scholarly journals Obrazy unii między Wielkim Księstwem Litewskim a Królestwem Polskim w litewskiej pamięci zbiorowej (koniec XIX w. – 1940 r.)

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 156-174
Author(s):  
Dangiras Mačiulis
Keyword(s):  
Negative Evaluation ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
The Public ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
Public Figures ◽  
National Movement ◽  
Polish Society ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Grand Duchy

The images of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Union of the Kingdom of Poland in Lithuanian collective memory (end of the 19th c. – 1940)Since the end of the 19th century the Lithuanian national movement created several narrations about national history, which presented a negative evaluation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Union of the Kingdom of Poland. Polonization of Lithuania was highlighted as the most negative consequence of these Unions.All unions formed under the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Union of the Kingdom of Poland got negative evaluation in the discourse of Lithuanian nationalism. However, the Union of Lublin was considered to be the greatest harm – it was evaluated as a fatal moment in the Lithuanian history giving rise to the processes of dangerous Lithuanian national ethnic identity loss. The Lithuanian national movement proclaimed cultural and political independence, and declared that the revival of historical ideal of the Unions’ national identity was unacceptable for the Lithuanian nation.When discussing the Lithuanians’ rights to political independence with the Polish public figures and reacting to ambitions of the Polish political figures to restore Poland with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth national borders of 1772, in the Lithuanian press the image of two Unions (usually, the Union of Lublin) was presented as the symbol underlying the Lithuanian national political and cultural dependence. The image of the Union of Lublin was like an obligatory illustration of the Lithuanian nationalism discourse underlining the negative consequences of the union for the Lithuanian nation. It was the Union of Lublin that became the generalized image of all unions and the symbol of Lithuanian political, ethnic, cultural dependence, the memory location underlying the traumatic memory.The initiatives of the Polish public figures to actualize the memories about the unions caused the Lithuanians’ negative response and numerous discussions. A similar situation happened in 1913 when the Polish society mentioned the 500th anniversary of the Herald Union. The celebration of this anniversary was evaluated by Lithuanians as a Polish attempt to revive the political union ideal – as an attempt to make Lithuania a part of Poland. The debates of those times were used by the public figures of the Lithuanian national movement in order to emphasize the orientation of the Lithuanian national movement towards the cultural and political emancipation and underline that the Lithuanians do not accept any idea of state revival reasoned by historical unions.The image of unions in the interwar Lithuania of the 20th century was the most vivid in propagandist discourse during the fights for Lithuanian independence and when trying to restore the historical capital, Vilnius. This image was used as a rhetoric figure of propagandist discourse symbolizing the Lithuanian slavery and a threat of its dependence on Poland.  Obrazy unii między Wielkim Księstwem Litewskim a Królestwem Polskim w litewskiej pamięci zbiorowej (koniec XIX w. – 1940 r.)Od końca XIX w. litewski ruch narodowy tworzył narracje historyczne, w których unie między Wielkim Księstwem Litewskim (dalej WKL) a Królestwem Polskim oceniano negatywnie. Za największy negatywny skutek unii uznano polonizację Litwy.W litewskim dyskursie nacjonalistycznym negatywnie oceniono wszystkie unie zawarte między WKL a Królestwem Polskim, jednak jako największe zło traktowano unię lubelską – decydujący punkt w historii Litwy, od którego rozpoczął się groźny proces utraty tożsamości przez naród litewski. Litewski ruch narodowy głosił dążenie do wolności kulturowej i politycznej. Towarzyszyła temu deklaracja, że dla narodu litewskiego nie do przyjęcia jest odrodzenie historycznej unijnej idei państwowości.W toczącej się w prasie litewskiej dyskusji z polskimi działaczami społecznymi o prawach Litwinów do samodzielności politycznej oraz w reakcji na ambicje polskich działaczy społecznych przywrócenia państwowości Polski w granicach Rzeczpospolitej Obojga Narodów z 1772 r., obraz unii (najczęściej lubelskiej) pojawiał się jako symbol zależności politycznej i kulturowej narodu litewskiego. Wizja unii lubelskiej była obowiązkową ilustracją litewskiego dyskursu nacjonalistycznego, świadczącą o negatywnych skutkach unii dla Litwinów. To właśnie unia lubelska stała się uogólnionym obrazem wszystkich unii oraz symbolem niewoli politycznej, narodowej i kulturowej Litwinów, traumatycznym miejscem pamięci.Inicjatywy polskich działaczy, by przywrócić pamięć o uniach, wywoływały negatywną reakcję ze strony Litwinów i rodziły dyskusje. Tak się stało, na przykład, w 1913 r., gdy polskie społeczeństwo obchodziło jubileusz 500. rocznicy unii horodelskiej. Obchody te oceniono jako próbę Polaków ożywienia idei unii politycznej – dążenie do uczynienia z Litwy części Polski. Ówczesne dyskusje działacze litewskiego ruchu narodowego wykorzystali do tego, by podkreślić swoje dążenie do emancypacji kulturowej i politycznej oraz zaznaczenia, że Litwini nie akceptują żadnej idei odrodzenia państwowości, opartej na uniach historycznych.W okresie międzywojennym na Litwie obraz unii najbardziej był dostrzegalny w dyskursie propagandowym w okresie walk o niepodległość Litwy oraz w dążeniu do odzyskania historycznej stolicy Wilna. Obraz ten wykorzystano jako figurę retoryczną dyskursu propagandowego, symbolizującą niewolę Litwy i jej uzależnienie od Polski.

