Archivum Lithuanicum

This text draws attention to the so-called Freemasonry movement, which intensified and expanded in Europe in the 18th century. Characterised by freedom of thought and culture, as well as an abundance of ideas, the Age of Enlightenment influenced the mentality of educated intellectuals in the 18th and 19th centuries. Therefore, it is only natural that a large number of intellectuals were members of different Masonic organisations. By promoting the moral development of people, Masons regarded education as one of their main goals. Among them was Heinrich Theodor von Schön (1773–1856), a prominent politician, Prussian statesman, and well-known figure in education and culture, as well as President of the Gumbinnen district in East Prussia and later Oberpresident (the Chief President) of East and West Prussia. Under his administration, many important reforms related to East Prussia were carried out. Schön became a member of the Masonic Society at the age of 20 (1795). Schön’s Masonry is undoubtedly an important element in a careful examination of his activities related to Prussia. Possible reasons behind his decision to became a member of the Freemasonry were the encouragement he received from his father Johann Theodor Schön (1744–1796), who was also a member of a few Masonic lodges, or due to the fact that other professors at the University of Königsberg also belonged or were closely related to the Masonic Society (Christian Jakob Kraus, 1753–1807; Friedrich Leopold von Schrötter, 1743–1815; Theodor Anton Heinrich von Schmalz, 1760–1831 and others). The lecturers who influenced Schön’s worldview might also have had an impact on his decision to belong to a Masonic Society. It is important to mention that throughout Schön’s activities, he maintained a huge network of contacts and relationships with well-known and important Prussian figures, who were members of different Masonic lodges at that time. Masonic echoes are found in Schön’s correspondence. He communicated and corresponded with many well-known personalities who also belonged to various lodges in Prussia (Johann Gottfried Frey, 1762– 1831; Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander von Humboldt, 1769–1859; Karl August Fürst von Hardenberg, 1750–1822 and many others). Schön pursued an education policy favourable to East Prussia. He founded new elementary schools, worked to improve teaching, founded a teaching seminary in Karalene (1811) and contributed to the founding of the Society for Child Care (1827). Schön also founded a newspaper in Gumbinnen to create a connection with the people of East Prussia. These transformations put in motion by Schön are closely linked to the values declared by the Masons – the promotion of education, the improvement of society and the pursuit of philanthropic activities.

Involvement in Lithuanian language-related activities by two generations of the Mielcke (Lith. Milkus) family, who had been active in the Lithuanian cultural arena of the Kingdom of Prussia over a period of eight decades in the 18th century, started with Peter Gottlieb Mielcke (Lith. Petras Gotlybas Milkus, 25/10/1695, Tilsit [Lith. Tilžė] – 09/06/1753, Mehlkehmen [Lith. Mielkiemis]), a teacher at the Lithuanian Language Seminar at the University of Königsberg (1723– 1725) who later served as an evangelical Lutheran priest in Prussian Lithuania, i.e. in Georgenburg (Lith. Jurbarkas, 1726–1735) and Mehlkehmen (1736–1753). The purpose of this article is to restore the missing links of Peter Gottlieb Mielcke’s family and its four generations, paying attention to genealogical relations with well-known contemporaries, especially those who contributed to Lithuanian culture. The genealogical reconstruction of four generations of the Mielcke family was based on primary authentic sources: the surviving church books of Prussian Lithuania, which are currently stored in the Evangelical Central Archives (Ger. Evangelisches Zentralarchiv) in Berlin and in the State Archives in Olsztyn (Pol. Archiwum Państwowe w Olsztynie), Poland. Microfilm copies from church books that had disappeared during World War II , which had been made before the war from the originals and are now kept at the Saxon State Archives in Leipzig (Ger. Sächsisches Staatsarchiv, Staatsarchiv Leipzig), were also used. In addition to the church books, the author referred to various archival documents stored in the Secret State Archives Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation (Ger. Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz) in Berlin. In restoring the subsequent generations of Peter Gottlieb Mielcke’s descendants and attempting to find any traces of Lithuanian language-related activity, secondary sources were also used. The most important of these are the biographies of East and West Prussian priests written by Friedwald Moeller (1894–1964) and published in the book entitled Das „Zwischenmanuskript“ zum Altpreußischen evangelischen Pfarrerbuch (vol. 1–7, Hamburg, 2012–2014). The conducted study led to the following conclusions: 1. Peter Gottlieb Mielcke was born in the family of Maria (?–after 1695) and Peter (?–after 1695) Mielcke, who were residents of Tilsit. His parents considered themselves Germans: their eight children were given German names, all of them were baptised in the German Church (Ger. Deutsche Kirche) in Tilsit, and his father’s surname was recorded in the church’s baptism register in its German form: Mielcke, Mielke. The maternal genealogical roots of Peter Gottlieb Mielcke in Prussian Lithuania, Tilsit, originate from the Engelbrecht family and date back to the 16th century.

The third edition of Wujek’s Poſtilla Catholicka Mnieyſza (W3 1590) is commonly regarded as the main source of Daukša’s postil, though it has been previously suggested in earlier investigations that some of the sermons might have been translated from the second edition of Wujek’s postil (W2 1582). From the evidence adduced here, it can be shown that all three of the earliest editions (W1 1579/80, W2–3) have entered into Daukša’s translations, exhibiting a clear distribution within the postil. Furthermore, it became evident that within the sermons a distinction must be made between pericopes, expositions and marginalia. The expositions can only be based on one of the three editions of W1–3 respectively, whereas the pericopes often seem to have additional, hitherto unidentified Polish, Latin or even Lithuanian sources. The marginalia as well as the chapter headings are, in turn, rather technical in nature and are mostly taken from W3, which clearly served as the model for the layout of Daukša’s postil.