“Walks” around (un) famous Vilnius: 50 places that tell about historical memory

Until then, photos of friends from warm countries, beaches or exotic places in the world, which dominated Facebook, were replaced by little-known Lithuanian mansions, forests and mounds. In such circumstances, there was a rare opportunity to recall regional memory sites that tell one or the other historical narrative, but often lack a context that makes everything meaningful. Thus was born the idea of ​​marking the objects of the Vilnius region visited during the quarantine on a map and considering their meanings from the point of view of the culture of memory.

On historical stories, or why are they necessary?

When we visit various heritage objects (castles, monuments, architectural heritage), we do not always delve into their content or purpose, which is the same, to maintain and strengthen the collective identity. Each community, whether national, religious, or otherwise, always creates a narrative about itself by defining its own patterns of identity. In it, as in every fairy tale or story, there are negative characters and there are heroes, there are higher historical periods, and there are collective traumas, usually with their clearly identified culprits.

Relevant groups in society seek to express these historical narratives in visual and aesthetic forms and rituals: names of places, streets, commemorative plaques, monuments, monuments, remembrance days, celebrations or commemorations. However, its implementation actually often faces several problems.

When we visit various heritage objects: castles, monuments, architectural heritage, we do not always delve into their content or purpose, which is to maintain and strengthen the collective identity.

First, identity is not a monolithic derivative: it is a process whose content constantly changes over time, depending on the changing contexts that determine attitudes toward the past and evaluations of history. Therefore, it is not uncommon for symbols that have had meaning in the past to become anachronisms over time.

Second, there are many different groups in society seeking to represent themselves in the public space. So often the different stories they create compete with each other. Both cases can lead to what historians like to call “memory wars,” illustrated by last year’s conflicts over the perpetuation of Kazys Škirpa, Jonas Noreika – General Vėtra, or Peter Cvirka in Vilnius.

Third, at the state level, collective memory is always political. With the help of laws, institutions or experts, a historical narrative is established or, in other words, today’s relationship with the past is formed. Here there is a danger that, for example, a dominant group will take advantage of this position to consecrate a version of its historical narrative that leaves no room for the representation of other groups in society.

Such a hegemonization of memory is dangerous, because what we want to remember and remember must come from a dialogue between different groups in civil society, and if it is dropped from above, it can lead to the problems already mentioned. These tensions are notable not only in the capital, but also at the regional level, where updated memory can complement the nation’s national narrative as much as an alternative. An illustrative example of this is the Vilnius historical region.

Ethnographic context

Today, the concept of Lithuanian ethnographic regions popularized during the Soviet era is enshrined in the Law on the basis of state protection of ethnic culture, which establishes five regions in Lithuania: Samogitia, Lesser Lithuania, Suvalkia (Sūduva), Aukštaitija and Dzūkija (Dainava). It also defines key concepts, including the “ethnographic region” (a historical part of the territory that retains its distinctive dialect, traditions and customs, the integrated heritage of white tribes) and “ethnic culture” (created by the entire nation (ethnos) , from generation to generation). The totality of cultural values, which helps preserve the national identity and the self-awareness and uniqueness of the ethnographic regions, is constantly transmitted and updated once and for all.

These legal definitions reveal several key points. On the one hand, national identity is associated with ethnos, that is, the Lithuanian nation in an ethnic sense. Second, the Lithuanian ethnographic regions are based on the “legacy of the white tribes”. Therefore, it would turn out that anything that is not Baltic is not Lithuanian nor can it claim to maintain national identity.

The regionalization of the entire country beyond its definition leaves all “others”: non-ethnic Lithuanians. According to this, the Vilnius region would be attributed to Dzūkija.

Although ethnography and ethnoculture are not themselves “demons”, such regionalization of the whole country, based on the aforementioned criteria, leaves all “others”, non-ethnic Lithuanians, out of their definition. According to this, the Vilnius region would be attributed to Dzūkija, which stretches from Druskininkai to Švenčionys.

Since much of this area is compactly inhabited by Lithuanian Poles, Belarusians, and other national minorities, such logic could be based on the fact that a large portion of local Poles do not say “good morning” in Polish like most Poles in Poland: “djien dobry”, with the consonant “dz”, but “dzien dobry”, with the consonant “dz”. Of course, this is a joke, but it reveals top-down and legal provisions that, when viewed from below, have nothing to do with reality.

However, even after rejecting ethnographic criteria, the question remains: how can we define what Vilna is? Probably an option could be to carry out sociological surveys in the region to determine how people identify and how many feel “Vilnius” or, more precisely, “Vilnius”, but the results would not be entirely accurate either, like Vilnius, and especially La Vilnius city can be a very important memory place for people who no longer live here or, for example, Lithuanian Jews, have very few remains due to the genocide carried out during the Second World War.

