LIETUVIŲ KALBOTYROS KLAUSIMAI, XXXIV (1994) LIETUVIŲ KALBOS TARMĖS IR JŲ TYRINĖJIMAI

Aloyzas VIDUGIRIS

ON THE EARLY STAGES OF SLAVICIZATION IN SOUTHEASTERN LITHUANIA

Today it would be difficult to discuss Southeastern Lithuania, its ethnolinguistic development and situation, without reference to the old Aukštaitian place names of this region. Yet few people probably know that these place names, which differ in neither sound nor formation from the names of other places in Lithuania, were restored to a second life in 1939–1943 through the efforts of Prof. Antanas Salys, Lithuania’s most authoritative expert on place names. Until then, these place names had been severely distorted and Slavicized—that is, covered with a thick layer of foreign accretions.

In 1969, during his visit to Lithuania, I had many conversations with Prof. A. Salys about the ethnolinguistic situation in Southeastern Lithuania. He told me a great deal about the elderly people he had encountered in the environs of Vilnius who knew how to speak Lithuanian, and about the characteristic features of their speech. I well remember his words that during the war, in the territory belonging to Lithuania and extending as far as Vildžiai, Svyri, Ašmena, and Krėvas, there were virtually no districts without people who knew Lithuanian^*.

With the restoration of the old forms of place names, this region is undoubtedly understood even more firmly as part of Lithuania as a whole, an integral element of our cultural context. This alone attests to the enduring significance of A. Salys’s work and to his greatness both as a scholar and as a person.

Today Southeastern Lithuania is quite diverse, both linguistically and ethnically, having undergone a long process of language change and, at times, population change. This article aims to examine in greater detail the causes of the earlier stages of Slavicization in this part of Lithuania, as well as the course of Slavicization itself.

The beginning of the general Slavicization (Polonization) of Southeastern Lithuania is usually dated to the mid-19th century, especially its second half (the account draws largely on the findings of H. Turska’s research¹). This generalization, however, is only partly correct when referring to the beginning of the general Polonization of the rural population. At that time, a vigorous surge of Polonization manifested itself in three centers: Vilnius, Kaunas, and Smalvos (more precisely, Daugavpils).

An even earlier process of Slavicization may be called incubatory. The standard Polish used by Lithuanian aristocrats gradually became imbued with numerous Lithuanianisms and elements of the local Belarusian language (usually called

^* During postwar expeditions, we encountered here (for example, near Naujoji Vilnia, in the village of Kyviškės, in Šumskas, or in Belarus—in the village of Mackonys near Kamojys, in Mikališkės, on the way to Syvri—and elsewhere) former elders from that period, remarkable people who had endured Siberian labor camps and the terror of the Armia Krajowa. Some had known Lithuanian from childhood (having learned it from their parents or grandparents); others had learned it later, while earning a living or in other ways.

75

Lithuanian through Polish—“polszczyzna litewska,” or a cultural, peripheral dialect of Polish—gradually spread here vertically, over several centuries, from the highest estate (the aristocracy), through the middle estate (the petty nobility and townspeople), down to the lower estate (Lithuanian serfs or free peasants).

The principal causes of the decline of the Lithuanian language were the Lithuanian Catholic Church’s dependence on the Polish ecclesiastical hierarchy and the weakening of Lithuanian statehood that began after the Union of Lublin in 1569. Statehood was finally destroyed through the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1772, 1793, and 1795). Most Lithuanian aristocrats, who until then had supported Lithuania’s sovereignty and had always emphasized their distinctness from the Poles, increasingly showed solidarity with the Polish nobility in the face of a common threat. The name Lithuania was also deleted from the 1791 Constitution.

