Lithuanian the of experience redemptive a for quest discovered the Finally, ents as a sort of sort a as ents

nature

ainl monuments, national

f h ntoa hre, uid in buried heroes, national the of the nation the national monuments and their contemporaries. Paradoxically, the discovered discovered the Paradoxically, contemporaries. their and monuments national o te monuments the f Futhermore form ection of the radicalization of the two discourses, competing from the from competing discourses, two the of radicalization the of ection

was embodied in the in embodied was moment bienheureux moment

was vaguely recognized by the general audience of interwar Kaunas. interwar of audience general the by recognized vaguely was

and the and

Kaunas often was considered as a failure in providing a national national a providing in failure a as considered was often Kaunas compliment the Church of Resurrection was responsible for the for responsible was Resurrection of Church the , in the 1930s the urban union between the initial competitors competitors initial the between union urban the 1930s the in ,

nte mnfsain f uitninl eouin f the of evolution “unintentional” of manifestation another

national ’ in Vytautas Magnus’ monument and the Church of of Church the and monument Magnus’ Vytautas in

rhtcua form architectural ary foundations of the Lithuanian nation. The quest quest The nation. Lithuanian the of foundations ary culture

delineated the thematics thematics the delineated metaphysical connection between the lower and and lower the between connection metaphysical 76

, a juxtaposition of the two national basis national two the of juxtaposition a , h Ntoa Garden. National the d as a resolution of this conflictual conflictual this of resolution a as d

n “opposition in of the of he unfolding he ”

to dialogue between between dialogue I suggested this this suggested I h histori the - building. building. continuous conflict cist

CEU eTD Collection submi of act the of signing the from religious and national the rise, permanent a of motif the in grounded was Church the of content ideological comp urban for point reference a as church Orthodox on enslaver national the of symbol extinct the on Built Resurrection. self and paradoxical most nationa modern true a as expression folk modernist unconstrained struggle national of experience forces memory historical the of reclamation national active the for called hand, o their of projects failedwere theyI suggest, monuments, two betweenthe connection transcendental discovered the Despite form. monumental the in idea national single a embody to attempt L interwar monument, which incongr the find to thebroader context, regionalin placeit to Itus monument. helps the of formand idea national observe of approach streets. the of pattern curvy the in preserved was architecture and people between relation organic the where Town, Old Vilnius’ of experience forgotten the to attributed often mod “faceless” of rise The environment. urban modern its to content aty I Lastly,

to fr an for stood wn, the illusionary national statements. The Vytautas Magnus’ monument, on the one one the on monument, Magnus’ Vytautas The statements. national illusionary the wn, resisting their ithuanian ithuanian moment bienheureux moment

inherent resurrection argue o h hsoiit regime historicist the to was bec o Vlis “ainl House” “National Vilnius’ of absence iis of uities ta te eonto o te us a a eepe ubn experience urban redempted a at quest the of recognition the that , eprr cptl city capital temporary intellectual “national load”, gradually perfecting relationship between relationship perfecting gradually load”, “national intellectual always . The symbolical end of of end symbolical The . - refuting national monument appeared to be the Church of of Church the be to appeared monument national refuting

a s h eprec o this of experience the

dialogue between thetwoperceptionsdialogue of between in the National Garden, the Cultural museum searched for an an for searched museum Cultural the Garden, National the in

allows us, the his the us, allows ssion on the part of the nation to the Heart of Christ. As Christ. of Heart the to nation the of part the on ssion .

W reminded us of the paradoxes inherent in any any in inherent paradoxes the of us reminded 77 here the War museum spoke about personal personal about spoke museum War the here

torians, given the distance of time, only to to only time, of distance the given torians, this

etition with the lower town. The main main The town. lower the with etition

East Central European fascist style style fascist European Central East promised monument can be counted counted be can monument promised . Although its its Although . ,

it planted the planted it eprec. Finally, experience. l Kaunas’ ern architecture was was architecture ern the onainl stone foundational nation.

hill, it took the took it hill, seed for seed

T hus the the hus two two the

in in

CEU eTD Collection 144 t of cityall with permeated capitalwas Lithuania temporary the it with suggested, Resurrection of Church the of leaflet the o finishthe na

Tėvynės garbei Tėvynės tional monument , (Kaunas: Žaibas, Žaibas, (Kaunas: ,

1939), 4. 1939),

evaporated. - embracing love embracing

144 . Even .

the need for national mobilization national for need the CEU eTD Collection “Kaip bažnyčia”. statoma Prisikėlimo varpai”.“Kaip Didžiojo Vytauto skambings “Kaip bažnyčios eina statyba”. Prisikėlimo K “Į organiškos valstybės kūrybą”. Galaunė, Paulius. Galaunė, Paulius. Galaunė, reikalu”. muziejaus “Tautos Paulius. Galaunė,muziejai”. “Oro Paulius. Galaunė, menoparoda”. “Bažnytinio Paulius. Vienožinskis. Kalpokas, “Dėl P. Galaunė, J. KaroMuziejaus, straipsnio A.Galdikas, P., Dubeneckis, “Apie mūsųarchitektūrą”. Vladimiras. bažnyči“Dek. Kapočius apiePrisikėlimo Bučys, “Pasimokykim Petras. išPrancūzų”. Bičiūnas, sumanymo“Tautos V. paminklo reikalu”. ARS, Architektas. “Pris Alantas, Vytautas. bažnyčią”.“Akmuo jaunugabentas įPrisikėlimo Lietuvos valstybės archyvas, centrinis Lietuvos centri sourcesPrimary Bibliography - nas, P. “Kokias melodijas girdėsimnas, “Kokias P. bokšto”. melodijas išmuziejaus Čiurlionies GalerijosstatymoČiurlionies kitųmuziejų ir reikalu”. K , no.5,1932. nis valstybės archyvas, l,b.51. f.1764,ap.

ikėlimo bažnyčios ikėlimo reikalu”. statybos Lietuvių liaudies skulptūros problemos liaudies Lietuvių meno keliai”.“Lietuvos Žygiuojanti tauta Žygiuojanti

Naujoji RomuvaNaujoji Gimtasis kraštasGimtasis . Kaunas: XX amžius f. 1640, ap. 2,b.16. f. 1640, ap. os statybą”. Baras Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos Laisvė Lietuvos aidas

79 Gimtasis kraštas Gimtasis Pažanga, Pradai ir žygiai, Pradai ir

, no. 2,1925. , , 1937 0621. , Lietuva , no.8,1936:169 , , no.24,19220228. , no.2,1934. Baras Rytas XX amžius Lietuva

1940. , 19340628. . Kaunas, 1932. , 19231223. , 19361122.

, no.1,1925:93.

, 19350531. XX amžius Li

, 19271206. etuva, , no.1,1939.

no. 3 , 19370227.

- 175. - 1924 0416. 4, 1927.

1937 0625.

CEU eTD Collection “KaroPronckus, laisvės muzėjussu varpu”. J. bažnyčios“Prisikėlimo reikalu”. Pen “Pašventinti Tautos Prisikėlimo bažnyčios pamatai”. “Paskutinį kartąvalstybės bokšto”. muziejas nuleista išsenojo vėliava P “Prisikėlimo Matijošaitis, bažnyčiaJ. Kaune”. “Atsikėlimo Matijošaitis, J. bažnyčos projektas”. Matalaitytė Maceina, Antanas. bažnyčios “Prisikėjimo Kz. statybos tolimesni pradedami netrukus”. darbai Ks. “Paremkime statybą”. bažnyčios K. M.A . Lietuvos “JaunosiosKeliuotis, Juozas. gairės Girėnui ir Dariui žuvus”. Katalikas. “Nenori bažnyčioms”. “Klastingas sulauž lenkas savo sutartį “Karo skyrių dar tikimasi muziejausžuvusiųjų įtengti šiaismetais”. Karo “Pagerbsime kareivį”. muziejausviršininkas. nežinomąjį b Kapočius, Kun.“Mūsų prisikėlimo Kairiukštytė Kairiukštytė yra bažnyč“KaipPrisikėlimo suPaminklinė - nis, A.“KaipKaune meno Pabaltijo auga - tis, Pr. “Pirmas koncertas”. Pr. karomuzejuje tis, 08. 11 04. 28. 11 10. 06. 1936 0301. 134, 1933.

acija.“Lietuvaitės, atgaivinkiterūbus”. tautinius -

Lozor - - Jacynienė, Halina. bažnyčiosJacynienė, “Dėl Prisikėlimo projekto”. Halina.Jacynienė, bažnyčios “Dėl prisikėlimo kritikos”.

aitienė, Vinventa. vardoaitienė, “Lietuvos paminklas”. lietuvių ir

Raštai , vol.1.Vilnius: Lietuvos aidas Vienyb ažnyčia”. Ū ė”. kininko patar ė Karys , no.7,1930.