Therefore, one of the alternative options to define a region could be the memory locations and the meanings they convey. In this sense, Vilnius stands out from other regions of Lithuania with pluralism, where in parallel there are many and not two collective memories created by different communities that live or no longer live in the region. Therefore, multiculturalism could become the main criterion that defines Vilnius. After all, the name Vilnius originates from the multicultural city of Vilnius, which holds an important place of remembrance for Lithuanians, Lithuanian Poles, and Jews or Belarusians.

Multiculturalism could become the main criterion that defines Vilnius.

Souvenir places in Vilnius

It seems that Vilnius’ multiculturalism has been recognized in recent decades and there is currently no major discussion about it. The same can be said of Trakai: after all, we always transport guests from abroad, treat them with kibinas and chebureks, and talk about “exotic” minorities and their cultural heritage, not to mention Vitautas the Great, who is associated with the settlement of Tatars and Karaites in Lithuania.

The Kernavė mounds or Medininkai Castle are slightly less popular, but are still frequently visited. However, these places of remembrance are associated with the heroic past and the times of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania “from sea to sea”, thus joining the great historical history of the Lithuanian nation. However, it is rare for anyone who dares to explore what was strange and other in this story for a long time: the Republic of the Two Nations, from the 19th century. Graduates of the University of Vilnius: scientists, romantic poets, 19th century. uprisings and finally the 20th century. Memory locations reminiscent of Vilnius “non-Lithuanian” contexts, which dominate the region.

Although there are hundreds of historical and memorial objects in Vilnius, it would take more than a month to visit them all, but after selecting and marking 50 of them, all of the historical stories and their emblems begin to emerge, which is best reflected in it. feature: multiculturalism. Although these memory locations can be analyzed in different sections, it is sufficient to use an elementary chronological principle that allows distinguishing at least 5 dominant memory layers.

1. The “Baltic” or the cape of the great Lithuanian dukes who embody the Lithuanian state.

Vilnius occupies a particularly significant, and perhaps even sacred, place in the nation’s great historical history of Lithuania. The places of memory here update the contexts of the ancient history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, in which Vilnius is the nucleus of statehood. In addition to the three former state capitals, the region has many mounds associated with a distant and often bewildered “Baltic memory”.

Along with Vilnius, Trakai and Kernavė, in recent decades, more memorials have appeared. As early as 1989. A commemorative stone was erected to King Mindaugas at Joseph Hill, and commemorations and celebrations have been held since 1990. 1997 In the village of Forty Tatars, the local Tatar community unveiled a commemorative stone to Vitautas the Great. In 2002, to commemorate the 625th anniversary of the death of Grand Duke Algirdas, a monument to the ruler was erected next to the Maišiagala mound. A monument to Vytautas the Great was also erected in Kernavė. However, most of these monuments were built during the first 15 years of independence, when there was an active attempt to emphasize Lithuania from the Vilnius region. However, since around 1999. In the region, monuments related to the history of the Republic of the Two Nations (ATR) and the “polyublial” history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) began to occupy a much more important place in the region.

2. The cloak of the Republic of the Two Nations.

In this regard, Vilnius stands out from the rest of the country’s regions, as it is probably the largest place of remembrance, not only in the 16th-18th centuries. The history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the ATR, but also the continuation of the memory of the state in the 19th century.

This distinguishes the Šalčininkai and Vilnius districts, where many new monuments have appeared in the last twenty years: museums have been organized and installed in Jašiūnai (2015), where they are presented modernly with the most famous 19th century. pr. History associated with personalities, the Sirokomlė Museum opened in Bareikiškės (2011), 2012 The atmosphere of the ancient republic of Paulava was arranged in Šalčininkai in 1998-1999. Adomas Mickevičius, Kostas Kalinauskas, in Rukainiai – Povilas Ksaveras Bžostovskis (2012), in Mickūnai – Julius Slovackis, in Vievis – author of the Slavic grammar Meletijus Smotrickis (2002), there are at least four signs for the Rūdninkai forest. meter. uprising, outside Vilnius, Paneriai, 2001 The monument was unveiled in 1830-1831. Uprising in Eišiškės in 2013 A monument dedicated to the Lithuanian-Polish joint struggle was inaugurated in 1863-1864. Sukilime. Incidentally, it is located on 3 de Mayo Street, which until now is the only one in Lithuania that commemorates 1791. Third May Constitution.

Stimulated memory in this region focuses on those historical periods and personalities that create an opportunity for Poles, Belarusians and other Lithuanian national minorities to discover their place in Lithuanian history and feel part of society, rather than, for example “Dzuks”. On the other hand, they also contribute to the fact that a story that was long considered “not his” is gradually becoming a great historical narrative of the Lithuanian nation. In this way, the main distinctive character and strength of the Vilnius historical region is maintained: multiculturalism, through which we learn tolerance, to communicate and live together in different ways.