Another contributing factor was that the Lithuanian state was not as homogeneous as it had been in the thirteenth century, during the reign of King Mindaugas. Later, Lithuania stretched from the Baltic to the Black Sea. Moreover, there had never been a clear ethnic boundary between Lithuanians and the eastern Slavs, the ancestors of today’s Belarusians: the eastern Slavs, who had converted to Christianity considerably earlier, spread into ethnic Lithuanian lands as they Christianized bilingual inhabitants. When, in 1323, Gediminas wrote letters to Western Europe from Vilnius, the official capital of the time, the city already had not only a Catholic church but also an Orthodox church. As the state grew and Catholicism took hold, Vilnius became one of the largest cities not only in Lithuania but throughout Eastern Europe². It was the capital not only of ethnic Lithuania but also of the western eastern-Slavic lands incorporated into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and one of the most important international crossroads between Western and Eastern Europe.

From the time of the Counter-Reformation, the university established in Vilnius and the many different religious orders gradually came to control a considerable amount of the surrounding lands. The Swedish and Russian invasions of the seventeenth century and the beginning of the eighteenth brought great calamities, causing famine and plague. A considerable number of Slavic inhabitants moved from the east into the depopulated lands of southeastern Lithuania, and in some places they significantly altered patterns of language use.

An accidentally obtained early-eighteenth-century (1702–1729) baptismal register from the Lavoriškės parish³ shows that many surnames were still Lithuanian, indicating that their bearers spoke Lithuanian; for example: Bajoraytis (1716, Dekaniškiai village), Bielunas (1705, Dekaniškės), Bivoynis (1704, Juozapinė), Butkunas (1723, Lavoriškės), Czeszninkas (1716, Lavoriškės), Dackunas (1713, Kirtimai), Dedela (1703, Kyviškės), Dervinis (1704, Slabada), Dudela (1717, Dekaniškės), Dutkus (1713, Bildžiai), Gaydaytis (1716, Kirtimai), Gaydis (1704, Skaisteriai), Gawris (1721, Puntuzai), Kuialis (1719, Mickūnai), Pavilenas (1713), Szwogzlis (1712, Bildžiai), and many others. Alongside them were numerous already Slavicized male surnames (with a Slavic suffix and no Lithuanian ending), for example: Bilksztowt (1723, Dekaniškės), Buywid (1718, Bildžiai), Derwin (1704, Slabada), Derwinowicz (1705, Skaisteriai), Gražul (1721, Dūbiai), Mikulaniec (1721, Slabada), Szwagżelewicz (1704, Dekaniškės), and others. The many Dzūkian girls’ surnames provide unequivocal evidence of Lithuanian-speaking inhabitants, for example: Awksztadwaricia (1713, Dekaniškės), Bajoryucia (1716, Dekaniškės), Derwin(i)uczia (1709, Skaisteriai), Dirwoniuszkn yczia (1716, Lavoriš-

76

kės), Ga(i)daluczia (1716, Bildžiai), Gaylucia (1714, Skaisteriai), Jeremnuzy-czie (1716, Dubniškės), Karaniucia (1702, Skaisteriai), Kiekcziucia (1705, Bildžiai), Melnikuycia (1718, Lavoriškės), Mikulayczia (1716, Kirtimai), Szaltanosa(i)cia (1713, Lavoriškės), Waskaitie (1713, Lavoriškės), Zmitruntkucia (1703, Rusai) ir nemaža kitų. Greta yra ir suslavintų pavardžių, pvz., Biżwoyniowa (1709, Kirtimai), Buywidowna (1717, Dekaniškės), Dedelówna (1703, Kýviškės), Derviniowna // Derviniuwna (1704, Skaisteriai; 1705, Slabadà; 1718, Bildžiai), Dagiliowna (1703, Dekaniškės), Mikulanka (1714, Slabadà), Milucanka (1703, Kýviškės), Smilginicha (1724, Mickūnai), Szakulanka (1712, Mickūnai) ir kt.

