mail: Bill Thayer	Help	Up	Home
previous: Chapter 23 This webpage reproduces a chapter of The Story of Lithuania By Thomas G. Chase printed by Stratford House, Inc. New York, 1946 The text is in the public domain. This page has been carefully proofread and I believe it to be free of errors. If you find a mistake though, please let me know! next: Chapter 25

You can follow much of the geography by opening Ian Macky's large map of modern Lithuania
in a separate window.

 p236  Chapter XXIV
Regeneration of Lithuania

(The numbers link directly to the sections.)

Each repressive measure introduced by Muraviev and fostered by Russian officials in Lithuania Major was met with stubborn and unyielding resistance. An increased number of Lithuanian writers promoting the Lithuanian national movement appeared. Among them were Simon Daukantas (1793‑1864), Mathew Valancius (1801‑1875), Lawrence Ivinskis (1808‑1881), Anthony Tatare (1805‑1889), Joseph Dovydaitis (1825‑1882), Anthony Baranauskas (1835‑1902), Anthony Vienazindys (1841‑1892). Furthermore, the influence of the Polonized landed gentry of Lithuania, who were anxious to gain the restoration of the Polish-Lithuanian political state, had been practically destroyed after the attempted revolt of 1863. Meanwhile, the Lithuanian peasantry, constituting the bulk of the nation, had obtained a progressive betterment of their pathetic position. The parochial school system, ardently sponsored by Bishop Valancius, had provided them with some means of education. After the abolition of serfdom, even the higher schools, although under strict Russian control, became accessible to the sons of the peasants. And thus the Lithuanian peasant, unaffected by Polonization, retaining his original Lithuanian language, although exposed to forty years of ruthless Russification, almost immediately assumed the leading role in the cultural and national regeneration of the Lithuanian nation.

 p237  1. Lithuanian Writings and Russian Characters

Surprising as it was, there were comparatively few publications in the Lithuanian language transcribed into Russian characters during the entire forty year period of suppression. Before Kaufman's edict of 1865, a simple Lithuanian grammar, edited by Stanislas Mikucki, and two Ukases of Tsar Alexander II, translated by Thomas Zilinskis at Warsaw, were published in the Russian transliteration. Afterwards, similar Lithuanian grammars were issued by Zilinskis and Kreczinski, the latter's surviving two revised editions. As a matter of fact, books of this kind had little practical value, since the Lithuanian language had been replaced in the schools and governmental departments by the Russian.

Among other such publications were: A Book of Gospels, A Brief Catechism, Hymnal, The Ancient Altar of Gold (1866), Prayers (1867), Explanation of the Gospels (1869‑70), Prayers and the Catechism (1892), Sacred History (1896). These grammars and religious manuals in addition to several collections of Lithuanian songs and some of Lermontov's and Pushkin's writings were the sum total of Lithuanian books that were published in Russian characters under the auspices of the Russian authorities.

The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom by Baltramaitis (1887) and A Tailor's Manual by Lalis (1887) were the only writings produced in Lithuanian in the Russian transliteration through private initiative. In fine, the issuance of literature of this nature was rather sporadic and occasional. Through the entire forty year period, only fifty-four such publications appeared, thirty within the first ten years, 1864‑73.

Not only had the Lithuanian writers refused to cooperate with this policy of the Russian administration and the people themselves had refused to accept these Lithuanian books printed in Russian characters, but a violent and positive reaction broke out against the suppression of the Lithuanian press.

 p238  2. Contraband Literature

In 1865‑66, old editions of Lithuanian prayerbooks had been printed at Vilnius and Tilsit without the permission of the Russian censor. But the motive in these cases was not altruistic, but rather the intent of certain individuals to reap personal profit. It was Bishop Valancius of Samogitia, who began the patriotic struggle against this form of oppression.