scholarly journals The Last Citizen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: The Editor Ludwik Abramowicz (1879–1939) and the Idea of "Krajowość"

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aliaksandr Smalianchuk
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Interwar Period ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Public ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
Indigenous Nations ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

The Last Citizen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: The Editor Ludwik Abramowicz (1879–1939) and the Idea of KrajowośćLudwik Abramowicz was one of the main ideologists of the idea of krajowość in its liberal-democratic version. He defended its principles even in the interwar period, when Poland was dominated by the policy of assimilation of national minorities and relations with Lithuania had the character of a cold war. Thanks to Abramowicz, Przegląd Wileński [Vilnius Review] (1921–1938) became the last bastion of the idea of krajowość, actively popularising it in the public life of the Vilnius Region. Abramowicz unwaveringly defended the idea of the political independence of the Belarusian-Lithuanian Lands and the decision of its future by the representatives of all indigenous nations. Abramowicz’s life and work, his publications in Przegląd Wileński prove that against all political and national-cultural realities, the idea of krajowość as an idea of harmonious coexistence of the nations of the historical Lithuania was popular and found new supporters.Ostatni obywatel Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego. Wprowadzenie do biografii redaktora Ludwika Abramowicza (1879–1939)Publicysta i redaktor Ludwik Abramowicz był jednym z głównych ideologów idei krajowej w jej liberalno-demokratycznej wersji. Bronił zasad krajowości nawet w dwudziestoleciu międzywojennym, kiedy w Polsce dominowała polityka asymilacji mniejszości narodowych, a stosunki z Litwą miały charakter zimnej wojny. Dzięki Abramowiczowi „Przegląd Wileński” (1921–1938) stał się ostatnim bastionem idei krajowej, czynnie popularyzując ją w życiu publicznym Wileńszczyzny. Abramowicz konsekwentnie bronił idei politycznej niezależności Kraju Białorusko-Litewskiego i decydowania o jego losie przez przedstawicieli wszystkich rdzennych narodów. Życie i twórczość Abramowicza, publikacje w „Przeglądzie Wileńskim” świadczą, że wbrew wszelkim realiom politycznym i narodowo-kulturowym idea krajowa jako idea harmonijnego współistnienia narodów historycznej Litwy cieszyła się popularnością i znajdowała nowych zwolenników.

