Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History DIDACTICAL GUIDELINES

VYTAUTAS MAGNUS UNIVERSITY Faculty of Humanities DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY

Linas Venclauskas

Kaunas, 2013 Reviewed by Dr. Modestas Kuodis, Prof. Dr. Jonas Vaičenonis

Approved by the Department of History of the Faculty of Humanities at Vytau- tas Magnus University on 30 November 2012 (Protocol No. 3–2)

Recommended for printing by the Council of the Faculty of Humanities of Vytautas Magnus University on 28 December 2012 (Protocol No. 8–6)

Translated and edited by UAB “Lingvobalt”

Publication of the didactical guidelines is supported by the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Government of the Republic of Lithuania. Project title: “Renewal and Internationalization of Bachelor Degree Programmes in History, Ethnology, Philosophy and Political Science” (project No.: VP1-2.2-ŠMM-07-K-02-048)

Preface 5 Culture and Civilisation ...... 7 Challenges of Modernity: Views, Identity, Culture 14 Nature of Culture: of the Lithuanian State or Lithuanian People? ...... 21 Political Culture ...... 30 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Adminis- tered Process? ...... 38 Literature: 57

Preface

Dear students, These didactical guidelines will give you an overview of problems of the modern history of Lithuanian culture. During the modern times Lithuania had to overcome a rather complicated period – the country suffered from the occupation of the Tsarist Russia and at the same time it experienced the creation of a modern nation, identity and culture. This process was developed during the existence of the first Republic of Lithuania (1918–1940). These didactical guidelines are compiled to present you the period which lasted from the second half of the 19th century till 1940. As it was mentioned before, this era was full of processes which determined and influenced each other: there was a need to create a modern structure of the society, to start publishing press, to handle political issues, to cherish culture, and this particularly complex situation is briefly presented in this material. At the beginning of it you will find a synoptic-theoretical chapter which is dedicated to the presentation of the classical conception of culture and civilisation, later on a discussion on formation of the modern Lithuanian world outlook and identity is presented together with cultural processes, much attention is paid to political culture’s matters because the policy of culture, priorities and other issues very much depended on the formation and level of this culture. A brief overview is given about the most important cultural processes in the first Republic of

5 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

Lithuania. The occupations of the Soviets, the Nazis and the Soviets again, as well as Lithuanian activities in the exodus, unfortunately are not covered in this material. As the presented information is quite comprehensive and exhaus- tive, short biographies of the most important figures of those times are given in the references. This is done in order to introduce you to some cultural figures of those times and also demonstrate (from the point of view of personal biographies) under what conditions at least some part of them created and what were their destinies. Culture and Civilisation

The formation of the modern history of Lithuanian culture coincided with the formation of the modern nation. After the third partition of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Polish Kingdom and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (which besides ethnic Lithuanian lands also included the present territory of Belarus and some parts of the present territories of Western Ukraine) lost their sovereignty till 1918. But the establishment of the Republic of Lithu- ania in 1918 framed the processes that started in the second half of the 19th century by giving them acceleration, direction, and form. Historical development of the country determined that at the same time country witnessed the formation of the modern society, modern identity and modern culture, which incorporates the aspects of every-day, high and political culture, and therefore, while discussing the cultural processes, it is inevitable to touch upon the subjects of society, mentality, political mind and changes of its content. Approaching the year 1918, the Lithuanian society not only had to prove its distinction and a desire to live in an independent free state, but also to show the acquired potential to achieve this. There are several ways how to tell the story from this perspective, but we have chosen to present you a relevant to this course classical perspective of culture and civilisation and leave you to decide your- self whether the Lithuanian culture and civilisation existed. The distinction between “my very own” and “alien” in terms of cultural differences has existed since the start of the humankind; we can remember the Ulysses who travelled to foreign and strange lands, or the antique term “barbarian”, which means the one who speaks an incomprehensible language. Therefore, the disjuncture and tension between different cultures existed for a long time and there was no ability or will to accept the distinctiveness of other cultures. The change happened in the 18th century – the Age of Enlightenment – when Europe understood that the central and the most important

7 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History factor of all processes was the individual, its uniqueness and distinction. Such an attitude helped to change the perception of the environment, as hostility towards different cultures declined and interest in them grew, but at the same time there was a desire to preserve one’s own distinctiveness or even superiority. The significance of individuals discovered in the Age of Enlightenment also encouraged interest in different cultures perceiving them as distinctive and interesting, therefore, worthy to explore. On the other hand, a visible progress in exact and natural sciences revealed several consistent patterns, and therefore, the notions of culture and civilisation were extended. Cul- ture is an organised way of living with its own structure, behavioural code and knowledge transmission system. At first, this definition seemed to be suitable but with the evolution of natural and exact sciences it turned out that the organised way of living, structure and knowledge transmission systems were typical not only to the human world. Similar processes were recognised in nature. It was noticed that the organisation, structure and knowledge transmission system also existed in the world of animals and the majority of living creatures existed according to a certain structure – they had leaders, intelligencers, workers, etc., and these positions existed under a certain hierarchy which in the most cases was followed. The knowledge transmission system also existed as animals recognised their own kind and enemies, good and bad behaviour (most frequently this was related to the observance of the structure and hierarchy), what changes were possible or impossible under the present structure. From this point of view, human and animal worlds became very similar as they both shared features of culture. On the one hand, this discovery showed that humankind was not absolutely distinctive and unique, but on the other hand, looking from the Eurocentric perspective a positive change happened – the non-European cultures were understood to be unique, valuable and worth attention. Yet the search for own distinctiveness, superiority and self-defining was continued. So, if humanity and nature have their own cultures what are their differ-

8 Culture and Civilisation

ences then? Bit by bit, the term of civilisation was introduced, and it was understood as a higher level of culture. This way at the end of the 18th century and at the beginning of the 19th century a model, which is considered to be classical, was formed. According to this model, culture and civilisation are related by hierarchical links – culture exists everywhere, whereas not every culture is civilisation. Civilisation encompasses everything what has been invented or adapted by the humankind. Civilisation is the entirety of all humanity’s created and used technologies – everything what has not been given by nature. Features of civilisation: • An organised society is created – residents obey their rulers, the state is formed; • Creation of cities; • Developed trade; • Invention of script; • Statuesque sacral architecture is created. According to this definition, the first civilisations were river civilisations in Asia and Africa (the Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Indian, Chinese), which were formed around 3500 BC. It is believed that there were from 8 (O. Spengler1) to 36 (A. J. Toyn- bee2) and more civilisations. They were divided into traditional and 1. oswald Manuel Arnold Gottfried Spengler (1880–1936) was a German historian and philosopher whose interests also included mathematics, science, and art. He is best known for his book The Decline of the West (Der Un- tergang des Abendlandes), published in 1918 and 1922, where he proposed a new theory, according to which the lifespan of civilizations is limited and ultimately they decay. In 1920 Spengler produced Prussiandom and Social- ism (Preußentum und Sozialismus), which argued for an organic, nationalist version of socialism and authoritarianism. He wrote extensively throughout World War I and the interwar period, and supported German hegemony in Europe. Some National Socialists (such as Goebbels) held Spengler as an intellectual precursor but he was ostracised after 1933 for his pessimism about Germany’s and Europe’s future, his refusal to support Nazi ideas of racial superiority, and his critical work The Hour of Decision. 2. Arnold Joseph Toynbee ( 1889–1975) was a British historian whose twelve-volume analysis of the rise and fall of civilizations, A Study of History, 1934–1961, was a synthesis of world history, a metahistory based on universal rhythms of

9 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History industrial civilisations. The Western,C hinese, Indian, Islamic, and Buddhist civilisations are considered to be the main ones. Toynbee divided civilisations into: • primary (Egyptian, Sumer-Akkadian, Aegean (Crete, Myce- naean), Indus, Chinese, Maya); • secondary (Syrian, Hellenic (Greek, Roman), Indian); • tertiary (Western Christian, Eastern Christian, Islamic); • satellite (Hittite, Iranian, Mississippian, Russian). Toynbee believes that the civilisation but not the state is the object of historic studies. The formation of civilisation, according to Toyn- bee, is illustrated by the occurrence of authority, monumental architecture, script, and science. At the time it was also believed that civilisations were live organisms, so their evolution was analogous to the evolution of an individual: 1. Genesis – the start of every civilisation is determined by a challenge and a reaction to it; the challenge – new natural or social conditions, in which a society finds itself; in order to survive, it has to react to the challenge; during the genesis the main traditions of the civilisation are formed; 2. Maturity – it is illustrated by an ability to respond to repeated challenges; during this phase the civilisation finally adapts to natural conditions, conclusively forms the rules of living together, and establishes a relationship with the neighbours; 3. Turning-point – it begins when the ruling majority starts using violence due to selfish reasons; 4. Decline – this phase most often begins when civilisation starts expanding its territory (creates a universal state), im- posing its own traditions on other nations, when the diver-

rise, flowering and decline, which examined history from a global perspective. A religious outlook permeates the Study and made it especially popular in the United States for Toynbee rejected Greek humanism, the Enlightenment belief in humanity’s essential goodness, and the “false god” of modern nationalism. Toynbee in the 1918–1950 period was a leading British consultant to the government on international affairs, especially regarding the Middle East

10 Culture and Civilisation

sity of beliefs stops existing in public life and intolerance to the otherwise-minded sets in, their persecution and killings begin, etc. Eventually, next to the theoretical model the Eurocentric point of view was formed according to which the Western civilisation was understood as the most perspective. So, the civilisation is characterised not only by an organised way of living, having its own structure, a behavioural code and knowledge transmission system, but also by more concrete, tangible and measurable features. Looking from the perspective of the distinction between culture and civilisation, the organised way of living in culture does not change – it is transferred from one generation to another – whereas in civilisation it changes and a search for more perfect and efficient forms exists. What concerns the behavioural codes, it could be said that some of them are universal, underlying and uniform for culture and civilisation, for example, the respect for life, yet again in the perspective of culture these codes are transferred from culture to culture, and it is believed that they do not change basically, but from the civilisation’s perspective these codes change, and in addition to this, new different motives of acceptable and non-acceptable behaviour appear. The work of Norbert Elias3 could be a classical

3. N. Elias (1897–1990) most important work is the two-volume The Civilizing Process (Über den Prozess der Zivilisation). Originally published in 1939, it was virtually ignored until its republication in 1969, when its first volume was also translated into English. The first volume traces the historical develop- ments of the European habitus, or “second nature,” the particular individual psychic structures molded by social attitudes. Elias traced how post-medieval European standards regarding violence, sexual behaviour, bodily functions, table manners and forms of speech were gradually transformed by increas- ing thresholds of shame and repugnance, working outward from a nucleus in court etiquette. The internalized “self-restraint” imposed by increasingly complex networks of social connections developed the “psychological” self- perceptions that Freud recognized as the “super-ego.” The second volume of TheC ivilizing Process looks into the causes of these processes and finds them in the increasingly centralized Early Modern state and the increasingly dif- ferentiated and interconnected web of society.

11 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History illustration of this. Referring to the knowledge transmission system from the perspective of culture, it most often functions as an oral system, whereas from the civilisation’s point of view, the knowledge transmission system is written. Therefore, written culture is characteristic of civilisation, and this also influences creation and development of the chain of schools, the invention of press, etc. By the way, critics of this concept notice that these achievements of civilisation only further imprison us. According to them, learning and script are needed not for such activities as creation of poetry, but for more efficient and rapid processes such as law-making so that laws and orders were rapidly and efficiently implemented and understood in the same way everywhere, as this is very important. The same could be said about schools as they not only give us knowledge, but also teach us how to behave properly, but the ap- propriateness of behaviour depends on the dominant ideology and beliefs of the individuals in power, etc. Shortly speaking, civilised societies, compared to cultural societies, are more fast, mobile and efficient, and differ from animals due to the script, learning system, ability to change behavioural codes and communication structures, as well as the ability to improve what was created earlier. Such perception determined two phenomena. The first one – the uplift and aggrandizement of the Western culture which partly became the ideological background of the colonisation processes of the 19th century; it is believed or at least publicly declared, that the essence of colonisation was to help local people, introduce scientific inventions, science, etc. Secondly, competition, tension and desire to lead were also felt in European countries. Therefore, the notion of civilisation was eventually concentrated basically on technical, numerable and measurable parameters. When it was declared that the West had the best education system, competition between Western countries started regarding the parameters that defined an education system. In an ideal situation an education system had to have three levels: primary, secondary, and high, as well as

12 Culture and Civilisation technical-vocational training. Once universities existed, it meant that researches were conducted, inventions were made, etc., and yet again demonstrating the highest level of civilisation, people started to believe that in addition to universities, Sciences Academy had to exist, which had to round up the best specialists and speak of the intellectual maturity of the society. The fact of having an encyclopaedia and its publishing also was of great importance. This fact gives a signal to the society and neighbours that country has a sufficient scientific research potential, the society is able to present particular and very specific knowledge in an accessible and clear manner, whereas publishing itself means that encyclopaedic thinking and knowledge are topical and needed for the civilised society. On the one hand, these processes seem to be natural, on the other hand, these parameters (whether the particular society has university or universities, Science Academy, encyclopaedia, etc.) become very topical in the competitive environment. Similar criteria were applied to other aspects of life, that way registering in a particular way the social life and achievements, and this, as it was mentioned before, could illustrate the development of societies and at the same time be a prove of its superiority and significance. After World War I, when new states and societies were created, these criteria became important instruments for struggle and competition. In the end, it should be mentioned that all registers which record the existence and strength of the society also include the existence of an army. A civilised society not only has a complete education system, press (newspapers and books), significant scientific and cultural achievements, but also possesses sufficient and efficient armed forces, and some history lessons remind us that the one who has the biggest army turns out to be the most civilised.