At that time, a portion of the population apparently still knew very little Slavic. This is indicated by girls’ surnames formed with a double suffix—Lithuanian and Slavic—for example, Dudician̨ka (<Dūd + yč + anka; 1716, Dekaniškės), Markuniczųwna (<Morkūn + yč + own̨a; 1702, Skaisteriai), and probably Brazaciow̨na (<Braz + aič + owna; 1716, Lavoriškės), Grigaičiow̨na (<Grig + aič + owna; 1713, Kaniūkai), since the aforementioned register contains neither the surname Brazaitis nor Grigaitis. However, bilingual inhabitants were probably increasing rapidly, since Lithuanian surnames were considerably more numerous in the first and second decades of the eighteenth century than in the third. Surnames with the Slavic suffixes -evič and -ovič also increased. Bilingualism was apparently spreading ever more widely. The plague and newcomers may have changed the ethnic composition of the population. Nevertheless, by the end of the eighteenth century—and in some places later—the ethnolinguistic situation had not changed substantially.

In Vilnius and its nearer and more distant surroundings, a person who knew Lithuanian was still considered an ordinary sight until the second half of the nineteenth century. Accordingly, the Lithuanian character of Vilnius County, the diocese, and, in part, the entire governorate was taken for granted. This is clearly evident in the writings of K. Bogušas, K. Kontrimas, D. Poška, P. Kėpenas, M. Balinskis, T. Lipinskis, J. Jaroševičius, T. Narbutas, and other authors of the time. At the same time, however, concern was expressed about the state of the Lithuanian language, its lack of legal rights, and its suppression.

The response that followed the first partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth—the 1773 education reform—set the goal of consolidating and merging the Lithuanian and Polish peoples into one⁴. To this end, the network of parish schools was greatly expanded⁵. They were to be supervised and their curricula coordinated by the secularized Vilnius University (Academy), where teaching was now conducted in Polish rather than Latin. Soon, by a decree of 1787, Polish was introduced into the churches of the Diocese of Vilnius⁶. This was the most painful blow to the Lithuanian language, as it was removed from the last venue for public, official use. In many places in eastern Lithuania, this blow proved fatal to the language.

How the abrupt change in status affected the use of Lithuanian is shown by a brief description of the linguistic situation in the area in 1827, provided by the parish priest of Lavoriškės: “The native language of the parishioners is Lithuanian, but now Russian is spoken (that is, Belarusian—A. V.); earlier, forty years ago, everyone spoke Lithuanian”⁷. Thus, from 1787—the removal of Lithuanian from the church, its effective prohibition—until 1827, exactly forty years had passed, and apparently people were already avoiding speaking Lithuanian in public. At best, Lithuanian

77

The language survived only in families, and even then—not everywhere and for varying lengths of time. The inhabitants who had begun speaking Slavic languages themselves rapidly became Slavicized.

However, until the second half of the 19th century, and in some places even later, it was not the promoted Polish language (although everyone tried to learn it) that spread, but Belarusian, or the vernacular, a language that had spread directly through horizontal (lateral) contacts by tradition and had served as a transitional, intermediate, and to some extent regional language. Its role and use grew particularly during the years of rule by the Russian Empire under the tsars, because Lithuanian peasants perceived it as an inferior variant of the prestigious Polish (lords’) language, and it was much closer to them socially. The need for Belarusian was fostered first by the policy of Polonization, pursued systematically through estates and the church, and then by Russification (the Russians regarded it as a dialect of Russian). It was simply impossible to learn Polish solely through chance encounters with estate owners and clergy, without direct ties to the Polish ethnic group.

