Suchergebnisse

Sąjūdis (Lithuanian independence movement) as an object of scholarly investigation has a certain history or maybe even a historiographic tradition. One of the first who started to investigate this problem was the representative of lithuanian diaspora in the US, professor of the University of Wisconsin Alfred Eric Senn. The changes of Lithuanian political life during the revival period were analyzed also by the Sąjūdis members themselves: Bronislavas Genzelis and Virgilijus Juozas Čepaitis. However, they often fail to avoid subjective views of certain personalities, their data is not always based on sources. Only at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries Sąjūdis received proper attention from historians. The society at large was presented with scholarly publications, collections of articles and sources on particular subjects. Among these publications one can distinguish the one written by Česlovas Laurinavičius and Vladas Sirutavičius which deals with the political history of Lithuania in 1988–1990. After the careful analysis of scholarly publications dealing with the topic of Sąjūdis, one may notice the tendency to restrict the investigations of the events only prior to the restoration of lithuanian independence in March 1990. However, the process of transformation of spontaneous social renewal movement into a public organization is still remaining a white spot in history. There are several reasons for this, the most important of which is, to my mind, political. Historians are not willing to confuse their scientific investigations with their political preferences. In the Lithuanian historiography one might notice a tendency for historical investigations of Sąjūdis to intensify prior to the anniversaries of Lithuanian independence restoration. Historians usually restricted their works to the analysis of the national revival period events taking place in the country's capital. [.]

Sąjūdis (Lithuanian independence movement) as an object of scholarly investigation has a certain history or maybe even a historiographic tradition. One of the first who started to investigate this problem was the representative of lithuanian diaspora in the US, professor of the University of Wisconsin Alfred Eric Senn. The changes of Lithuanian political life during the revival period were analyzed also by the Sąjūdis members themselves: Bronislavas Genzelis and Virgilijus Juozas Čepaitis. However, they often fail to avoid subjective views of certain personalities, their data is not always based on sources. Only at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries Sąjūdis received proper attention from historians. The society at large was presented with scholarly publications, collections of articles and sources on particular subjects. Among these publications one can distinguish the one written by Česlovas Laurinavičius and Vladas Sirutavičius which deals with the political history of Lithuania in 1988–1990. After the careful analysis of scholarly publications dealing with the topic of Sąjūdis, one may notice the tendency to restrict the investigations of the events only prior to the restoration of lithuanian independence in March 1990. However, the process of transformation of spontaneous social renewal movement into a public organization is still remaining a white spot in history. There are several reasons for this, the most important of which is, to my mind, political. Historians are not willing to confuse their scientific investigations with their political preferences. In the Lithuanian historiography one might notice a tendency for historical investigations of Sąjūdis to intensify prior to the anniversaries of Lithuanian independence restoration. Historians usually restricted their works to the analysis of the national revival period events taking place in the country's capital. [.]