13 Challenges of Modernity: Views, Identity, Culture

After the third partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1795 the sense of freedom and independence in Lithuania did not disappear, but it had to undergo several periods of transforma- tion: after uprising in 1830-1831 Vilnius University was closed, and after uprising in 1863-1864 publishing of theL ithuanian press in the Lithuanian language in the territory of Lithuania was prohibited. Both uprisings were organised together with the Poles, but during the first and especially the second uprising and the post-uprising period different Lithuanian statehood and independence visions started to emerge. But the major breakthrough in this process was felt when the sons of the richer farmers graduated from the universities of Tsarist Russia and became new public leaders and started to form a new Lithuanian nation and culture. Traditional rural culture was prevailing for several centuries in Lithuania, and people started to believe that traditional rural culture was the true Lithuanian culture. In this way tearing apart the previously existed public threads on the one hand and refus- ing some of the cultural phenomena and achievements on the other hand. Therefore, by forming a new perception of culture, first of all it was said that the true Lithuanian spirit was in the “straw garret”, and at this point the creation of a new modern Lithuanian identity started. The process of national resurgence in Lithuania more or less coincided with the processes of national resurgence in Europe, so the creation and thinking through of the identity was a characteristic feature of this period. Such questions as who is a Lithu- anian and how we should go on with the self-creation were raised. Similar issues were raised in the neighbouring states and national groups. From the very old times Lithuania – the Grand Duchy of Lithuania – was a multinational multi-religious state, in separate cases serving as a role model of tolerance to Europe, for example, reformation and contra-reformation fights in a vast majority of Eu-

14 Challenges of Modernity: Views, Identity, Culture ropean societies were blood-stained – the ideological opposition was simply killed off (e.g. the Huguenots in France), often victims of the bloodsheds were Jewish societies, which besides that were persecuted in Europe. Nothing of that kind happened in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, it ended up only with a verbal and ideological fight. In fact, there were some street fights and unrests, but they did not become massive, there was a reasonably low number of the injured, the Jewish pogroms were not strongly felt. But standing on the edge of a modern world there was a necessity to make new decisions. In Lithuania, as well as in the majority of Central and Eastern European countries, nationally and belonging to a particular nation became more and more important. Over the time this feature became a very important issue in modern Lithuanian identity, mentality and culture. It should be noticed that this phase of self-creation was started in Lithuania in the light of more sophisticated external conditions. The Tsarist Russian Empire was seeking for the unification of -na tions and religions and every national group underwent difficult times, but Lithuania was in a more difficult situation because, as it was mentioned before, after the 1863-1864 uprising publishing in Lithuanian characters was forbidden in Lithuania, and communication in the process of the creation of the new identity and mentality was very important. The first Lithuanian book Katekizmas by Martynas Mažvydas was published in 1547, but publishing of Lithuanian books witnessed some longer or shorter breaks. In fact, it should be mentioned that since the end of the 18th century and especially in the 19th century publishing of Lithuanian books became more active, there were more authors and publications. During the period when Lithuanian press was prohibited, Lithuanian books and newspapers were published in the neighbouring countries, mainly in Lithuania Minor, which belonged to Prussia4 at that time.

4. lithuania Minor, or Prussian Lithuania (Germ. Preussisch Litauen), rarely called – Litauischer Kreis, Litauische Ämter, Provinz Litthauen) is a histor-

15 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

In Ragainė and later on in Tilsit the firstL ithuanian newspaper was published. This newspaper Aušra 5 was published in 1883–1886. The

ical-ethnographic region of Prussia and later of Eastern Prussia, situated in parts of the North-Eastern province of Prussia, inhabited by Prussian Lithua- nians. Prior to the invasion of Livonian Brothers of the Sword in the 13th century, inhabitants of the region, which later became Lithuania Minor, were mainly representatives of Skalvians and Nadruvians. During the fights between Lithuania and Livonian Brothers of the Sword this territory lost a very big part of its inhabitants. People started to settle in the region again only after the Treaty of Melno, the majority of inhabitants was the remaining Balts, newcomers Lithuanians and inhabitants of other regions of Prussia. The notion of Lithuania Minor was firstly mentioned somewhere between 1517 and 1526. Currently the majority of its territory belongs to Kaliningrad Oblast, and some part – to Lithuania (Klaipėda Region) and Poland. In the narrow sense, the same name is applied to Klaipėda Region, which is one of five of ethno-cultural regions of the current Lithuania. Under the pressure caused by the Protestant Church and Prussia, a peculiar Lithuanian culture was formed in Lithuanian Minor. It was very different from the Catholic Lithuanian culture of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which was very much influenced by Poland. Lithuanians of Lithuania Mi- nor called themselves Prussian Lithuanians and this was their distinctiveness from the Lithuanians of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Even though after 1945 there were practically no PrussianL ithuanians and their culture in Lithuania Minor, this region was very important for Lithuanian culture. The first Lithuanian book in the Lithuanian language, the first Lithuanian Bible, the first Lithuanian grammar and the first Lithuanian newspaper were published in Lithuanian Minor. Till the plague of 1709–1710 Lithuanians were the majority in Eastern Prussia, mostly living in rural areas, whereas cities were inhabited by Germans. 5. From its very first editions the newspaper Aušra encouraged the fight of the Lithuanian nation against the policy of national oppression, which has a great power, and forced assimilation (polonisation, russification, germani- sation), which was implemented in the Lithuanian lands by the rule of Tsar and Kaiser, some landlords and clergymen. It claimed for equal rights of the Lithuanian language, took care of upbringing of national consciousness and the development of language, press, Lithuanian culture and education in a native language. The Aušra developed historical publications, wrote about various areas of social life, requested for the rights of national culture and language. The journal published literature and writings of literature critics. It also touched upon the topics of journalism. The Aušra also wrote about and discussed issues regarding the history and theory of Lithuanian journalism. It was the starting point of the research of national journalism and publications. The journal paid much attention to the theory of journalism, introduced several

16 Challenges of Modernity: Views, Identity, Culture year 1883 was the year when continuous publication of Lithuanian periodicals started. This has to be emphasised as periodicals have several important functions in modern societies, not to mention the most important one – the provision of information. Periodicals also become a peculiar forum for discussions about new ideas of various aspects of life including culture. It is worthwhile mention- ing that periodicals have the function of synchronisation and legitimisation. As long as the scope of knowledge and information in societies is limited, understanding of things is more local or regional, whereas in modern societies due to rapid changes in lifestyle and better means of communication – press, radio (nowadays – televi- sion and the Internet) – we receive information not only about the entire country but also about the world. Therefore, with the appear- ance of periodicals in Lithuanian, individuals capable of reading in Lithuanian, sooner or later (depending of the schedule of publishing and the availability of press to the readers) could receive information about the events in all Lithuania and understand that local events were not out of context of the development of the country. The perception of this evokes the effect of legitimisation, i. e. if local behaviour is also applied in other parts of Lithuania; it means that this behaviour is possible, right and encouraged. Another aspect of press to be mentioned is that of the unification and mobilisa- tion of the society. Periodicals provide behavioural models as many authors are keen to teach what is wrong or right, and how a “conscious” Lithuanian should behave in a particular situation and so on. These models and examples are gradually nationalised and become a normal, acceptable and teachable behaviour, and this means that individuals who started publishing Lithuanian press together

terms of journalism which are still used. The Aušra had an exclusive impact on the Lithuanian nation, its culture, literature, and journalism. The Aušra greatly influenced the national resurgence of Lithuanians. It encouraged the national consciousness of Lithuanians, gathered together Lithuanian intellectuals, and laid the ground for further activities.

17 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History with their co-workers gained a proper environment to spread their ideas and root them into the society. Besides the previously mentioned features, the Aušra could also be characterised by the fact that the newspaper incorporated various ways of thinking and ideologies. In other words, common ideas were more important than ideological beliefs and attitudes. But later on Lithuanian periodicals represented a particular ideology or a political power by printing the writings of people with similar beliefs. As it was mentioned before, the Aušra also discussed cultural issues. At the practical level it had two major blocks – the past of the Lithu- anian nation and the current ethnographical and folklore studies. TheAušra pictured the past of Lithuania as magnificent and romantic, paying much attention to the period prior to the agreements with Poland and also encouraging collecting folklore in order to capture the vitality of the nation; it supported the idea that the true Lithuanian culture existed in traditional societies, rural areas. The firstL ithuanian periodicals also had another function – often press was the space for Lithuanian writers and poets to publish their writings, and improve their style and language. Sometimes newspapers discussed issues of the cultural strategy, such as how cultural priorities of the new community should develop. The need for higher culture was understood but the agreement (in the Aušra and other 19th century Lithuanian periodicals) to pay more attention to everyday and even domestic culture (the reminder of hygiene norms and their promotion, presentation of new farming and stock-raising methods, practical tips on how to improve one’s wellbeing) by many authors was seen as an important issue, and it was by many agreed that only after people became aware of such everyday matters, the promotion of higher culture would be possible. One of the authors of the Aušra offered the following conclusion of these discussions: we are in the stage when “to talk to a country lad about culture would be the same as to sing a song to a deaf stump”. Therefore, the priority was given to practical cultural issues and needs.

18 Challenges of Modernity: Views, Identity, Culture

The same situation was noticed in the Varpas 6 – a periodical published after the Aušra. Publishers of this newspaper were the first to publish various supplements with practical advice and examples. On the other hand, the ideas of the Varpas were more related to politics, but the Varpas as well as the Aušra was the environment for self-expression of Lithuanian writers, as these newspapers published their short stories, poetry and other writings. A similar content was noticed in other Lithuanian periodicals, they included discussions on topical issues, practical advice and examples, as well as writings of Lithuanian authors.

6. The Varpas was a newspaper of the same epoch as the Aušra – the last 25 years of the 19th century. They had several similarities. The first one was the inability to print Lithuanian press in the Latin alphabet in the Lithuanian territory. But they had rather significant differences. The principles raised by the Aušra were self-sufficiency of the country, democracy, and civil rights; they did not have clear forms which could have been easily understood for everybody. The Varpas expanded those principles, emphasized them and, most importantly, based them on a concrete down to earth ground, connecting national culture’s issues to economic issues, such as a land reform, credit, craft and business schools, health issues, improvement of roads, etc. Mykolas Römeris in his book Litwa (1908), comparing periods of the Aušra and the Varpas says that the Aušra is the enthusiasm of a youngster, whereas the Varpas could be defined as a word and an action of a mature self-confident person. But the biggest merit of the Varpas is that it related Lithuanian national resurgence to the general progressive liberal union of Western Europe, in- spired a combat spirit in Lithuanian nationals and helped to form one of the main Lithuanian political stream called Varpininkai (followers of the Var- pas), which laid the ground for Lithuanian democrat parties and other leftist, right wing and centrist political organisations. The Varpas is inseparable from the life and creation of Vincas Kudirka. During the last years of his life, Vincas Kudirka gave a lot of good things to Lithuania. He was the author of numerous pages of the newspaper. In every edition he touched the most actual issues at that time and offered uncompro- mising solutions to them. He mainly wrote articles in the column Tėvynės var- pai (Bells of Homeland), which was introduced by him. In 1898, in edition No. 6 of the Varpas the song Tautiška giesmė (National Song), which has become the national anthem of Lithuania, was printed. Moreover, he translated into Lithuanian a lot of pieces of literature, and gave all his strength to stimulate Lithuanian self-consciousness, basing the grounds for Lithuanian resurgence.

19 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

Without its own statehood it was difficult to talk about a focused political culture and its development, but gradually Lithuania witnessed the birth of various public unions such as painters’ or amateur theatre troupes. The first Lithuanian performance was played on 20 August 1899 in Palanga after Liudas Vaineikis received permission from the governor. The first performance was publicly played in a barn (the warehouse of Count Tiškevičius), which was on a sea shore. The play immediately became popular and played a major role in the creation of the Lithuanian theatre. Even though the permit for the play was given, the regime saw the Tsar’s mockery in the comedy. Tsar’s gendarmes arrested all the participants of the play and exiled them, but maybe because of that the most unique phenomenon in our cultural history and maybe even in the global practice happened – Lithuanian speaking and non-speaking citizens showed more interest in this play from not only a cultural but also a political perspective. The play became known as a campaign of national self-awareness. TheL ithuanian word, which was uttered publicly, was more important than artistic requirements. By this play people declared to the world that they were there, they had their language and their land. And the entire nation showing support to the idea of the Lithuanian nation expressed by the producers of the play Palanga started to perform the same play in every village. This was the start of a more intensive Lithuanian cultural life quite often based on amateur attempts and traditions. But these processes were important, especially in the light of four components of nationalism, proposed by A. D. Smith – a particular vision, culture, solidarity, and politics. As it was mentioned before, the creation of a new Lithuanian vision started. First of all, it was presented in Lithuanian periodicals, and afterwardsL ithuanian culture was created, and it was acceptable for the majority of Lithu- anians, as could be proved by the example of the play Amerika pirtyje (America in the Bathhouse) (the abovementioned play). Yet another thing was that the mentioned factors should create the sense of solidarity and finally provoke actions, i. e. to go into politics.