Mintis, 1991.

šedevras”. ia”. ia”.

80 Lietuvos žinios Lietuvos Lietuva Rytas L , no.42,1930.

, 19300308.

ietuva Lietuva Rytas ė , 19290328. Lietuva jas, , 19271125. , 19220718.

, 19290511. XX amžius

, 19330530.

1936 1126. Trimitas , 19340630.

, 19220618. Lietuvos aidas

, 1939 09 05. , 193909

Lietuvos aidas, Lietuvos

, n

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos aidas o. 26,1927. Naujoji Romuva,Naujoji

Lietuvos aidas Lietuva , 19341120.

, 192602 1937 07 , 192911 , 1934 , 1929

no. ,

CEU eTD Collection Ališauskas, Vytautas (ed.), Aleksandravičius Aleksandravičius, Egidijus. Aleksandravičius, and Antanas Egidijus K Aleknait L.Adamson, Walter and Culture:“Fascism Avant įsitvirtinimas:Lenkijos įvaizdžio Abromaitis, Audrius. Lietuvoje “Priešo suvokimas 1919 Secondary sources muziejaus“Vytauto Komiteto patalpų Didžiojo dėlVytauto Didžiojo paiškinimas Vaižgantas. paminklas”.“Juodasis Vaižgantas, Tumas. paminklas šventykla”. “Atgimimo J. “Nepriklausomos Strimaitis, LietuvosJust. paminklas”. didis Donaldas. “Tautos namųidėjaStrikulis, I. Šeinius, “Soboras”. Šapoka, Adolfas. Šalkauskis, Stasys. Šalkauskis, Stasys. “Rytoj bažnyčios dedamas Prisikėlimo kertinis akmuo”. “Ramovės rūmai”. “PrisikėlimoRa., bažnyčia Pr. busstatoma”. leidykla, lankos, leidykla, Lietuvos XIX amžiausistoriografija Č Case”. 1920 metais”. naudojimo”. iurlionio atvejo analiz iurlionio ė - Bieliauskien

Journal of Contemporary History Journal ofContemporary 1994.

1993. 2001. , Egidijus. , Egidijus. Lietuvo Lietuvos Kardas

Tautybė, patriotizmas ir lietuvių ir pašaukimas patriotizmas tautos Tautybė, Raštai Istorija

Bangos, Bangos, ė , Rasa. , s istorija , vol. 4. Vilnius: Mintis, , vol.4.Vilnius: 1995. , no

Krikščionybės istorija Lietuvoje , no.53,2002:59 aidas XIX amžiausprofiliai kultūra: Lietuvių atgimimo ė . 8,1937.

). no. 27,1932. Tautiškos s Tautiškos Logos , 19350603. . Kaunas: ministerijos Šv. K.L.K. 1936. leidinys, Lietuvos aidas , no.49:187

– . Kaunas:

ulakauskas. ulakauskas. Tulpių rūmai”.Tulpių ą mon

Lietuvos aidas Lietuvos - 81 63.

, vol. 24, no. 3, 1989: 411 , vol.24,no.3,1989:

s brandos galimybis brandos , 19301009. . Vilnius: - Gardes and ReligionI Secular the in

- Vytauto Didžiojo universitetoVytauto Didžiojo 195. Nuo amžiųslenksčio: Nuo

XIX amžiausvidurys

Lietuva

Lietuva Šiaurės Atėnai

. , 19311109. Lietuvos sąjungos rašytojų

Vilnius: Lietuva

, 19340628. , 19230819. ų

, 19260113. Aidai,

ieškojimas . Kaunas, 1928. - , no. 12,2011:8. , no.

435.

2006 . Vilnius: naujausia naujausia

(

M. K.

Baltos

talian

- CEU eTD Collection Sartini. “FascistBlum, Cinzia Temples and Theat Blau,and Eve(eds.), Monika Platzer Blaga,Lucian. Berglund,BruceBrian and(eds.), R. Porter Berenis,Beresnevičius, Savukynas, A.Samalavičius, V.,G. V. Berend,IvanT. Ben Bauža, Česlovasand Setkauskis. Petras Baronas, et Darius al.(eds.), Banac,Ivo Verderyand Katherine (ed.), Balkelis, Tomas. Balina, and Marina Dobrenko(eds.), Evgeny Bachelard,Gaston. Baár, Monika. Architektas Reisonas, Karolis Andriušytė Andriušytė Alofsin, Anthony. - Ghiat, Ruth. “Italian FascismGhiat, “Italian of Ruth. Aesthetics the‘Third and Way’”. the Oxford: Oxford University Oxford Oxford: Press, 2010. aur aftermath, 1867 and its vol. 14, no. 3/4, 1997:45 vol. 14,no.3/4, Europe, 1890 1945 Budapest: European University Central Press, 2010. problemos irkultūros istorija Berkeley:California UniversityPress, of 2003. Contemporary History tęstinumas Eastern Europe 2009. New York:Press, Anthem eus, ). Budapest: European 2006. Central University Press, - - Žukienė, Rasa. Rasa. Žukienė, Žukienė, Rasa.

2004.

Historians and nationalism: East andnationalism: Historians Discourses of collective of andSoutheast Central Discourses identity in History d History . Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, The making of modern of The making Lithuania When buildings speak:buildings When architecture aslanguageintheHabsburg Empir

- The Poetics Space of The 1937 . New Haven:. NewYaleforInternational Center andArea 1995. Studies, . New York: Prestel, 1999. . New erailed: andEasternEurope Central inthe longnineteenth century

Istorijos štrichai Istorijos M. K. Čiurlionis: tarp simbolizmo ir modernizmo. ir simbolizmo tarp Čiurlionis: K. M. , vol. 31, no. 2, 1996: 293 , vol.31,no.2,1996: Christianity inLithuaniaChristianity -

1933 Kaunas: “Geltona”. UAB - 58

. University Chicago Press, of 2006. . Vilnius: Kultūr . Vilnius: Shaping the Great Modern City: Shaping the inCentral Architecture

Lietuv

, Boston: Beacon, Press, 1 Natio

Christianity andmodernity inEasternChristianity Europe . Kaunas: M. K. Čiurlionio dailės muziejus, 2012. . Kaunas: dailėsmuziejus, K.Čiurlionio M. Petrified Utopia. Hainess Soviet StylePetrified

82 os valstybingumas XXamžiuje: nal character ideology ininterwar andnational

- 2002. Central Europe in thecentury nineteenth ers ofers theMasses”. . London,. os, filosofijos ir meno ir os, filosofijos institutas, 2002.

316. Vilnius:

New York:New

Lietuvių mentalitetai: tautinė Lietuvių mentalitetai: Aidai,

994. South Central ReviewSouth Central

2002.

Routledge,

Europe

Journal of

atkūrimas ir atkūrimas ir Vilnius: ( 1770

. London,. 2011.

- Versus Versus

. .

e , .

CEU eTD Collection Cooke, Catherine. “Revolutionary Architecture Engagement: Russian Early ofthe 1920s”. Cooke, Catherine. Future’ “Beauty asRadiant aRouteto‘the Alon.LocalConfino, “The asa Heimat, Nation Nationaland theGerman Memory Metaphor: Alon.Confino, “Collective MemoryHistory: and Cultural ProblemsofMethod”. Čičinienė, Chadaga, Bekman.“Light Julia Captivity: in and Power Spectacular Soviet inthe Glass1920s Čepaitienė, Rasa. Bumblauskas,“Senasis Alfredas.tautų istorinės Vilnius sąmonės perspektyvose”. Bucur, Maria. Bucur,M. Wingfieldand Nancy(eds.), Maria Buck Brumfield, Craft. William Brubaker, “Beyond‘Identity’”. Rogers. Boym, Svetlana. Boym, Svetlana. Boym, Svetlana. or,Ruinophilia”. “Tatlin, Boyer, Christine. - University CaliforniaPress, 1991. of Harvard 1994. University Press, entertainments MoMA Architecture”. Empire, 1871 American R Historical santykiai1918 sutautininkais and 1930s”. Vilnius: studijos istorijos Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 2009. Purdue2001. University Press, Europe,commemoration Central 1848tothe present inHabsburg West Morss, Susan. Morss, . C Dalia. demokratĳos: identiteto “Tarpnacionalinio ir demokratų Krikščionių , vol. 2, no. 5, 1990: 16 , vol.2,no.5,1990: ambridge: 2000. MIT Press,

Heroes and victims: reme and Heroes Lietuvos istorijos instituto leidykla,Lietuvos instituto istorijos The future ofThe future nostalgia places:everyday mythologiesCommon inRussia oflife The City of Collective Memory: its historical imageryThe ofCollective City historical andarchitectural Memory: its Laikas ir akmenys: Laikas Slavic Review - 1918”. Journal ofDesign History . Cambridge: 1994. MIT Press, Dreamworld andcatastrophe:Dreamworld Eastand in the ofmassutopia passing , vol.8, 2000. The origins of modernism of The origins architecture inRussian

History andMemory History eview , vol. 66, no. 1, 2007: 82, vol.66,no.1,2007: , vol. 102, no. 5, 1997: 1386 , vol.102,no.5,1997: - -

1920 m.”

