Historical culture in the modern Lithuania: „multiculturalism“ concept in the society and n the researches of Grand Duchy of Lithuania

Abstract

The article explores the attitude to the multiculturalism, its relations with history and problems of identity in present Lithuania. The problem of multiculturalism in present Lithuania is closely connected with identity of Lithuanians. As it seems to me, external interest of some historians a variety of cultures frequently opens descriptive (demographic) multiculturalism, or any certain model of multiculturalism. Besides the traditional sight of historians at formation of the Lithuanian nation as historical subject first of all is connected with the theory of ethnos and-or the ethnic nation. There is a problem.
One of the first after 1990 sintetic works of the ancient history of Lithuania was „History of Lithuania up to 1795“ by Z. Kiaupa, J. Kiaupenė, A. Kuncevičius who have left in 1995. As the main reality of the Lithuanian history they consider Lithuanian people, ideas, feelings and acts of its members the given historiographic job can be named ethnocentristic. Various religious, ethnic and racial minority (here speech does not go about a role of Lithuanians, Ruthenus and Poles) in this version of history of Grand Duchy of Lithuania of three authors are represented as additional, illustrative and as a matter of fact the statistical fact lost in image GDL as „the multinational state, the state of different beliefs and cultures“. They are superseded on boondocks of history where they as though automatically get potential of insignificance and even greater threat and danger.
„History of ancient Lithuania. 1009–1795“ by Alfredas Bumblauskas – a vivid example of overdue connection of Lithuania to history of modernization of the Western Europe. It is new and even postmodernist work under the form in a context of the Lithuanian historiography. Traditional and modernist ethnocentrism in „History of ancient Lithuania. 1009–1795“ have different value, and their specific weight during the historical argument – different. Modernist – opened and inclined to dialogue – the ethnocentrism competes and, apparently, wins the traditional ethnocentrism closed and mistrustful to another and their originality.
I think that the exhaustive national history today should be considered not as one of alternatives which preference can give any of centres of science or the leadership of the Ministry of Education of Lithuania, and as a historical imperative for historians and the public as a whole. Simultaneously for Lithuania it is necessary flexible, focused on multiculturalism a policy of education. It would provide the option of the person which would correspond to its cultural identity, and also would enrich imagination of children, which collide with a variety, different languages and way of life.