In 1867‑69, he wrote and published, at Tilsit, in East Prussia, a number of booklets and pamphlets. Among them were Broliai Katalikai (Brother Catholics), Grometa Apskrita (Open Letter), Is Tamsybes veda Kelias Teisybes (From Darkness to Truth), Perspejimas (The Warning), Kataliku Baznycios Vargas (Persecution). And although these writings possessed a religious theme, they did not fail to create great political significance. They denounced Russian domination over the Lithuanian nation and demanded the restoration of the Lithuanian language in schools and governmental offices, freedom for the Lithuanian press, and the preservation of religious liberty. They urged the Lithuanian people not to speak the Russian language, to boycott books printed in Russian characters, and not to send children to Russian-supervised schools. These booklets were carried across the Prussian-Lithuanian border and secretly distributed among the Lithuanian people. Many other individuals, such as Gimzauckas, Stelmakauskas, Sederevicius, Antanvicius, Kuseliauskas, Dovydaitis, Vytartas, allied themselves with this movement and continued its work even after Valancius' death, until, in 1904, the Lithuanians recovered the right to print their Lithuanian books in the proper Latin characters.

In addition to this traffic in banned Lithuanian books, a series of Lithuanian news­papers appeared after 1883 as a manifestation of the refusal of the Lithuanians to submit to Russification. All had one common goal; namely, the preservation of the Lithuanian nation from the extinction to which it had been condemned by the Russian rulers. Among the principal papers were Auszra (The  p239 Dawn), Varpas (The Bell), Apzvalga (The Review), Tevynes Sargas (The National Guard).

Auszra (The Dawn) made its first appearance in 1883 and continued in existence for three years. Its chief directors and supporters were Basanavicius, Vistelis, Sliupas, Sernius and Miksas. Its aims were cultural and idealistic. It featured articles on Lithuanian history and the Lithuanian language. Although it proposed no definite political action, nevertheless, it sought to foster among the Lithuanian people a nationalism, which would oppose both Russification, afflicting the entire nation at the time, as well as Polonization, which had already affected the Lithuanian gentry and was even then still influencing the common people to a certain extent through some of the Polonized Lithuanian Catholic clergy.

Varpas (The Bell, 1889‑1905) was edited by Vincent Kudirka. Under its auspices two special supplements were also regularly published; namely, Ukininkas (The Farmer 1891‑1905) and Naujienos (The News, 1901‑1903). This monthly journal concerned itself with the economic status of the Lithuanian peasant. It constantly accused the Russian government of committing a serious blunder in not permitting the peasantry to purchase more land and in not allowing them to form agricultural and commercial schools, loan associations and cooperatives. A little more emphatically than the Auszra, the Varpas urged the Lithuanian peasants to resist and oppose both the Russian element, as well as the advances of the Poles and the Polonized Lithuanian gentry.

Apzvalga (The Review, 1890‑1896), sponsored chiefly by the Catholic clerics, was managed by the Reverend Casimir Pakalniskis. Its staff was also engaged in the publication of several Lithuanian books. Its pages repeatedly discussed, with utter and violent contempt, the effort to Russify the Lithuanian people through the Russian Orthodox Church.

Tevynes Sargas (The National Guard, 1896‑1904), directed by a young Catholic clergy­man, Joseph Tumas, continued the policies of the Apzvalga in a more diplomatic manner, constantly advocating the preservation of the Lithuanian language, particularly in church services.

Other news­papers and journals of less importance and significance  p240 were also published in the Lithuanian language, such as Sviesa (The Light), Kryzius (The Cross), Zinycia (Knowledge). All exercised a tremendous influence upon the Lithuanian people. All were printed in East Prussia. And together with the banned Lithuanian books they were smuggled across the frontier and made accessible to the Lithuanians living both in Lithuania Major and in various parts of the Russian Empire.

3. The Book Smugglers

The activities of the book smugglers in defiance of the Russian government have produced perhaps the most romantic and dramatic story in all of Lithuanian history. Without these men the vast output of Lithuanian writings would never have reached the bulk of the Lithuanian people. The first organization of this kind was formed by Bishop Valancius. Similar groupings soon appeared under the direction of individuals like Martin Sederevicius and George Bielinis. Numerous secret societies were created throughout Lithuania with the sole purpose of importing and propagating and supporting Lithuanian journals and books. Among them were: Lietuvos Motinele (The Mother of Lithuania), Svirplys (The Cricket), Ausrine (The Dawning), Teisybe (The Truth), Lizdas (The Nest), Trimitas (The Bugle), Zvaigzde (The Star), Akstinas (The Goad).