20.

kultūros

. New BasicBooks, York: 2001.

Th mbering war in twentieth in war mbering

eory and Society,eory and Cabine 83 Staging the past: the the past: of politics Staging Darbai ir dienosDarbai ir paveldo sampratos moderniojojeLietuvoje sampratos paveldo , vol. 10, no. 2, 1997: 137 , vol.10,no.2,1997:

, vol. 5, no. 1,1993:42 , vol.5,

t 2005. , issue 28:

- 105.

vol. 29, 2000: 1 vol. 29,2000: : Responses of Soviet : Responsesof Bones

- , no.7,1998:92 1403. - century Romania , 2007/2008.

- . West Lafayette: . West

86. . Cambridge: - 160.

. Berkeley: - 47.

- 120.

The

Lietuvos .

. CEU eTD Collection Gentes,Life, of the Andrew. “TheDeath andResurrection Cath Galaunė, Paulius. Galaunė, Paulius. Frisby, David. Freifeld, Alice. Fitzpatrick, Sheila. “Culture under and ARea Stalin: Politics Feldman,Marius“‘Clericaland Turda.Interwar MatthewFascism’ Europe: inAn Falasca Eliade, Mircea. Eigler,Friederike.“Critical Aroaches to Dementavičius, Justinas. etal.Dementavičius, (ed.), Justinas Damljanović,Emily and TanjaGunzburger Makaš. Dabrowski, M. Patrice Evans.Cornwall, W. Mark and J. R. Cooke, Catherine. RealistArc “Socialist planning incentral andsoutheasternplanning Europe Indiana 2004. University Press, 1918 Architecture in aOne BownBrandon and (eds.), Taylor Moscow”. Vilnius: Kracauer, andBenjamin Center Wilson Woodrow Press, 2000. no. 2,1976:211 205 Introduction”. Berkeley:Cal University of Brace, 1959. Critiq irraida minties ištakos universitetas, - Zamponi, Simonetta. - 212. - 1948 ue

, vol.39,no.115, 2012:27 Mokslas,

Fragments of modernity:of modernity of of theoriesintheFragments work Sim Nationalism andthe Hungary, crowd inliberal 1848 Nationalism The sacred and the profane: the nature ofreligion andtheprofane:The sacred thenature . Oxford: Oxford. Oxford: University Press, 2007. History Workshop JournalHistory Lietuvių liaudies menas: liaudies Lietuvių baruose: ir kultūros Dailės

2012. Totalitarian MovementsTotalitarian Religions Political and - 231. Commemorations and the shaping ofmodernshaping Poland Commemorations andthe

1988.

Valstybės Lietuvoje:lietuviškos samprata politinės modernios

- Party State, 1917 Party . Vilniaus universitetas,

Fascist spectacle: the aestheticsItaly Fascist spectacle: the powerinMussolini’s of . Cambridge:1986. . MIT Press, ifornia Press, 1997. Lietuvos politinės mintiesantologija Lietuvos politinės Czechoslovaki

Art of the Soviets: Painting, Sculpture Painting, and theSoviets: Art of hitecture: Theoryhitecture: Cullerne and Matthew Practice”. Heimat - 48.

jo meninių formų plėtojimosi pagrindai formųplėtojimosi jo meninių , no.46,1998:63

- straipsnių rinkinys 84 1992

and the‘Spatialand Turn’”. . London, New York:. Routledge, 2010. a in a nationalist and a innationalist fascist Europe, . Manchester University Press, 1993. . Manchester University Press, Capital cities intheaftermathCapital empires: of

2012.

raisal”. -

95. edral of Christ theSaviour, edral Christ of . Vilnius:

. New Harcourt, York: , vol.8,issue 2,2007: - Slavic Review, Slavic 1914 . Vilniaus New German New

. Washington: . Vaga, . Bloomington:

mel, 1970.

vol. 35,

. CEU eTD Collection Horn,“Constructing David G. and theSterile City:SocialInterwar Sciences Pronatalism in Hobsbawm,and Eric Terence (eds.), Ranger Herf, Jeffrey. Hanebrink, A. Paul Hájková, Dagmar. “ConstructingCommemorations ofTom Unity. National Hájková, DagmarNancy and M. Gudavičius, Edvardas. Griffin, Roger. Griffin,“Modernity, 9 vol.15,no.1,2008: Roger. modernism, and fascism”, Gilloch, Graeme. Ghirardo, AnEvaluation Politics: Yvonne. “Italian Architectsof andFascist theRationalist’s Ghirardo, Fascista: Yvonne. “Citta Spectacle”. Surveillanceand Iurii.Gerchuk, MythDecoration of “Festival theCity:Communist Materialization of The the Genzelis, Bronius. Gentile, Emilio. Gentile, “Fascism Emilio. asPoliticalReligion”. History in the 1930s”. universiteto leidykla, Press, 1996. 229 no. 2/3,1990: Italy”, 581 vol.18,no.3,1991: American Ethnologist, Press, 1992. ReichThird 1890 Centuries Death”. avenged”. during TomášG.thebattle of MasarykMountainand theinterwarWhite period. PalgraveHoundmills: 2007. Macmillan, Press, 1996. no. 2,1980:109 inRegimeRole Building”. - 1944 , vol. 31, no. 2, 1996: 347 , vol.31,no.2,1996: Reactionary modernism: technology, culture, andReactionary modernism: inWeimar politics andthe technology, Journal for Interdisciplinary Journal Central forInterdisciplinary Studies of Europe inthe 19thand20th Modernism andfascism: andHitler theof abeginningunderMussolini Modernism sense , vol. 4, issue 1,2012:33 , vol.4,issue Acta Histriae The sacralization ofpoliticsThe sacralization infasci . Ithaca:. Co

. CambridgeUniversity 1984. Press, Myth and metropolis: Walter metropolis: Myth andthe city and Benjamin

Lietuvos kultūros istorijos metmenys kultūrosistorijos Lietuvos In defense of Christian Hungary: ofChristian andantisemitism, religion,In defense nationalism, Journal ofDesign History, -

127. Lietuvos europėjimo kelias: istorinės studijos Lietuvos europėjimoistorinės kelias: - 251.

2001. rnell University Press, 2006.

, vol. 18, issue 3,2010:425 vol. 18,issue , Wingfield. “Czech( Wingfield.

Jour nal of theSocietyof Architecturalnal of Historians - 372. - 55.

The oftradition Invention 85

vol. 13, issue 2,2000:123 vol. 13,issue

Journal ofContemporaryHistory st Ital - oslovak) national commemorationsoslovak) national

. Kaunas:

- y. University Cambridge: Harvard 452. - 601.

Journal ofContemporary

Vytauto Didžiojo Didžiojo Vytauto

. Vilnius: Aidai, 2002. . Cambridge: Polity . CambridgeUniversi - 13 áš G.Masaryk’s - 6. 2 4.