As in the Lavoriškės area, the situation at that time was similar in other parishes east of Vilnius, where Slavic (‘Russian-Polish,’ ‘Ruthenian,’ i.e., Belarusian) predominated, for example, in Rudamina, Rūdninkai, Kena, Šumskas, Taboriškės, Medininkai, Aštravas⁸, and elsewhere. In the first half of the 19th century, Lithuanian still predominated only on the other side of Lavoriškės; for example, in Buivydžiai Parish, “all the inhabitants of the villages in Buivydžiai Parish speak among themselves in the customary Lithuanian language”⁹. In Bistryčia, “everyone throughout the whole parish speaks Lithuanian, only rarely Polish or Russian”¹⁰; in Varnionys, “Russian, Polish, and Lithuanian are spoken in turn; the Lithuanian language extends this far from the Kaunas and Courland Governorates”¹¹; in Mikalikiškės, “26 villages speak Lithuanian”¹², not to mention the still wholly Lithuanian Gervėčiai area. On the other side of this “corridor,” which had begun to become Slavicized somewhat earlier, Pārudaminis, Rūdninkai, Turgeliai, Šalčininkėliai, Šalčininkai, and other areas remained Lithuanian-speaking¹³.

Good connoisseurs of the region, the historians M. Balinskis and T. Lipinskis, described the linguistic situation in Vilnius County in the first half of the 19th century quite aptly and concisely: “Vilnius County is inhabited by Lithuanians themselves. However, the Lithuanian language predominates throughout only on the northern side, or on the right bank of the Neris; close to Vilnius itself, on the southern side, it gives way to Polish; farther on, Lithuanian villages mingle with villages where Polish-Russian (Belarusian — A. V.) is spoken. Nevertheless, among the rural people of this county, Lithuanian outweighs both of the latter”¹⁴. That the inhabitants along the Vilnius–Medininkai–Ašmena and Vilnius–Šumskas–Salos–Smurgainys roads, where Slavicization had begun earlier, assimilated unevenly was confirmed in 1860 by the writer V. Sirokomlė, who had traveled from Vilnius to Ašmena: “In places along the way, people encountered speak Lithuanian, but among the younger generation Lithuanian is already being forgotten and giving way to Ruthenian-Polish”¹⁵. In the 19th century, the vernacular, or local, Belarusian language as a second language spread rapidly farther west from Vilnius as well: along the Vilnius–Trakai roads and the banks of the Neris—around Riešė, Sudervė, Rykantai, Dūkštos, and elsewhere. Moreover, even minor nobles often spoke Belarusian.

By writing the Slavic languages with a hyphen—“Polish-Russian,” “Ruthenian-Polish,” and so on—many authors sought to emphasize not so much the affinity between those languages as their inseparable use: the older generation of Lithuanians was replaced by a younger one, for whom genetically related languages had become inseparable and indispensable. The vernacular that came to predominate was

78

the vernacular, or Belarusian, while the language of the estate, the gentry, the church, and culture in general was Polish. From the end of the 18th century until the second half of the 19th century and later, the vernacular spread most widely: in some places as the principal means of communication, in others as a supplementary, second means of communication. Yet what was taking place at that time was not national but chiefly linguistic assimilation of the population. Although the inhabitants already knew and spoke other languages, they were generally still called, or called themselves, Lithuanians¹⁶.

Thus, the first stage of Slavicization (late 18th century to mid-19th century) changed primarily the eastern part of Vilnius County: the southeastern outskirts closest to Vilnius (including the Vilnius–Trakai road), and the roads leading from Vilnius to Ašmena and to Šumskas, or along the so-called Black Road (“Čiorny tracht”), among others. The decline of the Lithuanian language was chiefly caused by the church, which began using only Polish (under the leadership of Poland), and by Polish-language parish schools, which forbade children to speak Lithuanian not only at school (the pinning on of “metelingai,” etc.), but also at home.

The second stage of widespread Slavicization (second half of the 19th century to beginning of the 20th century) was a direct reaction to forced Russification: after the uprising of 1863–1864, Lithuanian publications in Latin script were banned, schools taught only in Russian, inhabitants were persecuted, and churches were turned into Orthodox churches. It was precisely then that a struggle for influence over Lithuanian peasants flared up between the tsarist officials who promoted Russification and the landowners who promoted Polonization, along with clergy of a pro-Polish orientation. Although chronologically this stage was an unbroken continuation of the first stage of Slavicization, qualitatively it was a new period: widespread Polonization of Lithuanians encompassed not only language but also national consciousness. Polish, which had earlier taken hold only among the upper strata of society, reached the lower stratum as well during this period. A peripheral variant of Polish, or Lithuanian Polish (“polszczyzna litewska”), began to spread among Lithuanian peasants west and north of Vilnius—in the areas of Nemenčinė, Paberžė, Pabradė, Sužionys, Karvys, Maišiagala, Joniškis, Dubingiai, Inturkė, Giedraičiai, Bijūtiškis, Širvintos, Kernavė, and elsewhere.