The Lithuanians paid a severe price for promoting this traffic. It has been estimated that in 1891‑93 some 38,000 pieces of Lithuanian literature were confiscated on the Lithuanian-Prussian border. In 1900‑1902, the figure reached the total of more than 56,000. The penalties inflicted for this offense consisted of fines, imprisonment, exile to Siberia, banishment to the Russian interior. Homes of suspects were raided night and day. Many lives were lost in battles between the border guards, the police and the smugglers.

 p241  4. Legal Activities

Besides the use of every conceivable measure to preserve the written Lithuanian language, various legal means were employed by the Lithuanians to regain the freedom of the press.

In 1876‑77, Peter Vileisis, while studying at the University in St. Petersburg, succeeded in obtaining the censor's permission to publish several Lithuanian booklets. Consequently, he issued five such writings and even attempted to organize other Lithuanian students at St. Petersburg and Moscow for the same purpose. His efforts proved fruitless, because further permission was refused, and the manuscripts subsequently prepared by Pietaris, Ivinskis, Baukas, could not be printed.

Many similar requests were presented to the censor's office by such individuals as Kymantas, Sliupas, Smilga and Miezinis. (Miezinis had compiled a Lithuanian dictionary). And very consistently, the censor would allow the printing of Lithuanian publications only in Russian characters, which mode of procedure was unacceptable to the Lithuanian authors. Nevertheless, several Lithuanian scholar­ly works did succeed in gaining publication in Latin characters. Thus, in 1880‑1883, the University at Kazan and the St. Petersburg Academy issued several volumes of folk-songs that Juska had collected and some of Volteris' writings.

Again, numerous articles appeared in Russian news­papers, written by Lithuanians residing in the Russian interior. They denounced the injustice of the restrictions imposed upon the Lithuanian press and helped publicize the resistance offered in Lithuania against such oppressive measures. Likewise, various petitions demanding the restoration of a free Lithuanian press were frequently sent to the Tsar and other authorities.

Perhaps the most effective of all legal means employed was the use of lawsuits. Thus, Anthony Maciejauskas, after obtaining proper permission, published a map of Lithuania with Lithuanian words in Latin characters at St. Petersburg in 1900. The work was soon confiscated by the police. Maciejauskas had recourse to court action. And after appealing to the Senate, he obtained a favorable  p242 decision (1902) on the grounds that no law was known to exist within the Russian Empire, which forbade the use of Lithuanian language in Latin characters.

Similarly, in 1900, Paul Visinskis, having printed advertisements in the true Lithuanian language at Mitau, in Latvia, with the permission of the police, made use of them at Joniskis in Lithuania. He was arrested and fined three roubles by the Justice of the Peace. But Visinskis continued to appeal his case until it was brought before the Supreme Court of Appeal, the Senate (1903). As a result, the first sentence was suspended for the same reason as in the Maciejauskas case.

These decisions had an important bearing on the Lithuanian struggle for the freedom of the press, because the Senate possessed the power of promulgating laws for the entire Russian Empire. The year 1900 also marked a further relaxation on the part of the Russian administration in its efforts to suppress Lithuanian literature. It began then to stress not so much the smuggling of Lithuanian books and papers printed in Latin characters, but the revolutionary tendencies upheld by these writings; namely, the incessant clamoring for relief from Russian domination and for the political independence of the nation.

5. Religious Persecution

Similar struggles took place in the religious and educational fields. The tragedies that occurred were numerous. The intensity of the resistance, of course, was increased and fostered by the contraband Lithuanian literature. The keynote of struggle had been set at the very beginning by Bishop Valancius.

When repressive measures were applied to the Catholic Church after the revolt of 1863, Bishop Valancius issued no less than nine secret appeals to the clergy and laity to resist, even at the price of death, all attempted incursions of Russian-sponsored Orthodox Church into Lithuania. As a matter of fact, the first twenty years of the Lithuanian struggle for the freedom of the press (1864‑1883) was very intimately allied with the religious  p243 question. Only afterwards, with the appearance of the Auszra, could Lithuanian nationalism and the problem of religious persecution be more clearly distinguished.

Valancius' appeals produced results. Even before his death (1875), the Russian attempt to close down the parish church at Tytuvenai was violently opposed by the Lithuanian people. Again, in 1886, at Kestaiciai the church was demolished, only after the Russians had forcibly quelled the resistance of the Lithuanians. Undoubtedly, the massacre at Kraziai in 1893 gained the most prominence.