, vol.25, , vol.39,

ty . CEU eTD Collection Audronė. Janužytė, Maciej.Janowski, Giedrė.Jankevičiūtė, Giedrė.Jankevičiūtė, 1939 “Lietuva Giedrė.Jankevičiūtė, toKaunas: Paris “From Neo Giedrė.Jankevičiūtė, kaip propaganda: “Dailė 1939 Giedrė.LietuvosJankevičiūtė, irideologija: “Dailė portretai. tarpukario politikų Giedrė.Jankevičiūtė, “Constructing theNational Giedrė. MikalojausVorobjovoJankevičiūtė, menas” monografijos “Apie “Vilniaus skaitymą Ignatavičius Vidmantas.Jankauskas, “Juozas Lietuvos tarpukario ir tapyba”. istorinė Ivanovas, Ivanovas,Bernaras. demokratiją krikščioniųdemokratųį “Lietuvių požiūris XX a. Ivanovas,Bernaras. nuot “Antilenkiškos Ioan, Augustin. Ignjatovic,Aleksandar. “From ConstructedImagined MemoryTradition: NationalThe to ketvirtajame dešimtmetyje”. spaudoje”. Foundation, 1999. East Review Tom University, 1904 Press, 2004. Kaunas: 130 Academythe Polish Sciences, of 105 2010: andEasternEuropein Central ofthe 1920sand1930s Irena1930s”. (ed.), Kossowska 121 no. 2,2003:48 ( DuchyLithuaniaLithuanian ofthe1990s”. Art to infrom the 1920s įvaizdžiai ir skaitytojus”. Menotyra meto spaudoje”. London - - Bernaras.“Lietuvi - 149. 139. b ofthe Unknown Yugoslav (1934 Soldier European architecture: theRoman , vol.88,no.4(October 2010), 624

), vol.8,no.2,2010:158 Nacionalinis M. K. Čiurlionio dailėsmuziejus, M.K.Čiurlionio Nacionalinis

, 2010:191 , No.2,2002: Power, play, and national identity: politics ofmodernization identity: politics andnational and inCentral Power, play, Kauno istorijos metraštis istorijos Kauno

Polish liberal thought before liberal191 thought Polish - Acta Academiae Artium Vilnensis, Artium Acta Academiae Dailė irvalstybė: Dailė 54. - itras s ain state nation as Historians Kauno istorijos metraštis istorijos Kauno 1922

- 213. . Tampere University Press, ų 56

tautos švent

- 63. Istorija -

1944 m.: valdžios ženklai”. valdžios 1944 m.: Reinterpreting

- dailės gyvenimas LietuvosRespublikojedailės 1918 gyvenimas aikos Kaune krikščionių demokratų bei atspindžiai jų 180. , no.78,2010. , vol.8,2007: 219 ė

Kaune 1926m.geguž

ian file 86

, vol.9, 2008: 219

651. Identity: The ImageIdentity: the The Medieval of Grand - - 120. Traditionalism in LithuanianTraditionalism in Art of the - 8. Budapest: Central European Univers -

1941”. . Bucharest: The Romanian Cultural . Bucharest: The Romanian the Past: Traditionalist ArtisticPast: Traditionalist Trends the builders: - 38)”, 38)”,

vol. 57: vol. 57:

2005. The Slavonic and East European The Slavonic andEast Darbai ir dienos Darbai ir - . Warszawa: Institute. Warszawa: ofArt of 22.

2003.

h frain f Lithuanian of formation the Meninis įtakos ir Vilnius:

Menotyra e - 225. s 15 d. ir josatgarsiai s 15d.ir to

Central EuropeCentral , no.3 , no.52,2009: Menotyr - 4,

2009: - 1940 a , . ity CEU eTD Collection Lapinskienė, Alma(ed.), Labanauskas,“Romuviečių genezėje Ramūnas.vaidmuojaunųjų katalikų sąjūdžio (1921 Kulakauskas, Antanas. LietuvosLinas.Krūgelis, “Kaikurie raidos sakralinės architektūros bruožai XX Krapauskas, Virgil. “HisKostof, Spiro. Majesty thePick: The ofDemolition”. Aesthetics Koshar, Rudy. Kavolis, Vytautas. Kavolis, Vytautas. Kasparavicius, Algimantas. “The Experience Historical Twentieth ofthe Century: Jurgėla, Petras. Aušra.Jurevičiūtė, tarpukario studentų “Politinės demonstracijos Kaune”. Aušra. vaidmuokuriantJurevičiūtė, muziejaus švenčių 1921 “Karo tradicijas Kaune LietuvosJurėnienė, Virginija. “Visuomenės iniciatyva kuriant universitetą”. “Akademiko” pasaulėžiūraJonušas, Jonas. idėjosšvies tautinės Andrew.Jenks, “A The ontheMount: Metro Undergrounda Soviet Church as of Jedlicki, Jerzy. Kauno isto Kauno studijos Civilization”, civilization Vilnius: 1933 m.)”. švietimas XIX a.viduryje Mokslas his Lithuanian 32 118/119, 1982: Be Chicago: from the T Ziemer (eds.), Lithuania”.Authoritarianism in and Totalitarianism JerzyKlaus Borejszaand W. sąjunga, metraštis rkeley: University of Californiarkeley: UniversityPress, of 2000. , vol.10,2002.

Lietuvių literatūros irtautosakos institutas, 1990. –

, vol. 3, 2002: 127, vol.3,2002: From monuments to traces: GermanFrom monumentsof to artifacts memory, 1870 A suburb of Europe: nineteenthA suburb A. Mackaus fondas, knygųleidimo Sparnuoti lietuviai Darius ir Girėnas Dariusir lietuviai Sparnuoti

wentieth Century Lietuvos ateitis rijos metraštisrijos . Bud Soter

Žmogus istorijoje Žmogus trajektorijos: Sąmoningumo Technology andCulture Nationalism andhistoriography:Nationalism the ofnineteenth case

toricism Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes andAuthoritarian Totalitarian and Lessons inEurope. Legacies apest: Central European University Press, 1999. , vol.31(59), 2009. Kova užvalstiečių sielas: - 41. Vilniaus kultūrinis gyvenimas: kultūrinis 1900Vilniaus tautųpolilogas,

. Boulder:Monographs, EastEuropean 2000.

. Kaunas: , vol.9,2008. , vol.1,no.2,2009. - . New :Berghahn Books, York 2006. 142. . Vilnius:

Vytauto Didžiojo universitetoVytauto leidykla, Didžiojo

, vol. 41, no. 4, 2000: 697 , vol.41,no.4,2000:

87 Vaga, -

century Polisharoachescentury towestern lietuvių aspektai kultūros modernėjimo

caro valdžia, Lietuvos valdžia, visuomenė caro irpradinis

1986.

. Vilnius: Lietuvos. Vilnius: žurnalistų

1994.

2012.

oje”.

Lituanistica Design Quarterly Design -

724.

Kauno istorijos istorijos Kauno

- century Lietuvos istorijos Lietuvos istorijos - - 1 1990 – 945

, no.2,2006. 2000. XXI a.”XXI . . - 1930 m.”

. , no. -

CEU eTD Collection Lukšionytė Lukšionytė Lukšionyt Lukšionytė Lopata, Raimundas. Liutkus, Viktoras. dailės transformacijos”. “Lietuvos avangardas: stilistinės įtakos ir ištakos, Lefebvre, Henri. Lebedeva, Culture of Soviet “Totalitarian Valentina.in and MassElements the 1930s”. Laurinavičius, Česlovas. Laučkaitė,Laima. Lau Laučkaitė,Laima. History “Writing the Art Multi City: to of from Nationalism Lauckaite Laučkaitė,Laima (ed.), Lapota, Raimundas. Second “The ofNati Spring Lapinskienė, miestastarpukario irbaltarusių Vilniauslietuvių Alma.“Gedimino poezijoje”. č kait Kuns Vilnensis Vilnius: GrandLithuania”. of Duchy comparativaActa litteraria leidykla, kūrėjai irjų pastatai dermė 1998. kultūros židinys Laupastatuose”.Laima conception Estetikos irmeno filosofijos tra R fragmentai no. 2(31), 2003. 2010: 71 ussian Social Scienceussian Review e , Laima. pradžios dail a. “XX , Laima. tapyboje”. Vilniaus “Lūžis XXa., pradžios e titeaduslikke andArchitecture Studies inArt Uurimusi/ - - - -

Tolvaišienė, Nijolė. Tolvaišienė, Nijolė. Tolvaišienė, Nijole. Kauna?” “Kas amžiaus Tolvaišiene, state XIX Nijolė. “‘Meno vaizdinys Tolvaišienė, šventovės’ XXViln a. pradžios . Vilniaus dailės 2002. akademijos,

Kultūros, filosofijos meno ir institutas, - , vol. 15: , vol.15: 2001. 85. . Vilnius: . Kaunas: The Production ofSpace The Production

Vilniaus dailė XX dailė amžiauspradžioje Vilniaus Authoritarian regime Lithuania: ininterwar Authoritarian

. Vilnius: Kult

XX amžiaus pradžios Vilnius: amžiauspradžios modernėjančios židinys XX kultūros Modernumas XXamžiaus Lietuvos tapyboje tradicija ir Politika irdiplomatija: Politika

Lietuvos instutas, istorijos Naujasis lankas,Naujasis ( 1843 č kait Gubernijos laikotarpis Kauno architektūroje: Kauno Gubernijos laikotarpis Antanas Vivulskis - , vol. 4, 2009: 150 , vol.4,2009: 1915 e Lituanus

ū (ed.), , vol. 44, no. 6, 2003: 51 , vol.44,no.6,2003: ros, filosofijos ir meno institutas, 2004. ros, filosofijosirmeno institutas, nsformacijos ). Kaun e

– . Oxford: Blackwell,. Oxford: 1991. XX amžiaus pradžios Vilnius: modernėjančios Vilnius: amžiauspradžios XX

magistral

, vol.39,no.4,1993. 1997. 88 as:

ons and theTheory Reconstruction ofons the of

lietuvių raidos tapsmo ir valstybės tautinės

Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto Didžiojo Vytauto , 2005: 304 ( - 1877 e 158.

s ir marginalijos klausimas”. s irmarginalijos klausimas”.