RUSŲ KARININKIJA KASDIENINIAME IR ŠVENTINIAME XVIII A. VILNIAUS GYVENIME: TAIKAUS SUGYVENIMO REGIMYBĖ

2018 ◽  
pp. 229-243
Author(s):  
Lina Balaišytė
Keyword(s):  
Everyday Life ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
The Public ◽  
Russian Army ◽  
Polish Society ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Mass Entertainment ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Grand Duchy

Life in the eighteenth century Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was signified by active interference of the Russian Empire in the politics of the state. Imperial army was continuously summoned to reinforce Russian interests and to support internal feuds of the Commonwealth. Lithuanian and Polish society was forced to reconcile with the presence of foreign army in the country, whereas Russian officers sought to utilize their presence in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in enhancing useful personal relationships and for the purposes of propaganda. The article explores the relationship between the society of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Russian officers in daily life, how both sides built this coexistence, and how it was changing depending on circumstances. Analysis of sources on everyday life of Vilnius showed that daily life of its citizens was burdened by the obligation of housing and feeding the army, although in ordinarily they tried not to confront this menacing power. People wanted to earn favour of the Russian army leadership and be relieved of this duty through gifts, salutations and other signs of respect. On the other side, Russian officers depended not only on their power, they also tried to form good relationships with the high society and communities, e. g. officers visited monasteries and pass greetings during church celebrations. A pretext to assemble the nobility was a celebration dedicated to honour the rulers of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia. Russian officers also demonstrated signs of respect to the loyal high standing officials of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. They also tried to earn favour of the wider public through events of mass entertainment, e. g. the carnivals were made open to the citizens from various strata. The public could be rallied to watch show exercises of the Russian army, which was a spectacle for the curious citizens from lower social strata, and for the higher level citizens it was an opportunity to strengthen ties that could ensure their future privileges. Multiple festivities organized by the Russian officers were implemented with propaganda objectives in mind. Through such spectacular and luxury events they tried to demonstrate power and their decorations usually repeated motifs of the glorification of the Court of Catherine II. Celebrations, their decorations, occasional literature were some of the tools aimed at supporting the patronage of Russia. Existing sources on everyday life do not permit speaking about the moral side of the relationship with the Russian officers. Most likely, the start of the Four-Year Sejm, when the aim to strengthen the statehood was expressed in clearer terms, collaboration with the foreign power was not considered treason and condemned. Keywords: Vilnius, Russian army, everyday life, festivities, spectacles.

scholarly journals The development of Turkic studies at Vilnius University

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 209-223
Author(s):  
Galina Miškinienė
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Ethnic Groups ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Vilnius University ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
The University ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Grand Duchy

Institute of the Lithuanian Language At the beginning of the 19th century, the financial possibility to establish a department of Eastern languages at one of the oldest universities in Eastern Europe, Vilnius University, appeared. Turkish was among the Eastern languages that were expected to be taught. The intensive preparation of lecturers was started. Unfortunately, the ambitious plans were destined to never become reality; in 1832 the university was closed. Nevertheless, over the following two centuries the Turkic direction did not disappear; in one form or another it surfaced and retained its vitality. There was a sympathetic environment: Tartars and Karaims—both Turkic ethnic groups—began settling in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 14th century. Vilnius University was the cradle of many famous Orientalists who maintained Turkic research by their activities. In such a way, two main research subjects appeared: Kitabistik and the Karaim language. In this article, the origin problems, development and prospects of Turkic research will be examined.

scholarly journals Does apologizing work? An empirical test of the conventional wisdom

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
RICHARD HANANIA
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Empirical Test ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Women Scientists ◽  
Risk Averse ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Figures ◽  
Scientists And Engineers ◽  
The Individual

