In this article, the aspects of national self-awareness in the Lithuania of the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries are ventilated by invoking biographies and creation of artists. Tadas Daugirdas represents the members of such posture, who want to acknowledge the peculiarities of the Lithuanian nation and to express them in creation. Stanislovas Vitkevičius represents the ones under the influence of polonization; the posture of those, who while speaking Polish, though still feeling as the offspring of The Grand Duchy of Lithuania, markedly lean to the Polish culture. The aim of this article is to analyze the creation of artists who represent different postures of national identity, revealing possible interactions between the artistic ideas and decisions taken by the persons themselves with regard to the national dependence. The commonly used formulas (the components of which may be language, historical memory, customs, and traditions) are not meant for defining the national self-awareness of the Lithuanians of the analyzed period. Every person tackled the dilemma of being either Lithuanian or Polish individually and “drew“ the dividing lines inside themselves. It was difficult to take the decisions and they were accompanied by both external and inner conflicts. A wish to integrate into the Lithuanian nation and to create a national state was a big challenge, which meant conflicts with the bigger part of the members of the landed nobility and the change of the social position. The expression of national peculiarity in the fine arts’ creation was influenced by the dominant trend of the art at the particular time. It sometimes turns out that what was thought to be peculiar and unique, when looking from the common European art’s context assumes the touch of universality.[...].

This paper analyses the famous art historian Jurgis Baltrušaitis, educational, scientific and cultural activity period in Lithuania (1933–1939). The aim of the article is to analyse in detail Baltrušaitis’ pedagogical activity at Vytautas Magnus University and to evaluate his contribution to the interwar Lithuanian art research history. Although Baltrušaitis in Lithuania is not a forgotten personality, however, adequate attention to this period of his activity and its evaluation has not been given. This research expanded information about his pedagogical work at Vytautas Magnus University. It was found out that in the period of 1933–1939 his course “General History of Art” was devoted for the students of History department, General history group. He taught on art history from prehistoric period till 16th century and took a very wide geographical area. This famous art researcher discussed each period of art history in a very detailed and comprehensive way. He has never digressed from his scientific interest field. It is assumed that in this case he was passing interests of Lithuanian youth needs, because they have not even hadv the basis of art history. “General History of Art”, written by Baltrušaitis, was prepared on his lectures basis and published in two volumes in 1934 and 1939. This course book is a unique example of formalistic art research principles in Lithuanian interwar period. The book appeared in a context which clearly lacked elementary publications about Western European art history. The book of Ignas Šlapelis “Outlines on Art History”, published in 1930, or three volumes of Kazimieras Jasėnas’ book “General History of Art”, published in period of 1923– 1938, only partially upheld the needs of the persons who were interested in art history. The book of Šlapelis was written in a popular style, without references, citation and other scientific indications. [...]