Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis

The instrumental music-making tradition of Lithuania Minor was officially recognised as a valuable part of the Intangible Cultural Heritage and included in the national register in 2022. In the 20th century, the way of preserving the instrumental music-making of the Lietuvininkai (the inhabitants of Lithuania Minor) typically used for folklore was not followed, and it would have ceased to exist. However, the folklore revival movement that emerged in the 1960s, along with the determined efforts of Antanas Butkus, a master instrument maker, to restore the folk music instruments of Lithuania Minor, and other favourable circumstances, gave rise to renewed interest and new directions for the development of the tradition. The purpose of this article is to explore the forms and development of this folklore tradition, and to identify the factors that had the most important impact on its decline, restoration and continuity.

From the earliest descriptions and studies, the Prussian Lithuanians, or Lietuvininkai, and their sung folklore have usually been treated as one unit. However, the ethnographic region of Lithuania Minor is a vast territory stretching over 200 kilometres from north to south. Two distinct areas of ethnic Lietuvininkai music can be identified within it. This article aims to investigate the musical features of the folklore that existed in the Klaipėda district, and to reveal its uniqueness in the context of Lietuvininkai sung folklore.

The goal of the article is to examine chronologically the specific nature of the Easter holiday in

The paper discusses different appropriation strategies applied to the same historical region of East Prussia. By dating the beginning of the symbolic appropriation to the early 19th century, the author reviews the strategies, first applied by Germans and Poles, and later also by Lithuanians and Russians, to make East Prussia or their respective part (Warmia and Masuria, Lithuania Minor, and the Kaliningrad Oblast) their own. This is demonstrated by several periods, starting with the situation before 1914, the First World War, the interwar period, and the Second World War, when East Prussia still existed; and finishing with the postwar period and the changes after 1989. A distinction is made between national and regional East Prussia appropriation strategies, as well as different levels of the process, i.e. publicistic (literary) and practical.

Like many other towns in East Prussia, Klaipėda lost almost all its former population during World War II and was inhabited by newcomers after 1945. After an example of Klaipėda, the article analyzes the process of comprehension of a newly inhabited area and making it one’s own. Klaipėda became a former East Prussian city having returned to Lithuania and simultaneously incorporated into the Soviet Union. That caused the clash of interests, the development of which also changed the systems of meanings that provided a framework for the appropriation process. The city was gradually comprehended in the process of formation of unique interrelationships of the meanings of Soviet ideology, all-Union patriotism, Lithuanian national culture, and East Prussian cultural heritage. In the article, the author identifies the processes that affected different configurations of the said interrelationships in different post-war periods.