In 1891, the Russian authorities had decreed to close the convent, church and cemetery at Kraziai. The following year Bishop Paliulionis received an order to transfer the nuns to Kaunas. Appeals both by bishop and people proved in vain. Consequently, a guard of Lithuanians formed about the church day and night. Local Russian police had made repeated attempts to scatter the Lithuanians, who sought to prevent the departure of the parish clergy. Finally, Klingenberg, the Governor of Kaunas, arrived to execute the order personally, He entreated the people to yield peacefully. They refused. Force was employed and a violent battle followed, which lasted till morning and even required the calling out of Russian troops. Hundreds, of course, died. Others were seized, imprisoned and brutally flogged (1893).

One year later, the trial of the victims took place in Vilnius. They were accused of conspiracy and revolutionary plots against the government. However, the incident of Kraziai resulted in a moral victory for the Lithuanians. Its news had favorably influenced some cultured Russian gentlemen, who were even willing to offer their legal advice to the victims. The Court imposed light sentences, which were suspended by the Tsar. Only four men were condemned to one year of imprisonment.

These events seriously compromised the Russian administration in Lithuania Major. Three years later, 1897, the restrictions as to the building of churches were revoked. And within a short time, many fine new churches were erected on Lithuanian soil by the Lithuanians.

 p244  6. Schools

The attempted Russification of Lithuanian schools was also offered widespread resistance by the people. Rather than subject their children to the authority of incapable Russian teachers, vast numbers of parents sent them to secret Lithuanian schools or tried to instruct them at home. Naturally, the standards of education suffered in such circumstances.

Likewise, the gymnasia or secondary schools became hotbeds of opposition to Russian aims. At Siauliai, for example, so severe was Russian discipline, that the Lithuanian language was forbidden to be used even for religious exercises. But the Lithuanian student bodies formed secret societies, organized strikes, and quite often were expelled for such so‑called subversive activities. Under the direction of Anthony Baranauskas, the Samogitian Theological Institute, which had been transferred from Varniai to Kaunas in 1865, developed into a stronghold of Lithuanian national sentiment and was allowed the use of both the Lithuanian and Russian languages for homiletic instructions. The students became increasingly conscious of their Lithuanian nationality with the result that such eminent Lithuanian leaders as Jaunius, Vienazindys, Maironis, Jakstas were produced.

This Lithuanian national consciousness in the face of Russian oppression was most progressive in the Suvalkai area, which, although under Russian administration, remained annexed to the Vistula or Polish provinces. In this territory the policy of Russification had not been pursued as thoroughly as in the rest of Lithuania. Thus, at the secondary school of Marijampole and the Teachers' Seminary of Veiveriai, where only Russians were tolerated as instructors in history and Russian literature, classes were held for the study of the Lithuanian language, and Lithuanians were even eligible for teaching posts. At the Theological Seminary of Seinai, the students had assembled a collection of 500 Lithuanian folksongs and had compiled a Lithuanian dictionary, although Russian authorities did not permit the publication of these works. The alumni of this institution exercised great influence on the  p245 Lithuanian national revival. At Veisejai, Naumiestis, Sventezeris and other towns they replaced the Polish language for church services and catechetical instructions with the Lithuanian; the overwhelming majority of the residents of those areas were Lithuanian-speaking people, who previously had been under the jurisdiction of Polonized or Polish clergy­men.

The program of intense Russification formulated by Muraviev and executed by his successors indeed had placed the Lithuanian nation in a critical situation. This program sought to crush all future Lithuanian resistance either independent or in alliance with the Poles. It failed miserably. It rather provoked the appearance of a purely Lithuanian national sentiment, unrestricted by any foreign influence, and actually led to the regeneration of the Lithuanian nation, which sought not the reconstruction of the partitioned Polish-Lithuanian Republic, but an independent government of its own.

◂ previous						next ▸
Images with borders lead to more information. The thicker the border, the more information. (Details here.)
UP TO:		T. G. Chase: The Story of Lithuania	History of Lithuania	European History	Home
A page or image on this site is in the public domain ONLY if its URL has a total of one *asterisk. If the URL has two **asterisks, the item is copyright someone else, and used by permission or fair use. If the URL has none the item is © Bill Thayer. See my copyright page for details and contact information.

Accessibility