20 Nature of Culture: of the Lithuanian State or Lithuanian People?

It was mentioned before that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a multinational, multicultural and multi-religious state. Movements of the 19th century were called national, and this means that nationality became an important element of the new identity. We have also mentioned the fact that the processes of national self-awareness were noticed in all national groups of ethnic Lithuania. Lithu- anians, Jews, Poles, Russians, and Belarusians started to vocalise their nationality and, therefore, the question was raised whether common actions and common achievement of goals were possible. The answer to this question is complex and ambiguous. The first thing to be noticed is that all the mentioned groups had representatives who declared that their nationality, culture and religion were the most important and the exaggerated emphasis of self-importance weakened the possibilities of dialogue and understanding. Of course, it was very important what the number of such way thinking individuals in the group was, as well as what the perception of the environment and the point of view of the leaders of the groups, which had taken the responsibility to make changes and create something new, another important issue was how the group felt, how evaluated the environment and the other groups. Lithuania’s situation in Tsarist Russia was difficult, and protec- tive feelings were evoked naturally by trying to defend one-selves from possible dangers; so other ethnic groups and cultures were evaluated with reservation. Due to the historical context, the Rus- sian ethnic group could not be assessed positively – Lithuania was occupied and oppressed by Tsarist Russia. But here it should be mentioned that an attitude towards the Russian ethnic group was complex. Some part of Russians had lived in Lithuania since the Middle Ages, so they had grown together with the land and its culture, so this part of Russians was assessed positively. Most fre-

21 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History quently they lived in clearly defined historically settled territories and lived in rather compact and closed communities. Another part of Russians living in Lithuania were people who had come there after the tsarist occupation. These Russians were evaluated negatively because, first of all, they were seen as colonialists and establishers of Russian culture, and this meant that they were enemies to Lithu- anian culture. Even though the Russians were evaluated ambigu- ously, they did not gain many fellow-feelings. Just an opposite situation was with the Belarus ethnic group. On the one hand, the creation of the Belarusian identity started a bit later than the Lithuanian one, yet on the other hand, this emerg- ing ethnic group suffered from the same occupant – Tsarist Russia, and thirdly in Vilnius and especially in its surroundings Belaru- sians were the most populous ethnic group. Vilnius was one of the political centres of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the place of residence of the grand dukes of the Middle Ages. During the times of national resurgence a provision was formed that Vilnius was a historical Lithuanian capital which was established by the leg- endary Grand Duke of Lithuania Gediminas, and evidently in the political projection Vilnius was seen as the capital of the modern Lithuania. But according to the national composition of citizens of Vilnius and its surroundings Lithuanians were only the fourth or the fifth largest ethnic group and much more people in these territories spoke Polish, Yiddish7, Belarusian and Russian languages. In order to create as favourable environment for the Lithuanian cul-

7. This language was created approximately 1,000 years ago by the German Jews. Over the time it has expanded to Ashkenazi Jews. Yiddish is like a complex fusion, which consists of various Middle Ages German dialects, Hebrew, Armenian (20 per cent) and some elements of Slavic languages. Therefore, Yiddish belongs to the group of Germanic languages, but the graphics of the characters is taken from Hebrew. Yiddish was most widely geographically spread compared to other Jewish languages. It is not known when exactly Yiddish came to Lithuania. But the Lithuanian Yiddish (the dialect of Yiddish) was acknowledged as the literary version of Yiddish, which was standardised in the 20th century; it was spoken

22 Nature of Culture: of the Lithuanian State or Lithuanian People? ture as possible there was a need to look for allies, and the Belaru- sian ethnic minority seemed to be the least malady and therefore the best allies. The relationship with the Polish ethnic group was extremely complex. History shows that gradually the Lithuanian elite became Polish-speaking because since the start of the national resurgence the issues of language were not that topical, and more attention was paid to the belonging to a political community, the defence of liberty and self-sufficiency. The defence of liberty and self-sufficiency remained important issues during the national resurgence period but at that time the most attention was paid to the language, a “true” Lithuanian had to speak Lithuanian. Lithuania had a common state with the Poles and long communication traditions, but these particular issues were causing additional tensions. Some Polish politicians believed that independent Lithuania was unnecessary, that it would be weak, vulnerable and would cause more troubles than would be beneficial. They believed that it would be better if Lithuania stayed one of the Polish provinces and promised to leave possibilities for self-expression (please, compare the mentioned re- marks about the civilisation and culture; would it be possible, in the light of the discussed above, to use them as a base ground to support Lithuanian and Polish positions by presenting arguments for and against). Naturally, these perspectives did not seem attractive to Lithuanians and this caused huge tensions between the Lithu- anian and Polish communities and formed a negative Polish image

by Litvaks (Lithuanian Jews). At the beginning of the 20th century 99.3% of Lithuanian Jews considered Yiddish as their native language. Yiddish had a great influence on the culture ofL ithuanian Jews, especially between the wars when many social, cultural, scientific and educational institutions operating in Yiddish and publications in this language made Lithua- nia and Vilnius the centre of spiritual attention for Jews. In 1925, the Jewish Science Institute was established in Vilnius – JIVO not only worked in Yid- dish in the spheres of history, sociology, literature, folklore, and other, but also laid a ground for the current Yiddish linguistics; studies in this area were led by the academic director of the institute Max Weinreich (1894–1969).

23 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History among Lithuanians. The situation was aggravated by General Luc- jan Żeligowski, who declared himself an insurgent and occupied Vilnius and its surrounding in 1920. During these events Lithu- anians lost the centre of Lithuanian culture (as they believed) – the historical capital Vilnius – and the possibilities of the dialogue between Lithuanians and Poles remained minimum. A similar situation was with the Jewish national group in Lithu- ania. Just like some part of Russians, Lithuanian Jews had lived in the country since the Middle Ages and had had a long history and deeply rooted traditions in Lithuania. Despite this, since the beginning of the national resurgence a rather negative attitude towards the Jews started to prevail. Why did that happen? On the one hand, this was influenced by a different lifestyle, religion, traditions, and even eating habits. On the other hand, the Jews most often were small craftsmen and tradesmen and so they were in Lithuania. If the hostility towards the Jews prior to the formation of the modern identity and society was mainly caused by superstitions and religious mis- understandings, in the modern period the Jews were seen as some kind of obstacle to modernisation. The logics of the modernisation required changes of the steady public structure, i. e. to create broader city communities, a strong middle class. Yet again, historically Lithuanians lived in rural areas and were farmers, whereas cities were mixed, from the national perspective, and a large number of inhabitants in cities and towns were Lithuanian Jews. As it was mentioned before, the national resurgence gradually headed towards nationality, i. e. emphasis was put on the issues of nationality, religion, and language, and in that way Lithuanians became at least partially distinctive. But other national groups found themselves in an ambiguous situation: they had to choose between their identity and the new identity which was formed by Lithuanians who had assumed leaders’ position. Looking at modern and prosperous Lithuania, some participants and activists of Lithuanian national resurgence saw Lithuania as a country of

24 Nature of Culture: of the Lithuanian State or Lithuanian People?

Lithuanians. This concept required several things: Lithuanian cities and Lithuanian middle class. And this situation automatically created an opposition between Lithuanians and other national groups, especially the Jews. In fact, this meant that Lithuanians had to replace the position of the Jews, and the Jews, if they were conscious citizen, had to concede their positions, so naturally the image of the Jewish national group was not very positive looking from the perspective of Lithuanians. In modern societies the main economy drivers are cities, trade and craft, and the middle class was the main consumer, including consumption in the cultural sphere, therefore, when dealing with the issues of the structure of the society and the changes of it, it was indirectly dealt with issues of the nature of the future culture. In order for one or another culture to survive and develop, it has to have a strong middle class with its needs, habits and taste. The so called elite may satisfy its cultural needs abroad and indulge in the established high culture in other cities or countries, whereas rural, traditional societies may satisfy their needs by themselves – indulging in amateur creation and realization. The for the middle class, which finds the traditional art unsatisfying, but cannot afford (primarily from the financial perspective) often participate in cultural events abroad, a cultural situation in its own country and its achievements become very important. So if the middle class is of a mixed nationality, it is difficult to get closer to the creation and development of a national culture, and this seemed to be very important during the period of national resurgence and even later – after the creation of the Lithuanian state. On the one hand, the urban lifestyle but not farming ensured revenues and the existence of the middle class, but on the other hand, people started to think more about the ethnical Lithuanian middle class and this also contributed to the creation of conflicts. Besides the previously mentioned largest national groups in Lithuania, there were smaller ones, such as Latvians, Germans,

25 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

Tartars8, and Karaites. But when speaking about different national groups, the point of view of dominant national groups towards

8. lithuanian Tartars was a unique ethnic group, the descendants of Golden Horde and Crimean Khanate. Despite detachment from the main Tartar roots and being surrounded by foreign nations, they managed to preserve the ethnic culture of their ancestors – national peculiarities, as well as national and religious identity. Tartars quite early (in the 16–17th centuries) were deprived of their language, mainly due to mixed marriages and dependence on different tribes. But their strong attachment to Islam helped to preserve their self-awareness during 600 years spent in Lithuania. Separate Tartars or their groups could come to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania at the beginning of the 14th century, when Lithuania expanded to the Russian lands ruled by Tartars. But the organised Tartars’ communities settled in only at the very end of the 14th century (1397). This was the consequence of the marches of the Grand Duke Vytautas to the Golden Horte. Tartar warriors had a good reputation among Grand Dukes of Lithuania for their courage, stamina and loyalty to the ruler. They were settled in Podole, Kiev region, around Minsk and in ethnic Lithuania (close to Nevėžis, Kaunas, Trakai and Vilnius). Later Tartars came to Volhynia and Palenque. The Tartars retained their tribal organizational links, but they were gradually destroyed by the changing lifestyle. The tribal Tartar aristocracy received the statute of the Grand Duke of Lithuania and landownership, necessary for military service. The majority of simple Tartars having no or very little land started various businesses: craft (especially manufacturing of fur and leather), horses’ sale, vegetable-growing, and other. The Tartars, as direct servants of the Grand Duke, retained their right to confess Islam. The traditional profession of Lithuanian Tartars was military service, many Tartars were brave warriors. Therefore, the memory of Tartars, clever and honourable warriors, who always stayed loyal to their new homeland, will always remain in the Lithuanian nation’s memory. Tartar warriors participated in all wars of the Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania in the period from the16th century to the18th century. The Tartars of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania wrote their literature in Arabic letters. In the 15th century the administration of the Lithuanian state wrote diplomatic letters for the Crimean Khanate. Lithuanian messengers, the Tartars, also were going there. A special Tartars’ legacy to Lithuania was manuscripts written in old Be- larusian using Arabic characters. Later on, such writings were also written in Polish but there were no printed texts. Manuscripts in Arabic observed another aspect of cultural heritage – elements of Lithuanian Tartars’ folklore in kitabats (religious books) and chamillia (prayer-books). But the educational programme of Tartars was

26 Nature of Culture: of the Lithuanian State or Lithuanian People? them depends on their size and visibility in public life. Previously mentioned national groups were rather numerous and after the

modest. In schools nears mosques children were learning Arabic writing. The main education of Tartars was of a religious profile. Till the 19th century Lithuanian Tartars lived in their closed world, in compact societies. The Tartars were active in the uprising of 1794 lead by Tadeusz Kościuszko; they also participated in uprisings of 1831 and 1863 against the Tsar’s rule in Lithuania and Poland. For their connections and help to the insurgents, the Tartars were repressed, they were incapacitated to obtain properties; they had to pay contributions, guns were taken away from them, they were under a passport regime. Over the time, rich Tartars more often were choosing public services, took over positions in courts, municipalities, the Russian army. At the beginning of the 19th century the number of Tartars in rural areas decreased, but there were more of them in cities and towns. The First World War reduced drastically the number of Tartars in Lithua- nia, but after the War they revived their communities in Kaunas, Raižiai and Vinkšnupiai. In the 20th century the number of the Tartar aristocracy increased, especially numerous Tartars were among lawyers and representatives of exact and humanitarian sciences. They created various organisations, in 1925 the Tartar cultural and education union was established in Vilnius. Tartars started publishing their books. In 1938, Stanislovas Kričinskis wrote and published the first book about Lithuanian Tartars. The book in depth discusses the origin of Tartars, their lifestyle, belief, traditions, and manners. The Tartar cultural and education union published newspapers Rocznik Tatarski, Žycie Tatarskie, Przęgląd Is- lamski. In 1929 the museum of Tartars was established in Vilnius. There were also mosques of Tartars. Vilnius was the centre of Tartars’ activities and cultural life during the interwar period. Famous Tartar aristocrats, such as brothers Leonas and Ol- girdas Kričinskiai (lawyers), A. Achmtovičius (a lawyer and political activist), an army officer S. T. Baranovskis performed their activities in Vilnius. Their religious leader was one of the most famous Tartars’ religious leaders – mufti J. Šinkevičius, a very educated man, having a broad cultural outlook. He had influence on religious and cultural societies of Tartars. There were around 1,000 Tartars in ethnic Lithuania in 1923 and around 1,100 in 1930. Their religious issues were dealt by three mullahs. In 1930, on the occasion of the 500th anniversary of the death of Vytautas Magnus a mosque was built in Kaunas. A famous US actor Charles Bronson (his real name was Karolis Bučinskis) was a descendent of Lithuanian Tartars, born in a family of a Lithuanian Tar- tars’ emigrant and a Lithuanian.

27 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History declaration of independence they did not avoid to protect their rights and raise questions over one or another adopted decision related to the national groups’ policy, their treatment, cultural life, and guarantees of self-expression and other. On the contrary, small national groups, in this case the Tartars, did not receive much attention because they were small and lived in an enclosed community. Taking into account what was mentioned above, it could be stated that in the middle and at the end of the 19th century and during the existence of the firstL ithuanian state the country remained multinational and multicultural, but it should also be noted that the fact that Lithuania had chosen to become a modern state with a new identity, based on nationality, influenced such a situation in which the dominant and mostly cherished culture was Lithu- anian culture. Other national groups also cherished their cultures but there was not much intercultural communication or significant projects. But it should be also noted that in the first Republic of Lithuania national groups had a good environment for the development of their culture but, as it was mentioned before, they lived in a quite hermetic world and the dominant Lithuanian culture was not very open or much interested in other cultural movements. When we look at the period lasting from the middle of the 19th century till 1940 we can see that different national groups achieved quite a lot while creating their national cultures, but unfortunately they remained in their own closed worlds and after the declaration of independence, when there was a possibility to choose between the chance to direct culture and creation towards universal processes combining different experiences or to stick to the search for own exclusive distinctiveness and develop it, the latter has been chosen. Vytautas Kavolis9 has noticed that open and liberal outlook and at-

9. Vytautas Kavolis (1930–1996) was undoubtedly one of the most famous Lithuanian intellectuals of the 20th century who was able to harmonise academic and public aspects of life. The need to conceptualise the limits

28 Nature of Culture: of the Lithuanian State or Lithuanian People? tention to the world were noticed in Lithuanian culture up till 1922, afterwards more and more attention was paid to Lithuanian realia, the search of its own distinctiveness or efforts to reflect processes in the society and the country by artistic means, by no means, having alternative artistic movements, which were left on the margin of the main processes.

between society and culture defined scientific interests of Vytautas Kavolis, incorporating ideas of sciences of sociology, anthropology, culture and philosophy. He was born and raised in Kaunas. In 1936–1940 Vytautas Kavolis studied at Kaunas high school, in 1944 he emigrated to the West together with his parents. He went to gymnasium in Germany and since 1949 studied at the US universities in Wisconsin, Chicago, and Harvard. He deepened his knowledge in sociology and anthropology and gained some ex- perience of a teacher. His intellectual abilities were very visible and proper evaluated in the Western society. Vytautas Kavolis was a known professor of sociology and comparative civilisation studies at Dickinson College. Since 1978 he worked as an editor of the Comparative Civilisations Re- view and a scientific colleague in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Moral responsibility encouraged Vytautas Kavolis to participate in the Lithua- nian social life. After Lithuania gained independence Vytautas Kavolis became an external sociological professor of Vytautas Magnus University and other Lithuanian universities; he gave lectures on history and sociology, organised seminars. In 1993 he won the Lithuanian national art and culture prize for his books Sąmoningumo trajektorijos: lietuvių kultūros modernėjimo aspektai (Trajectories of Self-consciousness: Aspects the Modernisation of Lithuanian Culture) (1991) and Epochų signatūros (Sig- natures of Epochs) (1991). Reflective, existential and cultural ideas of Vytautas Kavolis formed the base of ideology of the organisation Santara– viesa (Union–Light) and the support of its intellectual activities; undoubtedly the accumulation of these ideas served as an inspiration to write many articles for the journal Metmenys (Sketch), mostly analysing cultural and political topics (Vytautas Kavolis was the editor of the journal in 1959–1996).