The peak of Polonization was reached in the 1880s and early 20th century, as the Lithuanian national movement gained momentum. After the appearance of “Aušra,” from 1884–1885 onward, the spiritual authorities of the Vilnius Diocese, under pressure from Polonized landowners and clergy, launched an open offensive against Lithuanian cultural activists, book smugglers, clergy of Lithuanian orientation, and the Lithuanian language in general, seeking to discredit it¹⁷.

Suffering the administrative oppression of the tsarist authorities and the spiritual yoke of the Poles, people endured a double burden. Polish political ideologues, using their unlimited influence, obstinately began proclaiming that in the former Polish-Lithuanian state there was only one Polish nation, one Polish language, and one Polish faith (“polska wiara”). All other languages, they claimed, were merely dialects of Polish. From then on, all Catholics were called Poles, regardless of what language they spoke. Large cities, many larger towns, district and parish centers, and the dense network of estates became the greatest centers of Polonization.

It was not easy for people to accept this betrayal by the upper classes. Many, if not most, were still strongly influenced by Lithuanian culture from the past and by various “anti-Polish” traditions, and most still knew and understood

79

Those who remembered their parents, grandparents, or great-grandparents speaking Lithuanian tended to identify themselves neutrally—as locals, people from here (tuteišiai), and so on. Having been subjected to coercion by various authorities, even now they cannot distinguish their nationality from their religion and citizenship.

Until the 1860s, there is no mention anywhere of any Polish-speaking areas northwest of Vilnius or elsewhere. Polish was only the language of the manor, the church, the szlachta, and the town. According to data collected from local clergy at P. Kėpenas’s initiative in 1857, even the present-day “capital” of the Vilnius region’s Poles—the Nemenčinė district—was regarded as entirely Lithuanian. Polish was spoken only “in the town and the rectory”¹⁸. The areas around Pabradė, Sužionys, and Paberžė were also purely Lithuanian. Lithuanian and Belarusian, or Lithuanian and Polish, were spoken mixed or side by side in the areas around Verkiai, Riešė, Kairvys, Dūkštos, and partly Maišiagala, Kernavė, and Dubingiai.

The 1872 economic questionnaire, answered by local officials and teachers (apparently mostly Russians), also provides considerable information about the linguistic situation. For example, in Riešė rural district, local residents spoke mostly Polish and Lithuanian (“Samogitian”), and occasionally Belarusian (“the Lithuanian Russian language”)¹⁹; in Maišiagala, Polish and Belarusian (some residents of Geisiškės recalled that their parents had moved from Vitebsk and Polesie)²⁰; in Nemenčinė, some families had begun speaking Polish, and to some extent Belarusian, but in public and at gatherings people were heard speaking mostly Lithuanian and, to some extent, Russian²¹; in Paberžė, Polish and Lithuanian²²; in Inturkė, Polish, but mostly Lithuanian²³; in Vievis, mostly Lithuanian, and also Belarusian to the southeast, while the nobility spoke Polish²⁴; in Širvintos, Lithuanian alone²⁵, and so on²⁶.

According to data collected by A. Piater in 1890 and published by Anonimas (J. Rozwadowski?), the number of Polish-speaking residents rose sharply in Nemenčinė (3/4) and Maišiagala (3/5) rural districts and—to half—in Paberžė rural district²⁷. Bilingual people with Polish as a second language began appearing in increasing numbers around Dubingiai, Joniškis, Giedraičiai, Inturkė, Bijutiškis, Širvintos, and elsewhere. At the beginning of the 20th century, reports in unofficial newspapers indicate that the number of Lithuanian speakers around Dubingiai and Joniškis had fallen to half (from 5/6), in Paberžė to 1/3 (from 1/2), in Nemenčinė to 1/3, and in Maišiagala to 1/3 (from 1/5)²⁸.

