Lietuvos istorijos institutas

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 key figure of this article is the late eighteenth-century canon priest of Livonia and parish priest of Vilkaviškis and Vaukavysk Wincenty Bakuzicz. Historical information on this person is scarce. His career of a clergyman began with the service in Vilnius Chapter, however during Bar Confederation (1768–1772) he got involved in its activities, travelled with a mission to Teshin and later was imprisoned by Russian imperial army officers, providing information on the movements of the Confederates. After being released from prison, W. Bakuzicz did not make any significant career in Vilnius Chapter, becoming parish priest of Vilkaviškis and Vaukavysk and being involved in several criminal court cases in Vilnius and its district. In 1794, during the uprising of Tadeusz Kosciuszko he was imprisoned by the rebels in Vilnius, although soon released. In that year he arranged his will, where he assigned significant sums to charity. The life of W. Bakuzicz was one of paradox and contradiction, just as was the entire period.

Straipsnyje žvelgiama į kunigaikščio Boguslavo Radvilos, Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės arklidininko ir Prūsijos kunigaikštystės generalinio gubernatoriaus, asmenybę per jo paties darytus įrašus privačiame dienoraštyje (1661–1666). Aptariama dienoraščio informacija apie B. Radvilos privatų gyvenimą. Aptariant B. Radvilos įvaizdį, atsiskleidžiantį įrašuose privačiame dienoraštyje, analizuojama informacija apie jo pomėgius, laisvalaikio leidimo būdus, pramogas, taip pat informacija apie jo sveikatos būklę ir charakterį. Patikslinami kai kurie istoriografijoje įsitvirtinę teiginiai apie B. Radvilos privatų gyvenimą. Parodomas B. Radvilos privataus dienoraščio, kaip istorinio šaltinio, unikalumas ir svarba tiriant kunigaikščio asmenybę bei jo kasdienę veiklą.

The article analyses data of the 567 Franciscan Friars Conventual from the Lithuanian St Casimir province, who died in the period of 1775–1832: age of entry, geographic and social background. These are the factors that allow to restore the dynamics of the development of this brotherhood. Order of Friars Minor Conventual accepted individuals from 12 to 40 years of age (94.6 % of all candidates), and this was in accordance with age requirements set within the Franciscan Order. Later, when faced with the calling crisis, the brotherhood started integrating candidates of a more mature age (sometimes even 67 years old) who could become both lay brothers (Lat. laicus professus) and friars priests (Lat. clericus proffessus). Likewise, both groups could include married men, who were formally named as friars of the Third Order (Lat. tertiarius claustralis). Therefore, this flexibility of the brotherhood, its ability to deal with the issues of the period, ensured viability of the community. The research revealed, that sometimes the brotherhood would be “enlivened” by the inter-congregational “migration” of the friars, which was not voluminous: the Franciscan Order would be joined by friars formerly from Carthusian, Bernardine, Discalced Carmelite and Piarist orders, yet sometimes Franciscan Conventual Friars would leave for the Dominicans or the Carmelites. Such movement shows the continuous search by the “men of prayer” on the path of spiritual calling. The established presence of several converts (Uniats, Jews) in the brotherhood shows that the Franciscans did have, even if not strong, influence in towns and in the eastern part of the Grand Duchy. On the other hand, “migrant” friars and converts would enrich the brotherhood spiritually and culturally. The dominance of nobility in the brotherhood shows specific social identity of the Franciscans Conventual. This was the reason for such limited number of callings, because eastern part of the province was dominated by the Uniats and nobility was less numerous. The other side of this phenomenon was that regions of Podlasie, Mazovia and Samogitia (with only one convent in each), with a numerous presence of Roman Catholic petty nobility, have become the resource “bases” for Franciscan candidates, unlike voivodeships of Vilnius, Trakai and Polatsk with the thickest network of convents, where the number of callings was small. townspeople (half of them from Vilnius and the rest – from other regional towns). Around 9 % of the friars were from peasantry (most of them were from the Franciscan dominions, also nearby parishes as well as further located parishes). The largest part, a whole 68 %, were individuals from nobility. Such social composition was first of all defined by family relations, when after one person joining the convent others would follow, either close or more distant relatives. At the same time, attracting (recruitment) of the new members was aided by the appeal of the Franciscans, their influence in society and their devotion. In time, a peculiar symbiosis of confessional and social factors was formed, when joining the brotherhood

Kotryna Hochstadė iš Telnicų (Moravija) žinoma kaip Žygimanto Senojo meilužė, jo nesantuokinių vaikų – Vilniaus vyskupo Jono iš Lietuvos kunigaikščių, Reginos Šafraniecienės, Kotrynos Montfortienės – motina ir Voiničiaus kašteliono, Lenkijos karalystės paiždininkio Andriejaus Koščeleckio žmona. Apie jos asmenybę žinoma labai mažai – akcentuojama, kad buvo labai graži ir gražuolių motina bei močiutė. Pasak legendų – vyrų kerėtoja, ragana, moteris, kišusis ten, kur nereikia. Tačiau iš menkai išlikusių šaltinių galima susidaryti subtilesnį vaizdinį apie šią nežinomos kilmės moterį svetimos visuomenės aukštuomenėje iš tiesų nuolat priklausiusią nuo vyrų – meilužio, sutuoktinio, sūnaus – globos. Vis dėlto ji taip pat sugebėjo naudotis savo įtaka – sukaupė nemažai turto, savo klientų ratą.

Straipsnyje atskleidžiama Vilniaus jėzuitų ganytojiška veikla plačiame Katalikų Bažnyčios potridentinio atsinaujinimo kontekste. Autorius analizuoja įvairialypius vienuolių veiklos aspektus, tokius kaip pamokslininkystė, šventųjų ir Švenčiausiosios Mergelės Marijos kulto puoselėjimas, studentų kongregacijų bei suaugusiesiems skirtų brolijų veiklos skatinimas ir kita. Pažymima, kad, būdami ypač kompetentingi kalbų srityje, jėzuitai teikė dvasinę globą ne tik Vilniaus gyventojams lenkams, bet ir vokiečiams bei lietuviams. Jėzuitai taip pat atliko svarbų vaidmenį reformuojant kitas vienuolijas, o jų įtaka bazilijonų vienuolijos intelektualinei ir dvasinei raidai nekelia jokių abejonių. Šv. Ignaco Lojolos ordino vienuoliai aktyvia veikla ir aukomis prisidėjo tiek prie 1655–1660 m. Maskvos okupacijos padarytos žalos, tiek ir prie 1710 m. miestą nusiaubusios maro epidemijos padarinių likvidavimo. Šių kataklizmų metu jėzuitai vykdė nesančios diecezinės dvasininkijos funkcijas. Organizuodami ganytojišką veiklą, Vilniaus jėzuitai sulaukė ne tik bajorijos ir didikų palaikymo, bet ir pasiturinčių miestiečių paramos. Atsakydamas į išsikeltus tyrimo tikslus, straipsnio autorius pažymi, kad Vilniaus jėzuitų ganytojiška veikla atitiko bendrąsias potridentinės Katalikų Bažnyčios dievotumo tendencijas. Tačiau Vilniuje veikę Jėzaus draugijos nariai išliko atviri gilias šaknis įleidusioms vietos religingumo apraiškoms ir prisidėjo stiprindami lokalinį šv. Kazimiero kultą, to meto visuomenės akivaizdžiai tapatintą su Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės valstybingumu.

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.