29 Political Culture

We have already mentioned that situation in Lithuania was different, not completely exclusive compared to the neighbouring countries, but different compared to some Western countries, so discussing problems of history of the culture it is inevitable to consider the issues of political culture because Lithuania had to create its political and diplomatic culture practically from nothing, whereas the political culture could be a separate object of research. On the other hand, the level of political culture has influence on the cultural politics, especially when a non-democratic path is chosen, which was the case in Lithuania after 1926, and in those cases culture most often becomes a maid or even a slave of politics. During the period of the Aušra, romantic perception of processes was popular with a belief that Lithuanianism was alive and that it had to be cherished and supported with conscious common actions, but not much attention was paid to practical actions, the institu- tionalisation of processes and inclusion in a political agenda, bear- ing in mind the regressive character of the ruling of Tsarist Russia, which weakened and stopped all the initiatives. Political thinking is primarily characterised by pragmatism, understanding of one’s purpose and knowing how to achieve it with an understanding that in order to achieve one’s goal sacrifices are inevitable. The years 1904 and 1905 were important years in the history of the Russian Empire; it witnessed the lost Russian and Japanese war, growing people’s dissatisfaction with the Tsar’s rule and liberal reforms caused by this. Some of these processes had a direct impact on Lithuania; in 1904, the prohibition of publishing in Lithuanian was abolished. This, of course, was an impulse to the development of Lithuanian culture, especially nurturance of writing. In 1905, the Great Sei- mas of Vilnius took place and defined the strategic benchmarks for the development of the national resurgence of Lithuanians, when cultural, common actions were replaced by organised political ac-

30 Political Culture tions. Partial liberalisation of the ruling system was one of the con- sequences of the Russian-Japanese war, besides the Tsar, the Duma (the Parliament) was elected, which basically was an advisory institution. In the light of these events young Lithuanian politicians understood that the Lithuanian community was too small to elect a sufficient number of representatives to protect its interests. How to behave in a situation like that? Pragmatic decisions were made which by some were understood as compromises but the political- pragmatic logic told that in order to achieve the goals one had to find the path which would help to do that with minimal losses or concessions. Once again it was looked at the three major minorities of multicultural Lithuania – Russians, Poles and Jews and the latter have been chosen. As it was mentioned before, some part of the Russians were seen as enforcers of the occupation and the Poles – as a potential threat to Lithuanianism. The point of view towards the Jews had not changed drastically but in that situation they seemed to be the least of all evils. The deal was simple – to propose a common candidate or support each other candidates. This agreement was successful. In fact, Lithuanian and Jewish candidates elected to Duma defended not only their national but also common interests; this scheme also increased chances to get to Duma. As it has been already mentioned, Lithuanian periodicals gradually included polarization of ideological values and some of the created parties started crystallising their ideological attitudes in the periodicals. Looking from the perspective of the three main ideologies of the 19th century – liberalism, socialism, and conservatism – all three of them had good starting points in Lithuania. The first party, the social-democrats, was formed in 1896, and later other parties were established. The Catholic Church had a great influence and strong positions in a traditional Lithuanian society and it supported the conservative views, which gradually enforced its positions, whereas the liberal forces were unsuccessful in creating an institution, therefore, liberal thinking in Lithuanian culture also weakened, it grew

31 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

stronger and became influential only in the Lithuanian exodus after World War II in the activities of Santara–Šviesa. The book of Adomas Dambrauskas-Jakštas10 Trys pa nekesiai ant Nemuno kranto (Three Conversations on the Bank of the River Nem- unas) published in 1906 was teaching proper behaviour and values. At the beginning of national resurgence an attitude was formed that on the one hand the Lithuanian nation was exceptional, but on the other

10. Adomas Jakštas (real name Aleksandras Dambrauskas) (1860–1938) was a priest, participant of the national resurgence movement, poet, critic, theolo- gist, philosopher, and publicist. He was born on 8 September 1860 in Kuronių village (Pagiriai territory, Ukmergė district) in the family of royal peasants. In 1872-1880 he studied at Šiauliai Gymnasium, in 1880–1881 – at the Fac- ulty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences of St. Petersburg University, in 1881– 1884 – at Kaunas Seminary, in 1884–1988 – at St. Petersburg Catholic Academy. After the graduation from this academy he was ordained to priests and desig- nated to the position of the chaplain of Panevėžys Gymnasium. For the partici- pation in the national movement in 1889 he was exiled to Ustiuzhn for 5 years. In 1898–1900 he worked in Kaunas Seminary, in 1902–1906 he was a professor of St. Petersburg Catholic Academy, in 1900–1902 m. – the secretary of the Samogitian bishop. He lived in Kaunas from 1906, was one of the founders of the Union of Christian Democrats (together with colleagues prepared the programme for the Union in 1905) and an activist of this political movement, in 1906–1938 – the chairman of St. Casimir Community, which was publishing books and periodicals. He was an active advocate of Esperanto, in 1890 published the first textbook of Esperanto Mokintuve terptautiškos kalbos d-ro Esperanto…, which, according to Sabaliauskas, was one of the first textbooks of this language in the world. In 1918 he established the Lithuanian Esperantists’ Union and was the editor of the Esperanto journal Litova Stelo. There are other original writings of Jak tas in this language, such as Mal- grandoj pensoj pri grandaj demandoj (1908), Esperanto kiel scienca helpilo (1910), both published in Kaunas, and Pri unu speco de kurbaj linioj, koncern- antaj la Van Euklidan postulaton (1905, Berlin). For the merits on the Europe- an scale to the Union of Esperanto the Union awarded Dambrauskas-Jakštas with the highest Medal of Honour Ora Stelo (Golden star). He was one of the founders of the Lithuanian Catholic Sciences Academy and was its chairman in 1926–1938. He started his literary work in 1884. His first collections of poems were: Dainų skrynelė (Cofferet of Songs) (1894), Nakties matymai (Night Visions) (1906), Rudens aidai (Echoes of Autumn) (1911), corrected and supplemented (1920), Lyrika (Lyrics) (1930). The topics of his writings were: human relationship with God and the Universe, patriotism, nature, intelligence, rationality;

32 Political Culture his versification was classical and regular. He wrote several satiric verses, paro- dies, feuilletons (Šypt-šypt! (Smile-Smile!) [1931]), articles and studies about literature and art (the book Ekspresionizmas dailėje ir poezijoje (Expressionism in Art and Poetry), 1921, Mūsų naujoji literatūra: 1904–1923 (Our New Litera- ture: 1904–1923) 2 volumes, 1923–1924, Mūsų naujoji prozos literatura (Our New Prose Literature), 1923, Meno kūrybos problemos (Problems of Art Creation), (1931), linguistics (Mūsų alfabeto klausimas (Issues of Our Alphabet)), politics (Pirmutinės (10 metų) spaudos atgavimo sukaktuvės. 1904–1914 (The First 10th Year Anniversary of Regaining of Press.1904–1914), both in 1914), mathematics (Naujos trigonometriškos sistemos (New Trigonometry Systems), 1922). He was an active representative of normative rational aesthetics and a literature critic, praised religious writings and creations of a traditional form, and condemned avant-garde literature. Jak tas is characterised by the preciseness of evaluation, assertiveness, and polemics. He published a collection of biographical essays and obituaries Užgesę žiburiai (Extinct lights) (1930) of cultural activists and writers (A. Baranauskas, J. Biliūnas, V. Pietaris, M. Valančius, J. Tumas-Vaižgantas, etc.). In philosophy Jakštas touched the philosophical problems of epistemology, logics, ethics, aesthetics, and natural sciences. His philosophical views were influenced by Solovjov (he attended his lectures), Polish messianism, J. Hoene- Wronski, Thomistic philosophy. Jakštas took Solovjov’s conception of global unity as a base for peaceful co-existence of religion, science, and philosophy, and their synthesis – as a general knowledge. He supported modernist catholic philosophers who thought that Thomism was a limited philosophic system and suggested to add Solovjov’s ideas to it. He emphasized the importance of scientific achievements to philosophy, but he did not understand some of them properly. He had a negative opinion about Relativity and accepted only the creation- istic interpretation of the birth of life matter from not an alive one. The natural processes, according to him, should be explained by supernatural factors – the essence of nature is its transcendental ground which could be reached with the help of mathematics. By philosophical interpretation of sciences he tried to show belief as an independent subject, equal to science. Jakštas based his ethnic and aesthetic views with an image of an eternal logo (deity) – the good and the beauty were the reflections of this logo, therefore, harmony, order, and unity are typical of them. Things that do not coincide with the eternal logo are immoral and non-aesthetic. He explained the evolution of the society from the theological point of view, and gave a theocratic explanation of history. He also emphasized the community of logics and mathematics, compiled Lithuanian philosophy terminology. Jakštas was an active defender of Lithuanian ideals. He wrote the first textbook of logics in the Lithuanian language Logika (The Logics) (1919) and important philosophic writings Mokslas ir tikėjimas (Science and Belief) (1930), Pikto problemos (Problems of the Angry) (1935), Aukščiausis geris (The Supreme Goodness) (1937). Dambrauskas-Jakštas – was one of the most conservative personalities in Lithuanian culture. Some called him “a stone rather than a human” (K. Kor

33 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History hand it was still in the maturation phase, as a peculiar child, therefore, many activists starting from the Bishop Motiejus Valančius11 to the President Antanas Smetona12 took care of Lithuania paternalistically.

sakas), a narrow-minded dogmatic who did not accept progress, the others saw him as a “sincere poet, zestful mathematician, enthusiastic fighter for the Lithuanian language and supporter of Esperanto, theologian and philosopher […] one of the greatest personalities of national Lithuanian resurgence“ (S. Šalkauskis). He died on 19 February 1938 in Kaunas. He was buried by Kaunas Cathedral Wall. 11. Motiejus Valančius (1801 – 1875) was born on 16 February 1801 in a wealthy peasant’s house. Motiejus was the fourth child. He had brothers Mykolas and Feliksas, and sisters Marijona and Petronėlė. Father Mykolas was a smith. From 1816 to 1821, Motiejus Valančius studied at a six-grade Dominican school in Žemaičių Kalvarija. In 1822, he entered the Theological Seminary in Varniai. Two years later, as a promising ordinand, Valančius was referred to the Supreme Vilnius Diocesan Seminary for further studies. In 1828, Motiejus Valančius graduated from the seminary and was granted the degree of a theology candidate. On 1 September 1828, at Vilnius Cathedral Motiejus Valančius was ordained as a priest. On May 27 of the same year he served his first high Mass at the Church of St. John, which was established under the University. Motiejus Valančius started his priestly activity as a chaplain at the school in Mazyr (today Gomel region, Belarus). From 1834 to 1840 he was a teacher at Kražiai Gymnasium, a librarian, and the author of the History of Kražiai School (manuscript not retained). In 1840 to 1842 Valančius was a professor at Vilnius Spiritual Academy, he lectured on pastoral theology and biblical archaeology. After the academy was moved to St. Petersburg, Valančius went to live there. In 1845, due to a weaker state of health he returned to Samogitia. From 1845 to 1850 Valančius was the Dean of the Samogitian Diocesan Seminary. Having become the Dean, he engaged in the activity and movement of temperance: he made attempts to withdraw peasants from drinking, took care of children and adult education, arranged trade in Lithuanian books, printing of Lithuanian works in Eastern Prussia and their secret transportation to Lithuania, established Lithuanian schools and libraries. This activity was supported by other clergymen as well. In 1850, Valančius was consecrated the Bishop of Samogitia. He disapproved of the idea of uprising of 1963. However, he made secret attempts to support the rebels. During the 25 bishopric years 550 ordinands were ordained to the priests by him. 30 stonework and 20 wood- en churches were built in Samogitia, others were expanded and decorated. By 1854, Motiejus Valančius resided in the centre of the diocese in Varniai. The government did not trust the bishop and wanted to control his activity, thus in 1964 the centre of the diocese was transferred to Kaunas. While living in Kaunas, the bishop was constantly observed by the police and punished by the administration of the governor.