During the 1957–1964 expeditions, Lithuanian-speaking elderly people born in the 1860s, 1870s, or 1880s were still found in the areas around Nemenčinė, Pabradė, Sužionys, and Paberžė. In their youth, only Lithuanian was spoken. Even more people were encountered who recalled how their parents spoke only Lithuanian with their neighbors, how they had wanted Lithuanian-language schools but had not only failed to get them during the Polish occupation, but were also forbidden to speak Lithuanian in public. Speaking Lithuanian had been particularly dangerous in the towns of Maišiagala and Nemenčinė, and in Vilnius, because of the aggressively minded chauvinist townspeople. Elderly residents of Švenčionys recounted more than once that the greatest hardship for those traveling to Vilnius for the market or its church feast was getting through Nemenčinė, because Polonized fanatics would attack them so viciously. The chauvinists of Maišiagala, who had grown brazen, inspired the same fear in the people of Ukmergė and Širvintos. More than one resident of Nemenčinė maintained that the boundary between the local Polish and ordinary (Belarusian)

80

languages had been the Neris: that is, on the Neris’s left bank people spoke the vernacular (“poprostu, poprostemu”), while on the right they already spoke Polish. In Karveliškės, a village beside the Neris near Nemenčinė, an 82-year-old woman encountered in 1964 sang a little song in Lithuanian and told how some neighbors had already begun speaking Belarusian but, corrupted by their neighbors, had switched to Polish. Her parents knew Lithuanian well and often still spoke it to each other. She too had known it from childhood, but over time had forgotten Lithuanian.

The Polish linguist H. Turska, who studied the origins of the Polish language in Lithuania in the second half of the 19th century during the interwar period, noted a fairly sudden surge in the use of peripheral Polish among rural people. Quite a few began speaking Polish as adults without knowing the language properly. She tended to explain this phenomenon as a spontaneous need for a cultured language and did not see its social roots. Numerous facts show that the break in self-awareness and language use occurred around the mid-1880s. The Barkovski brothers from Piliakalnis village in the Nemenčinė area, born around 1880, clearly remembered how their parents initially spoke Lithuanian to them until they were five to seven years old, but then began speaking only Polish. The recollections of J. Sinkevičius (born 1881), a resident of Ąžuolaukė village, are similar. Although parents in the families had already begun speaking Polish, they spoke only Lithuanian with their neighbors and their animals. When A. Lašakevičius (born 1886), a resident of Kaniūkai village in the Šalčininkai area, was eight or nine years old, his father wanted to send him out as a shepherd, but at that time people from other villages had begun speaking a great deal of Belarusian, and he did not yet understand a single word of it. He was then hired in Kiemėliai village in the Benekainys area, where nearly everyone still spoke Lithuanian.

In general, people at that time attached great importance to the opinion and word of an authoritative person (a clergyman or landowner). The virus of Slavicization would hardly have spread so rapidly had Lithuania’s affairs not been governed by foreigners and by people representing foreign interests. How much a clergyman’s personal stance and a word spoken at the right moment could mean to people is shown by the cultural activity of S. Gimžauskas (1845–1897), a priest from Kirdeikiai who was a fellow student of the East Lithuanian educator, poet, and linguist K. Jaunius at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. It was thanks precisely to S. Gimžauskas, who served as a priest in Valkininkai from 1884 to 1892, that this parish remained un-Slavicized. The residents themselves confirmed this to participants in the 1976 expedition. According to the parents and grandparents of the present generation in Valkininkai parish, the people of Valkininkai at that time (the late 19th century), like the Lithuanian speakers in the neighboring parishes of Paluknys, Rūdninkai, Paberžė, and Eišiškės, which have now become heavily Belarusian-speaking, began speaking Belarusian and making an effort to speak non-Lithuanian—that is, Belarusian or Polish—at the urging of Polonized clergy or landowners. Had Father S. Gimžauskas not personally and publicly criticized their efforts in sermons at the time, Valkininkai parish would also have become Polonized.