3. A layer of conflict over Vilnius.

The loss of capital in the collective memory of Lithuanians has long been one of the greatest traumas, partly alive to this day. At the end of the Soviet era and the first decade of independence, and especially when it comes to the issue of Polish autonomy, this trauma was again relevant; therefore memory signs were found in Vilnius to emphasize the Lithuania of the region. Notable in Maišiagala in 1989. a monument to the 50th anniversary of the recovery of the Vilnius region was unveiled; In Eitminiškės, the memory of the priest Ambraziejus Jakavonis, the spread of Lithuania in the Vilnius region during the interwar period, was immortalized. The roof pillars and pillars of the chapel were built in the village of Marijampolis for booksellers, dukes, native lands, etc.

The memory of Juzef Pilsudski, accused of losing Vilnius in his native Zalava, was also a long-standing concern of the Polish embassy and local Poles. Little by little, however, J. Pilsudskis began to be evaluated without preconceived notions: his formula for his noble identity was revised and his contribution to the history of Lithuania was considered. 2017 Lithuanian sculptors in Zalava unveiled a monument dedicated to brothers Bronislaw and Juzef Pilsudski.

On the other hand, the interwar conflict over Vilnius has also been seen in recent years not from a “traumatic” perspective, but in a much more original way. An example of this are the stands and the pedestrian route established in the Neris Regional Park, along the old Lithuanian-Polish demarcation line, where local history is presented in an interesting way through the eyes of residents of The time.

4. The layer of the Second World War and the postwar resistance.

This is the sharpest theme in the context of collective memories, but it is through it that Vilnius’ multicultural aspect and uniqueness are most revealed. In World War II and in the first years after the war, only different military and partisan units operated: the Lithuanian local team, the Polish army Craiova (AK), the provocative Lithuanian police, and the Soviet partisans. Just think of the tens of thousands of Jews killed in Paneriai, the Rūdninkai Forest and the related massacres in Kaniūkai, Pirčiupiai or the massacres carried out by the Lithuanian police and the Craiova army in Glitiškės and Dubingiai.

Unfortunately, until now, the only common place of remembrance dedicated to commemorating this complicated period and suitable for all parties to war can be considered only the Paneriai Memorial. Although there were ideas to commemorate the parties who fought each other with common monuments, thus renouncing contradictions and acknowledging the mistakes made between them (an example of this is the unimplemented idea of ​​building a common monument to the Glitiškės and Dubingiai massacres ), but so far they have not been done.

However, there are positive signs, for example in 2004. At the initiative of Valdas Adamkus, a symbolic reconciliation was carried out between the local team and AK supporters in the Lithuanian Presidency. In recent years, the AK soldiers ‘rematches have also not caused much opposition (for example, in 2018, high-ranking Lithuanian politicians also participated in the AK soldiers’ revalidation in Eišiškės). All this shows the complicated complexity of the coexisting cultures of memory in Vilnius and the fact that one form of memory cannot simply dominate here, outshining another.

5. Modern Lithuanian or European coat.

These are souvenir places that commemorate the latest events of the Republic of Lithuania today. As in all of Lithuania, there are not yet many in Vilnius. Among them we can mention the monument to the massacre of the Medininkai border post in 1990, as well as the geographical center of Europe and the monument to the accession of Lithuania to the European Union, the European Sculpture Park. They reflect the most important events in contemporary Lithuania, and at the same time form, albeit for the time being, a very thin but European memory layer.

Instead of conclusions

The memory sites discussed are only a small part of what exists in the Vilnius region rich in history. The local people and history buffs who live here could infinitely show you and tell you what the curious tourist won’t know anyway. However, even without looking at everything that is possible, it can be said that the factor that defines Vilnius is multiculturalism, which has different historical meanings and places of memory.

The meanings created in the contexts of Vilnius’ memory could be called an alternative to the dominant Lithuanian historical narrative.

Top-down ethnographic criteria could complement this, but cannot be global determinants of the region. The meanings created in the contexts of Vilnius’ memory could often be called an alternative to the dominant Lithuanian historical narrative. However, it is appreciated that it is not constant and is liberalized over time, incorporating those historical periods and personalities that have long been foreigners at the national level, and that occupy the most important place in Vilnius.

On the other hand, we ourselves must make an effort to broaden our horizons and try to understand how some historical regions differ from others and what stories local people create about themselves. Although the quarantine ends, the borders are opened, but due to the threat of the coronavirus, this summer you will often choose a trip to your native Lithuania, so I hope that the memory site map with short descriptions will ask more questions than answers, which will stimulate interest in your country.