Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis

The article notifies the significance of the cultural dialogue which has the history of four centuries, the dialogue between Prussian Lithuania and Lithuania Proper. Taken into account are the peculiarities of ethnic formation of both areas, as well as different strategies of assimilation policy used by Prussia and Russia. Consequently, these different strategies were accepted differently and yielded different effect. The activity of two cultural societies, that of Litauische literarische Gesellschaft, and that of Birutė is taken for comparison in the aspect of rising Lithuanian national self-consciousness, and the emphasis is laid upon sociopsichological aspects of the dialogue (which was not always direct) rather than upon historical or cultural parallels. To refresh run-of-the-mill academic attitude and discourse, unconventional literary means of the detective genre are put to use as a compositional and stylistic instrument.

The article focuses on kuršininkai ethnic group living in the Curonian Spit since 15th C. as an object of scientific investigations at the end of 19th C. and the beginning of the 20th C. My attention is paying also to the reasons which stimulated scientists interest to this small ethnic community cultural traditions in the German Empire, where the policy of ethnic minorities levelling was growing sharpat that time. I emphasize in this my article the importance of Franz Tetzner’s cultural perceptivity concerning kuršininkai ethnic culture transformations in the context of processes of modernisation and assimilation. It is very important to have a comprehensive information from Tetzner investigations on such ethnic traditions of already disappeared kuršininkai community at present times. This information helps us to understand much better the specific features of kuršininkai local identity (such as Latvian speaking at home, specific customs, fishery terms) and their ties with Prussian Lithuanians’ culture traditions (Evangelical Lutheran confession, Lithuanian language in the church and at school). The investigations from this my article have an idea to enrich particular research works on historical Prussian Lithuania region cultural heritage.

In geo-political terms, Lithuania was never a maritime state. In 1916, however, its politicians formulated a clear claim to obtain access to the sea and have a commercial port for the first time. The claim appeared in a memorandum attributed to Antanas Smetona, but signed by 12 politicians and presented to the German military authorities of the Ober Ost. So far, historians have not questioned the intellectual origins of the claim. Discussing the emergence of the issue of Lithuania’s sea access, the article seeks to identify the reasons for the ventilation of this issue in the Lithuanian-language press, and to show how it arose and how it manifested itself in political practice. The main argument is that the origin of the idea of Lithuania as a maritime state should be associated with the period of the First World War, whereas Lithuania’s claim for access to the sea cannot be explained solely by the idea of uniting Prussian and Russian areas inhabited by Lithuanian speakers.

Kristijonas Donelaitis (1714–1780), poet of Prussian Lithuania of the epoch of Enlightenment, who was first turned into a symbol in the late 19th c., for more than a century has been one of the brightest memory sites in the region. The paper analyzes the contexts in which the symbol was actualized in Prussian Lithuania and Klaipeda Region in the late 19th to the late 20th c. The change in the interpretations of Donelaitis is presented: from the resource for the maintenance of Prussian Lithuanian regional patriotism, a symbolic figure of Lithuanian national culture, to the Sovietization of Donelaitis and his turning into a resource for the maintenance of the Lithuanian national uniqueness within the boundaries of the USSR. The analysis of the meaningful content in which the symbol of Donelaitis functioned and of its symbolic expressions proves that, over all the analyzed period, Donelaitis has been a figure that encouraged not only the convergence of cultures, but also a conflict.

The paper analyses the context of the formation and the narrative structure of the borussianistic historical master narrative based on the myth of Prussia’s German mission. By examining the relationship between the master narrative and the culture of remembrance, the article shows how, during the period of 1871-1914, the meanings of the borussianistic historical master narrative were consolidated into public commemoration practices of East Prussia and how that consolidation changed the multiplicity of identity intrinsic to East Prussia in the first half of the 19th century. On the basis of a case study analysis (the erection of a national monument “Borussia” in Klaipeda/ Memel), the article investigates the forms of application of borussianistic historical master narrative meanings on the territory of East Prussia, inhabited by mixed Lithuanian and German population.