The fate of Butrimonys parish (formerly the Beniakainiai filial church) is also noteworthy. According to local people, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, the entire area around Butrimonys was still purely Lithuanian. In the town of Butrimonys, the only person who did not speak Lithuanian was Vasiukevičius, who had married into the family. People had only just begun speaking Belarusian. The landowner of Rėkliškės was especially hostile to the Lithuanian language. When the Lithuanian priest Budra was transferred to Butrimonys in 1905 and began delivering sermons in Lithuanian, he was fanat-

81

The Lithuanian-speaking parishioners, incited by the landowner, went to beat the priest, believing that they were defending the “Polish faith and church” against the “pagan Lithuanian language.” Unfortunately, at the beginning of the 20th century, Father Budra’s appeal not to renounce the Lithuanian language no longer moved many people, because the break in their self-awareness had occurred earlier.

Thus, the second wave of general Slavicization, which gathered particular momentum in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, encompassed even larger areas of Southeastern Lithuania. Slavicization advanced significantly from Vilnius to the south, west, and north.

It is impossible to know what would have remained of all Lithuania today had idealistic people not emerged to revive it for a second life and a struggle for survival, and had independent Lithuania not been re-established in 1918. The very beginnings of Polonization in Southeastern Lithuania were expanded and consolidated during the Polish and Soviet periods.

Literatūra

1 Turska H. O powstaniu polskich obszarów językowych na Wileńszczyźnie. Wilno, 1939.

2 Vilniaus miesto istorija, Vilnius, 1968. P. 214.

3 Księga metryk chrzestnych kościoła Lawaryskiego. 1702—1729. 1966 m. ekspedicijos metu gauta pasiskolinti iš Lavoriškių apylinkės Adomaičių kaimo gyventojo A. Jankovskio (buv. agronomo).

4 Zinkevičius Z. Lietuvių kalbos istorija. Lietuvių kalba XVIII—XIX a. Vilnius, 1990. T. 4. P. 16. Taip pat jo. Rytų Lietuva praeityje ir dabar. V., 1993. P. 96.

5 Lukšienė M. Lietuvos švietimo istorijos bruožai XIX a. pirmojoje pusėje // Pedagogikos darbai. T. 4. Kaunas, 1970. P. 68 t.t.

6 Vidmantas E. Rytų Lietuvos lenkinimas (XIX a. pab. — XX a. pr.) // Voruta. 1990. Nr. 4(7). P. 3.

7 Ведомости о костелах и монастырях епархии. 1827 г. Lietuvos Centrinis istorinis archyvas. F. 694. Ap. 769. L. 1.

8 Ведомости...L. 8—10, 17—21, 25.

9 Ten pat, L. 16.

10 Ten pat. L. 15.

11 Ten pat. L. 14.

12 Ten pat. L. 23.

13 Ten pat. L. 5—7.

14 Baliński M., Lipiński T. Starożytna Polska pod względem historycznym, geografycznym i statystycznym. Warszawa, 1846. T. 3. P. 122—123.

15 Syrokomla Wł. Wycieczki po Litwie w promieniach od Wilna. Wilno, 1960. T. 2. P. 58.

16 Basanavičius J. Vilniaus lietuviai ir ”lenkai” statistikos šviesoje. // Viltis, 1908. Nr. 127(162).

17 Vidmantas E. Min. veik. P. 3.

18 Žr.: Vilnius ir Vilniaus kraštas. Kaunas, 1932. P. 75.

19 Сведения о состоянии сельского хозяйства и промышленности. Vilniaus universiteto Rankraštynas. A. 64. Nr. 11. 243. L. 3.

