www.lituanus.org |
|
Copyright
© 1958 Lithuanian
Students Association, Inc. December, 1958 Vol. 4, No. 4 Managing Editor P. V. Vygantas |
Book Review
LITHUANIA MINOR
Studia
Lituanica I Mažoji Lietuva (Lithuania Minor), published
by the Lithuanian Research Institute, Inc., New York. 1958. 323 pp.
Even though Lithuania is a small country with a small papulation, there
are two Lithuanias: Major and Minor. The division is not an artificial
one but is a result of the historical development of the Lithuanian
nation. Lithuania Major is that area which from the 13th to the end of
the 18th centuries constituted the core of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
and which after 1795 passed under Russian rule.But to the west there
lay lands that were inhabited by Lithuanians yet never belonged to a
historical Lith. state. These lands were conquered by the Teutonic
Knights as early as the 13th century, and later they became part of the
Kingdom of Prussia; they make up the northern areas of so-called East
Prussia. Up to the end of the 18th century these areas were referred to
simply as "Litauen" in the administrative division of East Prussia.
Even today, Lithuanians refer to the area as Lithuania Minor.
When the Lithuanian state was reconstituted in 1918, these Lithuanian
lands remained outside the boundaries of Lithuania. Only the
northernmost part of the region, the Klaipeda (Memel) area to the north
of Nemunas River, joined the Lithuanian Republic in 1923, and in 1939
it reverted to Germany as the result of an ultimatum.
The first volume of
Studia Lituanica contains five studies of Lithuania Minor.
Dr. M. Gimbutas surveys the prehistory of the area; Juozas Lingis
writes of the use of the plow for cultivating the soil in Lithuania
Major and Lith-ania Minor. Each study is illustra ted and heavily
documented. The text Is in Lithuanian with English and German
summaries; biographical sketches of the authors appear in all three
languages.
Dr. M. Gimbutas, a recognized expert on the prehistory of Eastern
Europe and author of the book The
Prehistory of Eastern Europe I (Peabody Museum, Harvard
University Bulletin No. 20), after surveying the findings of other
students of the area, states that there were no population shifts after
2000 B.C.; from that time up to historical times there is a cultural
continuity here, the work of a single ethnic group. These people
maintained extensive trade relations with far-distant countries, to
which they sent the area's chief export commodity,amber. Because of
this extensive trade the area between the Vistula and Nemunas had
already become part of the culture of central Europe by the Bronze Age.
The time of this cultural flowering coincides with the first centuries
of the Christian era. The area was not dircctly involved in the
barbarian migrations, though these did disrupt the ancient trade
routes. Relations with Scandinavia be gan to develop in the 7th
century, and with this we reach historical times. Written sources
dealing with this area date from the 1st century A.D. There are few of
them from the earliest period, but there are enough to furnish ample
testimony that there were no population shifts for more than a
millennium, that the 13th century Prussians and related tribes were the
direct descendants of the people called by Tactitus and later writers
the "Aesti.'
This survey of some 3,000 years of prehistory brings the author to the
conclusion that the culture of these people is in essence similar to
that of the other Baltic peoples (the Lithuanians and Latvians). She
discovers no evidence to support that latter-day German nationalistic
theories that attempt to explain certain cultural aspects of the area
as due to the influence of Germanic cultures or even the immigration of
Germanic people. The author also concludes that the influence of the
Goths, whose lands for several centuries bordered on those of the
Prussians, was slight. Gothic loan-words in the Baltic language are
often adduced as evidence of this supposed influence, but such
loan-words are few, numbering less than ten. No evidence of other
foreign cultural influence is discovered either. The author's final
conclusion is that during some 3 thousand years of prehistory the
Prussian lands constituted a unit of uninterrupted cultural e-volution,
with close ties with othe Baltic peoples the Lithuanians and
Latviansand that they can be definitely distinguished from their
neighbors to the west and south, with whom they merely maintained
normal trade relations
Juozas Lingis defended a dissertation on plows at the University of
Stockholm in 1952. In this study, he shows that plows of two types
predominated in the Baltic areas, and that the western limits of their
use approximate the western boundaries of the Baltic settlements.
Jugis Gimbutas surveys the farmhouse types and village architecture of
Lithuania Minor. He reaches the same conclusions as earlier
investigators of the subject, namely, that the farm buildings of the
indigenous population of Lithuania Minor are of the same type as those
of Lithuania Major from the point of view of arrangement and
architecture, and that they are clearly distinguishable frora the types
of Germanic village architecture, introduced into the area by German
colonists. The author finds the limit of this Lithuanian village
architecture to lie substantially to the south of the Pregel River.
This study is extensively illustrated.
The first examples of Lithuanian folklore reached the scholarly world
by way of Lithuania Minor. Here the first collections of Lithuanian
folk poetry were prepared and translated into German in the 18th and
early 19th centuries. New collections appeared during the 19th and 20th
centuries, although during this time Lithuania Major caught up with and
surpassed Lithuania Minor. However, the riches of Lithuanian folklore
were still unexhausted even as late as the last war. Here Jonas Balys
analyzes the words of 40 typical folk songs of Lithuania Minor and
concludes that 24 of them are unique to this area, 12 others are more
or less known in parts of Lithuania Major while the four others are
familiar in all areas inhabited by Lithuanians. His conclusions are in
agreement with those of the German E. See-mann, who has made a special
study of the question. It would seem that during the two centuries when
the German colonists lived side by side with the native Lithuanians in
Lithuania Minor, their influence on the native folklore was negligible,
even though the Germans are at times referred to in these folk songs.
Juozas Žilevičius reaches a similar conclusion in his survey of the
folk music of Lithuania Minor. There are foreign influences, but they
do not destroy the native originality. Approximately 70 percent of the
melodies are common with those of Lithuania Major, although they retain
a more archaic form here, a fact that the author attributes to the fact
that the inhabitants of Lithuania Minor lived in single settlements and
that therefore the conditions for community singing were absent.
Besides, the predominant Lutheran faith condemned secular singing And
therefore, while the fields and forests of Lithuania Major rang with
songs, the songs in Lithuania Minor found themselves "in the
underground," as it were, and could get around only with difficulty. On
the other hand, the folk melodies here had a greater influence on the
religious music itself; the Lutheran hymns were for the most part
borrowed from the German, but only a few kept their original German
melodies. The same hymns were sung in the same church in one form
during services in German and in another form (as can be seen from a
Lithuanian hymnal published by Hoffheinz in 1894) during services in
Lithuanian.
Lithuania Minor's folk music instruments are identical with those of
Lithuania Major, except that some instruments disappeared from use in
Lith. Minor because the Lutherans frowned on all secular music, not
only singing.
It may be said in concluding this review that all the authors agree in
the conclusion that Lithu ania Minor maintained extremely close
cultural ties with Lithuania Major from prehistoric times, although the
two regions were politically separate. This is not a new theory but one
that is commonly accepted in all scholarly literature on the subject.
The authors clarify and expand some aspects of the theory. It is true
that many points were explained differently in Nazi Germany, since an
attempt was made there to discover influences of German sul-ture where
such influences never existed. Obviously, however, there was no need
for the authors of this book to comment at any length on these
political theories, whose very foundations had been disproved by
earlier German scien ce.