AbstractPublic figures often apologize after making controversial statements. There are reasons to believe, however, that apologizing makes public figures appear weak and risk averse, which may make them less likeable and lead members of the public to want to punish them. This paper presents the results of an experiment in which respondents were given two versions of two real-life controversies involving public figures. Approximately half of the participants read a story that made it appear as if the person had apologized, while the rest were led to believe that the individual had stood firm. In the first experiment, hearing that Rand Paul apologized for his comments on civil rights did not change whether respondents were less likely to vote for him. When presented with two versions of the controversy surrounding Larry Summers and his comments about women scientists and engineers, however, liberals and females were more likely to say that he should have faced negative consequences for his statement when presented with his apology. The effects on other groups were smaller or neutral. The evidence suggests that when a prominent figure apologizes for a controversial statement, individuals are either unaffected or become more likely to desire that the individual be punished.

scholarly journals Genealogy of Mongirdai Nobility

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 121-147
Author(s):  
Jolanta Klietkutė
Keyword(s):  
Geographical Distribution ◽  
Extended Family ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
The Other ◽  
Public Figures ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

The Author dealswith the forgotten history of the Mongird family of Samogitia. After conductinganalysis of Mongirdai family, genealogical table was compiled. According to statististics, extended family was active in both number of persons and in geographical distribution. Mongird(as) descendantsspread over much of the territory of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth – formally, the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and, after 1791, the Commonwealth of Poland and Tsar Russia (Russian Empire). Family itself Most members of the extended family bacame of priests, doctors,officers, artists, and public figures. For example, two brothers Vladislovas and Vytautas from a Mongird Mišučiai Manor became well known active participants inthe Lithuanian – Polish Nationalrevival back in 1863–1864. Their cousin patriot Vaclovas, a resident of Vilnius Town, who was fighting in the ranks of Polish Legion, and cousin Jadvyga Mongirdaitė were laid in Vilnius Pameriai Memorial. Their Grandmother Michalina Bankauskaitė was a great supporter of a Revival of 1863–1864. There are some unsolved relations and issues between the names of Mangirdaitis and Mongirdas that have notbeen identified yet. In the other words, Lithuanian genealogists and other researchers stillhave to work diligently (closely) to investigate and revive the history of this old Mongird tribe.

scholarly journals About Seraph’s arrow and St. Michael’s shield. A poem by priest Dominik Zabłocki OP for Countess Teresa Barbara Radziwill Pac on the occasion of her name day

2021 ◽  
pp. 52-64
Author(s):  
Regina Jakubėnas
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Political Life ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Intensive Development ◽  
Grand Duchy ◽  
Male Lineage

In the second half of the eighteenth century a lot of occasional poems were published in Vilnius. Their authors were often representatives of various orders: the Piarists, the Jesuits, the Basilians, the Dominicans. Name day poems enjoyed great popularity, which was influenced by the intensive development of various forms of social life. Name day poems were part of “home muse” or family poetry. The authors often addressed their works to representatives of the political and official elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, who played an important role in the public and political life of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The poems were more often devoted to the representatives of the male lineage due to their social status and functions, although it happened that women, especially representatives of influential families in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, were also the recipients of these poems. The article discusses an occasional work by a priest Dominik Zabłocki, Dominican friar, devoted to Countess Teresa Barbara Pacowa of the Dukes of Radziwills – a lady of the Austrian Order of the Starry Cross. The poem describes her personal merits, the merits of her husband and family, referring to the rich symbolism of the coat of arms of the Pac, the Radziwill and the Zawisza families from which Teresa Pacowa’s mother was descended. This piece of work undoubtedly belongs to the group of texts that were addressed to a wider audience and performed a political and propaganda function.

scholarly journals Lublin Union in the context of narrative minimalism and legal historical contents in the end of 16th – the first half of 17th century

2019 ◽  
pp. 22-30
Author(s):  
V. V. Halubovich
Keyword(s):  
Eastern Europe ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
Public Law ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Public ◽  
Documentary Sources ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Grand Duchy