20 Ten pat. A. 64. Nr. 11. 238. L. 1.

21 Ten pat. A. 64. Nr. 11. 251. L. 2.

22 Ten pat. A. 64. Nr. 11. 252. L. 1.

23 Ten pat. A. 64. Nr. 11. 253. L. 1.

24 Ten pat. A. 64. Nr. 11. 207. L. 3.

25 Ten pat. A. 64. Nr. 11. 240. L. 7.

26 Plačiau žr. Vidugiris A. Dėl kalbų kontaktavimo Pietryčių Lietuvoje // Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai. T. 23. Kalbų kontaktai Lietuvos TSR. Vilnius, 1983. P. 53—55.

82

27 Anonim. Obszar języka litewskiego w gub. Wileńskiej // Materyały antropologiczno-archeologiczne i etnograficzne. Kraków, 1898. T. 3. P. 11—13.

28 B / a g d o n a s / J. Lietuvių padėjimas Vilniaus vyskupijoje // Viltis, 1908. Nr. 115(150).

ZU ZEITABSCHNITTEN DES FRÜHEREN SLAWISCHWERDEN IN SÜDOSTLITAUEN

Zusammenfassung

Es werden zwei Perioden des massenhaften Slawischwerdens in Südostlitauen unterschieden.

Die erste Periode dauerte vom Ende des 18. Jh. bis zur Mitte des 19 Jh. Sie begann als Reaktion auf die Aufteilungen des litauischen und polnischen Staates, besonders nach der 1. Aufteilung, als die Bildungsreform (1773) stattfand, die die Aufgabe gestellt hatte das litauische und das polnische Volk zu einem Volk zu vereinigen. Es wurden massenhaft polnische Pfarrschulen gegründet. Der schmerzlichste Schlag wurde der litauischen Sprache durch das Dekret 1787 versetzt, wonach in vielen Kirchen des Wilnuser Bistums anstatt der litauischen Sprache die polnische Sprache verwendet werden mußte. Allerdings hat sich bis zur 2. Hälfte des 19. Jh. nicht die protegierte polnische Sprache, sondern die weißrussische oder einfach genannt einfache Sprache ermächtigt, die sich traditionell durch unmittelbare (horizontale) Kontakte ausbreitete und während der Zarenokkupation eine gewisse Rolle der regionalen Sprache gespielt hatte. In dieser Zeit ging vor sich nicht die nationale, sondern nur die sprachliche Assimilation der Bevölkerung und umfaßte meistens den Kreis von Asmena, den südöstlichen Teil des Kreises von Švenčionys, den mittleren Teil der östlichen Seite des Kreises Vilnius. Die Einwohner, ungeachtet ihrer Sprache, wurden Litauer genannt und sie nannten sich auch Litauer.

Die sogenannte polnische Sprache oder der periphere polnische Kulturdialekt (genauer, die vom Adel gebrauchte, allgemeine polnische Sprache, im Laufe der Zeit durchtränkt mit zahlreichen Litauismen und den Elementen der weißrussischen Sprache) verbreitete sich in Litauen ein Jahrhundert senkrecht von dem höchsten Stand, über den mittleren bis zum niedrigen, bis sie sich in der 2. Hälfte des 19. Jh. zum stürmischen Prozeß der Polonisierung ergob, der nicht nur die Sprache, sondern auch die Nationalität umfaßte. Dieser Prozeß — der zweite Abschnitt des massenhaften Slawisierung —, angefangen als Reaktion gegen die Russifizierung, wandte sich seit der Mitte der achtziger Jahre des 19. Jh. mit ganzer Kraft auch gegen die von dem Zaren verfolgte litauische Sprache und die Nationalität. Seit dieser Zeit begann man alle anderen Sprachen für polnische Dialekte zu halten, und die Katholiken, ungeachtet denen, welche Sprache sie auch sprachen, wurden Polen genannt.

83