|
|
Tai visų pirma pasakytina apie istoriografijos skyrių, kuriame daugiausia dėmesio skiriama mėgėjiškai išeivijos publicistikai, su istorijos mokslu neturinčiai nieko bendra. Analizuoti šiuos rašinėlius reikštų tą patį, kaip remiantis “Vorutos” laikraščiu svarstyti apie lietuvių mentalitetą, ką, beje, Paryžiuje beveik prieš 10 metų bandė daryti vienas lenkų autorius.
|
|
|
However there is no sense to continue writing about it, because there are no arguments, which would be worth discussion and approval. The most of the chapters of the book are unnecessary and a normal man should not tire himself by reading them. First of all this should be said about the chapter of historiography, where the main attention is granted to the amateurish publicist writing of the emigration, which has nothing in common with the scholarship of history. Analysing these compositions would mean the same, as considering the Lithuanian mentality, basing oneself on the newspaper “Voruta”, what, by the way, was attempted by one Polish author in Paris almost 10 years before. However these chapters not by accident appeared in the book, they reveal Baranauskas’ understanding of history. According to the author, the formation of the state was a continuos process, which began, when the hunter bands came to Lithuania (11 800 BC), the formation of the state was predetermined by internal and external reasons... Somewhere heard are these theses... Yes, these are nothing else, but the cornerstones of Marxist theory, which were attempted to dig into the solution of the problem of the Lithuanian State.
|