1998. 2004. .

Vilnius: -

1919

- - Acta academiae artium artium Acta academiae 81. 318. ) : tradicijų ir modernumo: tradicijųir

Baltos lankos,

circumstances, legitimation, Kauno istorijosKauno metraštis

(Tallinn), no.19/3 (Tallinn),

svarbiausi svarbiausi –

2002. Culturalism”. Culturalism”. , 1998:5 Menotyra iaus

– . 4, - 13. , ,

CEU eTD Collection Miknys, projekcijos lenkų realijos”. “Lietuvos tauta: ir Rimantas. XXamžiaus Antanas Tyla, Miknys, “The and Rimantas Staliunas. Darius Collective and “Old” Lithuanians: “New” Mickiewicz, Adam. Merkys,Lithuania”. Kudirka’s Vytautas. of Concept “Vincas McElligott, Anthony. Marcišauskytė Mansbach, Aspiration in Architecture“Modernist Nationalist Steven.and Mačiulis, Dangiras. Mačiulis, metų(1930) Dangiras. “VytautoDidžiojo kamp Mačiulis, Dangiras. vaizdinys vaduojančiojeLietuvoje”. “Vilniaus Vilnių Mačiulis, Dangiras. paveldo “Kultūros apsauga LietuvojeMačiulis, Dangiras. fondokūrimo projektai “Kultūros 1926 Mačiulis, Dangiras.kul “Dvarų Mačiulis, Dangiras.Lietuvoje”. XX a. dvipropagandines “Apie tarpukario kampanijos Mačiulis, įkūrimas”. Dangiras. lituanistikos Smetonos instituto “Antano Lukšionytė paminklai požiūris humanitatis studia (50), 2002:19 dailės akademijos 2000. leidykla, et al.(eds.), Diversity andInclusion MartynHous LithuaniaIdentity in at Types the TurnNineteenth andTwentieth ofthe Centuries.” During 1811 vol. 5,2000. London, York: New Routledge, 2001. Jacinienė”. Case Studies”. institutoleidykla,istorijos (46), 2001:54 comparativa Lituanistica no. 4(48), 2001: 41 - Tolvaišienė, Nijolė. Tolvaišienė, , 2009:119 - Jurašienė, Jolanta. “Įžymi, Jolanta. menoistorikė HalinaJurašienė, Kairiūkštytė bet nepažinta , vol. 9, 2002: 33 , vol.9,2002: Acta Academiae Artium Vilnensis Artium Acta Academiae , no.4(56), 2003: 18 Praeities baruos Praeities

, vol. 4, 2009: 80 , vol.4,2009: – den and David J. (eds.), Smith J. David den and 1812. - - Valstybės kultūros politika Lietuvoje 1927 politika kultūros Valstybės Pan Ta Pan 38. 75. Journal ofthe Society Historians ofArchitectural

The German urbanexperience,The 1900

, vol.9: -

- 139. 66. deusz Foray The Last ATale or of inLithuania: the Gentry . Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi, 2011: 35 2011: Amsterdam,Rodopi, York:. New

tūrinio palikimo likimas palikimo tūrinio Lietuvoje”. nepriklausomoje

Istorizmas ir modernas architektūroje ir Istorizmas Vilniaus 2005. Propagandos virsmaiir nekintamumas: tarpdisciplininis - 62. e - , Vilnius: Žara, 99 , Vilnius: 1999: 97.

40.

nepriklausomoje Lietuvoje nepriklausomoje (1918

Forgotten Pages History. inBaltic , vol. 62: , vol.62: anijos prasmė“. - 1945: modernity andcrisis modernity 1945: - Dailė 111. Lithuanian Historical Studies Historical Lithuanian - 1940 metais

, 201 - 1940 m.” 1940 , vol.65,issue 1. 1: 65 Lituanistic - 48.

Lituanistica Acta litteraria Acta litteraria the Baltic, Two . Vilnius: . -

79. . Vilniaus

Lituanistica - 1940)”. a , no.2

Kultūros Kultūros Lietuvos , no.2 . Inter

- , - , CEU eTD Collection Nesbitt, Kate.and “The Sublime Modern of) Architecture: Unmasking(an Aesthetic Mulevičiūtė, Jolita. (ed.),Mulevičiūtė, Jolita Dobužinskis,1875 Mstislavas L.Mosse, George L.Mosse, and George Wars World theMyth “Twoof L.Mosse, George “National ofthe Cemeteries Revival:TheNational Cult Fallen and Soldiers L.Mosse, Considerations”. George AestheticsSome “Fascist and Society: Morrison, Remembrance,Kevin. From Benjaminvia and “Myth, to Ruskin Modernity: Morkūnaitė Moravánszky,Ákos. Mockutė,“Kauno XXa. Vaiva.miesto vaizdai 3 Miknys, andthe Problem ofMode “Vilnius Rimantas. Miknys, iretnografinės istorinės Lietuvos “Tarp Lietuvos: Rimantas. ieškoti ar buvo bandyta LietuvosMiknys, Römerio “Mykolo Rimantas. valstybingumopastangos koncepcijają ir Miknys, Römeris irjopožiūris problemą”. “Mykolas įVilniaus Rimantas. istorijos metraštis istorijos Twentieth Century”. formulėsautonomijos 1905metais?”, įgyvendinti 1911 1994. Abstraction”. Kaunas: akademijos leidykla, muziejus, Cornell U movements Reich the GermanytheNapoleonic Third through in wars from Contemporary History in Germany”. Contemporary Proust,” Comparative. 1931)”. EuropeanCentral architecture, 1867

- Lazauskienė, Aistė. “Kauno savivaldybės ir centrinės valdžios santykiai (1918 santykiai valdžios centrinės ir savivaldybės “Kauno Aistė. Lazauskienė, istorijos metraštis Kauno Nacionalinis M. K. Čiurlionio dailėsmuziejus, M.K.Čiurlionio Nacionalinis

niversity 1991. Press, 1975. The nationalization of the masses: symbolismandmass political The nationalization New Literary History New Literary Modernizmo link: Journal ofContemporaryHistory

History Com

– , vol. 8, 2007:297 1919 metais” 1919 Modernity 1918 andIdentity:Artin peting visions: aesthetic invention and social imagination in peting in visions:aesthetic invention andsocialimagination

Lithuanian Historical Studies Historical Lithuanian 2000. , vol. 21, no. 4, 1986: 491 , vol.21,no.4,1986: 245 , vol.31,no.2,1996: Literature - 1975:

parodos katalogas

dailės gyvenima Lietuvių , vol. 60, no. 2, 2008: 125 , vol.60,no.2,2008: ,

vol. 10,2009. , vol. 26, no. 1, 1995: 95 , vol.26,no.1,1995: - 306. - 1918 Parlamento studijos 90

- . Cambridge: MIT Press,. Cambridge: 1998. MIT tgimimo istorijos studijos istorijos tgimimo 4 dešimtmečių tapyboje”. dailininkų 1 , vol.14,no.1,1979: rn Lithuanianrn inthe Early Statehood - - the War Experience”. the War Experience”.

s LietuvosRespublikoje, 1918 513. 252. . Vilnius: , vol.2,1997.

1940 2001. , 2005,no.5. -

141. LTSR dailės - 110. .

Vilniaus dailės

, vol. 13,1996. Lituanistica Journal of Journal of -

20.

. Ithaca:.