34 Political Culture

Motiejus Valančius in his writings gave a lot of practical advice on how to behave properly in order to have a successful life and was one of the first authors who encouraged Lithuanians to change the old-

Having lost a direct communication with churchgoers, Motiejus Valančius started writing – this was the period of the most intense activity as a writer. Dur- ing the period of press ban, while residing in Kaunas he wrote and published in Prussia the most favourite books Vaikų knygelė (The Book of Children), Paaugusių žmonių knygelė (The Book of Adult People), Pasakojimai Antano tretininko (The Narration of Antanas the Franciscan Observant), and Palangos Juzė (Juzė from Palanga). Altogether he wrote approximately 70 various didactic stories and tales. All of them were laid down in the Samogitian language, which was a favourite language for him and the people to speak. Motiejus Valančius died on 17 May 1875 in Kaunas and was interred in the crypt of Kaunas Cathedral Basilica. 12. Antanas Smetona (born on 10 August 1874 in Užulėnis, Taujėnai rural district, Ukmergė district municipality, died on 9 January 1944 in Cleveland, the USA. In 1975 his remains were moved from Cleveland’s Knollwood Cemetery mausoleum to All Souls Cemetery in Chardon, Ohio) – a politician of the interwar period in Lithuania and the President of the Republic of Lithuania. Having finished Taujėnai Primary School, he was trained by private teachers in Ukmergė and Liepoja (Latvia). In 1893, he finished Palanga Pre-Gymna- sium and passed his entrance examinations in the Samogitian Diocesan Semi- nary, but changed his mind and entered Mintauja Gymnasium. While studying at the gymnasium, Smetona, along with Jonas Jablonskis and Vincas Kudirka, was a member of a secret Lithuanian organisation. He was expelled from the gymnasium for nationalist claims and refusal to pray in the Russian language. In 1897, Antanas Smetona graduated from a gymnasium in St. Petersburg. He entered the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg University, was expelled from it twice, arrested, and imprisoned for a short period. He graduated from the university in 1902 and was employed at the Agricultural Bank in Vilnius. Member of the Lithuanian Democratic Party. From 4 to 5 December 1905, Smetona participated in the work of the Great Seimas of Vilnius. During World War I he was the 1st Vice-Chairman and later the Chairman of the Central Committee of the Lithuanian Relief Society for helping victims of the war. From 18 to 22 September 1917, Antanas Smetona participated in the Lithua- nian Conference in Vilnius and was elected the Chairman (from 1917 to 1919) of the Council of Lithuania (later the Council of the State). On 16 February 1918, Antanas Smetona signed the Act of Independence of Lithuania. From 4 April 1919 to 19 April 1920 he acted as the first President of the state of Lithuania. From 1920 to 1924, Smetona was the leader of the Party of National Progress. In November 1923, Smetona was imprisoned by the government for a few days for publication of the article by Augustinas Voldemaras in the magazine Vairas (The Rudder) (which he was editing). Until 1924, he participated in the activity of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union. In 1924, he was one

35 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History established lifestyle, exchange farming for crafts and businesses, and a good example of this is his short story Palangos Juzė. Smetona presented his points of view not only in writings but also applied them in practice. After the uprising of December 1926 Smetona became an authoritarian leader but in principle he did not deny democracy as a ruling form, just on the contrary, he stated that democracy was possible and it could be that one day it would be applied in Lithuania but

of the organisers of the Lithuanian Nationalist Union and its chairman (from 1925 to 1926). On 17 December 1926 (after the coup d’état) Antanas Smetona was declared the Head of the State of the Republic of Lithuania and elected the President on 19 December 1926; he was re-elected twice – in 1931 and 1938. He acted as the President until 15 June 1940. After the ultimatum of Moscow and refusal to resist by theC ouncil of the State, in June 1940 Antanas Smetona fled to Germany, later – to Switzerland, and finally – to the USA. From 1921 to 1924 he edited various publications. From 1923 to 1927 he lectured on ethics, antique philosophy, and stylistics of the Lithuanian language at the University of Lithuania. In 1926, Smetona became the associated professor. In 1932, he was awarded an honorary Ph.D. at Vytautas Magnus University. Moreover, he was the founder and one of the leaders of various associations and companies. Smetona translated several classic works from the Greek language, he was considered to be one of the top experts in stylistics of the Lithuanian language. Antanas Smetona was quite positive concerning the corporatism and believed that its rise meant the end of the liberal regime or even the era. He criticised liberalism for its aspect of egocentrism. Antanas Smetona propagated his own way and claimed that one could not blindly copy fascism or other alien regime, because every nation lives under its own unique conditions and it is only an individual political system, which matches respective conditions, that suits that nation. He harshly criticised the Nazism and its racial and national elite approach, and claimed that every nation is a value in itself. Characteristics of the authoritative regime, as imagined by Antanas Smetona, can be seen in his several speeches. In his address Nation and Its Government to the Union of Nationalists, Smetona rejects a possibility of a single-party system. The president may not face restrictions neither by the parties, nor by any particular party. It is only the common discipline that may ensure responsibility, which becomes lost in the course of collective decision making, because competition stimulates a mess and in the absence of a single responsible person it is impossible to demand responsibility from government institutions as well. However, Smetona made no attempt to provide a particular description of the authoritative regime as one of alternatives to liberalism (along with fascism or communism).

36 Political Culture in that situation a democratic system was too premature for Lithu- ania. Why? The third democratically elected Seimas started its work in the spring of 1926, but neither of the parties formed a majority and the coalition was formed by the leftist parties and the representatives of ethnic minorities, this fact was worrying for the right wing forces, and this encouraged organisation of the uprising. The post-election situation was described as follows: the Lithuanian nation behaves irresponsibly with democracy and elects to power forces which are hostile to Lithuanianism, namely the left wing politicians and national minorities. The earlier mentioned writing of Dambrauskas- Jakštas in 1906 was a peculiar insight in the future development of the Lithuanian political culture. In his book the prelate gives three conversations: the first with a polonised Lithuanian to whom he tries to remind of Lithuanianism, the second – with a timid Lithuanian whom he tries to encourage not only to publicly speak Lithuanian but also to write in Lithuanian, and the third – in which he engages in a discussion with a Lithuanian socialist. By trying to justify his position Dambrauskas-Jakštas tries to persuade his opponent that general universal socialistic ideas are useless and that a decent Lithu- anian must work hard for the sake of Lithuania and the Lithuanian nation, but not to deal with general questions unrelated to Lithuania as it is just a waste of time. The author also mentions in his arguments a stereotype popular at that time that the Jews are creators of socialism and this ideology is one of the ways to strengthen their positions in power, as well as raises a question whether a new resurg- ing Lithuanian nation wants a foreign ruler once again. After twenty years, the position presented by Dambrauskas- Jakštas to an imaginary opponent and the Lithuanian nation started to materialise: when explaining the uprising, similar arguments were used, which said that Lithuanians were premature to live in a democratic society and that it would be more harmful than beneficial to them and, therefore, leaders who clearly knew the priorities and development directions were needed.

37 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

Prior to the declaration of independence cultural life in Lithuania became more active. In fact, we have already mentioned one fundamental detail of this process – different national groups most frequently separately fostered their cultures only in rare cases join- ing for common projects, so we may talk about the Jewish, Polish, Russian cultures in Vilnius of the 19th century, but not about multicultural Vilnius, which mainly was de facto. It should be also noted that due to the objective reasons, the absence of the state, cultural processes were driven by individual initiatives without any clear coordination centre. From 1918 till 1926 none institution was established to coordinate cultural matters, these issues were directed to the Ministry of Education. Of course, an essential question may be raised whether cultural processes need any bureaucratic supervi- sion and coordination as it is well known that creation is spontaneous, unwilling to follow orders. On the other hand, when creating and strengthening the state, certain benchmarks are needed, and this, of course, may be set by artists themselves. It was mentioned before that till 1922 universal topics were prevailing in Lithuanian creative works and later on authors started to concentrate more on Lithuanian themes, and these processes grew even stronger after 1926. But of course, free and independent artists found their niches and possibilities for self-expression. We have also mentioned that in the conceptualisation of the culture and society created in the 18th century parameters which were clearly tangible, measurable and could be compared became important. On the other hand, lively societies understand their needs and see their perspective. Basically, just after the announcement of independence much attention was paid to education, and looking from the mentioned measurable perspective it was necessary for Lithuanians to have a complete education system and the need

38 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process? for various professionals in the new state was evident. Therefore, discussions about the future of the university started, and plans to reopen Vilnius University were created. Moreover, when this territory was attached to Poland, other alternatives were needed and they, first of all, came not from state administration but from private initiative, and one of the main authors of the idea was Zigmas Žemaitis.13 University creation issues coincided with state creation

13. Zigmas Žemaitis (1884–1969) – physicist, mathematician, aviator and public person of Lithuania. Zigmas Žemaitis was born in a peasant’s family, which owned a plot of land equal to 21 hectares. Zigmas was the eighth child in the family with nine children. Until he reached 14 years, Zigmas did various household works and only later, when the older brother Liudvikas, the certified pharmacist, taught him a little, continued studies in Vilnius. The studies were funded by the said brother. In 1902, in Odessa Zigmas Žemaitis passed the examination of a pharmacy apprentice and, while working at a pharmacy, in May 1903 he passed equivalency exams and obtained a certificate of secondary education. In 1903, he entered the Faculty of Physics and Mechanics of Novorossiysk (Odessa) University. Along with physics and mathematics Zigmas Žemaitis studied medicine. During the studies he participated in the activity of the Lithuanian Culture Society Rūta – he was the leader of a choir, a director of plays. In 1909, he graduated from the university and lectured at a girls’ gymnasium in Vilnius, participated in the activity of the Lithuanian Scientific Society and Lithuanian Art Society. From 1915 to 1918 he was employed at Lithuanian gymnasiums in Voronezh. In 1918, Zigmas Žemaitis established a Lithuanian secondary school in Švenčionys and became its administrator. During the period of interregnum the Provisional Board appointed him the Burgomaster of Švenčionys city. In a few weeks the government was replaced by others and 8 members (out of 13) of the Provisional Board were shot dead by Bolsheviks. It was a lucky accident that Zigmas Žemaitis survived. In the autumn of 1919 Žemaitis and his family moved to live in Kaunas, where the committee of the Public Commercial As- sociation elected him the director of the School of Commerce. In 1920, he organised High Courses. From 1923 to 1936 he lectured also at the courses organised by the Lithuanian Educational Association named after Vincas Kudirka. One of the first professors of the Lithuanian University. From 10 March 1922 to 1940 he took the positions of the Dean of the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. From 1940 till his death Žemaitis worked in Vilnius University. From 1946 to 1948 – was its rector. The main courses he taught at the university were Differential and Integral Calculus, History of Mathemat- ics, and Methodology of Mathematics. For a short period he taught Analytic

39 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History issues. Zigmas Žemaitis and his colleagues constantly received negative answers to his proposals from the government with ex- planations that the financial situation of that time did not allow to support the proposal. And actually this was the truth because after the declaration of independence the government had to take care of all spheres of economy, to counter fights in different fronts, etc. The group of initiators acted according to a rather successful model, they established the Higher Education Association. The number of its members was constantly growing and finally in 1922 the Lithu- anian University was established and became the first institution of higher education in Lithuania. Before establishing the Lithuanian University there were a lot of talk whether Lithuania needed a university, what kind of university it should be, etc. It seems that everybody understood the need, but as it was mentioned, the situation was complex. There were also numerous discussions on the university profile issues, whether it should provide a broad range education, which can offer understanding of the common human nature, development of the society, cultural processes, or offer only a narrow concrete specialisation. The latter was a very pragmatic and at the same time a concrete point of view, because a newly established state needed financers, lawyers, public officers, etc. During the discussions about the issues related to the establishment of a university and governmen- tal excuses that there were no sufficient resources for that, another argument was employed: Lithuania needs qualified specialists, but it will be cheaper to send people to study abroad (first of all to Ger-

Geometry, Differential Geometry, Fourier Theory of Lines, and Higher Alge- bra. From 1961 to 1968 he was a Vice-Chairman of the Lithuanian Association of Mathematicians. The life of the professor Zigmas Žemaitis is closely connected with establishment and development of sport aviation in Lithuania. From 1929 to 1940 he managed the Lithuanian Flying Club. He established this club on 1 May 1927 together with the aviators Steponas Darius, Antanas Gustaitis, Jonas Mikėnas, and the engineer and aviator Pranas Hiksa.