The article analyzes the information about Lublin 1569 Union from the narrative and documentary sources that date back to the reign of the first monarchs of Vasa dynasty. The author defines main contexts of the term «union» use in the sejm constitutions and documentation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania congresses. The direct correlation between the estimates of the Union at different levels of state representative institutions of the Commonwealth is revealed. The Lublin Sejm of 1569 was a key event in the history of Eastern Europe, but in the historical works (chronicles and annals) of the second half of 16th – early 17th century information about it and its decisions are concise and general. At the end of 16th – the first half of 17th century the memory of Lublin Union was not mainly broadcast by narrative channels. In keeping the memory about 1569 events legal deeds and state institutions decisions were of considerable importance. The result of the state union with Poland was the approval of the public law standards that could not be ignored by any representative of the so-called political people of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the following centuries. The author maintains that as a whole the Grand Duchy of Lithuania gentry did not question the correctness of the 1569 choice, took and defended «Lublin myth», as under those conditions it had more benefits than losses.

scholarly journals Adamo Mickiewicziaus įsavinimas tarpukario Lietuvos mokykloje: Mykolo Biržiškos indėlis

2020 ◽  
pp. 249-276
Author(s):  
Viktorija Šeina
Keyword(s):  
National Curriculum ◽  
National Literature ◽  
The Public ◽  
First Republic ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Linguistic Approach ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Adam Mickiewicz

CLAIMING ADAM MICKIEWICZ AS THEIR OWN IN INTER-WAR LITHUANIAN SCHOOLS: MYKOLAS BIRŽIŠKA’S CONTRIBUTION The society of the first Republic of Lithuania was not homogenous in its national and cultural self-perception. Although most intellectuals associated national culture exclusively with the cultural heritage of ethnic Lithuanians and Lithuanian-language writing, a part of the Lithuanian society’s elite opposed the ethno-linguistic approach to Lithuanian culture. One of the most prominent opponents of cultural ethno-nationalism in the first half of the 20th century was the literary historian Mykolas Biržiška. As the basis of national literature, he considered the society of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (and that of the first half of the 19th century) to be more important than language and therefore, he developed a multilanguage conception of Lithuanian literature as an alternative to the ethno-linguistic one. At the center of the canon of national literature, as formed by Biržiška, is the work of the world-famous poet Adam Mickiewicz. Realizing that in order to spread the concept of national literature to the public, it was necessary to first introduce it into schools. Biržiška made an effort to develop the national curriculum for Lithuanian literature according to the model of the history of Lithuanian literature that he created. To this end, he participated in the preparation of the curriculum for Lithuanian literature and made efforts to ensure Mickiewicz’s canonical position there. Biržiška also produced methodological material for schools (including selected works of Mickiewicz).

scholarly journals The Slavic Qur’an Translation of the 16th–18th Centuries: Poland and Russia

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-82
Author(s):  
D. V. Mukhetdinov
Keyword(s):  
19Th Century ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
The West ◽  
Research Cycle ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Ethnocultural Group ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Grand Duchy ◽  
Modern Russian

This paper aims to continue and develop the research cycle on history of Qur’an translations in Europe. The paper deals with rethinking of possible background of Russian Qur’an translations, commonly traced back up to the first half of the 19th century. Ca. 1800 the tradition of Qur’an translating in Russia was already rich and varied in its scientific, literary and religious contexts. However, its origin could be found in the earlier similar tradition of Lithuanian Tatars, which was developed at least from the 16th century in intellectual space of the three states, namely Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Rzeczpospolita and Tsardom of Russia. This Muslim ethnocultural group shaped their own Qur’an translation school in the West Russian (Ruthenian, Old Belorusian) language closely related to modern Russian.

Libraries of Belarus in the Period of the Lithuania Grand Duchy (the Second Half of 13th Century — 1569)

2010 ◽  
pp. 86-93
Author(s):  
Roman S. Motulsky
Keyword(s):  
13Th Century ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Public Figures ◽  
Literary Process ◽  
Grand Duchy Of Lithuania ◽  
Grand Duchy

The particulars of the development of Belarus libraries in the period of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania are considered. The article tells about the factors affecting the literary process, writers and public figures left mark in history, the most important chronicles and manuscripts of the time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document