- 1940 Kauno Kauno , no.4,

. - CEU eTD Collection Pallasmaa, “Touching Juhani. theWorldarchitecture,emancipation hapticity and the ofthe Paces, Cyn Paces, andRise“TheFall ofPrague’s Cynthia. Marian Column”. Paces,“TheBattle Cynthia.for Square: Prague’sOld Town SymbolicBirth Space and theof Paces,“Religious Cynthia. Heroes Commemorating a Husand for SecularSaint State: Jan Paces,“‘The Cynthia. Czech Nationbe Must Mona.Ozouf, Time “Spacethe inthe Festivalsand French of Revolution”. Orzoff, Andrea. Orzoff, Andrea.Interwar TomášMasaryk’s “TheHusbandman: Leader in Cult Orzoff, Andrea.pen and “Prague cultural Central 1924 European nationalism, Nora,LieuxMemoryLes Pierre.“Betweenand History: de Mémoire”. Alvydas.Nikžentaitis, Alvydas.Nikžentaitis, praradimas: kultūrinėstradicijos “LDK VytautoDidžiojo Nikžentaitis 26, 1989:7 Vilnius: 1998:tautosakos institutas, 324 patirtis Kunigaikštystės kultūrinė LietuvosDidžiosios Lietuvoje XIX 2009: 235 lyginamosios analizės bandymas”. Helsinki (2010). www.arquitectura eye”. U givenat Helsinki Speech century Issue 79,2001:141 of Civicthe Constitution Identities the Republic”. BlairRuble and Jo Press, 199 2001: (eds.), Wenceslas in1920sCzechoslovakia”. Nan Nationalism DuringFirst Republic”. the Studies inSociety andHistory University Oxford Oxford: Press, 2009. Czechoslovakia”. N ationalities Papers ationalities thia. , Alvydas.Lietuvos kultūrinės ir sostinių “Laikinosios Respublikos atmintys:

Staging the Past: Commemorations theHabsburg in thePast:Lands. Staging . Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009. . Pittsburgh: UniversityPress, ofPittsburgh

Aidai, - Prague panoramas: national memory and memory sacred national inthe twentieth space panoramas: Prague Battle for the Castle: The theCastle: Myth Czechoslovak of Battle for 246. - 24. –

2002. XX a.” Rita Repšienėa.” (ed.), XX Rita

- Vytauto irJogai Vytauto 225. Austrian History Yearbook History Austrian - 155. , vol. 29,no.2,2001:243

, vol. 17, no. 3, 1975: 372 , vol.17,no.3,1975: - 334. niversity Technology, School ofArchitecture, of los įvaizdis los įvaizdis LenkijosLietuvos visuomenėse ir hn Czaplicka (eds.), . Johns Hopkins University. Johns 165 2003: Press, - Acta Humanitarica Universitatis Saulensis Acta Humanitarica ucp.com/images/PallasmaaTW.pdf

Catholic!’: An Alternative Version of AnAlternativeVersion CzechCatholic!’:

91 Nationalities Papers, Nationalities

cyand WingfieldBucur Maria Senosios raštijos ir tautosakos ir sąveika: raštijos Senosios , vol. - 265.

39, 2008:121

. Vilnius: Lietuvių. Vilnius: literatūros ir

Composing Urban History and UrbanHistory Composing - 384.

ia in Europe, 1914 Europe, ia in

Radical History ReviewHistory Radical

vol. 27,issue 3,1999. - 137. Representations

Purdue University Comparative

- 1935”. kultas - , vol.9, . 1918 - 191. , no. . ,

CEU eTD Collection Valdas.Pruskus, kartosfašizmą “Jaunosios katalikųį intelektualų požiūris ir Valdas.Pruskus, kartos “Jaunosios katalikų intelektualų pažiūros Valdas.Pruskus, Valdas.Pruskus, “Antanas Maceina Marcel.Proust, Preišegalav Prazauskas, Algimantas.“Vilniaus Krašto problema”. Porter, Brian. Porter, Brian. Identity”.Popescu, Carmen. Time: “Space, “VDUprofesoriaiPivoras, Saulius. irkultūrinio intelektualinio studentai gyvenimo ir Kauno universiteto alternatyvos ideologinės liberalizmo: ir klerikalizmo “Tarp Saulius. Pivoras, Piłsudski, “AddressJozef. delivered (1922). inVilnius” Vaidas.Petrulis, est “Modernistinės Vaidas.Petrulis, “Erdvinės lietuvių Vaidas.Petrulis, Lietuvos “Architektūrosapraiškos politikos tarpukario(1918 2010. Texts Commentaries and States mintyje”. irkritika istorija no. 33(2), 2009:126 periodikoje: tarpsocialinio reprezentacijos ir teisin nacionalsocializmą tarpukario Lietuvoje”.nacionalsocializmą tarpukario tarpukarioLietuvoje”. 143 165; no.60,2009: 2008: interjere (1924)”. century Poland of Modern History ir visuomenė 1922 centre”. Aleks Egidijus 110. 1922 visuomenė ir Mokslas Aleksandr Egidijus koncepcijoje”.

ičienė, Lina.“TautinėVladimiro Dubeneckio ičienė, reprezentacija Seimo Steigiamojo

: 44 Discourses ofCollective Identity

“ When began tohate: imaginingmodern innineteenth politics nationalism - Democracy and Discipline in LateNineteenthDisciplineDemocracy in and 58. Urbanistika irarchitektūraUrbanistika Remembrance of Things Past Remembrance ofThings

“Gyvosios DvasiossąjūdistarpukarioLietuvoje”.“Gyvosios

. New York: OxfordUniversi York: . New , vol. 4: , vol.4: Science: FutureScience: ofLithuania - , vol. 71, no. 2, June 1999:346 , vol.71,no.2,June 2002 - 134. - Problemos: moksloProblemos: darbai andravi 148. . Kaunas: universitetas, 2002:111 . VytautoDidžiojo , vol. III/1., vol. Budapest Menas tapatumas ir

- 2002 : rasizmas ir tautinės mažumos valstybėje”. irtautinės: rasizmas mažumos etikos apraiškos tarpukarioLietuvos architektūrinėje tautinio stiliaustautinio č ius et al. (ed.), ius etal.(ed.), Kua: yat Ddij uiestts 20: 99 2002: universitetas, Didžiojo Vytauto Kaunas: . avi , vol. 34, no. 5, 2010: 262 , vol.34,no.5,2010: National Identities National č . New York: 1934. RandomHouse, u e a. (ed.), al. et ius

92 in Central andSoutheastEurope 1770 in Central

Problemos: moksloProblemos: darbai ty 2000. Press, , 2008:35

: Central EuropeanUniversity: Central Press, politikos projekcijos 1918politikos Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Didžiojo Vytauto Mokslas , vol. 3, issue 3,2011. , vol.3,issue Darbai ir dienosDarbai ir , -

393. Modernism: The Creation ofNation Modernism: The Creation vol. 62,2002. gumo”.

- - 48. Century Poland”. Century Poland”. Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. universitetas. Didžiojo Vytauto , vol.8,issue 3,2006:189 Urbanistika irarchitektūra Urbanistika

į kapitalizmą ir socializmą Logos - 269.

, vol.40,2004. , no. 59,2009:156 ,

vol. 60,2001. - - 1940 m.) 1939 m. Logos The Journal

- 124. – ,

1945

no.

Meno - - 206.

57 :

, - - -

CEU eTD Collection Shore, Marci. Sherman, “Objects Danieland J. ofMemory:Narrative Museums”. HistoryWar inFrench InterwarSherman, “Bodies in and Daniel Names:Emergence Commemoration J. The of Schorske, Carl E. Said, Edward “Invention, Memory, W. Malte.Rolf, “Working To Roberts, David modernismandthe D.“Fascism, quest for an alternative modernity”. Miknys,Rimantas ypatumai visuomenės“Tautos, irvalstybės sampratos Vilniaus ItsIts ofMonuments: Riegl, Cult Essence “The Development”.Nicholas Alois. and Modern Vytautas.Radžvilas, “XIX Valdas.Pruskus, Valdas.visuomenėsPruskus, humanizmo” “Naujojo organizacijos mode Valdas.Pruskus, katalikų intelektualų “Lietuvių kooperacijos XIX samprata Valdas.Pruskus, “Katalikybės supratimas modernistinis vaidmens katalikų lietuvių socialinio Pr uskus, Valdas. “KatalikybėLietuvoje”. tarpukario irvisuomenė ir atmintis”. ir atmintis”. sandūroje”. akademijosdarbai suvažiavimo sociologų kt.) Šalkauskio ir S. darbuose”. (A. Maceinos, darbai 1968 French Studies Historical France”. 192. andthe EasternBloc Stalin BalázsStalinism”. Apor et al.(eds.), of Prejudice 2004. institutas, Vilniu intelektinėje a.Lau aplinkojeLaima XX pradžioje”. Heritage Price et al.(ed.), studijos istorijos intelektualų katalikų įžvalgos

. New Haven:University Yale 2006. Press, s: modernėjančioskultūros židinys ,

vol. 59,2001. Caviar and ashes: a Warsaw ashes: life anddeath a generation’s i Caviar and . LosGettyInstitute,. Angeles: 1996:69 Conservation The American Histor American The Socialinė katalikybė Lietuvoje: tarpukario Soter Fin , vol. 43, issue 1,2009:91 , vol.43,issue Filosofija. SociologijaFilosofija. -

de , no.1,1990: 157 Historical and Philosophical Issues inthe andPhilosophical Cons Historical ,

vol. 25 (53), 2008. vol. 25 - siècle Politics andCulture Vienna: wards the Centre: Leaderwards the and Centre: Cults Spatial PoliticsinPre a. lietuvių tautinio atgimimo klausimu”. atgimimo a. tautinio lietuvių

, vol. 19, no. 1, 1995: 49 , vol.19,no.1,1995: . New PalgraveMacmillan, York: 2004:141 .

ical Review Vilnius: ,

vol. 18,2003. and Place”, - , no.1,2006:25 164. The Leader Cult in Communist Dictatorships: inCommunist Cult The Leader

- UAB “Eikoma”,

102. 93 . Vilnius: Kult

, vol. 103, no. 2, 1998: 443 , vol.103,no.2,1998:

Critical Inquiry Critical

- 74. - 32. č kait

jaunosios kartos lietuvių kartos jaunosios . NewKnopf, York: 1979.