40 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process? many) than to establish a university in Lithuania. Such practice was adopted but another thing was evident – only a certain number of students could be sent to study abroad whereas the need for specialists, not to mention the number of people who wanted to study, was much higher, and this pushed to come back to discussions about the establishment of a university in Lithuania. During the discussions whether the university should give a concrete specialisation for students or educate people for a specific profession but at the same time provide broader education, which would allow them to look for more creative solutions and adapt to changing situations, the latter idea was supported by Zigmas Žemaitis and his colleagues. The final decision was to establish a classical university which would not only educate professionals of a narrow specialization but would also prepare them to accept the challenges of the changing world. So, in 1922 a classical type university was established in Lithua- nia. It had seven faculties: Faculty of Theology and Philosophy, Fac- ulty of Evangelist Theology, Faculty of Humanities, Faculty of Law, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of Technology. Over the time its structure was changed a little bit and in 1930 it was named Vytautas Magnus University. The university was not only an educational institution but also the centre of Lithuanianism, therefore, next to common universal attitudes, the aspect of nationality was emphasized, the university had a function to foster Lithuanianism and study its manifestations. But it also had the sense of balance. Basically, the university was doing a hard job in strengthening Lithuanianism, but on the other hand it became a good environment for integration, where the boundar- ies of nationality were crossed. The university employed local professionals such as Mykolas Römeris14, who was three times elected the rector of the University, and foreign specialists, such as Lev

14. Being the seventh child, a representative of the eight generation of Römeris family in Lithuania, the future professor and the founder of the Lithuanian Constitutional Law - Mykolas Pijus Paskalis - was born on 17 May 1880 in

41 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

Bagdoniškis (Rokiškis region) in the family of Mykolas Kazimieras Römeris and Konstancija Tukallo Römerienė (died on 22 February 1945 in Vilnius). The old and big noble Römeris family came to Lithuania in 17th century, but its roots go deeper and spread into much wider history. The family originated in Saxony and retained “von”, an attribute of a noble family, which was used with the family name up to the beginning of the 20th century. The path of Römeris family to Lithuania led through Curonia – one representative of the family, who became the Knight of the Livonian Order, became evangeli- cal due to secularisation of the order, got married and became the founder of a new branch of Römeris family. Through many generations Römeris inter- married with Lithuanian noblemen and got assimilated. Mykolas Römeris is an outstanding personality in terms of his merits to the state, society and science. Extraordinary energy, deep erudition, strong democratic beliefs, deep public understanding and superior personal quali- ties enabled him to make an indelible imprint on the development of his native land. Mykolas Römeris obtained high education at a privileged St. Petersburg Royal School of Law, which was intended for training the children of noblemen for public service in the apparatus of Tsarist Russia. Having graduated from this school, but not intending to serve at the tsar authorities, Römeris went abroad. At first he attended lectures at the Department of History of the Faculty of Philosophy of the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. Later, from 1902 to 1905, he studied at the famous Free School of Political Studies in Paris. Having completed his studies and settled in Vilnius, Mykolas Römeris started an active public and publishing activity. The most significant works of this period were the daily Gazeta Wilenska, which advocated international cooperation and role of Lithuanian Poles in the Lithuanian national movement (published in 1906, in Vilnius), and voluminous publication in the Polish language Lithuania. National Revival Study, which became the first study of history of the Lithuanian national revival (1907). Especially productive and full of events to Römeris was the interwar period of the Republic of Lithuania. He did not belong to any political party and did not strive for power. However, during a relatively short period he managed to join the ranks of the most prominent people of our country. At first, in 1920 Römeris was appointed a judge of a district court and soon became a judge of the Supreme Tribunal. In 1928, he was appointed a member of the Council of the State, where he worked till 1933. In 1932, Römeris took the position of the Lithuanian national judge at the International Court of Justice in Hague, which heard the dispute concerning interpretation of the Statute of Klaipėda region. It was mostly due to Mykolas Römeris’ contribution that Lithuania was a winning party to the dispute. The case won a wide international interest, which strengthened Lithuania’s sovereignty over Klaipėda region. Moreover, Mykolas Römeris successfully represented Lithuania at the court in Hague from 1938 to 1939, when the dispute between

42 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

Lithuanians and Estonians was heard concerning payment for construction of the railway Panevėžys–Saldutiškis. Mykolas Römeris was a member of the Counsellor Commission on Klaipėda Affairs under the Government of Lithuania, and as an expert on international issues of Klaipėda region he took part in the activity of the United Nations. Römeris maintained close relations with Lithuanian intellectuals and became an active fosterer of the Lithuanian spirit. He did not stay silent on the incorporation of Vilnius into Poland as well. Having read the speech by J. Pilsudsky delivered on this occasion at the Polish Sejm, Mykolas Römeris sent him a letter condemning the Polish leader who turned an old Lithuanian capital into a commonplace Polish province without the slightest compunc- tion despite the fact that he considered himself to be a true citizen of Vilnius. The letter, one of Römeris’ “private diplomatic actions”, once again proved his devotion to the native land and his public spirit. “All my life, I have continu- ously rolled a stone up a mountain like mythological Sisyphus and every time the stone rolled back down”, he wrote in 1923. “I have struggled to prove that nationalism is unnatural and hypocritical and we, Lithuanian Poles, have to join the ranks of Lithuanian, rather than Polish citizens and understand our duty and honour to be in the front ranks of the state architects led not by the interest of foreign countries but by the welfare of our people.” Along with the diverse public and civic activity Mykolas Römeris started his scientific and pedagogical activity at the Faculty ofL aw of the Lithuanian University from its very beginning, i. e. 1922. From that moment the university became the key dimension in the life of Mykolas Römeris. He continued the scientific and pedagogical activity even whenL ithuania regained Vilnius in January 1940. Together with professors and students of the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University, Mykolas Römeris moved to the old Vilnius University, thus forming the core of the Law Faculty in the university. Professor Mykolas Römeris was acknowledged as one of the most prominent lecturers of the faculty, as a creative teacher, who was constantly search- ing for the most efficient ways to deliver the knowledge. Appreciated by the academic community of both the university and the faculty, Römeris was elected the Rector of the Lithuanian University (later – Vytautas Magnus University) for three times and held this office with a short break for seven years (from 1927 to 1928, from 1933 to 1936, and from 1936 to 1939), i. e. longer than any other rector at this university. For his contribution to science and teaching, Mykolas Römeris was granted a Professor’s degree in 1926 and a degree of Doctor of Juridical Science in 1932. The scientific heritage of Römeris is extremely abundant and versatile. It comprises numerous monographs and studies: Representation and Mandate, Administrative Court, Margins of Constitutional and Judicial Law, Lectures on the Lithuanian Constitutional Law, a collection of publications State and Constitutional Law, and a number of scientific articles published in Lithua-

43 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

Karsavin,15 Vasily Seseman16 and others. With the spread of xeno- phobia and anti-Semitism in Europe Vytautas Magnus University was also offered to accept the “best” practice and limit foreigners, primarily the Jews, from entering the university, and to legitimise separate-segregating places, etc. but all these offers were rejected. The university remained the main educational institution till the first soviet occupation. In this university a lot was done for the ben- efits of Lithuanianism, but at the same time international relations were created, as the most famous scientists in this university implemented their plans, taught students, contributed to a better recog- nition of the world and Lithuania.

nian and foreign (Polish, French and Romanian) legal periodicals. Mykolas Römeris always decisively expressed and defended his ideas, argued consistently and persuasively, had broad outlooks and was interested in various spheres of administrative, criminal, international and other branches of law, as well as in the science of history. However, his favourite subject was constitutional law, where he still remains a universally valued figure. Merits of the professor Mykolas Römeris to his country earned him a second degree Duke Gediminas medal and a Vytautas Magnum medal. He was also awarded a Latvian second degree Three Star medal and elected a member of the French Legion of Honour. His scientific achievements were noted not only in Lithuania, but also in foreign countries. Römeris was elected a member of the Science and Art Academy of the Czech Republic, the International French Revolution Institute and an associate member of Romania’s Royal Ad- ministrative Law Institute. Professor Mykolas Römeris is justly acknowledged as a founder of the Lithuanian constitutional law. He was the first inL ithuania to give lectures to the students on the constitutional law. His fundamental studies laid the basis for the Constitution of independent Lithuania and are still widely cited by scientists of law in their lectures and scientific studies. 15. lev Karsavin (in Russian: Лев Платόнович Карсáвин, born on 1 December 1882 in St. Petersburg, died on 12 July 1952 in Abez, Komi, Russia) – a Russian and Lithuanian historian of culture, a philosopher. He wrote in Lithuanian. His sister was a famous ballet dancer Tamara Karsavina. From 1901 to 1906 he studied history at the University of St. Petersburg. In 1909–1910, 1912–1916 he was appointed a professor of history in the Institute of History and Philology of Petrograd. In 1921–1922 he was appointed a rector of the institute, and in 1916–1922 – a teacher at the University of Petrograd; in 1921–1922 he became a dean of the faculty of philology. In 1916, he was granted a doctor’s degree in history and theology, and became a professor. In 1922 he

44 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

was exiled from Russia and until 1926 he lived in Berlin, participated in the activities of the movement of the Eurasians. In 1926 he moved to Paris. In 1927, professor Augustinas Voldemaras and Izidorius Tamošaitis invited him to teach at the University of Lithuania. From 1928 to 1940 he was a professor at Vytautas Magnus University, and in 1940–1946 he was appointed a professor at Vilnius University and became the head of the department of history of this university. From 1944 to 1949 Lev Karsavin was a director of the Museum of Fine Arts in Vilnius, a professor of the Institute of Arts in Vilnius. In 1949 he was arrested and since 1950 was jailed in Abez camp, where he wrote about 20 works on philosophy, poetry pieces. His essential statements of philosophy were presented in a poetical form in Sonetų vainikas (Circle of Son- nets), Tercinos (Terzinos).Despite the repressions, student books on history written by Lev Karsavin were used in the schools of Lithuania in the post-war period. The main features of his philosophical works are theosophical tendencies, unity of philosophy and theology, their application for finding solutions to problems of personality, society, history and culture. His philosophy was based on the struc- tural principal of total unity, which, he thought, was aimed for the idea of dynamic tri-unity, i. e. the idea of the Trinity, interpreted in accordance with teaching of orthodox. He saw the tri-unity as a source of becoming and development. His philosophy of history is grounded by religious principles. The subject of knowledge of history is not the reasons and motive of the historical process but the process itself, and in order to explain the process and realize its necessity, one needs to have a certain feeling of the organic unity. He specified hierarchy of the history subjects: the supreme (god’s humankind, meaning of empirical history and purpose), the realistic (socially active humankind as a diverse unity expressed through social subjects), the individual (a human being). According to him, culture and its history are an expression of spirituality inseparable from religion in the activity of humankind. Knowledge about a human being means knowing oneself. It begins from a feeling of amazement. The whole world, the created beings are topical because of their perfection, while they are potential because of their imperfection. The reason of imperfection is fear of death, unwillingness to sacrifice for others; it can exist in line with imperfection, be a part of it. Abstraction of reasoning expresses imperfection as a lack of the so-called symphonity. A human being is a part of unity of all, but his expression thereof is imperfect. Attempts of an individual to develop are his wish to actualize his unity with another being. Knowledge and love, which is inseparable from sacrifice, lead to perfection. Eternity means all the times including insights of unity of the past, presence and future. His ontology and gnoseology, including existential springs, are close to philosophy of existence, dialogue, phe- nomenology, anthropology of philosophy. His research in history of culture lacks application of principles of the philosophy theory of those times. 16. Vasily Seseman (born on 30 May 1884 in Vyborg, Finland – died on 30 March 1963 in Vilnius): philosopher, translator, representative of critical realism, professor of philosophy. Father of Seseman was Swedish and his mother was of the German origin and had a citizenship of Finland. His childhood and years of studies were

45 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History spent in St. Petersburg, where his father worked as a doctor. Seseman studied at the German gymnasium of Yekaterina in St. Petersburg, where he obtained classical education and was granted a gold medal for graduation. In 1902 he started his studies at the Military Academy of Medicine; however, he dropped his studies after a year and started studying philosophy and classical philology at the Faculty of Philosophy and History at the University of St. Petersburg. In 1909, he finished studies and worked as a post-graduate in the Depart- ment of Classical Philology of the university. Before long he was given a grant for studies abroad. In 1909–1911 he studied philosophy, psychology, aesthetics, pedagogy at universities of Marburg and Berlin, and his teachers were famous professors of those times: H. Cohen, P. Natorp, E. Cassirer, H. Diels, H. Wolfflin. After return to Russia, he worked as a teacher of philosophy, pedagogy, psychology, logics and classical languages in various schools of St. Petersburg. At the same time, he deepened his knowledge of philosophy. In 1913 he passed the exams to get a Master’s degree in Philosophy and was elected a privatdozent in the Department of Philosophy at the University of St. Petersburg. When World War I began, he terminated his pedagogical work and became a volunteer of the sanitary unit, and went to the front. After his return to St. Pe- tersburg he continued his scientific and pedagogical work. After the Revolution of February, he worked in the press bureau of the temporary government for several months and was a co-worker in the archive of Revolution. In 1918 he moved together with the family to Viatka, where he was appointed a teacher of pedagogy and psychology in the pedagogical institute. In 1919 Sesemin was elected a docent at the University of Saratov, where he worked until the summer of 1921. Soon afterwards he, as a citizen of Finland, together with his family went to Helsinki to visit his sick mother. Due to the unfavourable political situation Sesemin was forced to stay in Helsinki together with his family. Later, he moved to Berlin, where he worked as a tutor and translator, and he was also involved in the movement of the Eurasians. Moreover, he participated in the activity of the Russian Institute. In 1923 Sesemin was invited to the Lithuanian University in Kaunas to become the head of the department of philosophy. During his years in Kaunas he wrote the most mature studies in the fields of gnoseology, logics, aesthetics, ethics, antiquity and the latest history of culture. As a European thinker, he published his works in various European publications; however, at the same time he was interested in and joined the philosophical and cultural life of Lithuania. Lithuania became his second homeland, where he found good conditions for scientific research, writing and creating. Logika (Logics), published in 1928, and Estetika (Aesthetics), published in 1970, by Vasily Seseman were recognized as the major works in the field of philosophy in Lithuania. As his knowledge of the Lithuanian language was brilliant, he translated Ar- istotle’s On the Soul and made a huge contribution to creation and development of the Lithuanian philosophical terminology. After Lithuania regained Vilnius region, he moved to Vilnius together with his university and continued to fulfil his duties as a professor. He taught

46 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

After the events of 1926, cultural topics were more frequently discussed. There were several reasons for that: on the one hand, after the uprising the parties which did not get any powers started criticising the new authority for the lack of proper processes in cultural life and said that it stagnated or even degraded, on the other hand, the opponents were replied that cultural processes existed, and the expressed criticism was not a deep concern regarding the situation of culture, but just a simple politicking. Eventually, we have mentioned before, that under nondemocratic conditions the content of cultural life, the priorities and understanding of culture may change. To be honest, some of intellectuals, such as Stasys Šalkauskis17, criticised the uprising and stated that a democratic re-

history of philosophy, gnoseology, aesthetics, logics and pedagogy. In 1943 after German occupants closed the university, he taught German in the Russian gymnasium in Vilnius, was a head of the philosophy circle established in the Jewish ghetto. After the war, he was appointed a professor again. In 1950 he was accused of anti-Soviet activities and connections with Zionistic organizations, sentenced to 15 years and exiled to Irkutsk Taishet camp area. Having returned to Lithuania in 1956, he was engaged in scientific activities and taught in the Department of Philosophy at Vilnius University until his death in 1963. 17. Stasys Šalkauskis (1886–1941) – Lithuanian philosopher, educator, the last interwar Rector of Vytautas Magnus University (VMU). Stasys Šalkauskis was born on 16 May 1886 in Ariogala. His father Julijo- nas Šalkauskis was a doctor, his mother Barbora Goštautaitė was from the old noble Goštautai family. Stasys grew in the large family of 9 children. After he was born, two years later his parents moved to Riga with all the family, but soon they returned to Lithuania and settled in Šiauliai. In 1905 Stasys finished Šiauliai Gymnasium and entered Moscow Univer- sity to study law. When his health deteriorated, he went to Turkestan and used to come to Moscow only to deal with the formalities of studies. In 1911 Stasys Šalkauskis finished his studies, again went to Turkestan and settled in Samar- kand. In 1911 and 1913 his first writings-translations appeared in the magazine Ateitis (The Future). In 1913 an independent study of Stasys Šalkauskis Bažnyčia ir kultūra (The Church and the Culture) was published in the magazine Draugija (The Society). In 1913 the editor of this magazine Dambrauskas- Jakštas took care that Stasys Šalkauskis would be granted a scholarship for studies abroad. After World War I broke out, theC entral Committee appointed Stasys alkauskis their representative in Switzerland in order to support the war victims of the Lithuanian Society. In 1915, being a resident of Switzerland,