2001. ros, filosofijosirmeno e Li

(ed.), (ed.), etuvių katalikų moksloetuvių katalikų Problemos: mokslo Problemos: , vol.26, no.2,2000:175

Lietuvių atgimimo - 83. XX amžiaus pradžios pradžios XX amžiaus ervation of Cultural ervation ofCultural

n Marxism, 1918 lis: politinė vaizduotė vaizduotė politinė lis: - 466. – XX a. - 157.

- War War Patterns

- - CEU eTD Collection Stali Stali Stali 1905 Period the During Lithuania in tendencies “Ethnopolitical Darius. Staliūnas, Spector, Scott. Snyder, Timothy. Smilingyte Smilingytė Smilingyt Smetona, Antanas. Sirutavičius, Vladas. programme “Vincas Kudirka’s for modernizingand societyproblems of Sirutavičius, Vladas. “Šventės nacionalizavimas. šventės” “Tautos atsiradim atgimimoSirutavičius, Vladas.tautinio lietuvių “Dvi interpretacijos”. Sirutavičius, VladasAlgirdasGrigaravičius. and “Neįgyvendinta idėja: lietuvių Georg.Simmel, Life” and Mental “The Metropolis (1903). Watson Sophie Gary Bridge and Dmitri.“NationalSidorov, of and Scale: thePolitics Monumentalization The Resurrections of ū ū ū nas, Dar nas, Darius.XX a. “Kauno vizija pradžioje”. nas, Darius. idėja “Europos lietuviškame XIX istorijos studijos istorijos namai” Vilniuje”. (eds.), Geographers the Cathedral Savior inMoscow”. the ofChrist metraštis. 2000metai, leidykla,instituto 105 2002: (ed.),Staliūnas Vilnius”. of University the studies of Revival the of conceptions the siecle 1999 Men iniciatorė”. XIX a. pab. forminga national intellige ( Respublikoje”. Lietuva XIX irLenkija e otyra . New Haven, - - - . Berkeley:University ofCalifornia 2000. Press, Žeimiene, Skirmante.“Vladas kryžiuLietuva Nageviciusir muziejuje”, Karo Žeimienė, Skirmantė.“Dvasininkija Žeimiene,Bažnyčios Skirmante.“Apie religinės poziciją Katalikų dailėsatžvilgiu The Blackwell City Reader City The Blackwell , vol.1,1996. ius. “Lietuviškojo patriotizmo pėdsakai patriotizmo ius. “Lietuviškojo a. XIX viduryje”. Prague territories: national conflict national Prague innovation territories: andcultural in Ka , vol. 17, no. 4, 2010. , vol.17,no.4, Menotyra The reconstruction of nations: of The reconstruction – , vol Raštai XX a. Lietuvių Atgimimo istorijos studijos istorijos Lietuvių Atgimimo Europos idėja Lietuvoje: istorija irEuropos idėja Lietuvoje: dabartis istorija , vol.13, 1996. . 90, no. 3,2000:548 . 90,no. Kultūros barai Kultūros

London: , [vol. 1]: , [vol. I pusėje”. , no. 2(23), 2001. , no. 2001: 310 - XX a. ntsia”. ntsia”.

- Yale University Press, 114.

), 2001. Vienybės gairėmis Menotyra

- , no.10,1998.

325. Lithuanian HistoricalLithuanian Studies (Malden: Blackwell,(Malden: 2002).

572. 94 , no. 3 (36), 2004. , no.3(36),

–

Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus,Poland, Ukraine,1569 Lithuania,

tarpukariodailės kūrinių memorialinių

Darbai ir dienosDarbai ir - XX a. s

Annals of the Associationof of AmericanAnnals .

Kaunas: spaustuvė,1930. Spindulio

, vol. 17: , vol.17: 2003.

andūros Darius diskurse”.

. Vilnius: Lietuvos. Vilnius: istorijos Nacionalizmas emocijos ir , no.4,1997:59

, vol.5,2000. Lietuvių Atgimimo Atgimimo Lietuvių Lithuanian Historical Historical Lithuanian Lietuvos istorijos istorijos Lietuvos as Lietuvosas “Tautos fka’s de fin

- - 1907 and 1907 64.

- CEU eTD Collection Trencsényi, “‘ImposedBalázs. Authenticity’. National Approaching European Eastern Trencsényi, etal.Balázs (eds.), Trencsényi, andBalázs Michal Kopecek ( Todorova,Backwardness: of “TheTrap Modernity, Maria. theStudy and Temporality, of Terranova,N. “Marcel Urbanism:and Bergsonian Charissa Time, Vitalism, theCity”. Poëte’s Sverdiolas, Arūnas. Svarauskas, Art Surgailis, (ed.), Gintautas etal. Modern Gregory. Stroud, Common: in asa “Thepast Ruins Experience Shared Urbanof Striogaitė, Dalia. Stephan, Sona. “‘Ever Higher’:Projectof The ofthe for Soviets”. Evolution thePalace Stali St Stali ali ū ū ū nas,Lietuvoje”. Darius. karių tarpukario “Žuvusių kultas alternatyva:nas, Darius.amžiaus “XX etnosoar valstybės istorija”. nas, Darius. “Visuomene be universiteto?”. Lietuvos institutoleidykla, istorijos 2001:120 studijos no. 2 2000. 35 2011: Amsterdam,Rodopi, York: New Smith (eds.),David J. Lithuaniaat theand Cent TurnNineteenth Twentieth ofthe CharacterologiesInter inthe Hungaria European 2006. University Press, and SoutheastEurope Eastern European Nationalism”. Jo dešimtmetyje”. 2011. muziejus, kraštoLietuvosKaunas: apsaugos ministerija,Vytauto Respublikos karo Didžiojo Revolution Vilnius: Review, nas, Darius. “The “Old” and “New” Lithuanians: Collective Identitynas, “Old”Lithuanians:“New” Darius.Collective and “The Types in urnal ofUrbanHistory urnal

(11), 1996:7 , vol. 17: , vol.17:

vol. 62, no. 1, 2003: 41 vol. 62,no.1,2003: Lietuvių literatūros irtautosakos institutas, n case studies ū - ras. de politines “Lietuvos Avangardizmo s Avangardizmo Eraand Petersburg”. Moscow

Kultūros filosofija Lietuvoje filosofija Kultūros Parlamento studijos Parlamento

Nacionalizmas emocijos ir - 19. Forgotten Pages Diversity History. inBaltic andInclusion

( 1770 . Budapest:2001. Books, Regio , vol. 34, no. 6, 2008: 919 , vol.34,no.6,2008: Vytauto Didžiojo karomuziejus Didžiojo 2009metais: AlmanachasVytauto Nation ūkuryje: - - war Period”.war 1945 - 68. - Slavic Review

building and contested identities: Romanian & andcontestedbuilding identities: Romanian ) : texts and commentaries: textsand

eds.), eds.), , no.7,2006.

lietuvių literatūra: 3 literatūra: lietuvių šines radikalizacija XX a. ketvirtajame 95

Discourses ofcollective inCentral identity -

Slavic Review . Vilnius: Central Europe Central 48 Lietuvių ( Lie

- , vol. 64, no. 1, 2005: 140 , vol.64,no.1,2005: 132. tuva irLenkija XIX

1998. 943. Mintis, atgimimo istorijosatgimimo studijos

, vol.6

- Lietuvių Atgimimo istorijos istorijos Lietuvių Atgimimo

iasis dešimtmetis iasis , vol.8, uries”.Housden Martyn and

. Budapest: Central 1983. 5, no. 4, 2006: 712 5, no.4,2006:

no. 1,2010:20 – Darbai irdienos Darbai XX a. - 164. ), Vilnius: ), Vilnius: .