47 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

gime should be restored as soon as possible. While discussing the political culture, it was mentioned that from the beginning of national resurgence till the first soviet occupation much attention was paid to the nationality issues and culture was not an exception. On the one hand, after the uprising no drastic changes in the sphere of culture were felt. But we must admit that the censorship was returned, which was abolished only by the third Seimas in 1926, prior and after the uprising there was press censorship which was a filter of the public space and not all writings could reach the readers, there were also inflictions after the publishing of a text or a book, confiscations of printed material. There were also curious cases, for example in 1935 a number of publications were confiscat- ed and their publishers or authors were punished. Among the punished ones there was the editor of the journal Health Napoleonas Indrašius who was punished because he printed a scientific study of Dr. Meškys with the title Sexual Impotence of Men and Women. Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius18 was also punished. He wrote the book

he began to study philosophy at Fribourg University. There in 1919 he wrote a treatise in French on Lithuania Sur les Confine de deux Mondes (On the Edge of Two Worlds). In 1920 Stasys Šalkauskis graduated from Fribourg Univer- sity after he had written the dissertation L‘ame du monde dans la philosophie de Vl. Soloviev (The Soul of the World in Vl. Solovjev’s Philosophy), for which he was awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. After returning to Lithuania, since 1920 Stasys Šalkauskis was engaged in academic work: he taught in Higher Courses, and in 1922, when Lithua- nian (later Vytautas Magnus) University was founded, he worked as a docent in the Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Theology and Philosophy. He taught several subjects: Introduction to Philosophy, Logic, Philosophy of Cul- ture, Aesthetics, Pedagogy, and General Scientific Methodology. In 1939 Stasys Šalkauskis was elected the Rector of Vytautas Magnus Uni- versity. In 1940 he was dismissed from the office of the Rector, and after the closure of the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy he was removed from the professorship. In 1941 the Lithuanian caretaker government appointed Stasys alkauskis a professor to Vilnius University, but he did not work there. When his health deteriorated, he remained in iauliai, where he went in the summer of 1941 and died on December 4 of the same year. He was buried in St. Peter and St. Paul’s parish cemetery in Šiauliai.

48 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

18. Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius (was born on 19 October 1882 in Subartonys, Merkinė parish, Alytus Region, Russian Empire; died on 7 July 1954 in Pennsylvania, the USA) – a Lithuanian prose writer, dramatist, Lithuanian literature scholar, professor, political activist. His grandfather came from Nedingė. Village people called his family Krėvės, so Vincas Mickevičius chose this name as a pseudonym. The writer had a double name for a long time (Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius), and when in America he was already officially known as Vincas Krėvė. He studied with the village teacher, later at Merkinė school. After taking private lessons in Vilnius, he passed examinations of 4 gymnasium classes in St. Petersburg and in 1898 entered Vilnius Theological Seminary, where he studied for 2 years, but due to the disagreements with the management of the seminary, he left. In 1904 he received his Certificate of Maturity in Kazan Gymnasium No. I, and in the same year he began studying at Kiev University, the Department of Philology and Philosophy, where he studied Slavic languages. In 1904 he wrote his first story Miglos (Mist) and created poems in Polish. In 1905 the university was closed, and Vincas Krėvė moved to Lviv University in Galicia (Austria), while maintaining ties with Kiev University. In 1908 he graduated from Lviv University and was awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy; in the same year he passed state examinations in Kiev University, was awarded a gold medal for his work Indoeuropiečių protėvynė (Indo-European Ancestry), and was invited to prepare for professorship. Due to the low salary he left the university. In 1909 he went to Transcaucasia. He taught the Russian language and literature and gave lectures on Buddhism in Baku Real School. In summers he used to come back to his homeland to collect folk songs and stories. In 1911 he contributed to the establishing of Baku People’s University. In 1913 he defended his dissertation about the origin of Buddha and Pratjekabuddha names and was awarded a Master’s degree in Comparative Linguistics. On 24 August 1913 he married his former student of the Jewish origin Re- becca Karak in Vilnius St. Nicholas’ Church. During World War I, he actively participated in the activity of Baku Socialist Revolutionaries Party (Esers) and edited its newspaper Znamia truda (Banner of Labour). In 1919 he was appointed the Consul of Lithuania in Azerbaijan. In May 1920 he returned from Baku with his wife and six-year old daughter and settled in Kaunas. He worked as a secretary of the Book Publishing Committee in the Ministry of Education. In 1922 he was appointed a professor in ordinary in the Lithuanian University, and organized the Department of Slavic Languages and Literature. From 1925 to 1937 he was the Dean of the Faculty of Humanities. He read the history of universal literature. He collected folk art and published it; he was the head of VMU Folk- lore Commission. In addition to his writings Šarūnas (1911), Žentas (Son-in- Law, 1922), Skirgaila (Russian, 1922), Dainavos šalies senų žmonių padavimai (Dainava Region Elderly’s Legends, 1912), Raganius (He-Witch, 1939), a short story collection Šiaudinėj pastogėj (In the Straw Shelter, 1922), he also pre-

49 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

pared folklore collections Dainavos krašto liaudies dainos (Dainava Region Folk Songs, 1924), Sparnuočiai liaudies padavimuose (The Alar in Folk Leg- ends, 1933), Patarlės ir priežodžiai (Proverbs and Sayings, 3 volumes, 1934– 1937), and others. Krėvė’s Ra tai (Scriptures, 10 volumes, 1921–1930) were published. Though he refused the cleric road, he continued to be interested in religion, especially in its origin, and the primary Christianity form. Since 1907 till the end of his life he was writing a work based on the Bible Dangaus ir žemės sūnūs (The Sons of Heaven and Earth). He actively participated in a social and political life. When annexing Klaipėda Region to Lithuania, he went to Germany and negotiated the pur- chase of arms and ammunition with the Army Commander Hans von Sekt in Berlin. The Lithuanian Government of that time publicly distanced itself completely from the idea of rebellion, but secretly prepared in the army the “Special Purposes Squad”, which later led the revolt, and Vincas Krėvė as the chairman of the public organization “Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union” took full responsibility and courageously organized Klaipėda uprising. On 15 January 1923 the French army, which was introduced there in 1919 after the Treaty of Versailles, was moved from Klaipėda. He made friends with Antanas Smetona, Juozas Tumas-Vaižgantas and Augustinas Valdemaras. In 1922–1924 (two terms) he was elected the Chair- man of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union L( RU). He was one of the program developers of the National Union and Party. In 1924–1925 he was the first Chairman of the National Union Centre Board. He was twice (in 1922 and 1923) in the list of the National Progress Party and in 1926, being a member of the National Union, unsuccessfully participated in the parliamentary elections. After the uprising of 1926 he left the National Union and became one of the biggest critics of his former comrades because he had hopes that after the uprising Vilnius would be liberated from Polish occupation with the help of the Soviet Union. In 1936 he established the Marxist Student Society Scientia. He collaborated with pro-Communist writers and contributed to the publishing of the magazine Literatūra (Literature); he was also the member of the Society of the USSR Cultures Board. In June 1940, when the Bolsheviks took power in Lithuania, he sworn to A. Merkys, an interim President of the People’s Government, and was appointed Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and later served as the Prime Minister. However, after 1 July (1940) night negotiations with the Soviet Commissioner Molotov, when it was stated that all the Baltic states had to enter the Union of Soviet Republics, and in the event of war, the Soviet regime would come into force in Europe as far as the Atlantic, when he returned from Moscow, he wrote a letter of resignation from his office and withdrew. In August 1940 after transferring the Faculty of Humanities from Kaunas to Vilnius, he became a university professor. On 1 October 1940 the People’s Commissariat of Education appointed him the director of the Institute of

50 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

Patarlės ir priežodžiai (Proverbs and sayings), and as the author of the previously mentioned publication was accused of breaching moral principles and spread of pornography. In the indictment of Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius it was said that his book contained 300 porno sayings about genitalia. It is natural that every folklore con- tains ambiguous or even indecent sayings, but this is not an artifi- cial creation or provocation, this is a live creation of a nation (here we should remember that one of the leaders of national resurgence encouraged to collect folklore and that way preserve the true Lithu- anian culture). Therefore the discussion about cultural issues was supplemented with administration of culture. In 1927 the Art Council was established and the purpose of it was to deal with cultural issues. After a while the authority and the Art Council could not work together anymore, the Council consisting of well-known artists had its own opinion, but the authority not necessarily accepted this opinion and on many occasions the final decision was made by the authority. So, on the one hand, there was a will to organise and adminis- trate cultural life better, but on the other hand some priorities of the authority became evident and they not always coincided with the views of the world of art. Before the first soviet occupation the

Lithuanian Studies. On 18 April 1941 he was elected the first president of the Lithuanian SSR Academy of Sciences, and the developer of the Statute of the Academy. During the German occupation he was arrested and interrogated by the Gestapo, and the danger was imminent to his wife. On 9 December 1942 he was approved as a member of the Academy of Sciences; this happened only after 30 August 1942 when he publicly presented a speech together with several members of People’s Parliament about his activities in the People’s Govern- ment and about Soviet Union’s illegal actions towards Lithuania. He taught in Vilnius University until March 1943, when German occupying authorities closed Lithuanian higher schools. Avoiding arrest, he hid at his daughter’s place in Panemunė, near Kaunas. In July 1944, avoiding the Bolshevik repressions, he moved with his family to Austria.

51 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History nationalists19 intensively tried to coordinate cultural processes. On the one hand, this originated from the ideological provision of the union and Antanas Smetona (we have mentioned that after the uprising of 1926 it was stated that the Lithuanian society was too young, i. e. irresponsible, and it needed leaders having a clear direction, etc.), but on the other hand European societies of the 20s and the 30s were full of ideas of cooperatives, the public space was full of discussions about clear priorities in social life, strong leaders, etc. Examples of fascist Italy with the leader Benito Mussolini and Nazis Germany with Adolf Hitler in the front were commonly analysed as proper and revealing, showing how modern societies should live. Hitler used to say that modern art is destructive and unnecessary; some pieces of art were forbidden and destroyed, because they were called improper. We cannot forget about another clear German attitude – anti-Semitic psychosis. It was declared that the Jews or artists having Jewish roots cannot create anything valuable. Some Lithuanian public figures and politicians of those times

He founded a Lithuanian Gymnasium in the DP (displaced persons) camp in Glasenbach and was its director. He edited the magazine Į Tėvynę (To the Homeland). On 18 January 1946 by Resolution No. 31a the Lithuanian SSR People’s Council of People’s Commissioners (Chairman Mečislovas Ged- vilas) removed professors Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius and Mykolas Biržiška from the Lithuanian SSR Academy of Sciences as full members and declared them “motherland’s traitors”; his writings were prohibited: books removed from libraries and from school programs. In April 1947 he moved to America and settled in Philadelphia. He taught Russian, Polish, Lithuanian languages and literature in Pennsylvania Uni- versity. He died on 7 July 1954 after a heart attack in Marple settlement near Philadelphia. On 19 October 1992 Krėvė and his wife’s remains from Putnam Lithuanian Cemetery in Connecticut were moved to Subartonys cemetery. 19. The origins of the Lithuanian Nationalist Union (Lith. LTS) as well as many other traditional parties date back to the activities of the group of publishers of the newspaper Varpas (The Bell), which was active at the end of the 19th century. In 1916–1917 the founders of the nationalists who had formerly concentrated around the newspapers Viltis (The Hope) and Vairas (The Rudder) founded the Party of National Progress which, having united together with the Lithuanian Agriculturalist Union, during the conference of 17–19 August

52 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process? criticized the nationalist authority and Antanas Smetona for being too “soft” and encouraged to follow the good examples of Italy or Germany in order to achieve the best results, including the field of culture. We mentioned before that under undemocratic conditions all spheres of public life were gradually or instantly usurped and later on the same happened with the personal life of individuals with a goal to introduce as much control as possible. We have also mentioned that censorship existed in Lithuania and sometimes it made decisions that are difficult to comprehend for a person of common sense. During the authoritarian rule there were penal- ties and sentences for wrong opinions, i. e. opinions which did not match authority’s point of view. On the other hand, neither Anta- nas Smetona nor the nationalists managed to make all the spheres of social life, including culture, the means of their worshiping, cult and maintenance of power, and they were unable to avoid manifestations of corporatism. In 1934 the department of cultural affairs was established, and it was declared that the state had the right to raise claims to art by arguing that it could be done not because the maintenance of art was costly but because art had to have an educational function.

1924 turned into the Lithuanian Nationalist Union. The very title of this organisation, i. e. the union instead of the party, meant a brand new nature of this political power: instead of being a party which divided (“pars” means “a part” in Latin) it sought to become a union which united, consolidated and amassed Lithuanians by way of raising the issue of nationality above all other confessional and class-related differences. The professor Vincas Krėvė-Mickevičius was elected its first head. After Antanas Smetona became the head of the State for the second time, the position of the LTS chairman remained a more formal post of honour, which after the uprising of 1926 was most frequently taken by the Prime Minister of the State. After Seimas elections of 1926 only three party members – Antanas Sme- tona, Vladas Mironas, and Augustinas Voldemaras – succeeded, however, after the uprising of 1926 the leader of the nationalist union Antanas Sme- tona again became the president of the country, while the nationalist union together with the Christian democrats formed the Government.

53 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

When in 1940 Lithuania was occupied by the Soviet Union, the nationalist party was prohibited and its more notable members were repressed. 20. Mikalojus Konstantinas Čiurlionis (was born on 22 September 1875 in Varėna (currently Senoji Varėna); died on 10 April 1911 in Pustelnik near Warsaw, buried in the Rasos Graveyard in Vilnius) is a Lithuanian composer, painter, choirmaster, and cultural actor. Čiurlionis was born on 22 September 1875 in Varėna (currently Senoji Varėna) in a family of nine children. His father, Konstantinas Čiurlionis (1846–1914, born in Guobiniai) was an organist and a choirmaster, shortly played the organ in Li kiava and later, during the rest of his life, in Drus- kininkai. He organized a mixed choir which performed four part harmony Masses and canticles. His sons Petras and Jonas were the members of this choir, and the father was often assisted in this choir by the other sons Kon- stantinas and Povilas. The choir rehearsals usually were held at the place of the Čiurlionis family. His mother, Adelė Marija Magdalena Radmanaitė (in German Radman) was born in approximately 1854 in Seirijai Town; she originated from the family of German evangelic Lutherans of Bavaria. The family members com- municated in Polish; Mikalojus never learned to properly speak and write in Lithuanian. The artist spent his childhood in Druskininkai where, upon the super- vision of his father, he learned to play the piano. In 1885 he completed the national school and dreamed of further studies. In 1889–1893 he studied in the Oginskis’s Manor Orchestra School in Plungė in care of the doctor J. Markevičius. There he learned some music theory and tried to compose; he played the flute at the orchestra of the said manor. From 1894 to 1899 he studied in Warsaw Music Institute getting the support of the Duke Oginskis. Upon the completion of the studies he lived in Warsaw for some time and engaged in private music lessons. In 1899 Čiurlonis received a proposal to be appointed the director of Lublin Music School; however, he rejected this proposal and chose the track of his further development as a music creator. In 1901–1902, again with the support of Oginskis, Čiurlionis pursued its further studies in Leipzig Royal Conservatory. At that time he started to create musical neo-romantical pieces consistently. In Leipzig, which was the major cultural centre of Germany, Čiurlionis educated himself comprehensively: read philosophical writings, attended museums, operas etc. During the period of 1900–1901 one of the most famous musical pieces by Čiurlionis – the symphonic poem Miške (In the Forest) – was composed. It was most probably in Leipzig where Mikalojus was very much attracted by art; he might have acquainted there with the symbolist creations by Max Klinger and Arnold Beklin. In 1902 he returned to Druskininkai but shortly thereafter left for Warsaw again. In 1902–1903 Čiurlionis pursued his studies in Warsaw Painting School and in 1904–1906 – in Warsaw Art School. In 1905 he led the choir of the benefit society of the Lithuanians in Warsaw, while collecting and harmonising Lithuanian national songs in his homeland. In

54 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process?

Therefore, it was announced that Vytautas Magnus University, the editorial office of theL ithuanian dictionary, the Commission of Ar- chaeology, the Central State Archive, the National Theatre, the Gal- lery of M. K. Čiurlionis20, the School of Art, the Conservatoire and national radiophone would be controlled by the department. As it may be seen, the authority took control of such activities, which prior to the restoration of state were independent, supported by the free will of the society. The same happened with Čiurlionis, as according to the prevailing provisions he did not “fit” the Lithuanian culture, he did not know the Lithuanian language, but his achievements and works were very visible, and so the authority accepted his creations. But his Lithuanian colleagues and artists considered Čiurlionis as a unique and exclusive artist, and this position was heard. We should also bear in mind the fact that issues of preserva- tion of the memory and creation of Čiurlionis became an important matter just after the declaration of independence and, as it was

1903–1907 he created another musical piece – the symphonic poem Jūra (The Sea). However, at that time Čiurlionis became increasingly attracted by art. In 1906 the exposition of the art works by Čiurlionis in Saint Petersburg attracted the attention of a wider part of the Russian cultural community. Since 1907 Mikalojus finally abandoned music while his art works started to evolve to complex and fantastic cycles of symbolist paintings. In 1905 he travelled to Crimea and Caucasus, in 1906 he visited Dresden, Prague, Vienna, Nurnberg and Munich. At that time the painter got interested in the national revival of Lithuanians as well. The 1905 revolution in Russia shocked the whole empire. Čiurlionis wrote the following words to his brother Povilas: “Are you aware of the Lithuanian movement? I am determined to dedicate all my former and future works to Lithuania.” Then Čiurlionis made contacts with Lithuanian intellectuals and other painters who were active in Vilnius. In 1907 he held the first Lithuanian art exposition in Vilnius, where he presented his works. In 1908 he led the choir of the society Vilniaus kanklės (Baltic Psaltery of Vilnius), formed a separate men‘s choir which sang national songs harmonised by Čiurlionis himself. He also took part in various concerts as a piano player and a director, wrote a number of works on the issues of art and music. In 1908 he held the second Lithuanian art exposition in Vilnius, founded the Music Fund under the Lithuanian Art Society for the purposes of supporting the creations of composers (this fund was active in 1908–1911), and he was a member of its board.

55 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History mentioned before, till the 1920s more universal topics were quite visible in Lithuanian culture. In 1936 discussions about corporate ideas became more fre- quent, for example such ideas were expressed in the Naujoji Romu- va: “a path to the organic state is possible from liberal democracy through authoritarianism. The main idea of this trend is the state, and it must be felt by all the members of our nation. The more the man is involved in the well organised state, the more powerful and happy he is.” In 1938 discussion about the unlimited right of the state to govern the culture started. Once the power of the state was in good hands, the leaders of the state knew what the best for the country was, and so the cultural processes had to be clearly governed and regulated. Kazimieras Masiliūnas, the Vice-Minister of Education of that time, said that artists were producers, society – the consum- ers, and the state was the organiser of art. The state had to try hard to prevent art from becoming the Ritz, as well as a cheap massive consumption good to entertain masses, or a tool to sell political trends. Art had to stay a serious aspect of culture and the source of

On 1 January 1909 he married the writer Sofija Kymantaitė in the Church of the Saint Evangelist Marcus in Šateikiai Town. In 1909 he was elected in the general meeting of the Lithuanian Scientific Society as the member of the Commission of Collection of Songs and Notes. In the same year he made the most monumental of his works – a 4x6m curtain – for the Lithuanian society Rūta. However, this work was not accepted by the Lithuanian cultural community. In Saint Petersburg he got acquainted with the Russian painter and the art world actor M. Dobuzhinsky. He was accepted into the union of Russian painters. The constant tension and poverty ruined the painter’s health. Because of his poverty he painted most of his works on paper. At the end of 1909 doctor V. Bekhterev diagnosed the painter with psychological and emotional ex- haustion. Following the doctor‘s recommendations, Čiurlionis returned to Druskininkai and in March 1910 he commenced his treatment in the Red Manor Sanatorium in Pustelnik (near Warsaw). In March 1911 Čiurlionis went for a walk, caught a cold and fell sick with pneumonia. Mikalojus Kon- stantinas Čiurlionis died on 10 April 1911 at 35 years of age. His remains were transported back to Vilnius and buried in the Rasos Cemetery.

56 Culture: Spontaneous Creation or Guided and Administered Process? nation’s moral strengths. So step by step individual, spontaneous and later voluntarily organised (through communities, common projects, etc.) cultural activities were replaced (and very much ad- vised to replace) by state monitored or even controlled culture because the authority knew better and felt better what was necessary for the nation and in what direction culture should evolve. Some of these contemplations remained only contemplations, some of them were implemented. There is one clear issue about this situation: discussions and creation which started in the middle of the 19th century did not disappear automatically and were evolving following traditional and new directions, and arguments and counterargu- ments were searched for and found, but all these processes were stopped by the first soviet occupation in 1940. Literature Recommended literature Balkelis Tomas, The Making of Modern Lithuania (Basees/Routledge Series on Russian and East European Studies), 2011. Bauman Z., Making and unmaking strangers // Stranger or guest? Rac- ism and nationalism in Contemporary Europe, Goteborg University, 1996. Briedis, Laimonas, Vilnius city of strangers, Vilnius : Baltos lankos, 2008. Brubaker R., Nationalism reframed: nationhood and the national question in the New Europe, Cambridge University Press, 1997. Burke Peter, What is cultural history, Polity, 2008. Hiden John and Salmon Patrick, The Baltic nations and Europe, Long- man 1994. Laurinavičius, Č. Lithuanian general Aspects of Domestic Policy 1918– 1940 // The vanished World of Lithuanian Jews, edited by Alvydas Nikžentaitis and Darius Staliūnas, Rodopi, Amsterdam – New York, NY 2004. Savicka Aida, Lithuanian identity and values, The council for research in values and philosophy, 2007. Senn Alfred Erich, Lithuania in my life, Vytautas Magnus University, 2012. Swingewood Alan, Cultural theory and the problem of modernity, Pal- grave, 1998.

Used literature Anderson B., Įsivaizduojamos bendruomenės, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 1999. Anglickienė L., Kitataučių įvaizdis lietuvių folklore, Versus Aureus, 2006. Anglickienė L., Svetimas, bet neblogai pažįstamas // Lietuvos žydai, Kaunas, Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto leidykla, 2003. Anglickienės L., Žydas pasakojamojoje tautosakoje // Liaudies kultūra 5, 1999.

58 Literature

Arendt H., Totalitarizmo ištakos. Vilnius, Tyto Alba, 2001. Bauman Z., Making and unmaking strangers // Stranger or guest? Rac- ism and nationalism in Contemporary Europe, Goteborg University, 1996. Berger P. L ir Luckmann T., Socialinis tikrovės konstravimas. Vilnius, Pradai, 1999. Biržiška M., Lietuvių tautos kelias į naują gyvenimą, Los Angels, 1952, T. I. Brubaker R., Nationalism reframed: nationhood and the national question in the New Europe, Cambridge University Press, 1997. Čepėnas P, Naujųjų laikų Lietuvos istorija, Vilnius, 1992, T. I. Dictionary of sociology. Oxford University Press, 1998. Donskis L., Neapykantos formos: įaudrinta vaizduotė literatūroje ir politikoje, Vilnius, Versus Aureus, 2007. Eidintas A., Politinių partijų požiūris į ultraradikalų atsiradimą Lietu- voje 1923–1927 m. // Lituanistica, 1993, nr. 3(5). Eidintas, Alfonsas, Antanas Smetona ir jo aplinka, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2012. Ellul J., Propaganda. The formalion of men‘s attitudes. USA, 1973. Feldman R. S., Social psychology. Theories, researches and applications. USA, 1985. Fiske J., Įvadas į komunikacijos studijas, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 1998. Foucault M., Diskurso tvarka, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 1998. Gaigalaitė A., Lietuva Paryžiuje 1919 metais, Vilnius, 1999. Gellner E., Tautos ir nacionalizmas, Vilnius, Pradai 1996. Hartley L. E, Hartley R. E., Fundamentals of social psychology. USA, 1952. Ivanovas B., Tautiškumo beieškant Antano Smetonos Lietuvoje. Tautinių įvaizdžių klausimas, Vilnius, Versus Aureus, 2005. Kasatkina N., Etniniai procesai šiuolaikinėje visuomenėje. Kaunas, 1999. Kavolis V., Comperative perspectives on social problems, Boston, Little Brown, 1969. Kavolis V., Žmogus istorijoje, Vilnius, Vaga, 1994. Kulakauskas A., Aleksandravičius E., Carų valdžioje, Lietuva XIX amžiuje, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 1996.

59 Problems of Modern Lithuanian Cultural History

Kuzmickaitė L. Etniniai stereotipai. // Filosofija, sociologija, 1992, Nr. 3(9). N. Kuzminskaitė L., Tamošiūnaitė R. Stereotipai kaip socialinė realybė. // Etniškumo studijos: teoriniai samprotavimai ir empiriniai tyrimai. Sud. L. Kuzminskaitė. Vilnius, 2000. Laurinavičius Č, Lietuvos valstybės architektas // Kultūros barai, 1991, nr. 2. Laurinavičius Č., Lietuvos – Sovietų Rusijos taikos sutartis, Vilnius, 1992. Lippman W., Public opinion. N. Y. 1965. Lotman J., Kultūros semiotika, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 2004. Mardosa J., Lietuvių ir žydų santykiai Lietuvos miesteliuose ir kai- muose (1920–1940) // Atminties dienos, Vilnius, 1995. McLuhan M., Kaip suprasti medijas, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 2003. Merkys V., Draudžiamosios lietuviškos spaudos kelias 1864–1904, Vil- nius, 1994. Merkys V., Knygnešių laikai 1864 – 1904, Vilnius, 1994. Merkys V., Motiejus Valančius tarp katalikiškojo konservatizmo ir tautiškumo, Vilnius, Mintis, 1999. Penner Louis A., Social psychology. Concepts and applications. USA, 1986. Psychologie sociale. Sous la direction de Serge Moscovici. PUF, Paris, 1984. Römeris M., Lietuva, Studija apie lietuvių tautos atgimimą, Versus Au- reus, 2006. Schorske, Carl E., Fin-de-siècle Viena: XIX amžiaus pabaigos politika ir kultūra, Vilnius, Baltos lankos, 2002. Smith A., Nacionalizmas XX amžiuje, Vilnius, Pradai, 1994. Sužiedėlis S., Valdžia, visuomenė ir antisemitizmas // Akiračiai, 1995, nr. 5. Tapinas L., Septynios vienatvės Paryžiuje, Kaunas, 1993. Truska L., Antanas Smetona ir jo laikai, Vilnius, Valstybinis leidybos centras, 1996. Vaičenonis J., Lietuvos kariuomenės skaičiai 1920–1939 m. // Karo ar- chyvas, t. 17, 2002. Wieviorka M., Populism and Nationalism in contemporary Europe, // Stranger or guest? Racism and nationalism in Contemporary Eu- rope, Goteborg University, 1996.