, vol.16, . - Slavic - 47. 735. , ,

CEU eTD Collection Vytauto garbei, Didžiojo 1430 Dubeneckis:Vladimiras kūrybos 1 paroda,skirta jubiliejinė Vitas, Robert A. Visser, Romke:“Fascist Doctrinethe Romanita”. and of theCult kultasViliūnas, Giedrius. tarpukario Didžiojo Lietuvoje”. “Vytauto Venclova,“NativeLithuania Realm Mickiewicz’s Tomas.Revisited. Veljataga, Pillė. Vari,“Re Alexander. Vardy,ImpactB. Steven “TheofTrianon uponHungaryHungarian The andMind: Nature the LawrenceVale, J. Vaičenonis, Jonas. Vabalaitė, tarpuka “Meno pokyčių RūtaMarija. vertinimai Turda,“Conservative Palingenesis Marius. and Cultural Early Modernism in Twentieth Turda,and Paul J.Weindling Marius(eds.), Trencsényi, Balázs. Kultūros, filosofijos ir meno institutas, 2008: 355 meno 2008: ir Kultūros, filosofijos institutas, Andrijauskas (ed.), 437 century Romania”. Univ and inCentral nationalism SoutheastEurope, 1900 thought. valdyba, katalogas 1926 History studijos istorijos Lithuania”. visuomeniškumastautiškumas ir vol. 47,no.4, Interwarto Nationalize Budapestduring Period”. the Interwarof Ir Hungarian Press, 1992. 1940 – - ) 453. ersity 2006. Press, 1940. . Kaunas: , vol. 27, no. 1, 1992: 5 , vol.27,no.1,1992:

London: Routledge, 2011. 1936.

. Vilnius: Lietuvos estetinė mintis XIX a. pabaigoje Lietuvos estetinė XIX mintis a.pabaigoje Civil Lituanus Loyola University 1986. ofChicago,

Architecture, power, and national identity Architecture, power, andnational Lietuvos kariuomenė valstybės politinio gyvenimoLietuvospolitinio kariuomenė verpetuose valstybės The politics of “nati of The politics 2012: 709

- Versus aureus,Versus - territorializing the‘Guiltyterritorializing City’: Nationalist andRight , vol.17, 2001:68 Military Relations Lithuania Smetona,Military in Under President Antanas

Totalitarian Movements Religions Totalitarian Political and Lietuvos istorijos TSR iretnografijos muziejus, Estetikos ir meno filosofijos probleminių meno ir laukųsąveika filosofijos Estetikos , vol.53,no.3,2007.

- - redentism”. redentism”. 733. 1930

. Kaunas:

- 2004. 22. . Vilnius: Lietuvos tyrimų kultūros . Vilnius: institutas, 2011. onal character”: EastEuropean astudy in interwar

102. Hungarian Studies ReviewHungarian Studies

Blood and homeland: eugenics andracial andhomeland: eugenics Blood

96 Lietuvai pagražinti draugijos Centro

365. - 1940 – rio Lietuvosrio Antanas estetikoje”. Journal ofContemporaryHistory,

00 XX a.pirmojoje pusėje: meno

. New Haven: Yale University - . New York: Central European. New Central York: osioms gimimo metinėms:osioms gimimo Journal of Contemporary Journal of Lietuvių atgimimo atgimimo Lietuvių , vol. 10, no. 1,1983. , vol.10,no. and Mickiewicz in and Mickiewicz , vol.9, no. 4,2008:

1988. - wing Attempts wingAttempts

. Vilnius: Vilnius: . ( 1927 -

CEU eTD Collection 7. The(1930), www.delcampe.net. Black Monument churchIšeivijostower. an6. The centro oldOrthodox modified tower studijų archyvas, of f. 5. The 19thcentury ofKaunas, fortress 4. The Museum War thelate in 1930s. 3. The Museum War the1920s. in 2. TheLithuanian interwarnationalKaunas’ in monuments map, 2013. archyvas, sketch1. Vladimiras ofapskrities Dubeneckis’ 1930.Kaunas theWar Museum, f. Visual material Zimmermann, Susan. Žemaitytė,Zita. Žaltauskaitė, andyounger nationalism Vilma. “Catholicism inthegeneration views ofthe of Yampolsk, “InIconoclasm Mikhail. Time”. Noteson Shadow of Nancy and Monuments. the NathanielWood, Nancy.LesWood, Remains:“Memory’s mémoire”. de lieux Win Wingfield,Zborov“The Battle NancyofCommemoration Politics of and M. the in Whyte, “How Some dobuildings William. issues mean? ofint ter, Jay. The Case ofCracow”. 1, 1994:123 Cambridge:University 1995. Press, Cambridge Czechoslovakia”, architecture”. 1, ap. 1 http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/3989/800pxkaunotvirtovekauna.jp 156, a Central European University,1995. studies historical Lithuanianclergy inthe late Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 93 1995: Condee (ed.), p. 1,b.25. Sites of memory, sites of mourning: the Great War sitesofmourning:the history Greatcultural European memory, in Sites of - 9, B. 6647

Paulius Galaunė: Paulius . “Urban Self - 149. Soviet andHistory Theory Urban space and identity in theEuropean space city andidentityUrban in 1890

, vol.5, 2000. East EuropeanPolitics andSocieties

- 975 Hieroglyphics. Visual Culture in Late Twentieth inLate Culture Visual Hieroglyphics. East Central Europe, Central East

- Identification inEast CentralBefore EuropetheGreat War. -

nineteenth andearlytwentiethnineteenth centuries”. monografija

, vol. 45, no. 2, 2006: 153 , vol.45,no.2,2006:

Vilnius:

vol. 33,no.1

- 112.

Vaga,

, vol.17,no.4,2003. History and Memory andHistory erpretation thehistory in of

1988. - 2, 2006:9 - 177.

- - 1930s - 29(21). g Century Russia Lithuanian Lithuanian

. Budapest: , vol.6,no.

. . CEU eTD Collection 23. The Church interior. ofResurrection, 22. The planof ofResurrection. (KAVB) apskrities theChurch Kauno bibliotekos viešosios 21. The c 19. The project nonrealized Resurrection ofthe Reisonas,1929.Kauno Church by Karolis of 18. Oneof ofmany projects Church,17. The thebeginning Orthodox century.Miškinis, Algimantas 20th ofthe 15. The Gallery Čiurlionis during t 14. 1909. REX, 13. Čiurlionis, http://ciurlionis.eu/paveikslas/rex 12. 11. 10. 9. The 1939.Giedrė Museum War Jankeviciute, interior, 8. The by Museum War proposal (notrealized), Dubeneckis

Vladimiras The The The i dailės gyvenimas respubl Lietuvos f.56,3454. dailės muziejus, valstybė: Lietuvosrespublikoje 1918 dailėsgyvenimas 124. 2003 exhibition. no. 7,p.28 apskrities bibliotekos viešosios (KAVB) 2003 exhibition. Meno Kultura Laisvės alėja dailėsmuziejus,Čiurlionio G archyvas, 25. f. 156, ap. 1,b.

Čiurlionis GalleryČiurlionis GalleryČiurlionis’ by hosen project of theChurch byhosen ofResurrection projectof Reisonas. Karolis nterior of

Dubeneckis’ sketch ofDubeneckis’

. Vilnius: Savastis,. Vilnius: 2009,74. the , 1928,no.7

Čiurlionis Gallery,GiedrėČiurlionis 1920s. Jankevičiūtė, by Vladimiras Dubeneckisby Vladimiras the Church projectby ofResurrection (1928) Reisonas. proposed Vladimiras Dubeneckis - 8, 18.

he construction inthe 1930sand crown.construction theČiurlionis’ he

- 151553. the

ikoje 1918 Savivaldybe Čiurlionis Gallery,Čiurlionis apskrities 1920s.Kauno

- 1940 , 1933,no.7,p.29. (the temporary palace), 1925. Lietuvos(the 1925. temporary palace), , 1924.Giedrė Jankevičiūtė, . Kaunas, 2003,p.98. Daile irvalstybe - Naujas žodis Naujas - 1940 5/

. Kaunas, 2003, Dailė irvalstybė: Dailė

, 1930,Nr. 23 . Kaunas,. 2003, Savivaldyb

p. 92.

Dailė ir Kaunas: Kaunas: ė , 1933, - 24.